Creation Moment 3/12/2021 - Squid Case Study: Evolution as Default for Secularists

 I have seen the foolish taking root: Job 5:3

"Secular scientists have a bad habit of carelessly appealing to evolution as a default explanation for everything.

Sophisticated Skin (University of California at Santa Barbara). This article describes with rapture the capabilities of squid, which can change the color and texture of their skin almost instantaneously. Human fascination with squid is “no wonder,” the introduction reads: “their odd appearances and strange intelligence, their mastery of the open ocean can inspire awe in those who see them.” Professor Daniel Morse then interprets the Darwin code to tell how these awe-inspiring animals got that way:

Having evolved for hundreds of millions of years to hunt, communicate, evade predators and mate in the vast, often featureless expanses of open water, squids have developed some of the most sophisticated skin in the animal kingdom.

This is plainly fallacious. 

Even if one accepts the neo-Darwinian “mechanism” (not really a mechanism, but the outcome of the Stuff Happens Law), no animal or plant “evolves to” do anything. That would imply a plan or purpose to reach a distant target. Darwin explicitly denied any aim or direction inherent in his theory. This claim, therefore, is not only unscientific, but unhistorical as well.  

*Notice how “developed” is used synonymously with “evolved” – “squids have developed some of the most sophisticated skin” – how? by evolution. It evolved.

Morse and his accomplices go on to repeat the fallacy three more times:

• “Evolution has so exquisitely optimized not only the color tuning, but the tuning of the brightness using the same material, the same protein and the same mechanism,” Morse said.
• “…it reveals the intricacy of the evolutionary process, the millennia of mutation and natural selections that have honed and optimized these processes together.”
• “According to the researchers, ‘This evolutionarily honed, efficient coupling of reflecting of its osmotic amplifier is closely analogous to the impedance matched coupling of activator-transducer-amplifier networks in well-engineered electronic, magnetic, mechanical and acoustic systems.’ In this case the activator would be the neuronal signal, while the reflectins acts as transducers and the osmotically controlled membranes serve as the amplifiers.”

--If one can believe that “impedance matched coupling of activator-

transducer-amplifier networks in well-engineered electronic, magnetic, mechanical and acoustic systems” emerged mindlessly by chance, one can sense the absurdity of attributing squid engineering to the Stuff Happens Law." CEH