Welcome to the home of "The Question Evolution Project". There is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution. Evidence refuting evolution is suppressed by the scientific establishment, which is against the true spirit of scientific inquiry. Using an unregistered assault keyboard, articles and links to creation science resources are presented so people can obtain evidence that is not materialistic propaganda. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Wednesday, March 23, 2016

Flighty Evolutionary Fantasies

Purveyors of molecules-to-mallard evolution believe they have some ducky explanations for the origins of flight in various creatures, but they have one small problem: the explanations are anti-science. Sure, they sound good to the uneducated and will satisfy True Believers®, but cannot withstand scrutiny.

Evolutionists present explanations for the origin of flight, but they are superficial, faith-based, and do not withstand scrutiny and reason.
"Swallow in Flight" image credit: morgueFile / AcrylicArtist
Evolution is supposed to be gradual and accidental, relying on mutations (with a bit of help from natural selection). When different creatures have similar abilities, Darwinists use the fact-free faith-based claim of "convergent evolution". What makes things worse for them is that for something to evolve the ability to fly, everything has to be in place at the same time for this to happen. Otherwise, nothing makes sense, and evolving the necessary apparatus for flight one piece at a time would be harmful for the organism; such specified complexity happening by time and chance is ridiculous. No, there's no evolution happening, old son. The Creator designed critters to fly, and they do it quite well.
Examples of complexity in the natural world are not hard to come by. Living creatures all are examples of irreducible complexity. This phenomenon is well known in design engineering and refers to the fact that there are mechanisms which only work when everything works together. This is certainly true in the natural world as many mechanisms right down to the molecular world show that this is the case. The cell will not work without all the DNA machinery being in place, as very ably demonstrated by Behe.1 One of the best examples of complexity which defies a series of “gradual” changes is flight. Dawkins2 sought to try to justify such an idea of gradually producing flight, but showed very little understanding of the fundamental engineering principles involved in aerodynamics and control. He even suggested there may be wingless ancestors that, living in water, raised their gills to make primitive sails which then evolved into the flapping wings of insects as they got lifted by the wind.3 Insect flight and flapping motion is far more than having appendages to the body, and all engineers know this.

For controlled, heavier-than-air flight, there are four fundamental requirements: (1) A correct wing shape to give a lower air pressure on the upper surface; (2) a large enough wing area to support the weight; (3) some means of propulsion or gliding; and (4) extra surfaces, or a means of altering the main surfaces, in order to change direction and speed.

Flight occurs in many groups of the living world: (a) birds; (b) insects—flies, bees, wasps, butterflies, moths; (c) mammals—bats; (d) reptiles—the extinct pterosaurs (e.g., pterodactyls and pteranodons).
To read the rest, wing on over to "The Intricacies of Flight in the Natural World".