Yes, religious people state OVER and OVER and OVER again the same discarded ideas of how this MIGHT have happened or possibly COULD have happened.. and then expect a reasoning mind to accept the hogwash just because they've written it in some fairy tale book.
....a "fairy tale book?" The first chapter of the Bible gives partial details of some vital steps that God took to prepare the earth for human enjoyment. The chapter does not give every detail; as we read it, we should not be put off if it omits particulars that ancient readers could not have comprehended anyway. For example, in writing that chapter, Moses did not report the function of microscopic algae or bacteria. Such forms of life first came into human view after the invention of the microscope, in the 16th century. Nor did Moses specifically report on dinosaurs, whose existence was deduced from fossils in the 19th century. Instead, Moses was inspired to use words that could be understood by people of his day—but words that were accurate in all they said about earth’s creation.
Animal life would depend upon chloroplasts for survival. Also, without green vegetation, earth’s atmosphere would be overly rich in carbon dioxide, and we would die from heat and lack of oxygen. Some specialists give astonishing explanations for the development of life dependent on photosynthesis. For example, they say that when single-celled organisms in the water began to run out of food, “a few pioneering cells finally invented a solution. They arrived at photosynthesis.” But
could that really be so? Photosynthesis is so complex that scientists are still attempting to unravel its secrets.
Do you think that self-reproducing photosynthetic life arose inexplicably and spontaneously? Or do you find it
more reasonable to believe that it exists as a result of intelligent, purposeful creation, as Genesis reports?
In recent years, scientists have researched human genes extensively. By comparing human genetic patterns around the earth, they
found clear evidence that all humans have a common ancestor, a source of the DNA of all people who have ever lived, including each of us. Newsweek magazine presented those findings in a report entitled “The Search for Adam and Eve.” Those studies were based on a type of mitochondrial DNA, genetic material passed on only by the female. Reports about research on male DNA
point to the same conclusion—that “there was an ancestral ‘Adam,’ whose genetic material on the [Y] chromosome is common to every man now on earth,” as Time magazine put it. Whether those findings are accurate in every detail or not, they illustrate that the history we find in Genesis is highly credible, being authored by One who was on the scene at the time!
Can you really put faith in this account of creation and the prospects it holds out? As we noted,
modern genetic research is moving toward the conclusion stated in the Bible long ago. Also, some scientists have taken note of the order of events presented in Genesis. For example, noted geologist Wallace Pratt commented: “If I as a geologist were called upon to explain briefly our modern ideas of the origin of the earth and the development of life on it to a simple, pastoral people, such as the tribes to whom the Book of Genesis was addressed,
I could hardly do better than follow rather closely much of the language of the first chapter of Genesis.” He also observed that the order as described in Genesis for the origin of the oceans and the emergence of land, as well as for the appearance of marine life, birds, and mammals,
is in essence the sequence of the principal divisions of geologic time!
