the theoretical weaknesses mentioned above, the theory of
evolution by natural selection comes up against a fundamental
impasse when faced with concrete scientific findings. The
scientific value of a theory must be assessed according to
its success or failure in experiment and observation. Evolution
by natural selection fails on both counts.
Since Darwin's time, there has not been a single
shred of evidence put forward to show that natural selection
causes living things to evolve. Colin Patterson, the senior
paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in
London and a prominent evolutionist, stresses that natural
selection has never been observed to have the ability to cause
things to evolve:
No one has ever
produced a species by the mechanisms of natural selection.
No one has ever got near it, and most of the current
argument in neo-Darwinism is about this question.11
Pierre-Paul Grassť, a well-known French zoologist
and critic of Darwinism, has these words to say in "Evolution
and Natural Selection," a chapter of his book The Evolution
of Living Organisms.
The "evolution in action"
of J. Huxley and other biologists is simply the observation
of demographic facts, local fluctuations of genotypes, geographical
distributions. Often the species concerned have remained
practically unchanged for hundreds of centuries! Fluctuation
as a result of circumstances, with prior modification of
the genome, does not imply evolution, and we have tangible
proof of this in many panchronic species [i.e. living fossils
that remain unchanged for millions of years].12
A close look at a few "observed examples of natural
selection" presented by biologists who advocate the theory
of evolution, would reveal that, in reality, they do not provide
any evidence for evolution.
11 Colin Patterson, "Cladistics",
Interview by Brian Leek, interviewer Peter Franz, March 4,
1982, BBC (emphasis added)
12 Phillip E. Johnson, Darwin
On Trial, Intervarsity Press, Illinois, 1993, p. 27.