creation Archives

July 23, 2025July 22, 2025

Bryan’s Arguments Against Darwin

Yesterday, July 21, 2025, marked the 100^th anniversary of the end of the famous Scopes trial in Dayton, Tennessee. Over the past few days, the media have commemorated it, and we have written about it HERE and HERE. The play “Inherit the Wind,” loosely based on the Scopes trial, was adapted into a movie twice, with the names changed to protect the innocent, or guilty. The real name was William Jennings Bryan, and although Bryan’s arguments against Darwin were not presented in the play or movies, they have still not been answered in the 100 years since Scopes.

William Jennings Bryan was a renowned orator of his day and a devout Christian who was not convinced of the truth of naturalistic macroevolution. One of his arguments against it involved the origin of life. Evolution does not explain creation. Evolution requires creation, and Darwin merely suggested that life got started in a “warm little pond” without explaining how that might have happened. Bryan said this:

“Those who reject the idea of creation are divided into two schools, some believing that the first germ of life came from another planet, and others holding that it was the result of spontaneous generation. Each school answers the arguments advanced by the other, and as they cannot agree with each other, I am not compelled to agree with either.”

After 100 years of research, scientists are no closer to solving the mystery of the origin of life than they were in Bryan’s day.

Another area that Bryan challenged was genetics (the passing of traits through generations) and morphology (the shape and structure of living things). Bryan expressed his doubts with a watermelon illustration:

“I was eating a piece of watermelon some months ago and was struck with its beauty…One [seed], put into the ground, when warmed by the sun and moistened by the rain, takes off its coat and goes to work; it gathers from somewhere two hundred thousand times its own weight, and forcing this raw material through a tiny stem, constructs a watermelon. It ornaments the outside with a covering of green; inside the green it puts a layer of white, and within the white a core of red, and all through the red it scatters seeds, each one capable of continuing the work of reproduction. Where does that little seed get its tremendous power? Where does it find its coloring matter? How does it collect its flavouring extract? How does it build a watermelon? Until you can explain a watermelon, do not be too sure that you can set limits to the power of the Almighty and say just what He would do or how He would do it. I cannot explain the watermelon, but I eat it and enjoy it.”

Today, we know that DNA carries the code for proteins and regulates cell functions, but science still does not understand the body plan of living things. What was once called “junk DNA” (non-coding) appears to be involved in morphology, but its mechanism of action remains unknown. Consider the similarities between the DNA of humans and fruit flies, and notice the vast differences in their body plans.

William Jennings Bryan’s arguments against Darwin have still not been answered by science. The origin of life and the secrets of genetics and morphology are still unexplained. Tomorrow, we will look at two more of Bryan’s arguments against Darwin.

Reference: “Still Unrefuted: William Jennings Bryan’s Key Arguments Against Darwinian Theory” by Rick Townsend in the summer 2025 issue of Salvo magazine, Pages 28-32.

July 21, 2025July 20, 2025

Trial of the Century?

In July 1925, what is known as the “Scopes Monkey Trial” was held in Dayton, Tennessee. Now, 100 years later, the battle over evolution continues. USA TODAY ran a 12-page special edition on July 13, 2025, giving an excellent historical exposé and claiming that what was at stake was “modern science versus religion.” The article also addresses current issues, including the representation of LGBTQ+ books in schools today. The paper claims that the so-called “trial of the century” was America’s first major culture war battle.

In an era when American education is undergoing massive change, there are many questions: Do schools have the right to ban certain books? Who should write the curriculum? Can the Bible be displayed in public schools? Should school prayer be allowed? Are vouchers the answer for school choice? Should schools be involved in sex education? Should the 10 commandments be displayed? Should schools have chaplains? These issues are being battled in courts, school board meetings, PTA presentations, and churches.

Many churches have established their own schools, and private schools are increasingly replacing public schools in various locations. One side effect is that money and teachers are being pulled away from the public schools. How do you teach a lab course when you have no funds to purchase equipment for students to use?

The sad part of all of this is that most of the conflict is unnecessary. The “Does God Exist?” ministry is based on the simple fact that science and faith are friends, not enemies. Modern science may disagree with some denominational teachings, but it does not contradict the Bible. If you read the Bible carefully, you will see that it consistently deals with evidence. Science is knowledge, and if God is the source of knowledge, the two MUST BE SYMBIOTIC – mutually supportive of each other.

The Scopes “trial of the century” centered on the topic of evolution. It is foolish to think that change does not occur in living things. How many different breeds of dogs, cats, chickens, cattle, and corn exist today? How did they come into being? The answer is “evolution,” but this was guided evolution. This is not to be confused with naturalism, which holds that blind chance can explain all that we observe in the natural world. Evolution is simply unfolding change, and it is undeniable, as evidenced by adaptive changes within species.

We urge our readers to go to our website doesgodexist.org or watch our video series on doesgodexist.tv for more information. Enroll in our correspondence course or read our free books. None of this requires any money – it is all free. It is essential to understand why you believe what you believe and be able to support it with evidence. We are here to help as you wade through the “trial of the century” media presentations.

July 16, 2025July 15, 2025

Darwinian Toxic Masculinity

In recent years, many people have decried “toxic masculinity.” The term started trending on Google searches in 2015. Many social science authors have written about it, defining it in different ways. WebMd.com describes it as “an attitude or set of social guidelines stereotypically associated with manliness that often have a negative impact on men, women, and society.” The topic is not new, and even Charles Darwin addressed it. You might call it Darwinian toxic masculinity.

Are men pigs? In a bestselling book titled The Moral Animal, Robert Wright wrote, “Human males are by nature oppressive, possessive, flesh-obsessed pigs.” In Men and Marriage, George Gilder stated, “Men are, by nature, violent, sexually predatory, and irresponsible.” Where does this hostile view of men come from? We suggest Charles Darwin has something to do with it.

Darwin believed that males are superior to females. He argued that men can achieve a “higher eminence” than women in any field of effort. His conclusion was that “the average of mental power in man must be above that of woman.” He believed this was true because of natural selection. Male animals must do many things to win their females and even more to keep them. Therefore, natural selection favors the dominant and combative male. He concluded that their struggles and challenges “increase their mental powers.” Since he saw humans as merely evolved animals, Darwinian toxic masculinity was a consequence of evolution and natural selection.

Darwin also claimed that dark-skinned people were less evolved than those with light skin, and women were less evolved than men because men had to “struggle in order to maintain themselves and their families.” With all the criticism of men’s behavior, perhaps we should call it Darwinian toxic masculinity. Contrasting Darwin’s mistaken ideas, Jesus Christ is the perfect example of true masculinity. He showed love and forgiveness as He made the ultimate sacrifice for our sins. Men today need to learn from Him.

References: Wikipedia, WebMd.com, and The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes by Nancy R. Pearcey (available on Amazon)

July 15, 2025July 14, 2025

Radical Sea Level Changes

Scientific American magazine reported that if the entire Greenland ice sheet melted, global sea levels would rise by 24 feet. The article clarified by saying, “The sheet won’t melt all at once, of course…” What articles like this fail to convey is that Earth has experienced radical sea level changes throughout both geologic and human history.

Geologic history shows marine deposits in places you wouldn’t expect. When I taught earth science, I took my classes to Thornton Reef on the south edge of Chicago, Illinois. I am told that the gravel pit now occupying the reef is the largest in the United States. On one trip there, a student found the tube of a cephalopod, an ancient giant octopus-like creature. Clam shells, snail shells, and brachiopods filled buckets that my students took home. This reef is similar to modern ocean reefs, except it winds through the south side of Chicago with a major interstate highway running right through it.

Other examples of historic radical sea level changes are abundant. Oolitic limestone in southern Indiana consists of tiny ocean creatures called oolites. The limestone in the Grand Canyon contains marine deposits. On the other end of the scale, canyons are cut into continental shelves along the U.S. East Coast of the United States. Those canyons were cut when the shelf was out of water. Scuba divers have reported signs of ancient human-made structures and fire pits in those canyons.

Was the Red Sea at the same level when Moses led the Israelites across? Are people searching for Egyptian armor and chariot remains in the wrong spots? The “Sea of Reeds” was likely dry land at that time, so efforts there are probably doomed to fail. We still have much to learn about climate history, radical sea level changes, and ancient peoples. As our technology improves, discoveries will increase, and we look forward to uncovering more evidence of Earth’s history.

Reference: “Greenland’s Frozen Secret” in the July/August 2025 issue of Scientific American, pages 26-36.

John Cooper explores dry land evidence for the credibility of the biblical account in a series of videos produced by Does God Exist?

July 14, 2025July 11, 2025

Darwin’s Mistake According to Psychologists

In 1871, Charles Darwin proposed that the difference between human and nonhuman minds was a matter of degree, not kind. A 2008 publication by Cambridge University Press calls that “Darwin’s mistake.”

Animals with very different brains, and sometimes no brain at all, can perform the essential functions needed to live and survive. God has created various animal orders with what they need to fulfill their roles in the system of life. This explains the different sizes and capabilities of brains among animals. However, the mind is something more than just the brain.

According to the team of psychologists who authored the report, only humans possess a mind capable of “the higher-order, systematic, relational capabilities of a physical symbol system.” In this peer-reviewed journal, they wrote, “We show that this symbolic-relational discontinuity pervades nearly every domain of cognition and runs much deeper than even the spectacular scaffolding provided by language or culture alone can explain.” In other words, a vast gulf exists between the human mind and the brain power of any animal.

Darwin’s mistake, according to this Cambridge University article, was suggesting that all differences between humans and nonhumans are a matter of degree, not of kind. This theory is disproved by the fact that only humans can develop abstract thinking and writing because humans alone can invent and use symbols in communication.

When God created humans in His image, He gave us a mind capable of great achievements. Unfortunately, that ability can also be used for great evil. He gave us a spiritual nature with a desire to know Him. Yet, our pride can lead us to reject God and serve only ourselves. We humans are the only creatures who can choose to fulfill God’s purpose for us or to rebel against His will. Darwin’s mistake was to think the difference between humans and nonhumans was merely a matter of degree. It is truly a difference of kind.

Reference: “Darwin’s Mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds” at Cambridge.org

July 11, 2025July 8, 2025

The Evolution of the Bobtail Squid

Since the Scopes trial took place 100 years ago, numerous books and articles have been written in scientific journals, popular media, and other outlets regarding evolution and the biblical concept of God’s creation. We have attempted to clarify that the word “evolution” refers to an unfolding change and that it is a design feature of life on Earth. We have also pointed out that many features of living things are so complex that evolution cannot provide a reasonable explanation for their emergence through unguided gradualism. Today, we consider the evolution of the bobtail squid.

We are familiar with large animals, but often remain unaware of the intricate designs of smaller creatures that are essential for the natural world to exist. An example of this is the bobtail squid, a small creature in the coastal waters of most of the world’s oceans. They rarely reach three inches long but have eight sucker arms and two tentacles. They swim by using fins or by jet propulsion.

Bobtail Squid have a symbiotic relationship with bioluminescent bacteria. The squid supplies a sugar and amino acid solution to the bacteria, which emit light that hides the squid from predators below. Are the bobtail squid a special creation of God, or are they a product of evolution? The answer is that they are a product of unfolding change from cuttlefish.

Bobtail squid are classified in the class of cephalopods, sharing a subclass with squid and cuttlefish. Unlike modern taxonomic rankings, the groupings of animals in the Bible are very broad. Birds, for example, are just identified as fowl that fly, not robins, crows, sparrows, hawks, etc. Flightless birds such as penguins and ostriches have evolved through unfolding change over time. The waters bringing forth “every living thing with which the water teems” is another broad example from the Bible.

Humans benefit by learning about the interactions of living things on Earth. The evolution of the bobtail squid is an excellent example of what we can learn from God’s creatures and their history. God saw that His creation was “good” (Genesis 1:10, 12, 18, 21, and 25), but after He created the first humans, He declared it “very good” (Genesis 1:31). We can rejoice that we are the product of that goodness.

Reference: Wikipedia

July 7, 2025July 7, 2025

Taxonomic Ranking of Living Things

Suppose that billions of years ago, a once-in-an-eon event took place. In a primordial soup of chemical elements, some of them came together to form amino acids. Over time, some of these amino acids assembled themselves into complex organic molecules such as RNA or DNA. Eventually, a living cell formed, complete with a nucleus and cell walls. It became the first living cell capable of metabolizing and reproducing through cell division. This was the first species in the taxonomic ranking of living things.

Next, imagine that mutations and natural selection acted on this initial species, causing it to evolve into different species. Over eons, more species appeared until one developed sexual reproduction. Then, things started to accelerate. Billions of years of reproduction and speciation resulted in a completely different animal. This was no longer a new SPECIES but the beginning of a new GENUS. More billions of years later, a new FAMILY of living creatures emerged. As life diversified, new ORDERS of animals appeared, followed by new CLASSES. Eventually, new PHYLA emerged within the animal KINGDOM. The tree of life finally grew into the amazing diversity we have today.

The problem is that the narrative we described seems to be in reverse order. Scientific classification, or the taxonomic ranking of living things, aims to illustrate the progression of genetic change, or evolution. The taxonomic ranking follows: species, genus, family, order, class, phylum, kingdom. This bottom-up progression described in our narrative does not align with the fossil record.

The stages of life development seem reversed in the fossil record. Dr. Hugh Ross noted, “…in many instances, such as the Avalon and Cambrian explosions, enormous macroevolutionary changes occurred rapidly; later, over long time spans, mere microevolutionary changes occurred. Diversification of phyla occurred first, and in no time, while diversification of species and genera occurred over eons.”

In summary, the fossil record appears to show the opposite of what naturalistic evolution predicts. However, the pattern in the fossil record aligns with the biblical view that God created various kinds of animals, each capable of change and adaptation. Their genetic design allows for microevolutionary adaptations over time to address changing circumstances and environments.

Today, we observe microevolution happening naturally and through guided human breeding and hybridization. We see this clearly in dogs and cattle. Even though humans have bred dogs to be very diverse, they remain within the canine (Canidae) family and do not evolve into a new order. Many varieties of cattle exist, but they are still cattle. Likewise, fossil evidence of animals transforming into a different class or phylum is lacking.

The best explanation for the incredible diversity of life on this planet, whether in the animal or plant kingdom, is that it was designed by a wise Creator who endowed living things with the ability to adapt and change on a microevolutionary level. The taxonomic ranking of living things seems to occur from the general to the specific rather than from the specific to the general.

Reference: “Unconfirmed” by Hugh Ross in Salvo magazine, summer 2025, pages 38-41

July 2, 2025July 1, 2025

A Salamander’s Toes

A fascinating mystery in the natural world is how various forms of life can adhere to vertical or inverted surfaces. A recent report by researchers at Washington State University explains how a salamander’s toes allow it to climb, jump, and glide from limb to limb in the forests from California to British Columbia. The wandering salamander (Aneides vagrans) in this study can control the blood flow to its square-shaped toes.

The toes of these salamanders have blood vessels all the way to the tips. They can control the blood flow in the vessels to expand or contract the surface area of the toes. In this way, these salamanders can attach or detach from tree surfaces. They can release from one limb, glide to another, and instantly attach as they wander through the coastal redwood forests.

Everywhere we look in the natural world, we see that a wonder-working hand has gone before. Many special adaptations in living things enable them to live in challenging environments. God has endowed each living creature with the features necessary to survive and adapt to changing environments. This mechanism in a salamander’s toes could inspire human innovators in the areas of prosthetics and robotics.

References: Discover magazine for July 2025, page 10, and the Journal of Morphology for January 2025

June 25, 2025June 24, 2025

Ptarmigan Camouflage Design

One of the most remarkable birds on the planet is the ptarmigan. Along with the snowshoe hare and the Arctic fox, the ptarmigan is a master of disguise. What these animals do is change from dark colors in the summer to totally white in the winter. When I was in Alaska, I saw these animals in the snow. Their coloration was as white as the snow itself, and the only thing you could see was a pair of eyes.

What is unique about the ptarmigan is that they seem to be aware of the importance of their coloration. The changeover from winter plumage to summer is a difficult time for a bird because of the danger of predation if they lose their camouflage. However, if they dropped all of their feathers, they would be unable to fly. What the ptarmigan does is seek out patches of mud and dirt and bathe itself so that its camouflage remains effective.

The question is how the ptarmigan knows to do this. With a brain the size of a pea, this bird could not reason and plan this camouflage behavior. The three species of ptarmigan (rock, willow, and white-tailed) were designed to be aware of their environment and themselves. Joe Jackson wrote in Alaska magazine, “This is a bird that’s hyperaware of what’s around it, and, we now know, hyperaware of itself.”

Trying to explain this astonishing behavior by chance is creative but not logical. It appears that an intelligence has designed a system that enables this bird to survive in a complex environment. We truly can “know there is a God through the things He has made” (Romans 1:20).

Reference: Joe Jackson writing in the July/August 2025 issue of Alaska magazine, page 44

June 23, 2025June 22, 2025

A Partial Solution for Invasive Species

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has suggested a partial solution for invasive species: eat ‘em. Erin Huggins of the CDFW wrote, “Eating invasive species can help protect native wildlife by reducing their numbers and limiting the damage they cause to ecosystems.”

The nutria is an invasive species causing problems in 18 states, particularly in California. These rodents are native to South America but were initially introduced into the United States for the fur trade. Officials thought they had eradicated them from California in the 1970s, but they began to reappear in 2017. Nutrias cause significant problems for farmers and livestock owners, as they eat vegetation right down to the root. Nutrias are even more omnivorous than goats, so they are more destructive.

This is not the first time an invasive species has become an issue. In the 1970s, Asian Carp were introduced into ponds to control the growth of aquatic plants. Four East Asian species were introduced: silver carp, bighead carp, grass carp, and black carp. Some of these species would jump high out of the water when disturbed, creating a hazard for recreational boaters, and elaborate measures have been taken to keep them out of the Great Lakes.

Fish and wildlife officials are now advancing a partial solution for invasive species — making them a food source for humans. Even high-end restaurants now offer nutria and carp meat on their menu. Selling the public on this will take time. Consider that there was a time when Europeans shunned tomatoes, considering them to be poisonous.

The Bible has a good record of banning meat that would be hazardous for human consumption. A familiar prohibition of the Old Testament was against the eating of pork (Deuteronomy 14:8). The Israelites were also told not to eat anything that had already died or any bird or fish that could have eaten contaminated meat, such as vultures, owls, and falcons.

Strong evidence for the inspiration of the Bible is its accuracy in giving the ancient Israelites health guidelines that were far ahead of their time. We rely on science today to provide us with guidelines for healthy eating. A partial solution for invasive species might be to eat them, but a better solution is for humans to avoid upsetting the natural balance in God’s well-designed world.

Reference: “Rodent for Dinner” in The Guardian, March 6, 2025