http://www.discovery.org/a|plus

http://www.discovery.org/a/11241 PhD. Jonathan Wells exposes now Darwinist move the goal posts when trying to deceive the public regarding their so-called evidence of Evolution. The central claim of Darwin’s Origin of Species was that an unguided process of natural selection acting on minor variations is sufficient to produce new species (“speciation”), organs and body plans—indeed, every feature of every living thing, at least after the origin of life. But Darwin had no evidence for natural selection; all he could offer were “one or two imaginary illustrations.” Instead, Darwin’s argument (which was also heavily theological) relied on an analogy with artificial selection. Domestic breeders had been showing for centuries that existing species can be modified—sometimes dramatically—by selecting only individuals with desired variations. Darwin simply argued that such a process, if extended over geological time, could accomplish much more. Despite the title of his book, however, Darwin never solved the origin of species. Neither have his followers. In 1997, evolutionary biologist Keith Stewart Thomson wrote: “A matter of unfinished business for biologists is the identification of evolution's smoking gun,” and “the smoking gun of evolution is speciation, not local adaptation and differentiation of populations.” Before Darwin, the consensus was that species can vary only within certain limits; indeed, centuries of artificial selection had seemingly demonstrated such limits experimentally. “Darwin had to show that the limits could be broken,” wrote Thomson, “so do we.” 1 As a biologist, I have written on this subject. In the June 2009 issue of Scientific American, Mirsky quotes me: Creationists argue that speciation has never been seen. Here’s part of a December 31, 2008, posting by Jonathan Wells on the Web site of the antithetically named Discovery Institute: “Darwinism depends on the splitting of one species into two, which then diverge and split and diverge and split, over and over again, to produce the branching-tree pattern required by Darwin’s theory. And this sort of speciation has never been observed.” Actually, however, Mirsky mis-quotes me. I did not “argue that speciation has never been seen.” What I wrote in 2008 was: The leaves evolve by changing colors, the finches beak changes in thickness as the seasons change, the populations of certain bacteria and not others will rise and fall (evolve) based different antibiotics given. Evolutionists have mastered the art of "changing the goal posts" whenever it suits their fancy.

Sciences | Education | Culture | JESUS REVOLUTION RADIO | Evolution | Morphology | Drosophila | speciation | Polyploidy | hybridization | biology | biochemistry | polyploidization | darwin | darwinian | deception | macro-evolution | micro-evolution