Where is John Galt?

Where is John Galt? Follow along as we find out!

Sunday, September 15, 2013

A Conversation on Evolution: Part II

Yesterday I talked about Creation, today; I want to focus on Evolution. First, I want to make sure we all have the same definition of the word for clarity sake.

“Evolution is the process in which an organism adapts to better fit in its environment.”

Does everyone agree? (I hope so; I intend to move on using this definition.)

Most organisms have to change to fit the place they live, they adapt over hundreds or millions of years until they are not suited for any other place in the entire planet as well as they have adapted to their own little patch of the world.

Polar Bears would be at a horrible disadvantage if they were transplanted to the African Veldt, just as Lions would be ill prepared to live in the Polar Bears’ tundra. No one adaptation is truly superior to any other, but instead each has an advantage in its niche.

Which brings me back to the original conversation I had at work, and why humans don’t evolve, if evolution is real. Now to be fair, most of my life I accepted the Dogmatic answer that God created man, (and woman) and didn’t look at the process. I find no comfort in evolution; it requires a faith in chance that makes my faith in God look shaky. For evolutionists random chance over millions of years provides all of the impetus for evolutionary change.

I don’t quite buy that argument, simply because it requires so many random “wins”. Not all mutations will be beneficial, statistically most of them will be downright detrimental to the species, and not just in that generation, but cumulative negative mutations will make future generations (even if they were more successful then the parent generation) fail. Dinosaurs were perfectly adapted to their environment, and when the environment changed, they died out en-masse. So to say that evolution got us here by itself, well I don’t have that much faith in blind chance.

One of the other arguments I hear from evolutionists is that the Bible stated God created everything in seven days. I find it amusing when people who don’t “believe” in the Bible try to quote it at me to prove they are right, completely missing the point of the scripture they quote. My answer to the seven days drivel is “Who am I to restrict God to my time measurements.” The Bible states that God created Light, and separated out the Firmaments on the first day, and then just coasted along for the other five (he rested on the seventh day remember) doing the detail cleanup work. Now I don’t think that God, can, should or will be restricted to the twenty-for hour clock that works for us. Then again, maybe he only needed six days he is God after all.

The arguments tend to collapse then, if Evolution is a ‘stand-alone’ process it doesn’t work. Science has already mapped out the Human Genome, and since nearly everything on this planet that has DNA shares huge chunks with us, I tend towards God creating us in his Spiritual image not his physical one, and all the organisms on the planet are related to each other through the spark of life.

You see, Science shoots itself in the foot with evolution since it insists that non-living matter could “magically” (scientifically? randomly?) become alive, Louis Pasteur disproved that in the Nineteenth Century.

Nope sorry Science, rocks don’t come to life here, neither do inert chemical compounds. Scientists have been trying to duplicate the primordial soup for decades with no success, and never even a glimmer of life. So here we are, as clever as think we are, and we can’t replicate what chance did… Curious.

Intense Debate Comments