Evolutionists make a lot of claims, some of which are borderline bizarre, as evidenced by the recent claim that the octopus came from outer space. Most of their claims are not quite so wild, but often share a similar theme of desperation. One of these claims is what is termed convergent evolution. Evolutionists rely heavily on this term and it is accepted without question by a majority of the scientific community. This article will investigate convergent evolution, explain what the phrase means, and why it illustrates evolutionists desperation.
Convergent evolution is a somewhat nebulous term to the scientific layman so let us define what the phrase means before going any further. The biology online dictionary defines convergent evolution as follows. “A kind of evolution wherein organisms evolve structures that have similar (analogous) structures or functions in spite of their evolutionary ancestors being very dissimilar or unrelated.” Essentially, convergent evolution is evolution’s attempt to explain why organisms that are purportedly unrelated share common traits. Evolutionists make a big deal out of convergent evolution, as well they must in order to explain commonality in function without commonality in ancestry.
Having a definition of convergent evolution is not the same as understanding how it works. The general explanation evolutionists give is that natural selection simply selected for beneficial traits in organisms, regardless of their ancestry. The thinking is that there are only so many kinds of habitats, and thus animals in similar habitats are likely to share similar structures to survive. While this thinking is correct, it does nothing to explain why those creatures have the structures in the first place. This thinking also does not explain where the information for the structure came from. For this, evolution relies on random chance mutations gradually building up in the genome until a new structure is formed.
Evolution relies heavily on convergent evolution to explain a number of commonalities between unrelated creatures, even at the molecular level. Convergent evolution is used as an explanation for things as varied as similar body plans, similar enzymes found in unrelated organisms, mimicry, and even structural homology. With so much of evolutionary theory dependent upon convergent evolution, it would seem likely that evolutionists have a fairly solid understanding of the mechanism behind convergent evolution. However, that would be a faulty assumption. Evolutionists have assigned a lot of weight to convergent evolution without understanding why it happens or even completely how it happens. Despite this lack of understanding, many evolutionists remain convinced that convergent evolution not only happened but was the inevitable result of natural selection.
The truth is, like so much about the evolutionary theory, convergent evolution is riddled with weaknesses. In order for convergent evolution to occur, several assumptions must be made. The first, and most obvious is that it assumes evolution is true, as indeed it must. Because of this, many of the same assumptions that are made by the main theory of evolution, are also required to support convergent evolution. For example, convergent evolution relies on mutations to cause new traits to arise. This is the same requirement the overarching theory has and thus suffers from the same issues. Mutations only clutter existing information, they don’t create anything new. Natural selection also fails because it does not create the new traits, it merely allows the animals to slowly selectively breed for the more beneficial ones. The frequency of a given trait in a population is what changes with natural selection, not the trait itself.
While it is touted as the answer for analogous traits, convergent evolution actually raises more questions than answers. Convergent evolution admits that similar traits in unrelated creatures arose independently. This forces them to explain how evolution managed to come to the same result twice in unrelated creatures. Simply labeling it convergent evolution may give it a name, but does nothing to explain the process. Evolving a single trait once is unlikely at best. Evolving it multiple times in unrelated species is impossible statistically. It throws Darwin’s ideas of descent with modification out the window. Animals which are not related should not share common traits, and yet they do. Further, creatures with similar functions may arrive at those functions in a completely different manner in their genetics. The functions may be the same, but the genes producing the functions often are not.
Convergent evolution has become a desperation tactic. There is little agreement about its exact meaning among evolutionists precisely for that reason. It basically serves as a blanket answer for anything that has similar traits and shouldn’t. However, there is not one shred of evidence to support its existence, beyond the evolutionary assumption that their theory is true. Placed on its own, convergent evolution collapses under the weight of all the holes in the primary theory of evolution it has been used to patch. Convergent evolution is a myth taught as science.
In His Image 
1 Comment