How do you start with survival of shrubs after fire and end up discussing origins models? This is what Wells did when he claimed that Ceanothus evolved rapidly because its species could not resprout after fire but had to use the seedling mode of reproduction thereby being forced to undergo mutations, selection, and speciation more rapidly than plants like chamise that resprout. This paper contains a review of some of the data that conflict with Well's evolutionary hypothesis. The problem of how a plant could have originally gotten the ability to resprout after fires is discussed in terms of the neodarwinian microevolutionary model, the newer evolutionary concept of "punctuated equilibria", and the scientific creation model. Keeley has proposed a "stochastic fire hypothesis" that fits quite well with our field data in particular and with the scientific creation origins model in general. Keeley argued that resprouters like chamise are well adapted for growth in areas where fires are frequent and that obligate seeders like Ceanothus have an advantage wherever fires come along after long fire-free periods. The idea that both patterns of shrub growth after fire are advantageous under certain circumstances supports creation scientists' belief that there is a plan in nature.