410 likes | 535 Views
Evolution – a Theory in Crisis. Part 1 of 3 The Scientific Bankruptcy of Darwinian Evolution. Also available: Part 2 of 3 – The Philosophical Bankruptcy of Darwinian Evolution Part 3 of 3 – The Biblical Creation Alternative & Its Implications.
E N D
Evolution – a Theory in Crisis Part 1 of 3 The Scientific Bankruptcy of Darwinian Evolution Also available: Part 2 of 3 – The Philosophical Bankruptcy of Darwinian Evolution Part 3 of 3 – The Biblical Creation Alternative & Its Implications
Richard Dawkins“No qualified scientist doubts evolution is a fact.” 100 Scientists dissent: “We are sceptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.”
Charles Darwin(1809-1882) ‘Natural selection’
Definition of Evolution? Variation within a ‘kind’ or ‘prototype’?
The central Darwinian Claim Small changes (micro-evolution) + Millions of years = Big changes (macro-evolution)
Evolve a 4th chamber in its heart Evolve mammary glands and a milk supply Evolve a hair covering Evolve a temperature control system Evolve a corti in the inner ear Evolve a diaphragm A sample of what’s involved To turn into a mammal, a reptilemust:
Carl Sagan’s challenge: (1934 – 1996) “Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof.”
Outline • 14 ‘Proofs’ dismissed • 8 Problems discussed • 3 Pathways discovered
Proof No. 1The Giraffe J. Baptiste de Lamarck (1744-1829) “Inheritance of acquired characteristics”
The Natural History Museum - London
Proof No. 2Dog Breeding Variations between dogs tell us nothing about where dogs came from in the first place.
Proof No. 3 Galapagos Finches Variations between finches tell us nothing about where finches came from in the first place.
Proof No. 4 The Horse sequence ‘‘The family tree of the horse is beautiful and continuous only in the textbooks.’’ - Heribert-Nilsson, Biologist.
Proof No. 5 - Peppered Moths Population shifts between light and dark moths tell us nothing about where the moths came from in the first place.
Proof No. 6The Fruit Fly Variations between fruit flies tell us nothing about where fruit flies came from in the first place.
Darwin’s “three great classes of facts” 1. Similar Body Structure (homology) 2. Similar Embryonic Development 3. Rudiments (vestigial organs)
Proof No. 7 Homology Darwin’s claim: Structural similarity proves common ancestry. Rat Dog Horse Bat Mole Porpoise Man
Or does it? Claim: arms evolved from pectoral fins u Claim: legs evolved from pelvic fins u
Proof No. 8Similar Embryonic Development Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919)
Darwin’s ‘marvelous fact’… …is actually fiction.
Proof No. 9Vestigial Organs The coccyx is neither functionless nor useless.
Proof No. 10Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria “Resistance is gained…not by adding something, but by losing it” – Dr. Lee Spetner Ph.D
Proof No. 11 Sickle Cell Anemia This haemoglobin mutation tells us nothing about where haemoglobin came from in the first place.
Proof No. 12 Molecular similarity • Anomalies: • Chimp & human - 7.7% diff. • No. of chromosomes • Amount of DNA • Distance between proteins
Proof No. 13 Archaeopteryx
The Hoatzin Young Hoatzins have claws on their wings for climbing.
Proof No. 14 ‘Ape-men’ Australopithecus afarensis - ‘Lucy’
Proof No. 14 ‘Ape-men’ Australopithecus afarensis - ‘Lucy’
Prof. Simon Conway Morris (Cambridge palaeontologist) “When discussing organic evolution the only point of agreement seems to be: ‘It happened.’ Thereafter, there is little consensus…” (Evolution: Bringing Molecules into the Fold, Cell 100, (Jan 7 2000):1-11)
8 Problems with Darwinism: 1. The nature of mutations 8. Mathematics/Probability 2. The limits of mutation 3. Natural selection’s limits 4. The Cambrian explosion 5. Lack of transitional fossils 6. Complex beginnings 7. Irreducible complexity
Three Pathways to a Creator • Information Complex specified information demands an intelligent designer. • Elimination Only 4 options. • Revelation Evidences that God has spoken.
Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin ‘‘We take the side of [neo-Darwinian] science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfil many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.’’ (Billions and billions of demons, The New York Review, January 9, 1997, p. 31).