the earth will be around long after all of us are dead

If not, what is wrong with a world that forces us into such a situation?

why would god make a situation like this, anyway?

As with all great issues, the way in which a person views a problem and the course of action he follows in handling it depend fundamentally upon his basic philosophy of life. The ecological crisis, in particular, points up the evolution-creation conflict in a surprising light.

what does this have to do with the evolution/creation debate?

Evolutionists in recent years have tried to claim that our environmental problems result from man's exploitation of the world's resources in the Bible-founded belief that they were all made for him and that he was to develop and use them solely for himself. The Bible, however, teaches no such thing.

the bible does say that man has dominion over everything, doesnt it?..anyway, what evolutionist says that?

If there is to be any placing of blame for the problem of pollution and related ills, it should be assigned to the philosophy of evolution, where it really belongs.

the philosophy of evolution?..whats that?..it is not a philosophy..are there problems with it?..yes..are there similar problems in every other kind of science?..yes..if evolution isnt science, then there is no science at all!

Furthermore, effective remedies for such problems can be found only in the context of a sound creationist philosophy.

give me a break

The essence of evolution, of course, is randomness.

not complete randomness

The evolutionary process supposedly began with random particles and has continued by random aggregations of matter and then random mutations of genes.

nonrandom selection

The fossil record, as interpreted by evolutionists, is said by them to indicate aeons of purposeless evolutionary meanderings,

the fossil record has many fossils..and none contradict what is expected by evolution..there are no true mammals or birds before the jurrasic

the order of the first appearance of fossils is:fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, birds

the senseless struggling and dying of untold billions of animals,

ok..if everything needs a purpose, what was the purpose of all the millions of species that you think lived before the flood?

extinctions of species, misfits, blind alleys.

there are many extinct species, whether its creation 6,000 years ago or evolution!..if it is so horrible that there are "blind alleys," then what was the point of the creation of them?..you claim your god is all-knowing, but he doesnt know what is going to happen..that is NOT all-knowing

The present-day environmental-ecologic complex then is nothing more than the current stage in this unending random struggle for existence.

what is he talking about?..i thought he was going to talk about how man has hurt the environment(why else would he blame the "philosophy" of evolution?)..again, you blame evolution for it, but everything you blame evolution on:extinctions, bad environment, etc. is there regardless..and you claim a loving god did it..well, it doesnt matter whether a god would do it through evolution or young-earth creationism, he would have had many extinctions..and, what about genesis 6-9?..you want to say "arrr, extinctions are bad..arrr..that means theistic evolution is false..arrr..it is inconsistent with the god of the bible"..why dont you mention the billions of innocent animals that would have had to been drowned(which i imagine would have to be a terrible way to die) in a month!..this arguments is inconsistent

Those populations of organism which have survived to this point therefore must represent the "fittest"-those that have been screened and preserved by the process of natural selection.

if you have any evidence to show that the "fittest" are not the most likely to survive to produce the most offspring, i would like to see it

In spite of its randomness

natural selection is not random

evolutionists believe that the net result of evolution has somehow been the development of higher and higher kinds, and finally of man himself.

no..evolution is a variation..and, to think that man himself was a goal of evolution is nonsense..theres no DNA convention to decide on what species to evolve to next..it is arrogant to say that type of statement..this shows that morris doesnt have any idea of what evolution is or how it works..it doesnt go to "higher and higher kinds"..and there is no goal of evolution, not to mention a goal to get humans

This development is believed by most evolutionists to have been made possible by a peculiar combination of small populations,

because changes in a gene pool will spread more quickly in smaller populations

changing environments,

and we know there are changing environments..just like we know the earths magnetic field has varied for large to small..during the ice age, there are estimated to be something like eleven occurences of glaciers expanding and then receding

and accelerated mutational pressures, a combination which supposedly enables natural selection to function in its remarkable role as "creator" of new and better kinds of populations.

this is to say that evolution does a supreme being--like a god..this is untrue..no science says "there is a god"..no science says "there is not a god"..science says there is not sufficient evidence to prove one exists..the existence or non-existence of a god is a belief, not a science

It would seem therefore that anything that would change the environment today (for example, by altering the chemical components of the atmosphere and hydrosphere through pollution), decrease populations (perhaps by war, famine, or pestilence),

as opposed to those being part of your all-knowing, all-powerful god allowing things to happen?..oh, wait, thats satans fault

GOD:all-knowing and all-powerful except when it comes to satan!

famines have happened for a long, long time..famines are not just a human occurrence, either..look at the sea lions down in california that have died because of el nino(or la nina, i forget which) because not enough fish were going down there..(i happen to think that global warming isnt so much caused by humans as it is just natural..we are still technically in an "ice age," anyway)..famines among humans have gone one probably for as long as humans have walked the earth..especially before agriculture was created

or increase mutational pressures (such as by increasing the radioactive component of the biosphere through nuclear testing), would contribute positively to further evolution and therefore should be encouraged,

it happened either by the power of god(if he were truly all-powerful), in spite of god(meaning he isnt all-powerful or just doesnt care enough), or without a god

blaming evolutionists for this is absurd..in fact, i would say its stupidier than blaming evolutionists for racism

show how nuclear bombs would positively further evolution and, therefore, be encouraged?

at least if evolutionists are correct in their understanding of evolutionary mechanisms.

if morris's version of evolution were correct

In other words, the very processes which modern ecologists most deplore today are those which they believe to have been the cause of the upward evolution of the biosphere in the past. The conclusion would seem to be that evolution requires pollution!

well, absolutely..the dinosaurs' factories are famous for the terrible pollution they created

please..disasters happen whether evolution exists or not..disasters happen whether god exists or not..by saying evolution is impossible because of these horrible things(which i could only guess the point of this was for), he is placing all the blame on his all-powerful god

More directly to the point, however, three generations of evolutionary teaching have had the pragmatic result of inducing in man an almost universal self-centeredness.

what is he talking about?..man considers him the mightiest species in the universe because of evolution?..its the creationists who suggest that "evolution god higher and higher until it came to god," not scientists

God, if He exists at all, is pushed so far back in time and so far out in space that men no longer are concerned about responsibility to Him.

but, we all know that it is ATHEISTIC, HUMANISTIC EVIL-UTION!..evolution denies god!..arr, arr..i fail to understand what the point of this impact was..its saying evolution is bad because it encourages disasters..so its better to believe that it was a god that caused it

As far as other people are concerned, doesn't nature itself teach that we must struggle and compete for survival?

not necessarily..some scientists think that there could be cooperation in at least some cases

Self-preservation is nature's first law.

if i were battling you over the last scrap of food for a long distance, would you not try to take it

Race must compete against race,

WRONG!..racism has been around for much longer than 140 years..the spaniards, english and other early colonizers of the americas waited until the 1860s and 1870s to begin supressing indians rights and forcing them on reservations

nation against nation,

and im sure war between countries is a new thing, right?..the 100 year war between britian and france didnt begin in the 1300s, they began after..when america used to take over foreign areas in the late 1800s and early 1900s, it was always because "evolution states we must fight against the other nations," it was never to do something like christianize and already mostly christian group

it is also interesting that it appears the most paranoid about a "new world order"--one world government type thing--are fundamentalist christians..if nations are supposed to love each other, why is there any problem with a one world government..(i am not saying i support a one world government, but to say "evolution makes people hate other nations" doesnt fit with this)

also, pat buchanan--who calls evolution a myth--is the presidential candidate that constitently talked about cutting off immigration

class against class, young against old, poor against rich, man against man.

disagreements over those groups have been around for far more than 140 years..if it hasnt, id like you to show it

Two thousand years of Christian teaching linger on to some extent,

yeah..like when protestants go down to central america to evangelize to the already christian(albeit catholics) people, that isnt an example of "we are right, you are wrong"..what exactly is the teaching of the old testament?

in modern social concerns and in the diluted esthetics and ethics of the day, but these are easily forgotten when one's self-interests are at stake.

and we all know that pat robertson and the austin, tx-based christian athletes group ask for 10% of people's income a month for the stake of the heethens, not for themselves

Conservationist groups may inveigh against the ecological destruction wrought by petroleum and utilities barons,

from what i know, more of the environmentalists are on the left side of politics..but, 59% of "religious" people(people who attend church regular) are republicans

but they do not personally wish to give up their automobiles or electrical appliances,

um, i believe that would be a lie for some..and, those that dont give those up, probably dont use them as much as others

Furthermore, during the past 150 years especially, the very exploitation of nature-its flora and fauna, its resources, and even its human populations-against which environmentalists are protesting, has itself been carried out in the name of science and evolutionary philosophy.

really?..where is the evidence for that?..(note that "last 150 years" in this case means since around 1825)

Thus the modern ecologic crisis is not a product of Biblical theology at all, but rather a century of worldwide evolutionary thinking and practice.

no it isnt

It is significant that the environmental problems developed entirely within a period when the scientific and industrial establishments were totally committed to an evolutionary philosophy!

maybe it is because we have made scientific advances that industries have improved?..and since when were industrial establishments totally commited to evolutionary theory?

i also want to include that, if you want to blame all that on evolution, i would like to point out that the abolition of poll taxes in america came one year after mandatory prayer was taken out of school..so, apparently, we should all thank madalyn murray o'hare for eliminating mandatory prayer from school..on behalf on all atheists, you are very welcome for all americans getting an equal chance to vote

Recognition of the world as God's direct creation, on the other hand, transforms man's outlook on nature and his attitude toward other men.

yep..it tells him god couldnt give a rats behind what the earths environment is like

The creation is God's unique handiwork

pollution and the sort is an example of this unique handiwork, i suppose?

displays His character and glory (Psalm 19:1; Psalm 148; Rev. 5:13).

nuclear bombs, too?

The design and implementation of this marvelous universe

and the ability to destroy the entire planet that god is supposed to care so much about?

Man was created, not to exploit God's world, but to be His steward, exercising dominion over it (Genesis 1:26,28)

"exercising dominion"..there ya go!..look at the fourth part of this i responded to..according to that, this type of claim is a lie!

and "keeping" it (Genesis 2:15).

once again, the all-powerful god cannot do anything to stop destruction of his wonderful creation..or at least slow it

The primeval world as it came from God's hand was beautiful beyond imagination and perfect in every way as man's home.

so he let it decay?

There was ample food for both man and animals (Genesis 1:29,30) and each kind had its own ecological niche.

but, still, in order to make the flood more reasonable and logical, the creationist says there is "limited" evolution..why, if they are all meant to fill their ecological niche?

With man's fall and God's Curse on his dominion, this pristine perfection changed (Genesis 3:17; Romans 8:20,22).

and thats god persecuting current humans for the mistakes of their very-long dead ancestors, right?..doesnt somewhere in the bible talk about how no man will ever be punished for the sins of his parents?

On the earth itself, none of its resources were ever to be depleted and all processes were to function at perfect efficiency.

and they still are?

Everything was "very good" (Genesis 1:31).

until all-powerful god allowed people to rebel against him..(was the first sin by satan or adam or eve?..im always confused by that)

was destroyed when the great canopy of vapor condensed and deluged the entire globe.

does he mean the flood that isnt supported by geology?

It is significant to realize that today's pollution problems are derived mostly from using energy stores that were produced in the Noachian Deluge!

so what?..why werent these pollution problems occuring earlier?

Coal is the fossil product of the terrestrial plant life, and oil largely of the marine animal life, of the rich biosphere that had been created and developed by the Creator in the beginning.

but thats leading to the pollution of today..why didnt god realize that this was going to begin devastating the earth?

These organisms were not designed to serve as fuels for man's machines,

but that does not make it impossible..if god deliberates everything, why didnt he realize that these fossil fuels could pollute like they now do?

In a sense, of course, the burning of these fossil fuels is merely hastening the process of "returning to the dust," which is the present fate of all organic life, under the Curse.

im just wondering, what have non-human species of animals done to deserve that fate?..to deserve extinction?..and why do creationists talk bad about how evolution teaches extinction of many different species(which has definitely occured with or without evolution), but then talk about how all species are going to go extinct?

Nuclear energy is one possibility but this of course creates its own pollutional problems.

there is a new type of nuclear energy being created..its either nuclear fission or fusion..im not exactly sure which one is used at the nuclear power plants of the world, but i remember seeing something on the discovery channel about it

Solar energy is undoubtedly the best ultimate hope for an adequate energy supply, since the sun is the ultimate source of energy for all of earth's processes anyhow. To date, however, no economically efficient solar converters have been developed, except for special and limited applications.

solar energy takes a lot of room for just one house..hopefully there will be a better way discovered someday

Since the sun was created to "give light upon the earth" (Genesis 1:17)

that does not say energy..if you want to take the bible literally, dont be selective in how you take it

"there is nothing hid from the heat thereof' (Psalm 19:6), we may well believe that it is possible to find ways to utilize solar energy to meet all man's legitimate energy needs and to do so with a minimal amount of further damage to the environment.

that isnt going to happen soon..new developments like that will take many years to implement..you know that new nuclear energy i talked about earlier?..well, they expect that to begin appearing places in over 10 years(i think they said 15, but i am not sure)

Cost of the needed research should not be prohibitive, at least in relation to other energy and environmental costs.

any type of research like that will cost a lot of money, and be many years(in terms of a human lifetime)

In any case, a creationist orientation can certainly contribute more effectively to the alleviation of such problems than can an evolutionary perspective.

no..the thing that improves things like energy production and such comes from science, not prayer

But this bleak prospect will never be reached. God's eternal purpose in creation cannot fail.

according to morris, however, he has wasted 6 thousand years in getting to that

complete version of impact #13

email me