According to the theory of evolution, living
things came into existence by means of coincidences, and developed further as a
consequence of coincidental effects. Approximately 3.8 billion years ago, when
no living organisms existed on earth, the first simple single-celled organisms
(prokaryotes) emerged. Over time, more complex cells (eukaryotes) and
multicellular organisms came into being. In other words, according to Darwinism,
the forces of nature built simple inanimate elements into highly complex and
flawless designs.
In evaluating this claim, one should first
consider whether such forces in fact exist in nature. More explicitly, are there
really natural mechanisms which can accomplish evolution according to the
Darwinian scenario?
The neo-Darwinist model, which we shall take as
the mainstream theory of evolution today, argues that life has evolved through
two natural mechanisms: natural selection and mutation. The theory basically
asserts that natural selection and mutation are two complementary mechanisms.
The origin of evolutionary modifications lies in random mutations that take
place in the genetic structures of living things. The traits brought about by
mutations are selected by the mechanism of natural selection, and by this means
living things evolve. However, when we look further into this theory, we find
that there is no such evolutionary mechanism. Neither natural selection nor
mutations can cause different species to evolve into one another, and the claim
that they can is completely unfounded. Darwinism Refuted.
Natural selection exists but is not a
forward-looking mechanism.
Mutations are almost 100%
destructive.
Not much on which to build your
hypothesis!
