Quantcast
This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.
Print Friendly and PDF
caterpillar and snake

The Hindsight of Mimicry

Posted on

I just love all of the different nature programs on TV.  They provide an endless source of contradiction to their own evolutionary beliefs, which in turn provides an endless source of topics for creationists to write about.  This particular time, I was channel surfing as so many of us guys seem to do, and came across the last few minutes of an animal program that I just had to write about. 

The narrator of the program was showing several beautiful moths that had large circular ‘eyespot’ patterns on their wings.  His explanation for these patterns was that the moths evolved them to mimic the eyes of owls so that predators would leave them alone.  He then moved on to several caterpillars that also had large eyespot patterns on their rear ends.  He described how these caterpillars had purposely evolved ‘eyespots’ on their rear end to mimic other animals such as vine snakes in their efforts to fool predators.  And other caterpillars evolved their eyespots to mimic larger animals to stave off attacks. 

 

From the way he talked about the moths and caterpillars, it was obvious that he truly believed, as so many evolutionists do, that the moths and caterpillars somehow made conscious decisions to develop the eyespot patterns on their wings or rear ends, when there weren’t any there to begin with.  After all, they were being eaten up so fast that they had to do something to defend themselves, didn’t they?

So I guess a group of moths and caterpillars formed a safety committee to deal with the large predation issue.  They called a meeting to discuss the matter.  They talked and talked and thought about it for some time.  One of the moths noticed that very few predators attacked owls and owls had those great big eyes.  So they discussed it a little longer and finally decided that they needed to develop eyespots on their wings to mimic the owls.  Several caterpillars complained that they didn’t have wings.  One of the moths suggested that the caterpillars put eyespots on their rear ends since they were larger than their heads.  He drew a picture to show them that it would make them look like vine snakes or other larger animals.  The caterpillars all thought that sounded good to them, so they agreed to continue with the project.  The next step was to select a subcommittee to research genetic mutations and return to the full committee with a recommendation of how to go about developing the mechanisms necessary to start the mutation process.  Contained in their report was the list of genes involved in the mutational process; what was required to change each one to the desired mutation and how long the process would take.  When they delivered their report to the full committee, one of the other moths wanted to know how many moths and caterpillars would continue to be eaten by predators until the mutations would be functional. 

If that sounded completely ridiculous, it is.  But then so is the idea that moths and caterpillars chose to develop eyespots to mimic the eyes of owls and snakes in order to ward off potential predators.  Yet, I have heard similar comments and descriptions from evolutionists ever since I can remember.  Over and over, they perpetuate the fairy tale that everything evolved by random chance without any intelligence and then turn around and give intelligence to animals to make their own evolutionary decisions, completely contradicting the underlying premise of their foundational belief system.

Now you may ask, how does a creationist explain things like eyespots on moths and caterpillars?

Most likely, the moths and caterpillars that got off of the Ark contained the genetic information for numerous color and design combinations.  Over time, those that did not have eyespots were preyed upon quite heavily.  Those that had spots that resembled the eyes of other animals were not preyed upon as heavily and more of them survived to pass on those traits to following generations.  Therefore, today we see more moths and caterpillars of that particular variety of moths and caterpillars than those without spots. 

The only intelligence behind eyespots or any other form of mimicry belongs to the Creator God who put the information in the genes of the animals and plants to begin with.

Print Friendly and PDF
 

This entry was posted in Biology, Evolution and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

  • Nelson Haas

    Pity those who believe in evolution. Psalms 14:1 & 53:1
    Romans 1:20-25

  • Grandpa Tom

    Bet no-one can explain the process of how the caterpillars morph into the butterfly, or moth. The evolutionist cannot explain how the caterpillar disolves into 100% liquid substance including the brain. Then it reappears as something else. They say “FUNNY HOW NATURE WORKS.” Yea, God laughs, cause it is beyound funny.

  • John Cook

    Are you simply a fool or did you evolve into one? The moths didn’t “consciously” evolve eye spots. That was a product of millions and millions of years of evolution. It may have begun with an indistinct patterning, yet moths with a pattern more resembling eyes survived longer and were more apt to reproduce. This is natural selection, and it has occurred with many insects. Remember, and this seems beyond creationists, MILLIONS of years, many trillions of insect births! They reproduce very rapidly as the mature generally live only to reproduce, and many are gone within days. Think about that without your spoon fed nasty religious bias. Religion kills intellect and the ability to be rational and think critically.

    The problem is that you BELIEVE and are biased toward what you wish to see confirmed. If you can lay aside that indiscriminate belief system that requires faith (meaning acceptable without proof–and the bible is certainly not proof, but merely a circular reference) and consider things in the light of an unbiased reality, you might finally discover that what you have chosen to believe is suspect. Yes, I know you are afraid to make any attempt to consider otherwise, but your god concept will forgive you if you do. Read your bible as that is what it says. I would quickly bet I know much more about religion than you, and I do not find any god concepts reasonable enough to follow. Yes, I too was born into a Christian family, but unlike them, I can think, therefore god is merely an illusion born of some ancient myth. There have been thousands of similar ancient myths, so why choose the Jesus one? Oh, wait, because you were born in America… Can you consider what may have happened if you were born in Iraq?

    Does that help you to comprehend that religion is merely a geographical/social concept and not any part of reality? If it were real wouldn’t we all have only one god, not hundreds? Think about that without using your Christian bias, if you still can think. After reading your creationist malarkey, somehow I doubt thinking is something you do at all well.

  • SlimNm

    As a creationist, I’m disgusted by your strawmanning of the Evolutionist’s position.

ABOUT US | MEDIA KIT | CONTACT US | PRIVACY POLICY COPYRIGHT © 2014. CREATIONREVOLUTION.COM IS A MEMBER OF Liberty Alliance. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Proudly built by WPDevelopers