Believe in Evolution?

 

The Theory of Evolution Disproved

Most people today have learned  about   “the theory of Evolution”  at some point during their grade school years, and assume this  theory is fact. Though most people do not know the details behind this theory, who proposed it,  and what evidence the theory has been based on. If anyone stops to take a look at this so-called evidence, they will realize that much of it is not evidence but simply a combination of assumptions and wishful thinking. Below is some information we gathered from different source on the subject which we feel are true. 

 

The Problem

Throughout   the centuries Scientists have always argued when life on earth came  from . “Creationists” are people who believe we were created by God. People who do not believe there is  a God find the idea of life being created by a superior being unthinkable. So these people have been forced to try and think of other possible ways how life could exists on earth in so many different forms (from single cell all the way up to complex life forms called Homo Sapiens or human beings) 

 

The Theory

In   the  1800’s Scientists normally examined rocks and fossils (“or the fossil record”) to determine what life forms existed during different period s in history. At that time several scientists had proposed different   theories   of evolution  which they felt could explain our existence.

Most notable among these men was someone named Charles Darwin who , observing that in some  cases plants and animals showed an ascent of increasing complexity in strata(layers of rock and dirt), proposed his own theory of evolution. Charles Darwin assumed the forms higher in the strata physically evolved from the forms  lower in the strata. In other words , Darwin was saying that over many  many years, small living organism must have  evolved  into more complex creatures, which evolved into fish, which evolved into birds, which eventually evolved into larger animals, then into people, all by themselves. Charles Darwin then devised a theory in 1859 which stated that there is always a “struggle for existence” among living creatures and that only the fittest survive. In addition he stated that nature, over longer periods of time , gradually selects and promotes features of increasing complexity and usefulness  for  survival . He called this built  in feature “natural selection”. Scientists who did not believe in the creationist point of view(that we are created by God), were quick to adopt this new “theory of evolution”(having nothing  else to go on at that time) , and a battle between the “Creationists and Evolutionists” was born . By the year 1900 ,this new theory was well accepted by a large number of scientists and the battle between both sides  was still ongoing. 

 

What  The  Fossil  Records  Show

Throughout   the 1900’s Scientists continually studied the fossil  records  to try and determine if the theory of evolution was really the “fact of evolution”. If the theory of evolution were fact, then the fossil records would   clearly show  the gradual transformation over long periods of time that Darwin spoke of. But despite   intense research for over 150 years since the theory of evolution was proposed, no instances of a transitional form have been found in the fossil records. What the fossil records do show is each life form  suddenly appearing, full blown, without any apparent relationship to what we went before it. Why evolutionists look the other  way  and call this a lie  is incredible .These few quotes on the subject speak for themselves ! 

As an example , if the theory of  evolution were true , then the fossil records  would ALWAYS  show a smooth  transition from  one life  form to another, such that it would be difficult to tell where invertebrates  ended, and vertebrates  began. Though this is NOT always  the case.  Instead , fully formed  life forms  have been discovered to suddenly  jump into fossil  record seemingly from nowhere , with illogical gaps  before them where their ancestors should be. Many evolutionist do not dispute this fact , while other look  the other way. 

 

Darwin’s  View On The Gaps In The Fossil Records

Darwin  was aware of the gap in the fossil records though he felt there was more to his theory which explained this. Since human being s can breed living things for special  characteristics (i.e. breed sheep for  heavier wool , breed  horses for extra strength , and roses for color and size), Darwin reasoned that if man could  bring about small improvements in living things in such a short period ,then nature could surely bring about similar tiny improvement over millions of years in living cells, which could allow them to evolve all the way up to the human beings given enough time . In other words, Darwin felt plants and animals could vary to an unlimited degree , and given a time span of say , a hundred  million  years ,it could close all of the gaps in the fossil records. Next we will see that this is not the case 

 

Breeding Limitations

While Darwin  expressed plants and animals could vary to an unlimited degree , breeders  were discovering  otherwise . They were discovering that even though  it was possible to breed  a sheep with short legs, it was NOT possible to breed  a plum the size of a watermelon, or breed a horse with tusks .Each living thing was found  to have built in limitations which prevent it  from moving too far from the norm. Excessive breeding  for a characteristic was also found  to either result  in a reverse back  toward a given average  after many generations, or it resulted  in dead end species  which were unable to reproduce ( like the mule which is a cross between  a horse  and donkey ). To date  no breeding experiment s have ever resulted in major , new traits resulting  in a completely  new species .Darwin had no answer  for this limitation  and simply assumed there variations could continue  to an unlimited degree  without evidence. And that is still the case of this day.

 Some  evolutions like to refer  to speciation  via breeding in plants  as a proof of evolution. Though breeding  experiments  in animal and humans  has always run into limitation s and has NEVER  been shown to produce  a brand new species .So breeding  cannot be used  as a proof for evolution. 

Some quotes regarding breeding can be seen here.

 

If Breeding Is Not The Cause of Evolution, Then Maybe  Mutations Are?

Since breeding  was found to have limitations this put a road block in the way of theory  of evolution. Though  Darwin also felt that if breeding were not the answer ,then mutations might be. In other words he felt may  be it was possible for forms of life to inherit  changes ,which could explain changes from one form of life to another over long periods of time.

 

Mutations Are Typically  Harmful ,Sometimes  Neutral  and Are Rare

Creationists  and even  many evolutionists  immediately pointed out that all observed  mutations  whether  laboratory induced or occurring naturally have typically been harmful, or in some cases  neutral . Mutations are typically a copying error  or mistake ,which cause things like disease or monstrosities  and put the organism at a disadvantage . In addition, mutations have  discovered  to be an extremely  rare event  since genes  have built in function  to stabilize and rest change. So in other words,  mutations  are rarely  seen and when they do occur ,they do not bring out  and advantage to any living thing. Evolution like to use example of beneficial mutations in antibiotic  resistance  to bacteria , or in mutation of the tomato for example , though none of these types  of mutations  are relevant to any ideas about one kind of  creature changing to another. One kind of creature  changing into another via  beneficial mutations  has simply NEVER  been shown.

For evolutionists to state  that many  favorable, random mutation have occurred  is completely unfounded .Mutations simply cannot be the cause for evolution  into new, healthy , more  complex living  organisms. Again many evolutionists  simply state this fact is not true,  when proof is everywhere. These evolutionists are simply in denial.

Some quotes regarding the mutation  theory can be seen here

 

If  Evolution Didn’t Occur Gradually, May be  IT Occurred  Rapidly?

Another  evolutionist from Harvard  name  Stephen  Gould  next proposed  a possibility on how evolution could be taking place which he felt may  also explain the gaps in the fossils records. He proclaimed   that maybe evolution does not occur gradually, but may be rapidly. He proposed a scheme  called  “punctuated equilibrium” where he mention  that may be it was possible that large population of species  live unchanged  for millions of years, then for some unknown reason some of the species become  isolated , and by unknown means evolve  into new species. Thus this new   isolated species  would appear suddenly in the fossils records, which would  explain the gap before them.

Since there were no other explanations which could logically explain the gap in the fossil records, many evolutionists  accepted the “punctuated equilibrium” theory initially. 

 

Punctuated  Equilibrium  Directly Opposes  Laws of Genetics

Notice that Gould’s  proposed  “punctuated equilibrium”  was filled with “what-if’s”  and was purely speculation. To use  an unfounded  “punctuated equilibrium” theory to try and explain gaps in the fossil records without providing any proof  does not give any more  credence to the evolutionist  position. Rather new species  suddenly appearing in the fossil records  only supports  one position. In addition, “punctuated equilibrium”  opposes all known  rules of genetics. For example the genetics apparatus  of a lizard is devoted  100% to producing another lizard. The  idea that such an indescribably complex, finely tuned , highly integrated, amazingly stable  genetic apparatus  involving hundreds  of  thousands of interdependent genes could be drastically altered and rapidly reintegrated in such  away that new  organism  is actually an improvement over the preceding  organism  is contrary to all  known laws of genetics  and is pure speculations  and groundless.

It’s interesting to see that creationist s  have always  stated  that gaps in the fossil records are proof of special creations, and now the evolutionist with the new “punctuated equilibrium” theory, were starting  to say that gaps in the fossil record s were evidence of evolution!

In a  nutshell, up to this point  there is no proof of gradual evolution( over long period of time). And rapid  or sudden evolution is indistinguishable  from special creation! 

 

“Natural Selection” Is a Mindless  Process

 As a part of theory of evolution , Darwin also proposed that each time any organism evolves , every stage must be  an immediate advantage  to the species because “ natural selection” is a mindless process with no idea where it is going, so it cannot plan and conceive an end goal. Creationists immediately  argued that  how could many organs  of the human body , such as the incredibly complicated  human eye , develop bit by bit  by chance mutation, not knowing  it is going to be an eye? Of what use  would a half developed eye by? How could  each step have been  an advantage until the entire  eye was complete? How about other parts of a body such as a kidney or jaw? How about the wings of a bird? What good is half of a jaw  or half of a wing? We could give endless  examples here.

Some quotes regarding the “natural  selection” theory can be seen here

 

Is Evolution Occurring Right Now ?

Darwin has always stressed   that “survival of the fittest” was   an underlying component of his theory of evolution. Though evolutionists cannot identify which   aspects   are important for survival because survival cannot  be seen or proved. No evolutionist really  knows  how “natural selection” really works, or if it is currently working. Neither  has a “struggle for existence” been found to exist among plants and animals. Yet evolutionists   continue to preach the theory of evolution without any proof  for what they are claiming.

 

The Alleged  “Missing Links” between Man and  Ape

There have been several  claims  of fossils found that show  evidence between man and ape:

Neanderthal  Man– When the first  “Neanderthal Man”  was discovered  in about 1856, it was thought to be true link from ape to man .Though  well – known biologists such as  Virchow  and many other Scientists  and medical  authorities  since that time  have all declared  the Neanderthal  skulls shows signs  of severe rickets ( a deficiency disease characterized by defective bone growth ) which explains why it’s  appearance  is slightly different.

Other authorities  have also claimed that there have been skulls of modern man  found over the last century which look very similar to the  Neanderthal Man skull

In addition there have been instances  where the Neanderthal  Man bones  were put on display in museums  and it was later discovered the bones were  arranged correctly which is what gave it the “hunched “ appearance. When this incorrect arrangement was brought to light, it was still left on  display as is.

Quotes regarding Neanderthal Man Can be seen here.

Piltdown Man-  The “Piltdown “ skull was first “ discovered”  in England in1912  by Charles Dawson. For Forty –one years  it was leading evidence for evolution  until in 1953 it was discovered to be a forgery . It was actually  found to be a recent  human skull combined  with a female orangutan  jaw, and was dyed  and slightly  modified to give  it the appearance  of age. It’s  interesting  to note how all textbooks before 1953 showed Piltdown  man in every  human’s family tree, then one day it was no longer “true”. The British Museum has documented   other discoveries  by Dawson  as forgeries  as well.

Java Man- When this was  “discovered” in 1891 by Dr. Eugene Dubois , two other skulls were found  in the same formation and of the same age which were no different from skulls of modern  Australian aborigines. Dubois formed java    man from a chimp-like skullcap, human thigh bone, and teeth, all found within 50 feet of each other  and he simply put them together , assuming they were from the same man. Java man was later discredited by the finder himself, Dr Eugene Dubois, as actually being a gibbon in 1938. Yet  despite  Dubois  recanting  java man was left in many text books. As we can see many  scientist who claimed  “scientific evidence”  may simply be making guesses. True science has no place for guessing.

Nebraska Man-  In 1922 a tooth was discovered in Nebraska  By Dr Henry  Fairfield  Osborn  who examined  the tooth and claimed  it had characteristic of a man, chimp and Java Man. Years later it was determined  the tooth was actually from  an extinct  pig.

In  summary, when bones are found ,there is no way  for even the best of scientists  to state with certainty  that they all came from same being, or what that being looked like, or what type of life that being  lived . Yes, educated guesses can always be made , but they will be always guesses.

 

Others  Claims  By Evolutionists

There are several other claims by evolutionists  over the past 150 years  that have been used as arguments  in favor of theory of evolution. Here are few of them and evidence  that they are false:

Vestigial Organs- Organs such as tonsils and appendix were originally thought to be useless vestiges of organs once used by man's ancestors. At one time there were over 100 vestigial organs listed. All have now been shown to have useful functions.

In addition, if there were such a thing as vestigial organs, we would see emerging organs in process of development on extinct and existing life forms, since if evolution is a fact, all organs must have rudimentary beginnings. The complete absence of these emerging organs as passed over quietly by evolutionists.

Another interesting point to be made here is that evolution scientists claim that apes are our closest relatives and that man has vestigial organs that were used once, but are being phased out by evolution. If this is so, then scientists should be able to look at the ape (and other lesser animals) and determine how these vestigial organs were more fully functional. But you'll notice no scientist will touch this subject!

Transitional Forms-Many claim that transitional forms have been found, but this is simply speculation and there is no proof of it. For example, at one time the Archaeopteryx, a fossilized bird-like creature, was used as an example of transition from reptile to bird. This has since been discredited by many since many other birds were since found in the same strata, many birds from that time were found to have teeth, and many known birds existed at that time that could not fly. This is just one example.

From time to time we see other claimed discoveries come forward in the news which are claimed to be a type of missing link. We see many claims that something lived a certain number of years ago, walked a certain way, ate a certain type of food, and breathed a certain way etc, however we can clearly see these are purely speculation on part of the scientist as other scientists often present completely different scenarios. These are educated guesses and none are conclusive.

If transitional forms exist, then they should be commonly found everywhere, across all lifetimes, and in all parts of the world, which even Darwin himself admits is not the case (in the quotes link below). A few educated guesses in our day and age is not going to change this fact!

Also see the quotes from others regarding transitional forms.

 

Why Have We All  Been Taught  the theory of  Evolution As Fact?

Despite the fact that no facts have ever been produced making the "Theory of Evolution" the "Fact of Evolution", many people still blindly cling to it since they do not believe in creation and feel it is the best and only thing they have to go on.

Throughout the 1900's there have been numerous trials regarding teaching of evolution, creationism or both in the public schools. The Creationists have always fought to have the Theory of Evolution taught as THEORY, not fact, since it truly is only a theory to this day. The evolutionists on the other hand have always fought to have creationism NOT MENTIONED AT ALL in the schools. They have always refused to have creationism taught as an alternative to evolution. Since many people group creationism into a religious category, and religion was not to be taught in the public schools, evolution came out on top as what was to be taught to children in the public schools. The crime of the matter is that it is taught in the schools without mention of creation as a possible alternative, children assume it is fact. In addition, the theory of evolution has been taught as fact in every other branch of knowledge in the world, to the point where you may be laughed at or even refused funding (in the case of scientists) if you do not believe in the theory.

It's been over 150 years since the theory of evolution was proposed and promoted throughout the world, yet to this day we know little more about the origin of species then we did then, and the proofs mentioned above have been thrown out by most evolutionists. And despite all of the facts against each evolutionist argument, the evolutionists continue to grasp at straws and blindly accept a theory which is CLEARLY not fact. Many do this simply because they refuse to believe the alternative (creation), or because they fear to be at odds with their colleagues. Here are some quotes that show how evolutionists cling to the theory of evolution regardless of proof against it.

 

More quotes  on Evolutions in general  can be seen here.

*** Read quotes  from Darwin  himself  shooting  down his  own theory here.

*** If you feel any quotes  are out of Context , Please let us know and we will try to post  the entire source  through which the quote came.

 

Conclusion

To determine if the theory  of evolution is a fact ,one has to look at  scientific evidence  first regardless of belief in any religion. All true scientists(Creationist  or evolutionist ) if they are TRUE  scientists, study the scientific evidence first ,and make decision from  there.

Creationists dispute the underlying theories of natural selection , breeding mutations  and other facts above not because of their religious beliefs, but because no scientific research or laboratory observations over the past 150 years have shown these individual  sub-theories  can possibly be. Once these individual  sub-theories are shown to be false , the theory of evolution falls apart. Once the theory of evolutions is ruled out as being a possibility based on scientific facts  observed , the only thing left that make any sense is creations.

It  is a fact that Darwin and many other who had initial hand in theories  surrounding evolution  were known  atheists or agnostics. The theory of evolution for them  was essential  to give them mechanical  explanation of the universe  without any  spiritual principles. Without the theory of evolution, atheists  and agnostics  have nothing substantial on which the base thing , hence they tend to cling to the theory of evolution , even when presented  with facts that show sub-theories like natural selection  cannot be. Creationists on the other hand  do not have the attachment  since when the theory of evolution falls apart , creation still stands regardless.

It is also a fact that many religious people over the centuries who do believe in God, have accepted the theory of evolution and never give it a second thought. Again many assume it is true from what they learned in school, and leave it at that. It is when they discover the sub-theories like natural selection and mutations do not line up, that these religious people can easily discard the theory of evolution since they have their belief in creation to fall back on. It is simply a matter of a person who decides to learn about the theory of evolution in-depth, who stumbles on the discrepancies and realizes there is something wrong.

For those that believe in God and in Scripture, many questions arise when discussing the Theory of Evolution. First, if every human being is given a soul by God, at what point during the evolutionary process did God step in and give human beings their souls? And when considering the earliest human beings, were their immediate ancestors non-human without souls? You may have heard the joke: if Adam and Eve were the first human beings, were their parents apes? This actually becomes a serious question for those who believe in Scripture.

According to Sir Julian Huxley, an English biologist and author, he declared that "Darwin's real achievement was to remove the whole idea of God as creator from the sphere of rational discussion." What this means is, man, being descended from animals, is thus freed from being answerable for his own behavior. A few results of this are sexual license, the criminal as victim of society, and the Marxian belief that the end justifies and makes "moral" any means."

See the Creation Research website for good scientific  facts from creationist  scientists.

As for  creationism,  what proof  is there that we are created ? Solid “Scientific “ evidence is not available , though empirical evidence is plentiful! Belief in the existence  of God  stems from looking at the abundant empirical evidence  we see around us , as seen on our  Don’t Believe in God? page.