THE EVOLUTIONIST DECEPTIONS IN THE DOCUMENTARY
THE SHAPE OF LIFE
The first
in the series of documentaries called The Shape of Life, jointly
produced by the PBS and the National Geographic Society, was about the
origin of animals (metazoans). The scientific deceptions contained in
that documentary, which attempted to describe how the first multicellular
organisms came into being, are set out below.
The Organization Within the Sponge Cannot
be Explained by Evolution
At the beginning of the documentary there
is an account of how one day, in some way, sponge cells living independently
of one another took a decision among themselves to live together.
In fact, in line with the familiar evolutionist scenario, the program
even said that " Somehow, cells developed a language that allowed
them to work together." Yet, the fact is that this imaginary account-the
product of the evolutionists' own fantasy world-is a complete violation
of the facts.
The origin of the organization in living
things is one of the fundamental questions for which the theory of
evolution can never offer a logical explanation. There is absolutely
no reason for cells that can function independently of one another
to begin to act together. Yet, the different cells in all multicellular
organisms do work together towards a common purpose in an extremely
organized manner. The sponge is one example of this flawless organization
among cells.
Despite its very simple appearance, the
sponge, an animal from the phylum Porifera, actually consists
of exceedingly complex cells. These cells, organized in two layers,
set up a continuous flow of water inside the sponge. On the one hand,
the plankton in the water are filtered and digested; on the other,
waste material is deposited into the flow and carried away. In this
way, the sponge functions like a funnel in a specially established
current.
Sponges, which are regarded as having
the simplest animal organization, are actually very complex.
They attract scientists' attention because of their unusual
cellular organization (the cells do not form tissues such as
those found in other animals), their ability to regenerate lost
parts, and their biochemical features (they have many compounds
not known in other animals). This intricate design and perfect
organization in such a simple-seeming organism as the sponge
is evidence for God's incomparable creation. |
The cells cannot have adopted the principle
of working together by themselves. That is because they come into
being already in possession of the special connecting nodules that
bind them together. When sponge cells approach one another, these
connecting nodules grip one another and an organized, multicellular
appearance emerges. In short, sponge cells were designed to work together.
When they are all together, they immediately acquire a nature of their
own and assume the duties regarding the particular layer they are
in. With the enzymes they produce and their chemical digestion methods,
sponge cells are actually very complex.
This organization does not come about
with their knowledge. Cells have no brain, nervous system, or consciousness.
That is why there can be no question of "cells' inventing a language
of communication amongst themselves." The statement in the film that
"the cells somehow invented a language by which they could work together"
is as nonsensical and unrealistic as saying, "the paints somehow found
a language between themselves and produced the Mona Lisa." Like all
other paintings in the world, the Mona Lisa was created by a conscious
artist. Life was created in the same conscious manner.
The sponge cells take their shape, characteristics,
and function from the design described in the DNA sequence placed within
them. It is impossible for them to invent anything new or to write any
information in that DNA to allow them to acquire a new function. Thus,
not even the existence of the sponge, described as "the simplest animal
organization" by evolutionists, can be accounted for by a process of
evolution. Like all living things, sponges are evidence of the fact
of creation.
The Contradictions in DNA Comparisons
Refute the Theory of Evolution
In the final part of the documentary,
it is claimed that the sponge is the ancestor of all animals. This
claim rests on a comparison of certain fundamental areas in the DNA
sequences in living species with the same areas in the sponge DNA
chain. In this way, the finding of similar DNA sequences is regarded
as evidence of ancestral relationship by evolutionists.
The fact is, however, that this logic
is invalid. DNA is a common language by which life is described. If
we think of DNA as sentences which describe how a cell works, DNA
consists of different sentences in which different words are used.
The fact that the same words are encountered is the inevitable result
of the fact that this coded language employs only four letters. To
put it another way, the finding of similarities in DNA does not in
any way show that living things had a common ancestor. This similarity
is proof not of a "common ancestor," but of "common design." Every
similarity we encounter proves the common aspect of the design in
living things.
 |
On the other hand, just the length of
the DNA in the sponge is sufficient to invalidate the evolutionists'
expectations. The DNA of the sponge, put forward as the "primal animal
ancestor," consists of 1.8 billion base pairs (1.80pg.) According
to the evolutionary family tree, the DNA of the tench (species Tinca
tinca) should be a great deal longer than this, whereas in fact
it is only half the length of sponge DNA, consisting of a mere 810
million base pairs (0.81pg.) The chicken, described as a much more
advanced species than the sponge in the evolutionary family tree,
also has DNA that is shorter, at 1.25 billion base pairs (1.25pg.)
As we have seen, the genetic facts are
at total variance with the assumptions of the theory of evolution. As
the scientific findings have shown, living species did not evolve from
one another, but were created separately. (For further details regarding
genetic comparisons and the theory of evolution, see http://www.harunyahya.com/refuted10.php.)
Conclusion
The flawless design in living species
invalidates the idea of the evolutionary process. Evolutionists are
unable to account for even the emergence of a single cell by means
of evolution, so it is meaningless for them to try to use evolution
to explain the organization between those cells. Chance and unconscious
atoms cannot produce superior design.
The DNA in cells is a description written
in the same language in all the millions of different living species.
The fact that the information is written in the same language does
not support the claim that these species came about by chance and
evolved from one another. On the contrary, it shows that they were
created according to a common design. This is a scientific expression
of the fact that God created all living things.