One doesn’t have to be a 6K creationist to be put off by the hubris of the people who proselyltize science and evolution as something it is not.
Even an atheist can see the sophomoric nature of the science zealots, who are really not particularly scientific in outlook and philosphy.
Biology is still so nascent as a science that the know it all hubris is laughable, but also irritating, even disgusting.
We will know something about evolution in 10-20 years when many many more genomes are fully sequenced.
Until then pretty much nothing is known about it.
Whoever wrote this article assumes he knows enough to be able to declare that evolution cannot possibly account for the comb jelly genome.
There are, however, seven basic assumptions that are often
not mentioned during discussions of Evolution. Many evolutionists ignore the first six assumptions and only consider the seventh.
These are as follows.
(1) The first assumption is that non-living things gave rise to living material, i.e. spontaneous generation occurred.
(2) The second assumption is that spontaneous generation
occurred only once.
The other assumptions all follow from the second one.
(3) The third assumption is that viruses, bacteria, plants and animals are all interrelated.
(4) The fourth assumption is that the Protozoa gave rise to the Metazoa.
(5) The fifth assumption is that the various invertebrate phyla are interrelated.
(6) The sixth assumption is that the invertebrates gave rise to the vertebrates.
(7) The seventh assumption is that within the vertebrates the fish gave rise to the amphibia, the amphibia to the reptiles, and the reptiles to the birds and mammals. Sometimes this is expressed in other words, i.e. that the modern amphibia and reptiles had a common ancestral stock, and so on.
For the initial purposes of this discussion on Evolution I shall consider that the supporters of the theory of Evolution hold that all these seven assumptions are valid, and that these assumptions form the “ General Theory of Evolution.”
The first point that I should like to make is that these seven assumptions by their nature are not capable of experimental verification. They assume that a certain series of events has occurred in the past. Thus though it may be possible to mimic some of these events under present-day conditions, this does not mean that these events must therefore have taken place in the past. All that it shows is that it is possible for such a change to
take place. Thus to change a present-day reptile into a mammal,though of great interest, would not show the way in which the mammals did arise. Unfortunately we cannot bring about even this change; instead we have to depend upon limited circumstantial evidence for our assumptions, and it is now my intention to discuss the nature of this evidence.
IMPLICATIONS OF
EVOLUTION
By G. A. KERKUT
M.A., PH.D. 1960. Pergamon Press.