09 The theory of evolution

The following description of evolution was taken as a sample definition from the internet (shown in italics). Comments are added through the report.


  1. In recent times evolutionists have distanced themselves from the issue of the origin of life since it has been shown impossible for life to originate by natural processes. Without an initial life form evolution be initiated, but as the theory is so prevalent the tenets of its foundations are ere investigated.


The premise of Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection is that all life, from mammals to single celled organisms, is related through descent with modification from common ancestral stock.

Darwinian evolution assumes that all changes were accomplished in small steps. According to the theory each step adds a survival benefit to the creature and because of this theirs is the one who’s generation continues.

The mechanism he proposed to explain descent with modification was natural selection.

This is not a mechanism of change, see ‘neo-Darwinism’ below.

Natural selection: th=me engine of evolution

Natural selection is not an engine of change but a conserving process. It gives an advantage to the creature most adapted to the environment & disadvantages the weaker. It cannot form anything novel, it just culls. The problem for evolution is envisioning a series of small steps that can be made from one creature to another.

Take the example of flight. One of the necessary changes is for limbs to change into wings. Limbs are functional, wings are functional, but part limb/part wing is less functional than either end of the process, so natural selection would work against it. There are no examples in the fossil record displaying a transition from one form to another.

This is similar in the supposed transition from marine life to land. A fish would have to develop an air breathing system (which is of no immediate function) while living in a marine setting, at the same time having a beneficial advantage over other fish.

As I have stated, the fossil record shows no examples of one form changing into another & this posed a problem to evolutionists. Darwin thought that though the record did not give evidence for multiple changes through time, these would be later discovered. They have not.

Because of this the model of punctuated evolution was proposed. This is where long periods of time were interposed by rapid periods of evolution. Because the changes were so rapid there was not enough time for these to be shown in the fossil record. The evidence for this is the lack of observable data. Not a very scientific approach.


This is not the only alternative evolution model. Here is a list of varieties:

Darwinian evolution – small gradual changes caused by natural selection.

Neo-Darwinism – gradual changes caused by mutations (see * below).

Punctuated evolution – rapid spurts of changes in isolated areas.

Lamarckism – Lamarck proposed the idea that changes came about by excessive use, eg a giraffe stretched

its neck & caused it to extend.

Hopeful Monsters – In order to explain away the lack of intermediate stages Goldschmidt suggested that

explosive changes occurred, eg a dinosaur hatched an egg & a bird hatched.

I don’t know what mummy dinosaur would have thought.


Darwin unveiled his theory in 1859 in his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection.

The publication of Darwin’s book appears to have been delayed for social reasons. He set off on his voyages on the Beagle in 1831, where he started forming his ideas, but at this time there were famines & hardships in the nation. By the second half of the century the economic situation had improved dramatically, so it was an opportune time to release his book suggesting that mankind was in its ascendency.

He was certainly not the first to theorise that man was descended from animals – Greek philosophers such as Anaximander and Empedocles had advanced this view as early as the 6th century BC.

Charles Darwin’s grandfather, Erasmus, also had similar thoughts as his grandson, but he could suggest no mechanism to fuel the progression. About the same time as Darwin Alfred Wallace proposed a similar concept to Darwin & was just beaten to publishing his theory.


However through his keen insights as a biologist, Darwin was able to demonstrate the scientific basis for evolution: a concept which he called ‘natural selection’.

The term ‘Natural selection’ was originally named by a creationist some time before Darwin.

Natural selection sounds very plausible. The fittest, strongest, most robust survive. Actually in nature a better phrase would be, ‘the survival of the luckiest’. The chances of survival due to a minor change in body structure are remote. Being at the wrong place at the wrong time is much more relevant.


By observing different species, Darwin saw that there is variation in every population and that within these groups there is competition for limited resources such as food, water and shelter from predators.

Darwin appeared to be a good observational biologist. His extrapolation from microbes changing into mankind went far, far, beyond observations.

The creatures that survive this ‘struggle for existence’ pass on their favourable heritable traits to their offspring, and because more offspring are produced than can survive, this process of ‘natural selection’ continues. The process later became popularly known as ‘the survival of the fittest’.

Darwin‘s arrival on the Galapagos Islands

Living proof

It was during Darwin’s journeys on the British survey ship HMS Beagle that he saw the variations in different species that led him to develop the idea of natural selection. Darwin’s experiences on The Galápagos Islands were a catalyst for his thinking about evolution.

The species on these islands – birds, plants, insects and reptiles – resembled those on the South American mainland, but they were also different in many subtle ways. After his journey back to England, Darwin began to develop the idea that the species from the mainland had reached the Galápagos, and then changed, adapting to their new environment.

Here evolutionists & creationists agree about the migration of animals around the world & adaptations to suit the environment.

Until this point it was universally accepted that species did not change yet Darwin’s emerging theory was about to challenge this in a radical way.

This was due to the mistaken concept of ‘fixicitiy of species’. The bible teaches that ‘kinds’ do not change, but this is a wider specification than species.

What did finches teach Darwin about evolution?

An evolving idea

Unlike today’s scientists with their sophisticated lab techniques and computer equipment, Darwin was heavily reliant on observation and deduction; yet one of the amazing things about Darwin’s theory is that it has remained at the heart of scientific thinking about the origins and development of life.

This is the danger of extrapolation. Seeing small changes does not mean that they extend to major structural metamorphism.

Through our understanding of DNA we now have a much more sophisticated view of genetically inherited traits,

(Through our understanding of observed biology & microbiology it has become more & more clear that evolution could not have occurred.

This raises the subject of genetic load. This is where genetic mutations accumulate in the genome. Minor failures in the body’s cells, when the dominant & submissive cells are passed on to offspring this can result in genetic diseases. Genetic load has been seen to have increased in the population resulting in an increase of genetic diseases.)

which provides an even stronger scientific basis for Darwin’s 150 year old theory.

This is explained by indoctrination, a refusal to look at the problems in the theory & censorship of the alternative. If it were a true scientific theory then it would be open to challenge. Today any challenger faces discrimination or worse.

Whenever a discovery is made which does not fit the theory it morphs so to accept it.

If a creature is seen to change this it claimed as evidence for evolution. If there is stability, as in the fossil record, this can be claimed as evidence for evolution. This has been likened to the story of the emperor’s new clothes. It is totally invisible but people must say that they see it.

Another similarity is with an evolutionary biologist, where the idea of creation science is like an elephant in the lab. It takes up vast amounts of space, trumpets loudly, smells strongly & eats large amounts of food. Yet it has to be believed not to exist.


Claims that ‘evolution is a fact’ is scientifically false. The theory is an unproven, improvable worldview. This phrase has become a mantra spoken by believers. Technically it should not even be called a theory, rather a hypothesis.

* The lack of novelty that could be produced through natural selection was realised by scientists and the idea of mutations was added to the theory. This amendment was called neo-Darwinism.