Proof of God from Design Part 2 or Disproof of Evolution

This is a continuation of Proof of God from Design ? , which I will assume has been read. 

Many religious people think that if evolution is ‘proven’ false, then a God must exist. Actually, all it would mean is that evolution is false and that we should seek other explanations. Maybe, there are unknown factors that also are important. For example, when Darwin first proposed the origin of the species, his theory was not as certain as it is today with advances in genetics, experiments, new fossils, improved dating techniques...

Nevertheless, for many people having a natural explanation for the origin of the species probably does make it easier for some to be an atheist/agnostic. I think this was true in my case. 

Years ago there were Rabbi's and many Orthodox Jews claiming that there was a mass conspiracy by scientists to foist a hoax called evolution on the public. Sometimes they would augment their claim with ad-hominem attacks such as the scientists were rapist or criminals. How ironic that those same Rabbi's who use the Kuzari argument to argue there could not have been a mass conspiracy for the Exodus-Sinai Story would have you believe there was and still is a  virtual world wide conspiracy to delude the public with a scientific hoax ! Mind you, many of these scientist come from countries unfriendly with each other. Their work is peer reviewed and moreover could be publicly checked by interested parties. The Rabbi's thought that evolution was in conflict with the Torah, and I do agree with them on that score. That was almost  certainly the motivation for Rabbis, some Orthodox Jews and most other religious people for attacking evolution. It was the real reason then and is still the real reason today.

Yet, in my first years at University I found my professors who taught evolution were kindly, friendly and  sharing. They were dedicated teachers and researchers, nothing like the claims of those Rabbis. They were good people; how dare those Rabbis besmirch my innocent and humble professors. 

This post will provide some arguments against evolution (still put forth by religious people) and provide brief responses mainly (but not only) based on the book Evolution for Dummies by Krukonis and Barr 2008. This book is a fairly accessible book about Evolution and I would recommend it as a good introduction to Evolution and for fleshing out support for most of the scientific details supporting this post.

1) Evolution is only a theory, meaning it is just speculative guess.

Response:

Evolution is about genetic change over time in a population, a species etc:. Scientists can see these changes, measure them, and sometimes figure out when they occurred. Scientists today know natural selection and genetic drift are two key driving forces for the changes.

Evolution is a fact. The scientific theory of Evolution has an enormous amount of evidence to support it and is almost certainly true. 

2) Evolution violates the Second Laws of Thermodynamics

Response:

Earth is not a closed system and receives ordered energy in the form of essentially parallel rays of light. The energy is used by the Earth residents to increase complexity. Energy is then exhausted by the Earth’s inhabitants to Universe in an un-ordered form. Thus there is no violation of the Second Law. 

3) Scientist have proved Evolution wrong.

Response:

Scientist have not disproved ‘evolution’, but have added new insights and mechanisms to Darwin’s original book which in some instances were wrong. To mention just two new mechanisms: Genetic Drift; Random factors and events.

4) Evolution is Random. A 'complex' work by Shakespeare (or say a bacteria) could not occur by random chance. 

Response:

Evolution is not completely random. Mutations (errors in DNA replication and transmission) may be random, but natural selection sorts thru the mutations in a non random fashion. Scientist now know that given the time available, the process of natural selection acting on random mutation is more than sufficient to generate our own species.

5a) Evolution can't result in big changes in physical characteristics.

Response:

Small changes can result in big changes. Scientist know from laboratory evidence that tiny changes in DNA sequence can have major implications for body plan.  

5b) Mutations can affect existing structures or traits but can not be responsible for new ones.

Response:

The truth is mutations can so be responsible. For example - sometimes gene duplication results in multiple copies of the gene, and these copies may evolve along different trajectories.  Changes in one copy that could have been harmful are no longer harmful because there is a spare copy, and in fact could now be advantageous. This process allows an increase in the number of genes and diversification of function.

5c) Maybe evolution can lead to changes within a lineage, but it can not lead to lineage splitting or new species.

Response:

Gradual change can lead to reproductive isolation, a key characteristic of species differentiating. Chapter 
8 in the book discusses various mechanisms of species differentiating 

The arguments of 5a, 5b,5c are sometimes stated as micro evolution might occur but not macro evolution. The responses above still hold and the existence of ‘missing links’, vestigial body parts support macro evolution. There is much more support to be found here: 
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Macroevolution.cfm

6) There are no missing links.

Response:

There are not that many fossils and they are hard to find for obvious reasons and because speciation often occurs in small isolated pockets - see  Chapter 8 of the book.  So we will not always find a specific missing link between two species. Nevertheless, transitional fossils have been found including: “Fish with legs  Whale with legs  A series of feathered dinosaurs leading up to flight” (Page 339)

7) Some biological structures ‘clearly’ show evidence of  an intelligent designer. 

Response:

What objective criteria do they provide that allows any observer to determine when a certain biological structure requires an intelligent designer and when it does not ?  

Moreover, evolution can  provide natural explanations how the structures may have arose.

Positing an intelligent designer raises more questions than it answers. For example - Where does it exist ? How can we test for it’s actual existence ? Does it still exist ? Why may it have designed these structures ?  Why are there vestigial parts if the structure was intelligently designed ? Why is there so much evidence for evolution ? 

8) Evolution can’t  create complex structures. Irreducible Complexity - for example the eye would be useless unless all the parts worked together and were there from the get go.

Response:

Scientist have a very good idea how the eye evolved from intermediary structure. Also page 341 “Just because a system is made up of a series of parts doesn’t mean that those parts evolved to perform functions they now perform.”

Also consider a bird’s flight feathers. Feathers are found on earlier non flying dinosaurs and had some other function. The feathers became co-opted for flight. Also see 13)

9) Evolution is a Fringe Topic 

Response:

Evolution is central to modern biology, medicine, conservation and agriculture. 

10) There is a science conspiracy to foist evolution for anti religious reasons.

Response:

Page 343 “Evolution is a fact that scientists can measure and test. As we further our understanding of the underlying processes responsible for evolution, we refine our theories about the details. If these theories ever seem at odds with particular aspects of religious belief, be assured that the was merely a consequence of following the data and never an intentional goal.” 

Also see my introductory paragraphs. 

11) This argument claims there was extremely rapid evolution during the ‘Cambrian Explosion’ and evolution can not account for it. There  maybe other such periods. 

Response:

Evolution does not predict or require a slow rate of change or a constant rate of change.  Also, changes can occur rapidly if the environment drastically changes for one reason or another.  A massive extinction of a dominant type of animal say the dinosaurs would allow say a pre-existent small mammal(s) to rapidly emerge and evolve to exploit their new environment. 

For the Cambrian Explosion see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC300.html

{ETA 12/11/2019 From the book Magic Universe - The Oxford Guide To Modern Science Nigel Calder 2003:

Page 490 Regarding Cambrian Explosion - Al the animals had essentially the same set of genes. By exploiting the genes in different ways they were able to diversify in a mere 10 million years. 

Page 106 "The Cambridge explosion, so graphically illustrated in Yunnan and British Columbia, now makes better sense than it did before , in light of recent laboratory discoveries about evolutionary discoveries about evolutionary mechanisms at the molecular level. These allow natural experiments with body plans to proceed more rapidly than previous theories had supposed."}

Whenever confronted by religious people using ‘science’ to prove religious beliefs or to discredit evolution , check the scientific literature and not just the few cherry picked articles the religious person presents. 

12) Evolution is not falsifiable

Response:

Evolution predicted humans and other great apes descend from a common ancestor. This can be disproved based on genetics - i.e if we shared more DNA with other mammals than with say chimps. It has been found that humans do share more DNA with chimps than with any other mammal.

Another example could be fossil of an animal dated from an era (strata) much earlier than where evolution predicts the fossil should be found. Examples can be multiplied. 

No evolution falsifiable information exists to date. 

13) Evolution can't create new information.

Response;

Sure it can.  PCB (polychlorinated biphenyls) did not exist until humans made them. Yet some bacteria evolved very complicated ways to break them down. Remarkably, the way they evolved to do this was by kludging together biochemical pathways that serve other functions.  Also see 8)  

Related posts Genesis and Evolution  

Schroeder The Science of God Chapter Four

Updated 3/23/2016, 11/23/2016

Continued from here

{I have the 1997 edition. Schroeder has a newer edition - so the page numbers may not match up exactly. In addition, he may have changed his timelines a bit. Nevertheless, most if not all of my post will probably still apply to his newer edition.}

{12/31/2014 addendum - Schroeder's time line dated 10/2013 at http://geraldschroeder.com/wordpress/?page_id=53 is 

Genesis 
Day 
1 13.9 Billion years ago to 6.9 Billion years ago
2 6.9 Billion years ago to 3.4 Billion years ago
3 3.4 Billion years ago to 1.6 Billion years ago
4 1.6 Billion years ago to 0.7 Billion years ago
5 0.7 Billion years ago to 0.2 Billion years ago
6 0.2 Billion years ago to 6000 years ago 

Using this new time line will change this post very little if at all.}

For reference here is Genesis 1 

Genesis 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 Now the earth was unformed and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters. 3 And God said: 'Let there be light.' And there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. {P}

6 And God said: 'Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.' 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day. {P}

9 And God said: 'Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear.' And it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters called He Seas; and God saw that it was good. 11 And God said: 'Let the earth put forth grass, herb yielding seed, and fruit-tree bearing fruit after its kind, wherein is the seed thereof, upon the earth.' And it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, herb yielding seed after its kind, and tree bearing fruit, wherein is the seed thereof, after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day. {P}

14 And God said: 'Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth.' And it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; and the stars. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day. {P}

20 And God said: 'Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let fowl fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.' 21 And God created the great sea-monsters, and every living creature that creepeth, wherewith the waters swarmed, after its kind, and every winged fowl after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying: 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.' 23 And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day. {P}

24 And God said: 'Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind.' And it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth after its kind, and the cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 26 And God said: 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.' 27 And God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them. 28 And God blessed them; and God said unto them: 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that creepeth upon the earth.' 29 And God said: 'Behold, I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed--to you it shall be for food; 30 and to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is a living soul, [I have given] every green herb for food.' And it was so. 31 And God saw every thing that He had made, and, behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. {P}

Introduction and Schroeder's Formula 

{1/11/2015 I found some errors in my prior write up on the actual formula. But the conclusions did not change}

For discussion on the most likely translation of Gen1:1 see Kalam proof of god repudiated for theological reasons. For now we will mostly accept creation Ex-Nihilo as per the above translation.

This post will discuss Chapter 4. For others see Chapter 9 ,   and for Chapter 1 , Chapter 2 , Chapter 3 -section 1, Chapter 3 section 2, start here

Once again I will focus on our holy texts and how Schroeder uses/abuses them. There will be a limited amount of science.

Schroeder’s formula to shoehorn the billions of years of the big bang into the six days of genesis reduces to:

A=  (Cosmic Background Temperature at quark confinement divided by Cosmic Background Temperature now ) times (½) to the power of T. Dividing  365 turns days it into years.

'A'  is Earth time

T = 0 for  genesis day 1.
T = 1 for  genesis day 2. Etc:

Schroeder informs us Cosmic Background Temperature at quark confinement is 10.9 times (10^12)  Kelvin degrees,  and the Cosmic Background Temperature now is 2.73 Kelvin.

You can see the importance of what temperature is used in the numerator. Schroeder selection of quark confinement results in the duration since the Big Bang is about 15.75 Billion years ago. If he used the temperature say when Helium forms the temperature is cooler by about 1000 times and Schroeder would not be close to 15.7 Billion years. 

Why is Schroeder using a  (½) factor in the formula ? Why didn’t  he use a (1/3) or some other factor ?  Based on my reading he provides virtually no discussion and no sources advocating (½) for this important  factor. 

Schroeder is constrained by the requirement to get the resulting time periods and the activities that occur for each period according to science to match up Genesis activities for each day. 

To do this Schroeder will ignore the inconsistencies of science and genesis, sprinkle in some bizarre and novel ‘translations’ / ‘interpretations’ of Genesis, cherry pick and or misread some of our holy texts, speculate on what Genesis  and our holy commentators really mean, invent a formula to converge Genesis and Science, and ignore some science.  Intellectually honest ? No. Impressive ?  No.

But, how close does the formula correctly allocate the events of genesis to the billions of years of the Big Bang and Science ?

I wrote two posts exploring Genesis and Evolution, Genesis and Big Bang that outlines some of the disparities  between science and  Genesis. Maybe I have added a few more in this post. The obstacles required to overcome the science-genesis conflict in an intellectually honest way are insurmountable. In addition, if even one error is found in Genesis creation story, or in  any part of the Torah, it proves the Torah can not be divine.  I think there are more than one.


Genesis Day One: 15.75 billion years ago to 7.75 billion years ago

1a) Page 65 Schroeder cites Ramban Gen 1:4 the grabbing hold of time - see my discussion in Chapter 3 section 2, and the discussion of Schroeder’s formula above.

I will add another problem.... {ETA 1/10/2015 I deleted a  discussion that  'light' existing prior to  quark  confinement causes problems for Schroeder's time line. It gets complicated because of both the Science (did 'light' exist prior to quark confinement ?)  and interpretation of Torah verses.}

 1b) Page 66 - Genesis 1:2  Now the earth was unformed and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters (מימ )


The Hebrew word מימ - (waters). Schroeder with no source support translates it as the universe. Schroeder  goes on to claim this verse is referring to the one Big Bang rapid inflation period, with no support except that God Hovering is a one time event in the Torah.  Maybe the Torah meant the spirit of God was hovering over the waters, just like it says. Rashi explains it as the throne of glory hovering over the water -  like a dove hovering over it’s nest.

And this brings up yet another conflict between Genesis and Science. Using Schroeder’s time line for day one, Science tells us there was no water in day one, yet Genesis has water on day one.

1c) Earth was formed about 4.5 billion years ago (wiki earth) putting the Earth within Schroeder’s Day 2 time frame.  But Genesis has Earth existing already on Day 1. A big  problem.

 Alternately Ramban has Earth formed on Day 3 which begins according to Schroeder 3.75 billion years ago. This is no good for Schroeder either.  

Is this one of the reasons for Schroeder’s odd translation of ‘water’ as universe in  Gen 1:2 ? To avoid this problem.

1d)  Page 65 Schroeder cites Ramban on Gen 1:5

Gen 1:5  And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, day one.

Genesis writes  ‘day one’ as opposed to writing ‘first day’. Schroeder seems to insinuate some mystery to this - that Genesis is looking forward in time.

Ramban  explains it as follows:  The Torah writes  ‘day one’ as opposed to the ‘first day’, because ‘first’  would imply there are other days, which of course did not exist yet. Once day one is complete, The Torah can refer to day 2 as the second day. 

1e) Genesis - Does Genesis have Stars formed in day one ? Depends how it is interpreted. The plain reading Stars at Day 4. Science -  “Most stars are between 1 billion and 10 billion years old. Some stars may even be close to 13.8 billion years old—the observed age of the universe.” Wiki Stars.  So Stars would first appear within Day one per Schroeder time frames. A plain reading of Genesis does not have stars, sun or moon formed on Day one.

For alternate days for stars, moon, sun see discussion Day 4.


Genesis Day Two:  7.75 billion years ago to 3.75 billion years ago 


2a)  Schroeder claims the Genesis’s firmament formation is the formation of most of the stars of the Milky Way disc; and Sun formation.  This would conflict with Ramban’s interpretation of the events  - see day 4 below.

2b) Torah does not seem to have stars or galaxy formation on day one, yet Schroeder’s time line does. For alternate discussion of stars, moon, sun see day 4.

2c) Firmament  - does not appear at all in modern science and is relic of ancient science. See my Genesis and Big Bang post where this is discussed a bit more.

2d) Science says Earth appeared about 4.5 billion years ago, putting it into Schroeder’s Day 2. Depending how to interpret Genesis, Earth perhaps appears on Day one. Ramban has Earth created in Day 3 of Genesis. Not good for Schroeder. 


Genesis  Day Three:  3.75 billion years ago to 1.75 billion years ago 

3a) Genesis 1:11  And God said: 'Let the earth put forth grass, herb yielding seed, and fruit-tree bearing fruit after its kind, wherein is the seed thereof, upon the earth.' And it was so. 

Schroeder claims Genesis is referring to bacteria and algae. But Genesis has plants sprouting forth from earth , not water. This is inconsistent with evolution theory. Genesis was most likely not referring to microscopic bacteria and algae, but visible plants like grass etc:

3b) Page 67, 68, Schroeder claims the simple reading of Genesis 1:11 implying all types of plants is appeared on day three is wrong . He goes on to claim the Kabbala corrects this misunderstanding , that really plants only start on day 3 , but then develop during the following days, Schroeder  quotes Ramban “there was no special day assigned for this command for vegetation alone since it is not a unique work.”

Lets see what Ramban actually writes.

Ramban on Genesis 2:5 Citing Midrash Rabba 12:4 every herb of the field created on third day did not come forth above the ground but remained just below the surface of the earth  until it rains on the sixth day. 

[There is nothing about Plant creation taking place after day 3. It is just they are underground until day 6. According to science seed bearing plants appear  400 million years ago - within Schroeder’s Day 5 time line. This would be a  problem.]

But Ramban is of the opinion that on the third day the earth did bring forth grass and fruit trees in their full stature and quality. This is in contradiction Schroeder’s time line with plants only starting on day 3. And according to science flowers do not appear until 130 million years ago - Schroeder’s day 6. Kabala /Ramban had it wrong. This is another problem for Schroeder.]

Now onto Ramban on Genesis 1:12 Schroeder’s claimed source. I quote now in full.

Ramban writes “There was no special day assigned for this command for vegetation alone since it is not a unique work. The work of earth, whether it brings forth anything or is salt land is one.”

[Ramban may be teaching that the creation of plants was not a unique work because the earth was involved in it’s creation. He does not mention plants developing after day 3. Ramban even writes fruit trees develop on day 3 - see above. Schroeder’s claim that Ramban intends plants to only start on day 3 but continue after seems at best a poor speculation.]

Moreover, Schroeder is translating that the appearance of photosynthetic algae are included in the Torah’s plants. Yet, the Torah fails to mention the important simple cells (prokaryotes) which pre-date the cyanobacteria performing photosynthesis. The first living things are not plants.]



Genesis  Day Four: 1.75 billion years ago to .75 billion years ago 

4a) Schroeder on Page 69 -  cites Ramban, Talmud Hagigah 12A and Rashi to support the notion stars, Sun, Moon  were created during Day 4 as per Ramban or just became visible on Day 4.

Lets see what the sources actually write.

Talmud Hagigah 12A writes that according to Sages the light created on the first day is identical to the Luminaries which are created on the first day, but not hung up (in the firmament)  until the fourth day.  (Rashi just reiterates Talmud Hagiga 12A as the Luminaries are created on day one, but are suspended in the firmament of day four.)

The Talmud does not say became visible. It says hung up in the firmament. Also, according to the Talmud it maybe the Luminaries are actually created on day one. 

Schroeder claims: formation of the Firmament is Milky Way Disk 
Formation, and Sun formation occurring on Day 2. Then on day 4,  Earth’s atmosphere becomes transparent and so the Sun, Moon, stars become visible. 

Lets look at what Ramban teaches us regarding Genesis 1:14

Ramban explains as follows.  

First Day - light is created.

Second Day - Firmament made, which then blocks light from illuminating the lower elements.

Day Three - Earth is created and it is dark because the Firmament blocks light from reaching it.

Day Four - God desires there be firmament luminaries to light the Earth. God makes the light created on day one become corporeal.           
Do you see the problems for Schroeder ?

 First, the firmament per Ramban blocks light from hitting the Earth. This is not how Schroeder’s definition of the Firmament would behave.

Second, on day 4 Schroeder claims Earths atmosphere clears letting the Sun, Moon, and Stars become visible. This is not at all how  Ramban explains how light is received by Earth. 

Using Schroeder’s time line - Ramban has the Earth created on day three 3.75 billion years ago to 1.75 billion years ago. But Science says Earth appeared about 4.5 billion years ago, putting it into Schroeder’s Day 2.

Genesis  Day Five:  .75 billion years ago to .25 billion years ago 

Day 5  And God said: 'Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let fowl   (עןף -   pronounced oaf )   fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.' 21 And God created the great sea-monsters, and every living creature that creepeth, wherewith the waters swarmed, after its kind, and every winged fowl (עןף ) after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying: 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl (עןף) multiply in the earth.' 23 And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.

Rashi explains ‘swarms of living creatures’ include flies, beetles, ants, worms, moles, fish  and some others.

 This puts insects in day 5 of Schroeder’s with no problem. But Rashi says it also includes moles. But moles do not appear before 200 million years ago which is in Schroeder’s day 6. See the problem. 

Genesis -  Birds are also created on day 5. But evolution tells us birds evolve 150,000 million years ago putting them in Day 6 of Schroeder’s time line. This is a problem. { ETA 11/23/2016  Correction made to And in Hebrew עןף are birds, not winged insects.  According to the (Zoo Rabbi)Rabbi Slifkin's book the Challenge of Creation on page 188 'every winged עןף' INCLUDES both birds and winged insects.} {ETA 11/23/2106 So the problem still remains even with this correction.}  

Ramban’s commentary on Gen 1:22 - and let the oaf multiply - also uses oaf to mean birds. Ramban explains - fowl are created out of the waters, but their blessing was to be on earth. No fowl lays it’s eggs in the water, but only on earth. [And Ramban is wrong - fowl evolve from land reptiles, not water reptiles.] 

Besides, insects are already included in ‘swarms of living creatures’ according to Rashi, so oaf most likely does not mean flying insects. 

Here are several examples from among many in the Tenach demonstrating oaf means fowl, not winged insects and not other winged animals. 

Levit 11:13 And these ye shall have in detestation among the fowls [oaf]; they shall not be eaten, they are a detestable thing: the great vulture, and the bearded vulture, and the ospray;

Palams 104:12 Beside them dwell the fowl [oaf] of the heaven, from among the branches they sing.

Levit 1:14 And if his offering to the LORD be a burnt-offering of fowls [oaf], then he shall bring his offering of turtle-doves, or of young pigeons.

Ezekial 31:6 All the fowls [oaf] of heaven made their nests in its boughs, and all the beasts of the field did bring forth their young under its branches, and under its shadow dwelt all great nations.

{ ETA 11/23/2016  According to the (Zoo Rabbi) Rabbi Slifkin's book the Challenge of Creation on page 188:  'every winged עןף' INCLUDES both birds and winged insects. Flying insects, when referred to in exclusion of birds are called sheretz ha-עןף. The Rabbi adds, even if you explain  'every winged עןף' as to be exclusively flying insects there is still a problem with Schroeder's time line:  Per Bible terrestrial insects are created on  the sixth day, and flying insects on the fifth day.  But according to science the terrestrial insects preceded the winged insects.}


Genesis  Day Six:  .25 billion years ago to 6000 years ago 


6a) Genesis  fails to mention the catastrophic extinction of 90% of life destroyed occurring within Day 6 of Schroeder’s time line. This occurred prior to the alleged flood during Noah’s time.

6b) Science -for the last 150 million years, birds; for the last 130 million years, flowers; 

These all occur within Schroeder’s Day 6 time frame.

But Genesis has Birds on Day 5 ending 250 million years ago. This is a problem for Schroeder.

Genesis - Flowers on Day 3 (so says Ramban too). Day 3 ends 1.75 billion years ago.  This is a problem for Schroeder.


Conclusion 

{ETA 11/23/2016 According to the (Zoo Rabbi) Rabbi Slifkin's book the Challenge of Creation on page 188: Science has birds appearing after terrestrial animals. Genesis has birds on fifth day and animals on the sixth. Genesis has the order is wrong}

{ETA 3/23/2016 Understanding Genesis by Nahum Sarna 1966

He translates Gen 1:1 “ When God began to create the Heaven and Earth..”

Beginning Page 2 Regarding Genesis Creation stories:

“It is obvious” none of the stories are based on human memory, nor are they modern science accounts of the physical world’s origin or nature. The stories are Non Scientific. It is a naive and futile exercise to attempt to reconcile Bible creation stories and modern science.  Any correspondences discovered or ingeniously established are nothing more than coincidence.  


The book also provide many points of contact with ancient near east mythology with Genesis creation stories. Beginning page 39 The  Flood story - The Torah used very ancient traditions adapted for it’s own purpose. }

My summary of Schroeder as in the Introduction of this post has been sufficiently demonstrated and moreover Schroeder's claim of the convergence of science and Torah is preposterous. Schroeder is bending and twisting them to converge. This is unbecoming for a Scientist and an Orthodox Jew such as Schroeder. 

I will end my non exhaustive review of Chapter 4 with the following quotes from Schroeder.

Page 70 “ Though the Bible is eerily true and filled with wisdom that would not have been known widely, if at all , when it was written , nowhere does it claim to have all the answers”

Schroeder has provided us with absolutely nothing in the Torah that could not have been known or guessed at in ancient times.  Also see proof of god from secrets in holy texts.

Page 71 “The discoveries of Science have brought forth the measurable indication that our world has an aspect that exceeds the materialistic” 

Does Schroeder means supernatural being(s) ? He has offered no evidence for the claim.

I then began to read Chapter 5. Page 72 “The God an atheist does not believe in is usually not the God of the Bible.

It is the very God of the Bible I do not believe in. Why I do not is one reason for this existence of my blog. Maybe Schroeder should learn about modern academic bible scholarship, ancient near east comparative religion-myth- rituals and  read the Torah with an open objective mind with no apriori religious dogma, such as it is a divine book and that it also has hidden secrets.

Genesis and Evolution

UPDATED THRU 3/23/2016

{ETA 1/10/2015 My post is plain meaning of the Torah/Bible. See my discussion later about commentators and why I have avoided them for this post. In my December 2013 and December 2014 posts discussing Schroeder's  book The Science of God I do discuss  some commentators.}

Prior to summarizing Genesis, the evolutionary time line and listing only some of the myriad of differences between Genesis and Evolution there are two over overarching reasons why there is no room for gods within evolution.

First, evolution operates through such natural processes random mutation, co-evolution, natural selection, entropy efficiency... to explain how the various species came to exist. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. According to the principle of Occam’s razor/parsimony supernatural beings should not be added to the equation. They are superfluous. Of course there are gaps in our scientific knowledge, but plugging in supernatural beings is called the god of gaps fallacy. {ETA 7/25/2014 Evolution has no room for a designer. Species were and are still evolving without guidance and  not to some ultimate design. Evolution is governed by randomness, mutation, natural selection, changing environments, myriads of interactions...and is largely unpredictable.}

Second, Genesis has the creation ending on the sixth day, while according to evolution creation is a never ending continuous process.

The Genesis creation story:

Day one - Creates in this order "Heaven and the Earth", Light, "divided light from darkness"

Day two - Makes firmament in the midst of the waters

Day three - Gathers water under the heaven into one place and dry land appears. Grass, herb yielding seed, and fruit-tree bearing fruit.

Day four- Lights in the firmament of the heaven [stars ], sun, moon.

Day five - Living water creatures, flying fowl, sea monsters, creeping creatures, winged fowl 

Day six -  Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind. Male and Female [human]. (Genesis also says god formed Adam from earth and breathed life into him. Then god forms a female from Adam's rib {ETA or maybe side - see discussion below}).

Evolution Time line (from Wikipedia)

for the last 3.6 billion years, simple cells (prokaryotes);
for the last 3.4 billion years, cyanobacteria performing photosynthesis;
for the last 2 billion years, complex cells (eukaryotes);
for the last 1 billion years, multicellular life;
for the last 600 million years, simple animals;
for the last 550 million years, bilaterians, animals with a front and a back;
for the last 500 million years, fish and proto-amphibians;
for the last 475 million years, land plants;
for the last 400 million years, insects and seeds;
for the last 360 million years, amphibians;
for the last 300 million years, reptiles;
for the last 200 million years, mammals;
for the last 150 million years, birds;
for the last 130 million years, flowers;
for the last 60 million years, the primates,
for the last 20 million years, the family Hominidae (great apes);
for the last 2.5 million years, the genus Homo (human predecessors);
for the last 200,000 years, anatomically modern humans.  

Now for some of the incompatibilities of Genesis and Evolution. Arguably the conflicts seem insurmountable.

1) There was no one original human Adam. Evolution has mankind evolving from prior primate species and not created from earth. Human females were not created  from Man's rib {ETA or side}.) 

{ETA 1/10/2015 Somebody questioned me about the female Eve being created out of Adams Rib. Gen 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs (Hebrew root צלע), and closed up the place with flesh instead thereof. 22 And the rib (צלע), which the LORD God had taken from the man, made He a woman, and brought her unto the man -  So translates the Jewish Publication Society (JPS) 1917.  JPS Jewish Study Bible 2004 by the editors Berlin and Brettler also translates as Rib. Ramban on Gen 2:20 Translated by Rabbi Chavel (1971 edition) also writes Adam's Rib being taken.

Rib is a common translation of the Hebrew word  צלע in these Genesis verses. Another translation is 'side'. The Torah text writes 'one' of, suggesting 'one' from many. If the Torah text meant 'side' it could have written from man's side. There are other Hebrew words for side as well. Rib is a very reasonable translation. Using the translation 'side' will not change the fact the Torah contradicts evolution on the matter.}

{Update 2/19/2014 Religions of the Ancient Near East - Helmer Ringgron (Translated by J. Sturdy) 1973

Page 121 Regarding Assyrian and Babylonian religion:
" It is known that life or the BREATH of life is a gift of the gods, who also have the power to take it back." [My capitalization. Such a notion is found in Genesis.]}

2) Plants evolved after the Sun existed, while Genesis has plants before the Sun.

3) Genesis has first life forms as plants. Evolution has other living forms before plants.
.
4) Genesis has fruit-bearing trees before fish were created. Evolution has fish before fruit-bearing trees.

5) Genesis has fruit-bearing trees before say insects. Evolution has insects before fruit-bearing trees

6) The six days of creation is incompatible with the billions of years of the big bang and evolution. Some Apologetics reinterpret days to be something other than normal human observed earth days. But the Torah says  it was  evening and morning  for each day, as if to place human markers and affirm a clear separation of creation events.  Also, which days should be reinterpreted and by how much should they be changed from normal earth days ? By an amount to force fit genesis with whatever is the current scientific theory. This operation is called working backwards.  Human civilization have been around easily over 6 thousand years.

7) Evolution has in this order: Insects, Birds, Flowering plants. Genesis has Flowering Plants then Birds. Genesis has Flowering plants before any Insects. 

8) Seems Genesis has reptiles after birds. But Evolution has birds evolving from reptiles.

{Update 12/29/2013 My post is plain meaning of the Torah/Bible and relying almost solely on Genesis 1:1 through 1:31 the only place I am aware of with a detailed temporal sequence. It may be possible to selectively cite midrash/talmud/commentary/ kabbalah/verses and or reinterpret/speculate  to smooth over many inconsistencies between evolution and science.  However, those same texts themselves are frequently unclear, in conflict with science and even contradictory within themselves. I sincerely doubt that midrash/talmud/commentary/ kabbalah/verses all can be reconciled to provide a consistent internal accounting in any intellectually honest fashion.}

{Update 2/16/2014 To give the reader a sense of the importance,  consider this simple example which can be multiplied thousands of  times. Regarding the Genesis creation story - Beth (meaning the school of) Shammai says the Heaven was created before the Earth. Beth Hillel - the earth was created before the heavens, Rav Simeon says they were created simultaneously. (Midrash Rabbah Genesis 1:15) }

{Update 2/1/2014 Attempts  to "reconcile this 7 day creation story with evolution, geological and cosmological evidence  of the age of the universe are absurd, requiring a twisting of the words of the text in ways they never remotely meant". "Of course the Biblical picture is not a factual, literal account of the universe's  origin. The evidence to this effect is overwhelming". (Commentary on the Torah with a New English Translation 2001 by Richard E, Friedman Page 14)}

{ETA 3/23/2106 Understanding Genesis by Nahum Sarna 1966

He translates Gen 1:1 “ When God began to create the Heaven and Earth..”

Beginning Page 2 Regarding Genesis Creation stories:

“It is obvious” none of the stories are based on human memory, nor are they modern science accounts of the physical world’s origin or nature. The stories are Non Scientific. It is a naive and futile exercise to attempt to reconcile Bible creation stories and modern science.  Any “correspondences” discovered or ingeniously established are nothing more than coincidence.  

The book also provide many points of contact with ancient near east mythology with Genesis creation. stories. Beginning page 39 The  Flood story - The Torah used very ancient traditions adapted for it’s own purpose. }

ETA 1/10/2105 Anchor Bible Genesis E.A. Speiser 1964 
Page 9 Regarding Gen 1 - The Babylonian creation epic Enuma Elis - is in striking correspondences in both details and order of the events with Genesis 1.  It is clear the Bible approach is closely related to traditional Mesopotamian beliefs. The similarities include and are in the same order and type of creation: A primeval chaos, Light emanation from gods , firmament creation, dry land creation, luminaries creation, man creation, god resting.
Speiser explains Gen 1 has God creating light.  He goes on to write the Babylonians did not copy the Hebrews since cuneiform accounts such as the Enuma antedate in substance the Bible statements on the subject. There is no basis in fact for assuming an unidentified ultimate source for both Hebrew and Babylonian accounts.

JPS Torah Commentary Genesis by Nahum Sarna
Page 7  Verse 4-Light -  The first creation by God's utterance. The notion of light independent of the sun most likely derives from the observation that the sky is illuminated even on cloudy days and that brightness precedes the rising sun. In both situation no sun is visible. Verse 5 God called - According to the conception in  the ancient near east possessing no name was equivalent to non existence. "Name calling was thus associated with creation and by extension, with domination, for the one who gives a name has power over the object."}

Proof of God through Design (Part One) ?

UPDATED THRU 12/15/2015

Briefly this argument is as follows.  We know a house has an architect and  a shirt has a maker  etc : etc: . When studying say an eye we marvel at its design and fitness for focusing light rays.  Similarly for  numerous other biological organs and features.  Therefore  we should  conclude plants and  animals have a designer. 

This argument for god logically fails because it is a false analogy.  Humans have empirical experience and therefore know houses need  architects.  But we have no experience that  biological forms require a designer. 

The argument also logically fails because we could then ask who designed the designer of the eye ? We get into an infinite regress . Also there is a logical inconsistency between the premise a design needs a designer, yet god does not need a designer.

The argument also fails because of the fallacy of the god of the gaps. Briefly stated this is when  a lack of knowledge (for example how did the eye come to be)  is plugged with god doing it. Of course that contributes nothing to our knowledge and progress.

An important an empirical refute to the argument of god thru design is evolution . The scientific evidence for evolution is overwhelming and is the overwhelming scientific consensus of why there is an eye.  The eye evolved from previous  structures.
  
(Interestingly numerous biological organs or functions have the appearance of poor design and seem like make shift modifications or atrophies of prior organs. For example, why do humans have a remnant tail. These kinds of imperfections and anomalies betray the concept of an actual omniscient designer.)

{ETA 11/15/2014 Page 143 of Zoology by Burnett, Fisher, Zim 1958 "The fact of evolution is incontrovertible." Among other evidence the book presents is embryonic stages of mammals and birds  include fish like and reptile like stages. Fossil progression of say earlier forms of the horse to later forms. Vestigial organs found in many animals including for example horse splint bones. [The latter two examples also prove there was no omniscient designer. Why would a designer place vestigial organs or parts into a design ? Rather, they are there as vestiges of earlier animals from which later animals evolved from.}


Some apologetics try to inject god into the evolution equation. However, evolution operates completely independently of any supernatural beings, so there is no room for god in evolution.  God is simply superfluous. {ETA 7/25/2014 Evolution has no room for a designer. Species were and are still evolving without guidance and  not to some ultimate design. Evolution is governed by randomness, mutation, natural selection, changing environments, myriads of interactions...and is largely unpredictable.}

Some apologetics say the emergence of life forms as described in the Torah is consistent with evolution. However a careful reading of the Torah and an understanding of evolution refutes such a proposal. This would be a topic for another article but consider the fact that evolution is an on going process while the Genesis model is static.  Also,Genesis has god bringing forth land plants then flying creatures and then mammals. While evolution has certain types  land plants emerging  after the emergence of certain types of mammals. Then we have the major hurdle of how to explain away the temporal periods of Genesis.

Finally apologetics resort to alleged low probabilities of the emergence of life. Proof of God via the origin of life itself will be a topic for another post.

UPDATE: The second law of thermodynamics does not refute evolution, since the Earth is not a closed system and receives energy input from the sun.{ETA 10/31/2015 Also scientists explain the rays of the sun come in ordered and are then released by living things and the Earth disordered. And there is pollution/waste products created by living things which is also disorder. So Total Entropy in fact does increase and no violation of second law occurs. Finally, since the Universe is expanding the maximum total allowable entropy is increasing. Therefore small pockets of ordered structures can appear with no violation of the second law.} 

{ETA 12/15/2015 From http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001.html "Several scientists have proposed that evolution and the origin of life is driven by entropy (McShea 1998). Some see the information content of organisms subject to diversification according to the second law (Brooks and Wiley 1988), so organisms diversify to fill empty niches much as a gas expands to fill an empty container. Others propose that highly ordered complex systems emerge and evolve to dissipate energy (and increase overall entropy) more efficiently (Schneider and Kay 1994). "}

Continued Proof of God from Design Part 2 or Disproof of Evolution

Also see the posts Genesis and Evolution, Proof of God from Origin of Life Proof of God from Thermodynamics