Foundations of Evolution – Part 2

A hillside of orange dirt worn away by wind and waves, topped with grasses and trees, The bare roots of the trees are exposed and the trees look weather beaten and gnarled.

The foundations of evolution, like all other theories, must start at the beginning. If the foundations of evolution are incorrect then you can reasonably conclude that the rest of the theory is junk and should be discarded. So then, let’s begin to look at what people claim happened.

A Cracked Foundation

One of the major obstacles to evolution is abiogenesis (also known as biopoiesis). Abiogenesis is the theory that life originated through natural means from a composition of a collection of inanimate chemicals in the (hypothesized) primordial sea of an early earth environment. That assumption is fraught with a number of issues on its own simply because nobody knows what the composition of that ‘early earth’ looked like. If you look at the studies and papers regarding the presumed chain of events you notice some interesting details, particularly the wording used. Probably, possibly, assumed, and expected, are some of the terms those people use in describing what they think happened, and that in itself should be a red flag to anyone reading it. So why is that a problem?

Science – real science – is not based on things that assumed which are then claimed as fact. While science uses a hypothesis-theory-law framework, nothing is (or at least should be) declared as factual until it can be proven using the scientific method.

A basic example can be used in how photosynthesis works. Plants take up water, CO2 and sunshine, and convert the CO2 into oxygen (released into the atmosphere) and sugar (which the plant uses for energy). This process can be observed because we can measure the amounts of the different elements involved in the process. We don’t ‘assume’ the plant takes up CO2 because we can actually measure the amounts. Plants don’t ‘probably’ take up water because that uptake can be measured and observed.  They are facts which can be verified. We can confidently claim photosynthesis is a fact because we can duplicate it and observe it happening repeatedly. That leads us to the issue with the foundations of evolution, which is the claim of a hypothesis as a fact.

If you read any science textbook in any public school (from middle school up through graduate courses) you will immediately confront the problem of theories being presented as facts. They are not the same thing, yet evolutionists (through those books) present various theories as factual when it comes to the origin of life. Why do they do that? It’s due to an a priori mindset (as we reviewed in the last post). They don’t allow for a Creator, therefore (in their a priori mindset) life originated some other way – any other way. That is not science, it’s conjecture and defeasible reasoning.

Have you ever heard ‘house of cards’ used to symbolize the framework of something fragile? I would use that term to describe the foundations of evolution because the first tenet (abiogenesis) is built on conjecture, not science. That distinction is obvious to any reasonable person – even for devout evolutionists! That is also why most evolutionists try to disconnect abiogenesis from evolution.

The House Tumbles Down

Evolutionists will state that the origin of life and evolution are two separate concepts, and that evolution doesn’t have anything to do with life’s beginning. That is an absurd view, simply because most evolutionists denounce a Creator. If you denounce a Creator then, logically, you must rely on abiogenesis as the origin of life. Assuming something is true simply because you believe it to be true is not science, it’s circular logic and it looks like this;

There is no God/Creator ⇒ Life happened via abiogenesis ⇒ Evolution (speciation) results from abiogenesis ⇒ Speciation proves there is no God ⇒ There is no God/Creator

The reliance of evolution – the way it is taught, presented and believed everywhere by nearly everyone who believes it to be true – rests on assuming abiogenesis is factual. It is not.

The foundations of evolution require abiogenesis to be real. If it isn’t real then the whole theory becomes a house of cards and should be thrown out.  So, is abiogenesis real? Is it even possible? The short answer is no, it is not possible.

We’ll delve into the details of why biopoiesis is not possible in the next post, using real science (not presumption and guesswork) to make it evident for anyone to see.

This is Part Two of a multi-part series. Keep watch for the next installment!

Posted in Culture Watch, Science & Creation Tagged with: , , , , ,