When Charles Darwin first proposed his theory of evolution, he made a frank, honest
admission. In fact, he stated that his entire system could be proven false,
based on just one criterion. He wrote in 1859:
If it could be demonstrated that any complex
organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous,
successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I
can find out no such case. (Charles
Darwin, The Origin of
Species: A Facsimile of the First Edition, Harvard University
Press, 1964, p. 189)
On this Darwin was right. And that’s what makes
Darwinism wrong.
There
are countless “complex organs” and systems which depend on multiple facets and
elements coming into being at the same time. The ear, for example, could not
work without all the parts in place simultaneously. It simply defies reason to
suggest that one piece formed at a time, which could not function by itself,
and which depended on the other parts to work. The same is true of the lungs,
the eyes, blood clotting, cilia in human cells, birds’ wings, bats’ sonar, and
millions of other complicated, interdependent systems.
This
principle, called “irreducible complexity,” is not something invented by those
who believe in intelligent design and/or the Bible. It was noted and insisted upon by Darwin himself.
Darwin
believed that scientists would eventually uncover proof – which he lacked – of countless
intermediate links. He thought that these new findings would account for the
complex organs and systems that are so evident. From his time of writing in
1859, to the present day, such evidence has still not been produced.
One fascinating
case of irreducible complexity is that of the bombardier beetle. The following
description is taken from the book, The
Collapse of Evolution, by Scott Huse, on pages 78-79.
The
bombardier beetle is a small insect that is armed with a shockingly impressive
defense system. Whenever threatened by an enemy attack, this spirited little
beetle blasts irritating and odious gases, which are fired at 212 degrees F.
out from two tail pipes right into the unfortunate face of the would-be
aggressor.
Dr. Wermann
Schildknecht, a German chemist, studied the bombardier beetle to find out how
he accomplishes this amazing chemical feat. He learned that the beetle makes
his explosive by mixing together two very dangerous chemicals (hydroquinone and
hydrogen peroxide). In addition to these two chemicals, this clever little
beetle adds another type of chemical known as an inhibitor. The inhibitor
prevents the chemicals from blowing up and enables the beetle to store the
chemicals indefinitely. Whenever our beetle friend is approached by a predator,
such as a frog, he squirts the stored chemicals into the two combustion tubes,
and at precisely the right moment he adds another chemical (an anti-inhibitor).
This knocks out the inhibitor and makes the chemical combination toxic. It then
explodes violently right in the face of the poor attacker.
Could such
a marvelous and complex mechanism have evolved piecemeal over millions of
years? The evolutionist is forced to respond with a somewhat sheepish
"yes," but a brief consideration of this opinion will reveal its
preposterous nature. According to evolutionary "thinking" there must
have been thousands of generations of beetles improperly mixing these hazardous
chemicals in fatal evolutionary experiments, blowing themselves to pieces.
Eventually,
we are assured, they arrived at the magic formula, but what about the
development of the inhibitor? There is no need to evolve an inhibitor unless
you already have the two chemicals you are trying to inhibit. On the other
hand, if you already have the two chemicals without the inhibitor, it is
already too late, for you have just blown yourself up.
Obviously,
such an arrangement would never arise apart from intelligent foresight and
planning. Nevertheless, let us assume that our little beetle friend somehow
managed to simultaneously develop the two chemicals along with the all-
important inhibitor. The resultant solution would offer no benefit at all to
the beetle, for it would just sit there as a harmless concoction. To be of any
value to the beetle, the anti-inhibitor must he added to the solution. So, once
again, for thousands of generations we are supposed to believe that these poor
beetles mixed and stored these chemicals for no particular reason or advantage
until finally, the anti-inhibitor was perfected. Now he is really getting
somewhere! With the anti-inhibitor developed he can now blow himself to pieces,
frustrating the efforts of the hungry predator who wants to eat him.
Ah yes, he
still needs to evolve the two combustion tubes, and a precision communications
and timing network to control and adjust the critical direction and timing of
the explosion. So, here we go again; for thousands of generations these
carefree little beetles blew themselves to pieces until finally they mastered
their newfound powers. But what would be the motivation for such disastrous,
trial and error, piecemeal evolution?
The beetles did not blow themselves up.
Instead it was Darwin’s theory that exploded.
Hear him
again:
If
it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not
possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my
theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case. (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of
the First Edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 189)
Cory Collins
