A comparison of two models of the origin of life and biodiversity
Darwinian tree of life
|
Creation orchard
|
 |
 |
A hypothetical model.
Never observed.
|
Observational
science.
|
Requires increase of
biological information, new structures and functions. Never observed.
|
Genetic mutations
are mostly harmful errors and result in degradation and loss of biological
information. Genes are driven by life(style). Observed science.
|
Based on an assumption
that organisms experience positive changes through random mutations and
selection. Genes are drivers. Never observed.
|
Variation of
organisms is based on existing information = Epigenetic mechanisms are induced
by nutrition, climate, stress and other environmental factors. Observed
science.
|
Not supported by the
fossil record. A serious lack of the most important transitional fossils.
Still missing link between apes and humans. The assumed ancestor of primates?
|
Confirmed by the
fossil record. Fossils point to a global, catastrophic event and rapid
burials.
|
Not supported by
modern science, because:
- There are no mechanisms leading to simultaneous and synchronized increase of different forms (digital, analog, metadata) of biological information. |
Supported by modern
science, because:
- Changes in organisms are based on epigenetic mechanisms or loss of biological information. |
Biggest problems:
- Abiogenesis
- Dinosaur bones’ soft tissues. - 203,000 disease-causing genetic defects in the human DNA. - Dog breeding shows the results of variation: a dead end. - Molecular mechanisms and language of DNA are way too complex. Random lottery is not able to build such intelligent mechanisms. - Receptors, signals and response regulators! Irreducible complexity. |
Biggest problems:
- The most of created kinds are extinct. |
Conclusion:
Darwinian tree of life is not based on science.
|
Conclusion: Creation
orchard is supported by discoveries made by modern science.
|
