Articles

Beauty of Butterflies—Is It Functional?

By Dr. E. Norbert Smith

 Prior to the widespread acceptance of evolution, the beauty of nature was often seen as evidence of God. Indeed, scriptural support abounds “For how great is his goodness and how great his beauty…is Zech. 9:17 (see also Ps. 19:1, 139:13-14, Is 6:3). With the acceptance of evolution, nature must be functional. The evidence of a Creator-god once seen in the beauty of flowers is now seen only to function in pollination. Yet problems remain. Consider the markings and color of butterflies. Surely we have all marveled at the beautifully varied patterns of butterflies and moths. So beautiful, in fact, the North American Indians called them “flying flowers”. Evolutionists have long ago concluded (albeit without a shred of experimental evidence) that the contrasting markings of butterflies—called disruptive coloration—functions by fragmenting the visual image. It is thus a form of protective coloration. In fact few concepts in adaptive coloration theory re as well accepted as that of descriptive coloration.

In a recent Science paper attempts to demonstrate the adaptive significance of disruptive coloration in the butterfly Anartia Fatima were unsuccessful. A small insular population of butterflies was studied extensively on the Panama island, Borro Colorado Island. A significant proportion of the native population of butterflies was collected and the disruptive color markings were masked. The butterflies were released and survived under field conditions for more than 90% of their lives. Recapture data showed no significant difference in life expectancy of marked and unmarked butterflies.

What then is the function of the beautifully patterned markings of butterflies? It remains a mystery. But I submit at least one function is to declare the glory of god the creator. It is alos of interest how a theory may be produced, accepted (often dogmatically) and modified without any definitive experimental evidence., “…guard what has been entrusted to you, avoiding worldly and empty chatter and the opposing arguments of what is falsely called ‘knowledge’ which some have professed and thus gone astray from the faith”. (I Tim. 6:2021)

Panorama of Science, Vol 17, March, 1981, pg. 227

Silberglied, R. E., A. Aiello, and D. M. Windsor, 1980. Disruptive coloration in butterflies: lack of support in Antartia Fatima. Science 209 (4456): 617-618

(More citations are with the article.)