"There is nothing conscious or intentional in the action of natural selection. A biologic species does not say to itself, 'Let me try tomorrow (or a million years from now) to grow in a different soil, or use a different food, or subsist on a different body part of a different crab.' Only a human being could make such conscious decisions. This is why the species Homo Sapiens is the apex of evolution. Natural selection is at one and the same time a blind and a creative process. Only a creative but blind process could produce, on the one hand, the tremendous biologic success that is the human species and, on the other, forms of adaptnedness as narrow and as constraining as those of the overspecialized fungus, beetle, and flies mentioned above" [Mark Ridley ed. "Evolution" Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997, p. 381].
"The organic diversity becomes, however, reasonable and understandable if the Creator has created the living world not by caprice but by evolution propelled by natural selection. It is wrong to hold creation and evolution as mutually exclusive alternatives. I am a creationist and an evolutionist. Evolution is God's, or Nature's, method of Creation" [Ibid., p. 382].
"Does the evolutionary doctrine clash with religious faith? It does not. It is a blunder to mistake the Holy Scriptures for elementary textbooks of astronomy, geology, biology, and anthropology" [Ibid., p. 387].
Albert Einstein once wrote that "Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind."
Why do you want to divorce one from the other OG?
You seem to want to use the idea of evolution and science to disprove the existence of a conscious creator. |