Much of Darwin’s theory Much of Darwin’s theory of evolution is still of evolution is still widely accepted among widely accepted among the scientific community.the scientific community.

A brief history of evolution

Contrary to popular belief, Darwin was not the first person to describe the concept of evolution, but he was the one who gave it its driving force.

PLATO:PLATO: Greek philosopher Greek philosopherPhilosophy of idealismPhilosophy of idealism which which

held that there are 2 held that there are 2 coexisting worlds: an ideal coexisting worlds: an ideal eternal real world and an eternal real world and an illusionary imperfect world illusionary imperfect world that humans perceive with that humans perceive with their senses.their senses.

Went wrong: Went wrong: when he said that when he said that only ideas wereonly ideas wereabsolute, he absolute, he viewed physical viewed physical world as not world as not genuinely genuinely real...Did Not real...Did Not know Godknow God..

Greek philosopher, Father of Greek philosopher, Father of Biology.Biology.

Recognized that organisms range Recognized that organisms range from relatively simple to very from relatively simple to very complex, all living organisms complex, all living organisms could be arranged on a scale of could be arranged on a scale of increasing complexity.increasing complexity.

Since their were no vacancies, no Since their were no vacancies, no mobility along the ladder of life mobility along the ladder of life was possible...species are fixed was possible...species are fixed and do not evolveand do not evolve..

• • Problem; The only Problem; The only scientific error was that scientific error was that Aristotle searched for Aristotle searched for the meaning of living the meaning of living nature only. God was left nature only. God was left out of the picture.out of the picture.

Swedish physician Swedish physician and botanist, and botanist, developed binomial developed binomial nomenclature. nomenclature. Father of TaxonomyFather of Taxonomy

He was convinced He was convinced that species were that species were fixed andfixed andunchanging.•unchanging.•

He wanted to impose order on He wanted to impose order on the large numberthe large numberof Plants and Animalsof Plants and Animals

He epitomized the attitudes of He epitomized the attitudes of the 17th throughthe 17th through19th centuries.... For the 19th centuries.... For the greater glory of Godgreater glory of God

Note: His taxonomic system Note: His taxonomic system became a focal point in became a focal point in Darwin's argument for Darwin's argument for

evolution.evolution.

Founder of paleontologyFounder of paleontology He stood against the theories He stood against the theories

of evolution.of evolution. He believed that it was only He believed that it was only

logical that Godlogical that Godwould use the same basic plans would use the same basic plans for many different animals and for many different animals and plants when he created them.plants when he created them.

The bodies of man and animals The bodies of man and animals have certain basic similarities have certain basic similarities in their overall designs.in their overall designs.

• • Note:Note: Evolutionists interpret Evolutionists interpret similarities of comparatives as similarities of comparatives as proof for evolutionproof for evolution..

However comparative anatomy:However comparative anatomy: furnishes evidence of a single Creator.furnishes evidence of a single Creator.

Comparative anatomy shows that the Comparative anatomy shows that the bodies of man and animals have a basic bodies of man and animals have a basic similarity in their overall design.similarity in their overall design.

It furnishes some damaging evidence It furnishes some damaging evidence against evolution ex the similarities against evolution ex the similarities between such structures as the squid between such structures as the squid eye and the human eye.eye and the human eye.

leading geologist of Darwin's leading geologist of Darwin's time.time.

Believed that the geological Believed that the geological processes occurring now have processes occurring now have always been occurring at the always been occurring at the samesamerate.. rate.. .theory of .theory of UniformitarianismUniformitarianism

The geological processes The geological processes do not occur at the same do not occur at the same rate all over the world rate all over the world today, or eventoday, or evenfrom year to year in the from year to year in the same region.same region.

This theory is refuted by This theory is refuted by 22ndnd 2 2ndnd PETER 3:3—6 PETER 3:3—6

""their shall come in the last days their shall come in the last days scoffers...saying all things scoffers...saying all things continue as they were from the continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the world of God the of, that by the world of God the heavens were of old, and the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished."overflowed with water, perished."

•• Felt that animals exercised Felt that animals exercised the needed parts ofthe needed parts oftheir bodies, strengthening their bodies, strengthening some traits and causing others some traits and causing others to degenerate...enhanced to degenerate...enhanced traits could be passed on to traits could be passed on to their offspring...called their offspring...called use use disuse theorydisuse theory

Jean Baptiste LamarckJean Baptiste Lamarck

(early 1800’s) proposed:(early 1800’s) proposed:““The inheritance of acquired The inheritance of acquired characteristicscharacteristics””

He proposed that by using or not He proposed that by using or not using its body parts, an individual using its body parts, an individual tends to tends to developdevelop certain certain characteristicscharacteristics, which it , which it passespasses on on to its to its offspringoffspring..

““The Inheritance of Acquired The Inheritance of Acquired CharacteristicsCharacteristics””

Example:Example:

A giraffe acquired its long neck A giraffe acquired its long neck because its ancestor stretched because its ancestor stretched higher and higher into the higher and higher into the trees to reach leaves, and that trees to reach leaves, and that the animal’s increasingly the animal’s increasingly lengthened neck was passed lengthened neck was passed on to its offspring.on to its offspring.

Was born on February Was born on February 12, 1809 in 12, 1809 in Shrewsbury, England. Shrewsbury, England.

Studied medicine at Studied medicine at the University of the University of Edinburg,Edinburg,but left without a but left without a degree.degree.

Enrolled at Chris Enrolled at Chris college at Cambridgecollege at CambridgeUniversity to study for University to study for clergy....received his clergy....received his degreedegreein 1831in 1831..

• Set sail from England December 1831 on theship "the HMS Beagle" as the ships Naturalist.

• Due to seasickness, Darwin spent most of histime ashore while the ship's crew surveyed the coast....believed that he was infected with either yellow fever or dengue fever here...which caused health problems later in life.

From 1831 to 1836 Darwin served as naturalist aboard the H.M.S. Beagle on a British science expedition around the world.

He observed much variation in related or similar species of plants and animals that were geographically isolated from each other.

These observations were the basis for his ideas.

•Collected thousands of specimen's including 13 types of finches from Galapagos Islands...somewere unique to individual islands, while others were found on two or more islands that were close together.

Darwin presumed that populations of individuals changed over time, and, in 1844, he developed the concept of the driving force for evolution. It wasn’t until many years later that he published his idea.

“I have called this principle, by whicheach slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term Natural Selection.”—Charles Darwin from "The Origin of Species“, 1859

Influenced by Charles LyellInfluenced by Charles Lyell who published “Principles of Geology”.“Principles of Geology”.

Darwin’s dilemma

• It was a letter Darwin received on June 18, 1858, that precipitated the publishing of The Origin of Species.

• Alfred Russell Wallace, exploring in Asia, had come to the same conclusion as Darwin

.

• The Origin of Species published 1859)

• Within a few years after publication, many biologist were convinced that evolution was a fact.

• “…tell me, is it on your grandfather’s or grandmother’s side that you are descended from an ape.”

• -Bishop Samuel Wilberforce to Darwin defender, Thomas Huxley

Huxley was a passionate defender of Darwin's theory -- so passionate that he

has been called "Darwin's Bulldog".

• “If…the question is put to me would I rather have a miserable ape for a grandfather or a man highly endowed by nature and possessed of great means and influence and yet who employs these faculties and that influence for the mere purpose of introducing ridicule into a grave scientific discussion I unhesitatingly affirm my preference for the ape.”

• -Huxley’s response

• Two main points:Two main points:

1.1. Species were not created in their Species were not created in their present form, but evolved from present form, but evolved from ancestral species.ancestral species.

2.2. Proposed a mechanism for Proposed a mechanism for evolution:evolution: NATURAL SELECTIONNATURAL SELECTION

Darwin did not reject biblical creation; Darwin did not reject biblical creation; he knew nothing about it.he knew nothing about it.

Even though he studied for the Even though he studied for the ministry at Cambridge, it is obvious ministry at Cambridge, it is obvious from his writings that he did not have from his writings that he did not have a clue as to what the Bible actually a clue as to what the Bible actually taught requiring Special taught requiring Special Creation...that those imperfections of Creation...that those imperfections of nature were the result of the fall, and nature were the result of the fall, and the world is not now thethe world is not now theway God originally made it.way God originally made it.

Darwin was made susceptible to Darwin was made susceptible to many of his errors by the fact that many of his errors by the fact that some Christians had been reading some Christians had been reading their own preconceived hypothesis their own preconceived hypothesis into the book of Genesis.into the book of Genesis.

Darwin's observations of nature Darwin's observations of nature showed him that these statements showed him that these statements were false, and Darwin mistakenly were false, and Darwin mistakenly thought that these came from the thought that these came from the Bible and therefore dismissed the Bible and therefore dismissed the Bible as being in error on the Bible as being in error on the subject.subject.

1.1. GeologyGeology: : theory of Uniformitarianismtheory of Uniformitarianism2.2. Comparative AnatomyComparative Anatomy: Homologous : Homologous

structuresstructures3.3. TaxonomyTaxonomy4.4. Embryonic evidenceEmbryonic evidence: Closely related : Closely related

organismsorganismsgo through similar stages in their embryonicgo through similar stages in their embryonicdevelopment. The pharyngeal arches of development. The pharyngeal arches of humanhumanembryos never act as gills, they are a stage embryos never act as gills, they are a stage of development and are just embryonic of development and are just embryonic pouches that later develop into the thymus pouches that later develop into the thymus gland, middle ear canal and parathyroid gland, middle ear canal and parathyroid glandgland..

5.5. Molecular biologyMolecular biology: An organisms : An organisms hereditary background is hereditary background is reflected in its genes and their reflected in its genes and their protein products. Due to the protein products. Due to the complexity of the cell and its complexity of the cell and its chemical processes made it chemical processes made it unlikely to support evolution unlikely to support evolution after more knowledge was after more knowledge was gained about cellular processes.gained about cellular processes.

EFFECT OF EVOLUTION:EFFECT OF EVOLUTION:

In the Descent of Man, In the Descent of Man, Darwin appears to beDarwin appears to beendorsing voluntary endorsing voluntary eugenics, but does noteugenics, but does notadvocate coercion:advocate coercion:

EFFECT OF EVOLUTION:EFFECT OF EVOLUTION: We must therefore bear the We must therefore bear the

undoubtedly bad effects of the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, at least one check in steady action, that the weaker and inferior that the weaker and inferior members of society do not marry so members of society do not marry so freely as the sound; and this check freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased by might be indefinitely increased by the weak in body or mid refraining the weak in body or mid refraining from marriage, though this is more from marriage, though this is more to be hoped for than expected" to be hoped for than expected" Darwin , Descent of Man p 502Darwin , Descent of Man p 502

•• ..

EugenicsEugenics Some 20th century Some 20th century

evolutionists have takenevolutionists have takenDarwin's ideas much furtherDarwin's ideas much further

Natural SelectionNatural Selection• IndividualsIndividuals with favorablefavorable traitstraits are more

likely to leave more offspring better suited for their environmentenvironment.

• Also known as “Differential Reproduction”“Differential Reproduction”

• Example:Example:

English peppered moth (English peppered moth (Biston betularia))

- light and dark phases- light and dark phases

Natural Selection:Natural Selection: Darwin said that nature, in the form of the Darwin said that nature, in the form of the

total environment selected “ those total environment selected “ those characteristics that made an organism better characteristics that made an organism better able to survive.able to survive.

Ex: English pepper moth:Ex: English pepper moth: •• In England the air was cleaner and In England the air was cleaner and

pepper moths were mostly lightpepper moths were mostly lightcolored with only a few dark colored colored with only a few dark colored ones. The light blended on the birchones. The light blended on the birchand lichen., the black did not...so birds and lichen., the black did not...so birds saw the black moths and moth thesaw the black moths and moth thelight. As pollution darkened the light. As pollution darkened the environment, dark moth populationenvironment, dark moth populationincreased and light moth population increased and light moth population decreaseddecreased

Reply:Reply:

There were both light and dark There were both light and dark pepper moths present from the pepper moths present from the beginning. No new kinds of moths beginning. No new kinds of moths appeared. Only the ratios shifted. appeared. Only the ratios shifted. Both dark and light moths can Both dark and light moths can interbreed, thus are the same interbreed, thus are the same species. Survival of the fittest is not species. Survival of the fittest is not evolution. It does not explain how evolution. It does not explain how new life forms change from one into new life forms change from one into another or can suddenly appear.another or can suddenly appear.

The survival and reproduction of individuals w/ certain advantageous characteristics

This is not evolution and is accepted by both evolutionist and creationist

Adaptive RadiationAdaptive Radiation

Darwin discussed emergence of Darwin discussed emergence of numerous species from a numerous species from a commoncommonancestor.ancestor.

Ex. Galapagos finches:Ex. Galapagos finches: 13 different types of finches in 13 different types of finches in

the Galapagos islands. Lead the Galapagos islands. Lead Darwin toconclude the finches Darwin toconclude the finches shared a common ancestor.shared a common ancestor.

Reply:

•Finches may develop larger bills, or change color, or grow longer tail feathers, but they still belong to the same kind, they never become ducks, ostriches, or eagles....microevolution

Punctuated Equilibrium

• First proposed 1972 By Niles Eldrige and Stephen Gould.

• Says that Evolution occurs in fits and spurts separated by long periods of little change

Reply:Reply:

. . No classification system can No classification system can show intermediate forms...only show intermediate forms...only existing species.existing species.

. With regard to the horse . With regard to the horse series, it is a collection of series, it is a collection of unrelated mammals that share unrelated mammals that share a similar overall body plan.a similar overall body plan.

Problems with horse series: Problems with horse series: Eohippus had 18 pr of ribs, but Eohippus had 18 pr of ribs, but its descendant Orohippus had its descendant Orohippus had only 15 pr of ribs, Pliohippus only 15 pr of ribs, Pliohippus had 19pr of ribs while modern had 19pr of ribs while modern horses have 18 pr of ribs. Thus horses have 18 pr of ribs. Thus a jumping back and forth with a jumping back and forth with ribs disappearing and ribs disappearing and reappearing like magic.reappearing like magic.

. .

George Gaylord George Gaylord SimpsonSimpson

, world's foremost evolutionary , world's foremost evolutionary paleontologist paleontologist

said, "The uniform, continuous said, "The uniform, continuous transformation of transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so Hyracotherium into Equus, so dear to the hearts of dear to the hearts of generations of textbook generations of textbook writers never happened in writers never happened in nature." (George G. Simpson, nature." (George G. Simpson, Life Of The Past, p.119) Life Of The Past, p.119)

George Gaylord George Gaylord SimpsonSimpson

Simpson, after stating that nowhere in the world is there Simpson, after stating that nowhere in the world is there any trace of a fossil that would close the considerable gap any trace of a fossil that would close the considerable gap between Hyracotherium ("Eohippus"), which between Hyracotherium ("Eohippus"), which evolutionists assume was the first horse, and its supposed evolutionists assume was the first horse, and its supposed ancestral order Condylarthra, goes on to say "ancestral order Condylarthra, goes on to say "This is true This is true of all the thirty-two orders of mammals…The earliest and of all the thirty-two orders of mammals…The earliest and most primitive known members of every order already most primitive known members of every order already have the basic ordinal characters, and in no case is an have the basic ordinal characters, and in no case is an approximately continuous sequence from one order to approximately continuous sequence from one order to another known. In most cases the break is so sharp and another known. In most cases the break is so sharp and the gap so large that the origin of the order is speculative the gap so large that the origin of the order is speculative and much disputed."and much disputed." (Tempo and Mode in Evolution, G. (Tempo and Mode in Evolution, G. G. Simpson,1944, p 105) G. Simpson,1944, p 105)

Thought to have Thought to have been the been the

transitional transitional species between species between

fish and fish and amphibians.. amphibians..

Evolutionist say that living fossils, like the coelacanth, ginkgo, and horseshoe crab, are examples of organisms that are relatively unchanged from their distant ancestors. Exterior of a horseshoe crab, an example of a living fossil.

Reply:Reply:

1938 a coelacanth was caught off 1938 a coelacanth was caught off the coast of the Indian ocean. It was the coast of the Indian ocean. It was discovered to live deep within the discovered to live deep within the ocean, rarely above 500 feet of ocean, rarely above 500 feet of surface, thus could not crawl onto surface, thus could not crawl onto land. No resemblance to amphibian land. No resemblance to amphibian anatomy internal or external anatomy internal or external

horseshoe crabhorseshoe crab

horseshoe crab, an horseshoe crab, an example of example of organisms that are organisms that are relatively unchanged relatively unchanged from their distant from their distant ancestors…then ancestors…then where is the where is the “evolution”???????“evolution”???????

Archaeopteryx:Archaeopteryx:

Often presented as an Often presented as an evolutionary link between a small evolutionary link between a small dinosaur (maniraptoran) and dinosaur (maniraptoran) and modern birds. modern birds.

Reply;Reply; Even if the fossil proves that Even if the fossil proves that

Archaeopteryx and theropod dinosausrs Archaeopteryx and theropod dinosausrs were so much alike that birds would have were so much alike that birds would have to be reclassified as subtype of dinosaurs to be reclassified as subtype of dinosaurs (is possible), this still does not imply birds (is possible), this still does not imply birds evolved.evolved.

It only indicates that God created It only indicates that God created dinosaurs and birds with very similar dinosaurs and birds with very similar design characteristics.design characteristics.

Cladistic taxonomyCladistic taxonomy classifies organisms classifies organisms according to the order in time that according to the order in time that branches arise along a phylogenetic tree, branches arise along a phylogenetic tree, (a visual model of the inferred (a visual model of the inferred evolutionary relationships among evolutionary relationships among organisms) with out considering the organisms) with out considering the degree of divergence.degree of divergence.. .

The product is a The product is a cladogramcladogram.;.; a a diagrammatic tree consisting of diagrammatic tree consisting of a series' of dichotomous forks. a series' of dichotomous forks. Each branch point is defined by Each branch point is defined by novel homologies unique to the novel homologies unique to the various species on that branch.various species on that branch.

Cladistics is favored by some evolutionary Cladistics is favored by some evolutionary biologist because it makes describing evolution biologist because it makes describing evolution the goal of taxonomy.the goal of taxonomy.

Probably the most serious drawback to cladistic Probably the most serious drawback to cladistic terminology is its use as a rhetorical tool by terminology is its use as a rhetorical tool by evolutionists. evolutionists.

Ex using cladistic terminology can make it more Ex using cladistic terminology can make it more difficult to argue that mammals did not evolve difficult to argue that mammals did not evolve from fish, for example, because by cladistic from fish, for example, because by cladistic definition mammals are fishdefinition mammals are fish. .

A major difficulty in cladistics is finding A major difficulty in cladistics is finding characteristics that are appropriate for each characteristics that are appropriate for each branch point.branch point.

Despite these problems, the growing acceptance Despite these problems, the growing acceptance of cladistics in biology has had a few positive of cladistics in biology has had a few positive effects:effects:

Instead of looking at fossil and dreaming up Instead of looking at fossil and dreaming up hypothetical ancestors, many cladists now use hypothetical ancestors, many cladists now use cladograms for careful comparisons of cladograms for careful comparisons of fundamental traits— then try to group similar fundamental traits— then try to group similar animals togetheranimals together. .

Reply:Reply:

Cladograms can be used by Cladograms can be used by creationists as a tool to more creationists as a tool to more objectively discern similarities and objectively discern similarities and differences between animal differences between animal species.species.

Reply:Reply:

Geological Time-Geological Time- Evolutionist believe the earth to Evolutionist believe the earth to

be 4.5 billion years oldbe 4.5 billion years old–As a result of these large As a result of these large

numbers, scientists have numbers, scientists have named large chunks of time named large chunks of time based on dominant events of based on dominant events of the time.the time.

– c. Evolutionist say the fossil record seems to c. Evolutionist say the fossil record seems to support thissupport this

-a. Darwin, however, explained evolution as a gradual accumulation of variations

Constant

SuddenChanges

Time

Change

Time

Change

**Known as: Punctuated Equilibrium

**Known as: Gradualism

The fossil recordThe fossil record When asked to provide evidence of When asked to provide evidence of

long-term evolution, most scientists long-term evolution, most scientists turn to the fossil record. turn to the fossil record.

Within this context, fossil horses are Within this context, fossil horses are among the most frequently cited among the most frequently cited examples of evolutionexamples of evolution

A.A. The fossil recordThe fossil record

The prominent Finnish The prominent Finnish paleontologist Bjorn Kurten wrotepaleontologist Bjorn Kurten wrote

. : 'One's mind inevitably turns to that . : 'One's mind inevitably turns to that inexhaustible textbook example, the horse inexhaustible textbook example, the horse sequence. This has been cited -- incorrectly more sequence. This has been cited -- incorrectly more often than not -- as evidence for practically every often than not -- as evidence for practically every evolutionary principle that has ever been coined.' evolutionary principle that has ever been coined.' This cautionary note notwithstanding, fossil This cautionary note notwithstanding, fossil horses do indeed provide compelling evidence in horses do indeed provide compelling evidence in support of evolutionary theory." (The Fossil support of evolutionary theory." (The Fossil Record And Evolution: A Current Perspective, B. Record And Evolution: A Current Perspective, B. J. MacFadden Horses, Evol. Biol. ISBN: 22:131-J. MacFadden Horses, Evol. Biol. ISBN: 22:131-158, 1988, p. 131) 158, 1988, p. 131)

Supposed Evidence Supposed Evidence from Comparative from Comparative

AnatomyAnatomy

Comparative Anatomy- the Comparative Anatomy- the study of structural study of structural

similarities and differences similarities and differences between living thingsbetween living things

Homologous Structures-Homologous Structures-

parts of different organisms that have parts of different organisms that have similar structure, but different forms similar structure, but different forms and functionsand functions

Example: human arm and hand, Example: human arm and hand, whale flipper, cat leg, bat wing, bird whale flipper, cat leg, bat wing, bird wingwing

Homologous Structures- same Homologous Structures- same structure: different functionstructure: different function

analogous structures-analogous structures-

parts of different organisms parts of different organisms that have similar forms and that have similar forms and functions, but different functions, but different internal structure (example: internal structure (example: wing of a bird, wing of an wing of a bird, wing of an insect)insect)

Vestigial StructuresVestigial Structures

remnants of structures that were remnants of structures that were once functional in an ancestral once functional in an ancestral formform

Examples -appendix, wisdom Examples -appendix, wisdom teeth, coccyx (tailboneteeth, coccyx (tailbone))

NotNotee comparative anatomy:comparative anatomy: furnishes evidence of a single furnishes evidence of a single Creator.Creator.

Comparative anatomy shows Comparative anatomy shows that the bodies of man and that the bodies of man and animals have a basic similarity animals have a basic similarity in their overall design because in their overall design because of the one creator.of the one creator.

Structurally different species show Structurally different species show common patterns in embryological common patterns in embryological development development

»a. presence of gill slits, 2-chambered a. presence of gill slits, 2-chambered hearts, tailshearts, tails

»b. the longer the embryos show b. the longer the embryos show similarities, the more closely related similarities, the more closely related the speciesthe species

Comparative EmbryologyComparative Embryology

1860s German Darwinist Ernst Haeckel 1860s German Darwinist Ernst Haeckel made some drawings to illustrate the made some drawings to illustrate the distorted view that embryonic development distorted view that embryonic development supported evolution. Haeckel faked his supported evolution. Haeckel faked his drawings. drawings.

The embryos are not nearly as similar as he The embryos are not nearly as similar as he made them out to be; furthermore, Haeckel made them out to be; furthermore, Haeckel was very selective in his choice of was very selective in his choice of embryos. embryos.

Haeckel used mammals from the same Haeckel used mammals from the same order and omitted embryos from 2 order and omitted embryos from 2 orders including kangaroos and orders including kangaroos and platypuses. platypuses.

He also omitted the 2 classes of He also omitted the 2 classes of vertebrates that include lampreys and vertebrates that include lampreys and sharks. and amphibians that include sharks. and amphibians that include frogs because they didn’t embryonically frogs because they didn’t embryonically support evolutionsupport evolution

Haeckel’s fakery was exposed by Haeckel’s fakery was exposed by his own contemporaries, who his own contemporaries, who accused him of fraud, yet his accused him of fraud, yet his drawings are still used in modern drawings are still used in modern biology booksbiology books

C. Evidence from DNAC. Evidence from DNA– 1. 1. Each Each individualindividual organism has its organism has its

own specific DNA own specific DNA structure (DNA fingerprint)structure (DNA fingerprint)

– 2. The closer the structure of DNA 2. The closer the structure of DNA between organisms (species), the closer between organisms (species), the closer the evolutionary relationshipthe evolutionary relationship Ernest Ernest HaekelHaekel

Since experience shows that intelligence is the Since experience shows that intelligence is the only presently acting cause of information, we only presently acting cause of information, we can infer that intelligence is the best can infer that intelligence is the best explanation for the information in DNA.explanation for the information in DNA.

When philosopher Stephen Meyer Published When philosopher Stephen Meyer Published this inference in a biology journal, with this inference in a biology journal, with supporting scientific evidence, Darwinist tried supporting scientific evidence, Darwinist tried to ruin the career of the journal’s editor to ruin the career of the journal’s editor

Artificial SelectionArtificial Selection

• The selective breedingselective breeding of domesticated plants and animals by man. Question:Question: What’s the ancestor of the domesticated dog?

Answer:Answer: WOLFWOLFQuestion: Did evolution occurQuestion: Did evolution occurAnswer: No, no new species..still a Answer: No, no new species..still a

dogdog

MacroevolutionMacroevolution

• The origin of taxonomic groups higher higher than the species levelthan the species level

• Change from one species to anotherChange from one species to another.

MicroevolutionMicroevolution

• Evolutionist say: • A change in a population’s gene poolpopulation’s gene pool over

a secession of generations.

Evolutionary changesEvolutionary changes in species over relatively brief periods of geological timegeological time.

• Response: no its just adaptation to the environment…. We are ok with adaptation

Five Mechanisms of MicroevolutionFive Mechanisms of Microevolution

1. Genetic drift:1. Genetic drift:Change in the gene pool of a small Change in the gene pool of a small population due to chance.population due to chance.

2. Gene Flow:2. Gene Flow:TThe gain or loss of allelesgain or loss of alleles from a

population by the movementmovement of individuals or gametes.

Five Mechanisms of MicroevolutionFive Mechanisms of Microevolution

3. Mutation:3. Mutation:

Change in an organism’s DNA thatChange in an organism’s DNA thatcreates a new allele.creates a new allele.

4. Non-random mating:4. Non-random mating:

The selection of mates other thanThe selection of mates other thanby chance.by chance.

5. Natural selection:5. Natural selection:

Differential reproduction.Differential reproduction.

SpeciationSpeciation

• The evolutionevolution of new species.• Microevolution: adaptation..no new animal

CoevolutionCoevolution• Evolutionary changeEvolutionary change, in which one species

act as a selective forceselective force on a secondsecond species, inducing adaptations that in turn act as selective force on the firstfirst species.

Example:Example:Humming birds and plants with Humming birds and plants with

flowers with long tubesflowers with long tubesDid a new animal form or did adaptation Did a new animal form or did adaptation

occur ?occur ?

Observation and Inference

Let’s do a little exercise…

•What is the size and nature of the organisms?

•Were the tracks made at the same time?

•How many animals were involved?

•Can you reconstruct the events that occurred?

The following summer some more digging revealed more of the track. What additional information have you gained that allows you to refine your answers?

•Were the tracks made at the same time?

•How many animals were involved?

•Can you reconstruct the events that occurred?

•In what direction did the animals move?

•Did they change speed or direction?

In the final summer of the excavation one last part of the footprint trail was uncovered. Does this section provide additional information to refine your hypothesis?

So what happened?

What part of your hypothesis is observation? What part is inference(act of reasoning from factual

knowledge or evidence) ? What part is conjecture?(guesswork

This is how science is done.

Except guesswork must be testable based on the scientific method…Evolution is not testable

Modern Primates : divided into 2 groups

• 1. Prosimians:• lemurs, lorries, pottos, tarsiers, bush

baby, aye aye• 2. Anthropoids:• monkeys, apes, humans• , had color vision, rounded skull,

diurnal, stereoscopic vision, social organization

• Potto

• 1. Old world monkeys: Catarrhine group• Means narrow nose group• Lack prehensile tail and have callous

buttocks• Arboreal and terrestrial• 2. New world Monkeys: Platyrrhine group• Means broad nose group• Have prehensile tail and no callous buttocks• Arboreal

• Limber shoulder joints allowing for Brachiation (swinging)

• Dexterous hands for hanging and manipulating food.

• Sensitive fingers with nails, not claws

• Eyes close together on front of face giving overlapping field of vision fordepth perception (needed for brachiation)

• Excellent eye hand coordination

• Parental care

• Hylobates: gibbons

• Pongo: orangutans

• Gorilla

• Pan: chimpanzee

• Man regulates body temperature by eccrine (sweat) glands, apes do not.

• respiratory anatomy: man has a 1 descended larynx, apes do not.

• apes have vibrisae (whiskers), man does not.

• Differences in the musculature, especially the hands.

• Skull differences: including teeth arrangement with humans having aparabolic tooth arrangement (u shaped arch) and apes having a slightlyrectangular tooth arrangement