It is intriguing that modern Creation Science argues that it is perfection that proves the role of a divine being. They argue that a watch as we know it today is evidence of "intelligent design theory". Chance, according to this theory, could not possibly lead to the tremendous complexity one finds in nature or in our watches of today. The weakness of this argument lies in the evolution of watches over time and even in broader terms of calculations of time. Just as in breeding cattle or horses, humans form the artificial selective agents for change. Better designs for keeping time occur as people invented something new. Inventions are nothing more that chance finds that work. They are analogous to mutations in genetic materials. These too are chance occurrences that may work as better designs. As Stephen Jay Gould has noted many times, it is in imperfection that we discover the nature of the world. Gould points to the panda's thumb as an example of a crudely designed piece of nature. It works to extract bamboo, but it works very crudely and awkwardly because it isn't perfect. It isn't like the watch.

What then are we to do with these two world views? Or what are we to do with the thousands of world views that explain human origins? We could discuss the story of the lonely raven who one day because he was feeling forlorned wished for company. Suddenly a large clam pushed through the sand and slowly opened. Tiny people emerged from the clam and all of them were talking and happy. Men, women, an children spread out. The raven was very happy too, and he sang a song of greeting to the first people of the world. Or we could talk about how human life began when skywoman descended to an island that grew when a muskrat brought mud from under the sea and placed it on a turtle's shell. This was her home, and she gave birth to a daughter - the beginning of the world. We must accept that different peoples explain who we are in different ways according to their own world views.