Evolution Vs. Creation: Examining the Origin of Life

The evidence for both the evolutionists and creationists are identical. However, the two groups' interpretations are much different. One of the major topics that fuels the controversy between science and religion is the origin of life. The disagreement arises because creationists believe that God created human life as stated in Genesis. On the other hand, scientists claim that simple life forms that arose from the primordial soup led to larger life forms through biological evolution.

The Young Earth Creationist Club particularly caught my interest because it presented its argument in a straightforward and almost blunt method. The section titles include extreme statements such as "Mutations Don't Prove Evolution" and "Life From Dead Chemicals." The web site provides and cites sources as evidence for its general stance that human life occurred through the actions a God. Though the website includes convincing and thorough evidence to support its viewpoint, such as extensive analysis of the concept of life occurring from the "primordial soup" or "dead chemicals," it fails to acknowledge the other side of the argument. Though the website does a sound job of providing sufficient evidence to support its point, the bluntness of its messages and claims gives off a somewhat ignorant vibe, a vibe that almost takes away from the sites effectiveness. One particular strand of evidence presented by the site was the bacterial flagellum. It continued to explain how immense the complexity of the structure and function almost definitively points towards the direction that a higher being specifically designed the flagellum to function in such perfect harmony with its structure.

Although it is necessary for any viewpoint to present sufficient evidence to support a claim, it is essential for the scientific side of the creation versus evolution battle to provide extensive support. Science, after all, is based on facts and interpreting those facts in the most scientifically logical way. One scientific site I focused on was the University of Ediacara (www.talkorigins.org). The focus of this sight is to provide evidence that complex life arose from the simple life forms that appeared from basically simple chemicals. However, the approach is much different than the Young Creationists Club site. Although both sources present excessive factual information to create a foundation for their argument, the Talk Origins site utilizes more deductive reasoning. One piece of evidence concerned a fallacy in the claim that if "science cannot account for the origin of life, evolution is false, and that 'spontaneous generation' was disproven, so therefore evolution is false." The site argues that "evolution occurs whether or not life arose by chance, law or design." Therefore, "it is not true that 'spontaneous generation' has been ruled out in all cases by science." By exposing the faults of the opposing side, the Talk Origins site essentially strengthened their argument.

Much similar to the Young Creationist Club, Answers in Genesis, Inc is another website that promotes the belief that a higher being, God, created life on earth rather than arising from a "chemical soup." Answers in Genesis seems to provide much of the similar information as the other creationist website, but it includes different types of media ranging from articles to interviews of scholarly people. By including different types of evidence, it certainly strengthens its viewpoint. For example, there is one interview with Dr. Aw Swee-Eng titled "Chemical Soup is not your Ancestor!" that specifically challenges the scientific concept that life arose from the soup of chemicals. Dr. Swee-Eng emphasizes the fact that the more we know about the cell, the more unlikely that "such an intricate thing could have just evolved by sheer random process over time without any directive force." This particular website certainly combines a fact and opinion, but by doing so, it appeals to the readers' logic and emotions.

But while the creationist side can appeal more to pathos, science can always rely on pure factual evidence to postulate the possible beginnings of life on Earth. Resa.net is a regional education school agency in Wayne, Michigan that provides a compilation of information concerning the formation of life. The site claims that there was an initial abiotic production of organic molecules. The nonliving structures called "prebionts" eventually led to the first living cell. The cells then multiplied to develop into the first living organism, often referred to as the "common ancestor." The site goes into great detail and provides the evidence in sequential order, which makes it extremely effective and convincing. Because it is focusing completely on evidence, the website must organize the material to be digested by the reader efficiently and easily. Rather than trying to disagree with the opposing side, this site simply states its argument and theory of how life on Earth appeared.

The end to the ongoing dispute between science and religion does not seem to be coming to an end. Both sides have valid arguments and evidence to support their claims. Though a person should be allowed to choose one view point or another, they should not remain ignorant that other explanations may exist. After all, no side has a clear, definitive explanation of how life on Earth truly appeared.