"First of all, the lack of a case for evolution is clear from the fact that no one has ever seen it happen. If it were a real process, evolution should still be occurring, and there should be many "transitional" forms that we could observe. What we see instead, of course, is an array of distinct "kinds" of plants and animals with many varieties within each kind, but with very clear and -- apparently -- unbridgeable gaps between the kinds. That is, for example, there are many varieties of dogs and many varieties of cats, but no "dats" or "cogs." Such variation is often called microevolution, and these minor horizontal (or downward) changes occur fairly often, but such changes are not true "vertical" evolution."
https://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution/" Life Cannot Evolve from Non-Living Matter
It would seem that the biggest leap of faith for the evolutionist is the origination of life itself from non-living matter. Such has never been demonstrated in the laboratory or observed in nature. All living things have come about from other living things. The argument is that it had to have happened because life abounds. This is the logical flaw of begging the question; that conclusion has to be based on the assumption that God does not exist, and thus, He could not have created life. No one can argue that if you assume God out of the argument from the outset that evolution is not the next-best theory; but we are not willing to be that close-minded. Why exclude the possibility of a Creator?
But for a moment let us stipulate that some weird combination of circumstances did occur that created life. There is still a problem for the evolutionist. The characteristic of consciousness does not exist in the lowest forms of life (e.g., mold). At some point this crud would have to acquire a sufficient degree of intelligence to be able to perceive that it existed, a characteristic that we call consciousness. How could such evolve from nothing other than natural selection? There is a major scientific/medical lack of understanding of consciousness and the connection between brain waves and our self-awareness. Again the only explanation for the evolutionists is that it had to have evolved because it currently exists. This circular argument begs the question once again, and again the existence of a Creator whose knowledge of such things is infinitely above ours is much a more reasonable explanation."
https://www.biblethought.net/arguments-against-evolution.html"Complex Interdependent Components Cannot Evolve Incrementally
Darwin confessed that stating that natural selection could account for the evolution of the eye with all of its interdependent parts had to be considered “absurd in the highest degree.” There are many components of higher level living organisms that are much more complex than the most sophisticated automobile. We can all understand that a car can hardly be considered as functional unless all of its essential components function to some rudimentary degree. If we were to remove the spark plugs, for example it would become totally disabled. Similarly with the carburetor. There are many human organs that have dozens of interdependent components such as this, and they will not function at all unless every component is present and totally operational. Natural selection could not possibly take advantage of the development of some of these components unless they were all perfectly in place and functional. The presence of some and not others could even cause the organism to deteriorate.
Since there is no way that such components can evolve one at a time, the evolutionist has to claim that all of these components came about simultaneously through a process of mutation (if such can be called a process). If ten components are essential to the functioning of a given organ, for example, it would do no good, natural-selection-wise, for nine of them to somehow evolve, since the only advantage the organism could possibly have would be for all ten of them to function simultaneously.
“A baby needs a number of very complex, interdependent systems to live and survive. These systems include the nervous, digestive, excretory, circulatory, skeletal, muscular … an immune system” … and many others. If a baby should be unlucky enough to be born without one of these, s/he will not likely survive. Yet we are expected to believe that such an organism did exists on the way to getting everything working together perfectly. While this is considering the entire organism, we must realize that there are any number of internal organs with such components that are all-or-nothing in their functionality. The protein motors that enable human movement are examples of organs that have a large number of interacting components the absence of any one of which will prevent the organ from being functional. Their coming into existence without their partial composition serving any function defies natural selection as being the cause for their evolution.
Unlike species cannot mate because the DNA in the male sperm must be comparable to that of the female egg for the necessary match to take place. The chromosomes and genes from the sperm have to combine with the mother's contribution. For these to join together they have to be the same number of chromosomes and contain the same number of genes. There are exceptional examples, but they are exceptions. Let us suppose that a new species is formed in a particular male by some mutation event. This could explain the evolution of a new species if it were not for the fact that the identical mutation would have to occur in the female in order for them to mate and have offspring, which is essential to the propagation of the new species. Timing and co-location is crucial – if this should happen to a male and female separated in either time or distance, successful mating could not occur.
“There is no evidence anywhere of the evolution of such [interdependent - dbb] systems. More than that, not even any hypothetical process can be thought of to explain how something like the brain and the digestive system could have evolved bit by bit over time!” "
https://www.biblethought.net/arguments-against-evolution.htmlMags
Author
Topic: The Reality of Evolution? (Read 46684 times)
