Viewed socially and politically, creationism refers
to a number of twentieth-century religiously-based
anti-evolution movements originating in the USA,
but now spreading to many countries. The most
familiar of these (and the movement to which the
term is most frequently applied) is ‘creation science’,
an attempt to demonstrate with scientific data and
theory the theological view known as special cre-
ationism. According to special creationism, God
created the universe – stars, galaxies, Earth, and
living things – in essentially their present forms.
Living things were created as ‘kinds’ that do not
have a genealogical (evolutionary) relationship to
one another. This biblical literalist theology views
Genesis narratives, such as the creation of Adam
and Eve, their sin and expulsion from Eden, and the
Flood of Noah, as historical events. In creation sci-
ence and its ancestor, ‘Flood Geology’, the Flood of
Noah has shaped most of the Earth’s geology. A recent
creationist movement, Intelligent Design Theory,
pays little attention to the Flood of Noah or to
geology, or to fact claims of any sort, contenting
itself with proclaiming God’s intermittent creation
of supposedly ‘irreducibly complex’ biochemical
structures, such as the bacterial flagellum or the
blood clotting cascade, rather than presenting
a scientific alternative to evolution. A non-Christian
creationism is promoted by the Krishna Conscious-
ness movement, whose members agree with geolo-
gists about the age of the geological column and
how it was shaped, but who argue that human arte-
facts are found from the Precambrian on, thus sup-
porting a literal interpretation of the Vedas that
humans have existed for billions of years.
Christians who opposed evolution during Darwin’s
time rarely referred to themselves as ‘creationists’;
they used the term ‘creationism’ generically to refer
to the idea that God purposefully creates living
things, in contrast with Darwin’s naturalistic explan-
ation for the appearance of humans and other crea-
tures (see Famous Geologists: Darwin). Nineteenth-
century clergy and scientists could choose from
many models of creation beyond the Biblical literalist
six 24-h days. Charles Lyell (see Famous Geologists:
Lyell) proposed that God had created animals
adapted to ‘centres of creation’ around the world;
Cuvier (see Famous Geologists: Cuvier) proposed a
series of geological catastrophes followed by a series
of creations. Theologically, the 6 days of Genesis
Creation could be interpreted as very long periods
of time (the ‘day-age’ theory), or Genesis could be
read as permitting a long period of time between
the first and second verses (the ‘gap theory’). Some
doubtless clung to a literal Genesis of six 24-h days
and a historical, universal Flood, but this view was
not common amongst university-educated scientists
or clergy.
The evolution of creationism and its relationship to
geology are the subjects of this article, and thus,
befitting an evolutionary approach, we begin with a
historical perspective.
Static versus Dynamic Views
of the Earth
Throughout much of the early European scientific
period (1600–1700), two perspectives of the world
competed: either it had remained unchanged since
the special Creation described in Genesis, or it was
changing now and had changed in the past. The shift
from a static to a dynamic view of nature was stimu-
lated by European exploration during the 1500–1700s.
During these expeditions, vast amounts of natural his-
tory, including geology, were learned by travellers and
settlers, and the new information proved to be difficult
to fit into a biblical literalist framework.
The remains of molluscs and other sea creatures on
mountaintops, found in the same groupings as living
shellfish, encouraged da Vinci to question a literal
Flood; he argued that the Flood would have mixed
up the shells, not deposited them in life-like settings.
Biological data also did not fit into the view of a static
world: new species were discovered in the new lands
that were not mentioned in the Bible, and geolo-
gists found remains of extinct species, troubling for
a theology assuming a perfect Creation. Biogeog-
raphy also made a literal Flood story problematic:
how did marsupials in Australia and South America
get there after the Ark landed on Ararat? Old views of
a static Creation, unchanged since God rested on the
seventh day, gradually gave way to an appreciation of
an evolving world and, eventually, of the evolution
of living things.
Geology is an evolutionary science, dealing as
it does with cumulative change in the history of the
planet. Geology came into its own as a scientific dis-
cipline during the 1700s, as more was learned about
the geological characteristics of the planet, prompting
speculations about the processes and mechanisms that
produced them. The fruits of fieldwork and careful
mapping illuminated such processes as sedimentation,
erosion, volcanoes and earthquakes, mountain build-
ing, and the like, and it made sense that these pro-
cesses had also operated in the past, changing the
contours of the planet. The increased understanding
of the Earth and the forces that produced its land-
forms led to the inevitable conclusion that the Earth
was ancient.
An ancient Earth, however, conflicted with trad-
itional scriptural interpretation that the Earth was
382 CREATIONISM