[aageneral] Creation and Science

This article may be freely published provided the author's
bylines and resource box remain intact. Please send an email if
you choose this article for publication.

Title: Creation and Science
Author: Jan A. Larson
Word count: 1000
Copyright: (c) 2005 All rights reserved.

Creation and Science

By Jan A. Larson

Following the recent Board of Education hearings in Kansas
debating the teaching of "intelligent design" versus evolution, I
decided that I would offer my two cents on the subject.

Before I begin, it is important to state the context in which I am
offering my views.

First, I am of the belief that the sum of all human knowledge �
everything learned since the dawn of mankind to this day � on
every subject, is extraordinarily small compared to the sum of all
knowledge in the universe. As an analogy, I am perfectly
comfortable in accepting that human knowledge is to universal
knowledge as the knowledge of an amoeba is to human
knowledge. In other words, there are vast realms of knowledge
that are not only unknown to us, but are likely incomprehensible
and unknowable to the human mind. I will assert that it is
presumptuous of mankind to believe otherwise.

Much of this universal knowledge is not simply unknown to
mankind, but it is unknown that it is unknown. We don't know
what we don't know. I have discussed this in greater detail on
my website [1].

Second, and more importantly, this essay is not based on a
particular religious perspective per se, as most major religions
accept the idea of a Creator.

If we can at least accept the possibility that mankind knows
very, very little about the universe, then the notion that the
universe itself is the product of an intelligent Creator is every bit
as logical as the notion that it all sprang forth by chance. Either
view requires a degree of faith since neither is provable using
conventional scientific means.

Those that do not accept the idea of intelligent design dismiss
the possibility that the heavens and the Earth were created and
can only rationalize that everything that mankind has ever seen
sprang forth spontaneously. Non-believers would not consider
that a Creator could exist without proof.

I laugh at such a notion. What kind of evidence would an all-
powerful Creator provide to show that He exists? A billboard
along the side of the road that says, "I exist, signed God?"

Nothing that a non-believer would believe would be believable.

However, in my view, evidence of a Creator abounds. An all-
powerful Creator would demonstrate His presence by showing
us things that are so immensely grandiose that humans can
barely comprehend them, never mind duplicate or fake them.
The Milky Way galaxy, spring roses in bloom or the sunset in
Key West. These things just exist or occur by happenstance?
The odds are incalculable.

It is from the work of Edwin Hubble that the theory of the "big
bang" was developed. The Big Bang theory postulates that the
entire universe, everything that mankind has ever seen or
experienced, all matter and energy, came to be when a point, a
"singularity," exploded some 15 billion years ago.

Physicists have worked for years to arrive at a "unified theory"
of the universe. A unified theory would combine Einstein's
theory of relativity (which explains the nature of stars, planets
and galaxies) and quantum mechanics (which explains the nature
of sub-atomic particles). Thus far, there is no widely accepted
theory that combines these two contradictory theories.

Physics and mathematics can explain (as best we know) what
occurred following the first few moments after the Big Bang.
But what happened in those first few moments? What existed
before the universe existed?

It would require a serious leap of faith (no pun intended) to
believe something sprang out of nothing just because there is
now something where before there was nothing. Is it more
logical that the Big Bang just "happened" or that it was the work
of an all-powerful Creator?

Turning to the question of creation versus evolution, if we accept
that there is (1) an all-powerful Creator, and (2) there are vast
amounts of knowledge that we don't know we don't know, it is
possible that the heavens and the Earth were created as described
in Genesis and the fossil evidence is merely a clever
smokescreen. However, the physical evidence does not suggest
that the Creator spent six days, that is six 24-hour days, as we
know them, creating the universe and the Earth.

Would it not make better logical sense to think that the process
of the creation of the Earth, and the population of the Earth by
the members of the animal kingdom and humans have followed
a longer process; a process that is revealed to us by the physical
evidence?

I do not see that the apparent conflict between creation and
evolution is really a conflict at all. I have satisfied myself that
evolution is simply the process of creation.

Science says that we don't know what existed or what happened
before the Big Bang. Science can't explain why a bag of
chemicals, that is the body of every living being, lives. These
are things that we may never know. Maybe it is beyond our
capability to know.

When it comes to teaching about the origins of the universe and
the origin of life, the real answer is that we really don't know.

Even those that do not believe in the concept of a Creator must
admit, if they are being intellectually honest, that the possibility
exists that the universe was created by a higher intelligence.
Those that believe that all of "this" couldn't just spring out of
nothing might be better served to accept that creation, via the
process of evolution, just might be an ongoing process.

The fact that there continue to be conflicts over the teaching of
creation versus evolution in the schools is simply indicative of
just how limited the human mind really is. Believers and non-
believers alike believe what they believe, but neither have all the
answers. Education should not be an indoctrination of young
minds and when it comes to the questions of the origins of the
world and the origins of life, there is nothing wrong with telling
the truth � no one knows.

[1] http://www.pieofknowledge.com/about.html

-----
Jan A. Larson publishes a weekly commentary, "What is the
Deal?" at the Pie of Knowledge
(http://www.pieofknowledge.com). His work also appears on
NewsBull (http://www.newsbull.com), OpinionEditorials
(http://www.opinioneditorials.com), American Daily
(http://www.americandaily.com), ChronWatch
(http://www.chronwatch.com) and The Conservative Voice
(http://www.theconservativevoice.com).

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
DonorsChoose. A simple way to provide underprivileged children resources
often lacking in public schools. Fund a student project in NYC/NC today!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/KZzaMD/.WnJAA/HwKMAA/C1XolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

########################################################

Looking For Quality Content?

The Syndicator provides free, quality syndicated articles
for your website that are automatically updated each week.

Syndication feeds include:

Business/Sales
Internet Marketing/Promotion
Web Design/Development
Biz Tips
Web Design Tips
Home & Family Matters
Dinner Ideas
Health & Fitness
Horoscopes
AngelVoice
Headlines
and more...

http://www.web-source.net/syndicator.htm

########################################################

Post Articles: mailto:aageneral@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: mailto:aageneral-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: mailto:aageneral-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Change subscription: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aageneral
List owner: mailto:aageneral-owner@yahoogroups.com
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aageneral/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
aageneral-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/