Teaching Creation Part 4

Is There Any Justification For Teaching Evolution In School?

Part 4

systems are in a flux of decay, from order to disorder. Even the evolutionist recognize the universality of these laws. Issac Asimov, an acclaimed evolutionary author, writes, “As far as we know, all changes are in the direction of increasing entropy, of increasing disorder, of increasing randomness, of running down (76).

Evolution would predict that all things are in a flux of upward movement, and the laws of Thermodynamics contradict this prediction. No one would ever predict these laws on the basis of the evolution model. However, they perfectly fit the predictions of the creation model!

Possibly, one of the strongest proposed arguments for the evolution model is the fossil record. Therefore, the predictions pertaining to the record will be examined next. As to the fossils themselves, the evolution model would predict that within the record there would be found numerous transitional intermediates since all present complex forms of life have been slowly developing from simpler forms.

The Creation model,
however, would predict that there would be found systematic gaps within the record, separating all forms into categories. Again, at this point, the creation model best fits the evidence. Within the record there has never been observed any transitions with which to support evolution. David Kitts, a leading paleontologist, admits, Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides a means of `seeing’ evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists, the most notorious of which is the presence of `gaps’ in the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them. The gaps must therefore be a contingent feature of the record (467).

model, how and when were the great bed of sedimentary rocks containing the fossils formed? This question brings up a secondary issue, the issue of uniformitarianism or catastrophism. Uniformitarianism is the concept that every feature of the earth’s crust was formed slowly over a long time span by continued and gradual application of the same natural processes at work today.

Catastrophism is the concept that most of the sedimentary deposits were formed rapidly in a relatively short period of time by a great cataclysmic event. Evolution fundamentally adheres to uniformitarianism, whereas, the creation model is associated with catastrophism.

The evolution model is associated with uniformitarianism because evolution obviously demands a immense stretch of time. Nevertheless, this immensity of time is in no way demanded by the actual facts of the geologic strata. This conclusion, contrary to the evolutionary interpretation of the fossil record, is fully warranted by a major component of the strata, the fossils themselves!

Note the following circulatory reasoning employed to support the evolution model. First, the fossils are the means by which rocks are assigned a geologic age. Second, the assumption of evolution is the basis by which fossils are dated. And lastly, it is the fossils that provide the main evidence for evolution (Morris,*Creationism* 95). The fossils speak of endless ages because evolution makes them thus speak, yet it is the fossils themselves which so clearly declare rapid formation. Fossils are