Creationism, Evolution or… Both!

A while back I was appalled to read an article about how Bill Nye (the science guy) was challenging the creationists who were trying to get bible stories into schools as an alternative to the current teachings of evolution.

I was appalled not by the story itself but by the fact that there was so much fanfare over a foolish argument.

Many people spend so much energy opposing views that don’t agree with theirs that they miss the idea that there may be a solution which answers both sides of the argument.

My stance is that Science and God go together. That Creationism (to a point) works with Evolution (to a point). I suppose one way to look at it is to ask the question: can you empirically prove either stance? I’m getting old, but not as old as the earth (at 6,000 years old or 6,000,000,000 years old), therefore I wasn’t there and can’t say either is 100% true. I sincerely believe it’s likely a combination of both evolution and creation.

I know atheists don’t like this idea but, why not? Why can’t science be our discovery of how God created all that we know? That answers both positions.

After reading Richard Dawkins The God Delusion, I came to the conclusion that asking science to prove the existence of God is like asking gravity to prove the existence of Newton. Science is the art of discovery. Newton didn’t invent gravity, he discovered it and gave us mathematical equations to understand how it works.

The problem is, when you dig in your heels on a certain position, it seems inevitable that you will at some point need to change that stance. Funny how that works. It’s like the makers of the Titanic (not James Cameron, the actual ship makers) were allegedly quoted saying “God himself couldn’t sink this ship”. Well, they sure needed to change that position, right?

If you remain curious and flexible, you will learn so much more.

1000 years ago, we didn’t know what penicillin was, 100 years ago, we didn’t know what computers were, 10 years ago we didn’t know what neutralinos were. What don’t we know today that we will know tomorrow?

Isn’t it possible that there are answers which satisfy both sides of the argument?