Guest Column by Kent Otterman

On May 20, Jennifer Vogt-Erikson shared her opinion that evolution is scientific fact, while the Biblical account of creation is just a myth.

However, evolution is certainly not a proven scientific fact.  Technically speaking, it’s not even a scientific theory. A scientific theory is an explanation of data that is well-substantiated through testing and observation. Scientific theories include Einstein’s theory of relativity and Newton’s theory of gravity.

“Particles to people” evolution does not fit in this category.  It has not been tested, nor can it be observed. Evolution is a hypothesis. That is, evolution is a conjecture or speculation or guess of how all that exists came into being.

Evolution teaches that life came into being spontaneously from non-living chemicals,  something that has never been observed. It then teaches that one kind of organism slowly changed into another kind of organism starting from “simple” single-celled creatures all the way up to the amazing complexity of the human body, again something that has never been observed.

Naturalist Charles Darwin predicted that the fossil record would show numerous transitional fossils (missing links that are part one creature and part another). Yet after all these years, all we have are a handful of disputable examples.

Vogt-Erickson points to a so-called transitional form or missing link between a fish and amphibian called tiktaalik. Supposedly the bottom fins of this fish were in the process of becoming legs so that it could walk out of the water and live on land.

However, tiktaalik’s fins were not connected to the main skeleton, so they could not have supported its weight on land. The discoverers claimed that these fins could have helped to prop up the body as the fish moved along a water bottom, but evolutionists had similar high hopes for coelacanth fins.  However, when a living coelacanth was discovered in 1938, the fins turned out not to be used for walking, but for deft maneuvering when swimming.  All such missing links are wishful thinking based on evolutionary ideology rather than scientific fact.

In evolution, the means by which one kind of creature changes into another kind of creature are natural selection and mutations. Natural selection is a proven scientific fact that creationists also accept.  Natural selection simply means that in any given environment, nature selects the genetic characteristics of a creature that are the most advantageous in that environment.

So Darwin noticed that some finches had short beaks in one environment but long beaks in a different environment. But guess what, they were all finches!

Natural selection enables creatures to adapt to their surroundings, but it can only use the genetic information that is already there. Natural selection does not create new genetic information that would be required for one creature to change into a totally different kind of creature.

In a similar way, scientists have yet to find a genetic mutation that increases genetic information in ways needed for “microbes to man” evolution to be feasible. Furthermore, the vast majority of genetic mutations are harmful to an organism, not helpful.

The truth is that both evolution and creation require faith, since neither one can be scientifically observed. Given this, when it comes to the teaching of origins in our public schools, why not give various perspectives and the arguments for each one, and let young people decide for themselves?

For many excellent articles on understanding scientific evidence from a creationist perspective, I recommend creation.com.

Finally a couple quotes:

“There is a popular image of human evolution that you’ll find all over the place. On the left of the picture there’s an ape; on the right, a man. Between the two is a succession of figures that become ever more like humans. Our progress from ape to human looks so smooth, so tidy. It’s such a beguiling image that even the experts are loath to let it go. But it is an illusion.” — Bernard Wood (professor of human origins, George Washington University), “Who are we?” New Scientist, 2366 (Oct. 26, 2002), p. 44.

“The BBC teased religious leaders by asking them if they believed in the literal truth of the great Bible stories. I would like to ask the BBC chiefs and the rest of our secular establishment if they believe in the literal truth of evolution. Evolution is an unproven theory. If what its fundamentalist supporters believe is true, fishes decided to grow lungs and legs and walk up on the beach. The idea is so comically daft that only one thing explains its survival — that lonely, frightened people wanted to expel God from the universe because they found the idea that he exists profoundly uncomfortable.” — British Columnist Peter Hitchens, International Express (UK) Jan. 5, 2000.

 

The Rev. Kent Otterman is the chaplain at Good Samaritan Society of Albert Lea and is pastor of Faith Lutheran Church of London.