Evolution Free Course 2

Lesson — 2

The Evolution/Creation Models
  
In the last chapter we saw that science deals with repeatable phenomena. Observations, hypotheses, and inferences (deductions) have to interact repeatedly with each other to arrive at valid and acceptable conclusions. 

Evolution as a whole unit does not yield itself to this kind of repetitive testing. First, it is said to be a past phenomena. Second, it is said to have taken billions of years to reach the present stage. Nobody has that long a life span to observe it. 

Creation also is not available for laboratory experiments because it cannot be repeated by humans for observation. Further, no human observer was there to witness the events related to creation of Universe or life. Thus a study of Evolution/creation as whole units one needs a special scientific approach known as “Model Making”. We will first explain what model making is. Then we will introduce the evolution and creation models and evaluate them to see which is a better scientific model. 

Of course there are individual aspects of both evolution as well as creation that can be tested directly and without employing models. For example, fossils can be examined directly and repeatedly for possible evidence of mega Evolution. Also, laws of nature can be examined directly and repeatedly to see whether randomness will produce order out of chaos or behave the other way round. These are highly reliable fields of investigation, and we will do precisely that in the lessons that follow. But before we go to specific subjects, we will look at the models first. 
 

What Is The Meaning Of “Scientific Model”: Observing a physical entity is necessary for studying it. But many physical entities do not yield themselves to visual observation. Atoms and molecules are good examples of this. While one can see indirect traces of atoms and molecules, nobody has yet been able to see them directly or in satisfactory detail. 

Further, many non physical realities also exist in the world. They are real, but not made up of physical matter. Consequently, they cannot be seen with the eyes even though they are real. 

Scientists have found that the best way to study invisible realities is to make a “model” of it. A model is a mental picture that tries to be a good representation of the reality. The most widely publicized model today is probably the model of the atom. Almost every person know that atoms are made up of a heavy nucleus of protons and neutrons, surrounded by fast-moving electrons. Interestingly, nobody has ever seen this “atom” either visually or with the help of photographs or scientific instruments. Rather, what’s available is a lot of observations about the atom. All these put together gives the mental picture known as the atomic “model”. Of course the atomic model has been translated into mathematics to make it more precise. That brings us to the types of models. 

Models are of two types: qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative models are descriptive in nature. While they serve usefully in many areas of investigation, they do not yield exact information. On the other hand, quantitative models are mathematical in nature. They yield more exact information. 

Once a model is formulated, it is used to make predictions. Experiments and observations are repeated to see if these predicated properties are seen. If they are, the model is accepted. If the predictions are not observed, the model is modified. By a constant interaction between observations, predictions and correlating, the model is brought as close to reality as possible. 

At times the entity or phenomena under study might be so complex or so much influenced by basic outlooks of researchers that more than one model might arise. Each school of thought then tries to perfect its model. All models are then allowed to compete with each other. Whichever model is found to be closer to reality is accepted as the better model. The better the model, the closer it is to reality. 

Researchers have developed both Evolution as well as Creation models. We will introduce both models in brief to you and then you will be able to decide which of them is a better model. 
 

Totally tuition-free Theology, Ministry, Apologetics, Counseling degrees with FREE textbooks: Trinity Graduate  School of Theology

The Evolution Model:  There are several evolution models, but all of them have certain common features that yield a common Evolution Model. The following points describe the model: 
 

1-All order seen in universe is the product of randomness and blind chance. 
2-Life and living systems developed by the random (unplanned) interaction of matter and energy. 
3-Viruses, bacteria, plants and animals have all evolved from a common ancestor. 
4-The evolution of one form of life into another takes place through numerous intermediate forms. 

Many other points can be added, but the four points above give a representative picture of the model. On using this model one can make the following predictions: 

1-A tendency for self-organization should be seen in nature, specially where randomness is predominant. 

2-The fossil-record should produce millions upon millions of fossils of intermediate creatures. A gradual change should be visible. 

Many other predictions have been made, but the two predictions mentioned above are the most important. 

When nature is examined, the hard facts of science go against both of these predictions. Instead of a tendency towards organization, nature demonstrates a tendency towards disorganization and breakup. The more the random forces, the more is the break up. 

Also, instead of finding millions of expected intermediate life-forms, the fossil record does not yield even a handful of them ! The situation is so bad that many fossil-experts have abandoned the whole idea of intermediate forms. They advocate a new way of classification in which there is no place for intermediate forms. 

The two major predictions of the Evolution Model turn up to be false. The same is the fate of other predictions also. This means that this model is not an appropriate description of reality. 
 

The Creation Model: Similar to the Evolution model, the Creation model is also made up of numerous points. Some of the most important ones are as follows: 
 

1-All living and non living bodies have been created by a planner. 

2-All basic kinds of life forms are fixed. Changes are restricted within the kinds, and one kind never changes into another. 

3-Since basic kinds of living creatures have been fixed by the creator, no intermediate forms will ever be seen. 

4-Randomness is the opposite of plan. Therefore, randomness will work against the plan, design, and complexity in nature. 

The above model has also been examined in great detail, comparing it with nature. The model predicts absence of intermediate forms and also destruction of order by random forces. Intense researches of the twentieth century have confirmed the correctness of both the predictions in great detail. While basic kinds of living creatures show great variation within their own category, no basic kind has ever been observed to change into another. Intermediate fossils have never been discovered. Further, randomness has been demonstrated to be the greatest enemy of order and complexity.  
 

Which Model Is Scientifically Better:  The model that gives most accurate predictions is considered to be the better one. It is considered to represent the reality most accurately and closely. On this count the creation model turns out to be better than the Evolution model. 

All the major predictions of the Evolution model go against nature and the laws of science. On the other hand all the major predictions of the creation model agree well with nature and the laws of science. 

Thus the Creation model is better and closer to reality than the Evolution model. 
 

Bibliography: 
 

Plenty of books and articles are available on the topic of Evolution/Creation model. A few of them are: 
 

1-The Science Of Evolution, William D. Stanfield, New York: MacMillan, 1977. 
This book presents a college level course in the present understanding of evolution. 

2-Implications Of Evolution, G.A. Kerkut, New York: Pergamon, 1960. 
The author is an evolutionist and an authority in paleontology. Yet this book is a condemnation of the Evolution model. 

3-Chromosomes, Giant Molecules And Evolution, Bruce Wallace, New York: Norton, 1966. 
The book presents biochemical defense of the Evolution model. 

4-What Is Creation Science, Henry M. Morris and Gary Parker, San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers, 1987 Revised Edition. The best exposition available of the Creation Model. 
 

5-A Case For Creation, Wayne Frair & Percival Davis, Chicago: Moody Press, 1983  A popular yet authoritative book favouring creation

Register NOW, Study Tomorrow, Never Pay Tuition
Distance Education  At 
Trinity School Of Apologetics And Theology

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *