The Creation vs. Evolution debate rages on. On the surface, it looks like we have Creationists on one side with their faith argument, while on the other side there are Evolutionists with their science argument. But beneath the surface of that murky primordial pond lies something more profound.
Every person leans on one side of the fence a little more. Even Evolutionary Creationists must lean to the Creation side in order to substantiate their Evolutionary argument. And the term “Creation Evolutionist” doesn’t really hold any water because those who start from the evolutionary standpoint do so in direct contrast to creation. If you can prove that last statement wrong, have at it.
The funny thing is: creation and faith are not necessarily linked, nor is evolution and science. I say that it takes less faith to believe in creation than it does to believe in evolution. To understand this, let’s take a look at how an entrepreneur attempts to secure funds for a business.
By default, we humans want to see then believe. When an entrepreneur is hoping to get a loan or an investor, he must write up a well-thought-out business plan to convince the guy with the cash (Mr. Money) to hand it over. Mr. Money is a human (usually) and, like I said, humans are a seeing-is-believing creature. Mr. Money wants to see how the entrepreneur plans to start his business, run his business, and make money for an ROI (return on investment). Basically, Mr. Money wants to know the creation process before he can have enough faith to invest. Sure, one can claim this is a scientific method, but bear with me.
Creationists believe that we were created by a higher power with a bigger brain. An intelligent Creationist will understand his limited intelligence in relation to that higher power and say that the methods are beyond his mental ability and capacity. When you think of it, that’s not really all that rich in faith. I know that BMW’s have complex motors engineered in ways I don’t understand by people smarter than me. I don’t have faith that they can do it because I know how they do it, I simply know they’re smarter than me and do their nerd work. No faith there.
Now consider faith in evolution. The whole science factor has to be thrown out because there’s absolutely no way to accurately determine the exact path or the exact time frame which it took any given organism to evolve into another. There’s a gap there, and that gap requires a leap of faith. To believe that everything randomly came together to create a perfect symbiotic earth environment is a tall order. Scientifically, there are too many holes in the theory. So many, in fact, that the theory would be considered flawed by scientists themselves. It’s like trying to prove that A + B + 2 + D + E = 25; too many unknowns to pin down what the factors are from the sum.
Where do I fit in? I’m an artist, so, I naturally believe in creation. The things I created have thought behind them; practice and effort. I don’t go to my drawing board and wait for an illustration to create itself — I pick up the pencil and get to it. Having said that, I will also say that I believe in survival of the fittest; but not necessarily linked to evolution. All organisms must adapt to their environment or die. When a species changes their physiology to not die, they’re not really evolving but merely altering themselves a bit. It doesn’t mean the “new” altered organism is better than the “old” one, it just means it’s different for that environment.
Consider the age-old argument: In a fight, which would win — Bear vs. Shark? Is the bear a superior animal to the shark or vice versa? If they fought in water, the shark has the advantage. But, on land, the bear does. A shark has no natural enemies but that doesn’t make him the most evolved creature on water or land. Strangely, the shark hasn’t changed in who knows how long. I don’t see him solving calculus equations.
There is enough wiggle room in our makeup to change ourselves so that we don’t die. This is obvious. If no creature could change, all creatures would die from the natural changes in environment. Does change equal evolution? No. When a human moves to a colder climate, his blood thickens. Does that change mean he has evolved, that he’s smarter? No, he simply adapted by change. And wears earmuffs.
Will these words of mine change anybody’s beliefs? I doubt it. It’s just my two-cents. Perhaps we should adapt ourselves and focus on a subject more pragmatic than the Creation vs. Evolution argument. After all, are we really ever going to figure it out? And what do we accomplish with this debate? Why not spend our time trying to help out homeless people or mentoring kids who have been neglected? Not into all that bleeding heart stuff? Try calligraphy. Everyone likes calligraphy.
We can’t change the past, no matter how solid our argument may seem, but we can play a part in a brighter future. Let’s make the world a better place for our children and future generations starting now, regardless of what happened eons ago. I bet even the creationists out there would have to agree that such an act would be a positive next step in our species’ evolution.