rem said:
"This means, if your theory were correct, that the original ancestors of a 'kind' would have to contain ALL of the variety that we see today within their genes."
This is correct. The following extract from AIG explains the creationist position that most of the variation came from recombination, while some may have come from information losing mutations.
"A better explanation is that virtually all the necessary information was already there in the genetic makeup of the first bears, a population created by God with vast genetic potential for variation.
| Get ANSWERS about created kinds and natural selection |
 Creation: Facts of Life Dr Gary Parker
Dr Parker, a leading creation scientist and AiG speaker, presents the classic arguments for evolution used in public schools, universities, and the media, and refutes them in an entertaining and easy-to-read style. A must for students and teachers alike! This is a great book to give to a non-Christian as a witnessing tool.
More info/Purchase online |
This doesnt mean that all of the features of todays bears would have been on obvious display back then. A simple example would be the way in which mongrel dogs obviously had the potential to develop all the different breeds we see today. Thus, there was no actual poodle to be seen among mongrel dogs hundreds of years ago, but by looking closely at many of them, one would have seen at least some of the individual features found in todays poodles popping up here and there.
Similarly, it is unlikely that there were polar bears before the Flood however, since much of the information for their specialized features was already there, some of these features, in lesser form, would have also been apparent in a few individuals from time to time.
It takes selection (natural or artificial) to concentrate and enhance these features however, this does not create anything really new, no new design information. If there were no genetic potential in the bear family to grow really thick fur, then no bears would ever have inhabited the Arctic.
However, it is likely that not all the features for todays bears would have been coded for directly in the genes of the original bear kind. Mutations, genetic copying mistakes which cause defects, may on rare occasions be helpful, even though they are still defects, corruptions or losses of information. Thus, the polar bears partly webbed feet may have come from a mutation which prevented the toes from dividing properly during its embryonic development. This defect would give it an advantage in swimming, which would make it easier to survive as a hunter of seals among ice floes.
Thus, bears carrying this defect would be more likely to pass it on to their offspring but only in that environment. However, since mutations are always informationally downhill, there is a limit to the ability of this mechanism to cause adaptive features to arise. It will never turn fur into feathers, for example. 3
After the Flood, when dramatic climate and environment changes occurred, there was suddenly a large number of empty niches, and as the first pair multiplied, groups of their descendants found new habitats. Only those whose predominant characteristics were suitable for that environment thrived and bred. 4 In this way, it would not need millions of years for a new variety (even a new species) to arise.
For example, of the first bears forced to exist on bamboo, only those exhibiting the genetic information for a stronger oesophagus and stomach lining would have survived in each generation. Animals without these features would not have lived to produce offspring, thus reducing the gene pool as only the surviving animals interbred. Thus these characteristics became more prominent in that group. This is more reasonable than assuming that this group had to wait for the right mutations to come along, over thousands or millions of years, to provide those vital features.
Notice how such new species will
be more specialised;
be better adapted to a particular habitat; and
- have less genetic information than the original group.
(See the box (below) for a simple example of how information is lost as creatures adapt).
It makes a great deal of sense for God to create the original kinds of creatures as very robust groups, possessing the ability to vary and adapt to changing environments.
In other words, animals which have adapted to their habitat are mostly expressing latent characteristics bestowed by God at Creation. The evolutionary belief that mutations have added all of the necessary design information is opposed to both theory and observation. 5
SUMMARY
Creationists accept that the design features we see in modern animals are largely the result of original created design, expressed and fine-tuned to fit the environment by subsequent adaptation, through natural selection in a fallen world of death and struggle. If, as seems probable from fossil evidence, there were no ice-caps before the Flood, there would have been no polar bears at that time. The wisdom of the Creator is revealed in providing the original organisms with the potential to adapt so as to be fit for a wide range of habitats and lifestyles.
The bear family, with its incredible variation, provides clear evidence of an intelligent Creator.
How information is lost when creatures adapt to their environment | In the example at left (simplified for illustration), a single gene pair is shown under each bear as coming in two possible forms. One form of the gene (L) carries instructions for long fur, the other (S) for short fur. In row 1, we start with medium-furred animals (LS) interbreeding. Each of the offspring of these bears can get one of either gene from each parent to make up their two genes. In row 2, we see that the resultant offspring can have either short (SS), medium (LS) or long (LL) fur. Now imagine the climate cooling drastically (as in the post-Flood ice age). Only those with long fur survive to give rise to the next generation (line 3). So from then on, all the bears will be a new, long-furred variety. Note that: - They are now adapted to their environment.
- They are now more specialized than their ancestors on row 1.
- This has occurred through natural selection.
- There have been no new genes added
- In fact, genes have been lost from the population i.e. there has been a loss of genetic information, the opposite of what microbe-to-man evolution needs in order to be credible.
- Now the population is less able to adapt to future environmental changes were the climate to become hot, there is no genetic information for short fur, so the bears would probably overheat.
|
Edited by - hooberus on 22 November 2002 13:36:44
