The constant argument between the evolutionists and the creationists is an unending one. While the creationists believe that organisms are product of purposeful intelligence from a divine creator, evolutionists believe organisms arose as a result of descents with modifications from common ancestors. While the former is based on faith, the latter is based purely on scientific evidences. Accusations and counter accusations have been flying around between the two groups.
Regardless of whether you're a creationist or an evolutionist, if you disagree with the stereotype, you're condemned and "exposed" as a religious fanatic who is secretly trying to pass religion off as science or, even worse, trying to disprove science in order to redeem a ridiculous, unscientific, religious worldview
How possible is it to be religious at the same time be a scientist?
This is the dilemma of a lot of scientists that are religious. I can remember vividly one of my professors that taught me evolution in my undergraduate days:
I am just teaching you all these things, I have zero belief in them
An uproar of laughter greeted the comment. Not necessarily because the comment was funny, but because most of the students (including myself) found it ridiculous that a professor of evolution does not believe in what she teaches. Another professor of mine, someone I have serious respect for seemed to have carved a way out for himself. During one of his classes in genetics, he cited evolution as one of the ways in which new traits are added into the gene pool. He gave an exclusive example in the evolution of rice (Oryza species), specifically how Oryza longistaminata came into existence as a result of natural crossing between Oryza barthii and Oryza glaberrima. In his words, he said
God did not create everything, but he created something that gave rise to everything.
As a scientist and a religious person, I could not agree less with him even if this will pit me against core evolutionists. The basis on which evolutionists built their theory is the hypothesis of primeval atom, also known as the big bang theory which hypothesized that the universe was created from nothing. Among all the theories of origin of life, the chemo-synthetic theory takes the center stage when it comes to the belief in evolution. I do not have anything against these theories but I simply do not agree that they are enough to prove beyond reasonable doubts that organisms exist only by evolution. My argument is very simple and straight forward;
If life arose from nothing, who created nothing?
This is why up till today, I am still in agreement with my genetics professor that said God did not create everything at a go, but put mechanisms in place that will bring about everything. So what does this makes me? Someone that believes partly in evolution and partly in creation. I will prefer to call myself and my professor CREAVOLUTIONISTS.
I will like to see contributions from my fellow scientists on this platform, but being a newbie on steemit, I do not know any except 