|
|
|
The Myth of Darwinism The birds of the air, the fish of the sea, the human race that inhabits the earth - all are a product of evolution. We've all heard the story. But no one told it quite like Charles Darwin when he wrote The Origin of Species in 1859. Darwin was actually the first one to give evolution a reasonable mechanism. His mechanism, of course, was Natural Selection (NS). Now, it's a known fact that natural selection occurs, as Phillip Johnson explains in his book, Darwin on Trial:
Before we go any further, we must understand the meaning of NS, otherwise known as "survival of the fittest." The concept of NS is simple. It basically means that when a species undergoes a beneficial mutation, it records it, saves the mutation, and that species tends to have more offspring than the species that experienced a harmful mutation. All of these changes occur so that these species can adapt to their environment, thus having an advantage over the less-adapted species of their kind. On and on this process of minute changes continues through millions and millions of years. But that's not the whole story. There are several problems with NS. Almost all mutations are harmful, a few neutral, but it's a rarity to find one beneficial. However, before we discuss the problems of mutational changes we'll discuss the problems Darwinists face when confronted with a designed universe. In the first chapter of his book The Blind Watchmaker, Richard Dawkins writes:
Dawkins then goes on to say in chapter two:
Nevertheless, Mr. Dawkins believes all of this is an illusion - that these amazingly complex systems are an accidental product of natural selection. But what if these complicated things appeared to be designed because they really were? Why Random Mutations Can't Produce Complex Systems When we gaze at the vast complexity of the human eye, we understand that many complex parts must be in concert with each other in order for the eye to properly work. Briefly, we'll look into several parts of the eye, starting from the outside and working in. The sclera is the white part of the eye and is also the toughest of the parts we will examine. Next, at the front of the eye, is the cornea, which is followed by a transparent fluid, known as aqueous humor. The visible iris is the colored section behind the cornea that surrounds the dark part of your eye, which is called the pupil. The pupil enlarges when it is exposed to dim light, and becomes small when exposed to bright light. Located behind the iris is the lens, followed by the retina. The retina consists of a somewhat thin layer of nerve cells that are light sensitive. It also detects and translates images into your nerve impulses. It is not necessary to explain in detail all of these parts and their functions, that would take up too much of my free time. But I will tell you that chance and mutation couldn't produce the complexity of a human eye. For example, if we decided to remove the retina, our vision would no longer be useful. Moreover, taking away any part of the eye would leave us visually impaired. In his article "Molecular Machines", Michael Behe defines this as irreducible complexity and offers the analogy of the mousetrap:
Because the mousetrap is necessarily composed of several parts, it is irreducibly complex. Thus, irreducibly complex systems exist. Behe goes on to say that there are biochemical systems that are irreducibly complex. He describes the cilium as an irreducibly complex system:
Behe has demonstrated an irreducibly complex system, which is another proof against Darwin's theory of natural selection. He finishes his section on the cilium by explaining: Since the irreducibly complex cilium can not have functional precursors it can not be produced by natural selection, which requires a continuum of function to work. Natural selection is powerless when there is no function to select. We can go further and say that, if the cilium can not be produced by natural selection, then the cilium was designed. Well, the obvious has been shown. Natural selection and random mutation can't produce complex systems. Yet Darwinian evolution continues to be taught in numerous textbooks as fact. Come hither friend, and let's peek into what is being taught in textbooks today. The Fruit Fly Fallacy The famous fruit fly example, (Drosophila melanogaster), is taught as an evidence of a beneficial morphological mutation. Fruit flies are small insects about 3mm in length, and the average life span of a fruit fly is two weeks. They're constantly being bred and researched in laboratories by evolutionary biologists. Thus, many mutations occur in the fly. One well-known mutation in particular is the four-winged fruit fly, in which a two- winged drosophila undergoes a mutation (not in the wild) becoming a four-winged fly. Hard-core morphology, you might say. But a dilemma arises. The extra pair of wings on our four-winged friend is non-functional, therefore this drosophila is handicapped. Moreover, a mutation such as this is definitely by no means advantageous. For this fruit, flying isn't an easy task. The only noted accomplishment we have here is the fact that the biologists copied the original wing genes to the fly which resulted in an extra pair. In the words of Jonathan Wells in Icons of Evolution:
Whether it's fruit flies or peppered moths, false assumptions continue to be taught as truth. The Responsibilities of Scientists In conclusion, I would like to address the responsibilities of those in authority - men that the general public believes to be credible, men with great power, men like Richard Dawkins and Stephen J. Gould. Even if it's not what the public wants to hear, and even when it could very likely damage their reputation and career, these individuals should use their influential power to teach truth, not to support an unsubstantiated theory when the evidence of a designed universe stands before them. At the end of the box- office hit Spiderman, personal sacrifice is evident as Peter Parker (Spiderman) makes a decision that he knows is the right thing to do. He was influenced by the words of his uncle, who said, "With great power, comes great responsibility." Works Cited Behe, Michael J. 1996. Molecular Machines: Experimental Support for the Design Inference. Access Research Network. Dawkins, Richard. 1987. The Blind Watchmaker, pp. 21-1. New York: W W Norton & Company. Johnson, Phillip E. 1991. Darwin On Trial. p.16. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Gateway. Wells, Jonathan. 2001. Icons of Evolution. p.187. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc. Comments? Contact Jon Runyan at growingingrace22@juno.com. Copyright 2001 idurc.org. All rights reserved. International copyright secured. Click here to return to the Papers Archive
|
