|
The
Battle Line
If evolution is a given fact, then it
should be easily proven. Yet after over 100 years of ardent research since
Charles Darwin, the proofs are still only in the dreams of talented artists and
philosophers – not in provable science.
This booklet is put together to ask the reader to step back from all the hype
associated with “science” these days, and to think about the fundamental
questions raised by both the evolutionary theory, and the Biblical Creation
theory. Only one is right, and better subjected to the scientific method of
verification (for proof).
Evolution is the concept that everything in the universe started off from a
massive explosion of a ‘dot’ of super-dense matter billions of years ago, and
then over time, by an unknown process of improvement, all the order and design
that we see in nature (from DNA to Galaxies) has come to be. This process
over-rides all the known laws of physics, but is believed to be making
everything better and better with time.
Creation, as clearly described in all of the Bible, is the concept that about
6,000 years ago, God instantaneously spoke everything into existence, and gave
it order and complexity according to His design and intelligence, and that
everything is currently falling apart – all of which matches the scientific
Laws.
Many people try and merge the two concepts, but by doing so they destroy the
rational approach to both science and the obvious use of words in the Bible.
The biggest weaknesses of the evolutionary theory are:
-
There is no adequate explanation
for the origin of life from dead chemicals. Even the simplest life form is
so tremendously complex and different from the matter that it is formed
from.
-
The fossil record, our only
documentation of whether evolution actually occurred in the past, lacks any
transitional forms at all, and all types of life always appear fully-formed
in the record. The evidence that "pre-men" (ape-men) existed is dubious at
best. So-called pre-man fossils turn out to be either those of apes, extinct
apes, fully man, or historical frauds.
-
All the laws of Physics say that
what we see occurring in Nature now is slowing down and falling apart – not
improving.
The biggest weakness of the Creation theory is that the Bible has been lumped in
with palm readers, superstitions and religious mythologies that have nothing to
do with facts. One of the most important proofs of the Bible being the words of
God is its absolute accuracy when it makes statements concerning science. The
Bible never said the earth was flat. It never said angels dance on the heads of
pins. But people have the impression that THAT is contained in the Bible.
Instead, the Bible says the earth is a sphere (see Isaiah 40:21,22), suspended
in space upon nothing (see Job 26:7). It stated these things thousands of years
before Columbus, and the invention of the telescope. And that is just the
beginning!
It is hoped that you find some information here that would increase your
appetite for the Gospel truth about where we came from, so that you can know for
sure where you are headed!
|
INDEX
OF SUBJECTS
We also have a booklet containing most of this information entitled, Evolution
- Fact or Fraud. This booklet is free for the asking, while supplies
last! Request it by clicking HERE
and asking for the booklet entitled Evolution - Fact or Fraud!
We welcome your comments - send them to this
Email
|
|
Evolution is not
science: (No man quoted below is a creationist)
[In a letter written to Asa Gray, a
Harvard professor of biology:] "I am quite conscious that my
speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science."
(Charles Darwin, quoted in N.C. Gillespie, "Charles Darwin and the Problem
of Creation", 1978, p. 2)
"There is the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen
from a single source which itself came from an inorganic source. This theory
can be called the `General Theory of Evolution' and the evidence that
supports it is not sufficiently strong to allow us to consider it as
anything more than a working hypothesis." (G.A. Kerkut,
"Implication of Evolution", 1980, p. 157.)
"Unfortunately, in the field of evolution most explanations are not
good. As a matter of fact, they hardy quality as explanations at all; they
are suggestions,
hunches, pipe dreams, hardy worthy
of being called hypotheses." (Norman Macbeth, "Darwin Retried", 1971, p.
147.)
"Our theory of evolution has become ... one which cannot be refuted by
any possible observations. It is thus 'outside of empirical
science, '" (L. Birch and P. Ehrlich, "Evolutionary History and
Population Biology", Nature 218, 1987, p. 352.)
"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are
great con men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest
hoax ever. In explaining evolution we do not have one iota of fact." [Tahmisian
called it] a tangled mishmash of guessing games and figure juggling. (Fresno
Bee, August 20, 1959, p. 1-B, [quoting T.N. Tahmisian, physiologist for the
Atomic Energy Commission].
"The sciences dealing with the past, stand before the bar of common
sense on a different footing. Therefore, a grotesque account of a period
some thousands of years ago is taken seriously though it be built by piling
special assumptions on special assumptions, ad hoc [invented for a
purpose] hypothesis on ad hoc hypothesis, and tearing apart the
fabric of science whenever it appears convenient. The result is a
fantasia
which is neither history nor science." (James Conant, quoted in "Origins
Research", Vol. 5, no. 2, 1982, p. 2. [Chemist and former president, Harvard
University.]
... these theories are actually tautologies and, as such, cannot
make empirically testable predictions. They are not scientific
theories at all." (R.H. Peters, `Tautology in Evolution and Ecology",
American Naturalist, 1976, Vol. 110, No. 1, p. 1.)
"I have often thought how little I should like to have to prove organic
evolution in a court of law" (Errol White, Proceedings of the Linnean
Society, London 177.8 (1988) [An ichthyologist (expert on fish) in a 1988
address before a meeting of the Linnean Society in London.]
"This is a book with a disturbing message; it points to some unseemly
cracks in the foundations. One is disturbed because what is said gives us
the uneasy feeling that we knew it for a long time deep down but were never
willing to admit this even to ourselves. It is another one of those cold and
uncompromising situations where the naked truth and human nature travel in
different directions. The particular truth is simply that we have no
reliable evidence as to the evolutionary sequence of invertebrate phyla
We do not know what group arose from what other group or whether, for
instance, the transition from Protozoa occurred once, or twice, or many
times ... We have all been telling our students for years not to accept any
statement on its face value but to examine the evidence, and therefore, it
is rather a shock to discover that we have failed to follow our own sound
advice." (John T. Bonner, book review of "Implications of Evolution" by
G.A. Kerkut, in "American Scientist", June 1961, p. 240. [John Bonner is
with the California Institute of Technology.] |
