Tuesday, 5 April 2016

Environmentalism and Liberalism: Extinction must be part and parcel of Evolution?

Some scientists, basking in the euphoria of their theories of “evolution”, “Big Bang” and other “discoveries”, have attempted to explain the creation of the universe without reference to God Almighty (Wisdom 11:22-26). Charles Darwin is said to have propounded the theory of Evolution in about 1859, but it has always and only remained a theory ever since. How much longer does it have to validly remain a theory before it could ever be upgraded and/or scientifically (or otherwise) proven to be a factual reality, at least in the 21st century or so soon thereafter!

This debate is now framed in the form of Creationism vs. Evolutionism. But, in the spirit of the untruth of the liberalists’ grand design, we hear of “recreation” of the world; and never “re-evolutionization” of the world. Logically, only what is created could really be recreated. It makes no sense at all in first having an evolution (as claimed by some) and then, afterwards, attempt recreating it! In their liberal arguments, the promoters of the evolution theory often alternate from creation to evolution, as frequent as they could, and as long as it suits their particular purpose at any time and place.

In a book published in 2010, The Grand Design, the British theoretical physicist, Stephen Hawking, argues, particularly, on pages 34, 42, 51, 72, 83, 87, 135, 171 and 172, that God did not create the universe and that the “Big Bang” was an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics. He posits that:

"...because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing, as it is governed by the laws of science. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist."

Basically, if the universe can and will recreate itself from nothing, then no one, especially Obama's EPA and other self-acclaimed liberals, should worry about climate change, because the environment will, inevitably, fix itself! On face value, Hawking’s argument presupposes, particularly, in Chapters 2 and 5 of his book that: there are first laws of gravity and other scientific laws, as well as other forces of nature, upon which everything else is formed; and then there is spontaneous creation. He, however, as in other cases of scientific hypothesis, failed to clearly state who created all those mediums or substances we now (in human terms) call laws and forces: There must always be a force behind every force! In other words, if the law of gravity was the very first activity of creation, how did the universe get to that point in the first place? If “the universe can and will create itself from nothing”, who then created the nothing, and for how long did the nothing last before creation came about? Besides, which one of the sexes (male or female) first evolved; why and how did the natural selection take place?

Hawking states on pages 32 and 33 that:

“…we cannot solve exactly the equations governing the gravitational interactions of every atom in a person’s body with every atom in the earth…Similarly, we cannot solve the equations governing the behavior of complex atoms and molecules, but we have developed an effective theory called chemistry….”

The law of gravity is simply incapable of creating something from nothing: it only sends things back to where they came from, literally. Things do not originate from the laws of gravity–because that would be implying that there is no “grand design” after all, as the term “grand design” presupposes a calculated and intended purpose by an entity, capable of designing things, innovatively. It would also mean that things just came together haphazardly, but which, according to the evolutionary theory, somehow evolved into monkeys, and then into human beings! Finally, how does the evolutionary theory apply to outer space creatures?

The outer limits of science and human intellect is God's workshop. One thing is certain though, human rationality or intellect did not create the universe (1 Corinthians 1:25). Paradoxically, the insatiable quest for knowledge and intelligence has apparently overtaken our senses and beclouded mankind’s vision. More and more reliance is placed on human and artificial intelligence than in God, from whom all wisdom and good things come.

2 Timothy 3:7:

“…always seeking learning, but unable ever to come to knowledge of the truth.”

Hebrews 2:10:

“It was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists…”

Hebrews 11:3:

“It is by faith that we understand that the ages were created by a word from God, so that from the invisible the visible world came to be.”

Until recently, astronomers estimated that the Big Bang occurred between 12 and 14 billion years ago. To put this in perspective, the Solar System is thought to be 4.5 billion years old and humans have existed as a genus for only a few million years. National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA), on their website (http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_age.html) stated:

"…If we compare the two age determinations, there is a potential crisis. If the universe is flat, and dominated by ordinary or dark matter, the age of the universe as inferred from the Hubble constant would be about 9 billion years. The age of the universe would be shorter than the age of oldest stars. This contradiction implies that either 1) our measurement of the Hubble constant is incorrect, 2) the Big Bang theory is incorrect or 3) that we need a form of matter like a cosmological constant that implies an older age for a given observed expansion rate….If the expansion age measured by WMAP had been smaller than the oldest globular clusters, then there would have been something fundamentally wrong about either the Big Bang theory or the theory of stellar evolution…"

Hawking also states on page 51 that:

"Some people support a model in which time goes back even further than the big bang. It is not clear whether a model in which time continued back beyond the big bang would be better at explaining present observations because it seems the laws of the evolution of the universe may break down at the big bang. If they do, it would make no sense to create a model that encompasses time before the big bang, because what existed then would have no observable consequences for the present, and so we might as well stick with the idea that the big bang was the creation of the world."

However, it is clear to see that these are all estimations in any case. Now, how old was the void before the alleged occurrence of the big bang, some fourteen billion years ago? As lay persons, we have no ways or means of contesting these scientific claims, which are not even exactitudes. Besides, geology, specifically, estimates age by studying rocks to see the effects of having oxygen in the atmosphere. However, certain aspects of creation like angels and spirits necessarily could not operate in an oxygenated realm of existence, whose age, therefore, could not be determined by similar scientific methods: They defy the age of ontology (1 Corinthians 15:45-49; 2 Corinthians 4:18), and herein lies the distinctive realm of religion or Christianity!

The discovery of the Higgs Boson particle July 4, 2012, excites the science community. It is scientifically believed that this is the particle that gives mass to objects in our universe, “and by so doing, explains why galaxies, planets, and even humans have any rights to exist… they still need to determine whether it behaves as the God particle is thought to behave—and therefore what its role in the creation and maintenance of the universe is.”

However, note that giving mass is not exactly the same thing as giving life or even creating energy, “It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh has nothing to offer…” (John 6:63). It only presupposes the avenue or provision of a form (instead of a formless void that existed since before creation), which encloses life in a characteristically separate and distinct manner, thereby enabling us to exist as individuals. But it would also be interesting to know how the Higgs Boson particle gave form to water, air, fire and sound as well! Accordingly, it is only an aspect of the transitory and visible creation (2 Corinthians 4:18), at best. Giving mass would restrictively refer to the physical world that, inevitably, needs nourishments; not the spiritual world or life which has no mass at all (needing a different kind of nourishment), for instance, spoken words (Matthew 4:4, supra). Besides, giving mass or shape cannot be equated to physical design!

The Higgs Boson particle supposedly gives mass, which may be the bodily form that humans discard in this life to assume a new life in Christ (Ephesians 2:15-18), in the afterlife. Accordingly, though science expands its knowledge base with this discovery, our religious faith remains unaffected by it, notwithstanding.

Essentially, Energy, as the driving force of life (because everything we do in life is connected to it), must have been in existence before the need to encase it in different forms would have arisen, logically. In other words, what would have been the need for the Higgs Boson particle without Energy, an empty casing? In some literal respects, the Higgs Boson particle maintains creation, while Energy sustains it. It is probably because of the utility of the Higgs Boson particle that energy is conserved, utilized and transformed into its various and several forms today.

“Energy cannot be created or destroyed; it can only be changed from one form to another.”

God of all power and creation, and all ages, has the whole world in His hands. God created man from the soil of the earth and blew the breadth of life into his nostrils (Genesis 2:7, Job 10:9, and Romans 9:20). “For dust you are and to dust you shall return” (Genesis 3:19). Empirical evidence abounds since time immemorial, attesting to these holy words of God. If objects, and most especially human beings, obtained their bodily forms from the Higgs Boson particle (except where it was one of the constituent elements of the soil God used at creation), why do we, at death, all return to dust and not to the Higgs Boson particle formation, in the spirit of evolutionism, and in accordance with liberalism?

Festus Nyiwo, Esq

No comments:

Post a Comment