Page 843 - Atlas of Creation Volume 1

Harun Yahya

The Genetic and Embryological Impasse of Homology

In order for the evolutionist claim concerning "homology" to be taken seriously, similar (homologous)
organs in different creatures should also be coded with similar (homologous) DNA codes. However, they are
not. Similar organs are usually governed by very different genetic (DNA) codes. Furthermore, similar ge-

netic codes in the DNA of different creatures are often associated with completely different organs.
Michael Denton, an Australian professor of biochemistry, describes in his book Evolution: A Theory in
Crisis the genetic impasse of the evolutionist interpretation of homology: "Homologous structures are often
specified by non-homologous genetic systems and the concept of homology can seldom be extended back

into embryology." 159
A famous example on this subject is the "five digit skeletal structure" of quadrupeds which is quoted in
almost all evolutionist textbooks. Quadrupeds, i.e., land-living vertebrates, have five digits on their fore-
and hindlimbs. Although these do not always have the appearance of five digits as we know them, they are

all counted as pentadactyl due to their bone structure. The fore- and hindlimbs of a frog, a lizard, a squirrel
or a monkey all have this same structure. Even the bone structures of birds and bats conform to this basic de-
sign.
Evolutionists claim that all living things descended from a common ancestor, and they have long cited

pentadactyl limb as evidence of this. This claim was mentioned in almost all basic sources on biology
throughout the 20th century as very strong evidence for evolution. Genetic findings in the 1980s refuted this
evolutionist claim. It was realised that the pentadactyl limb patterns of different creatures are controlled by
totally different genes. Evolutionist biologist William Fix describes the collapse of the evolutionist thesis re-

garding pentadactylism in this way:
The older text-books on evolution make much of the idea of homology, pointing out the obvious resemblances
between the skeletons of the limbs of different animals. Thus the "pentadactyl" limb pattern is found in the arm
of a man, the wing of a bird, and the flipper of a whale, and this is held to indicate their common origin. Now
if these various structures were transmitted by the same gene couples, varied from time to time by mutations
and acted upon by environmental selection, the theory would make good sense. Unfortunately this is not the
case. Homologous organs are now known to be produced by totally different gene complexes in the different
species. The concept of homology in terms of similar genes handed on from a common ancestor has broken
down... 160

Another point is that in order for the evolutionary thesis
regarding homology to be taken seriously, the periods of simi-
lar structures' embryological development-in other words, the
stages of development in the egg or the mother's womb-would

need to be parallel, whereas, in reality, these embryological pe-
riods for similar structures are quite different from each other
in every living creature.
To conclude, we can say that genetic and embryological re-

search has proven that the concept of homology defined by
Darwin as "evidence of the evolution of living things from a
common ancestor" can by no means be regarded as any evi-
dence at all. In this respect, science can be said to have proven

the Darwinist thesis false time and time again.

Invalidity of the Claim of Molecular Homology

Evolutionists' advancement of homology as evidence for
evolution is invalid not only at the morphological level, but Professor Michael Denton: "Evolution is a
also at the molecular level. Evolutionists say that the DNA theory in crisis"
codes, or the corresponding protein structures, of different

Adnan Oktar 841