The Theory of Evolution is accepted by many scientists and institutions. The Creation Story in the Bible is accepted by the Christian Church. How can both think they’re right?
In doing research, scientists use what is called the ‘scientific method’. The main steps are:
Define a question
Gather information (Observe)
Form an explanatory hypothesis
Test the hypothesis by performing an experiment and collecting data
Analyze the data
Interpret the data and draw conclusions
When defining a question, scientists start with a pre-conceived notion which influences what the question will be. That pre-conceived notion also influences what they look for and how they interpret the data.
In researching evolution, scientists discount the possibility of God, so they naturally look for other reasons to explain their data. The problem is, often times their theories run counter to known scientific laws, so they come up with other theories to explain the conflict.
For example, evolution runs counter to the Law of Biogenesis (See previous article). How do they explain it? They would say that evolution happened over billions of years and conditions on earth were different then. But there is no scientific proof of this.
Next: About Transitional Forms
The Theory of Evolution says that life arose from nonliving matter and eventually evolved into higher forms, but – this is incompatible with a scientific law called the Law of Biogenesis. The Law of Biogenesis, proven in experiments by Louis Pasteur, states that life arises only from pre-existing life, not from nonliving matter.
Biology-online.org says; “Any living thing can only come from another living thing, and no cellular life has ever been observed to arise from non-living matter. For example, a spider lays eggs that will develop into spiders”. The observable science is that animals only reproduce their own kind – fish reproduce only fish, dogs reproduce only dogs, humans reproduce only humans.
The Law of Biogenesis actually supports Biblical Creation. Genesis 1:25 says “God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds”.
Animals reproducing their own kind is observable science, animals evolving into higher forms is not. Some may say the evolution is too slow a process to be observable, but even if that’s so, it has not been proven conclusively. Animals may evolve – for example, people get taller in successive generations, but that’s not the same as evolving into a higher life form.
Next: Evolution Accepted as Truth
A big part of the Theory of Evolution is the idea that certain organisms have traits that enable them to survive better than others. This is called Natural Selection, or Survival of the Fittest. Does Natural Selection exist?
Yes it does. For example, an animal in a cold environment will more likely survive if it has a furry coat. Also sometimes insects can become immune to pesticides.
I looked up ‘natural selection’ in Wikipedia. Charles Darwin explained it this way, “Each slight variation of a trait, if useful, is preserved”. Basically, it means that organisms best adapted to their environments are more likely to survive and reproduce.
Natural selection does exist, but it’s a longer stretch to say that it leads to higher life forms. Actually, Darwin himself, in a letter written in 1860, regretted the use of the term ‘natural selection, preferring the term ‘natural preservation’.
People seem to believe that natural selection is the same as evolution, and that it proves evolution, but it’s not, and proving evolution would require more than animals adapting and surviving in their environment.
Next: A Scientific Law that Supports Creation
The Theory of Evolution says that all life on earth started from single celled organisms, and over the course of billions of years, evolved to higher forms of life. How do evolutionists explain this?
For one thing, the assumption is, that if it happened over the course of billions of years, anything is possible. Evolutionists might say that “Conditions on Earth were different back then”. But can they prove this scientifically? I haven’t found any proof of this, but I encourage people to do their own research. Without proof, evolutionists only have assumptions or theories.
Another way evolutionists may explain evolution is that mutations led to the formation of higher forms. I looked up mutation in Wikipedia.org, and in simple terms, it said that a mutation is a change in the DNA sequence of a cell. Most mutations are harmful, for example, causing cancer. Some mutations are neutral or beneficial, but the beneficial mutations were about adaptation to the environment, a mutation that helped the organism survive.
A beneficial mutation may help an organism survive, but I couldn’t find any conclusive proof that a mutation created a higher life form.
Next: What About Natural Selection?