From Newsgroup: talk.origins

On 7/19/2025 12:46 PM, RonO wrote:

I Googled the topics and added Duane Gish.-a It just demonstrates that Wells' Icons were all well used creationist denial Icons.

Wells' icons
1-a-a-a MillerrCoUrey experiment
2-a-a-a Darwin's tree of life
3-a-a-a Homology in vertebrate limbs
4-a-a-a Haeckel's embryos
5-a-a-a Archaeopteryx
6-a-a-a Peppered moth
7-a-a-a Darwin's finches
8-a-a-a Four-winged fruit flies
9-a-a-a Fossil horses
10-a-a-a Hominid evolution

I tried homology first because Gish's denial was multi level and
included, claims of a drosophila experiment to deny vertebrate homology.
-aGoogle does note this argument, but does not note that Gish's evidence was for suspected genes associated with drosophila eyes and not for vertebrate limbs depicted in his homology slide.-a The quote that he put
up came from someone talking about a drosophila experiment that occurred years before any actual genes had been identified as being responsible
for drosophila eyes.-a It would have been a shift within species and did
not have much to do with homologous structures.-a There is no reason why
the genes responsible for the development of homologous structures
cannot be swapped out or changed over time.-a Any changes just have to
work within what is already working.

QUOTE from below:
"Unproven" Genetic Basis: Gish also questioned the genetic basis of homology, suggesting that similar genes for reptile legs and bird wings should be present if they evolved from an ancestral leg, but that
evidence presented by evolutionists doesn't consistently support this.
END QUOTE:

Homology in vertebrate limbs and Duane Gish

rCo-a-a-a Definition: Homology refers to the similarity in anatomical structures, physiology, or development of different species due to
descent from a common evolutionary ancestor.
rCo-a-a-a Vertebrate Forelimbs as an Example: The classic example of homology
is the forelimbs of vertebrates, such as the human arm, bird wing, and
whale flipper. Despite their different functions (grasping, flying, swimming), they are all composed of similar bones rCo the humerus, radius, and ulna rCo arranged in a comparable pattern. This underlying similarity, despite functional divergence, is explained by the idea that these structures were inherited from a common ancestor who had a similar limb structure, which was then modified over time through evolution to suit different purposes.
rCo-a-a-a Evidence for Evolution: Homologous structures like the vertebrate forelimb provide strong evidence for the theory of evolution and common ancestry. They suggest that diverse species have evolved from a common ancestor, adapting the inherited structures to their specific
environments and functions.
rCo-a-a-a The Pentadactyl Limb: The presence of a pentadactyl limb (five- fingered limb) in various vertebrates, including humans, bats, and
whales, further strengthens the argument for common descent. Even though their limbs serve different purposes, the shared basic structure points towards a common ancestor with a similar limb design.
Duane Gish's arguments and criticism
rCo-a-a-a Duane Gish was a prominent creationist who engaged in debates against the theory of evolution.
rCo-a-a-a Gish's Arguments Against Homology:
o-a-a-a Lack of direct evidence: Gish and other creationists argued that homology does not prove evolution, as nobody has witnessed the gradual changes in millions of generations from a common ancestor to a bird or a human.
o-a-a-a Alternative Explanation: They suggested that similarities could be explained by a "common design" by a creator, where similar structures
are used to solve similar functional problems.
o-a-a-a "Unproven" Genetic Basis: Gish also questioned the genetic basis of homology, suggesting that similar genes for reptile legs and bird wings should be present if they evolved from an ancestral leg, but that
evidence presented by evolutionists doesn't consistently support this. o-a-a-a "Gish Gallop": Gish was known for using a debating tactic called
the "Gish Gallop," where he would present a large number of arguments,
some accurate and some inaccurate or misleading, in a short time frame, making it difficult for his opponents to address them all comprehensively.

1-a-a-a MillerrCoUrey experiment
Google
Duane Gish
Duane Gish (1921-2013) was an American biochemist and a prominent
advocate of young Earth creationism. He served as a Vice President of
the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and was known for his numerous publications and debates arguing against evolutionary theory.
Gish's arguments against the Miller-Urey experiment
Gish and other creationists used the perceived shortcomings of the Miller-Urey experiment to argue against the possibility of abiogenesis
and, by extension, against evolution.
Some of the key points of their critique included:
rCo-a-a-a Atmospheric Composition: Gish claimed the gases used in the experiment (methane, ammonia, and hydrogen) were not representative of
the Earth's early atmosphere, which he argued was likely oxidizing (containing oxygen) rather than reducing. However, more recent research suggests the early Earth's atmosphere might have been reducing,
containing elements like methane, ammonia, and hydrogen, supporting the conditions used in the Miller-Urey experiment.
rCo-a-a-a Destruction of Products: Gish argued that lightning and other harsh
conditions on the early Earth would have destroyed any organic compounds formed, according to the Iowa State Daily.
rCo-a-a-a Chirality: Gish highlighted the fact that the experiment produced a
racemic mixture of left- and right-handed amino acids, while living organisms exclusively utilize left-handed amino acids.
rCo-a-a-a The Law of Biogenesis and the Second Law of Thermodynamics: Gish argued that the Miller-Urey experiment contradicted these fundamental
laws, which he interpreted as stating that life cannot arise from non-
life and that order cannot arise spontaneously from disorder.

Darwin's Tree of Life and Duane Gish:
Gish would put up the tree of life slide only to claim that the branches were not connected.-a The fossil evidence was fragmentary.-a The tree of life no longer depends on morphology and fossils.-a The DNA and protein sequences fill in all the gaps.-a Forensic geneology proves that genetics can fill in the gaps and identify the identity of persons who's genetic
data is not available.-a Behe understands that we can reconstruct
ancestral sequences.-a Some of his claims of finding 2 neutral mutations being on the edge of evolution depend on the ability to identify the ancestral sequence and determine when the neutral mutations occurred.

Darwin's Tree of Life and Duane Gish: contrasting perspectives
Charles Darwin's "Tree of Life" is a foundational concept in
evolutionary biology, illustrating the idea that all life on Earth
shares a common ancestor and has diversified over time through a
branching process of descent with modification. This concept is visually represented by a tree-like diagram where each branch represents a
species, and the points where branches diverge indicate a common ancestor. Duane Gish, a biochemist and prominent young-Earth creationist, was a
vocal opponent of evolutionary theory, including Darwin's concept of the Tree of Life. He argued against evolution, particularly the concept of common descent, and advocated for creationism based on a literal interpretation of the Genesis story.
Gish's arguments against evolution and the Tree of Life
Gish primarily challenged the scientific evidence for evolution, often presenting arguments that focused on perceived weaknesses in
evolutionary theory, rather than presenting a scientific case for creationism. His arguments included:
rCo-a-a-a The fossil record: Gish claimed that the fossil record lacks transitional forms, which he considered evidence against evolution. He
also asserted that the Cambrian Explosion, a period of rapid
diversification of animal life, contradicts evolutionary expectations of gradual change.
rCo-a-a-a Second Law of Thermodynamics: Gish argued that the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which states that systems tend towards disorder,
prevents the natural emergence of complex life and the ongoing evolution
of organisms. Critics countered that Gish's interpretation of the Second
Law was oversimplified and failed to account for localized order within
open systems like Earth.
rCo-a-a-a Probability of life's origin: Gish used calculations of vanishingly
small probabilities of random assembly of biological molecules to argue against the naturalistic origin of life, effectively creating a straw
man of scientific theories on abiogenesis.
rCo-a-a-a Homology and vestigial organs: Gish dismissed the evidence from homology (shared characteristics due to common ancestry) and vestigial organs, again often misrepresenting evolutionary explanations for these phenomena.

4-a-a-a Haeckel's embryos
Duane Gish and creationist use of the controversy
rCo-a-a-a Duane Gish, a prominent creationist debater, often used the controversy surrounding Haeckel's embryo drawings as an argument against evolution.
rCo-a-a-a He claimed that the inaccuracies in Haeckel's drawings constituted scientific fraud, which in turn supposedly undermines the entire theory
of evolution, according to the National Center for Science Education. rCo-a-a-a Creationists have sometimes argued that if Darwin relied on Haeckel, and Haeckel was a fraud, then Darwin and the theory of
evolution are also fraudulent.
rCo-a-a-a However, modern biology textbooks have moved away from using Haeckel's original drawings, instead opting for photographs of real
embryos to illustrate embryological development.
rCo-a-a-a While acknowledging the inaccuracies in Haeckel's drawings, many scientists and educators emphasize that comparative embryology still provides strong evidence for common descent, even without relying on Haeckel's potentially flawed illustrations.
In essence, Duane Gish and other creationists used the acknowledged historical inaccuracies and the ensuing debate surrounding Haeckel's
embryo drawings as a rhetorical tool in their debates against evolution. While some of Haeckel's depictions were inaccurate, it's important to differentiate between those historical shortcomings and the broader scientific understanding of evolution and the supporting evidence from comparative embryology. Modern science relies on more accurate data and techniques, but still recognizes the value of comparative embryology in understanding evolutionary relationships.

5-a-a-a Archaeopteryx
rCo-a-a-a Creationist Perspective:
Gish, affiliated with the Institute for Creation Research (ICR), viewed Archaeopteryx as evidence supporting a biblical creation model, where
birds were created on Day 5 of the creation week, fully formed and able
to fly.
rCo-a-a-a Transitional Fossil Challenge:
Creationists like Gish reject the idea of transitional fossils, arguing
that Archaeopteryx, despite its bird-like features, was simply a bird,
not an evolutionary link between reptiles and birds, according to the ICR. rCo-a-a-a Gish's Claims:
Gish asserted that Archaeopteryx possessed feathers identical to modern birds and was capable of flight, suggesting it was not a transitional form. rCo-a-a-a Scientific Counterarguments:
Scientific literature has extensively documented the anatomical features
of Archaeopteryx, including its feathered wings, claws on its wings, and teeth, which provide evidence of its reptilian ancestry and its place as
a transitional form between reptiles and birds.
rCo-a-a-a Gish's Legacy:
Despite scientific evidence supporting Archaeopteryx's transitional
status, Gish's arguments have been influential within creationist
circles, shaping their interpretation of the fossil record.
rCo-a-a-a Beyond Archaeopteryx:
Gish's work extended beyond Archaeopteryx, encompassing broader
challenges to evolutionary biology and promoting a young-Earth
creationist perspective.

6-a-a-a Peppered moth
The Peppered Moth (Biston betularia) and Duane Gish are linked through
the creation-evolution debate.
Peppered Moth evolution
rCo-a-a-a The peppered moth is considered a classic example of natural selection in action.
rCo-a-a-a Before the Industrial Revolution, the light-colored peppered moth (var. typica) was more common in England.
rCo-a-a-a With industrialization, pollution darkened trees, providing camouflage for the darker form (var. carbonaria), which increased in frequency due to predatory birds eating the more visible lighter moths. rCo-a-a-a As pollution decreased with clean air acts, the light form became camouflaged again and its numbers rebounded.
rCo-a-a-a Bernard Kettlewell's experiments in the 1950s provided strong evidence for this selection process.
rCo-a-a-a Subsequent research, including Michael Majerus's extensive study, further confirmed the role of bird predation and camouflage in the
moth's evolution.
Duane Gish's critique
rCo-a-a-a Duane Gish, a prominent creationist and biochemist, used the peppered moth example in his arguments against evolution.
rCo-a-a-a He challenged the validity of the peppered moth story and experiments, questioning the conclusions drawn from them.
rCo-a-a-a Gish often focused on what he claimed were methodological flaws in the experiments and alleged "fraud" in staging photographs of moths on
tree trunks.
rCo-a-a-a Creationists have argued that the peppered moth story is not "evolution in action" because both light and dark forms existed before
and after the Industrial Revolution, representing variation within a
species rather than the development of a new species or "basic kind".

Galapagos finches and Duane Gish
Duane Gish's opposition to evolution
rCo-a-a-a Duane Gish (1921-2013) was a prominent biochemist and creationist, known for his debates against evolutionary theory.
rCo-a-a-a He worked at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR), which promotes a young-earth creationist perspective.
rCo-a-a-a Gish's arguments against evolution included claims that the fossil record lacked transitional forms and that the Second Law of
Thermodynamics prevented the natural emergence of complex life.
rCo-a-a-a His book "Evolution: The Fossils Say No!" was a widely circulated resource for creationists.
rCo-a-a-a Gish was criticized for oversimplifying scientific concepts and using outdated information or mischaracterizations of evolutionary
theory in his arguments, according to the National Center for Science Education.
The contrasting perspectives
rCo-a-a-a The Galapagos finches provide powerful evidence for evolution by natural selection and adaptive radiation, supporting Darwin's theory of evolution.
rCo-a-a-a Duane Gish, representing a creationist viewpoint, actively challenged the scientific consensus on evolution, including the evidence from the Galapagos finches.
rCo-a-a-a Creationists like Gish often contend that observed changes in finch
beak size are examples of microevolution (variation within a species)
but do not demonstrate the kind of "information-adding" evolution
required to produce new species. However, this argument ignores the
evidence from the Grants' research and genomic studies showing the development of new finch species and the genetic basis for beak shape variations.

Four-winged fruit flies and Duane Gish
Google doesnrCOt give a summary, but links to articles citing Gish.-a This one is inaccurate, but has the basic Gish gallop denial. https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/5901808.real-question-god/
QUOTE:
Until I heard a lecture by Dr Duane Gish, a marine biologist, whose job
for years had been to irradiate fruit fly larvae to cause mutations.
They created literally millions of mutations -- some blind, some with
four wings on one side, none on the other...but they never made a better fruit fly!
If we all arrived by random mutations, where is the fossil evidence of
all the ones that went wrong? Where are all the transitional species?
There simply aren't any -- none -- anywhere!
END QUOTE:

Gish was an immunologist and not a marine biologist.-a When I saw Gish
put up the slide of the 4 winged fruit fly it was to claim that
mutations produced nonfunctional wings.-a The bithorax mutation doubled
that body segment, but didnrCOt get the nerves and muscles quite right. It wasnrCOt just a mutation reverting halteres to the actual second set of wings.

Duane Gish and fossil horses
Duane Gish was a prominent creationist who challenged the scientific evidence for evolution, including the evolution of horses.
Gish's arguments
rCo-a-a-a Gaps in the fossil record: Gish argued that gaps in the fossil record of horses disproved evolution and pointed to the lack of complete transitional forms between major groups.
rCo-a-a-a No clear progression: He claimed that the fossil record does not show a clear, smooth progression from small, multi-toed ancestors to the large, single-toed modern horse.
rCo-a-a-a Variations within kinds: He suggested that the horse fossils represent variations within "created kinds," rather than evidence of evolution across different species or genera.
rCo-a-a-a Contradictory evidence: Gish highlighted what he saw as contradictions in the fossil record, such as the finding of both three-
toed and one-toed horse fossils in the same layer, or irregularities in
the number of ribs in the supposed horse evolutionary series.

Hominid evolution and Duane Gish
My recollection was that Gish would make fun of the fossils that
existed.-a He kept claiming that all the known hominid fossils would fit onto a pool table, and he would claim that Lucy was obviously just an ape. Google:
Key arguments and criticisms:
rCo-a-a-a Fossil Gaps:
Gish argued that the fossil record contained significant gaps, which he interpreted as evidence against evolution. He emphasized the relatively small number of fossils found compared to the vast number of species estimated to have existed.
rCo-a-a-a Misinterpretations and Errors:
He highlighted instances where fossil discoveries were initially misinterpreted or later found to be hoaxes, such as the Nebraska Man and Piltdown Man.
rCo-a-a-a Geological Column:
Gish claimed the geological column was based on evolutionary theory, but
it is actually based on radiometric dating, which provides absolute ages
for rock layers, according to the search results.
rCo-a-a-a Creation Model:
Gish proposed a creation model to explain the diversity of life,
suggesting that gaps in the fossil record supported his view. However,
this model doesn't align with the observed order of fossils in
geological strata, according to the search results.
rCo-a-a-a Quote Mining and Misrepresentation:
He was known for using quotes from evolutionary scientists out of
context and misrepresenting their views, according to the search results.
In essence, Gish's arguments against hominin evolution, and evolution in general, relied on selective presentation of fossil evidence, misinterpretations of scientific data, and claims that gaps in the
fossil record supported his creationist views.

Ron Okimoto

The ID perps have been putting up junk claims about Jonathan Wells after
his death. He is supposed to have been the Newton of the ID creationist
scam.

https://scienceandculture.com/2025/09/evolutions-stubborn-icons-peppered-moths-and-miller-urey-still-shambling-along/

The saddest thing about the moth example of Wells regurgitating the
Icons of scientific creationist science denial is that the Wellsian lie
about "no moths on tree trunks" got incorporated from his book into the
Ohio model lesson plan for teaching the ID perp's obfuscation and denial switch scam in the Ohio public schools. The initial drafts had that
lie, but the section was rewritten instead of deleted. When the
obfuscation and denial had to be supported by a lie the whole section
should have been deleted. Wells knew that he was lying in the book
because it was pointed out that a reference that Wells used had found
10% of the moths in trees on the trunk. When you consider the surface
area of the trunk compared to the rest of the tree (leaves have two
surfaces) 10% was likely more than they expected to have found by chance association. My guess is that the number was inflated because it was
easier to find moths on the tree trunks than other parts of the tree.
The Wellsian lie was defended on the ARN discussion board as an
"exaggeration" as if fictional Vulcan logic could defend the ID
creationist scam artists.

The moths are just examples of natural selection in action. It doesn't
matter that Gish used to claim that they were still moths. Humans are
still apes, apes are still mammals, mammals are still amniotes, amniotes
are still tetrapod vertebrates etc.

Ron Okimoto



--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: talk.origins

On 9/15/2025 10:38 AM, RonO wrote:

On 7/19/2025 12:46 PM, RonO wrote:

I Googled the topics and added Duane Gish.-a It just demonstrates that
Wells' Icons were all well used creationist denial Icons.

Wells' icons
1-a-a-a MillerrCoUrey experiment
2-a-a-a Darwin's tree of life
3-a-a-a Homology in vertebrate limbs
4-a-a-a Haeckel's embryos
5-a-a-a Archaeopteryx
6-a-a-a Peppered moth
7-a-a-a Darwin's finches
8-a-a-a Four-winged fruit flies
9-a-a-a Fossil horses
10-a-a-a Hominid evolution

I tried homology first because Gish's denial was multi level and
included, claims of a drosophila experiment to deny vertebrate
homology. -a-aGoogle does note this argument, but does not note that
Gish's evidence was for suspected genes associated with drosophila
eyes and not for vertebrate limbs depicted in his homology slide.-a The
quote that he put up came from someone talking about a drosophila
experiment that occurred years before any actual genes had been
identified as being responsible for drosophila eyes.-a It would have
been a shift within species and did not have much to do with
homologous structures.-a There is no reason why the genes responsible
for the development of homologous structures cannot be swapped out or
changed over time.-a Any changes just have to work within what is
already working.

QUOTE from below:
"Unproven" Genetic Basis: Gish also questioned the genetic basis of
homology, suggesting that similar genes for reptile legs and bird
wings should be present if they evolved from an ancestral leg, but
that evidence presented by evolutionists doesn't consistently support
this.
END QUOTE:

Homology in vertebrate limbs and Duane Gish

rCo-a-a-a Definition: Homology refers to the similarity in anatomical
structures, physiology, or development of different species due to
descent from a common evolutionary ancestor.
rCo-a-a-a Vertebrate Forelimbs as an Example: The classic example of
homology is the forelimbs of vertebrates, such as the human arm, bird
wing, and whale flipper. Despite their different functions (grasping,
flying, swimming), they are all composed of similar bones rCo the
humerus, radius, and ulna rCo arranged in a comparable pattern. This
underlying similarity, despite functional divergence, is explained by
the idea that these structures were inherited from a common ancestor
who had a similar limb structure, which was then modified over time
through evolution to suit different purposes.
rCo-a-a-a Evidence for Evolution: Homologous structures like the vertebrate >> forelimb provide strong evidence for the theory of evolution and
common ancestry. They suggest that diverse species have evolved from a
common ancestor, adapting the inherited structures to their specific
environments and functions.
rCo-a-a-a The Pentadactyl Limb: The presence of a pentadactyl limb (five- >> fingered limb) in various vertebrates, including humans, bats, and
whales, further strengthens the argument for common descent. Even
though their limbs serve different purposes, the shared basic
structure points towards a common ancestor with a similar limb design.
Duane Gish's arguments and criticism
rCo-a-a-a Duane Gish was a prominent creationist who engaged in debates
against the theory of evolution.
rCo-a-a-a Gish's Arguments Against Homology:
o-a-a-a Lack of direct evidence: Gish and other creationists argued that
homology does not prove evolution, as nobody has witnessed the gradual
changes in millions of generations from a common ancestor to a bird or
a human.
o-a-a-a Alternative Explanation: They suggested that similarities could
be explained by a "common design" by a creator, where similar
structures are used to solve similar functional problems.
o-a-a-a "Unproven" Genetic Basis: Gish also questioned the genetic basis
of homology, suggesting that similar genes for reptile legs and bird
wings should be present if they evolved from an ancestral leg, but
that evidence presented by evolutionists doesn't consistently support
this.
o-a-a-a "Gish Gallop": Gish was known for using a debating tactic called
the "Gish Gallop," where he would present a large number of arguments,
some accurate and some inaccurate or misleading, in a short time
frame, making it difficult for his opponents to address them all
comprehensively.


1-a-a-a MillerrCoUrey experiment
Google
Duane Gish
Duane Gish (1921-2013) was an American biochemist and a prominent
advocate of young Earth creationism. He served as a Vice President of
the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and was known for his
numerous publications and debates arguing against evolutionary theory.
Gish's arguments against the Miller-Urey experiment
Gish and other creationists used the perceived shortcomings of the
Miller-Urey experiment to argue against the possibility of abiogenesis
and, by extension, against evolution.
Some of the key points of their critique included:
rCo-a-a-a Atmospheric Composition: Gish claimed the gases used in the
experiment (methane, ammonia, and hydrogen) were not representative of
the Earth's early atmosphere, which he argued was likely oxidizing
(containing oxygen) rather than reducing. However, more recent
research suggests the early Earth's atmosphere might have been
reducing, containing elements like methane, ammonia, and hydrogen,
supporting the conditions used in the Miller-Urey experiment.
rCo-a-a-a Destruction of Products: Gish argued that lightning and other
harsh conditions on the early Earth would have destroyed any organic
compounds formed, according to the Iowa State Daily.
rCo-a-a-a Chirality: Gish highlighted the fact that the experiment produced >> a racemic mixture of left- and right-handed amino acids, while living
organisms exclusively utilize left-handed amino acids.
rCo-a-a-a The Law of Biogenesis and the Second Law of Thermodynamics: Gish >> argued that the Miller-Urey experiment contradicted these fundamental
laws, which he interpreted as stating that life cannot arise from non-
life and that order cannot arise spontaneously from disorder.


Darwin's Tree of Life and Duane Gish:
Gish would put up the tree of life slide only to claim that the
branches were not connected.-a The fossil evidence was fragmentary.
The tree of life no longer depends on morphology and fossils.-a The DNA
and protein sequences fill in all the gaps.-a Forensic geneology proves
that genetics can fill in the gaps and identify the identity of
persons who's genetic data is not available.-a Behe understands that we
can reconstruct ancestral sequences.-a Some of his claims of finding 2
neutral mutations being on the edge of evolution depend on the ability
to identify the ancestral sequence and determine when the neutral
mutations occurred.

Darwin's Tree of Life and Duane Gish: contrasting perspectives
Charles Darwin's "Tree of Life" is a foundational concept in
evolutionary biology, illustrating the idea that all life on Earth
shares a common ancestor and has diversified over time through a
branching process of descent with modification. This concept is
visually represented by a tree-like diagram where each branch
represents a species, and the points where branches diverge indicate a
common ancestor.
Duane Gish, a biochemist and prominent young-Earth creationist, was a
vocal opponent of evolutionary theory, including Darwin's concept of
the Tree of Life. He argued against evolution, particularly the
concept of common descent, and advocated for creationism based on a
literal interpretation of the Genesis story.
Gish's arguments against evolution and the Tree of Life
Gish primarily challenged the scientific evidence for evolution, often
presenting arguments that focused on perceived weaknesses in
evolutionary theory, rather than presenting a scientific case for
creationism. His arguments included:
rCo-a-a-a The fossil record: Gish claimed that the fossil record lacks
transitional forms, which he considered evidence against evolution. He
also asserted that the Cambrian Explosion, a period of rapid
diversification of animal life, contradicts evolutionary expectations
of gradual change.
rCo-a-a-a Second Law of Thermodynamics: Gish argued that the Second Law of >> Thermodynamics, which states that systems tend towards disorder,
prevents the natural emergence of complex life and the ongoing
evolution of organisms. Critics countered that Gish's interpretation
of the Second Law was oversimplified and failed to account for
localized order within open systems like Earth.
rCo-a-a-a Probability of life's origin: Gish used calculations of
vanishingly small probabilities of random assembly of biological
molecules to argue against the naturalistic origin of life,
effectively creating a straw man of scientific theories on abiogenesis.
rCo-a-a-a Homology and vestigial organs: Gish dismissed the evidence from >> homology (shared characteristics due to common ancestry) and vestigial
organs, again often misrepresenting evolutionary explanations for
these phenomena.

4-a-a-a Haeckel's embryos
Duane Gish and creationist use of the controversy
rCo-a-a-a Duane Gish, a prominent creationist debater, often used the
controversy surrounding Haeckel's embryo drawings as an argument
against evolution.
rCo-a-a-a He claimed that the inaccuracies in Haeckel's drawings
constituted scientific fraud, which in turn supposedly undermines the
entire theory of evolution, according to the National Center for
Science Education.
rCo-a-a-a Creationists have sometimes argued that if Darwin relied on
Haeckel, and Haeckel was a fraud, then Darwin and the theory of
evolution are also fraudulent.
rCo-a-a-a However, modern biology textbooks have moved away from using
Haeckel's original drawings, instead opting for photographs of real
embryos to illustrate embryological development.
rCo-a-a-a While acknowledging the inaccuracies in Haeckel's drawings, many >> scientists and educators emphasize that comparative embryology still
provides strong evidence for common descent, even without relying on
Haeckel's potentially flawed illustrations.
In essence, Duane Gish and other creationists used the acknowledged
historical inaccuracies and the ensuing debate surrounding Haeckel's
embryo drawings as a rhetorical tool in their debates against
evolution. While some of Haeckel's depictions were inaccurate, it's
important to differentiate between those historical shortcomings and
the broader scientific understanding of evolution and the supporting
evidence from comparative embryology. Modern science relies on more
accurate data and techniques, but still recognizes the value of
comparative embryology in understanding evolutionary relationships.

5-a-a-a Archaeopteryx
rCo-a-a-a Creationist Perspective:
Gish, affiliated with the Institute for Creation Research (ICR),
viewed Archaeopteryx as evidence supporting a biblical creation model,
where birds were created on Day 5 of the creation week, fully formed
and able to fly.
rCo-a-a-a Transitional Fossil Challenge:
Creationists like Gish reject the idea of transitional fossils,
arguing that Archaeopteryx, despite its bird-like features, was simply
a bird, not an evolutionary link between reptiles and birds, according
to the ICR.
rCo-a-a-a Gish's Claims:
Gish asserted that Archaeopteryx possessed feathers identical to
modern birds and was capable of flight, suggesting it was not a
transitional form.
rCo-a-a-a Scientific Counterarguments:
Scientific literature has extensively documented the anatomical
features of Archaeopteryx, including its feathered wings, claws on its
wings, and teeth, which provide evidence of its reptilian ancestry and
its place as a transitional form between reptiles and birds.
rCo-a-a-a Gish's Legacy:
Despite scientific evidence supporting Archaeopteryx's transitional
status, Gish's arguments have been influential within creationist
circles, shaping their interpretation of the fossil record.
rCo-a-a-a Beyond Archaeopteryx:
Gish's work extended beyond Archaeopteryx, encompassing broader
challenges to evolutionary biology and promoting a young-Earth
creationist perspective.


6-a-a-a Peppered moth
The Peppered Moth (Biston betularia) and Duane Gish are linked through
the creation-evolution debate.
Peppered Moth evolution
rCo-a-a-a The peppered moth is considered a classic example of natural
selection in action.
rCo-a-a-a Before the Industrial Revolution, the light-colored peppered moth >> (var. typica) was more common in England.
rCo-a-a-a With industrialization, pollution darkened trees, providing
camouflage for the darker form (var. carbonaria), which increased in
frequency due to predatory birds eating the more visible lighter moths.
rCo-a-a-a As pollution decreased with clean air acts, the light form became >> camouflaged again and its numbers rebounded.
rCo-a-a-a Bernard Kettlewell's experiments in the 1950s provided strong
evidence for this selection process.
rCo-a-a-a Subsequent research, including Michael Majerus's extensive study, >> further confirmed the role of bird predation and camouflage in the
moth's evolution.
Duane Gish's critique
rCo-a-a-a Duane Gish, a prominent creationist and biochemist, used the
peppered moth example in his arguments against evolution.
rCo-a-a-a He challenged the validity of the peppered moth story and
experiments, questioning the conclusions drawn from them.
rCo-a-a-a Gish often focused on what he claimed were methodological flaws >> in the experiments and alleged "fraud" in staging photographs of moths
on tree trunks.
rCo-a-a-a Creationists have argued that the peppered moth story is not
"evolution in action" because both light and dark forms existed before
and after the Industrial Revolution, representing variation within a
species rather than the development of a new species or "basic kind".

Galapagos finches and Duane Gish
Duane Gish's opposition to evolution
rCo-a-a-a Duane Gish (1921-2013) was a prominent biochemist and
creationist, known for his debates against evolutionary theory.
rCo-a-a-a He worked at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR), which
promotes a young-earth creationist perspective.
rCo-a-a-a Gish's arguments against evolution included claims that the
fossil record lacked transitional forms and that the Second Law of
Thermodynamics prevented the natural emergence of complex life.
rCo-a-a-a His book "Evolution: The Fossils Say No!" was a widely circulated >> resource for creationists.
rCo-a-a-a Gish was criticized for oversimplifying scientific concepts and >> using outdated information or mischaracterizations of evolutionary
theory in his arguments, according to the National Center for Science
Education.
The contrasting perspectives
rCo-a-a-a The Galapagos finches provide powerful evidence for evolution by >> natural selection and adaptive radiation, supporting Darwin's theory
of evolution.
rCo-a-a-a Duane Gish, representing a creationist viewpoint, actively
challenged the scientific consensus on evolution, including the
evidence from the Galapagos finches.
rCo-a-a-a Creationists like Gish often contend that observed changes in
finch beak size are examples of microevolution (variation within a
species) but do not demonstrate the kind of "information-adding"
evolution required to produce new species. However, this argument
ignores the evidence from the Grants' research and genomic studies
showing the development of new finch species and the genetic basis for
beak shape variations.


Four-winged fruit flies and Duane Gish
Google doesnrCOt give a summary, but links to articles citing Gish.
This one is inaccurate, but has the basic Gish gallop denial.
https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/5901808.real-question-god/
QUOTE:
Until I heard a lecture by Dr Duane Gish, a marine biologist, whose
job for years had been to irradiate fruit fly larvae to cause
mutations. They created literally millions of mutations -- some blind,
some with four wings on one side, none on the other...but they never
made a better fruit fly!
If we all arrived by random mutations, where is the fossil evidence of
all the ones that went wrong? Where are all the transitional species?
There simply aren't any -- none -- anywhere!
END QUOTE:

Gish was an immunologist and not a marine biologist.-a When I saw Gish
put up the slide of the 4 winged fruit fly it was to claim that
mutations produced nonfunctional wings.-a The bithorax mutation doubled
that body segment, but didnrCOt get the nerves and muscles quite right.
It wasnrCOt just a mutation reverting halteres to the actual second set
of wings.


Duane Gish and fossil horses
Duane Gish was a prominent creationist who challenged the scientific
evidence for evolution, including the evolution of horses.
Gish's arguments
rCo-a-a-a Gaps in the fossil record: Gish argued that gaps in the fossil
record of horses disproved evolution and pointed to the lack of
complete transitional forms between major groups.
rCo-a-a-a No clear progression: He claimed that the fossil record does not >> show a clear, smooth progression from small, multi-toed ancestors to
the large, single-toed modern horse.
rCo-a-a-a Variations within kinds: He suggested that the horse fossils
represent variations within "created kinds," rather than evidence of
evolution across different species or genera.
rCo-a-a-a Contradictory evidence: Gish highlighted what he saw as
contradictions in the fossil record, such as the finding of both
three- toed and one-toed horse fossils in the same layer, or
irregularities in the number of ribs in the supposed horse
evolutionary series.

Hominid evolution and Duane Gish
My recollection was that Gish would make fun of the fossils that
existed.-a He kept claiming that all the known hominid fossils would
fit onto a pool table, and he would claim that Lucy was obviously just
an ape.
Google:
Key arguments and criticisms:
rCo-a-a-a Fossil Gaps:
Gish argued that the fossil record contained significant gaps, which
he interpreted as evidence against evolution. He emphasized the
relatively small number of fossils found compared to the vast number
of species estimated to have existed.
rCo-a-a-a Misinterpretations and Errors:
He highlighted instances where fossil discoveries were initially
misinterpreted or later found to be hoaxes, such as the Nebraska Man
and Piltdown Man.
rCo-a-a-a Geological Column:
Gish claimed the geological column was based on evolutionary theory,
but it is actually based on radiometric dating, which provides
absolute ages for rock layers, according to the search results.
rCo-a-a-a Creation Model:
Gish proposed a creation model to explain the diversity of life,
suggesting that gaps in the fossil record supported his view. However,
this model doesn't align with the observed order of fossils in
geological strata, according to the search results.
rCo-a-a-a Quote Mining and Misrepresentation:
He was known for using quotes from evolutionary scientists out of
context and misrepresenting their views, according to the search results.
In essence, Gish's arguments against hominin evolution, and evolution
in general, relied on selective presentation of fossil evidence,
misinterpretations of scientific data, and claims that gaps in the
fossil record supported his creationist views.

Ron Okimoto

The ID perps have been putting up junk claims about Jonathan Wells after
his death.-a He is supposed to have been the Newton of the ID creationist scam.

https://scienceandculture.com/2025/09/evolutions-stubborn-icons- peppered-moths-and-miller-urey-still-shambling-along/

The saddest thing about the moth example of Wells regurgitating the
Icons of scientific creationist science denial is that the Wellsian lie about "no moths on tree trunks" got incorporated from his book into the
Ohio model lesson plan for teaching the ID perp's obfuscation and denial switch scam in the Ohio public schools.-a The initial drafts had that
lie, but the section was rewritten instead of deleted.-a When the obfuscation and denial had to be supported by a lie the whole section
should have been deleted.-a Wells knew that he was lying in the book
because it was pointed out that a reference that Wells used had found
10% of the moths in trees on the trunk.-a When you consider the surface
area of the trunk compared to the rest of the tree (leaves have two surfaces) 10% was likely more than they expected to have found by chance association.-a My guess is that the number was inflated because it was easier to find moths on the tree trunks than other parts of the tree.
The Wellsian lie was defended on the ARN discussion board as an "exaggeration" as if fictional Vulcan logic could defend the ID
creationist scam artists.

The moths are just examples of natural selection in action.-a It doesn't matter that Gish used to claim that they were still moths.-a Humans are still apes, apes are still mammals, mammals are still amniotes, amniotes
are still tetrapod vertebrates etc.

Ron Okimoto

Google quote:
During the Industrial Revolution, soot and ash from coal burning created
a selective pressure that favored dark-colored peppered moths ( Biston betularia) through camouflage, a phenomenon known as industrial
melanism. The color shift is a classic example of natural selection in
action.
END QUOTE:

This is the usual scenario because the light morph color pattern was
obviously adapted to a lichen background. Coal burning pollution killed
the lichen and covered the trees with soot, but the soot is toxic.
Melanin isn't just used as a pigment. Melanin likely first evolved to
protect the cells from free radicals and heavy metals. Melanin also
protects the organism from UV light, but bacteria around deep sea vents
do not need the UV protection, nor did they need the pigment camouflage properties of melanin.

One of the selection factors for dark morphs could be due to melanin's
ability to absorb heavy metals and free radicals that would be an issue
for the animals ingesting contaminated foliage. The trunks and branches
were not the only parts of the trees being dusted with soot.

Ron Okimoto

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2