Once upon a time while debating evolution I would often times find myself encouraging my opponents away from old worn-out topics (like fossils) onto what I felt was their “strongest” argument: genetics. It turns out the best arguments from genetics are rapidly failing as well.
Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson, in his article “Darwin vs. Genetics” takes a look at the top four arguments from genetics and shows their weaknesses. The following is adapted from that article…
- Relative Genetic Similarities
THE ARGUMENT: Studying anatomy & physiology confirms predictions made by evolutionary theory regarding their placement on the “tree of life” by common ancestry.
THE PROBLEM: Nested hierarchies do not exclude design and can be determined by studying anything that
has been designed. The article uses transportation vehicles as an example:
“An Indy racing car has much more in common with a sedan than with a hovercraft. However, all three
vehicles have more in common with one another than with a helicopter. Thus a ‘tree of transportation’ could
be drawn. Hence, genetic hierarchies do not provide valid scientific evidence for evolution.”
- Absolute Genetic Differences
THE ARGUMENT: Evolution predicts exactly how many genetic differences should exist between humans and chimps.
THE PROBLEM: It’s not adding up. 900 million differences between chimps and humans need to have
occurred in 6 million years. That’s impossible.
“The rate of mitochondrial DNA mistake accumulation has been experimentally measured for only three
distinct animal species, yet all three of these species have far too few differences for any of these species to
have arisen millions of years ago.”
- Junk DNA
THE ARGUMENT: Evolution predicts useless, left over DNA from previous ancestors.
THE PROBLEM: The ENCODE Human Genome project has found the exact opposite.
“Evolutionists have yet to demonstrate that junk DNA exists at the levels they expect to find in light of
evolution, and this discrepancy effectively removes junk DNA as a line of evidence.”
- Shared DNA Mistakes
THE ARGUMENT: Non-functional pseudogenes in the same locations between chimps and humans confirm common ancestry.
THE PROBLEM: Scientists have been identifying important functions in pseudogenes since 1985. Similarities
no more confirm common ancestry than common design… even if we don’t understand its function yet.
“The evolutionary case from genetics is unravelling at multiple levels because it was never based on any direct evidence for common ancestry in the first place.”
The argument from genetics has always been and will always be an ad-hoc seeing-what-you’re-looking-for situation, and possibly an ignoring what doesn’t fit situation. Common ancestry is assumed first based on prior beliefs about the fossil record and evolution and then applied onto the evidence. This entire article has been another confirmation of how your worldview will always affect your interpretation of the evidence.
This article has been adapted from here: