Page 54 - The Origin of Life and the Universe - International Conference 2016

The Origin of Life and the Universe

That the variations falsely alleged
as micro-evolution cannot account for
the claim of macro-evolution, and cannot
explain the origin of species, is also
admitted by other evolutionist biologists.
The well-known evolutionist paleontol-
ogist Roger Lewin set out his conclusion
at a four-day symposium attended by
150 evolutionists at the Chicago Mu-
seum of Natural History in November
1980:
The central question of the Chicago con-
ference was whether the mechanisms
underlying microevolution can be extrap-
olated to explain the phenomena of
macroevolution ... The answer can be
('-(,-+)/-*/(/ .).,-%/!&.)+ .)+)/,&(,/%("*.*/-) - - given as a clear, No. 6
"($*/+'/ '+"!*/ -,&-)/(/*!.%-.*/,+/. &- -,/ -##.'.),/%&(' The evolutionist biologists Fager-
(%,.'-*,-%* / ('-(,-+)/($ ( */,( .*/!$(%./ -,&-)/,&.
strom, Schuster and Szathmary stated
+") ('-.*/+#/ .).,-%/-)#+' (,-+) / &-%&/ +") */('.
'.#.''. /,+/(*/,&./ .)./!++$/ ",/*"%&/ ('-(,-+)//'.!'. the same thing in an article published
*.),*/)+/. - .)%./#+'/. +$",-+) in Science magazine in 1996:
specific genetic bounds and that have nothing Major transitions in evolution—such as
the origin of life, the emergence of eukaryotic
at all to do with evolution.
cells, and the origin of the human capacity for
In fact, even contemporary evolutionist au-
language, to name but a few—could not be
thorities accept that the variations described
farther away from an equilibrium. Also, they
as micro-evolution cannot give rise to new living
cannot be described satisfactorily by established
classes, or lead to macro-evolution. In a 1996
models of microevolution 7
paper published in the journal Developmental
Other scientists, however, are aware that
Biology, the evolutionist biologists Scott Gilbert,
such a claim totally conflicts with the picture re-
John Opitz and Rudolf Raff stated that:
vealed by scientific findings and the fossil
The Modern Synthesis is a remarkable achieve-
record. Douglas Erwin, from the American Mu-
ment. However, starting in the 1970s, many bi-
seum of Natural History emphasized this in a
ologists began questioning its adequacy in ex-
paper that appeared in the journal Evolution
plaining evolution. Genetics might be adequate
8
and Development in 2000. According to the
for explaining microevolution, but micro-evolu-
American biologists Douglas Erwin and James
tionary changes in gene frequency were not
Valentine, to account for the origin of new phys-
seen as able to turn a reptile into a mammal or
to convert a fish into an amphibian. Microevolution ical characteristics with micro-evolutionary
looks at adaptations that concern only the changes that are in fact nothing more than
survival of the fittest, not the arrival of the fittest. variations within species is incompatible with
4
As Goodwin (1995) points out , "the origin of the available evidence. 9
species—Darwin's problem—remains un- The fact is, macro-evolution has never been
solved. 5 observed. There is no explanation compatible