Currently, there is an open confrontation between evolutionists in the scientific community. Most evolutionists are neo-Darwinists who believe in a gradual transition from one form of life to another, but the number of other evolutionists who advocate intermittent equilibrium is constantly growing. They say that lifeforms changed suddenly through massive random genetic mutations caused by radiation
The reason new evolutionists hold this view is because they are aware that many of the fossils found are causing heated debate among neo-Darwinists themselves. The fossils that are used to support the theory of human evolution are considered either fake, human, or non-human. In addition, all "life forms" in the fossil record were found completely intact and intact (that is, there were no intermediate links), and new evolutionists are well aware that partially developed organisms or biological systems could not survive in the real world.
Imagine a fish with part of the fins, or with the feet that have begun to develop. What will be the survival rate of such creatures? A fish will not be able to fully use either fins or "legs", and if there is no corresponding fossil, then, consequently, there was no such creature. It can only exist in fairy tales.
Both groups of evolutionists admit that they cannot explain the origin of life, although they believe that it arose by accident. We do not hear about this war in the media, but it is actually real, and every year more and more neo-Darwinian scientists become supporters of the theory of intermittent equilibrium. Of course, both theories require belief, but creationism is, for intellectual reasons, a rationally based belief.
Scientific fact - there are restrictions on biological changes in nature. Genes exist in all types of micro-evolution (or limited evolution, such as different types of dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.), but not in macro-evolution (that is, from worm to human). Contrary to popular belief, there is no scientific evidence that random genetic mutations caused by a set of environmental factors, such as radiation, can produce entirely new genes and new traits. Mutations can only produce more variations on existing genes. For example, mutations in the genes responsible for human hair growth can create another type of human hair, but it will still be hair.
Due to the fact that mutations are accidents that occur in the genetic code, caused by random environmental factors, are almost always harmful. They damage the genetic code in the same way that the random energy of an earthquake damages buildings. Even if a good mutation occurs, for each such mutation, there are hundreds of harmful to the species, even deadly. Even a neutral mutation can turn into a harmful one over time, if enough of them accumulate. Moreover, mutations can cause duplication of existing traits (for example, an extra finger), but this is not the same as creating new traits. Most biological changes are not due to mutations, but due to new combinations of pre-existing genes.
What about junk DNA? Recent scientific evidence suggests that junk DNA is not at all useless. However, until recently, we had no idea how important these segments of DNA really are. "Non-coding" DNA segments are required for the regulation of gene expression and for various intracellular activities. Just because these parts do not encode a protein cannot be considered useless and cannot be used for anything else.
Many people have a completely misconception about how evolution should work. Physical properties and characteristics are determined and transmitted by genes, not by what happens to our body parts. For example, if a woman loses a finger, it will not affect how many fingers her child will have. Changing the color and structure of your hair will not affect your child's hair color and structure. Therefore, even if the muscles and bones of a particular monkey are changed in such a way that it becomes erect, it still cannot transfer this feature to its offspring. Only changes or mutations that occur in the genetic code of the reproductive cell (sperm or egg) can be passed on. This is exactly what neo-Darwinists believe and teach macro-evolution, which supposedly took place over hundreds of millions of years.
Monkeys, by the way, feel quite comfortable with their mode of movement, just like humans. Even a slight change in the position of muscles or bones can create some discomfort when walking, which can later turn into a problem. Most evolutionists believe that apes and humans descended from common ape-like ancestors, but there is no evidence that humans descended from ape or from an ape-like creature, but there is evidence that clearly indicates that apes descended from four-legged, dog-like animals.
Promotional video:
Genetic and biological similarities between species can logically be explained by a common "constructor" that has designed similar functions for different life forms. Some evolutionists have used the similarity of traits between species as an argument for the existence of transitional forms. However, this is not a very good argument, since the traits they speak of are fully formed and fully functional, they belong to a certain species. What about the platypus? It has traits that belong to both birds and mammals, but even evolutionists would not argue that it is a transitional link between the two species.
The fossils show that all species emerged as fully formed and fully functional. This could only happen by making them such. However, in educational institutions, along with the arguments of the traditional theory, opposite views are also given, this is done with the aim of developing critical thinking in students.