Page 138 - A Definitive Reply to Evolutionist Propagand‪a

A DEFINITIVE REPLY
TO EVOLUTIONIST
PROPAGANDA

give rise to increasingly large squirrels as autumn approaches.
Yet, this cannot be a propulsive force of evolution, because
there have been no findings to show that the squirrels that this
force is alleged to influence have undergone a mutation that
has provided them with an advantage. There can be no talk of
genetic change in the absence of mutation, and no talk of evo-
lution without genetic change. If it is suggested that there is a
propulsive force bringing about evolution in this example,
then it must be shown which mutations apply. Yet, as we have
made clear above, these mutations exist only in the minds of
the researchers themselves.

Conclusion

This change seen in squirrels is not an example of evolu-
tion. Living things possess the ability to adapt to climatic
conditions. This is well known, and it has been proven many
times that it cannot bring about evolution. The statistical
analyses put forward for the claim that climatic changes led to
genetic change in squirrels have no evolutionary significance.
Until the gene which controls this behavioral alteration and
the mutations that took place in it during this 10-year period
are identified, the claim can go no further than being a fairy
tale.
It remains to say that even if there were a mutation that al-
tered the time squirrels give birth, that would still not consti-
tute proof of evolution. The theory requires mutations to pro-
duce new genetic information, new organs, and new biochem-
ical structures. In other words, mutations must bring about
"vertical development." Even if it had to do with a mutation, a
change in the time at which squirrels give birth would not
mean the emergence of a new organ, a new system, or a new
biochemical structure. It would only be a "horizontal variation,"
for which reason it could not be described as "evolution."

136