Biology for Higher Tier - Oxford University Press

Biology for Higher Tier, by Beckett and Gallagher, Third Edition, published by Oxford University Press, 2001.

This textbook covers Darwinism a little more thoroughly than many GCSE texts. It presents evolution as the only theory of origins in a dogmatic manner, dismissing other theories as primitive and unscientific.

Here are some extracts:

Life first appeared on earth more than 300 million years ago, and from these simple beginnings living things have evolved, multiplied and spread over all the planet

A criticism of evolution: “Evolution is only a theory; there is no proof that it occurred”
…change in the genes of a population over time…is an indisputable fact. What critics forget is that this mechanism is all that is needed to produce a variety of creatures from a common ancestor, and with time, new species…This ‘theory’ is based on a mass of evidence from fossils, anatomy, ecology, genetics, animal behaviour, and more…To dispute evolution is to say all this evidence is either wrong or irrelevant.

A 15 year old school pupil, would have little doubt that science has shown that evolution is true. But let’s have a closer look at the evidence which this book cites for Darwinism.

Under the heading How life began the book describes Stanley Miller’s experiment in which he made amino acids (the building blocks of proteins) from a gas mixture of more simple compounds, using sparks of electricity. The textbook claims that

...he imitated conditions in the earth’s atmosphere as we think they were over 4000 million years ago.

Actually, there is considerable debate even among Darwinists about what these conditions were. Geochemical evidence would be the most independent source of data, but this does not give a clear picture. Why then does anyone think that conditions could have been like those Miller used? An A Level textbook explains to us why many scientists believe that Miller was right:

the lack of oxygen in the atmosphere would probably be a necessity since…it is far easier to generate organic molecules in a reducing atmosphere. (Soper Ed. Biological Science 1 and 2).

What they are saying is that because this are the only conditions in which the chemicals could have been formed, and because they have already decided that evolution is true, then these conditions must have occurred. This is of course a circular argument. Miller’s experiment can hardly be seen as proving evolution.

The chemicals of life accumulated in lakes and ponds, where they changed, combined and re-combined in millions of different ways over vast periods of time. Complexity increased until cell-like structures appeared.

...after countless generations the variety and often the complexity of living things increases.

This is hand waving. There is no explanation about how complexity could have increased.

Evolution means change and improvement from simple beginnings. Modern aircraft were evolved by changing and improving the first simple aircraft designs.

This is, of course, an example of intelligent design, of which more later.

Examples of Natural Selection

The Peppered Moth study, used in this text as an example of natural selection, is widely acknowledged to be flawed. A news article in Science, America’s leading journal, called it an infamous study that’s been attacked by both evolutionists and anti-evolutionists. The study is currently being re-done by a scientist in Cambridge, to try to overcome its problems.

Artificial selection, used in this text as an analagous process to natural selection, reveals clear limits to how much a species can change, and shows that most ‘improvements’ involve trade-offs which reduce the fitness of the organism in natural conditions.

Fossils – the record in the rocks

In many parts of the world, if you could dig a tunnel deep into the ground, it would be like taking a journey into the past. As you tunnelled deeper and deeper, the rocks would be older the further you went. If you could collect fossils on your way down, you would end up with a selection from the most ancient organisms which ever lived.

The oldest rocks contain no fossils, since they were formed before life began. Fossils in younger rocks show an increase in complexity with time, and include an enormous variety of creatures which are different from today’s plants and animals. Many fossils are of creatures which no longer exist. This is why the fossil record is the strongest evidence we have that evolution occurred.

The textbook fails to mention that scientists generally agree that The Fossil Record does not show the gradual “branching tree” pattern which Darwin predicted for the evolution of plants and animals. Instead, fossil forms appear suddenly, without clear precursors, then change very little except to go extinct. Most animal body plans appear fully formed in Cambrian Rocks, giving no fossil evidence that they have all descended from a common ancestor.

On the Island of Kerguelen in the Indian Ocean, where mutant moths with tiny, useless wings live. Normally they wouldn’t live as long as their winged cousins, but Kerguelen is very windy and winged insects get blown out to sea. Crawling flightless insects are safe.

This example of evolution does not involve a gain in complexity. Rather, the insects are losing one of their members. They are not improving, but decaying.

Change in the genes of a population over time…is an indisputable fact. What critics forget is that this mechanism is all that is needed to produce a variety of creatures from a common ancestor, and with time, new species.

The strictest creationist would agree that gene frequencies in a population can change over time. However, many scientists dispute whether new genes can arise, and whether the complexity of organisms can increase.

This ‘theory’ is based on a mass of evidence from fossils, anatomy, ecology, genetics, animal behaviour, and more…To dispute evolution is to say all this evidence is either wrong or irrelevant.

Presumably the textbook picked the best evidence available to describe to us in detail, so perhaps we needn’t feel too intimidated by this other mass of evidence!

Representation of non-Darwinian

In addition to overstating the case for evolution, this book does not accurately represent modern non-Darwinians. The only ideas opposing Darwinism are portrayed as out of date, and motivated only by religion.

Early evolutionary theories

Early ideas

All human cultures have developed explanations for the origin and amazing variety of life. Most of these were not theories at all but declarations of fact, such as: all living things were created separately at some time in the distant past, and have remained the same ever since…This idea is directly opposed to the theory of evolution.

Darwin’s theory was only slowly accepted because it demonstrated how the variety of life can be explained without the work of a creator. Instead he proposed that species can be changed by the action of simple laws of nature. Many though this to be atheistic and immoral.

So, any opposing theories are treated as primitive “Early ideas” which are not scientific. Evolution is apparently supported by overwhelming evidence, and “Critics” whose arguments are not explained, have not properly understood the theory of evolution or the evidence.

To the contrary: in recent years 400 PhD scientists have signed a statement We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged. There are many more PhD scientists who are quietly skeptical of Darwinism but have not yet signed this list. Michael Behe, Professor of Biology at Lehigh University, claims that recent advances in molecular biology provide some of the best evidence we have against Darwinism, and that it is the most up to date scientific knowledge which most convincingly disproves Darwinism.