Confonting the Assumptions of Evolution: Microbiological Simplicity

Part Two: The Smallest Creatures

As an important part of Christian Evidences, the refutation of the Theory of Evolution (and its legion of variations) is a large area of study. There are many avenues of criticism, both through Biblical evidences and scientific evidences. However, some of its greatest weaknesses do not lie with its conclusions, but instead with the assumptions necessarily made to arrive at such conclusions.

A Big Assumption

The second assumption we will examine deals with so-called “simplistic” organisms. Darwinist evolutionary theory rests heavily on this assumption that theorizes that macroevolution took place from the “simple” organism (amoebae, single cells, etc.) to steadily more “complex” organisms, with the eventual end of man.

Limits of “Observation”

The origin of much of this thinking came from making assumptions from simple observation. For instance, in years past it was commonly believed that insects and small animals such as rats arose directly from spoiled food and refuse. Because the microscope had yet to be invented, scientists assumed that such “simple” organisms lacked even internal organs! Of course, when observed it was found that this was not indeed the case; that the even “simplest” of creatures were themselves intricate machines requiring careful design.

This discovery of complexity even among the “simplest” of organisms called the entire theory into question, and only opened more questions. Michael Behe, in his book Darwin’s Black Box, described this progression of questions from the last century: “This level of discovery began to allow biologists to approach the greatest black box of all. The question of how life works was not one that Darwin or his contemporaries could answer…The complex structures revealed by the electron microscope were themselves made of smaller components. What were those components?” (10, emph. orig.).

Design in Everything

If even a “simple” organism has the makings of design, where did such design come from? From what “materials” was it “built”? As our ability to look into the world of the truly miniscule, even formerly supportive microbiologists are having trouble answering these questions.

comments powered by Disqus