Self Analysis

When I choose this issue for my project, I was in no way taking the easy way out. Although this issue is extremely important to me it has been hard to stay unbiased and present all the information that needs to be presented. However if I could go back to the day we choose our issues, I would not have picked any other one. I have truly enjoyed this topic and have learned so much more about the evolution/creation debate; my view of the issue has definitely been broaden.

While looking back at my posts and after my conference I have come to learn that I was leaving something out. In my posts I have seemed to imply that believing in God and believing in the evolutionary theory are mutually exclusive. Mutually exclusive means that two events have no outcomes in common. So I have implied that if one believes in the evolutionary theory then one can not believe in God. However this is not the case. I know this is not the case because my Biology teacher in high school was an evolutionists that believed in God. As I researched most of the sites that I came upon questioned the existence of God. There are some evolutionists that do believe in God, but not many. I found a study that proved this point. The study was conducted where the participants were professional evolutionary scientists (for more detail on the study click here or here). I found part b of the picture above to be quite interesting where approximately 80% said that they do not believe in God. The rest of the twenty percent are divided between a belief in a personal God (theists), belief in God as a deist, or no belief in God but they leave room for mystery. Being a deist means that one does believe in God and that God did play a role in the beginning of life, but He no longer is involved in the world. They do not believe in a personal relationship with God. (Read the blog "Imagine...A Complex Creation" if you are interested in seeing why there is more to God then what deist believe.) So in way I focused on the 80% of evolutionists that do not believe in God. However, I should have included the fact that some evolutionists do believe in God and so I am adding that now.

Through this project I have became even more aware that there are so many people that remain uneducated about the issues of evolution and creation. I had one commenter who said that they believe the universe has always existed and may always exist. There are many sites that disprove his assumption and that show why the universe has a beginning point. The universe does have a beginning and it has not always been as this one commenter assumed rather blindly. (Click here, here, or here for the evidence). In fact, the point that the our universe does have a beginning is agreed upon by both evolutionists and creationists as I stated in one of my first posts. This point proves that there is a need for more education on both of these issues. Before this post I just accepted the fact that only evolution was taught in public schools. But through this project I have seen more and more that both sides need to be taught, so that everyone can make their own opinions about the issue-not just blind opinions. I feel that it is extremely important for people to know why they believe something and it is even more important for them to be able to back it up. I think our schools should accept other theories into the curriculum so students have the choice...we are a free country aren't we?

I have grown in so many other ways as well. Beginning off I thought I could present a lot of the facts of evolution and creation however I have not even began to skim the top of those theories. The more research I did the more complex I found both of the issues to be. If one is talking about Creation, then one needs to talk about the existence of God. If one is talking about the existence of God then one should talk about the validity of the Bible. So both of these issues of Creation and Evolution are intertwined with so many other issues that it is impossible to write everything that needs to be said in such a short blog. I seemed to think before this project that both issues were a whole lot more simple than they actually are. This issue has always been important to me since I learned of evolution in school but I had never taken the time to really research it myself. So this project has helped me grow in my view of creation and evolution. I have truly enjoyed this assignment.

Sites You must Visit

Whether you smoke or not everyone should visit the site, Second Hand Smoke is No Joke. This site shows the effects of second hand smoke and relates the issue to today. Both sides of the issue are presented and it helps one see the prospective of both the smoker and the non-smoker. It helps smokers understand non-smokers point of view and, helps the non-smokers understand the smokers point of view. It does a great job of being fairly unbiased. The site comments on political issues of today that have to do with banning smoking in public places. It presents why smoking should be banned according to non-smokers and why it should not be banned according to smokers. This is a great side to go to, to see the issue completely laid out. It is also great to go to to learn more about both sides. This issue effects all of us even if you do not smoke because of the effects of second hand smoke. I encourage all to read this site so that you can become more knowledgeable in this issue and maybe help solve it.



Another blog worth visiting is the People Shouldn't Kill People, So Neither Should the Government. This blog is devoted to the death penalty and the arguments for why the death penalty should be abolished. It makes many great points including the cost of the death penalty, how different each states standards are (and how different each countries standards are), how bad the death row inmates representations is, and so much more. If you are for the death penalty read this site and consider the arguments that are made and if you are against the death penalty read this site and be encouraged that our country is getting one step closer in abolishing it.

If you are interested in immigration go to Crossing the Border, Crossing the Line? This site shows that everything about illegal immigration is not bad and shows to those that are not apathetic towards illegal immigration how it actually helps our economy. It does a great job in showing the opinions of both sides of the argument and I feel it does a good job in convincing others that there is positive in the negative situation of illegal immigration.

The Implications of the Evolution/Creation Debate

As stated in my theory post, the issue of Evolution verses Creation will never be completely resolved. However, I do think that people will become more knowledgeable of both theories.

As evolutions claim to find more evidence for evolution, creationists are going to combat that evidence with another explanation. As creationists show more proof for the existence of God the Creator, evolutionists will find a way to say that that can not be. So has you can see debates will continue, even as more information and evidence for either side is found. However, as more information and evidences are found, I think that many more people will become aware of what all each side entails.

I think the biggest problem concerning this issue is that many people are very uneducated when it comes to knowing about both theories. The solution of this problem would be to teach both theories in school, stating that they are just theories (not fact). This way each individual will know more about each theory and they will be able to decide on their belief by comparing both theories, and accepting which one they think to be more logical. Many have tried to get creation taught in public schools, but so far it has not been passed. In a recent poll 79% of people thought that creation should be taught in public schools. This is another site that has supreme court cases dealing with this issue and it also proposes how creation can still be taught in public schools legally. One can overview creation in school as long as it is kept in context and is not promoted. Click here to read about how the public schools threw out a Christian worldview for a atheistic one.

So what does the future hold for this issue? The creation/evolution debate will always continue. More people will try to get creation permanently added to the curriculum as other fight for why it should not be taught. People are always going to have different viewpoints but hopefully people will begin to learn about both theories, instead of just one.

Links, Links, and More Links

In this post I will be describing some of the links that I have used in previous posts. Hopefully, if you want to research this issue further you will find these links useful.



I use many sites that focus on the creation theory of the beginning of the Universe. Most of these sites, if not all are biased since it presents opinions of why creation is more logical than evolution. However, these sites show the view of creationists and if one felt compelled, one could go to the evolution sites in my posts and compare the two views. I do try to do this in my post. These creation sources are credible because many are written by authors who are experts in the field of Creation. They might be biased since so much emotion goes into this issue, but they do show what creationists believe. Some are the site are as follows.

http://www.sbea.mtu.edu/users/slstonge/ This is site is extremely biased, but makes the arguments against evolution very simple and easy to understand. It empathizes the complexity of life and how preposterous it is to believe it evolved spontaneously from nothing.

http://www.think-works.com/the_complexity_of_life.htm This site takes on the complexity of life in a much more serious way as well as many other arguments for creation. It is more scientific that the site listed previously, but it has the same idea- that life is to complex to have been evolved over time from nothing, along with other arguments. The author was once a evolutionists who believed only in facts he could see, nothing metaphysical. Then he had a lot of questions and decided to research. He presents his findings and says why he changed is mind about evolution.



http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/reprints/Cosmological-Argument-for-Exist.pdf

http://www.doesgodexist.org/Pamphlets/Mansproof.html

http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

These sites show reasons for why God does exist. God's existence is a major question that evolutionists ask about creation. They ask, "You say God created the universe, but how do you prove God exists?"Although biased, these sites show why, in the author's opinion, God exists. They sites are reliable however. They are written by authors with a lot of education under their belt and they have reliable sources that back up their statements. What they write may not be agreed upon by all, since it is dealing with the issue of Gods existence, but what they do write is true facts of why people believe God does exists. I use these links and others to make my argument more reliable, for the creation side. I do not know everything there is to know about apologetics and God's existence so these sites fill in my missing knowledge.



I have also used sites to state the facts of evolution. Some of these sites may also be biased, since many of them are stating theories of evolution that have not been proven as fact. However, I want to present both sides of the evolution/creation issue in my blog. If I have both biased evolution and biased creation sites then that helps my site be less biased, although it is about impossible to not be biased at all when talking about this issue. Some of the sites I have used for evolution are: http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/ExpandUni.html, which states Hubble's Law and why the expanding universe is evidence for evolution. It is copyrighted by The Board of Trustees at the University of Illinois, which makes the site creditable, but absolutely true, since some believe this is not evidence for evolution. Another site is http://library.thinkquest.org/26070/data/eng/. This side presents the evolutionary theory and also lists the arguments for and against the evolutionary theory. http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-origin-of-species/ This site has the complete Origins of Species written by Charles Darwin. The Origin of Species is where the theory of evolution began, so it is very important for the evolutionary side of the issue.

Update: These two sites show that some evolutionists do believe in God. Click here or here. Many evolutionists do not believe in God as the study on these sites show but there still are some.

The Theory- Why is this Issue Unresolvable in Our Society?

Since 1859, when Darwin's Origin of Species was published there has been a controversy between evolution and creation. Since then we have not made much progress; the issue still remains and unfortunately always will. But why can this issue not be solved once and for all? There are two main reasons (at least in my theory of this question) why this gigantic issue can not be solved.

The first reason in that neither one of them can be proved, or at least that is what creationist say about evolution and evolutionist say about creation. The purpose of this blog is to present both sides of the evolution/creation issue, and to hopefully show which one is more logical. The purpose was NOT to prove which one was correct. It is nearly impossible if not impossible to prove one side or the other because both require some bit of faith, although different kinds of faith. For creation, there is the faith that a being of Higher Intelligence exists. There is an extremely long list of explanations that show God exists and the Bible is 100% correct (click here or here to read about some of them). This is called apologetics. Creationist would say that there are proofs for God, but evolutionists would counter that they are not tangible evidences. For evolution one must have faith in spontaneous generation and also believe we evolved from one simple single celled organism gradually over time. Some evolutionists believe there is proof for this like the fossil record, the Urey experiment, and the fact that the universe is expanding outwards. However, creationists find fault in all of these evidences, which I wrote about in another post. So you can see that this is a never ending circle.

The second reason this issue remains unresolved is summed up in this quote. "There is an old saying: There is no point in debating with someone who knows they are right." No matter what proofs and evidences one gives on evolution or creation and no matter how logical they might be, there will always those who will not change their mind. Stubbornness seems to contribute to this issue not being resolved. Many have the mind set that they are right and anyone who believes differently is wrong. This fact is hard to change since those people that have that mind set are not going to change. This issue would be resolved easier if one could present solid evidence that no one could refute. This goes back to my first reason- the evidence that is presented will be refuted my the other side of the argument which ties into my second reason. So basically no matter what evidence is found someone (if not many) will not believe it and therefore the issue can not be resolved.

I have presented both sides and I hope that my presentation shows which one is more logical. However what I think is logical may seem preposterous to someone else. So my blog has not gotten any closer to resolving this issue, but hopefully some have either been encouraged by my blog or maybe some have found creation to be logical then what they used to think.

The Stats. on the Origin of Life

Life is extremely complex and to some life has not always been this complex. The view of evolutionists is that life first spontaneously generated (abiogenesis) from non-life. Then the simple organism that spontaneously generated evolved different types of cells and through a long period of time mutations and natural selection occurred and life became more and more complex. Others however find this extremely hard to believe. Lets take for instance one very tiny fraction of life and examine its complexity....the human eye.

"The eye has 40,000,000 nerve endings, the focusing muscles move an estimated 100,000 times a day, and the retina contains 137,000,000 light sensitive cells."


Charles Darwin even said,
"To suppose that the eye...could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree."

If man can not create an eye then how did it merely form by chance? If not chance then, how did this so extremely complex organ evolve from a simple one-celled organism that spontaneously generated from nothing? "The eye is only a small part of the most sophisticated part of creation-the human body" and yet to some the eye evolved from essentially nothing. This is just the eye. This just not even begin to touch on the complexity of the rest of our universe. But still some hold that life was not created but it was evolved. Which do you believe?

Here are some statistics to get you to think a little more about the facts of evolution and creation.

"In the last 30 years a number of prominent scientists have attempted to calculate the odds that a free-living, single-celled organism, such as a bacterium, might result by the chance combining of pre-existent building blocks. Harold Morowitz calculated the odds as one chance in 10100,000,000,000. Sir Fred Hoyle calculated the odds of only the proteins of an amoebae arising by chance as one chance in 1040,000.…the odds calculated by Morowitz and Hoyle are staggering. The odds led Fred Hoyle to state that the probability of spontaneous generation 'is about the same as the probability that a tornado sweeping through a junk yard could assemble a Boeing 747 from the contents therein.' Mathematicians tell us that any event with an improbability greater than one chance in 1050 is in the realm of metaphysics - i.e. a miracle."

I try to make my arguments as least biased as possible but the truth is I could not find one quote from an evolutionists on this matter. It seem the avoid this issue all together. i wonder why...

There are no staggering statistics on this subject that favor evolution. All I could find were tons of sites and statistics that showed that the complexity of life did not just evolve from a simple one-celled organism. There is just no way. But please if I have overlooked something or you know of a staggering statistic in favor of evolution please let me know because I am still searching....but if not it is up to you to decide which you want to believe.

The Analysis

"...as I became exposed to the law and order of the universe, I was literally humbled by its unerring perfection. I became convinced that there must be a divine intent behind it all... My experiences with science led me to God. They challenge science to prove the existence of God. But must we really light a candle to see the sun?"-Dr. Wernher von Braun.

"Observe constantly that all things take place by change, and accustom thyself to consider that the nature of the Universe loves nothing so much as to change the things which are, and to make new things like them." -Marcus Aurelius Antonius

These two quotes sum up my issue, the controversy between creation and evolution. There are only two sides or two solutions to the question, what is the origin of life? Either something created to universe or it created itself http://www.allaboutcreation.org/creation-evidence.htm. There is however, a lot that goes into both sides of the issue. So I am just going to focus on the origin of life and present both sides of the argument in a non biased way so the each person that reads can make up their own mind about the issue, rather than being persuaded to one side or the other.

I am going to start defining my issue by the one fact that both creationist and evolutionist agree on. Creationist and evolutionist both agree that the universe has a beginning; it has not been here eternally (click here for more information). That is the only thing that they can agree on and so the debate begins...

If the universe has a beginning then how did it start?

The Creationist's Answer:

The universe and everything in it was created by a being of higher intelligence (i.e. God). Everything that has a beginning must have a cause. Therefore, since the universe has a beginning it also has a cause. God caused the universe, however God does not have a beginning so he does not have a cause. "Einstein's general relativity, which has much experimental support, shows that time is linked to matter and space. So time itself would have begun along with matter and space. Since God, by definition, is the creator of the whole universe, he is the creator of time. Therefore He is not limited by the time dimension He created" http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c039.html.
The universe did not evolve into what it is today through millions of years of evolution but was created in only six days (read the first two chapters of Genesis or click here). Also, life is way to complex and unique for it to of occurred by random chance.

Although it may be hard to prove God's existence through the statement: if everything has a cause then there must be one thing that has always existed, that does not have a cause, that created everything that does have a cause (the universe). This is what makes this issue even more complicated. So I will try to explain why this statement is more logical than evolution. Evolutionists and creationists agree that the universe has a beginning. Therefore it had to begin somehow. Evolutionist believe that a singularity expanded into the universe, but they readily admit that they do not know where the singularity came from. Lets just say that evolutionist are right. The universe was formed through the expansion of a singularity. But there is still the question of where the singularity came from. It had to come from somewhere, since most agree that the universe has a starting point. Does it not make more logical sense to say that there is something that exists that has always existed and that has no need for a cause since it has always existed. This is the only answer. The line of causation would be impossible if this was not true, because then there would be no first cause and there would be no answer for where the singularity came from. It had to come from something, and that something must be eternal or else it too would need something that caused it. This does not prove that "God" exists but does show there is some higher intelligence that must exist (or at least something that has been here forever) since most agree the universe has a starting point (it has not been here eternally). Click here for reasons why God does exist or here because I do not have the space in this analysis to go through it.

God is this eternal something and this is why Creation is more logical since evolutionists have no answer to that question. (All from a creationist's prospective).

The Evolutionist's Answer:

The universe was created from a primeval atom or a "singularity." The singularity expanded and the universe began. Through millions of years (10-20 million years) the universe has evolved from this singularity into what it is today. Everything in our universe evolved from this singularity. There are lots of evidences that suggest evolution is true. One is that many animals have common bone structures and very similar DNA, so they must have evolved from a common ancestor. Also Hubble's Law shows that the universe is still expanded, which supports the theory that the singularity expanded into the universe. However, it is not known at this time where the singularity came from and that might remain a mystery. (All from and evolutionist's prospective).

The Creationist's Response to Evolution:

First or all, evolutionists have no answer for how the singularity appeared. (As stated before). Second of all, just because different species may have the similar structures and DNA does not mean they have a common ancestor. A more logical approach would be that they have a common designer. Thirdly, does the fact that Hubble's law shows that the universe is expanding really mean that that how it all began? Could it not also mean that that is just how the universe was created? Even more so, there is no evidence whatsoever to prove the theory of evolution. There is no transitional forms in the fossil record, there is no anatomical, biochemical or genetic evidence that has been proven to support evolution. Also it is highly improbable that the earliest forms of life formed out of non-life.

The Evolutionist's Response to Creation:

"Today, the theory of evolution is an accepted fact for everyone but a fundamentalist minority, whose objections are based not on reasoning but on doctrinaire adherence to religious principles." - James D. Watson
There is no evidence for the creation theory. None of the creationists points are based on fact.

So what's the point?
I want to present both sides of this argument in the least biased way possible so that those who read can decide for themselves. However, there is another reason that goes along with the first, the political part of the issue. More and more problems dealing with this debate are coming up in the United States school systems. In my opinion I think that both sides of the debate should be presented in schools so that each student can decide for themselves which they believe. I want to point out the fallacies in evolution and show why creation is more logical to show that creation should at least be taught along side evolution since it is more logical (to me). Even if creation is not taught as a truth (which will never happen because of the Separation of Church and State) it should at least be presented with evolution so the students know of both sides of the debate (click here for more information this issue in the school system). I have laid out the basic arguments in this analysis for the origin of life. In further post will focus even more in on each issue in the origin of life debate. I will do my best to prove my point.