The word evolution has become meaningless. It’s original meaning, describing a process by which the species of animals and plants originated, has been changed by the anti-creation crowd for the strategic purposes of giving them the upper hand in arguments. Now it is said that evolution isn’t concerned with origins, just change over time. This is a rhetorical feint, it’s not reality. The way that evolution is taught has also changed so that the newly educated don’t know what it means. Not only that, but the process in nature that we observe is of continual genetic degradation, not advancement.
Christian apologists, using the old-fashioned definition, try to fight the battle of creation vs. evolution but it doesn’t work: it’s apples and oranges. Evolution is an observed process, even speciation can occur. There were two horses on Noah’s arc, but now there are at least seven species in genus Equus – speciation. I don’t have a problem with it, because I understand how the process of evolution fits the context of history.
Evolution is dependent on death, and the passage of inheritable traits to successive generations. There was no death before sin, so therefore evolution began at Genesis chapter 3. Only it’s not evolution. It’s devolution.
Let’s turn first to the dictionary, for a reminder of what we have decided “evolution,” means: “The theory, now generally accepted, that all species of plants and animals developed from earlier forms by hereditary transmission of slight variations in successive generations, those forms surviving which are best adapted to the environment.”
If only the best adapted did survive, then may be evolution would stand a chance. Unfortunately, chance can cut down the best, brightest, strongest of any kind, leaving the rest to make do as best they can. Note the dependence on time in the definition above, lots of time. The assumption of an ancient earth is the basis of evolutionary theory. This brings up the issue of circular reasoning, but we’ll deal with that elsewhere.
If, however, we believe that the created earth is about 6000 years old, it is obvious that genetic decay, or devolution, has rapidly destroyed genetic variability, making the remaining species less adapted to survive, as they fall before waves of human destruction. God created all the animals and plants. Since the first sin, extinction has been wiping them out.
Devolution and genetic decay are analogous to the story of the tower of Babel (Genesis 11). After the great flood, the growing population stayed together in the city of Babel. They all spoke the same language at this time. The people began to build a tower to the heavens. God stopped this project by creating language and thus communication failure. The people dispersed to the four corners of the world.
This event initiated the development of the human races. Each race characteristic in its own way. Perhaps most characteristic of any race is that it is different. It fails to be the same. Information has been lost. By modifying and specializing in some way it is less adaptable overall. This applies well to the process of devolution. Genetic material is gradually lost through the generations. The survivors become more adapted to (dependent on) ever narrowing niches and, therefore, become less adapted overall, less “fit.”
We see the continual destruction of species and the reduction in the fitness of those that remain. “New” strains of bacteria are variations of created strains on their last battle for survival. One by one we are wiping them all out. We scrape them up from somewhere, people die, then we eradicate them. They are just trying to survive the vicious onslaught of sin and death produced by humans.
Darwin used artificial selection, like the breeding of dogs and pigeon fancying, as evidence for natural selection and evolution. This is to say that a person notices some feature (characteristic) of an animal that is variable. Examples are the shape of a dog’s face, or the amount of feathers on a pigeon’s legs. The human chooses males and females that show the same form of the feature they noticed – dogs with wide faces rather than narrow, pigeons with feathered legs rather than scaly legs – and mates them in the hope that this feature will be exemplified in the offspring. The offspring is examined for individuals that show the best development of the selected feature. These individuals are then selectively bred to others that show the same developmental characteristics. Most people could name or recognize several breeds of dogs, and so the development of breeds is used as support for the underlying mechanism of evolution.
It works just as well as evidence for devolution. Darwin saw myriad variations of certain types of animal and plant. An example is the finches of the Galapagos Islands. Darwin noticed that some had narrow beaks for catching insects while some had broad beaks for cracking nuts. He lived in Victorian England, a time and place where optimism and enthusiasm for pioneers and colonial spirited people was part of his daily routine. It was natural at the time, a time of new discovery, to see this variation as representing a spread of new types and diversity. In truth, the different types (species, subspecies, varieties…) show each a different aspect of the original, created, kind. However, through the mechanism of inheritance some information is lost from each divergent type.
In nature, selection is a much more blood thirsty affair. The story goes that, in the desperate struggle for survival, the best adapted individuals leave behind the most offspring. These offspring have the same advantages that the parents had, and have more offspring of their own. This pattern of “cause-and-effect,” is used to explain the origin of new species and types. It is, however, completely self-defeating. The more of the best adapted kind there are, the greater the competition for that niche will be. Then it isn’t very advantageous to be that kind any more.
Cause-and-effect is a misleading name for effect-and-cause. We see the effects of God’s actions in Creation everyday. Everywhere we look, whatever we see, touch, taste, smell and hear are the effects of God’s divine power. We wonder how the effects happened, and what caused them. As scientists have a priori eliminated God as a cause, they have to invent one. Effect is investigated so that cause may be inferred. We don’t know the cause. The cause cannot be known to us, it has already happened. All we have are the effects, so in science, effects precede causes. “I think, therefore I am,” is effect-and-cause. “I am, therefore I think,” is cause-and-effect.
Since evolution views life as having developed from nothing, there has to be a way for the basic DNA complement of a species, or cell, to gain more DNA. Humans have many times the amount of DNA per cell than bacteria do, so where did it all come from? As evolution changes bacteria into algae; algae into plants and animals; animals into worms and mammals; mammals into men and apes; where do all the new genes come from? Why do cells and genomes accumulate functions and genes? When the largest Lion in the pride beats off all the others, and lies with the females in the pride, does it acquire DNA? When a garden becomes overgrown with one particular weed, does the weed grow more genes?
The evolutionist answer is random mutations. The Lion just happened to have a random mutation in a gene that made the gene more productive. The Lion was thus stronger, better adapted. Effect-and-cause. I think, therefore I am. The weed just happened to have a random mutation that allowed it to out-compete all the other species.
By denying the creation, evolutionists are then responsible for explaining how DNA, cells and people, sprang up from nothing. Where they explain themselves to, is a place where minute acts of creation occur billions of times over billions of years. Perhaps they think that if they spread out creation over time and molecules, no one will notice that their theory is bankrupt.
The natural tendency of the universe is towards disorder and chaos, this is the law of entropy. Dishes get dirty, houses get messy, gardens become jungles, cars rust and break; people get old, they get sick, they die – everyone is familiar with it, it’s life. DNA replication errors occur many times more frequently than we produce offspring. DNA information is constantly being lost from cells and genealogies, so what makes evolution able to buck the system, to defy entropy? How can random processes literally beat gravity, and drag themselves up from the slime into the organized pattern of life we are and see? Evolutionists have no explanation for this at all. They brush it off and focus on hypothesizing black holes, the effects of traveling near light-speed, the age of the ancestor of humans and apes; making maps of the creation itself, and calling it evolution; anything to divert attention from the fact that they’re chasing the wind.
The concept that evolution pertains to account for is fatally flawed. An evolutionary origin of humanity simply can not happen. It did not happen. The logical result of natural selection is animals that are less adapted to survive, simply because they are more specialized. The whole process is truly devolution. You realize, I hope, that you only need billions of years if you are building a genome with random mutations. If you start with a complete genome then you only need a few years to wreck it.