Kathryn King Period 7 January 15, 2013

Darwins Disputed Theory of Evolution

Although the theory of evolution is often said to be true by many, I do not support it. There are too many gaps that make it hard for a complete picture into the past to be formed. Charles Darwin, the creator of the theory of evolution, has even said, I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science.It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaw[s] & holes as sound parts. The main pieces of evidence that do not create a complete picture include comparative anatomy and embryology, fossils, artificial selection, and biochemistry. However, some pieces of evidence, such as antibiotic resistance, pesticide resistance, and camouflage/mimicry do make the theory of evolution seem highly plausible. Comparative anatomy and embryology do not support the theory of evolution because they can only scratch the surface, literally. Anatomy is only the physical aspects of an organism, not the chemical. Comparative anatomy is the study of similarities and differences in the anatomy of different organisms. The basic idea of embryonic anatomy is that two embryos look like each other before they are fully developed. With the evidence (see picture attached to back) that has been given in support of comparative embryology and comparative anatomy, the public cannot be sure of what they are seeing. Those in favor of the theory of evolution may change images to support, and those that oppose might change the images to discourage. Also, all living things need three things: food, water, and shelter. The sole reason any embryos may look even slightly related would be because they have the same needs. Another piece of evidence that is unable to support the theory of evolution is fossils. Fossils also do not provide adequate information to support the theory of evolution. Certain types of organisms don't fossilize well, and the environmental conditions for forming good fossils are not that common, which then create a gap in the history of what once roamed the Earth. Without these crucial pieces of evidence, nobody can comprehend what came before a certain organism. The image on the back page supports this, with the transitional species between the earliest tetrapod and the lobe-finned fish missing. Artificial selection does not prove evolution because it is done by humans, not naturally. As humans choose what traits they want in an organism, it creates a whole different type of pet/plant/animal. A perfect example of this is the shorkie, a mix between a yorkie and a schnauzer. Pure bred shorkies do exist, but only because humans have created the category for them. Evolution would be a schnauzer and a yorkie producing an offspring naturally. Artificial selection does not change the schnauzer or yorkie breeds, but instead is considered a branch or mixed breed.

The last piece of evidence that does not support evolution is biochemistry. Since the genetic code that runs through all humans has only 4 different nucleotides, its no surprise that there are sequences of matching DNA in different species. Also, since there are different combinations of nucleotides that can make up the same amino acid, a different sequence of nucleotides could possibly code for the same amino acid as another. Although there is information that does not support evolution, there are a few pieces of evidence that do. For example, antibiotic resistance, pesticide resistance, camouflage, and mimicry support the theory. All of the pieces of evidence all have to do with a species surviving, and with the members of a species surviving that have the traits being forced to reproduce with one another; they then pass along those traits over a long period of time, evolving the species. Although some people claim that there is ample evidence to support the theory of evolution, comparative and embryonic anatomy, fossils, artificial selection, and biochemistry prove the theory incorrect.