1
2
3
Table of Contents
4
By Cindy Martins
The topic of the origin of life is
continue in my studies “believing” in
controversial in science and education,
evolution in order to pass my biology
not because there are no answers, but
courses. But even then I could not make
because there are multiple theories.
sense as to how species could change
There are always questions, such as
from one kind of animal to another,
“Where do we come from?” or “How
such as a reptiles evolving into birds.
did the natural world come to be?”
Many
These common questions are often
graduated
answered
from
the
years
have
from
passed
High
since
School
I
and
evolutionary
College, and now I come across the
worldview, often pertaining to Darwin’s
same questions as before. This time,
theory in his publication On the Origin
however, is different. I am led to believe
of Species.
that humanity has had it all wrong, and that the answers are found in only one
Personally, as I passed through my biology high school courses, we learned about
Darwinian
evolution,
our
common ancestry from “apes,” and the prime principle of “the survival of the fittest.” An example was given of the
book,
the
Bible.
In
fact,
many
researchers have found various proofs for a world created by a designer, and the evidence has left me breathless with more answers to my questions than I ever had before.
giraffe, in which I was taught that initially its ancestors were shorter, and
As C.S. Lewis stated, “Men became
as the need to reach higher vegetation
scientific because they expected law in
grew, the species with longer necks
nature, and they expected law in nature
thrived, while those with shorter necks
because they believed in a legislator.”
died out. In this second edition of the Many other teachings, pertaining to
HisDominion
Magazine,
Steven
Darwinian evolution, provided no room
Martins will be analyzing Charles
for an intelligent designer. What I had
Darwin’s
to
other
modern scientific challenges, and the
Christians, was to accept the theory and
evidential conclusion. In respect to the
do,
along
with
many
theory
of
evolution,
its
5
estimated age of the earth, George
producing new data in genetics. And to
Simopoulos
follow, Steven will be addressing the
will
be
exploring
the
ineffectiveness of radiometric dating,
controversy
and
challenging
education’s
of
“dogma,” presenting the alternative narrative of biblical creation, and the
Dizon, however, will be examining the
reason for the public’s antagonism.
of
worldview
public
Scottish geologist James Hutton. Luis probability
the
of
natural
processes
_______________________________________________________ Cindy Martins Diploma in Practical Nursing RZIM Apologetics Certificate
Cindy is the worship director of Evangelium & Apologia Ministries and has led the Christian Band Sudden Glory since 2013. As a Mohawk College graduate, Cindy uses her skills and assets towards helping the less fortunate in poverty-stricken regions through local, national and international missions. She also operates as an itinerant international speaker for women-related events and ministries in North and LatinAmerican communities.
E&AM had the opportunity of visiting the Canadian Rockies in February 2014. This edition of HisDominion is in-part inspired by the rich natural history of the Rocky Mountains.
6
By Steven R. Martins
In
our
education
and triumphs but ultimately ending in
system, one of the most common
grief. It was in 1831 that the Captain of
lessons that a child receives in his or
the HMS
her school curriculum is on the origin
sought a naturalist to accompany him
of species. And as every graduate will
on a five-year voyage around the
recall,
Darwinian
world.2 Having a great variety of
evolution has followed them ever since
naturalists to choose from, it was
the early years of elementary to the
Charles Darwin who would capture his
final years of University and College.
attention due to his passionate vigor for
It’s an apparent naturalistic “truth,”
the sciences.3 You could imagine that as
unquestionable and unchallenged, and
a naturalist Darwin would be ecstatic,
to consider otherwise would often
but
result in one’s academic ostracization.
inhospitable the conditions were for
But it wasn’t always this way; in 1859
travel and sleep. In fact, he nearly
the theories of common ancestry and
abandoned the voyage if it were not for
natural selection were first proposed by
his commitment with the Captain. But
a man named Charles Darwin, and
it was due to his travel throughout
instead of wide-spread acceptance, it
various regions of the world, most
was first met with intense hostility.
especially the Galapagos Islands, that
the
secularized
theory
of
not
Beagle, Robert
until
he
FitzRoy,
realized
how
led him to develop the theory of The Life of Charles Darwin Charles
Darwin
was
a
evolution; what we know of today as British
Darwinian Evolution.
naturalist, a scientist who spent most of his life studying natural history after having abandoned his medical and ministerial studies.1 He was born in 1809 in Shrewsbury, England, and lived what most would describe a very “tumultuous” life, filled with sorrow
At this point in time, in the nineteenth
(Leff, 2008)
the
education
available to students regarding the origin of species was mainly extracted from biblical interpretation. In fact, the majority believed that God created all 2
1
century,
3
(Ibid.) (Bio, 2014)
7
living beings as written in the book of
an old-earth naturalistic framework.
Genesis. However despite this common
This was also the reason why he
upbringing, Darwin struggled to accept
suffered with guilt, even until death,
any teaching regarding the Bible’s
because besides the disappointment of
claims of origin. He married a Christian
his wife, he knew he was going against
woman, attended church with his wife
the
and children, but lived what most
considered his publication as an “act of
believed was a double life.4
murder,” because his published theory
God
of
the
Bible.
He
even
would not only change public opinion, Darwin
was
initially
it would murder the concept
sceptical of the institution
of god in the minds of the
of the Anglican Church due
people.7
to alleged forgeries and fraudulent activities, but it
This
controversial
wasn’t seen to be the
publication was his life’s
driving influential force for
work On the Origin of
his evolutionary
thinking.5
Species,
Charles Darwin
which
was
However, what is believed is that due to
published in 1859 and sold to the
the slow death of his daughter Anne,
general public. The publication was
who died rather painfully, he closed the
initially a hit, but it was prior to its
door to the possibility of there being a
publishing that Darwin experienced the
“god” in the natural universe. In his
hostile
mind, there was no way that you could
community. This explains why he
reconcile suffering and death with a
remained quiet and secretive during
benevolent
God.6
reaction
of
the
scientific
Although we can’t
most of his theoretical research, fearing
quite say that his evolutionary ideas
the potential backlash of both the
were based upon this one experience,
scientific community and the Church.
we can say that it played an influential
But what kind of effect did his theory
role considering how disinterested he
have? Well, for starters, it eliminated
already was in theology and biblical
the belief of Scripture’s authority in the
matters, and how open he remained
public square, it removed God as the
with other scientific theories proposing
foundation of objective morality, and even provided the means to develop
(AiG 2009) 5 (Bio, 2014) 6 (Sanders, 2009. pp. 15-17) 4
8
7
(Bio, 2014)
various other worldviews that excluded
“mythologizing” of Noah’s flood. It was
the concept of god, including those of
his theory of uniformitarianism that
which even violate the nature of the
further fueled Darwin’s pursuit for an
created order.
adequate theory regarding the origin of species. And in fact, due to the work
What was once controversial has now
become
an
unquestionable
normality, but is the evidence really supporting Darwinian evolution? That question continues to surge today, and there appears to be more than enough reason that the real foundation for naturalism is not the evidence but the unwillingness to accept the reality of God and moral accountability.
data and fossil strata. In this model, in which the world is supposedly billions, not thousands of years old, the fossil record stretches from the Archean era to the Quaternary era.9 Now according to Darwin, his belief that all living originate from a
common
discovery of transitional life forms that
Lyell, who attempted to “understand Earth’s
their respective findings in geological
ancestor could only be proven with the
It was Scottish geologist, Charles reconstruct
developed a timeframe according to
species
The Cambrian Dilemma
and
and studies of Lyell, mankind has
clearly illustrate the accuracy of natural selection.
geological However,
history” from a non-biblical worldview
when
comparing
the
prior to the works of Charles Darwin.8
known fossil record of Darwin’s time to
In
man
who
the present 21st Century, we still haven’t
theory
of
found transitional forms linking two
uniformitarianism, in which present-
different “kinds,” such as dinosaurs
day geological processes are a clear
evolving into birds, or apes evolving
indication of the rate and intensity of
into mankind. We will explore that
past history. His studies, teachings,
later; but what the fossil record does
writings and resulting conclusions are
show is quite the opposite of what
what led to a controversial old-earth
Darwin hoped to see. In a time called
framework,
“debunking”
the Cambrian era, approximately 600
the young-earth biblical model of past
million years ago, there was a point in
history,
time in
fact,
he
spearheaded
8
was
the
the
supposedly and
(Palmer, 2012. pp. 12)
leading
to
the
9
which
complex
life-forms
(Dorling Kindersley, 2012. pp. 6-7)
9
suddenly appeared out of nowhere.
author of Signature in the Cell, lists the
This has been termed as the Cambrian
following
Explosion; and even adopting the old-
Darwinism based on this discovery:
reasons
to
discredit
earth framework to accommodate the “(1) the sudden appearance of
evolutionary theory hasn’t quite helped
Cambrian animal forms; (2) an
considering this historic finding. How exactly
is
this
Darwinism?
a
Well
problem let’s
take
absence of transitional intermediate
for
fossils connecting the Cambrian
the
animals to simpler Precambrian
discovery of the Burgess Shale in 1909 by
Charles
Walcott.10
Dating
forms; (3) a startling array of
the
completely novel animal forms with
findings of the Burgess Shale in the Canadian
Rockies,
novel body plans; and (4) a pattern
Palaeontologists
in which radical differences in form
determined that the fossils were of the
in the fossil record arise before
Cambrian era, but what continues to
more
puzzle scientists is the amount of diversity
and
complexity
of
we
belief
have
this
all
life
that
originated
from
common
ancestor,
which
in
evolved
turn from
There is a clear issue in that Darwinists readily admit
a
explanation has done
non-
grand
Trilobite Fossil from the Cambrian
narrative
of
evolution. Instead, you find great astronomical
leaps
in
genetic
information,
diversity
that
renders
these species as unrelated to one another, and no explanation as to why nothing simpler is found prior to this
(Meyer, 2013. pp. 26-28)
10
this
dilemma
justice,
and no broad consensus has been reached beyond admitting that this is in fact a mystery that casts doubt upon the whole theory of Darwinian evolution. But despite the wide-spread scepticism, there is an explanation to this mystery, a solution that most would not dare consider. They have it all wrong.
Cambrian Explosion. Even Dr. Meyer, 10
they
mystery; no adequate
also
you hoped to see were gradual changes the
that
CANNOT explain this
organic, non-living materials, and what revealing
small-scale
diversification and variations.”11
the
uncovered specimens. Here
minor,
11
(Ibid., 34)
The mistake was taking an old-
empty lab, and a few chemicals lying
earth framework, assuming that the
around.12 No matter how many billions
Earth is billions of years old rather than
of years pass, no living essence is going
thousands, and making the unfounded
to emerge from non-living chemicals.
assumption that present-day geological
You need a Creator, and that’s exactly
processes operated at the same rate and
what Darwin wanted to do away with.
intensity in the prehistoric past. To trace it back to the root problem, by discarding
of
What proved most problematic for
Genesis, along with the rest of the Bible
Darwin’s theory of common ancestry
as a source of revealed knowledge,
was the lack of evidence for transitional
we’ve instead invented a broken man-
life forms. At the time, the fossil record
made system shrouded in mystery due
had only just begun to grow, but it was
to its lack of evidential data and
Darwin’s belief that the fossil record
inherent contradictions. Not only that,
would eventually prove his theory of
mankind has assumed that replacing
common ancestry. Having seen an
the God of the Bible with unguided
incredible pace of fossil discoveries
naturalistic processes was the rational
since the time of Darwin, we would
approach to the origin of life, however
have expected to find the golden goose,
absolutely no naturalistic explanation
a transitional life form that proved that
can
we
be
the
given
early
for
chapters
Missing Links
the
Cambrian
emerged
from
simpler,
less
Explosion; let alone the birth of living
complex, organisms. Unfortunately, we
cells from non-living materials. Even
have discovered quite the opposite,
artificial
lab
greater diversity and absolutely no
environments prove contrary to what
connecting life-forms that can prove
naturalists claim; without an intelligent
macro-evolution.
cells
created
in
agent you’d be left with a set of tools, an
The Problem with this traditional time-scale of evolution is the absence of transitional life-forms! 12
(Rana, 2011)
11
However, despite the glaring holes in Darwin’s
theory,
public
Take for example one of various
education
arguments based on the analysis of
systems continue to teach on the origin
fossil hominids: The Pelvic Bones.
of man, claiming that a pre-historic
Human anatomy reveals that the iliac
“ape-like” creature was our common
blade (hip bone) is “curved forward like
ancestor; and that at some point in time
the handles of a steering yolk on an
our ancestors divided into present-day
airplane,” while that of fossil hominids
apes and human beings. The supposed
point outwards towards the sides.14
claim of evolutionary descendency is
What does this reveal about these
based on the discoveries of several ape-
supposed “ape-man” creatures? That
like species in the fossil record, but not
they couldn’t walk upright like man, but
every discovery is made public for study
instead walked like any other living ape
and analysis. In fact, not anyone can
today.
comment on personally analyzing and studying
these
world-class
But what about the argument firmly
fossils,
“those who specialize in the evolution of man have never actually seen an original hominid fossil, and far fewer have ever had the opportunity to handle or study one.”13 When considering the facts, all of the discovered fossil hominids tell no greater story than today’s existing apes. When comparing various species of apes to mankind, we may notice various similarities in skeletal structures, but that does not mean that the apes are equal to humans, they are distinctly different. Likewise with the discovered fossils, they bear similarities to human skeletal structures, but they are also distinctly
based between
on
the
DNA
chimpanzees
at first the data seems convincing, after all the genetic analysis reveals that humans and apes share 98% of their genes.15
However,
upon
further
inspection, those 98% of our shared genes are what you would call the “body-building genes.”16 This does not mean that we are apes in any shape or form, but rather that an intelligent creator could very well have created different organisms using common building materials.
(Ibid., 16) (Strobel, 2004. pp. 54-55) 16 (Ibid.) 15
12
human
Darwin’s icon of macro-evolution. Well
14
(Menton, 2010. pp. 11-12)
and
beings? This is often regarded as
different.
13
comparisons
Also consider how flawed our
principle towards Darwin’s theory of
studies and evaluations have been
common ancestry? With the absence of
throughout the history of the natural
fossilized transitional forms, surely it is
sciences. In the early 1920s there was
evidence against Darwinian evolution
an
as a whole. And in essence, the
artistic
pithecus,
rendition
a
of
believed
Hespero-
ancestor
to
mankind. This artistic rendition was all
naturalist worldview would no doubt collapse based on its own philosophy.
based on a single tooth discovery, but In light of the recent research, and
when further analyze was made, the flawed evaluation had been exposed. The tooth didn’t belong to an “apeman” creature but rather to an extinct wild pig.17 This unfolding of events was the result of further excavations in 1927 which revealed the remaining skeletal structure
of
the
original
tooth
discovery. The supposed “Nebraska
the vast amount of existing data that greatly discredits Darwinian evolution (of which I cannot sufficiently provide in a short article), we can conclude that Charles Darwin was wrong, and that Charles
Lyell,
in
his
geological
evaluations, was also wrong. But if this is the case, to where can we turn? The only alternative that we find faithful to
Man” was no more.18
the historical evidence is the book of Concluding Remarks
Genesis, where every man ought to first
It was during a lecture at the Creation
Museum
by
Dr.
begin with, the revealed word of God.
Terry
The truth of the matter is, there
Mortenson, on “Dinosaurs: Why You
isn’t such a thing as “examining the
Have Been Brainwashed,” that I wrote
evidence from a neutral standpoint,” as
down a statement about the common
our ministry colleague Luis Dizon
naturalist philosophy. Because up to
would say, “neutrality is a myth.”19 The
this date, mankind has never found
question instead is, “Which bias is the
fossilized hominids alongside fossilized
best bias with which to be biased”?20
dinosaurs, they have inevitably adopted the stance of “the absence of evidence is the evidence of absence.” If this is true, then why can they not apply the same
17 18
(Menton, 2010. pp. 12-13) (National Center for Science Education, 1985)
19 20
(Dizon, 2014) (Ham, 2012. pp. 37)
13
The infamous Nebraska Man hoax was clear evidence that secular scientists were willing to twist, and in some cases, even invent the evidence.
_______________________________________________________ References AiG. (2009). A Pocket Guide to Charles Darwin: His Life and Impact. Hebron, KY: Answers In Genesis. Bio. (2014). Charles Darwin - A Fantastic Voyage. Retrieved July 07, 2014, from Famous Biographies & TV Shows: http://www.biography.com/people/charles-darwin-9266433/videos/charles-darwin-a-fantastic-voyage-2080048675 Bio. (2014). Charles Darwin: A Religious Dilemma. Retrieved July 15 2014, 2014, from Famous Biographies & TV Shows: http://www.biography.com/people/charles-darwin-9266433/videos/charles-darwin-a-religious-dilemma2080045700 Dizon, L. (2014, April 02). Apologetics Pt. 3 – The Myth of Neutrality. Retrieved July 14, 2014, from Evangelium & Apologia Ministries: http://eamcanada.org/2014/04/02/apologetics-pt-3-the-myth-of-neutrality/ Dorling Kindersley. (2012). The Prehistoric Life: The Definitive Visual History of Life on Earth. New York, NY: Dorling Kindersley. Ham, K. (2012). The Lie: Evolution/Millions of Years. Green Forest, AR.: Master Books. Leff, D. (2008, February 10). Darwin's Timeline. Retrieved July 07, 2014, from About Darwin: Dedicated to the Life & Times of Charles Darwin: http://www.aboutdarwin.com/timeline/time_01.html Menton, D. (2010). Did Humans Really Evolve from Ape-like Creatures? In AiG, Apemen: Separating Fact from Fiction (pp. 11-16). Hebron, KY.: Answers In Genesis. Meyer, S. C. (2013). Darwin's Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design. New York, NY.: Harper Collins Publishers. National Center for Science Education. (1985). The Role of "Nebraska man" in the Creation-Evolution Debate. Retrieved July 14, 2014, from The Talk Origins Archive: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/wolfmellett.html Palmer, D. (2012). Young Earth. In D. Kindersley, Prehistoric Life: The Definitive Visual History of Life on Earth (p. 12). New York, NY: Dorling Kindersley.
14
Rana, F. (2011). Creating Life in the Lab: How New Discoveries in Synthetic Biology make a Case for the Creator. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group. Sanders, R. (2009). Darwin's Personal Struggle with Evil. In AiG, A Pocket Guide to Charles Darwin: His Life & Impact (pp. 15-17). Hebron, KY: Answers In Genesis. Strobel, L. (2004). The Case for a Creator. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
_______________________________________________________ Steven Richard Martins Bachelor of Human Resource Management RZIM Apologetics Certificate
Steven is the executive director of Evangelium & Apologia Ministries and operates as the lead-evangelist and apologist. As a York University graduate, Steven specializes in training and development, and has led various apologetic workshops in University-College settings and in Church communities. He is also a prolific itinerant speaker for E&AM, speaking at various international Conferences, including most recently the Canadian cities of Edmonton, Winnipeg, and Toronto, and the Central-American country of El Salvador. Steven is also working towards his Masters in Religious Studies.
A graphic novel translated from the original Greek manuscripts, Messiah: Origins captures the real imagery of the early portions of the Gospels. The blending of all four Gospel accounts into one fluid story, recounting the early years of Jesus Christ, provides a breath-taking experience for all readers. Enamored with the artistic renditions and the powerful imagery, Mark Arey, Kai Carpenter, and Matt Dorff have produced a great pageturner that rivals their previous graphic novel, The Book of Revelation. You can find your copy of Messiah: Origin at your local bookstore, or online through Zondervan, a subdivision of Harper Collins Christian Publishing.
15
By J. Luis Dizon When asked for a contemporary
swept the world last 2009, stating that
example of evolution in action, some of
“the sudden ability of the new swine flu
the most
that
virus to hop from pigs to humans and
proponents of evolution provide are
then to skip from person to person, at
usually in the field of medicine. The
least in Mexico, is an excellent example
reason why it is considered necessary to
of evolution at work.”22
common
responses
develop a new flu vaccine every year is because new strains of flu viruses
With examples such as these, it is
evolve every year. Also, the reason why
tempting for some people to conclude
scientists
that evolution is a done deal, with the
have
to
research
new
antibiotics is because disease causing
case
bacteria have evolved in such a way as
incontrovertibility
to become resistant to them. Richard
However, one can never be too hasty
Dawkins, for example, in The Greatest
about coming to conclusions, especially
Show on Earth, points to the fact that
when
many
controversial as the origins debate.
strains
developed
of
resistance
bacteria to
have
(methycillin-resistant aureus)
and
citing
MRSA
Staphyloccocus
C. Diff. (Clostridium
difficile) as examples of such bacterial evolution.21 In a similar vein, Robert Roy Britt of Live Science looks to viruses for evidence of evolution. Britt points to the Swine Flu epidemic that 21
(Dawkins, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution, 2009. pp. 132-133)
16
topic
of
is
due the
to
the
evidence.
something
as
Two Kinds of Evolution
as evidence of evolution’s ability to organisms,
the
closed
antibiotics
within a relatively short period of time change
being
The most important thing that should be noted is that there is a certain amount of equivocation that is taking place here with regards to the usage of the word “evolution.” Broadly speaking, evolution can be defined as “descent with modification.”23 By this definition, then it cannot really be disputed that
22 23
(Britt, 2009) (Spanish Society of Evolutionary Biology)
what we have observed taking place is
new information, and consequently of
“evolution.” However, there is more to
the creation of new structures in the
it than that. The term “descent with
organisms in question. However, as
modification” encompasses both small-
biologist Jerry Bergman points out, the
scale evolutions (changes in allele
genetic traits for antibiotic resistance
frequencies in a population brought
already exist in some bacteria. It is
about by natural selection acting upon
simply a matter of bacteria having
genetic mutations) as well
those traits being selected
as large-scale evolution
by natural selection over
(also known as “common
against
bacteria
descent,” the idea that all
lacked
them.
living
a
bacteria are also capable of
common ancestor).24 A
obtaining genes from other
beings
share
common mistake is made whereby observations of
that Some
bacteria, which is another
E-Coli Bacterium Credit: Rocky Mountain Laboratories, NIAID, NIH - NIAID
mechanism antibiotic
by
existing
latter, even though what we have are
spread in a bacterial population. And
two totally different types of evolution
most significantly, when bacteria do
involved. This is what is going on with
develop
microbial mutations. We observe small-
mutation, it is through mutations that
scale evolution taking place among
certain
bacteria and viruses, and large-scale
deactivated and thus not targeted by
evolution is extrapolated from that,
the antibiotics, such that the drugs have
even though the leap from the former to
nothing to affect in the bacterium’s
the latter is totally unwarranted by the
system.25
antibiotic cellular
resistances
which
the former are used as evidence for the
resistance functions
can
via are
evidence. No New Information The other major problem with the arguments that evolutionists make is that they assume that the evolutionary changes taking place involve addition of
What we have thus are examples of “evolution” wherein some information is lost or existing information is readapted, but no new information is added to the species’ gene pool. Without
the
information, 24
(Spanish Society of Evolutionary Biology)
25
addition the
of
new
organisms
being
(Bergman, 2003)
17
“evolved” cannot become any more
evolution”); the viruses themselves
complex than they already are.
have not
gained
any
increase in
complexity.27 This is also the case with the evolution of new strains of viruses.
Arms Race or Trench Warfare?
Despite the chorus of voices in the media back in 2009 claiming that the appearance of Swine Flu was evidence for evolution, there are numerous facts that militate against this. First of all, many viruses have long existed in animal species before they eventually find
their
way
into
the
human
population. This was the case, for example, with measles, which originally came from a virus that causes canine distemper and normally only infects dogs. Given that the virus was originally present in birds and pigs before spreading to humans, this leads us to believe that the virus would be a lot older
than
when
it
first
started
appearing among humans.26 And
second,
as
already
existing
information in the viral DNA, rather than the addition of new information.
evolutionary arms race is that when two or more species (say, a predator and its prey) are in a competition with each other, evolutionary adaptations furnish individuals within a species with better means to survive against the competing species, while the same process works within the other species to do the same. This is similar to how nations that are hostile towards each other will engage in an arms race where each nation would develop better weapons as the other does the same to counter enemy
As Dawkins claims in The Blind Watchmaker, this process over time results in more complex and welladapted structures to develop, and that without it evolution would be at a stand-still:
falls under the criteria of “small-scale
18
viral
arms races.” The idea behind an
frequencies amongst the viruses (which
(Catchpoole & Wieland, 2009)
and
evolutionists as forms of “evolutionary
There may be a difference of allele
26
bacterial
examples are often referred to by
with bacterial
strains of viruses involves the reof
the
developments.
resistance, the development of new arrangement
Both
27
(Ibid.)
A Cheetah chasing a Gazelle in Ngorongoro Crater, a “supposed” depiction of Richard Dawkin’s arms race. Credit: Professor Lee R. Berger, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
“Arms races are run in evolutionary
how the evolutionary arms race works.
time, rather than on the timescale
As cheetahs hunt for gazelles, they end
of individual lifetimes. They consist
up killing off the slower gazelles. This
of the improvement in one lineage’s
leaves the faster gazelles to reproduce
(say prey animals’) equipment to
and further spread the genes for fast
survive, as a direct consequence of
running in the gazelle population. In
improvement
turn, as gazelles become better at
predators’)
in
another
lineage’s
(say
evolving
outrunning
cheetahs,
the
slower
equipment. There are arms races
cheetahs find themselves unable to find
wherever individuals have enemies
food and die off, leaving the faster
with
for
cheetahs who are able to outrun and
evolutionary improvement. I regard
catch gazelles to reproduce and spread
arms
their races
own
capacity
as of the utmost
their genes in the cheetah population.
importance because it is largely
This process repeats itself over several
arms races that have injected such
hundred
‘progressiveness’ as there is in
equilibrium is reached where neither
evolution. For, contrary to earlier
species can get any faster due to
prejudices,
there
nothing
physiological limitations. Because both
inherently
progressive
about
species are evolving simultaneously,
is
evolution.”28
generations
until
an
neither one gains a net advantage over the other.29 According to Dawkins, it is
In the same book, Dawkins uses the
arms races such as these that explain
cheetah and a gazelle as illustrations of
the existence of organisms with genes
28
(Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design, 1996. pp. 252-253)
29
(Ibid., 255-260)
19
that make them well-adapted to their
myriad of other adaptive traits, such as
environments:
having slightly better camouflage or slightly different feeding strategies. If it
“[T]he arms-race idea remains by
helps the individual survive, then it is
far
selected for, without any regard for
the
most
satisfactory
explanation for the existence of the
“progressiveness.”32
advanced and complex machinery that animals and plants possess.
Behe goes on to note that while
Progressive ‘improvement’ of the
small-scale arms race (via small-scale
kind suggested by the arms-race
evolution) is possible among ants, other
image does go on, even if it goes on
invertebrates and micro-organisms, the
spasmodically and interruptedly;
kind of large-scale arms races being
even if its net rate of progress is too
posited by Dawkins simply cannot be
slow to be detected within the
documented anywhere. Instead, what
lifetime of a man, or even
we observe taking place in
within the timespan of
nature is more akin to trench
recorded
history.”30
warfare. In trench warfare, anything to help your side
There are major problems
and stop the enemy is a
with
legitimate tactic, even if that
which
this are
theory
however,
highlighted
by
means destroying one’s own
Biochemist Michael Behe. In
infrastructure
rather
than
his book, The Edge of Evolution, Behe
letting them fall into the hands of the
points out that the hypothetical story
enemy. Likewise, in natural selection all
that Dawkins paints “seems plausible at
“progressiveness” is thrown aside as
first only because it doggedly focuses its
individuals scramble for whatever will
gaze on just one trait—speed—ignoring
help them survive long enough to pass
the
of
on their genes to the next generation,
possibilities.”31 Since natural selection
even if that means sacrificing biological
is a blind process, there is no reason
functions or systems that bacteria or
why it would select speed over any
viruses
rest
of
the
universe
could
attack
and
thus
compromise their survival. In Behe’s (Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design, 1996. pp. 258) 31 (Behe, 2007. Pg. 41) 30
20
words, “Darwinian trench warfare does 32
(Ibid., 41-42)
not lead to progress—it leads back to
A single copy of the sickle gene causes
the Stone Age.”33
the hemoglobin in red blood cells, which have been penetrated by the
Evolutionary Monkey-Wrenches The best examples of the attritive (rather than constructive) nature of evolution are the adaptations humans have developed against malaria. This disease,
common
throughout
the
tropical and subtropical world, has been the bane of human existence for years,
killing
millions
throughout
history. In the year 2010 alone, there
malaria parasite, to stick together and gel,
compound
the
problem,
the
Plasmodium Falciparum parasite that is responsible for most cases of malaria is highly adaptive. Most of the drugs that have been developed to cure malaria become useless within a matter of years or decades, as P. Falciparum develops resistance to them within that short span of time.35 However, there are certain
natural
“monkey-wrenches”
that have evolved among human beings that prevent malaria from killing their hosts.
the
cell
to
become
misshapen. This damages and traps the parasite inside, until the cell (and the hidden invader) are destroyed by the spleen. Unfortunately, two copies of the sickle gene lead to sickle cell disease, where all the red blood cells are misshapen, leading to anemia and in many cases, death at a young age.36
were over 154 million cases of malaria, resulting in 660,000 deaths.34 To
causing
Another common adaptation that protects against malaria is thalassemia. Unlike the sickle gene, which is largely confined to people of African descent, thalassemia can be found among people of African, Asian and Middle Eastern descent. Although it is only half as effective as the sickle gene in protecting against malaria, the resulting anemia is also less severe than what is caused by sickle cell disease. This protection is accomplished by making the red blood cells more fragile, with the parasites getting destroyed along with the cells they infect.37
The most common adaptation is the sickle gene, which arose in West Africa.
(Behe, 2007. pp. 42-43) (World Health Organization, 2012) 35 (Behe, 2007. pp. 44-45) 33
34
36 37
(Ibid., 24-27) (Ibid., 35-36)
21
What these and other adaptations
chances of survival and passing on its
against malaria have in
genes to its offspring.
common
they
There is a “net loss” in the
work, not by adding to
gene pools affected, since
the red blood cells, but by
the
“damaging” in a way, in
produce
effect
information
is
that
preventing
the
processes
do
any
not new
in
the
parasite from replicating
affected individuals. One
itself. Behe likens this to
could
plugging a hole in a dam
evolution is actually a
with a TV set. Leaving
Plasmodium Parasite
thus
deconstructive
We
evidence of any “progressiveness” to
act of desperation, since the result is
this process, contrary to what Dawkins
the “least bad” alternative for the
has claimed in his published materials.
affected humans.38 Instead of an arms
And if there is no progressiveness to the
race, we see trench warfare at work.
evolutionary process as we are able to
The human gene pool actually has to be
observe, then we certainly cannot rely
degraded to some extent because the
upon it as an explanation for the origin
degradation would prevent any worse
of the vast diversity of life forms that
damage. As Behe notes: “In a real war,
exist on this earth.
genome has only diminished.”39 Conclusion This is how evolutionary processes work: not by adding new and better systems to living organisms, but by modifying existing
ones—sometimes
with the loss of existing functionality— in order to improve the individual’s 38 39
(Behe, 2007. pp. 30) (Ibid., 43)
22
not
process.
dam originated, it is clear that this is an
real war with malaria, the human
have
that
aside the question of where the TV and
everything relentlessly gets worse. In its
certainly
say
seen
any
References Behe, M. (2007). The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism. New York, NY.: Free Press. Bergman, J. (2003, April). Does the Acquisition of Antibiotic and Pesticide Resistance Provide Evidence for Evolution? Retrieved July 16, 2014, from Creation Ministries International: http://creation.com/does-the-acquisition-of-antibioticand-pesticide-resistance-provide-evidence-for-evolution Britt, R. R. (2009, April 28). Swine Flu is Evolution in Action. Retrieved July 19, 2014, from Live Science: http://www.livescience.com/7745-swine-flu-evolution-action.html Catchpoole, D., & Wieland, C. (2009, June 02). Swine Flu: Is It Evidence of Evolution? Retrieved July 18, 2014, from Creation Ministries International: http://creation.com/swine-flu-is-it-evidence-of-evolution Dawkins, R. (1996). The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design. New York, NY.: W.W. Norton & Co. Dawkins, R. (2009). The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution. New York, NY: Free Press. Spanish Society of Evolutionary Biology. (n.d.). Evolution 101: An Introduction to Evolution. Retrieved July 18, 2014, from Understanding Evolution for Teachers: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/IIntro.shtml World Health Organization. (2012). World Malaria Report 2012. Retrieved July 17, 2014, from World Health Organization: http://www.who.int/malaria/publications/world_malaria_report_2012/wmr2012_no_profiles.pdf
_______________________________________________________ J. Luis Dizon Bachelor of Arts in History and Near & Middle-Eastern Civilizations
Luis Dizon is an associate apologist with Evangelium & Apologia Ministries, and a University of Toronto student. Initially raised as a Roman Catholic, he became an agnostic in his early teenage years. Ironically, it was due to Richard Dawkin’s The God Delusion that led him to inquire of the Christian faith and later become a devout Christian. Faithful to his passion, Luis followed through with his studies on church history, systematic theology, and apologetics. Presently, his specialization has primarily been focused on cults and comparative studies between Christianity, Judaism and Islam.
23
By George Odysseus Simopoulos There is really is no such thing as a
The issue of radiometric dating,
value-free fact. Since James Hutton’s
thought
development of the geologic timeline in
incontrovertible proof of an earth
the late
18th
century, naturalists have
by
naturalists
to
be
billions of years old, is rife with
been trying to maintain the appearance
contradictory
of objectivity in an effort to masque the
inconsistent results. However, before
undisclosed assumptions supporting
we
their hope of a world without God.
radiometric dating and its ability to
Perhaps
accurately infer the age of the earth, it’s
the
most
ubiquitous
dive
and
into
is the concept of uniformitarianism; the
radiometric
belief that all the earth’s processes have
Rutherford, in 1905, suggested that
operated in the same way today as they
certain elements which decayed into
dating
explain
of
important
have in the
first
problems
assumption of modern scientists today
past.40
to
the
internally
works.
how Ernest
This assumption,
other elements because of radioactivity
like all assumptions, is affirmed in the
could be used to determine the age of
mind of the scientist before he even
rocks.
enters the laboratory to make his
radioactive elements in rocks decayed
observations and pronouncements on
at a constant rate, we could measure
nature. Modern scientists are some of
the
the
people,
isotope) and the derivative element
particularly on matters which challenge
(daughter isotope) in order to find an
the foundation of their belief in an old
approximate
earth. And so, rather than disclose the
difference between the two.41 To use the
beliefs they cannot substantiate, they
example of a popular dating method,
deny their bias and claim an objectivity
Potassium-Argon dating, half of a
which does not and cannot exist.
Potassium-40 rock sample decays into
most
bias-driven
41 40
(Pidwirny, 2006)
24
The
belief
radioactive
age
was
that
element
based
since
(parent
on
the
(DeYoung, et al., 2005. “Radioisotope Dating is Performed by many Commercial Laboratories”)
Argon-40 with a half-life of 1.25 billion
assumptions is demonstrably false.
years. If the assumptions about the method are correct, then we can measure the amount of Potassium-40
Assumption 1: Constant Rates of Decay
and Argon-40 and determine the age based on how much of each is present. A
sample
that
Potassium-40
contained
and
50%
50%
Argon-50
would then have a dated age of 1.25 billion
years.
straightforward,
This right?
seems
Creationists
have been correct to point out that this method is based on three unprovable and questionable assumptions: (1) That the rate of decay has been constant throughout time (2) That the isotope abundances in the specimen dated have not been altered during its history by addition of either parent or daughter (3) that when the rock first formed it contained a known amount of daughter material.42
There
is,
however,
compelling evidence to suggest that each
one
of
these
foundational
An inalterable rate of decay in radioactive
rocks
insurmountable
poses
obstacle
to
an the
creationist model, which suggests an age of the earth of approximately 6000 years. There are indeed samples of rocks that have undergone tremendous radioactive decay based on radio-halos and
fission
damage
tracks
resulting
– from
microscopic radioactive
decay – leading scientists to believe that such samples are billions of years old. If, however, it was shown that rates of decay are subject to change and can experience short bursts of decay, in some cases a billion-fold more, this assumption would be proven false and would
drastically
undermine
the
assumption of uniformitarianism. As it stands, there are compelling reasons to believe that certain events could alter the rate of decay in a number of elements. In one instance, German scientists in 1999 were successively able to strip all 187 elections from a sample of rhenium-187, reducing the half-life
The Process of Radioactive Decay: Parent Isotope becoming Daughter Isotope. Image Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0
42
(Vardiman, Snelling, & Chaffin, 2000)
from 42 billion years to just 33 years!43 The
43
process
employed
by
these
(Woodmorappe, 2001)
25
scientists is a relatively new discovery,
life rates.45 The RATE (Radioisotopes
known as bound state beta decay.
and the Age of the Earth) research team, in exploring this process, found out that increasing the energy of the alpha particle by only 10% decreased the nuclear half-life by 100,000 times.46 The
connection
between
quantum
mechanics and rates of decay are in their infancy at the present time, but An illustrated example of Radioactive Alpha Decay
given more research, it may one day
Another possible way that decay rates
shed more light into how nuclear decay
can be altered applies directly to what is
rates are established and how they can
known as the alpha decay process.
change.
Alpha
decay
occurs
for
the
radioisotopes samarium-147, thorium-
Assumption 2: Unaltered Rock
232, uranium-235, and uranium-238.44
Samples
Throughout the decay process, the nucleus of the decaying atom emits an alpha particle at high speeds. This phenomenon, while essential to the stability of all matter, is actually not well understood. What we do know, however, can help shed light as to how the
radioactive
decay
rates
can
accelerate. When the alpha particle emitted reaches a certain distance, relative to the distance from the nucleus of the atom, the half-life of the atom becomes extremely sensitive to changes in half-life, causing atoms that emit alpha particles to vary from milliseconds to trillions of years in half-
The second major assumption held by uniformitarian scientists is the belief that rock samples have not been contaminated with additional parent or daughter
isotopes.
scientists
will
(DeYoung, et al., 2005. “Radioisotopes Samarium-147, Thorium-232, Uranium-235”)
26
concede
in
textbooks on the radioactive dating of rocks
that
problems
persist
in
determining which rock samples have been contaminated and how.47 The best example to illustrate how inconsistent this assumption can be is in the oldest two Precambrian sites, Elves Chasm in the Grand Canyon and the Beartooth Mountains. From these two sites,
(Ibid., “Milliseconds to Trillions”) (Ibid., “Half-life by 100,000 times”) 47 (Faure & Mensing, 2005); (Dickin, 2005) 45
44
Uniformitarian
even
46
potassium-argon, rubidium-strontium,
isotopes. Another example of this is
samarium-neodymium, and lead-lead
Mount
dating methods were used to evaluate
scientists commented: “We observe an
their ages. The dates derived by these
age of 3.9 billion years versus a true age
methods conflicted with one another to
of just 50 years. This is a discrepancy of
such a degree that it was concluded that
7.8 billion percent!”49 Unfortunately,
they could not provide any statistically
uniformitarian scientists place great
usable isochrons. These findings imply
trust in isochrons plots and graphs,
substantial contamination of the rock
which
sample, particularly the potassium-
information on sample age. The RATE
argon radioisotopes, and suggest an
research results raise serious challenges
open system, where other factors are
to the assumption of unaltered rock
contributing to the composition of the
samples, given the grave inconsistency
rock sample. The way such conflicting
of
dates could emerge from supposed
methods.
ancient
rocks
is
through
Ngauruhoe
are
dates
rocks.
thought
across
to
RATE
give
multiple
valid
dating
magma
chambers or pockets existing in the crust. Evidence shows that daughter
Assumption 3: Known Amounts of Parent and Daughter Isotopes
isotopes from mantle-magma remain when the pockets of magma in the crust cools. As a result, these rocks yield ages far greater than they actually are.48 What is happening in most cases are a mixing of crustal materials that carry its own mixture of parent and daughter
The
final
assumption
held
by
uniformitarians is the belief that we can know the amount of parent and daughter isotopes present at the time a rock was formed. The simple challenge raised by creation scientists is that no geologists were present when most
The South Rim of the Grand Canyon, USA; a treasure-trove for geologists and paleontologists. Photographed by Roger Bolsius, Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0
48
(DeYoung, et al., 2005. “The Resulting Rock Formation”)
49
(Ibid., “This is a Discrepancy”)
27
rocks were formed, so they cannot test
that we have seen form. Kilauea Iki
how much of each element was present
basalt in Hawaii, formed in AD 1959
at
This
was given an age of 8.5±6.8 million
assumption is proven to precarious just
years; Mt. Stromboli in Italy, formed in
by looking at lava flows today. Just as
September 23, 1963 was given an age of
an example, the Mt. St. Helens crater,
2.4±2 million years; and Kilauea basalt
observed to have formed and cooled in
in Hawaii is known to have formed less
1986, was analyzed in 1996 and was
than 1,000 years ago and was given an
found to have so much argon-40
age of 42.9±4.2 million years.52 The
content that it was given a calculated
obvious conclusion most researchers
age of 350,000 years.50 The importance
have reached is that there has to have
of argon-40 in a rock sample cannot be
been excess argon-40 in the molten
understated. For over three decades,
lava. Further confirmation comes from
potassium-argon dating has been the
diamonds formed in the mantle and
dominant method when coming to
carried to the surface by explosive
dates in the billions of years. Andrew
volcanism. When Zashu et al. obtained
Snelling from the Institute for Creation
a potassium-argon date of 6.0±0.3
Research remarks:
billion years it was obvious that excess
the
time
of
formation.
argon was responsible, because there “The
potassium-argon
dating
method is the only decay scheme that can be used with little or no concern for the initial presence of the
daughter
isotope.
This
is
because Ar-40 is an inert gas that does not combine chemically with any other element and so escapes easily from rocks when they are heated.”51 The problems associated with relying on this method become evident when
could not possibly be diamonds older than
the
earth.53
Funhouser
and
Naughton found that excess argon-40 resided in fluid inclusions of olivine, plagioclase, and pyroxene in basalt, and was sufficient to yield ages of 2.6 million years to 2.9 billion years.54 The overwhelming evidence suggests that excess
argon-40
is
ubiquitous
and young volcanoes, but is equally valid when applied to supposedly
we do a brief survey of rock samples (Ibid.) (Zashu, Ozima, & Nitoh, 1986. pp. 710-712) 54 (Funkhouser & Naughton, 1968. pp 46014607) 52 53 50 51
(Austin, 1996. pp. 335-343) (Snelling, 1999)
28
in
magma. This is not only true for recent
ancient volcanoes from the Middle
amount of nuclear decay which took
Proterozoic.55 Since 99.6% of decay-
place in this layer, it is hypothesised
derived argon-40 is indistinguishable
that accelerated decay during the first
from primordial argon from the earth’s
two days of creation occurred, before
mantle, we can never be sure of argon
any life was on earth. As the rocks were
gas as a barometer of a rock’s age. Thus,
being put in place, several billion years
all potassium-argon dates must be read
of nuclear decay took place, as heat
with great suspicion, and so must the
from the radioactive decay dispersed
fossil dates calibrated by
quickly.57 Another hypothesis proposed
them.56
by creation scientists is accelerated Geologic History and the Bible Given
the
prevalence
mechanisms that would
decay during the Flood, which included of
allow for
accelerated decay processes, creation scientists
have
begun
to
develop
an unprecedented period of global tectonics, erosion, and rapid rockforming processes. The RATE research team concluded:
tentative models as to how such processes earth’s
could
early
research gathered
have
history.
team evidence
occurred The
“The rocks resulting from this
in
catastrophic event [the Flood] give
RATE
clear evidence of nuclear decay with
has
resulting daughter products,
of
radio-halos,
accelerated decay within
fission
tracks… The RATE research
the past few thousand
concludes that accelerated
years, which has been
decay on this scale occurred
understood in light of its theological
and
during the single year of the
connection.
Flood.”58
The team hypothesised that Precambrian rock, a geologic strata containing
With the placement of “The Deluge” by Gustave Doré (1832-1883)
accelerated
decay
rates
in
few fossils and which accounts for 88%
place, the next logical question is how
of the conventional geologic history,
does the young-earth model account for
represents much of the original crust of
the
inconsistency
across
dating
the earth at creation. Given the large (DeYoung, et al., 2005. “Heat from Radioactive Decay”) 58 (Ibid., “The Rocks resulting from this Catastrophic”) 57 55 56
(Snelling, 1999) (Ibid.)
29
methods then? As the earth was being
for
formed, substantial radioactive decay
scientists cannot account for. Given
occurred throughout the entire planet.
more time and research, we should
As
expect to hear even more from creation
a
result,
the
original
surface
(Precambrian strata) contained a large
phenomenon
uniformitarian
scientists.
amount of daughter isotopes. 1,500 years after creation, the Flood began a short period
of intense geological
activity. Flood sediments, sometimes miles in thickness, diffused throughout the
earth
radioactive
with
varying
material,
levels
making
of
them
statistically unusable. Instead, igneous magma from the mantle intruded these upper
sedimentary
layers,
and
as
tumultuous geologic activity persisted, a brief one year period of accelerated decay occurred within this layer, giving dated ages younger than the originally created crust (Precambrian).59 From what we know about argon in the mineral muscovite, we can deduce that heating certain rocks will cause them to absorb significant amounts of argon gas.60
During
the
Flood,
intense
geological activity would have caused the perfect conditions for such rapid absorption of argon gas, giving us abnormally high potassium-argon dates today.
These
explanations,
while
grounded in the reality of the scripture, are possible models that could account (DeYoung, et al., 2005. “This Episode Corresponded to”) 60 (Snelling, 1999) 59
30
Concluding Remarks From the overwhelming evidence against uniformitarian assumptions, it is clear that we as biblical creationists have solid grounds to critique the supposed science of an old earth. The implications of new research showing the validity of the creation model is far reaching for the Christian community and beyond. Educators, parents, and scientists
must
interact
with
the
evidence showing a young-earth in order
to
do
away
with
faulty
assumptions clandestinely dragged into people’s worldviews. At the street level, it should be the duty of every Christian to know the assumptions of their neighbors and the evidence against it in order to lovingly critique them. By showing
the
naturalistic
inconsistency worldview,
of
we
the can
effectively show how it is in scripture that we have true knowledge of our origins. The idea of an old earth, simply put, rests on a crumbling foundation of faulty assumptions. Let your friends, family and colleagues hear the words of Jesus when he said: Everyone then who
hears these words of mine and does
Be that wise man or woman. Let God’s
them will be like a wise man who built
word determine the past, not man’s
his house on the rock (Matthew 7:24).
opinions.
_______________________________________________________ References Austin, S. (1996). Excess Argon within Mineral Concentrates from the New Dacite Lava Dome at Mount St. Helens Volcano. Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal 10.3 , 335-343. DeYoung, D., Baumgardner, J., Humphreys, D., Snelling, A., Austin, S., Chaffin, E., et al. (2005). Thousands, Not Billions: Challenging an Icon of Evolution, Questioning the Age of the Earth [Kindle Edition]. Green Forest, AR: Master Books. Dickin, A. (2005). Radiogenic Isotope Geology, 2nd Edition. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Faure, G., & Mensing, T. (2005). Isotopes: Principles and Applications, 3rd Edition. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Funkhouser, J., & Naughton, J. (1968). Radiogenic Helium and Argon in Ultramafic Inclusions from Hawaii. Journal of Geophysical Research, 73 , 4601-4607. Pidwirny, M. (2006). Concept of Uniformitarianism. Retrieved July 21, 2014, from Fundamentals of Physical Geography, 2nd Edition: http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/10c.html Snelling, A. A. (1999). Excess Argon: The Achilles Heel of Potassium-Argon and Argon-Argon Dating of Volcanic Rocks. Acts & Facts 28 (1) . Vardiman, L., Snelling, A., & Chaffin, E. (2000). Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: A Young Earth Creationist Research Initiative. El Cajon, CA: Institute for Creation Research. Woodmorappe, J. (2001, August 1). Billion-Fold Acceleration of Radioactivity Demonstrated in Laboratory. Retrieved 19 2014, July, from Answers: https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/acceleration-of-radioactivityshown-in-laboratory/ Zashu, S., Ozima, M., & Nitoh, O. (1986). K-Ar Isochron Dating of Zaire Cubic Diamonds. Nature, 323 , 710-712.
_______________________________________________________ George O. Simopoulos Bachelor of Arts in Political Science & Ethics, Society & Law
George Simopoulos is an associate apologist with Evangelium & Apologia Ministries. As a University of Toronto graduate, he serves as an intern with Power to Change at the UofT downtown campus, and serves his local Harvest Bible Chapel Church as a Youth Leader. Having joined E&AM in 2014, George is now an itinerant speaker and contributes to the ministry through intensive research and education. 31
32
By Steven R. Martins When analyzing culture, we can
their
own
bias.
This
is
why
generally find three layers of its
secularization isn’t truly non-religious.
composition: (1) surface, (2) content
Little have we known that by sending
and (3) foundation. The first layer is
our children and grandchildren to
likened to an apple’s skin, it is the
public institutions, we have sent them
individual’s
to various secularized indoctrination
expressed second
behaviour throughout
layer
is
commonly culture.
what
you
The
camps,
find
possibility that naturalism may have it
underneath the apple’s skin; peel the
antagonistic
towards
the
all wrong.
skin away and you’ll find the values that It’s no exaggeration; just consider
the culture upholds. And finally, the core of the apple is the third layer, the beliefs of the people who form the culture.61 Beliefs develop values, values (or lack thereof) develop behaviours, and this in turn determines the culture.
the lack of evidence for Darwinian evolution, and the empty claims of life originating from non-living materials. Without ever having witnessed macroevolution
in
action,
without
ever
finding a transitional life form in the It is the belief of the general public
fossil record, the public continues to
that mankind, along with every other
rally behind Darwinian evolution as
living species, evolved from a common
“science,” confusing the discipline of
ancestor. And it is because of this belief
knowledge for an unproven “theory.”
that culture has shaped the teachings
But unfortunately, children aren’t given
and curriculums of public education as
a choice as to what they can believe
“anti-biblical.” Every individual has a
based on the available evidence. They
belief, every person
are force-fed and taught Darwin’s
approaches
a
subject with their own presuppositions;
concepts
therefore neutrality is nothing more but
common ancestry, completely oblivious
a mere “illusion” to those ignorant of
to
its
of flaws,
controversy. 61
natural holes, We’re
selection and
and
historic
indoctrinating
(Malphurs, 2013. pp. 26)
33
children by not teaching them the truth,
produced, a sample was taken, a known
while
the
50-year-old rock created by the various
opportunity to investigate the evidence
eruptions. When tested for dating
for biblical creation.
analysis, the results were different than
also
robbing
them
of
the known 50 years of its formation. The Science of Creation
The dating methods used are the same
At first glance, viewing the world through the lenses of naturalism, one could claim that biblical creation is nothing more than a myth, a fictional story. However, such claims of biblical creation being “unscientific” are both false
and
shallow.
There
is
an
abundance of evidence that builds the case for a real biblical creation account, with real biblical events. In fact, whether you believe in naturalism or Christianity, both require a certain degree of faith, and in naturalism’s case, the faith required for Darwinian
that are used to date fossils and rock sediments, radiometric dating. The result was not 50 years, as scientists had affirmed, but rather a calculated 350,000 years.62 What was wrong with the
dating
there’s
no
method? issue
with
calculating how many parent isotopes there are in comparison with daughter isotopes,
it’s
more
regarding
and
uniformitarian
assumptions
the
presuppositions that we have inserted into the interpretation-phase of the evidence.
evolution greatly outweighs the faith we find in Christianity. Having exposed the
radiometric
Technically,
To
provide
a
more
detailed
explanation, geologists and naturalists
flaws of Darwinian evolution in earlier articles, and the naturalistic approach to history, we now delve into the various arguments for the biblical creation account. Radiometric Dating In
1986,
Mount
St.
Helens
produced, as a result of continuous volcanic activity, a lava dome (rock layer). Amongst the rocks that were
34
Mount St. Helens demonstrated the potential for catastrophic geological changes as a result of eruption. Credit: Lyn Topinka, United States Geological Survey
(Snelling, Problems with the Assumptions, 2010. pp. 17) 62
have
to
Assumption 2: The rate of change
determine the age of rocks and fossils.
used
radiometric
dating
was constant. Scientists assume
An example of how this works is finding
that
a rock sample in the Grand Canyon that
changed
may have any of these five parent
throughout
isotopes (isotopes are radioactive forms
impact of Creation or changes
of an element, containing equal number
during Noah’s Flood.
radioactive at
atoms
the time,
have
same
rate
ignoring
the
of protons but different number of neutrons in their nuclei, therefore differing in atomic mass):
Assumption
3:
The
atoms
all
produced
were
daughter by
radioactive decay. Scientists assume “(1) Uranium-238; (2) Uranium-235;
that no outside forces, such as
(3) Potassium-40; (4) Rubidium-87;
flowing groundwater, contaminated
and (5)
Samarium-147.”63
the sample.”64
Because of the instability of these
Considering the case of the rock sample
elements,
(better
from Mount St. Helens, the assumption
understood as “transform”) into a
they
decay
made by geologists were that the newly
stable
uranium
formed magma rocks had little to none
decaying into lead, potassium changing
element,
such
daughter isotopes, but instead they
to argon, etc. Again, radiometric dating
discovered that the rock sample had
is accurate, but its problem concerns its
more
interpretation
presentation.
expected.65 As a result, a 50-year-old
Geologist Dr. Andrew Snelling provides
rock rendered a result of 350,000
the following erroneous assumptions
years, clear evidence that naturalists
that naturalists embrace:
had been adjusting the results to
and
as
daughter
isotopes
than
accommodate an old-earth worldview, “Assumption
1:
The
original
number of unstable atoms can be known. many
Scientists unstable
assume
(parent)
how atoms
rather than to acknowledge a relatively young earth. But have any dating methods
revealed
a
young
earth
“number”?
existed at the beginning based on how many parent and daughter atoms are left today. (Ibid., 12) (Snelling, Geochemical Processes in the Mantle and Crust, 2000. pp. 123-304) 64 65 63
(Snelling, Back to Basics, 2010. pp. 11)
35
In New Mexico, zircon crystals were
of the rock strata and fossils. Also,
tested by geologists, first by calculating
many
rates
the uranium (parent isotopes), which
accelerated in the recent past
rendered “an age of 1.5 billion years,”
including
sedimentary
rock
and then by calculating how much
formation,
erosion
and
helium had “leaked out as a result of
radioactive decay. Whatever the
the decay,” rendering “an age of 6,000
source
years.”66 There is a clear contradiction,
presence in nearly every sample
and the reason is found in the three
tested worldwide is a strong
main assumptions previously listed by
challenge to an ancient age.”67
of
of
the
change
were
rates,
carbon-14,
its
Dr. Snelling. Whether naturalists realize it or not, Even consider Carbon-14 dating, often
used
fossils.
for dating pre-historic
After
intensive
carbon dating has actually supported the side of young earth creationists. But
research
this is only a fraction of what we find in
Geophysicist John Baumgardner states
support of a young earth worldview.
the following:
There are other evidences that point towards a biblical creation, such as soft
“An alternative interpretation of the carbon-14 data is that the
tissues found in Dinosaur bones, and whole frozen Mammoths in Siberia.
earth experienced a global flood catastrophe which laid down most
Soft Tissue in Dinosaur Bones In 2000, paleontologists discovered a fossilized Tyrannosaurus leg bone in South
Dakota.
Included
in
the
discovery was an intact femur bone, 107 centimetres
long.68
Although
these
discoveries take place all around the world, this was one of the most shocking How can Tyrannosaur soft tissue survive millions of years? The answer is, it can’t! In fact, a Northridge Scientist (Mark Armitage) was fired from his job for finding soft tissue on a Triceratops fossil, proposing a “Young Earth.”
(Snelling, Problems with the Assumptions, 2010. pp. 19) 66
36
discoveries
recorded
in
human history, soft tissue was found inside the Tyrannosaurus’ femur bone!
67 68
(Baumgardner, 2010, pp. 61) (Hecht, 2005)
These soft tissues were blood cells that
sheds some light on the dinosaur’s soft
were still intact inside the femur, real
tissue preservation:
soft tissue that can be stretched like an “No experimental results support
elastic. The scientists who published
long-age survival, as the last paper
these findings were Mary Schweitzer
by
and her team of paleontologists, and although a remarkable discovery for the Schweitzer’s
ago during Noah’s Flood.”72
However, what was later discovered that of a duck-billed dinosaur, in the “Judith River Formation (below the Hell Creek, and supposedly 80 million years old).”70 This finding produced substantial
soft
tissues,
and
even
verified as real and authentic by various laboratories. How do you account for this given naturalism’s claim of an old
readily
buried only a few thousand years
findings.69
was another fossilized dinosaur bone,
team
makes sense if the bones were
history of science, others have sought to destroy
Schweitzer’s
admits... yet the discovery really
The evidence doesn’t stop there; it keeps mounting, such as in the case of the
Siberian
reportedly buried,
graveyard
50,000 some
where
mammoths even
are
completely
mummified by the below freezing temperatures.73 Frozen Mammoths
earth? According
to
the
naturalist’s
What has continued to puzzle
geologic timeframe, the Ice Age took
naturalists is how fossilization liquids
place millions of years ago, but as we
have not penetrated or seeped into the
have already seen, how we’ve derived
bones after “millions” of years. Even
an old earth framework has been wrong
Jeff Hecht, writer for the New Scientist,
from the upstart. An argument that we
writes “[the femur] was intact when
find in support of a biblical young earth
found, and its hollow interior had not
are the surrounding conditions of the
been filled with minerals. That is
mammoths in Siberia. Secular scientists
bone.”71
have claimed that mammoths have
Paleontologist Marcus Ross, however,
lived and thrived during the ice age
unusual for a long-buried
(although true, they falsely imply “in (Ross, 2010. pp. 84) (Ibid.) 71 (Hecht, 2005) 69 70
72 73
(Ross, 2010. pp. 84-85) (Oard, 2006. pp. 17)
37
Woolly Mammoths couldn’t have thrived during the intense Ice Age; the conditions would have had to be favorable to sustain creatures of great magnitudes, meaning that places like Siberia could not have been fully glaciated. Credit: Charles R. Knight, 1916, American Artist who painted Pre-Historic Creatures for World-Class Museums.
the conditions of the ice age”), but the
than gradual, of a whole species, of
uniformitarian theory doesn’t match up
which approximately fifteen million are
with the evidence.
estimated to have been buried and/or fossilized worldwide, serious questions
Woolly mammoths are in fact much larger and heavier than their elephant counterparts of today, but they are similar in the amount of energy they use and the amount of nutrition they require on a daily basis for survival. Given the conditions of the Ice Age, very few bodies of water could provide mammoths with sufficient hydration, let alone vegetation for consumption. As meteorologist Michael Oard states, “Where is such feed going to come from in Siberia? ...nearly all of the water in
are raised against naturalism’s theories for the mammoth’s living conditions.75 What
is
credited
to
their
mass
extinction is not a long thousand year process of burial, or quick-freeze, but rather “compressing the time scale into a 100- to 200- year period,” the evidence found in “sand and loess deposits”
reveal
a
major
weather
catastrophe similar to a dust storm, burying creatures alive and suffocating them to death.76 To quote Michael Oard:
Siberia is frozen during the winter.”74 “Climate change at the end of the In
fact,
many
of
the
frozen
Ice Age was the main cause of late
mammoths discovered were found to be
Ice Age extinctions. A post-Flood
frozen in a standing upright position,
Ice Age explains why the large
appearing as if they had been buried
animals did not go extinct at the
alive. To have mass extinction rather 75 74
(Oard, 2006. pp. 27)
38
76
(Ibid.) (Ibid., 173)
end of previous glaciations. There
information.78
were no previous glaciations or
transcends its materialistic medium,
interglacials. There was only one
pointing towards an intelligent mind.
Ice Age, brought on by the unique
In
conditions
information contained in our DNA is
that
followed
the
not
global Flood.”77
the
The
same
way,
derived
from
information
the its
complex chemical
composition; but rather transcends its What can we conclude? The evidence leads us to believe that mammoths
medium, Intelligent
pointing
towards
an
Creator.79
didn’t live in glaciated regions during the ice age, and that their death was the
In truth, the evidence for biblical
result of earth’s global climate change
creation and a “young earth” abounds,
as a result of a post-flood world.
but that’s not what we find in our classrooms. Although we don’t suspect,
The Argument for a Creator
given the secularization of our public
But evidence for a young earth is insufficient if there isn’t evidence for an intelligent designer, a biblical creator. We don’t need to go searching in caverns, or digging up rocks in canyons to find any of that evidence, we can just turn to our DNA.
education,
makes a point in the following analogy: You could write a message on a piece of information contained on the written paper would not be derived from the chemical ink or the fibres of the paper, but rather, the ink and paper serve as
(Ibid.)
even
least hope that some mention of these young earth evidences are presented to students. But instead, teachers and governments
remain
silent
while
endorsing the teaching of false “truths”, Haeckel. The Deception of Ernst Haeckel
communicate
the
Ernst
Haeckel
was
a
German
biologist who constructed a series of diagrams comparing the embryos of different
species
embryonic
in
their
development.
early These
diagrams are commonly presented in
78 77
is
mentioned in our schools, we would at
paper and give that to a friend, the
to
creation
such as the historic scandal of Ernst
Biologist Dr. Stephen C. Meyer
mediums
that
79
(Meyer, 2003) (Ibid.)
39
today’s
science
and
ancestry. Yet even then, the evidence
common
would no longer be evidence, because
of
fish,
in truth these diagrams are nothing but
chicken, pig, calf, and human side-by-
false misrepresentations of the real
side at three stages of development.80
embryos.
museums;
textbooks
the
illustrating
the
The
most embryos
diagrams
reveal
And yet despite this scandal in the
unquestionable similarities between the
late
embryos on display, which supposedly,
diagrams are still used today in many
according
to
1800’s,
Haeckel,
Haeckel’s
textbooks,
and
embryonic taught
in
pointed towards a common
various provincial and state
ancestor.
school
However
these
systems.82
The
diagrams, as convincing as
authenticity of the facts are not
they
taken into consideration if it
may
seem,
were
exposed for what they were, fraudulent
forgeries.
illustrations nothing
of
close
involves
Human Embryo Photograph
The
the
embryos
to
the
were
casting
Darwinian
Credit: Ed Uthman, MD
doubt
evolution,
on the
“doctrine” that cannot change.
authentic
photographs; in other words, Haeckel had forged his diagram to better fit
What Public Education Should Provide
Darwin’s theory of evolution.81 An additional issue with Haeckel’s infamous diagrams was that he had chosen the embryos that looked the most similar to each other to better present his case, yet even then the various species’ embryos looked very different from each other in their earliest stages. What would have better suited Haeckel was to select species at random, rather than carefully select what fitted Darwin’s theory of common
But can we fault a secularized postChristian culture for teaching a mancentered
religion
of
atheism?
We
should expect that, after all it is culture that shapes the education, and the education that helps develop culture by influencing
beliefs,
values
and
behaviours. To request that evolution be removed from our school systems would be too bold a request, violating in turn the free will of students to choose for themselves what they want to believe. Instead, both naturalism and
(Strobel, 2004. pp. 47-50) 81 (Ibid.) 80
40
82
(Ibid.)
biblical creation should be taught side
committing a “disservice” to the general
by side, and then allowing students to
public, rather than contributing to
develop their worldview based on their
scientific thought.84 But the hostility we
choice.
find against creationists, not only against Dr. Ross, is due to the biblical
Having
visited
the
Creation
Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, the museum took up the initiative to present
both
the
naturalistic
and
truth that secular culture (or any culture for that matter) apart from God renders its constituents as “hostile to God.”85
biblical origin narratives side-by-side. This allowed attendants to compare the
Why the Public fears Genesis
evidence, to consider the alternatives, There’s a reason why naturalists
and to re-evaluate their beliefs. Most importantly, it provided a positive atmosphere where both naturalists and creationists
can
feel
secure
in
expressing their thoughts. We find quite the contrary in public education, in which naturalists can express their theories freely while creationists are
fear the book of Genesis, and it’s not because they believe it to be myth and fairytale,
it’s
more
concerning
its
content and implications. The book of Genesis reveals that mankind was created by God and in the image of God. To be created by God and to be governed by God is in other words to be
ostracized and persecuted.
held morally accountable to God. What An example is a young earth
we find in Genesis is not only the origin
creationist’s pursuit for his Ph.D. in
story for our physical universe, but the
Geosciences, Dr. Marcus Ross. He
reason why we see evil and suffering in
wrote
our world. Genesis reveals that we are
an
dissertation
“impeccable” on
the
197-page and
sinners as a result of Adam’s sin, and
extinction of Mosasaurs, according to
diversity
not only Genesis; the whole of Scripture
field.83
from Genesis to Revelation paints a
However “it is this use of a secular
historical picture of sinful man in need
credential to support creationist views
of
that worries many scientists,” who
evidence in support of biblical events,
other paleontologists in the
saving
grace.86
With
scientific
apparently claim that Dr. Ross is (Ibid.) Romans 8:7 86 Romans 5:12 84 85 83
(Dean, 2007)
41
along
documents
(Ten Commandments) that all men
affirming the historicity of Scripture,
with
historical
have failed to keep, lived a perfect
there’s no doubt that what Scripture
moral life, and paid our penalty
portrays is an accurate description and
through a sacrificial death, that all men
depiction of reality. And to take the
and women who place their faith in
teachings of Scripture into
Him will “not perish but
consideration, the Word of
inherit eternal life.”88 In
God reveals that no man is
other words, God the Son
morally perfect, that’s what it
came to restore and to
means to be a sinner, a
save. But what secular
violator of God’s objective
culture desires is not the
moral
reality
law.87
of
the
biblical
God; it desires an illusory According to naturalism, we
emerge
from
nowhere,
The Tanakh, Hebrew Bible (Old Testament)
world can
evolve our own moral code, and disappear into nothingness upon the
where
determine
mankind its
own
truths, morals and destinies, without any higher accountability.
time of our physical deaths. However the Bible presents another story: (1)
Naturalism’s Moral Flaw
man was created by God; (2) man has broken
God’s
law;
and
(3)
punishment and consequence for man’s violation of the moral law is death, disease, and eternal torment. Seems rather cruel of a “loving” God to allow evil to run its course and sentence us to eternal damnation, but from a legal standpoint, God is operating from a just character; He will not pervert justice and
judgment.
However,
Scripture
doesn’t leave us hanging on a cliff, God does respond to evil. He sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to fulfill the moral code
87
Romans 3:20
42
The scientific realm, however, is not
the
the only source of evidence for biblical creation and the biblical God; much can be said of the moral argument for God’s existence. Most naturalists detail that evil is simply the cruelness of natural selection in action, Darwin’s “survival of the fittest.” In respect to Christianity, they in turn claim that evil is proof of God’s absence, yet in a debate at York University on Why Believe in the God of the Bible?, the naturalist side couldn’t give an account on why
88
John 3:16
morality can co-exist with a naturalistic
escaping the reality of a dead-end.
worldview. Concluding Remarks Leading Christian philosopher Ravi Zacharias made the following remark regarding the moral reality of God. If you can acknowledge that there is such a thing as evil, then you automatically assume that there is such a thing as good. If you acknowledge both good and evil, then you assume a moral law from which to differentiate between the two. If you assume a moral law then you are implying a moral law giver, of which that can only be God, but that is precisely attempting
what to
the
naturalist
disprove.89
is The
naturalist’s argument collapses, and no moral foundation is found for the naturalist
worldview.
There’s
no
In retrospect, a broken system will always produce broken people with broken results, and that’s the inevitable end-result of the student majority in our public “indoctrination” camps. The academic, philosophical and spiritual encouragement that we can provide to students and parents alike is to reconsult the evidence, be wary of the reasoning of your own conclusions, and consider the alternative, a historical and biblical creation. But don’t just stop there;
follow
its
implications,
the
redemptive plan of God offered to us through His inspired Word, the Holy Bible, and the Son of God, Jesus Christ.
Naturalism hasn’t provided a moral foundation for living; that is not to say that naturalists aren’t moral beings, but rather that their worldview provides no basis for morality. The Bible however holds us to a moral standard established by our Creator, and unlike any other worldview, it answers the questions of Origin, Meaning, Morality and Destiny in a cohesive and coherent manner, proving faithful to the tests of empirical adequacy, logical consistency and existential relevance. 89
(Zacharias, 2007. pp. 184)
43
References Baumgardner, J. (2010). Carbon-14 Dating. In D. DeYoung, Thousands... Not Billions: Challenging an Icon of Evolution, Questioning the Age of the Earth (pp. 46-62). Green Forest, AR: Master Books. Dean, C. (2007, February 12). Believing Scripture but Playing by Science’s Rules. Retrieved July 22, 2014, from The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/12/science/12geologist.html?_r=0 Hecht, J. (2005, March 24). Blood vessels recovered from T. rex bone. Retrieved July 22, 2014, from Science News and Science Jobs from New Scientist: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7195-blood-vessels-recovered-from-t-rexbone.html#.U86GvLFZbhc Malphurs, A. (2013). Look Before You Lead: How to Discern & Shape Your Church Culture. Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Books. Meyer, S. C. (2003). Darwinism, Design & Public Education. Michigan: Michigan State University Press. Oard, M. (2006). Frozen In Time: Wooly Mammoths, the Ice Age, and the Biblical Key to their Secrets. Green Forest, AR: Master Books. Ross, M. (2010). Those Not-so-dry Bones. In AiG, A Pocket Guide to Dinosaurs: Is there a Biblical Explanation? (pp. 83-85). Hebron, KY.: Answers In Genesis. Snelling, A. A. (2010). Back to Basics. In AiG, A Pocket Guide to a Young Earth: Evidence that supports the Biblical Perspective (pp. 9-13). Hebron, KY.: Answers In Genesis. Snelling, A. A. (2000). Geochemical Processes in the Mantle and Crust. In L. Vardiman, A. A. Snelling, & E. F. Chaffin, Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: A Young Earth Creationist Research Initiative (pp. 123-304). El Cajon, California: Insitute for Creation Research. Snelling, A. A. (2010). Problems with the Assumptions. In AiG, A Pocket Guide to A Young Earth: Evidence that supports the Biblical Perspective (pp. 15-21). Hebron, KY.: Answers In Genesis. Strobel, L. (2004). The Case for a Creator. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. Zacharias, R. (2007). Existential Challenges of Evil and Suffering. In R. Z. Ministries, Beyond Opinion: Living the Faith we Defend (pp. 178-208). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishing.
Join former atheist Lee Strobel as he explores The Case for a Creator. In an effort to disprove God and the Bible, Lee Strobel visited top scientific scholars and instead found a depth of knowledge leading him from atheism to theism. In his other journey, The Case for Christ, Lee Strobel finds himself believing in Christianity, finding that all the evidence points towards Christ, the Cross, and Creation. You can find your copy of either The Case for a Creator or The Case for Christ at any Video Retail Store.
44
45
By Fatima Alibaba The subjects tackled in this issue of the
HisDominion,
along
with
the
volumes to most wise open-minded individuals, far better than I could.
included articles, have probably not answered all the questions that are out there regarding the origin of life. Questions on evolution vs. creation, or many others that commonly arise in the mind of mankind regarding God and His existence may seem prevalent. However, that’s not a problem, nor the purpose of this issue in responding to each question. The main function of these
articles,
this
issue
of
the
HisDominion, is the sharing of such pertinent, informative, factually-based material, creating a forum for all this, and ultimately the Gospel and the Christian faith. In summary, it is to point humanity in the right direction; towards Jesus.
who will view my perspective as biased, and
perhaps
even
opinionated, and that’s okay. The facts speak for themselves, so in truth there is no room for argument. The articles outline historic, factual data compiled by
qualified
specialists
in
their
respective fields, and that will speak
46
you
have
never
questioned
evolution as a basis for our existence and origin before, maybe take another look
at
the
article
Doubts
on
Darwinism. The truth is clear cut and corroborative. Without the missing pieces in the Cambrian era (or fossil record), how can the case for an old earth really hold water? We cannot be subjective
in
our
thinking
and
presenting of the evidence, for if we are, we lose sight of the objective truth behind the facts and draw unfounded, illegitimate & detrimentally contorted conclusions. The same is the case when looking at our methods of evaluating and
Undoubtedly there will be those narrow-minded,
If
assessing dating systems as thoroughly elaborated
in
our
Concerning
Radiometric Dating & its Assumptions article. It
shows
and
demonstratively
proves the dangers behind trying to justify
“findings”
as
opposed
to
researching facts for what they really are, and presenting them in focus,
without
a
slanted
view.
George
Steven had elaborated on in The
highlighted the vast room for error as
Deception
well as self-confessed discrepancies in
Education.
of
a
Culturally-Biased
findings by many scientists and teams working towards, in simple speech, discrediting the creation of the earth and accrediting the grand design by God to evolution instead! If there can be so many mistakes and possibilities, and unknown variables in calculations, such a vast array of counterparts and contradictions, how and why should we believe so readily the results that point towards an old earth? I think we need to re-think our stance on this issue and settle on facts that are proven and traceable both scripturally, historically and scientifically. These are after all the most solid and accurate sources to be trusted.
Luis even details in his article Can Evolutionary Processes Build New Structures? that it is not scientifically possible to have a species change so drastically over an unknown timeframe, and for those changes to magically desist once a certain point has been reached. Who or what would have determined that point in the first place? What contributing factors would alter a species to the extent of genetic and aesthetic mutation at such a rampant level? I dare you (even briefly) to open your mind up to the possibility of the truth, that only a wise and intelligent Creator could have created all the wonders of this world. That only He
In the article about small and large
(Elohim)
has
the
capability
and
scale evolution, Luis laid some solid
capacity to design creational templates
truths as foundation and followed
and building blocks to use as He sees
through with well-founded points that
fit, and for it to come together
left me more resolute than ever in my
extravagantly and work as well as it
disbelief of large scale evolution being
does. To display wondrous creatures
an option. Think long and hard about
and florae, each after their own kind, to
whether or not the scientific material
the extent that we see and discover
being siphoned into our educational
daily, only God Almighty-Creator of the
and social/cultural systems is in fact
universe could have done this all.
plausible. I contend that it is not, as
47
Fatima Alibaba Fatima Alibaba is the Secretary of Evangelium & Apologia Ministries, and is a current York University Glendon student. Her ministerial experiences includes outreach and evangelism, minstry through music, counsel, administrative service, encouragement, and loving God’s people. Fatima’s heart is for social and human justice, to feed the nations through both physical and spiritual sustenance. As a new 2014 member, she is currently developing project ideas to help develop and contribute towards the growing discipleship department of E&AM.
Thousands, Not Millions of Years Old
Fossilized Ammonite (Cut)
Ammonite (Asteroceras BW)
Credit: Steven Martins E&AM Fossil Collection
Credit: Nobu Tamura, License CCA-3 www.spinops.blogspot.com
Thousands, Not Millions of Years Old
Enchodus Sabre Tooth
Enchodus
Credit: Steven Martins E&AM Fossil Collection
Credit: Dmitry Bogdanov Russian Artist, License CCA-3
Thousands, Not Millions of Years Old
Ammonite Orthoceras Credit: Steven Martins E&AM Fossil Collection
48
Ammonite (Orthoceras) Credit: Nobu Tamura, License CCA-3 www.spinops.blogspot.com
The following are a list of books for further reading (not already listed in our references), pertaining to the topic of this issue’s HisDominion, selected and endorsed by the E&AM team. Boot, Joe. Searching for Truth: Discovering the Meaning and Purpose of Life. Kitchener, Ontario, Canada: Joshua Press Inc., 2011. Collins, Francis S. The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. New York, NY: Free Press, 2006. Garner, Paul. The New Creationism: Building Scientific Theories on a Biblical Foundation. Carlisle, Pennsylvania Geisler, Norman L. Creation & the Courts: Eighty Years of Conflict in the Classroom and the Courtroom. Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 2007. Geisler, Norman L.; Hoffman, Paul K. Why I Am A Christian: Leading Thinkers Explain Why They Believe, Revised and Expanded Edition. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 2006. Ham, Ken. Six Days: The Age of the Earth and the Decline of the Church. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books, 2013. Ham, Ken. The New Answers Books 1-4. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books, 2006. Lennox, John C. Seven Days that Divide the World: The Beginning According to Genesis and Science. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2011. Lisle, Jason. The Ultimate Proof of Creation. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books, 2009. MacArthur, John. The Battle for the Beginning: Creaton, Evolution & the Bible. Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2001. Morris, Henry M.; Morris, John D. The Modern Creation Trilogy. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books, 2004 Mortenson, Terry; Ury, Thane H. Coming to Grips with Genesis: Biblical Authority and the Age of the Earth. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books, 2012. Oard, Mike; Reed, John K. Rock Solid Answers: The Biblical Truth Behind 14 Geological Questions. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books, 2011. Samples, Kenneth Richard. 7 Truths that Changed the World: Discovering Christianity’s Most Dangerous Ideas. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 2012. Snelling, Andrew. Earth’s Catastrophic Past. Dallas, Texas: Institute for Creation Research, 2009. Stockes, Mitch. A Shot of Faith to the Head: Be a Confident Believer in an Age of Cranky Atheists. Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2012.
49
The following are a list of DVDs and Videos for further viewing (not already listed in our references), pertaining to the topic of this issue’s HisDominion, selected and endorsed by the E&AM team. Answers in Genesis. Check this out: Radiometric Dating (Digital Download). Answers in Genesis, 2011. https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/check-out-radiometric-dating/?sku=90-2-066 Austin, Steve. Mount St. Helens: Modern Day Evidence for the World Wide Flood (DVD). Compel Media, 2012. Austin, Steve. Radioisotopes & the Age of the Earth (DVD). Answers in Genesis, 2003. Cloud Ten Pictures. Dragons or Dinosaurs? Creation or Evolution (DVD). Cloud Ten Pictures, 2010. Dawkins, Richard; Lennox, John. The God Delusion Debate (DVD). Fixed Point Foundation, 2007. Eternal Productions. God of Wonders (DVD). Eternal Productions, 2008. Guliuzza, Randy. Human Design: The Making of a Baby (DVD). Institute for Creation Research, 2013. Ham, Ken; Nye, Bill. Uncensored Science: Bill Nye debates Ken Ham (DVD). Answers in Genesis, 2014. Institute for Creation Research. Unlocking the Mysteries of Genesis (12-DVD Set). Institute for Creation Research, 2014. Lisle, Jason. Created Cosmos – Special Edition (DVD). Answers in Genesis, 2011. Menton, David. Body of Evidence (8-DVD Set). Answers in Genesis, 2011. Psarris, Spike. What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol. 1 & 2 (DVD). Creation Astronomy Media, 2009-2013. Snelling, Andrew A. Geology: A Biblical Viewpoint on the Age of the Earth (5-DVD Set). Answers in Genesis, 2009. Snelling, Andrew A. Radioactive and Radiocarbon Dating: Turning Foe into Friend (DVD). Answers in Genesis, 2009. Thomas, Brian. What You Haven’t Been Told About Dinosaurs (DVD). Institute for Creation Research, 2013.
50
Back Cover 51
52