Creation Bits

This blog has been superceded, and is only here for archive purposes. The latest blog posts, depending on topic, can be found at one of the blogs at the new location!

These are very uneditted and underthought ideas that I get while debating the creation/evolution debate. This is the more-often-updated but less-thought-out version of the crevo blog.

Wednesday, March 29, 2006

Evolution -- the Propetual Motion Machine

Robert Marks did a great piece on Evolution being the modern equivalent of a perpetual motion machine here.

Basically, the argument is like this:
  1. The search space for finding a beneficial set of mutations for a changed environment is very, very huge

  2. Bernoulli's principle of insufficient reason states that without knowledge, all changes are on an equal playing field, thus the changes must be a blind search

  3. Blind search even in a small search space with a small target is impossible (i.e. only 500 bits)

  4. Therefore, in order to actually achieve success, one must use information to structure the search space to get results quicker

  5. However, if the search space is optimized for certain sets of problems, it will be unoptimized for others. Search optimizations require problem-specific knowledge to work at all

  6. Therefore, evolution cannot occur unless organisms have been designed with optimizations to find relevant solutions

Darwinists see evolution as some sort of magical problem-solving device. It violates all laws of probability and optimization, yet somehow people still cling to it, because, since they know God doesn't exist, it must be true!

Using a different approach, I have written a short article on the algorithmic issues that make evolution impossible.

The most important thing to recognize about evolution is that it is no longer in progress. Just as ontogeny terminates with the adult so has evolution terminated. There is no evidence that current organisms are capable of any progressive change at any taxonomic level above variety. Until such changes are documented the only proper assumption is that evolution is finished and was preprogrammed to be finished exactly as ontogeny is programmed to be finished.


Davison, J.A., 2004. "Is evolution finished? Rivista di Biologia 97: 111-116.

Davison, J.A., 1998. "Evolution as a self-limiting process." Rivista di Biologia 91: 199-220.

Furthermore, when it did occur it most certainly did not progress through Darwinian means. To blindly assume otherwise is without foundation.

"It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for believing it to be true."
Bertrand Russell

"Everything is forces over which we have no control."
Albert Einstein
"There is no evidence that current organisms are capable of any progressive change at any taxonomic level above variety."

What about crosses between genuses? What is the taxonomic status of, say, a Liger or a Tigon?

The tiger and the lion are both in the Genus Felis and their hibrid progeny is, as I understand it, sterile which means that they qualify as true species. Sterility can hardly be considered progressive evolution. I have repeatedly requested an example of true speciation in action and never received a satisfactory response. I also have repeatedly asked for a mammalian species younger than Homo sapiens and also received no response. It should surprise no one that I am convinced evolution is finished. So were Julian Huxley, Robert Broom and Pierre Grasse. People believe what they want to believe. It is as simple as that.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?