click here to jump to start of article
Join Our Newsletter

Get latest articles and videos with Jewish inspiration and insights​




Not By Chance: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution

Not By Chance: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution

A physicist brings a novel approach that challenges the assumptions of evolution.

by

(Adapted for the web by Rabbi Shmuel Silinsky)

Dr. Spetner's book, "Not By Chance", has created a stir among biologists and geneticists. It explains a new approach to evaluating evolution, and has been hailed by Professor E. Simon of Purdue University, a prominent geneticist, as "the most rational attack on evolution that I have ever read."

Dr. Spetner shows that neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory cannot do what is claimed for it; the theory cannot account for the development of life from some simple beginning. It simply cannot account for the broad sweep of evolution.

What follows is a synopsis of some points in the book. For in depth understanding, read the book for yourself. You can get it at Amazon Books.

A SYNOPSIS

When prominent biologists claim that "evolution is a fact," they are stating a half-truth that means far less than what they would like the public to believe. The theory of evolution -- and it is just that, a theory -- states that the development of life is a purely natural process, driven by known mechanisms. But this is simply not true. There is no evidence that life developed, or even could have developed, by a purely natural process.

According to neo-Darwinian theory, the process that accounts for the evolution of all life is that of random mutations shaped by natural selection. This theory says that evolution is built up by a long series of many steps. In each step many random changes occur in the hereditary storage of organisms. If one of these random changes should by chance happen to make the organism better adapted to its environment, then natural selection will spread that change through the population. Each of these changes is said to be small, but the accumulation of a long series of them is said to account for large changes in populations adapting them to their environment. This process is assumed to work, and on the basis of that assumption, evolution is said to account for the development of all life.

On the basis of an unproven assumption, evolution is said to account for the development of all life.

Experiments have also been performed to show that the process of selection does indeed work under the right conditions. Moreover, random mutations have been observed that do improve the adaptiveness of the organism under certain conditions. From these observations, evolutionists have (unjustifiably) extrapolated to say that random mutations and natural selection can account for the development of life.

THE GLITCH IN EVOLUTIONARY THEORY

However, on both theoretical and experimental grounds, the broad sweep of evolution cannot be based on random mutations. On theoretical grounds, the probability is just too small for random mutations, even with the filtering of natural selections, to lead to a new species.

On experimental grounds, there are no known random mutations that have added any genetic information to the organism. This may seem surprising at first, but a list of the best examples of mutations offered by evolutionists shows that each of them loses genetic information rather than gains it.

One of the examples where information is lost is the one often trotted out by evolutionists nowadays in an attempt to convince the public of the truth of evolution. That is the evolution of bacterial resistance to antibiotics.

Clearly, if random mutations could account for the evolution of life, then those mutations must have added a vast amount of information to the genetic code. From the time of the first simple organism until the present profusion of life, billions of genetic changes would have to be built up by a long series of accumulated mutations and natural selection. It follows that each of these many billions of mutations must have added information. Yet in spite of all the molecular studies that have been done on mutations, not a single one has been found that adds any genetic information! They all lose information!

NON-RANDOM EVOLUTION

There is, however, both direct and indirect evidence that some evolution has occurred. How did it occur?

It is suggested that although significant evolution cannot occur by random mutations, it could occur by non-random mutations. Non-random here means that the environment itself influences what mutations can occur. There is extensive evidence for evolution by non-random mutations -- evidence that spans life forms from bacteria through vertebrates.

No one has yet been able to point to a flaw in this basic argument. No one has so far refuted this conclusion.

No one has yet been able to point to a flaw in this basic argument, nor refuted this conclusion.

Whereas standard neo-Darwinian theory relies on point mutations that are essentially mistakes in replicating the DNA, there are other kinds of mutations that are not mistakes.

Genetic rearrangements are complex genetic changes. They are carried out with precision and are driven by sophisticated cellular mechanisms. These mutations appear to be triggered by cues from the environment and they do not appear to be the product only of chance.

These genetic rearrangements may be part of a built-in mechanism that permits a line of organisms to adapt to a new environment. Part of the genetic program of the organism seems to be a set of genetic switches that can be triggered by the environment. These enable a heritable switch in the organism to one of a limited set of alternate forms. An interesting feature of this mechanism is that it can cause a population to adapt rapidly to a new environment.

Since "Not By Chance" has been published, biologists are beginning to acknowledge the importance of these non-random mutations in evolution. They suggest, though, that these built-in mechanisms have themselves evolved. Can this be?

Classic neo-Darwinian evolution calls for many steps, each consisting of a large number of trials whose duration is a generation. For the evolution of these built-in mechanisms one must invoke the same kind of process, but each trial would have to have a duration of millions of generations. Can this really be?

This brief synopsis gives several points mentioned in Dr Lee Spetner's "Not By Chance". For in depth understanding, read the book for yourself. You can get it at Amazon Books

Published: January 25, 2000


Give Tzedakah! Help Aish.com create inspiring
articles, videos and blogs featuring timeless Jewish wisdom.

Visitor Comments: 12

(11) ray, August 20, 2014 4:56 AM

reconciling it all

in truth it is not difficult to reconcile all the evidence for common ancestry from a literal reading of the biblica text - but one has to know a bit about jewish outlook. see this http://dafyomireview.com/chovos/jewish_views_on_evolution.htm

(10) Anonymous, December 5, 2013 6:02 AM

Dr. Spetner, what is your current laboratory research
?

(9) seba, October 24, 2012 5:14 PM

z

One does not simply says "just a theory", it kills all your authority if you don't understand what "scientific theory" is. Yes, life is evolving in front of our eyes, I don't know if by chance, or by God, or by aliens or whatever, but saying 'evolution is just a theory' won't stand.

ray, August 19, 2014 7:59 PM

not true

life is not evolving there is changes in population distribution but only within the same gene pool. no new information is ever added. it is like selective breeding - you can breed dogs to get bigger stronger dogs, but you can never breed dogs to make a cat

(8) leo, February 17, 2005 12:00 AM

GENIUS!

Having just finished (around 15 minutes ago) Not By Chance, I can honestly say that it was incredible book. It offers extremely valuable insights into many diverse fields of scientific research which have important implications for neo-darwinian evolution. I highly recommend the book. (Though I do think it's somewhat technical, and that a reader would be best off with at least some background in cellular biology before reading the book.) (Interestingly, Spetner reports that the thrust of his thesis is actually parallel to an idea presented in the Talmud!)

In regard to Benjamin's comment below:
Shalom. There is much written about about the "evolution" of birds, and finches in particular. (I guess following the tradition of Darwin from his trip to the galapagos.) Spetner actually addresses the issue in his book. (Icons of Evolution also has some very good material on "darwin's finches".) Bottomline: these cases of "evolution" are not secrets and are well known in the biological world. There are very many valid objections to using it as a "proof".

Also, I would have to argue with your belief that "no religion is perfect". I believe that G-d is all powerful and is thus fully capable of making a perfect religion. (I don't think He'd give us a religion which wasn't perfect either!)
And, as King David declared in one my favorite psalms (which is part of the Jewish prayer on Sabbath), "The law of the L-RD is perfect, restoring the soul; the testimony of the L-RD is sure, making wise the simple." (Ps. 19:8)

btw, I first heard of this incredible book around 6 months ago when I read this article on aish! Reading it has enhanced my understanding of the world. Thanks again aish!

See All Comments

Submit Your Comment:

  • Display my name?

  • Your email address is kept private. Our editor needs it in case we have a question about your comment.


  • * required field 2000
Submit Comment
stub