| About this site |
| About us |
| Our beliefs |
| Your first visit? |
| Contact us |
| External links |
| Good books |
| Visitor essays |
| Our forum |
| New essays |
| Other site features |
| Buy a CD |
| Vital notes |
| Spiritual/ethics |
| Spirituality |
| Morality/ethics |
| Absolute truth |
| Peace/conflict |
| Attaining peace |
| Religious tolerance |
| Religious hatred |
| Religious conflict |
| Religious violence |
| Laws and news |
| Religious laws |
| Religious news |
|
 | The term "theory" in science can mean something much different from the same word in general use. The Theory of Evolution of plant and animal species is far more than a simple idea; it is well beyond a hunch; many leading scientists consider it an established fact. It is the foundational belief upon which many branches of science are based. Dr. Gerald Wheeler, director of the National Science Teachers Association said in 1999-OCT: "Everything is a theory, but...[evolution is] probably the biggest unifying theory that exists in all of science." If either the theory of evolution or an old Earth were to be proven incorrect, then our understanding of many different sciences would collapse. |
| Various U.S. court decisions have concluded that "creation science" is not actually science. This is because the beliefs of creation scientists cannot be falsified. That is, it would be impossible for a creation scientist to accept a proof that their beliefs are false and that naturalistic or theistic evolution is true. That is because their fundamental, foundational belief is that the creation stories in the Book of Genesis are inspired by God and are thus inerrant. All physical evidence is judged by comparing it to their interpretation of Genesis. No evidence from nature can disprove this belief. Once a person accepts a religious text as the basis of their scientific studies, they no longer are free to follow where the data leads. They cease being a scientist. |
Theories of origins:
Most media accounts and websites refer to a battle between two belief systems: evolution and creation science. This is not a particularly good model, because:
| The scope of the conflict is much larger than this. It extends beyond the origins and the development (if any) of the plant and animal species to include the origins and development of the earth and the rest of the universe. |
| There are not one but two main forms of creation science in North America. There are also two main forms of what drove, and continues to drive, evolution. |
In North America, there are really at least four main belief systems on the origins of plants, animals, the earth itself, and the rest of the universe.
| Belief System | Approximate age of the universe in years | Biological evolution happened? | Evolution driven by God? |
| Creation Science (Young Earth version) | Under 10,000 | No | N/A * |
| Theistic view | 15 billion | Yes | Yes |
| Scientific view | 15 billions | Yes | No |
| Creation science (Old Earth version) | 15 billions | No | N/A * |
* N/A" Not applicable because they do not believe in evolution. Thus God did not drive it.
Within some of the main views, there are many variations.
There are also perhaps 500 other belief systems. These are the creation stories taught by the many thousands of faith groups worldwide. Very few resemble the account in Genesis. We will not extensively discuss these beliefs. Only a few percent of our web site's visitors follow one of these belief systems.
More detailed descriptions of beliefs about origins:
|
Most scientists, from astronomers to paleontologists, regard the scientific view as the best representation of reality. Only 0.15% of earth and life scientists subscribe to one of the creation science belief systems.
Sponsored link:
How old is the earth, and when did various species of animals live?
These two topics are closely related, because each theory has to account for all cosmological, geological, biological and other evidence :
Young earth creation scientists comprise about 0.15% of all earth and life scientists. Most are conservative Christians who believe that:
|
Supporters of the theistic and scientific views: Almost all scientists who are not fundamentalist or evangelical Christians believe that:
|
Old Earth creation scientists believe:
|
Who is right?
Scientists feel that their beliefs can be proven correct because they are based on observation and measurements:
| Evidence from geology, anthropology, paleontology, nuclear physics, astronomy, cosmology and many other sciences show that the Earth and the rest of the universe have been in existence far longer than 10,000 years. |
| Observations of nature show that all "kinds" did not come on the scene at roughly the same time. Rather, simple forms of life came first, and then evolved into more complex forms. |
However, scientists cannot prove whether or not God or a collection of deities steered various processes over time. This is a speculation that cannot be tested.
Meanwhile, those who base their beliefs on their interpretation of the Genesis creation stories feel that their beliefs can be proven right, for the simple reason that they are based on their interpretation of the Bible.
Unfortunately, there exists no universally accepted proofs from nature that eliminate any of the main major belief systems. What evidence is accepted by one group is rejected by the others.
The age of the Earth is a key factor:
If someone can prove that the Earth or the rest of the universe is billions of years old, then belief in young earth creation science would have to be abandoned. Scientists will then be faced with three possible models for the earth's animal species:
| The theistic view is correct. God guided evolution which caused simple bacteria to evolve into complex animals over billions of years. |
| The scientific view is correct. Natural processes caused simple bacteria to evolve into complex animals over billions of years. |
| Old earth creation science is correct. God created the Earth and the rest of the universe billions of years ago, and created all of the animal kinds long ago. Some have since become extinct. Other kinds have changed to a minor degree. |
To winnow the possibilities down further, someone will have to prove whether all the species were created at approximately the same time, or whether evolution from simple bacteria to complex species actually occurred. Even if evolution were proven to have existed, it would not be possible to argue from nature whether God or natural forces directs evolution. However, if evolution were proven false, then the only option would be old earth creationism.
Of course, unless there is a direct revelation from God, young earth creationists are unlikely to accept an old earth. They are unlikely to accept any observation of nature as proving their interpretation of the Genesis creation stories as wrong.
If someone can prove that the earth is less than 10,000 years old, then of all the common belief systems in North America, only young earth creation science could be correct. Evolution would be impossible; there simply would not have been sufficient time for plant and animal species to have evolved.
The rest of this web site will be primarily devoted to the debate over the age of the earth, and whether evolution of the species actually happened.
Can science determine the age of the earth accurately?
Science will never be able to prove absolutely that the world is over 10,000 years old. Collecting countless pieces of evidence for an "old earth", is supportive of their theory, but is not proof. Creationists can simply counter scientists' arguments with two of their own:
| That when God created the universe 6 to 10 thousand years ago, he created everything as if it had a history. e.g. when God created trees, he made them with tree rings to look as if they been growing naturally for many years before creation. When he created the Appalachian mountains, he chose to formed them to look as if they were the remains of tall mountains which had been eroded for millions of years. When he created the world, say 8,000 years ago, it was fashioned to appear 4.5 billion years old. |
| All scientific dating methods share a single assumption: that basic processes behaved in the past much as they do at the present. e.g. the speed of light, the gravitational constant, the rates of nuclear decay, etc. are constant or near constant. There is no absolute proof that this is true. If some of these basic quantities changed by a factor of a million times or more, then dating methods would suggest an age of the universe that is 10,000 years or less. |
And so, the debate will probably continue forever. We see no possibility of resolution.
Reference:
- Based on a Gallup Organization poll conducted during 1997. The poll did not have a category for old earth creation science. More details.
Copyright © 1995 to 2005 by Ontario Consultants on
Religious Tolerance
Originally published: 1995-NOV-3
Most recent update: 2005-AUG-30
Author: B.A. Robinson
|
|
