SIX FUNDAMENTAL FLAWS IN THE EVOLUTIONIST HYPOTHESIS – William Stoddart
SIX FUNDAMENTAL FLAWS IN THE EVOLUTIONIST HYPOTHESIS
(1) Logical
The greater cannot come from the lesser.
(A biological example: The acorn gives rise to the oak-tree pre- cisely because it already “is” an oak-tree. The acorn is not some nondescript “unicellular organ” or an ameba.)
(2) Physical (entropy; the second law of thermodynamics)
Complexity tends towards degradation. Systems naturally move to a greater degree of randomness. Things run down, not up; they proceed from a state of order to a state of disorder. Order does not emerge from disorder (or organization from disorganization). Order is conferred on disorder by the input of “information” (“intelligence”), and cannot arise by chance. “Intelligence” is not the product of disorder! Nothing has ever been known to contra- vene this law, but the evolutionary hypothesis contradicts it.
(3) Biological (the stability of species)
There is no conclusive evidence that one species ever changed into another. (If there were, evolutionists would trumpet it from the house-tops!) “Parents” have never been known to give rise to other than their own kind. (There is evidence only for intra- specific variation, not for the formation of new—and self-repro- ducing—species.) This is because of the fundamental “stability” of species. A species is a Platonic archetype. Evolutionists try to “blur” this as much as possible; some even deny the reality of species.
(4) Statistical (not enough time)
Evolution requires that there should have been a spontaneous gen- eration of life, but the simplest of living cells is so complex that the probabilities of its coming into existence by chance cannot be expressed in meaningful figures.
No matter how much one extends—on a realistic basis—the time-scale envisaged, it is statistically impossible for the genera- tion of life, and for evolution, to have taken place by chance in the time available.
(The rather fantastical theory that life “may have come from outer space” merely sets the problem one stage further back; it does not solve it.)
(5) Teleological (the argument from design)
“It is impossible that blind, deaf, and dumb evolution could have given rise to eye, ear, and voice.”
“The miracle of consciousness did not arise from a heap of pebbles.”
(6) Philosophical (the relativist pitfall)
The evolutionist hypothesis is fatally impaired by the well-known contradiction of relativism, often demonstrated by means of the statement “All men are liars.” (If they are, then this statement, also made by a man, is false.) Specifically, in the present case: man, who is said to be evolving (and is therefore relative), cannot all of a sudden step out of the evolutionary process, take up a stationary position, and dare to make absolute statements regarding the con- tinuing process. It is this that is absurd.
For the theory of biological evolution to be sustainable, each one of the above objections must be refuted. This cannot be done. The evo- lutionists do not rise to this challenge. They look the other way, and bury their heads in the sand.
Six Fundamental Flaws In The Evolutionist Hypothesis
Features in
Remembering in a World of Forgetting:
Thoughts on Tradition and Postmodernism
by William Stoddart, Edited by Mateus Soares De Azevedo and Alberto Vasconcellos Queiroz
