Here are more reasons why so-called "natural selection" cannot produce new species. This is science vs. evolution—a Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia, brought to you by Creation Science Facts.
CONTENTS: Natural Selection: 2
Evidences that It Does Not Occur: Disproving evolutionary evidences of cross-species changes
Why Natural Selection Cannot Cross Species: Still more facts to think about
Conclusion: Subspecies changes Are Not evolution
Page numbers without book references refer to the book,
NATURAL SELECTION, from which these facts are summarized. An asterisk
( * ) by a name indicates that person is not known to be a creationist. Of over
4,000 quotations in the set of books this Encyclopedia
is based on
, only 164 statements are by creationists.
There is no evidence that evolution (cross-species change) has ever occurred. The best which evolutionists have to offer are subspecies variations.
Evolutionists point to two examples as the outstanding evidences that natural selection actually does occur. But, examining them, we find that neither supports evolutionary theory. The first is the peppered moth, and the second is the Galapagos finches.
The peppered moth. Evolutionists cite the peppered moth more than any other single item—as evidence that "natural selection" can produce a change of one species to another. Even *Isaac Asimov, the leading evolutionary science writer of our century, declared that the peppered moth was the best example.
Before 1845, in England, the peppered moth was primarily light colored. Some were born with light-colored wings while others had darker ones. But, since the bark on the trees was light, the darker moths were eaten by the birds. Yet both varieties continued to be produced.
By the 1880s, soot on the trees was turning the bark darker—and the birds were eating the most visible of the moths: the light ones. As a result, there were more dark peppered moths. But both varieties continued to be produced.
Well, what had happened?
First, both were variants of the same species. So a changeover from one to the other would not be evolution, since no new species had been produced. Both the light and dark varieties were regularly produced by their parents.
Second, both the dark and light varieties continued to be produced. The only thing that had changed was which subspecies were more likely to be eaten by birds. Both moths were the same species: Biston betularia.
We have here nothing more than a color variation within a stable species.—pp. 13, 15.
Galapagos finches. *Charles Darwin said that his visit to the Galapagos Islands, and particularly the finches there, were his best proof that natural selection makes evolutionary changes from one species to another.
Yet an examination of those finches reveals they are all varieties of the same finch species. All are nearly the same size and color.
There has been adaptation to different diets, but the species has remained the same.—pp. 16-17.
The dog and the pigeon. There are more varieties of dog (over a hundred) than any other creature, yet every biologist will readily agree they are all part of the same species.
There are more color variations among pigeons than among any other animal or bird in the world. Yet they all are variations of the same species, and recognized as such.—p. 17.
Lamarckianism. This is a discredited theory which was widely believed in the 19th century. It is the theory of "inheritance of acquired characteristics." No reputable scientist today will admit that Lamarckianism is true, yet evolutionary theory is based on it.
If your finger is cut off, your children will not inherit that loss. Why not? because they inherit—not accidents—but DNA patterns. Many examples could be cited.—p. 17.
Still more facts to think about.
The DNA barrier. The DNA code is a wall which evolution cannot pass across. A creature is born like its parents. There are variations within species, but these variations are within limits permitted by the DNA code for that species. We call this the "Mendelian laws of heredity." The code locks each species into a certain pattern, which it cannot escape from. Yet each species is permitted to have a certain range of variation.—pp. 17-18.
The variation range within each species. Some plants and animals have a greater range than do others. For example, the chrysanthemum has been found to produce a very wide range of variations. In contrast, the cheetah has been found to have one of the narrowest ranges of any mammal. This means that one cheetah looks almost identical to the next, yet its amazing speed and athletic ability is not in the least weakened because of its narrowed range of variations.—pp. 18, 21.
The amazing eye. Every eye is amazing, no matter which creature it is on. Did you know that there are a remarkable number of totally different types of eyes? Yet it would be impossible for one eye to change over to another type. The differences are too great. Each eye would have to come into existence exactly right and all at once. What good would half an eye be to anyone?—pp. 18, 20.
The cell battery. ATP is the chemical compound in cells which provides them with energy. Yet the formula for making the battery is totally complicated! On one hand, there would be no possible way that it could gradually be brought into existence by "natural selection"; and, on the other, the cell could not exist without it! Without electrical energy, every plant and animal cell would quickly die. Without continual ATP production and utilization, you would be dead in a minute.—p. 19.
The marvelous organic fit. Every species of plant and animal is perfectly adapted for its environment. It was brought into existence that way. Not only is it perfect in form and structure, but it is provided with the exact food it needs to survive.
Keep in mind that "natural selection" is always said, by evolutionists, to be totally random. Then how could it make every creature have just what it needed and work just right?
Try letting "natural selection" make a pocket watch. How could iron, copper, and sand change itself into steel and brass wheels, springs, and crystal covers? Yet a pocket watch is much simpler in design and function than is a living creature!—p. 20.
Natural selection destroys evolutionary change. The only natural selection there is, is the kind we find working within species. Anytime an individual is born with traits too far from the species norm, it dies. It does not change into a new species!—p. 21.
There should be no distinct species. Any thinking person will agree that this is a powerful argument against evolution: If natural selection really did make new variations, wandering away from the basic species,—then, if evolution were true, there would be no distinct species! Yet, instead, all we find in life today, and in the geologic strata of life in earlier times, are definite types of creatures.—p. 21.
An intelligent purpose. Evolutionists fear to admit that there is any purpose in the formation of galaxies, stars, planets, or living creatures. They fear it, because purpose points to a super-intelligent Creator.
Therefore, evolutionary theory requires total randomness in everything made.
Yet all about us we see purpose in everything. The plant is given roots to extract water and minerals; and leaves to process sunlight and water, and produce sugar. The animal is given legs, eyes, ears, and marvelous internal organs. Everything is purposive. Nothing is random or haphazard.
How long would you live without kidneys? or a heart? Yet both are very complicated and impossible to come into existence by chance.—pp. 22-23.
Staying by the average. Statisticians well-know that all living creatures tend to keep coming back to the average. Even though varieties can be bred, if not continually guarded, their descendants will tend back toward the average. Educational psychologists call it "regression toward the mean." The offspring of the gifted will move back toward the mean, or mathematical average.
The principle of regression toward the mean rules out the possibility of evolution.—p. 24.
Mutations. Mutations are the only way that something quite different from the average could be produced. But, as we will learn in the next article in this series (Mutations), mutations only damage or kill; they never help or improve.
You will find the words, "mutation" and "mutant," tossed around a lot in contemporary literature. Much of this concerns variations within species, within the natural range permitted by the genetic code of that species.
A true mutation only wounds, sterilizes, or kills. Examples of true mutations can be found at Hiroshima and Chernobyl.—pp. 25-26.
Subspecies changes are not evolution.
Natural variations. There are indeed natural variations within species. Because we see such varieties, it sounds logical when we hear it said that "natural selection produces evolution."
But all the natural variations only result in changes or varieties within the species; they never produce new species.
It is because of natural variations that everyone's face looks a little different. Yet even those differences come from inherited DNA patterns. That is why, although you look a little different, you still look so much like your parents and grandparents.—p. 26.
Another term you will hear, from time to time, is "inheritance of acquired characteristics." This is the idea that, if you lose an arm, your son will only have one arm. But that, of course, is not true. It was a theory which scientists rejected in the 19th century. Yet it is the basis of evolutionary theory today. Your children inherit, not accidents, but DNA code patterns. That is why your puppy dog will only have puppy dogs. It will not have cats or cows or cucumbers.
The DNA code is a barrier wall which evolution cannot pass across. We call it the "Mendelian laws of heredity." This code locks every species into a certain basic pattern. But within each pattern, or species, there is a certain range of variation.
There are indeed natural variations within species. Because we see them, it sounds logical when we hear it said that "natural selection produces evolution."
But natural variations result in changes, or varieties, only within the species; changes which make one species into a different species never occur.
It is because of natural variations that everyone's face looks a little different. Yet even those differences come from inherited DNA patterns. That is why you look so much like your ancestors.
Evolutionists fear to admit that there is any purpose in the formation of galaxies, stars, planets, or living creatures. They fear it, because purpose points to a super-intelligent Creator.
Therefore, evolutionary theory requires total randomness in everything made.
Yet all about us we see purpose in everything. The plant is given roots to extract water and minerals; and leaves to process sunlight and water, and produce sugar. The animal is given legs, eyes, ears, and marvelous internal organs. Everything is purposive. Nothing is random or haphazard. Everything is wonderfully designed.
Only God can make a tree, a butterfly, or a hummingbird.
And when He works, He does not work in a confused manner. He made many different kinds of creatures, but each kind is special.
We can be thankful we are special to Him also.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Forward to the next topic in this series:
SCIENTISTS SPEAK ABOUT NATURAL SELECTION:
Research scientists tell us that natural selection does not go across true species.