NOT Seeing Evolution in a Petri Dish!
In the December 2007 edition of the evolutionist magazine Scientific American is an article titled Evolution in a Petri Dish. It tells of an experiment in a Spanish laboratory in which tiny worms known a C elegans were dumped in a petri dish filled with an infectious bacterium called Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Within a week one dish of C elegans out of over 100 dishes had survived the bacterium.
Trumpeted in Scientific American as proof of evolution, this adaptation is of course nothing of the kind. It is another example of evolutionists grasping at straws, which they even admit to if the article is read carefully. It turns out that the C elegans that survived the bacterium were a “second-class selection”, they were slower in their movements because they consumed 30 percent less oxygen than their first class cousins. What this so-called proof of evolution really is is an example of a downward spiral of genetic information. What really happened was there was a loss of genetic information that weakened the worms overall, while simultaneously making them resistant to the bacterium. This kind of downward mutation has been seen before in such things as antibiotic resistance in bacteria and sickle cell anemia. The evolutionists at the Spanish lab stated that the mutated worms were on the verge of being classified as a new species, but so what. Dogs and wolves are classified as separate species, even though the are genetically close enough to interbreed. Determining species is largely just a naming game; it says nothing about the genetic makeup of the animals involved. Genetically all of the worms are virtually identical, with the second-class worms being just a little slower. But being a retarded worm is hardly evidence that a worm will ever turn into a human, which is what evolutionists want people to believe.
The fact that evolutionists feel compelled to invent a story like this out of the genetic equivalent of smoke and mirrors really does show just how bare their cupboard really is. In a backhanded salute to Creationists the editors in a sidebar state that polls show that significantly larger numbers of Americans reject evolutionism than in other countries, but that “Research that shows microscopic worms on the verge of speciation provides evolution with experimental evidence – evidence that creationism does not have”. The fact that a genetically downhill mutation is considered “experimental evidence for evolution” graphically demonstrates the scientific bankruptcy of evolutionism. Creationists have never disputed that animals, big and small, are capable of sufficient variation to produce animals that can be given different names. What this experiment does not do is to give any true support to those who are seeking real evidence for evolution that would be capable of turning fish into philosophers or worms into women.