Two funny looking trees grow in my yard, they are called Ginkgo trees. What makes them quite peculiar is that they are called “living fossils”. A living fossil is an organism that once was thought to be only found in the fossil record, or in other words, scientists thought they were extinct. However, after much searching (or should I say stumbling), scientists find the organism still alive in some remote area. If we’d ever find a living dinosaur it would be called a living fossil.
That’s why I like my ginkgo trees, they are kinda cool. But there is another reason too. I think they show the silliness of Darwinian evolution. Now some will not like me saying that, but let me tell you why.
Why it makes Darwinism look silly
It strikes me these plants and animals aught to have changed how they look over eons of time, in fact that’s what evolution implies. But they have not. When I point this out to the Darwinian believer, he or she says something like “oh, it just has been successful in its environment.” Here’s what makes me smile, the believer then goes on to claims this was predicted in Darwinian evolution! And we mustn’t forget their “left-hook”, that intellectual word to define this process: stasis.
Please checked out the iApologia YouTube channel!
Hit the “Subscribe” button as you enter.
The double standard
But it strikes me that bunches of bugs, birds and bacteria that don’t change over time also don’t sound that much like evolution. The most basic definition of evolution is something like a group organisms that change over time.
However, it sounds like they “want their cake and to eat it too”: if populations of plants, pandas or potato beetles change over time, it’s evolution. If plants, pandas or potato beetles don’t change over time, it’s evolution. Really?
Maybe, like a double standard, they are wanting it both ways. Or maybe it’s just a pretty dress on a dead view!
It explains nothing
But there’s more too. It seems Darwinism is being used to explain everything, even if it does not fit well. Think of a round peg hammered into a square hole, not a good fit, right?
As the old saying goes “an explanation that explains everything explains nothing.”
Here is a slightly humorous example: The Dead Man Story.
The Dead Man Story
A guy told his doctor “I think I’m a dead man”. The doctor assured him that he was fully alive, but he man did not believe him.
The doctor asked, “do dead men bleed”?
The man said “no.”
So the doctor said “let me poke your finger here and see if blood comes out” and the man agrees. Blood beaded up on his finger and the doctor says “well, it looks like you are fully alive.” The man thought for a second and said “well, maybe dead men do bleed.”
Excuses, excuses
This guy just kept making things up to explain his claim, but it really just sounds silly.
Same here. It sounds like a silly excuse that is used to explain away the many, many, many plants, animals and bugs found in the fossil record that looks identical to the ones we find in our lawns and gardens today.
The apostle Peter taught us to have answers for our faith, which is what I try to do here. I would love for you to follow iApologia to get the latest updates to your inbox. Plus, I will send you my Free Quick Guide why that gives 8 reasons science points to God.
Please tell us your thoughts below!
It seems to me that Evolution Theory is thrives because it is science.
How do you define evolution?
There is more tha one definition around. One that I know is:
the change in the frequency of alleles in the genetic pool of a population over time.
This is the standard definition that every biologists agrees with, including myself. So, great, we agree!