Atheism & Evolution Answered 24 – Hovind 3


 

Advertisements

Atheism & Evolution Answered 21


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.

Atheism & Evolution Answered 20


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 theory 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 any 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 lving 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

I’m going to backtrack a bit, since some of my very first contentions apparently upset some people, which was of course not my intentions.

At least two people objected to the definition of Atheist as “One who does not believe there is a God.” I’m using it in its politest sense. The actual definition stems from its translation from the Greek: A (no, against, without) The’os (God).

Literally it means “without God” or “against God.

The New Atheists, I am told, often hold to a position of “We do not know for sure there is a God” or “we cannot know whether there is a God or not” – which would be A (no, against, without) Gnosis (knowledge). A Gnostic, in the common vernacular.

The argument that was cited against me was The Appeal to the Group: “Most atheists I know hold to the second definition.” That’s known as the Lemmings argument. Our parents often dealt with that by asking, “And if all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you?” Saying “all my friends call themselves doctors” when they’ve never been to medical school would be a fallacious argument, so the appeal to the group is not a valid refutation.

Ray Comfort and Kent Hovind both repeat the fact that most Atheists are in face Agnostics, which does appear to be the case. I would rather use the correct term myself. And again I apologize if it makes anyone angry. If you’re NOT an Atheist, and you object to the first couple of articles which dealt with Atheism, I woud suggest you save your ire for any articles dealing with agnosticism. Which – there’s not going to be any.

If you don’t know if there’s a God, I have plenty of writings (and more on the way) in which I will deal at length with this issue. Indeed, I already dealt with quite a few common objections to the existence of God. If someone is seeking, I will help.

And while my critics have rightfully pointed out I should not say what another persons reasons are – I’ll reply by saying that on your own blogs, you do this far more often when speaking of Christians than I did about Atheists – which you even admit not to being.

However, I will say this – you took offense at what I described in the very first article as MY thought process, MY reasoning. I can only assume that subconsciously it echoed your own for my talking about MY OWN rationale to have offended at least three people.

Let’s move at last to the Absolute Moral standard.

This is actually an sociological study. A quick comparison of moral codes and laws of cultures all over the world show that many forbid the same activities. Like, killing your next door neighbor and eating them. This points to a common reference of thinking. It usually takes famine to reduce a group to cannibalism. Yes, some cultures used cannibalism in warfare to show the ultimate contempt for a foe. Again, this points right back to the absolute moral standard: “I despise you so much I an willing to violate the most basic taboos concerning you.” I point to the Maori’s who would stick their tongues out at their opponents before battle. The meaning? “I’m going to eat you.” The absolute contempt depicted showed a willingness to violate basic taboos.

Murder, theft, and rape are almost universally condemned in almost every culture. If we are products of blind chance, then there’s no reason to have these taboos, or laws against these acts. It might be argued that if I were to beat a person and take their belongings, evolution would approve of that act. Why? Survival of the fittest. But this action is universally outlawed. Earliest cultures can be shown to sometimes have the most violent reactions to such behavior, such as death or disfigurement. If you didn’t learn not to steal after the first time, you lost the ability to do so, unless you could pick someone’s pocket with your teeth.

The laws enacted by these cultures are there to protect you. As my father used to say, “There’s always a bigger horse.”

The understanding these are deviant behaviors point to a common understanding of what is right and wrong. Indeed, the most basic understanding of mental illness is an incapacity to tell right from wrong. Or in the case of sociopaths, an incapability to understand how those two concepts apply to themselves.

This points to an understanding there is something higher than ourselves. I’m going to come right out and tell you that’s God. That’s your first evidence there is a God, the Absolute Moral Code.

The whole case for Christianity can be made in a matter of minutes of simple logic and deduction. If there’s a creation, there’s a creator. If there’s an absolute moral code, then there’s a source for it. And it points to a Holy God, who determines by His very nature what is right and wrong. If you violate what is right and commit what is wrong, then this is a sin.

There’s no obvious way encoded in human nature to remove sins. If I offend you and apologize, it’s not going to immediately remove the hurt or anger incurred. I have to restore myself to your good graces eventually.

We’ve got no way to remove our sins. If we are condemned by our sins, that means God must then dispose of them for us. Why? You can’t do it. There’s no WAY to remove your own sins. So God has to do it.

Christianity is the only religion on earth in which God Himself must pay for our own sins, because we’re incapable of it. God loves you that much He came to earth and died for you. It’s a free gift, yours for the choosing, to accept that free offer.

I actually cannot see why anyone would not avail themselves of that forgiveness. Especially when a few minutes thinking of a Holy God’s nature would show that there must be a judgment for sin.

So, choose. Eternal punishment for your own sins, or complete forgiveness, absolutely free. Your choice. You have the REST OF YOUR LIFE to choose.

I recommend choosing now, since you have absolutely no idea how much longer that will be.

Common objection: “If there’s a God, why doesn’t He tell us He exists?”

Answer: He does. He left you a book.

Common objection: “Why should I accept the Bible? It’s one book out of many.”

Answer: That’s a completely different question. There’s enough proofs for Christianity, and enough things that set it apart from other religions. Like – this empty tomb in Jerusalem. Nobody else has a God that came to earth, died for mankind, and rose from the dead physically. We say the Holy Bible is inspired of God. You can of course wait until He returns, but i’m just going to say – if you’ve never read the book of Revelation, you’re going to have to live through everything between chapter’s 4 through the end. You might want to read it. The odds of you personally living through the Tribulation are extremely low.

I’d choose Jesus now, before it’s too late. Because the moment that “…every eye shall see Him” is the TOO LATE moment.

Recommended reading –

  1. Revelation
  2. Gospel of John
  3. Gospel of Matthew
  4. Gospel of Mark
  5. Gospel of Luke
  6. Romans
  7. 1 John (the first epistle of John)

If you remain unconvinced after this, re-read. And try this: praying. See if God answers you. You might be surprised.

Atheism & Evolution Answered 19


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 neccessary 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 periodics 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, Amoni 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 comparible 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. Embarassingly, 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 developement 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 lving 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 pulminary 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 Sherpherd) 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.

Paleontology. It’s as lacking in concrete evidence as the other forms of Evolutionary science we’ve looked at.

“What about cavemen?” Okay, what about them? The skull of “Cro-Magnon” man bears astonishing resemblance to modern Scandinavian skulls. “Cro-Magnon” habitations were buildings, with paved floors, art, kilns, baked pottery, musical instruments, sewn clothing, and stone ovens. In other words, pretty sophisticated for fur wearing club carrying cavemen. And artifacts and skeletons of modern men can be found in the same sites and “strata” as the Cro-Magnon, and Neanderthals. Meaning – science is choosing to ignore the fossil evidence that modern man (Homo sapiens) existed at the same time and place, living side by side with “Cro-Magnon”. In other words – there’s no such thing as “Cro-Magnon.”

What about Neanderthal? Well, their brain cavity is as big as yours. And A. C. J. Cage examined the skeleton of the Neanderthal in the 1950’s – and pronounced it to be the skeleton of an elderly human male with arthritis . So, “Cro-Magnon” and “Neanderthal” never existed. Similar problems exist for “Homo Habilus” and “Homo Erectus”. Both had apparently sophisticated standards of living, and complex tools. In what way is this “primitive man”? Primitive man never existed. That’s a conclusion so easy to come to, even an Evolutionist can do it.

“They (the bones of Neanderthal) belong to people and do not prove evolution.” — Thomas Huxley

“the bones were those of modern men afflicted with rickets and arthritis.” Rudolph Virchow, Ger man anatomist

Marcellin Boule was one of the first to theorize Neanderthal might be a proto-human or early human – and was ridiculed by his peers. Anatomists and medical professionals had already shown Neanderthal was merely aged human beings with arthritis.

In 1908 a typical Neanderthal skeleton was found in Poland. It had been buried in a suit of chain armor that was not yet fully rusted (“Neanderthal in Armour,” in *Nature, April 23, 1908, p. 587).

Neanderthals in armor. Wow. You gotta admit, that would be a fierce battle! As long as they gripped the flail by the right part! “Don’t like swords – handle sharp.”

“Lucy?” Some of the bones mixed in with “Lucy” were found almost a mile away but were crushed. The alleged measurements of those bones are unverifiable – as the scientists guessed what the measurements would have been if they hadn’t been crushed. There is no guarantee that Lucy’s skeleton included these bone fragments. One scientist (Leakey – the poster child of anthropologists) has dismissed “Lucy” as being “Imagination plus plaster of Paris”, and points out that Lucy’s skull may be two mismatched skull halves mistakenly put together. With these suspected bones removed, one scientist points out that “Lucy” is identical to the skeleton of a modern female chimpanzee, and that “Lucy’s pelvic bone would have produced a child about the size of a newborn chimpanzee. If it looks like a chimp and walks like a chimp, and gives birth to a chimp…

And none of the other “Early Man” specimens are any more scientific than the Neanderthal or Cro-Magnon. Indeed, less so – we have more “evidence” of “Cro-Magnon” and “Neanderthal” than we do “Homo Habilus”. “Habilus”, by the way, has been re-examined and determined to be the remains of an Ape – not a human. Back in the 1980’s . Have the museums removed all the exhibits yet, I wonder? No? They were quick to remove Pluto from their list of planets!

Did man descend from the apes? Our DNA is different from that of each of the apes, monkeys, and all the rest. The number of vertebrae in our backbone is different from that in the apes. Our cranial (brain) capacity is totally different from the great apes.

Orangutans . . . . . . 275-500 cc.

Chimpanzees . . . . . 275-500 cc.

Gorillas . . . . . . . . . 340 -752 cc.

Man . . . . . . . . . . . .1100 -1700 cc.

— Vance Ferrell, The Evolution Cruncher, pg. 544

Again, we’re struck with the fact that there should be millions of missing links, transitory stages between monkey, great ape, primitive man, and modern man. Yet we’re confronted with Neanderthals, Cro-magnons, Homo Habilus, Homo Erectus – all full formed as species. Not quite conclusively, as the number of authentic fossils of “Early man” are MUCH smaller than what we were led to believe.

Eyewitness accounts in Australia show that people literally were murdered for their skeletons. There was a mass shooting of an Aboriginal tribe, whose bodies were skinned according to eyewitnesses… and only the skeletons taken. Why? For museum exhibits. If this account is true, then some of these skeletons in museums in England and America and Canada are actually evidence of mass murder. And they are passed off as being “two million years old”. No, less than a century.

That’s the fruit of Evolution. Mass murder. Darwins teachings influenced Stalin, and Hitler. If we’re all just animals, then it’s easier to butcher countless millions – like killing cattle.

In addition, it is strange that if man is essentially the same as he was a million years ago, then why did he only begin leaving writings, buildings, and artifacts during no more than the last few thousand years? Why does human history only go back less than 5,000 years? – – Vance Ferrell, The Evolution Cruncher, pg. 544

the evidence cannot be found. Indeed, there should be all kinds of transitory changes, some of which there is no evolutionary need for.

Several differences between man and ape:

(1) Birth weight as a percent of maternal weight is, in man, almost twice that of the great apes (5.5 vs. 2.4-4.1), but about the same or less than that found in monkeys (5-10) and in gib bons (7.5).

(2) Order of eruption of teeth is the same in man and in the Old World monkeys, but it is different than that of the great apes.

(3) Walking upright is quite different. Man and the gibbon walk habitually upright; the great apes do not. As with the other teachings of evolution, scientific facts are on the side of the creationists; and the evolutionists, and their incredulous theories are outside the domain of scientific fact, discovery, and law.

(4) The neck hinge is at the back on man, but at the front on the ape.

– – Vance Ferrell, The Evolution Cruncher, pg. 546

Java man (Pithecanthus Erectus). One of the embarassing finds. A skull cap found by a college dropout. He finds a femur a year later in the same general area, and three teeth fifty feet away. Dubois assumed that all artifacts were from the same person, and had to be a million years old. He names it Java Man. in 1907, German scientists, feeling something was amiss with the entire story, went to Java to search, after recieving little help and much evasion from Dubois. The Trinil site was thoroughly excavated, and the scientists analyzed their findings, declaring the entire expedition a waste of time. The Java site was buried by volcanic eruption, and animal and human bones were intermingled under the ash flow. (apparently a pyroclastic style eruption, rather than strombolian).
After Java man was debunked by scientists who examined the remains critically, Dubois finally admitted the skullcap and teeth probably belonged to a gibbon.
Piltdown Man (Eoanthropus dawsoni). Found in 1912, it was heralded as the evidence long looked for. A dentist reported in 1916 that the teeth had been filed down – but was ignored.
until 1953, when Weiner & Oakley examined it again, and found that science had been bamboozled by outright fakery.
Rhodesian Man: Had a bullet or arrow hole in his head. dfiscovered in 1921, was assumed to be primitive man until an anatomist analyzed it later and discovered – it was just a regular human skeleton.
Taung African Man: found in 1924. In the textbooks for a number of years. Now dismissed as a young ape.
Nebraska Man – constructed imagitively from a single tooth. Which later turned out to be from a pig. But not before exhibits and drawings were made of Nebraska Man and Mrs. Nebraska Man. That’s pretty good reproduction from a tooth to tell what Mr. Pig’s wife looked like as well!!! Incidentally, “Nebraska Man” was some of the key evidence introduced at the Scopes Trial. The single tooth was lauded as being “the herald of anthropoid apes in America” and “Speaking volumes of truth” (Henry F. Osborn). Osborn proceeded to ridicule William Jennings Bryan at the Scopes Trial, thanks to his conviction Mr. Pig was the best evidence for Evolution.
Peking Man (Sinanthropus pekinensis): Found in 1927, again, a single tooth. The Rockefeller foundation financed the excavation for a few more years, and a few more bones were found. Nobody ever mentioned to Rockefeller it was in a garbage dump, which held over 150 feet of animal bones with a few human skulls mixed in. The Skulls had been smashed in the back, as if the victims of cannibalism. How the dig proceeded for years and only yielding a tooth suggests that Davidson Black was not too systematic or thorough in his excavations. The remains were either lost during the Japanese invasion of World War II, or were packed into a ship which sailed for America – and was sunk. Peking Man has NO authentic fossils – all are plaster “recreations”. In the 1950’s, Java Man and Peking Man were placed in a category called “Homo Erectus”. I was taught about “Homo Erectus” in 1979 in school – this was some 40 years after Java Man was debunked, and after all fossil remains of Peking Man were lost, stolen or sunk.
Homo Erectus – See above. Looking pretty bad for H. E. when the only fossil remains we have for H. E. were debunked by 1930!
Australopithecus & Homo Habilus – now thought to be just – apes. Amazingly, my father had been convinced by Australopithecus to be the missing link, and proof for evolution. Sorry, Dad. See Some Implications of Variant Cranial Capacities for the Best-preserved Australopithecine Skull Specimens,” by GeraldDuffert (Creation Research Society Quarterly, September 1983, pp. 96-104)

“The ape-like profile of Australopithecus is so pronounced that its outline can be superimposed on that of a female chimpanzee with a remarkable closeness of fit, and in this respect and others it stands in strong contrastto modern man.”—*J.S. Weiner, The Natural History of Man (1973).

Nutcracker Man – Found by Louis Leakey. Eventually, Leakey admitted it was probably an ape. The finding of nearby stone tools had led him to speculate wildly it was a proto-human.
Now for the question – how many of these can still be found in school textbooks, and in Museums?

Atheism & Evolution Answered 18


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 periodics 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 lving 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.

Boy, I tell ya… you can’t set a bowl of Jelly Bellies in front of me. I don’t care how full I get, I’ll just keep snacking on that sugary goodness! I’m actually a little queasy right now, and the only reason I stopped was because… well, the bowl’s empty.

I can hear ten thousand Evolutionists saying, “Amen, brother!” It’s like Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream. Ya just can’t stop until it’s empty. Well, I’ve gotten enough willpower to stop halfway through, put it up, and pull it out the next day and finish it. How? By getting full on Jelly Bellies, and realizing that if I save it, I’ll have more tomorrow.

I’m actually running out of stuff to talk about, since i’ve devastated all the major arguments for Evolution. I’m probably not going to make it to 30 days on this subject! So, I’ll quickly move on to the Grand Canyon.

Years ago, a guide for the Grand Canyon wrote a book, and got the gift shop to sell it. His contention was the Grand Canyon was full of evidence for God creating it. Atheists got mad, and had the book pulled. Rumor has it the guide was fired as well, but I haven’t been able to find evidence one way or another.

Supposedly the Grand Canyon was carved over millions of years by the Colorado River.

Impossible.

Why? The entrance to the Grand Canyon is at 1800 feet above the river. The cliff edges rise upwards. Read that sentence again. They rise upwards, gently, for a thousand feet. Now, it doesn’t matter if it’s only a 3% grade. Water doesn’t run uphill.

Atheists and Evolutionists all claim the river ran uphill for millions of years to carve out the canyon. Okay. Sure. Set up a terrain where the water runs uphill by itself at a 3% grade for a thousand foot climb in elevation. Prove it to me. You’re the scientists. I’m just the stupid Bible Fundamentalist, right?

“Well, I can do it using irrigation and aquaducts…”

Nope. Gotta be under its own power like the Colorado River. No Aquaducts. Just terrain going uphill for a thousand foot change in elevation. Go ahead.

“It’s impossible!!”

So tell me how I know you’re not convinced yet?

It goes back to my very first contention. There is an absolute Moral authority in the Universe. All of science points to an origin, a creator. He’s the designer of the absolute moral code.

If you acknowledge Him, you have to acknowledge there is a moral code. A law of God, if you will.

I’ll return to this point in a minute. Let’s finish with the Grand Canyon. What made it then?

Really simple. 4,400 years ago, there was a flood. The higher elevations of the Grand Canyon filled up with water, and eventually, at some point in that year of the waters sloshing back and forth from the pulls of the tides all across the earth, plus quakes (doubtless a lot of seismic disturbances during that year)… At some point the weakest area of the canyon gave way… and the flood carved the canyon out in a manner of minutes.

“wait! There’s all those layers visible from the ice age, and from the various layers of dirt and stone laid down…”

Nope. Those are layers of the levels of the flood going down as the waters receded. That happened much faster than did the theory you have. After all, where’s the erosion between the rock layers? It’s far more consistent with a flood decreasing and receding. after all, as Kent Hovind points out, “You’d think it’d rain a few times in a million years.” There should be heavy erosion between the layers in your theory.

Here’s the point – about 4,500 years ago, God looked out on the early world, and was grieved He’d made mankind. So He ordered Noah to build a boat. Noah did so. Noah also preached for 120 years, telling people that God was going to execute vengeance on the world. nobody listened – the way you’re ignoring this.

Millions drowned, while Noah and family sat safely inside the Ark. There was room, and any of them could have dashed inside the Ark prior to the rains.

The Walt Brown theory has a comet or meteor striking the earth, smashing through a layer of water or ice that surrounded the earth at its beginning.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. Genesis 1:7-8 (KJV)

It wasn’t a gentle rain, with the sewers backing up, until people drowned. It was a devastating deluge of torrential downpours as the water canopy shattered, and descended to the earth. A quick look at the writings of Freeman Dyson would show the water canopy would be MASSIVE amounts of water!

“Wait! That would have generated massive amounts of heat!!!”

Yup. The Hebrew word for the flood is Mevushal, meaning “boiling”.

However, this is counteracted by the waters in the deep – see Genesis 1:7. The waters under the firmament were released when the comet or meteorite struck the earth along an abyssal fault (well, at that time, exposed). The theory places it somewhere near Iceland where it hit. The Earth separated along the seams like a Baseball splitting open.

The waters falling from the sky were met with geysers of water erupting. Now, I use the word Geyser in its non-Icelanding form, as the Geysers were heated springs, volcanic on nature. These geysers, however, would be cool water released under pressure, and would to a certain extent have counteracted the creation of heat from the rain.

I’ll leave it for you to calculate. In the meantime, think about what Noah, over in the Middle East, would have heard as the flood waters rose. The screaming, the pounding on the outside of the Ark, the pleading. The thumps and screams fading off. Then silence eventually. And that would have been the worst of all – knowing that millions just drowned, who scoffed and ignored the message of mercy and salvation, until it was too late.

The Ark for us came 2,000 years ago, to Galilee. In the town of Nazareth, a man lived who was perfect in every way, sinless. God in Human flesh, born of a virgin. He paid the penalty for sin, the breaking of God’s moral code, His holy laws. Jesus kept the laws perfectly, and then took on himself the penalties of our sins.

Little wonder that after Noah left the ark a year later, he got himself good and drunk.