Definitions are a good place to begin. What is “evolution”? When the evolution versus creation debate started in the 1800s, the ground rules were clear. At that time the issue was plain and simple. Everybody knew Genesis recorded all the cattle, creeping things and beasts of the earth reproduced “after his kind.” There was the “dog kind;” there was the “horse kind.” A “specie” was understood by all to be a “Genesis kind.”
The question was—Did a one-cell living organism evolve in complexity from one Genesis kind to another Genesis kind and finally culminate in humankind? Now evolutionists have changed the rules. They changed “specie” to refer to minute classifications of possible variation within the Genesis kind.
After decades of experimentation, scientists have produced many exotic varieties of fruitflies. Each variety has been designated a “specie.” As a result, some claimed they proved evolution from one specie to another. But it remained self-evident that all the numerous varieties were still fruitflies. What they did prove was a sort of “micro-evolution” within a Genesis kind. A change from one Genesis kind to another Genesis kind—a macro-evolution—was not demonstrated.
This variation within a specie, a Genesis kind, is now what is commonly referred to as “evolution” and applied to validate Darwinism. Unfortunately, most evolutionists who make these spectacular claims of evidencing evolution are the popular writers of books and articles for the general public and our schools. Jonathan Weiner’s book, the
Beak of the Finch: A Story of Evolution in our
Time, is a case in point. Weiner wrote about his time in the Galapagos Islands with two scientists who study finches.
Darwin had made many of his observations on the same island. These observations became the basis of his book,
The Origin of Species. The distinctive characteristic of what has come to be known as “Darwin’s finches” is that their beaks change up to five percent in size from time to time due to environmental changes.
A New York Times book review (May 15, 1994) of Weiner’s book began by degrading Biblical creation advocates for not being aware of the overwhelming proof for evolution that had been discovered. The review then praised Weiner for demonstrating that evolution is not just a theory about changes that occurred in the remote past, but a process that we can watch because it is going on all around us all the time. However, the ironic twist about the “Darwin's finches” saga is that Charles Darwin, who first discovered variations within the finches at the Galapagos Islands, did not himself use this beak variation factor as a proof of his evolution theory. Why?
This variation was only the minimal micro-evolution changes within a fixed Genesis kind or specie. Darwin’s evolutionary theory not only requires numerous genetic changes within a Genesis kind, but an evolving from one Genesis kind to another. For example, a fish would eventually become the progenitor for a horse somewhere down the line.
On the other hand, how reasonable for a master-mind Creator to design fixed classifications of species with genetic possibilities for variation within its kind. Science validates this rigidity between true Genesis-kind species. If evolution claims changes from one specie to another specie, the theory cannot be proved by simply redefining what a specie is!