There are many different views on the origins of the universe. The two prominent beliefs on this topic are as different as night and day. One hypothesis that the universe and all it contains is just a mere cosmic accident while the other postulates that the universe came about through the will of an all-powerful being. I believe, and have recently had my beliefs strengthened through a recent Answers in Genesis conference, that the latter belief is the correct explanation of the universe’s origins. I believe that creationism has the strongest possibility of being true because it is supported by the bible, evolution has little scientific evidence while creationism is constantly confirmed by scientific discovery.
Scientific theory is in constant …show more content…
At the Answers in Genesis conference, many of the speakers pointed out the numerous inaccuracies in the primary sources of evidence used to support these ideas. For example, radiometric dating, the primary process used to derive the age of fossils, is based on the idea that a certain isotope of a certain element has been present in an environment, in a certain ratio for a given amount of time. Therefore, to derive dates that are millions of years old from this method one must assume that our atmosphere has remained unchanged for at least that amount of time. However, you would have to believe that there were asteroids crashing into and volcanos erupting out of Earth during this time of unchanging atmospheric composition for these dating methods to hold up. Therefore, evolutionists have come up with ways to “calibrate” radiometric dating to account for these events. However, the methods that are used to calibrate this method of dating are similarly based on facts that require other unlikely consistencies in natural processes. While there may be little scientific support for evolution, there is ample support for …show more content…
One great example of scientific support for creationism is mitochondrial DNA (mDNA). Mitochondrial DNA has little variation from person to person. Therefore, if we assume that all humans share a common ancestor, as posed by the creation account in Genesis, we are able to calculate how long it would take to go from a single version of mDNA to all the variations we encounter today. Evolutionist’s agree with and embrace this idea as it would also be useful for the support of their theory. Therefore, the crux of this scientific proof is not whether or not humans have a common ancestor, but rather how long ago that ancestor lived. After extensive research, it was found that based on the amount of variation in today’s population, a common human ancestor would have lived around 6,000 to 6,500 years ago. This timeframe is in line with the universe’s age according to the Bible. The timeframe is also much too short for the kind of evolution to occur that is required to support the theory of
Scientific theory is in constant …show more content…
At the Answers in Genesis conference, many of the speakers pointed out the numerous inaccuracies in the primary sources of evidence used to support these ideas. For example, radiometric dating, the primary process used to derive the age of fossils, is based on the idea that a certain isotope of a certain element has been present in an environment, in a certain ratio for a given amount of time. Therefore, to derive dates that are millions of years old from this method one must assume that our atmosphere has remained unchanged for at least that amount of time. However, you would have to believe that there were asteroids crashing into and volcanos erupting out of Earth during this time of unchanging atmospheric composition for these dating methods to hold up. Therefore, evolutionists have come up with ways to “calibrate” radiometric dating to account for these events. However, the methods that are used to calibrate this method of dating are similarly based on facts that require other unlikely consistencies in natural processes. While there may be little scientific support for evolution, there is ample support for …show more content…
One great example of scientific support for creationism is mitochondrial DNA (mDNA). Mitochondrial DNA has little variation from person to person. Therefore, if we assume that all humans share a common ancestor, as posed by the creation account in Genesis, we are able to calculate how long it would take to go from a single version of mDNA to all the variations we encounter today. Evolutionist’s agree with and embrace this idea as it would also be useful for the support of their theory. Therefore, the crux of this scientific proof is not whether or not humans have a common ancestor, but rather how long ago that ancestor lived. After extensive research, it was found that based on the amount of variation in today’s population, a common human ancestor would have lived around 6,000 to 6,500 years ago. This timeframe is in line with the universe’s age according to the Bible. The timeframe is also much too short for the kind of evolution to occur that is required to support the theory of