In every civilization throughout history, man has searched for the explanation to his existence. In ancient societys people created origin myths. Every civilization had a unique myth. Some myths involved gods and others involved nature. Sometime around one thousand B.C.the longest standing creation myth was popularized. This creation myth is still in practice today, almost three thousand years later. The myth I am referring to is the Genesis recollection in the bible. In the early 1800s scientists carried out many experiments in the attempt to give scientific proof to the Genesis account. In 1859 when Charles Darwin published his Origin of Species theory, the Genesis “myth” was no longer regarded as scientifically plausible. Darwins theory went against everything in Genesis and gave a more logical explanation to human existence than the account in Genesis.
Religion and science were separated and were now fighting for peoples beliefs. Evolution, or Darwinism, offers a reasonable and highly logical explanation whereas the religious groups offer another logical explanation though in this explanation you have to presume certain assumptions taken from Genesis. Most creationists believe that the earth was created somewhere between five to ten thousand years ago. Their arguments involve primarily attacking evolution.
Evolutionists dispute all of the creationist claims and have explanations to most if not all of them. Creationism is a creditable pursuit but due to the fact that it is primarily based in religion it should not be considered a science as many people deem it to be. There are two kinds of creationists, pure creationists, which I will be talking about in this essay, and theistic evolutionists. Pure creationists believe that the bible is a literal depiction of the creation of the universe; they believe God created the universe during six 24-hour days, the earth is young, and the global flood was a real event. Theistic evolutionists believe that the days of creation are long periods of time in which evolution occurred. They consider themselves creationists because they believe God started the process and intervened along the way.
This view incorporates evolution and religion. Theistic evolutions can be religious as well as scientific. It is this compromise that gives people a believable view of creation while not dismissing Gods role in creation. Pure creationists do not except theistic evolutionists as creationists. They believe that if you dont believe that the bible is literal then you are not a real creationist. Creationism is rooted in the bible, but is not entirely unscientific.
Modern creationists deal mainly in finding and presenting scientific fact that will work against evolution or give proof to Genesis. Creation scientists attempt to disprove evolution in any way possible. Some of their main arguments include their claim that natural selection, the backbone of evolution, does not occur outside of the category “kind”; The claim that there are no fossils indicating transition, meaning that all life was created in its full form, by god; flaws in radiometric dating and several other disputable errors in evolutionary thought. The creationists believe that science is the act of pursuing scientific facts.
They believe that their motives in searching for these facts are irrelevant. They use the scientific method drawing hypothesis from the bible. In many respects I agree with this view of science. I agree with the idea of pursing scientific facts but I disagree that all scientific motives should be equal. Science should be unbiased and when using a religious hypothesis you will draw a religious conclusion.
The main flaw in creationist thought is that they set conditions that will prove creationism but they do not stipulate conditions that will disprove creationism. The results of creationist experiments will either count for creation or not count at all. In a true scientific experiment the results of an experiment can falsify the hypothesis, this is not the case with creationist experiments. Since Darwin separated creation science from the rest of science in 1859 there has been strong opposition to creation science.
Religious belief in creationism is the one factor that keeps evolution from being considered an absolute fact. If Genesis was not a fundamental part of two or more widely practiced religions then people would look at the origin of man as a scientific concern. Evolutionists do not take creationism seriously. The science community regards creation science as a pseudoscience. Creationism despite any “proof” working for it is still based in religion and thus cannot be considered a science. Any experiment in creation science will be conducted to prove the events described in the bible.
Evolutionists believe that science is the study of the physical or material universe using the scientific method. In creation science the conclusions are already drawn and experiments are merely finding certain terms that will give the desired result ignoring all the facts that will dispute the conclusion. I agree with the evolutionist view of science, creation science could be considered a biased science and therefore a pseudoscience. The main creationist arguments do not attempt to justify Genesis, instead, they attempt to falsify evolution. The majority of all creationist arguments deal with”errors” in evolution. Their primary argument is that natural selection does not exist outside of the category of living things, kind.
Kind is one level above species in the categories of living things. According to evolution, natural selection does effect outside of kind and is responsible for all of evolution. When natural selection occurs outside the category of kind it is called macroevolution, when natural selection occurs inside of the category of kind it is called microevolution. Creationists use examples such as dog breeding and the English peppered moth to show that microevolution occurs but that macroevolution does not. Dog breeding is done by combining different species of dogs to produce a new species of dogs. Though a new species of dogs is created it is not possible to make a new “kind” from breeding a cat with a dog, this is an example of microevolution.
Looking at the peppered moth study in England 95% of moths were white and the other 5% were black. When pollution turned the trees the moths lived on black, the population of moths was 95% black and five percent white. A moths color camouflages it. When the trees were white, …
