12/10/02

Creationism and the fossil record

 

A preface

For some people this may be a sensitive subject and it is not my intent to disparage anyone's religious beliefs.  I have no trouble if someone believes, as a matter of religious faith, that the universe, earth and life were created in six days.  I have no trouble is someone believes, as a matter of religious faith, that God has directed the evolution of the earth and life.

I do have trouble if someone wants to claim that such views are scientific, that there is evidence in the rocks and fossils for them, or that such views should be presented as science in public schools. 

I want to make it clear that "creation-science", so-called, is an attempt to present a particular religious viewpoint as science. 

This is an issue for me as a scientist who is concerned about the quality of science education in this country: creation-science is bad science.  It's an attempt to mold the facts of biology, geology and astronomy into a particular biblical framework.

It's also a constitutional issue:  federal courts have consistently held that teaching creationism in public schools is a violation of the first amendment prohibition against the state's establishment of religion.

The people who are part of the creationist movement are sincere, most are personally very pleasant and polite.  With few exceptions, they have never been hostile toward me.  They welcome my interest and are eager to show me the error of my ways.  They have their point of view and I respect that -- even though I disagree with it. 

It is not my place to tell them that their religious views are wrong.  I would never presume to do that.  However, it is not their place to determine what is science nor is it their place to determine the content of public science education in this country. 

 

Creationism

Creationism is a theory of the universe, earth and life that argues that the Universe and the earth were created by an intelligent, knowing creator a relatively short time ago (on the order of tens of thousands of years), and that the major, basic kinds of plants, animals and humans were also created a short time ago and have not undergone any major changes since their initial creation.

 

The viewpoints of creationism basically argue against much astronomy, geology, and biology, although the controversy frequently focuses on evolution alone.

 

What I want to do here is consider the history of creationism: its origins in England, its development in the United States, the principal arguments of creationism today, and the legal and educational aspects of the creationist movement.  In short, I will talk about the "Evolution of Creationism"

 

I'll pick up the story in 1859, the year in which Darwin published his famous book "The Origin of Species", basically a long argument in favor of new species arising from pre-existing species by means of natural selection (later dubbed "the survival of the fittest").  You will find almost nothing in this book about the origin of humans or their evolution. 

 

"Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history"

 

But people certainly knew what the implications of Darwin's theory was.  I've always thought that no-one would object to evolution so long as only applied to non-human forms of life.

 

By 1860, one year after publication of the publication of The Origin of Species, there were four types of objection to the  idea of evolution via natural selection.  Each of these came out in a famous debate (famous in retrospect, not at the time)at Oxford, at the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science.  One of the principal speakers against Darwin's ideas was the bishop of Oxford, Samuel Wilberforce.  Speaking in favor was not Darwin, but his champion, Thomas Huxley.

 

1.  It was scientifically wrong.  Debates about brain differences in gorillas and humans, the complexity of organs, the age of the earth.

 

2.  It was morally repugnant.  The death of weak and unfit individuals via natural selection was seen by some to sanction or even encourage suffering in both the natural world and in human society.

 

3.  Personally insulting.  The idea that humans were descended from apes and even lower forms of life.  Wilberforce's jibe against Huxley.


 

4.  Ran counter to a literal reading of biblical scripture.  Earth created only about 6000 years ago in a six day period, Noah's flood caused many geological features.  If the Bible was divine, revealed truth, then evolution must be wrong.

 

What's happened with these four objections in the 140 years or so since publication of Darwin's book?

 

1.  The scientific issues were settled rather quickly.  There is an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence that indicates that all life is related through a system of ancestry and descent, that new species form out of old ones, that natural selection is effective in shaping organisms, that the earth is old, etc.  Debate continues on some aspects of mechanisms, but no one doubts that evolution has occurred.

Evolution as a fact - ancestry descent, new species arise from pre-existing             ones.

Evolution as a theory - natural selection as the principal mechanism

 

By 1880, only two prominent naturalists in North America remained unconvinced by the Darwinian argument.

 

2.  Morally repugnant.  To suggest that the existence of death and suffering in the natural world justifies death and suffering in human endeavor is a logical fallacy.  As humans, we can derive our moral standards from our religious beliefs or chose our own moral standards from what we think right and wrong.  We need not have "nature" force one on us.  We are not prisoners of nature.

 

3.  Personally insulting.  Most people, I think, have gotten over this and admit that humans are part of nature, rather than apart from it. 

 

4.  Counter to literal reading of the Bible.  This is still with us, and is at the heart of what has come to be called "creationism".  This motivation comes from a sect of Christianity that is commonly called "fundamentalism".

 

Nevertheless, this last point is perhaps the major motivation for continued attacks on evolution that masquerade as if they are based on scientific issues..

 

In the United States, perhaps the heyday of creationism, its strongest days, were in the 1920s, when laws against the teaching of evolution were passed in Tennessee, Arkansas and Mississippi.

 

1925 Scopes trial.  - In 1925, a high school teacher, John Scopes was convicted of teaching evolution.  The trial (see Inherit the Wind) received national attention and though Scopes lost, was often seen as a victory of science over religion.  Scopes' conviction was overturned on a technicality but the law remained on the books  - un-enforced- for many years.


 

1930's-present  The campaign against textbooks

 

1960's - 1980's  The campaign for state laws mandating "equal time for creation-science and evolution-science"

 

1980's -- present   Pressure at the local school board level to weaken textbooks.

 

1990's -  Faced with the continued difficulty in getting creation in into the schools, tactics are changing.  Efforts are being mounted to water down or get rid of the evolution that is taught.  Make it "controversial" and scare away its coverage.

Recent Alabama book disclaimer

 

1990's - present.  Intelligent design theory

 

As this evolution of tactics should show, the creationist movement today is a mostly grassroots, loosely organized effort to have its viewpoints introduced into public schools. 

 

It views evolution and much of geology as atheistic, secular humanism, and threatening the foundations of their religious beliefs (fundamentalist Christianity).  - poster.

 

Creationists will frequently attempt to make a distinction between what they call "Biblical creationism" and "Scientific creationism".  The former stresses the Biblical arguments against evolution while the latter stresses evidence for a young earth, the absence of transitional fossils, and other arguments based on scientific grounds.

 

One of the best organized groups promoting creationism is the Institute for Creation Research, based in Santee, California (outside of San Diego).  A creationist think tank.

 

They publish newsletters, books, radio programs, videos, sponsor creation-evolution debates around the country, participate in "back to genesis" revival meetings at churches, and offer a graduate level curriculum in the sciences. 

 

Examples of their literature

Acts and Facts        

Answers in Genesis

Morris book

Gish book

Ham book & Creation ex nihilo

Austin's book

 

Here, from their own writings, is the basic content of creationism:

 

1.  Special creation of universe and earth by a creator [e.g., not through natural processes]  - God, Genesis

 

2.  Subsequent deterioration of earth and life.  2nd law of thermodynamics (entropy) causes things to "run down".  The curse and the fall from grace in the Garden of Eden.

 

3.  Special creation of life by a creator.  God and the six days.

 

4.  Fixity of "kinds" - no transitional forms between major groups. Small-scale evolution is OK, but birds from reptiles, whales from terrestrial mammals, not OK.

 

5.  Distinct ancestry of humans and apes.  God and Adam and Eve.

 

6.  Relatively recent origin of earth and life (somewhere between 6 and 10 thousand years)

 

7.  Earth's geology a consequence of a worldwide flood.  Noah's Flood, as in the Bible.  Note time scale on handout.

 

Some favorite creationist arguments:

 

1.  Geological dating of rocks based on invalid assumptions.  They assert that radiometric decay rates are not constant and that biostratigraphy presumes evolution. [Neither is true]

 

2.  Probability.  amino acids, proteins, organs, life are much too complicated to have been form through chance.  [No one says they formed through chance, only that they formed step by step, rather than a single full assembly of a human from raw chemicals.]

 

3.  2nd law of thermodynamics makes evolution impossible.  Evolution generates an increase in order, while the 2nd law states that in a closed (from the input of energy) system entropy (or disorder) increases though time. [But Earth and life are not a closed system – they receive energy from the sun.]

 

4.  No succession of appearance in the fossil record.  Human footprints with dinosaur tracks,  sandal prints with trilobites show that all kinds originated at the same time and co-existed.  Any appearance of order is due to the Flood. [No support from the rocks]


 

5.  No evidence for human evolution.  Australopithecines were apes.  All of 'em.  [Ignores important transitional features.]

 

6.  No transitional forms.  Archaeopteryx had feathers, it was 100% bird, not a transitional form with reptiles.   Species to species transitions are just variations within kinds.  [Ignores data.]

 

 

Until now, the creationist's efforts to get their doctrines and approaches into the public schools has been largely unsucessful.  Wherever state legislatures have passed laws giving creation science a place in the curriculum, these laws have been eventually ruled unconstitutional, based on the Bill of Rights' first amendment calling for separation of church and state.  The courts have recognized creationists for who they are - a group of people intent on pressing their particular religious viewpoints.

 

Fighting back:

 

National Center for Science Education

Watchdog, support for high school teachers

Newsletter