Spontaneous Generation and Evolution02/18/2015 Kathy Sanny Add Comment
February 18, 2015
Encyclopedia Britannica: “Spontaneous Generation, the hypothetical process by which living organisms develop from nonliving matter; also, the archaic theory that utilized this process to explain the origin of life. According to this theory, pieces of cheese and bread wrapped in rags and left in a dark corner, for example, were thus thought to produce mice, because after several weeks there were mice in the rags. Many believed in spontaneous generation because it explained such occurrences as the appearance of maggots on decaying meat.”
All About Science: “Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life on earth is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers–all related. Darwin’s general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) ‘descent with modification’. That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random general mutations occur within an organism’s genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival–a process known as ‘natural selection’. These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature).”
No living scientist today would give serious credence to Spontaneous Generation, so why do so many jump on the bandwagon of life developing slowly over time from non-life?
They will point to the difference being that the Theory of Evolution says it happened slowly over time from less complex to more complex, rather than “higher” forms suddenly appearing from non-life.
Is there really a difference?
Everything that we can study today shows that life can only come from life. Not only does life only come from life, it is only kind after kind.
“The law of biogenesis as taught in biology class states that only life could produce life.
You’ve probably heard the famous question: Which came first, the chicken or the egg? It’s a real dilemma for an evolutionist to answer. An egg comes from a chicken, yet the chicken comes from an egg. How can there be one without the other?
To complicate matters even more, the chicken has to come from a fertilized egg that has the mixture of two different genetic strains from both its parents. So the problem of the origin of life and initial reproduction is still a mystery that evolutionary science cannot adequately answer.
Yet for someone who believes in a special creation by a Creator, there is no dilemma here. First God made the male and female chickens, which produced the first fertilized egg-and the rest is history.” (Prove Evolution Is False-Even Without the Bible-Mario Seiglie-Vertical Thought-January-March 2012)
We do not have any examples of life coming from non-life to even expound on, so I want to look at a couple of examples of what happens when you try to produce a new “kind” from differing animals.
When creatures of different kinds are manipulated into reproducing, the offspring are not capable of reproducing.
Lions and tigers, which have almost identical skeletal features, both carrying 38 diploid chromosomes, yet when they mate they are not capable of producing viable reproducing offspring. The World’s Largest Cats: “Ligers are the world’s biggest cats, larger than their parents, with the strength of a lion and speed of a tiger combined. An average male liger stands almost 12ft tall on its hind legs and weighs up to half a ton, twice the weight of a wild lion or tiger. If the father is a lion and the mother a tiger, the offspring are known as ligers and the pairing results in gigantism.
Strangely, if the pairing is reversed and the mother is a lion, the offspring – known as a tigon – will be small. Tigons are even harder to breed than ligers and there are less tigons in the world. Although tigons are more inclined to dwarfism, it is not always the case. However, they weigh on average almost 3 times less than a liger.
Ligers look like both their parents only bigger. Their teeth are whoppers: two inches long. They may resemble either parent, and range from white to gold to brown, with or without spots and stripes. A male liger may have a mane, but it is usually much smaller than his father’s.
I was not able to find any documentation that a female has ever produced an offspring that then in turn reproduced.
When you mix horses and donkeys- you will get sterile mules. This is said to be because of the chromosomes. Mules have 63 chromosomes, a mixture of the horse’s 64 and the donkey’s 62. The different structure and number usually prevents the chromosomes from pairing up properly and creating successful embryos, rendering most mules infertile. There are no recorded cases of fertile mule stallions. A few mares have produced offspring when mated with a purebred horse or donkey, but their offspring have been sterile if they have any of the donkey characteristics.
Only one such case from 1939 claims the pairing of a female mule with a male horse produced a viable offspring (a male) that could reproduce-but his offspring had none of the donkey characteristics.
“The mule is a renowned example of hybrid vigor.” Charles Darwin wrote: “The mule always appears to me a most surprising animal. That a hybrid should possess more reason, memory, obstinacy, social affection, powers of muscular endurance, and length of life, than either of its parents, seems to indicate that art has here outdone nature.” (What Mr. Darwin Saw in His Voyage Round the World in the Ship ‘Beagle’. New York: Harper & Bros. p. 33-34.)
“The mule inherits from its sire the traits of intelligence, sure-footedness, toughness, endurance, disposition, and natural cautiousness. From its dam it inherits speed, conformation, and agility. Mules exhibit a higher cognitive intelligence than their parent species. This is also believed to be the result of hybrid vigor, similar to how mules acquire greater height and endurance than either parent.” (Hauer, John, ed. (2014). The Natural Superiority of Mules. Skyhorse.)
So, if a mule (and a liger) exhibits these superior characteristics, in size, speed, intelligence, and length of life to its parents, why would it not “naturally” select these traits to pass on to its young? Instead pairing a female with the original species can only reproduce offspring, and their offspring will be sterile if they exhibit any of the characteristics of the female.
“If throughout past ages life was actually drifting over in one continual stream from one form to another, it is to be expected that as many samples of the intermediate stages between species should be discovered in fossil condition as of the species themselves… All should be in a state of flux. But these missing links are wanting. There are no fossils of creatures whose scales were changing into feathers, or whose feet were changing into wings, no fossils of fish getting legs or reptiles getting hair. The real task of the geological evolutionist is not to find ‘the’ missing link, as if there were only one. The task is to find those thousands upon thousands of missing links that connect the many fossil species with one another.” (Byron Nelson, After Its Kind, 1970, pp. 60-62)
I believe that future generations will look back on this idea of life coming from non-life with the same humorous skepticism that the Spontaneous Generation idea of a few hundred years ago is looked upon now.
The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Scientific studies literally show that a creation cannot come without a Creator, life cannot come except through life, and that evolutionists have yet to find true ‘missing links’. Those who seek to do what is right in their own eyes are the ones who blindly follow this impossible theory, which lacks as much plausibility as the Spontaneous Generation taught centuries ago. Mankind does not wish to accept the God who lays down rules and standards of worship. Like it or not, believing or not, they will face Him one day and they will have to give an accounting of why they chose to ignore Him with the preponderance of evidence on His side.