The Myth of “Evolution Science”
by Bill Dietrich

When you hear anything repeatedly, day after day, year after year, eventually you begin to accept it as truth. This is especially true when you hear it from every corner of our culture… schools, the media, movies. Even in many of our churches, due to fear of being ridiculed by the secular elites, you find a willingness to accept Darwinian evolution as fact. After all, who are we to question the science of evolution?

But the theory of Evolution is not really science. It’s not even close to being science. When it comes to oxymorons, the term “Evolution Science” tops the list. If you look at the origin of the theory, one can only wonder why any self-respecting modern day scientist would place any credence in it at all.

Look at a few historical facts. Charles Darwin is generally credited as the father of the theory of evolution. He first postulated his theory in 1859, with his book The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. Without any knowledge of genetics, DNA, or cell biology, he attempted to explain how inherited traits are passed from generation to generation. He speculated that traits which tend to make an individual better suited to survive in his environment would be more likely to be expressed in future generations. In other words, an organism more “fit” than individuals lacking these traits will survive to reproduce more abundantly. Eventually, these traits would then become predominant in the population. His ideas were based strictly on empirical observations and lacked any evidence of how such mechanisms work at the level of genetics.

While it may be difficult to argue against Natural Selection as it relates to variations within a species, the extension of this process to allow the creation of a new and different species cannot happen, and does not happen. There is also no evidence in the fossil record that it has ever happened.

The discipline of science was still in its infancy in the 19th Century. The prevailing explanation for the transfer of traits from generation to generation was Lamarckism. This is also called the “Use and Disuse Theory”. People believed that if a man became a blacksmith, for example, and developed large muscles, then his sons would have large muscles, also. Lamarck postulated that the reason giraffes have long necks arises from their striving to reach higher and higher to eat leaves off trees. Their offspring, therefore, would be born with longer necks. The action of genes and the enormous complexity of even the simplest single-cell organism were not even contemplated. Even though Cell Theory was beginning to emerge, Darwin could not have made the connection between the nucleus of cells and heredity, so he simply made up his own explanation of why different varieties of animals and plants existed. Darwin’s explanation was different from Lamarck’s in that it relied on accidental changes, or mutations, which favored a given trait rather than intentional or “use and disuse”. However, both theories were totally unscientific by today’s standards.

At first, the scientific community of the day rejected Darwin's theory because scientists were predominantly Christians seeking to understand the complexity of God’s creation. They were not attempting to disprove His existence nor His role in creation. However, in time the Humanist movement began to embrace the notion of evolution and sought to use it as a means to undermine belief in God as the Creator of the universe. If the mechanisms of evolution proceeded on their own, there was no need for God, and therefore, no absolute basis for moral absolutes.

To better appreciate what the Darwinian phenomenon was all about, read his brief biography . The author of this biography is clearly a believer in evolution. It demonstrates the point that those who fervently believe this theory are either ignorant of biological processes or choose not to accept any evidence that defeats this antiquated pseudo-science.

As Christians we have truth on our side. We should not be timid about defending the truth of our Creator God and His explanation of the origin of species. It’s the only one which makes any sense and agrees with the facts.

Copyright 1/7/2008 William C. Dietrich

Social Bookmarking: What is it?

---

DIGG
Stumbleupon
Reddit
Google
Yahoo!
Netscape
Askjeeves
Blink List