The Blog

It is essential that the right distinctions be made and that all hidden assumptions be exposed when discussing the creation-evolution controversy. So if someone ever asks you, “Do you believe in evolution?” you should ask that person, “What do you mean by evolution? Do you mean micro or macro-evolution?”

Microevolution has been observed, but it cannot be used as evidence for macroevolution, which has never been observed.

Darwinists are masters at defining the term “evolution” broadly enough so that the evidence in one situation might be counted as evidence in another. Unfortunately for them, the public is starting to catch on to their deceitful tactic, thanks to the groundbreaking book “Darwin on Trial”. The author, Philip Johnson, points out that, “None of the proofs for natural selection provides any persuasive reason for believing that natural selection can produce new species, new organs, or any other major or minor changes that are permanent.”

Why can’t natural selection do the job? One reason is genetic limits.

Darwinists say that microevolution within types proves that macroevolution has occurred. If these small changes can occur over a short period of time, think what natural selection can do over a long period of time. Unfortunately for Darwinists, genetic limits seem to be built into the basic types.

For example, dog breeders always encounter genetic limits when they intelligently attempt to create new breeds of dogs. Dogs may range in size from the Chihuahua to the Great Dane, but despite the best attempts of intelligent breeders, dogs always remain dogs.

Likewise, despite the best efforts of many intelligent scientists to manipulate fruit flies, their experiments have never turned out anything but more fruit flies. This especially significant because the short life of fruit flies allows scientists to test many generations of genetic variation over a short period of time.

Most importantly, the comparison between natural selection and the artificial selection that breeders do is completely invalid. The biggest difference is the fact that artificial selection is intelligently guided while natural selection is not.

Personal Reflection:
What are other differences between artificial and natural selection?