Remember those Florida lizards that, within only 15 years, evolved a new version of their feet to enable them to better climb trees? We wrote about it and the Discoveroids’ reaction here: Casey Does the Micro-Macro Mambo.
Those lizards must be troubling the creationists, because now we have a reaction from the creation scientists at Answers in Genesis (AIG), the online ministry of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo). This one was written by Elizabeth Mitchell, a creationist gynecologist. The title of her essay is Is Rapid Lizard Adaptation a Template for Deep-Time Evolution?
After several paragraphs describing what was observed, she then launches into a denial which is very much like the one from Casey, about which we wrote earlier. There’s not much new here, except for some young-Earth stuff which Casey carefully avoided. But that’s how it is with creationists — with minor variations, they all say the same thing. We’ll skip to the second half of the gynecologist’s article, because that’s where the drool begins. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:
This study provides a marvelous demonstration of the speed with which selective pressure can prompt a kind of animal — in this case the anole lizard — to diversify and adapt. Animals diversify and vary within their created kinds, and it should be no surprise that they can do it quickly. Those offspring expressing the traits that best equip them to survive and reproduce in a stressed environment do so, and the population soon takes on their traits.
It’s amazing that creationists can acknowledge the mechanism that results in evolution, but then continue to be creationists. As we said in Common Creationist Claims Confuted, the error is enormous, because first it involves accepting, at the scale of a few visible generations, both the fact of and the mechanism for evolution (variation and natural selection), and then rejecting the inevitable consequences of what has been accepted. Yet that’s what they do. Watch as it’s done right before your eyes:
But nothing about this study can be extrapolated in support of amoeba-to-Adam evolution. The green lizards didn’t grow wings and fly to safety. No new kind of animal evolved. No new anatomical structure evolved.
No “new kind of animal evolved”? Well, darn, what does she expect? It was only 15 years! But let’s give the creationist gynecologist some credit — she devised a new slogan: “amoeba-to-Adam evolution.” That’s a worthy companion to ol’ Hambo’s usual “molecules to man.” Let’s read on:
God in the beginning tells us that He created all kinds of living things to reproduce after their kinds, and He did so with a few normal-length days about 6,000 years ago.
Yes, we’ve heard about that. She continues:
Based on the great diversity that can be observed to develop or is already present in each kind of living thing, we infer that God designed a great deal of potential variation in each kind of organism. After the global Flood, it would have been the variations available in the genomes of the animals that repopulated the earth that led to the biodiversity we see today.
Right. After the Flood, which killed almost everything in the world, the few thousand “kinds” that were providentially preserved aboard the Ark swiftly became the millions of species we now see on Earth. It was — what shall we call it? — hyper micro-evolution. Here’s more:
But we do not observe animals evolving into new, more complex kinds of animals, for there is no way for animals to acquire the genetic information needed to evolve into a new, more complex kind of animal. Natural selection among the variations and even mutations seen in each kind of animal is not able to produce the new information that would be needed.
Oooooooh — information! AIG is borrowing some of the Discoveroids’ technical vocabulary. She says that natural selection doesn’t produce new information. Duh! Of course it doesn’t; it preserves favorable mutations. But wait — she says that “even mutations” don’t produce new information! Wow — who knew?
And now we’ve arrived at the end. Here’s the last of it:
There is no reason to assume that biodiversity takes millions of years or that variation provoked by competition within a lizard genus is a pattern for the evolution of complexity.
No reason at all. Those lizards don’t mean a thing to creationists. Nothing does — except Oogity Boogity!
Copyright © 2014. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.