If you spend any amount of time on social media you will inevitably come across memes. The concept of the meme has been around for some time, but has been rediscovered and adapted for use on the internet. In it's current incarnation, a meme, as defined by Google is:

"a humorous image, video, piece of text, etc., that is copied (often with slight variations) and spread rapidly by Internet users."[1]

Memes are perfectly suited for the internet and social media, where attention spans are short and tolerance for reading an entire article (like this one) on a topic is even shorter.  Memes tend to be very visual, and therefore  memorable, perhaps leaving a lasting impression. But when the meme expresses a false idea, you now have the problem of a falsehood being re-enforced by a false, but perhaps memorable meme.

Another problem is that since memes are short, the idea they express is almost never backed by sources you can consult to affirm or deny what is being expressed in the meme. And being short, as a rule they leave out critical detail and context and thus are prone to the fallacy of suppressed evidence -  failing to give all the information needed to come to the correct conclusion. All these problems are particularly true of memes that are propagated in support of evolution.

So given that:

A. Memes have become a popular way of expressing support for evolutionary ideas;

B. Memes lend themselves to the reader adopting faulty conclusions without considering the entire picture or doing any cross checks on the matter;

C. Memes for evolution are almost always either outright wrong, misleading, or contain some logical fallacy (aside from the ones which simply insult your intelligence or faith)

Therefore:

D. It seemed appropriate to give a short, paragraph or 2 response to these various memes to demonstrate their mistakes, and why ultimately their claims fail to support the failed theory of evolution.  So here's the plan:

Busting the Myths of the Memes of Evolution

This series of articles will present various memes in use on the internet and then expose why they are fallacious and misleading. The goals will be:

1. Length - to keep the exposé brief - one or two paragraphs (if possible - there'll likely be exceptions).
2. Easy to Share - To make them easy to share (like a meme), I will present a link (just below the title)  that you can copy, which will allow you to send links to that specific meme and meme-busting explanation beneath it.
3. Easy to find -since this is a series, the list of unmasked memes will grow. To make them easy find, I will keep a running list of them here.  Bookmark the site for easy reference to them.
4. Documentation - Unlike memes, these explanations will provide you with links and  references to where the claims in the debunking exposé come from so you don't have to take my word for it. You can look it up yourself. 

So without further ado, here - in no particular order[2] are the first five memes, and why they are wrong. These memes carry the theme of "common creationist misconceptions" - trying to show why the given statement is incorrect. The statements are correct, and the exposé explains why.

Meme: Evolution has never been observed
Link to this topic: http://rationalfaith.com/2017/03/unmasking-mistakes-in-memes-of-evolution-part-1/#Evolution_never_observed

When dealing with evolutionists you'll find a lot of their arguments are made on the basis of the fallacy of  equivocation - the illegitimate switching of a term or terms in the middle of an argument. (I detail this tactic in Games Evolutionists Play: The Name Game) Therefore you must be precise in your definitions. When creationists say "evolution has never been observed" we are referring to molecules-to-man evolution - or macro evolution.  Evolution from basic chemicals in the supposed primeval pond to man (or any other complex creature) - that type of evolution has in fact never been observed. When evolutionists claim "evolution has been observed" they are speaking of variation - or micro evolution - which no one denies.[3] For  the difference between Microevolution and Macroevolution see neo-evolutionist Dobzhansky's realization here. In passing, notice the equivocation on the word "evolution" and beware - it's a common tactic of evolutionists. On the claim about speciation, see the next meme.
 

Meme: Speciation is not evolution
Link to this topic: http://rationalfaith.com/2017/03/unmasking-mistakes-in-memes-of-evolution-part-1/#Speciation_not_evolution

Once again definitions are the key. This meme has a lot of red herrings so let's start by clarifying the main claim. The primary claim here is that  creationists don't know what they're talking about when they say that "speciation is not evolution." So let's be clear about what we're talking about:

• Creationists are referring to molecules-to-man-evolution when referring to evolution .
• Speciation aka Variation aka Microevolution deals with minor changes within a Biblical kind.
• Evolution aka Darwinian evolution aka Macroevolution deals with large scale changes from one kind to other kind, such as from bacterium to biologist which has never been observed.

Clearly defined,  evolution (molecules-to-man) is not merely Variation (or speciation or minor changes within a kind); thus creationists who make that claim are correct - once all terms are defined and understood. When clarified in this manner it is obvious that microevolution is not macroevolution.

All the other verbiage is a distraction. Evolutionists like to talk about alleles as a distraction[4] but they are not necessary for this discussion. [5] Evolutionist also claim microevolution and macroevolution are the same (as this meme claims) but they are not. For details see Microevolution: Dispelling the Myths and Misconceptions

Meme: Evolution is not Science
Link to this topic:  http://rationalfaith.com/2017/03/unmasking-mistakes-in-memes-of-evolution-part-1/#Evolution_not_Science

Evolution is not science because according to the definition of science used in the meme itself, among other things, science is observable. But evolution is not observable.  This is acknowledged by the evolutionist making this meme, by claiming in another meme (here) that evolution is too slow to be observed,[6] thus refuting himself his claim that evolution is observable.

Furthermore, not only is evolution not science, it fits the definition of a pseudoscience (or in other words, it is a pseudoscience) because in addition to being unobservable, it breaks many laws of science, such as the laws of biogenesis, chemistry and information theory. For more on why evolution is a pseudoscience, see Evolution not Science, Pseudoscience [7]
 
Meme: Evolution can't explain how life started
Link to this topic: http://rationalfaith.com/2017/03/unmasking-mistakes-in-memes-of-evolution-part-1/#origin_of_life


 

This is a rather disingenuous response. Once again we see evolutionists trying to hide the failure of evolution to explain the origin of life behind definitions.  It is correct that Darwinian evolution necessarily begins with two reproducing members of a species; without which natural selection has nothing to select from. As noted neo-evolutionist  Theodosius Dobzhansky put it: "Prebiological natural selection is a contradiction of terms."[8] Put another way: without pre-existing life, Darwinian evolution is impossible.

There are only two options for the origin of life: Either God initiated it or some material process initiated without God's intervention. The process apart from God - whatever the details may be - is called "evolution." Aside from these two options, there is no other option for the origin of life.  Darwinists[9] don't believe God initiated all life. Thus they are left with the only other option - some process - typically called chemical evolution or abiogenesis - as the origin of life; but these terms are included as part of the generic term "evolution". Thus to say "evolution" doesn't attempt to explain the origin of life is to equivocate on the meaning of the word "evolution":  pointing to Darwinian evolution while denying they believe in  Chemical evolution aka abiogenesis - which they must believe in to explain the origin of life since they deny God's intervention.[10] Note also the propensity to claim evolution as a "fact" - another  equivocation on micro vs. macro evolution (see the above meme on that).

Meme: Something can't come from nothing
Link to this topic: http://rationalfaith.com/2017/03/unmasking-mistakes-in-memes-of-evolution-part-1/#something_from_nothing


 

This is more a concern for Big Bang believers, but since it's presented with the memes of evolution, and since evolution cannot be true if the Big Bang isn't true (which it isn't) I'll address it.  This can  be approached from two perspectives: the logical errors, and the physical impossibilities.

Logical Errors: Let's start with the admission that "empty space does not actually mean nothing."  Thus what a creationist means when talking about "nothing" is typically different from what a evolutionist or big bang believer means - the creationist means absolutely nothing. Thus already we see an equivocation on the word "nothing"

Next, let's look at what is known as a category error.  The mistake: treating something as if it were nothing. Simply put: something that exists is not the same as something which does not exist. They don't get to claim "quantum fluctuations" did anything if they are truly "nothing"; meaning - lacking existence. The problem is "quantum fluctuations" are in fact something that exists -  which they treat as nothing - and thus the fallacy and the failure of the theory:  they don't really start from nothing.  They can't talk about them popping into and out of existence in space because "space" is not "nothing." Which brings us to the next category of errors.

Physical errors: The big bang theory claims the universe began out of an explosion from an infinitely small (note: infinitely small=nothing) dot  containing "all the energy that will ever be in our universe"[11]  in an event called "the singularity." What evolutionists and big bang believers fail to understand is that before the big bang, nothing  - meaning absolutely nothing - existed[12].  Therefore none of what they claim happens, can happen - because there is no space, time, matter or energy for it to happen with, and in.  They can't talk about quantum fluctuations popping into existence because there is no "existence." Nothing exists - including quantum fluctuations and space itself.  Thus there is also no space for fluctuations to pop into. The recent detection of gravitational waves proves Einstein was right in viewing space as a "fabric." So likewise, they can't talk about fluctuations or dark energy in "space" before the big bang because 1. Before the singularity there was no place for "space"  to exist in (remember, space came into  existence with the big bang) and 2. If there is energy (as it is claimed for dark energy) it is still "something," not nothing. Einstein proved this in his famous equation E=mc² which shows that matter (m) and energy (E)[13]  are different manifestations of the same thing. Those things on either side of the equation are not "nothing." Thus dark energy (if it exists), like space, is not "nothing."

If anyone claims the universe came from nothing, you'll understand they're either ignorant of the truth - not understanding what "nothing" is; or they're  just another big bang magician, performing feats of flawed logic and science. For more on such errors, see Exposing the Big Magic behind the Big Bang and More Big Bang Magic Tricks - Shadows and Waves

Conclusion

And so concludes the unmasking of  this first group of misleading evolutionary memes. Remember a running list of all these can be found at http://rationalfaith.com/mememistakes/.  If there's an evolutionary meme you'd like to see unmasked in a future article, send me a link to it here.

Duane Caldwell | posted 4 March, 2017
Follow @duanecaldwell

1.  Meme - As defined by Google on 1 March, 2017
Back

2. Another reason for the running list - which you'll find here: http://rationalfaith.com/mememistakes/
Since I won't be presenting them in any particular order, to easily find the response to a meme check the list - which will continue to grow as more erroneous memes are addressed.
Back

3. For a precise definition of Evolution see the one given by Paul Nelson, philosopher of Science from “Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed” Documentary, 2008 viewable here: http://rationalfaith.com/2016/08/microevolution-dispelling-the-myths-and-misconceptions/#paulnelsondef

For the distinction between Microevolution (Variation) and Macroevolution (Darwinian Evolution) as recognized by highly regarded neo-Darwinist Theodosius Dobzhansky see: http://rationalfaith.com/2016/08/microevolution-dispelling-the-myths-and-misconceptions/#Dobzhansky-realization

For more on the claim of evolution being observed, see Games evolutionists Play: The Name Game http://rationalfaith.com/2016/01/games-evolutionists-play/#namegame
Back

4. For more on the distractions evolutionists use, like "variations in allele frequencies", see the graphic "Evolutionary wheel meaning of Fortune" Full article here
Back

5. For more on Microevolution and Macroevolution see http://rationalfaith.com/2016/08/microevolution-dispelling-the-myths-and-misconceptions/
Back

6. When answering the question, "How come evolution stopped", this evolutionist answers, essentially that evolution is too slow to be observed. This precludes it from being science. View that meme here: http://rationalfaith.com/img/meme_why_evo_stopped_500.jpg
Back

7. Duane Caldwell, Evolution: Not Science: Pseudoscience, 6 May, 2016 http://rationalfaith.com/2016/05/evolution-not-science-pseudoscience/
Back

8.  Theodosius Dobzhansky quoted by Jonathan Sarfati, "The Greatest Hoax on Earth - Refuting Dawkins on Evolution" Atlanta, GA: Creation Book Publishers 2010, p.228
Back

9. Darwinists who are purists are in view here, not those who are confused and believe in theistic evolution.
Back

10. When not trying to hide the fact that evolution has no explanation for the origin of life, evolutionists freely admit they have no idea how life originated. As one documentary notes: "Man continues to seek answers to this extraordinary mystery of 'How Life Began'" 
Narrator, How Life Began, History documentary, 2008
Back

11. Narrator, Morgan Freeman's Through the Wormhole episode "What happened before the beginning?", Science documentary, 2010
Back

12. Physicist Michio Kaku affirms “The Big Bang is the origin of space and the origin of time itself.”
How The Universe Works episode “Big Bang”  Discovery documentary, 2010
Back

13. In the equation  E=mc² , E = energy, m = mass and c=speed of the light (or c= 186,000 miles/sec) you'll note that c is squared, which gives an extremely large number and so for a little bit of mass a lot of energy is released. This explains the power behind nuclear weapons.
Back