Evolution Today

A lot has changed in 200 years...
Do you realize how far the study of science has come in the last century? It was only 105 years ago, that flight was discovered by the Write brothers. The first controlled nuclear chain reaction was 66 years ago. The first time a man walked on the moon was only 39 years ago! If our understanding of science has changed so much in the past century, why should we still believe, unquestioningly, in the ideas of a man born 200 years ago? Much less in a man with no scientific notability except a bachelors degree in medicine! I hope you’re surprised to find that most people do. In fact, much of our tax money is used to support his ideas, and make students question the existence of God in our public schools. Of course, I’m talking about macro evolution.

A quote you won't hear in class
Charles Darwin seemed to realize that as science advanced, his ideas might be proven wrong. He even said, “What is true in my book will survive, and that which is error will be blown away as chaff.” So, has evolution been confirmed over the years, or “blown away”. I hope that by the time you are done reading this website, you will be better informed in the truth. Evolution cannot compete with modern science. The only reason that people think evolution is viable is that everyone else does, and if they question evolution they will be ridiculed and called a "Creationist". Here is one example of a way that modern science has brought problems in Charles Darwin’s Ideas to light. Also, read the other posts on this website, to get an even better idea of the types of problems evolution now faces.

Structural Homology
As Charles Darwin studied different species, he discovered a trend in the skeletal structure of vastly different creatures. For instance, if you would examine the bones in the forearm of a bat, porpoise, bird, and human, you would find that they are quite similar. They all have a Humerus in their upper arm, and two bones, (one called a radius, the other an ulna) in its lower arm. And, like the human hand, they have carpals, metacarpals, and phalanges in the hand. In fact, with the exception of the bird, they all have five digits! Of course, the bones have each been adapted to suit each creatures needs, for instance, (a bats digits are longer than its lower arm). Darwin saw this, and decided it was clear evidence that all these creatures all came from the same ancestor. In his day, this was a valid observation. However, back in Darwin’s time, no one knew how traits were passed from parent, to offspring. Genetics is a fairly new field.

What they wish we never learned
So what’s the problem? Well, now that we know how DNA works, we can look at the chromosomes that contain the DNA that tells an animal what types of bones to grow. If structural homology is the result of common ancestry, then the DNA that tells these creatures what types of bones to make should also be similar. However, no two DNA strands resemble each other at all! Impossible? Yes, unless you’re talking about intelligent design. The only one who could build similar structures out of completely different DNA sequences is God. After all, He wrote the genetic code. I personally think he used the same forearm design multiple times because it worked well. As to the genetic side of structural homology, I think god used totally different DNA sequences so that no one could discredit him for his awesome creation.

Micro, Not Macro
This is just one example of how multiple branches of science contradict macro evolution. There are so many out there I will never be able to write about all of them. You know, I don’t think Charles Darwin was that bad of a guy. He was a careful researcher, and he realized that his ideas were not all going to be scientifically valid forever. If scientists today were as open minded as Charles Darwin, I guarantee, we would be hearing a very different message in our public schools. Although Darwin's work with micro evolution contributed greatly to the science of biology, he took his ideas too far, and tried to explain all of life with macro evolution. I think Darwin has a place in the classroom for his work with micro evolution and natural selection, but lets be fair and say macro evolution is being taught like a law, when in reality it is flawed, and is less scientifically noteworthy than intelligent design.