Sunday night’s “Creation Evolution Debate” wasa knock-down, drag-out fight, where creationism emerged victorious.(That’s partly because there was no one fighting on theevolution side — but only partly.)
No, no, the debate wasn’t actually a debate. The two hosts(campus Christian groups) tried to find a geologist to representevolutionary theory. They asked geologists at Tulane and otherSouth Louisiana schools. One of the group’s leaders evenwrote a Letter to the Editor asking students to spread the word andsuggest possible geologists. But no one took the bait.
“I think I understand why,” a creationist geologisttold a crowd of more than 100 members of Campus Crusade for Christand the Refuge. Creationists seem to win, he said.
Geologist Don Patton spent about an hour and a half presentingscientific evidence for creation. Patton’s not a nut-case.He’s got a Ph.D. (though that doesn’t exclude thepossibility of mild insanity). He didn’t stand in the frontof the room waving a Bible. He didn’t quote a word ofscripture to prove his argument. The debate didn’t even openwith a prayer.
Instead Patton presented what he saw as sound geological,scientific evidence in support of creation and at odds withevolution.
“Geological, scientific evidence for creation?” youask.
It sure seemed that way.
Patton’s presentation began with “what we find whenwe dig in the earth,” he said. What Patton and others likehim have found is human bones buried near dinosaur bones in thesame layer of rock.
To non-geologists that may sound like nothing special. But toPatton, it’s something extraordinary.
Evolutionary geologists have held that “topsy-turvy”fossils would make the case for evolution difficult to prove.Advanced human fossils are only supposed to be found in newerlayers of rock where other advanced fossils are. Likewise,less-advanced fossils are supposed to be found in older layers ofrock where other less-advanced fossils are. This makes the casethat less-advanced organisms evolved over time.
“Topsy-turvy” fossils would be advanced humanfossils found in layers of rock where they’re not supposed tobe (ahem, next to dinosaurs) or early, less advanced fossils foundwhere they’re not supposed to be (in newer layers ofrock).
Turns out, both cases have happened, Patton said.
Patton was part of a team of geologists that found the bones of10 humans in Utah — right next to dinosaur bones. Butaccording to evolution, humans (as we know ourselves today)didn’t exist when dinosaurs did. We were more like gorillas,instead, with large skulls and four limbs for walking instead oftwo.
Patton was also part of a team that investigated humanfootprints in the impressions of dinosaur prints in Texas.
Once thought to be fake, some evolutionary geologists haveacknowledged the prints are real. Patton said the prints areevidence that men and dinosaurs walked the earthsimultaneously.
Some geologists argue against Patton that the prints are erodeddinosaur footprints. Others say the prints are real impressionsthat look an awful lot like human prints, but that a human carvedtoes onto an animal’s prints to fool geologists. Onecolleague suggested to Patton that the prints were from aliens.Another argued that geologists weren’t sure if dinosaursdidn’t have human feet. Patton responded that geologistsweren’t sure humans didn’t have dinosaur feet.
Patton has found other human tracks in Utah in layers of rockthat suggest they are about 100 million years older thandinosaurs.
A dig in Turkmenistan revealed more than 3,000 human tracksamong dinosaur tracks.
To add to a picture of evidence that says humans were human whendinosaurs were around are amazing images in Indian art ofdinosaurs. In North and South America, geologists have founddrawings, paintings and sculptures that look more real than thedinosaurs in “Jurassic Park.”
Does all this prove beyond a reasonable doubt that creationism,not evolution, explains human life and progression on earth? Iwouldn’t go that far.
But I would go far enough to say that most educated people todayaccept evolution without thinking twice — sort of funny inthis age when we’re taught to question the value and truth ofeverything, including truth itself.
The creation picture of the holes in evolution theory isinteresting and thought-provoking. If science is a search forreality, there’s no harm in investigating the creation sideof the equation (or the evolution side, for that matter).
And that’s what the debate was. Maybe not whollyconvincing, but thought-provoking.
Like science, faith is a search for reality, only people offaith call reality by another name — truth. The twodon’t have to be at odds if we understand their end and rolein explaining human life.
The creation evolution debate was a great addition to thatunderstanding.