For the past two days, we have talked about beauty in nature and how it often seems to defy the evolutionary principle of survival of the fittest. Darwinists refer to “emergent order” as the process of living things coming into being without any design or intelligent guidance. Instead, they say it was accomplished by a set of simple rules laid out originally by Charles Darwin and refined into what is now known as Neo-Darwinism.
In his 1859 book On the Origin of Species, Darwin presented his principle of natural selection. However, he realized that natural selection acting on random mutations couldn’t explain the “selection” method used in all cases. Moreover, he was troubled by the excess beauty in nature. He saw unnecessary frills and flourish, which he could not explain by natural selection. A year after that book was published, his frustration caused him to write, “The sight of a feather in a peacock’s tail, whenever I gaze at it makes me sick.”
To cover those cases where natural selection can’t explain the beauty in nature, he introduced “sexual selection” in his 1871 book The Descent of Man, and Selection Related to Sex. Sexual selection involves the beauty often seen in male birds in general and peacocks in particular. According to Darwin’s sexual selection theory, the reason for the beauty of the peacock’s tail is that the peahens prefer such gaudy but impractical decorations. The same principle applies to many other species, such as bower birds or birds of paradise, where the males display striking colors or impressive actions to attract a mate.
German zoologist and eugenicist Ernst Haeckel was also an artist. He popularized Darwin through his artwork published in several books. His drawings depict the beauty he saw in even one-celled animals called Radiolaria, and he attributed the beauty to natural selection and mathematical principles. Haeckel was so enamored by Darwin’s hypothesis that he went out of his way to promote it in books of drawings.
Haeckel’s drawings sometimes showed his bias for Darwinism. For example, in The Natural History of Creation (published in German in 1868 and later in English), he displayed drawings that compared human embryos with embryos of various animals, suggesting that the development of those embryos repeats the path of evolution. However, he manipulated his illustrations to prove his point. Other scientists later pointed out the flaws, and his dishonesty discredited his scientific credentials.
However, the books of Haeckel’s drawings were best sellers in their day, and they are still selling even today. Nevertheless, those drawings did not prove design without a designer. We have called the question of how excessive beauty in nature could have evolved by natural selection “the problem of beauty.” Yesterday, we said that we prefer to call it the blessing of beauty—a blessing from God. However, atheists do not see it as a gift from the Creator, and they try to explain it away as accidental. They suggest that what appears to be designed for a purpose has no purpose and no designer. We will look at that tomorrow.
— Roland Earnst © 2022