Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Creation-Evolution Headlines: Darwinism puts the fog in dogma, …


“ … producing fogma, a dogma so thick you can’t see it unless you are outside of it.”  CEH comments on the tale of the jumping fish and the revealing fact that the Last Universal Common Ancestor was probably more complex than current simple organisms.

The fish story is just that (a fish story), but the LUCA story provides continuing confirmation of a trend seen for a decade (search on LUCA in our search bar, or go to 07/12/2010 “Bacteria Too Complex to Be Primitive Eukaryote Ancestors,” 01/14/2008 “Bacteria to the Future”, and 2/29/2004 “Was Their a Single Common Ancestor for All Life?” where Whitfield and the U of Illinois crew were struggling seven years ago with the LUCA myth). It confirms again that bacteria cannot be considered primitive transitional forms from the “RNA World” or whatever other speculative scenario the evolutionist wants to conjure up, as if “primitive” prokaryotes “emerged” from a chemical soup, then “tinkered” for a billion years or more before becoming eukaryotes. It puts more strain on origin-of-life scenarios, because the first cell had to “innovate” all this machinery early on by a blind, purposeless, unguided process. We report this not that one must accept the LUCA myth; it just shows that even using their own assumptions, evolutionists are having a harder time against the facts.

We said “revealing fact,” not “amazing fact” because organisms sometimes simplify themselves just by losing features, even to the point of becoming dependent on other organisms for basic functions. Theeis nothing in principle astonishing about an organism being more complex in the past, but it is inconvenient if you needed it to be simple.

Notice in the article that the lead author, Manfredo Suefferheld, who found the acidocalcisome in bacteria in 2003, said that finding organelles in bacteria went against tradition. “It was a dogma of microbiology that organelles weren’t present in bacteria,” he said. Science would be better without dogma. Darwinism puts the fog in dogma, producing fogma, a dogma so thick you can’t see it unless you are outside of it. The Darwin Party then puts the dog in fogma, sending their attack dogs barking and biting anyone who tries to clear the air.

Of course, as writer Dave Coppedge himself has cause to know, for the truly committed Darwinist, the attack dogs are the best argument; If they succeed, Darwin was right. It’s that simple, really.


Leave a Reply