Evolutionists Don’t Understand Their Own Theory
If evolutionists understood Darwinism
they wouldn’t make such illogical statements.
Darwinist scientists and reporters routinely personify evolution, turning it into a god or idol that does things on purpose. They should be ashamed of themselves. They should never say:
- [This organism] evolved [a trait]. That ascribes agency to the organism.
- [This trait] evolved to [perform this function] or evolved for [this function]. That ascribes purpose to evolution.
There is no agency or purpose in Darwinism, because it is a strictly materialistic, unguided process. That’s if the Stuff Happens Law could even be dignified with the word “process” which carries a hint of an algorithm or goal.
What Darwinians should say is, “By chance, this trait appeared in this animal for no reason.” It would not even be correct to add, “but the animal found it useful.” What is “useful” if not a purpose-driven word? Stuff happens. Given Darwin’s anti-teleological assumptions, that is all his disciples can say.
Here are recent examples of this shameful habit among Darwinian storytellers. By repeating fallacies like these week after week, year after year, they mislead students and the public.
Understanding how elephants use their trunk (University of Geneva). This headline is innocent, but Phys.org altered it to, “How elephants evolved strategies that reduce the biomechanical complexity of their trunks.” But the Geneva group is not absolved. Its subtitle repeats the error: “A multidisciplinary team of scientists from the UNIGE identified how elephants evolved strategies that reduce the biomechanical complexity of their trunk.” Elephants have no ability to “evolve strategies” for anything, according to Darwinian theory. Stop. Hit the Just-So Story gong.
Rapidly evolving bits of DNA helped develop the human brain (New Scientist). Shame on you, Michael Marshall. You know better. Bits of mutating DNA don’t “help develop” things. They just exist. They just happen.
Many of the fastest-evolving sections of the human genome are involved in brain development. These rapidly changing segments of DNA may have played key roles in the evolution of the human brain and in our cognitive abilities.
Nothing but nobody plays any “role” in evolutionary theory. Roles belong in movies and plays. If your brain evolved according to this imaginary screenplay, Michael, you could never know it. You could never know anything.
Plants evolved ability to actively control water-loss earlier than previously thought (University of Birmingham). Aaarrrggghhh! Stop it. Plants did not evolve anything, much less did they evolve an ability to do something purposeful.
These storytellers compound the fallacy by shedding black light on it and raising their perhapsimaybecouldness index.
New research has shed light on when plants first evolved the ability to respond to changing humidity in the air around them, and was probably a feature of a common ancestor of both flowering plants and ferns.
Why tiny tardigrades walk like insects 500,000 times their size (Live Science). Look at the cute video of a tardigrade walking like a fat piglet across the set. How could creatures in different phyla (tardigrades and insects), drastically different in size and morphology, move their limbs in a similar manner? Mindy Waisberger tackles this evolutionary conundrum and commits the usual fallacies:
But why do tardigrades walk like arthropods? It could be that the groups share a common ancestor that was wired to walk this way. However, it’s also possible that arthropods and tardigrades evolved this stepping pattern independently, after their lineages diverged, according to the study.
According to “the study.” Oh barf. Somebody didn’t study very hard. Neither tardigrades nor insects “evolved” this stepping pattern. To be consistent with evolutionary assumptions, it just happened.
These geckos crash-land on trees but don’t fall, thanks to their tails (UC Berkeley). Geckos are wonderful creatures, loaded with intelligent designs. Scientists have now found that some of them can hit a tree head on, but prevent falling by using their tails as extra legs. That’s great. But to force the observations into Darwinism, evolutionists at UCB have to resort to logically inconsistent statements.
Vertebrate tails evolved in aquatic animals, likely as a means of propulsion in the water — something Jusufi also studies and models with soft robots that undulate. But the tail turned out to be such a versatile thing that the lizard evolved various exaptations, a term for structures that were shaped by natural selection for a particular function or adaptation, but that have been used for other behaviors.
“Exaptations are structures that have been co-opted for many behaviors, no matter what that structure evolved for originally, and here’s one that you wouldn’t expect,” Full said.
The first cells might have used temperature to divide (Cell Press via Science Daily). This has to win an award as one of the dumbest ideas in the history of origin-of-life narratives. Protocells, if there ever were such things, could not have the know-how to “use” something to do something. And if mindless blobs of molecules did divide because of temperature, the copies would not have the essential ingredients, or metabolism, or a genetic code, or proteins, or anything they would need to be alive. Moreover, if imperfect protocells did divide because of mindless factors like temperature, error catastrophe would make quick work of them, and there would be no descendants to “evolve” further by natural selection. The storytellers know this, but they barge on boldly into fantasyland
The splitting of a cell to form two daughter cells requires the synchronization of numerous biochemical and mechanical processes involving cytoskeletal structures inside the cell. But in the history of life, such complex structures are a high-tech luxury and must have appeared much later than the ability to split. Protocells must have used a simple splitting mechanism to ensure their reproduction, before the appearance of genes, RNA, enzymes, and all the complex organelles present today, even in the most rudimentary forms of autonomous life.
The only cause that can act for a purpose is a mind. Only minds come up with strategies. Only minds seek to build a mechanism for a function.
To get a sense of the degree of purposeful planning in life at the molecular scale, watch this video from WEHI movies on YouTube. How exactly does “stuff happens” explain this? Temperature? Time for a major reality check.