Reading time: ~3 min read
Clearly, all the scientific findings on this subject point to one single truth: The story of the Industrial-Revolution moths is of no scientific worth at all, and must assume its place among the discredited so-called proofs of evolution. Nonetheless, some Darwinists still insist on defending this story at all costs.
Most biology textbooks devote space to Kettlewell's account story and these fraudulent photographs. For example, the 2000 edition of Biology by Kenneth Miller and Joseph Levine refers to Kettlewell's research as a "classic demonstration of natural selection in action."312 Similarly, according to another textbook, it is "a classic example of natural selection." 313
You can encounter similar statements in encyclopedias that engage in Darwinist propaganda. For instance, the 2001 edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica describes Kettlewell's classic story in detail, and still portrays it as an illustration of natural selection, even though its erroneous nature has been proved and documented.314 According to Paul M. Brakefield, "The peppered moth, Biston betularia, is rightly regarded as a striking example of adaptive change through natural selection and as one of the foundation stones for the modern synthesis of evolutionary theory" 315 and became a striking example of rapid evolutionary change.316
In the book titled The Illustrated Origin of Species, Richard Leakey wrote:
The peppered moth is a striking example of evolution in action... but, sadly for Darwin, no one knew it at the time. This is just the evidence he needed to show the effectiveness of natural selection."317
These and similar statements reflect the dreams of bigoted supporters of Darwinism, but are of no scientific worth. Modern science makes clear that the story in question lacks any foundation and that there is no such thing as evolutionary change.
One evolutionist book written for the purpose of supporting evolution says;
Consider the well-known example of industrial melanism in the British peppered moth, Biston betularia. Few high school biology texts fail to mention this study, yet few students seem to understand what it is that this example demonstrates. Clearly, environmental pressures, through natural selection, can effect rapid shifts in the genotype of a population ... This is evolution in action, under observation.318
These and similar extracts are examples of Darwinist demagoguery. Nothing about this observed difference in the levels of light and dark-colored individuals in the moth population can represent evidence for evolution in the light of scientific research. That is the only truth to emerge from 150 years of intensive research.
Certain journals are determined to keep Darwinism alive at any cost, but their attitude is incompatible with true science. The following quotation from New Scientist magazine is an example: "The peppered moth remains one of the best examples of evolution in action."319
In this way, albeit unconsciously and unwillingly, evolutionists are once again confirming an important fact. This example, portrayed as the best and most explicit proof of evolution, is actually a clear proof that evolution lacks any evidence whatsoever. The famous "proof" again reveals the invalidity of a theory that claims to possess incontrovertible evidence.
References
- K.R. Miller, J. Levine, Biology, 5th edition, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2000, pp. 297-298. ↩
- Jonathan Wells, "Second Thoughts about Peppered Moths," http://www.arn.org/docs/wells/jw_pepmoth.htm ↩
- Encyclopedia Britannica 2001, Deluxe Edition CD, "Heredity: Natural selection in operation." ↩
- Paul M. Brakefield,. "Receding black moths, " Trends in Ecology and Evolution, Vol. 13, No. 9, 1998, p. 376. ↩
- Malcolm R. Forster, "Evolutionary Theory" http://philosophy.wisc.edu/forster/220/notes_4.html. ↩
- Richard Leakey, The Illustrated Origin of Species, London: Faber and Faber, 1979. p. 30. ↩
- M. Archer, The Reality of Organic Evolution, , in D.R. Selkirk & F.J. Burrows, eds., Confronting Creationism: Defending Darwin, Kensington, NSW, Australia: New South Wales University Press,, 1988, pp. 30-31. ↩
- Jeremy Cherfas, "Exploding the Myth of the Melanic Moth," New Scientist, 25 December 1986, p. 25. ↩