Plain Truth Magazine
October 1967
Volume: Vol XXXII, No.10
QR Code
Garner Ted Armstrong & Paul W Kroll  

Evolutionists claim moths provide proof of evolution IN ACTION. The truth is, they DISPROVE evolution entirely! Read the shocking truth about the moth-eaten theory of no God and see with your own eyes more of the breathtaking marvels of Creation!

   Have we been presenting an "UNFAIR" view of evolution in these pages?
   With the many thousands of letters expressing gratitude and enthusiasm for the articles on evolution, we have received a few of dissension.
   None of the few objecting writers has ever explained ANY of the unanswerable difficulties for evolution we have presented. Not ONE has pointed out ANY specific error, misstatement, inaccurate quotation, or lack of research.

Evolution's Impossible Position

   When we deal with "survival of the fittest" one will criticize us for neglecting "micromutations." When we deal with "natural selection" one will wonder why we did not cover "genetic leaps."
   The truth is — evolution is IMPOSSIBLE TO PRESENT in any coherent, cohesive, WHOLE FORM. The truth is, EVOLUTIONISTS do not know how to present it in any form that could be called SENSIBLE, and COMPLETE. The truth is, the theory is a MAZE of incompleteness,
Kroll (left) Gentry — Ambassador College
Left, wife and baby of co-author, Paul Kroll, sit next to yucca to show size of plant and flowers. Right, strip series shows species of Pronuba moth pollinating yucca flower. ~he moth is the sole pollinator of the yucca. The moth depends on development of yucca seeds to feed its brood. One cannot exist without the other. A perfect case of symbiosis — showing interdependency of life — proof that God created them together!
completeness, of inadequate hypotheses, of guesses, disagreements, and arguments between evolutionists themselves.
   But we HAVE presented factual, THOROUGHLY researched TRUTHS concerning many of the strange and marvelous creatures around us — and have shown the utter inability of the evolutionary theory to account for them.
   Our Ambassador College libraries contain every major and significant work published on evolution right up through the last months of this year. Our researchers are thorough. On our staff are. MANY scientists in MANY fields.
   Obviously, it is impossible to present all the arguments of evolution in their entirety in anyone article, or even a series of articles. But each article DOES DISPROVE another facet of the evolutionary theory.
   Not all the letters we receive from those who believe in evolution are blind prejudice. Some few actually and sincerely want to know the answers to questions they have not been able to solve for themselves.
   So, in this article, we give you excerpts from one such letter — and the thoroughly researched, SCIENTIFIC answers! Here is the letter, concerning moths, and evolution:

A Good Question!

   "I would like to know more about your position on evolution. Those who support evolution have what appears to be a rather strong argument, and I would like to know in full the grounds on which you refute it.
   "According to Young, Stebbins and Brooks, in the book. Introduction to Biological Science, pages 493-494:
   "'Certain steps in evolution... have taken place so recently that we have HISTORIC records of them. One example, is the evolution of dark-colored... moths which inhabit the industrial areas of northern and western Europe.
   "'About a century ago, the common species of moths in these regions were mostly PALE in color. DARK forms occurred in a few species as very rare aberrant types.
   "'A few years later, however, a gradual increase in the frequency of the dark forms began and at the present time they are more common in the industrial regions than are the pale moths of the SAME SPECIES. In country districts, however, the dark forms are still rare.
   "'The dark forms apparently have ALWAYS occurred as rare mutants...'"
   (Emphasis throughout quote is ours and its significance will be explained later in the article.)
   This man's letter ended on this note:
   "Much more could be said, of course, but there's no point in going on... the point is this:
   "Evolutionists are not a bunch of dummies whose case rests on sand. They are, as a group, sincere, thoughtful, intelligent people and what they propose is based on a very large body of impressive evidence.
   "No THOUGHTFUL PERSON would be satisfied to push them aside as a crowd of dogmatic stupes grasping at straws.
   "I'm looking forward to hearing from you and to receiving a detailed explanation of your position."
   We have never said evolutionists are a "bunch of dummies." We HAVE only said, "The FOOL has said in his heart. 'There is no God'" (Psalm 53:1).
   But evolution is the product of intelligent men. Obviously, its arguments will SEEM REASONABLE. Every untruth begins with a FALSE PREMISE which is in turn CARELESSLY TAKEN FOR GRANTED.
   Once an unsuspecting student has TAKEN FOR GRANTED that the origin of the universe, and of the solar system, the origin of the earth, and the beginning of LIFE is an ACCIDENT — once he has SIDESTEPPED the MAMMOTH issues involved in such occurrences — he begins IMAGINING he sees a relationship in living creatures from "simple" to "complex."
   Once the false PREMISE is established, and he has left the real TRUNK of the tree — he then begins investigating DEEPLY into the "twigs" of the theory.
   Micromutations, comparative anatomy, comparative embryology, biology, many other related fields APPEAR — because they are the result of research by INTELLIGENT MEN — to be "PROOFS" to unsuspecting people.
   But they are NOT proofs. They are reasonings from ANALOGIES which are based upon a totally FALSE premise which was carelessly TAKEN FOR GRANTED.
   We have shown in the past how evolutionists admit they DO NOT WANT to step into the "realm of theology." They do NOT LIKE to retain God in their knowledge (Rom. 1:28). But now back to the questions raised in the letter.
   OF COURSE many evolutionists are sincere. We HAVE NOT, and DO NOT question their sincerity! We do not question their mental powers, or their intelligence quotient. But we DO UTTERLY REJECT and DISPROVE their theories! We have not pushed aside their arguments — but have thoroughly researched ALL of them — the BEST of them — the very LATEST of them — and have found them CONSISTENTLY WANTING!

Intellectual Pressure

   Realize one important fact! The public today finds itself subjected to a great deal of intellectual PRESSURE concerning evolution.
   The average student — especially in the life sciences — is subjected to a very subtle form of brainwashing. This same student, upon graduation, then teaches his students to believe the same false principles his teachers have taken for granted as true.
   In time, an entire generation — in all walks of life — have had FALSE premises funnelled into their unsuspecting minds. Any new facts coming into those minds are judged and INTERPRETED in the light of those false ones already in the mind. In the realm of nature — including life, matter, energy, laws — TWO foundational principles are customarily accepted by the professional people.
   They are:
   1) There is no God or Supernatural Being responsible for the presence of matter, energy, life — or whatever we see in the material world.
   2) Everything we see around us — especially life — HAS EVOLVED.
   All voices to the contrary are hushed up as "superstitious," "ignorant" or "UNscientific."
   In both the Ambassador College News Bureau and Science Research Department we have many, many quotes demonstrating this attitude. It's common knowledge.
   Harlow Shapley claims, "There is no need for explaining the origin of life in terms of the miraculous or supernatural" (Science News Letter, July 3, 1965).
   Julian Huxley would have us believe, "There are three possible alternatives as regards to the origin of living substances on this earth... it was (1) supernaturally created... the first suggestion runs counter to the whole of our scientific knowledge.
   "To postulate a divine interference with these exchanges of matter and energy at a particular moment in the earth's history is both UNNECESSARY AND ILLOGICAL" (Evolution In Action} pages 20-21).
   Theodosius Dobzhansky flatly states, "All... changes have arisen from causes which NOW continue to be in operation, and which therefore can be studied experimentally.
   "At present, an informed and reasonable person can hardly doubt the validity of the evolution theory... WE TAKE IT FOR GRANTED" (Genetics and the Origin of Species, page 11).
   George Gaylord Simpson writes, "But now that WE KNOW EVOLUTION IS A FACT, we can no longer accept ... adaptation as reflecting the purpose of a Creator manifested in the separate creation of each species of plant or animal" (This View of Life, George Gaylord Simpson, page 193).
   Yet Dean W. Wooldridge admitted, "Science can never tell us WHY the natural laws of physics exist or where the matter that started the universe came from. It is good that our ancestors INVENTED the concept of the supernatural, for we need it if we are to answer such questions.
   "While the physical scientist has not been able to dispense completely with the concept of the UNexplainable or supernatural, he has at least managed to consign it to a corner of his mind where it does not greatly interfere with his day to day activities" (Machinery of Life, page 4).

Interpreting the Facts

   The above illustrates a common attitude among many biologists, paleontologists, zoologists, astronomers and other scientists. Any facts they discover — and there are a plethora of them — are INTERPRETED in the light of these two false foundations: 1) There has been NO intervention in the course of nature by any Supernatural Being; 2) All things have evolved.
   For example, we see all life is marvelously fitted for its environment and ecological niche. What does this prove?
   Since evolutionists ALREADY believe creation is a myth and evolution is a fact — they ASSUME this is proof of evolution.
   We DON'T assume evolution is true. We DON'T assume that the physical world, including life, has not been created.
   We can PROVE — based on a very large body of impressive evidence — that GOD CREATED the whole universe and that evolution is a myth!

What About the Moths?

   "Fine," you say, "perhaps there is a Creator God — but what about these new dark moths? The authorities tell us they show evolution in action."
   Well, what about these dark moths? Are they REALLY proof of evolution? Let's look at the facts.
   Since the Industrial Revolution large areas of the earth have become polluted by grit, grime and smog. In heavily industrialized areas this smoke and soot can be measured in TONS per square mile — per month!
   Sheffield, England, for example, has been smothered with as much as FIFTY TONS in One month.
   The smoke particles kill foliage and pollute the lichens. The boughs and trunks of trees become bare and BLACK.
   Enter the famous peppered moth.
   This moth occurs in two forms: a light one (Biston betularia) and a dark form (carbonaria).
   A curious thing has been happening over the past fifty to one hundred years.
   For example, in the Manchester, England, area during 1848 some 99% of the peppered moths were WHITE! Fifty years later, 99% of the peppered moths were BLACK. The blacker the area became, the greater was the spread of the black version of the peppered moth.
   The ratio, has apparently stabilized at 90% dark forms to 10% light forms in British industrial areas such as Birmingham.
   What's the significance of all this?
   Biologists and entomologists claimed: "This is evolution in action'!" These moths, we are asked to believe, provide "the MOST STRIKING INSTANCE of evolution ever actually witnessed in any organism, animal or plant!" (The Evolution of Life, article, "Evolution in Progress," Vol. 1, Sol Tax, editor.)
   There you have it!
   The authorities — and they HAVE studied the peppered moth — tell us it is a direct proof of evolution.
   But is it really "evolution"?

Getting to the Trunk of the Tree

   We want to hear it from the evolutionists themselves — so let's see what Julian Huxley has to say about it:
   "There is the remarkable case of what is called industrial melanism — the FACT that during the past hundred years many different species of moths have become virtually black in industrial towns, while remaining light and protectively colored in the countryside.
   "Here, again, the new conditions had nothing whatever to do with the ORIGIN of the mutation which results in melanism. There were ALWAYS A FEW rare melanics [black ones}... and the new conditions merely provided them with their opportunity" (Evolution In Action, pages 39, 40).
   Oh, oh! Problem Number One.
   Did you catch it?
   There are ALWAYS some black or "melanic" moths in certain varieties — just as there are the proverbial black sheep. In other words, no new species came into existence. Not even a gene had changed!
   Now look at this short admission from another modern writer about this so-called "proof" of evolution.
   "There was also the case of the peppered moth... it was believed that the dark form is more vital, but that it had been at a disadvantage until smoke darkened the landscape. When the grime of the cities offered protection, its superior viability reasserted itself and it rapidly spread.
   "Natural selection was always at work, shaping, forming, adapting [according to evolutionists]. But NO NEW CHARACTERS, no new trees, NO DIFFERENT MOTHS could be seen emerging from the process" (Man, Time, Fossils, Ruth More, pages 186-187).
   Ah, so they are still peppered moths!
   But further — not even the dark ones were new types. Dark ones had already existed but formerly were more readily found by birds. But now they were able to spread more rapidly in soot-darkened areas. Not only were the dark moths more hardy, but the light ones were NO LONGER protected by their coloration from birds. At a DOUBLE disadvantage, they diminished in numbers.
   But there is no evolution here!
   This is simply the increasing and decreasing in numbers of two color forms that had long existed.
   But the point we make is this.
   The peppered moth has within its genetic makeup a dominant gene that transmits — somehow, in a manner not completely understood by science — the color black to some of its offspring.
   But it isn't as simple as that.
   That gene — or whatever it is — does much, much more than just determine the wing color of the moth.
   Let's read it in the words of a well-known researcher:
   "The mutant gene [which, apparently, has always existed — since black moths have always been seen], however, does more than just simply control the coloration of the moth. The same gene (or others closely linked with it in the hereditary material) also gives rise to physiological and even behavioral traits."
   After describing some of the intricate
INDUSTRIAL MELANISM — Left, melanic (black form) of Biston betuloria — called carbonaria — is plainly visible on lichen-covered, unpolluted oak tree in rural Dorset, England. The white form of moth is there too — but camouflaged. Can you find it? Right, moths of same species on lichen-denuded, blackened bark of oak tree in Birmingham, England. Now the black form is camouflaged. White form is exposed to be readily found by birds. (See PDF For Pictures)
correlations which the moths must make — which we'll discuss briefly — the author concluded:
   "It is evident, then, that industrial melanism is much more than a simple change from light to dark. Such a change must profoundly upset the balance of hereditary traits in a species" ("Darwin's Missing Evidence," H. B. D. Kettlewell, Scientific American, March, 1959).
   The ability of the moth is staggering. Experiments were conducted to see if both light and dark forms could correctly "choose" the proper background to be camouflaged.
   The results?
   A very large proportion rested on the correct background. Whatever hereditary mechanism passes on color to a moth must also do something else.
   The moth must have passed on to him the ability to SENSE COLOR of both the background and himself — and make the proper selection!

How Evolutionists Reason

   We've dearly seen that this "great proof" of evolution is no such thing. A black moth is STILL the same moth! And further — a black moth is NOT evolution before our eyes. It's been admitted that as far as scientists know, there have ALWAYS been black moths.
   They were simply under a disadvantage in the resting position until industrial developments blackened the landscape. But now the BLACK ones were camouflaged, were more protected, escaped predators and rapidly multiplied. The white ones, having lost their camouflage, were reduced in numbers by birds.
   It's as simple as that.
   No evolution, no change — not even new forms of the same species.
   Yet, this example is the one most often cited as an analogy of how big changes — reptiles' legs into birds' wings — supposedly occur.
   Here, again" is Julian Huxley:
   "'That is all very well,' you may say, 'It seems to be true that natural selection can turn moths black in industrial areas... but what about REALLY ELABORATE improvements?
   "'Can it transform a reptile's leg into a bird's wing, or turn a monkey into a man? How can a blind and automatic sifting process like selection, operating on a blind and undirected process like mutation, produce organs like the eye or the brain, with their almost incredible complexity and delicacy of adjustment? How can chance produce elaborate design?
   "'In a word, are you not asking us to believe too much?'
   "THE ANSWER IS NO: all this is not too much to believe, once one has grasped the way the process operates...
Moths and butterflies (order Lepidoptera) have been designed with mimicking and camouflaging abilities by the Creator God. Top left, moth imitates bumblebee. Top middle, bagworm moth, on cocoon, just emerged, blends with leaves. Top right, geometrid moth larva makes a perfect twig. Bottom left, hawk moth on a rock. Right, swallowtail butterfly larva flashes false eyes at would-be predator. (See PDF For Pictures)
the clue to the paradox is TIME" (Evolution In Action, pages 40-41).
   But evolutionists themselves DO NOT KNOW how the "process operates" and ADMIT they don't. They admit the IMPOSSIBLE "odds" against any such thing happening. They are FORCED to admit there ARE NO INTERMEDIATE SPECIES. NONE of the literally MILLIONS of subtle changes required — and which SHOULD appear in the fossil record — have been found. They call it a "paradox" and then insist the "clue" to it all is TIME. Given enough time anything might happen, they say.
   No. The real "clue" is a fertile IMAGINATION.
   Face it, now. Haven't you just "imagined" how a certain creature "MIGHT HAVE" "gradually" acquired this or that characteristic? Evolutionists have. They can't SEE it happen. So they must use interminable periods of time.
   But another important point you need to realize is THERE IS NOT ENOUGH TIME — EVEN IN THE WILDEST amounts of time included in the hypothetical succession of strata — for these changes to have occurred. And that is according to evolutionists' own calculations! They simply RUN OUT OF TIME in their time REQUIREMENTS for evolutionary changes WITHIN their imagined age of the earth.
   No. The process DOESN'T "WORK" and therefore NO one can "grasp" the way it "operates" because it DOES NOT operate.
   The black moth is still a moth and it has always been black. The only difference is there are more of them in blackened areas because as an industrial area becomes darker, the ratio of black moths to white moths within the area becomes greater.
   Of course, we've never seen a reptile's leg become a bird's wing. It just doesn't happen. As a matter of fact, it's ILLOGICAL and taxes the imagination to even think of such a ludicrous possibility.
   What is the trunk of the tree?
   "The way the process works!" But the process DOESN'T work that way. Do the evolutionists need a billion years to transform a reptile into a mammal? We'll give them two billion, five billion — no, TEN billion, if they want it.
   There is 120 proof in the fossil record of evolution. There is no proof from human experience demonstrating evolution. How can we then KNOW if evolution or creation is true?
   It's simple!
   Turn to Genesis 1:1, "In the beginning GOD CREATED the heaven and the earth." But apparently this is too simple for some who refuse to acknowledge that God does exist. But God says that EVERY KNEE will bow to Him.

Beyond Black and White

   Moths perform some very phenomenal duties in the balance of nature. Moths are not just black and white. They come in a riot of color. Not only that, but the activities of moths provide some of the most striking proofs of the existence of a Creator God.
   Both moths AND butterflies belong to the insect order Lepidoptera. The word simply means "scalywinged." Together moths and butterflies number 140,000 species.
Moth feeding on nectar. Note long proboscis — especially designed to reach hard-to-get juices. The geologic record shows moths and butterflies suddenly began WITH the flowering plants. Each is dependent on the other. Another case showing interdependency in God's Creation. (See PDF For Pictures)
   To describe all the almost unbelievable relationships between moths and plants and other organisms would require a book.
   But here's a sampling.
   The larva of the wax moth Galleria eats ONLY — or at least lives on — the wax of the honeycomb in a beehive — much to beekeepers' chagrin! The larva has a SPECIAL BACTERIUM in its alimentary canal that breaks down the wax into nourishing food.
   Conversely, moths such as the clothes moth Tineola readily digests the sub• stance of such unpalatable materials as feathers, horns and wool.
   The hummingbird hawk-moth Macroglossa ("Big Tongue" in English!) determines whether certain plants and Bowers such as tobacco can even EXIST. The hawk-motb and other Sphingids are the only ones that can reach the nectar with their elongated proboscis.
   And as they eat, they pollinate,

Yucca and Pronuba Moth

   One of the most obvious and marvelous interdependencies in nature exists between the one-centimeter-long Pronuba moth and the bright desert-type flowers of the yucca.
   Here is one researcher's comments:
   "Yucca are common on the southern portions of the Great Plains, where they are conspicuous features of the landscape. Some kinds are also grown in gardens. They belong to the lily family and their blooms are large and white but are not attractive to most insects.
   "ONLY the small white Pronuba moth is adapted to their pollination, and this moth shows NO INTEREST in any other bloom.
   "The female moth has special appendages on her mouthparts with which she collects a ball of pollen and places it upon the stigma. This assures her that the Bower is properly pollinated and that seed will be produced.
   "The Pronuba also plunges her ovipositor into the yucca ovary and deposits several eggs. As the seeds develop, the Pronuba larvae feed upon them and grow. By the time the larvae are mature most of the seeds will have been consumed. Only rarely, however, are all the seeds destroyed, and the plant is able to produce enough seeds to feed 'the Pronuba AND to perpetuate the yucca species.
   "Here is the CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF SYMBIOSIS, a case where two organisms cooperate to their mutual benefit.
   "Without the moth the yucca would not be pollinated, and the yucca is the sole host plant of the moth larvae. ONE COULD NOT EXIST WITHOUT THE OTHER" (Insects, Ross Hutchins, page 266, 267).
   No evolution here!
   But this is only part of the story.
   At just the right time, the Pronuba moth struggles into the air. The Bower's fragrance leads it right to the top of the stamens. The moth scrapes together a wad of pollen.
   She carries the load of pollen in her jaws and tentacles — these are ESPECIALLY ADAPTED for the job!
   Off she goes to another Bower.
   She backs down into the bottom of a flower, there to lay her eggs. The Pronuba moth is one of the FEW moths equipped with an ovipositor through which she lays her eggs. This tube is needle sharp — especially designed to be thrust through the yucca Rower's ovary wall.
   Next, she invariably climbs to the top of the same pistil. There she finds a cavity just the RIGHT SIZE to receive the wad of pollen which she deposits. The yucca is now cross-fertilized.
   There is a great plan here. While the Pronuba eggs are growing and getting ready to hatch, the yucca's seeds are ripening. When the moth caterpillars emerge from the eggs — there is plenty of food to sustain them.
   There are several species of yucca plant and each has its OWN SPECIES of moth. The Pronuba moth has tentacles covered with stiff bristles. These are obviously designed for the PURPOSE of collecting the pollen.

Remarkably Adapted

   But does the moth KNOW what it is doing? Did it THINK OUT the relation• ship? How did it learn to cross-fertilize the yucca?
   Let this authority speak:
   "The number of the eggs laid are so moderate that the caterpillars have ENOUGH to eat until pupation, and there is still seed to spare.
   "Thus the plant also gains, for without the interference of this small moth it would presumably remain barren. But did this creature behave intelligently? The reply is unfortunately No.' The yucca moth never knew its parents, so there is no question of learning from experience" (What Science Knows About Life, Heinz Wolterek, page 121).
   Here is an insect which, though INCAPABLE of reasoned-out thought, yet seems to know that better seeds result from cross-fertilization than from putting the pollen on the stigma of the SAME FLOWER!
   Here are plants which, when grown as ornamental plants in gardens away from the Pronuba moth's environment, DO NOT YIELD SEEDS — because the moth is absent. Without the moth to pollinate them they will die out. And think of the moths that could not perpetuate their species without their particular variety of yucca!
   Yet, we are asked to believe that this relationship could have evolved over thousands of years. Meanwhile all the yuccas and Pronuba moths would have died — before they learned how to live together! Blind, unthinking natural selection could not produce such an exacting relationship!
   It's an INSULT to anyone's intelligence.
   It should be obvious to a child that great planning was involved in the creating of such a relationship.
   The planning required was infinitely more advanced than what man has been able to think out and plan. The yucca-Pronuba-moth relationship required Super-human intelligence. It requires an Intelligence that ONLY the Great Creator God possesses.
   This is only the beginning of the proof that evolution is moth-eaten. A succeeding installment will reveal the marvelous mysteries of moth and butterfly metamorphosis which puzzle and astound evolutionists.

In Conclusion

   You have just finished reading the eleventh installment of this series. The question is: what are you doing about this knowledge.
   You now have proof positive that a Great Living God exists. The Creator of this vast universe. The Living Ruler over all things!
   And He created all the vast interdependency of life around us — just so that we human beings could exist. The oxygen, the water, the plants, the animals, the sea life — everything is absolutely NECESSARY to sustain human life on earth.
   That's the ONLY reason it exists!
   But why?
   Because God has a GREAT PURPOSE for each human. Most people simply aren't aware of why they are here; where they are going; or what they hope to accomplish.
   The reason is simple. Most people have forgotten God exists. But this series of articles should be burning it into your mind that God DOES exist. You need to read our free booklet, Why Were You Born? Find out what your purpose in life is. It's a whole lot greater than you have ever imagined.

Back To Top

Plain Truth MagazineOctober 1967Vol XXXII, No.10