LIVING FOSSILS
Jerry Bergman
(Investigator 210, 2023 May)
Evolution Suppresses Nature's Testimony of Design
Volumes have been written about the complex and intriguing lives and
worlds of plants and animals. Many biologists remain fascinated with
the wonders of the natural world throughout their entire career. One
regularly reads their exclamations of wonder, awe, and amazement which
often seeps through their writings. The original motivation of many
young people for entering the life-science field is the sense of awe
that they first experienced in its study. This experience can motivate
a lifelong exploration of the natural world.
When science is presented in an intriguing fashion, such as common in
children's science books and movies, this drive can easily be
stimulated. The now dated Walt Disney and Bell Telephone film series
are good examples. The Bell System Science Series (1956-1964) is
what first made me interested in science, a motivation that has
remained with me for over 70 years. The Disneynature Film studio
division of Walt Disney included The Living Desert (1953) The Vanishing
Prairie (1954), The African Lion (1955) and many others.
Harvard-trained attorney, Norman Macbeth, observed "Who can fail to be
impressed by [the biological world] and to admire the patience and
diligence of field workers who discovered and described [these
wonders]. They are the glory of the profession." Macbeth related that
many biologists remain fascinated by "the wonders of nature, especially
the extraordinary complexities, adjustments, and inventions that are
commonly spoken of as 'adaptations’...[which] all unite in wonder at
the works of nature" throughout their career. This observation is
a major reason people give for believing in God. As Leon Pijparet
observed "In 1831 when Charles Darwin was 22 years old, most
people believed that a Divine Creator made all organisms" that could
not change into other new organisms. This view drastically
changed with Darwin.
The goal of evolution is not science but something very different. In
the words of University of Chicago evolutionist Jerry Coyne: "Charles
Darwin's 1859 publication of On the Origin of Species was the greatest
scripture-killer ever penned. The [Origin] book demolished … an entire
series of biblical claims by demonstrating that purely naturalistic
processes—evolution and natural selection—could explain patterns in
nature previously explainable only by invoking a Great Designer” who
Christians call God.
As atheist Richard Dawkins notes, the problem in accepting evolution
“is that of complex design” which appears to prove intelligent design.
This problem of what is obvious to most people is solved by claiming
that what is obvious is wrong because it "is almost as if the human
brain were specifically designed to misunderstand Darwinism, and to
find it hard to believe" that chance ultimately turned nothing into
everything." Most people accept the evidence for design in the
natural world because the world looks very much like it is designed.
Why Darwin Developed His Evolution Theory
Darwin's openly stated goal was to murder God by destroying the reason
people believe in God, namely the evidence of their senses demanding a
Creator. He thus wrote his so-called "one long argument" for the
purpose of disproving creation including intelligent design. His Origin
of Species was openly an anti-Paley, anti-design argument. William
Paley authored the book arguing for God on the basis of the design
existing everywhere in the natural world. Darwin was required to
carefully study Paley in college. Paley impressed Darwin greatly, and
Darwin realized that to murder God he had to refute Paley. His theory
of evolution was how he refuted Paley. No need exists to invoke God any
longer because evolution explains how life got here without Him. No
Creator God was needed. Evolution is now regarded as the creator. In
the end, Darwin was enormously successful. As has been well-documented,
due to Darwin's affront undermining the Biblical account of creation,
the majority of eminent scientists today are atheists.
Most people accept design in the natural world because the world
actually looks like it is designed. As Professor Stewart-Williams
wrote: "most people would agree that certain parts of the natural world
look as though they were designed. Before Darwin, philosophers thought
there were two possible explanations for this: either they [the natural
parts] were designed or [they] came about through chance alone. The
idea that they came about through chance alone stretches credulity to
[the] breaking point, and thus we are left with design."
Stewart-Williams added, Darwin provided a third way, namely "a mindless
natural process [today called evolution] could create the illusion of
design." After noting that “Darwin’s theory provided an
alternative way to account for this design… God is not needed to
explain the design in nature (which was generally considered the best
evidence for a designer), then maybe God does not exist."
Life Found Only on Earth
Why are planets very similar to the Earth, such as Venus and Mars, as
well as the many moons in our solar system, totally void of even simple
life—after all, they are at least as old as the Earth? If life appeared
here fairly soon, almost from its beginning as evolutionists claim,
consequently the eons of time available would have given these other
worlds more than enough time to evolve some type of simple living
organism.
Yet, life exists only on the Earth, and not on even one of the over
1,160 known other worlds in our solar system (8 major planets and their
207 moons, 5 dwarf planets and their 9 moons, and 457 minor
planets/asteroids and their 477 moons), even though scientists estimate
billions of years are available for life to evolve in these places. The
explanation evolutionists give is all of these other planets are too
hostile for life to have evolved there.
The fact is the total lack of evidence for the evolution of life called
abiogenesis produces not a reason but an excuse. Certain life forms
exist on Earth that a few years ago were felt to be impossible to
survive in enormously hostile environments. Environments hot
enough to boil water, environments containing deadly highly toxic
poisons and environments lacking both oxygen and sunlight. However, if
life did indeed evolve on Earth, at least one unequivocal piece of
evidence must exist. It does not. Only excuses exist. However, if life
exists on Earth in such hostile environments, surely it could have
evolved elsewhere in these hostile environments.
In view of the incredible complexity of bacteria-like organisms, some
scientists reason that life, to have evolved, must have existed on
Earth during the vast majority of its four billion year existence. This
fact raises many questions relative to evolution. Not the least of
which is “how did such complex organisms evolve so extremely rapidly so
very early in the Earth’s history, and then so incredibly slowly ever
since?” This question is a result of the finding that no matter how far
back in time we go, most life-forms look very much like they look
today. An example is "Magnolia trees just like the ones that grace our
lawns lived on earth at the time of the dinosaurs… Ginkgo trees, which
now shade many city streets, were growing on earth 50 million years
before the first dinosaurs existed. And cockroaches ran about in
forests 50 million years before the ginkgoes appeared."
Because evolution requires a longtime to evolve, these examples must
have first evolved hundreds of millions of years ago, then, for some
unknown reason, stopped evolving. The explanation evolutionists offer
is that life evolved rapidly until it stopped because by then it was
well-adapted to its environment, so ceased evolving. The problem with
this explanation is no small number of life-forms have become extinct.
The many dinosaur kinds that have become extinct is the most well-known
example. The fact is, from the known evidence, life did not evolve. If
biological evolution was true we should see some evidence (fossil or
otherwise) of major anatomical change among living creatures in the
natural world, not stasis (form stability) which is, by far, the norm.
Much of Nature Cannot Be Explained by Natural Selection
<>
In contrast to Darwinism, much of what exists in the natural world
seems to have little to do with the process of natural selection or
even survival. The tree shape which facilitates survival for all trees
is that which maximizes its leaf exposure to sunlight. Increased
sunlight intake facilitates utilizing more of the existing sunlight,
resulting in increased photosynthesis, thus more energy, food, and
growth. The genetically programmed shapes of most trees, though, does
not always fully maximize its exposure to sunlight, and therefore
selection would not seem to explain or have caused this important
genetic-based taxonomic aid. A tree type can often be determined by its
overall profile or shape. Viewed from a distance, most tree experts can
tell a cypress (tall and pointed) from a maple (very roughly ball
shaped) from an elm (tends to fan out at the top). It is unlikely that
these small, identifying shape differences, while they are of enormous
help in identifying tree types, have anything to do with selection or
survival.
In addition, many plant leaves grow out from the stem in pairs, one
leaf of each pair facing east, for example, and the other west. The set
directly above is rotated 180 degrees. If one of the pairs faces north,
the other will face south. This would not seem to be the most optimal
arrangement relative to maximizing sunlight exposure, but it may have
other advantages not necessarily related to survival. The "stair-case"
pattern, if supported by a strong stem and leaf support, would absorb
far more sunlight than this arrangement. The existing pattern is
determined by the enzymes and the biochemical factors in the plant, but
this explains only the mechanism behind its development; the full why
of this arrangement seems to be forthcoming. This problem is
common in the plant world.
Summary
The evolution-as-creator notion has failed to be supported
scientifically, but in America one is not allowed to give the other
side. In essence, American schools indoctrinate its citizenry into the
Darwinian worldview and this is why it is widely believed as the
accepted answer to the origins if the universe, the solar system, and
life.
i Macbeth, Norman. 1971. Darwin Retried: an Appeal to Reason. Boston, MA: Gambit.
ii Pijparet, Leon. 2002. How to Study Biology. Long Beach, CA. Students First Publishing Co. P. 73.
iii Dawkins, Richard. 1986. The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of
Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design. New York, NY: W.W. Norton
& Company, pp. ix, xi.
iv Bergman, Jerry. 2012. Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview: How
the Nazi Eugenic Crusade for a Superior Race Caused the Greatest
Holocaust in World History. Kitchener, Ontario, Canada: Joshua Press;
Bergman, Jerry. 2011. The Dark Side of Charles Darwin. Green Forest,
AR: New Leaf Press.
v Stewart-Williams, Steve. 2010. Darwin, God and the Meaning of Life:
How Evolutionary Theory Undermines Everything You Thought You Knew.
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, p. 50.
vi Stewart-Williams, 2010, p. 50; emphasis mine.
vii Stewart-Williams, 2010, p. 51.
viii Smith, Howard. 1982. Living Fossils. New York, NY: Dodd, Mead & Company, p. 10.
<>