ONE HEARTBEAT AWAY 9

                                           ONE HEARTBEAT      AWAY     9

Mark Cahill's Book


Chapter two

I can see clearly now

To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different  distances , for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of sperical  and chromatic abberation, could have been formed by  natural selection, seems , I freely confess,  absurd. in the highest degree. -  Charles Darwin.


As we have seen in the previous chapter, the evidence is pretty solid that our universe is designed. Yet, despite the logical evidence pointing to the existence of a Creator, many people still reject the idea of God because they believe evolution is a fact.

We were all told in kindergarten that when a frog becomes a prince, that is a fairy-tale. But when I was in high school and college, they told us that when a frog becomes a prince, that is science!

So, people tend to think that if some scientists say they have conclusive proof  that the entire universe came into 
being by itself, then no fairy-tale  "Creator" need apply.

Because I grew up in a public-school
environment and attended a public university, I was one of the many children taught evolution, from the time I started school. So, as an adult, I thought,  "Couldn't evolution be how all of creation came into being?"  Then I decided to do some searching - and I was surprised by what I found.

Since this issue is so important in determining, not only whether God exists but what kind of God He is, let's take a few minutes to honestly examine the evidence and see where it leads.

What is evolution?

First let's look at what is meant by "evolution."   Evolution has two main branches. One is macroevolution, which involves minor changes in variations
within a species. We see evidence of this all the time. Such as when bacteria become resistant to antbiotics. This is also called adaptation or natural selection.  Microevolution is scientific because it is observable and measurable.

The other branch is macroevolution, which is the concept that successive small changes can, over time, gradually change one species to another. It involves not only minor variations, but also the addition of completely new features and body types. 

Dr. J. P. Moreland  summarises it in this way: 

Macroevolution is the general theory that all life arose from non life, in some-prebiotic soup ( where chemical reactions plus some form of energy gave rise to the first life), and all life evolved from the first life up to Homo Sapiens.

Macroevolution - the belief that variations we can see taking place in microevolution (within a species)  are supposedly continuous and limitless, so that one species will continue to change and eventually become a new species  - is the heart of evolutionary theory.

Macroevolution, however, has never been observed ; therefore it is not scientific.

As I was searching for the truth about evolution, one of the most compelling facts I learned was that microevolution is limited by the genetic code. No features that are not already present in a creatures DNA  can ever be produced by natural selection. 

So, while there is a variation within species, it is always within these limits. For example, there are many different types of dogs, - from the Chihuahua to the Irish wolfhound,  from the Mexican hairless to the Yorshire terrier - yet they are all still dogs.


In The Answers Book,
Ken Ham describes     the limitation of           microevolution:

Adaptation and natural selection are biological facts;
amoeba-to-man evolution is not. Natural selection can only work on the genetic information present in a population of organisms - it cannot create new information. For example, since no known reptiles have genes for feathers , no amount of selection will produce a feathered reptile. Mutations in genes can only modify or eliminate existing structures, not create new ones. "

Thus, there are always natural limits to biological change. Natural selection is just that - selection. It cannot create anything new; it can only select from the information contained in the organism's genetic blueprint.

Yet, evolutionists ignore this key fact
and claim that one species can gain new information and evolve into another species. Unfortunately for their theory, evolutionists don't have any evidence for this. It has never been proven or observed in nature, and indeed, never can be.

Let's take a look at the two conditions of macroevolution , both of which are necessary  for the theory of evolution to be true.

Next post  25th July