In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

Below is the online edition of In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood, by Dr. Walt Brown. Copyright © Center for Scientific Creation. All rights reserved.

Click here to order the hardbound 8th edition (2008) and other materials.

[ The Scientific Case for Creation > Life Sciences > The Theory of Organic Evolution Is Invalid. > Organic Evolution Has Never Been Observed. > Natural Selection]

5. Natural Selection

Like so many terms in science, the popular meaning of “natural selection” differs from what the words actually mean. “Selecting” implies something that nature cannot do: think, make decisions, or make choices. Instead, the complex genetics of each species allow variations within a species. In changing environments, those variations give some members of a species a slightly better chance to reproduce than other members, so their offspring have a better chance of surviving. The marvel is not about some capability that nature does not have, but about the designer who designed for adaptability and survivability in changing environments. With that understanding, the unfortunate term “natural selection” will be used.

An offspring of a plant or animal has characteristics that vary, often in subtle ways, from those of its “parents.” Because of the environment, genetics, and chance circumstances, some of these offspring will reproduce more than others. So, members of a species with certain characteristics will tend, on average, to have more “children.” Only in this sense, does nature “select” genetic characteristics suited to an environment—and, more importantly, eliminates unsuitable genetic variations. Therefore, an organism’s gene pool is constantly decreasing.^a

Notice, natural selection cannot produce new genes; it “selects” only among preexisting characteristics. As the word “selection” implies, variations are reduced, not increased.^b

For example, many mistakenly believe that insect or bacterial resistances evolved in response to pesticides and antibiotics. Instead,

a lost capability was reestablished, making it appear that something evolved,^c or

a mutation reduced the ability of certain pesticides or antibiotics to bind to an organism’s proteins, or

a mutation reduced the regulatory function or transport capacity of certain proteins, or

a damaging bacterial mutation or variation reduced the antibiotic’s effectiveness even more,^d or

a few resistant insects and bacteria were already present when the pesticides and antibiotics were first applied. When the vulnerable insects and bacteria were killed, resistant varieties had less competition and, therefore, proliferated.^e

While natural selection occurred, nothing evolved; in fact, some biological diversity was lost.

The variations Darwin observed among finches on different Galapagos Islands are another example of natural selection producing micro- (not macro-) evolution. While natural selection sometimes explains the survival of the fittest, it does not explain the origin of the fittest.^f Today, some people think that because natural selection occurs, evolution must be correct. Actually, natural selection prevents major evolutionary changes.^g It deletes information; it cannot create information.