18 reasons why evolution is a lie
Evolutionary theory (not fact, I might add) is of the opinion that we developed from a primordial protozoon; merely an algae or amoebae from a water pool. Over “millions and millions of years,” man developed from this algae over a series of transformational events, i.e., the algae grew an eye, then a leg, then became a fish, which then became a mammal, then half mammal-half-ape, half ape-half man and so on. Basically, the opinion is that we evolved from ‘molecule to man’ or ‘particle to person’. This is known as macro-evolutionary theory. Despite much evidence for micro-evolution (as explained shortly) there is no evidence for macro-evolution (i.e. molecule to man) as many evolutionists would have us believe.
Jean-Baptiste Lamarck also came up with “redundancy theory” i.e. that we lose bodily functions and parts through time as we evolve (i.e. our little toe will soon be lost as we no longer have need for it). I would suggest that his theory is redundant. In fact Evolutionary theory was first established by Aristotle the Grecian Philosopher, then later developed by Charles Darwin. The predominant secular worldview that stemmed from Aristotle’s philosophy was brutal. It reduced man to beast like status, and originated the ‘survival of the fittest’ mindset, with morals discarded and primitive passions elevated to supremacy. The conscience of man has not evolved my friends but is a gift from God (Rom 2:15) and a means to temper our inherent lascivious nature.
Here are 18, clear and concise reasons as to why macro-evolutionary theory has no scientific proof and remains a flawed view, in comparison to creationism:-
- God’s Omission Leaves Unanswered Questions: How did life originate from non-living matter? Ask any scientist, no-one has ever been able to create life in a test lab, nor will they ever be able to from scratch. This leaves us with the ‘Big Bang theory’ or that an extra-terrestrial species more advanced than us cross-pollinated our gene pool. So who created the extra terrestrials? We are back to the original question. To think that life developed from an unknown combination of elements, there is more chance of finding a needle in a haystack as high and wide as the state of Texas. Even Einstein (perhaps the most respected scientist of his or any generation) was quoted as saying that his only conclusion to life was that it had to be created by some divine being, not by a random mis-match of elements. It requires a lot of faith to believe in macro-evolution as we will soon see.
- The Gap between the Animal and Vegetable Kingdoms: At some time in history they have shifted apart, evolutionists have no answer for this, why only two types of life? Why not millions randomly developed, why just animal and vegetable? Why? God created the heavens and the earth and everything is to stay within the boundaries of its own ‘kind’(Gen 1:11-12, Gen 1:21-25, Gen 6:20, Gen 7:14, Gen 8:19).
- Life Cannot be Reproduced Except by Life: Science has never been able to solve the simple equation of producing life. There is a limit to human wisdom. The chemist can separate a cabbage leaf into its component parts, but only God can take those parts and make a cabbage leaf.
- The Formation of Species Lines: Granted that man is affected by his climate and food to a certain degree there is no doubt (this is known as micro-evolution), however macro-evolution is based upon a change of inheritable characteristics of life forms which is not evident in nature. For example, climate might cause a rabbit to grow a heavier coat of fur; he will adapt to his environment and food can influence its strength and weight etc., but these changes die with the rabbit. DNA traits can be passed on as part of its genetic make up, yet the species remains the same. A rabbit is a rabbit, is a rabbit. This is where macro-evolution falls down. Moving a rabbit from Texas to Alaska may reveal a thickening of its coat within 2-3 generations, but it still remains a rabbit.
- There are No Transformational Species: This is by far the most tangible evidence (or lack thereof) as to why evolution is flawed. For every sequence of evolutionary advancement along the species line, we should find countless, if not millions of fossils that are half algae/half fish, half fish/ half-mammal etc. None of these have ever been found, despite countless investigations into the fossil record. Isn’t that a kind of major hindrance to the whole thing? None of these ‘monkeys’ and ‘lemurs’ in an exact line of descent to man have been found, simply use your imagination to fill in the gaps. Also there is practically nothing about a skeleton to indicate the bodylines of the animal that owned it. We are left to fill in so many gaps for ourselves. Carefully placing human and monkey bones in museum glass cases next to each other, doesn’t validate evolutionary sequencing. There have been numerous documented fossil frauds down the years where man has tried to authenticate evolutions existence using the bones of pigs or monkeys. This merely proves the decrepit sinful state of man in need of a savior and does not justify Darwin’s hypothesis.
- What Stopped the Evolutionary Process? Why? Because God created us in his own image that’s why. Why has the evolutionary clock stopped now all of a sudden? If we descended from apes then why is there not a shadow of an evolutionary change in my 50,000 year old Grandpa (a primate living in the Congo right now)? That’s what I want to know from the scientists. Some scientist’s have us believe that in 5 to 10 generations apes could have transformed into homo-sapiens. If we used simple germs as an example, we know it would take 50,000 to 50,000,000 years to go from say a typhoid to malaria germ. They are contradicting themselves; it’s one or the other.
- Embryos Do Not Propagate: It’s impossible to produce an apple seed from apple seed without first producing an apple tree and second, producing an apple. Caterpillars do not produce caterpillars; they produce butterflies, which produce eggs from lava, which hatch to produce caterpillars. Evolution demands embryos to be directly productive, yet these embryonic forms live side by side. If they really were embryonic and in the line of man’s descent, then human mothers would give birth to lemur babies, or some further removed form. No friends, these boundaries have been set by God and are never to be breached, unless science in the form of trans-humanism chooses to do so.
- The Sterility of Hybrids: A true hybrid is a cross between individuals of distinct species. Let’s remember that breeding can induce changes of individuals within a species but such changes do not change the species. Crosses produce true hybrids and such hybrids are sterile. It is true that there have been very few reports of hybrids that were fertile. In fact it rarely ever occurs in mammals, birds or reptiles. A mule for example is a hybrid and offspring of a donkey and a horse, which are typically sterile.
- The Question of ‘Reversion to Type’: It is possible to improve varieties within a species by carefully controlled breeding. Let’s say we use a Clydesdale horse as an example, which is a cross between a Cob and a Flemish Horse. If you were then to place a dozen or so of these prime Clydesdale specimens together (male and female) then every time, the progeny would return to the original Cob and the Flemish types. This is ‘reversion to type’ and is a biological fact. It’s in clear opposition to the evolutionary hypothesis.
- The Unexplained, but Admitted, Failure of Evolution at Unexpected and Unpredictable Times: Many scholars agree there is no proof whatsoever of organic evolution, so why then surmise that this will take place in the Animal Kingdom? If there were but one species that remain unchanged, we might by a stretch of the imagination accept it as the exception to the rule. However, reality states there are hundreds of these species that remain unchanged, a fact that is admitted by even the most dogged evolutionists.
- Conflict of the Theories of Evolution with Available Records: Archaeology has proven conclusively that man has had a fluctuating experience throughout history. He has traveled more nearly a circuitous route rather than an uphill climb. In Mesopotamia he’s gone from civilization almost to the depths of savagery and back again, some four or five times. Egyptian records tell almost exactly the same story. The conclusion is unavoidable; the earliest traces of man as far as records go are of a simple yet nonetheless civilized culture. Man did not build up to a civilized state, he started there. The idea that man has developed from a bestial state of savagery is based upon theory that is diameterically opposed to every fact thus far discovered and goes against the biblical record. Man has been building complex structures and forging iron and brass for Millennia (Gen 11:9 and Gen 4:22). It is not a recent discovery after years of adaptation.
- The Co-Existence of Types: It’s now a well known and generally accepted fact that some types, formerly supposed to have descended the one from the other, have actually lived side by side, e.g. our modern day horse was believed to have descended from a three toed animal the size of a fox (eohippus). Then one day the remains of our modern day horse ‘hippus’ was discovered in the same drift with “eohippus” and the bubble burst on that one. The same can be said of other species including man, who have lived ‘side by side’ with apes from the earliest traces. We have con-currently existed with all animal and vegetable types throughout the Millennia. Species can and have, of course become extinct for various environmental reasons. In fact the Biblical record speaks of Dinosaurs and man living side by side (Deut 23:33, Neh 2:13, Job 30:29, Job 40:15-17, Psalm 74:14). Examples of these Dinosaurs are the Leviathan and Behemoth, mentioned in the archaic Book of Job.
- The Constant Number of Species: The number of species on the planet has remained constant since the Tertiary period. This completely dismisses the entire basis of evolutionary theory. It states clearly that life has evolved from one single form, to form all various orders, families, varieties etc. as are found today. If that were true the number of species would of necessity be a constantly and regularly increasing one. Yet these evolutionists still harp on about this single form hypothesis.
- The Question of Method: There are several theories, Darwinism speaks of ‘survival of the fittest’, Lamarck preferred the ‘use and disuse of faculties’ and Yung and Boffon favored ‘adaptation in a modified form’. However none of these will stand the simple test any child can apply. If it’s survival of the fittest, then the ‘fully clawed’ domesticated house cat has outclassed the fearsome Tyrannosaurus Rex. Also the humble rabbit and dog have outlived the Saber Tooth Tiger, Mastodons and Woolly Mammoth. In fact the only remaining reptilia on earth today are the smallest and weakest ones. This friend is not survival of the fittest, although I’ve seen some nasty Miniature Poodles and Chihuahua’s in my time. Also Lamarck’s theory of redundancy does not apply to apes for example. Some have no tails, which are extremely good climbers in the wild, which live alongside other monkeys with long tails that are equally good climbers. His theory would be that one species has lost its tail as it evolves….why? It is still an excellent climber? Why lose the tail? The reason exists in the mind of the creator who created all things for his own good pleasure and by design.
- The Preservation of Species Lines: Modifications of characteristics in an individual are not transmitted naturally and do not tend to change the species. Occasionally individuals are born with abnormal or distinctive characteristics. Some individuals have been born with mutations and these have entered the gene pool due to man’s corrupted state. Actually this is so rare as to sink into insignificance when compared to the species as a whole. Despite these ‘throwbacks’ as the evolutionists call them (e.g. dwarfs, albinos, giant’s etc.) they do not transmit their unique characteristics. They usually disappear in the first generation, only to have normal offspring. In fact it’s being investigated that these are a product of glandular deficiency or abnormality and not the result of heritage at all. We know that God gives these people greater grace to cope with these difficulties.
- The Mystery of Skin Color: It has been found that all men are from the same species but colored man would not run concurrently in the progressive evolutionary system. The cause of skin color is ‘Melanin’. All skin colors and tones stemmed from one man, Adam who had the DNA from which all skin colors could be propagated in time. Indeed, this same substance—a dark brown pigment called ‘Melanin’—colours the skin of all humans. Individuals that have much Melanin appear to have ‘black’ skin; people that have fewer allocations of it, appear ‘white’. Melanin is produced by organelles called melanosomes, contained in special cells called melanocytes. Melanocytes are located in the bottom layer of the skin, and produce melanin with the aid of tyrosinase and other enzymes. People with lighter-coloured skin have smaller, fewer and less dense melanosomes than darker-skinned people.
- The Mathematical Difficulty Based on Current Population: Let’s do the math. A constant life span in species is the rule rather than the exception. It’s very easy to determine the rate of increase of the human species, which is one of the least prolific compared to other species. Beginning with Abram (2160 B.C.) and following the scriptural account, we can conclude 2000 B.C. to be the commencement of the Jewish people. Let’s use 1960 A.D. as an arbitrary Datum. In 1960 there were 16-18 million Jews worldwide, including New York City. Thus we find that the descendants of Jacob have doubled themselves 23.5 times in the 4000 years since the marriage of Jacob to his two wives. We can therefore extrapolate this conclusion for humanity as a whole. If we date the flood to be 3500 B.C. approx., and begin with a family of eight (which was the number in the ark) and use the same ratio of increase for 5500 years since the time of the flood, we would estimate that in 1960 there should be about 2.6 Billion children of our father Noah, on the planet. To confirm our calculations, in 1960 the World Almanac estimated the population of the globe to be 2.5 billion people and if we project this same ratio of increase forward; the population projection remains close to 7 billion, which is today’s population. Now, if we do the same calculation for the evolutionists, starting at 50,000 years ago as the beginning of humanity and using the same rate of increase in population as for the sons of Jacob (not accounting for wars, famines etc.), then the human family would have doubled itself more than 294 times. If this were true, every surface of the earth including the water mass would be covered in people to a height of 13 miles deep!! Evolutionists also say that the human race would not begin with one trio but with a large number of trios, further dispelling evolutionary theory based upon current population estimates. Wait, there’s more, remember there are some 3 million animal species alone and most of them are much more prolific than the human species. We haven’t even considered them yet, and if we did, there wouldn’t be room to move an inch on this planet, being swamped by humans, animals and excrement, consuming it’s entire land and water mass.
- The Desperate Attempts of Evolutionists to Crush all Opposition to their Doctrine: We grant the right of every man to ‘freedom of speech’ so long as his speech is not offensive to decency and morals. If you want to make yourself unpopular in any sphere of worldly society just announce that you do not believe in evolution. The favorite answer by scientists to any creationist’s objection is usually that “No scientist would deny the fact of evolution“, my friend, the truth is that, “no ‘right minded’ scientist would affirm evolution as fact”.
The issue my friend has and always will come down to the question of accountability. If man evolved, there is no sin, if there is no sin, man is not accountable for it, therefore Christ died in vain. If Christ died in vain, then what do we need God for? Today’s secularists esteem self-worship, where man serves himself and concocts his own genesis to justify his sinful condition. A more apt truth is that Satan has blinded people to the Gospel, utilizing man’s reasoning’s for his own gain (2 Cor 4:4).
Don’t believe the lies of today’s culture, choose today whom you will serve (Joshua 24:15).
 “Why I Accept the Genesis Record: An Answer to Evolution (1963)” by John Raymond Hand.
|Senior Pastor Carl Joseph desires to see God move in power in the downtown Denver area. He is joined in the ministry by his wife, Amy. In his spare time, he rides his motorcycle and plays golf.|