Skip to main content
  1. Life
  2. Religion & Spirituality
  3. Western Religions

Gradual evolution, punctuated equilibrium, or creation

See also

The world has produced numerous brilliant scientists in various fields. No one can deny the extraordinary facts they have been able to produce, or the great things they have been able to accomplish by their efforts. One in particular that I have always held admiration towards was one Stephen J. Gould. Gould was born in September of 1941 and died May 20, 2002. His life was during one of the most prolific times in history of scientific discovery. As always, I did not agree with Mr. Gould concerning evolution and naturalist thought, yet he acknowledged that gradual evolution was simply not a provable theory. And, of a certainty it is not. His most notable contribution to the cause of evolution was a study in which he and an associate, Niles Eldridge, proposed punctuated equilibrium. They based this on the fact that they could find no evidence of gradual change in the evolution process. Here is one of Mr. Gould's quotes which is very factual I am sure.

"Paleontologists have paid an enormous price for Darwin's argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we almost never see the very process we profess to study. ...The history of most fossil species includes two features particularly inconsistent with gradualism: 1. Stasis. Most species exhibit no directional change during their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking much the same as when they disappear; morphological change is usually limited and directionless. 2. Sudden appearance. In any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the steady transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and 'fully formed.'" (Gould, Stephen J. The Panda's Thumb, 1980, p. 181-182)

He is not by far, the only one who has reached that conclusion and were faced with the dilemma that, under their present course, the entire evolutionary hypothesis was useless. However, their new course of study has been blocked in virtually every way. His statement above explains that in the fossil records, there is virtually no evidence of change, yet they grab at straws and surmise that species suddenly 'jump' to a different type. Evolution from species to species is a foolish conjecture in itself, but for it to suddenly make the drastic move is outrageous. I do admit, that it would explain the lack of intermediate fossils.

To simply speculate that one species is similar to another so it must have suddenly made that wild step upward to the next most advanced stage towards humans is ludicrous. They even made jokes about this. Some who were critical of this new guess, referred to it as "evolution by jerks', and Mr. Gould good naturedly returned the remark by calling the gradualists, "evolution by creeps". Neither has been proven, and in fact, none have produced any evidence.

A quote by Jonathan Wells, PhD Molecular Biology, PhD Cell Biology, puts a thought which I agree with:

'Evolution' is a slippery word. I would say 'Minor changes within species happen', but Darwin didn't write a book called 'How Existing Species Change Over Time'. He wrote a book called 'The Origin of Species'. He purported to show how the same process leads to new species, in fact, every species. And the evidence for that grand claim is, in my opinion, almost totally lacking. (Expelled, April 18 2008 31.29)

“People who tell you that 'Science tells you everything you need to know about the world' or 'Science tells you that religion is all wrong' or 'Science tells you there is no God', those people aren't telling you scientific things. They are saying metaphysical things and they have to defend their positions from metaphysical reasons.” ( John Polkinghorne, theoretical physicist.) (Ibid)

To use a religious exclamation…Amen.

Advertisement