Today, the word “Creationist” describes someone with very fundamentalist beliefs regarding the Creation. Many Creationists still believe in the 6-day creation period of Genesis and do not believe in evolution. Most still believe the earth is about 10,000 years old. Again, if you are interested in where the Evolution vs. Creationist debate stands today, listen in.
“Science and Scriptures” Episode #4 – What You Might Say to a Creationist
Hello again. My name is Scott Frazer and I would like to welcome you to episode #4 of the podcast Science and Scriptures. In our last episode, we discussed what you might say to an Atheist Evolutionist who asks you about your beliefs. We ended the discussion with the conclusion that the case for randomly-directed evolution has little merit. If you understand the concept of probability at all, the conclusion of creation without a Directing Force becomes very hard to defend.
As I mentioned in that last episode, I am an Evolutionary Theist. I believe in God and I believe that He used natural evolutionary processes to create our world. Being a Evolutionary Theist means you can be criticized by both Creationists (for not being loyal to a literal reading of the book of Genesis) and by Atheists (for believing in God at all). Last week, we discussed what you might say to an Atheist about the Creation. Today I wish to discuss what you might say to a Creationist about the Creation, should one ask you about your beliefs.
If this is the first time you have heard arguments against fundamental Creationist beliefs, I hope you don’t write off my podcast because of this episode. It took me many years to change my own creationist-like beliefs to get to my belief system today. Please know that it takes time for your brain to wrap itself around new explanations that contradict what you have believed for decades.
As I make this argument, I also realize that in the early 1900’s, many church leaders were Creationists as well. But even then, beliefs were changing. The dispute of Evolution vs. Creationism finally came to a head in 1930, when the Apostle Joseph Fielding Smith and B.H. Roberts took the matter to President Heber J. Grant for a decision regarding church policy on the issue. President Grant issued a statement that declared the church was decidedly neutral on the subject. This was a fascinating time in church history, by the way. In any case, church doctrine on the subject has not changed. In regards to evolution, church members can believe however they wish.
In the interest of not offending anyone, please let me make one final disclaimer. I realize that many of you in my listening audience may still define yourselves as Creationists. Technically speaking, anyone who believes that God created the world might be called a Creationist. But the word “Creationist” has been redefined over the past forty years or so and you should understand the implications of that change. Today, a Creationist is someone with very fundamentalist beliefs regarding the Creation. They take the Genesis account to be quite literal. Many Creationists still believe in a 6-day creation period. Creationists do not believe that evolution had anything at all to do with the creation of life. Most still believe the earth is about 10,000 years old. The word carries around a lot of baggage. In the 1980’s, the term “Intelligent Design” was coined in an attempt by the religiously faithful to get away from the Creationist label.
The Creationist movement is not a small effort. They have their own Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky. If you go there, you will see a number of exhibits with which you will probably agree. Obviously, the group believes in all the accounts of the Old Testament. But Creationists’ refusal to consider making slight changes to their understandings of the creation account and the age of the earth has made them the target of much ridicule.
So, moving on, to start this discussion, a little bit of history is in order.
First, let’s talk about fossils.
You can find fossils in most museums and, if you are lucky, on a hike in the wilderness. If you take all the fossils that have ever been found, you have what is called the fossil record. The fossil record is very strong evidence of evolution—simply because there is so much of it. Since fossils are usually made out of rock, there are, quite literally, tons and tons of evidence in the fossil record. Museums across the world are filled with fossils. They are so plentiful that you can buy your own fossils at most rock shops and museum gift stores for a small price. The most well-known fossils of extinct animals are, of course, those of the dinosaurs. Re-creation of the skeletons of dinosaurs such as the Tyrannosaurus Rex and Diplodocus are still the main attractions at most natural history museums.
The age of fossils can be determined by a several techniques. The most well-known method is carbon dating, an analysis developed in 1946 by Willard F. Libby at the University of Chicago. Carbon-14 is a radioisotope of normal Carbon-12.Carbon-14 exists in our atmosphere, where much of it ends up in a molecule of carbon dioxide. Some of that carbon dioxide is incorporated into plants by photosynthesis and then into animals when they eat those plants. When a plant or animal dies, the amount of carbon-12 in it is set, as no more uptake can occur. However, over time the radioactive carbon-14 in the skeleton will decay back to its more stable form. Exactly one-half of the carbon-14 in an animal’s skeleton will decay every 5,730 years. Thus, the less carbon-14 is found in a bone, the older it is. This analysis can accurately assess the ages of wood and other organic material that are less than 50,000 years old.
For years after its development, carbon-14 dating was criticized from every angle by creationists. Lots of theories were put forth, including the idea that the earth was made from the remains of older planets. This would allow the rocks to be millions of years old, but the earth to be about 10,000 years old. This idea doesn’t really work, as much of the earth’s crust is made out of layers, remnants of which can be found hundreds of miles apart. Because of the barrage of attacks that lasted for years, Carbon dating has been tested on many articles of known age—from the wood found in tombs of Egyptian pharaohs to the inner tree rings of very old trees. Despite the desperate attempts to discredit the technology, the accuracy of Carbon-14 dating is well established.
For most of the 1900s, there was intense debate about creationism versus evolution. Fossils and their dating were in the very middle of this argument. Fossils of humanoids were found, dated, and then the branch of pre-Adamites represented by the fossil was named. Thus you may have heard of “Peking Man” or “Java Man”. It was a crazy time for paleontologists, as everyone wanted to find evidence of the “missing link” between chimpanzees and man. Fossils representing a so-called Piltdown Man were highly publicized - until they were found to be a hoax. In 1974, a significant skeleton was found in Ethiopia. The team named the female skeleton “Lucy”. Her bones were dated to be 3.2 million years old. Her branch of primate was called Australopithecus afarensis, with characteristics of both ape and man. The discovery was convincing, but the debates continued.
Though fossils are still entertaining to see when you visit a natural history museum, there is little of the mania for finding fossils that there was in the 1900’s. There is a good reason for this. In making the case for evolution of species, we could now take the fossil record that we have collected over the past two centuries – and throw it all away. We really don’t need fossils anymore to make the case for evolution. A new technology that provides much more convincing evidence has been developed – DNA Sequencing.
Let’s talk about Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) Sequencing
As a quick review of genetics, your DNA is made up of 23 double-helix structures called chromosomes. Lined up within those 23 chromosomes, you have about 20,000 genes, which create the proteins needed by your cells to function and maintain life. Those genes, in turn, are constructed from about three billion “base pairs” or complex molecules called nucleic acids. To understand how your double helix chromosomes work, picture in your mind a very long spiral staircase. The inside and outside supports of the staircase are merely structural in purpose. The “stairs” between the supports are where the genetic information is stored. On each stair resides two of four “bases”—cytosine (or called C by his friends), thymine (whose nickname is T), adenine (who everyone calls A), or guanine (shortened to G). These two bases connect in the middle of the stair. The “C” base is always attached to a “G” base, while a “T” base is always attached to an “A” base. Each linkage of the two bases is called a base pair, and all your genetic information is encoded in the sequences of these base pairs.
When geneticists sequence your DNA, they are simply determining the order of all your base pairs. The results of the sequencing may look something like “CCTGAGGAAATT . . .” Your DNA string is very long, but also rather boring since you only get to use four letters and no words. For many years, sequencing a gene was a long and tortuous process, but new technology made sequencing much faster and cheaper.
Before genetic sequencing became common practice, genetics research had made comparisons of our DNA structure to that of other species. First, the chromosomes of all plants and animals (except bacteria) have the same double-helix structure that we do. Secondly, all plants and animals (including bacteria) have genes within those chromosomes, just like we do. Lastly, all genes are made up of the same four nucleotide base pairs that we have. Naturally, these similarities suggested that humans, plants, and animals all have a common ancestor. It seems unlikely that every species on Earth could have been created individually or evolved separately, yet still have the same basic DNA structure of nucleotides, genes, and double helixes. When the sequencing technology was developed to allow us to conduct a base-pair-by-base-pair molecular comparison, we could know how very similar we are to the rest of Earth’s plant, bacterial, and animal life.
As fast sequencing of the individual base pairs in DNA became achievable, comparing the similarity of the DNA of different species became the new argument for evolution. Since the “alphabet” of DNA only contains four letters (C, T, A, and G), some similarity is expected. But with three billion base pairs to compare, similarity above and beyond random chance is going to be obvious.
To start with, when you compare your DNA to that of your neighbor, you will find that 99.9% of your sequences are a match. If you are related to your neighbor, the percentage goes up even more. By the way, this is the basis of sending in a spit sample to look for genealogical matches. These genealogy DNA sequencing laboratories know there are certain DNA sequences that are normally found in the DNA of say, full-blooded Germans. If you have some (or all) of those same sequences, calculations can be made as to how much German ancestry you have in you. The same calculations can be made to determine where your other ancestors came from as well. You can get a map of the world with your % ancestry from each region. If you have ever submitted a spit sample, your DNA is held on file. Again using % Similarity data, if your cousin submits a sample as well, these genealogy labs can identify that you are related. If your cousin has agreed that her information can be released, the lab will send you a notice of the relationship they have found!
The same technology that is helping church members do their genealogy is rewriting our understanding of the creation and evolution.
One might expect such high percentages of DNA similarity with other humans. But, getting back to our topic of evolution, you also share about 24% of your genes with rice and about 60% of your DNA with bananas.
I realize that you may be scoffing at this declaration right now. But in considering the reason for DNA similarities, remember that DNA is the blueprint for all of your bodily processes. Your cells and the cells of bananas are obviously quite different, but both sets have outer membranes, need to be able to survive in earth’s atmosphere, and need to incorporate water to stay hydrated. Both sets of DNA must unravel their helixes and replicate to create new cells. God and evolution did not create whole new biochemical processes for the development of each new species. More complex species (like us) used tried and true methods for their basic cellular processes (as might be used by the banana). We developed new processes (such as brains) as they were required.
Comparing ourselves within the animal kingdom, about 70% of your DNA sequence is about the same as that of a zebrafish. Not surprisingly, similarity increases as we move our comparisons into the mammalian class. We share about 85% of the same DNA sequences as a cow and 88% of our DNA is similar to the DNA of a mouse. Again this should not be surprising. Mice have lungs, brains, kidneys, stomachs, skin and hair, as do we.
You can probably see where this is going, so it should not surprise you that as we move into the order of primates, we find the most DNA similarity. After all, primates have the same body shape and facial structure as we do. So, about 97% of our DNA nucleotide sequencing is the same as the gorilla. But at the top of the human DNA similarity list is the chimpanzee. When you lay the DNA sequences of man next to that of chimpanzees, fully 99% of the base pairs match.
With such data, one can draw out what we can call The Tree of Evolution. At the trunk of the tree you start with the earliest known mammal for which we have recovered DNA. Its closest relative – the one with the highest percentage of identical DNA sequences – is laid next to it. The process of comparing % similarity continues, putting branches in the tree as new species break off.
Besides “% Similarity”, there are other markers which add accuracy to the tree. DNA is not static. Errors will be made during transcription. Sometimes, the more nomadic genes of DNA will actually break off from their normal location in the chromosome and attach themselves to another spot. Those changes may disrupt the function of the body so much that the baby dies at birth. But some changes can be survived. For example, early in mankind’s evolutionary progress, it appears that we lost the gene that enabled us to produce our own Vitamin C. Many mammal species still have that ability, but we don’t. Since our progenitors consumed enough fruits to provide them with Vitamin C, the loss of the gene was not fatal. But its loss is still a genetic deficiency. Today, if you don’t get enough Vitamin C in your diet, you will get scurvy and die.
But this change is also a marker on our Evolutionary Tree. As it turns out, neither primates nor humans can synthesize their own Vitamin C, but dogs, cats and other mammals still can. Our loss of the Vitamin C-synthesizing gene occurred after our primate’s genetic line broke off from other mammals. If a nomadic gene has moved between chromosomes, its move will be a marker as well. If a species has the nomadic gene in its original location, the species broke off before the move. If the nomadic gene is in its new location, the species broke off after the nomadic gene moved.
When you have three billion bases pairs to compare (“CCTGAG, etc.) – and a computer to sort through them all - you can run a lot of comparisons. You can look for similarities and differences between two different species. You can compare members of one species that live in different parts of the world – and thus follow migrations of that species to different parts of the world. DNA Sequencing gives you a biological history of plant and animal species - their evolution, migrations, and sometimes extinctions.
Thousands of scientists are working on DNA sequencing – including, I might add, scientists in the DNA Sequencing Center at Brigham Young University. More is being learned every day.
It has been suggested by fellow church members that new discoveries in biology might someday change our conclusions that evolution actually occurred. I’m sorry, but that will never happen. Simply put, there is simply too much data to support evolution, whether in fossil evidence using dating techniques or in DNA evidence using sequencing techniques.
When Albert Einstein first proposed his Special Theory of Relativity in 1905 and his General Theory of Relativity in 1915, his equations were hailed as changing everything we knew about physics and Newton’s Laws of Motion and Gravitation. In reality, Einstein’s revelations only tweaked Newton’s Laws, showing a few modifications in his equations. Newton’s theory held up and still exists today. Likewise, Darwin’s Theory of Evolution may be tweaked on occasion as we continue to understand it better. But it is here to stay. In conclusion, by believing in God and Evolution, you are going to get arguments from those who believe only in one of the two. But that belief holds up well under argument, whether that argument is a dialogue with a friend or if it is going on inside your own head. Think about it for a while, because it may take some time.
That is all that I have for today. Thank you for listening to this episode of Science and Scriptures. I hope you can join with me next time, when we will be talking about what you might say to someone who has lost their faith in God or in the church. If you like it, please let your friends know about the podcast. As always, please let me know if you have any questions or comments. So, till next time… Take care.