Summit Ministries

By Chuck Edwards

Evolution and "Stuff"

When it comes to the theory of evolution, there are two major problems that have not been resolved by scientific evidence. The first problem is the "origin of life" issue. Evolution assumes that life can come from non-living stuff. The third article in this series titled Science and the Origin of Life demonstrated how this idea is scientifically impossible. Scientific experiments confirm that life only comes from pre-existing life. This is called the Law of Biogenesis. Therefore, it was concluded that it takes God (a pre-existing living being) to originate life on earth.

But that is not the only problem for the theory of evolution. The theory goes on to assume that living organisms have the ability for unlimited change. Or, to put it another way, once you have something living, like the first amoeba, then it can change over time into something totally different, like a man. This is called "macro-evolution".

But this "amoeba to man" theory has a major flaw. Think of it this way: a man has a lot more "stuff" than an amoeba, right? Stuff like hair, toes, ear wax, a circulatory system, brains, eyeballs, sweat, etc., etc., etc. So to go from a one-celled organism to something like a human, that little amoeba has to add more "stuff". Somehow, somewhere, at sometime new and different "stuff" has to come on the scene to make this little amoeba guy progress toward manhood.

Evolution theory says it is possible to "add more stuff" to living systems. If you can't add new stuff, then there is no macro-evolution.

What does science tell us about the ability of living organisms to add new stuff from one generation to the next?

Discovering the Laws of Genetics

In the 1860's, a Austrian monk, Gregor Mendel, performed careful experiments on garden peas and discovered the patterns of heredity. This was later verified by Thomas Morgan in the early 1900's. Morgan found that heredity was located in the genetic makeup of DNA contained in every living cell. Experiments lead to discoveries about the scientific laws of genetics. These genetic laws govern the amount and kinds of change that is possible in plants and animals.

Pigs with Wings!

Thousands of experiments have been performed to verify how genetic laws operate. Artificial breeding has been applied to all types of plants and animals, from corn to cows. What have scientists discovered? Controlled breeding produces sweeter corn and cows that give more milk, but it never produces a different kind of plant or animal.

Or consider the dog family. Extensive breeding has produced a great variety of dogs, ranging from the Great Dane to the Chihuahua. But the offspring continue to be dogs. No new kind of animal has emerged. We have never been able to breed a dog with "new and improved" features, like feathers or gills. In other words, no new "stuff" has ever been produced. And if there is no new stuff, then there is no macro-evolution.

But science has discovered something else. If a variety of different dogs were let loose in Wyoming and left to "do their own thing", after several generations the total population would revert back to a common stock. They would all start to look the same! This means there is a conserving quality built into the genetic material which insures that the species remain within certain limits.

This accumulation of scientific evidence has lead one scientist to remark, "Some remarkable things have been done by crossbreeding and selection inside the species barrier, or within a larger circle of closely related species, such as the wheats. But wheat is still wheat, and not, for instance, grapefruit; and we can no more grow wings on pigs than hens can make cylindrical eggs." [1]

Years of experimentation have verified what the Laws of Genetics hold true: "You don't get new stuff from genetic variation." And no new stuff means no evolution!

A Fly in the Ointment

But evolutionists say, "Hold it, we have an ace up our sleeve. Mutations can cause variations that lead to new stuff in the offspring. And given enough time, these small changes can take an amoeba all the way up to a man." A high school biology textbook even says: "Mutations act as a source of the variation that is needed for a species to adapt to changing conditions or a new environment, and thus, evolve over time." [2]

But there is a fly in this evolutionary ointment. Mutations in genetic structure add nothing new to the offspring. Mutations only rearrange the stuff that is already there. Experiments done with fruit flies produced the following result: fruit flies with larger bodies, fruit flies with smaller bodies, fruit flies that couldn't fly, blind fruit flies and dead fruit flies.

The experiment started with fruit flies and ended with weak, sickly, mutated fruit flies. No new kind of insect developed, just mutated fruit flies. No new "stuff" as added. The stuff that was already there was just rearranged or lost! These micro-changes do not add up over time to macro-stuff.

Remember, for evolution to take place, you have to add new stuff. NO NEW STUFF MEANS NO EVOLUTION.

Creation to the Rescue

Science confirms what we know to be true: plants and animals reproduce after their own kind. And this is exactly what the Bible has said all along. (See Genesis 1:12 & 25) So based on the best scientific evidence, God is necessary for the creation of the abundant variety of life on planet earth. This is the only view that is consistent with the facts.

Since the laws of biogenesis and genetics are true, then maybe their implications for a Creator should be discussed, also. Professor Phillip E. Johnson agrees:

"If a high-school curriculum incorporates the subject of biological origins, and if supernatural creation is a rational alternative to naturalistic evolution within that subject, then it is bad educational policy as well as viewpoint discrimination to try to keep students ignorant of an alternative that may be true." [3]

For further study on the problems with the evolution model and the evidence for the creation model, here is a partial listing of scientists and scholars and their published works:

• Lane Lester, Biology Professor: The Natural Limits to Biological Change, Zondervan Publishing House, 1984.
• Michael Denton, Molecular Biologist: Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Adler & Adler, 1986.
• Phillip E. Johnson, Law Professor: Darwin on Trial, Intervarsity Press, 1991.
• Dean Kenyon, Chemistry Professor: Of Pandas and People, Foundation for Though and Ethics, 1993.
• Charles Thaxton, Ph.D. in Chemistry: The Soul of Science, 1994.


• Michael J. Behe, Biochemistry Professor: Darwin's Black Box, The Free Press, A Division of Simon & Schuster, Inc., 1996.

Notes

1. Edward S. Deevey, Jr., "The Reply: Letter from Dirnham Wood," Yale Review, vol. 61, p. 636.
2. Biology: Visualizing Life, Holt, Rinehart, Winston, 1994, p. 127
3. Professor of Law, Phillip E. Johnson, Reason in the Balance, 1995, p. 26.