Science and Culture Today Discovering Design in Nature
Embryo_in_flower
Photo credit: AudeNommick, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons.
Latest

Why Cell Division Challenges Darwinism

Categories
Evolution
Intelligent Design
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

One of the most incredible features of cellular life is the capability of self-replication. But can a Darwinian mechanism take the credit for the origin and design of the cell division process? On a new episode of ID the Future, I conclude a four-part series with Dr. Jonathan McLatchie on the intelligent design and irreducible complexity of eukaryotic cell division.

In his recent paper on eukaryotic cell division, Dr. McLatchie quotes a Latin expression Darwin uses in his famous book On the Origin of Species to describe natural selection: natura non facit saltus, nature does not make jumps. That’s the built-in limitation of Darwinian processes: by default they are stepwise and gradual. And of course, Darwin himself acknowledged this test of evolution himself in the Origin: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” The eukaryotic cell cycle is just one of the many biological systems and processes that could not have arisen by numerous, successive, slight modifications.

In this final segment of the series, McLatchie compares the disparity between prokaryotic cell division and the cell division process in eukaryotes. The Darwinian paradigm would have us believe that one came from the other, but when you take a close look, there’s essentially nothing in common between the two systems. They exhibit different parts and different design logic. McLatchie explains the key differences and illustrates the lack of evidence that these two systems are related through descent with modification. It adds up to yet another headache for a Darwinian framework, but as McLatchie notes, these findings are not at all surprising on the hypothesis of design.

Download the podcast or listen to it here. This is Part 4 of a four-part series. Listen to Part 1Part 2, and Part 3.

Dig Deeper

Andrew McDiarmid

Director of Podcasting and Senior Fellow
Andrew McDiarmid is Director of Podcasting and a Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute. He is also a contributing writer to Mind Matters. He produces ID The Future, a podcast from the Center for Science & Culture that presents the case, research, and implications of intelligent design and explores the debate over evolution. He writes and speaks regularly on the impact of technology on human living. His work has appeared in numerous publications, including the New York Post, Houston Chronicle, The Daily Wire, San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, Newsmax, The American Spectator, The Federalist, Technoskeptic Magazine, and elsewhere. In addition to his roles at Discovery Institute, he promotes his homeland as host of the Scottish culture and music podcast Simply Scottish. Andrew holds an MA in Teaching from Seattle Pacific University and a BA in English/Creative Writing from the University of Washington.
Benefiting from Science & Culture Today?
Support the Center for Science and Culture and ensure that we can continue to publish counter-cultural commentary and original reporting and analysis on scientific research, evolution, neuroscience, bioethics, and intelligent design.

© Discovery Institute