Evolution vs. Intelligent Design

One of the big debates about evolution concerns the debate about evolution and intelligent design or ID. Evolution and ID are competing ideas how the Cosmos (including this earth) was created. The short answer is that I believe evolution is based on science while ID is based on religious belief. My understanding of ID is that it does not refer to "god". It refers to an intelligence that created the Cosmos. However, the parallels between a god and the intelligence are so great, I think that many people would say that ID involves a god. I believe that evolution is the best explanation that science can currently give. ID is a reasonable religious explanation, but it isn't a scientific explanation. Now, let's look at the long answer to the debate.

The Scientific Method

Wikipedia gives the following explanation of the Scientific Method.

Scientific method refers to a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. The Oxford English Dictionary says that scientific method is: "a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses."
Although procedures vary from one field of inquiry to another, identifiable features distinguish scientific inquiry from other methods of obtaining knowledge. Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter. Theories that encompass wider domains of inquiry may bind many independently derived hypotheses together in a coherent, supportive structure. Theories, in turn, may help form new hypotheses or place groups of hypotheses into context.
Scientific inquiry is generally intended to be as objective as possible, to reduce biased interpretations of results. Another basic expectation is to document, archive and share all data and methodology so they are available for careful scrutiny by other scientists, giving them the opportunity to verify results by attempting to reproduce them. This practice, called full disclosure, also allows statistical measures of the reliability of these data to be established.

The Nature of Intelligence Design

The following information about ID is taken from the ID website.

Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Through the study and analysis of a system's components, a design theorist is able to determine whether various natural structures are the product of chance, natural law, intelligent design, or some combination thereof. Such research is conducted by observing the types of information produced when intelligent agents act. Scientists then seek to find objects which have those same types of informational properties which we commonly know come from intelligence. Intelligent design has applied these scientific methods to detect design in irreducibly complex biological structures, the complex and specified information content in DNA, the life-sustaining physical architecture of the universe, and the geologically rapid origin of biological diversity in the fossil record during the Cambrian explosion approximately 530 million years ago..

Intelligence Design is not Scientific

Proponents of ID claim that ID is scientific. The following information is from the ID website, in answer to the question, "Is Intelligent Design a scientific theory?"

Yes. The scientific method is commonly described as a four-step process involving observations, hypothesis, experiments, and conclusion. Intelligent design begins with the observation that intelligent agents produce complex and specified information (CSI). Design theorists hypothesize that if a natural object was designed, it will contain high levels of CSI. Scientists then perform experimental tests upon natural objects to determine if they contain complex and specified information. One easily testable form of CSI is irreducible complexity, which can be discovered by experimentally reverse-engineering biological structures to see if they require all of their parts to function. When ID researchers find irreducible complexity in biology, they conclude that such structures were designed.

Notice that that statement implies that only intelligent agents produce complex information. That implication is false. In another part of this discussion of evolution, I show that evolution can create complex information. In addition, information which is given below about the eye shows that the eye is a product of evolution and was not created as a complex organ.

Also notice that ID claims the identification of CSI is scientific, but nothing is mentioned about the use of the scientific method to determine the existence of an intelligent agent. Proponents of evolution do not deny that complex information exists in nature. They do claim that such information evolved from simpler forms. They key characteristic of ID is that intelligent agents exist, not that complexity exists in nature. I have found nothing in the ID website that shows the scientific method has found the existence of intelligent agents. Because of this, I do not believe ID is scientific.

School Curriculum

One aspect of the debate between evolution and ID is whether ID should be taught in school science classes. The answer is, to me, a straight-forward "No". I have just shown that ID does not follow the scientific method to show the existence of an intelligent agent and that ID is not science. Whether ID should be taught in school as a religious philosophy is a question individual school boards will have to answer.

The Eye

People who support creationism say the eye is a good example that supports ID. The eye is probably the most complex organ in the human and animal bodies, and proponents of ID say evolution couldn't create such a complex organ. However, in 2008, a researcher in Australia published a paper saying that fossil evidence shows the eye has evolved.

The palaeobiologist discovered that unlike all living vertebrate animals – which includes everything from the jawless lamprey fish to humans – placoderms had a different arrangement of muscles and nerves supporting the eyeball – evidence of an “intermediate stage” between the evolution of jawless and jawed vertebrates.

The researcher (Dr. Young) went on to say that

“Part of the trouble in tracing the evolution of the eye is that soft tissues don’t tend to fossilise. But the eye cavities in the braincase of these 400 million-year-old fossil fish were lined with a delicate layer of very thin bone. All the details of the nerve canals and muscle insertions inside the eye socket are preserved – the first definite fossil evidence demonstrating an intermediate stage in the evolution of our most complex sensory organ.

“These extinct placoderms had the eyeball still connected to the braincase by cartilage, as in modern sharks, and a primitive eye muscle arrangement as in living jawless fish.” Dr Young said that this anatomical arrangement is different from all modern vertebrates, in which there is a consistent pattern of tiny muscles for rotating each eyeball."

This, it seems, is evidence that the eye has evolved and wasn't created as the complex organ we have today.

Future Study

Wikipedia is a good starting place for study about evolution. The article contains many links that will enable you to study various aspects of evolution. The blog, LDS Science Review, is maintained by Jared, a LDS biologist, and contains a number of articles about evolution and ID, as well as other aspects of science that parallel Mormon doctrine. Another blog that discusses evolution and ID is The Mormon Organon. That blog is maintained by Steve, a BYU biology professor.

Wikipedia is also a good starting place for study about ID and for an introduction to the Discovery Institute. In addition, there is a web site for ID.

One of the key factors in the debate about evolution and ID is DNA. Future research by scientists should give more information about this.

Mormon,Mormonism Freedom to Choose, But Who Is Responsible?

Latter-day Saints often think of agency as the freedom to commit a sin or not. However, science is beginning to show that we may need to think of agency in a slightly different way.

Research at the University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing shows that "the seeds of violence may be planted before a child is born".

Recent research demonstrates a biological basis of crime, says Dr. Liu. "'Biological' does not mean only genetic factors," she explains, "but also health factors, such as nutritional deficiency and lead exposure, which influence biological processes."

Dr. Liu's study emphasizes the prenatal, perinatal, and postnatal periods, which are critical times for both a child's neuro-development and for environmental modifications.

The article points out that the most important times for development of the brain are in the first 36 months (age 3). This has important implications for LDS, because the church teaches that children are not held accountable by God for their actions until they reach the age of accountability, which is defined by church leaders as age 8.

Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me. (Moroni 8:8)

That is, young children are not capable of making intelligent decisions about things; "mistakes" they make are not considered "sins" by the Lord, and the Atonement cleanses the children (in terms of their eternal salvation).

The dilemma facing Latter-day Saints is that if children undergo brain and emotional development before age 8, a just God would not punish them for actions after age 8 that were conditioned by their development before age 8 (and even development before birth). This is counter to the common belief of LDS that all acts after age 8 may be sin. I have been concerned about this for years, because people are born into conditions that predispose them to committing acts of sin later on. I remember, while living in Phoenix, reading about burglaries that were committed by parents while their children were in their automobile as they cruised neighborhoods looking for houses that were not occupied at that moment. Perhaps the children even helped the parents enter the houses and remove objects. These children were being taught by the actions of their parents that it is OK to steal from others.

I resolved this dilemma by believing that we are judged by God for the decisions we make and the actions we perform after age 8, but we are not judged by God for the conditions we lived in prior to age 8. After reading about this research from the University of Pennsylvania, I've extended my beliefs to include that we are not judged by God for the physiological and psychological development we have as children under age 8. That is, our agency involves how we react to conditions we are under when we aren't responsible for our being under those conditions. Those children in Phoenix weren't responsible for participating in burglaries, and I believe they won't be held responsible for their participation in the burglaries, but they will be held responsible for their actions after they become old enough to understand "right" from "wrong" and to defy, if necessary, their parents who want them to help with the burglaries. They may have been born into homes in which stealing was considered OK; they may have experienced physiological and psychological changes as children that predisposed them to creating acts of crime, but the Atonement removes the effects of their acts of crime that were committed while they were under age 8. This is, of course, just my personal belief and doesn't necessarily reflect LDS church doctrine.

Another example of a dilemma about agency is that of homosexual members of the church. For many years, some church leaders took the position that homosexuality was a matter of choice and not of biological reasons. However, homosexuality among animals is documented in the scientific literature, and I think this implies there may be a biological factor in homosexuality. This presents a dilemma for the church leaders who say homosexuality is only a matter of choice. It is a science dilemma because the views of church leaders may disagree with science, and it is a theological dilemma because many people say a just God wouldn't punish a person for something that wasn't a factor of his or her choice. In recent years, President Gordon B. Hinckley said the sin is not in having feelings of homosexuality but in having sexual relations outside the bonds of marriage, as the church defines marriage. That is, the Lord will not punish people for having feelings of homosexuality, but the Lord will punish persons who act on their feelings in ways that transgress the boundaries given by the Lord for sexual activity. The Lord expects the same limitations on their actions by homosexuals as he does of non-married heterosexuals.

Let me repeat the conclusion I have come to, because that conclusion answers for me questions about the justice of God: I believe that when we become responsible for our actions, God will hold us responsible for how we react to influences in our lives when we weren't responsible for those influences. We may, through no actions of our own, live in an environment that conditions us to accept sin as "normal", but God won't hold us for accountable for being in those conditions and for our actions as children under age 8 that result from those conditions. He will hold us responsible for how we react to those conditions after we are old enough to be held responsible for our actions. In the case of the children in Phoenix, God will, I believe, recognize the influence of their parents while they were children, and he will recognize how those influences have influenced the physiological and psychological growth of the children. He will recognize how well the children have been taught right from wrong. He will recognize how capable the children were after age 8 to choose right from wrong, and he will judge accordingly. As law enforcement and legal officials of society, as Priesthood and auxiliary leaders in the church, we have to judge people about their membership in society and in the church. Fortunately, we don't have to judge people about their eternal salvation, for we don't understand enough about people to be just judges in the eternal sense.

Mormonism: Adam lived in the general Missouri area of the US?

Is there not room enough on the mountains of Adam-ondi-Ahman, and on the plains of Olaha Shinehah, or the land where Adam dwelt, that you should covet that which is but the drop, and neglect the more weighty matters? (D&C 117:8)

Spring Hill [Daviess County, Missouri] is named by the Lord Adam-ondi-Ahman, because, said he, it is the place where Adam shall come to visit his people, or the Ancient of Days shall sit, as spoken of by Daniel the prophet. (D&C 116:1)

Three years previous to the death of Adam, he called Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, and Methuselah, who were all high priests, with the residue of his posterity who were righteous, into the valley of Adam-ondi-Ahman, and there bestowed upon them his last blessing. (D&C 107:53)

Traditional Latter-day Saints believe that Adam lived in the general Missouri area and that it was through the flood that Noah and his family sailed to the mid-East and spread from there, as depicted in the Old Testament. However, I have serious concerns about the flood being a global-wide flood, and I discuss these concerns in other posts. If Adam lived in North America, then his descendants would have had to migrate to the Mid-east prior to the advent of Abraham, as described in the Old Testament. The Bible gives no information about such a migration.

Scientists have long believed that modern humans evolved in Africa and spread from there throughout the Eastern Hemisphere. The scientists have believed this, because the earliest fossils of early humans were discovered in Africa. However, recent scientific research indicates this assumption may not be accurate. Specifically, one report indicates the anthropoids that lived anciently in Africa may have been migrants to the area rather than being native to the area. I have never felt that the fossil record supported the theory that modern civilization began in Africa. The fact that the oldest fossils of ancient humans were found in Africa only shows that the oldest fossils known so far have been found there. The fossil record does not show that ancient humans originated there.

Mormonism: The Resurrection: A Parallel With Science

There is an interesting parallel between science and religion about the resurrection. Christians believe that Jesus Christ was resurrected, never to die again, and many Christians, including Latter-day Saints, believe that all people will be resurrected.

36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.

38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?

39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.

41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?

42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.

43 And he took it, and did eat before them. (Luke 24:36-43)

As seen from this religious perspective, resurrection is a recreation of the human body, but immortal physical matter is used instead of mortal physical matter. Because the resurrected body is composed of immortal matter, it will never die again.

Some scientists are attempting to cause "resurrection" of bodies, genes, etc. that once lived but are now dead. These scientists use the term, resurrection, to refer to successes to recreate bodies, genes, etc., but that use of the word, resurrection, is different than the religious use of the word. Successes by scientists would recreate the bodies or genes, but mortal matter would be used, and those resurrected objects would still be subject to death. As explained above from the religious perspective, resurrected bodies would be composed of immortal matter and would not be subject to death. Thus, this parallel of the resurrection is a parallel for the recreation of dead objects but not a parallel of the matter used in those recreations.

Mormonism: The Earth will Become Celestialized

In Section 43 of the Doctrine & Covenants, the Lord explained that after the Millennium, the earth will be consumed by fire. This is before the earth will become Celestialized.

For the great Millennium, of which I have spoken by the mouth of my servants, shall come.

For Satan shall be bound, and when he is loosed again he shall only reign for a little season, and then cometh the end of the earth.

And he that liveth in righteousness shall be changed in the twinkling of an eye, and the earth shall pass away so as by fire. (Doctrine & Covenants 43:30-32)

This destruction by fire will happen after the Millennium, and the earth will become a celestial world.

Therefore, it [the earth] must needs be sanctified from all unrighteousness, that it may be prepared for the celestial glory;

For after it hath filled the measure of its creation, it shall be crowned with glory, even with the presence of God the Father;

That bodies who are of the celestial kingdom may possess it forever and ever; for, for this intent was it made and created, and for this intent are they sanctified.

And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law— (D&C 88:18-20, 25)

Apparently that destruction by fire is part of, perhaps a prelude to, the earth becoming a celestial world. After the earth has become a celestial world, it will not be composed of mortal matter and will not be governed by the mortal laws being discovered by scientists.

Science has an interesting parallel with this. Scientific American, in an article called The Sun Will Eventually Engulf Earth--Maybe, discussed the possibility that as the sun slowly expands as it ages, it will eventually engulf the earth, causing the earth to literally be engulfed by fire. Scientists expect this destruction of the earth will occur in billions of years. The scriptures don't say when the Millennium will occur and when the earth will be destroyed by fire. I doubt, though, that many theologians think the Millennium will occur in a billion years from now. Thus, there is an interesting parallel between science and Mormonism about the earth being consumed by fire but probably a large discrepancy as to when that event will occur.

Mormon,Mormonism Blessings come through Obedience to Law

There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated—

And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated. (D&C 130:20-21)

Does this mean that obedience is the first law of heaven, as some LDS say? No, it merely  says that obedience brings blessings. The important thing to understand is the reason behind obedience. Do we obey our Priesthood leaders because they are our Priesthood leaders, that is, for the sake of obedience? Do we obey our priesthood leaders because we love them and love the people they are serving, that is, we obey because of love?

I believe that obedience for the sake of obedience is a stepping stone to obedience because of love. I believe that love is the first law of heaven. For example, do we do our home teaching teaching or visiting teaching because we are told by our leaders to do it, or do we do our teaching because we love the people we serve and want them to have the blessings of being a disciple of Christ.

Obedience for the sake of obedience has its place in our lives, but if we are to be really effective disciples of Christ, we must progress to obedience because of love.

Mormon,Mormonism: God's Use of Eternal Matter and Laws

In this post I discuss the nature of matter and the laws that govern matter, and God's use of that matter to create our earth.

Christ is the Source of Law

Latter-day Saints believe that all things in our mortal world are governed by an influence that comes from Jesus Christ. This influence is known in the scriptures as the Light of Christ.

Which truth shineth. This is the Light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made.

As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made;

As also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made;

And the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand.

And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings;

Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space—

The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things. (D&C 88:7-13)

These verses say that "all things" are governed by the Light of Christ, which "is the law by which all things are governed". Those verses do not say or imply that Christ is the originator of laws. The verses only say that the laws come from Christ. Christ is a user of natural laws. This is a religious way of saying that the Cosmos is governed by natural laws, the same laws that are being discovered by scientists. Christ used those laws to create worlds.

The Elements are Eternal

The Lord explained to Abraham that the earth was created from existing materials or matter.

And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell; (The Pearl of Great Price, Abraham 3:24)

Not only were the elements in existence at the time of the creation, they were eternal elements.

For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy; (D&C 93:33)

The elements may change form or be converted to energy, but they have always existed and will always exist.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that Jesus used existing matter in creating the earth. That teaching is a parallel to the scientific theory of the Big Bang. According to Wikipedia,

The Big Bang is the cosmological model of the universe whose primary assertion is that the universe has expanded into its current state from a primordial condition of enormous density and temperature.

If the Big Bang Theory is correct, the Cosmos began with matter of enormous, perhaps infinite, density and energy. Another description of the Big Bang describes the beginning of creation as finite matter that is compressed into an infinite density.

The New York Times article Laws of Nature, Source Unknown explains that scientists accept natural laws as the basis of creation and organization of the Cosmos but that they aren't in agreement about the source of those laws.

If the laws of physics are to have any sticking power at all, to be real laws, one could argue, they have to be good anywhere and at any time, including the Big Bang, the putative Creation. Which gives them a kind of transcendent status outside of space and time.

On the other hand, many thinkers — all the way back to Augustine — suspect that space and time, being attributes of this existence, came into being along with the universe — in the Big Bang, in modern vernacular. So why not the laws themselves?

The LDS viewpoint of natural laws is in agreement with the scientific viewpoint about the existence of natural laws but not about the source of those laws.

There is a traditional belief in Christianity that God is "all powerful" or omnipotent. According to this belief, God can speak, and instantly his words are obeyed. The common belief in Christianity that God created the cosmos out of nothing is based on this belief. However, Latter-day Saints do not believe that God can instantly create things out of nothing. Latter-day Saints believe that God created or organized the cosmos out of existing, eternal elements. Going further with this, let us read from the Doctrine and Covenants. Section 93, verse 33 states

For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;

In telling us that the elements are eternal, the Lord has given one of the great laws of science: the elements have always existed. They may change form or be converted to energy, but they have always existed and will always exist.

The use of eternal elements implies that God used eternal laws to organize the elements. At least within Christianity, this belief that God followed natural laws in His creative work is, I believe, a belief that is unique to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The Book of Mormon establishes the fact that God can not violate the laws of justice and mercy, and this implies that God cannot violate any of the laws that are involved in His creative works. This means that all of the laws of nature that are being discovered by scientists are eternal laws that govern the cosmos, and that God obeys those laws in His work. Jesus Christ used those laws in his creation of the cosmos under the direction of his Father.

God can, of course, bring into play higher laws that might overshadow lower laws. A simple example of such hierarchies of natural laws is the law of gravity vs. the law of aerodynamic lift. An unorganized weight of several tons can not "fly" through the air. It just "sits" on the ground like the lump of matter that it is. However, if that matter if formed into particular shapes and given sufficient thrust, it can move through the air. The law of gravity is still in effect, but the law of "lift" has overshadowed gravity and causes the matter to leave the ground and fly. I believe that God's performing of miracles is such a use of higher laws to overrule lower laws.

I'm grateful that God follows natural laws and that those laws are absolute in their existence and influence. Were it not for this, our universe would be chaotic and inconsistent, and we would be unable to advance in our spiritual and scientific lives. We would always hiding in our houses, caves, or where ever, not knowing what would happen next.