Mickey TeKippe and Calley Voorhees are both biology students. For three years, they have taken many of the same courses from the same professors. Yet, they have very different views about one thing – the origin of life.

“I’m a firm believer in the big bang and the evolution of species,” said TeKippe, senior in biology. “I don’t think you can learn biology without evolution.”

TeKippe said he is more persuaded by the scientific literature he has read than by the arguments he’s heard from creationists.

In contrast, Voorhees, junior in biology, said she believes God created the earth and all life.

“My whole life, I’ve known that there’s got to be something greater than us,” she said. “There’s no way that this just happened. The more I study the complexity of life, the more I realize how unlikely it would be for a random process guided by the laws of science over billions of years to produce life as we know it.”

Just as there are differing opinions at Iowa State about evolution, a recent Gallup Poll indicated the American public is also split on this issue.

Of the 1,000 adults surveyed about their beliefs in February, 57 percent said creationism is responsible for the origin of life, while 33 percent chose evolution. The remaining 10 percent said they were unsure.

Respondents were also asked to choose which of the three explanations about human origins they agreed with. Two of the explanations were compatible with evolution, and the third was a strict creationist view.

Of those surveyed, 49 percent said they agreed with one of the evolutionary viewpoints. Slightly fewer – 45 percent – chose the creationist explanation. The poll’s margin of error was plus or minus three percentage points.

More than half of the respondents agreed with the term “creation,” but less than half of them chose the creationist explanation.

John Pleasants, temporary assistant professor of zoology and genetics, said these responses about human origins were somewhat contradictory. He said the discrepancy exists because many people think they understand evolution and creationism, when in fact they don’t clearly know how the two ideas differ.

Creationism, Scientific

Creationism, and Evolution

Pleasants said creationism is a religious view of the earth’s origins that follows the Bible literally.

“It’s very difficult to knock down aspects of the creation theory,” he said.

Pleasants said the idea of a creator being responsible for life’s beginning and complexity can’t be tested, because it does not involve science. The scientific creationism movement began 20 years ago, he said, and treats creationism and evolution as two alternate hypotheses.

“Scientific creationism attempts to bring creation into the scientific arena,” Pleasants said.

However, John Patterson, professor emeritus of materials science and engineering, rejects scientific creationism. He said it is a “bogus theory” intended to convince people of Christian beliefs.

“I consider creationists to be counterfeiters of science,” Patterson said.

Warren Dolphin, university professor of zoology and genetics, also disagrees with scientific creationists. He called scientific creationism a misnomer in a book he contributed to, “Did the Devil Make Darwin Do It?”

“Science doesn’t deal with the supernatural,” he said. “By definition, science deals with the natural. You can’t put those two together.”

After reading and hearing the arguments of scientific creationists, Dolphin said he does not think there is any scientific evidence that supports the creationist theory.

“There’s no question that the people writing this have a great and deep faith, but it’s not science,” he said.

Tom Ingebritsen, associate professor of zoology and genetics, teaches an honors seminar called God and Science. He said mainstream science views scientific creationism as an attempt to disprove evolution by finding gaps in the theory.

“There are gaps in our knowledge of evolution, although they don’t necessarily disprove the theory,” Ingebritsen said. He said one of these gaps is the evolutionary explanation of the origin of life.

Scientists believe life originated from organic matter, but they don’t know how this happened, he said. “Nobody has convinced me yet that matter has organized spontaneously to create life,” he said. “Sometimes science is guided by a belief system, too.”

He said science has a belief system based on the idea that all natural phenomena have material causes.

Voorhees also said he believes there are gaps in evolution.

“I think that, eventually, science will be left with no alternative but creation because there are so many things left unexplained by science,” she said.

Education and Origins

For several years, Pleasants has surveyed the students in his evolution class to find out what they know and think about evolution.

In this year’s survey, he said 52 percent of the students, who are mainly life science majors, said creationism should be taught in schools along with evolution.

“I think we do a disservice to evolution if we don’t talk about [scientific creationism] to some extent,” he said.

Pleasants said he designates a class period for discussion about conflicts between evolution and creationism, because he wants his students to know about the creationists’ arguments.

Dolphin has a different view about discussing scientific creationism in the classroom.

“We’re not going to talk about evolution as one of many theories,” he said.

Patterson said the only legitimate way to discuss this theory in the classroom is as “a prime example of what science is not.”

“This would allow students to see the contrast of legitimate science with counterfeit theories,” he said.

TeKippe said most of his professors just briefly mention creation.

“They glaze over it because it’s a matter of faith rather than something that can be tested,” he said.

Pleasants said he wants students to feel comfortable talking to him about their views. He said some creationist students feel they are not being true to their beliefs when they answer test questions. Occasionally, they write “I don’t believe this” in the margins of their exams, he said.

While Dolphin and Pleasants said they don’t require their students to believe in evolution, they do expect them to understand the theory.

All of the professors and students interviewed agreed that students are usually respectful of each other’s beliefs. Pleasants said he avoids conflict in the classroom by not “baiting” creationists with insults about their views.

Voorhees said she does not feel her beliefs are always respected by professors.

“I think that professors should look at the evidence and present the facts, and instead of trying to fit them into the current scientific paradigm, they should strive to find the truth,” she said. “This would involve not equating religion with fantasy.”

Ingebritsen said faith is not a synonym for irrationality.

“There’s a belief among many academics that there’s no rational basis to religion,” he said. “As a Christian, I really want to respect other peoples’ beliefs.”

This can be difficult for a science professor, Ingebritsen said.

“The problem is that science isn’t really neutral, even though it tries to be,” he said. “By default, you’re saying that God isn’t a part of this. It’s hard to teach evolution without implying that God doesn’t exist.”

Is Evolution Compatible

with Belief in God?

Pleasants asked his evolution class if a person can believe in both God and evolution.

Eighty-six percent of the students said yes, while 8 percent said no and 4 percent did not answer. One student said yes, if the person is Catholic.

“It depends on what you want your God to do and to be,” he said.

If God acts in a physical way, he could direct evolution, Pleasants said. Faith and evolution are also compatible if the material is separated from the spiritual, he said.

TeKippe said evolution does not clash with his religious beliefs.

“I don’t view it to be one or the other,” he said.

Dolphin said the answer to this question depends on how one interprets origins. If the Bible is interpreted literally, a Christian cannot believe in evolution, he said.

On the other hand, “a scientist who feels everything is natural can’t be a Christian,” he said.

However, Dolphin said a person who believes God intervened at the origin and then nature took an evolutionary path could be both a Christian and an evolutionist.

Ingebritsen said there are several belief systems that relate religion to evolution. The beliefs range from a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis to the idea that the earth’s origin was completely natural, he said.

Ingebritsen said he accepts a modified form of theistic evolution, which would allow for the possible miraculous intervention of God at some stages.

“I believe that, in some way, this whole process is guided by God,” he said.

However, Ingebritsen said his faith isn’t based on which point of view is right.

Voorhees, also a Christian, said she feels differently about this question. “My relationship with God depends on the fact that he created me and that he knows his plans for me,” she said.

Voorhees said she knows God created humans because all humans have a conscience telling them what is right. “There is no morality without God,” she said.

Dolphin said many people, like Voorhees, feel they have a personal relationship with a god that created them. They pursue religion because this relationship gives them a good feeling, he said.

“Evolution makes this relationship less personal,” he said. “It removes God.”

Dolphin said realizing this Christian point of view 20 years ago was a “eureka moment” in his understanding of how evolution takes away from this relationship. This realization also revealed to him why this controversy exists – and that it will not be settled soon, he said.

Voorhees said some people may say her belief in a God who created the world is wishful thinking.

“It is just as wishful to believe that there is not a God, and therefore nothing to hold us accountable for our actions,” she said.