Is Science Opposed to Religion?

The scientific method is an objective way to study science and refine theories.

1. Come up with a hypothesis based on some observation and information.
2. Figure out a way to test whether the hypothesis is true.
3. Do the test, with a control group to make sure the data is accurate.
4. Refine the hypothesis based on the results of the test or experiment. Eventually, after more than one group of scientists go through this process several times, you can start to call your hypothesis a theory.

When discussion of theories of origin come up, many people start to say that those who believe in Creation have “religious” ideas, whereas those who believe in Evolution are talking about a “Scientific” theory. They then take one step further and start to either state or imply that “religious” people are somehow against science.

Recent test results show American students are not performing well in Science, and there has been some discussion that this is related to the debate between creation and evolution that rages in our nation.

I could not disagree more, and I’d like to state my opinion on this subject in a clear and concise manner. But first I’d like to state some facts about me, so you’ll know where I’m coming from.

• I believe in a literal 6-day creation, as stated in the Bible.
• I am a conservative born-again Christian and was, until recently, a homeschooler.
• I attended public school in New York state and got A’s in all of my science classes. In fact, I got a 100% on the Biology Regents exam (despite the teacher saying no one got 100%) and I still know all of the biology answers on Jeopardy. I say this to prove my interest in science.
• My younger son, who is in 7th grade at our local public school, just got an A on his science test that covered Evolution, despite the fact that the first two bullets, above, are also true of him.

So, here’s my opinion on religion and science:

If science is practiced as noted at the beginning of this article, the conclusion is that Evolution is a theory. The reason for this is twofold:

• The circumstances and environment that existed “in the beginning” cannot be replicated; nor do we, indeed, even know for sure what those circumstances are.
• The process that brought about the variety of species of life on planet Earth were not observed by scientists.

Despite this, scientists and those who teach science want to label the theory of Evolution a “fact.” I am not saying that there is not evidence to support that theory. What I am saying is that there is evidence to support another theory, the theory of Creation.

There are scientists who believe in Creation. And of course, I’m sure there are scientists who believe in Evolution. All the time, we are reading about new scientific discoveries that don’t support an aspect of the theory of Evolution. There are lots of problems with the Evolutionary theory, and it’s not only Creationists that are pointing this out.

The truth is this: there is no way to prove either theory, and there is evidence that supports both. Creationists are up front about the fact that it takes faith to believe in a Creator God. Evolutionists don’t want to admit how much faith it takes to believe everything just evolved by some random process. Neither of these positions are pure science.

Those who believe in Creation are not anti-science. Far from it. We want to know the truth of science, and we applaud the study of science. We happen to believe that

• The Bible, being the Word of the God who created us, the God who was there when it happened, is a true and reliable source for learning about creation.
• Physical evidence supports the theory of origins as stated in the Bible.

Those who believe in Evolution have other beliefs.

It’s a matter of two conflicting belief systems. It has nothing to do with a conflict between “religion” and “science.”

 

Penguins: One of the Many Wonders of God’s Creation

Penguins were created on day 5, along with all the other fish and bird kinds. Penguins share much in common with both of these kinds because, while they are birds, they don’t fly, and they spend much of their time in the water.

These flightless birds seem to have been created specifically for the colder climates they inhabit:

• They have a layer of blubber that insulates them from the cold.
• They produce an oil from a gland near their tail that makes their feathers waterproof.
• As parents, they are able and willing to prevent their eggs and the newly-hatched young from freezing to death in the harsh weather.

Did you know that the fossil record indicates that at one time, some penguins were as tall as humans? But they were still penguins, they didn’t evolve into a different kind of bird (or dinosaur) and they haven’t evolved from something else. They are just another example of the wonders of God’s creation.

 

What are your biggest questions about creation science?

I want this blog to answer questions people have about creation and how the Biblical account can be supported by science.

What are your questions? Are there things you wonder about? Post a comment to this post telling me what your questions are, and I’ll try to answer them.

A note about the comments: I’ve set it up so that you have to get approved when you first post a comment. After that, you should be able to comment automatically, and I’ll leave it like that unless I get a lot of spam comments or people harassing and name calling. Don’t be put off by the approval process, it’s just an extra layer of protection to keep out the riffraff.

 

What do you do when you find evidence you don’t expect?

Scientists digging in Poland found footprints of a supposed early land animal. They were surprised to find the footprints showed the animal was much more developed than they expected.

They expected to find extra strong paired fins of an animal whose parents had been fish. But what they found had fully developed toe digits. Further, the trail of footprints showed the animal had true legs, not super-fish-fins-on-their-way-to-developing-into-legs. And also of note, the footprints may indicate that if this animals ancestors were indeed water-dwellers, they dwelled in saltwater, not the fresh water scientists had hypothesized for the first transitional form of land animal. Even more puzzling is that the time frame is off: the date for these animals is earlier than they expected.

I guess they’ll have to re-think their theory just a bit.

 

Neanderthals Wore Make-up

Neanderthals may have lived in caves, but they were fully human. http://www.flickr.com/photos/niravameen/ / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Archeologists digging in southern Spain have unearthed evidence  that Neanderthals wore make-up or body paint. They used seashells as containers to store various colors, which they created using complex recipes. There is also evidence that they sculpted other seashells and wore them as jewelry.

The significance of this discovery is that it shows higher level thinking and creativity that many scientists assume was not present in Neanderthals, whom they consider to be a sub-human evolutionary link between humans and apes, or a branch of the supposed evolutionary tree that died out.

But creation scientists believe neanderthals were fully human, a tribe of descendants of Adam and Eve.

Other Neanderthal-related fun facts to know and tell:

• Neanderthals had brains as large as “modern humans,” and maybe even larger.
• Some of them may have engaged in medical procedures to save the lives of other Neanderthals. There is evidence of at least one amputation of a Neanderthal man’s lower arm, which healed and did not cause his death.
• They were skilled hunters and toolmakers, and they cooked their food.
• Examination of their skulls indicates they could talk.
• They buried their dead, sometimes holding flowers.

 

Read through the Bible in a year — using audio files

Every December my church puts out a schedule that helps you read through the Bible in a year. There are many such schedules, some of which get you through the Bible in a year and others that proceed at a more leisurely pace.

Answers in Genesis has a link to a resource that lets you go through the Bible in a year using audio files instead of reading it aloud or to yourself. You can use the default plan or change the settings if you want to do it differently. The version they use is NIV and the audio files require a RealOne player; their page has a link if you don’t have that kind of audio file player.

I was thinking about reading through the Bible in a year recently. Someone in my Sunday school class shared an interesting idea about that a few months ago. The idea was to read through the Bible each year using a different translation. I tend to be a one-translation type of gal. I like the NASB and I tend to stick with that. But earlier this year I purchased a Holman Christian Standard Bible and I also have an English Standard Version that I haven’t read much. There are lots of ways to read through the Bible in a year. If you have a favorite method, why don’t you post about it in the comment section below?

 

Exploring God’s Creation: Great audio resource

I recently discovered a creation science podcast that is really full of wonderful information.

It’s also a radio show, if you happen to live in the Portland, Oregon area, Denver, or Phoenix (which I don’t). So I downloaded the first few episodes and listened to them in my car. I learned a lot, was reminded of a lot of things I already knew and just generally appreciated the comfortable, informative teaching style of Bob Knopf, the host and creator of Exploring God’s Creation.

This is an excellent way to learn the basics of creation science or to introduce someone to it. But it’s got a lot of good information for those who think they know a lot about the subject, as well. I’m looking forward to listening to more. As of this writing, there are 46 episodes online and I have only heard 5 or 6.

 

Scientists find muscle and blood in a fossil

Are fossils really millions of years old? If so, they just found one that still had muscle and blood tissue in it.

I’ve been really busy with not any extra time to blog, but I wanted to make sure this story was listed here. Amazing to think that such tissue could survive millions of years without decomposing.

 

AiG Pocket Guides

I don’t want to make it a practice to review things I haven’t seen, but these books look really good. Answers in Genesis has a series of Pocket Guides and right now, they are on sale (saving you almost $10 if you buy all 5 of them).

The description says that these are meant to be concise and powerful and that they are illustrated. There are 5 topics:

• The Global Flood
• Noah’s Ark
• Social Issues
• Charles Darwin
• The Bible

Each has 96 pages and is softcover. I took a peek at the table of contents of the one on the Flood and there are several authors, and many sub-topics, so though there are less than 100 pages, it seems like the book is packed with information.

In our increasingly busy society, this is one way Christians can quickly keep informed on the main points they need to know about these important issues. I’d love to read comments from anyone who has seen or who owns these.

 

News flash: evolution is not reversible

Apparently some scientists have been studying evolution on a molecular level and have come to the conclusion that evolution is not reversible — it can’t go backwards. What that means is, they think we evolved from a common ancestor of apes, but our great-great-great-great-great grandchildren won’t evolve back into apes.

That’s a relief, isn’t it?

Creationists agree with this. Creationists believe in microevolution — small changes that take place within the boundaries of a “kind” so that there are Dobermans and German Shepherds and Poodles that all came from one dog ancestor. But they don’t believe in macroevolution — meaning that dogs will always give birth to more dogs, there won’t be a dog some day who gives birth to an ape.

Creationists also believe that any genetic mutations result in loss of genetic information. So Adam and Eve’s descendants have many different skin colors and facial features. But if you take two very dark skinned descendants of Adam and Eve and study their descendants, you probably won’t ever find a really light skinned one. Unless one of their descendants marries a light skinned person and the genes come from there. As time goes forward, we lose genetic information, we don’t gain it. So, we can’t go back. We might not ever see a dog that looks exactly like the original dog as God created him.