All of nature exhibits the common characteristics of intricate design and interdependence of parts. Could the interdependent parts of a whole organism have arisen in a step-by-step fashion? If not, the origin must have been instantaneous creation. A butterfly the perfect example. Could some worm-like creature have mutated with the ability and desire to seal itself inside of a cocoon? If both did not happen simultaneously, the organism would be doomed. Yet for either to happen would require thousands of simultaneous and useful changes to the chemical structure of this mysterious "pre-butterfly" type creature. What would have happened to the larvae that was sealed inside of its cocoon which did not have the ability to rearrange its biomatter into an adult butterfly? It would have been the end of its' evolutionary lineage. There is no logical explanation of how any insect other than a caterpillar (which already possesses the necessary information to become a butterfly) could transform itself into a butterfly by a series of small genetic changes. It has to be all or nothing.

Another example is the woodpecker. According to evolutionists, some other kind of bird turned into a woodpecker at some time in the distant past. But what would happen to the first bird born with its feet turned backwards... yet did not have the instinct to search for insects while holding onto a vertical tree trunk? Or to the first bird born with backwards feet and the desire to beat its head against a tree... but the incorrect bill? Or the correct feet, desire, and bill...but no instinct to blink its eyes at the moment of impact to keep its eyeballs from popping out? Or the correct feet, desire, bill, and blinking ability... but the tongue which was too short to reach the insects inside of the hole which it had just beaten into the tree? Or the correct feet, desire, bill, blinking ability, shock-absorbing membranes in the back of the skull, and tongue...but now the tongue too long to fit into its mouth because its skull was not yet redesigned to hold the tongue? In each and every case the bird on it's way to turning into a woodpecker would be at an incredible disadvantage and natural selection would have put an end to its evolutionary development. Natural selection is a very real force of nature and any change which is not advantageous to an organism will doom that organism to extinction... not advancement!

These are just two of a thousand possible examples. How could any creature have become perfectly suited for its niche in the environment? It is all too easy to look at a perfectly designed organism and say, "Look at how well this creature is adapted to its environment!" The critical question, one which is ignored by evolutionists and not presented to students, "Is it really logical that this type of animal could have developed by one small change at a time?"

1. Exerts from an original interview in "Applied Christianity", from the Bible-Science Newsletter, May 1974, p.8.

Note: Throughout this series the word evolution will refer to it's originally intended meaning: the transformation of one type of animal into a completely different type. No-one disputes minor variations within an organism (mico-evolution), but this is just variation within the created kind, not classical evolution.