Total Pageviews

What Matters About Me

My photo
I am who I am, not what I have done. For those who care about pedigree, I have little more than being a former public school teacher and a pastor/denominational adminstrator. The following insights come from a couple of tests I took. They may explain why I am a Contrarian and why I decided to do a blog about it. The first test is a standardized personality profile. The second is something strange called a Brain Type test! 1)“Jack lives outside traditional boundaries and ahead of the curve. When others focus on limitations, Jack creates new possibilities and ideas. He is a doer, not just a dreamer. Well grounded in reality, logic and analytical thinking. He enjoys meeting and working with other creative and ambitious people...a fearless leader. Only 3-5% of U.S. population has these qualities.” 2) Jack's Intellectual Type is Word Warrior. This means he has exceptional verbal skills. He can can easily make sense of complex issues and takes an unusually creative approach to solving problems. His strengths also make him a visionary. Even without trying he's able to come up with lots of new and creative ideas. (Like blogging as Contrarian?)

This challenges common ideas about the purpose of praying. Not a rehash of old dogma.

This challenges common ideas about the purpose of praying. Not a rehash of old dogma.
Click Image to purchase - Search Jack Corbin Getz Or Check major online book sellers.

Search This Blog

Monday, August 29, 2011

Evolution haunts me.

For some reason I’m drawn to those wonderful nature shows that appear ‘round-the-clock on cable television. The beauty of nature and the wonder of how the animal kingdom works together boggles my mind.

As a Christian, I often feel guilty if I fall for the evolution talk that permeates the scripts of every episode. While I find some of it hard to refute, much of it smacks of an easy linguistic convenience or expedience that satisfies the scientific intelligentsia who won’t consider any other possibilities. Sure, it’s much easier to say that the lemur evolved its long tail over 30 million years than to say, "There sure is a clever and creative mind behind how all these creatures function in their habitats."

The other night while watching a program about how all big cats are part of the same genus, we heard that their amazing diversity came about from eons of adaptation to their unique environmental needs. For example, according to the guy on TV, because the black panther hunts exclusively at night, one old panther way back millions of years ago decided to change his family’s fur color to black. Wow. How smart was he to make that happen?

They also say that all the big cats, as well as a bunch if other night stalkers, changed the pigment in their eyes to allow them to see in the dark. Somehow, that special fluorescent stuff that coats the back of their eyeballs started working. So tonight, they will easily see all the other edible night creatures whose lazy ancestors fell down when it came to evolving enough defenses to keep them from being run down and consumed by panthers, leopards, tigers, lions and hyenas.

My favorite part of the show related to the great Bengal tigers that are so invincible as well as beautiful. The narrator said they were once tan like lions, but because they hunted in the forests, they needed to break up their evolved orange fur with stripes so they are invisible while they stalk the less-evolved prey they call dinner. What’s funny about that is they tried to tell me that the tiger was invisible, but I saw him without any trouble. His stripes helped, but his orangeness made him stand out like ... an 800 pound orange tiger standing in the bushes.

Something didn’t make sense as my restless mind wandered away from the narrative for a few minutes. The it hit: if tigers evolved stripes (or leopards spots) to hide in the forest, why didn't they go ahead and evolve themselves green? That way they would really be invisible. But if they did that, they would be creepy, ugly and probably much fatter, not majestic, muscular and orange.

And what about sharks evolving as the top predator of the ocean? Did the rest of the ocean's stupid creatures (prey) not bother to travel that far? They say dolphins have almost human level intelligence and speak a special dolphin language, but apparently sharks liked being dumb as rocks.

It seems that each creature evolved from something less to something more, but some weren’t as clever as others when it came to evolving. Many species chose to survive by simply creating multitudes of offspring so at least some of the family would escape the dolphins and sharks. "Hey Fred. How do you think we can change ourselves to avoid being eaten?" "That's simple Barney, make more babies!"

That reminds me of the old joke about the two back-packers who were wary of bears in the woods so they planned their survival techniques. One of them said "I'll just take off and run like crazy." The other said "That's foolish. A bear can run you down in no time," to which the first responded, "I know that, but all I need to do is outrun you!"

If the evolutionists can get by with explaining the mysteries of nature by saying every animal if perfectly self-adapted to survive and reproduce, why do so many still get eaten by tigers, leopards, lions, panthers or sharks or sneaky snakes?

If an animal 10 million years ago was eaten by another one, how does that hard lesson or congenital weakness get genetically transferred to the next generation who also gets eaten? If stinks bugs evolved an awful smell to survive, why don't all bugs evolve some stink? And if one species of fish was clever enough to develop wings, why didn’t other fish do the same? Obviously, evolution doesn't explain why every group stops short of becoming impregnable or invisible to the Genghis Kahn's of their world.

Simplistic as it seems, the food chain appears to be less about random self-generated chance and more about an actual plan that works great for everyone. The little critters reproduce so many offspring that their species survives, and the big dudes make just enough of themselves to control their area but not too many to strip it bare. Sometimes the big guys win, but sometimes the little meerkat scampers back to his hole only to emerge a minute later to see an ugly green tiger slinking back to the jungle. (That's metaphorical, because I clearly don't know enough about meerkats to know if green tigers eat them.)

Oaky, I admit, it's easier for my brain to say this was all well-planned, not the result of millions of years of self-generated mitosis. (Or is that bad breath?) I think I’ll leave it right there for now.

4 comments:

  1. The saddest part of those wild speculations is that they are offered up as "science". No research is required and no testing is possible. These quasi-scientists assume them to be true simply because "they must be; how else could evolution explain the existence of these creatures?" Then, in a blatant case of circular reasoning, they assume evolution must be true because, well, we have all these examples that prove it.
    Obviously, evolution at least played a part in shaping the current form of life. That much can be shown through scientific research and it can be tested. But then, in my view, they muddy perfectly good scientific work by giving evolution credit for things that make no sense and can never be proven.
    On the other hand, we believers don't truly know the exact process by which God created everything. He didn't give us much to go on. Sometimes we would do well to avoid speculation of our own about things we don't understand.
    For me, it is enough to marvel at the beauty and creativity in what he has made and to love him like crazy for it. And I do feel sad for those wasting their excellent minds on silly speculations just so that they won't have to acknowledge our magnificent God

    ReplyDelete
  2. Brilliantly said, my friend. I hope my humorous attempt sent the same message. It doesn't add up but I don't have answers that will satisfy anyone.

    The Bible isn't a science book. We know that because science books change every few years and the Bible doesn't. If we want to make it into one, we look as foolish as the other guys who make educated guesses and call them fact.

    Great comment!

    Jack

    ReplyDelete
  3. How about how we've all "evolved" as humans? Some with lots of melatonin to protect against the scorching tropical sun, some with almost none (like me) because we come from northern, frigid climes. All well and good. Seems perfectly logical. But now, increasingly, we're hearing that eventually, our great "blended family" will all be the same color.

    More on human "evolution": Did you read the NYTimes magazine article about "reductions" in pregnancy? It has long been "acceptable" to "reduce" multiples (as in triplets or beyond) for the health of the mother, but now many women, horrified for whatever reason at carrying twins, are choosing to eliminate one of the babies in utero. Many allow the doctor to make that choice (which often amounts to which one is closest at the moment to the potassium chloride needle), but some are choosing girl over boy (interestingly, the predominant Western option), for example. Combine that with the idea that many of these women are carrying babies made from other women's eggs and sperm donors of their choice, and you've got a "natural selection" even scientists never imagined possible.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Linda

    That's beyond the pale of selfishness, although making babies in this kind of world may not be such a great idea for them either!

    I haven't read about that. It's natural selection at warp speed... and it's not really natural, is it?

    Great to hear from you.

    ReplyDelete