Nathaniel T. Jeanson. Replacing Darwin: The New Origin of Species. Master Books, 2017.
Replacing Darwin directly challenges certain aspects of Darwinism, but it is no hatchet job. Indeed, it assumes that the reader knows something of genetics and current evolutionary theory. It notes where Darwin was likely correct, but also where he took things too far.
Replacing Darwin notes that Darwin (and Wallace) were successful because they noted geographical variation which distinguished similar species. People could acknowledge that similar creatures, whether plants or animals, varied depending on their location. In many cases the environment was a little different or they were separated by some distance. It is not a stretch to hypothesize a common ancestor within those related species.
For example, there are three species of zebras. They are separated now by distance and environment. One is even called the Mountain Zebra, as opposed to zebras that live on plains. It is likely they had a common ancestor. Indeed, one could make a case that donkeys, horses, and zebras may have all had a common ancestor because they can still breed with one another. We also are aware that there are extinct equids, both fossil horses like the eohippus and ones that have become extinct in historical times like the quagga.
Yes, this is a kind of evolution, what is called microevolution. Darwin’s problem was that in noting differences in creatures with an apparent common ancestry, he hypothesized macroevolution, that unrelated species have common ancestors, too.
The weakness and false assumptions of Darwin had to with the fact that in 1859 no one knew anything about genetics and very little about the function of cells. Replacing Darwin gets the reader up to date on genetics and how the DNA of the cell nucleus (nDNA) and the distinctive DNA of the mitochondria (mtDNA) are passed on. He then shows how mutations and recombinations of DNA sequences alter genes over time. From known DNA sequences and historical observations, he then presents a mathematical model to illustrate how related species could evolve from an ancestral type.
Jeanson notes that Darwin accepted Lyell’s notion that the earth was quite old and that geologic time covered millions of years. Darwin’s idea, and the idea of evolutionists since, is that not only species but even life itself appeared millions, if not billions, of years ago and gradually populated the earth with the variety of plants, animals, and other living things we see today.
Jeanson also notes that in Darwin’s day people were familiar with many fewer species than today—even species of mammals, for example, let alone plants. The variety is stunning. And in some areas of study such as microbes and insects, we are probably still lacking in knowledge of many species.
Where Jeanson challenges Darwin and presents what the subtitle calls The New Origin of Species is that he shows that a young earth creationist (YEC) model works just as well. Indeed, it is much less speculative because there is no need hypothesize “missing links” or “hopeful monsters” because the changes take place within related types. There is no need to speculate on a “missing link” between birds and reptiles because they were separate creations.
To use the example of horse family, the horse ancestor could reasonably have evolved into the seven species of the equid family today over the course of four to six thousand years. While there are many genetic sequences that have not been coded yet, we have enough of both nDNA and mtDNA of a number of related species to illustrate how this is possible. Jeanson’s case is that if we start with certain types or kinds of creatures, many will develop separated types or species over time—and it is not taking eons.
The model also explains extinction more effectively as well. Clearly, some species failed to adapt to changes. Perhaps the extinctions were catastrophic. Evolutionists like to pose a large meteor or a chain of volcanic eruptions, for example. Historically, of course, most cultures in the world have a tradition of worldwide flood. Here is where Jeanson may upset some readers or cause others to roll their eyes.
Such a catastrophe best explains the laying down of fossils. To be fossilized, the burial had to be sudden. We have fossils of creatures giving birth or in the process of swallowing food as if they were photographically captured in a moment of time. The fact that some fossils of extinct creatures still have soft tissue tells us that they cannot be millions of years old. A laying down of even and nearly parallel sedimentary layers is also best explained by a sudden waterborne event. As Joseph Heller would say, something happened.
Replacing Darwin is a visually effective production. There are helpful charts and graphs, and many photos. There is a whole color section not only with photos but with charts illustrating many of the points the text makes on cells, chromosomes, genes, and DNA. I received a copy of this from a former biology teacher. It is worth sharing with those who are comfortable with biology and biological science. It is truly a different and updated Origin of Species.