Specious Speciation: The Myth of Observed Large-Scale Evolutionary Change - Evolution News & Views

Evolution News and Views (ENV) provides original reporting and analysis about the debate over intelligent design and evolution, including breaking news about scientific research.

Evolution News and Views
Evolution NEWS
 

Specious Speciation: The Myth of Observed Large-Scale Evolutionary Change


Specious Speciation:
Response to the TalkOrigins "Speciation FAQ"


FULL RESPONSE (PDF)

Other Installments:
This Post (Part 1): Specious Speciation: The Myth of Observed Large-Scale Evolutionary Change
Post 2: "Speciation"? It's All in the Definition
Post 3: Plants, Polyploidy, and Evolutionary Dead Ends
Post 4: Uncooperative Fruit Flies Refuse to Speciate in Laboratory Experiments
• Post 5: Speciation Fail: Single Bona Fide Example of Animal Speciation is Later Retracted
Post 6: Does the Evidence for Speciation Come from Nature or Groupthink?
For years, Internet Darwin activists have cited the TalkOrigins Speciation FAQ, titled "Observed Instances of Speciation," citing its claim that it "discusses several instances where speciation has been observed." This Speciation FAQ (for "Frequently Asked Questions") has long been a cornerstone citation for many pro-Darwin internet debaters, who claim it demonstrates that Darwinian evolution is capable of producing significant biological change.

Jonathan Wells responded to part of the FAQ in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design, but unfortunately a wholesale (and freely accessible) response has not been posted on the Internet -- until now.

Over the last few months, I've received a few of inquiries about this FAQ and decided to write a response (the full response can be found here). After analyzing a large portion of the technical literature cited in the FAQ, this review finds that the FAQ's claims are incorrect. For example:
  • NOT ONE of the examples studied documents the origin of large-scale biological change.
  • The vast majority of the examples do NOT even show the production of new species, where a "species" is defined by the standard definition of a "reproductively isolated population."
  • Only one single example in the FAQ shows the production of a new plant species via hybridization and polyploidy, but this example does not entail significant biological change.
  • Only one of the examples purports to document the production of a reproductively isolated population of animals -- however this example is overturned by a later study not mentioned in the FAQ.
  • Thus, not a single bona fide example of speciation in animals -- e.g. the establishment of a completely reproductively isolated population -- was found.

I should note from the outset that my purpose is not to deny that speciation can occur in nature, especially when it is defined merely as a reproductively isolated population. When trying to assess the creative power of the Darwinian mechanism, that definition is trivial. Rather, my purpose is to test the FAQ's claims. In that regard, if the FAQ is correct that "Many researchers feel that there are already ample reports [of speciation] in the literature," then an analysis of the literature cited in the FAQ suggests those researchers are wrong.

While most of the FAQ's discussions of the papers it cites are reasonably accurate, these papers amount to citation bluffs when one is claiming to provide "several instances where speciation has been observed." People who believe this FAQ demonstrates that Darwinian processes can produce large-scale biological change have been badly misled. As we'll see in some subsequent articles, the examples in the FAQ are ultimately used to make inaccurate claims, and the FAQ's title, "Observed Instances of Speciation," is unwarranted.

For additional details, please see the full response to the TalkOrigins Speciation FAQ.


FEATURES
 

TOP ARTICLES

TOP VIDEOS

TOP PODCASTS


more...