Creation Vs. Evolution

Because creationism and evolution have conflicted for many years, creationists now rely on scientific evidence, as well as biblical evidence, to prove that their beliefs are correct and that the problems in evolution cannot be ignored. The Bible tells the creation story, but it does not provide scientific evidence of creation. Creation scientists now use theories such as new catastrophism and provide proof for the Great Flood in the geological column. The second law of thermodynamics and the process of irreducible complexity deny many claims made by evolutionists. Creation scientists also counter evolution by questioning the validity of radiocarbon dating.
The Bible is an important source for creationists. It tells the creation story. The creation consisted of seven days. In those seven days God created the earth and everything on it. There have been some important scientific discoveries that are relevant to the days of creation. On the first day “the Holy spirit moved upon the earth. From this omnipotent, vibrating energy source began to flow our energy waves- waves of heat and sound magnetism. Thus, the created universe was energized. The earth rotating on its axis also began at this time. Both energy and matter w

One theory that creation scientists claim supports the biblical creation is the theory of new catastrophism. George McCready Price introduced this theory in 1902. Price believed that evolution was based on geology; therefore, Price set out to prove geological assumptions wrong in order to reveal the inaccuracies in evolution (Sonder 39-40). Price’s theory of new catastrophism stated that “most changes on Earth had been caused by only one catastrophe- Noah’s Great Flood- rather than by the multiple catastrophes theorized by nineteenth-century geologists” (Sonder 42).

There are also many problems in the theory of evolution that cannot be ignored. Charles Darwin was the founder of evolutionary theory, but even Darwinism had some unexplained problems. “Darwin never found and explanation for the origin of the first living thing or for things on Earth from which all others descended. He never answered questions such as ‘What caused the first thing to exist?’ and ‘What created the universe itself?” (Sonder 25).

“Charles Darwin himself wrote that his theory of evolution would ‘break down’ if it were proven that any complex organ could not have developed over a long period of time in gradual increments” (Leone 18). This process is referred to as irreducible complexity. Michael J. Behe defines irreducible complexity as “a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning” (Leone 18). This process has been studied by modern molecular biologists, and it has been proven that “there are certain complex organs in both animals and insects that could not have evolved by gradual, successive additions” (Leone 18). “As the number of unexplained, irreducibly complex biological systems increases, our confidence that Darwin’s criterion of failure has been met skyrockets toward the maximum that science allows” (Leone 19).