Perhaps the most frequently repeated mistake that evolutionists make in their attacks on creation is to assert that "natural selection" and "speciation" prove evolution and disprove the Biblical account of Orgins. Thier bait-and-switch arguments imply that creationists believe in "fixity of species." The glossary for the PBS "Evloution" series ONLINE COURSE FOR TEACHERS: Teaching evolution explicitly makes this empty allegation:
"In creationism, species are described as 'FIXED" in the sense that they are believed not to change their form, or appearance, through time."
But NO reputable creationist denies speciation- In Fact, it is an important part of creationist biology. The real issue is whether evolution can explain the increase of genetic information content- enough changes to turn microbes into men,Not simple change through time.
Creationists, starting from the Bible, believe that God created different KINDS of organisms, which reproduced "after their kinds" (Gen. 1:11,12,21,24,25). Thus the Biblical kinds would have originally been distinct biological species, i.e., a population of orginisms that can interbreed to produce fertile offspring but that cannot so breed with a different biological species.
But creationists point out that the Biblical "kind" is larger than one of today's "species." Each of the original kinds was created with a vast amount of information. God made sure that the original creatures had enough variety in thier genetic information so that their descendants could adapt to a wide variety of inviroments.
Based on the Biblical criterion for kinds, creationists have made several deductions about the modern descendants of the original creations. They deduce, for example, that as long as two modern creatures can hybridize with ture fertilization, the two creatures are descended from the same kind. Also, if two creatures can hybridize with the same third creature, they are all members of the same kind. The hybridization criterion is a valid operational definition, which could in princible enable researchers to list all of the kinds. The implication is one-way-- hydridization is evidence that two creatures are the same kind, but it does not necessarily follow that if hybridization cannot occur then they are not members of the same kind (failure to hybridize could be due to degenerative mutations)
The boundaries of the "kind" do not always correspond to any given man-made classification such as "species," genus, family ect. But this is not the fault of the biblical term "kind"; it is actually due to inconsistencies in the man-made classification system. That is, several organisms classified as different "species," and even different genera or higher groupings, can produce fertile offspring. This means that they are really the same species that have several varieties, hence a polytypic (many type) species. A good example is Kekiamalu thw wholphin, a fertile hybrid between a male false killer whale and a female bottlenose dolphin between two different so-called genera.
Biologists have identified several ways that a loss of genetic information through mutations (copying mistakes) can lead to new species -- e.g., the loss of a proteins ability to recognize"imprinting' marks, "jumping genes," natural selection, and genetic drift. When these mutations take place in small populations, they can sometimes result in steril or nonviable offspring. Of changes in song or color might result in birds that no longer recognize a mate, so they no longer interbreed. Either way, a new species is formed. Thus each created kind may had been the ancestor of several present day species.
But again, its important to stress that speciation has nothing to do with real evolution (GTE) The general theory of evolution, because it involves sorting and loss of genetic information, rather than new information.
The Biblical creation/Fall/Flood/migration model predicts rapid formation of new varieties and even species. This is because all the modern varieties of land vertebrates must have descended from comparatively few animals that disembarked from the ark only around 4,500 years ago. In contrast, Darwin thought that this process would normally take eons. It turns out that the very evidence claimed by evolutionist to support their theory supports the Biblical model.
Excerpt taken from Jonathan Sarfati's book "Refuting Evolution 2"
"In creationism, species are described as 'FIXED" in the sense that they are believed not to change their form, or appearance, through time."
But NO reputable creationist denies speciation- In Fact, it is an important part of creationist biology. The real issue is whether evolution can explain the increase of genetic information content- enough changes to turn microbes into men,Not simple change through time.
Creationists, starting from the Bible, believe that God created different KINDS of organisms, which reproduced "after their kinds" (Gen. 1:11,12,21,24,25). Thus the Biblical kinds would have originally been distinct biological species, i.e., a population of orginisms that can interbreed to produce fertile offspring but that cannot so breed with a different biological species.
But creationists point out that the Biblical "kind" is larger than one of today's "species." Each of the original kinds was created with a vast amount of information. God made sure that the original creatures had enough variety in thier genetic information so that their descendants could adapt to a wide variety of inviroments.
Based on the Biblical criterion for kinds, creationists have made several deductions about the modern descendants of the original creations. They deduce, for example, that as long as two modern creatures can hybridize with ture fertilization, the two creatures are descended from the same kind. Also, if two creatures can hybridize with the same third creature, they are all members of the same kind. The hybridization criterion is a valid operational definition, which could in princible enable researchers to list all of the kinds. The implication is one-way-- hydridization is evidence that two creatures are the same kind, but it does not necessarily follow that if hybridization cannot occur then they are not members of the same kind (failure to hybridize could be due to degenerative mutations)
The boundaries of the "kind" do not always correspond to any given man-made classification such as "species," genus, family ect. But this is not the fault of the biblical term "kind"; it is actually due to inconsistencies in the man-made classification system. That is, several organisms classified as different "species," and even different genera or higher groupings, can produce fertile offspring. This means that they are really the same species that have several varieties, hence a polytypic (many type) species. A good example is Kekiamalu thw wholphin, a fertile hybrid between a male false killer whale and a female bottlenose dolphin between two different so-called genera.
Biologists have identified several ways that a loss of genetic information through mutations (copying mistakes) can lead to new species -- e.g., the loss of a proteins ability to recognize"imprinting' marks, "jumping genes," natural selection, and genetic drift. When these mutations take place in small populations, they can sometimes result in steril or nonviable offspring. Of changes in song or color might result in birds that no longer recognize a mate, so they no longer interbreed. Either way, a new species is formed. Thus each created kind may had been the ancestor of several present day species.
But again, its important to stress that speciation has nothing to do with real evolution (GTE) The general theory of evolution, because it involves sorting and loss of genetic information, rather than new information.
The Biblical creation/Fall/Flood/migration model predicts rapid formation of new varieties and even species. This is because all the modern varieties of land vertebrates must have descended from comparatively few animals that disembarked from the ark only around 4,500 years ago. In contrast, Darwin thought that this process would normally take eons. It turns out that the very evidence claimed by evolutionist to support their theory supports the Biblical model.
Excerpt taken from Jonathan Sarfati's book "Refuting Evolution 2"
