What Evolutionists Almost Got Right

For years, both secular and creation scientists have been connecting the dots between the data they observe in the world, arguing over the origins of our universe and everything in it. Despite being presented with the same data, they often draw different conclusions. Why?

Everything we believe is built on one of two foundations: man’s word or God’s Word. Both viewpoints require faith, but one draws from ever-evolving ideas while the other draws from never-changing truth.

Without a biblical worldview for reference, it’s possible to get close to the truth. But even a little compromise leaves you with an incomplete or distorted picture. Though creationists and evolutionists have different starting points, not everything evolutionists believe completely disagrees with Scripture. In fact, some of their beliefs almost line up with the truths of a biblical foundation. Almost.

Filtering every scientific discovery through Scripture allows us to see the full picture, keeping us from being deceived by the “almosts” of secular scientists, and helping us know how to communicate truth.

1. Apes and Humans

Roger Patterson, Science Educator

Creationists agree with evolutionists that, on the surface, humans have a lot of similarities with apes—especially my Uncle Bart with that hair all over his back. Apes and humans both have hands with five fingers and opposable thumbs. Our basic body structures and the layout of our internal organs are similar. And an ape is even capable of learning simple communication through nonverbal methods.

The comparisons go even deeper with many similar biological processes happening inside our cells. One example is hemoglobin, the molecule that transports oxygen in the blood. While there are subtle differences, oxygen binds to the core of the molecule the same way in humans as in apes. Since God created animals and humans to eat the same food sources, before and after the fall, the chemical processing of those foods in the cells is almost identical in humans and apes. Starches and sugars are converted to the simple sugar glucose and then the 10-step glycolysis pathway converts glucose into ATP—the energy molecule of the cell.

But there are also significant differences between humans and apes. For example, if you look down at your feet, you will see that your toes point in the same direction, but an ape’s big toe points toward the middle, allowing it to grip branches.

Another difference is in our chromosomes, the DNA structures found in nearly every cell. Evolutionists believe that sometime after the split from our common ancestor with the chimpanzee, there was a fusion of chromosomes 12 and 13—renamed 2A and 2B in modern chimps. From that point, the apelike creatures that would become modern chimps had 48 chromosomes and the apelike creatures that would become humans had 46. Though chimp chromosomes 2A and 2B have banding patterns similar to our human chromosome 2 (due to similar base composition), no evidence suggests that human chromosome 2 resulted from a fusion somewhere in the past.

The most important distinction between humans and apes comes from Scripture. The Bible makes it clear that God created the first humans in a very intimate and supernatural way, distinct from all other animals. As the crowning jewel of creation, humans were endowed with the image of God—something no ape can ever claim.

2. Natural Selection

Dr. Georgia Purdom, Molecular Geneticist

Both creationists and evolutionists agree that natural selection happens. We agree it’s an observable process that occurs in the present. We agree it leads to organisms with certain traits surviving and reproducing. We also agree it leads to variation within populations of organisms. For example, beak sizes in Galápagos finches fluctuate depending on climate and food availability. If environmental conditions persist long enough, natural selection can even result in speciation. This was likely one of the major factors that led to the formation of nearly 20 finch species in the Galápagos.

Though we agree natural selection does happen, creationists and evolutionists disagree on what natural selection can ultimately accomplish. Evolution requires the gain of new traits as one kind of organism evolves into a different kind of organism. For a dinosaur to evolve into a bird, it would need to gain feathers, a beak, and wings.

Evolutionists claim that time is the key for change and that billions of years of natural selection have resulted in all organisms forming from a common ancestor. However, time is useless for organisms to gain new traits.

But natural selection can only lead to the loss or alteration of existing traits—it doesn’t have the ability to add new traits. While natural selection can lead to change within a kind of organism (different species of finches), it can’t result in the formation of a completely different kind of organism (dinosaurs evolving into birds).

Evolutionists claim that time is the key for change and that billions of years of natural selection have resulted in all organisms forming from a common ancestor. However, time is useless without a mechanism for organisms to gain new traits.

Both creationists and evolutionists can observe and agree on what natural selection does in the present. But what natural selection has accomplished in the past is consistent with Genesis: God created animals according to their kind, and they only reproduce within those kinds. Natural selection is wholly inadequate to accomplish anything else.

3. Laws of Nature

Dr. Jason Lisle, Astrophysicist

Secular and creation scientists agree that laws of nature exist. These laws describe the predictable and consistent way the universe behaves. Laws of nature allow scientists to predict the motion of planets and moons in the distant future with accuracy and precision. Most of these laws are mathematical in nature and provide the basis for all technology. However, creation scientists disagree with secularists on the origin, nature, and justification of such laws.

Many secularists tend to consider laws of nature as a replacement for God’s power. They might ask, “Why do we need God when we know how the universe operates?” However, Christians see laws of nature as examples of the way God upholds his creation (Hebrews 1:3). He does so in such a logical and orderly way that we can often discover equations that describe the details. Rather than being a replacement for God’s power, laws of nature are manifestations of God’s power.

Therefore, we expect laws of nature will work everywhere since God is omnipresent and sovereign over all creation (Jeremiah 23:24). We expect laws of nature will work in the future as they have worked in the past because God is beyond time and does not change (Malachi 3:6). He has promised a certain degree of consistency in nature (Genesis 8:22).

Strangely, secularists also accept these properties of natural laws, but they have no way to account for them in their secular worldview.

Strangely, secularists also accept these properties of natural laws, but they have no way to account for them in their secular worldview. Why should there be laws of nature in a chance universe? Why should we expect them to remain the same for all locations at all times? The fact that secularists embrace laws of nature shows that they really do know God exists (Romans 1:18–20).

4. Geological Layers

Dr. Andrew Snelling, Geologist

Creationists and evolutionists agree that fossil-bearing geological layers exist because we can see and study them. However, whereas evolutionary geologists insist those layers took millions of years to be deposited, creation geologists say they were laid down during the yearlong global flood cataclysm and its aftermath, only about 4,500 years ago.

To derive the millions of years, evolutionary geologists study today’s slow sedimentation processes and then claim that past sedimentation must have occurred the same gradual way. This belief is called uniformitarianism.

However, creation geologists also study today’s sedimentation processes to interpret the rate at which past layers were deposited. By studying where sedimentation has occurred rapidly, such as during tsunamis, hurricanes, local floods, and volcanic ash flows, geologists have repeatedly demonstrated that features in the geological layers were deposited rapidly by water. Thus, even layers such as mudstones (shales) and limestones, once considered by uniformitarians to have been deposited slowly, have been experimentally demonstrated to form rapidly.

But is there evidence that millions of years lapsed between these layers, as evolutionary geologists claim? No! The boundaries between layers either show rapid erosion between the layers or indicate continuous deposition. Creation geologists also point to the exquisite preservation of fossils, many of which required rapid burial by many layers to be preserved. Studies have also demonstrated that thick sequences of layers were folded when still soft and wet, soon after the whole sequences were rapidly deposited, not over millions of years.

5. Radiometric Dating

Dr. Andrew Snelling, Geologist

Creation geologists agree with evolutionists that lots of radioactive decay has occurred. We see the visible damage caused by radioactive decay in radiohalos (tiny black circles found in granites and metamorphic rocks) and fission tracks (damage trails left in minerals). But creationists disagree that radioactive dating can yield absolute ages of rocks.

Evolutionists use radiometric dating to estimate the age of rocks based on the present slow decay of their radioactive elements. However, these methods rely on three assumptions. First, the dated rock initially had no decay product in it. Second, all the measured decay products were produced by the radioactive element since the rock formed. And third, the radioactive decay rate must have been constant at today’s measured rate.

Yet these three assumptions are unproven and unprovable. No geologists observed the rock form millions of years ago to measure the initial amount of decay product. And no geologists have monitored the rock for any contamination or measured the decay rate as constant during the subsequent millions of years.

While creation geologists agree that radioactive decay has occurred, they have demonstrated that the radioactive decay rates during the global flood cataclysm were much faster than today’s measured rates. For example, coal, oil, and fossils, dated at hundreds of millions of years by evolutionists, actually have radiocarbon ages of just thousands of years.

Another piece of evidence is the amount of helium within zircon crystals. As the uranium atoms within zircon crystals decay, they create helium. The helium then works its way out from between the atoms in the crystals.

Secular scientists say 1.5 billion years’ worth of helium still exists in particular zircon crystals. However, when these zircon crystals were tested, they were dated with the assumption that decay rates have remained the same through all time. But when we apply the rate at which helium gas leaks out of the zircon crystals, we find that the amount of helium that has leaked out is equivalent to only 6,000 years’ worth of helium.

Therefore, the 1.5 billion years of uranium decay must have occurred in only 6,000 years, which means that uranium decay must have been accelerated during some event in the past, compared to today’s slow measured rate. This occurred during the flood when many other physical processes operated at catastrophically fast rates.

6. Ice Age

Dr. Alan White, Chemist

By the late-nineteenth century, creationists and evolutionists agreed that at least one ice age had occurred but disagreed on the number of ice ages and the cause. Polished and scratched bedrock,

Polished and scratched bedrock, moraines (debris deposited near glaciers), and giant erratics (massive boulders moved long distances by advancing glaciers) are now considered by all scientists to be robust evidence for glaciers. Many glaciers today are in Antarctica while other glaciers are at very high latitudes or altitudes on other continents. But scientists have concluded that glaciers at their maximum extended as far south as the northern border of Kentucky in North America and halfway down into Russia and continental Europe. An ice age is the name given to climate change significant enough to cause glaciers to move far south. Determining the cause of an ice age is challenging since none has ever been directly observed.

Recent catastrophism—the global flood about 4,500 years ago—provides a much better explanation.

Evolutionists claim that many ice ages have occurred, and they say the cause was lower temperatures due to natural variations in the earth’s orbit or the tilt of its axis. However, glaciers are known to advance by increased snowfall. Massive snowfalls are much more likely with warm, moist air rather than cold, dry air. Decreasing sunlight at different latitudes caused by the variations in earth’s orbit or tilt will slowly lower the earth’s temperature but will not necessarily cause an ice age.

Recent catastrophism—the global flood about 4,500 years ago—provides a much better explanation for a single ice age. From the phrase “the fountains of the great deep burst forth” (Genesis 7:11) and from the presence of mid-ocean ridges on the seafloor, most creation scientists have concluded that lava from beneath the seafloor met the ocean, creating steam and warming the oceans. The rapid movement of continental plates during the flood likely resulted in volcanic activity spewing dust that could have blocked much of the sunlight. Warm, moist air from the oceans moving over cooler continents would have provided ideal conditions for a single massive ice age.

7. Earth’s Destruction

Rob Webb, Aerospace Engineer

Christians agree with secularists’ warnings that the earth in its fallen state will eventually be destroyed. However, secularists often warn us that humans will destroy the earth by human-caused climate change.1 Many also say that even if humans somehow don’t destroy the earth, it’s likely that some large asteroid will one day obliterate us.

Christians know from the Bible that the earth will be destroyed—but not by climate change or any random extinction event. Rather, the earth will be destroyed by God’s intentional judgment (2 Peter 3:7, 10). When Jesus returns in the future, the earth and the whole universe will be judged with fire to make the new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells (2 Peter 3:13).

Secular scientists are right about another thing: humans are indeed the cause of this coming catastrophic event. Because of man’s sin, the whole creation is now groaning and waiting to be made new (Romans 8:20–22).

We can be confident in God’s promise: “While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease” (Genesis 8:22). Because God determines when the ultimate catastrophe will happen, we can rest assured that neither humanity nor an extinction event is going to destroy the earth before God’s time.

8. Life on Earth

Dr. Danny Faulkner, Astronomer

For many years, evolutionists believed that life must be common in the universe. After all, if life arose naturally on the earth and nowhere else, wouldn’t that make the earth unique? And if the earth is special in this way, wouldn’t that strongly imply creation? But many evolutionists are starting to agree with creationists that earth is the only planet suited to host life (Isaiah 45:18).

What does the data say? Long ago, most scientists concluded that no other planet in our solar system could support life. Three decades ago, technology advanced to the point that astronomers could detect exoplanets (planets beyond our solar system) and search them for earth-like conditions. More than 5,000 exoplanets are now known, but none of them meet all the criteria to be like earth.

In the year 2000, before many of these exoplanets were discovered, paleontologist Peter Ward and astronomer Donald Brownlee, both secular scientists, combined astronomical, geological, and biochemical factors to conclude that while microbial life may be common enough in the universe, multicellular organisms are probably very rare. Their book Rare Earth: Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe coined the term “rare earth hypothesis.”

The rare earth hypothesis and the lack of observed earth-like planets strongly suggest that intelligent life, and possibly even microbial life, could be unique to the earth, much as biblical creationists think. However, rather than proposing that earth evolved by chance to host life, biblical creationists believe that it was intentionally created by God as an environment ideally suited for humans and all manner of life that inhabit our planet.

9. Mass Extinction

Dr. Gabriella Haynes, Paleontologist

When it comes to mass extinction, creationists and secular scientists share the same observations of the fossil-bearing sediment layers, but they ultimately interpret the data through different lenses.

According to evolutionary ideas, at least five mass extinctions have occurred during the supposed millions of years of earth’s existence. Secular scientists cannot explain what exactly caused these mass extinctions, besides agreeing that it had to be powerful enough to reach a global magnitude that sent an extremely high percentage of species into extinction each time. Secular scientists assume many events led to mass extinctions of different creature groups, opening the door for others to evolve.

These conclusions are driven by an evolutionary worldview that rejects a global catastrophic event like Noah’s flood and any intervention from God. They assume the sediment layers containing fossils were deposited slowly over millions of years. While creationists agree that sediments and fossils were deposited during a mass extinction event, they believe that these occurred recently over a very short period during the global flood.