Discussion Group Report

Creationist Controversy

August 2003

By Richard Layton

Did you know that the Grand Canyon was formed in a matter of only weeks, or at the most, months; that all of the earth and space were created in one day and the atmosphere in another single day; and that it is not unreasonable from a scientific point of view to believe that all the plants were created in one day?

"Creation science" can explain all this for you. And this movement has become very politically powerful. It has claimed to have taken majority control of 2200 school boards in the United States and is demanding that its point of view be taught as a scientific theory in schools on an equal basis with the theory of evolution. Although creationists are agreeable to teaching evolution in science classes, they demand that it be taught as only a theory, not fact. However, the creationists commonly teach creationism as fact, rather than theory.

This month the Humanist Study Group viewed a two-hour PBS videotape called "In the Beginning...The Creationist Controversy," an excellent explication of both the creationist point of view and the evidence for evolution. This tape can be obtained in some public libraries, for sure in the one in Murray city. It contained the main arguments of the creationists and a wealth of evidences for evolution.

Creation scientists are now attempting to use a "scientific" approach in promoting their views. There is no evidence for evolution, say creationists. There are no intermediate transitional forms, as between a fin and a foot, or a forelimb and a wing or scales and feathers of birds.

Creationists are claiming that most scientists follow a closed-minded orthodoxy of thought where they see what they want to see and reject any alternative theories to evolution arbitrarily. The scientists are a "priesthood" which does not allow deviance from the one true theory. Darwinism is the creationist myth of our culture.

Creationist advocates have an Institute of Creation Research, which attempts to reconcile science and religion. They say it is scientifically sound to accept the idea that the earth was created in seven days. The first three days were as described above. The "firmament" of the Bible was the atmosphere. The sun, moon and planets, including the solar system were created in the fourth day; the things that flew and swam in the fifth; the land animals in the sixth; and God rested in the seventh. This explanation, they contend, is not unreasonable from a scientific point of view. As long as this interpretation is not anti-scientific, its reasonable. If all things came from one place, as hypothesized by "orthodox" scientists in the Big Bang theory, there would be homogeneity in the sun, moon, stars and planets; but instead there is a great diversity. It is known that the comets, for instance, Halley's, are very young, indicating they were created in a short time. This fact suggests that the solar system is only about a million years old. Other information doesn't rule out the interpretation that all of these phenomena had a creator. Therefore, it is scientifically feasible.

Adam and Eve's disobedience of God brought sin and death into the world. Evolution denies this fact. Without the concept of sin, people feel no sense of responsibility for their actions, and society will disintegrate into a chaotic immorality. Evolution, the creationists declare, takes the moral significance away from life.

Noah's flood is of central importance. Most of the extinct creatures whose fossil remains we have discovered died in the flood. Others were unable to adapt to life after the flood. Strata of earth and rocks were formed over a short period of time. In the Grand Canyon, which is very large, stretching over several states, the layers were laid down when part of Arizona was uplifted, sending a great rush of water laying down various layers. The Canyon was carved in weeks or perhaps months. The word "catastrophe" should be becoming a more accepted word in geology than it is, since it explains some geologic "episodes."

Humanists can readily see the logical fallacies of creationists. This tape does a good job of presenting the compelling evidences for evolution. Here are just a few of them:

If you take a close look at the details of the Grand Canyon, you see that the life forms in the lower strata are less well developed than those farther up. You can see evolution taking place all around us as life forms change. We even help it along ourselves in some cases, as in the selective breeding of animals like horses, cows, and dogs. There is a good deal of fossil evidence for transitional forms, as in the changes found from reptiles to mammals and the transitional fossils of pre-humans. All of life is based on a common biochemistry. All of life shares a common basic anatomy. There are certain useless anomalies in fossils that would not occur if all life were created by an intelligent creator, for example, pigs with two toes that touch the ground and two that don't, birds and bugs with wings that can't fly, and human males with nipples.

Creationism causes many problems for scientists, mainly in the waste of time they have to spend refuting it. Unfortunately, many scientists do not take this problem seriously; they just ignore creationist claims. There would be many fewer people among the general public believing erroneous creationist claims if more scientists, especially science teachers in college and high school, would do a more adequate job of teaching evolution.

The tape says there are certain things we can learn from evolution: that there is change, that science has nothing to say about the existence of God, that there is no evidence of a world-wide flood, and that creationism is racist because it puts forth only the myth of a particular culture as the truth while it rejects the creation myths of all other cultures. It is the job of science to help allow as many parties as possible into the dialogue about creation but to see to it that no one view commandeers discussion.