In evolution, organisms happen to change in various forms by an unthinking process through the means of mutations. These later generations according to evolutionary thinking get better. So this prediction was put to the test. An experiment was conducted that used a plant which has been studied quite often by scientists, it goes by the name, Arabidopsis thaliana.
The objective was to find out how plants adapt to different temperatures. Two plants were exposed to mildly hot temperatures while others were exposed to normal temperatures but in the final generation they raised the temperature. The results were very interesting, in only two generations, the plants exposed to the warmer temperatures outperformed those plants which were exposed to colder temperatures…One science writer put it this way…
“Because the chance of accumulating mutations within just two generations that led the heat-conditioned plants to thrive in hotter conditions was essentially nil, the authors conclude that inherited epigenetic factors affecting flower production and early-stage seed survival in those plants had to be at play.”
The research defies the story of evolution which needs a lot of time for natural selection to work in order for things like a plant to adapt while learning that these designed plants have the ability to adapt much quicker. What researchers were looking for was slight modifications in mutations that would eventually lead to adaptation in future generations.
Rapid adaptation in variants is a design rather than evolution. As scientists observed, there was no natural selection detection being made in the plants to use random mutations to build new information from an existing source that would allow two generations to adapt in various temperatures. The bacteria example cannot rescue this theory either! Without mutations be able to accomplish the impossible, it’s not evolution.
While the experiment teaches nothing about hypothesis of evolution other than the fact it’s prediction is wrong, it does have interesting implications in the way we understand variation in agronomic productivity! Could new experiments be on the way? I hope so!