Page 186 - The Cambrian Evidence that Darwin Failed to Comprehend

The Cambrian Evidence That Darwin Failed to Comprehend

get one important point: The more people are made aware of the sci-
entific facts, the less effective such tactics are. People now see that all
living things are the matchless works of Almighty Allah, and this is
confirmed every passing day by the scientific facts. And evolution-
ists must know that this awareness is increasing rapidly all the time.

The Modern Evolutionary Synthesis (Neo-
Darwinism)
Some evolutionists were quick to see the invalidity of Darwin’s
claim of fossils as yet undiscovered in pre-Cambrian strata. They
had to admit that nothing could be achieved by means of the natu-
ral selection that Darwin had proposed as evolution’s fundamental
mechanism. However, this meant that evolutionists had to explain,
using their own assumptions, the origins of Cambrian life forms that
fundamentally refuted evolution. Therefore, they came up with an-
other claim, based on no evidence but on a complete lack thereof.
This theory accepted the hopeless nature of the gradual evolu-
tion model that Darwin had put forward, and proposed an alterna-
tive to it—neo-Darwinism, otherwise known as the modern evolu-
tionary synthesis.
In 1941, a group of scientists at a meeting organized by the
Geological Society of America sought a way to reconcile Darwinian
logic with genetic science. The result of lengthy debates among ge-
neticists like G. Ledyard Stebbins and Theodosius Dobzhansky, zo-
ologists like Ernst Mayr and Julian Huxley, and paleontologists like
George Gaylord Simpson and Glen L. Jepsen was to use the concept
of mutation, proposed by the Dutch botanist Hugo de Vries at the
beginning of the century, against the genetic stability revealed by ge-
netic laws.
Mutations are defects occurring in the hereditary mechanisms

184