Evolutionary Theory: Tree Of Life

Now we can apply evolutionary theory to this same format:

a. There is life on Planet Earth.

b. I propose evolutionary theory is the cause of all life.

c. I have formulated a tree of life as a theory to explain statement b.

d. My proposed tree of life predicts that there should be vestigial structures in the descendants of creatures. Such structures have been shown to exist.

e. The fact such vestigial structures have been shown to exist is evidence for my evolutionary theory being the cause of all life (statement b).

Of course the vestigial structure argument only makes sense if the organisms with them are on their designated spots on the proposed tree of life which has been created as a theory to explain the initial hypothesis (statement

Why would a supernatural intelligence give a creature a useless organ or appendage? Surely if the designer is intelligent enough to create life from non-life, then they would design creatures perfectly. The problem with this argument is firstly we do not know for sure whether these vestigial structures are completely redundant and useless; they may in fact have unseen or unknown uses. And secondly, does this argument actually reduce the likelihood of a supernatural intelligence significantly enough to promote evolutionary theory as very likely? It would seem not. Also remember, creationism by God is not the only alternative to evolutionary theory. Other theories such as alien life creating/developing all life on Earth with possible deliberate misdirection would negate such an argument. You may be scoffing at the page right now at the suggestion of alien life being responsible for all life on Planet Earth, but on the surface of it evolutionary theory itself is equally unfathomable when you think about it and realise that the premise is a bacterium turned into a man through a series of random mutations. And anyway, all that we are asking you to establish is whether there is any reasonable doubt that evolutionary theory is true, and if there are equally viable theories in play, then reasonable doubt exists. In

Unfortunately, there is just not enough evidence to make a decision on this one way or the other. Pro-evolutionists will argue that a supernatural intelligence would not make creatures with such “mistakes”, however, we have already dismissed a similar type of argument with the case of vestigial structures, and it seems this argument would not make a strong enough case to go beyond reasonable doubt. Opponents of the atavism argument state that gene mutations occur frequently resulting in anatomical abnormalities which have nothing to do with evolution, therefore on what grounds do we consider only some gene changes to be the result of (and prove) evolutionary theory – it can only be on the grounds that the changes are explained through the phylogenetic tree (i.e. changes which resemble traits that the supposed ancestors have) and therefore are explained through evolution, however, this is of course using circular reasoning. For example, humans can be born with extra digits (toes or fingers), but no-one claims that ancestors of humans had 6 digits once upon a time, as our supposed ancestors never did. However, if a human is born with a tail, then pro-evolutionists will argue this is representation of evolution as our supposed ancestors did have tails. There are cases of humans being born with two heads but of course this is not claimed by pro-evolutionists to be anything to