Last updated on August 4th, 2020
There is one thing I find odd about people who believe in evolution: why do they make such a fuss when a species becomes extinct?
After all, each living thing is supposed to have originated from one single life form, based on a ‘primeval soup’ of organic molecules. Of course, the origin of the particles making up these molecules is mostly ignored, as is the origin of the entire physical existence of the universe and everything in it; but that is another matter. My point is that if all living things, in all of their diversities, came into being from one simple organism then surely the loss of any one species is not so tragic?
If all life today really did evolve from a single simple life form, why is there the concern about species becoming extinct? Surely, based on evolutionary theory, within a few hundred million years the whole of creation will have evolved into different species anyway? Well, some seem to not have bothered evolving: we refer to certain creatures alive today as being ancient and prehistoric, specifically when referring to the Horseshoe Crab, a creature that is supposed to have barely evolved at all over millions of years. I find it peculiar how this archaic creature possesses the ability to regrow its limbs, which is an ability we could do with — and we’re supposedly quite a modern evolutionary outcome!
We are led to believe that many living things died out during ice ages, and that we have had temperature fluctuations much greater in times past than what we are experiencing now. If the remaining living things back then evolved into the hundreds of thousands of different life forms we see today, most of which would die out if another ice age were to arrive, why are we concerned about extinction? Supposedly evolution is an ongoing transformation, and things naturally evolve around their environment? Evolution says that life shall go on regardless, that new and diverse species can develop from the most simple life forms. When the big bang occurred the environment was extremely hostile, and yet life supposedly arose from it. Why the concern?
Evolution has no limitations: it takes a single form of life and metamorphoses it into many vastly differing and more complex forms. The thing that makes evolution seem such a foolish idea is that all of these forms of life are interdependent upon each other. If one species died out it could affect another, and so on and so forth. In the end all forms of life could die because of this interdependence. Surely it would have been better that the very first life form had not evolved at all? But I digress.
The problem with interdependence is that it doesn’t seem to fit in with the theory of evolution. For example, flowers produce nectar to attract bees, so that when retrieving the nectar they brush against the flower’s stamens and receive pollen grains. When the bee takes a drink of nectar from another flower the pollen grains it was carrying will fertilise this flower. How did the flowers come to produce nectar in order to attract bees? Why does the flower seem designed to depend upon an external source to fertilise it rather than being self-pollinating? Surely a flower would have to know that living things exist around it that could take its pollen to another flower, know that such things are able to ingest nectar, and would have to know their size, and the way they could ingest? Flowers cannot know these facts, so how did this happen? Perhaps the bees just evolved to take advantage of the nectar the flowers produced… but why would a flower produce something like nectar unless it had a reason? How did the flowers evolve ultraviolet signals specifically to attract the bees, considering that there is no other benefit or use of the ultraviolet signals? Evolution claims that insects evolved before flowers, and that insects had photoreceptors in their eyes that could see ultraviolet before flowers came into being, so it is clear that evolution claims flowers evolved for the bees, and not the other way around. And why did bees decide to try sticking their tongues into flowers when they didn’t know anything about nectar? Evolution cannot explain this. Evolution cannot explain how a bee, from birth, knows how to find nectar from a flower.
The fact that so many people believe in evolution without knowing hardly any of the facts, and without asking some fundamental questions, leads me to believe that any excuse for not believing in God will be gladly received by mankind.