 |
Do Peppered Moths Prove Evolution?
| |
John D. Morris, Ph.D.
Back To Genesis
No. 64b, April 1994
| |
Darwin's book, Origin of Species, published in 1859, proposed the concept ofevolution by purely naturalistic causes, especially natural selection. Hisidea was that the small variations observed within a population of plants oranimals would lead to large changes, given a fortuitous environmental change,which favored the variant's opportunity for survival and reproduction.
In his book, Darwin cited no examples of natural selection (or of the originof any species, by the way), for none was known at the time. It was ahypothetical concept only. He did discuss at length artificial selection-theresults of animal and plant breeders, which had produced significantresults. In fact, during the twenty years or so before he published, hecorresponded with many plant and animal breeders. They had purposivelyselected particular characteristics, which had some commercial value, producingnew breeds of dogs, faster horses, cows with more milk, crops with greateryield, etc. Darwin reported these successes, and postulated that the samecould happen in a natural setting, all the while acknowledging that, left tothemselves, the new variations quickly would breed back into the basictypes. Furthermore, those individuals, far from the norm, were typicallyless fit for survival in natural settings. Nevertheless, artificialselection was the main support for his idea of natural selection. | |
About this same time, an episode of true natural selection was taking place,however, and Darwin seems not to have fully grasped its significance. It issuch a good example of a population shift brought about by environmentalchanges that some have called it, "Darwin's missed opportunity."Evolutionists have not missed it since then, for it appears in almost everybook dealing with evolution and is touted as the proof of Darwinian (orNeo-Darwinian) style evolution. It concerns the peppered moth Bistonbetularia in England, and the case of "industrial melanism."
Throughout the centuries, this moth was observed to have a light color withsmall dark spots (pepper) 98% of the time. The other 2% possessed a darkcolor; same moth; two colors; all interfertile; all one species. Thepeppered group was well camouflaged from birds by the lichen-covered treetrunks.
|  | | In the 1800s, the industrial revolution brought air pollution and soot whichkilled the light-colored lichen, exposing the dark tree trunks. Now, so thestory goes, the light colored moths easily were seen by birds, while thedark moths were camouflaged better. The dark group survived and reproducedover 90% of the total population. Now that the environment is being cleanedup, the lichens are resuming, and the percentage of light moths isincreasing proportionately. The population shift has been hailed as proof of Darwinian evolution.Probably every student in public education has been taught it. However, whatreally happened? At the beginning, there were light and dark shades. Oncethe pollution darkened the environment, there were light and dark shades.There are light and dark shades now. Throughout the entire time, both shadesexisted and comprised a single interbreeding species. There is no evolutionhere. Actually, the situation is more complex than the textbooks present. Thereare at least five varieties of shades forming a continuum. The "controlled"experiments by Kettlewell and others in the '50s and '60s actually employedhighly abnormal population diversities and environments. Genetically, thesituation is quite complex.
|  | But, at any rate, the peppered moth demonstrates what creationists havebeen saying all along. Variation within a specific created type occurs allthe time. Natural selection can select the variant best suited for anenvironment, but natural selection does not create anything new. Why, then,do evolutionists use this as Exhibit No. 1? This, obviously, must be thebest evidence they have.
"Vital Articles on Science/Creation"
April 1994
Copyright © 1994 All Rights Reserved |
 |
