Evolutionist Versus Creationist Theory

Maury Navarrete

10 March 20114

Evolutionist Versus Creationist Theory

        The reliance of the evolutionist theory and creationist theory has been discussed for many years. Nowadays the defense of each theory is stronger comparing with years ago, the arguments have become more persuasive that before, the research shown on the many different arguments is advanced and concrete, and the techniques to convince are changing many ways of thinking even those pragmatics. The difference between one another and the proves that influence the audience have to be managed in a cleverly way in order to be accepted. In this particular case we are going to study Mark I. Vuletic in defense of evolution, and Kevin Martin against evolution.

        Mark I. Vuletic arguments in defense of evolution have been focused in four main points, the first one is the fossil record, the second one is the patterns in genetic material, as a third one evolution and atheism?, and the last one the Bible and creationism; however, among this arguments there are some stronger than others. For example, the fossil record and the patterns in genetic material have many proves that help the author to build his discourse as a powerful weapon to convince the audience of hid position. In contrast, the two other left points that are evolution and atheism? And the Bible and creationism, this two arguments are lacking of proves and they just claim why the opposite theory condemn evolutionists as atheist , the misunderstanding of the book of Genesis on behalf of creationists, and the reliance of the book of Genesis, instead of focus on scientific facts that support the evolutionist theory.

        On the other hand, Kevin Martin is the author of seventeen evidences against evolutionism, but on this side there are some arguments stronger than others, such as the moon dust as complementary with probability and earth´s rotation. The first point provides some NASA´s information that supports the fact of a young moon. The second strong argument is probability, which show a research made by Dr. James Coppedge in a center for probability research in Biology in California, that claims that in order to get a single cell  from one protein molecule and one single gene as the evolutionist theory affirm to be the origin of the world, this probability could last 1 followed by 262 zeros years that simultaneously display  that the earth is not that old, so this cannot be possible. The fact that the rotation of the earth is slowing .00002 second per year claim that the earth is not that old yet; otherwise, the centrifugal force would have notably deformed the earth, yet there are some weakest points that Martin pointed out on his discourse that are not helping his position. One of them is when he mentions the existence of dinosaurs trying to prove that dinosaurs live with man in the same time in different places, using empty basis such as fairytales and meetings with humans without real foundations. Another weak point is the writing record which place the date of creation at no earlier than 7000 B.C based in thirty-seven ancient writings, in fact this could not be a prove that humans live year before without knowing any kind of writing. The last and more controversial Martin´s point that is the Bible, he did not know how to place it and managed because he introduce us in a very weak and simple creationist idea that in my point of view did not persuade the audience.