Darwinist Reporters Push Old Misinformation

There’s no longer any excuse
for scientists or reporters to publish
flawed evidence for Darwinism

 

 

Some Disproven or Falsified Claims of Evolution Are Still Used

by Jerry Bergman, PhD

The following is my response to this article:
Human evolution: Facts about the past 300,000 years of Homo sapiens (Kristina Killgrove, Live Science, 5 June 2025).

When I mention the vestigial organs argument against evolution in articles and debates, it is not uncommon to be told by my critics that, in so many words, “We evolutionists have not used the vestigial organ argument for years. Resorting to old arguments that we have long moved beyond illustrates the fact that you do not have a valid case against evolution.” Actually, all of the main arguments (and most of the minor ones) have now been refuted in the peer-reviewed science literature.[1] The reality is, however, that long refuted old arguments are often still raised against creationists.

A recent article by anthropologist Kristina Killgrove published in Live Science effectively illustrates this fact.[2] All of the claims she outlined have long been refuted, yet are still recycled today. In this article, I have selected six examples that Killgrove presented to [or to support] her belief in human evolution. I then explain why they are not valid evidence of evolution.

Alleged Evidences for Human Evolution

1. Claim: Walking on two feet causes back pain.

After claiming that humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor seven million years ago, Killgrove provided as evidence that humans evolved from quadrupedal to bipedal travel and she explains, “evolving to walk on two feet has led to problems like back and knee pain.” This common claim has been carefully refuted in the peer reviewed literature. Back pain has nothing to do with defects that resulted from the evolution of humans from quadrupedal to bipedal walking.

I used to have terrible back pain. The doctor explained to me that our back problems are the result of humans evolving from the past four-legged ape design. He opined that, when you have back pain, therefore, the solution is bed rest. The result for me was that the bed rest caused my back problems to progressively become worse. Then I consulted a better-informed doctor who explained that bed rest is not the solution, but rather it is the problem!

Because the human back was designed to walk bipedally, walking is the key to alleviating most kinds of back pain, especially in the lower back. My back problems soon ended after I applied this solution. I now attempt to walk a mile a day. I wrote an entire chapter in my book about the scientific evidence for this anti-evolutionary solution.[3] Killgrove admits that evolutionary biologists are clueless about the human upright posture: “for some mysterious reason, human ancestors began to walk upright on two feet, and this new habit, called bipedalism, set the evolution of human skeletons on a distinct path from our ape cousins.”[4]

Update: A new study finds a 23% reduction in chronic back pain for those walking 100 minutes a day (JAMA). There is no mention in the paper that back pain is caused by human evolution to upright walking.

2. Claim: Babies are born with more than 300 bones in their skeleton, and by adulthood, they have only 206. 

How this proves human evolution, Killgrove did not explain. Although the statement is partly true, it has nothing to do with evolution, and everything to do with engineering design. One reason is to allow the skull room to expand to create space for brain growth as the child matures. Once the brain growth is completed, the child’s skull bones fuse together, creating one large coherent bone.

3. Claim: “Wisdom teeth are an evolutionary ‘leftover’ — and some people don’t ever grow them.”

It is true for some people that their wisdom teeth never erupt, but that does not mean they are evolutionary leftovers. Children’s jaws typically are too small to accommodate these teeth until adolescence (thus they are called wisdom teeth because they come out when adolescents are becoming wise, i.e., mature). They are important teeth for several reasons, including the fact that they add four teeth to facilitate chewing (mechanical digestion, i.e., mastication).

The reason that wisdom teeth sometimes cause problems is that in Western societies, a diet consisting primarily of soft-cooked foods often impedes full jaw development in certain individuals. As a result, in Westerners, the human jaw is typically, on average, smaller today than in the past. In cultures where the diet is coarser, the jawbone and associated muscles develop further, or more fully, allowing the wisdom teeth to erupt in the jaw without problems.[5] Thus, this problem has nothing to do with human biological evolution, but rather cultural advancements in Western societies.

4. Claim: Humans’ closest relatives are other apes, such as chimpanzees and bonobos. In fact, we share nearly 99% of the same genes, or letters in our DNA, with chimpanzees.

The statement implies that this 99% value has been measured with precision and is settled science. It is not. The most recent genetic analysis shows that the difference between human and chimp DNA is as much as 15 percent, which is close to 480 million nucleotide differences.

We humans are so different genetically from chimps that determining a numerical estimate which accurately shows how different we are has proven very difficult.[6] Recent study of the difference between chimp and human DNA is proving to be one of the most significant challenges to the evolutionary model of human origins in recent decades. It dismantles the decades-old claim, parroted as scientific fact/dogma for over 30 years, that humans and chimpanzees differ by only 1–2% genetically—a claim that is more propaganda than truth. Concerns about this estimate existed from the start of the genetics revolution and have only increased since then.

5. Claim: Humans are still evolving.

Killgrove then asserts that “humans are still evolving,” citing the EPAS1 gene—which enables improved function in oxygen-thin environments, such as high altitudes—as evidence for her claim.

The EPAS1 gene is common to all humans, yet its presence varies between populations. The most notable example is among Tibetans, 87% of whom carry a specific EPAS1 gene variant, compared to only 9% of Chinese populations. Tibetans split from Chinese populations about 2,700 years ago, and this EPAS1 gene variant, now widespread in Tibetans, provides an adaptive benefit in their high-mountain habitats. Killgrove claimed, “That’s some of the fastest evolution ever seen in humans.” But actually, it is not an example of evolution at all. This adaptation only has an advantage in certain environments.

This is one of scores of examples where the commonality of certain genes depends on the environment. This is part of an important, designed system, to facilitate adaptation, not further evolution. If Tibetans were to relocate to China, the gene would likely become far less common in their population compared to today. Likewise, if large numbers of  Chinese were to move to Tibet, the commonality of the EPAS1 gene would increase over time. Some of the changes would also be due to intermarriage.

6. Claim: Skin color demonstrates evolution.

The last example Killgrove gives is skin color, which she claims is due to “mutations — changes in the letters in our DNA — [that] started to crop up. These mutations — which cause light-colored skin, hair, and eyes — became much more common than before, particularly in people living in less sunny environments like Northern Europe.”[7] This difference, however, is not due to mutations.

An example that explains why is found in post-slavery Blacks living in America. They are progressively becoming lighter-skinned due to environmental influences. This change is also partly due to intermarriage with lighter-skinned Americans. Creationists have also effectively shown that Adam and Eve would have carried enough genetic variety to produce all the skin color variations existing today. See the figure at right.

Summary

All of the examples presented by Live Science as evidence of biological evolution by natural selection acting on mutations are, in reality, non-examples due primarily to non-Darwinian factors. In reality, none of the examples Killgrove presented as support of biological evolution through natural selection acting on mutations are valid. They are all primarily effects caused by non-evolutionary processes.

The claims that the article provided to demonstrate biological evolution in humans are all illegitimate. The facts, instead, support engineering design and environmental adaptation. Both the skin color variations and the EPAS1 gene differences have been shown by creationists to be adequately explained by the original genetic variation within Adam and Eve.[8] A mutation causing ‘white’ skin, if true, is due simply to gene loss, not the evolution of a new gene as required by Neo-Darwinism.

A more accurate name for this article, therefore, should have been, “Proving evolution by the ‘Bait and Switch] tactic.”

References

[1] Bergman, Jerry, The Last Pillars of Evolution Falsified: Further Evidence Proving Darwinian Evolution Wrong, WestBow Division of Thomas Nelson and Zondervan, Bloomington, IN, 2022; Three Pillars of Evolution Demolished: Why Darwin was Wrong, WestBow Division of Thomas Nelson and Zondervan, Bloomington, IN, 2022.

[2] Killgrove, Kristina, “Human evolution: Facts about the past 300,000 years of Homo sapiens,” Live Science, 5 June 2025.

[3] Bergman, Jerry, Poor Design: An Invalid Argument Against Intelligent Design, Bartlett Publishing, Tulsa, OK, 230 pages, revised edition, 2024.

[4] Killgrove, 2025. Italics mine.

[5] Bergman, Jerry, Useless Organs: The Rise and Fall of a Central Claim of Evolution, Bartlett Publishing, Tulsa, OK, 332 pages, revised edition, 2024.

[6] Bergman, Jerry, “The Human and Chimp 98% Similarity Reduced to 84%,” https://crev.info/2025/06/human-and-chimp-similarity-reduced/, 2025.

[7] Killgrove, 2025.

[8] See http://www.pcchong.com/race.htm#:~:text=As%20all%20the%20factors%20for,still%20mid%2Dbrown%20in%20color.

---

Dr. Jerry Bergman has taught biology, genetics, chemistry, biochemistry, anthropology, geology, and microbiology for over 40 years at several colleges and universities including Bowling Green State University, Medical College of Ohio where he was a research associate in experimental pathology, and The University of Toledo. He is a graduate of the Medical College of Ohio, Wayne State University in Detroit, the University of Toledo, and Bowling Green State University. He has over 1,900 publications in 14 languages and 40 books and monographs. His books and textbooks that include chapters that he authored are in over 1,800 college libraries in 27 countries. So far over 80,000 copies of the 60 books and monographs that he has authored or co-authored are in print. For more articles by Dr Bergman, see his Author Profile.