 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Paul Gosselin (17/5/2024)
Perhaps some of my contacts read ICR's Acts & Facts magazine. Recently I read with much interest an article by Randy Guliuzza Theory of Biological Design, part 2 article in the May 2024 A&F. I wrote a note to Guliuzza and observed he was quite right to highlight the ideological motivation in Evolution proponents such as Harvard's evolutionary psychologist Steven Pinker. I then added:
------------
In any case, your article provides the diagram below summarizing mechanisms involved with the theory of evolution
I submit that this diagram might have one added item in the light purple “Inferences” column. Here it is:
While evolutionists believe that random genetic mutations are the driving force behind evolution, it is assumed that genetic transmission mechanisms and genetic error correction mechanisms in living organisms are NOT subject to the (generally degrading) effects of genetic mutations...
-------------
Now this statement is something philosophers of science would call a “metaphysical presupposition”, but in everyday language we just call such things a “belief”, NO MORE. That said, it is worlth understanding that this particular belief is ESSENTIAL for the NeoDarwinism that presently reigns in the West.
If all other parts of the genome are subject to mutations, why aren't genetic transmission mechanisms and genetic error correction mechanisms also subject to mutations? How convenient... But what happens if you deny or reject this belief? Well the whole house of cards falls to the floor. Neo-Darwinism then has NO driving mechanism... The whole thing falls apart... If the mechanisms of reproduction itself are subject to mutations, then you might manage to get bacteria for a few thousand years, then mutations will kill them off. End of story... Now even if one were to accept the (irrational) presupposition that genetic transmission mechanisms and genetic error correction mechanisms magically appeared fully functional and working perfectly in the first living organism in the first generation, one still has to consider that millions of years of mutations would have soon destroyed these genetic transmission mechanisms and genetic error correction mechanisms, a systen that is ESSENTIAL for life. And here is where the logic takes us, evolutionists NEED the belief that genetic transmission mechanisms and error correction mechanisms in living organisms are NOT subject to the effects of genetic mutations, but they also NEED to keep this belief out of sight...
Evolutionists will of course attempt to say something in response, insinuating perhaps that the claim that genetic transmission mechanisms and error correction mechanisms in living organisms are NOT subject to the effects of genetic mutations is a “scientific belief”...
Sorry, no can do. That is unacceptable and for one good reason: Ask the evolutionist what empirical/observational proof he can offer of the effects of genetic mutations over millions of years on genetic transmission mechanisms and error correction mechanisms in living organisms? Ask him WHO has observed these effects over millions of years? Which lab conducted the experiment?
No, the claim that genetic transmission mechanisms in living organisms are NOT subject to the effects of genetic mutations over millions of years is a BELIEF and NOTHING more. There can be no proof. An act of faith is required before you can buy into it. The grim irony is that evolutionist's belief in genetic transmission mechanisms in living organisms NOT being subject to the effects of genetic mutations fits in amazingly well with the New Testament definition of faith:
Now faith is assurance of things hoped for, a conviction of things not seen. (Heb 11: 1)[1]
And disregarding the matter of proof, the belief that millions of years worth of genetic mutations would NOT affect the functionality of genetic transmission mechanisms and error correction mechanisms in living organisms is irrational and in effect requires a MIRACLE... Seems like evolutionists have hypocritically introduced a Maxwell's Demon[2] into the picture and neglected to tell anyone...
As a Young Earth Creationist, I prefer to believe in miracles that have a Sufficient Cause... At least that is rational.
[1] - Yes, of course while the evolutionist's object of faith is NOT the same as the Christian, but the principle is the same...
[2] - Wiki page on Maxwell's Demon.