Creationsim vs Evolution

Yes, fire ants can put together a raft in about 100 seconds, using claws, jaws and adhesive pads on their legs to stick together, and releasing an oily fluid that allows them to stick to a smooth surface. The ant’s hard covering is water repelling. Prof. David Ferris, University of South Carolina declares that this isn’t all that unusual.

 

Prof. Ferris ~ “What you’re seeing is a normal response (built in) of the fire ants to the flood,” Ferris said. “Just like people want to get out of the way, the fire ants want to get out of the way...They’ve adapted to a flood zone in South America. So when water would flood along the rivers there, they’d put their queen on top of what is basically a floating raft of ants with all the young."

Is that because of evolution? Well, we would have to find out how many times they all drowned before they all made a step in the direction not to, especially since ants work together. If it is an instant response, then it is rather built in. Anything built into a computer program was done by the creator of that program. 

Oh, excuse me someone might say. What are you suggesting, they were created that way? Well let me tell you, they did evolve. How? Well its obvious this person would say to me. Ants like any other creature evolving had to go through many attempts to survive floods and they learned from past experiences that water would flood them out if they did not prepare to flee at the right moment. They 'naturally' decide when the water comes that they all better get to high ground. 

Really??? I would say then that means that all ants must be able to react instantly and for the same reason. As a sociologist, I could argue that 'real' evolution is learning over time what works and work does not through experience which could also suggest a kind of natural selection. Those that don't work for/contribute to the good of the whole could be considered useless eaters and would have to eventually fall by the wayside of natural selection social process, a kind of survival of the fittest. That usually does not go down well with most people who have themselves a disability or child with one. This was the hidden agenda of Soviet communism. After all... all workers had to work hard and enthusiastically for the good of the whole.

In order for evolution to be in the least bit logical, you would have to argue that through natural selection, only those ants that evolved through natural selection would and could react at just the right moment when water threatened. They became over time better immediate reactors through the same selective process; but that suggests that in the long time past, there weren't any such reactors at all and thus in a flood event all ants must have drowned. But, let's say that one or two survived and were thus witness to those that did not react and now they having such experience have graduated to being at least early sign reactors. 

Therefore, over time, these now simple reactors breed and their reaction to 'intervene' at just the right moment when the threat of flood comes is passed on. That is evolution, right?  Little by little, they deal with floods and evolve in their reactions, losing fewer and fewer to floods. But, because fire ants build rafts to save everybody 'all fire ants' (likely because they are already in their perfectly evolved state) at once, they must have had the idea for the raft before the next flood came as the best idea and though they may not get everyone on board with the idea or on board at all; thus, they would still evolve in raft building. Right?

Its nonsense to think that over time, fire ants have evolved to become better reactors so that they could evolve to devise a plan (build a rafter for the entire group) and save everyone 'all ants' not just some and certainly not just the better bred or more useful, quicker reactors. 

What an incredible social imagination some people have. Isn't it easier and wiser to say that ants and all creation were programmed from the beginning to react in just the right moment to situations.  But, then I am sure you would argue that people don't seem to learn from their mistakes immediately and over time they get better. Good point. What does that mean? For one thing, man making mistakes is not an argument for evolution. Rather, it is an argument for transgression. After all, man has been pointed as not using all his brain capacity. Guess he is turning into or evolving toward a lower species, right?

However, to explain man making mistakes and not evolving, one can take a creationists' perspective? Well, there a glitch in our 'evolution' program.... and it is called original sin. What to hope for or what kind of evolution can we expect? Resurrection through Jesus Christ, our Lord God, the creator of heaven and earth of all things seen and unseen! 

* Do fire ants make mistakes in this fallen world, the world with a 'glitch'??? Sure they do, we just can't recognize it 'an ant mistake'.