THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

This PDF is available at http://nap.edu/6024 SHARE

   

Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of

Sciences, Second Edition (1999)

DETAILS

48 pages | 8.5 x 11 | PAPERBACK

ISBN 978-0-309-06406-4 | DOI 10.17226/6024

CONTRIBUTORS

GET THIS BOOK Steering Committee on Science and Creationism, National Academy of Sciences

FIND RELATED TITLES

SUGGESTED CITATION

National Academy of Sciences 1999. Science and Creationism: A View from the
National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition. Washington, DC: The National
Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/6024.


Visit the National Academies Press at NAP.edu and login or register to get:

– Access to free PDF downloads of thousands of scientific reports

– 10% off the price of print titles
– Email or social media notifications of new titles related to your interests
– Special offers and discounts


Distribution, posting, or copying of this PDF is strictly prohibited without written permission of the National Academies Press.
(Request Permission) Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition

SCIENCE AND CREATIONISM

The Origin of the Universe, Earth, and Life 3

T
he term “evolution” usually refers to the biological evolution of living things.
But the processes by which planets, stars, galaxies, and the universe form and
change over time are also types of “evolution.” In all of these cases there is
change over time, although the processes involved are quite different.
In the late 1920s the American astronomer Edwin Hubble made a very interest-
ing and important discovery. Hubble made observations that he interpreted as
showing that distant stars and galaxies are receding from Earth in every direction.
Moreover, the velocities of recession increase in proportion with distance, a discov-
ery that has been confirmed by numerous and repeated measurements since
Hubble’s time. The implication of these findings is that the universe is expanding.
Hubble’s hypothesis of an expanding universe leads to certain deductions. One
is that the universe was more condensed at a previous time. From this deduction
came the suggestion that all the currently observed matter and energy in the uni-
verse were initially condensed in a very small and infinitely hot mass. A huge explo-
sion, known as the Big Bang, then sent matter and energy expanding in all directions.

Astronomer Edwin
Hubble discovered that
the Milky Way is just one
of many galaxies in the
universe and that the
universe is expanding.

For ten consecutive days the Hubble Space

Telescope focused on a small patch of sky near
the Big Dipper, revealing hundreds of galaxies never
seen before. This Hubble Deep Field photograph, in
which virtually every speck of light is a separate galaxy,
shows collections of stars that are forming less than a
billion years after the Big Bang.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition

SCIENCE AND CREATIONISM

This Big Bang hypothesis led to more testable deductions. One such deduction
4
was that the temperature in deep space today should be several degrees above
absolute zero. Observations showed this deduction to be correct. In fact, the
Cosmic Microwave Background Explorer (COBE) satellite launched in 1991 con-
firmed that the background radiation field has exactly the spectrum predicted by a
Big Bang origin for the universe.
As the universe expanded, according to current scientific understanding, matter
collected into clouds that began to condense and rotate, forming the forerunners of
galaxies. Within galaxies, including our own Milky Way galaxy, changes in pressure
caused gas and dust to form distinct clouds. In some of these clouds, where there
was sufficient mass and the right forces, gravitational attraction caused the cloud to
collapse. If the mass of material in the cloud was sufficiently compressed, nuclear
reactions began and a star was born.
Some proportion of stars, including our sun, formed in the middle of a flattened
spinning disk of material. In the case of our sun, the gas and dust within this disk
collided and aggregated into small grains, and the grains
formed into larger bodies called planetesimals (“very small
planets”), some of which reached diameters of several hun-
dred kilometers. In successive stages these planetesimals
coalesced into the nine planets and their numerous satel-
lites. The rocky planets, including Earth, were near the sun,
and the gaseous planets were in more distant orbits.
The ages of the universe, our galaxy, the solar system,
and Earth can be estimated using modern scientific methods.
The age of the universe can be derived from the observed
relationship between the velocities of and the distances sepa-
rating the galaxies. The velocities of distant galaxies can be
measured very accurately, but the measurement of distances
is more uncertain. Over the past few decades, measurements
of the Hubble expansion have led to estimated ages for the
universe of between 7 billion and 20 billion years, with the
A disk of dust and gas, most recent and best measurements within the range of 10 billion to 15 billion years.
appearing as a dark band in The age of the Milky Way galaxy has been calculated in two ways. One
this Hubble Space Telescope involves studying the observed stages of evolution of different-sized stars in globu-
photograph, bisects a glow- lar clusters. Globular clusters occur in a faint halo surrounding the center of the
ing nebula around a very Galaxy, with each cluster containing from a hundred thousand to a million stars.
young star in the constella- The very low amounts of elements heavier than hydrogen and helium in these stars
tion Taurus. Similar disks indicate that they must have formed early in the history of the Galaxy, before large
can be seen around other amounts of heavy elements were created inside the initial generations of stars and
nearby stars and are later distributed into the interstellar medium through supernova explosions (the Big
thought to provide the raw Bang itself created primarily hydrogen and helium atoms). Estimates of the ages of
material for planets. the stars in globular clusters fall within the range of 11 billion to 16 billion years.
A second method for estimating the age of our galaxy is based on the present
abundances of several long-lived radioactive elements in the solar system. Their
abundances are set by their rates of production and distribution through exploding

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition

SCIENCE AND CREATIONISM

supernovas. According to these calculations, the age of our galaxy is between 9 bil-
5
lion and 16 billion years. Thus, both ways of estimating the age of the Milky Way
galaxy agree with each other, and they also are consistent with the independently
derived estimate for the age of the universe.
Radioactive elements occurring naturally in rocks and minerals also provide a
means of estimating the age of the solar system and Earth. Several of these ele-
ments decay with half lives between 700 million and more than 100 billion years
(the half life of an element is the time it takes for half of the element to decay
radioactively into another element). Using these time-keepers, it is calculated that
meteorites, which are fragments of asteroids, formed between 4.53 billion and 4.58
billion years ago (asteroids are small “planetoids” that revolve around the sun and
are remnants of the solar nebula that gave rise to the sun and planets). The same
radioactive time-keepers applied to the three oldest lunar samples returned to Earth
by the Apollo astronauts yield ages between 4.4 billion and 4.5 billion years, provid-
ing minimum estimates for the time since the formation of the moon.
The oldest known rocks on Earth occur in northwestern Canada (3.96 billion
years), but well-studied rocks nearly as old are also found in other parts of the
world. In Western Australia, zircon crystals encased within younger rocks have
ages as old as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials so far
found on Earth.
The best estimates of Earth’s age are obtained by calculating the time required
for development of the observed lead isotopes in Earth’s oldest lead ores. These
estimates yield 4.54 billion years as the age of Earth and of meteorites, and hence of
the solar system.
The origins of life cannot be dated as precisely, but there is evidence that
bacteria-like organisms lived on Earth 3.5 billion years ago, and they may have
existed even earlier, when the first solid crust formed, almost 4 billion years ago.
These early organisms must have been simpler than the organisms living today.
Furthermore, before the earliest organisms there must have been structures that one
would not call “alive” but that are now components of living things. Today, all liv-
ing organisms store and transmit hereditary information using two kinds of mole-
cules: DNA and RNA. Each of these molecules is in turn composed of four kinds of
subunits known as nucleotides. The sequences of nucleotides in particular lengths
of DNA or RNA, known as genes, direct the construction of molecules known as
proteins, which in turn catalyze biochemical reactions, provide structural compo-
nents for organisms, and perform many of the other functions on which life
depends. Proteins consist of chains of subunits known as amino acids. The
sequence of nucleotides in DNA and RNA therefore determines the sequence of
amino acids in proteins; this is a central mechanism in all of biology.
Experiments conducted under conditions intended to resemble those present on
primitive Earth have resulted in the production of some of the chemical components
of proteins, DNA, and RNA. Some of these molecules also have been detected in
meteorites from outer space and in interstellar space by astronomers using radio-
telescopes. Scientists have concluded that the “building blocks of life” could have
been available early in Earth’s history.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition

SCIENCE AND CREATIONISM

An important new research avenue has opened with the discovery that certain
6
molecules made of RNA, called ribozymes, can act as catalysts in modern cells. It
previously had been thought that only proteins could serve as the catalysts required
to carry out specific biochemical functions. Thus, in the early prebiotic world, RNA
molecules could have been “autocatalytic”—that is, they could have replicated
themselves well before there were any protein catalysts (called enzymes).

RNA, below, like the related molecule DNA, on the left, consists of subunits called
nucleotides (this computer-generated model of an RNA strand has six nucleotides).
Because RNA molecules can catalyze chemical reactions as well as carry genetic
information, they may have played an important role in the early evolution of life.

Laboratory experiments demonstrate that replicating autocatalytic RNA molecules

undergo spontaneous changes and that the variants of RNA molecules with the
greatest autocatalytic activity come to prevail in their environments. Some scientists
favor the hypothesis that there was an early “RNA world,” and they are testing
models that lead from RNA to the synthesis of simple DNA and protein molecules.
These assemblages of molecules eventually could have become packaged within
membranes, thus making up “protocells”—early versions of very simple cells.
For those who are studying the origin of life, the question is no longer whether
life could have originated by chemical processes involving nonbiological compo-
nents. The question instead has become which of many pathways might have been
followed to produce the first cells.
Will we ever be able to identify the path of chemical evolution that succeeded
in initiating life on Earth? Scientists are designing experiments and speculating
about how early Earth could have provided a hospitable site for the segregation of

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition

SCIENCE AND CREATIONISM

molecules in units that might have been the first living systems. The recent specu-
7
lation includes the possibility that the first living cells might have arisen on Mars,
seeding Earth via the many meteorites that are known to travel from Mars to our
planet.
Of course, even if a living cell were to be made in the laboratory, it would not
prove that nature followed the same pathway billions of years ago. But it is the job
of science to provide plausible natural explanations for natural phenomena. The
study of the origin of life is a very active research area in which important progress
is being made, although the consensus among scientists is that none of the current
hypotheses has thus far been confirmed. The history of science shows that seeming-
ly intractable problems like this one may become amenable to solution later, as a
result of advances in theory, instrumentation, or the discovery of new facts.

Creationist Views of the Origin of the Universe, Earth, and Life

Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the
universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and
that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and
life on Earth. This belief, which sometimes is termed “theistic evolution,” is not in
disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution. Indeed, it reflects the
remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology,
paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines.
The advocates of “creation science” hold a variety of viewpoints. Some claim
that Earth and the universe are relatively young, perhaps only 6,000 to 10,000 years
old. These individuals often believe that the present physical form of Earth can be
explained by “catastrophism,” including a worldwide flood, and that all living
things (including humans) were created miraculously, essentially in the forms we
now find them.
Other advocates of creation science are willing to accept that Earth, the planets,
and the stars may have existed for millions of years. But they argue that the various
types of organisms, and especially humans, could only have come about with
supernatural intervention, because they show “intelligent design.”
In this booklet, both these “Young Earth” and “Old Earth” views are referred to
as “creationism” or “special creation.”
There are no valid scientific data or calculations to substantiate the belief that
Earth was created just a few thousand years ago. This document has summarized
the vast amount of evidence for the great age of the universe, our galaxy, the solar
system, and Earth from astronomy, astrophysics, nuclear physics, geology, geochem-
istry, and geophysics. Independent scientific methods consistently give an age for
Earth and the solar system of about 5 billion years, and an age for our galaxy and
the universe that is two to three times greater. These conclusions make the origin of
the universe as a whole intelligible, lend coherence to many different branches of
science, and form the core conclusions of a remarkable body of knowledge about
the origins and behavior of the physical world.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition

SCIENCE AND CREATIONISM

Nor is there any evidence that the entire geological record, with its orderly suc-
8
cession of fossils, is the product of a single universal flood that occurred a few thou-
sand years ago, lasted a little longer than a year, and covered the highest mountains
to a depth of several meters. On the contrary, intertidal and terrestrial deposits
demonstrate that at no recorded time in the past has the entire planet been under
water. Moreover, a universal flood of sufficient magnitude to form the sedimentary
rocks seen today, which together are many kilometers thick, would require a vol-
ume of water far greater than has ever existed on and in Earth, at least since the
formation of the first known solid crust about 4 billion years ago. The belief that
Earth’s sediments, with their fossils, were deposited in an orderly sequence in a
year’s time defies all geological observations and physical principles concerning
sedimentation rates and possible quantities of suspended solid matter.
Geologists have constructed a detailed history of sediment deposition that links
particular bodies of rock in the crust of Earth to particular environments and
processes. If petroleum geologists could find more oil and gas by interpreting the
record of sedimentary rocks as having resulted from a single flood, they would cer-
tainly favor the idea of such a flood, but they do not. Instead, these practical work-
ers agree with academic geologists about the nature of depositional environments
and geological time. Petroleum geologists have been pioneers in the recognition of
fossil deposits that were formed over millions of years in such environments as
meandering rivers, deltas, sandy barrier beaches, and coral reefs.
The example of petroleum geology demonstrates one of the great strengths of
science. By using knowledge of the natural world to predict the consequences of
our actions, science makes it possible to solve problems and create opportunities
using technology. The detailed knowledge required to sustain our civilization could
only have been derived through scientific investigation.
The arguments of creationists are not driven by evidence that can be observed in
the natural world. Special creation or supernatural intervention is not subjectable to
meaningful tests, which require predicting plausible results and then checking these
results through observation and experimentation. Indeed, claims of “special cre-
ation” reverse the scientific process. The explanation is seen as unalterable, and evi-
dence is sought only to support a particular conclusion by whatever means possible.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.