Flatfish Flattens Creationist Argument

Darwin’s Origin of the Species ignited a firestorm of controversy between scientists and creationists when it was published, and for some reason that firestorm has been rekindled in the last two decades. Virtually every new development in ancestral DNA research or fossil discovery either fully supports or refines the theory of evolution. Things that are yet undiscovered or unknown are cited as proof positive of creationism. Now another one of those unknown questions often cited by creationists, the mystery of the flatfish, has been answered.

The Creationist’s Flatfish Argument

The adult flatfish has both eyes on the same side of its head. Creationists have long argued that since the intermediary steps between the current eye map of flatfish and the usual symmetrical skull would have no survival advantage, it could not have been a survival-selected trait according to Darwin’s theory. Therefore, say creationists, since this feature of flatfish anatomy cannot be explained by evolutionary scientists, the entire theory of evolution is invalid and God’s active creation of all living things must be the correct acknowledge. Besides, evolution is fair a theory anyway and as a theory, by definition, it remains unproven by the weight of evidence. If there were strong evidence it would be a law instead of a theory. Thus, creationists argue, creationism and intelligent design are theories and should be accredited the same weight.

What Theory Means in Science

First, let’s address the last argument. A theory does remain unproven by the weight of evidence. That does not make it false. That does not mean there is any evidence whatsoever against the validity of the theory. A scientific theory, in fact, goes away as an option, when any piece of conclusive evidence disproves it. The term theory, in science, is only customary when a statement is the best available solution to a problem based on an overwhelming preponderance of the evidence. Scientists, by nature, are a conservative lot, and if they are at all unsure about something, it is generally termed a hypothesis until it can be tested or backed up with solid and measurable evidence. If something as broadly researched as evolution is given the appellation “theory”, it is because there is an abundance of evidence to support it as true, and not a single piece of available evidence which rules the theory of evolution out. While absolute proof is a difficult hurdle in science, the fact that evolution is labeled a theory does not’t mean, as creationists would have us believe, that it is on shaky ground. In fact, it means quite the opposite. Both creationism and intelligent design rely not on evidence, but on lack of evidence. If a scientist cannot explain something like the flatfish anatomy in terms of the original understanding of evolution, then it is seized upon as solid evidence that creationism or intelligent design is the reason why evolution cannot explain it.

The Curious Anatomy of Flatfish

Next, let’s address the curious anatomy of the flatfish. The lack of any intermediary species between fish with symmetrical heads and one eye on each side of the skull and the current flatfish, in which both eyes migrate to one side of the head, has long been viewed by creationists as evidence of a flaw in evolutionary theory. Scientists confronted with the question of how this particular feature could have evolved have had to say “I don’t know,” until now. Now there is new evidence, and that new evidence supports the gradual change of evolutionary theory 100%.

The Missing Flatfish Link

Paul Friedman, of the University of Chicago, examined multiple fossil specimens of Amphistium and Heteronectes fishes, both visually and with a CT scanner to reveal interior details of the fossils. His observations show that both these fish fossils relate early ancestors of the modern flatfish, but while the peep of the adults was partially displaced from a symmetrical place, it had not fully crossed over to the opposite side of the head. Amphistium and Heteronectes narrate an, until now missing, intermediary stage between ancient fish with symmetrical skulls, and new flatfish with both eyes on one side of the skull. As Friedman states in a University of Chicago press release, this indicates that “the evolution of the profound cranial asymmetry of extant flatfish was gradual in nature.”

The result of this discovery is that the question of whether such a feature could have evolved gradually is answered. It could, and it did. Once again new evidence is discovered and it falls in line with all the other evidence supporting evolution, and contradicting creationism and the sudden creation of the species as they exist today.

What the Flatfish Discovery says about the Existence of God

The flatfish missing link discovery says absolutely nothing about the existence of God, although it does say something about the literal versus allegorical nature of certain Bible passages. Many scientists, even evolutionary scientists, are devout Christians who believe in God. If there is an omniscient and omnipotent God who created the universe, He knew even before He set the Big Bang into motion that we would evolve to worship Him. The debate between creationists, intelligent produce advocates, and evolutionary scientists is really just a inquire of God’s methodology.

Source:
The University of Chicago Medical Center (July 2008). Flatfish Fossils Gain in Missing Evolutionary Link. Retrieved July 13, 2008, from www.uchospitals.edu/news/2008/20080709-flatfish.html

Related Posts

• Living Life In High Definition – There Is Life After Add (0)
• Duality, Polarity And Paradox (0)
• Narcissists And Psychopaths On The Internet (0)
• Medicare Cuts, Medicaid Cuts And Obama Care. A Moral Dilemma (0)