Evolution, or Design?

Posted: 26th August 2011 by Pastoral Musings in apologetics, creation
Tags: , , ,
Orpington chicken head

Image via Wikipedia

Chickens and other birds are thought to have descended from dinosaurs through a series of genetic changes.

But by altering the DNA of chicken embryos in the early stages of their development, scientists are able to undo the progress made by evolution and give them qualities they lost millions of years ago…

…by altering parts of their DNA to resemble alligator genes before the beak began to develop, Dr Abzhanov and Harvard University graduate student Bhart-Anjan Bhullar were able to alter the development of chicken embryos so that they grew snouts instead.

via Scientists reverse evolution with snouted chicken – Telegraph.

The issue is obvious that what truly happened points to the fact that a designer can make changes in creatures.

There was no evolution involved in this. What was involved was intentional design on the part of the ones working with DNA.

Enhanced by Zemanta
  1. Joel says:

    The issue is actually the reverse. It proves that within the DNA of chickens, birds, there remains the DNA of alligators and the such. Yes, I do believe in a hand guiding us, through evolution or whatever you want to call it. Personally, you would have to be a scientific fundamentalist (lower case f) to not be able to agree that our universe is so finally tuned for life, and not just any life, but our life.

    • Pastoral Musings says:

      I think that you miss the fact that the DNA was altered.
      Similarities in DNA do not necessarily mean common descent. There is the option of the common Creator.
      Even the first sentence of the article bears out the fact that it has not been proven that chickens descended from dinosaurs. “Chickens and other birds are thought to have descended from dinosaurs through a series of genetic changes.”
      Note again, “But by altering parts of their DNA to resemble alligator genes before the beak began to develop, Dr Abzhanov and Harvard University graduate student Bhart-Anjan Bhullar were able to alter the development of chicken embryos so that they grew snouts instead.” In other words, they changed what was there. They did not necessarily cause it to revert to what it once was.
      The answer is hidden in plain sight.

  2. Joel says:

    Jason, I think you read too literally the article, as science will rarely say (in official papers) that they have proven anything. Further, as this is a news story, they are not an authority on what science thinks or proven.

    The fact is, is that the DNA was only altered using the same DNA. It is not just a case of ‘commonality’ but of science.

    It was a reverse because they only worked within the bounds of the present DNA. They didn’t reconfigure it, but stopped some from developing. We could – and we should not – the same with human DNA and prevent certain things from developing.