Evolution or Creation? You Decide :)

Ram Samudrala ram at mbisgi.umd.edu
Mon Mar 17 00:21:30 EST 1997


I probably shouldn't be adding fuel to this argument. And what a
shame, since BillyJack started off with such a promising introduction.

BillyJack6 at aol.com wrote:

>Evolution Model:  What we observe today is the result of chance events
>and long periods of time.  There is no design and thus no designer
>behind anything in the Universe. 

Actually evolution itself can be considered "intelligent".  That is, a
set of chance events and time can produce a system that is
"intelligent", like humans. Humans controlling molecular evolution is
one such example.  So the evolution model says humans arose by a
certain stochastic process.  But Dolly the sheep did NOT (entirely)
arise by that process.

>THE TOP TEN REASONS THE CREATION MODEL IS A BETTER EXPLANATION FOR THE
>ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE AND THE CURRENT STATE OF THE UNIVERSE THAN THE
>EVOLUTION MODEL

I am sorry, but all you're sort of saying in the top ten reasons is
that the evolution model isn't perfect (which everyone I know
accepts).  It says nothing about the creation model.  It is this sort
of disingenuity that bothers people who are into reason.  I am not
going to dissect each of your reasons, but keep in mind a single iota
of proof or logic wasn't presented here.

>conclusion that these complex systems are result of an intelligent
>designer requires much less faith  than the idea it arose by time and
>chance.

This is your argument?

>   I have read a lot of evolutionist literature, and I have never seen
>an explanation of how complex organs & systems evolved.  THINK!  How
>could something like human reproduction have evolved?  How did half
>the population evolve male systems, and the other half evolve female
>systems that work together so precisely and in such incredible
>complexity to produce a baby? 

THINK!  Have you ever done a  simulation of complex systems?

>   Look at your computer.  Suppose I tried to convince you that a
>glass factory, a plastic factory, a metal factory, a paint factory,
>and a silicon factory all exploded, started on fired and mixed
>together.  The result of this explosion, chemical reaction and time
>was your computer.  You would never believe it.  Your intellect and
>logic would cause you to passionately deny an explanation that an
>explosion and mixing of chemicals and time could ever produce
>something as functional and orderly like a computer.

So what did create the computer? Humans. How did they do it?  In
primitive evolution (i.e., molecular objects found 2-3 billion years
ago), there is so much more sophistication than what is there in the
tools required to build a computer.  You're forgetting incremental
steps.  Some of these steps can be repeated by people.  You're the one
not thinking.  Take your scenario and add that for each part put
correctly, the half-finished computer would be the only thing you
could put a part on.

Ah screw this! I am wasting my time.  Creationists (who generally I
see as Christians) are gasping their dying breaths. BTW, even if a god
existed, that god is a despot.  Rather than waste my time arguing
against you, I've just decided to teach the concepts of evolution to
the children I work with.  They can decide for themselves whether to
believe me or not.  I think you're a lost cause.

--Ram

me at ram.org  ||  http://www.ram.org  ||  http://www.twisted-helices.com/th
     Your shadow, the white one, who you cannot accept and who will never
                                             forget you --- Rolf Jacobson



More information about the Mol-evol mailing list