11/28/2012 12:02:00 PM Dang - more scientific consensus befuddled
I've always found creationism vs evolutionism arguments to be essentially futile because, as I have often written, in the end all creationists need do to win is say their god made evolution the way it is. Game over. Religionists 1, scientists 0. That's the nice thing about faith, it doesn't need facts. So I, as an agnostic evolutionist, have always steered clear of creationism arguments with my devoutly religious friends. Why argue the unwinnable?
Yet, as with Warmists and their skeptics, whole scientific and not-so-scientific communities of evolutionists have been so long convinced of evolution as Darwin defined it as to cast self-superior derision on creationists as being fundamentally ignorant. I've been tempted to do the same often, except that, just as I can't prove there is a god ... I can't prove there isn't one either, and I can't buy either concept on faith. Faith and I were divorced a long time ago in a land far, far away called Vietnam (Google it, public school students).
Almost no one argues that life (including humankind) has not evolved to some extent over time. The case for it is too obvious even in recent time. The creationist argument is with Darwinism, the hypothesis that all life as we know it evolved from a single life form over immense time to become many current variations due to natural selection adapting to environmental pressures. Darwinists say it did, randomly, and lo they are safely the 'consensus' in science. Creationists say, no, all life sprang relatively suddenly and recently from actions of their god. Superstitious fools, say the scientists. Kiss our grits, say the creationists.
But it turns out, I recently find, that evolution can only be explained by the best of science back to something called the Cambrian Era where it literally falls apart due to unmistakable, scientifically undisputed fossil evidence confirming that complex life forms did indeed form in a relatively short period of time (comparable to 2 minutes in a 24 hour day, a little after 9 p.m.), and ... no ... evidence ... of any connection to any less complex root life exists prior to the Cambrian Era.
So now, after an entire adult life of watching science butt heads with religion, and finding myself a godless evolutionist, I hear respected, wholly non-religious scientists unambiguously telling me two profoundly astonishing things:
(1.) That those Cambrian Era life forms that came about relatively overnight in time are not only complex life forms but they all share the same basic construction plan: brains, nervous systems, etc.
And (2.) that the mathematical odds of them forming that way randomly in that short a time are one in many trillions of trillions (no misprint - 72 zeros). Even Darwin took to his grave the frank admission that he could offer "no satisfactory answer to the Cambrian Mystery." Neither, it turns out, can anyone else to this day.
Now, understand me, none of these world respected scientists are talking about spirits, magic, miracles or gods (and neither am I). But here's what they do say (are you listening?): for those complex, uniformly patterned life forms to have sprung from no prior evolutionary existence in that short period of time ... the virtually slam-dunk odds are that there had to have been some form of ... (sitting down?) ... "intelligent ... design" ... at work. Their words. Non-religious scientists. The odds ... otherwise ... they say ... exceed ... "one to trillions ... of trillions".
Darwinists, one scientist says, will be ... extinct ... in 50 years.
Dang. Just when I thought I knew it all.
(See: Darwin's Dilemma - the Mystery of the Cambrian Fossil Record - Illustra Media, 2009).
William Slusher is an author, columnist and sociopolitical writer with a ranch on the Okanogan River. His most recent novel is a nonpartisan Pacific Northwest political comedy: CASCADE CHAOS, or How Not To Put Your Grizzly In The Statehouse (Amazon, or your local bookstore). He may be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org.