Divine Truth: Debunking Fast Mouse Evolution Claims with Biblical Wisdom

Fast Mouse Evolution Claims

Researchers at the University of Illinois in Chicago conducted a study comparing the DNA of present-day mice with that of museum specimens dating back to 1855. They specifically focused on the DNA found in mitochondria, which are cell powerhouses and easier to detect in ancient specimens. The researchers discovered a significant genetic shift, which they referred to as "evolution," occurring over a relatively short period of time. This rapid genetic change had not been observed before in mammals.

It's important to note that genetic changes are not inherently problematic from a creationist perspective. Changes in gene frequency within populations, natural selection, and adaptation simply rearrange existing genetic information. In fact, selection actually removes information from a population when creatures that are not well-suited to their environment are eliminated. Additionally, mutations, which are accidental hereditary copying mistakes in DNA, do not lead to an increase in genetic information. Even in cases where a mutation confers a survival advantage, it does not add new information. Therefore, the observed changes labeled as "evolution" do not provide any evidence for the gradual development of complex organisms.

Interestingly, rapid diversification aligns with the biblical Creation/Fall/Flood/Migration model. After being on board Noah's Ark, the different "kinds" of animals needed to diversify fairly quickly. For example, the dog kind diversified into wolves, dingoes, coyotes, etc., while another kind diversified into horses, zebras, and asses. The faster we observe these "downhill rearrangements" occurring, the better it fits with the biblical model.

The reports about the mouse observations in Chicago do not suggest that new genetic information was added to the biosphere. Real evolution would require the addition of new genetic information that was previously non-existent, such as the development of feather genes where there was no previous information for feathers anywhere in the world. Instead, these reports discuss shifts in populations and the introduction of mutations.

Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) plays a significant role in calculations related to "mitochondrial Eve" or "African Eve." This hypothetical woman, not to be equated with the biblical Eve, is believed to have lived with other women at the time, but her mtDNA was the only one passed down to all humans living today. The estimated dates for her existence are based on assumptions about the speed at which mtDNA changes. These dates have ranged from up to 250,000 years ago, but recent recalculations based on observed mutation rates in human mtDNA bring it down to around 6,000 years ago. The rapid change observed in mtDNA in mice challenges the assumptions underlying these calculations.

It is important to recognize that the scientific community and the media label all genetic change as "evolution" without considering the nature or direction of the change. This careless equivocation leads many people to believe that they can observe evolution everywhere, which is not the case. The changes we see are unrelated to uphill evolution and are consistent with the biblical account of creation. They reflect the overall decline in information since Adam's Fall and the resulting Curse on the world, which will eventually be removed when a new heavens and earth are ushered in.

Why This Matters

Understanding the limitations of genetic changes is crucial for evaluating claims about evolution. Genetic changes that occur within a population do not lead to an increase in information but rather involve reshuffling and rearranging existing genetic material. Recognizing this fact helps us critically assess scientific studies and interpretations that may present genetic changes as evidence for gradual evolution.

Think About It

Consider how different interpretations of genetic changes can shape our understanding of origins. How does your worldview influence your view of scientific evidence? Reflecting on these questions can deepen our engagement with creationist ideas and encourage critical thinking about scientific claims.