One of the largest arguments raging on in the scientific world today involves the

question of creation. It is a heavily heated discussion, with representatives and scientists

on both sides pointing fingers to their data. It is especially difficult to determine which

side happens to be correct, as both sides lean towards more theoretical data than hard,

physical evidence. However, after looking at many pieces of solid research over the past

couple hundred years, it is reasonable to concur that the Universe –and everything in it-

could be scientifically proven to no longer require a theological God to have been

created.

Many proponents of Intelligent Design have attempted to prove Creation Theory as

the one true explanation of how the Universe was made. Creation Theory itself relies

heavily on the existence of a Theological God, or a Creator figure at the very least. The

arguments supporting Creation Science always fall short, as they require proof of the

very existence of a Creator. (Vuletic) Without proof or presence of such, “God” cannot be

a constant to measure human knowledge by. (Folger) Many of these researchers have

attempted a different approach, which would involve simply pointing out fundamental

flaws in Evolutionary theory. Some of their arguments include simple debunking of

terminology, such as the view that there is no such thing as a simple cell.

According to Creatonists, all animals have cells and bodies that are far too complex

to have simply evolved out of one so-called “simple cell”; for that matter cells themselves

cannot form different cells for different functions going by the Evolutionary viewpoint.

While it is a compelling argument, it falls flat. Research has proven again and again that

cells from one part of the body can in fact be replicated a number of ways; some cells

can even regenerate damaged tissue that has little functional relation to the transplanted

ones.
 Many Creationists also like to argue the fact that living beings are too complex to

have come about without a Divine Creator. Without anything further to back their proof,

they refer to decrepit religious texts to explain things for them. Their arguments consist

of small points that usually repeat the same thing: “Life is simply too complex to have

come from nothing, there obviously has to be a Creator of some sort.”

While this is a nice viewpoint to have, we must again return to the fact that a Divine

Creator cannot be a testable constant to subject research to. At the very least, it is

comforting to know that scientific theories such as Evolution or the Big Bang can be

subjected entirely to mathematics, as well as analytical research. Creationists have no

research; they only have philosophical speculation.

In early 2007, a select group of Creationists banded together with Ben Stein to

create a documentary challenging the existing scientific theories. However, their entire

selling point of their own theories relied heavily on propaganda material; such material

has very little to do with actual science. Ben Stein and his followers attempted to label

Evolution as “Pro-Nazism”, “Pro-Eugenics”, and “An overtaking of Atheist beliefs in an

attempt to destroy Christianity”. Such claims are sketchy at best, and numerous

university professors have debunked the entire list of arguments time and time again.

The first component to center on is Creation itself. Many scientists speculate that all

matter was released in an event known as the Big Bang. To fully understand how the Big

Bang works, one must look into Quantum Mechanics. Quantum mechanics states that

the Big Bang could have happened due to Virtual Particles colliding together to cause a

chain reaction. Virtual particles themselves have been proven scientifically to be

particles that can simply come from nothing and “borrow” or “transfer” the existing

energy of another particle that it collided into, and then quickly disappear. (Folger) Such
an occurrence causes a vast chain reaction, as numerous particles begin to collide with

one another. According to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, this causes a shift in the

radiation and energy fields created, and the reaction itself causes molecules, electrons,

and protons to form. (Singh) Over a small period of time, this amount of newly created

matter can bond together to create massive amounts of different types of matter.

(Kalzev) With this in mind, it is apparent that Universal Creation itself does not require a

Preexisting God figure to jump-start Creation. It could have easily happened without one.

After the advent of the Big Bang, matter in the new Universe began to settle. Stars

began to form out of the simultaneous expansion and compression of universal dust and

gasses. (Hawking) The gravitational fields from these new entities caused nearby

deposits of matter to revolve around the bodies of these stars. According to Geological

Planetary Theory, many of these deposits formed together with the aid of asteroid

collisions, thus causing different mineral deposits to affect the overall makeup of the

planet. Gasses, combined with the heat from the sun, caused earth’s surface to become

molten iron. This process could have caused numerous amounts of atmospheric

altercations due to the heat’s effect on different material deposits, causing an

atmosphere to form.

These chemical reactions in the environment itself could have theoretically caused

the formation of organic matter. One need only look at the famous Miller-Urey

experiment in 1953. The experiment revealed the fact that amino acids could be made in

the right conditions using electricity and base chemicals. Amino acids themselves make

up the building blocks of Deoxyribonucleic Acid, otherwise known as DNA. The Genome

Project has sequenced many DNA strains from many different species of varying

genuses. DNA itself is the makeup of all the features of a specific being; the species’
features can vary greatly from one being to another in the case of mutation; thus

explaining a heavily important component of Evolution and Natural Selection.

Evolution and Natural Selection are the delivered theories of Charles Darwin, an

1859 researcher and scientist. The Descent of Man caused an uproar in the scientific

community of the day, but his theories have become widely accepted as they happen to

be the most complete explanation of the diversity and unification of all living things.

(Wells)

Natural Selection is the theory that animals in a species will mate with other animals in

possession of a superior trait. Such traits are handed down and a new species is formed

over time, allowing a species to adapt to new environments; a fitting example would be

an animal that can survive intense heat can hand down this trait by looking for a similar

mate in nature. (Darwin) Such mutations are quite common, and the concept itself is

sometimes mistaken for “microevolution”, in which small parts of a species change over

the course of thousands of years. In any case, mating over desirable genes is a heavily

influential part of nature; animals with less desirable traits tend to become extinct

through becoming obsolete. (B.U Evolution Dept.)

Natural Selection ties in very well with the concepts of Evolution. Inherited traits in a

species will often become the norm as animals continue to mate and adapt. Over an

extended period of time, entirely new studies occur. Preferable genes become dominant

in a new species, and the changes occur over and over again in synchronicity with the

environment. (Darwin) It is completely possible for beings to become increasingly more

advanced over a course of hundreds of thousands of years; such a process is directly

applicable to human beings themselves.

 Archaeological digs and analysis have suggested possibilities many times over that

humans come from a common gene pool in conjunction with apes. These findings tend

to get misconstrued by the general public, but the connection is apparent. Genetic

sequencing and biological examination have pointed out that Neanderthals share many

of the same organic and genetic traits that humans do; this is especially true in the case

of speech. If Neanderthals were capable of speech, it is highly possible that they relied

on a language, thus implying sentience of some degree. Sentience and speech were

traits originally thought to be distinctly human characteristics, so the possibility of an

intelligent non-human species points science heavily towards evolution and away from

religious scripture.

The question is raised, however: If Neanderthals were sentient beings, then why are

they not around today? According to the evolutionary cycle, some races lack adaptability

to an environment and begin to die out. This case is said to be true for numerous

species of birds that are unable to adapt to certain regions. Another possible case is that

Neanderthals simply became obsolete by the arrival and expansion of the human race.

What ever the case may be, the human race achieved dominance over all other

forms of life by the application of technology. The use of organized language and

sentience brought forth the ability to spread ideas; the application of these ideas caused

different variations of social and physical change depending on the use case. For

example, the discovery of fire allowed early humans to cook their food, allowing them to

gain new nutrients while destroying many of the germs they ate before. With better

strains of nutrients and less germs, these early humans raised to a level of improved

health, allowing them to make better dietary variations over the course of time. As part of
a cycle, every generation would theoretically become healthier and more knowledgeable

than the last one.

The prosperity of humanity and the numerous applications of discovery eventually

led to the uprising of different unified cultures. Different tribes of humans relied upon

crude forms of leadership; at the same time discovery also depended on simple

explanations. This requirement of explanation ultimately formed different belief systems

in different regions of the world. As a rule of thumb, early cultures relied very heavily on

belief systems to explain both science and politics. As these cultures refined themselves,

the various beliefs were consolidated into various religions. Religions gave people a set

of rules to follow to maintain social order, thus integrating the church and state for

several millennia.

It is interesting to note, however, that the advent of forced belief systems caused

many social outcasts to review the flaws in dominant religions and political systems. The

prevalence of religious persecution caused many different cultural shits; some groups of

people were entirely wiped out from harsh oppression while others broke away from the

church. Due to these splits, many groups of people became dissatisfied with turning to

religion for answers. Many of these vagabonds dabbled in alchemy and the occult, which

were said to be the stepping-stones to modern science. This new appreciation of

discovery through experimentation led to a higher level of intellect in society.

Mathematics, Biology, and Physics grew out of this to further human knowledge, as well

as further human technology.

As human capability grows, the requirements for an organized religion wane.

Modern medicine replaces the age-old concepts of exorcism and prayer. With a set of

completely explainable logical theories for creation, development, and growth, there isn’t
much of a need to cling on to outdated beliefs based on Mysticism. The model of using

dogmatic beliefs to control followers has literally become outdated because science and

collaboration between human beings outweighs any of the merits of so-called “Faith”. No

one has ever been persecuted or killed in the name of Science. Science is a

collaboration tool to stimulate sociological and intellectual expansion. Tearing down the

walls of Religion causes Man to realize the eye-opening perspective that all beings have

errors, even Science itself. With this in mind, Man is able to serve the good of mankind

for himself. He is no longer a slave to an imaginary God conjured up 6,000 years ago or

more.

In conclusion, it is a perfectly viable concept that the Universe could have come about

without a God or creator figure of any sort. Of course, this doesn’t disprove any

possibility of there being a God, afterlife, eternal damnation, or any of that. It merely

states that God doesn’t have to exist just because we do.

Works Cited

Darwin, Charles. Descent of Man. London: John Murray, 1871. Literature.org.

Knowledege Matters, Ltd. 25 Nov. 2008

<http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-descent-of-man/index.html>

Darwin, Charles. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the

Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray,

1859. Literature.org. Knowledege Matters Ltd. 25 Nov. 2008

<http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-origin-of-species/>

Evolution. Dept. home page. Berlkey University. 20 Nov. 2008

<http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/>

Folger, Jake. Personal interview. 27 Oct. 2008. “Quantum Physics, Evolution, and

Atheism: A Discussion with Jake Folger.”

Hawking, Stephen. A Brief History of Time. London: Bantam Dell Publishing Group,

1988

Kazlev, Alan, and Franco Maria Boschetto. “The Hadeon Ion.” Palaeos. 9 Apr. 2002.

Palaeos Foundation. 30 Nov. 2008

<http://www.palaeos.com/Hadean/Hadean.htm>

Singh, Simon. Big Bang: the most important scientific discovery of all time and why you

need to know about it. London: Fourth Estate, 2004

Vuletic, Mark I. “Creation Ex Nihilo -Creation without God.” Indifdels.org. 1997. The

Infidels Organization. 20 Nov. 2008

<http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mark_vuletic/vacuum.html>

Wells, Jonathan. “Issues in the creation-evolution controversies.” The World and I. 1996.

eLibrary. ProQuest. Metamora High School Lib., Metamora, IL. 24 Nov. 2008

<http://elibrary.bigchalk.com/>
 About the Author

Sean Tilley is a typical 18 year old. He

lives in Illinois, loves to mess with
computers, and tends to have many
thoughts about the world, as young
people tend to do. Sean is a wanna-be
programmer who spends more time on
creative projects. Hey, it's how this got
made.
Sean Tilley runs several blogs, which
are noted below.

As a side note, he's a huge Free

Software/Open Source/Free Culture
Enthusiast.

Sites of Interest

Sean Tilley's Life Blog:

http://seanrtilley.blogspot.com

Sean's Literature Blog:

http://seantilleywritesalot.blogspot.com

Sean's Cruddy Music Profile!

Http://www.myspace.com/musicofseantilley

Sean's crummy YouTube Account!

http://www.youtube.com/user/seantilley