The most prominent argument in support of creationism and most difficult to disprove is the notion that something cannot come from nothing. This can be considered an argument from incredulity, a common means to reject the theory of evolution and all subsequent proofs demonstrating its mechanisms of action. A recent example of evolution would be that African elephants; as they are constantly in danger of being poached for ivory, the main targets, the males, have been gradually losing their tusks (or, rather, being born without them to a male parent whose genes didn’t result in tusks.) This is evolution by removal, as all males with tusks would be in much greater danger of being killed before reproducing. This could be considered an observable example of microevolution, a change within species. Macroevolution is still the most contested concept in evolution, but there are many, many examples of this taking place.
When the proof for evolution is finally accepted (as was the heliocentric model of the solar system in the end) there will only arise more proposals to maintain the idea of a creator deity. The main argument is perhaps the oldest: something cannot come from nothing. A lot of secular thinkers and atheists look at this objection and say something like, “If something cannot come from nothing, then how did God come into existence?” It’s a good rebuff to an ontological argument (an argument of being), but ultimately unsatisfying. A better response would be to demonstrate something coming from nothing by means of natural, autonomic processes, and though it may not sound like an easy thing to do, if you look at biology, the method of something coming from nothing is obvious: through our conception and the conception of our ancestors. It can be reasoned briefly with the following eight points:
1 – At one point, we did not exist
2 – At one point, our fathers did not exist
3 – What leads to our creation must take place within the lifetime of our fathers
4 – As our fathers once did not exist, they are a defined nothing
5 – They come into existence through natural processes
6 – At the age of reproductive maturity, a defined nothing is now a something
7 – We come into existence from a defined nothing, as what was needed to create us once did not exist
8 – Something (us) came from nothing (the pre-existence of our parents) through natural, autonomous means.
First, we accept that there was a time before we were born. And during this time we didn’t exist, but we didn’t “come from nothing” because our father was alive, and so provided the something that led to our conception and eventual birth. But to show that something does arise from nothing, you have to define what is accepted as nothing – whether it is a temporary or ultimate nothing. It is a temporary nothingness, but if it is true in the autonomic processes of biology, it can be extended to autonomic processes in physics and cosmology. If we are the result of the existence of our mother and father, then our parents are what gave rise to us, the something from which our lives arose. But, as at one point we accept that we ourselves did not exist, we must accept that, like us, our father did not exist; and, not existing, he was in no position to contribute to the process that creates us. So, before our existence, we had our father’s existence as a something. Go back a little bit further and you have a non-existent father, a father without the genetic material to create life, without any of the sperm that would be necessary to fertilize an ovum. An ovum itself is something that arises from autonomic biological processes, as an ovum is only a mature female reproductive cell — and many are never fertilized. and there was a time before the production of reproductive cells, another defined nothing.
So, when we go back to the non-existence of our father, that is a nothing; his father before him, too, at one point didn’t produce sperm, nor his mother produce the reproductive cells necessary to create our father. Through this process our father, once our grandfather reached that awkward age of maturity, came into existence from what had been a defined nothing. As there was a time in which our fathers did not exist, a defined nothing, then came into existence autonomously, only to later create us, a defined something: something came into being from what was once not there, therefore something does in this manner come from nothing.
This is one of many examples in biology when you see that creation itself is not an individual act of will, but the result of genetic code inherited and gifted to new generations from the last, each arising from what was once a defined nothing in turn. And since we at one point did not exist, whatever life we create will have arisen from what was one a defined nothing, with life being the resultant product of an autonomic process that goes back to the first eukaryotic lifeforms, as all of our ancestors never once failed to reproduce. If anything may be considered immortal, it could be the forever changing genetic code that, when traced far enough back in time, will take us to the first hominids, the parent species of several offshoots of what is now the primate order, and further still to all life.
You can take this argument to its logical conclusion by simply applying reproduction in human beings and the way by which something arises from nothing to the emergence of variations of entire species. As all species are the product of long periods of adaptation and imperfect but beneficial genetic replication, there were times before the first Australopithecus gave way to the next hominids in the continuing line of genetic descent, australopithecus afarensis and then australopithecus africanus, respectively. As there was a time when the first australopithecenes did not exist in the fossil record and we are the result of millions of years of adaptation between then and now, from Lucy to homo sapiens, all species come into being from nothing; each, instead, arising from autonomic processes explicable in natural terms, through biology and genetics.