One of the very strongest arguments against evolution has always been the tendency for every system, living or dead, individual or societal, moral or mundane, to wear out, deteriorate, or die. As is common to all experience, nothing, absolutely nothing, gets better on its own.
This ubiquitous tendency for decay has been recognized as one of the basic laws of nature. First codified in science, and dubbed the second law of thermodynamics, it has now been recognized in every system of thought, including genetics. This tendency has received the name "time's arrow," always pointing downhill.
However, notice that evolution proposes a directly opposite tendency. Subatomic particles evolve into galaxies; molecules evolve into men, although spontaneous increase in order has never been observed.
Now a well-indoctrinated evolutionist would cry "foul" at this point, for there are many examples of living systems developing into higher levels of order (like a seed into a plant), and evolution is about life. Such an evolutionist insists that the tendency for decay be offset by incoming energy from the sun, and nutrients from the soil. In addition, of course, no creationist would deny such growth.
But evolutionists need to realize that growth does not equate to evolution! A seed grows to maturity precisely because it already has presented the marvelous ability to take the sun's energy and convert it into useful forms. We call this process photosynthesis, although we don't fully understand it. Furthermore, the plant has the intricate DNA information code, which directs the growth along pre-ordained paths.
In order for the evolutionist's arguments to work, they must somehow account for the origin of photosynthetic ability and the DNA code, not to mention the myriads of other abilities and parts of the plant (or animal or cell). The plant appears to have been designed to do what it does right from the start. How could random changes in non-living chemicals produce any precursor of these entities, and how could random mutations in any (simple) living system produce the unfathomable complexity we now observe, when every random change we see points to disintegration, not improvement. Even wild hopes like "chaos theory," or "dissipative structures," merely produce (at best) interesting arrays of presently existing forms, not new and more capable structures, or abilities.
Unfortunately, evolutionary illogic doesn't stop with biology, for "ideas have consequences." Justices see our Constitution as "evolving to fit the needs of a maturing society." Social engineers view man as an animal, complete with animal habits and tendencies. Politicians sanction promiscuity and homosexuality as animal behavior and as a beneficial mutation. I just read an article justifying President Clinton's adulterous lifestyle by noting that the dominant male in animal groups possesses all the females. The evolutionary drive to succeed is supposed to be the same one, which drives one to unbridled sexual activity. This is therefore to be accepted as good(!)
The time has come for thinking people to throw off an illogic, which dominates our deteriorating culture. We have in place both the ability to do useful work and the minds to direct our efforts. Time is short. The death of a once great culture looms.
* Dr. John Morris is President of the Institute for Creation Research.
Cite this article: Morris, J. 1994. Are Things Getting Better or Are They Running Down? Acts & Facts. 23 (10).