Customer Reviews

Not by Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution

5 star:		(42)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(12)

 

 

Each new revelation in genetic research, no matter how bizarre and unforeseen, can be construed as a ringing confirmation of the theory of evolution, or so evolutionary biologists would have us believe. With this book, Dr. Lee Spetner risks the wrath of the evolution establishment by challenging the validity of the neo-Darwinian theory, or "dogma" as he calls it. Evolutionists assume that the observed ability of organisms like finches and bacteria to adapt to altered environments is clear proof of the NDT, which holds that random mutations in the DNA molecule are a prime factor in these adaptations. But this inference is negated by compelling new evidence at every level of biology according to Spetner, whose credentials include an MIT doctorate in physics, expertise in molecular biology, and published papers on biology in prestigious scientific journals. Numerous experiments are cited indicating many of these survival modifications are linked to a particular class of nonrandom mutations responding on cue to specific changes in the environment. A given external stimulus will trigger the same chain reaction of hormone-induced DNA mutations every time, yielding an identical adaptive response.

Spetner claims research findings like these which don't fit approved doctrine are simply ignored by evolutionary biologists. That charge is echoed with gusto by renowned biologist Lynn Margulis, who issues scathing denunciations of their obscurantist tactics in "Slanted Truths." She believes the "stranglehold" of the Darwinian "religious movement" can only be broken by a rational counter-force from outside the fold. Spetner's authoritative book is an ideal instrument for this deliverance. Critics of the NDT will savor the hard-science rigor of molecular arguments adduced against a theory they believe is largely based on speculative just-so stories.

In a historical overview, the author reminds us that when the so-called synthetic theory was first crafted fifty years ago, DNA had yet to be discovered. Darwin himself was blissfully ignorant of the functions and structure of the cell. We now know that mammals are composed of trillions of cells, each containing an information-packed DNA molecule and hundreds of interacting organelles. It is therefore not unreasonable to ask: What if Darwin's quaint theory were advanced today for the first time? The proposal that a clumsy hypothetical mechanism modeled on eighteenth century economic theories and pigeon breeding practices could possibly account for the origins of EVERY SINGLE ELEMENT in the incredibly complex universe of microbiology unfolding before our eyes would be laughable. The hodgepodge theory of evolution has become a religious faith so deeply ingrained in its adherents they appear oblivious to its absurdities. This book relates how stunning advances in biotechnology in just the past two decades have dramatically widened the gulf separating the realities of empirical science from the myths of neo-Darwinism.

A number of these myths are spun in "The Blind Watchmaker" by one of evolution's high priests, zoologist Richard Dawkins. Spetner searched this work for traces of solid science and found mainly false assumptions and technical inaccuracies instead. He notes that, "like many passionate believers, Dawkins did not examine his evidence critically." Indeed, his vaunted cumulative selection thesis is riddled with unfounded assumptions. He built his case for it entirely on the power of the concept, with not one word of proof. His biomorph and lexical computer simulations are demonstrated not to represent natural selection as his uncritical disciples may believe, only artificial selection, as in pigeon breeding.

The author's diversified background, which also includes lectureships in information theory and communication theory at Johns Hopkins University, enables him to speak expertly on a host of technical issues surrounding this subject. Laymen who've fallen behind the dazzling pace of microbiology will be intrigued by his lucid account of the counter-intuitive adaptive strategies in Nature's arsenal. The architecture and mechanisms of the DNA molecule are examined in depth, introducing lay readers to a host of basic concepts like introns, transitrons, point mutations, mutation rates, genetic information and heritable genetic switches. This potent brew is spiced with liberal doses of humorous asides and amusing anecdotes.

It should be noted that Spetner's work is narrowly focused on the purely secular, scientific aspects of his topic. It rarely strays into the domains of metaphysics or theology. Amazon reviewers of this book who parrot mindless shibboleths about creationism and gods of the gap as they did with Michael Behe's ground-breaking "Darwin's Black Box " will clearly establish they either didn't read the book or have been hopelessly brainwashed in orthodox biology classes.

To appreciate the extent of evolutionists' distortions in the classroom, one has only to browse through a current biology textbook after reading Spetner. To cite one case, he has found thousands of examples of convergence, or parallel evolution, buried in the literature, so one might assume they are a significant fact of biological life. He demonstrates mathematically the impossibly long odds against these uncanny near-identities of features in unrelated species, like wings in birds and bats, being evolved by any feat of natural selection. Evidently academic biologists prefer not to dispute this conclusion. A typical nationally distributed college text, "Biology " by N.A. Campbell, contains 1200 pages saturated with evolution mythology, but just one short paragraph on convergence. An equally inextricable companion phenomenon, mimicry, is completely ignored. Other slanted omissions and distortions abound.

Spetner's definitive treatise on what many consider an extremely important issue deserves a much wider audience than it presently commands. Whereas the shelf space afforded the evolutionist tomes of Dawkins and Steven J. Gould in the mega book stores Barnes & Noble and Borders is measured in linear feet, "Not by Chance" is nowhere in sight, not even in inventory. These giant outlets are rapidly driving out alternative book sellers. The inability of an author of Spetner's stature to address a substantial segment of the population that would be sympathetic to his message amounts to de facto censorship by a quasi-monopolistic distribution system. Although most of them will never have the opportunity, avid evolutionists would find this slender volume an eye-opening read.

After reading the guy who wrote the review using an analogy of cars and intersections, I wondered if this guy read the same book I did. The point of the book was not that random events cannot happen, but rather that 2 billions years of random events cannot explain the endowment of DNA with the information content it has, but any known means, unless you are willing to believe in some kind of spontaneous arrangement of molecules that require more faith than the supernatural. At any rate, Dr Spetner does a fine job of demonstrating that neo-darwinism simply has no credible explanation for the information content in DNA. And when it's all said and done, if you cannot show how the information got there, you have no explanation. Moreover, if one can show the virtual impossibility of DNA aquiring information in the way neo-darwinism asserts, then neo-darwinism is simply a false hypothesis. Dr Spetner does this aptly. Information aquisition is the name of game here, and Dr Speter is an expert in information theory, unlike most neo-darwinists. Dr Spetner also demonstrates why all the examples of mutations are not evidence for neo-darwinist evolution. I particularly enjoyed his treatment of Richard Dawkins (having seen the same flaws in Dawkins' apologetics myself. It's no wonder that Dawkins refuses to debate Dr Spetner.) Dr Spetner also speculates about the source of variations. Get this book and consider the contents carefully. This book will appeal to the technical mind, unlike so much of the "creationist" drivvel in print these days.

This books puts Neo-Darwinian Theory under the microscope of a rigorous quantitative critique. As the author points out, where facts and figures are important non-quantitative arguments can mislead. "Clever debaters have long shown that they can make even the weakest case look strong."

Spetner quotes Fisher's conclusion based on the latter's quantitative work in population genetics: "A mutation, even if favourable, will have only a very small chance of establishing itself in the species if it occurs once only." In other words many favourable mutations which occur in individuals never get passed on to their populations. This is contrary to the assumption of Darwin, Dawkins and Dobzhansky. This problem is of course much more acute for small isolated populations.

Using numerical data provided by evolutionary paleontologists from their study of horse evolution, Spetner computed one small evolutionary step to require about 50 million births. Ledyard Stebbins estimated that it takes 500 such steps to generate a new species. Assume each of these steps consists of establishing a single transcription error (the most trivial mutation available) in the population. Suppose only one in every million species needs to be successfully generated for NDT to work. Spetner calculated that it would require at least a million adaptive transciption errors. This does not take into account the fact that macro-evolution demands mutations which are not just adaptive, but which also contain novel information. This is a demand that evolutionists prefer not to discuss, as apparently not even a single such mutation is known to exist.

It is extremely unlikely that a population's genome contains so much potential for adaptive errors, let alone information-enhancing ones. But Spetner goes on to demonstrate quantitatively that if there were, then they would provide such an enormous number of potential evolutionary paths as to rule out the possibility of convergent and parallel evolution, which are a major feature of NDT. So either way, NDT loses.

Richard Dawkins' famous computer simulations come under scrutiny. They are doubtless clever, and fun to play with, but have little to do with the real world of biology. The `weasel' program is deterministic, not stochastic. Moreover, good mutations invariably get established in the population, and are frozen, the mutation rate is far too high, and the `genome' has far too few symbols. The same calculation mentioned earlier that shows speciation cannot happen under NDT also shows that the `weasel' algorithm will succeed in a relatively few trials. But "If he had run a more realistic simulation he would have been at his computer for a long time."

The `biomorphs' program is equally irrelevant to the biology of the real world. Selection is artificial, based on the selector's whim with no predefined criteria; at any stage any mutation could be chosen as adaptive; there are no lethal mutations and hence no limit on the mutation rate. "Because of the way it's built, the simulation sidesteps the reason evolution doesn't work in real life."

Spetner agrees with the `tachys' that the evolution that is observed to occur, i.e. micro-evolution, is effected by the action of recombination on regulatory genes, but he argues that these mechanisms require far too much precision and therefore micro-evolutionary changes cannot be random.

One very important basic fact is that mutations are known to cause loss of information, while macro-evolution demands gain in information. "Just like a fortune can't be made by losing money, evolution can't build up information by losing it. Moreover before you can lose money, or information, you first have to make it." This is a problem that NDT advocates must honestly address.

Evolutionists often make the bland assertion that a 5 billion year earth provides plenty of time for even for the most improbable events to occur. In doing so they often pull the wool over their own eyes. As an example, Richard Dawkins (The Blind Watchmaker) asserts that a hypothetical alien with a lifespan of 100 million years would not be surprised to be dealt an occasional perfect hand at bridge. He will "scarcely trouble to write home about it when it happens." This is an example of how a non-quantitative argument can mislead. Spetner assumed that this hypothetical alien played 100 bridge hands every day of his life! Even so the probability of his ever getting a perfect hand comes to less than two in a thousand million million! Anyone with a basic knowledge of probability theory can verify Spetner's result.

The ICR newsletter Acts & Facts (June 1999) relates the following incident:

One student related a recent incident when her teacher challenged the class: "If your car breaks down, could you open the hood, step back 20 feet, throw a wrench at the engine, and fix your car? No. But what if you threw the wrench one million times. Chances are you'd fix it."

This is the kind of absurdity evolutionary thinking generates! That a treatise as specious as The Blind Watchmaker can be embraced with so much uncritical enthusiasm is symptomatic of such mental aberration.

Needless to say there is far more to the book, and this review is only able to give a flavour of what is in store for the reader. You have to read the book itself to appreciate the full force of the arguments.

Diehard evolutionists usually react to serious challenges to their cherished theory in two ways: ad hominem attacks on the challenger, and the hand-waving technique. However, intellectual integrity requires them to provide a detailed and rigorous scientific response to those challenges.

I am not one who argues from a religious point of view. Please, just the facts and the tests will convince me of something. So, I have no emotional interest in whether the Theory of Evolution is true or false. I personally have no problem with either God, one or many, aliens, or even evolution. I just want the facts and tests presented to me.

Ever since I was in graduate school in Physics, I have learned to ask questions and not believe without facts and tests. No one in the biology departments were able to answer my questions concerning genetics and evolution concisely and accurately. Perhaps it was the times; but after reading this book, I know now they did not know the answers themselves, but, only expected me to believe them. Acutally, I have the same problem with people who expect me to believe their religion, Christian or other.

I found first in this book a clear presentation of genetics and mutations. Wonderful ! First set of questions answered. Second, I found the books arguments well documented and mostly tractable. This book is not in the "easy reading" category, nor, is it in the "Particle Physics" level. You must exercise your brain.

I always expected from evolutionists and explanation for speciation. If evolution were a real theory I thought, they should be able to show me the steps of mutations to change one species to another. We could test this and go on. This book clarified for me why my second set of quesions to biologists, ie, tests, were never answered. There are none and again, I was suppose to just believe them.

This book clarifies not just genetics in the most coherent fashion than any I have read before, but, goes on to show how using the suppositions of evolution and the evolutionist's data, you reach contradictions. Ergo, it cannot be true. The evolutionists must come from another logic universe, or are just professing their religion.

If there are some problems with the logic or mathematics the author quotes, I am convinced, they would be minor and not contradict the conclusions of this book.

Anyone who searches for the truth of evolution, must read this book.

Richard Lombardi
M.S. Physics

In his book, "Not by Chance," Dr. Lee Spetner does a fantastik job of hitting the Theory of Evolution where it hurts. In my opinion, the concept of information is the biggest problem for evolutionists to overcome and Dr Spetner demonstrates this beautifully. It is no wonder that reviewers are posing Ad Hominem attacks, spending many paragraphs criticizing Dr. Spetners degrees rather than criticising the science. When evolutionists result to personal attacks, I automatically assume that they have given up the debate and admitted defeat.

In the first chapter, Dr. Spetner discusses the history of evolution. If you have devoted any study to the creation/evolution controversy, this chapter may just be a repetition of things you already know. However, Dr. Spetner does an excellent job of discussing a very important aspect of the controversy, the history.

The second chapter reads basically like a college biology textbook. I found it very interesting that Dr. Spetner felt compelled to discuss and define many aspects of biology. I suppose he did this so that the uneducated will have some idea as to what the key concepts in biology are. Something Dr. Spetner did that I really appreciated was to offer an appendix that discusses topics in more detail like the structure of DNA, how enzymes work, Transcription, etc. Because Dr. Spetner is a physicist, I was skeptical as to whether or not he would be correct on concepts such as these(although any freshmen biology major would be qualified to write about DNA, enzymes, and Transcription). It turned out that Dr. Spetner was right on target on every topic he touched. In fact, I felt he discussed these topics with much more clarity than do most college biology textbooks(which I own and cross checked them with Spetners work).

In the next few chapters, Spetner deals with defining the Neo-Darwinian theory and discussing probability. I honestly found chapters 3 and 4 to be boring. I have never been a fan of probability arguments, mainly because it is so easy to make mistakes and unintentional straw-man arguments. Nonetheless, Dr. Spetner demonstrated the best probability arguments that I have ever seen. Sadly, evolutionists will probably spend all their time criticising Spetners calculations while ignoring his ideas on information.

If you, the reader, are planning on reading anything in this book, let it be chapters 5-7. These deal with the heart of the matter. In the earlier chapters, Spetner was being generous when dealing with probability because he assumed that increases in new genetic information are possible(which he doesn't believe, of course). Now he shows that increases in new genetic information is not only unlikely, but impossible.

Lee Spetners book was published in 1997. Before this time I have never read any anti-evolution literature that deals with the concept of information in relation to the Theory of Evolution. This is suprising, since information theory has been around for a long time. Before Dr. Spetner's work, anti-evolutionists used the micro-macro arguments(unfortunately many still do). Although Dr. Spetner used the micro-macro argument, he defined the terms in such a way so that it ties into the concept of information. What Dr. Spetner does is demonstrate that no increase in new information has ever been found in nature. He says that if large scale evolution were possible, then increases in new information should be found all throughout nature, happening every day. So its not about how large of a change can happen, but rather the TYPE of change. No doubt, large changes can and do happen, but they can happen as a result of a LOSS of information. Anti-evolutionists need to stop using the micro-macro arguments and start using the information concept, which Dr. Spetner beautifully demonstrates.

I think that anyone interested in the creation/evolution controversy can benefit from this book. If you are an evolutionist, you will become more aware of the new attacks that are being posed at your theory so that you can defend it better. If you are an anti-evolutionists, you will encounter one of the best apologetic defense of special creation ever encountered, next to the Bible. I must warn, that if you haven't had atleast an introductory course in biology, this book might be a boring read. If you are a beginner to the creation/evolution subject, I would recommend purchasing a college biology textbook so that the unfamiliar terms and concepts can be explained.

"Not by Chance" by Lee Spetner is another of the many popular-level books challenging Neo-Darwinian Theory (NDT). A physicist by profession, the author employs mathematical analysis to highlight weaknesses in current evolutionary theory. I offer the following comments for potential readers.

The author's argument focuses on what is known as macro-evolution (speciation and the broad development of bio-diversity) rather than more modest and widely accepted micro-evolution (variation within existing species - dogs, bacteria, etc.). Some would argue that this division is arbitrary, and, the two categories are in fact just different aspects of the same process (i.e. a collection of small micro-evolutionary steps culminate in macro-evolutionary change) - Spetner disputes this view.

The application of statistical probability and information theory to NDT is enlightening. Spetner makes a strong argument for the improbability of NDT when it is examined at sub-cellular level. The author uses statistical probability to argue that macro-evolution is vastly more unlikely that many events that are commonly considered to be impossible. Although these types of arguments will not likely carry the day with orthodox Darwinists - they can be quite powerful to the uninitiated.

The author applies his rigorous analysis to many aspects of evolutionary theory with similar effect. For example, Convergence (independent development of similar features - wings, echo location, eyes, etc.) has long been recognized as an ackward fit for NDT. Again, applying statistical analysis, Spetner notes that the likelihood of these features developing independently through random mutation and natural selection is almost incomprehensible. Indeed, citing varied research he suggests that there appears to be evidence of environmental triggered adaptive change. This is an interesting area that warrants further examination - unfortunately this appears to be an excessively dangerous question in the current climate.

A couple of minor criticisms. The book has a chapter on sub-cellular genetic structures that may be helpful to lay readers - while a good thought it be could improved (a few more diagrams would add to its value). Additionally, while Spetner's detailed analysis is appreciated, it can move a bit too quickly in spots and as a result his style is occasionally choppy.

Overall, a solid discussion of NDT that is a worthwhile read. For readers interested in the author, Spetner has a range of material published on the Internet (the correspondence/debate with Max is particularly interesting). For readers new to this issue works by Dawkins (e.g. The Blind Watch Maker) and Johnson (e.g. Darwin on Trial) may be helpful in framing the current debate.

Review of "NOT BY CHANCE!"

Very enjoyable read! I was only disappointed with the inability to quantitatively measure "information." We know that it exists, but if we can't measure it how do we know it needs to increase? According to Richard Dawkins, of which Spetner refutes, evolution works sporadically and unpredictably. In his original two books, The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype, he established himself as an authority, and broke free with his book The Blind Watchmaker. The recent books, River out of Eden and Climbing Mount Improbable elaborate on that book. His other points, as I said, were refuted, but his main thesis cannot be ignored. Spetner would have refuted his entire thesis if he could have been more specific about what he meant by "information" and showed how it's measured. It seems very subjective at best, and it therefore undermines a great deal of his book. It is also not true information theory, but consists of made-up definitions, sort of like a "theory of meaning". He does show how mutations are basically always harmful and that the probability of evolution is slim, but I was haunted with the problem of the above.

But ignoring only this minor flaw for a moment, the book is great and should be read by both parties. It should have also been more widely distributed, as the previous reviewer rightly pointed out.

Though this point is hard for me to ignore, it might be easier for others to. I myself am very familiar with the information theory, as introduced by Claude Shannon, and tend to read William Dembski. I suggest his books also.

Dr. Spetner is a brilliant scholar on information and communication theory, physics, and biology, and cannot be overlooked. His reputation is impeccable and I strongly suggest he follows up this book with a sequel. I myself WILL hold my breath for such a book, because I know he can do a tad better.

Wonderful critique of Darwinism, Lee!

Dr. James T. Perkins,

San Francisco, California,

Tuesday, February 16, 11:57 PM, 1999

Don't it just rile you when people come along and write a review when they clearly haven't read the book. I'm referring to the read from California. Spetner has written a chapter called 'The Watchmaker's Blindness' which tackles Richard Dawkins' theories and statements, and rebuts them on experimental grounds. Spetner's entire book is based on exposing the fatal flaws of Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection - on experimental grounds. What does the reader from California have to say? "He (Spetner) may come to other conclusions by reading first books which I recommend instead:" ... "Dawkins' books on evolution" and "'The Descent of Man' by Charles Darwin".

This book shouldn't be shoved under the carpet by people who are too scared to admit that materialists' theories are fatally flawed. If the reader from California were to read the book, maybe he/she "may come to other conclusions". How this book can be described as "Jewish science", beats me.

Spetner's work does not show that evolution didn't occur. It shows that Darwin's theory of natural selection (adhered to by Richard Dawkins), absolutely falls short of explaining how we, and all the other species, came to be. This book is serious. Buy it.

As a research scientist in molecular genetics, I found Dr. Spetner's conclusions not only sound, but very compelling. The writings of many of the current leading advocates of evolution, such as Dawkins and Gould, reveal they lack an indepth understanding of genetic principles and processes. The molecular genetic basis of their arguments has always been as flimsy as a house of cards. And, as with any house of cards, a slight tap will bring it crashing down. Spetner, though, has done far more than just tap. Within the scientific circles that I travel, no one has yet been able to offer a single valid refutation of his conclusions. In fact, I've even witnessed a small degree of panic as the full weight of his arguments became painfully clear. Despite what most people (including many scientists) have been led to believe, genetics has never offered much hope for the types of evolutionary changes that either Darwin, Dawkins, or Gould have proposed. As Spetner methodically illustrates, it likely never will.

Not an especially well written book; it's painfully repetitive in places. The explanations and examples are not always very clear. The introduction seems to promise to look at evolution in light of modern information theory, but the book never really defines or describes information theory.

Despite its faults, the main point seems inescapable: theories of evolution based on random variation can't hold up under close scrutiny. If you're a naturalist taking refuge from intelligent design in evolutionary theory, you have three choices: 1) Insist that evolution is some how above or immune to the natural laws of mathematics and probability (i.e. evolution is "super-natural"). 2) Abandon your self delusion. 3) Press the back button now. Don't read this book. Place your hands over your ears and repeat loudly, "I CAN'T HEAR YOU".