Why evolution contradicts itself

Evolutionists like to believe that this is simply an exception to their rule that homology proves common ancestry. But how many exceptions does it take until the exception becomes the rule? So what does this do to the main assumption…that biological similarity implies inheritance from a common ancestor? With so many exceptions to the rule, one has to wonder if the rule itself holds merit.

According to Dr. David Menton, who holds a Ph. To explain, blue eyes are a mutation. This mutation in eye color is only possible because the genes that code for eye pigmentation are there. But fish — of which many evolutionists argue some mammals, including humans, came from — cannot develop uteruses and other mammal specific traits because the genes that code for a uterus are not there. But an organism that does not have genes that code for a uterus cannot randomly develop one, because the genes that code for the uterus are not there.

Natural selection is real, but it can only work with genes that are already present. Evolution supports natural selection, but natural selection does not support evolution.

Due to the way natural selection works, species cannot mutate fully enough to become different species. People arguing against evolution will often say the world is too complex for evolution to have occurred. But it is not complexity that puts evolution up for questioning; it is integrated complexity.

Living things are multifunctional; they can do many complex things at once. Evolution cannot accurately represent this with its step by step, painfully slow approach to the development of life.

To explain, a fetus needs to make its own blood to survive. It relies on its mother via the placenta see fig. It cannot make its own blood without hemoglobin. The fetus gets hemoglobin from its mother.

But there is a very small yet very big problem. Hemoglobin contains iron, and iron cannot permeate the placental barrier. The fetus cannot make its own blood and dies. Placenta under a microscope. But this is not the case, and why placental mammals like you and me still exist is because of a glycoprotein known as transferrin. See fig. Transferrin is able to permeate the placental barrier to deliver iron to the fetus. Thus, the fetus is able to make its own blood and live.

Without transferrin, all placental mammals simply would not be around. But they are because one little glycoprotein just happens to exist.

The glycoprotein transferrin. Read the original article. More from Biology and Medical. Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page.

For general inquiries, please use our contact form. For general feedback, use the public comments section below please adhere to guidelines. Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages. Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.

You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties. More information Privacy policy. This site uses cookies to assist with navigation, analyse your use of our services, collect data for ads personalisation and provide content from third parties. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Home Biology Evolution. Do I resemble your great-great-grandfather by any chance?

Source: The Conversation. This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

SpaceX launches 53 Starlink satellites into orbit Nov 13, Nov 12, Covid vaccines - CDC report on associated mortality Nov 12, Related Stories. Is evolution more intelligent than we thought? Dec 18, Jan 29, Nov 03, In evolution, 'house of cards' model wins May 14, Feb 05, Jan 09, The fossil record does not document such transitions.

Yet there are countless millions of fossils, all of which are non-transitional. Prof Schwartz claims that instead of filling in the gaps in the fossil record with so-called missing links, most paleontologists found themselves facing a situation in which there were only gaps in the fossil record, with no evidence of transformational intermediates between documented fossil species.

Not only are the links missing, but professional evolutionists now admit they cannot even imagine how one species could be linked with another. Even with DNA sequence data, we have no direct access to the processes of evolution, so objective reconstruction of the vanished past can be achieved only by creative imagination N. DNA and other genetic evidence as proof of evolution are found to be inconsistent with the fossil record and comparative morphology of the creatures.

Anthropologist Dr Roger Lewin has commented: "The overall effect is that molecular phylogenetics is by no means as straightforward as its pioneers believed. The Byzantine dynamics of genome change has many other consequences for molecular phylogenetics, including the fact that different genes tell different stories" "Family Feud", New Scientist, vol January 24th, , p Evolution theory depends upon the great age of rocks calculated by the geologic timescale.

This scale was based upon principles of geology recently invalidated by laboratory experiments. If this fact had been known in the 19th century, Darwin could never have formulated his theory. Evolution depends upon geological formations taking millions of years to form, and Darwin's geologist friend Charles Lyell provided those years with his principles of geology.

It is these principles that now stand refuted. New knowledge of geology allows the reconstruction of the original conditions in which the rocks were formed. These original conditions include the time taken for formation. In reconstructions, the time taken is shown to have been in weeks or even days rather than millions of years see www.

The supposed evolutionary process breaks the most universal and best-proved law of physics, the law of increasing entropy, known as the second law of thermodynamics.

It applies not only in physical and chemical systems, but also in biological and geological systems, in fact all systems, without exception. The law stipulates that all systems tend to lose order. They go towards disorganisation and loss of complexity.