The California Collection/TheCaliforniaCollection.cdr/his065/fossl_d.arj/FOSSL-D.TXT

Text File | 1990-11-26 | 6KB | 95 lines

                 Origins: What Does the Fossil Evidence Reveal?

                In 1859 Charles Darwin published a book entitled The
        Origins of Species by Means of Natural Selection. This one book has
        spawned hundreds more and raised controversy in religion, science,
        education, and government. People in all walks of life have been
        effected whether a person is an atheist or a believer in a deity.

        Most of Darwin's conclusions are based on what he observed in the
        fossil record. This, of course, would be the place to come to look
        for evidence to support his theory of evolution. Here in the fossil
        record the remains of creatures that lived perhaps millions of years
        ago would be found. This is exactly the same place that creationists
        go for evidence to support the theory of creation. Just how well
        does the fossil record support one theory or the other?

                In discussing the origins of life we are concerned with
        how the world and the multitudes of living organisms all came into
        being.

        There are only two accepted models used when speaking of
        origins. The first and most widely accepted viewpoint is that of
        evolution. The evolution theory requires extremely long time spans;
        some scientists believe that it took as long as three billion years
        for life to reach the complexity that we see today (Volpe 144).

        Long
        time periods are needed because evolution works slowly with chance
        and natural selection guiding structural change. Another require-
        ment of evolution is that life occured spontaneously by accident
        from non-life. The origin of life is a process which is innate in
        matter (Gish 17). All life, as we know it today, emerged from single
        celled organisms which evolved over billions of years. Evolution
        also mandates that geologic processes on earth have been uniform.
        That is to say, there have been no sudden changes in geography or
        the environment here on earth. Man and apes have a common ancestor;
        the universe and our solar system have all ocurred through natural
        processes.

                In order for evolution to be true, the fossil evidence must
        support the evolution model. The slow and gradual change necessary
        to bring about highly complex creatures should be clearly shown
        in preserved animal remains. During the billions of years that
        evolution has been operating there must be millions and millions
        of transitional forms of life. These transitional forms would be
        in the process of changing from one form to another. The change
        may be from invertebrate to vertebrate or from fish to amphibian.
        It is believed that lizards evolved into birds. To support this
        tremendous change in form and function we can expect to find
        fossil evidence which is rich in transitional forms. This means
        that creatures will be found with partially formed wings or fea-
        thers or front leg structures that have partially changed to wings.
        The evidence of the transitional form is critical to the evolution
        model.

                The creationist has an obviously divergent point of view.
        The earth is relatively young. Its age is on the order of tens of
        thousands of years. Earth's geology has been one of catastrophy
        rather than uniformity. All life occured through the willful act
        of a Designer. Each type of species was complete and highly complex
        at the moment of creation. Life has not become more complex with
        the passage of time.

        Any change in speciation has been small and
        limited to particular kind. These changes are controlled by the
        constraints of genetics. Man and apes are not related. Again we
        can say that the evidence in the fossil record must support the
        theory. The creationist would not expect to find transitional
        forms, but rather, highly complex creatures should appear in the
        sedimentary rock. There should be no evidence of any gradual change
        from one kind to another.

                Before going any further, it is important to establish one
        other point. Neither theory, creation or evolution, can be proven
        in the laboratory.

        Evolution requires tens of millions of years
        for any observable changes to occur. It is intuitively evident
        that it is not possible to conduct an experiment over such a vast
        time period. Creation has a problem of even greater magnitude.
        For creation to be true, it must be proven that it occured through
        divine  intervention.  This is a major obstacle for the theory.

        Again, it is impossible to perform any such experiment in the lab-
        oratory. We now have a dilemma because neither of these two theories
        can be proven in a controlled situation. Here is where the fossil
        evidence will prove to be of such great importance. The fossils
        are a historical record of what creatures existed in the past.

        This historic information can be used with the two origin models
        we have established. By comparing the historical evidence with
        what can be expected on the basis of these two origin models we
        should be able to see which model best fits the evidence.