The controversy over creation and evolution involves an ongoing cultural, political, and theological dispute over the origins of the Earth, humanity, and other life (Beck, 1). The big debate is creationism versus evolution, a controversial issue that has been discussed and debated for as long as one can think of. Many may ask about the most probable one, as both sides have reasonable arguments and good reasons why the opinion of the other side is incorrect. A massive number of scientists have adhered to the theory of evolution, which states that the modern world has evolved from single lad bacteria to what exists today, also claiming that the human race has come down from a wide line of apes. Yet these apes that coexist with humanity are still to be found today. Moreover, it has been found that the theory of natural selection, the ambiguous evidence from genetics and the modern hindered process of evolution have been abundantly validated by evolutionists through flawed evidence. This would lead one to conclude that the universe is created by a higher power.
Creation and evolution: one chooses to believe in one of these two different perspectives as to how the universe started. As the theory of evolution states, the universe is “contained in its own right” or “self-contained”. This means that the world of today, including all forms of life, has emerged from a sequence of chemical and biological courses of action, starting from single-celled organisms arising from non-living objects in succession. However, contrary to the evolutionary theory, the theory of creation states that the universe is “not self-contained”. In fact, creationists believe that a higher authority has deliberately created the world by designing and using techniques that are infinitely small in current times, helping to create all life on the planet, from plant species to animals to mankind or humans (Apologetics Press, 2001).
The foundation of Earth within its rocks, the granites are microspheres of pigmentation, halos, obtained by the radioactive decline of primordial polonium, and established only to have a fleeting or momentary presence. The following general analogy or comparison shows exactly how these polonium microspheres disprove the convictions of the evolutionary theory that granites made as hot magma over millions of years have gradually cooled. On the contrary, this line of reasoning illustrates how certain halos offer clear evidence of the near-instant production of granites and the earth’s early age. According to Patrick Briney’s research and studies, he cites Dr.Kamann stating that Polonium, classified to be an element found in melted rock turned granite, decomposes in the maximum of three minutes, entailing that the neighboring rock had almost instantaneously coagulated to conserve the primordial substance that has been discovered today. Hence, Earth’s theory developing from a magma-full planet would not be valid in any way, seeing as magma is assumed to have completely solidified in well over a millennia, implying the creation through a greater or higher power (Briney, 2007).
In addition, the sun and the moon also play a very important and significant role in defending creation. These two bodies of mass are positioned at a distance away from earth, set up perfectly for them to provide the necessary sources and professions needed for its inhabitants to survive. “Can it perhaps be all a matter of chance that our world has been at the accurate climatic distance for the successful production and maintenance of living creatures for those revolving around the sun?” The sun provides the necessary quantity of light, energy, warmth and as well as other factors which, in turn, provide life forms and terrestrial life, such as animals living on photosynthetic plants and sometimes even human beings likely to benefit from them for a wide variety of advantages along with vaporization of salt water and vegetation. Another side of the sun is the moon, which influences the tides of the ocean. Whether the moon’s distance or size was to have been changed, the damage sustained would indeed be unthinkably dangerous and disastrous to the coastlines and the harbors or water ways. It is also absurd to suggest that perhaps the distance between certain bodies has been ‘evolve’ to be something it is today, achievable to life in this planet (Tier, 1970).
While creationists and evolutionists engage in debate of the idea, multiple factors, as well as the ones that follow, are covered and discussed. To start off, the fossil remains of men and of apes, as well termed “fossil men”, are used by evolutionists to determine or establish an evolutionary chain among both men and apes. However, whenever the presumed chain is tested and investigated, it is recently discovered that the fossil records actually refer to the several classifications of the fossil records into men, apes and misplaced information. Austalopithecines, kenyapithecus, Limnopithecus, Ramapithecus, and Oreopithecus are referred to as “ape men” generally used to make the evolution of humanity or mankind clear. Yet, all of them were pure multiple kinds of apes, precisely critically endangered kinds of orangutans.
Additionally, a transitional region from ape to man, have been studied by the Neanderthals and seen to have a rather bigger brain than a mankind or a normal man. A sketch from evolutionists to them with ape like characteristics and features in order to help and support their case, even though their bones specifically their skulls could support either of the qualities, ape like or the mortal. Also, there seems to be a group known as Pithencanthropines throughout the alleged chain, which is in fact more of a group of mistakes and deception. To demonstrate, the Piltdown Man was exposed to have been a deception, along with the Nebraska Man a pig, no Peking Man internal organs had all been finally discovered, he had been styled as to what scientific researchers thought he might look like in the late nineteen twenties. The Java Man, who was intended to be a “single bipedal ape man”, was further discovered to be the bones of two different self reliant organisms or species. At last, the Zinjanthropus was simply an ape harvested beside the fossils of a child (Mcgee, 2009).
Furthermore, the basic message in Charles Darwin’s Evolutionary theory would be that natural selection incorporated evolution, simply means that even the fittest who have been tougher, bigger, or quicker, and capable of producing fertile as well as feasible babies would be those who managed to survive and reproduced to create a newly kind of species with some of these distinguished skills after too many generations. A deer was said to be a good example to the theory that had been appointed, meanwhile other kinds of animals, particularly birds, might well mean it may be distorted. Flightless or featherless birds have been shown to have emerged wings, but there has been no proven evidence of this hypothesis and neither disclosed. In this case, the philosophy of Darwin’s theory which plants and animals change and reshape to still be capable of sustaining the society or environment is invalidated because the firstly stubs of the wing developed, did not affect the bird to stay alive, but because of its ineffectiveness, it became even more easily susceptible to serious risk. Some other case in point which often directly contradicts such a philosophy would be the idea that fish sprang from the water off on the ground of land and afterward developed limbs which replaced the previous lizard species. In view of this ideology, the fleeing fish might well have been dead as gill slits worked in removing oxygen from water but not the environment on its own (Rieske, 2004).
In relation, owing to the entire mismatch created by the absence of evidences, evolution scientists depend on categorical evidence to back up their claim for genetic material (DNA) or other biochemical component parts of organisms. With all of that, it is sufficient confirmation for evolution to present organisms of analogous DNA structures that have been shown to associate shared ancestors, or down to the fact that the genetic information is communal. This, in fact, helps to promote smart designs and creation or development as there is a slight chance or probability that somehow the Creator would have just used the same DNA-based genetic codes of information. “Commonalities- either of embryonic development, genetic information (DNA), anatomy, of anything like that-were often explained better by some kind of popular Designer in aspects of formation or creation than it is by relationships of evolution and development. The observed contrast among species seems to be more important than those of the commonalities found. It is asked why large gaps o differences would ever show up when they came out of the same ancestor. The resemblances spotted among both men’s and apes’ DNA were of each low value and the distinctions, those which form just 10% of the genetic material, end up causing useful measurable security differences, corresponding anatomies as well as many other components. Adding to all that, “junk DNA” which was shown to have no need of has now been found to still be workable and beneficial, whether or not such operations have already been uncovered to date (Morris).
Last but not least, and the most important, evolution has ceased to take place. From the reality, the lack of a situation for growth or production is clear that no one had ever seen it or witnessed it. If by any chance that it would be a real procedure, evolution would still occur and plenty of transitory aspects or forms of change would be seen. In other words, there are conflicting sorts of plants and animals each found with different and self reliant character traits and certifications. Furthermore, to justify, there are still no “cogs” and “dats” found in different kinds and various breeds or animals of dogs and cats. In addition to that, developmental evolutionary geneticists often experiment and find their studies and research on insects such as fruit flies and other organisms of rapid reproduction to produce differences that are likely to lead to a highly developed generation. All of this experimentation has been unlikely to succeed in studying the simple truth that almost no new dominant type has yet been developed, not acknowledge a true new “fundamental type”. Traditionally, the method or process of scientists has needed exploratory analysis and transcription or in simpler words, experimented on. Taking into consideration that evolution by natural selection or macro evolution, has never before been interpreted, evolution on even a macro level of differentiated genetic groups, would also not be approved in the real science domain. Ernst Mayr, head of the department of living evolutionary biologists, happens to agree that evolution is indeed a “basic fact” a “science of history” whereby “rules and regulations as well as experimentation are unnecessary methods” which deduce that natural selection of evolution could never be witnessed (Morris).
There are still many various factors or even marks that could also disprove evolution but instead demonstrate something that are a common misconception such as those of the reality that were no organisms or microbes of temporary forms that are ought to confirm that evolution never really did happen. In general, evolution really is not considered to be science, but rather considered to be religion. The concept of molecule to people development does not in any sense encounter the long accepted requirements of such a theory of science. Such transitions of evolution have never been seen throughout the fossil evidence of the intervening time which appears to make this really incredibly difficult to any meaningful scale; as well as the universal truth or law of universe of gravitation. After the verification that creation is still the only correct solution to either the start of the universe or even showing the various scams, mistakes, and differences in evolution through natural selection, this is made very clear that creation is the main way of the world yet conversely evolution is shown to be part of the popular misconception.
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can order our professional work here.