In an episode of “Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman,” Morgan Freeman suggests that robots may be the future of human evolution (Season 4, Episode 6).
A “what” didn’t conceptualize and build the robots. Robots have not evolved like evolutionists claim chemicals, with no design, information, or intelligent purpose, evolved into what we see in the world today.
Humans designed and built the robots. Robots are far less complex than humans, and yet evolutionists swear on their science books (which they wrote) that we’ve evolved from nothing into something.
For the evolutionist, the word evolution has many meanings:
“The difficulty [in defining evolution] arises because the word evolution can be used in different senses, and equivocation can easily confuse people. In one sense evolution just means common descent — that living creatures are all related to a common ancestor. . . . In another sense evolution is sometimes used to mean Darwin’s particular theory of natural selection that results in one species evolving into another.”1
The multiple means of the word evolution extend to the absurd. For example, Tim Berra, professor of zoology at Ohio State University, compares biological evolution with the “evolution” of the Corvette:
“Everything evolves, in the sense of ‘descent with modification,’ whether it be government policy, religion, sports cars, or organisms. The revolutionary fiberglass Corvette evolved from more mundane automotive ancestors in 1953. Other high points in the Corvette’s evolutionary refinement included the 1962 model, in which the original 102-inch was shortened to 98 inches and the new closed-coupe Stingray model was introduced; the 1968 model, the forerunner of today’s Corvette morphology, which emerged with removable roof panels; and the 1978 silver anniversary model, with fastback styling. Today’s version continues the stepwise refinements that have been accumulating since 1953. The point is that the Corvette evolved through a selection process acting on variations that resulted in a series of transitional forms and an endpoint rather distinct from the starting point. A similar process shapes the evolution of organisms.”2
The Corvette didn’t evolve in any way like evolutionists claim that inorganic chemicals evolved into us. The Corvette had conceptual designers, engineers, technicians, and a labor force to bring a concept car to a finished product. Without them, there never would have been a Corvette. No amount of time and chemicals would have “evolved” the Corvette or any single part of a Corvette. The same is true of robots.
Take a look at the encounter that Freeman has with a robot, and ask this question: Did it evolve or was it designed?
The new evolutionary claim is that one day we could evolve beaks.
“Dr Gareth Fraser, from Sheffield University [in England], said the process could see teeth fuse together to form a bill over millions of years.
“A beak would be ‘more robust and practical’ than teeth, and less susceptible to wear and tear.”
Given his hypothesis, we could evolve an extra set of hands for multitasking.
This is what passes as science.
- Michael Behe, “Darwin’s Breakdown,” Signs of Intelligence: Understanding Intelligent Design, eds. William A. Dembski and James M. Kushiner (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press/Baker Book House, 2001), 91. [↩]
- Tim Berra, Evolution and the Myth of Creationism: A Basic Guide to the Facts in the Evolution Debate (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1999), 118–119. [↩]