I was surfing some Creation Science websites yesterday, and came across a link to an article about some research concerning St. Bernard dogs! As the research had been done in the UK - Manchester University, no less - I thought I'd see what it was all about.

A research team has spent time and money measuring 47 St. Bernard's skulls, dating back over 120 years! They wanted to find out how they had changed over the years. Well if someone wanted them to do it, who am I to complain?! They concluded that certain features have changed over the years (if you want to see the report, with links to the whole research paper, it's at http://www.ls.manchester.ac.uk/about/news/articles/article/?id=126176).

But they couldn't just leave it there...

They had to add statements that it was further 'proof' of evolution in action, and evidence that creation was not true. Quote from Dr Chris Klingenberg, Head of the team:

"Creationism is the belief that all living organisms were created according to Genesis in six days by 'intelligent design' and rejects the scientific theories of natural selection and evolution.

"But this research once again demonstrates how selection — whether natural or, in this case, artificially influenced by man — is the fundamental driving force behind the evolution of life on the planet."

I do get passionate about my God, the Truth of His Word, Creation, and Creation Science in particular. I WAS INCENSED!! What was the source of my wrath? Bare in mind I'm not a scientist, but even I can pick holes in what he said:

1) His statement about Creationism is not true; Creation Science CONFIRMS variation within kind. The dog KIND includes dingos, wolves - and St Bernards! These varieties have come about since disembarking from the ark, through the gene pool being split up as different groups spread in all directions. Gene expression is a mechanism God has built in for species WITHIN kind to survive. In the case of dogs, man has learned to exploit this mechanism to breed all sorts of useful breeds; to guard, to shepherd, to keep company, to carry, and so on.

2) Dog breeders select breeding animals according to breed standards. These animals are DESIGNED! They have not evolved at all - evolution has nothing to do with it!

3) 47 skulls over 120 years is a PATHETICALLY small sample from which to draw any conclusions about anything.

4) A bit of research on the web showed me that over the decades, St Bernards have been bred which were deviating from the breed standard. In order to stabilise the genes, Newfoundlands were mated with St. Bernards, to get them back to standard! Could, I wonder, it just be possible that this might have something to do with the variation???!?

5) The philosophy of Neo-Darwinist evolution demands a mechanism for an increase in the information stored in the DNA. It seems quite obvious to me that a human being has a more complex body pattern than an amoeba, so needs more information to construct. Gene selection, whether by natural or man-made causes, brings about a REDUCTION in gene information! If we assume that (say) the South African wild dog is closer to the original KIND that stepped of the ark, it would be possible over generations to breed St Bernards from them. But you CAN'T get a wild dog from a St. Bernard! The genetic information has been reduced, so that St Bernards ONLY breed St Bernards.

6) Old St Bernards, current St bernards, dingos or wolves ; it's ALL still dogs. Dogs will always give birth to dogs! They might be different shapes sizes and temperaments, but they're still dogs!

I must confess i fired off a very hot email to the person who published the article, and asked him to forward it to Dr Chris Klingenberg. I've not had a response yet! But it was only yesterday...