Sir John Ambrose Flemming

7/22/09
To Lagomort,

I found Flemming's book, Creation or Evolution? on line which I ordered. I recently started reading it. His arguments against organic evolution are similar to the ones I am already familiar with. But I wonder if I show you this evidence, if you will reject it like a knee jurk reaction? I wonder if you would really consider it as evidence or would you let your emotions get in the way?

I will continue to read the book to get a more complete handle on his arguments.

But for now let me say this. Fleming had a Doctorate of Science and was familiar with the scientific method: Observable, repeatable, testing. Observations are the key to true science. Fleming noted that there are no observations of one kind of creature changing into another completely different kind. There are systematic gaps between kinds. No transitional forms exist. Darwin predicted that we should find countless links in the fossil record, but none have been found. For example where are the link between the single-cell and multi-celled animals. There should be two celled animals, 20 celled, 200 celled, 2000 celled animals, etc and every number in between, but there are none. We don't find them alive or in the fossils.

What we actually find are single celled animals and multicellular animals. This is observable. You can repeat this finding over and over again including not finding any transitional links of 2 celled, 200 cells. etc, etc. 10 times in Genesis 1 it states that God made each kind to reproduce after its own kind. Like kinds producing like kinds with no Evolution and this matches observable facts.

This is only one of many systematic gaps that have missing links showing genetic homeostasis (no change in kind), and no limitless biological change. Other gaps can be seen between fish and amphibians, amphibians and reptiles, reptiles and birds, reptiles and mammals, & apes and man.

Gaps can be systematically observed as far down as the taxonomic level of Families.

All gaps not accounted for expose flaws in Evolution as a theory. That is what DARWIN indicated. This is so clearly factual that Gould and Eldredge revitalized Goldschmidt's "hopeful monster theory" and popularized "punctuated equilibrium": the notion that Evolution happened without leaving any transitions as evidence for it.

Creation Science as a Model of Origins predicts that Like Produces Like. We observe this today and in the fossils. Darwinian Evolution as a Model of Origins predicts thousands of intermediate step by step changes of one kind of animal changing into another kind. This is not observable.

Colin Patterson, curator of London's Natural History Museum and author of the book Evolution stated that if there was a single transitional link to give as evidence of Evolution he would have displayed it in his book (from Darwin's Enigma by Luther Sutherland chapter 4 under the heading Are There Any Documented Transitional Fossils?).

Fleming references respected Scientists in his day that rejected Darwinian Evolution based on observations like this. No he was not a Biologist specifically, but neither was Darwin. Fleming was a intellectual who thoroughly understood Science. To insinuate he was incapable of making rational scientific judgments about origins because he was religious simply does not stand. He points to observations made by himself as well as other scientists including Biologists.