Evolution dispute 17/9/13
Sir,
I do not believe that the websites referred to by Prof. Paul Braterman (13/9/13) provide any indisputable evidence supportive of the notion that microbes evolved gradually into men.
It would be surprising if they did. The sort of 'facts' which are essential for the theory of evolution to be true include the following: the existence of mutations representing the increase in genetic information necessary to arrive at more advanced life forms; the existence of life forms (extant or extinct) which are obviously transitional in character; the existence of billions of years of time.
Mutations clearly occur within every form of life but these mutations, which are overwhelmingly detrimental and only very rarely beneficial to the organism, cannot explain how the different life forms came into being in the first place.
A huge variety is evident within some animals and plants today, largely as a result of breeding by man, but we still look in vain for specimens which are intermediate between one life form and another. The fossil record, which Darwin expected to provide examples of missing links, has yet to yield them.
Aeons of time are crucial to the theory of evolution yet it cannot be proved that the earth is billions of years old: indeed many scientific facts point to a much younger earth.
The situation for evolutionists is actually far worse than this. Their theory must be able to account not simply for microbes to men but molecules to men – or even more precisely – particles to people. In other words it must be able to explain how life can arise from non-life. That is a real leap of faith!
There is no observable evidence for the theory of evolution. It is not testable over time and cannot be verified.
Rev. David Blunt
17 Knockline
Isle of North Uist