Given the recent upsurge in the debate between Darwinism and Creationism, I will attempt to objectively compare and contrast the merits of the two theories. Both need to be given equal respect if one is to be methodical. However, if one has only empiricism in mind, the discussion will be one sided.

Working in the Galapagos Islands, Charles Darwin proposed that all beings on Earth had evolved, and were adaptive. This happens through the process of random mutation and natural selection. It follows that life on Earth has been in a constantly changing state for millions of years. This gives us a time frame from which to work from. The bible says, on the other hand, that the Earth was created 7000 years ago. This offers us a nice contrast which we can use.

First we can use plate tectonics as a test. The Earth’s crust moves at precise speeds, causing continental shift. There is strong evidence that Africa once met South America. Fossil remains of one species exist on both sides of the Atlantic, suggesting that they were once joined. At current continental speeds, they split about 150 million years ago.

This number does not marry up with Genesis. Moreover, the creationist claim that man existed alongside dinosaurs does not add up. Bones decay at a pre-defined rate, showing that the dinosaurs etc existed at a time which agrees with the tectonic data. If such fossils are only 7000 years old, then our theories about decay must be wrong. These decay rates are based on ions, which are part of nuclear physics. If these decay rates are wrong, it would throw all of physics out the window. The fact remains that there is no mention of such beasts in the bible.

WE see similar tales in Cosmology. When we look at the most distant stars, they appear red. The Doppler Effect suggests this is because the stars are moving away from us. Apparently when the paths of such stars are traced, they all originate from one point – the site of the Big Bang.

However, creationists claim that this evidence was planted by either God or the Devil to test our faith. If so, why did God go out of His way to so convincingly disprove Himself. All the available evidence points to a lack of God, from atomic physics to fossil evidence of ancient fish in the Himalaya. It’s true that I myself have heard this evidence second hand, and thus could have been lied to, but on the sheer volume of evidence 9including my experiences at Hebden) All my instincts rule out the existence of a creator. One can argue even with this, but then one might argue forever. What, then, is the purpose of asking the question?