Amber midges not primitive, according to ScienceDaily 5 October 2016 and Scientific Reports, 2016; 6: 34352 DOI: 10.1038/srep34352.

Frauke Stebner and colleagues from Universities of Bonn, Kassel, (Gdańsk, Poland) and Lucknow (India) have found a previously unknown species of midge preserved in Amber from India. They found it has “a unique, vesicular structure at the front edge of both of its wings”. This structure is shaped like a bubble, but it’s opening is edged with fine hairs at the bottom. According to Stebner, “Biting midge species alive today do not have these ‘pockets’ on their wings”, so they looked for similar structures in other insects. They found them in “highly developed butterflies”. Stebner explained: “These have very similar pockets on their front wings, which they use to spray pheromones into the air in order to attract a mate”. This structure on the front of the wings would enable more effective distribution of pheromones than in living midges which release pheromones from their abdomens.

Jes Rust, one of the researchers, commented: “It is noticeable that the pheromone evaporators in the fossil are much more complex than in present-day biting midges”. The amber containing the midge is dated as 54 million years old. The ScienceDaily article comments: “‘Old’ doesn’t always have to mean ‘primitive’”.

ScienceDaily goes on to conclude “The environmental conditions in the 54 million-year-old primeval forests in present-day India clearly made such an adaptation necessary. Presumably there were various species of insect at that time that all wanted to attract their sexual partners using pheromones. Unusually effective distribution techniques were probably necessary in order to thrive in this “pheromone concert””.

ScienceDaily

Editorial Comment: The ScienceDaily article is correct is saying that old does not mean primitive. Equating old with primitive is an evolutionary assumption, i.e. that living things are progressing from simple to complex. However, the article is still steeped in evolutionary thinking, as shows in the conclusion that the environmental conditions made the pheromone distributer a ‘necessary adaptation’, as if the forest environment somehow made midges develop the structure. However, if the midges did not already have this kind of pheromone distributor, (let’s repeat the obvious), placing them in forest conditions will not make them develop one.

If midge fossils show they have changed, the midges have actually gone from complex to simple – the opposite of evolution. But let’s be honest, evolutionists. This is exactly what you would expect from the Biblical history of the world, which tells us living things were created as fully functioning organisms, but since then, some have lost functions or died out altogether.

The belief that the environment can make living things develop new features is one of the basic flaws of evolutionary thinking. The environment cannot ever enable new structures and functions to develop in organisms that are not already suited to living in a particular place. The environment can only determine which organisms can live in that place, and which ones cannot. This is natural selection at work, but it is never observed, and has no mechanism, even when combined with time and mutation, to make any living things evolve into different living creatures.

Evidence News vol. 16, No. 18
19 October 2016
Creation Research Australia

 Were you helped by this item? If so, consider making a donation so we can keep adding more answers. For USA tax deductible donations click here. For UK tax deductible donations click here. For Australia and rest of world click here.