EVOLUTION VERSUS CREATIONISM

If I could, I would encourage no one to argue this subject... on either side. The timing is wrong. The subjects are wrong. The two have nothing to do with each other really. And the issue is not really religion at all ... but a problem with someone understanding Science as we know it today. And if someone wanted to argue Evolution theory, which I see as a good thing to do since it is already old and not keeping pace, that discussion should purely be a Science issue - and of course a logic issue.

The Timing is All Wrong

Where to start? The Timing is all wrong. Scientists who now are the ones that believe the Big Bang Theory is the most likely theory of our universe beginning tell us that the universe is a bit over 13.7 billion years old. And while they did not tell me how they calculated it, it would seem a simple thing to me ... well, for a good physicist. It is really just speed times time equals distance. If there was a big bang, and we know where in the universe it began from, and we know the distance the parts have flown since then, and how fast they are going, then we have speed and distance and can calculate time. Now this of course is the simple answer. But even if the speed the universe is expanding has acceleration or deceleration factors, or even surges (acceleration of an acceleration), this would still be a reasonable thing to ask a real physicist to calculate. And so, we would believe the scientists that the universe is a bit over 13.7 billion years old. Earth on the other hand, we hear, is about 4.5 billion years old, and our solar system itself, really only about 4.6 billion years old and the sun perhaps 5 billion years old. Now, I do not know how they calculated these earth related numbers, but I believe it was done by looking at the aging of earth materials of some kind. But let me just say that on surface, once again, I believe the scientists on the age of earth as well. Okay then, well here is the issue. Arguing evolution versus creationism seems to be absurd with this information since earth in fact was not the center of the universe. In fact earth is a fairly recent addition to the universe, since the universe had been around (apparently) for 9 billion more years. And so what happened on earth could have nothing to do with where the universe came from.

Now some here may scream that this means Darwin was right. No, it does not mean that at all. Darwin is a whole separate discussion. But I do believe Darwin was a great man who at least tried to figure out where things came from. I believe we have learned much since his theory came out, and his theory should be updated. I believe parts of it are simply correct, but other parts have shown no proof. Now, note, that I am not disparaging Darwin, but adding a Scientific Realism that I see from neither side of the discussion. The first pioneer like Darwin is a great one, but just gets us started. They cannot get everything correct since much will be learned after they pass on. And this has been the case with Darwin. We now know much more about the universe. It would be folly to assume that the universe did not affect life on earth at all. It seems now clear among a number of scientists, perhaps including me, that some life has come to earth in comets, or just through space or other means and may have helped seed life on earth ... or aided it. There is more. There is always more. But it is safe to say that Darwin was a great man, but his theory should continue to evolve as well ... as we all learn more. I am not saying Darwin was wrong. That is too simple and also quite unfair. Let us say that the first pioneer has no way of predicting what will be learned in total in the many years after their initial theory.

Now a person might now scream that Science disproves God, but that also would be logically not a valid statement. They occur at different times. Science can only investigate what happened AFTER the big bang. But where did the materials and or energy come from to cause the big bang? And where did this huge space the universe occupies come from? Those are huge questions that science of course cannot answer .... since there is no evidence to look at. And I suspect there never will be evidence ... since we are really sort of talking here about "what happened before the beginning of universe time." If this boggles the mind, I would agree. Yes, it does.

And so, I would not suggest arguing evolution versus creationism ... since those discussions seem to center on the earth and we already know that is the wrong place to look. If however, you wish to ponder, "Can Science and God exist at the same time?" Now, that, I would say, is indeed a great question. But it is a different question. And it is one we try to look at in our book. Of course, there is not what I would call proof in this book, on that subject either way. But one thing I hope and trust ... is that we will get our discussions into the 21st century and begin discussing some of the right questions. And hopefully we will all respect each other when we do that.

Go to More about this Book by Clicking here

please note: "excerpts" of our books shown here are excerpt of our ideas in the books. It will not be word for word.

See More Excerpts from Our Books? Click here