EVOLUTION VERSUS CREATIONISM
Why would educated, reasonable people believe in one side of an argument when the majority of the evidence points to the other? The argument between science and religion began with Charles Darwin publishing Origin of the Species, and since then, is still a conflict, because every individual questions: Where do people come from? Where does the earth come from? The universe? Not only Charles Darwin, but many scientist who followed Charles Darwin as a paragon of evolution, found evidence and answers to argue that evolution is the more reasonable theory in the question of: Where did everything come from? This paper focuses on a traditional Creationist theory as ...view middle of the document...
But then the next question is: Where did god come from? If that gets considered as an unanswerable question, then save a step and say the origins of the universe are an unanswered question. Creationist also argue, that god always existed, why not save a step again and consider that the universe always existed, but then there wouldn’t be a need for a creation, it was always there. These are not easy questions. In an evolutionist eyes though, the universe did not always existed, but was the consequence of an unusual event. The Big Bang.
How could life begin without intelligent interference?
It is possible that through a chemical process life can begin without intelligent interference.
To answer this question requires looking at the primordial earth as it was over 1.7 billion years ago: warm, mostly wet, and with an atmosphere of different gases like hydrogen, ammonia and hydrogen cyanide. DNA is a chain of just four different types of nuclear tights. Under the condition of the primordial earth those nuclear tights can form on they own. After they formed the next step is to join together. Researches found that the clay in the primordial earth was in perfect condition for them to join and so they did. The result was RNA. RNA is able to make copies of itself. The copies are not always perfect there are mistakes. The ones that are copied better are stronger and survive. And so over 1.000 years RNA grew more complex to DNA. DNA needs protein to replicate itself. Protein are made of amino acids and they involve in the same experiment that produces nuclear tights, from hydrogen and ammonia cyanide which also produce a lot of amino acids. So those long chains of DNA replicated. DNA shared their environment with other chemicals in the clay. One group called lipids has the natural tendency to clump together. DNA attracted those, because it felt protected inside the membrane. The DNA was better protected, it better survived, so it duplicated more successfully. And that were the first primitives cells. They look different from the once we have nowadays, because they involved over a billion years. That is the chemical process of how nonliving chemicals evolved to living chemicals in billions of years. ("10 Stupid Creationist Questions, 10 Intelligent Answers Part 1." YouTube. YouTube, 09 Feb. 2010. Web. 30 Apr. 2014. )
God created humans in their present form, at one time within the last 10.000 years.
While creationist claim that the whole human species comes from two individuals – Adam and Eve – evolutionist argue that humans involved over 3 million years of evolution from ape to man.
Creationists believe that all humans descend from a single pair and that this pair – Adam
and Eve – were not apelike ancestors, but humans as in their present form. ("Adam and
Eve." Adam and Eve. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 May 2014.) Scientific evidence shows that
Adam and Eve could not have existed as they were Pictured in the Bible. In tracing back
of the history of our...