This site hosted by 
Get your own Free Home Page
|
It was only a relatively short time ago that evolutionists denied the existence of any real gaps in the archaeological record. When you stated the obvious, they asked you to quote a mainstream evolutionist to back your allegedly ridiculous claims up. Stephan J. Gould therefore took a courageous risk with his career, in proposing a theory in the 1970s called punctuated equilibrium ( punk-eek ), which openly admitted large gaps in the fossil record. And while many evolutionists have bitterly and regularly attacked Gould for this, including Dawkins, it is fortunate for Gould that the response of his fellow scientists was not wholly hostile, and his career does not appear to have suffered as a result. In fact, his original paper has become quite celebrated in some quarters.
So, there are no fossil remains of intermediates. But as a thought experiment, what would they hypothetically have looked like?
Well, Denton in his book Evoltuion a Theory in Crisis provides a description of the best current guess for brids. It basically consists of a flightless bird hopping around trying to catch flies, and SOMEHOW, slowly developing wings to jump a little bit higher each time. A number of problems spring to mind with this thesis.
Firstly, light feathers are totally different from down feathers or feathers used for insulation; they involve an exquisite system of cross-latched barbules and shapes which are totally different from those of down feathers. Moreover, a flight feather would be totally useless for anything other than flight, and so the odds would be massively weighted against a creature which did not have them to begin with ever developing them. There would be no reason for it. The odds of it happening would be an infinitessimal, basically one divided by some gigantic number. Likewise with the development of arms into wings; that would actually be disfunctional prior to the day the creature flew and, again, the odds against such a development for no particular reason are astronomical. We DO have several kinds of birds such as ostriches with vestigian wings, but again these are descended from birds which flew and are not in some process of evolving INTO flying birds. They are developing OUT of being flying birds. Flying birds likewise require highly specialized bone structures, tails, hearts, lungs, and general balance parameters, all of which are totally different from those of other creatures, any of which would be antifunctional prior to flight. Developing any one of these things prior to being flight-capable would require overcoming gigantic odds. The odds of ALL of these things developing from scratch thus, which is required by the notions of evolution of flying birds, thus amount to several infinitessimals MULTIPLIED TOGETHER. The entire age of the universe isn't long enough for that to happen. In fact, assuming one such feature had developed by chance, by the time the next one did, the first would, in all likelihood, still having been antifunctional during the time that the the next was evolving, have de-evolved. The only other possibility from the point of view of evolution would be to have all necessary functionality for flying birds arise via mutation on the same day, which is a miracle whether God did it, Ra did it, or (as an evolutionist claim for such a thing would have to amount to) Loki (luck) did it.The funny thing is that scientists believe in evolution(ism) because they wish to rule out what they see as the "supernatural" alternative, while in fact they have created the supernatural alternative in their requirement for endless violations of probabilistic laws. Thus, we observe that any change to a substantially different kind of creature with new kinds of organs, an entirely new set of system integration requirements for those organs with both old and other new organs, and a new plan for life, is seen to be a zero-probability event, both statistically and programmatically.
And thats just the macro part of avian evlution. Denton also discusses the micro-bilogical features of an intermediate. This is much harder hitting, and evoltuionists are 100% clueless on how this transition happened. And do not tell me the first bird could have been a glider - the flight principals are totaly different for powered and unpowered flight. In all honestly, I do not think there is a valid intermediate form for a bird - it is mathematically and physcially impossible, both on a microbiological level AND a macroscopic system level. Period.
DNA Intermediates : Proof of evolution, or yet another nail in the coffin?
In the 1960s scientists began to figure that not only did animals differ at the morphological level in terms of their gross anatomy, but that they also varied at the molecular level. So evolutionists reasoned, by analysing the molecules, DNA, proteins, etc, we should be able to uncover the precise evolutionary relationships between species. And indeed, it has been revealed that all animals on this planet have astonishing similarities at the molecular level which point irrefutably to there being some common process behind the appearance of life on this planet. We can also say with great confidence that microevolution and population genetics have now moved from the status of theory, to a well established and understood scientific fact.
However, the problem has been no clear molecular intermediates have been found between any of the previously established classes of organisms. All we have is extensive tables of isolated classes of molecules, none of which shed much light on how one turns into another. For the full details I refer you to chapter 12 of Denton's book Evolution a Theory in Crisis. I refuse to reproduce large chucks of it for you, because he deserves to make money from his excellent text. But, he does take you through protein, RNA, haemoglobin, nucleic acid, and other molecules to demonstrate this point. The traditional evolutionary sequence of cyclostome - fish - amphibian - reptile - mammal, is shown to be an exploded myth. Mammals are as close in molecular terms to cyclostimes, as fish and amphibians! Traditional text book favourites for evolutionists such as the lung fish, are shown to exhibit no molecular signs whatsoever of their alleged critical intermediate status!
Chandra Wickramasinghe has compared the neo-Darwinian account of evolution to saying that all of world literature came from the book of Genesis by occasional typos and paragraph swapping. The mechanism discussed here is analogous to stipulating that every text along the way was viable as literature. Such gradualistic series have not been shown to be possible in written text or computer programs. Nor have they been shown to exist in biology. If this is how new genes are supposed to evolve, the mechanism remains to be demonstrated.
This site hosted by Get your own Free Home Page
|
