Monkey Madness (part 5)

According to the National Geographic article by David Quammen in 2004 (to which I referenced in one of my previous posts), a staggering percentage of the American population do not accept the theory of evolution. The statistics were actually quite surprising to me, but they provide another opportunity for more questions.

A question I would love to hear students asking in response to these kinds of findings might be, Why do you think roughly half of Americans believe that God created people sometime within the last 10,000 years? This question isn't so much to make an argument against anything, but it is important to realize the underlying assumptions of both sides in this debate.

When teachers make any kind of statements about religion, the Bible, or creationism, it should be fair for a student to ask, What does taking the Scriptures (or tenets of said faith) literally teach us about creation and the origin of life?

Some things to ponder when considering source evidence:

• New discoveries and understandings lead to changes in the theory of evolution. The creation story as told in Genesis has never had to be revised due to new findings.
• The Bible is written by about 40 different authors over a 1500 year time span on three different continents from people of all ranks of society. There is simply no other work, sacred or secular, that has even close to such an incredible story of formation and preservation.
• The Bible is the best selling book in the world. Its historical accuracy is remarkable. Archaeologists uphold its claims time and time again.

Please note that none of these facts mean that the Bible is divinely inspired, or the "word of God." That belief still requires faith. However, it also makes no sense to entirely dismiss a source that is the most scrutinized, analyzed, and critiqued literary and historical work ever known to mankind. The time and careful process the Bible went through as it was developed and compiled through the ages is unmatched.

Monkey Madness - The Creation/Evolution Debate Rages On (part 4)

In case anyone wonders if this topic is still timely, here is one of the featured videos on the MSN website for today, August 4, 2012. Enough said!

You can't even make this stuff up. Watch this clip about the "randomness and nastiness of evolution" (their words, not mine) if you want and ask yourself, Does this sound like science or science fiction? By the way, the second video on the site is "Humans vs. Aliens." I have to give it to them. If they can't be scientific, then at least be entertaining. I guess that's what Morgan Freeman's voice is for. Maybe it is their attempt to add scientific credibility to their position. You know, because famous Hollywood movie stars do that.

The third video is just as fun. I wish I could have been in the room while Morgan Freeman was recording it so I could occasionally interrupt and ask, "Could you say that last sentence out loud again?"

Monkey Madness (part 3)

The following link is an article that launched a series I presented at my local church at the time (almost 8 years ago). It lays out a four-fold argument in favor of Darwinian evolution. What interests me about this article is that the points the author uses are rather easy to refute by merely setting out a few facts with only a small amount of research, which could be done by just about anyone, anywhere, anytime.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0411/feature1/fulltext.html

Besides the interesting selection of points, this article is also entertaining because of the "artistic" description of the theory of evolution. The sentences below offer one example.

"Evolutionary theory, though, is a bit different. It's such a dangerously wonderful and far-reaching view of life that some people find it unacceptable, despite the vast body of supporting evidence."

Dangerously wonderful? Despite the vast body of supporting evidence?
Students need to be trained to read critically and recognize the bias of authors, teachers, etc. If you read the article, then you will find many other not-so-subtle jabs that paint critics of evolution as religious nuts or ignorant fools with covert brush strokes. This is a common tactic of people that lack substance in their position on the real issue.


What makes a scientific theory "dangerously wonderful" anyway?

Monkey Madness (part 2)

Question #1

Student: "My theory, or belief, for how life began involves a supernatural act. I believe God, a divine being, created all plant, animal, and human life on this planet in the beginning of time on Earth. I realize that this view is sometimes ridiculed and labeled as a "myth" or "fairy tale." I would like it if you, Mr./Ms. ____ (professor/teacher/indocrinator), would just give me a simple summary of how you think life began on this planet."

Thoughts to Consider
No one was there when it all started. Whether it was billions of years ago or 6000 years ago, we can still be confident that no one alive today was anywhere close to the events that launched this whole process! Therefore, right off the bat, we know one thing for sure. Everything about the origins of life is educated guesswork at best. Theory! Neither side can be dogmatic about much of anything. So, then, it comes down to how evidence is interpreted.
This leads to some follow-up questions that students can always ask, all based on whether evidence is interpreted in an objective, sensible manner.

Now, when a teacher does honestly answer this student's question and includes things like life arising from nonliving matter, primordial soup, a moon-like object breaking apart and then combining with other "space rocks" to form another ball of rock that continues to grow and morph into a suddenly life-sustaining planet on a defined orbit (another proposal I've heard), etc., then it will be up to that student to determine whether the answer sounds more like science or science fiction.

Below is an excerpt from a PBS website that is about a NOVA special considering how life began:

In a nutshell, what is the process? How does life form?
The short answer is we don't really know how life originated on this planet. There have been a variety of experiments that tell us some possible roads, but we remain in substantial ignorance. That said, I think what we're looking for is some kind of molecule that is simple enough that it can be made by physical processes on the young Earth, yet complicated enough that it can take charge of making more of itself. That, I think, is the moment when we cross that great divide and start moving toward something that most people would recognize as living.


The truth is that the more you read responses from evolutionists about how life may have begun, the more you will find there is great uncertainty, and even disagreement, among many of them. Of course, to their defense, there can't be much certainty about something no one was around to observe.

Monkey Madness - The Creation/Evolution Debate Rages On (part 1)

At one time, I was really big into Christian apologetics (defending the Christian faith). While I am still interested in some of the arguments out there on all sides, I'm just not as concerned now with the idea of having to "defend" Christianity. Christianity, as a religion, actually may not be all that defensible anyway. At least not anymore than any other religion. Jesus, on the other hand, is still worthy of worship and allegiance. I like Carl Medearis' book, Speaking of Jesus, on this matter.

There is, however, still one topic that has quite a strong hold on me when it comes to defending biblical history. The funny thing is that it is not so much about my desire to defend anything religious or spiritual as much as it is a preoccupation with simply standing for truth. When it comes to learning, people should be entitled to draw their own conclusions when presented with facts objectively. Granted, that rarely happens these days, but we can still fight for it.

So, what is the one topic? It is that hairy, controversial, highly politicized and grossly misrepresented debate of creation vs. evolution. It is hard to say exactly why this topic still matters so much to me. I believe it has something to do with how aggressively and pervasively the unscientific theory of evolution has been pushed on this generation. Personally, as a parent, I am simply hoping for one thing when my daughter enters a science classroom - that they will teach her science!

In our efforts to make a much greater place for the next generation to become free and fruitful, there must be assurance that children and youth will have the freedom and opportunity to explore science and history and other areas in an honest manner.

Along these lines, here is the start of a series of posts related to thoughts about the entire creation vs. evolution debate, how it affects public education, and questions that students may consider asking their teachers in a variety of settings when challenged with particular assumptions.