Installment Three – Part three

Suggested Mechanisms for Evolution

As mentioned earlier in our article, scientists have suggested mutations as the one basic mechanism, or the raw ma­terial from which evolution springs. Mu­tations are caused by the rearrangement of the structure of the genes within the Chromosomes. It is postulated that by gradual and successive rearrangement of the genes and differential reproduction that evolutionary changes take place. Sev­eral important observations must be noted concerning mutations.

First, A very large percentage of muta­tions are either lethal or semi-lethal. This means that either the rate of reproduc­tion is depressed or the mutations cause changes which are determental to the animals or the plants in their natural habitat. We can illustrate this with an example. It was found in raising a certain type of sheep that certain sheep had short legs. Men continued to interbreed the sheep with short legs until they got a breed of sheep which had shorter and shorter legs. The sheep could not run around as much and would have more fat on them and more meat. However, in their natural habitat this would be detrimental to the sheep because they could not run away from the attackers as rapidly. The inter­breeding and mutations which led to the short legs was so destructive to the repro­duction rate that this breed of sheep have become extinct even though they were given good care under domestic surround­ings. Thus, mutations have actually only caused changes that are  not helpful to the organism.

Secondly: It has been found, under tests, that mutations are not adaptive to their cause. For instance, a certain type of fruit fly that breeds very rapidly was constantly bred and reproduced under continually warmer conditions. Now, sup­posedly this would make them more and more resistant to heat. However, the fruit fly did not develop more resistance to the heat no matter how much they repro­duced under these conditions. The same types of experiments were carried out un­der cold conditions in which supposedly they should have then developed more resistance to cold. However, this was not the case—they retained their same- char­acteristics.

The third problem with the effect of mutations is that some mutations are re­gressive. The theory of evolution says that all changes are for better adaption to the environment and are progressive in nature and lead to more complicated or­ganisms. However, there are many exam­ples in nature in which mutations have caused changes which go backwards to less complication and into conditions which are not adaptive to the environ­ment.

A fourth observation upon mutations is the rate of change. Even the very long timetable of 45 hundred million years postulated for the development from the lowest forms to the present state of man­kind requires some very rapid rates of mutation. However, it has been found in experimenting with mutations that the more rapid the rate of mutation and the bigger change in each mutation, the more lethal and more destructive is the resultant cause. The rate of lowered reproductivity and lethality is only reduced by slow mu­tations. However, mutations which take place at such a slow rate would give times much too long for even the exten­sive timetable which has been postulated by the evolutionary theory.

In conclusion on the subject of muta­tions, it can be said that this basic theory which is called, “The Raw Material for Evolution”, has many serious problems to overcome to be a satisfactory explanation for the basic mechanism of change. Here are two quotes from noted scien­tists: “Direct and complete proof of the utilization of mutations in evolution un­der natural conditions has not yet been given.” Huxley. “Only changes within species can be explained by mutations.” —Goldsmith.

One other suggested mechanism for evolution is that variation is caused by changes in whole chromosomes. Chromo­somes are the larger unit which are made up of many genes. All of the changes which have taken place by variations in whole chromosomes have been demon­strated and they are known to bring about marked changes in the organisms. Furthermore, these changes are of much greater magnitude than those caused by mutation. However, there are some very important comments concerning these changes cause by changes in whole chromosomes.

1. The changes are definitely harmful.
2. They bring a marked reduction in fertility.
3. They are limited almost exclusively to changes cause in plants.
4. They have shown no evidence of progressive evolution.

Biological Time and the Fossil Record

The main reason for interest in bio­logical time is the fact that the very long time period shown on the chart is absolutely essential for the evolutionist. Even with the rapid mutations required by this chart, a very long period is re­quired for the development from simple to complex organisms.

The only record that we have of past organic plants and animals is contained in the fossils. Therefore, fossils are the mainstay of the evidence that the evolu­tionist uses.

What are fossils? Fossils are the hard parts of plants and animals preserved by petrification. One example is found in fossilized bones and teeth. The pores have been filled with minerals, and the hard parts of the bones and teeth have re­mained unchanged. In other cases, no­tably in wood, the original organic parti­cles have been replaced hit by hit by minerals and have retained the same struc­ture as the original particle. Other types of fossils are casts of footprints that have been left in mud and then covered over and solidified, insects cast in amber and whole animals trapped in ice.

One of the basic requirements of a good fossil is that of immediate burial. For good preservation of the initial bone structure, air must be excluded to stop oxidation. This immediate burial is usual­ly carried out in water borne sedimentary material so that the organism is quickly surrounded by the water and mud or sand. Eventually the mud or sand becomes solidified and turns to rock.

Stop and think how many places there exist on the earth at the present time where fossilization such as this could take place. It would be primarily where there is running water and where there are large quantities of sediment in which to bury the creatures. You can see that these conditions occur in a very small percentage of the places upon the earth. Thus, the immediate conclusion is that the number of plants and animals being trapped by these conditions and being fossilized is very small and is not repre­sentative of all the plants and animals which exist on the earth. Therefore, the fossil record itself is not truly representa­tive of all of the kind of organisms which have existed.

In rare instances immediate burial has taken place by entrapment in tar such as the La Brea Tar Pits. This again is not a representative condition.

Fossilization cannot occur in igneous rock because this is rock that is initially in a molten form and subsequently solidi-ties. In its molten form it would be so hot it would immediately burn up any organism that came in contact with the liquid rock.

In order to establish a biological time­table, the scientists must be able to date the fossils .Since by far the greatest ma­jority of fossils are found in sedimentary rocks it boils down to a method of dat­ing the sedimentary rock in which the fossils are found. Sedimentary rocks con­tain a wide mixture of various minerals which form the original sand and mud.

There is no known way of estimating the age of this mixture because all mineral dating methods depend on relatively pure and uncontaminated rock.

Furthermore it is generally conceded that the age of any particular layer cannot be estimated by its thickness because of the variation of the rate at which the layers could have been deposited.

There is one method of correlation. In general the main older layers are on the bottom and the newer ones are on the top if they were laid down in order and there has been no displacement later. The general conclusion, however, is that there is no direct way to measure the age of sedimentary rocks.

There is one indirect way. In some sed­imentary rocks fissures have formed and molten rock has intruded into these fis­sures forming igneous dikes younger than the basic sedimentary rock. There are methods of estimating the age of igneous rocks. If the age of the igneous dikes can be established then we have one point of correlation. The igneous dikes that in­truded into the fissure is younger than all of the sedimentary on the outside.

The scientists have advanced another way of dating the sedimentary rocks. The following is a quotation from a modern high school biology book:

“Biology” By Stanley L. Weinberg–Dating the igneous rock may make it possible to determine the age of the associated sedimentary rock and any fossils it may contain. Second, sedi­mentary rock of each age is charac­terized by a particular group of fossils. The fossils can he used to date the rock.”
-The Genesis Flood”—By Henry M. Morris and John C. Whitchomb, Jr. —”A trained paleontologist can identi­fy the relative geologic age of any fossiliferous rock formation by a study of its fossils almost as easily and cer­tainly as he can determine the relative place of a sheet of manuscript by look­ing at its pagination. Fossils thus make it possible to correlate events in differ­ent parts of the world and so to work out the history of the earth as a whole. (Quoted in the Genesis Flood” from Outlines of Historical Geology. by Schuchert and Dunbar.
The only chronometric scale applica­ble in geologic history for the strati-graphic classification of rocks and for ‘dating geological events exactly is fur­nished by the fossils. Owing to the ir­reversibility of evolution, they offer an unambiguous time scale for relative age determinations and for worldwide correlations of rocks.” (O. H. Schinde wolf: “Comments on Some Strati-graphic Terms,” American Journal of Science (Vol. 255, June 1957, p. 394).

What did we start out to find? We started out to find the way of dating the fossils. First, we came to the conclusion that we could only date the fossils if we could date the sedimentary rock in which they were found. Now we are back to the point where we can date the sedimentary rock by the fossils in them. We have gone around in a complete circle and met our­self in the beginning.

Let us now briefly look at the uranium method of dating minerals. It is known that the radio-active mineral uranium 238 decays spontaneously to radiogenic lead which is called “lead 206”. This radio-genic lead is different from the regular kind of lead which we use in our fishing sinkers because it is the product of ura­nium decay.

The process of the decay of uranium to lead occurs at a constant rate which cannot be changed by any of the forces known to man at the present time. Sci­entists have determined that seven bil­lion, six hundred million grams of uranium (8300 tons) decays into one gram of lead per year. Therefore the age of a mineral which contains radiogenic lead and uranium can be computed by divid­ing the weight of the lead by the weight of the uranium and multiplying by seven million six hundred thousand years.

This method is called the “Uranium Timeclock” and is one of the most uni­versally accepted methods at the present time. There are some very definite prem­ises that this method relies upon. (1) Originally the rocks must have contained only uranium and no radio-genic lead. Any existence of radio-genie lead would disrupt the calculations. (2) Any changes in the ratio of uranium to radio-genie lead can take place only by the decay of uranium. (3) Each ore has come from a single area and has not had any oppor­tunity to mix with any other radio-genie lead. (4) There has been a constant rate of decay of the uranium.

Relating the uranium timeclock method of dating to the dating of fossils in rocks of the earth is not without its problems. First, there have been many samples which have been called anomalous leads. These are samples in which the leads are excessively contaminated with radio-genie lead. These samples have been discarded and not included in the calculations.

One of the biggest problems is that uranium only occurs in very few igneous rocks. It occurs primarily in a rock called “pegmatite” which is not widely distrib­uted throughout the earth.

The intrusive dikes which contain peg­matite are in most cases found where there are no fossils in existence. This presents a real problem in relating the estimated ages of pegmatite rocks to the fossil bearing strata. Since these are only spot checks this method of dating does not solve the uniform evolution problem.

There is one other factor that should be mentioned. There is always the possibility that a divine creator would have included all types of rocks in His creation including radio-genic lead. This would produce rock with an apparent great age which could in actuality be very young.

A few words should be said at this time about the radio-carbon method of dating. In the first place, radio-carbon dating is limited to organic material only. Secondly, because of the small amounts of radio-active carbon, the method is limited to ages under 25,000 years. Wherever the method has been used to check dates that can be evaluated in known history it has checked out very well.

An explanation of the method can be found as outlined below: Cosmic rays which enter our atmosphere change atmospheric nitrogen into radio-active carbon called “Carbon 14”. This Carbon 14 combines with oxygen to form radio-active carbon-dioxide which exists in a certain fixed ratio to the amount of normal car­bon-dioxide in the air. Carbon-dioxide of both types is used by the plants. The radio-active carbon is retained in the tis­sues of the plants. It decays but is re­placed by more radio-active carbon during the period the plant or organic material is alive. As soon as the organic form dies, the radio-active carbon begins to decay and the amount starts to reduce. By tak­ing the remains of any dead organic ma­terial and measuring the ratio of the basic carbon to the radio-active carbon the number of years to the time when the original organism died can be estimated.

The radio-carbon method of dating is based upon several assumptions. (1) The concentration of Carbon 14 in the carbon-dioxide cycle in the atmosphere and in the organisms has always remained con­stant. (2) The cosmic ray flux coming into the earth has always remained con­stant. (3) There has been no contamina­tion of the dead organic material with other types of carbon.

The last assumption has given them problems because marine shells have shown ages that seem to be far too great. This is because some of the other type of carbon has been carried into the shells through the sea water and gives them an apparent age which is too high. This is also a possibility in other types of or­ganisms.

One other problem should be pointed out with respect to fossils. Human footprints have been found in mud that has subsequently turned to rock which is esti­mated to be 250 million years old. But a glance at the chart shows that human be­ings did not come into existence until many, many years later. Also a human skull has been found in coal which is placed in the tertiary age, which is also many years earlier than human beings are supposed to have come into existence. In other places on the earth there have been found sedimentary rocks which are out of sequence with the older rock on top of the younger. This has been ex­plained by folding and pushing of the older rocks on top. But an examination of the physical and the structural prob­lems would show that this is a physical impossibility.