Homology: Descent or Design? | The Institute for Creation Research
Homology: Descent or Design?

An evolutionist friend and I recently chatted about animals. He said it’s amazing how many different animals’ skeletons look so similar. Just stretch, shrink, and shape the bones of one creature to transform them into the skeletal arrangement of another. I recognized this as his way of expressing the keystone argument for evolution called homology. The conversation reminded me of two major flaws with this idea.

To scientists who reject the existence of a Creator, homology basically means that two different creatures with a similar feature must have evolved from a shared ancestor that also had that feature.1 Evolutionists label these similarities homologous features. For example, raccoons and humans have five fingers on each hand. Does this require that raccoons and humans both evolved from an unknown five-fingered mammal that lived millions of years ago?

Perhaps the most obvious flaw in this view is that the evidence fails to favor one origins option over the other. One may argue that evolution explains it, but what if a Creator crafted those five fingers only thousands of years ago to ensure raccoons and humans have just the right tools to thrive across a range of times and places? Either creation or evolution could explain the fact of five fingers.

That leads us to the second flaw in the homology argument—it oversimplifies similarities between the features. Creature features may look simple from a distance, but they actually require personal, skillful, preplanned precision engineering of the same sort that cars need. Cars and trucks have metal frames to which their engines and four wheels attach. At first glance, one might remark about how amazingly similar so many vehicles look. All you’d need to do is stretch and scrunch one frame to transform it into another vehicle’s frame. But zoom in closer and you’ll see that each tiny difference precisely accommodates a specific part. Even very similar vehicles often require different-size bolts, increased frame thicknesses to support higher engine torque ratios, and many other body style specifications. One can pretend that a car frame evolved into a truck frame, but we know that actual engineers customized each of these design details. The same could certainly be true of living creatures.

Imagine replacing a bone with the corresponding bone from a different creature. Would your hand work better with a raccoon thumb stuck on it, or the raccoon’s with yours? Instead, the length, width, size, shape, thickness, density, and angle of each bone’s facet makes a precise fit with its neighboring bone.

Where can we witness nature engineering features? When have we seen an animal skeleton morphing into that of another animal? As I saw printed on a recruitment poster for an engineering school, “Cool stuff doesn’t just make itself.” This truth applies just as much to man-made parts as it does to God-made creatures, despite the chatter about homology.

Upon closer examination, we find that similar creature features don’t point to a common ancestor but to a common designer. The precision engineering observed in both animals and people suggests that a Creator handcrafted every part.

Reference

  1. However, creation scientist Richard Owen pioneered homology in the mid-19th century, and he restricted the definition to pure descriptions without attributing origins scenarios to them. See Owen, R. 1843. Lectures on the comparative anatomy and physiology of the invertebrate animals delivered at the Royal College of Surgeons in 1843. London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans.

* Dr. Thomas is Research Associate at the Institute for Creation Research and earned his Ph.D. in paleobiochemistry from the University of Liverpool.

Cite this article: Brian Thomas, Ph.D. 2019. Homology: Descent or Design?. Acts & Facts. 48 (12).

The Latest
CREATION PODCAST
What About Transitional Fossils? | The Creation Podcast: Episode...
Transitional fossils supposedly contain evidence of one kind of creature morphing into another, and purportedly provide proof for evolution. But is...

NEWS
Did Our Middle Ear Evolve from Fish Gills?
A recent SciTechDaily article begins by saying, “Embryonic and fossil evidence proves that the human middle ear evolved from the spiracle of fishes”1...

CREATION.LIVE PODCAST
Can Scripture Be Trusted? | Creation.Live Podcast: Episode 8
Both believers and skeptics can find themselves asking if Scripture can be taken at its word. Is it scientifically accurate? Can its history be trusted?...

NEWS
Cambrian Soft Tissue Defies Evolution
Paleontologists have discovered “early fossils [of] simple hollow tubes ranging from a few millimetres to many centimetres in length.”1...

NEWS
Fruit Fly Jitters
Researchers working with fruit flies–the ubiquitous lab animal–have discovered the flies are able to undergo an amazing ocular process called...

CREATION PODCAST
Can Radioisotope Dating Be Trusted? | The Creation Podcast: Episode...
Carbon dating is a common method used to determine the ages of fossils and other materials, but carbon14 deteriorates quite quickly. How can it still...

NEWS
Prepare for the Big Non-Event!
In 1950 the famed Italian physicist Enrico Fermi asked his coworkers at the lunch table the simple metaphysical question in regard to possible aliens...

NEWS
Move Toward the Enemy: Fighting for Truth in Science
Honor to the soldier and sailor everywhere, who bravely bears his country’s cause. Honor, also, to the citizen who cares for his brother in the...

NEWS
Evolving Mammals?
The evolution of mammals from non-mammals, like the evolution of all other animal groups, has been, and will always be, problematic. English paleontologist...

NEWS
Butterfly Variation
Butterflies have made science news again, this time in regard to a master gene called WntA: “a combined team of researchers from Cornell University...