Creation vs Evolution (Part 6)

Here's the next part of the creation vs evolution discussion.

The Debate About Natural Selection

The evolutionists' theory of Universal Common Descent requires a mechanism by which organisms can change into entirely new species over time. The evolutionists believe that natural selection is that mechanism. The process of natural selection involves three steps. The first step is that a species varies, and the variation gives the individuals that have it an advantage. The second step is that the varied individuals survive better than the others in that species. The final step is that the variation is passed to offspring until most or all of the species have the variation. Examples of natural selection are finch beaks that become larger than normal and peppered moths that change color over time. Another example is selective breeding, which increases certain traits in certain species. The evolutionists claim that many small changes over time will eventually produce a new species, and conclude that natural selection is the mechanism for Universal Common Descent.

The opponents of evolution agree that natural selection does occur, and that the process does produce small changes within a species. However, they disagree that those many small changes can produce a completely new species over time, and they have evidence to support their opinion from several different fields of science.

The first evidence is from selective breeding. Selective breeding has limits in that traits can be increased or reduced by only so much. Selective breeding also has problems in that it increases the risk of disease and undesirable traits. In natural selection, these problems could kill off a whole species instead of turning it into a new species.

The next evidence is from micro-evolution. During a drought, Darwin noticed that the ratio of finches with larger beaks to those with smaller beaks had grown, because the finches with smaller beaks could not access and crush the few hard seeds that were left. This example of micro-evolution does not support the idea that natural selection can create new species, because nothing new was created and because the ratio of finches with larger beaks to those with smaller beaks decreased after the drought. More evidence from micro-evolution is that scientists noticed that different varieties of finches were merging, thus showing that the finches were all variations of the same species.

Another example of micro-evolution is peppered moths. Before the Industrial Revolution there were more light colored moths, but when the Industrial Revolution began and tree trunks darkened, there were more dark colored moths. This example does not support the idea that natural selection can create new species, because nothing new was created and because it was only the ratio of light colored moths to dark colored moths that was changing.

Also, scientists who support evolution did an experiment to try to prove that what they said about natural selection was true. They placed peppered moths on tree trunks and watched the lighter ones get eaten quickly while the darker ones survived. The experiment is invalid for two reasons. The first reason is that the moths were released during the day, while moths are usually active at night. The other reason is that they were placed on tree trunks when they usually rest in tree canopies. The example of peppered moths changing color does not provide evidence for natural selection's ability to change one species into another.

The last evidence is from genetics. Scientists have discovered that natural selection loses information instead of gaining it. Natural selection does not manufacture the DNA needed to produce the cells necessary for making the organs and tissues required to make a new species. This discovery does not provide any evidence for natural selection's ability to change one species into another.

Evidence against the idea that natural selection can change one species into another can be found in the areas of selective breeding, micro-evolution, and genetics. Looking at this overwhelming evidence, opponents of evolution conclude that it is impossible for natural selection to be the mechanism for Universal Common Descent.