FROM  THE  BOOK  "AFTER  ITS  KIND"  (1958)



THE "PROOF" FROM THE GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS


Because this proof is so vague that many evolutionists do not use it the writer would be justified in ignoring it also and would do so except that a brief discussion of the present distribution of plants and animals over the earth's surface will show that the Scriptures offer a completely satisfactory explanation of this problem.


The real evolutionary proof on the basis of the geographical distribution of plants and animals consists essentially in one thing, namely, that of setting up a dummy conception of special creation and then knocking it down. A ridiculous and unwarranted doctrine of creation is attributed to those who accept the Biblical account, and a vague conception of evolution is postulated. When the absurd doctrine of special creation is destroyed by ridicule, the dogma of evolution is left standing and is thus "proved." The argument is, therefore, a purely negative one and requires that the creation explanation of the distribution of plants and animals be defended.


Just what that conception of special creation is which is attributed by evolutionists to those who believe the Bible is best shown by a quotation from Charles Darwin, which is quoted with approval by one of the late evolutionary propagandists, Vernon Kellogg. Darwin, after describing the plants and animals of the Galapagos Islands, 500 miles off the West coast of South America, and after telling how similar they are to those on the nearby continents, says, "Why should this be so? Why should the species which are supposed to be created in the Galapagos Islands and nowhere else (note the 'nowhere else') bear so plainly the stamp of affinity to those created in America?


Facts such as these admit no sort of' explanation on the ordinary view of special creation, whereas in the view here maintained (i.e., evolution) it is obvious that the Galapagos Islands would be more likely to receive colonists from America by flight, on and in logs, than on the creation basis."72


It is evident from the above quotation that Darwin and those who approve his words think that the creation doctrine demands that every living organism was created just as it is and where it is; that the plants and animals of the Galapagos Islands were created there; that those of Wisconsin were created there; that those of England and Africa were created there. Whether they were or not has nothing to do with the present distribution of plants and animals in the light of Revelation …. The evolutionists themselves assume certain "centers of distribution," the chief of these being central Asia. This has been so stated by Henry Fairfield Osborn of the American Museum of Natural History, and thither, therefore, that institution has of late years dispatched Roy Chapman Andrews in hopes of securing evidence on some of the hidden problems of the supposed evolution.….


72 Vernon Kellogg. Evolution the Way of Man, pages 86, 87. Notes in parentheses within quotations in this book are the author's.


….each species began to "mutate" and produce varieties differing in some respect from the original parents (See Appendix II). As this multiplication and variation continued the species spread out continually into new and distant places. The natural species song-sparrow varied into the twenty to thirty known varieties found on two continents. The museum of Princeton University contains a large map of the North American  continent to which have been pinned many different varieties of stuffed song-sparrows with a legend saying that this variation in different localities shows the influence of evolution. Joseph Grinnel, writing in the Report of the Smithsonian Institute on the "Geography and Evolution in Pocket Gophers of California," states that there are thirty-three distinct races of pocket gophers in California, occupying regions to which they are adapted from the hot, moist lowlands to the cold, dry highlands. Such sort of evolution the Bible lover can well agree to, for it is what is to be expected on the Biblical basis. Some varieties have found one locality suitable to their tastes and remained there, others have found other localities suitable. Squirrels, rabbits, and other species also varied into the numerous different types in which they were given power in creation to appear, and under one condition or another, according to the possession of a warmer or a colder coat of fur, or a more protective coloring, or some other advantageous inherited characteristics, the species have spread throughout the world. White animals are today usually found in the wild state only in the north where their color against the snow protects them.


The large part of the present distribution of plants and animals has likely taken place outside the influence of man. The population of America with animals and birds from Asia likely took place when the two continents were connected in the region of Alaska. Man, however, has had a part in the distribution, and the readiness with which certain species of plants and animals have multiplied and thrived when they have reached the localities into which man has brought them shows that not all species have yet found the regions to which they are best adapted. No rabbits were in Australia when the English came there. When introduced for hunting purposes they multiplied so rapidly as almost to destroy the cattle industry. No blackberries were in New Zealand originally. Upon being placed there by man they grew so rank as to destroy thousands of acres of valuable land. Man is responsible for the introduction into America of the English sparrow, which now represents forty per cent of the bird life of the land. Man re-introduced the horse into America.


On the evolutionary basis it is difficult to see why, if all species arose by themselves in response to certain environments, they did not originate in the regions where they flourish so well when once introduced. On the evolutionary basis of plant and animal distribution, which is a very vague one and is nowhere stated clearly, there are some serious problems to be faced. For example, how does it happen that the bison pictured on the caves of Europe so closely resembles the bison of America if they have not both come from a common pair as the sacred record indicates? For every difficulty that the Biblical explanation of the distribution of plants and animals may have to face, the evolutionary explanation has one to match it.


The theory of creation does not require, as Darwin and his cohorts have supposed, that the plants and animals of the Galapagos Islands or of any other islands or continents were created there. They may have come over from some neighboring place "by flight, on or in logs" as well on the creation basis as on any other; and there may be slight differences between the varieties in two geographical localities as well on the creation basis as on the evolution basis.


SUMMARY


The "proof from classification" is merely the arranging of living forms in a graded system from the simple to the complex according to a supposed evolutionary course. This proof assumes what is to be proved.


The "proof from comparative anatomy" rests on an interpretation of the similarity of animal structures that is not necessary. The similarity may be accounted for on the basis of a common plan in the mind of the Creator.


The "proof from vestigial organs" rests on the false assumption that there are organs in animal and human bodies that are totally useless. Ignorance concerning the functions of the various organisms of the human body does not constitute a proof that they have no function. Ignorance furnishes no arguments. The early force of the "vestigial" argument rested on ignorance. The least benefit a body derives from the presence in it of a so-called vestigial organ renders that organ non-vestigial, and it is now known that the human body derives much good from every part that is in it.


The "proof from embryology" consists in making untrue statements of facts, and rests on unnecessary interpretations of actual facts.


The "proof from geology" rests on the unwarranted assumption that future search of the evolutionists will reveal the millions of fossil links now missing, and rests also on the arbitrary arrangement on paper, according to an evolutionary order, of fossil-bearing strata that are not in that order in nature. The fossiliferous condition of the earth can be accounted for on the basis of the Deluge.


(IT  WAS  THE  DELUGE  OF  GENESIS  1:1-2  THAT  BROUGHT  THE  WORLD  THAT  THEN  WAS  -  THE  DINOSAUR  WORLD  -  TO  OBLIVION,  WITH  THE  PLANTS  THAT  BECAME  THE  OIL  AND  COAL  BEDS  WE  USE  TODAY - Keith Hunt)


The "proof from the geographical distribution of plants and animals" consists in setting up a false doctrine of the present distribution of plants and animals according to the Bible, then knocking it down again by ridicule. The Biblical view of the distribution of plants and animals coincides well with conditions of distribution as they exist.

………………..


TO  BE  CONTINUED