Personifying Evolution

From Human Hands Are Designed, Not Evolved by Jerry Bergman

In my library are two dozen books that attempt to dispute the validity of Intelligent Design (ID) and argue that ID has been refuted by scientific facts. They contend that claims of the natural world everywhere giving evidence of ID are motivated by religion and are not supported by science.[1] Nature just looks like it was intelligently designed, they say, and we must keep in mind that it was not designed, in spite of its appearance of design. Richard Dawkins’ exact words were: “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.”[2] What we see is only “apparent design,”[3] they say. Nobel Laureate Francis Crick wrote: “Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.”[4]

“Don’t trust the evidence that is staring at you in the face!”

A rather odd attitude for someone working in the field of observational, verifiable scientific research, don’t you think?

Personifying Evolution

This attitude contrasts with that of the admission by University of Tübingen (Germany) professor Madelaine Böhme, founding director of the Senckenberg Centre for Human Evolution and Palaeoenvironment (SHEP). She did not use the phrase ‘Intelligent Design,’ but conveyed the idea in more superlative terms, namely “your hands… are… marvels ….Nature’s Masterpiece.”[5] Writing in Discover, the leading science magazine for the general public, she wrote that

our hands gave us tools, new skills and better communication. Take a moment to pay attention to your hands. It will be time well spent, because they are evolutionary marvels. Hold one up and examine it. Open and close it. Play with your fingers. Touch the tips of your four fingers with your thumb. Rotate your wrist. You should be able to turn it 180 degrees with ease. Ball your hand up into a fist until your thumb lies on top of and lends support to your index, middle and ring fingers. That is something no ape can do.[6]

Notice how the three authors of this article manage to attribute these marvels to ‘Nature’ as if evolution is a designing mind. They claim that evolution created “Nature’s Masterpiece: How Evolution Gave Us Our Human Hands… they are evolutionary marvels.” Human hands are just one of many examples of “Nature’s Masterpieces.” Why are they described as “evolutionary marvels” instead of just marvels? In addition, the authors admit that human hands are clearly superior to those of the apes (our putative closest living evolutionary ancestors). This personifying of evolution is all too common in the evolutionary literature. Evolution produces masterpieces, is smart, is a stern master, works hard to produce perfection, and produces marvels. These are all words and phrases commonly used to describe evolution’s wonders.

Just don’t blaspheme!

Don’t say the repulsive G-word!

DON’T SAY IT!

Hand Design

The human hand is described by a Harvard-trained medical doctor who supports ID. He writes, “The design of the human hands displays an astonishing level of skill, flexibility, and durability, allowing us to accomplish tasks that otherwise would be impossible—tasks that clearly separate us from the animal kingdom” including apes.[7] Evolutionists ascribe this complex design to impersonal forces called Nature. The Harvard-trained medical doctor ascribes it to intelligent design. Which view makes more sense? No disagreement exists about the facts, but only about the cause. Are human hands the result of intelligent design, or thousands of mutations selected blindly? Making evolution into the creator has a serious problem: the vast majority of mutations are harmful or near-neutral. They would never add up to produce something with so many interlocking systems that can do so much.

[…]

Problems with human hand evolution

These hand-evolution just-so stories attempt to explain the hand’s many advantages, but ignore the fact of its uniqueness. In the animal world with its estimated 1.7 million species, why do only humans have this hand design? No other primate possesses this design which is in many ways obviously superior to all other hands. The researchers admit that chimpanzees “bonobos, gorillas and orangutans are also capable of communicating with gestures” but admit “their repertoire is extremely limited.”[16] A large gap exists between human hands and those of all other primates.

Neanderthal hands show no evidence of evolution

Our claimed evolutionary predecessors, the Neanderthals, also had fully human hands – not ape-like transitional hands that one would expect of less-evolved humans. Neanderthals (spelled Neandertals by some) lived between about 130,000 to 40,000 Darwin years ago. Assuming these dates for the sake of argument, an evaluation of their hands is one way to determine if any hand evolution has occurred during this time, as far back as 130,000 years ago.

Evolutionary anthropologists once commonly assumed that Neanderthal hands were designed for power, not precision (as are modern human hands). This assumption has now been thoroughly refuted. An article in Smithsonian Magazine says that our “early human ancestor, better known colloquially as the Neanderthal, has long been associated with brutish behavior, but a new study published in Science Advances adds to the growing body of literature that challenges this stereotype.”[17]

The Racial Purity Progressives that founded and fueled Darwinism are having to change with the times.

Quick! When Darwinism goes down, what’s going to be the root cause?

  • It was completely refuted, shown to be scientifically disconnected from observed reality, and so rightfully tossed into the garbage heap;
  • Too many Inferiors got into the universities, while the Superior Race failed to enslave and kill enough of the Inferiors reproduce;
  • The government money ran out.

My money is on “three”, with a good bit of “two” tossed in.

Of course, it isn’t going to be “one”.

If merely being logically and empirically refuted by reality was enough to dismiss a politically useful theory, then Mises’s Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth (download here, discussed here) would have been enough to end socialism/communism way back in 1920… and allowed the world to sidestep another 70 years of suffering, poverty, oppression, mass murder, and lies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.