Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Scientists believe the world is the result of the simple evolutionary principle – survival
of the fittest. Others believe that there is something else
that created us and everything around us. The argument seems to be won by the scientists
as the theory of evolution seems to fit very well - and has evidence to back it up.
But is that the final answer? Creationism means an external being, beyond
our normal comprehension, created the worlds and all upon them.
This explanation is provided by religious texts passed down through history.
Modern findings however shed problems on their logic, with Dinosaurs being a common and major
stumbling block. But some may argue that this was an intentional
omission, as it would confuse primitive man. It would be like explaining to someone how
a phone works by explaining electricity. You leave out things that would be too confusing
and unnecessary. Evolution sounds like a solid theory, where
creatures evolve through the premise that offspring have random variations, and any
of these that improve their chances of survival, live longer and pass this on to their children.
…But I have a problem with this theory too, and it also comes down to Dinosaurs.
Dinosaurs were around for 160 million years – that’s a REALLY long time.
And they were subject to the evolutionary principle, but it is generally believed that
they were extreme examples and in many cases the results cannot be explained.
For example the famous T-Rex had arms – but they are almost completely useless. They couldn’t
clap and couldn’t even bring food to their mouths. Predecessors also had these useless
arms and so they were not evolutionary left-overs getting smaller over time.
Other dinosaurs had long crests of spikes and plates but none of these were strong enough
for defence. So why did these near useless things come
about if not through the evolutionary process? Is there something else that could be governing
it?
The other question I have is that of intelligence. If evolution WAS solely in charge then it
would be reasonable to expect a species, that lasted 160 million years, to develop greater
and greater intelligence. After all intelligence is one of the best ways to evade predators
and survive for longer – and thus propagating that skill.
But this didn’t happen in Dinosaurs. Why???
They had remarkably small brains. So why did this obvious evolutionary path not develop?
How can the fundamental precept of evolution seemingly stop during their reign?
The evolutionary process is reasonable and probably governs most development but there
seems to be something else that must be either inhibiting or controlling it. What is this?
Are there many other influences? Could it be intelligent design of some kind, or could
be something completely different? Neither side seems to have a good answer.
So lets look for a different answer.