Posted on 10/29/2003 2:48:18 PM PST by GaryL
Evolution: A Fraudulent Theory Finally Exposed
God blessed me with an introspective nature and, as a result, I like to think of myself as somewhat of a “deep thinker.” By that I don’t mean to imply that I’m necessarily an intellectual, but only that I tend to ponder some of the deeper questions of life - the “why are we here?”- type questions.
I agree with historian Paul Johnson who has suggested that the most critical question we can ask ourselves about this life is: does God exist? How we answer this question will determine our particular “world view” – either theistic or naturalistic – and the concomitant ramifications it holds for the way we conduct our lives. Are we really immortal souls made in the image and likeness of God, or are we just a highly evolved species of animal? The answer is profound and there does not appear to be any “middle ground.”
This being the case, a number of years ago I decided to conduct an investigation into the Creation/Evolution debate. As a former biology major, I was well acquainted with the basic theories of Darwinian evolution (mutation, natural selection, survival of the fittest, etc,), but I had never conducted a thorough examination of the arguments favoring creation. Which side did the empirical evidence support? I was also aware of how pervasive evolutionary thinking had become in our culture. Like most science majors, I had been taught that evolution was proven scientific fact. Conversely, I viewed the Book of Genesis as, at most, a collection of allegories or folklore that was never meant to be taken literally by any serious student of the sciences.
I was stunned by what I found. I discovered that I had been severely misled by my teachers and by the scientific establishment, and that there was virtually no unbiased evidence to support evolution. It was an a priori theory, meaning that it was accepted as true in spite of the evidence. And, to my surprise, the vast preponderance of the empirical evidence that did exist actually supported the Biblical model! I found myself being transformed, in spite of myself, from a mildly religious agnostic into a Biblical fundamentalist.
I quickly came to the realization that the scientific establishment seemed to be totally unaware – or perhaps willfully ignorant – of the strong, credible, and continuing challenge to evolution that had erupted in the past decade. This challenge had not arisen from fundamentalist religious circles, but from the secular academic community. The dam started cracking with Dr. Michael Denton’s paradigm-challenging book, Evolution – A Theory in Crisis, which discussed the glaring lack of evidence for evolution from the fossil record down through to the levels of molecular biology and biochemistry. Panic started to set in as one of their own had actually defected to the other side.
The assault continued with Berkeley law professor (Harvard and U. of Chicago educated) Dr. Philip Johnson’s epical book, Darwin on Trial (the first of his five books on this subject), which demonstrated convincingly that the confirmatory evidence for evolution, including the fossil record - which most people have been led to believe was self-evident - was severely lacking. It also displayed the fraudulence willingly engaged in by the Darwinian establishment to keep the theory afloat. Unlike other critics, the highly-respected, highly-credentialed Dr. Johnson could not be dismissed out-of-hand.
Other notable titles along this same theme included: Darwin’s Black Box, by Dr. Michael Behe, which introduced the concept of “irreducible complexity” to reveal the absurdly untenable nature of the basic theory of evolution; and Michael Denton’s later book, Nature’s Destiny, which demonstrated how the laws of science reveal purpose in the universe.
These books and many others in this genre supported the growing consensus among unbiased observers that evolution is an outmoded, superficial, 19th century theory that can not withstand the intellectual scrutiny available to the 21st century. It is a theory sustained by metaphysics, not empirical science.
I also discovered that the “dirty little secret” of the evolutionists is that there are no intermediate forms in the fossil record. Many honest evolutionists will admit this. If you think I’m making this up, read this quote from a leading evolutionist, Dr. Colin Patterson, Director of the British Museum of Natural History, responding to an inquiry as to why there were no transitional forms illustrated in his new book (at the time) on evolution: “I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustrations of evolutionary transitional forms [in my book]. If I knew of any, fossil, or living, I would certainly have included them…I will lay it on the line – there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.” (emphasis added)
Think about the fossil record simply from the view point of “common sense”: If evolution really had occurred and all of life evolved from a single-celled ameba by the process of mutation and natural selection (as the evolutionists claim), then intermediate forms should be everywhere in the fossil record. Instead there are none! Zip! Nada! What the fossil record does reveal is the abrupt appearance of fully formed species, exactly what the creation model predicts. This in itself does not, of course, prove creation, but it is a severe blow to the establishment’s notion that evolution is proven scientific fact while creationism is mere fantasy. Charles Darwin himself said that if the fossil record did not produce intermediates in the decades following the publication of The Origin of Species, his theory would be meaningless. Darwin was exactly right and he has proven to be more intellectually honest that those who came after him, speaking in his name.
What the fossil record shows is the sudden and abrupt appearance of fully formed mammoths, dinosaurs, turtles, birds, apes, humans, etc. There are no intermediates showing the gradual transformation of one species into another, much less the gradual development or evolution of any of the major organ systems necessary for life. Where, for example, are the fossil remains of the creatures with half-formed eyes, hearts, wings, noses, legs, beaks, or lungs, which surely must have existed if evolution actually took place? If any such grotesque freaks of nature had ever been formed, they most certainly would have been immediately eliminated – by the Darwinian theory of survival of the fittest! How would creatures with half-formed hearts or heads ever have survived? What advantageous purpose would a half-formed eyeball or wing serve? Of course, there are no such grotesqueries in the fossil record. And believe me, I’m just scratching the surface of the absurdities of this half-baked theory.
Another little known fact that the evolutionists conveniently overlook is that 99% of all mutations, which are the supposed mechanism of all this change, are harmful – often fatal – and render the subject less likely to survive! Just a slight oversight here, wouldn’t you say? When you think about it in these terms, the whole theory becomes preposterous on its face and crashes like a house of cards.
The evolutionists have no credible answers for this lack of intermediate forms. They usually counter with contrived notions like “punctuated equilibrium,” some form of spontaneous generation (which is a direct violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics, whereas the whole theory of evolution itself is a violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics), or even – and, again, I’m not making this up – that life was brought to earth by aliens from outer space! Trust me - creationism is much easier to accept than what these evolutionists are forced to swallow.
Many people tend to confuse “microevolution,” - a concept that no one really doubts - and “macroevolution.” No one doubts, for instance, that the color of moths, or the size of finches’ beaks, or panda’ thumbs, or turtles’ shells will change or evolve in different local settings and isolated environments. These are all examples of “microevolution” – or species adaptation – not “macroevolution,” which is the unseen and unproven notion of one species changing into another over time.
As any biology major would know, a rapidly reproducing insect commonly used in the laboratory is the fruit fly (known in scientific parlance as drosophila melanogasteria). The poor fruit fly has been zapped with every conceivable type of radiation, DNA-altering agents, and mutation-causing chemicals known to science. All this has altered its eye color, its wing span, the number of its legs, its gestation period, and I even remember hearing of fruit flies with multiple heads! But the simple truth is this: in spite of all these genetic alterations over all this time, no one has ever seen a fruit fly change into any thing other than a common fruit fly, no matter how hard they try and no matter how long they try it. The same could be said for any other rapidly reproducing laboratory species such as bacteria and viruses. Doesn’t that suggest something? There is plenty of evidence for intra-species change, adaptation, and microevolution, but there is no evidence anywhere in any form of one species evolving into another.
Does anyone doubt that the infectious spread of Darwinian evolution throughout Western culture since its introduction in the mid 19th century has led directly to a profound undermining of traditional Biblical authority? If the Bible, specifically the Book of Genesis, is wrong about creation, how can it be trusted on any topic? Perhaps we are not really immortal souls, made in the image and likeness of God. Perhaps the evolutionists are right – we are just naked apes. The social carnage inflicted upon our society by this a priori theory of man-centered naturalism, successfully taking God out of the equation of life, would be hard to put into words.
If we are ever to return to the moral and ethical values that our once-great culture was founded upon, throwing the false, fraudulent theory of Darwinian evolution into the ash heap of history would be a great first step. Freeing oneself from the dead-end implications of evolution is a great tonic for the soul and I highly recommend it to everyone.
Gary L. LiVacari, D.D.S. 1330 Granville Park Ridge, IL 60068 847-318-6354 Livac2@aol.com
We are finally free to argue full-time about the real meaning of the Civil War.
Evolution is a fact. Religion is conjecture. You're welcome to believe in any faith as a matter of taste or opinion but don't try to reason out facts from matters of taste.
Is that statement fact or a matter of taste? You seem to base your criteria for 'fact' as something scientifically provable, and since your above statement cannot be scientifically proven it must be a matter of taste by your own definition. You're statement argues against itself.
These books and many others in this genre supported the growing consensus among unbiased observers that evolution is an outmoded, superficial, 19th century theory that can not withstand the intellectual scrutiny available to the 21st century. It is a theory sustained by metaphysics, not empirical science.
Gee, Where have I heard that before? The Imminent Demise of Evolution?
Does anyone doubt that the infectious spread of Darwinian evolution throughout Western culture since its introduction in the mid 19th century has led directly to a profound undermining of traditional Biblical authority?
Not directly, It's more the fundamentalist behavior (i.e. Silly articles like this) about evolution that has undermined biblical authority than evolution itself.
If the Bible, specifically the Book of Genesis, is wrong about creation, how can it be trusted on any topic?
Good Question, But Genesis is in fact wrong. Just read chapters 1 and 2 they directly contradict each other in order of creation.
Genesis 1
Plants-->Animals-->Man & Woman at the same time
Genesis 2
Man -->Plants-> Animals-->Woman
There are no such contradictions in the evolution theory.
Perhaps we are not really immortal souls, made in the image and likeness of God. Perhaps the evolutionists are right – we are just naked apes. The social carnage inflicted upon our society by this a priori theory of man-centered naturalism, successfully taking God out of the equation of life, would be hard to put into words.
Nah! Many cultures do fine without the Christian God (like modern day Japan) while many cultures do horribly under the Christian God (Latin America)
If we are ever to return to the moral and ethical values that our once-great culture was founded upon
Which great culture would that be? Europe in the 9th century?
The assault continued with Berkeley law professor (Harvard and U. of Chicago educated) Dr. Philip Johnson’s ...........Gary L. LiVacari, D.D.S.
Sorry but just because a lawyer and dentist don't believe in evolution that doesn't count as many scientist leaving evolution in droves.
And it's the same old, same old.
...there are no intermediate forms in the fossil record...
Stock pro-evo reply: All fossils are transitional forms, since evolution is a continuing process. Gaps in the record are inevitable since the rate of change in allele ratios (rate of evolution) in a population appears to be inversely proportional to the size of the population, while the probability of leaving a fossil record is directly proportional to the size of the population. In other words, evolution will always seem to happen fastest when the fossil record isn't watching.
...the DNA research under way that positively ties different species to the same family and back to precursor species.
Stock anti-evo reply: interesting statistics but the "ties" are conditional probabilities based on questionable assumptions (like evolution).
...which is a direct violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics, whereas the whole theory of evolution itself is a violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics...
Stock pro-evo reply: The laws of Thermodynamics are applicable only to closed systems. The Earth is not a closed system; it receives light and heat from the sun and loses both back to space. Local reversals of thermodynamics are permitted by the laws.
But Genesis is in fact wrong. Just read chapters 1 and 2 they directly contradict each other in order of creation.
Stock literalist response: Differences in the Hebrew words used allow a contradiction-free interpretation.
If you read enough of these stupid useless threads you can argue both sides.
Evolution is a fact. Religion is conjecture.
Is that a fact? BTW, most religions are quite testable as hypotheses: die, and then see what happens next. No, NDE's don't count--you have to stay dead. Billions of people have already tested these hypotheses. Religion is a well-tested conjecture. In fact, I daresay it has been tested more thoroughly than the conjecture of evolution.
But the researchers aren't publishing their results in peer-reviewed journals AFAIK.
If anyone reading this feels offended because your favorite crevo argument was not addressed, post your complaints at www.tellsomeonewhocares.com and wait for someone to get back to you.
Actually, I don't mean any of this. I'm just tired and grumpy. And this is the LAST crevo thread I'm posting to. I mean it!
That's one problem right there. There was many books of the bible that were not included. Constantine was responsible for compiling the bible. He omitted the books that he thought were not quite pro-Christian enough. So, the tone of the bible is the result of one man's opinion and choice as to what to include.
Like Archaeopteryx. You know, a fully formed organism with characteristics of both bird and reptile. Not one of those awful intermediate forms.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.