Middle Ground in the Creationism Debate?

The two opinions in the ongoing discussion of creationism versus evolution (PHYSICS TODAY, June 2005, page 26) are not that far apart. Adherents of both believe in a common origin of modern humans. Creationists call the origin "Adam." But they obviously believe in evolution; otherwise they cannot explain the differences in Africans, Asians, Europeans, and other groups. Darwin became interested in evolution when he observed naked natives in Tierra del Fuego living in freezing temperatures. They had evolved to survive under those conditions.

The difference in beliefs is in the time period involved. A clear track goes back through Arab traditions to Abraham. Before that there are lists of names, the so-called begats in the book of Genesis. In ancient usage, the term "son of" could either mean son of an actual person or son of a tribe established by the person. Religious fundamentalists—that is, creationists—use the more restrictive meaning and come up with a time period that is too short. Use of the latter meaning results in a much longer time period that matches scientific evidence for events such as the great flood, and puts Eden at the end of the last ice age, which is where it should be if it is the origin of modern humans. The ice melted, and the population expanded into new areas, evolving to best survive the environment.

The problem is that Genesis is a very brief document that gives no history of the world outside Eden. It simply states that "sons of God married daughters of man." So Adam and Eve were exiled from Eden, and their sons married daughters of the indigenous people outside Eden, about whom Genesis gives no information. Everything is left to interpretation, scientific investigations, and opinion. The amount of material manufactured on the basis of such a brief document is truly amazing.