April 1, 2015 | David F. Coppedge

Darwinism as an April Fool Prank

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. April Fool!

You have to be careful what you read today, because normal-looking articles may end up with “April Fool!” at the end. Science Magazine published a whopper today, saying that scientists heard human screams in emanations from the planet Mercury. Nature posted one about dragons on the resurgence due to climate change. We’re not going to do that— promise. Instead, we’ll look at serious claims by evolutionists, who are committed to the notion that biology is in a constant state of flux, and suggest that maybe the joke is on them.

Humans related to corn: Some people are corny, but their genes shouldn’t be. Science Daily reported that a “four stranded DNA-protein is conserved in plants and animals.” (“Conserved” means “unevolved” or basically unchanged.) Researchers from Florida State working on maize found that “the same type of protein works in plants and animals to bind to peculiar DNA structures called G-quadruplexes, or G4 DNA for short.” Now, when do evolutionists believe plants split from animals? Wasn’t that toward the dawn of multicellular life, half a billion years ago or so? Doesn’t that mean that the two kingdoms of life had lots of time to evolve after they went their separate ways? Well, this article begins without pretense of April fooling anybody, “When it comes to plants and animals, sometimes the two are more alike than you’d think.

Ye olde switchboard: This is beginning to sound like a broken record. Another Science Daily headline reads: “Language of gene switches unchanged across evolution.” We’re on a different continent now; these evolutionists hark from Sweden’s Karolinska Institute. “The language used in the switches that turn genes on and off has remained the same across millions of years of evolution, according to a new study,” the article begins. “The findings indicate that the differences between animals reside in the content and length of the instructions that are written using this conserved language.” Most people think that switches and languages are designed. The author of the study, however, seemed only mildly surprised to observe that, “in spite of more than 600 million years of evolution, almost all known DNA words found in humans and mice were recognised by fruit fly transcription factors.”

Survival of the weakest: According to standard Darwinian sexual selection theory, male birds evolved colorful plumage to attract females, providing the females a way to assess the male’s genetic fitness. (Note: the following headline on PhysOrg is NOT an April Fool joke.): “‘Most attractive’ male birds don’t have the best genes.” What would Darwin say? Contrary to expectations, UCL geneticists suggests that attractive males would cause a species to go extinct: “a male may be attractive to a female and fight hard to mate with her but he doesn’t deliver at the genetic level. As a result, his descendants will be less fit.” In spite of this, the authors of the study still believe sexual selection is a valid theory.

See le Coelacanth: This prank goes back 77 years. Evolutionists had been saying that the Coelacanth, an extinct bony-finned fish, was an evolutionary missing link to a land creature. That was until 1938, when… well, let’s let Augy Syaihailatua tell us on The Conversation:

The Coelacanth (Latimeria menadoensis) was thought to be extinct for more than 60 million years and took the science world by storm in 1938 when it was re-discovered living in South Africa. This fish has retained its features for 400 million years. Parts of its body, such as its back and belly fins, have an additional structure that resemble amphibian feet.

But they are not amphibian feet. This deep-sea fish does not use them for support on land at all. Syaihailatua says that Indonesian native fishermen have become more interested in their prized “living fossils” which they used to consider just another form of grouper. “Now that they know how extraordinary this fish is, they have started to tell us when they accidentally catch one,” he says. And why does he want to study this fish? Perhaps, maybe, as a case study on a scientific theory gone astray, falsified by the evidence?

As researchers, we are curious to learn more about Coelacanth’s reproductive system, feeding habits, growth, genetics and migration, because all that information can reveal more about the evolution of living species….

By looking at its form, shape and structure, we can study how evolution happens, and how long the process of morphology changes occur.

But evolution didn’t happen for 400 million years! The living fish is nearly identical to the fossil one. Why isn’t he studying how evolution doesn’t happen?

The “April Fool” that some evolutionists might like to hear never comes.

FAQ: Who is playing the prank? The empirical evidence.

Why is it funny? Because evolutionists are living in Darwin Fantasyland, not the real biological world.

Does this happen to them every April 1? No, it happens every day of the year, and has gone on for 155 years.

 

Comments

  • Donald Holliday says:

    quote: “In spite of this, the authors of the study still believe sexual selection is a valid theory.”
    ———–

    Except there is that Rape Adaptation thingy. Wonder how much they factored that into the study ?

  • mmartin says:

    You almost fooled me with this Augy Syaihailatua guy, you know: “Oh gee, see ya later.”

  • rockyway says:

    ‘Contrary to expectations, UCL geneticists suggests that attractive males would cause a species to go extinct: “a male may be attractive to a female and fight hard to mate with her but he doesn’t deliver at the genetic level. As a result, his descendants will be less fit.” In spite of this, the authors of the study still believe sexual selection is a valid theory.’

    – Huh? It’s wrong… but it’s still valid? I guess this is ‘valid’ in the sense that political legislation can be legal even if it’s morally wrong. (I guess that SS will be valid until the courts decide differently.)

    – I guess we could call this the Liberace effect.

Leave a Reply