Purpose, Progress, and Promise, Part 6 | The Institute for Creation Research

Purpose, Progress, and Promise, Part 6

In this series, we are tracing the Institute for Creation Research’s efforts to replace the evolutionary model on the origin of species with one that is both biblically faithful and scientifically superior. Previous installments give some background as to why we are pursuing this goal and to our progress.1,2 This update describes our successes involving the most controversial question of all: the from whom of species’ origins, or the question of species’ ancestry.

For over 150 years, Darwin’s answer to this question has troubled scientists and lay audiences alike. Nevertheless, his proposal that all species share a common genealogical thread—i.e., universal common ancestry—has become iconic as the familiar “tree of life” diagram. Surprisingly, despite this icon’s popularity, the evidence supporting it has never been scientifically compelling. For example, as we articulated in a previous article (part 5 in this series), the evolutionary arguments from the fossil record, from anatomical and physiological comparisons, and from biogeography are, at best, indirect.2 Genetics alone directly records genealogical relationships.

However, attempts to corral evidence of common ancestry from genetics have encountered significant challenges. In order to demonstrate the validity of a given hypothesis, scientific tests must eliminate competing hypotheses, and the tests of universal common ancestry have failed to do so. As a case in point, life is organized into a nested hierarchical pattern (groups-within-groups, analogous to Russian nesting dolls), a finding that evolutionists cite as confirmation of universal common ancestry. Yet intelligent humans design things that can be objectively organized into nested hierarchies. Hence, the mere existence of nested hierarchies cannot be used to support Darwin’s chief contention.3

Evolutionists have tried to eliminate the design hypothesis by other means, but to date their attempts have fallen short. To illustrate, secular scientists have long claimed that “junk DNA” exists, arguing that the apparent lack of design in large portions of human DNA refutes the idea of a creator. Yet recent experiments have revealed precious little evidence of such junk.4

Evolutionists have also tried to eliminate the design hypothesis via a different but related argument—the existence of shared mistakes. If two creatures share identical DNA copying errors, then the probability that those two species inherited these errors from a common ancestor, rather than both randomly making the mistakes independently, is quite high. In principle, this fact could connect humans and the great apes, along with all the other species on the planet. However, finding bona fide mistakes has been much more difficult than evolutionists originally thought.5 Thus, far from being the best-supported aspect of evolution, the question of common ancestry has been one of the most difficult to answer.

These difficulties carry over to the creationist approach, where there is a different ancestry question to solve. Since God created kinds of creatures in the beginning, and since these likely did not represent species but progenitors from which new species could arise, young-earth creationists face the challenge of identifying which species are related and which ones are not.6

The most promising lead on this question seems to be a discovery we made over a year ago: the existence of a molecular clock. At the DNA level, this clock has ticked off only 6,000−10,000 years of time, a fact that might be useful to the question of common versus separate ancestry.7 For example, if the molecular clock for two species can be dialed back to zero in just 6,000 years, then perhaps these two species have a common ancestor. If not, then they might stem from separately created kinds. As research progresses, we plan to detail how this clock might shed light on the origins discussion. Stay tuned!

Click here to read the previous articles in this series.

Click here to read Part 7.

References

  1. Jeanson, N. T. 2014. Purpose, Progress, and Promise, Part 1. Acts & Facts. 43 (10): 13; Jeanson, N. T. 2014. Purpose, Progress, and Promise, Part 2. Acts & Facts. 43 (11): 9.
  2. Jeanson, N. T. 2014. Purpose, Progress, and Promise, Part 3. Acts & Facts. 43 (12): 9; Jeanson, N. T. 2015. Purpose, Progress, and Promise, Part 4. Acts & Facts. 44 (1): 9; Jeanson, N. T. 2015. Purpose, Progress, and Promise, Part 5. Acts & Facts. 44 (2): 9.
  3. Jeanson, N. T. 2014. Darwin vs. Genetics: Surprises and Snags in the Science of Common Ancestry. Acts & Facts. 43 (9): 8-11.
  4. Jeanson, N. T. 2013. Does “Junk DNA” Exist? Acts & Facts. 42 (4): 20.
  5. Jeanson, N. T. 2011. Human-Chimp Genetic Similarity: Do Shared “Mistakes” Prove Common Ancestry? Acts & Facts. 40 (9): 6.
  6. Jeanson, N. T. 2013. The Origin of Species: Did Darwin Get it Right? In Creation Basics & Beyond: An In-depth Look at Science, Origins, and Evolution. Dallas, TX: Institute for Creation Research, 125-131.
  7. Jeanson, N. T. 2014. New Genetic-Clock Research Challenges Millions of Years. Acts & Facts. 43 (4): 5-8.

* Dr. Jeanson is Deputy Director for Life Sciences Research and received his Ph.D. in cell and developmental biology from Harvard University.

Cite this article: Nathaniel T. Jeanson, Ph.D. 2015. Purpose, Progress, and Promise, Part 6. Acts & Facts. 44 (3).

The Latest
NEWS
May 2024 ICR Wallpaper
"Have I not commanded you? Be strong and of good courage; do not be afraid, nor be dismayed, for the LORD your God is with you wherever you...

NEWS
Was a Key to Photosynthesis Evolution Discovered?
Northern Canadian lakes were the source of recently discovered unique photosynthetic bacteria of the phylum Chloroflexota. After years of culturing,...

CREATION PODCAST
Four Moons That Indicate a Young Universe | The Creation Podcast:...
Earth has one moon, but Jupiter has many! What can we learn from our celestial neighbor's satellites? Do they indicate youth?   Host...

ACTS & FACTS
Creation Kids: Seeds and Sprouts
by Renée Dusseau and Susan Windsor* You're never too young to be a creation scientist and explore our Creator's world. Kids, discover...

APOLOGETICS
Christ’s Creativity in Canyon Critters
Grand Canyon animals display many marvelous traits and behaviors as they live life in that harsh habitat. These canyon creatures succeed thanks to the...

ACTS & FACTS
Standing Against False Science
I’m Michael Stamp, and I’m in my 12th year as an editor at the Institute for Creation Research. It’s always an encouragement to see...

ACTS & FACTS
Oysters and Pre-Flood Longevity
The oyster species Crassostrea virginica, also known as the eastern oyster, is a prized seafood. Research has demonstrated that a fossil version of...

ACTS & FACTS
Galápagos Finches: A Case Study in Evolution or Adaptive Engineering?
A group of birds known as Darwin’s finches live in the Galápagos Islands, which are located in the Pacific Ocean 600 miles west of Ecuador....

ACTS & FACTS
Hot Springs National Park: Hydrothermal Springs Formed By The...
Hot Springs National Park is located about an hour southwest of Little Rock in the folded Ouachita Mountains of central Arkansas. It is the second smallest...

ACTS & FACTS
Why Biology Needs A Theory of Biological Design—Part 2
“Based on a true story” is included by movie producers to add authenticity, importance, and a flair of anticipation. So, my account of how...