Booklet > Creation or Evolution =97 Animal Oddities = That Defy Evolution

When Darwin proposed his famous theory back in 1859, he was aware = that one of=20 the glaring weaknesses of his speculations was how to explain complex = features=20 in animals by small and gradual evolutionary steps. He admitted, "If it = could be=20 demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly = have been=20 formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would = absolutely=20 break down" (Origin of Species, p. 149).

Close to 150 years later, research has provided numerous examples in = nature=20 in which complex organs in animals could not have developed by small, = successive=20 steps. From molecular science on up, many complex systems had to appear=20 simultaneously, with all their components intact, or they would not = function,=20 thus offering no survival advantage.

Molecular biochemist Behe explains: "It was once expected that the = basis of=20 life would be exceedingly simple. That expectation has been smashed. = Vision,=20 motion, and other biological functions have proven to be no less = sophisticated=20 than television cameras and automobiles. Science has made enormous = progress in=20 understanding how the chemistry of life works, but the elegance and = complexity=20 of biological systems at the molecular level have paralyzed science's = attempt to=20 explain their origins" (Darwin's Black Box, 1998, p. x).

The bombardier beetle's chemical weapon

One example of this kind of biological complexity is the bombardier = beetle's=20 defense system. It has so many essential parts and chemicals that, if = any are=20 missing, the whole system will not work. Moreover, if everything did not = work=20 just right, the deadly chemical mixture inside the beetle would prove = fatal=20 rather than favorable.

The tiny beetle, less than an inch long, appears as a tasty morsel = for many=20 types of animals. But, as they near the beetle to gobble it up, they = suddenly=20 find themselves sprayed with a scalding and noxious solution that forces = them to=20 beat a fast retreat. How can this unassuming insect produce such a = complex and=20 effective defense system?

The components making up the beetle's effective chemical warfare have = been=20 analyzed by chemists and biologists down to the molecular level. When = the beetle=20 senses danger, it secretes two chemicals, hydrogen peroxide and = hydroquinone,=20 that end up in a storage chamber inside its body. By tensing certain = muscles, it=20 moves the chemicals to another compartment, called the explosion = chamber.

But, just as a loaded cannon will not go off without some sort of = ignition=20 device, so these two chemicals will not explode without the right = catalyst being=20 added. Inside the beetle's body, this catalyst is injected into the = explosion=20 chamber. As a result, a boiling hot and toxic liquid is spewed out of = the=20 beetle's rear toward the threatening predator's face. All three chemical = elements and chambers have to exist for this powerful defense system to=20 work.

How could such a complex system evolve by gradual steps? With only = the two=20 chemicals mixing, nothing happens. But, when the catalyst is added in = the proper=20 amount and at the right time, the beetle is equipped with an amazing = chemical=20 cannon. Could all these components appear by a gradual, step-by-step=20 process?

Francis Hitching comments on the bombardier beetle's defense system: = "The=20 chain of events that could have led to the evolution of such a complex,=20 coordinated and subtle process is beyond biological explanation on a = simple=20 step-by-step basis. The slightest alteration in the chemical balance = would=20 result immediately in a race of exploded beetles. The problem of = evolutionary=20 novelties is quite widely accepted among biologists . . . In = every=20 case, the difficulty is compounded by the lack of fossil evidence. The = first=20 time that the plant, creature, or organ appears, it is in its finished = state, so=20 to speak" (The Neck of the Giraffe, 1982, p. 68).

Nevertheless, evolutionist Richard Dawkins tries to dismiss the = complex=20 features of the bombardier beetle by simply saying: "As for the = evolutionary=20 precursors of the system, both hydrogen peroxide and various kinds of = quinones=20 are used for other purposes in body chemistry. The bombardier beetle's = ancestors=20 simply pressed into different service chemicals that already happened to = be=20 around. That's often how evolution works" (The Blind = Watchmaker, 1986,=20 p. 87).

This is not a convincing explanation at all for Dr. Behe, who has = studied=20 this beetle's components down to their molecular level. "Dawkins' = explanation=20 for the evolution of the system," he says, "rests on the fact that the = system's=20 elements 'happened to be around' . . . But Dawkins has not = explained=20 how hydrogen peroxide and quinones came to be secreted together at very = high=20 concentration into one compartment that is connected . . . to = a second=20 compartment that contains enzymes necessary for the rapid reaction of = the=20 chemicals" (Behe, p. 34).

Now that the whole defense system of the beetle has been thoroughly = studied,=20 even if the chemicals "happened to be around," this elaborate chemical = cannon=20 would not work without everything from the molecular level up working = together=20 and at exactly the right time. Dawkins' argument is as absurd as saying = that if=20 gunpowder, a fuse, a barrel and a cannonball "happened to be around," = eventually=20 they would put themselves together, carefully load the ingredients in = the right=20 sizes and proportions, and then go off at the right direction without = blowing=20 themselves up somewhere along the way. No, all the components had to be=20 carefully and intelligently assembled in order to function.

Dr. Behe notes: "Some evolutionary biologists-like Richard = Dawkins-have=20 fertile imaginations. Given a starting point, they almost always can = spin a=20 story to get to any biological structure you wish . . . = Science,=20 however, cannot ultimately ignore relevant details, and at the molecular = level=20 all the 'details' become critical. If a molecular nut or bolt is = missing, then=20 the whole system can crash" (Behe, p. 65).

Astounding bird migrations

Consider another enormous biological complexity-how birds, such as = certain=20 storks, ducks, geese and robins, gained the ability to navigate = accurately=20 across thousands of miles of previously unknown territory and land in = exactly=20 the right zone and at the right time of year to feed and breed. Then, = when=20 winter ends in the northern hemisphere, they fly thousands of miles back = and=20 arrive safely in their same nesting grounds.
Homing experiments have = revealed=20 that these birds have inherited the ability to map their location using = the=20 stars by night and the sun by day.

hey subconsciously process astronomical data and gauge the altitude, = latitude=20 and longitude to fly unerringly to a predetermined place. They have an = internal=20 clock and calendar to let them know when to start and finish their = migrations.=20 Perhaps what is most surprising is that they are able to reach their = distant=20 destiny even on their first trip-without any experience!

For instance, the white-throated warbler migrates every year from = Germany to=20 Africa. Remarkably, when the adult birds migrate, they leave their = offspring=20 behind. Several weeks later, when the young birds are strong enough, = they=20 instinctively fly across thousands of miles of unknown land and sea to = arrive at=20 the same spot where their parents are waiting! How can these = inexperienced birds=20 navigate with such accuracy across thousands of miles and arrive safely = to be=20 reunited with their parents?

In North America the golden plover circumnavigates around most of the = northern and southern hemispheres in its migrations. After nesting in = Canada and=20 Alaska, plovers begin their trip from the northeastern tip of Canada and = fly=20 across the ocean down to Brazil and Argentina, a trip of more than 2,400 = miles.=20 When the season is over they travel back north, taking a different route = through=20 South and Central America, then up the Mississippi basin all the way to = their=20 nesting grounds. They do this flawlessly year after year.

Dr. Huse comments: "The causes of migrations and the incredible sense = of=20 direction shown by these animals presents the evolutionist with one of = the most=20 baffling problems of science. Evolutionists are indeed hard-pressed to = explain=20 how these remarkable abilities evolved piecemeal through mere chance = processes=20 apart from any directing intelligence. The piecemeal development of such = an=20 instinct seems highly improbable because migratory instincts are useless = unless=20 perfect. Obviously, it is of no benefit to be able to navigate perfectly = across=20 only half of an ocean" (The Collapse of Evolution, 1998, p. = 34).

The salmon's amazing cycle

Some species of salmon exhibit amazingly complex migrations. Hatching = from=20 eggs in streams, they spend the first few years of life in freshwater = lakes and=20 rivers. After growing to several inches they swim downstream to the = ocean, where=20 they adapt to a completely different chemical environment-saltwater-and = spend=20 the next few years.

In the process they often migrate for thousands of miles as they feed = and=20 grow. Eventually, toward the end of their lives, they leave the ocean=20 environment and swim upriver and upstream against the current until they = reach=20 the very stretch of stream where they were hatched years earlier. There = they=20 spawn and die, with their decaying bodies providing nutrients for the = newly laid=20 eggs. The eggs then hatch to start a new generation, repeating the = amazing=20 cycle.

These many adaptations go against the supposed "numerous, successive, = slight=20 modifications" of evolutionary theory as well as plain common sense. If = a=20 species is well adapted to live in freshwater, why undergo the = physiological=20 changes necessary to live in saltwater? And why the enormous and = exhausting trip=20 back to their original birthplace only to face certain death?

How do these species, after traveling up to several thousand miles, = manage to=20 find the very streams in which they were first spawned several years = earlier? No=20 plausible evolutionary explanation has been offered.

The decoy fish

In Hawaiian waters swims the astounding decoy fish. When hunting for = other=20 fish to eat, it raises its dorsal fin, which appears as a small, = helpless fish,=20 complete with an apparent mouth and eye.

It then stays motionless except for the dorsal fin, which it moves = from side=20 to side to make the decoy appear to open and close its mouth. The fin = itself=20 becomes transparent except for the upper part of the fin, which looks = like a=20 separate fish. It turns a bright red, enhancing the illusion of a = smaller fish.=20 This unassuming creature has just created an optical illusion that even = a=20 Hollywood special-effects artist would envy. To an incoming fish the = decoy looks=20 like an easy meal, and as it moves in for the kill it suddenly finds = itself=20 inside the jaws of the decoy fish.

As Dr. Huse notes: "The decoy-fish clearly exhibits great ingenuity,=20 attention to biological details, and a sense of purposefulness. No = matter how=20 one contorts one's reasoning, one cannot explain such a marvel in terms = of the=20 evolutionary theory. Such clear design does not result from mere chance = but=20 rather requires careful and deliberate blueprint encoding within the DNA = of the=20 decoy-fish by a highly capable molecular programmer"
(Huse, p. = 36).

Dr. Huse notes other fish species that use similar deceptions to = snare a=20 meal. "One type of anglerfish has a 'fishing rod' coming out of its back = with a=20 luminescent 'bulb' at the end of it. Another, the deep-sea angler, has a = 'light=20 bulb' hanging from the roof of its mouth. It just swims around with an = open=20 mouth, dangling the lure from side to side. Small fish, attracted by the = display, swim to their death right into the angler's mouth!" (Huse, p. = 36).

He also notes that anglerfish have the ability to move their "bait" = in a=20 manner that mimics the real thing; an anglerfish with a fishlike bait = will move=20 it in a swimming motion while one with an appendage resembling a shrimp = will=20 move it with a shrimp's backward-darting motion. On those occasions when = the=20 anglerfish's "bait" is nipped off-as could be expected to happen under = the=20 circumstances-the anglerfish can fully regrow
it within two weeks = (Huse, p.=20 36).

Gradual adaptations?

Now, with our greater understanding of enormously complex and = integrated=20 systems that rule all living systems, we see that Darwin's theory that = all life=20 evolved through a gradual system of adaptations can be easily and = satisfactorily=20 refuted.

Dr. Behe sums up the results of many years of working in molecular=20 biochemistry: "The simplicity that was once expected to be the = foundation of=20 life has proven to be a phantom; instead, systems of horrendous, = irreducible=20 complexity inhabit the cell. The resulting realization that life was = designed by=20 an intelligence is a shock to us in the twentieth century who have = gotten used=20 to thinking of life as the result of simple natural laws" (Behe, p. = 252).

Scientist Soren Lovtrup, admits, "I believe that one day the = Darwinian myth=20 will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science" = (Darwinism:=20 The Refutation of a Myth, 1987, p. 422).

Creation or Evolution =97 Does It Really Matter What You = Believe?

[ Return to = booklet=20 contents ]

Animal Oddities That Defy Evolution

[ Return to = booklet=20 contents ] [ Read = Next=20 Section ]