2017/06/07

A comparison of two models of the origin of life and biodiversity

A comparison of two models of the origin of life and biodiversity


Darwinian tree of life
Creation orchard




A hypothetical model. Never observed.
Observational science.
Requires increase of biological information, new structures and functions. Never observed.
Genetic mutations are mostly harmful errors and result in degradation and loss of biological information. Genes are driven by life(style). Observed science.
Based on an assumption that organisms experience positive changes through random mutations and selection. Genes are drivers. Never observed.
Variation of organisms is based on existing information = Epigenetic mechanisms are induced by nutrition, climate, stress and other environmental factors. Observed science.
Not supported by the fossil record. A serious lack of the most important transitional fossils. Still missing link between apes and humans. The assumed ancestor of primates?
Confirmed by the fossil record. Fossils point to a global, catastrophic event and rapid burials.
Not supported by modern science, because:
- There are no mechanisms leading to simultaneous and synchronized increase of different forms (digital, analog, metadata) of biological information.
Supported by modern science, because:
- Changes in organisms are based on epigenetic mechanisms or loss of biological information.
Biggest problems:
- Abiogenesis
- Dinosaur bones’ soft tissues.
- 203,000 disease-causing genetic defects in the human DNA.
- Dog breeding shows the results of variation: a dead end.
- Molecular mechanisms and language of DNA are way too complex. Random lottery is not able to build such intelligent mechanisms.
- Receptors, signals and response regulators! Irreducible complexity.

Biggest problems:
- The most of created kinds are extinct.
Conclusion: Darwinian tree of life is not based on science.
Conclusion: Creation orchard is supported by discoveries made by modern science.