Modern science has shown that random genetic mutation (which can be caused by carcinogenic chemicals, radioactivity, and sunlight, for example) is a highly destructive process. It can result in diseases such as cancer, hemophilia, cystic fibrosis, color-blindness, and muscular dystrophy, not to mention severe deformities in offspring.
Darwinian evolution does not even begin to address the issue of how organisms transformed from one species into another on the genetic level. For each accidental genetic improvement -- if it truly was random -- there should have been myriads of accidents which did not work out. Many of these "failures" would have resulted in diseased and deformed life forms, regardless of how long they lived or whether they lived at all. Thus, for every successful species -- and there have been literally billions of them -- there should have been many unsuccessful ones littering our planet. The fossil records show no such scenario.
Fossil records show, by and large, healthy life forms. The absence of a prolific number of deformed and diseased life forms actually supports the notion that a random evolutionary process -- the one taught in school text books -- never took place.
I have yet to hear a biologist, geneticist or biophysicist explain how evolution transformed one species into another on the genetic level.
The problem with Darwinian evolution is not that it's incompatible with faith in God. The problem is that it's incompatible with science. And we're not yet even talking about complexities and design. We're talking about how random genetic changes could have produced a vast majority of healthy life forms with such a relatively negligible number of deformed ones (even if we agree for the sake of argument it is possible to produce complex healthy ones at all).
Ironically, the only way you can even entertain the notion that evolution was even possible is if you bring God into the equation. God certainly could have laid down a blueprint in the genetic code (not unlike that of a fetus, which "evolves" from one cell) that gives single-celled organisms the ability to evolve into various species. And this would explain why the fossil records show relatively few diseased and deformed life forms.
Now, I realize you can't bring God into a science classroom; you can't scientifically explain God. But shouldn't you be able to scientifically explain evolution? And if after over one hundred years you still can't, isn't it time to reconsider? Simply because it's accepted for a long period of time doesn't turn a theory into a fact. In a science classroom they should teach science, not one person's religion or another person's cult.
Published by Josh Greenberger
Josh Greenberger is the author of the book "The V-Bang", which addresses the following issues: How did the universe begin? Where did all the matter in the universe come from? Why is the universe exp... View profile
- An Insider's Guide to the Bronx High School of ScienceCome to Bronx Science and learn what past students already know...that is is an amazing institution and will be the best 4 years of your life
- The Art and Science of TeachingOne cannot truly become an effective teacher without integrating both the art and the science of teaching.
- The Crumbling Facade of the Theory of EvolutionDoes the fossil record disprove evolution?
Genetic Memory and the Theories on How We Become like Our AncestorsYou can keep trying...but it might be useless trying to fight off that theoretical genetic memory that makes you seemingly follow along the same path as your immediate (and mayb...- The Impact of the Separation of Church and State on EducationThe United States of America was founded on the basis of religious freedom. Its school systems were centered on religious education. Theology was weaved into every song, every thought, and every act of Americans.
- Evolution Vs. Creation
- The Teaching of Evolution in Schools, and the Intelligent Design Camp's Agenda
- Evolution and Intelligent Design in the Classroom
- Evolution and Creationism: A Speech Against Intelligent Design in the Classroom
- Ben Stein's Expelled: Documentary Diminishes Evolution Debate
- Faith Journey of Sherry Allen: Trust in God when People Mistreat You!
- When Relationships Fail, We are Still Loved by God

3 Comments
Post a CommentYou say you have never heard a scientist explain how one species can transform into another. Try Ernst Mayr out. His work bridged the gap between Darwin and the modern synthesis and is highly respected amoungst biologists. But feel free to continue being ignorant. As far as the lack of mutants in the fossil record I think Gadren's post hits the nail on the head.
Take a look at all the deformed mutants in the human gene pool. Notice something? It's a small fraction of the total population. Most mutations are "neutral;" that is, they tend not to really improve or hurt an organism's chances at survival. Some mutations are good, others are bad. It would make sense that we would see fewer bad mutations, because those wouldn't survive and the net amount of mutations seen would be good.
Also, you treat species as some kind of immutable barrier, when it's really just a human classification. When two groups of organisms mutate enough to not be able to reproduce with each other, that's speciation. Oh, and speciation has been actually OBSERVED, multiple times.
Oh, and I like the confusion regarding the definition of a scientific theory that you threw in there at the end.
I don't think you understand Natural Selection. ;/