Continued from Part 1
Good science is that which is supported by evidence, logical reasoning and can be tested experimentally… Good science will go wherever testable repeatable data and ideas will lead. ~Daniel Szwaya 06/19/13 Daily Herald
Let’s try that on the “science” that is used as evidence for macroevolution in the textbooks:
- Evolutionary claim: Induction of mutations by chemicals, physical trauma or radiation will cause a species to evolve into a new species.
Truth: Extensive research was conducted on fruit flies because of their short life spans and ease of control in the laboratory. After many years of inducing mutations in the flies, only detrimental mutations with the loss of information could be effected. The experiments failed to demonstrate macroevolution. The claim that fruit flies have evolved as far as they can go is a conclusion of poor science.
- Evolutionary claim: Gradual mutational change may not work, so mammoth mutations are necessary. This requires a punctuated equilibrium or a “hopeful monster” (i. e. A dinosaur lays an egg and a bird hatches out.).
Truth: No punctuated equilibrium occurred at Hiroshima, Nagasaki or Chernobyl. What has been observed is diseases from mutations induced by excessive radiation. That’s the same thing observed in the fruit flies. Mutations scramble the information in the DNA and produce new diseases not evolution.
The impact of mutations is described in the text Human Physiology and Mechanisms of Disease. The 400 pages of the text describe how mutations cause diseases. There is not one word about macroevolution. No instances of the transmigration of plants and/or animals has been observed. They reproduce after their kind. Punctuated Equilibrium is more poor science.
- Evolutionary claim: Natural selection, like artificial selection, assures the survival of beneficial traits that appear in plants and animals by mutations.
Truth: Selection requires a thinking mind. A mind is operative in artificial selection, but there is NO MIND operating in natural selection… by definition! Even if there were beneficial mutations in the evolutionary scenario, there would be no mind to make the selection. The phenomenon occurs, but it is conservative not creative. It retards the deterioration of the species, but will neither produce new information nor prevent the eventual extinction of the species! Equating natural selection with macroevolution is poor science.
- Evolutionary claim: The fossil record shows evolution over time.
Truth: There is no fossil “record.” Fossils do not come with labels attached, explaining how they were formed and when. There is no objective, written record; just fossils. The worldview of the scientist controls the interpretation of the fossils. Claiming one’s interpretation as the record is poor science!
- Evolutionary claim: The sedimentary strata were laid down slowly over hundreds of millions of years.
Truth: Polystrate tree fossils, penetrating supposed millions of years of strata falsify this notion. If the trees stood exposed for millions of years they would decay and not be fossilized. The fossils imply rapid burial before natural forces decomposed the specimens. The inferred millions of years for strata accumulation is not good science.
- Evolutionary claim: There are myriads of transitional fossils showing macroevolution.
Truth: Even Colin Patterson of the British Museum of Natural History admitted that there are no transitional fossils and quoted Dr. Steven Gould of Harvard as agreeing. Then Dr. Gould co-authored with Dr. Eldridge Claim #15 above to explain the absence of transitional fossils. Claiming that transitional fossils exist is poor science.
- Evolutionary claim: Fossil ages are obtained from the age of the strata in which they are found, and the strata are dated by the age of the index fossils that are found in the strata.
Truth: The dating of fossils and strata is a good example of circular reasoning. One cannot break into the circle to obtain an objective answer. One can establish virtually any age one desires, and that’s not good science.
- Evolutionary claim: The radio-dating methods give absolute ages.
Truth: Good science, when applied to analytical methods, requires that the methods be validated. When radio-dating methods were validated using rocks of known age (e. g. observed historical lava flows), the methods overestimated the age by hundreds of thousands to millions of years. The validation was a colossal failure. Then lava flows from the top and bottom of the Grand Canyon were dated by several radio-dating methods. The younger lava flow on the top dated older than the old lava flow at the bottom. That was the opposite of a valid appraisal. To claim these methods give valid ages is TERRIBLE science.
- Evolutionary claim: The fresh tissues found in fossilized dinosaur bones indicate that animal tissues can be preserved for millions of years.
Truth: In the laboratory it has been shown scientifically that tissues and DNA are quite fragile and decompose fairly rapidly. Under some conditions one could talk of thousands but not millions of years for the preservation of animal tissues. Claiming millions of years is poor science.
- Evolutionary claim: It takes millions of years for fossils to form.
Truth: Many objects have been fossilized in a matter of years. I have seen fossilized hats, bats, water wheels, etc. all in one person’s lifetime. It does not require millions of years for objects to be fossilized. Claiming otherwise is not good science.
- Evolutionary claim: It took millions of years for the Colorado River to carve out the Grand Canyon.
Truth: The river enters the canyon at about 2,500 feet above sea level. The walls then rise to about 8,300 feet. Thus, the river would have flowed uphill 5,800 feet to begin to erode the canyon out of the Kaibab Upwarp, if the claim were true. Then it would have continued to flow uphill for millions of years until it reached its current status. That’s nonsense and not good science.
- Evolutionary claim: The Colorado River slowly eroded the Grand Canyon over millions of years and deposited it in the ocean.
Truth: When rivers slow down at the mouth they drop their load of sediment and create a delta. The amount of erosion in the Grand Canyon, which is 200 miles long, 18 miles across at some places and one mile deep, would produce an enormous delta, but no huge delta is observed. That strongly indicates that the canyon caused the river rather than the river causing the canyon. Claiming otherwise appears to be poor science.
- Evolutionary claim: There are 120 million years of strata missing from the walls of Grand Canyon.
Truth: Most of the strata of the Grand Canyon lie flat on each other. If the evolutionary claim were true, there would be massive signs of erosion and animals burrowing in the sediments during the missing eras. No such signs appear. For no erosion to occur during those eras, no wind could blow, no rain could fall and no animals could dig for millions of years. That’s very poor science.
There you have more than 25 false notions of poor science that are used to support macroevolution in the textbooks, and there are more!. Why is the idea so fragile that it must be protected from truth and examination as an authentic idea in science, and why must students be indoctrinated with poor science to assure they embrace evolution and defend it as adults?