I am in a human evolution class right now, and I find it very compelling to reply here. But I dont as a student have time to read 325 pages of debate about creationism and evolution. I will make a few points though.
First off, scientists stay away from the God issue usually. Their claim is not that God doesn't exist, but rather they take evidence that has been tested and retested and retested, and let me reiterate RETESTED and form theories about that evidence. I have to tell you seriously that a scientific theory is not the same thing as the way we lamens use the word. It is basically the highest level of surety an idea can attain in Science. Nobody is saying that without a shadow of a doubt evolution is the basis of all life. But they are saying that all the evidence points that way. And in science, thats BIG.
Darwins theory was hard to dismiss at the time it was written. But now, after all the genetic research that has gone on in the twentieth century, it is hard to dispute.
Let me give you a concrete example, (and credit where it is due to Steve Jones in his book
Darwin's Ghost. The most excellent modern example of evolution in action is the HIV virus. The theory behind evolution is that mutations occur randomly and the ones better suited to reproduce will, thereby creating more efficient and resilient organisms that are equally better equipped to reproduce, and new forms of organisms arise. What makes HIV so good at this is that it can multiply at astonishing rates, so the chance for mutation is even greater. Obviously, most of those mutations are unsuccessful, but some are. And now, there are somewhere around 12 recognized strains of the HIV virus (pretty much, one for every continent, and then some).
Jones makes the point that creationists have been willing to accept the process of evolution through HIV (though they don't call it that) because they see it as an example of God's wrath agains homosexuals. Jones states,
Quote:Creationists find it easy to accept the science of AIDS> ITs arrival so close to the millennium and the Last Judgment is a useful illustration of God's wrath. Homosexuals, they claim, have declared war on nature, and nature has exacted an awful retribution. Fundamentalists admit the evolution of a virus as nature's revenge but will not concede that the same process acts upon life as a whole (Jones, 2000)
The rest of the book is a modern version of The Origin of Species with examples from Genetics factored in. Basically the point is that biologists and other scientists have worked for a long time testing and retesting this theory. And just because you cannot disprove it entirely does not mean it has no credibility. And it is also not a credible argument to say that a controversy exists between Creationism and Evolution because in order for there to be a controversy, both have to be theories that have relatively equal credibility in the scientific community.
Creationism is a useful field of knowledge, but one cannot call it science. I am a religious person, and believe that God is behind the creation of the world, whether it is that he devised evolution or that he created energy (something that most scientists cannot explain where it came from as of yet). But the six days seven nights thing doesn't fit into my world view any more. We can talk about creationism in philosophy and religion and other humanities, but to call it a science implies that it has been tested and has gained respect through the scientific method. The fact remains, you cannot test something that relies on faith.
Hope this wasn't too lengthy, but this is an issue of importance to me.
