The Epilogue of Evolution – BIG MISTAKE!
Over a century ago, Charles Darwin had a simple idea that hoodwinked the world. Amongst the offspring of any organism, he pointed out, there will be tiny variations in body structure that make some of them a bit stronger, faster or sexually attractive than the rest and therefore ‘fitter’– i.e. better equipped to cope with the pressures of their environment and the struggle for survival. He called the imagined evolutionary process ‘descent with modification’ and the collective pressures of life were called ‘natural selection’.
Thus, he suggested, given enough time, which was conveniently supplied by the developing science of geology, a primitive organism (possibly created by God, as he was initially willing to admit) in that famous primeval pool of slime, could have gradually evolved and diversified, generation by generation, to create all life on earth as we know it. The theory of evolution proved seductive, so much so that even today it is embraced as gospel truth by many Nobel scientists who should know better. A quite incredible situation! growing magic mushrooms
Essays and Reviews
Darwin’s simple idea provided evolution with the crucial missing mechanism, i.e. natural selection, that had eluded its atheistic supporters since the days of the ancient Greeks.
And so evolution was given a spark of life and Darwinism was born, and in the year 1859 The Origin of Species was finally published – and the world applauded. Then, one year later, in a sad parody of the wise men coming to the birth of Jesus, a group of very un-wise British clergymen turned up and were emboldened to publish a book of their own, entitled Essays and Reviews, claiming the Bible to be a mixture of error, myth and superstition. Evolution was helped on its way, to do its nefarious work of hoodwinking the world. Their sorry book, I am told, which actually outsold Darwin’s at the time, is still held in high esteem in Anglican seminaries.
Darwin’s theory stressed that any small difference that gave an organism some tiny ‘advantage’ would cause it to be favoured and selected for survival. The principle of natural selection soon became a magic mantra, still being spouted by nano-brain TV presenters who glibly assure us that if the acquisition a new feature, such as legs for a fish, would give them an ‘advantage’, then natural selection would have ensured that feature ‘evolved’, ‘developed’ or was ‘acquired’. No questions asked. No need for messy details of How? and Why? No need for chains of logical cause-and-effect explanation.
The true believer just knows it works that way, even though Darwin himself admitted that it was virtually impossible, given the complexities of nature, to define what the fittest meant in any situation. For example, for a given group of organisms, which is the fittest? Is it the fastest, the strongest, the biggest – or could it be the little chap who ignores the territorial battles and quietly casts his seed as widely as possible?
You Just Gotta Believe It
One such true believer, is EvoDevo enthusiast Professor Sean Carroll. In discussing how the ‘icefish’ must have evolved to survive in in the ocean in freezing temperatures, and without the red blood cells and the haemoglobin that normally acts as an antifreeze, Carroll lists the following evolutionary design changes from normal fish: larger gills, scaleless skin with unusually large capillaries, large heart and bigger blood volumes. In fact, he says, the fish also has ‘many cardiovascular adaptations’ that somehow get the vital oxygen to its muscles. Survival has even required that the micro-structure of the ‘tubules’ in its cells be modified for freezing conditions.
He adds that a number of other coordinated ‘inventions’ were also needed – such as special ‘antifreeze proteins’ in its blood plasma, without which the fish would turn into a block of ice. He then glibly describes in terms of amino acids how ‘many more genes’ must have been modified to make these adaptations possible. And all this was due, he claims, to the accumulation of randomly generated DNA copying errors. And this is serious science at work? Gadzooks!