Conservapedia

Difference between revisions of "Counterexamples to Evolution"

m (Reverted edits by JFox (Talk) to last version by Aschlafly)
(further copy-edit improvements)
 
(651 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
[[File:Darwin_monkey_cartoon.jpg|thumb|180px|Caricature of [[Charles Darwin]]. To date, no fossils of ''H. darwinicus orangutanishicus'' have been found.]]
+
[[File:Question-Evolution-Campaign.jpg|thumbnail|250px|right|The [[Question evolution! campaign]] by [[Creation Ministries International]] is a worldwide campaign that poses 15 questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer.<ref>[https://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign] by [[Creation Ministries International]]</ref> The 15 questions posed to evolutionists can be found [https://creation.com/15-questions HERE] ]]
−
A scientific theory proven by the logical principal of deduction  cannot permit any counterexamples.  In order to be true, the [[theory of evolution|theory of evolution by natural selection acting upon random mutation]] must be able to explain the origins of '''''all''''' living things in terms of a purely naturalistic view. '''If any of the counterexamples listed below is correct, then the theory of evolution fails'''. Moreover, if there is merely a 5% chance that each of these examples is correct, then the odds that these are ''all'' incorrect and that evolution is true is infinitesimally small.
+
The [[theory of evolution]] cannot allow any counterexamples. '''If any one of the 55 counterexamples listed below is correct, then the theory of evolution fails'''. Moreover, even if there is merely a 10% chance that each of these counterexamples is correct (and the odds are far higher than that<ref>Many of the counterexamples are indisputable, rendering each of their probabilities of being correct nearly 100%.</ref>), then the '''''probability that the theory of evolution is false is more than 99%'''''.
 
==Counterexamples==
 
==Counterexamples==
−
===Based on statistics===
+
===Logical examples===
−
* Parsimonious repetition of design elements throughout creation, e.g. the eye's appearance in remarkably different species.  For such complex structures to [[convergent evolution|arise repeatedly via evolution]] is [[statistical_impossibility | impossible]], as evolution is an inherently random and historically contingent process.
+
# Evolution cannot explain artistic beauty, such as brilliant autumn foliage and the staggering array of beautiful marine fish, which originated before any human to view them. "[[Natural selection]] has no reason to produce beauty," Ann Gauger says in ''Metamorphosis'' about a principle that applies to flowers as well as butterflies. "Beauty is a sign of the transcendent. It's purely gratuitous. We all recognize it. We just have to acknowledge what it points to."<ref>[http://www.evolutionnews.org/2016/03/baroque_botany102711.html Baroque Botany: Elaborate but Functional]</ref> See: [[Argument from beauty]].
−
* ''Pleiotropy'', the fact that a change of a single gene can have several different effects, renders the "improvement" of animals by random mutation impossible, as any mutation with a potentially beneficial effect will be coupled with one or more other potentially lethal effects.
+
# The current annual rate of extinction of species far exceeds any plausible rate of generation of species. Expanding the amount of time for evolution to occur makes evolution even ''less'' likely.
−
* The development of feathers, which could not have conceivably "grown" from the scales of dinosaurs<ref>http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/40/4/687.pdf</ref><ref>[http://palaeoblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/early-evolution-of-feathers.html]</ref>
+
# The [[Second Law of Thermodynamics]] establishes that everything in the world becomes more disordered over time, in the absence of intelligent intervention.  The theory of evolution falsely claims that some systems can become more ordered over time, like an impossible [[perpetual motion machine]]. See: [[Creation Ministries International on the second law of thermodynamics|Evolution and the second law of thermodynamics]] and [[Genetic entropy]]
−
* For evolution to be true, every male dog, cat, horse, elephant, giraffe, fish and bird had to have coincidentally evolved with a female alongside it (over billions of years) with fully evolved compatible reproductive parts and a desire to mate, otherwise the species couldn't keep going. <ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90743</ref>
+
# Royal Truman and Peter Borger wrote concerning optimization and the genetic code: "The distribution of ‘code quality’ would roughly follow a Gaussian distribution, based on the [[law of large numbers]]. This means that as coding conventions are improved, it would be ever more difficult for natural selection to generate yet better codes."<ref>[https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j21_3/j21_3_84-92.pdf Genetic code optimisation: Part 2] by Royal Truman and Peter Borger</ref> 
 +
# More than 70% of Earth is covered with water, devastating flooding is frequent, and a massive ancient flood is historically recorded by every culture.  Limestone and fossils exist at the highest peaks of altitude.  Yet mammals cannot survive large floods.  It is impossible to increase the period of time to permit evolution without also increasing the likelihood of extinction of mammals due to large flooding. [[Jesus]] mentioned the [[Great Flood]] at [[Luke, Chapter 17#27|Luke 17:27]].
 +
# Evolution cannot explain the lack of genetic diversity among the Homo sapiens species. If evolution and the Old Earth theory were true, the human population would show a much larger genetic variance.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2008-02-15 |title=Descent of Man Theory: Disproved by Molecular Biology |url=http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/descent.html#rpafAHIwKHS7 |url-status=deviated |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191106001429/http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/descent.html#rpafAHIwKHS7 |archive-date=2019-11-06 |access-date=2023-11-09 |website=godandscience.org}}</ref> Some scientists have stated that a troop of 55 chimpanzees contains more genetic diversity than the entire human race; this would support the idea that all chimps are descended from a relatively large initial population while all humans are descended from a much smaller initial population (two people, perhaps). 80% of all human diversity is found on the African continent, which accords with a human population growing from a small group in the post-Flood Middle East. [[File:Ara macao -on a small bicycle-8.jpg|thumbnail|300px|right|[[Parrot]] feathers are a problem for evolutionists.  For more information, please see [https://creation.com/parrot-fashion parrot feathers].]]
 +
# Parsimonious repetition of design elements throughout Creation, e.g. the eye's appearance in remarkably different species.  For such complex structures to [[convergent evolution|repeatedly arise via evolution]] is [[statistical impossibility|impossible]], as evolution is an inherently random and historically contingent process.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Does Homology Provide Evidence of Evolutionary Naturalism? |url=https://answersingenesis.org/theory-of-evolution/evidence/does-homology-provide-evidence-of-evolutionary-naturalism/ |access-date=2023-11-09 |website=Answers in Genesis |language=en}}</ref>
 +
# ''Pleiotropy'', the fact that a change of a single gene can have several different effects, renders the "improvement" of animals by random mutation impossible, as any mutation with a potentially beneficial effect will be coupled with one or more other potentially lethal effects.<ref>{{Cite web |title=A Creationist Perspective of Beneficial Mutations in Bacteria |url=https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/mutations/a-creationist-perspective-of-beneficial-mutations-in-bacteria/ |access-date=2023-11-09 |website=Answers in Genesis |language=en}}</ref>
 +
# The development of feathers, which could not have conceivably "grown" from the scales of reptiles<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Martin |first=Larry D. |last2=Czerkas |first2=Stephan A. |date=2000-08 |title=The Fossil Record of Feather Evolution in the Mesozoic |url=https://academic.oup.com/icb/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/icb/40.4.687 |journal=American Zoologist |language=en |volume=40 |issue=4 |pages=687–694 |doi=10.1093/icb/40.4.687 |issn=0003-1569}}</ref><ref>[http://palaeoblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/early-evolution-of-feathers.html]</ref>
 +
# For evolution to be true, every male dog, cat, horse, elephant, giraffe, fish and bird had to have coincidentally evolved with a female alongside it (over billions of years) with fully evolved compatible reproductive parts and a desire to mate, otherwise the species couldn't keep going.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2009-03-04 |title=Atheists strategize against book on God |url=https://www.wnd.com/2009/03/90743/ |access-date=2023-11-09 |website=WND |language=en-US}}</ref>
 +
# There are no historical records of anyone directly observing one major kind of animal evolving into another, which would certainly be something worth writing about. Also, "Why are the (expected) countless millions of transitional fossils missing?"<ref>[https://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]</ref>
 +
# If evolution were to explain where human beings come from, then every personality type should benefit human life. This is clearly untrue because the world is filled with liars, psychopaths, and murderers. These traits clearly do not benefit humanity.
 +
# If [[homosexuality]] were a result of genetics as many [[liberals]] claim and not [[Homosexuality and choice|a sinful choice]], then evolution should lead to the extinction of [[homosexuality]], yet to this day homosexuality exists among humans. See: [[Causes of Homosexuality|Causes of homosexuality]]
 +
# The Theory of Evolution dictates that all organisms descended from single-celled bacteria. Considering that bacteria are, and always have been, the most successful group of organisms, covering all areas of the globe in some of the most extreme environments, why would it have been advantageous to evolve into organisms that are so much more limited to the environments they can inhabit? Surely, staying as bacteria would be far more advantageous, due to their tolerance of extreme conditions, quick reproduction time, etc.
 +
# Evolution cannot explain why tapeworms exist since parasitism is worse than mutual cooperation. This is because parasitism would mean they will have to destroy their host and have less opportunity to evolve while those that cooperate with other organisms will evolve at a much faster rate and overtake their cousins.
 +
# Body odor, especially during long periods of not washing in nature, can become very pungent and easily detectable by predators. At the same time, over 80% of East Asians have the ABCC11 gene, which causes the body not to produce body odor from the armpits.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kuo |first=Kaiser |date=2019-07-08 |title=Why Chinese people don't need deodorant |url=https://thechinaproject.com/2019/07/08/kuora-why-chinese-people-dont-need-deodorant/ |access-date=2023-11-21 |website=The China Project |language=en-US}}</ref> There is no reason that this trait would not have been advantageous to evolve from the get-go by the first humans, or at least have spread to the other races tens of thousands of years ago in an evolutionary scenario.
  
 
===Lack of mechanism===
 
===Lack of mechanism===
−
* Animals flee to high ground ''before'' a deadly tsunami hits their shoreline, defying any plausible [[materialistic]] explanation.<ref>http://www.deseretnews.com/article/600105348/Utah-scientific-Did-animals-sense--and-flee--the-tsunamis-in-S-Asia.html</ref>
+
[[Image:Feather image.jpg|thumb|300px|right|[[Harvard]] biologist [[Ernst Mayr]] wrote: "It must be admitted, however, that it is a considerable strain on one’s credulity to assume that finely balanced systems such as certain sense organs (the eye of vertebrates, or the bird’s feather) could be improved by random [[mutation]]s."<ref>[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes9.html Ernst Mayr, Systematics and the Origin of Species (New York: Dover Publications, 1942), p. 296]</ref>]]
−
* Mutations cause a loss of information, rendering it mathematically impossible for mutations to advance the complexity of life.  Similarly, entropy (disorder) increases over time, making it impossible for order to increase on its own.
+
# The extraordinary [[animal migration|migration]] patterns of butterflies and birds cannot be explained through naturalistic development, and lack any plausible materialistic explanation.<ref>[[Animal migration]]</ref>
−
* "Social insects" such as bees, ants, and termites, which have extremely ornate caste systems.  Where an insect fits is determined by its diet when young.  Evolution requires that both the genetics for the various castes, the genetics for caste determination, and the genetics for ''behavior'' allowing caste determination all appeared simultaneously.  Akin to the concept of [[irreducible complexity]], but on a higher (social) order, this is impossible given random chance.
+
# Evolutionists falsely asserted for centuries that [[corn]] evolved from teosinte, when in fact they have many fundamentally irreconcilable differences;<ref>https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1820997116</ref> there is no plausible evolutionary path of development for [[corn]].
−
* [[Ant]]s and other social [[insect]]s, for at least two reasons:  First, their complex social structure is evidence of [[intelligent design]]; second, since the overwhelming majority of individuals are workers and do not reproduce, they cannot perpetuate their genetic material, as evolution requires.
+
# Evolution does not account for the immense amount of [[information]] in the genome. While there are various definitions of information, and many types have been observed to occur naturally, DNA contains information that is processed to lead to a result predetermined by the content of that information. Strictly speaking, it is inaccurate to refer to DNA as a "code" or "language," as many scientists are prone to doing. In fact, DNA is more like a template, which produces messenger RNA (mRNA), a new template with more appropriate bases for protein production. The mRNA essentially acts as a scaffold to which the appropriate amino acids attach to form a protein molecule. Rather than being a language containing words that each has a meaning, DNA is more like a jig or framework that allows a specific molecule of mRNA, and subsequently a specific protein sequence, to be assembled on it. In effect, the information is the sequence of chemical reactions which that length of DNA will catalyze. Given the huge number of useless protein molecules which could be formed and the complexity of even a simple protein such as hemoglobin, this sequence could not have evolved by natural selection as the odds against the initial organism having a functional protein are too great.
−
* evolution cannot explain artistic beauty, such as the brilliant autumn foliage and staggering array of beautiful marine fish, both of which originated before any human to view them; this lacks any plausible evolutionary explanation
+
# The development of feathers, which could not have conceivably "grown" from the scales of reptiles or any other known structure.<ref>http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/40/4/687.pdf</ref><ref>[http://palaeoblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/early-evolution-of-feathers.html]</ref> [[File:Autumn.jpg|292px|right|thumbnail|The beauty of [[God]]'s [[creation]], such as [[autumn]] foliage, cannot adequately be explained through the evolutionary [[paradigm]]. See: [[Argument from beauty]]
−
* the fact that [[cicada]]s appear like clockwork every 13 years for some species, and every 17 years for others<ref>http://inside.msj.edu/academics/faculty/kritskg/cicada/faq.html</ref>
+
 
−
* the extraordinary migration patterns of butterflies and birds, which lack any plausible materialistic explanation<ref>[[migration]]</ref>
+
<small>([https://www.flickr.com/photos/universalpops/5236103680/ Flickr] picture, see:'' [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en license agreement])</small>]]
−
* Evolution does not account for the immense amount of [[information]] in the genome, as well as the origin of the information-processing systems in the cell. Information always has a sender, who must be God in this case.
+
# Humans exhibit behaviors such as performing [[science]], creating [[art]] and [[music]], [[dance|dancing]], and a number of other intellectual and artistic behaviors which could not have been produced by random mutations. There is no known evolutionary reason why these should be favored.
−
* the manner in which chickens return to their chicken coops at the same time, and enter the chicken coops in the same order, each day
+
# Trematode parasites, like many other kinds, lack a plausible evolutionary phylogeny, though they can easily be explained by a teleological design.<ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/36/36_4/trematodes.html</ref>
−
* Symbiosis - There are many examples where creatures rely on each other to survive which could not arise through evolution. Grass cannot survive without a certain fungus that helps it fix nitrogen from the atmosphere and the fungus can't survive without the grass. They must have appeared on earth at the same time.<ref>[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070410084136.htm]</ref>
+
# Evolution cannot explain the many complex sex-determining systems. For example, in most mammals, females have two identical sex chromosomes (XX in this case) whereas males have two different ones (XY). However, in birds, reptiles, many insects, and other organisms, the situation is reversed to where the male has two identical sex chromosomes and the female has two different ones; for example, male birds have a ZZ chromosome pair and females ZW. No evolutionist has proposed a mechanism by which mammals could have a different sex chromosome system from the reptile ancestors they allegedly share with birds. In fact, many evolutionists admit that the XY and ZW chromosomal systems could not have shared a common origin.<ref>Ellegren, Hans (2011-03-01). "Sex-chromosome evolution: recent progress and the influence of male and female heterogamety". Nature Reviews Genetics. 12 (3): 157–166. doi:10.1038/nrg2948. ISSN 1471-0056. PMID 21301475. S2CID 21098648</ref>
−
* Consciousness - No animal displays self-awareness (such as clothing), morality, to