The following is a list of species characteristics which should
not occur, according to evolution theory. The fact that we
can generate this list at all is an illustration of how
evolution theory is a scientific theory, and creationism is not.
Ask a creationist for specific predictions and a list of
characteristics which should not occur and you'll get
nothing but a blank expression, because their ideology has been
constructed in such a manner that no conceivable evidence could
possibly disprove it. But evolution can readily provide such a
list:
A complex organ for which no
simpler versions ever existed. In the 19th century,
creationists tried and failed to use the human eye as an example of
such an organ. Since then, they have used progressively smaller and
simpler examples of what they believe to be "irreducibly
complex" organs, until they are now literally talking about
microscopic sub-cellular structures smaller than a single cell
(such as the bacterial flagellum cited by Dr. Michael Behe, for
which we have, predictably enough, found even simpler versions).
Ironically, this long creationist progression from complex to
simple illustrates Darwin's point beautifully.
A feature which exists solely for
the benefit of another species, with no benefit whatsoever to the
host species. Every attempt to find an example of such a
feature has invariably resulted in the discovery of some form of
either symbiosis, where both species benefit in some way, or
parasitism, where an organism feeds from its host but the host has
not developed any features specifically to assist with this
process.
Different biochemistry (eg-
different base nucleotides) than the rest of the biosystem.
Note: a lifeform which evolved in a highly isolated environment
(such as an extra-terrestrial lifeform) might meet this criterion
without violating evolution. But in our biosystem, every organism
evolved from the same nucleic acids that were found in the first
life form, so we all share those acids in our biochemical
makeup.
A feature which leaps from one
branch of the evolutionary tree to another. For example,
mammals evolved from the mammal-like reptile therapsids over
200 million years ago. If a feature which developed in mammals only
10 million years ago suddenly appeared fully-formed in a reptile
from the same period with no reptilian antecedent, this would be an
example of a feature jumping from one branch of the evolutionary
tree to another. This is quite normal in man-made systems. For
example, fuel injection started in race cars and slowly developed
from primitive mechanically metered injectors to sophisticated
computer-controlled fuel-injection systems. But when the Ford Crown
Victoria switched from carburetors to fuel injection, it did not
follow this slow progression; computer-controlled fuel injection
systems simply appeared in the product line one year, having jumped
there from other product lines where all of this development had
occurred.
We have never found even a single example of
such a "branch-jumping" event anywhere in the millions of
species of the animal kingdom. Features slowly develop within their
branch of origin, and advanced versions do not suddenly appear in
other branches. Sub-cellular parasites can transfer genetic material
between organisms on occasion (in fact, we have "parasitic"
mitichondrial DNA in our own bodies, which only further establishes
the pathways of evolutionary transmission), but the kind of advanced
feature migration which is common in man-made systems is
completely absent from the animal kingdom.
Despite having catalogued animal species for centuries, we have
never found even one that meets any of these criteria. This is what
evolution science means when its proponents say that it has been
proven "beyond a reasonable doubt." Surely, if we were
created or "intelligently designed" rather than evolved,
we would have found at least one example, somewhere in our vast
animal kingdom. In fact, we should have found thousands. Especially
#4, which virtually screams for explanation if we did not
evolve, and which creationists conspicuously avoid ever
mentioning.
This site was written using OpenOffice, running on Mandriva Linux.