billion years old
the same as
Michael J. Oard
Natural selection has been redefined from ‘survival of the
fittest’ to differential reproduction.
Accordingly, the organism with the
most offspring is more fit and should
evolve faster than those with few. If
this were true, rapidly multiplying
bacteria should have evolved far
faster than the branch that led from
amphibians to humans, which by
comparison have few offspring.
Bacteria that do not change with
In spite of evolutionary expectations
some bacteria have not changed for
billions of years. A formation in
Western Australia claimed to be 1.8
Ga old contains fossilized sulfur-
1 These bacteria
metabolically are fueled by seawater
sulfate, meaning they can live in an
anoxic zone. They are very similar
to those found in another formation
that is dated 2. 3 Ga old. Contrary to
evolutionary theory the sulfur-cycling
bacteria are essentially identical with
“An ancient deep-sea mud-
sulfur-cycling microbial com-
munity from Western Australia is
essentially identical both to a fossil
community 500 million years older
and to modern microbial biotas
discovered off the coast of South
America in 2007.”
Claims of similarity are based on
morphology, community structure,
habitat features, and physiology
inferred from the characteristics of
the mineral deposits. This presents a
conundrum for evolution. Why have
the bacteria “remained fundamentally
unchanged over billions of years?”
Little or no change has also been
noted with Precambrian cyanobacteria
supposedly over billions of years.
The researchers suggest that the
stasis is because the environment had
“Once subseafloor sulfur-cycling
microbial communities had become
established, however, there appears
to have been little or no stimulus
for them to adapt to changing
How likely is it that the environment remained the same for a
few billion years? More to the point,
how would the researchers know the
environment did not change?
A confirmation of Darwin’s
This stasis is supposedly a ‘
confirmation’ of Darwin’s null hypothesis
that environments must change for
evolution to take place. The authors
admit that, “Although logically
required, this aspect of evolutionary
theory has yet to be established.”
The authors then go on to admit the
tenuous nature of their arguments by
pointing out that evidence based on
morphology does not say anything
about relatedness at the genomic level.
Stasis is evidence for creation
Stasis of course is no surprise
to creation scientists, even in a
‘changing environment’. Creation
scientists would expect kinds to
remain unchanged although variety
within each kind would exist. In a
recent book, Michael Denton states
that the supposed evolution of at least
100,000 unique biological features
had to occur rapidly. This is based on
the fossil record in which the features
suddenly appear with no ancestors.
Then the fossil record shows amazing
stasis once the feature has ‘evolved’.
This is an interpretation with no
evidence. Evolution is hypothetical
while the real evidence shows supports
creation with burial in the Flood and
1. Schopf, J. W., Kudryavtsev, A.B., Walter, M.R.,
Van Kranendonk, M.J., Williford, K.H., Kozdon,
R., Valley, J.W., Gallardo, V.A., Espinoza,
C. and Flannery, D.T., Sulfur-cycling fossil
bacteria from the 1.8-Ga Duck Creek Formation
provides promising evidence of evolution’s
null hypothesis, Proceedings of the National
Academy of Science
112( 7):2087–2092, 2015.
2. Schopf et al., ref. 1, p. 2087.
3. Schopf et al., ref. 1, p. 2090.
4. Schopf, J.W., Disparate rates, different fates:
tempo and mode of evolution changed from the
Precambrian to the Phanerozoic, Proceedings
of the National Academy of Science
5. Schopf et al., ref. 1, pp. 2090–2091.
6. Schopf et al., ref. 1, p. 2091.
7. Denton, M., Evolution: Still a Theory in Crisis,
Discovery Institute Press, Seattle, WA, 2016.