A letter to a friend:

I read you were questioning evolution verses creation. Here is my perspective from examining the subject closely since I was in high school. I used to go on blogs and debate people also, but find that most of the time people lack a base to really give opinion on the matter. It isn’t that they are stupid, but just haven’t thought the matter through and have mistaken notions. This is a quick summary of my own conclusions

In forensic science, we look at a crime scene and collect data to form conclusions. Even with all the tools we have now, a cold case is very difficult to solve. We still require a trial for the accused because there is no way to make certain conclusions about past events. Even an eyewitness’s testimony can become sketchy over time. And we are only talking about ten years or so. Genuine science can only study things that can be currently observed. The scientific method eliminates all other possibilities through experimentation to make a conclusion true. The variables increase as time goes by. Science about current events that we actually observe and record is sound science.

When it comes to origins and creation, a person has to leave the realm of science and enter into philosophy. Although those who have theories of origins claim to have science behind them, there can be little actual science in what they present. The question becomes which one has the most potential as a possibility. That makes it more of an enjoyable contemplation with no worries. Let’s look at a few of my contemplation.

I haven’t been able to ascribe to the evolution philosophy because there are far too many loose ends and things that don’t make sense. Darwin based his conclusions on the simple cells he observed and said static electricity shocked them to bring them to life. Now we have learned cells are far from simple. They contain fascinating factories that transport and convert the right amounts of nutrients and raw materials to the right places. When it comes to reproduction, the process is complex and precise. It is silly now with what we know, to think that it could have happened by chance. We observe scientifically, when nature is left alone, things will decay. There is some kind of force that keeps live things organized. A random electrical shock bringing life belongs in Frankenstein movies. I have an electrical background and it always follows the path of least resistance. We observe that mutations bring deficiencies that don’t improve species either.

Many things presented as science today are really done to secure grants so the people doing the studies can make further money. Proving evolution generates money like saving the planet does. The stories are sensationalized so not only scientists get grants but advertisers get money for all the hits. The Neanderthal over the years has evolved from a missing link to just normal people who lived alongside modern man. There are races and individuals today that have different cranial and skeletal structures living among us. Tracing genetics back takes computer modeling that isn’t all that accurate since there are variables they leave out. But once in a while stories pop up. Most of them are a waste of time scientifically but interesting philosophically.

You have to move out of philosophy to study the characteristics of a being that would have organized it all. Philosophy can form conclusions about origins from experiences but religion goes further to say what that being is like. An Atheist makes the claim that there is no being. But that isn’t even a sound philosophy since we see that chemicals work in certain ways and don’t create. When cornered on how their philosophical arguments are un-based, most Atheists I encounter will become agnostic and say it would have to be an indifferent being or they go to space theories where life came from a meteor. The conclusion is the same; they usually end up agreeing that life came from a designer. The philosophy about single cells reproducing themselves into beings is still kind of lame. I think people become atheistic just to oppose those who are dogmatic about biblical creationism and rightly so.

You have to study religion to believe Biblical creationism. Describing how someone who lives outside of time created things that are in our dimension would be a hard task. The seven days, the fall of Adam and similar things would have began outside of the dimension of time we live in. Religiously, I believe that God created the earth, yet philosophically, I don’t think the literal description of how it happened is perfect and the actual events are beyond human description. Moses or whoever came up with it did their best.

I think all theories of origins belong in a philosophy class and should be eliminated from science textbooks. As I look through Organic Chemistry College textbooks, these theories are a distraction from the actual subject matter. When we debate philosophies, it pulls people out of the superficial and into good human contemplation. I am all for having classes in school for it. There should be objective studies on religions too. But confusing origin philosophies with science dilutes science and takes time away from science that can be better applied to help solve energy supply, diseases and hunger.