Offspring resemble their parents, but also vary in small ways. Whilst examining the various finches and other species found on the Galapagos islands, Darwin proposed that the random variation in an individual creature would give that individual an advantage; then, by natural selection, that individual would have a better chance of survival than the others, and would pass on the favourable variation to its offspring in turn.
However, Darwin proposed that the small favourable variation would be handed on over countless generations, improving at the same time, eventually breaking across barriers of genera and species; ultimately evolving into a new species!
The fatal error in Darwinism is relatively easy to pinpoint. Darwin noted that variation was in species. He observed varieties of finches, varieties of lizards and varieties of turtles, etc. Darwin then went wrong! He imagined that these variations must be able to continue beyond the species, jumping across barriers of genera and family so that jelly fish, for example, could vary on and on into lizards for example, and on and on into monkeys, and eventually into man.... His fantastic imaginativeness was soon accepted and dressed up as science.
Charles Darwin in 1840 |
Variation
in species is a wonderful thing. In different species of plants
and animals we continually observe variation at work; almost
without boundary or limit. Darwin proposed that the variations
would not reach a boundary/saturation point within the species,
and thus would continue on and on beyond the boundaries of the
species. However, the work of Gregor Mendel finally laid Darwin's
assumptions to rest. Mendel's work was extremely unpopular when
his findings were published in the late 1860s, mainly because
Darwin's theories of evolution had gained significant recognition
and popularity. Mendel's findings inflicted a temporary blow to
Darwinism and belief in evolutionary theory seemed to decline; at
least for a short period.
Darwinists eventually re-emerged with a new theory that was said to be quite consistent with Mendel's findings. |
Mendel's Experiment
Mendel crossed various races of edible peas and found that when he crossed a red-flowered plant with a white-flowered plant the resultant offspring was red-flowered. Mendel then took the red-flowered plants and crossed them together and found that the offspring were both red-flowered and white-flowered in the ratio 3:1. Mendel knew that a particular gene was responsible for the colour of the flower. In the case of the flower colour, a gene responsible for red and a gene responsible for white. The offspring of the original red-flowered and white-flowered plants did, however, contain both these genes i.e. one gene for each colour. Thus, Mendel's conclusion was that the gene responsible for red flowers was a dominant gene. Therefore, two red-flowered plants bred together could produce a white-flowered plant, if the two white genes, one from each parent, had come together.
In this particular case, Darwin's theory presupposed that the white-flower bred from the red-flowers had acquired this new white-flower characteristic. Against Darwin's expectations, Mendel's scientific findings said 'No'! Mendel clearly showed that the white-flowered gene was simply masked by the more dominant, red-flowered gene. When these findings emerged, Darwinists went underground for a time, at least until a new theory emerged to substantiate their belief in evolution.
Alas, the new theory eventually surfaced and that is the theory generally accepted amongst many evolutionists today - the theory of 'genetic mutation'.
Information provided by: http://www.catholic-forum.com