Torch, Summer 1979

Natural selection, according to Darwin, involved a struggle for existence, in which the suIVivors were declared to be more fit than the nonsuIVivors. The concept has been modified somewhat in Neo– Darwinism: the individuals that leave more offspring are considered more fit. However, the definition of natural selection is a bit ambiguous. The individuals who suIVive are the fittest; and the fittest are defined as those who suIVive. By this definition, if you outlive someone else you are more fit. Let us consider an example of natural selection. The example most popular now among evolutionists is the peppered moth in England, in which we are supposed to be able to see evolution actually taking place. Peppered moths are either black or white. Originally probably only one color existed; the second color was produced by a mutation. At one time nearly all the moths were white. Darker colored moths were easily spotted by birds in search of food. The moths would be found on tree trunks; the lighter colored moths blended with the color of the bark, but the dark moths were very noticeable. The birds "selected" dark moths, so that the light moths appeared to be more fit. As industrialization spread in England, so did air pollution, resulting in the darkening of tree trunks. The dark moths were then camouflaged against the bark, but the light moths stood out against the dark background. This resulted in more light moths being eaten by birds; so that in a few years, most of the moths were dark. Now, with efforts to limit air pollution, the bark of trees is returning to its original lighter color. Scientists are obseIVing an increase in proportion of white moths, as more of the dark moths fall prey to birds. Natural selection is playing a role in determining the color of the peppered moth. This is suggested by some as visible evidence of evolution. But is it really evolution? Evolution is sometimes defined as a change in gene frequency. The illustration of the peppered moth does fit this definition; the proportion of light and dark moths in the population does change over a period of time. However, a change in the frequency of one gene cannot be used as evidence for inanimate chemicals combining to form a cell and that cell's descendents gradually changing, developing new species. The peppered moths are still peppered moths after the color change, with no indication of becoming something else. The color change gives no clue as to the ancestry of peppered moths. Some evolutionists are realizing that natural selection does not explain the origin of kinds of life;it does not tell us how a peppered moth or a horse got here. If natural selection is ndt an agent of evolution, what is its function? Remember that most mutations are detrimental. So a plant or animal expressing a new mutation is less likely to~ suIVive or to produce offspring; that is, it is less fit than the "normal" individual. Natural selection will then eliminate the mutation. This is the function of natural selection: to preserve the original type by preventing detrimental mutations from being establish~d in a population. Consider the evolution of birds from reptiles in which the wing developed from the front leg. This would have required many mutations in succession. After the first mutation, but before the wing was fully developed, the reptile-bird would be seriously handicapped. It could not fly, nor could it use its front leg efficiently.This would make it a less fit individual, and natural selection would soon eliminate it. Thus natural selection would prevent evolution rather than act as a force of evolution. The color mutation in the peppered moth may be called a neutral rather than a detrimental mutation. Even so, when the environment changes, natural selection plays a preseIVing role. Without this selection, the entire species of peppered moth might quickly have become extinct. Mutations and natural selection are examples of two fundamental forces in the universe. When God finished His work of creation and pronounced it very good (Gen. 1:31), all of creation was designed to last forever. All life, including trees (Gen. 1:11), other plants (Gen. 1:12), marine life (Gen. 1:21), birds (Gen. 1:21), and other animals (Gen. 1:24) were commanded to reproduce after their kind. This is the principle of conservation; natural selection is one of God's means of perpetuating life in its originally created form. With the fall of man, death and decay have become a second force affecting not only man (Rom. 5:12), but the entire universe (Rom. 8:22). Mutations are but one avenue of decay in the world. The two principles: one of conservation-the other of decay, are working against each other. The story told by the fossil record is one of extinction of species; it appears that decay may be winning the battle. But we have the promise of the new earth (Rev. 21:4) . It seems that mutations and natural selection are two agents used by God to accomplish His purpose in creation. Dr. Baumann is Chairman of the Department of Science and Mathematics at Cedarville College. 5