Answers in Genesis are an endless provider of material for this blog it seems, as they have recently posted their Top Ten: Myths about Evolution, and as you can imagine it is a beautiful fabrication of straw men and make believe.

They lack even the most fundamental understanding of not only science and the scientific method, but for people whom claim to study this stuff everyday, they have less than a middle school understanding of evolution.

The danger this causes is that they sell others on this ignorance and push for change in the classroom and in legislation based on this misunderstanding of science.

So let’s take a look and at Answers in Genesis’ 10 myths about evolution.

10: Computer Simulations Prove Evolution

Every few months, a news report will trumpet a new computer program with “living cyber organisms” that prove how life on earth evolved. These simulations often show how artificial life-forms reproduce, grow, and change over several generations. The algorithms behind these creatures can be quite complex in an effort to be as close to the “real world” as possible.

The wording they chose here is no mistake, because it would be a myth to say that computer simulations “prove” evolution. What computer simulations do is allow scientists to better understand certain processes because simulations can run millions of different scenarios and show how certain processes in natural selection may work. Coupled together with laboratory evidence you can conclude how certain functions work.

The simulations are a tool to further our understanding and not a piece of evidence to supply proof. Misleading statements as this are how Answers in Genesis sell their product to uninformed masses.

9: Homologous (Similar) Structures Show Past Evolution

It is a staple of almost every biology book on the market: drawings of colored bones that show how evolution left its fingerprints on animals of common descent. These drawings point out how similar structure proves that we all come from one ancestor. The proof, they say, is as plain as the hand in front of our face. Objectively, however, similar design and function can prove nothing. An iPod and an iPhone may have very similar parts, for example, but that certainly doesn’t mean the iPhone evolved from the iPod because of hardware glitches. Instead, because we have objective knowledge of history, we know that the same company designed both, which accounts for the similar design.

This reeks of the blind watchmaker analogy, but the gist is, of course species look similar because they have the same designer. That would be good and fine, except their own example misses some huge points. When I open an iPhone, I do not find leftover pieces that would make up the click wheel on an original iPod as vestigial. I find a whole new product, and obviously we know someone designed the iPhone and iPod, so we would not expect to find outdated and unneeded parts.

Yet in our bodies and other species we find this all the time. As a human fetus forms we see gills forming from our fish ancestry, we see the vestigial tailbone, and more.

Whales have vestigial hipbones for hind legs, and something like 1 in 500 whales are born with hind legs of some kind (useless limbs).

If we or any other species had been designed, we would not see leftover parts, we could see similarities, but the designer would not bring over parts that would go unused. It would make no sense.

8: There Are Clear Transitional Fossils

Darwin fretted over the lack of them, paleontologists are still looking for them, but they are often touted as the foundation of evolutionary theory. What are they? Transitional fossils. According to evolutionists, transitional fossils are sparse for a number of reasons: (1) fossils in general only give us a glimpse of the past, (2) punctuated equilibrium may cause geologically “rapid” changes in species, and (3) they aren’t easy to distinguish. However, many of us have seen the supposed fossils of the horse and whale series and the new “missing link” called Tiktaalik.

This is more misleading wording because every single fossil is a transitional fossil. All scientists know this and none claim we need a “clear transitional fossil” to prove evolution. It would not exist, an ape did not simply give birth to a human and there was never a half ape half human, this is simply not how evolution works, and I think Answers in Genesis knows this and are deliberately lying, and if they don’t know this, it is an even scarier sign of their ignorance.

7: Ape-Human DNA Similarities

The “slam dunk” proof for human evolution is, according to evolutionists, the claimed 98% similarity between human and chimp DNA and the evidence of chromosomal fusion. Textbooks tell us that this proves the common ancestry of humans and apes from ape-like beings that lived millions of years ago.

This evidence is in a way a slam-dunk because it fits in 100% with what one would expect to see if we evolved from an earlier species. Not just that we share DNA, because as we explained above, a designer may use DNA again and again if it worked, but its what DNA is shared and why, and what similarities do we share and is there DNA that is passed on that is now useless?

In the case of apes to humans, yes, there is DNA that is being used and “junk” DNA that is leftover and unnecessary, and why would any designer do that?

But some of the best evidence is the Chromosome 2. This explanation is much better served at the link provided, but here is an excerpt:

“Evolution makes testable predictions,” observes Brown’s Miller, who has been a leading defender of evolution, and whose testimony about chromosome 2 played a prominent role in the 2005 Dover, Pennsylvania, trial over the legality of teaching “intelligent design” in public schools. When it comes to chromosomes, Miller explains, the prediction of evolution is that if we have 46 chromosomes and our closest cousins have 48, then “somewhere in our genome should be a chromosome formed by a recent fusion, and that chromosome should have telomere DNA, and it should have two centromeres. That is a prediction made by evolution, and bingo, you look and there it is.”

6: Apemen and Artistic License

The pervasive ape-to-human montage that shows an ape-like being on the left slowly becoming a human on the right is so much a part of culture that most anyone can recognize it. Natural history museums and TV shows give us supposed glimpses into the past and how human ancestors might have looked. Too bad it’s all a sham.

Wait, so some popular T-shirt design that doesn’t reflect how evolution works is proof against evolution? I mean, now they just sound desperate.

Scientists again and again lament that cartoon because it is misleading, but it is a part of pop culture and is used often when describing evolution, however it is not scientific and is not used to provide evidence for evolution, so including it in their list is just rather pathetic.

5: Bad Design

If we look around us (and even in our own bodies), there are many structures that seem to show less-than-optimal design. What this means to some evolutionists is that this proves there is no creator. After all, a creator as intelligent as God would not have made imperfect designs.

Well, yes. Unless you want to argue cancer and birth defects are great design choices.

AiG continues:

Debunking this myth requires very little effort. First of all, how can humans judge what is optimal design? Some designs require a balance of efficiency and effectiveness, as we find in the human eye (a structure perfectly suited for human life).

Well, I can judge optimal design, and as I said, cancer and birth defects are not optimal, and there example of the eye? Not so perfect, we have a built in blind spot and we cannot see many colors and wavelengths on the prism. Eyes are far from perfect, and in fact many other species have better eyes than we do, so did their designer not like us as much?

4: Vestigial Organs

While evolution does its dirty work, it leaves behind vestiges of its machinations, or so the argument goes. Evolutionists claim that humans and other animals have leftover organs and DNA that prove the power of mutations and natural selection. In fact, this is often touted as a powerful rebuttal to creationists.

AiG goes on to focus on the appendix as proof this is a myth, as if that is the only vestigial part we have.

I already discussed this at length above, but gills, tailbone, whale legs, and the list goes on would make zero sense from a design standpoint. Why would a human have the capability to be born with a tail if it was never a part of our evolutionary past? Is their designer that lazy that he made monkeys and then used their bodies to make us and just bent us into shape, were we like the last thing on his list and he was just over it?

3: Antibiotic Resistance

You may have heard this one a time or two. The development and spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria (and pesticide-resistant plants and insects) is shouted from the rooftops as proof of evolution happening “right now.” Selection pressures push these organisms to evolve—at least, this is how evolutionists explain it.

Antibiotic resistance is a piece of evidence for evolution, it is not standalone proof and no one claims it is. Yet how it evolves and why fit the evolution model perfectly and the predictability of their mutations fits right into the theory, as one would expect should evolution by natural selection exist, as it does.

AiG claims:

Bacteria, in fact, show the amazing creativity of God in that they can swap DNA with other bacteria.

I can swap DNA with my wife right now; I don’t think this is as impressive as they think it is. In fact, if arguing perfect design, why again are we battling life-threatening bacteria?

2: Natural Selection Is Evolution in Action

Natural selection is the driving force behind evolution. This mantra has been repeated so often that people often conflate the two ideas. But are evolution and natural selection the same thing?

They are not, scientists also don’t think they are, but Ken Ham wishes you to believe they do so he can call this claim a myth by saying they aren’t.

Lying for Jesus again.

Natural selection is a process that results in evolution. The idea of survival of the fittest –though not my favorite way of explaining evolution– is natural selection favoring “stronger” characterizes over weaker ones, over time and through different scenarios that drive groups apart this causes evolution and species change and adapt to environmental pressure, and we call this whole process evolution, and this is the important part, by natural selection. Paying attention to the word by is key.

What makes this important is that evolution could potentially happen by another process, but no evidence has surfaced as of yet to show otherwise, but natural selection is not evolution, and a species does not have to change or evolve into another species for natural selection to exist.

1: All Scientists Agree

When all is said and done, the ultimate “proof” of evolution is an appeal to human authority. We are often reminded by anti-creationists that virtually all “real” scientists agree that evolution happened.

Well, not “all” but of course this is another misleading title to a myth. I sense a pattern. Of course not “all” scientists agree on everything, but that is not how science works, science is not a democracy, science is dictated by evidence, not vote.

What makes scientific consensus important here is that their backing is based on evidence and the scientific method. They agree evolution by natural selection is a fact because they don’t have a choice if they are going to do their jobs honestly, the evidence says what it says, and there job as scientists is to try to disprove a claim, and in over 150 years, no one has.

This is not a conspiracy against creationism or a unanimous rally against God, it is simply scientists being honest about the findings and saying yes, evolution is true, whether you or me like it or not.

So there you have it, 10 more pathetic attempts by creationists to disprove evolution. A bit too simple to walk all over these claims, but the fact they have to use such weak arguments shows just how little they have going for them. All 10 of these seems to be nothing more than “nuh uh” when faced with actual evidence.

(Image courtesy of Wikipedia)