NOTE: This document is for personal use only. It is not to be distributed in either print or electronic format.

Responses of Senior Biology Majors at Andrews University to
Issues Related to Creation and God's Creatorship

John Stout
Professor of Biology, Andrews University

FOR: Faith and Science Conference, Glacier View Ranch, CO — August 2003

    In a carefully planned progression of lectures, laboratory experiences and discussion, issues relating to the origin and development of living organisms on this earth are integrated into the undergraduate curriculum in Biology at Andrews University. Creation/evolution topics permeate our first course in Biology and are integrated into the diverse topics covered, ranging from molecular biology through ecology. These themes are continued through our advanced undergraduate courses, especially in courses that all majors take including a course titled Historical and Philosophical Biology (typically as juniors, a separate course with the title Earth, Life and Time is offered for students who are not Biology or science majors). This course features a laboratory and presentations by a number of AU faculty and others with a wide range of relevant specialties.
    The goals of these experiences include:

• Building a faith position which sees God as Creator/Designer and a recent creation as His handiwork that is in harmony with Genesis 1 and 2.
• Understanding evolution as typically presented, including molecular evolution, the fossil record, geology, the measurement of geological time and other issues.
• Supporting an "intellectual patience" which does not need to have all questions answered before a faith position is reached which is in harmony with inspiration.

    A unique additional feature of our program is a year long, senior capstone experience which is based on interaction and dialog. This capstone experience includes a series of discussions that involve the students in expressing their own perceptions and reactions to important topics covered in previous courses/experiences, that are centered on origins, design, God's roles as Creator, etc. It attempts to help each student carefully evaluate and integrate the information and propositions surrounding origins into a meaningful faith position that is consistent with the inspired Word in which God is both Creator and Redeemer. These discussions are organized around a series of topics carefully chosen by the coordinating faculty member to include the most important topics that are central to building a position of faith while dealing with unanswered (and perhaps unanswerable) questions. The discussions are led by a series of students who each present a short, carefully thought out paper to the group that not only summarizes the topic under discussion, but also, more importantly, gives their critique and personal response to the topics under discussion.
    As a contribution to the Conference on Science and Faith, excerpts from the students' personal responses in these papers, along with a brief introduction of each topic and synthesis of the students' reactions and responses are included. The students' responses are in their own words and are intended to express their individual feelings. They represent a sampling of the responses of about 80 senior biology majors who have gone through this relatively new program. They are presented with the hope that the students' voices and concerns will be heard as expressions of an important constituency that this confernce hopes to address. While these students are better informed after four years of experience in AU's Biology program than the average Adventist college student, their responses and concerns represent issues that are widely important to students in SDA education around the world.
    The rest of this presentation is organized around the sequence of topics covered in the series of discussions included in this senior level experience.

Irreducible Complexity - Design in the biological world

    Michael Behe, in Darwin's Black Box, contends that at cellular, molecular and biochemical levels, Darwinian evolution (via natural selection of genetically variable traits) can not explain the evolutionary development of complex cellular components (such as cilia). He takes the position that these cellular components (organelles or cellular pathways) are made up of a number of subcomponents (different structural and/or functional proteins or groups of proteins) that would have to independently develop through evolutionary time. Behe contends that this evolutionary development would not be possible because these subcomponents have no function until they are joined with other components to form the functional organelle. Since natural selection only functions as a guidance mechanism in Darwinian evolution when a cellular component (organelle or pathway) has a function(s) that can be advantageous or disadvantageous, Behe argues that many cellular organelles and pathways must have been "put in place" by a designer, since they could not have evolved.

The student's responses to the evidence for design in nature

• "I am a creationist because intelligent design seems to be the only logical explanation for the tremendous complexity, diversity, perfection and creativity found in all biological life."
• "The truth of the matter is that this 'fact-free science' has no basis in reality and the subsequent experiments have never been attempted. The pathways are too complex to arise by any natural means".
• "Biochemistry textbooks abound with pathways that refute Darwin's theory of evolution."
• "In order to realize that something was designed we do not need to recognize the identity of the designer, but we must acknowledge that a superior mind designed these incredible systems . . . Christians call this superior mind God."
• "Attempts at a gradual evolution of the protein transport system would lead to extinction. For this reason the protein transport system points clearly and unambiguously to the concept of origin by design."
• "As Christians we must remember that scientific understanding does not negate the power of God, it may simply mean that we have been blessed with a small insight into the workings of God's creative power."
• "Behe also pointed out that just because we can infer that some biochemical systems were designed, it doesn't mean that all of them were designed."

Synthesis

    Our senior biology majors see the evidence for design, at levels ranging from subcellular to environmental, as evidence for a Designer and go on to believe that the Designer is the God they have come to know through experience and scripture. They see design as the most important scientific support for a Creator/Designer/God. However, they also note that Behe does support the evolution of some of the cellular components and systems and that he is not proposing the origin of living things through God's special creation.

Unexplainable Complexity - The logic behind the design seen in our physical world and the feasibility of molecular evolution

    This physical earth appears to have been designed to support life as we know it. However, a science based on naturalism excludes a Designer/Creator from the considerations surrounding the origin and maintenance of life. Thus, there is no alternative but to propose and support the origin of life through molecular evolution from inorganic precursors without considering the apparent impossibility of molecular evolution in a world with slightly different physical characteristics. The proposed steps from inorganic precursors to organic, self replicating entities that exhibit at least some properties of living cells require mechanisms, many of which have defied, so far, any successful substantiation in the laboratory and for which there is no supporting evidence in nature. Proposals that the early steps in molecular evolution required the development of self replicating proteins from an enriched "organic soup" have run into so many difficulties, that many investigators have abandoned proteins as the earliest, larger, organic molecules that could support life processes. More recently, evidence that ribonucleic acids (RNAs) could exhibit catalysis and might possibly become self replicating has refocused the attention of many researchers on an early RNA world. They propose that such a world could support the development of self replicating molecular aggregates that exhibited functions that natural selection could influence in such a way that simple, but living "cells" could develop. However, numerous steps that would be necessary for the development of the RNA world continue to defy substantiation using the most modern laboratory techniques.

The students' responses to design in our physical world, molecular evolution and the RNA world

• "The anthropic principle . . . states that if the universe existed in any other way, we would not be here to observe it. . . . Is there design in the universe? Or did this universe just happen to come about through the chance convergence of all the forces critical to the development of intelligent life?"
• "It seems impossible that such a simple molecule could coincidentally fulfill in one package so many of the characteristics required for life. Water stands alone in its life-giving capacity and most of its properties are anomalous. Life is absolutely dependent on water, and it seems to follow that water was designed on purpose to be the medium through which life sustains itself."
• "Although I admit to a definite bias towards origin by design, the overwhelming lists of parameters that could not fall out of a narrow range in order for life to exist, seem to point almost directly away from any sort of random coincidence and directly towards a Divine Designer."
• "All in all this seems to be a game of number and chance. It has been my experience that science usually doesn't like to count on chance. But it would appear that it very much does so in regards to gradualist evolution."
• "Overall I was not convinced by Orgel's article on the origins of RNA and other early organic molecules. This of course is due to my being a strong creationist. I am still open minded to the evolutionists' theories as to the origin of biological life via natural processes."
• "The limitations of RNA do not favor its feasibility as the originator of evolutionary life. However, there are currently no other options to consider. Thus, scientists will continue to probe the questions and challenges surrounding the capabilities of catalytic RNA."
• "How many assumptions must be made for this RNA world to create the first living cell? Simply put, too many. How many 'probably' or 'possibly' do scientists suggest when describing the RNA scenario? Again, too many of the hypotheses to have any credibility. . . . The RNA world is a fantasy."
• "The common cause that is becoming more and more readily apparent as we study the universe is that of an Intelligent Designer."

Synthesis

    The students feel strongly that our physical world and the surrounding universe exhibit so many traits that are finely tuned to support life that design resulting from the planning by a Designer is evident. They also feel that molecular evolution requires processes that could not develop, even in the most ideal of early environments in which precursor molecules were readily available. They recognize that even if such an environment filled with organic molecules ('organic soup") could become available, the probability of a single "cell" with some properties of life developing through Darwinian selection (or any other mechanisms) is so disappearingly small that it doesn't warrant serious consideration. However, even if the empirical support for molecular evolution were much stronger, they would still see the role of a Designer/Creator as not only more likely than development by chance, but more importantly, as fundamental to God's roles in this world and in our lives.
    In summary our students believe design in the natural world requires a Designer who fully understands the physical laws that govern the physical world and thus life processes. This belief not only informs their picture of God, but also strengthens their faith in His operation in their lives and in the world more generally.

Fossil Explosions - The sudden appearance of life forms in the fossil record with no occurrences in earlier strata

    In assessing the quality of evidence for the gradualistic, evolutionary development of living organisms one would expect a fossil record that clearly supports the progressive development of new life forms from preexisting ones in small steps. The sudden appearance of large groups of animals and plants in the fossil record with few, or entirely absent ancestral forms leaves huge gaps in the proposed evolutionary progression of life forms. Some propose that the earliest appearance of organisms in the fossil record represents the forms in which they were created. However, although these assemblages of animals and plants appear suddenly, they also document a fauna and flora that were very different from what we see today. To some observers, the appearance of very large changes in the various life forms from first appearance until now presents an argument for progressive change, either from their evolutionary origins or since their creation.

The students' responses to the sudden appearance of complex life forms

• "As we climb through the ages, we can observe that the major phyla just appear with increasing complexity until modern man is reached. There is no explanation as to why they just suddenly appear. Some speculations include that intermediate groups will be discovered as time goes on to fill in these gaps. Today, 150 years later (after Darwin's Origin of the Species) paleontologists are still looking fervently to find patterns of intermediates between major groups of organisms."
• "The apparent absence of life before the Paleozoic era and the sudden appearance of life in full complexity forwarded the anti-evolutionist movement thus viewing the Cambrian explosion as God's creation. The sudden appearance of high complexity organisms excludes the hypothesis of higher organisms gradually evolving from simpler organisms."
• "Through a very systematic analysis of the Burgess Shale fauna, Gould has developed several ideas about the origin of life as we know it now, and about how evolution takes place. As a creationist, I have a lot of issues with his theories which tend to reduce humanity to a mere mistake in time."
• "Crane also pointed out the importance of acknowledging the fact that still missing groups may be key elements in understanding seed plant phylogeny and the origin of flowering plants, yet it is not certain that these missing groups will ever be found. The mystery surrounding the origin of the angiosperms placed a gap in the fossil record and a subsequent gap in the theory of evolution. . . . . Yet, no conclusive evidence has been found that promotes the origin of angiosperms by chance and thus we remain led by our faith in explaining the phenomenon of the 'miraculous angiosperms'".
• "The conclusion to all three methods for the origin of Metazoans and the relationship between them and Protozoa is that any scheme is possible. There is insufficient information available, which does not offer any scientific conclusion regarding the relationship. The best supported conclusion is that each of the groups of Metazoans originated independently as complex organisms - a view best described as an evolutionary forest rather than an evolutionary tree."
• "The evidence, then, for the affinities of the majority of the invertebrates is tenuous and circumstantial; not the type of evidence that would allow one to form a verdict of definite relationships." Again the idea of independent origins of each group is the best supported suggestion.
• "Kerkut points out that although it is useful to consider that the relationships determined by comparative anatomy and embryology give proof to some of a monophyletic origin of the major phyla, this can only be done by leaving out much of the available information." This leads to Kerkut's suggestion that a polyphyletic origin (a fossil forest) fits the data better.

Synthesis

    The sudden appearance of diverse forms of animals in the Cambrian and flowering plants in the Cretaceous does not support their slow evolution over long periods of time (hundreds of millions of years). Hypothetical ancestors were (and continue to be) proposed to explain their supposed common origin at an earlier time as evolution would predict. The almost uniform failure to find earlier fossils that resemble these needed connecting links has concerned paleontologists for more than 140 years. It has led a few evolutionists (e.g. G. A. Kerkut) to propose that a polyphyletic origin of groups of different organisms in complex forms (an evolutionary forest) fits the data of paleontology better than a monophyletic scheme (an evolutionary tree) which forces all life forms converge to a single, much earlier common ancestral type. The model of an evolutionary forest also fits very well an original creation with subsequent development of new life forms through variation and natural selection.
    One attempt to reconcile the absence of connecting links is to propose that perhaps the gaps in the fossil record are real because evolutionary change may have occurred in large jumps. Modern developmental biology is now being used as a possible explanation. For example, a mutation in a single gene (antennapedia) in fruit flies can transform the development of an antenna to a fully developed leg growing out of the insect's head. This group of regulatory genes that can cause such radical developmental changes in form are termed Hox (or homeotic) genes. A senior responding to this proposal for sudden, large changes occurring during evolution had the following to say: "One class of these genes is the Hox gene family. A change in the arrangement or expression of these genes has a huge affect on the outcome of the animal. A Hox gene has this huge effect because the genes it regulates control other genes which in turn effect others. These ideas have been used to describe how a sudden appearance and radiation of life forms could occur. The author of this argument never reveals how the Hox gene system arose in the first place, which I think is the real question."
    However, the life forms of flowering plants found in the Cretaceous and invertebrate animals found in the Cambrian are consistently, and often dramatically, very different from life forms that are found today. In a creation model with representatives of all major groups of organisms created in the same short period of time (one week), one would expect to both find Cambrian or Cretaceous life forms alive today and extant life forms present, for example, in the Cambrian or Cretaceous.

The Dating Game - How ages and sequences of fossils and strata are determined

    The record of fossils buried in different layers at varying depths, frequently with layers of rocks and other materials that are datable using radioactive (or other) dating methods presents evidence for various life forms living a very long time ago and appearing and disappearing at different times in the past. The concordance between different clocks (whose "ticks" are detected using different methods) which seem to similarly separate in time, organisms found as fossils in, for example, the Cambrian from those found in the Cretaceous (see above) provide reinforcing evidence for time differences between the fossil layers. This evidence suggests that the large time differences between fossils found in different layers are real. Perhaps this assemblage of evidence is the most difficult to harmonize with a relatively recent creation of all major groups of organisms over a very short period (one week) of time.

The students' responses to the measurement of time differences between different fossil layers

• "There are well over forty different radiometric dating methods and scores of other methods such as tree rings, ice cores, etc. All of the different dating methods agree a great majority of the time over millions of years. Some Christians make it sound like there is much disagreement, but this is not so. The disagreement in values needed to support the position of young-earth creationists would require differences measured by orders of magnitude. The differences actually found . . . are usually close to the margin of error, not orders of magnitude. . . . Today there are many Christians who accept the reliability of geologic dating, but do not compromise the spiritual and historical inerrancy of God's word. . . . We can marvel even more, knowing how vast the universe is, how ancient the rocks and hills are, and how carefully our environment has been designed. Truly God is more awesome than we can imagine!"
• "But what it really comes down to is that no one truly knows how old the earth is or the contents in it and while we can try to make educated guesses, in the end they are still guesses and it will take a matter of faith no matter what you believe in to decide that the data proves your point and disproves the other view."
• "At the end of it all I have to say that my belief in radiometric dating hasn't' been affirmed. It would appear that it has inconsistencies that are over looked."
• "Certainly most people will recognize that the concepts of radioactive decay as presently seen are valid. So far radiometric dating has seemed to be one of the better methods for determining age."
• "The long ages given by radiometric dating may present questions to those that hold the earth has been in existence for a short time. The time periods obtained using radiometric dating are one of the evidences that do seem to indicate an evolutionary history. Reproducible results are obtained from samples located in different regions. Radiometric dating is one of the strong holds of the evolutionary theory because there are not good explanations of this method that relate it to a young earth because it indicates the exact opposite. However, radiometric dating makes several assumptions based around the setting and reading of the radiometric clock. It is valuable to question if those assumptions are accurate and valid."

Synthesis

    The evidence from dating methods for geological formations has rather uniformly led to a view of great age for the physical earth. This has led many thoughtful, orthodox Adventist scientists, scholars, theologians and others to accept a model that proposes an old earth, but young life. This view still has some difficulties with the interposition of rock strata bearing old but different ages between strata which contain fossils that are the descendants of an original, recent creation. One of the greatest challenges is to encourage our students to build an intellectual patience which is willing to wait for answers that may or may not be forthcoming in their lifetimes. One of the most important tools in encouraging this "patience" while they continue to believe in God's recent creatorship of living organisms during a literal week as a faith position is new advances and understanding that have resulted from studies by Adventist scientists. Three very important studies/interpretations have been very influential:

Yellowstone fossil forests. The work of Harold Coffin, Clyde Webster and colleagues has resulted in a reinterpretation of the fossil forests. The demonstration that the petrified tree remains were transported to their position of fossilization, rather than being fossilized in their position of growth has resulted in a very substantial reduction in the amount of time required for the fossil forests to develop. The following are student responses:

• "In conclusion, fossil trees are present in many locations around the world. One site in particular, Yellowstone National Park, is very unique in the characteristics of its fossil depositions. Close examination has revealed that the petrified trees were deposited as a result of water transport, quite possibly the result of a catastrophe."
• "The results are a strong argument for transport of these trees to the sites of their burial."

Paleocurrents. Art Chadwick's studies of paleocurrents, based on extensive evaluation of the geological literature, provide some of the most direct evidence for widespread water action during various geological eras. Students see his studies as supporting widespread, catastrophic flood events. They responded as follows:

• "The interesting thing about this theory is that it fits so nicely into a creationist model while still being consistent with most of the current data available, including the deposition of specific fossils in the same strata in a sequential pattern, the glacial activity, and the formation of current land features such as mountains and canyons, etc. There are some major issues that this model does not explain, however. One of the biggest of these is radiometric dating. . . . In spite of these questions, this model does show promise in explaining origins from a biblical standpoint."
• "This is a very interesting model in which the paleocurrents from the different ages seem to fit. Like any model though, further testing of it needs to ensue, but it does fulfill the goal that Chadwick had of providing creationists with a testable model to explain the geological column."
• "This would surely help encourage my support and belief in a worldwide catastrophe, such as the Genesis Flood."

Events related to the deposition of fossils forming the fossil record. Leonard Brand has recently articulated ideas growing out of geological and paleontological work of the Natural Sciences group at Loma Linda University. The very positive response by a student who reviewed the paper Leonard shared with us last year expresses the response of the whole group of senior biology majors who discussed it last year.

• "If Christians believe that scripture is truthful it will lead all who search with open minds to greater discoveries. . . . Many times we see Christian creationists blindly charging angrily after evolutionists and vice versa. If we are confident enough in our faith we should not be deterred by threatening evolutionary claims or even discoveries. We should never try to put down the other side. Even though the Bible doesn't talk about dinosaurs or the fossil record it will guide humans in many things. If we believe that God is the Creator then why can we not trust His Bible for guidance in enlightening us to His creations? There are so many different processes, as Brand mentioned, that are out there for us to discover. It will not be an over night ordeal, but what research is done could be an opportunity to glorify God. Brand's model is very approachable for me . . . It has given new light to the way I look at some ideas concerning the biblical flood. I predict that this model will take hold in the Christian community and work toward a well-built theory that fits ancient history and the Scriptures."

How Did They Get There? - Continental drift and biogeography as explanations for the distribution of both fossil and living organisms

    The geographical distribution of animals and plants is difficult to explain or understand from any viewpoint. The acceptance of continental drift by most Adventist geologists adds complications from the standpoint of time and mechanisms for rapid movement of the plates. Dispersion of organisms from a single geographical region following a worldwide catastrophe is difficult to reconcile with the distribution of both present and fossilized organisms. This is a relatively new topic in our discussions.

Student responses

• "It seems that the subject of wandering mammals raises more questions than answers. . . . It may be more comforting to think that God did play a big role in helping the mammals get from the ark to their current locations but this idea also puts fear in the hearts of others and is a major reason why the flood and the ark are not widely accepted around the world."
• "Taking all of this into consideration, it is easy to see why there has yet to arise any substantial explanation as to the diverse distribution of similar fish species in completely unrelated areas of the world. This is one area of science that could quite possibly never be fully understood or explained. . . . So, it then becomes a personal issue of faith and reason."
• "There are many questions yet to be answered in either theory (of continental drift). The causes for continental breakup and movement are still quite obscure. The case for creationism is strong in this area (continental drift helping to explaining flood and post flood changes), but weak where geological evidence provides rock dating and plate tectonics both of which seem to be accurate so far."
• "Catastrophism recognizes the idea of a supercontinent but must increase the rate of its breakup and movement to speeds that may be too high to even allow the continents to survive."

Synthesis

    The challenges presented by the distribution of organisms remain among the most difficult to integrate into a biblical flood that includes continental drift. It is an area that we have made little progress in understanding or explaining. Intellectual patience and continued study are very important. Our students await enhanced understanding while they maintain faith in a recent creation and their Creator.

The Blind Clock Watcher - Darwinian evolution, rather than design, as the source of natural diversity - as presented by Richard Dawkins

    For most evolutionists, the progression from molecules to complex life forms occurs through Darwinian evolution results from a combination of random genetic variation and natural selection over long time periods. Richard Dawkins insists that this is all accomplished through cumulative selection and that design plays no role. He develops this theme in three books including The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker and Climbing Mount Improbable.

The students read from each of these books and responded in the following ways:

• "In the views of origin by design or origin by Darwinian chance, Dawkins often quotes great scientists who are not Darwinian and tears their statements apart."
• "Dawkins admits that we still don't know how natural selection began on earth. . . . He goes on to admonish that the present lack of a definitely accepted account of the origin of life should certainly not be taken as a stumbling block for the whole Darwinian world view - probably wishful thinking."
• "First Dawkins says that a God capable of the feat of creation would be complicated beyond our imagination, yet he still requires an explanation of God. How can a God too complicated for us to imagine explain how creation took place? It just seems like he is requiring a lot more of the God than he ever would of his precious Darwinian theory."
• "In the midst of his own one-sided discourse, Dawkins frequently takes time out to attack creationists and anyone else who believes that intelligent design may have played a role in the development of living organisms. . . . As creationists, we must make a concerted effort to get past Dawkins' flagrant biases and attempt to objectively evaluate his arguments."
• "It is sad to think of Dawkins' theory as being correct. That means that we are only here to provide transport for genes that want to be superior. In addition, we have families, not for our benefit of feeling connected to a group, but to provide a protective unit for the sustaining of our selfish genes. We are nothing more than pawns, functioning solely for the benefit of our selfish genes that possess us."
• "If someone's survival depends on someone else's destruction, natural selection will certainly favor the victor. Although that may make sense from a biological point of view, it undermines all human moral principles."

Synthesis

    The evidence from nature demonstrates to our seniors that both design and a Designer are necessary for the origin of living things in the life forms found today and in the fossil record. They found Dawkin's analysis highly biased, opinionated and unconvincing. They were very uncomfortable with the implications of human life resulting only from evolutionary chance. They also found cumulative selection, the selfish gene and Dawkins' explanations generally led to wholly unsatisfactory ethics and principles for human interactions and relationships.

To return to the Home Page for the 2003 Faith and Science Conference.