Should Darwin Day Be Observed? | The Institute for Creation Research
 
Should Darwin Day Be Observed?

Several countries have recently set aside February 12, Charles Darwin's birthday, as a special day to remember him. Evolutionists in America are calling for its adoption here too, and have tried to use the day to promote his work.

Certainly Charles Darwin was a major figure in world history. Few people have "changed the world" as he did. While he wasn't the first to propose evolution, or even natural selection as evolution's cause, when he published his book, Origin of Species, it captured the fancy of western scholarship like no other work. After a time it fully caught on, and now his ideas dominate thought. It extends not only into biology, but into geology, archaeology, sociology, astronomy, theology, economics, etc. Almost everything is thought to undergo gradual change over time, by means of random, natural processes. Truly it has become an entire worldview, affecting virtually every discipline. Maybe he deserves a day of remembrance.

As we consider this proposal, let's remind ourselves of the nature of biological systems and the main mechanisms of Darwinian change of one type into another; mutation and natural selection.

All forms of life which exist today are unimaginably complex. Even the simplest form of life is not at all simple. Even the simplest living thing is more complex than a super-computer. Furthermore, each form of life has its own unique genetic code, the DNA. The genes residing here dictate how the organism develops, functions, and reproduces. In order for one type of life to evolve into another, new genes must be obtained, presumably through random mutation of existing genes. Evolution claims that the most fit of these new genes can then be selected by natural selection. The accumulation of such better genes leads to new traits, features, and eventually organisms.

The letters in the DNA code have been deciphered recently but it hasn't really been decoded or read. Its complexity far exceeds human intelligence.

Note that all of this is thought to operate by random, natural processes. No intelligent input is required. Darwin had trained to be a pastor, but as his concept took shape, he renounced his belief in a personal, intelligent Creator God in favor of random forces of nature to design complex life. As his life progressed he essentially became what we now call an atheist, insisting that no Designer was responsible for the design we see.

But is it reasonable to claim that complexity which far surpasses human comprehension can be achieved by random mutation? Is this school of thought worthy of a special day of recognition?

The Bible has something to say about atheistic thinking. "The fool has said in his heart, There is no God" (Psalms 14:1). A fool in Scripture is not an idiot, but an atheist. It is foolish to ascribe complexity to random forces. Those who embrace evolution may be brilliant, but how foolish to believe that complexity can arise by random, thoughtless processes. "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:22).

This being realized, foolishness certainly doesn't need a special day. Actually, many have noted that there already is such a day. It's in April each year.

Cite this article: John D. Morris, Ph.D. 2005. Should Darwin Day Be Observed?. Acts & Facts. 34 (4).

The Latest
NEWS
The Brain’s Amazing Ability of Visual Perception
Scientists will never fully understand the brain’s operation.1,2,3 As neurological research continues, it will only reveal more...

ACTS & FACTS
Continuous Environmental Tracking : An Engineering-Based Model...
Purpose The Institute for Creation Research is engaged in our biggest science initiative in the last two decades, and it could be our most important...

ACTS & FACTS
CET: Testing the Cavefish Model
Staff Writer Purpose The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) is testing an engineering- based model of rapid biological adaptation called...

ACTS & FACTS
Original Biochemistry in Fossils
Purpose In 1997, paleontologist Dr. Mary Schweitzer accidentally stumbled upon what appeared to be blood vessels and blood cells from a T. rex...

ACTS & FACTS
Debunking an Iconic Uniformitarian Ice Age Theory
Purpose The Milankovitch, or astronomical, theory holds that the timing of Ice Ages is controlled by slow changes in Earth’s orbital and...

ACTS & FACTS
ICR and Explaining the Ice Age
by Larry Vardiman, Ph.D., and Michael J. Oard, M.S.* Purpose There is strong geological evidence for an Ice Age, so the Institute for Creation...

ACTS & FACTS
Planetary Magnetism
Purpose In 1971, Dr. Thomas Barnes publicized a then “trade secret” of scientists studying the earth’s magnetic field, which...

ACTS & FACTS
Cosmology Research
Purpose Taking the Hebrew text of Scripture at face value without inserting gaps or revising the meanings, the universe is only about 6,000 years...

ACTS & FACTS
The Coconino Sandstone: Water, not Wind
Purpose The Coconino Sandstone is one of the most well-known formations in Grand Canyon. The blond-colored sandstone, just three layers down from...

ACTS & FACTS
Global Stratigraphy Supports a Progressive Worldwide Flood
Purpose Is there geological evidence for a global flood? Is there evidence that the waters rose and peaked on Day 150 as recorded in Genesis 8?...