Evolution a Theory in CrisisPart 1 of 3 The Scientific Bankruptcyof Darwinian EvolutionAlso available:Part 2 of 3 The Philosophical Bankruptcy of Darwinian EvolutionPart 3 of 3 The Biblical Creation Alternative & Its Implications

Richard Dawkins

No qualified scientist doubts evolution is a fact.

100 Scientists dissent:We are sceptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.

Charles Darwin(1809-1882)Natural selection

Definition of Evolution?Variation within a kind or prototype?

Relatives?

Darwinian evolutions tree of life

A caricature of the creation model

The actual creation model

Small changes (micro-evolution) + Millions of years = Big changes (macro-evolution)The central Darwinian Claim

A sample of whats involvedEvolve a 4th chamber in its heartEvolve mammary glands and a milk supplyEvolve a hair coveringEvolve a temperature control system Evolve a corti in the inner earEvolve a diaphragm

To turn into a mammal, a reptile must:

Carl Sagans challenge:

Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof.(1934 1996)

Outline 14 Proofs dismissed 8 Problems discussed 3 Pathways discovered

Proof No. 1 The GiraffeJ. Baptiste de Lamarck (1744-1829) Inheritance of acquired characteristics

The Natural History Museum - London

Proof No. 2Dog BreedingVariations between dogs tell us nothing about where dogs came from in the first place.

Proof No. 3Galapagos FinchesVariations between finches tell us nothing about where finches came from in the first place.

Proof No. 4 The Horse sequenceThe family tree of the horse is beautiful and continuous only in the textbooks. - Heribert-Nilsson, Biologist.

Proof No. 5 - Peppered MothsPopulation shifts between light and dark moths tell us nothing about where the moths came from in the first place.

Proof No. 6 The Fruit FlyVariations between fruit flies tell us nothing about where fruit flies came from in the first place.

Darwins three great classes of facts1. Similar Body Structure (homology)2. Similar Embryonic Development3. Rudiments (vestigial organs)

Darwins claim:Structural similarity proves common ancestry.Proof No. 7HomologyRatDogHorseBatMolePorpoiseMan

Claim: arms evolved from pectoral fins uClaim: legs evolved from pelvic fins uOr does it?

Proof No. 8 Similar Embryonic DevelopmentErnst Haeckel (1834-1919)

Darwins marvelous factis actually fiction.

Proof No. 9 Vestigial OrgansThe coccyx is neither functionless nor useless.

Proof No. 10 Antibiotic Resistance in BacteriaResistance is gainednot by adding something, but by losing it Dr. Lee Spetner Ph.D

Proof No. 11 Sickle Cell AnemiaThis haemoglobin mutation tells us nothing about where haemoglobin came from in the first place.

Proof No. 12 Molecular similarityAnomalies: Chimp & human - 7.7% diff. No. of chromosomes Amount of DNADistance between proteins

Proof No. 13 Archaeopteryx

The Hoatzin Young Hoatzins have claws on their wings for climbing.

Proof No. 14 Ape-menAustralopithecus afarensis - Lucy

A pictures worth a thousand words

.and a few more thousand words

Proof No. 14 Ape-menAustralopithecus afarensis - Lucy

10 Design features for Upright Posture

Prof. Simon Conway Morris (Cambridge palaeontologist)When discussing organic evolution the only point of agreement seems to be: It happened. Thereafter, there is little consensus(Evolution: Bringing Molecules into the Fold, Cell 100, (Jan 7 2000):1-11)

1. The nature of mutations8. Mathematics/Probability3. Natural selections limits4. The Cambrian explosion5. Lack of transitional fossils6. Complex beginnings7. Irreducible complexity8 Problems with Darwinism:2. The limits of mutation

Three Pathways to a CreatorInformationComplex specified information demands an intelligent designer.EliminationOnly 4 options.RevelationEvidences that God has spoken.

We take the side of [neo-Darwinian] science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfil many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. (Billions and billions of demons, The New York Review, January 9, 1997, p. 31).Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin