Soil Disproves Evolution? Pbbt
A couple of posts ago I mentioned that I was going to write about a particular creationist text that I’d been given when I was a child. I’ve been flipping through the book and finding out that I remember all of this stuff really well because I frikin’ memorized this book and thought it was a coolest thing ever when I was a kid. It has also reminded me that I still have some lingering anger at some of the crap I was taught and believed because I thought Christians wouldn’t lie to me. So instead of spending a lot of time on this topic, I’m going to zoom in on the main argument in the book that I found convincing in my ignorance and even repeated to others, to my embarrassment.
Starting on page 50, the author argues that soil disproves the theory of evolution.
If we look at the surface of the Earth and ask what is necessary to support life, we have to give this answer. We need soil made of weathered rock, and we need the chemicals and water washed from the rocks. We need air and water. But soil must contain organic matter. And soil must have millions of tiny living organisms in it if anything is to grow.
This poses a difficult problem for those who believe in the slow evolution of Earth’s surface and of living things. Where did the soil that living things need in order to exist come from before there were living things to fill the soil with organic matter?
The only possible explanation is that Earth and life did not develop as scientists now think. When God created the world, he must have covered its continents with soil already filled with the living creatures that Earth must have in order to support life.
Seriously. Anyone who has even a casual knowledge of natural history knows that the first living things did not evolve in soil, and did not depend on preexisting organisms in soil (or anywhere else). It makes me think that the author was either writing in total ignorance — having no business writing a “science” book for children — or was deliberately lying. This is not even picking at the boundaries of our knowledge, like a discussion of where the laws of the universe come from and why they are the way they are. This is so easily upturned with only basic education. And the rest of the book is pretty much like this.
So why does he think that scientists are so dense as to not see the obvious proof of God in front of their faces?
The only option [for the beginning of the universe] we can imagine is God. But still, there are many people who don’t believe in God! Why?
Romans 1:18 says that men who do not believe “suppress the truth.” That is, they simply will not believe, whatever the evidence. And there is evidence!
Yep, child, there is a conspiracy of atheistic scientists who are suppressing the evidence for God. And I believed it. And that makes me angry. I think there is someone suppressing the truth here, but it’s not the scientists.
So for the preservation of my mental health, this is the last I have to say on this book.