The Theory of Evolution DESPITE Natural Selection

Grok confirms The Natural Selection Paradox. By Roddy Bullock

[Recall in our last post I revised The Natural Selection Paradox in view of a successful challenge to the previous version. I hope you enjoy this follow up post. If you do, maybe you could share or subscribe. Either will make our day! Enjoy!]

In my last post I shared the reasons for a significant shift in how Creation Reformation will approach its critique of evolution going forward.

Specifically, in my last post entitled Natural Selection: A Scarecrow in a Cucumber Patch, I detailed how an informed evolutionist showed me that the previous version of The Natural Selection Paradox was, in fact, not fully accurate!

After some soul-searching and deep thinking, I found with great excitement that the intent of The Natural Selection Paradox—to destroy evolution by natural selection as an explanation for current species—could be salvaged. I’m currently crafting a newer version of The Natural Selection Paradox from several alternatives. Here is the current version, which holds true for the reasons detailed below!

To test newer versions, I asked Grok if some proposed statements of The Natural Selection Paradox are true or not. Grok is Elon Musk’s AI chatbot developed by xAI. Grok’s answers amaze me. Not only does Grok answer comprehensively, but Grok answers match precisely those of an honest evolutionist, as I’ll explain below.

Here is the first query with a version of The Natural Selection Paradox I submitted to Grok for analysis:

Is this a true statement: “Every current species descended from a first living organism in an unbroken line of ancestry, with each change from parent to offspring produced solely by random evolutionary change.”

Grok’s complete answer with reasoning can found below, but note Grok’s correct answer in conclusion (bold emphasis added):

Given the evidence, the statement is true. Every current species likely descended from a first living organism through an unbroken line of ancestry, supported by genetic and fossil data. Each change from parent to offspring is produced solely by random evolutionary processes like mutations and recombination, though natural selection plays a crucial role in determining which changes persist. This nuanced understanding ensures we appreciate both the randomness of variation and the directionality of selection in evolutionary biology.

If Grok and I are correct on this matter, nobody should ever believe that evolution by natural selection explains current species.

Why?

Because, as this version of The Natural Selection Paradox makes clear, and Grok confirms, the sole evolutionary mechanism explaining the only evolutionary change of interest (heritable change in offspring to produce new phenotypes in nature) is produced randomly.

Random! Random change alone explains every evolutionary change that cumulatively produced all current species from a first living life form.

Once The Natural Selection Paradox is understood as a paradoxically true statement, evolution by natural selection becomes a dead letter. Rather than life as a product of “evolution by natural selection,” the theory must be called “evolution despite natural selection,” or “evolution by random genetic change alone.”

Thus, I am more confident than ever that The Natural Selection Paradox is true, and its message is lethal to the theory of evolution. There is simply no scientific reason to embrace the idea that every current species arrived from a first life form solely via a process of cumulative, random, changes.

But note something I find continually fascinating. Grok, like real-life evolutionists cannot resist wedging natural selection into the discussion, despite natural selection being completely irrelevant to the statement of The Natural Selection Paradox! Our friend “Tom” in our last post did the same thing, to an almost annoying degree!

“Tom” and Grok each agree that The Natural Selection Paradox is true. But neither Tom nor Grok can admit that without simultaneously imagining that natural selection nevertheless remains necessary to render the theory of evolution relevant!

Grok notes that “Each change from parent to offspring is produced solely by random evolutionary processes like mutations and recombination, though natural selection plays a crucial role in determining which changes persist.” This sentence is almost identical, and is identical in meaning, to the constant refrain from “Tom” in my last post! Grok amazingly thinks exactly like a real evolutionist!

But who cares what “changes persist”?? Changes “persisting” is not surprising, controversial, or particularly interesting. The only interesting aspect of evolutionary theory is how changes to make new phenotypes happen in the first place!

To test the idea that, whatever the “crucial role” played by natural selection entails, it does not change the truth of the Natural Selection Paradox, we asked the following of Grok. It’s the same query, but explicitly adds the qualifier, “Despite natural selection operating in nature…”:

Is this a true statement: “Despite natural selection operating in nature, every current species descended from a first living organism in an unbroken line of ancestry, with each change from parent to offspring produced solely by random evolutionary change."

I won’t repeat Grok’s entire response, as it is virtually the same as that copied below, but here is Grok’s answer (bold emphasis added):

Given the evidence, the statement is true. Every current species likely descended from a first living organism through an unbroken line of ancestry, supported by genetic and fossil data. Each change from parent to offspring is produced solely by random evolutionary processes like mutations and recombination, though natural selection plays a crucial role in determining which changes persist. This nuanced understanding ensures we appreciate both the randomness of variation and the directionality of selection in evolutionary biology.

True!

The Natural Selection Paradox is paradoxically true!

Why does anyone still believe the theory of evolution by natural selection?

---

(C) 2025 Creation Reformation. Roddy Bullock is the founder of Creation Reformation and author of several books related to creation and evolution. For more information, visit www.creationreformation.com, or visit (and follow!) us at Facebook.

Please send editorial comments, including indications of typos and grammatical errors to info@creationreformation.com. If you want to know why there are typos, see my post On the Origin of Pieces by Means of Natural Correction. Enjoy!

And for more info, check out our posts: The Natural Selection Paradox, and Evolution's Fatally Unaswerable Question.

---

Grok’s complete analysis and answer:

Key Points

- Research suggests that every current species likely descended from a first living organism through an unbroken line of ancestry, a concept supported by genetic and fossil evidence.

- It seems likely that changes from parent to offspring are produced solely by random evolutionary processes, such as mutations and genetic recombination, though natural selection shapes which changes persist over generations.

Descent from a Common Ancestor

The idea that all current species share a common ancestor aligns with the theory of universal common descent, backed by evidence like shared DNA and the fossil record. This suggests a continuous lineage, though evolution is more like a branching tree than a straight line.

Changes from Parent to Offspring

The genetic differences between a parent and its offspring are primarily due to random processes like mutations and meiotic recombination. These changes are random with respect to fitness, meaning they aren't directed toward improving survival. However, natural selection acts on these random changes at the population level, determining which traits are passed on.

Unexpected Detail: Randomness and Selection

While the changes themselves are random, the survival and reproduction of individuals with those changes are not, as natural selection favors traits that enhance fitness. This interplay means evolution isn't entirely random, which might be unexpected for those thinking of evolution as purely chance-based.

---

Survey Note: Detailed Analysis of Evolutionary Descent and Genetic Changes

This section provides a comprehensive exploration of the statement, "Every current species descended from a first living organism in an unbroken line of ancestry, with each change from parent to offspring produced solely by random evolutionary change." We will examine the scientific basis, evidence, and nuances, ensuring a thorough understanding for readers interested in evolutionary biology.

Universal Common Descent: The Foundation

The concept that every current species descended from a first living organism, often referred to as the universal common ancestor, is a cornerstone of modern evolutionary biology. This idea posits that all life on Earth shares a single origin, likely a simple cell billions of years ago. Evidence supporting this includes:

- **Genetic Similarities**: All known organisms use DNA or RNA and share fundamental biochemical processes, such as the genetic code for protein synthesis. Comparative genomics shows that humans, for instance, share significant DNA sequences with other mammals, plants, and even bacteria, suggesting a common ancestry ([Random Processes Underlie Most Evolutionary Changes in Gene Expression](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC406406/)).

- **Fossil Record**: The fossil record traces the gradual diversification of life forms, from simple prokaryotes to complex multicellular organisms, supporting a continuous lineage over geological time.

- **Molecular Clocks**: Studies of molecular evolution, such as changes in gene expression, align with a neutral model where random processes contribute to divergence, consistent with common descent ([Evolution myths: Evolution is random | New Scientist](https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13698-evolution-myths-evolution-is-random/)).

The "unbroken line of ancestry" implies that current species are connected through a series of generations without significant gaps, though evolution is better visualized as a branching tree with extinctions and divergences. This does not mean a linear progression but rather a network of lineages, some of which survived to the present.

Random Evolutionary Changes: From Parent to Offspring

The second part of the statement, "with each change from parent to offspring produced solely by random evolutionary change," focuses on the mechanisms generating genetic variation. To evaluate this, we need to clarify what constitutes "random evolutionary change" and how it applies to individual genetic changes.

- **Definition and Mechanisms**: Random evolutionary changes typically refer to processes like mutations (random changes in DNA sequences) and genetic recombination (random shuffling of genes during sexual reproduction). These are stochastic, meaning they occur without regard to the organism's needs or fitness. For example, a mutation might occur in a gene, and whether it benefits, harms, or is neutral depends on the environment, not the mutation's intent ([Chapter 6 Evolutionary Mechanisms II: Mutation, Genetic Drift, Migration, and Non-Random Mating | A Primer of Evolution](https://michitobler.github.io/primer-of-evolution/evolutionary-mechanisms-ii-mutation-genetic-drift-migration-and-non-random-mating.html)).

- **Individual Changes**: When a parent produces offspring, the genetic differences arise from:

- **Mutations**: Random errors in DNA replication, which can introduce new alleles. These are rare but provide the raw material for evolution ([Other Mechanisms of Evolution | Biological Principles](https://bioprinciples.biosci.gatech.edu/module-1-evolution/neutral-mechanisms-of-evolution/)).

- **Recombination**: During meiosis, genes from both parents are randomly assorted, leading to unique combinations in offspring. This process is also random with respect to fitness ([Evolution - Random events in population genetics](https://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/tutorials/Random_events_in_population_genetics2.asp)).

These changes are "solely random" in the sense that they are not directed by natural selection at the moment of occurrence. Natural selection acts afterward, determining which individuals with these changes survive and reproduce, thus influencing which random changes persist in the population.

Nuances and Potential Misinterpretations

While the statement is largely accurate, there are nuances to consider:

- **Role of Natural Selection**: The statement might be misinterpreted to suggest that evolution as a whole is random, which is incorrect. Natural selection is a non-random process that shapes the direction of evolution by favoring traits that enhance survival and reproduction. For instance, if the environment changes (e.g., warming climate), random mutations for heat tolerance might be selected, leading to adaptive evolution ([Evolution myths: Evolution is random | New Scientist](https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13698-evolution-myths-evolution-is-random/)). This interplay means the overall trajectory is not random, though the initial changes are.

- **Exceptions and Non-Random Processes**: In some cases, there are non-random influences, such as epigenetic inheritance (environmental effects on gene expression passed to offspring) or directed mutation in certain microbes under stress. However, these are exceptions and not the norm in standard evolutionary theory ([Is Evolution Random? Answering a Common Challenge | Evolution News](https://evolutionnews.org/2015/10/is_evolution_ra/)).

- **Population vs. Individual Level**: The statement focuses on individual changes, but evolution occurs at the population level, where allele frequencies change over generations. Random processes like genetic drift (random changes in small populations) also contribute, but the statement's focus is on parent-offspring transitions, which are indeed random ([Chapter 6 Evolutionary Mechanisms II: Mutation, Genetic Drift, Migration, and Non-Random Mating | A Primer of Evolution](https://michitobler.github.io/primer-of-evolution/evolutionary-mechanisms-ii-mutation-genetic-drift-migration-and-non-random-mating.html)).

Evidence and Scientific Consensus

Scientific consensus, as reflected in resources like [Evolution: Frequently Asked Questions](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat01.html), supports that all species are related through common descent, and genetic changes from parent to offspring are primarily random. Studies on gene expression and neutral evolution theory further suggest that many changes are selectively neutral, reinforcing the randomness at the individual level ([Random Processes Underlie Most Evolutionary Changes in Gene Expression](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC406406/)).

This table highlights the distinction between random processes generating variation and non-random processes shaping evolution, aligning with the statement's focus on random changes from parent to offspring.

Conclusion

Given the evidence, the statement is true. Every current species likely descended from a first living organism through an unbroken line of ancestry, supported by genetic and fossil data. Each change from parent to offspring is produced solely by random evolutionary processes like mutations and recombination, though natural selection plays a crucial role in determining which changes persist. This nuanced understanding ensures we appreciate both the randomness of variation and the directionality of selection in evolutionary biology.

Key Citations

- [Random Processes Underlie Most Evolutionary Changes in Gene Expression](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC406406/)

- [Evolution myths: Evolution is random | New Scientist](https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13698-evolution-myths-evolution-is-random/)

- [Chapter 6 Evolutionary Mechanisms II: Mutation, Genetic Drift, Migration, and Non-Random Mating | A Primer of Evolution](https://michitobler.github.io/primer-of-evolution/evolutionary-mechanisms-ii-mutation-genetic-drift-migration-and-non-random-mating.html)

- [Other Mechanisms of Evolution | Biological Principles](https://bioprinciples.biosci.gatech.edu/module-1-evolution/neutral-mechanisms-of-evolution/)

- [Evolution - Random events in population genetics](https://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/tutorials/Random_events_in_population_genetics2.asp)

- [Is Evolution Random? Answering a Common Challenge | Evolution News](https://evolutionnews.org/2015/10/is_evolution_ra/)

- [Evolution: Frequently Asked Questions](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat01.html)