Creation Studies Institute
Mayan Calendar

The Mayan’s were wrong, but in the end, global warming will still get us all!
By Steven Rowitt, Ph.D.

That is right. Evidently, after forecasting a calendar that far outlived the civilization that created it, the world has once again survived the latest Chicken Little catastrophe to befall mankind. My guess is that the Mayans simply ran out of ink, but I am not an expert in Mesoamerican pre-Columbian civilizations. You might be wondering why I am connecting the latest doomsday scenario from antiquity with the modern global warming zealots of today. It really has very little to do with actual reality, but everything to do with the public’s perception of reality.
Looking back over the past 50 years, perceptions of reality have changed drastically going from one extreme problem to another. Before climate change (the global warning moniker was ditched as soon as it became evident that it had been warmer during the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) from 1500 to 1850 AD), a crisis ensued as it became evident that the Industrial Revolution actually cooled things off from when it was decidedly warmer. Enter David Deming, an assistant professor at the University of Oklahoma's College of Geosciences, who can testify first-hand about this effort to censor this data. Dr. Deming was welcomed into the close-knit group of global warming believers after he published a paper in 1995 that noted a warming trend in the twentieth century. Deming says, he was subsequently contacted by a prominent global warming alarmist and told point blank, “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period” (Heartland Institute 2006).

It is clear that prophecy, both secular and progressive, sells in popular Western culture. Whether it is The Late Great Planet Earth enthusiasts of the evangelical community or the atheists version of end time prophecy and their science and computer models that foretell the bleak post- apocalyptic future, it seems that doomsday sells. Since the 1960’s, environmentalists have latched on to one Chicken Little scenario after another. Paul Ehrlich’s (1968) Population Bomb predictions failed to produce the necessary overpopulation and mass starvation necessary for the end of civilization on planet Earth. I can still remember the warnings of nuclear winter,  earth killing holes in the ozone, potentially lethal acid rain and a dozen or so lesser known predictions of imminent gloom and doom including the Y2K scare of Dec. 31, 1999.

Even secular pundits have labeled the modern climate change movement as an environmental religion. In 1967, Professor Lynn White wrote, The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis and defines the religious basis of the modern ecological movement. Since the 1960s and the rise of the “counter-culture,” environmentalists have predicted one failed doomsday prediction after another that should have wiped out the earth dozens of times (Loflin, 2012).

You might be wondering why I am reviewing the history of failed doomsday scenarios. Well, I am attempting to make a comparison between the pseudo-science of man-made climate change and the pseudoscience of Darwinian Evolution. I can hear the protestations being readied, pre-emptive strikes against any such analogy. “You’re comparing apples to oranges” or “Darwinian evolution is a fact of science, right?” Not so fast. Evidently, perception is once again being promoted as reality. Just because anti-biblical agnostics and atheists love to attack biblical literalists for their insistence that the Bible is the infallible Word of God, that does not mean that the Bible is not accurate and trustworthy.
So many agnostics and atheists substitute knowledge (GNOSIS in the KOINE or original Greek of the New Testament), in the place of the Creator, that they actually look to scientific knowledge for their salvation. They see scientific truth as the only valid form of reality. They put science in the place of God rather than seeing the God of science as the ultimate Lawgiver, the Intelligent Designer of all things seen and unseen. Many in the evangelical community are willing to agree with that premise. They are willing to doubt the clear teaching of the Bible and substitute what science has to say in its place. They are willing to view the history of Israel through the paradigm of evolution. They claim that Israelite monotheism evolved from the polytheism of Israel’s neighbors. Evolutionists view all religion from the perspective of Darwinian evolutionary theory. They think that God is a construct of the Homo sapien psyche, or so the evolutionary psychologists would have us believe. The persistence of religion among the entire family of man has some scientists theorizing about the God gene, a genetic predisposition to spiritual reality in the mind of man (Hamer, 2005).

In the first century AD, a Jewish Pharisee-turned-apostle, Saul of Tarsus, described all such machinations of the ungodly in the following way:

Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things, Rom. 1:22-23. 

There is a very thin line that separates the pagan idolatry that exalts the creation in the place of the Creator, and the way evolutionists consider themselves to be the announcers of ultimate truth. Moreover, since the publication of Darwin’s theory in 1859, all who disagree with his notion that life can create itself, intelligently design itself by itself, sustain itself and morph itself into every variety of living organisms we find in our world are characterized as fools. Because of the perception that evolution is a “fact” of science, anything that constitutes evidence against it must be denied or made to conform to evolutionary theory. There is no better example of this practice than views concerning the fossil record. Almost every living organism appears abruptly in the fossil record, fully formed without transitional precursors. Yet Darwinian evolution contends that over time, one form of life, under the right conditions, can change dramatically into another life form. Somehow, single celled microorganisms became more sophisticated. Eventually, natural selection and the ever-illusive beneficial mutation would produce new and improved organisms.

What evolutionists will not tell you is that there is simply nothing other than microbes below the Cambrian layer in the geological column. At the Cambrian layer, there is an explosion of complex invertebrates that suddenly appear. According to evolutionary sources, what is found below the Cambrian rocks are traces of organisms moving on and directly underneath the microbial mats that covered the sea floor. They are preserved from the Ediacaran period allegedly 565 million years ago. Evolutionists content they were probably made by organisms resembling earthworms in shape, size, and how they moved. The burrow-makers have never been found preserved, but, because they would need a head and a tail, the burrowers probably had bilateral symmetry – which would in all probability make them bilaterian animals (Fedonkin, 1992). Evolutionist’s surmises that they fed above the sediment surface, but were forced to burrow to avoid predators (Dzik, 2007).

In case you had not noticed, almost everything these evolutionary sources are saying about pre-Cambrian lifeforms is entirely speculative. Even these hypothetical worm-like creatures are either identical to, or very similar to, earthworms that exist today. Everything is premised on what they might have looked like, how they might have burrowed in bilateral symmetry which would make them bilaterian animals. All of this is premised on a need to avoid predators. One might enquire what predators are they are referring to since these imaginary worm-like creatures lived below the Cambrian layer and, therefore, predate the Cambrian Explosion?

Another trade secret of Darwin’s disciples goes right to the heart of the matter. They are being dishonest in their presentation of the facts. They refuse to admit to the general public that “change over time” is adaptation, not rocks-to-Rowitt Darwinian evolution. This “bait and switch” tactic of promoting adaptation as evidence for Darwin’s theory is a common practice in science today. The types of changes we see in the fossil record are exclusively horizontal or microevolutionary in nature. They are not vertical or macroevolutionary changes at all. Therefore, when the evidence for Darwinian evolution did not appear in the fossil record, some very clever evolutionists, Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldridge (1977), came up with Punctuated Equlibria (or Equilibrium depended on who is quoting them). Now, all the gaps in the fossil record that used to be evidence against Darwin’s theory have conveniently been labeled as evidence for Darwin’s theory.

The battle that is now raging within the Bible believing community is not between creationists and evolutionists. No, the enemy has taken a page out of his own playbook and has pitted creationists against creationists. Jesus warned us that no kingdom divided against itself can stand, Matt. 12:25-26. Yet this is exactly what the enemies of God and His Word have done. They have split creationists into two groups, e.g. Young earth creationists (YEC) and old earth creationists (OEC). This has been a successful ploy of the great deceiver, Satan, ever since he was caste out of heaven, Is. 14:12-15.

The result of this ploy continues to generate serious problems within and without the evangelical community. It has been said that the time issue is really a non-issue. Whether you postulate billions of years or thousands of years of time, life cannot arise by purely naturalistic means. There is a clear discrepancy between science facts and the science fiction that evolutionary scientists promote. This is clearly demonstrated in the evolutionary views concerning the origin of life. While evolutionists readily admit that Spontaneous Generation, the theory that living organisms can arise from inanimate matter, i.e. fleas from dust or maggots from meat, was successfully disproved by Francesco Redi in 1668. They do not readily admit that it took almost two centuries for the scientific community to embrace this truth. Only after the empirical results of Louis Pasteur’s research were announced in 1864 was the matter finally settled, or so one might think. When you research the evolutionary literature, you will find such contradictory statements such as this:

Biogenesis is the production of new living organisms or organelles. The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, is the observation that living things come only from other living things, by reproduction (e.g. a spider lays eggs, which develop into spiders). That is, life does not arise from non-living material, which was the position held by spontaneous generation (Pasteur, 1879). This is summarized in the phrase Omne vivum ex vivo, Latin for "all life [is] from life." A related statement is Omnis cellula e cellula, "all cells [are] from cells;" this observation is one of the central statements of cell theory.

Evolutionary sources continue:

The term biogenesis was coined by Henry Charlton Bastian to mean the generation of a life form from nonliving materials, however, Thomas Henry Huxley chose the term abiogenesis and redefined biogenesis for life arising from preexisting life (Strick, 2001). The generation of life from non-living material is called abiogenesis, and has occurred at least once in the history of the Earth, or in the history of the Universe (see panspermia), when life first arose (Wikipedia, 2013).

Note that evolutionary scientists consider that life spontaneously came into existence “at least once in the history of the earth, or in the history of the universe when life arose.” Therefore, in an attempt to have their cake and eat it too, evolutionary scientists proclaim that nothing (or aliens yet unknown in the case of panspermia) created life. Mention the concept that a Creator intelligently designed living organisms to survive and thrive, to be fruitful and multiply, here on planet earth and you are suddenly deemed ignorant or worse.

The next time evolutionary scientists or others begin to promote their doomsday flavor of the month catastrophe, tell them to get in line behind all the other doom and gloom prognosticators.  For those who believe that God created the heavens and the earth and all that are contained therein, there is no room for man-generated doomsday scenarios. Neither is there any reason to doubt the inerrant Word of God, the security found in the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth, and the promise of new and everlasting life in Him. For we know how the world will end.

Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder), that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us,  the apostles of the Lord and Savior,   knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.  Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells, II Peter 3:1-13.NKJV


Recommended Resources


Dzik, J (2007). The Verdun Syndrome: simultaneous origin of protective armour and infaunal shelters at the Precambrian–Cambrian transition, in Vickers-Rich, Patricia; Komarower, Patricia, The Rise and Fall of the Ediacaran Biota, Special publications, 286, London: Geological Society, pp. 405–414.

Fedonkin, M.A. (1992). Vendian faunas and the early evolution of Metazoa. In Lipps, J., and Signor, P. W.. Origin and early evolution of the Metazoa. New York: Springer. pp. 87–129.

Gould, Stephen Jay, & Eldredge, Niles (1977). “Punctuated equilibria: the tempo and mode of evolution reconsidered.” Paleobiology 3 (2): 115-151.

Hamer, Gene (2005). The God Gene: How Faith is Hardwired into our Genes. New York, NY: Doubleday  

Heartland Institute (2006). Climate Variance No Crisis, Says Senate Committee Chair. Accessed 1.3.13.

Loflin, Lewis (2012). Origins of modern environmental religion. Accessed 1.3.13.

Pasteur, Louis (1879). Pasteur's Papers on the Germ Theory. The Physiological Theory Of Fermentation, Louis Pasteur, Trans. F. Faulkner & D. C. Robb. The Germ Theory And Its Applications To Medicine And Surgery, Mm. Pasteur, Jourbert & Chamberland, Trans. H. C. Ernst, M. D. On The Extension Of The Germ Theory To The Etiology Of Certain Common Diseases, Louis Pasteur, Trans. H. C. Ernst, M. D. Accessed 1.10.13.

Strick, James (April 15, 2001). Evolution & The Spontaneous Generation. Continuum International Publishing Group. Bristol, England: Theommes Press, pp. xi–xxiv.    

White, Lynn (1967). The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis. Accessed 1.3.13.

Wikipedia (2013). Biogenesis. It should be noted that the term abiogenesis Accessed 1.10.13. The word employed by evolutionists has also evolved. The current popular term for the spontaneous generation of life from non-living materials is biopoesis.