I have removed the search box because it was not working but the search box in the title bar seems to.

Wednesday, 14 November 2012

A Problem with Evolution – What it Hasn’t Done

Darwinists seem not to have a problem with the most astonishing adaptations. There are insects which mimic bird droppings, others which resemble sticks and leaves. Some harmless species cloak themselves in the
garb of deadly others. Without aiming to do so – aiming is disallowed – they achieve protection from their foes. The number of individual adaptations in each case is mind-blowing. To get from a vulnerable beetle to one which predators ignore takes a lot of adaptations – zillions.

The Darwinian explanation is that with zillions of years there is no problem, in spite of the fact that nobody has any idea of how other beetles (or twigs) got to be the way they are. [How credulous are you?]

The Establishment has it that is what has happened. Assume this is so. Assume that zillions (always an
underestimate) could have done it.

OK. Why are you so untidy – even the tidiest of you? We are. Look around. Putting your spear away, in the most accessible location, is a smart move when there are sabre-tooths about. Keeping the fire-pit free from
clutter is a good way of reducing the number of little ones who fall in. Nevertheless, human beings are very untidy.

The Darwinian theory would predict that over aeons humans would have become tidy. We haven’t.

My dad was an untidy git. My sister fell in the fire. My brother was eaten by a sabre-tooth. If my granddad had been a bit (genetically) tidier and my dad had inherited the trait, my siblings might have survived.
Untidy gits are, by Darwinian theory, less likely to survive. But here I am and there you are. We have no business being here.

Darwinian theory ought to have eliminated us. The steps by which we should have got eliminated are really simple. It didn’t happen.

I started to muse on this while watching a wildlife programme. As always, the antelopes simply ran from the carnivores but some got caught. But these antelopes were armed with the most fearsome horns, which
could have inflicted severe injuries on the predators, particularly if the antelopes had circled the wagons and cooperated. No, these dumb creatures used their weaponry only against each other during the rut.

A very few behavioural adaptations would have put the carnivores out of the antelope business and there have been zillions of years for this to have happened.

My objections to the Darwinian mechanism are largely based on what Dawkins has called “the argument from personal incredulity”. I have said before that I think it is an excellent argument. “Credulous” is normally
used pejoratively. Dawkins would not be complimenting me on my Catholicism if he said I was “credulous”. Dawkins believes three impossible things before breakfast.

No comments:

Post a Comment