It was one time taught that mutations caused beneficial changes which accumulated to effect evolution. To the knowledgeable this is no longer a valid explanation. This is because for all practical purposes there is no such thing as a beneficial mutation for evolutionary purposes. Many evolutionists have admitted this.
Charlesworth, Brian, "Entropy: The Great Illusion," review of Evolution as Entropy by Daniel R. Brooks and E. O. Wiley (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986, 335 pp.), Evolution, vol. 40, no. 4 (1986), pp. 879-881. Charlesworth is in the Department of Biology, University of Chicago.
p. 880 "It should be clear that the claim for an inherent evolutionary increase in entropy and organization is based on an arbitrary model which shows signs of having been constructed simply to yield the desired result... There is nothing in evolutionary or developmental biology that justifies their assumptions that a successful mutation (which seems merely to mean a selectively neutral one in their model) is always associated with an increase in some global measure of phenotype. Nor is there anything to support the assumption that new species arise as the result of single gene mutations and are initially genetically uniform. If these assumptions are removed, the whole edifice collapses."
p. 880 "Mutations with drastic phenotypic effects are overwhelmingly likely to cause disorganization of development, as a glance around a Drosophila lab will convince anyone."
Mutations usually cause a decrease of information, to change from one type of animal to another "higher on the evolutionary tree" would require an increase in vast amounts of information. Only intelligence generates information. Hence there is no way for "chance" to produce evolutionary changes.
" for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore the lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it." -Exodus 20:9-11
Most chronometers (ways to date earth's age) point to relatively "young" earth, that is in the range of thousands as compared to millions or billions of years. The few that allow but don't require an ancient earth (the radiometric chronometers) are based on questionable assumptions that can be shown to be false.
Anonymous, "The Disappearing U.S., " Scientific American, vol. 211 (October 1964), p. 58. "The question of how fast the U.S. land mass is being washed into the sea has been given a new answer by two Princeton University geologists, Sheldon Judson and Dale F. Ritter. They calculate that solid and dissolved material carried by the rivers of the U.S. is sufficient to lower the average land surface by 2.4 inches in 1,000 years, a rate about twice as high as previous estimates.
"The authors conclude: 'Taking the average height of the United States above sea level as 2,300 feet and assuming that the rates of erosion reported here are representative, we find that it would take 11 to 12 million years to move to the oceans a volume equivalent to that of the United States lying above sea level. A this rate there has been enough time since the Cretaceous to destroy such a land mass six times over'."
When you do the calculations associated with evolutionary speculations it soon becomes apparent there has not been enough time in anyone's time line to bring about the evolutionary changes claimed. In fact new insights show there will never be enough time and that is why
An interesting exercise is to look up the following topics in old encyclopedias and textbooks (1940's and 1950's) and then see what is being said about them in more recent years. Although these were given as proofs of evolution in school and college textbooks you will find them missing in most present day textbooks though still to be seen in some textbooks and still used as examples by some unknowing teachers. You will find retractions by famous evolutionists in their "professional journals". Sometimes you will also see denials of the retraction in the popular media this because they admit among themselves what they deny to the general public. Some of the following examples have been shown to be frauds or hoaxes. All are at least faulty examples for evolution:
Piltdown man, Nebraska Man, Java Man, Feathered dinosaur, Recapitulation theory, Peppered moths, Mars meteorite, archaeopterix, coelacanth, transitional fossils (which should be numerous turn out to be only a few which are questionable), and the "horse series".
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics states that in the physical universe all processes are running down, being depleted or wearing out. That is everything is "going "downhill". Although this downward trend can be delayed or postponed, but it can do so only with the input of energy and information. Eventually everything will wear out, decay, or become depleted. In an effort to avoid this "law" some evolutionists will try to make a distinction about "open" and "closed" systems. The distinction "doesn't wash" because whether open or closed the 2nd Law can only be overcome if there is an input of information as well as energy. Chance alone does not provide information! The theory of evolution postulates the opposite of this universal law! For a more detailed discussion of this topic see Dr. Menton's are "There Ought to be A Law and There Is".
© 2001-2004 Missouri Association for Creation, Inc.
All Rights Reserved