Current explanations don’t work

The opening chapters of Genesis give a historical account of the origin of the world. They do not amount to a scientific theory (though they contain the kernel of one), and whether they should be classed as myth or not depends on whether they are true. That question has become increasingly complicated over the last two hundred years. Today the dominant world-view is Darwinian evolutionism, a science-based account which has supplanted the Genesis narrative and has all the authority of an explanation that man has workedCharles Darwin out for himself. Historical tradition plays no role. In reaction against this revolution, biblical creationism attempts to give a scientific account that upholds the Genesis narrative.
Evolutionism is the doctrine that the universe had a natural origin; that natural causes eventually gave rise to the earliest form of life; and that all subsequent organisms descended from that first simple organism. The beginning of all things is dated to about 13 billion years ago and the origin of the Earth to about 4.5 billion years ago. From their different perspectives, modern cosmology, biology and geology have all contributed to the story. The term Darwinian refers to the fact that some of the biological foundations for modern evolutionism were laid down by Charles Darwin.
The ‘ism’ at the end of the word denotes a belief system. Evolutionism is not just the acceptance of the fact that organisms have changed over time and new species have arisen from old. Rather, it interprets the process of species diversification as evidence that all diversity goes back to a single species, and that species as they evolved were continually upgrading their biological programs. It is a theory, one that (a) rests on the evidence that species must have multiplied, (b) proposes a mechanism for the multiplicity (natural selection of chance variation), and then (c) links all organism, from the simplest to the most complex, into a genealogical continuum of numerous, successive, slight modifications.
Creationism is the doctrine that the universe came into existence through the will of a supreme being who was, and is, outside time and space, that he made land and sea and everything in them in six days, and that he subsequently destroyed them in a global flood. The beginning of the universe is dated to less than 10,000 years ago, maybe even 6,000 years ago. The term biblical refers to the fact that believers take as their starting point the book of Genesis rather than Darwin’s Origin of Species, and they base their date of less than 10,000 years on the Genesis genealogies, assumed to record the number of years between Adam and Abraham without abridgement. As an apologetic movement, creationism goes back to the Scriptural geologists of the 19th century, but it was following the publication in 1961 of The Genesis Flood by John Whitcomb and Henry Morris that it made an appreciable impact on the intellectual landscape.
Creationism is also a belief system. One can draw the conclusion that organisms were created without believing that they were created in their present form or that the universe came into existence only 6–10,000 years ago, looking much as it does now.
The essence of the debate as seen by an evolutionist cartoonistEvolutionism and creationism are embroiled in a propaganda war. Champions of Darwinism claim that evolution is a fact and dismiss creationism as religion masquerading as science. Champions of creationism, conversely, claim that Darwinism is a pseudo-religion: if one interprets the facts in accordance with the Bible, it becomes clear that God made the world and Noah’s Flood produced its fossils. In their sense of conviction and unwillingness to look for common ground, both sides are similar to each other. It is not only creationists who start from a fixed position and then look for facts to support it.
What, then, makes a theory scientific? Perhaps it is the reliance on data gathered by scientific methods? Perhaps it is the investigation and explanation of physical processes in terms of cause and effect. We don’t have to produce a definitive answer, but one characteristic a scientific theory must have is the capability of being falsified. The crux of the matter is not whether there is evidence which the theory satisfies – other theories may be able to do the same – but whether evidence exists which contradicts the theory.
In this sense, because they are falsifiable, Darwinian evolutionism and biblical creationism both have the characteristics of a scientific theory.
And both have been falsified, notwithstanding that they continue to be advocated as vigorously as ever. Adherents believe in them and promote them for all they are worth despite their having failed as scientific theories. Both beliefs – as each party indeed says of the other – function as myth, satisfying the basic questions about where life came from and where it is going, and determining how reality is perceived. They provide the rules which govern the interpretation of everything else. As they go to the core of one’s being, they are immune from investigation and generate only taboos.
If the two doctrines are both wrong, there must be a third possibility, as succeeding parts of this website argue. The following summaries are restricted to showing just how comprehensively current theories have been falsified.