Modern Science Fails in the Creation Argument: Stereotypes


The Basilica del Pilar Zaragoza, Aragon, Spain. Built in 1754.

The polarizing argument of creation vs. evolution has divided society for over a century. A discussion with such an extended history deserves more than a single article. It deserves a thorough investigation through a series of relevant works.

One of the most astounding aspects of the creation vs. evolution argument is the extent with which science will go to force its beliefs on the individual, while claiming to have confidence in its beliefs. It’s usually after accusing those with a faith of being the same way. This is truly a time when all religions should unite in supporting creation as a viable theory in the education system, but human differences usually make that a moot point. Instead, more churches, temples, and synagogues embrace the ideology behind what is really an incredibly dubious theory.

Regardless, it is imperative to keep this argument in its place. Science is more to blame to creating the modern-day fervor than religion. Science would have us believe that our opinion on origins defines everything about us. For the majority of individuals, this kind of belief has no influence on any part of life. You will not get a better job by accepting evolution. You will not lose your job, education, status, or financial stability for accepting a creation theory, unless perhaps you are a scientist. Accepting the evolution theory will not magically transform a high school dropout into a neurosurgeon.

Science’s primary weakness is the reliance on ignorant stereotypes. Stereotypes should be beneath any intellectual field, not saturate it. Science likes to pretend that Christianity is synonymous with ignorance, even when they are aware Copernicus, Kepler, Isaac Newton, Galileo, Max Planck, George Washington Carver, Louis Pasteur, Emanuel Swedenborg, RenĂ© Descartes, Francis Bacon, Boyle, and Nikola Tesla were all Christian. Those are just a few of the greatest minds in history, who also had faith.

The narrow-mindedness of modern science is likely the only reason why we haven’t had a life-changing invention in decades. There has been no equivalent discovery of a miracle drug like penicillin since its inception. The advent of internet and cellular telephones were nothing more than improved technologies developed during World War II. Those concepts were developed by such minds as Tesla and Edison long before that.

Science has reduced itself from a field that focused on developing knowledge of our natural and biological world, to a field of intolerance and bigotry. It is a world of “flat-earthers” who seek more to accuse others of the same, than to improve itself. Apparently, whether you believe in creation or evolution takes precedence over curing cancer, finding new water sources, improving the world’s food stores, or any other positive contribution.

There was never previously a competition between science and religion, because science was not a religion. The two usually complemented one another. A seemingly “magic” transformation occurred during the Twentieth Century that destroyed this previous harmony. Suddenly, there’s a competition between two subjects, which should be nothing alike.

Science once said, “Question everything.” Perhaps the better question for today would be, “Question only what we question.”