Debate About Creationism: "Was Darwin Wrong?"

As students walked into Gregory Gym on Tuesday night, religious groups and science organizations handed leaflets, bookmarks, and stickers. On both sides of the evolution debate, people have strong assertions and strong feelings. Members of Austin Agape were curious to attend the debate inside the gym and think about these issues and assertions for themselves.



Gregory Gym was packed with students and members of the Austin Community to attend the debate entitled, "Was Darwin Wrong?" Rather than a debate specifically on Darwin's methods and conclusions, the debate was more accurately centered on the validity of creationism. Hugh Ross, founder and president of Reasons to Believe, and Fazale Rana, Vice President of Research and Apologetics at the same institution, presented information about their Testable Creation Model. And Michael Shermer, Executive Director of the Skeptics Society and publisher of Skeptic magazine, argued against creationism, particularly against the assumptions of the Reasons to Believe model. The event was sponsored by the Department of Biomedical Engineering at UT and was co-sponsored by the Atheist Community of Austin and Hill House, a Christian organization at UT.



Dr. Ross argued that the Bible accurately presents "Four Points of Biblical Cosmology." These include 1) singularity beginning, 2) continual expansion, 3) constant physical laws, and 4) pervasive entropy. He cited scriptural passages to show that the Bible depicts current scientific understandings of the origin, expansion, and physical laws of the universe.

He cited Job 9:8 to argue that the Bible accurately depicts an expanding universe. The verse describes God as one "who alone stretched out the heavens and trampled on the waves of the sea." (NRSV) He argued that this "stretching" refers to the expansion of the universe.

He also cited Romans 8:20-21 to argue that the Bible accurately depicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the law of entropy, through its language of "decay." The passage in Romans says, "for the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage from decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God." (NRSV)

Dr. Ross also argued for creationism by stating that there are 140 features of the universe that must be fine-tuned for life to exist, and because these fine-tuned features appear to be intelligently designed, there must be a creator.


While Dr. Ross primarily dealt with the discipline of astronomy, Dr. Fazale Rana, his partner at Reasons to Believe, discussed "life sciences as they pertain to the Testable Creation Model." He argued that information comes from intelligence, and encoded information requires not only intelligence but a coder. He turned to the topic of DNA to support his arguments.

He also discussed "Biological Big Bangs" in the fossil record. He argued that animals suddenly appear in the fossil record on earth in the Cambian Explosion 543 million years ago. This explosion occurs within a rage of two to three million years, a period that is too rapid for macro-evolution to occur.



Dr. Michael Shermer, on the other side of the debate, called the arguments of the Reasons to Believe scientists "nonsense." He claimed that their arguments follow this logic:

1. X looks designed.
2. I can't think of how X was created naturally.
3. Therefore, X was created supernaturally.

Dr. Shermer argued that it is impossible to scientifically test something outside of space and time, a categorical definition that Reasons to Believe scientists attribute to God. He claimed that people believe in God because of "patternicity," a term he coined to describe the human tendency to group data into patterns. He believes that the goal of science is to test which patterns are accurate.

He argued that Reasons to Believe scientists are proposing "Post-dictions" rather than "Predictions" out of Biblical literature. He stated that these scientists have looked at current theories and evidence, found Biblical references to support them, and predicted more of the same. Instead, he challenged the Reasons to Believe scientists to make a prediction that experts are not currently proposing.

He turned to the Biblical literature itself and asked some questions about what the Bible is truly seeking to claim. He asked, "Is Job about cosmology?" He argued that Job is not about science but about human suffering. Dr. Shermer said that when the Bible describes God as the one who "stretched the heavens" in Job 9:8, the passage is really a poetic expression about a powerful God. It is not about cosmology.

He cited Job 9:7, the preceding verse, which describes God as one "who commands the sun and it does not rise; who seals up the stars." He posed a question to the Reasons to Believe scientists: If cosmologists were to suddenly discover that the universe is collapsing, would you then cite this scripture as evidence?



The debate was fascinating in the questions it raised. Proponents of both sides were vocal and enthusiastic in the audience. And we at Austin Agape were glad to experience the debate and use our minds to form questions of our own.