In
regard to origins, there are only two possibilities. Either someone made
everything or everything made itself. There are no alternatives.
In our world today, evolutionary theory (of which there
are three commonly accepted varieties: Darwinian, neo-Darwinian, and saltation)
stands as the chief representative of one position. Creationism is the other
position.
Someone may ask, “What about pantheism
and Gaea?” Pantheism declares that everything is god, and the Gaea theory
fancifully says that our world is a god. Since both teach that matter made
itself, they are just forms of evolution.
How can we know which is correct?
One way is by observing the things of nature. We call that science. That is
what researchers do.
Observed
phenomena:
Most thinking people will agree that:
Known options:
Choices of how the observed phenomena came into
being..
Evolution has been acclaimed as being the only
process capable of causing the observed phenomena.
Evolution is often presented in our public school
textbooks as a process that:
People believe in evolution; they do not know that it
is true. While beliefs are certainly fine to have, it is important to give
another side to the story as I see it. If evolution is just small change over
time then I am in agreement. However if it is something else such as a huge
change from a microbe evolving into a human over millions of years then I
require evidence. I do not see the evidence in the fossil rocks. There are no
transitional gradations as this website shows you. Surely if a molecule or a
microbe is going to change into another life form such as a man over time then
there must be evidence of it somewhere. In other words there must be links
leading from the particular molecule or microbe up to man. I hope that I can
show you the evidence that there is no transitional fossil linking primordial particles
or microbes to people. There are no
links. The whole chain is missing in
fact! This type of evolution does not exist. There are small changes alright.I
agree with all scientists on that point. I would be stupid not to. The evidence
of small change is around us. However many scientists go too far in
extrapolating that small changes (micro evolution) add up to big changes(macro
evolution).
. That is why I am getting another view out to the
children often at my own expense even though I am a teacher at second level and
am a public servant as such. I want to balance the scales. It helps to give our
pupils another view. It is my contention that evolutionism is a religious
worldview that is not supported by science, Scripture, popular opinion, or
common sense. The exclusive teaching of this mind-altering philosophy, in
schools, museums, television (Attenborough,Dawkins et. al.) etc., is also
having an effect on the self esteem of young people. I find that sometimes some
of our students are driven to distraction simply because they do not know where
they come from or why they are here on this earth. You might say that is
ridiculous. Many of our children and students don’t seem to have any hope or
reason for their existence. This lack of hope, I believe, can be indirectly
related to the teaching of evolution, molecules to man, goo to you type theory.
My suggestion:
Proponents of the theory of evolution
would do well to admit that they believe in evolution(macro), but they do not
know that it happened the way they teach. They should call evolution their
"faith" or "religion," and indeed reform it in the books of
science.
*NOTE:
When I use the word evolution, I am not referring to
the minor variations found in all of the various life forms (microevolution). I
am referring to the general theory of evolution which believes these five major
events took place without God:
Students in Irish schools are being taught that
evolution is a fact. I am convinced that evolution is a religion masquerading
as science and should not be part of any science curriculum. It has nothing to
do with the subject of science. There are at least six different and unrelated
meanings to the word “evolution” as used in science textbooks.
Even a quick review of a typical secondary school
textbook will show that students are being deceived into thinking all six types
of evolution above have been proven because evidence is given for minor
variations called micro-evolution. The first five are smuggled in when no one
is watching.
This deception is a classic case of bait and switch.
People have gone to jail for that!!! One definition of evolution (such as
“descent with modification”) is given and the others are assumed to be true by
association. The first five meanings are believed by faith, have never been
observed and are religious. Only the last one is scientific. It is also what
the Bible predicted would happen. The animals and plants would bring forth
“after their kind” in Genesis 1. Dogs reproduce dogs i.e. their kind – not a
totally different kind of animal, which is what evolution proposes.
Evidence of minor changes within the same kind of
plant or animal does not qualify as evidence. For example, doubling the
chromosome number of a sterile hybrid does not add additional genetic information;
it duplicates what is already present in the parent plant. Because of the
absence of additional genetic information the resultant plant can't be
classified as different or new species. The plant may differ in a number of
ways - bigger, vigorous as observed in any polyploid plants. Such easily
recognizable phenotypic changes have confused many. Some evolutionists have
jumped to the conclusion that a new species has been evolved. The key is that
no new genetic information has been added. Even a new “species” is not proof
for evolution.. Some have insisted on a precise definition of the word “kind”.
The Bible defines “kind” as those that are able to “bring forth” or reproduce.
Those animals that were originally able to reproduce were of the same kind. There
may be diversity now, 6000 years later that could cause some varieties of the
original kind to not be able to reproduce now. For example, I understand that
rabbits from
The idea that the majority of scientists believe in the
theory is not evidence either. Majority opinion is often wrong and must be
corrected. History is full of examples. e.g. Galileo
Many have offered evidence of microevolution and
assumed that the other 5 meanings of the word are somehow magically connected.
They don’t seem to realize that they are blinded to the obvious.. It is your
job to prove that what is being taught to our kids as fact (all six meanings of
the word evolution above), is indeed a fact. If this cannot be done then it
should be admitted that evolution is a religion but not a science. Some say it
is unfair to define evolution including the origin of the universe. They say it
only has to do with “change in gene frequency over time.” All you need to do is
read your local textbook and see that all 6 meanings of the word are part of
what is taught as evolution theory. If these nay Sayers are agreeing that it
should not be included then they should help me get it out of the books, if
they are genuine.
Over the years I have heard many evolutionists say,
“Evolution is a theory like gravity is a theory. Don’t you believe in gravity?”
They repeat this mantra as if repetition will make it true. Their example is
silly of course. We can all observe gravity every moment of our lives. We can
do tests and experiments to verify the theory of gravity. No one has ever seen
an exception to it. By the same token, no one has ever observed evolution nor
been able to demonstrate any evolution beyond minor variations within the kind.
To try to make evolution science by associating it with theories like gravity
is ridiculous.
Nearly all responses go something like this: “Of
course no one can prove evolution, can you prove creation?” This response is
what I expected and wanted. Neither theory of origins can be proven. Both
involve a great deal of faith in the unseen. Since they can teach their
religion, I can teach mine which is creationism. I am a teacher in
I really want to get involved in debate with you. So
write away to your heart’s content. I would love to talk to anyone by phone or
debate with any qualified scientist (even a panel of evolutionists) in a public
forum at a university, on radio or TV, as long as there is equal time for each
position not each person. If you call, please have a list of topics to discuss
or questions to ask and feel free to record the conversation if you like. Just
inform me that you are recording please. I hope this response is satisfactory.
I have taught for the past few years that evolution
is nothing but a religion mixed in with real science. Many have been duped into
believing in it. There is no evidence that any plant or animal ever can or did
change to any other kind or creature. It is time that intelligent people the
world over began to admit that the emperor has no clothes! There is no evidence
for changes between kinds of animals. The Bible teaches that God made them to
“bring forth after their kind.” This is all that has ever been observed. Dogs
come from dogs and cats come from cats. The same Bible teaches that all of us
will face the Creator one day to be judged for everything we have said, done or
thought. We need to remind ourselves of that. I don’t judge you. In fact I
judge myself sometimes too harshly. Nevertheless our God is merciful and loves
everyone. He even rewards us when we turn away from the mistakes we have made.
I always take time for calls. I am most often in
Monday to Sunday. Check web site (Contact) for email if you need to write to me
so that I can give you my phone number. Remember I am a teacher so I don’t give
out my phone number to everyone for fear of prank and nuisance calls.
This Site
provides you with thousands of items of data from scientific research and
observation. It clearly establishes that evolution cannot possibly be the
causal agent of matter, objects, or life(See
Life DNA Protein and Fossils).
That leaves
us with Creationism as the only means by which everything came into existence.
Someone
will ask, “But what are the evidences that Creationism is true?” There are
two.
Second,—and if possible —even more solid, we have the very
existence of everything about us! Whether it be the whirling of electrons in
the atom, the orbit of our world which mysteriously does not decay and crash us
into the sun, or the existence of a living creature.
Can
anyone, viewing a hummingbird in action and knowing that all its hundreds of
organs are packed inside something the size of a marble, believe the myth that,
way back, it originated when a lightning bolt hit some dirty seawater?
Come now,
not even a four-year-old would believe that one.
Not
evolution, but a creative act of God brought everything into existence.........in 6 days which is our pattern for a daily
week i.e. 6 days plus one more in which God "rested”. This is the seven
day week which everyone in the world aligns themselves to. I wonder why that is
the case? Well read on...
The mountain of scientific
data now available to us also narrows the range of that Creation act. It
obviously occurred rather recently, only
within the last few thousand years. We know this because the condition and
arrangement of sedimentary strata(see fossils) show
it was rapidly laid down by a worldwide Flood only a few millenniums ago . We
also know it because of 58 (see Age of earth) dramatic findings that
our world is youthful.
Other
types of scientific evidence establish the fact that, contrary to what some
Christians suggest, no evolving from one species to another has occurred. The
original species remain intact, but they have produced many sub-species.See Natural Selection
Although neither
the book of Genesis nor any other part of the Bible is used in the site as
scientific evidence, we should note that those Christians who choose to embrace
evolutionary theory deny the reality of the Genesis accounts of the Creation
and the Flood. If we cannot trust Genesis, what can we trust?
In addition, according to the Bible,
sin and death began after the fall of Adam and Eve. But that important truth
would be negated by the theory that savagery, violence, and sudden killing
reigned for millions of years on our planet before Adam and Eve came into
existence.
So that brings us back to two views
of origins, evolution or Creation—only two. By accepting the one, we reject the
other. They cannot be blended.
“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,
“I doubt if there is any single
individual within the scientific community who could cope with the full range
of [creationist] arguments without the
help of an army of consultants in special fields.”—*David M. Raup, “Geology
and Creation,” Bulletin of the Field Museum of Natural History, Vol. 54, March
1983, p. 18.
“The evolutionary establishment
fears creation science, because evolution itself crumbles when challenged by
evidence. In the 1970s and 1980s, hundreds of public debates were arranged
between evolutionary scientists and creation scientists. The latter scored
resounding victories, with the result that, today, few evolutionists will
debate. Isaac Asimov, Stephen Jay Gould, and the late Carl Sagan, while highly
critical of creationism, all declined to debate.”—James Perloff, Tornado in
a Junkyard (1999), p. 241.
“No one has ever found an organism
that is known not to have parents, or a parent. This is the strongest evidence
on behalf of evolution.”—*Tom Bethell, “Agnostic Evolutionists,” Harper’s,
February 1985, p. 61.
“As by this theory, innumerable
transitional forms must have existed. Why do we not find them embedded in the
crust of the earth? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of being, as we
see them, well-defined species?”—*Charles Darwin, quoted
in H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation (1866), p. 139.
“Evolution became in a sense a
scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are
prepared to bend their observations to fit in with it.”—*H. Lipson, “A Physicist Looks at Evolution,” Physics Bulletin 31
(1980), p. 138
* An asterisk before a
name indicates that the person named and/or quoted is not known to be a
creationist.
Underlining generally
indicates a special evidence disproving evolution. This helps you more
quickly grasp the key points.
The scientific
facts presented here will help insulate you from the desolating effects of
evolutionary theory.
COPY WHATEVER YOU WANT—Copy
whatever you want from our website, at no charge, and share it widely. There is
a real need for this information to be widely circulated. However, the Site
will be your best tool for the widest education of others, whether students,
church members, or the general public. HOW TO USE THIS MATERIAL—This
website, is excellent for (1) personal knowledge enrichment; (2) data
when you need it on a certain science topic; (3) private school and home-school
chapter reading or research topic assignments; (4) church-group study; and (5)
sermon, prayer meeting, and lecture source material. There
is enough material here to form the basis for a sizeable number of school,
college, or university research papers. Even those working on advanced theses
will find the source material, provided here, extremely helpful. When
conducting such research, you will want to also use the greatly expanded
collection of data and statements by scientists.
STUDY AND REVIEW QUESTIONS-
The student can use the questions as a basis for further study. The teacher may
wish to assign some of them. The simplest are generally given first, followed
by more advanced ones. POSITION OF THIS SITE—This site adheres to a broad range
of scientific evidence that our world is only several thousand years old and
that a worldwide Flood has occurred.
NATURE NUGGETS—The
"design factor" is an overwhelming evidence of Creation. You will
find examples of natural wonders, which evolution could not possibly
produce.
Because most of them work within limited
fields, scientists assume that researchers in other fields have successfully
proven evolutionary theory. Unfortunately, their narrowed focus of study, and
their acceptance of evolutionary presuppositions, hinder them from recognizing
the implications of very obvious scientific facts and
discoveries.This site contains many basic facts and principles you will
not learn in the secular schools. Reading them will broaden your grasp of
hundreds of reference points, which will enable you to have a clearer
understanding of science and natural history. An understanding of truth always
strengthens the mind; an acceptance of error always tends to confuse it.The men
and women with the greatest breadth of mental capacity are those who recognize
and willingly accept truth when they see it, and are willing to identify
underlying principles and trace from cause to effect.
This site can equip you with a more
accurate overview of scientific facts, often superior to that of the average
secular science teacher and even of many research scientists.
Because of this, you should not feel
intimidated by science teachers, nor even by research scientists you may meet.
It is true that they know more about less, yet you will be able to correlate
facts they have never considered.
Be polite and courteous, but never
forget that you will have a grasp of a number of basic scientific principles
which, unfortunately, they do not have and probably never will. Although they
have a deep knowledge of a narrowed field, their dedication to evolutionary
theories requires that they ignore valid scientific evidence. False premises
inevitably lead to erroneous assumptions and conclusions. Minds become cramped
when men dare not consider facts which disagree with their theories.
The facts in this site will provide you with a bulwark against the acceptance of many false scientific concepts you will encounter throughout the rest of your life.