Miraculous Transformation: Revealing God's Purpose for Blind Fish Island Immigrants and Hairy Babies

Blind Fish, Island Immigrants, and Hairy Babies

Introduction

In recent years, there has been a rise in attacks on the creation movement as it gains effectiveness. One such attack is a book by renowned evolutionary fossil expert Niles Eldredge titled "The Triumph of Evolution: The failure of creationism." In this article, we will examine a review of Eldredge's book by Jerry Coyne, another well-known evolutionist. Coyne highlights three arguments for evolution that he believes are strong evidence against creationism: the presence of vestigial organs, the recurrence of ancestral features in development, and the geographical distribution of organisms on our planet.

Sightless Eyes

Coyne's first argument is the presence of vestigial organs, specifically citing the nonfunctional eyes of cave organisms that evolved from sighted creatures. However, classifying organs as vestigial based on their alleged lack of function does not support the idea of gradual evolution. In fact, it aligns more with the biblical teaching of a fallen creation affected by harmful mutations.

While blind cave creatures descended from those with eyes, this does not demonstrate the type of evolution typically associated with the term. Blind cave fish provide an excellent example of "downhill" or "information-losing" mutations causing devolution. In total darkness, eyes become a handicap rather than an asset, making eyeless fish more likely to survive and reproduce. This loss of eyesight is not evidence for the massive net gain of genetic information required for evolution.

Why This Matters

Understanding the concept of vestigial organs and their supposed role in evolution is crucial for evaluating the evidence presented by proponents of evolution. It challenges the assumption that loss or degeneration of traits supports the idea of upward evolutionary change.

Think About It

Consider how loss or degeneration can occur in other aspects of life. Can you think of examples where a loss or degeneration of certain traits or abilities has been beneficial in a particular environment?

Hairy Embryos

Coyne's second argument revolves around the recurrence of ancestral features in development, such as the temporary coat of hair that forms on the human embryo. This argument suggests that the presence of lanugo hair is a throwback to our primate ancestors. However, closer examination reveals that this argument falls short.

The number of hair follicles in humans remains consistent throughout life, debunking the claim that there is a "hairier" embryonic stage. The soft, downy covering known as lanugo is shed before birth, but the same follicles go on to produce vellus hairs and, eventually, terminal hairs. The idea that lanugo reflects a hairier evolutionary past lacks scientific support.

Why This Matters

Understanding the development of hair in human embryos challenges the notion that it is evidence of an evolutionary history. It highlights the need to critically evaluate claims made about ancestral features in development.

Think About It

Can you think of other examples where temporary or developmental features in organisms have been mistakenly interpreted as evidence for evolution? How does this impact our understanding of biological development?

Island Migrants

Coyne's final argument focuses on the geographical distribution of organisms on our planet. He questions why oceanic islands lack mammals, freshwater fish, and reptiles if species were created. However, this argument demonstrates a lack of understanding regarding the biblical perspective on the distribution of organisms.

The Bible does not teach that each creature was created in its present-day environment. The global Flood described in Genesis caused land vertebrates to repopulate a devastated and different earth from one location. Plants likely regrew from windblown, bird-dispersed, or floating seeds. The differential survival and post-Flood adaptation of freshwater and saltwater fish can be explained through a biblical understanding.

Why This Matters

Understanding the biblical perspective on the distribution of organisms challenges the misconception that creationism requires each species to be created in its present-day environment. It encourages a deeper exploration of the compatibility between the Bible and scientific observations.

Think About It

Consider how the migration and dispersion of animals can be compatible with the biblical account of creation and the Flood. How does this challenge common misconceptions about creationism?

Conclusion

It is important to critically evaluate arguments put forth by proponents of evolution, such as the presence of vestigial organs, ancestral features in development, and the geographical distribution of organisms. These arguments often rely on flawed assumptions and incomplete understandings of biblical teachings.

By examining these arguments from a young-earth creationist perspective, we can gain a deeper understanding of the evidence presented and encourage further exploration of the compatibility between science and faith.

References:

• Creation magazine archives
• Eldredge, Niles. "The Triumph of Evolution: The failure of creationism."
• Coyne, Jerry. Review of "The Triumph of Evolution" by Niles Eldredge.