Tim Ellsworth

This is a paper about evolution written by Scott Gladin for one of his high school classes. He has some good points that refute some of the claims of evolution. I’m sure Scott would appreciate any feedback you might have to offer.
——–
The Truth: Creation
By Scott Gladin

Throughout history, a battle has raged over the first verse of the Christian Bible, Genesis 1:1 and another verse, Genesis 1:27. “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” and “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” are the words which have partly caused the controversy. For some, it is important to know one’s origin and how life began. Mankind is accustomed to knowing a beginning and end to all things. The main question with life is not particularly when life began, but how it began and who made it begin. In the past, only the theory of evolution was recognized but scientific evidence now points to the existence of a divine creator.

Over time there has been an abundance of experiments, discoveries, and theories that have convinced many people that evolution is the truth. In reality, most of these experiments, discoveries, and theories are either false or misleading. Although some of these things have been proved wrong and lost credibility among scientists, they are still given as valid examples and taught today. The issues that may be evidence for evolution or creation should not be regarded as fact. Nothing has absolutely been proved as of today.

The controversy between evolution and creation has a deep and extensive history. In 1859, Charles Darwin poured lighter fluid on the fire when he published his book, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. His book, which created a revolution called “Darwinism,” says that every living thing is “related through descent from some unknown prototype that lived in the remote past.” Darwin spoke and wrote of macroevolution. This means that everyone and every living thing came from the same simple organism. Microevolution, which is just variation within different species, is not questioned by anyone. This is because microevolution is proved just by seeing different types of cats and dogs running around. The controversial author claimed much more than that; what he implies, for one example, is that fruit flies and humans both came from the same cell somewhere down the line.

Over time, Darwin’s theory has not held up to a credible theory’s standards. His famous drawing, The Tree of Life, is not a good representation of the fossil record. One of the most important clauses of his theory is that evolution would act “slowly by accumulating slight, successive, favorable variations” and would have “no great or sudden modifications.” Unfortunately for Darwin, the Cambrian explosion does not agree. In fact, it shows the exact opposite of what Darwin claimed. Scientists believe that about 540 million years ago there was a sudden and rapid jump in the fossil record. New species and animals suddenly appeared, with no gradual changes leading up to them. This went against his branching tree theory; the Cambrian explosion basically skipped the trunk of the tree and went directly to the small branches.

Another famous event in the battle between the theories was an experiment conducted by Stanley Miller and Harold Urey, graduates of the University of Chicago. In 1953, they were able to produce a red substance containing amino acids. The pair used an atmosphere rich in hydrogen, which scientists thought to be accurate for primitive earth, and shot bolts of electricity through it, as in lightning. This experiment showed that living organisms could randomly be created. This particular example said that just a simple lightning strike through the Earth’s atmosphere could have made life.

Although Miller and Urey’s experiment was convincing to many, it was wrong. The atmosphere that they used, rich in hydrogen, is now known to be false. The theory of today is that there was in fact very little hydrogen. That one mistake alone caused a very misleading, and believable, experiment. Scientists have repeated the experiment with the correct atmosphere and a very different result was produced. Instead of amino acids, another substance was produced, this one toxic. It would not be able to produce life. Although this important truth has come out, some sources still consider this a valid experiment. The World Book Encyclopedia states:

“They [scientists] have replaced the hydrogen-rich ‘atmosphere’ of the Miller-Urey experiment with various mixtures high in carbon dioxide and relatively low in hydrogen. These mixtures have also yielded biochemical compounds when exposed to sparks of energy.”

The wording here suggests that it did not cause an important difference. It is true that the substance was a biochemical compound, but this kind was different; it was not life-supporting.

Perhaps the most shocking and misleading icon of evolution is the set of drawings by Ernst Haeckel. He compared the images of embryos from a human, rabbit, calf, hog, chicken, tortoise, salamander, and fish in three stages of development. When put together, they look remarkably similar. They were so similar that they caused many people to turn to atheism, they didn’t see a need or purpose for a creator, a God. This is often called the best evidence for evolution, although it is known among scientists that it is far from the truth.

When actual photographs of the embryos are compared to the drawings, they do not match. The first of three major problems with the drawings is that they were faked. Haeckel was overly confident in his theory, which caused him to not be completely accurate. In some cases he used the same woodcut to print the images and in others he simply doctored the drawings. This might have been the most misleading mistake of Haeckel, although it was not a mistake at all. His purposely altered the drawings to make them look more similar than they really are.

The second of Haeckel’s blunders was that he omitted certain types of animals for the examples in order to make his case look valid. Four of the eight embryos are placental mammals; they took up half of the set. Because of this he was able to exclude two other kinds of mammals. This is an obvious attempt to try to mislead others, for his benefit.

The third major problem with the drawings is that the experiment is an all-out fraud. What Haeckel claimed as the early stage of development for the embryos is actually the midpoint. He changed it to better suit already known things. There is a theory which scientists refer to as the “Developmental Hourglass.” This refers to the shape of an hourglass; it is wide at the top and bottom, or beginning and end, but somewhat similar in the middle. Haeckel twisted this theory to make it look like evidence for his drawing’s validity.

Almost everyone has seen the pictures of the half-ape, half-man creature nicknamed “Java man.” He has become one of the most widely known examples of evolution. The picture that most everyone is familiar with is a row of creatures that range from an ape to a human. In 1891 and 1892, Dutch scientist Eugene Duboise was excavating on an Indonesian Island when he found and dug up bones along a riverbank. Duboise was so confident that his find was a major breakthrough that he declared it was the missing link between apes and humans. Afterwards, pictures were drawn and models were made which depicted this man as exactly what one’s imagination would think a blend of man and ape would look like. This amazed and convinced many people that evolution was true, despite their lack of knowledge of the entire story.

In fact, there were not many bones discovered from Java man at all. An author by the name of Hank Hanegraff wrote, “What is not so known about Java man is that he consists of nothing more than a skullcap, a femur (thigh bone), three teeth, and a great deal of imagination.” The idea of Java man being the link between apes and humans is just that, an idea.

So much can be said against evolution, but what can be said for creation? If human life is mere coincidence, as Darwinists believe, then the creation of life is completely unguided. However, this is far from the truth. One of the most amazing machines is directly under people’s noses – literally. Within the human body is a tiny machine called the bacterial flagellum. It, described as the “World’s Most Efficient Motor,” is a propelling device for cells. The flagellum, which only bacteria has, works like a rotary propeller. A good example of how it works is a boat’s outboard motor. However, it is much more efficient than an outboard motor.

This machine is far more advanced than any man-made machine with today’s technology. It covers only a few microns; a micron is about 1/20,000 of an inch long. Although it has a small size, the propeller can spin at a rate of ten thousand rounds per minute. The flagellum is not only efficient in spinning, but in stopping as well. It can stop its spin in a quarter of a revolution and, in an instant, spin in reverse at ten thousand rounds per minute. To put its speed in perspective, a high-performance sport car’s engine cannot even redline at ten thousand rounds per minute.

Is it really possible that there was no direction or maker for this extraordinary machine, that it was just a random assembly? Why is it that people can marvel over and call a roughly shaped rock that was used as a hammer a result of intelligent design but look at the amazing life of humans and say it was merely a coincidence, that it just popped up out of nowhere?

In today’s world, the fire between evolution and creation is heating up more than ever. The most recent event in the battle happened in early 2005. This was when a federal judge in Cobb County, Georgia ordered the sticker which was placed on science textbooks be removed. The stickers on the textbooks read, “This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered.” If society will not even allow this, what will be allowed? What the sticker states is absolutely true; it should be considered carefully. It needs to be known that evolution and creation are not facts, but theories. The World Book Encyclopedia, for one, is especially guilty for not making this clear. For example, “Most scientists believe that human beings and apes – such as chimpanzees and gorillas – share a common ancestor.” This implies that it is fact, but in reality it is just a guess by some scientists. The choice is a personal one, one that should be taken very seriously. It is time for people to study the facts, develop faith, and realize that creation is the answer; the truth.

Bibliography

The Journey: The Study Bible for Spiritual Seekers (NIV). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996.

“Life.” The World Book Encyclopedia. 2002 ed.

“Prehistoric people.” The World Book Encyclopedia. 2002 ed.

Strobel, Lee. The Case for a Creator. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996.

Various Theories of Origins of Life, The Earth and The Rest of The Universe. 3 November 1995. 1 March 2005. .