National Geographic ""Fox City""

This documentary dealt with a species of fox living in Israel. The program was presented by scientists who observed the foxes in their natural habitats, in a semi-desert environment, and made an evolutionary claim about the origin of birds. In one scene, where foxes stole and ate the young from a bird"s nest, it was suggested that the alleged evolution of birds was as old as the time of reptiles and dinosaurs.

This documentary dealt with a species of fox living in Israel. The program was presented by scientists who observed the foxes in their natural habitats, in a semi-desert environment, and made an evolutionary claim about the origin of birds. In one scene, where foxes stole and ate the young from a bird"s nest, it was suggested that the alleged evolution of birds was as old as the time of reptiles and dinosaurs. One feature of this claim by a scientist who researches these foxes was particularly striking: the way that the theory of evolution was portrayed not as a hypothesis but as a proven, incontrovertible fact. The fact is that there exists no scientific evidence to support claims about the evolution of birds. The fact that these statements were put forward as definitive pronouncements stems from National Geographic TV"s own prejudices. In fact, the origin of birds, which cannot be explained in terms of evolution, deals a heavy blow to the theory.

Birds possess an entirely different structure to that of reptiles, which are claimed to be their ancestors. Lungs which allow a one-way flow of air, wings and the hollow bones which make it possible for the animals to remain in the air by reducing their weight, are structures unique to birds, and are not found in reptiles. Furthermore, the bird wing and lung are structures which come together within a particular organizational system, and cannot function in the absence of any one of their parts. This feature, known as irreducible complexity, requires that all the components should be present at the same time, in a suitable organizational system and functioning flawlessly. Such a structure can only be explained by means of creation. In the same way that irreducible complexity clearly and definitively demonstrates creation, it also deals a lethal blow to the theory of evolution. That is because when one component is missing the organ in question is just a collection of cells unable to perform its function, and the theory of evolution envisages such structures becoming vestigial over time.

The impossibility of irreducibly complex structures forming gradually, despite this process of vestigialisation, is apparent. That is because there is no mechanism in nature which can determine a suitable system of organization beforehand, preserve all the components except for one even if all these are ready, or which can await the completion of the missing part. Looking at all these facts it can be seen how mistaken it is to support claims concerning bird evolution. Irreducible complexity definitively demonstrates that the theory of evolution, which people still seek to keep alive although its invalidity became apparent years ago, and confirms the fact that God has created all living things by showing that the origin of living things can be explained in terms of intelligent design. In its subsequent broadcasts we advise National Geographic TV to give more objective and consistent accounts rather than providing fanatical support for the claims of Darwinism.

(For further details on the origin of birds, see http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/natural_history_2_01.html )