So far, we’ve examined:
- There is an absolute moral standard in the universe.
- There is something greater than myself
- That something set up those absolute moral standards.
- That Something greater who has set up moral standards will someday judge me according to those standards.
- If the Universe exists, it either has always been there, or it has been created.
- If it was created, it had a creation.
- If it had a creation, it had a creator.
- If I see something moving, I recognize that a force or energy was applied to that something to make it move.
- A+B=C. If C = 0 and A =0 then B = 0. If A =0 and B=0, then C cannot equal “Everything”
- There’s no reason why we have universal laws.
- If we did not have protons, would the laws of nature work? No. By that very concept, we identify that the kinds of materials the universe is made of are DESIGNED to cooperate with the very laws that were put in place.
- It is nearly impossible to know A+B=c if you don’t know the value of A or B
- The same scientist who popularized the Big Bang theorry also proposed the Oscillating State theory, which is contradictory
- Red light spectrum shifts may be objects receding from us, gravity bending the light, or objects between us and the star. We cannot say for sure at this time.
- There is not enough background radiation to account for the Big Bang
- radio waves from space are probably just the sounds of comets, stars and planets
- Triangulation to determine the distance of starts is not accurate past a certain point, as the error factor becomes too great
- The laws of thermodynamics prevent the Big Bang or Evolution for that matter to be valid science
- Gambler’s Ruin decrees that sooner or later the gambler loses – so the Big Bang and Evolution should have degenerated into chaos and death long before life arose.
- Space is a vacuum. Prior to the creation of the universe, there was nothing to slow down particles once accelerated. After the Big Bang, all the subatomic particles should have just kept flinging on into space… forever.
- There was nothing to cause the subatomic particles to form atoms and molecules. Still no satisfactory explanation from Science how this happened.
- Gas is too nebulous and lacks sufficient weight and mass to start the attraction of elements to one another, and would not have compacted into ultra-dense objects to become stars.
- We lack discovery of any active proto-stars or stage 1 stars, required for the theory of the birth of stars.
- We lack any organizing external force to cause any of the elements to change into heavy metals such as Uranium necessary to cause the star to explode from compacting.
- If the first and second laws of Thermodynamics prevent all of this from “Just happening”, what external force caused it to happen?
- Compacting gasses requires some external force.
- Gas is composed of elements very low on the periodic table. It has VERY little weight, and almost no mass.
- Science truly has no way to explain stars, solar systems and galaxies.
- Science has conflicting theories about how planets formed, all of which lack evidence
- We should be crowded with plutoids and planets if the Universe is as old as Evolutionists claim – and yet we’re not.
- According to evolutionists, the earth had no air when the planet was first created, and the rocks absorbed it. (Huh?)
- most so-called fossil evidence is actually plaster. Many exhibits are constructed from a few actual bones. One species of “primitive man” was constructed from a single tooth, which turned out to be… from a pig. Oops.
- The Schoolbooks still present a long time between the creation of the Earth, and the origin of life – but Gould wrote that the evidence shows that life arose on Earth “as soon as it cooled enough to support it.”
- A simple display of logic blows huge holes in the theory of Evolution – any living thing that spontaneously was created would have to have a way to take in nutrition, process that nutrition, excrete wastes, and duplicate itself. The odds against that rise so phenomenally high that it has to be discarded as impossible.
- The Miller-Urey experiments were deliberately conducted in a way to produce favorable results – and still produced nothing more than amino acids that could not have supported life, and were insufficient in number to have sustained life.
- Scientists are now convinced that all of the parameters used by Miller-Urey were incorrect.
- If science is still going to champion Miller-Urey, they need to redo the experiment with the correct parameters.
- I will buy and mail a King James Bible at my own expense to any scientist who reduplicates the Miller-Urey experiments with the correct parameters, for helping to disprove evolution.
- The odds of a complete DNA-RNA strand and the correct m-RNA, Amino Acids, s-RNA etc. arising by chance is 10 to the 600th power – far beyond the level mathematicians dismiss as impossible.
- The odds of dropping 200 decks of cards and having them all land in order by suite are roughly comparable to the odds of DNA-RNA arising by chance.
- The argument of “top of the food chain” is flawed.
- There are many animals with more chromosomes than human beings, including shrimp and crayfish. At least we have more than a mouse.
- the various methods of carbon dating an object make a number of assumptions, some of which have already been proven inaccurate, as far back as 1930
- The various methods of carbon dating an object fail to take many variables into account that can skew the results greatly.
- Science once advocated “Spontaneous generation”, invented to explain the appearance of mice in clothing left in a corner. Science has returned to that theory.
- The major error of spontaneous generation is that you’d need two “happy monsters” appearing at roughly the same narrow window of time, and very close to one another geographically. The odds against this are now multiplied so drastically they fall far below the “Vanishing point” of probability.
- mutations are usually the result of something lost or corrupted in the genetic code (or the random repeating of existing code, such as a sixth finger), and not added.
- There are no historic examples of any mutations adding something to their genetic code and passing them on down to successive generations.
- most mutations are hazardous to the host, and usually result in their early death
- DNA-RNA is locked like a combination lock, and makes evolution and “adaptation”/”natural selection” impossible
- Evolutionists rarely consider the hundreds of transitory stages required to deviate from one species to another.
- The steps of transitory change from T-Rex to Pelican creates so many difficulties for survival as to contradict “adaptation”/”natural selection”
- we have no “fossil record” showing transitory phases between any one kind of animal and another, when we should see thousands of transitory fossils between T-rex and bird, and anyn other kind of animal and any other. Embarrassingly, we’ve got nothing except conjecture for two animals whom we have only a couple of bones from, and whom scientists posit as two intermediary stages for whales.
- the slow development of wings on the T-rex would have made it impossible for him to evolve, as eventually the transitory stages would have killed by starvation all Trexes that reached the midway point.
- There’s no need to T-rex to have evolved smaller if he’d developed suddenly wings and flight.
- Animals do not evolve smaller. they end up that way temporarily if they are deprived sufficient food during development.
- A catastrophe would have been too quick for the T-rex to begin a slow, gradual evolution to bird.
- All the fossil record proves is that these animals died.
- The Cambrian Explosion refutes the theory of evolution, in that all the living beings on earth appeared at once, fully formed, with no transitory forms
- The Geologic Column is not consistent worldwide, and often does not conform to the theory
- The geologic column is far more consistent with a worldwide flood than with the “Billions of years/slow gradual rise and change of life” model that science likes to portray
- All the fossil record proves is that something died
- petrification takes places much faster than evolution claims, perhaps only a year.
- By Darwin’s own admission, his theory relies on progressive, slight modifications over a large period of time to create organs – or his theory breaks down.
- The respiratory, circulatory and pulmonary systems are all interrelated – how did this evolve? The absence of one causes the host animal to die.
- How could an animal live with only one of the first five stages of any of those systems?
- What advantage would the host animal gain from having a rudimentary heart, but no blood or oxygen?
- What advantage was passed onto the host animal from the first elementary five stages of the development of the eye? There must be a demonstrable advantage for the host animal to pass on that genetic code.
- The Trilobite, supposedly one of the first animals, had an incredibly sophisticated eye – no rudimentary eye can be seen.
- There are only 26 places on earth where the fossil record for the most part resembles the geologic column. There are over 50,000 that do not.
- Evolution has no proof of cross-kind divergence (rodent to dog), but rather, turns to inter-kind breeding (Wolf to German Shepherd) to prove its theory
- There is no missing link – there should be millions of missing links. The whole chain is missing.
- Science is observable and demonstrable. Evolution is neither.
- The Grand Canyon bears evidence of having been created in a universal flood, only a few thousand years ago.
- There have been quite a few “Early Man” finds that later were revealed to be hoaxes, simply monkeys of one kind or another, actual human remains, or even in one case a pig.
- These same hoaxes or errors often remain in textbooks long after being disproved
Short one today.
I’ll repeat a point today before we get too far into this. Evolution emphasizes mutations as the catalyst for the change – essentially, something is born accidentally with a wart, and the wart somehow passes beneficial information on. “I’m going to be a pair of wings!!!”
Apparently, the wart must somehow be a prophet to predict this, and the organism gratefully adapts, adding information upon information until it has wings.
Well, mutations don’t work this way. Mutations are often the removal of existing information, the corruption of existing information, or the re-adding of existing information. For instance, most of the mutations that are cited are extra heads or extra toes.
Sadly, the reality is that two-headed fish and turtles don’t seem to do that well. And after all the two-headed turtles that have been born, if it was a successful adaptation, some species somewhere in the world would have two heads by now if Evolution was true.
Here’s why it’s not evolution – the animal already had one head. Now it has two heads. It’s not the appearance of the head on an animal without one.
Okay, we’ve moved onto primates. We keep hearing a chimpanzee is 98% human. Well, as more research is done in the genomes and DNA/RNA, it turns out that this is not the case. the “99% human” that the media triumphantly reported has slipped, and is not as high as previously reported (notice that the press bumped it up a percent? And in one article I recall reading, they actually later on in the article claimed Chimpanzees were identical to humans, which added ANOTHER percent). The more they know and understand of the DNA chain, the less they talk about this claim. They actually moved onto bonobos as being “Superior” to chimps.
If we descended from an ape, why do we have a different number of vertebrae in our backbones than apes have? — Science Vs. Evolution, Vance Ferrell, pg. 539
So, supposedly we came from chimps or bonobos. Sadly, there’s no proof. Remember, we’re not looking for a “missing link”. Transitional evolutionary stages need to be found, and we simply just don’t have them. If we posit 50 transitional stages (which is extremely low!), we’re missing how many transitory stages for evolution if we believe the chimp – bonobo-man tree? Well, we need… 49.
The achilles heel of evolution – the missing proof.
This is a lengthy quote from “Science Vs. Evolution” by Vance Ferrell, a highly recommended book. See page 520.
1) Why is it that, each time, only one specimen is found? Why not hundreds or thousands of them? If these are our ancestors, there should be millions of specimens. There are so many people alive today, there should have been large numbers of half ape people alive during that “million years” that men are said to have lived on this planet. Indeed, evolution teaches uniformitarianism, the concept that past climates and living conditions were essentially like those we have now in the world.
(2) Why are only little pieces of bone found for each specimen—never a complete skeleton? Is this not reading a lot into almost no evidence? Or is it possible that the less found, the
easier it is to try to make unfounded claims for it? (Later in this chapter we learn that if only parts of bones are found, their positions can be moved about to imitate half-ape skulls and jaws.)
(3) Although bones decay in a few years in damper regions, and in a few centuries in drier regions,—why is it that these special bones did not decay even though they are supposed to be “a million years old”? The very possibility, that these “million-year-old bones” are not supposed to have decayed, makes it all the more certain that there ought to be millions of other bones lying Ancient Man around belonging to our ancestors! There are millions living to day, if people have lived on earth for a million years,—the earth should be filled with the bones of our ancestors!
(4) How could “million-year-old bones” possibly be found in damp earth (not encased within solid rock) in Indonesia, China, and England? Yet the evolutionists claim that such bones have been found, as we shall learn below.
In an article about the grand opening of the International Louis Leakey Memorial Institute for African Prehistory (TILLMIAP) in Nairobi, Kenya, *Lewin wrote this: “Perhaps more than any other science, human prehistory is a highly personalized pursuit, the whole atmosphere reverberating with the repeated collisions of oversized egos. The reasons are not difficult to discover. For a start, the topic under scrutiny—human origins—is highly emotional, and there are reputations to be made and public acclaim to be savoured for people who unearth ever older putative human ancestors. But the major problem has been the pitifully small number of hominid fossils on which prehistorians exercise their imaginative talents.”—*Roger Lewin, “A New Focus for African Prehistory,” in New Scientist, September 29, 1977, p. 793.
ONLY BONE PIECES— One problem, as indicated above, is all that these experts work with is such things as jaw fragments, broken skull pieces, and parts of other bones. No complete or even half-complete skeleton, linking man with the rest of animals has ever been found. But, working with pieces collected here and there, imagination can produce most wonderful “discoveries.” In some instances, some of the pieces have been found at some distance from the rest of the fragments.
Think about it. If there’s no evidence, the theory is busted.
God created man. That’s all there is to it. God created YOU, and wants to have a relationship. But your sins separate you from God. One sin is enough to condemn you to hell. God doesn’t want you to go there, so He came to earth as a human being, and died in your place.
It’s as if you were stranded in the ocean because your ship sank, and a boat comes along. “Get on board, here’s a life preserver!” “Sorry, I don’t like your boat. Besides, I think I can swim to England. I’ll be fine.”
No, you’d drown or die from exposure, or be eaten by sharks long before you get to England. Jesus is standing there, begging you, pleading with you, for you to be saved.
Do it now, before its too late.