To Dr. Richard Lumsden, former professor of biology at Tulane University and medical school and the former dean of the Graduate School, evolution was science whereas creation was merely religion and he taught as much to his students. What I would try to get across is that science is science. Science deals with the real world, was real phenomenal. We don’t bring into such discussions inferences of supernatural.
Dr. Lumsden who studied at Tulane Harvard and Price couldn’t believe it when the Louisiana state legislature passed the law that if evolution were taught in the public school classroom, then equal time had to be made for creation science. My reaction to that was just total consternation. Who are these people telling us PHD-level scientists how to teach and what to teach regarding science? So I just thought the whole thing was we’re just absolutely absurd but it was not the energy of a supernatural nature. I was prompted at that point to give a lecture on the origin of life giving creationists due with as much mockery as I could summon. Truly in the beginning was the word but the word was hydrogen.
After that class one of his graduate students came up to him and said “great lecture doc”. Well I got my attention flattered, always did. And she said but I have some questions and indeed she did. She had a legal pad and I could see line after line after line after line. So they had an appointment which ended up lasting longer than anticipated. The appointment also ended up changing Dr. Lumsden’s life.
Now I’m not trying to challenge anything. I just want to get my science straight. Last month you taught how mutations were genetic disasters. How by natural selection can they randomly produce new and better structures? That’s a good question. I’ll probably have to think more about that.
Aren’t the odds of the random assembly of genes mathematically impossible? You’ve all had your share of mathematics. Let’s see if we can figure that out. Not only were we talking about a mathematical impossibility, we were talking about a physical and chemical impossibility. Genes that might be 10: 200, these are pretty formidable odds. But the fact remains is we’re here and in reality the only way we could have gotten here is through the evolutionary process so the fact that we’re here really proves evolution and these are the events – molecular events, genetic events – that were mechanisms, part and parcel of the evolutionary process.
I could buffalo astute when I felt myself getting a little bit in trouble okay. I’d had a few years experience at that, it’s a trade secret but for the first time maybe in my life in explaining various facets of evolution theory I began to listen to what I was saying and what I was saying wasn’t making very good scientific sense.
Where exactly in the fossil record is the evidence for progressive evolution the transition of forms between the major groups? You know most of them, come to think of it, are fully formed kinds in their own right. This conversation with the young lady went on for approximately three hours during which time again we entertained these questions and the whole time on answering I’m listening to my own responses and trying not to betray this to the student. It was rapidly concluding that this is not making good scientific sense. What I’m telling this young lady and what I told the students this morning is not good science. “So I guess we just haven’t been lucky enough to pick up the critical evidence.”
It dawned on me right then and there that evolution was bankrupt as a scientific theory. Well if that were so, if life did not originate by a naturalistic materialistic spontaneous process, what was the alternative explanation? “Oh my God.” And I said it then not in blasphemy but in awe. What happened that afternoon was first of all a mortal embarrassment to me as professor. Professing to be wise, the professor was made a fool. And then secondly with the realization that hey God exists and God created was that experience of fear. Now that’s enough to turn a corner in anyone’s life. After much study and soul-searching, Dr. Lumsden became a creationist first and then a Christian. One event led to the other and the culmination was finding myself before saving altar on my knees and stiff neck broken in obedience, asking Jesus to come into my life to be my Lord and personal savior.
Today Dr. Richard Lumsden, former evolutionary professor, is a committed creationist because of the scientific evidence. He has since openly debated evolutionist. He feels that in light of the great advances of science in the 20th century, evolution is no longer tenable. The evidence of science, the best in paleontology, the best in biochemistry, the best in genetics and so on is all compelling for creation. Creation theory does not rest on some purely metaphysical principles, it rests on the same science that evolution theory would rest on except that the better explanation is creation not naturalistic materialistic stochastic or random evolutionary process.