Evolution

Evolution, initiated by Charles Darwin in the 17th century has become both a widely accepted and popular theory among many biologists and scientists of our day. However, several key impediments and controversies continue to stand in the way of it’s being wholly accepted by the mass populous of learned humanity. These key factors which I will here on in illustrate are the very fabric of the supposed evolution theory and should they as Darwin himself stated, be proven incorrect then the whole theory itself would uniformly collapse.
The first of these essential elements is the supposed occurrence of initial existence from chance. According to Richard Dawkins book, “The Selfish Gene,” the first living cell spontaneously generated itself in an “organic soup” that was still very much lifeless. Such factors too such as the unlikely escape of amino acids from ultraviolet light, life’s use of only twenty left-handed amino acids out of the hundred present, and the probability of even a simple protein molecule forming at random in an “organic soup” being 10113 (followed by 113 zeros, a number larger than the estimation of all the atoms in the universe), cannot rightly be ignored. These protein molecules too present a problem since the chances of obtaining all 2,000 randomly ratios to one in 1040,000, an “outrageous possibility” according to Hoyle, “that could not be faced even if the whole universe consisted of “organic soup”. The chances of DNA are no less staggering. The probability of forming even the simplest of it’s histones reaches 20100, a number larger than the total of all the atoms in all the stars and galaxies visible in the largest astronomical telescopes.
The second of these key elements lies in the evolutionist’s belief that man descended from ape-like ancestors. In his book, “The Mismeasure of Man,” Gould notes, “We have no evidence of biological change in brain size and structure since Homo sapiens appeared on the fossil record some fifty thousand years ago.” Thus “Newsweek” observes, “The missing link between man and the apes is merely the most glamorous of a whole hierarchy of phantom creatures. In the fossil record missing links are the rule.” To supply these missing links man has often been associated with ancient mammals such as the shrewlike, quadraped rodent and the Aegyptopithecus who bear both no genetic links to each other or to the successors in the evolutionary lineup. Deceptions such as the Piltdown man (a composition of human skull and orangutan jaw and teeth), the Ramapithecus (which was declared an ancestor based only on fragments of upper and lower jaws plus a collection of teeth, but was later proved to resemble the ape family), and the Australopiceus skull (which some scientists agree to be overwhelming simian), have become very prevalent, and according to English author Malcom Muggeride a “slipshod and unconvincing theorizing,” that “so easily captivated twentieth century minds and been so recklessly applied.”
Another important factor in evolutionary controversy is the huge and substantial gulfs in the evolutionary chain. This theory presumes that fish became amphibians, some amphibians became reptiles, from the reptiles came both mammals and birds and eventually some mammals became men. However, in order for a fish to become a amphibian the backbone had to undergo some major modifications, the gills must change to lungs, and a pelvis had to be added, although no fossil fish is known to illustrate this. Likewise, amphibians and reptiles, reptiles and birds, and reptiles and mammals, similar monumental changes had to be adopted such as the shelled egg, internal fertilization, change in body temperature, skeleton changes, continuos air circulation, extra heart chambers, mammary glands, the Corti organ with it’s 20,000 rods and 30,000 nerve endings, and dental variations. The jump from mammals to humans however, initiates an even larger gap. Man’s brain according to one scientist, “is different and immeasurably more complicated than anything else in the known universe.” Man also possesses such innate and unique qualities as love, justice, wisdom, power, and mercy. Furthermore, the “Science Digest” has been quoted as saying that; “No fossil or other physical evidence directly connects man to ape.” Even as the book “The New Evolutionary Timetable” adds, “The human family does not consist of a solitary line of descent leading from an apelike form to our species.”
In conclusion, by now it is probably more discernable to one that there valid reasons to doubt the prevalent evolution theory, considering it’s conception of life’s origin, the lack of sufficient fossil evidence, the massive and undeniable gap between various evolutionary stages, and many fossil deceptions. However, there remains still so much more evidence, the like of which would fill more than two hundred enlightening pages. It is my hope however, that with this one paper one would at least be provoked to question it’s claim to authenticity, the like of which has held so many fast within it’s grip for more than a century.