Darwinism (letter)

Darwinism (letter)

Michael Griffiths

Brian Detheridge wrote (AD2000, August 2003): "That humanity and other animals are close kin, as species, there can be no serious doubt." This seems to imply that Darwin's theory of evolution is indisputable - a view I wish to reject.

Since Darwin's theory has been falsely used by enemies of the Church to attack fundamental Christian teaching, I submit some general observations about Darwinism.

The original theory submitted by Darwin was incomplete, and cannot properly be called scientific. His presentation was heavily and critically dependent upon fossil evidence which had not, and still has not, been discovered. The fossils of missing links, or intermediate species, whose discovery was confidently awaited, are still undiscovered. A study of the abundant fossils available today consistently shows that species suddenly appear - some die out, some still survive - but none branch off into other species.

About the middle of last century the absence of missing links was ingeniously explained by suggesting that evolution proceeded when, from time to time, a pregnant member of some species or other unexpectedly gave birth to an offspring of a different species. The newborn creature obviously had the problem of finding a mate. This theory was, I think, unique for two reasons: the only evidence in its favour was the lack of evidence, and it demanded a miracle for its explanation.

Over many years there have been proposed some twenty different, and conflicting, lines of evolution of the horse. Some decades ago all these lines were discarded by evolutionists themselves, but they have continued to appear in text-books.

Scientist Fred Hoyle, investigating the mathematical probability that life began in a primordial soup, concluded that the chance that life began in this way was similar to the chance that a tornado blowing through a junk yard would produce a modern jet-liner. Also, recent discoveries have shown that the simple cell, the smallest unit of life, is so complex, and its countless parts are so interdependent, that it can exist only in its complete form, and could not have come into existence by Darwinist gradualism.

The implications of this for Darwinism have been largely ignored by scientists. My reasons for writing are my love of science and the hope that others, especially students, might choose to look up the evidence for themselves. There are many books on Darwinism, and many sites on the internet under the heading "theory of evolution".

MICHAEL GRIFFITHS
Glenroy, Vic

Be the first to comment

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.