Home > Evolution > Why I don’t believe in neo-Darwin evolution

Why I don’t believe in neo-Darwin evolution

February 26th, 2009 Leave a comment Go to comments

Here are some reasons why I don’t believe neo-Darwin evolution is true, and the explanation I lean towards is Intelligent Design.

1) There is not enough time for evolution

Durrett and Schmidt, two mathematicians, published an article in Genetics of how long it would take for a 2 step mutation to occur in a complex organism such as a fruit fly or a human. The two point mutation they were looking at was a mutation that first inactivated a binding site then created a new binding site in its place. This is a trivial process as far as neo Darwin evolution goes because it’s not actually changing the gene. The amount of time they came up with was over 100 million years just for this trivial change. Given that the history of primates are in the ball park of 50 million years this change is impossible.

2) The second law of thermodynamics, things move towards entropy.

Every field of science adheres to the 2nd law of thermodynamics, things move from order to disorder. I see this in every day life, I clean my room and it gets messy. I buy a car and it slowly breaks down. An ancestor of a money evolves into a human. Erm, what? In John C Sanford’s book Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome he explains that not only do mutations fail to to provide the raw material for bodily features, but that genetic entropy is increasing because natural selection cannot stave off the loss of information caused my mutations. According to Sanford “Unless selection can somehow stop the erosion of information in the human genome, mutations will not only lead to our death, they will lead to the death of our species.” You see, this makes sense to me because it adheres to the 2nd law of thermodynamics. We will eventually get so many mutations we will be unable to reproduce and become extinct. Along these lines I would say that people who lived 5,000 years ago are smarter than the ones living today. Sure we may know more than they did because each generation passed knowledge, thus more time equals more knowledge. However, there is nothing to suggest that we are smarter than they were, and I believe that according to the 2nd law of thermodynamics they were certainly smarter than we are today.

3) There is evidence of design in nature

Douglas Axe, Ph.D., who I believe will be the next science star, said that he was in a lecture where they were covering the trp operon and how the cell accomplishes control of making an amino acid called tryptophan. He was amazed at how elegant it turns on and off the production of tryptophan. It was a design far beyond anything he learned as an engineer. He said that it looks not just like the product of engineering but brilliant engineering. Some engineers are becoming wise to this line of thinking. When they find a hard-to-solve problem they are starting to look at biology for the solution. Look at the Flagellum. This thing is a rotary engine that has a motor, a rotor, a stator, a bearing, a u-joint, propeller and a clutch. Michael Behe talks a lot about the Flagellum and I definitely recommend his books.

4) The origin of species

It turns out that if you ask a neo-Darwinist how the first organism came about to start the evolutionary process they will tell you “We simply do not know.” In the terms of everyone else, they simply don’t even have a good idea of how it started. They will say things about bad tasting soups and magical crystals but that’s about it. When you dig deep into this issue you’ll find many problems of how life could have originated. For example, all life requires proteins, which are made of Amino Acids that have left and right handed forms. As it turns out, all living things only use the left handed forms. How can only left handed forms join together to make the kinds of molecules required to make living things exist? Charles Garner did a study on this. He first assumed that all left handed molecules would show preference to left handed molecules and the same with the right handed molecules. As it turns out there is no preference and right handed molecules will bind with left handed molecules on a 50:50 ratio. This is a major problem for neo-Darwinist.

I only gave a few reasons why I don’t believe neo-Darwinism, there are thousands.

Is evolution true?
Problems with evolution.
What are some arguments against evolution.
reasons to believe Intelligent design
Categories: Evolution Tags:
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Easy AdSense by Unreal