COULD it really be possible? Did Noah鈥檚 flood create the fossil record that we see today? Or perhaps God designed the fossil record to make it look as though evolution had happened. These are just two of the ideas put forward by creationists for dispensing with Darwinian evolution. The first has been tested and found wanting. The second is impossible to test, though it seems highly implausible.
Bizarre they may be, but these kinds of ideas are attracting growing support 鈥� not only in America鈥檚 Bible Belt but in other countries too. Christian creationists are even linking up with like-minded people in the Muslim world. Why? What is driving this movement? We can鈥檛 simply ignore these questions and hope they鈥檒l go away, because creationism threatens to distort and undermine science. In this issue of New 杏吧原创 you鈥檒l find several articles exploring these themes (see 鈥淟et there be light鈥�).
Though different creationist groups hold different beliefs, they are united in a bitter aversion to evolution by natural selection. To them, Darwin鈥檚 idea challenges the biblical account of how God created Adam and Eve. In so doing, they argue, it questions God鈥檚 existence and the entire Christian way of life, from its morality to the very purpose of life. Creationists start by assuming that the Bible is correct and then, to prove it, they cherry pick what they need from the body of scientific data 鈥� discarding anything that doesn鈥檛 fit.
Advertisement
To scientists, this is perverse. Science is about devising a theory to explain the evidence and then testing it. It鈥檚 a process. Some theories stand the test of observation and experimentation well, others not so well. In time, strong theories replace the weaker ones. Science is in a constant state of flux and there are no absolute truths. So, whatever else creationism is, it is not science. It certainly has no place in a science classroom, despite what the Kansas State Board of Education seems to think.
Unfortunately for creationists, evolution is an incredibly successful theory. Almost 150 years after Darwin laid out his ideas, we鈥檙e still finding evidence to support it, and little reason to reject it. Even experimental microbiology has pitched in, showing how a single species of bacteria will evolve into different variants when placed in different environments, and how organisms robbed of specific genes will mutate to overcome their handicap.
Evolution, like all science, is rooted firmly in the material world. It says absolutely nothing about God. Yet creationists still take offence.
There is a general point to make here. The very success of science in many areas has frightened people. The appearance is that science will eventually give the answer to every conceivable question about the material world. Human life will be reduced to a soulless collection of machine parts.
Researchers are already starting to play God, remaking plants and animals at will. To many people, this is threatening. But they do not always receive much sympathy from scientists doing this type of work.
On the other hand, when a subject is not yet clearly defined 鈥� if, say, we do not have enough information to frame a question properly, scientists tend to be dismissive, and imply that the topic is just not interesting. This leaves people feeling disenfranchised.
Either way, scientists need to think through their reactions. Ignoring public worries resolves nothing and may disillusion people further, driving them towards 鈥� if not creationism 鈥� then New Age alternatives in which reductionism is replaced by mysticism.
Ultimately, of course, applying any materialistic, scientific theory to explore a spiritual question, such as the existence of God, is just wrong-headed. Will science tell us where God resides? If life is worth living? Will it tell us how to behave towards our fellow humans? Science is simply the wrong tool for answering these questions.
But if science and religion inhabit different domains, there is a warning here for creationists who would try to justify their spiritual beliefs through science. Evolution does a much better job than any creationist theory at explaining how plants and animals appeared on this planet.
Absolute belief in the Bible鈥檚 version of creation resembles the 300-year-old dogma that the Sun revolved around the Earth. During that debate, Cardinal Baronius said: 鈥淭he Bible teaches the way to go to Heaven, not the way the heavens go.鈥� And creationists please note: when the Church in Rome finally accepted its error, Christianity did not crumble, morality did not go to hell and God was not belittled in the eyes of believers.
