"Still Life with Fighting Monkeys" by Frans SnydersA Poem for the Birthday of Charles Darwin: ‘Dog Eat Dog’ by Warren Bonham The Society February 12, 2025 Poetry, Satire, Science 39 Comments . Dog Eat Dog As cells get divided, if outcomes are guided _completely by rolling the dice, the fit must survive so their genes stay alive, _while the weak pay the ultimate price. So students of Darwin, say people who are win- _ners of this genetic roulette must all procreate so that they replicate _the ideal DNA alphabet. We all bear a label, as fit or unable, _to fight in this jungle we’re in, which makes you my rival, so for my survival, _I strike first so my genes will win. I stab my blade in you and cut through your sinew _and organs until I hit bone, and then find another, thus dogs eat each other _until the last one is alone. When life has no function beyond some compunction _to leave DNA in our wakes, there’s no controversy, there’s no place for mercy _for those who win Darwin’s sweepstakes. Keep selfishly living, and have no misgiving, _if you’re just an ape with a mind. Now… wake from that nightmare and know that God’s right there, _each one was uniquely designed. We’re much more than merely smart apes cavalierly _at war to spread our DNA. God planned every feature of each living creature, _and hears what each one has to say. It’s just the beginning, we’re in the first inning, _the outline of heaven is dim. God walks right beside us, His image inside us, _and wants just to guide us to Him. . Poet’s Note Charles Darwin was a scientist born on February 12, 1809. He is best known for writing On the Origin of Species which summarizes his theory of evolution. This book describes his hypothesized unguided process whereby all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase their ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. Over time, his theory was embraced by atheists thankful for a scientific basis for dispensing with the need for God to explain how life evolved. It was also adopted by the Communist Party, the Nazi Party, and eugenicists around the world, as a rationale for helping nature weed out what they believed to be weaker elements of the human race. As scientists have learned more, a new school of thought has emerged that acknowledges the contributions of Darwin’s theory but only insofar as it describes survival, rather than the arrival of new species. This scientific theory, the theory of Intelligent Design, posits the need for an all-powerful creative mind as the initial inventor of life and all subsequent species. . . Warren Bonham is a private equity investor who lives in Southlake, Texas. NOTE TO READERS: If you enjoyed this poem or other content, please consider making a donation to the Society of Classical Poets. The Society of Classical Poets does not endorse any views expressed in individual poems or commentary. 39 Responses Martin Rizley February 12, 2025 It is quite a literary achievement to produce what is in essence an apologetic discourse commending Intelligent Design theory in poetic form! You have somehow managed to discuss the theological, philosophical, and biological implications of two rival views of origins, wrapping the whole up in nice poetic language that chugs along at an easy rolling rhythm with metrical precision and nifty rhymes. In my opinion, the literary organism that has thus “arrived” on the scene, emerging from the fertile thought processes of your mind, passes the fitness test of poetic survival! . Reply Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 Intelligent Design makes a lot of sense to me. I’m very glad that some of its precepts came through in this poem. Thanks for the supportive comments! Reply Martin Rizley February 13, 2025 I agree that the evidence for intelligent design, according to Psalm 19 and the apostle Paul in Romans 1, has always been sufficient enough to remove all excuse from the atheist who believes in the absurd proposition that 0 + 0 = Everything, that order can arise from chaos, life from non-life, personality from impersonal nothingness, mind from eternal mindlessness, beauty from ashes, moral duty from amoral matter, intricate complexity from a mere explosion, law and order from initial lawlessness and disorder, and so forth. As Frank Turek says, “I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist!” But then add to the “always known” the additional light of things that were formerly unknown, but now brought to light, such as the four-dimensional complexity of DNA as it generates new information at each stage of organic development, and the absurdity of atheism stands out even more clearly. The real conflict in our day is between strict materialistic naturalism and the full-blooded supernaturalism of the Christian worldview which allows God to be God and to bring forth the universe in the time and manner He chooses by His unlimited power. If Jesus made fermented grape juice in a moment of time from water, transforming instantaneously the very structure of molecules to do what nature itself, by its own inherent powers, could only do over weeks or months, then it is clear to me that God can bring the universe into being however He pleases in the time frame He chooses– which is not to say He made fossils out of thin air to “fool fools” as some early opponents of Darwin alleged! Roy Eugene Peterson February 12, 2025 The theory of survival of the species makes a lot more sense than the theory of “arrival” of the species. The creation theory of each species reflected in Genesis is how I accept the “origins.” This well-conceived poem resonates with thoughts and theories over the course of the verses ending with the perfect homage to our Creator. Reply Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 Thanks! Whoever came up with the differentiation between the “arrival” and “survival” of species was a poetic, but even more importantly, a scientific genius. Reply fred schueler February 12, 2025 IF THE OLD RELIGION IS TRUE, THEN THIS IS A HYMN TO FATHER DARWIN (To the tune of Stan Rogers’ ‘I Took Back my Hand.’ Hecate Strait to Westbank to Chiliwack Lake, BC. June 1989 Father of theories, Husband of the World, Barnacle Master, the lord of the Worms, Stretched out on the White Goddess’ altar he lay, Orchid-mad, twining like plants. Wonder of wonders, no longer sublime, Each thing for itself he perceived in its place Winnowed by chance throughout infinite time, Each Beetle, each Sundew, each race. Father of fathers, the first in all Time: Husband of Emma, the first one to know Why your children are precious, why parents combine Their lives so that families grow. Father of knowledge, Odysseus knew No more of the Goddess’ girdle than you, Who saw her plates hinted by Andean shells, Crowned islands that sink in the sea. With Malthus and Pigeons and Galapagos Finch A story you told that would throw down the gods, A thousand times sterner than Abraham’s test, It stood as the cause of the World. Blind as the watchmaker, cruel as the spring, The Truth is the stories that offer to die, For the monkey-bred brain can do no more than this, Than to know when its tales go awry. Father of Life, and the Husband of Death, All of the others have died for our birth, Ghosts of their genes and the flesh of their flesh, Selection has ordered the Earth: Orchid-mad, twining like plants. Reply Mike Bryant February 12, 2025 Fred, your poem, especially this part: the monkey-bred brain can do no more than this, Than to know when its tales go awry.“ Brought this to mind: https://amandascookin.com/monkey-bread/ Reply fred schueler February 12, 2025 these lines combine Darwin’s wondering if conclusions reached by a mind that was descended from ancestors could reach reliable conclusions, and the “Triumph of the Darwinian Method” in the use of the modern scientific hypothetico-deductive hypothesis that is always prepared to lay down its life for the truth. Yael February 12, 2025 This is a neat and well composed way to sum up this contentious topic. Great poem, thank you! Reply Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 I’m very glad it resonated with you. Reply Gigi Ryan February 12, 2025 Dear Warren, A perfect poem for a perfect day to remind us that life matters and we are no accident. “God planned every feature of each living creature, _and hears what each one has to say. It’s just the beginning, we’re in the first inning, _the outline of heaven is dim. God walks right beside us, His image inside us, _and wants just to guide us to Him.” This is truly good news for three families I know whose children suffer with life and death heath problems. They are not genetic accident and this story is just getting started. Thank you very much. Gigi Reply Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 I hate hearing stories like that, but they are truly hopeless and pointless in Darwin’s world. Reply Evan Mantyk February 12, 2025 Thank you for this poem, Warren. It is well-timed and a topic that I think should be brought up, reflected on, and debated more frequently. In some ways, the entire house of cards of modern life (humans as only animals / God as optional) goes back to Darwin’s theory being used to explain away the necessity of a Creator. Yet there are obvious problems with Darwin’s theory. The classic example is giving a monkey a typewriter and he eventually produces all of Shakespeare’s plays… what are the chances of that? Better than the chances of random mutations producing human life. There are also the lack of intermediate species, the evidence of previously advanced civilizations etc. etc. It is the strange situation we human beings find ourselves in, in which we look at dead space and emptiness endlessly in the ocean, the sky, and the universe. However, it is worth reflecting on the fact that if you were standing on an electron that formed the carbon in your body, you would also think it was all dead space. Unfortunately, from this dead space the mainstream scientific mind begins and says there must be an explanation of how nothing became something. In fact, the starting point is wrong. I think some people, from a spiritual perspective, know that actually there is something always and eternally and the nothing we perceive is an illusion. Reply Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 Great points. I’ve heard other people say that children understand that something doesn’t come from nothing. It takes a lot of education to know otherwise. Reply Mike Bryant February 12, 2025 Warren, I love this poem and everything it presents. I believed evolution, even though I went to a Catholic school. Why, because the nuns and brothers believed in evolution. It is still fashionable to believe this lie because it just seems true. It has gained a truthiness because all the smartest people truly believe it and preach the undeniable truth of it. Only recently, computer and information specialists have come to realize, as Evan alluded to, that the odds of the information encoded in DNA coming together by chance are too long… far, far too long by orders of magnitudes. Random processes CANNOT create meaningful code. Information theory completely rules out randomly generated life. Life by Chance Is Not Just Unlikely—It’s Impossible Even if the universe were trillions upon trillions of times older than it is, it would still not be old enough for life to have formed randomly. Math proves that life required guidance, design, and an organizing principle beyond mere chance. Reply Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 I’m surprised to hear about the curriculum choice even in Catholic Schools. I hope that Intelligent Design is gaining some traction in those schools now. If not there, I don’t know where it will gain a foothold. Reply Mike Bryant February 12, 2025 I should add that evolution from species to species is also impossible. While small changes within species is observable, the large-scale evolution of entirely new species, organs, and body plans faces overwhelming probability and information barriers. The required number of coordinated mutations, time constraints, and functional dependencies make species-to-species evolution via random mutation and natural selection mathematically impossible. Also, if species gradually evolved, we should see millions of transitional fossils showing slow changes. Instead, the Cambrian Explosion (~540 million years ago) shows the sudden appearance of nearly all major animal groups without clear precursors. Many species appear in the fossil record fully formed and remain unchanged for millions of years (a phenomenon called stasis). The theory of evolution is dead… people need to get over it. “I attempted mathematics… but I got on very slowly. The work was repugnant to me, chiefly from my not being able to see any meaning in the early steps of algebra. This impatience was foolish, and in after years I have deeply regretted that I did not proceed far enough at least to understand something of the great leading principles of mathematics; for men thus endowed seem to have an extra sense. But I do not believe that I should ever have succeeded beyond a very low grade.” -Charles Darwin Reply Jeff Kemper February 12, 2025 Warren, I love this poem! I was discussing the evolution hypothesis just this morning with an evolutionary biologist, an atheist recently (three years ago) having become a Christian, who had problems with the survival/arrival idea, i.e., nothing somehow generating something. He will appreciate this. Thanks! Reply Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 Interesting timing. Maybe there was a hidden intelligence influencing things somehow? Reply Cynthia Erlandson February 12, 2025 I agree with the comments above about evolutionary theory, so I will just comment on the wonderful poetic elements you’ve used, such as some hilarious internal rhymes (Darwin / are win-; in you / sinew; nightmare / right there; and end rhymes like roulette / alphabet; also fun lines like “if you’re just an ape with a mind.” Great blend of serious (and important) subject matter, and humor. Thanks, Warren! Reply Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 I almost gave up on this one because rhyming with Darwin created a real problem for me. I’m very glad you enjoyed both the light and serious sides of this one! Reply Paul A. Freeman February 12, 2025 Happy birthday, Chuck. You’ve generated much debate, which is still evolving. Thanks for the read, Warren. Reply Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 Very clever pun! Chuck certainly had an impact. No one is going to be talking about me 200+ years after I was born. Reply Joseph S. Salemi February 12, 2025 I agree that the complexity of living organisms suggests the working of Divine Omniscience, but I do not accept the absurdity that the universe is only 6,000 years old (as Bishop Ussher argued, and as certain fundamentalist types continue to insist upon). Even William Jennings Bryan, in the 1925 Scopes trial, admitted that the length of time that encompassed creation could have been countless millions of years. Reply Mike Bryant February 12, 2025 I agree, Joe. The vast distances of the observable universe, combined with the time it takes for light to travel, present a major challenge to the idea of a 6,000-year-old universe. Reply Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 I’ve never read anything about the young-Earth hypothesis. It doesn’t seem to line up with any of the scientific observations I’m familiar with, so it never felt like a good use of time. Joseph S. Salemi February 13, 2025 The Young Earth Creationist position stems largely from a fundamentalist Protestant view of all scripture as literal and inerrant, with no figurative or allegorical readings of the text being accepted as possible. Margaret Coats February 13, 2025 Warren, I can’t tell you how delighted I am to see this topic brought to light and generating discussion. As Evan Mantyk says, it is timely. Special Creation rather than evolution has much to be said for it–indeed, much that has been very long neglected. We had the second law of thermodynamics stated about the same time as Darwin’s theory; it is based on universal empirical observation. It is a law of physics without evidence against it, while Darwin has so much evidence against him that (as Mike Bryant says) his theory is dead and should be abandoned. With that second law as just one reason. It is hilarious that your poem does so much with DNA, for the discovery of DNA structure in the 1950s, along with computer assisted calculations of probability in the 1960s, nailed the coffin for Darwin’s theory. Nonetheless, because evolution had become so popular among academics (whether atheist or religious), it remains the belief of the vast majority. It is, however, (and I emphasize) a belief of unthinking faith in Darwin and in academia rather than in evidence. Religious persons have mostly adopted the compromise of Theistic Evolution, which is the idea that God used evolution as the means of creation. Happily, it has now been shown that Theistic Evolution involves so much ridiculous illogic as to be untenable. That means it is a simple conflict between creation and evolution as the means of what you call “arrival” of species. And the Young Earth is part of the matter. This will cause conflict among thinking persons on this site, as we already see. I will encourage you to look into it, as it is quite satisfying to know more and more about the Scriptural perspective. I had to deal with this while homeschooling, and thus my reading is now far out of date. Should you want to begin where I left off, The Young Earth by John Morris is a general book covering many kinds of evidence, and it was congenial to me as having been an undergraduate physics major. But it is now an old book, followed up by much new research and thought. Maybe I can get back to some of it. Even a few professors now teaching Intelligent Design, at least as a rational option. Thanks for your effort on this! Reply Martin Rizley February 13, 2025 People who are unfamiliar with the “Young Earth Creation” position might well be amazed to discover the high quality of the material being produced by leading YEC organizations. Even old earth creationists would agree with many of the well-informed and well-reasoned arguments they put forth against Darwinian evolution. I love watching the interviews with degreed professional scientists produced by Creation Ministries International. Here is a link to one video explaining the difference between natural selection and evolution: https://creation.com/es/videos/why-natural-selection-is-not-evolution Reply Yael February 13, 2025 Here is a recent video about mitochondrial DNA discoveries which you may find interesting, as it sheds some light on the topic under discussion: https://www.youtube.com/live/Sdrxhs8TmtA Reply Margaret Coats February 13, 2025 Thanks for the links, Martin and Yael and Mike! I will get around to them. Just as amusement, if you haven’t seen it, take a look at the medieval French poem I translated as “Understanding Nature.” The Middle Ages had their own challenges, to which Froissart says firmly at the opening of the second stanza, “Nature makes nothing, except by commandment of the celestial King.” https://classicalpoets.org/2020/01/18/three-translations-of-the-poetry-of-jean-froissart-by-margaret-coats/ Reply Warren Bonham February 14, 2025 I will order that book by Morris (hopefully it’s digestible for a mind untrained in physics). There’s a long and growing list of things I’ve been wrong about. Mike Bryant February 13, 2025 Warren, and anyone else interested in the history of the intelligent design debate this article is a must read… “Charles Darwin, Abraham Lincoln, and Intelligent Design” written by John G. West. https://evolutionnews.org/2023/02/charles-darwin-abraham-lincoln-and-intelligent-design/ Reply Susan Jarvis Bryant February 13, 2025 Warren, thank you very much! I have thoroughly enjoyed your poem for its rhyme, rhythm, and engaging subject matter. The form is a challenging one and I admire your creative use of internal rhyme – “in you / sinew” being a cheeky favorite. The subject reminds me of my first lesson on Darwin’s theory at primary school. At the age of eight, I thought it hilarious – from mud to fish to mudskipper to monkey to me… with a missing link in the mix? Really? And why are there still mudskippers and monkeys? – the poor inferior sods! What’s wrong with them as they are? They’re beautiful! Life wouldn’t be the same without monkeys! My childish musings led me on a journey of discovery. A long and arduous journey of confusion that led me straight back to the unanswered questions of my childhood… without the laughter. Charles Darwin, the man who thought we evolved through monkey-world; the man who wrote “Our descent then is the origin of our evil passions!! – The Devil under form of baboon is our grandfather”; the man who called himself “the devil’s chaplain”; the man who removed God from science and set humanity on a “survival of the fittest” path to racism and eugenics, has shaped the world. I’m sure he didn’t foresee the consequences of removing God from science, but how can one who says it must “be enquired whether man, like so many other animals, has given rise to varieties and subraces, differing but slightly from each other, or to races differing so much that they must be classed as a doubtful species?” not foresee the consequences?… today’s world is full of the dire consequences of Darwin’s unproven theories. But here’s the rub – last summer, I think I spied a couple of missing links in the ice-cream aisle of our local Walmart. Reply Warren Bonham February 14, 2025 I’m glad you enjoyed the effort! The topic of missing links gave me pause many years ago as well. Darwin’s evolution happens in very tiny increments so there should be innumerable missing links in the fossil record, rather than the periodic explosions of new species that have been found. Reply Julian D. Woodruff February 14, 2025 Congratulations, Mr. Bonham! Possibly the best of the many poems you’ve posted here, but one that’s prompted a lot of spirited, stimulating responses. “Way ta go–Awesome!” Mike Bryant February 14, 2025 Darwin’s theory fell apart with the discovery of DNA and the explosion of computers and code. I remember when my friends were writing programs in DOS that would alphabetize lists. One letter out of place, missing or added rendered the code inoperable. DNA is code. But it is code written in the chemicals of life. Code does not write itself. Darwin’s supposition enlists “mutations” and “natural selection” as the building blocks of the evolution of species. Mutations… the word itself conjures monsters. Mutations are caused by damaged DNA code. Scientists did spend billions firing gamma rays, x-rays and other scientific missiles at the DNA of the usual sacrificial beasts only to find that no amount of creative destruction could help but, instead only harmed the organism, just as haphazard changes to the letters in a simple alphabetizing program ruins the output. They’ve given up on that and have now decided to simply conflate “natural selection” with “evolution of species”. Natural selection… Darwin said, “Hey look, those finches beaks plus time can grow by inches!” Which, I suppose, we are to take as proof that natural selection can create life or make us into monkeys! No, Natural selection is not THE Darwinian EVOLUTION that’s been sold to us by the experts. Natural selection, with or without mutations, cannot create life. Natural selection does NOT and cannot change the information in DNA, it is an expression of the possibilities written into and allowed by the instructions. Information technology has changed everything. Reply Brian A. Yapko February 14, 2025 I’m rather late to commenting here, Warren, but wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed this poem of the Darwinian temptation to think Science has it all wrapped up. While the idea of “survival of the fittest” certainly seems to have a domain of validity, it also clearly is not the whole story. When confronted with the conflict of faith versus science, I tend to see science as a tool in God’s toolbox rather than a substitute. The door must always be left open to miracles. And Creation is nothing if not a miracle. I’m intrigued by the form of your poem and its internal rhyme scheme. It reads to me rather like a song lyric — something which, for me, often adds interest to a poem. This makes the internal rhyume of a line like “So students of Darwin, say people who are win-/” work nicely. The intricacy of internal rhyme suits the science-puzzle tone of the piece. Reply Jeff Kemper February 17, 2025 Warren, I love this poem! I was discussing the evolution hypothesis just this morning with an evolutionary biologist, an atheist recently (three years ago) who become a Christian, who had problems with the survival/arrival idea, i.e., nothing somehow generating something. He will appreciate this. Thanks! The morning I was talking about was when your poem appeared. I forgot to post this until five days later (17 February). Reply Leave a Reply Cancel ReplyYour email address will not be published.CommentName* Email* Website Δ This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Martin Rizley February 12, 2025 It is quite a literary achievement to produce what is in essence an apologetic discourse commending Intelligent Design theory in poetic form! You have somehow managed to discuss the theological, philosophical, and biological implications of two rival views of origins, wrapping the whole up in nice poetic language that chugs along at an easy rolling rhythm with metrical precision and nifty rhymes. In my opinion, the literary organism that has thus “arrived” on the scene, emerging from the fertile thought processes of your mind, passes the fitness test of poetic survival! . Reply
Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 Intelligent Design makes a lot of sense to me. I’m very glad that some of its precepts came through in this poem. Thanks for the supportive comments! Reply
Martin Rizley February 13, 2025 I agree that the evidence for intelligent design, according to Psalm 19 and the apostle Paul in Romans 1, has always been sufficient enough to remove all excuse from the atheist who believes in the absurd proposition that 0 + 0 = Everything, that order can arise from chaos, life from non-life, personality from impersonal nothingness, mind from eternal mindlessness, beauty from ashes, moral duty from amoral matter, intricate complexity from a mere explosion, law and order from initial lawlessness and disorder, and so forth. As Frank Turek says, “I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist!” But then add to the “always known” the additional light of things that were formerly unknown, but now brought to light, such as the four-dimensional complexity of DNA as it generates new information at each stage of organic development, and the absurdity of atheism stands out even more clearly. The real conflict in our day is between strict materialistic naturalism and the full-blooded supernaturalism of the Christian worldview which allows God to be God and to bring forth the universe in the time and manner He chooses by His unlimited power. If Jesus made fermented grape juice in a moment of time from water, transforming instantaneously the very structure of molecules to do what nature itself, by its own inherent powers, could only do over weeks or months, then it is clear to me that God can bring the universe into being however He pleases in the time frame He chooses– which is not to say He made fossils out of thin air to “fool fools” as some early opponents of Darwin alleged!
Roy Eugene Peterson February 12, 2025 The theory of survival of the species makes a lot more sense than the theory of “arrival” of the species. The creation theory of each species reflected in Genesis is how I accept the “origins.” This well-conceived poem resonates with thoughts and theories over the course of the verses ending with the perfect homage to our Creator. Reply
Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 Thanks! Whoever came up with the differentiation between the “arrival” and “survival” of species was a poetic, but even more importantly, a scientific genius. Reply
fred schueler February 12, 2025 IF THE OLD RELIGION IS TRUE, THEN THIS IS A HYMN TO FATHER DARWIN (To the tune of Stan Rogers’ ‘I Took Back my Hand.’ Hecate Strait to Westbank to Chiliwack Lake, BC. June 1989 Father of theories, Husband of the World, Barnacle Master, the lord of the Worms, Stretched out on the White Goddess’ altar he lay, Orchid-mad, twining like plants. Wonder of wonders, no longer sublime, Each thing for itself he perceived in its place Winnowed by chance throughout infinite time, Each Beetle, each Sundew, each race. Father of fathers, the first in all Time: Husband of Emma, the first one to know Why your children are precious, why parents combine Their lives so that families grow. Father of knowledge, Odysseus knew No more of the Goddess’ girdle than you, Who saw her plates hinted by Andean shells, Crowned islands that sink in the sea. With Malthus and Pigeons and Galapagos Finch A story you told that would throw down the gods, A thousand times sterner than Abraham’s test, It stood as the cause of the World. Blind as the watchmaker, cruel as the spring, The Truth is the stories that offer to die, For the monkey-bred brain can do no more than this, Than to know when its tales go awry. Father of Life, and the Husband of Death, All of the others have died for our birth, Ghosts of their genes and the flesh of their flesh, Selection has ordered the Earth: Orchid-mad, twining like plants. Reply
Mike Bryant February 12, 2025 Fred, your poem, especially this part: the monkey-bred brain can do no more than this, Than to know when its tales go awry.“ Brought this to mind: https://amandascookin.com/monkey-bread/ Reply
fred schueler February 12, 2025 these lines combine Darwin’s wondering if conclusions reached by a mind that was descended from ancestors could reach reliable conclusions, and the “Triumph of the Darwinian Method” in the use of the modern scientific hypothetico-deductive hypothesis that is always prepared to lay down its life for the truth.
Yael February 12, 2025 This is a neat and well composed way to sum up this contentious topic. Great poem, thank you! Reply
Gigi Ryan February 12, 2025 Dear Warren, A perfect poem for a perfect day to remind us that life matters and we are no accident. “God planned every feature of each living creature, _and hears what each one has to say. It’s just the beginning, we’re in the first inning, _the outline of heaven is dim. God walks right beside us, His image inside us, _and wants just to guide us to Him.” This is truly good news for three families I know whose children suffer with life and death heath problems. They are not genetic accident and this story is just getting started. Thank you very much. Gigi Reply
Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 I hate hearing stories like that, but they are truly hopeless and pointless in Darwin’s world. Reply
Evan Mantyk February 12, 2025 Thank you for this poem, Warren. It is well-timed and a topic that I think should be brought up, reflected on, and debated more frequently. In some ways, the entire house of cards of modern life (humans as only animals / God as optional) goes back to Darwin’s theory being used to explain away the necessity of a Creator. Yet there are obvious problems with Darwin’s theory. The classic example is giving a monkey a typewriter and he eventually produces all of Shakespeare’s plays… what are the chances of that? Better than the chances of random mutations producing human life. There are also the lack of intermediate species, the evidence of previously advanced civilizations etc. etc. It is the strange situation we human beings find ourselves in, in which we look at dead space and emptiness endlessly in the ocean, the sky, and the universe. However, it is worth reflecting on the fact that if you were standing on an electron that formed the carbon in your body, you would also think it was all dead space. Unfortunately, from this dead space the mainstream scientific mind begins and says there must be an explanation of how nothing became something. In fact, the starting point is wrong. I think some people, from a spiritual perspective, know that actually there is something always and eternally and the nothing we perceive is an illusion. Reply
Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 Great points. I’ve heard other people say that children understand that something doesn’t come from nothing. It takes a lot of education to know otherwise. Reply
Mike Bryant February 12, 2025 Warren, I love this poem and everything it presents. I believed evolution, even though I went to a Catholic school. Why, because the nuns and brothers believed in evolution. It is still fashionable to believe this lie because it just seems true. It has gained a truthiness because all the smartest people truly believe it and preach the undeniable truth of it. Only recently, computer and information specialists have come to realize, as Evan alluded to, that the odds of the information encoded in DNA coming together by chance are too long… far, far too long by orders of magnitudes. Random processes CANNOT create meaningful code. Information theory completely rules out randomly generated life. Life by Chance Is Not Just Unlikely—It’s Impossible Even if the universe were trillions upon trillions of times older than it is, it would still not be old enough for life to have formed randomly. Math proves that life required guidance, design, and an organizing principle beyond mere chance. Reply
Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 I’m surprised to hear about the curriculum choice even in Catholic Schools. I hope that Intelligent Design is gaining some traction in those schools now. If not there, I don’t know where it will gain a foothold. Reply
Mike Bryant February 12, 2025 I should add that evolution from species to species is also impossible. While small changes within species is observable, the large-scale evolution of entirely new species, organs, and body plans faces overwhelming probability and information barriers. The required number of coordinated mutations, time constraints, and functional dependencies make species-to-species evolution via random mutation and natural selection mathematically impossible. Also, if species gradually evolved, we should see millions of transitional fossils showing slow changes. Instead, the Cambrian Explosion (~540 million years ago) shows the sudden appearance of nearly all major animal groups without clear precursors. Many species appear in the fossil record fully formed and remain unchanged for millions of years (a phenomenon called stasis). The theory of evolution is dead… people need to get over it. “I attempted mathematics… but I got on very slowly. The work was repugnant to me, chiefly from my not being able to see any meaning in the early steps of algebra. This impatience was foolish, and in after years I have deeply regretted that I did not proceed far enough at least to understand something of the great leading principles of mathematics; for men thus endowed seem to have an extra sense. But I do not believe that I should ever have succeeded beyond a very low grade.” -Charles Darwin Reply
Jeff Kemper February 12, 2025 Warren, I love this poem! I was discussing the evolution hypothesis just this morning with an evolutionary biologist, an atheist recently (three years ago) having become a Christian, who had problems with the survival/arrival idea, i.e., nothing somehow generating something. He will appreciate this. Thanks! Reply
Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 Interesting timing. Maybe there was a hidden intelligence influencing things somehow? Reply
Cynthia Erlandson February 12, 2025 I agree with the comments above about evolutionary theory, so I will just comment on the wonderful poetic elements you’ve used, such as some hilarious internal rhymes (Darwin / are win-; in you / sinew; nightmare / right there; and end rhymes like roulette / alphabet; also fun lines like “if you’re just an ape with a mind.” Great blend of serious (and important) subject matter, and humor. Thanks, Warren! Reply
Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 I almost gave up on this one because rhyming with Darwin created a real problem for me. I’m very glad you enjoyed both the light and serious sides of this one! Reply
Paul A. Freeman February 12, 2025 Happy birthday, Chuck. You’ve generated much debate, which is still evolving. Thanks for the read, Warren. Reply
Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 Very clever pun! Chuck certainly had an impact. No one is going to be talking about me 200+ years after I was born. Reply
Joseph S. Salemi February 12, 2025 I agree that the complexity of living organisms suggests the working of Divine Omniscience, but I do not accept the absurdity that the universe is only 6,000 years old (as Bishop Ussher argued, and as certain fundamentalist types continue to insist upon). Even William Jennings Bryan, in the 1925 Scopes trial, admitted that the length of time that encompassed creation could have been countless millions of years. Reply
Mike Bryant February 12, 2025 I agree, Joe. The vast distances of the observable universe, combined with the time it takes for light to travel, present a major challenge to the idea of a 6,000-year-old universe. Reply
Warren Bonham February 12, 2025 I’ve never read anything about the young-Earth hypothesis. It doesn’t seem to line up with any of the scientific observations I’m familiar with, so it never felt like a good use of time.
Joseph S. Salemi February 13, 2025 The Young Earth Creationist position stems largely from a fundamentalist Protestant view of all scripture as literal and inerrant, with no figurative or allegorical readings of the text being accepted as possible.
Margaret Coats February 13, 2025 Warren, I can’t tell you how delighted I am to see this topic brought to light and generating discussion. As Evan Mantyk says, it is timely. Special Creation rather than evolution has much to be said for it–indeed, much that has been very long neglected. We had the second law of thermodynamics stated about the same time as Darwin’s theory; it is based on universal empirical observation. It is a law of physics without evidence against it, while Darwin has so much evidence against him that (as Mike Bryant says) his theory is dead and should be abandoned. With that second law as just one reason. It is hilarious that your poem does so much with DNA, for the discovery of DNA structure in the 1950s, along with computer assisted calculations of probability in the 1960s, nailed the coffin for Darwin’s theory. Nonetheless, because evolution had become so popular among academics (whether atheist or religious), it remains the belief of the vast majority. It is, however, (and I emphasize) a belief of unthinking faith in Darwin and in academia rather than in evidence. Religious persons have mostly adopted the compromise of Theistic Evolution, which is the idea that God used evolution as the means of creation. Happily, it has now been shown that Theistic Evolution involves so much ridiculous illogic as to be untenable. That means it is a simple conflict between creation and evolution as the means of what you call “arrival” of species. And the Young Earth is part of the matter. This will cause conflict among thinking persons on this site, as we already see. I will encourage you to look into it, as it is quite satisfying to know more and more about the Scriptural perspective. I had to deal with this while homeschooling, and thus my reading is now far out of date. Should you want to begin where I left off, The Young Earth by John Morris is a general book covering many kinds of evidence, and it was congenial to me as having been an undergraduate physics major. But it is now an old book, followed up by much new research and thought. Maybe I can get back to some of it. Even a few professors now teaching Intelligent Design, at least as a rational option. Thanks for your effort on this! Reply
Martin Rizley February 13, 2025 People who are unfamiliar with the “Young Earth Creation” position might well be amazed to discover the high quality of the material being produced by leading YEC organizations. Even old earth creationists would agree with many of the well-informed and well-reasoned arguments they put forth against Darwinian evolution. I love watching the interviews with degreed professional scientists produced by Creation Ministries International. Here is a link to one video explaining the difference between natural selection and evolution: https://creation.com/es/videos/why-natural-selection-is-not-evolution Reply
Yael February 13, 2025 Here is a recent video about mitochondrial DNA discoveries which you may find interesting, as it sheds some light on the topic under discussion: https://www.youtube.com/live/Sdrxhs8TmtA Reply
Margaret Coats February 13, 2025 Thanks for the links, Martin and Yael and Mike! I will get around to them. Just as amusement, if you haven’t seen it, take a look at the medieval French poem I translated as “Understanding Nature.” The Middle Ages had their own challenges, to which Froissart says firmly at the opening of the second stanza, “Nature makes nothing, except by commandment of the celestial King.” https://classicalpoets.org/2020/01/18/three-translations-of-the-poetry-of-jean-froissart-by-margaret-coats/ Reply
Warren Bonham February 14, 2025 I will order that book by Morris (hopefully it’s digestible for a mind untrained in physics). There’s a long and growing list of things I’ve been wrong about.
Mike Bryant February 13, 2025 Warren, and anyone else interested in the history of the intelligent design debate this article is a must read… “Charles Darwin, Abraham Lincoln, and Intelligent Design” written by John G. West. https://evolutionnews.org/2023/02/charles-darwin-abraham-lincoln-and-intelligent-design/ Reply
Susan Jarvis Bryant February 13, 2025 Warren, thank you very much! I have thoroughly enjoyed your poem for its rhyme, rhythm, and engaging subject matter. The form is a challenging one and I admire your creative use of internal rhyme – “in you / sinew” being a cheeky favorite. The subject reminds me of my first lesson on Darwin’s theory at primary school. At the age of eight, I thought it hilarious – from mud to fish to mudskipper to monkey to me… with a missing link in the mix? Really? And why are there still mudskippers and monkeys? – the poor inferior sods! What’s wrong with them as they are? They’re beautiful! Life wouldn’t be the same without monkeys! My childish musings led me on a journey of discovery. A long and arduous journey of confusion that led me straight back to the unanswered questions of my childhood… without the laughter. Charles Darwin, the man who thought we evolved through monkey-world; the man who wrote “Our descent then is the origin of our evil passions!! – The Devil under form of baboon is our grandfather”; the man who called himself “the devil’s chaplain”; the man who removed God from science and set humanity on a “survival of the fittest” path to racism and eugenics, has shaped the world. I’m sure he didn’t foresee the consequences of removing God from science, but how can one who says it must “be enquired whether man, like so many other animals, has given rise to varieties and subraces, differing but slightly from each other, or to races differing so much that they must be classed as a doubtful species?” not foresee the consequences?… today’s world is full of the dire consequences of Darwin’s unproven theories. But here’s the rub – last summer, I think I spied a couple of missing links in the ice-cream aisle of our local Walmart. Reply
Warren Bonham February 14, 2025 I’m glad you enjoyed the effort! The topic of missing links gave me pause many years ago as well. Darwin’s evolution happens in very tiny increments so there should be innumerable missing links in the fossil record, rather than the periodic explosions of new species that have been found. Reply
Julian D. Woodruff February 14, 2025 Congratulations, Mr. Bonham! Possibly the best of the many poems you’ve posted here, but one that’s prompted a lot of spirited, stimulating responses. “Way ta go–Awesome!”
Mike Bryant February 14, 2025 Darwin’s theory fell apart with the discovery of DNA and the explosion of computers and code. I remember when my friends were writing programs in DOS that would alphabetize lists. One letter out of place, missing or added rendered the code inoperable. DNA is code. But it is code written in the chemicals of life. Code does not write itself. Darwin’s supposition enlists “mutations” and “natural selection” as the building blocks of the evolution of species. Mutations… the word itself conjures monsters. Mutations are caused by damaged DNA code. Scientists did spend billions firing gamma rays, x-rays and other scientific missiles at the DNA of the usual sacrificial beasts only to find that no amount of creative destruction could help but, instead only harmed the organism, just as haphazard changes to the letters in a simple alphabetizing program ruins the output. They’ve given up on that and have now decided to simply conflate “natural selection” with “evolution of species”. Natural selection… Darwin said, “Hey look, those finches beaks plus time can grow by inches!” Which, I suppose, we are to take as proof that natural selection can create life or make us into monkeys! No, Natural selection is not THE Darwinian EVOLUTION that’s been sold to us by the experts. Natural selection, with or without mutations, cannot create life. Natural selection does NOT and cannot change the information in DNA, it is an expression of the possibilities written into and allowed by the instructions. Information technology has changed everything. Reply
Brian A. Yapko February 14, 2025 I’m rather late to commenting here, Warren, but wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed this poem of the Darwinian temptation to think Science has it all wrapped up. While the idea of “survival of the fittest” certainly seems to have a domain of validity, it also clearly is not the whole story. When confronted with the conflict of faith versus science, I tend to see science as a tool in God’s toolbox rather than a substitute. The door must always be left open to miracles. And Creation is nothing if not a miracle. I’m intrigued by the form of your poem and its internal rhyme scheme. It reads to me rather like a song lyric — something which, for me, often adds interest to a poem. This makes the internal rhyume of a line like “So students of Darwin, say people who are win-/” work nicely. The intricacy of internal rhyme suits the science-puzzle tone of the piece. Reply
Jeff Kemper February 17, 2025 Warren, I love this poem! I was discussing the evolution hypothesis just this morning with an evolutionary biologist, an atheist recently (three years ago) who become a Christian, who had problems with the survival/arrival idea, i.e., nothing somehow generating something. He will appreciate this. Thanks! The morning I was talking about was when your poem appeared. I forgot to post this until five days later (17 February). Reply
