In this article -“A Layman’s view on Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.” I am trying to analysie the Theory of Evolution from a layman’s perspective. I am not a scientist but someone with a little bit of common sense like most of you out there.
It is true that many of the things that we learned in school about the Origin of Life do not agree with the reality we see around us and here I am making a very humble attempt to share some of my thoughts on those discrepancies.
Charles Robert Darwin was born on 12 February 1809 in England.
Both His father Robert Waring Darwin and Grand Father Erasmus Darwin were Medical Doctors and his father wanted Charles also to become a medical Doctor.
With this aim in mind his father put him in a medical school. However, young Charles could not continue with his medical course as he was not courageous enough to attend surgery classes.
So, after two years, Charles left the medical school and his father sent him again to study theology at Cambridge University, so that, he could become an Anglican Priest.
This too was not something Darwin really liked. But he continued his studies and graduated from Cambridge University in 1831 with a Master Degree in Divinity.
Though Darwin was studying theology, all his passion was in observing the flora and fauna around him. As soon as he graduated from Seminary, he got a chance to be part of “Beagle Expedition” and he set out on a journey through the wild oceans of the world.
The expedition gave him the chance to visit some of the most exotic islands where he spent plenty of time observing and cataloging the flora and fauna that he came across.
With the newly collected information Darwin started writing a book about the origin of Species. Besides, his own collected information, Darwin was also inspired by his Grandfather Erasmus Darwin’s book called “Zoonomia” which contained a highly rabid and contentious idea related to origin of species.
In his book, Erasmus Darwin claimed that one specie could transmute into another. In fact, Darwin’s theory on Origin of Species got its fundamental idea from “Zoonomia.”
Anyway, Darwin published his book:
On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life? on 24 November 1859.
In this book Darwin put forward a theory that explains the origin of species through a method called “Natural Selection” a process by which living organisms change overtime as a result of changes in inheritable physical or behavioural qualities.
And those Changes that help a living organism to better adapt to its existing environment will also help it survive and re-produce more offspring of the same kind.
This theory can be divided into two branches; they are:
- Micro Evolution caused by Natural Selection
- Macro Evolution caused by Natural Selection
Micro-evolution happens when species change in small ways overtime causing the entire population of the same species change their external characteristics like colour or size in a few generations.
While Macro Evolution happens when the small accumulated changes by the process of Natural Selection through a long period of time (may be hundreds of millions of years) results in the development of entirely new species.
I think the above given information will help you get a basic idea about the theory of evolution and I don’t intend to elaborate on it because, most of the people who have studied up to middle school might have already come across some of the basic information about the Origin of Species theory put forward by Charles Darwin.
Hence, I would like to focus on writing about some of the fundamental flaws in this theory.
1. Darwin’s Theory on “Origin of Species” is void of the most fundamental component of life that is – Genetic Information (DNA)
Charles Darwin published his book on Origin of Species in 1859 very long before we came to know about the existence of DNA in a living Cell.
During Darwin’s time, the scientific community did not have any idea about DNA. They thought cells and tissues were just pieces of meat that contained no information.
But, in 1953, almost 90 years after the publication of Darwin’s book, James Watson and Francis Crick discovered the DNA which has completely revolutionized the study of Biology.
Now, in the 21st century, we have even far more advanced equipment and technology which help us understand living cells much better than in Darwin’s time.
Today, we know very well that, life depends on information, life is built and sustained by information contained in the cell of a living organism. Without information life cannot be sustained. Even a small change in a living organism is directed by its DNA.
However, Darwin had absolutely no idea about its existence and Darwin’s theory assigned no role whatsoever for DNA in the changes that were taking place in a living organism.
Darwin’s observation was external and he thought a mechanism called natural selection is directing the changes in a living organism. But now we know that it is not natural selection that is driving the change but the information contained in the cell of a living organism.
The changes are the result of a well-planned, and directed mechanism in operation within the cell and it is not anything external that is directing it.
Hence, Darwin’s idea that Natural selection is the driving force behind the changes in a living organism is completely wrong.
It is like saying a car is moving just because its four wheels are rolling. of course, a very wrong conclusion about an automobile.
The truth is: there is a very sophisticated Engine and gear system that controls and manages the movement of the vehicle which are hidden from the sight.
Similarly, in a living organism, the changes are directed, controlled and managed by a very sophisticated system of DNA which is hidden within the cells of a living organism.
Darwin unfortunately had no idea, whatsoever, about this mechanism. His conclusions based on the external observation is completely wrong and hence his theory built on the foundation of Natural selection also is wrong.
It is time long overdue for the mainstream scientific community to admit the fault.
2. Charles Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection Does not explain the origin of the living organisms.
Charles Darwin built his theory on Origin of Species around the idea of Natural selection. However, Natural Selection is not capable of explaining the complete origin of a living organism. Because, it is something that happened in the past and there is no way to reproduce the exact method or means by which a living organism came into existence.
Moreover, Natural Selection is happening within an organism that is already existing. Darwin, has to explain how this living organism came into existence in the first place.
Natural Selection cannot take place without an organism existing first. As we know very well, an organism cannot be formed as a whole through the mechanism called Natural Selection, we don’t have any observable evidence for that, scientifically also it is impossible.
Because, Natural Selection brings only small changes within a living organism which are not adequate enough to turn it into completely new species.
3. Life is built and sustained by Information (DNA) and Natural Selection has no role whatsoever in Building Life.
There is a “day and night” difference between the science of 21st Century and the science of Darwin’s day. Today, we have very sophisticated equipment that can look into a living cell and find out how it works.
Now, we know very well that a cell in a living organism is a very complex information storing and processing bio-device that is far more advanced in technology than anything that human beings have ever made.
However, despite having highly sophisticated technology in our possession, we still have a long way to go in understanding the complete working of a living cell.
Every feature and change of a living organism are determined by the genetic information contained in its cell. Life is made and sustained because of the information contained in the cell. “No information, no Life.” Some of the deformities or flaws we see in living things is the result of losing the required information and nothing else.
4. Common Design Points to a Common Designer.
Another common argument put forward by Darwin and other evolutionists is that, a common design points to an evolutionary chain of species of one kind developing into another kind.
But this argument does not hold any water if we examine them under the light of modern science.
Today, we have very sophisticated technology in our possession, which can examine in detail the content of a cell in every living organism.
Today, if we examine the cell of a Bacterium, we could find that, it has the genetic information just enough to reproduce only a bacterium. Similarly, a dog has genetic information only to reproduce a Dog.
Hence, the argument that one species can turn into another species is completely unscientific.
Life is built and sustained on information contained in a living organism and each living organism has genetic information just to reproduce only its own kind.
If a Dog wants reproduce a cat, it needs the necessary genetic information which is impossible for a dog to have. Furthermore, there are no known external or internal mechanisms that adds information in a living cell. Hence, there is no way for a living organism to get additional information apart from what is already existing in its cell.
Additional features required additional information and there is no way any external natural force that can add this required information into the cell of that particular living organism.
Another silly argument put forward by evolutionists is that:
human beings evolved from Chimpanzees.
This is another unprovable theory held close to their hearts by the evolutionists.
Human beings and Chimpanzees may have some similarities, for e.g.
We need to see, so we have two eyes, chimpanzees also need to see so they have two eyes too.
We need to walk, so we have two legs, similarly chimpanzees need to walk too, so they have two legs.
There is nothing surprising about these similar features.
If both were designed by a single designer, both will naturally have similar organs for similar functions. It does not mean that one evolved from the other.
Another noteworthy point is: Human beings have more features but fewer chromosomes than the chimpanzees.
Each additional feature requires additional genetic information, if human beings evolved from chimpanzees, how can we have features that they don’t have? from where did the genetic information to develop those features come from?
5. Cambrian Explosion disproves Macro Evolution.
What is Cambrian Explosion?
Cambrian explosion is the sudden appearance of living organisms, especially a large variety of animal species roughly around 535 million years ((According to the evolutionist dating methods) ago.
This sudden appearance of animals in huge number and variety really proves that macro-evolution is something that never happened in the history of planet earth.
According Charles Darwin, Macro Evolution happens when the small accumulated changes by the process of Natural Selection through a long period of time (may be hundreds of millions of years) results in the development of entirely new species.
However, this is not true, there is no evidence whatsoever to prove that Macro Evolution has taken place.
In addition, when we examine the life forms that exist today, we don’t find any evidence of macro evolution except small changes that are triggered for the purpose of adapting to the changing environment.
Furthermore, we are yet to find the fossil remains of many animal species that evolutionists claim to have evolved. So far, no intermediary fossil forms have been found which proves that Macro Evolution is just a theory in the texts books and there is no reason to discuss it outside the classrooms.
6. The Law of Biogenesis proves that evolution is impossible.
The evolutionary theory of “Spontaneous Generation” has been completely dismantled by Louis Pasteur who proved that – “life only comes from life”.
According to Charles Darwin the first form of life at the micro level began by a method called Spontaneous Generation, but anyone with a little common sense would say that this is surely a non-starter. However, the whole evolutionary theory is built on this idea.
So far, no evolutionists have been able to prove that a non-living material could be transformed into a living organism at the micro-level. Even a layman without any scientific background could easily understand that something that has no life in it cannot produce life.
“Only life can produce life.” This is a hard fact that every human being on the face of the earth understand, but the evolutionists are still not willing to accept this truth.
Charles Darwin’s theory on the “Origin of Species” is just a theory suitable for text books and it has no practical applicability whatsoever in the real world.
The life forms that we see around us today from the micro level to macro level are technically so complex that they had to be designed.
In addition, these life forms, even at micro level is loaded with so much technical complexity that, even with the most advanced technology of the 21st century, we still find it difficult to understand them fully.
Another element that adds to the complexity is the high content of information (DNA) in the cells of all living organisms. DNA is a very complex information system which could have come only from an intelligent source.
According to modern Information Science theories, intelligible information can only come from an intelligent source. A Highly complex information set like DNA must have surely originated from a highly intelligent source and not from any material sources as Evolutionists claim.
Therefore, for me, as a layman with common sense, it is impossible to believe that Darwin’s theory on the “Origin of Species” is true.
It is just a theory developed during a period in which we had no advanced technology to understand the living organisms and the world accepted it as science then, but not anymore.
It is time for mainstream scientific community to come out and admit that Darwin’s theory of Evolution is not true.