Thursday, March 8, 2012

The eminent scientist and the false premise

I was watching a science & nature show on TV the other day: a very interesting piece about efforts to return the black-footed ferret to Saskatchewan. Apparently, the species had been extirpated (personally, I think they all moved to Alberta to work in the oilsands) and now conservationists were trying to re-build the stocks.

As we watched night-vision footage of the ferrets hunting -- they do so at night, apparently, when their favorite food, prairie dogs, are asleep and less likely to fight back -- the host, an eminent scientist in his own right, blithely made a remark that made my eyes pop.

"The ferret has evolved eyes that admit more light than other animals do."

Yes, I hold fast to Creation and in his documentary, "The Case for the Creator", Lee Strobel pretty much shreds evolution theory, but when I hear someone talk about Evolution, I usually shake my head and consider that the speaker has been misled through the secular education system.

But the remark by the program host was just plain illogical, and any eminent scientist should be ashamed.


Consider the implication of the statement. It suggests that, at some time back in the mists of prehistory, there were ferrets that could not see in the dark. Really? What fossil evidence exists to show what their eyes could or could not see? Did ferrets somehow make a conscious decision to train their eyes to admit more light? Was there a transition period when ferrets started being able to see on cloudy days, then twilight, then total darkness? Or was there one generation of ferrets where the baby woke up in the middle of the night and said, "look, ma! I can see!" "What, honey? Where are you?" "Over here, ma! And watch out for that ....... owl!"

Yet for all that implied silliness, the eminent scientist says the ferret "evolved" eyes that can see in the dark.

God forbid he would actually suggest that God made ferrets to be able to see in the dark so they can hunt better and perpetuate the species. A Creator, who's smarter than mankind? Say it ain't so, Shoeless!

A Creator, who may actually have planned everything, including the assumed effects of climate change (one of the eminent scientist's favorite topics)?

The most environmentally-friendly verse in the Bible is the first one: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. It's environmentally-friendly, because it establishes that Someone bigger and infinitely more powerful than we created everything and set it all in motion; and also because -- as we find out as we read further into the Word -- we are responsible to Him for the things we do with, for and to His Creation. It's one thing to do something and risk placard-waving protesters and the wrath of eminent scientists ... but the knowledge that we ultimately have to answer to The Big Sir for our actions should give us all cause for pause.

You can read more about the necessity to acknowledge God as the Creator and the One who gave us an assignment to take care of His Creation in my e-book, A Very Convenient Truth available online through most booksellers or from Smashwords.