GLENDORA, CA (ANS) -- The old saying goes, “Seeing is believing.” Many evolutionary biologists employ this way of thinking to argue for the validity of the evolutionary paradigm. They claim that because we can see evolutionary changes in action today, the theory of evolution must be a fact. Oxford biologist and outspoken atheist Richard Dawkins makes this very case in his most recent book, The Greatest Show on Earth, which presents what he believes to be the best evidence for biological evolution.

Yes, we really do see some types of evolution happening today. But this shouldn’t trouble Christians at all. That’s because the types of evolution we see do not necessarily prove that life’s origin, history, and diversity came about by purely natural means—but they do lend support for creation.

As a biochemist, I think of evolution as fitting into one of five distinct categories.

1. Microevolution refers to changes happening within a species. For example, peppered moths changed wing color in response to rising pollution in Britain caused by the Industrial Revolution, thus allowing them to continue to evade predators via camouflage.

2. Speciation occurs when one species gives rise to a closely related sister species. The finches on the Galapagos Islands provide a textbook example of this kind of transformation. An ancestral South American finch species arrived at the Galapagos Islands and eventually became a variety of species that differ primarily in body size and in beak size and shape.

3. Microbial evolution describes changes in viruses, bacteria, archaea, and single-celled eukaryotes (cells that contain a nucleus). Common examples of such changes are the acquisition of antibiotic resistance in bacteria and the emergence of drug-resistant strains of malaria parasites.

4. Chemical evolution refers to the processes that presumably generated Earth’s initial life-forms. According to this model, chemical selection transformed a complex chemical mixture of simple compounds (known as the prebiotic soup) into protocellular entities that further evolved to yield the first true cells.

5. Macroevolution refers to the change of one kind of animal into an entirely different kind. Examples would include humans’ evolving from a primate ancestor, whales’ evolving from a terrestrial wolf-like mammal, and birds’ evolving from dinosaurs. The question of whether macroevolution has actually occurred resides at the center of the creation/intelligent design/evolution controversy.

Here is my take as a biochemist and Bible-believing Christian on these categories. There is a preponderance of evidence for microevolution, speciation, and microbial evolution occurring today, but the data shouldn’t be regarded by Christians as threatening or even controversial. Observation of these three types of change doesn’t mean that macroevolution is necessarily valid. The scale of the biological change that takes place in microevolution and speciation is radically different from the presumed alterations that must take occur to support macroevolution.

In reality, the ability of organisms to experience microevolutionary change can be taken as evidence for creation and offers little to support the evolutionary paradigm. By providing a means for species to adapt to changing conditions, God has equipped them for survival. As for microbial evolution, it isn’t surprising that single-celled microbes and viruses can evolve given their extremely large population sizes and capacity to take up large pieces of DNA from their surrounds and incorporate it into their genomes. It’s a stretch to maintain that what is true for viruses and single-celled prokaryotic (nucleus-free) organisms is valid for complex, multicellular creatures.

Chemical evolution and macroevolution deserve our skepticism. Origin-of-life researchers have admitted that a prebiotic soup did not exist early in Earth’s history. (My colleague, Dr. Hugh Ross and I discuss the problems with chemical evolution in some detail in our book Origins of Life.)

Meanwhile, supposed macroevolutionary changes require that evolutionary processes possess genuine creative potential, something which is more compatible with an intelligent, intentional Creator than with mindless natural processes. Furthermore, the absence of transitional forms and the sudden appearances of new organisms in the fossil record fly in the face of the evolutionary framework, yet they are exactly what we would expect the fossil record to look like if a Creator orchestrated life’s history.

As is true in other areas of science, natural processes happening at one level can’t automatically be extrapolated to other levels without adequate validation. In my opinion, this validation doesn’t exist for macroevolutionary changes.

Seeing, may be believing, but there is often more than meets the eye. That is definitely the case when it comes to observing evolution in action.

To schedule an interview with Dr. Fazale Rana, please contact Kristi Sandberg at ksandberg@reasons.org or call (800) 482-7836 ext. 112.

---

Fazale Rana, PhD, is vice president of research and apologetics at Reasons To Believe (RTB). He holds an undergraduate degree in chemistry from West Virginia State College and a PhD in chemistry from Ohio University. Before joining RTB, he worked seven years as a senior scientist for Procter & Gamble. He is a coauthor of Origins of Life and Who Was Adam? and the author of The Cell’s Design. Dr. Rana travels around the country speaking on science/faith issues and is a frequent guest on TV and radio interviews. He and his wife, Amy, live in Southern California with their three daughters.