In 1859 Charles Darwin published a book entitled, Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. Since the release of his publication the Darwinian theory has remained similar. With over a hundred years of research the theory has been refined and modified a bit. But, I wanted to take some time and present some challenges to the theory of evolution.
Related Post: Science And The Bible
First off, we need to know what evolution theory is and the explanation evolutionist’s use when answering the question,
“How did life start here on earth?”
Evolution theory believes that development of life began when multiple chemicals present on earth spontaneously produced a single celled. This is known as an organism. This single organism was then able to reproduce with itself and eventually there were several mutations that developed. Over time these organisms became more complex. Living in a hostile environment meant that some would perish but those naturally suited for the environment would survive and multiply. This is “natural selection.” As time went on, more and more mutations developed into a variety of living things/creatures. All trace their ancestry to the one single cell organism mentioned previously.
One caveat before we get into the meat and potatoes of this post. There are two different ways of looking at the word evolution. One meaning looks at it from a micro level and the other looks at it from a macro level. Micro-evolution is small developments within one species. A couple good examples of this are mosquitoes and fruit flies which become immune to insecticides, or roses that come in different colors and varieties. There is ample evidence and science to back up micro-evolution and I have no problem with it. But, when speaking of evolution from a creation stand point it looks at it from a Macro level (entire species changing) and that is the kind of evolution I will be referring to in this blog post.
Phillip E. Johnson is a law professor who specializes in analyzing the logic of arguments and he wrote a book entitled, “Darwin on Trial.” He quotes from current evolutionary enthusiasts and developed 6 points challenging evolution.
Professor Wayne Grudem does a great job of summarizing some points challenging evolution below:
- “After more than one hundred years of experimental breeding of various kinds of animals and plants, the amount of variation that can be produced (even with intentional, not random, breeding) is limited. Dogs who are bred for generations are still dogs, and fruit flies are still fruit flies.”
- “Natural selection is a tautology (a meaningless repetition of the same idea) since it boils down to saying the “fittest” animals are those who have the most offspring. In this sense, natural selection means: animals who have the most offspring have the most offspring. But this proves nothing about any supposed mutations to produce different, more fit offspring over the course of many generations.”
- “The vast and complex mutations required to produce complex organs could not have occurred in tiny mutations over thousands of generations, because the individual parts of the organ are useless unless the entire organ is functioning. The mathematical probability of such random mutations happening together in one generation is 0.
Three More Points
- “The fossil record was Darwin’s greatest problem in 1859, and it has become a greater problem since then. In Darwin’s time, hundreds of fossils were available. This showed the existence of many distinct kinds of animals and plants in the distant past. But Darwin was unable to find any fossils from “intermediate types.” He could not fill in the gaps between distinct kind of animals. Gaps exist between fossils showing some characteristics of animal and a few characteristics of the next development type, for example.”
- “The molecular structures of living organisms do show relationships, but Darwinists assume that relationships imply common ancestry, a claim that has not been proven.”
- “The greatest difficulty of all for evolutionary theory is explaining how any life could have begun in the first place. Kofahl & Segraves report a study by an evolutionary scientist who formulates a model to calculate the probability for the formation, not of one enzyme molecule but the smallest likely living organism by random process. He comes up with a probability of one chance in 10 to the 340,000,000 power. That is, one chance in 10 with 340 million zeros after it! But Kofahl and Segraves note, “Yet Dr. Morrowitz and his fellow evolutionary scientists still believe that it happened.”