|Case Against Homology
Category: Misc Thoughts
Case Against Homology: Similar parts mean a common ancestor
Bones in the human arm, the forelimbs of horses and dogs, a bat’s wing, and a penguin’s flipper all share a similar structure called Homology
First we must look at what Homology is defined as.
Creationist say: creation according to a common plan
Evolutionists say: descent from a common ancestor
Today I will prove that Homology is creation according to a common plan
“Extensive comparisons of skeletons, muscles, nerves, body organs of different animal kinds have confirmed that a great deal of similarity exists in both their structure and function. By arranging or classifying large sets of anatomical structures according to the similarity of selected traits,” evolutionists have tried to use this as evidence for a long line of animal changes leading up to humans. They use that as a so called “evidence” to prove that there was a hypothetical ‘common ancestor’ from which all life evolved.
However, it was found out that, homology led Darwinists to assemble very select examples that seemed to prove ancestor-descendant relationships that often were quite convincing.
This shows that the studies they did were not thorough therefore they should be disregarded as evidence for a “common ancestor”
Now evolutionists say that proof of common descent is as plain and simple as our hand
So let’s look at four different hands
At first glance they appear to be alike yet it is not the similarities we need to focus on, but the differences. These hands are similar in appearance but they are designed for different purposes. Humans do not leap and swing from trees, so they do not need a hand as long and skinny as a Gibbon.
That points to a designer, who saw that certain creatures need the same type of structure for different reasons. It shows an original blueprint that a creator modified and changed to suit the needs of that creature and their environment. It’s creation according to a common plan, a plan in which the requirements for life are similar for similar creatures.
All of the evolutionists proof for common descent is based on assumptions about the past. They ignore the fact that similarities point to a common design because they say that it cannot be proven, however what they suggest cannot be confirmed through observation. Also their assumptions about the past have other explanations than a common ancestor. It is a common Designer.
Similar design and function cannot prove a common ancestor.
Let’s look at an example to test this way of thinking
Here are two different phones. We know that the LG GS170 did not evolve into the LG Double Play just because they look similar and serve the same function. We know that the same company LG created them which lets us know that there was a common designer.
Descent from a common ancestor is simply a rejection to the fact that there was a designer.
Without a naturalistic mechanism to account for homology, however, Darwinian evolution cannot claim to have demonstrated scientifically that living things are undesigned
Homology is creation according to a common plan and that plan had a designer