Again, creation vs. evolution
Well, I consider myself at least some sort of scientist, and also a Christian. I find myself being insulted pretty regularly on these pages. When any of us talk about “creation,” we should recognize that we are talking about the creation of everything from nothing, not the “... evolution of life from primitive form on an old Earth in a still older universe ...” as in the June 22 letter titled “Evolution based on the sciences.” Is creation everything that took place after the (somehow) creation of a fully functional universe and an advanced form of life? Is that any sort of comparison with what we think of as Biblical creation?
Most scientists today claim we know that at some first instant in time there was a totally inexplicable gush of everything (from nowhere) through a tiny point, a tiny singularity, in nothing (the Big Bang theory). And yet, the well-founded second law of thermodynamics claims that disordered nonliving stuff simply cannot, by itself, create itself into some kind of higher order. (The deck of cards lying on the table will never arrange itself into a house of cards.) But in the Big Bang theory, every ordered thing in the subsequent universe, including living beings, was somehow created from that initial totally disordered gush of everything. Do we actually know that so well that we can then totally discount all other forms of creation?
It would seem that any responsible scientist should readily admit that scientifically, they know nothing about that initial “creation.”