Evolution is a Big Hoax

Hutton's book, Theory of the Earth, published in 1795, made people doubt the earth was 6000 years old. Lyell's book Principles of Geology, published in 1830, made people doubt Noah's Flood. Darwin's book, The Origin of Species, published in 1859, made people doubt the Creator. But Charles Darwin himself doubted his own theory: "Often a cold shudder has run through me and I have asked myself whether I may have devoted myself to a PHANTASY." (Charles Darwin, Life and Letters, 1887 vol. 2, p. 229). Darwin also wrote in his book, Origin Of The Species, "Why, if species have descended from other species by fine graduation, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?" "If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties must assuredly have existed" (p.211).

Truth be told, there is no known mechanism for evolution. Mutations are all harmful so don't improve a species. There is no fossil evidence of Evolution. The Geologic Column does not exist in nature. There are no vestigial organs. The earth is not billions of years old. Life does not spontaneously arise from non-living matter.

Was There A "Big Bang" Explosion Billions of Years Ago?

According to Stephen Hawking, all the cosmic matter, energy, dimensions and time were reduced down to an infinitely small point of zero volume, and thus, matter, three-dimensional space, and time virtually did not exist before the Big Bang. If there is a beginning, there must logically be a "Beginner" to initiate the Big Bang. The Beginner of the Big Bang precedes and is outside of (transcends) all matter, dimensions and time. Thus the Beginner would have to be non-matter (Spirit), non-dimensional (Omni-present), and timeless (Eternal). The Big Bang would support the biblical view that "the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen (matter) was not made out of what was visible" (Spirit) (Heb. 11:3). In addition the Bible alone says that there was a "beginning of time" (2 Tim. 1:9; Titus 1:2), -- and God existed before that beginning (John 17:5; Col. 1:16-17).

But the "Big Bang" excludes God. This is inexcusable. He "stretchest out the heavens like a curtain" (Ps. 104:2; Isa. 42:5). The "fabric of space-time" is continually being "stretched," indicating that at some finite moment in the past, it was concentrated into a small point of very dense matter. If time can be stretched, and if it is a fourth dimension, then time is also variable. The billions of years indicated by some stars and their distances from earth in light-years may actually be thousands of years in reality. Scientists today admit that the universe is expanding in all directions or "stretching out." How did they figure this out? First they determined that the universe has a definite beginning rather than the Steady State Theory. Since the amount of usable energy in the universe is running down (Second Law of Thermodynamics -- Entropy) and since stars will burn out eventually, the universe had to be wound up originally with more energy than today. It had a beginning. As God said, the heavens "wax old like a garment" (Ps. 102:26) and "the earth shall wax old like a garment" (Isa. 51:6). Then Einstein's Theory of General Relativity demanded that space-time had to have a beginning. Then Hubble in 1929 discovered that the universe is expanding at the same rate everywhere. This implied it was once a small point of infinite density. Then Penzis and Wilson discovered the radiation afterglow coming from the universe which also indicates the "Big Bang" beginning. Then the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) determined that there are temperature ripples in background radiation allowing the galaxies to form amidst voids in space. This explains why matter is not evenly distributed across space. Then they discovered the "Red Shift." When looking at a distant star with a prism attached to the telescope, the observer sees a rainbow of colors which tell him the composition of the star. There are also black lines found in the rainbow which indicate light being squeezed (moving toward earth) when found in the blue band or stretched (moving away from earth) when found in the red band. Since most stars have black lines in the red band, they are moving away from earth. This is known as the Doppler Effect and indicates a "Big Bang."

Our Universe Was Precision-Made and Fine-Tuned For Humans

But there are problems with the Big Bang. Random explosions don't make an orderly universe. Every explosion that has ever been observed generates greater destruction and chaos. The Second Law of Thermodynamics teaches that the universe becomes increasingly disordered -- not the reverse. Yet our universe is a precision, fine-tuned instrument adjusted to be "life-friendly." The chances of all variables existing in the narrow range to support life is one in 10 to the 120th power. The fact that the universe was specially designed for man is known as the "Anthropic Principle." Life on earth is balanced on a knife-edge. If the neutron were not about 1.001 times the mass of the proton, all protons would have decayed into neutrons or all neutrons would have decayed into protons, and therefore life would not be possible. How can we account for this? Only a very narrow range of temperatures from a stable sun allow for life. The orbit of the earth has to be very nearly circular -- and is. If gravity were a little weaker, we'd have lost all our atmosphere. If it were much stronger, we'd break every time we fell over. Without that layer of ozone above our heads, we'd be exposed to deadly UV radiation. The distance between earth and sun is just right for animal and plant life. If Earth were 5% closer to the sun, the oceans would boil. If Earth were 1% further from the sun, oceans would freeze. As our moon circles the earth, it acts as a huge space vacuum cleaner, sweeping back and forth across the ecliptic and attracting almost every comet, meteor shower or asteroid that would hit the earth if the moon did not exist exactly where it is. If it were not for the moon, there would be no life on earth as a result of the enormous bombardment of comets, meteors and the asteroid belt that would otherwise hit planet earth. Our moon also pulls on the bulge of the earth's equator and stops it from any excessive wobble (caused by an asteroid collision, etc.). Our moon pulling on the seas causes a tidal bulge. This cleanses the sea shores and stirs up the seas to bring nutrients to the surface for the feeding of sea creatures. Our moon provides light at night because of its highly reflective surface. Our moon's diameter almost exactly covers the diameter of the sun in a full eclipse. There is no other moon going around a planet that does this. This requires precision. Our sun is not an average, ordinary star. It is solitary as opposed to most stars which are in systems of two-or-more stars bound together and thus wobbling constantly. Other stars produce huge amounts of X-rays. Most other stars vary in their output from 10% to 150,000%. But our sun has a constant output of light and heat. God "formed" the earth "to be inhabited" (Isa. 45:18). It is not the result of a random destructive, explosion. That has never been observed and can't be reproduced in the lab. The wisdom and fine-tuning and existence of life in the universe require much more than a random explosion.

If the universe came about, without wisdom, as a result of a small pinpoint of matter twirling faster and faster until it finally exploded 20 billion years ago, all the planets would be spinning the same direction. But two planets (Venus and Uranus), and six moons, spin backwards. Some galaxies spin backwards. Furthermore, nobody has ever seen a star or planet form. Boyle's Law prevents a star from forming from a dust cloud because it prohibits gas compressing. We have seen stars blow up as novas and super-novas -- one about every 30 years. But since we have discovered less than 300 dead stars, this indicates a young universe rather than an old one (300 x 30 = 9000 year-old universe). We should see trillions of dead stars if the "Big Bang" occurred 20 billion years ago. If the Big Bang created hydrogen and helium, where did all the other elements come from? Did fusion inside planets produce all the elements? Stars can't create any elements past iron on the Periodic Table by fusion. Even if they could, there is still a serious chicken-and-egg problem. Which came first, the stars to make the elements or the elements to make the stars? Where did the energy come from for a "Big Bang"? Where did the matter come from? Where did the laws (centrifugal force, gravity, inertia) come from? Evolutionists don't know. The First Law of Thermodynamics states that matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed. "The silent embarrassment of modern astrophysics is that we do not know how even a single one of these stars managed to form." (Martin Harwit, Science, vol. 231, 7 March 1986, pp.1201-1202)

How and When Did Earth Form?

According to evolutionary textbooks, "Earth formed from a hot mass. It cooled down and formed a rocky crust 4.6 billion years ago." (Holt, Earth Science 1994, p.280). This is in all the textbooks. But Genesis 1:2 says the earth was created under water, meaning the temperature was less than 212 degrees Farenheit or it would have turned to steam. Looking in granite rocks, Robert Gentry found tiny halos of radio-Pollonium which have a half-life of 3 minutes. If the rock were hot, the Pollonium would have melted away before forming these halos (see Creation's Tiny Mysteries by Robert Gentry). The sun and insects are needed in order for plants to survive, so all three had to be created within days of eachother as the Bible teaches.

Nobody Knows How and When Life Began

"Nobody knows how a mixture of lifeless chemicals spontaneously organized themselves into the first living cell." (Paul Davies, Australian Centre for Astrobiology, Macquarie University, Sydney, New Scientist 179 (2403); 32 12 July 2003). "Both the origin of life and the origin of the major groups of animals remains unknown." (Alfred G. Fisher, evolutionist, Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia, 1998, fossil selection). "The first living cells emerged between 4 billion and 3.8 billion years ago. There is no record of the event." (Biology, The Unity and Diversity of Life, Wadsworth, 1992, p.300). We've never seen it happen. It can't be repeated in a laboratory experiment. It is contrary to the Law of Biogenesis, that life can only come from pre-existing life. Louis Pasteur proved that life can't come from the non-living. "Spontaneous generation" has been disproven. It violates Mendel's laws of heredity and genetics teaching "after its kind" (Gen. 1:24). Also Newton's Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the universe becomes increasingly disordered, not the opposite. As God said "the earth shall wax old like a garment" (Isa. 51:6). Romans 8 says that the creation is subject to decay.

Despite Miller and Urey's experiment which produced 85% tar, 13% carboxylic acid [both toxic to life] and 2% amino acids which mainly contained only two amino acids (Glycine & Alanine), not the 20 needed for life, they did not even come close to creating life. Their amino acids were equally left-handed and right-handed but only left-handed can make proteins. Many proteins then make a cell. Many cells then make an organism. But these amino acids bond with tar and acid more readily than with eachother and unbond in water much faster than they bond (supposedly life began in an ocean). Brownian motion drives them away from eachother to equilibrium. Methane, ammonia, water vapor and hydrogen were ignited with a spark. Miller excluded oxygen because any amino acids that try to combine are "oxidized." Thus evolution teaches that "Several billion years ago, Earth's atmosphere had no free oxygen as it does today" (p.412, Biology). But ammonia is destroyed by UV light so UV light must be blocked by ozone -- made from oxygen which must therefore be present. Life cannot evolve without oxygen.

Oxygen is found in the lowest rocks (see Evolution A Theory in Crisis, Dr. Michael Denton p.262 and Icons of Evolution by Jonathan Wells p.9-27). Air bubbles in amber have 50% more oxygen than our atmosphere today (Time magazine Nov. 9, 1987, p.82). The ancient atmosphere may have been as high as 35% oxygen (New Scientist, Mar.11, 2000). "What is the evidence for a primitive methane-ammonia atmosphere on earth? The answer is that there is no evidence for it, butmuch against it." (Philip H. Abelson, "Chemical Events on the Primitive Earth," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol.55, June 1966, p.1365). "Scientists have not been able to cause amino acids dissolved in water to join together to form proteins. The energy-requiring chemical reactions that join amino acids are reversible and do not occur spontaneously in water." (George B. Johnson, Peter H. Raven, Biology Principles and Explorations, HRW, 1996, p.235). "In general, we find no evidence in the sedimentary distribution of carbon, sulfur, uranium, or iron, that an oxygen-free atmosphere has existed at anytime during the span of geological history recorded in well-preserved sedimentary rocks." (Erich Dimroth and Michael M. Kimberley, "Precambrian Atmospheric Oxygen: Evidence in the Sedimentary Distributions of Carbon, Sulfur, Uranium and Iron," Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, vol. 13, No. 9, Sept. 1976 p.1161) "It is suggested that from the time of the earliest dated rocks at 3.7 (billion years) ago, Earth had an oxygenic atmosphere." (Harry Clemmey, Nick Badham, "Oxygen in the Precambrian Atmosphere: An Evaluation of the Geological Evidence," Geology, vol. 10, March 1982, p.141). "The only trend in recent literature is the suggestion of far more oxygen in the early atmosphere than anyone imagined." (Thaxton [Ph.D. Chemistry], Bradley [Ph.D. Materials Science], Olsen (Ph.D. Geochemistry], The Mystery of Life's Origin, 1992, p.80). "Some super-calculating intellect must have designed the properties of the carbon atom. Otherwise the chance of my finding such an atom through the blind forces of nature would be utterly miniscule.... A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question." (Dr. Fred Hoyle -- an atheist who now believes in God). "The only way life could have come into existence is because of some Super-Intelligence having created it." -- Sir Fred Hoyle.


Humans Are Not Millions of Years Old -- Many Biological Clocks Indicate A Recent Past

1.) The SAHARA DESERT has a prevailing wind pattern. The hot air blows off the desert and kills the trees next door and that new area becomes desert. This process is called "desertification." (HBJ Earth Science 1989, p.277) After studying it for years, the experts claimed the Sahara Desert is probably "about 4000 years old" (see Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, July 15, 1999 Geophysical Research Letters). It expands approximately four miles per year.

2.) The BRISTLECONE PINE in southern California is the oldest living tree in the world. Estimates of its age vary from 4300 to 4800 years old. "Tree-ring dating is not an exact science. Trees often produce more than one ring each year. 4300 would be the max. for this tree. It is probably younger." The flood of Noah was 4400 years ago. A professional wood carver, who has been growing seven-year-old trees for 40 years to make them into walking sticks, says, "They always have at least eleven rings in seven years." If the earth is billions of years old, why don't we have an older tree somewhere?

3.) The GREAT BARRIER REEF off the eastern coast of Australia is the largest coral reef in the world. During World War Two some of the Great Barrier Reef was destroyed by bombs and sunk ships, etcetera., so the environmentalists decided to see how fast it grows back. They watched the reef grow for 20 years. Based on this 20-year study they concluded that the reef is less than 4200 years old. If the earth is millions of years old, why don't we have an older, bigger reef somewhere?

4.) When it rains, about 30% of the water runs into the OCEAN. The rest evaporates or soaks into the ground. As it runs into the ocean it brings mineral salts. Because of the distillation process of sunlight evaporating pure H2O, and minerals washing in, the oceans are getting saltier every day. Minerals don't evaporate out. Today the oceans are 3.6% salt. They could have achieved this degree of salinity in 5000 years. Over the last 4400 years some animals have gradually become adapted to salt water. Noah's flood was probably mostly fresh water. Evidence indicates that animals and fish and other sea creatures started out as fresh-water animals. But today we have fresh-water crocodiles and salt-water crocodiles. They had a common ancestor -- a crocodile.

5.) Why are the oldest reliable HISTORICAL RECORDS less than 6000 years old? "The first fully developed systems of word writing appeared only about 5000 years ago." (World Book Encyclopedia) Our year 2013 is the Chinese calendar year 4711 (perhaps dating from Noah's birth or Japheth's birth before the flood). Our year 2013 is the Jewish calendar year 5774 (dating from Adam and Eve with some errors). The Bible is a historical record that indicates a 6000-year chronology. (For more on calendars, see Creation Ex Nihilo, Feb. 2000, p.46) (Evolution Cruncher, p.49) (see Its A Young World by Paul Ackerman).

6.) But what about STARS that are BILLIONS of LIGHT YEARS away? 1. Scientists cannot measure distances beyond 100 light years accurately using trigonometry, even if they know the distance of one of the sides and two angles of the triangle. The diameter of Earth's orbit around the sun is 16 light minutes if an observer were to look at the same star in January and June of any given year. To measure just one light year would be equivalent to two surveyors 16 inches apart who aim their telescopes at a dot 8.33 miles away. The triangle becomes very skinny, with an angle of .017 degrees. One hundred light years are the equivalent of 830 miles away. 2. Furthermore, nobody knows what light is, and whether it has always travelled the same speed throughout time, space and matter. Experiments have proven that the speed of light can be speeded up 300 times, or slowed down to one mile per hour, or even stopped altogether. Both temperature and gravity affect the speed of light. "A shocking possibility is that the speed of light might change in time during the life of the universe." -- Dr. Joao Magueijo of Imperial College, London, (www.sunday-times.co.uk 12-24-2000) The entire theory behind a black hole is that light can be attracted by gravity. If true, light cannot be a constant. 3. In addition, the creation was finished in a mature state when God made it. Adam and Eve were fully grown and the fruits were fully ripe on grown trees. Yet everything was only a few days old. Wouldn't the same hold true for the stars? 4. Finally, a light year is a distance, not a time. When you're taught in school that a star is 14 BILLION light years away, its a myth. It can't be proven. They can't measure BILLIONS -- only about a HUNDRED light years. It may be that the furthest stars are a mere six THOUSAND light years away. God stretched out the hevens and thus stars left behind a trail of light as they were pulled outward.

7.) The MOON is RECEDING from the EARTH a few inches each year. The distance from the moon to the earth is increasing every year by approximately 2 inches.Two inches per year is not much but if you multiply that by 4.5 billion years as suggested by evolutionists, the moon would be nearly out of sight by now! Billions of years ago the moon would have been so close that the tides would have been much higher, eroding the continents quickly. Because the gravitational forces of both the earth and moon and friction loss can be computed and predicted mathematically, we can determine how close the moon could orbit before resulting in lunar destruction or eradication of life on earth. With this in mind, the earth/moon relationship could not possibly be more than 1.2 billion years old.

Furthermore, one of the reasons so much money was spent to send a rocket to the moon was to see how THICK the MOON DUST was on its surface! Evolutionists had long held to the fact (as we do) that the earth and moon are about the same age. It is believed by many, that the earth and its moon are billions of years old. If that were true, the moon would by now have built up a 20-60 mile [32 to 97 km] layer of dust on it! In Isaac Asimov’s first published essay (1958), he wrote: ” . . I get a picture, therefore, of the first spaceship [to the moon], picking out a nice level place for landing purposes, coming slowly downward tail-first and sinking majestically out of sight.”—Isaac Asimov, Asimov on Science: A Thirty-Year Retrospective (1989), xvi- xvii. In the 1950s, R.A. Lyttleton, a highly respected astronomer, said this: “The lunar surface is exposed to direct sunlight, and strong ultraviolet light and X-rays [from the sun] can destroy the surface layers of exposed rock and reduce them to dust at the rate of a few ten-thousandths of an inch per year. But even this minute amount could, during the age of the moon, be sufficient to form a layer over it several miles deep.”— R.A. Lyttleton, quoted in R. Wysong, Creation-Evolution Controversy, p. 175. In 5 to 10 billion years, 3 or 4/10,000ths of an inch per year would produce 20-60 miles [32-97 km] of dust. In this regard, NASA was afraid to send men to the moon. Landing there, they would be buried in dust and quickly suffocate! So NASA first sent an unmanned lander to its surface, which made the surprising discovery that there was hardly any dust on the moon! In spite of that discovery, Neil Armstrong was decidedly worried about this dust problem as his July 1969 flight in Apollo 11 neared. He feared his lunar lander would sink deeply into it and he and Edwin Aldrin would perish. But they had no problem. There is not over 2 or 3 inches of dust on its surface! That is the amount one would expect if the moon were about 6000-8000 years old. Dr. Lyttleton’s facts were correct; solar radiation does indeed turn the moon rocks into dust. With only a few inches of dust, the moon cannot be older than a few thousand years. It is significant that studies on the moon have shown that only 1/60th of the one- or two-inch dust layer on the moon originated from outer space. This has been corroborated by still more recent measurements of the influx rate of dust on the moon, which also do not support an old moon. The moon is approximately 238,855 miles from earth. The size of the moon is approximately 1/4 the size of planet earth. Our lunar moon orbits around the earth every 27.3 days. The gravity on the moon is just 17% of the gravity we have here on earth! America sent it’s first Apollo Spacecraft to the moon on May 30, 1966? It landed on the lunar surface on June 2, 1966 and was designed to send back photographs of the moon’s surface in preparation for a manned flight which would make history in July, 1969.The moon was created within the last 10,000 years!

8.) Energy from our sun is the source of heat for our earth. Because of the heat and light transmitted to us, we live in a perfect environment for both plants and animals. But the sun can also be very destructive. It’s ultraviolet rays not only can burn the skin, but over-exposure is known to cause cancer. We are fortunate that the sun is exactly the right distance away from earth so we can live in a world that sustains abundant life. But the sun is actually getting smaller! The shrinking of the sun at the present calculated rate will cause the diameter of the sun to be approximately half the size it presently is just 100,000 years from now. So much for earth warming! Since 1836 more than one hundred different observers at the Royal Greenwich Observatory and the U.S. Naval Observatory have made visual measurements that reveal that the DIAMETER OF THE SUN IS SLOWLY SHRINKING at the rate of 0.1% per century. That 1/10th of 1 percent per century. But if the earth and sun were just 100,000 years old, the sun would have been TWICE THE SIZE IT IS right now! In fact, the sun, at the present rate of consumption and shrinkage, would have been TWENTY TIMES as large just 1 million years ago! Evolutionists tell us that the earth, sun, and universe are over 4.5 billion years old. Even one million years ago, the surface of the earth would have been too hot to sustain any life. 20 million years ago, the sun would have been so large that it would have nearly touched the surface of planet earth.

9.) For the truth about when mankind began, we can mathematically figure the HUMAN POPULATION growth backwards. The population in 1999 was 6 billion people (July 24, 1999, Star Tribune, Minneapolis Minnesota.). In 1985 there were 5 billion. In 1810 it was 1 billion. At the time of Christ it was 1/4 billion and if we plot it on a graph, we find that the population began about 4400 years ago. (Scientific Creationism, p. 167). (see article by David Derbyshire, Science Correspondent, 30 Sept. 2004, News Telegraph. "Scientists Have Worked Out the Most Recent Common Ancestor of All Six Billion People Alive Today"). Anyone trying to trace their family tree soon discovers that the number of direct ancestors doubles every 20 to 30 years. Using a computer model, researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology attempted to trace back the most recent common ancestor. Dr Steve Olson, a researcher, said, "Our results suggest that the most recent common ancestor for the world's current population lived in the relatively recent past - perhaps within the last few thousand years." If we start off with 1 couple (Noah and his wife) and calculate that the average couple has 2.2 children every generation (a .2 increase) and that each generation is 36 years on average, how long would it take to reach our present population? The formula would look like this: 1(1 + .2)^124 = 6,583,767,866. That is 124 generations of 36 years each which equals 4464 years, or 2400 B.C. -- about when the flood occurred.

If man has been here for three million years as Evolution teaches, the human population would be 150,000 people per square inch today.

Another method is to start with 6 billion people in 1999 and halve the population every 150 years (a very conservative estimate which assumes famines, wars, disease and natural disasters). Using this reckoning, there were 3 billion in 1850, and 1.5 billion in 1700. Thus 29 x 150 years = 4350 years or 2350 B.C. when there were 11 people. That is a very accurate estimate since there were actually 8 people in 2304 B.C. when Noah's flood occurred. Other population growth equations are given below:

Population Growth Equations:

PN / P0 = ( 1 + R )N

R = ( PN / P0 ) 1/N -1


PO = Original Population
PN = Final Population
R = Growth Rate / Year
N = Number of Years

Missing Links are Still Missing in Fossil Record -- "Professing Themselves Wise... (They) Become Fools"

"There are gaps in the fossil graveyard, places where there should be intermediate forms but where there is nothing whatsoever instead. No paleontologist writing in English (Carroll,1988), French (J. Chaline, 1983) or German (V. Faulbusch, 1983), denies that this is so. It is simply a fact. Darwin's theory and the fossil record are in CONFLICT " (Dr. D. Berlinski, Sept. 1996, p.28). "As Darwin noted in the Origin of Species, the abrupt emergence of arthropods in the fossil record during the Cambrian presents a problem for evolutionary biology. There are NO obvious SIMPLER or INTERMEDIATE FORMS -- either living or in the fossil record" (Osorio, Bacon and Whitington in 'American Scientist,' vol. 85). "The [evolutionary] origin of BIRDS is largely a matter of deduction. There is NO FOSSIL EVIDENCE of the stages through which the remarkable change from reptile to bird was achieved." (W.E. Swinton, British Museum of Natural History, London)."The evolutionary origin of WHALES remains CONTROVERSIAL among zoologists" (Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia 1996).

The British Museum of Natural History has the largest fossil collection in the world. When the senior paleontologist was asked why he did not show the missing links in his book he said: "I fully agree with your comments on the lack of evolutionary transitions 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." (-- Dr. Colin Paterson, Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History, in correspondence to Luther Sunderland quoted in Darwin's Enigma, 1988, p. 89). The whole chain is missing, not just some links. "The ABSENCE of fossil evidence for intermediary stages ... indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates ... has been a persistent and nagging problem for ... evolution." (-- Dr. Stephen J. Gould, Evolution Now, p.140, Professor of Geology and Paleontology at Harvard University in Boston). In order to maneuver around this dilemma, some evolutionists suggest "The first bird hatched from a reptilian egg." (-- Richard B. Goldschmidt, The Material Basis of Evolution, Yale UP, 1940, p.395). This is called "Punctuated Equilibrium" and has never been observed. But suppose it did happen. Who did this unique bird mate with? How did it reproduce? “It is as though they [fossils] were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say this appearance of SUDDEN PLANTING has delighted creationists. Both schools of thought (Punctuationists and Gradualists) despise so-called scientific creationists equally, and both agree that the MAJOR GAPS ARE REAL, that they are true imperfections in the fossil record. The only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is DIVINE CREATION and both reject this alternative.” (Richard Dawkins -- Cambridge, The Blind Watchmaker, 1986, p229-230)

"All those trees of life with their branches of our ancestors, that's a lot of nonsense." (Mary Leakey Assoc. Press, Dec. 10, 1996). "The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils." (-- Stephen J. Gould, Harvard University, Evolution's Erratic Pace, Natural History, vol. 5, May 1977.) "All the many forms of life on earth today are descended from a common ancestor, found in a population of primitive unicellular organisms. What were those first cells like? How do we know? What events led up to their formation? No traces of these events remain." (p.324, 1994 Glenco Biology) “If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking closely together all the species of the same group, must assuredly have existed. But, as by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, WHY DO WE NOT FIND THEM embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?” (-- Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, 1859, p.211) "In the years after Darwin, his advocates hoped to find predictable progressions. In general, these have NOT BEEN FOUND -- yet the optimism has died hard, and some pure fantasy has crept into textbooks." (-- David Raup, "Evolution and the Fossil Record," Science, vol. 213 (July 17, 1981), p.289.) If “evolution” was happening right now, there would be millions of creatures out there with partially developed features and organs. But instead there are none. Even if such a fossil were found, how do we know that the fossil is an ancestor of another organism anyway? How do we know it had any children? It can't speak. Why should we think it can do something that animals today can't do? Animals today can only reproduce after their kind.

Eohippus Was A Rock Badger -- "Professing Themselves Wise... (They) Become Fools"

"The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium (small horse) into Equus (large horse), so dear to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in nature." (Simpson, George, Gaylord, Harvard, "Life of the Past," 1953 p.119). "Many examples commonly cited, such as the evolution of the horse family or of sabertooth 'tigers' can be readily shown to have been unintentionally falsified and not to be really orthogenic." (-- G.G. Simpson, Evolutionary Determinism and the Fossil Record, Scientific Monthly, vol. 71, (Oct. 1950) p.264.) "Other examples, including the much-repeated 'gradual' evolution of the modern horse, have not held up under close examination." (--Biology, the Unity and Diversity of Life, Wadsworth, 1992, p.304) Why not? 1. The ancient horse (hyracotherium) is not a horse at all. It is a Hyrax (rock badger) still alive in Turkey and E. Africa today. A meat-eater. 2. The ribs, toes and teeth are different in these "horse stages". (18 ribs; 15 ribs; 19 ribs; 18 ribs). The South American fossil sequence goes from one-toed to three-toed (reverse order from Othniel C. Marsh's 1874 version). 3. The three-toed horse grazed side by side with the one-toed horse.

What was the original "kind"? A wolf can mate with a dog or a coyote. Foxes, coyotes, wolves, hyenas and dogs may have originally been the same kind. We are able to cross-breed horses, zebras and jack-asses. The horse has 64 chromosomes and donkey has 62 chromosomes. When a zebra stallion mates with a donkey mare, it is calley a Zonkey. When a Zebra stallion mates with mates with a horse mare it is called a Zorse. When a pony mates with a zebra mare it is called a Zeony. Also Zedonk and Zebroid. What was the original "kind"? These may have been the same kind originally.

Comparative Anatomy Proves a Wise Designer

We have a radius and an ulna in each arm and a whale has a radius and an ulna in each fore-fin. These bones developed from different genes in each different creature. Men named the bones, so the labels are arbitrary. But the same design indicates the same Designer -- not evolution.

Geologic Column Exists Only in Textbooks -- "Professing Themselves Wise... (They) Become Fools"

Charles Lyell invented the Geologic Column in 1830 long before C-14 or K-AR dating. He gave each layer a name, an age, and an index fossil. The dates for different sedimentary layers were conjured up out of his imagination. He said his goal was to "free the science from Moses." But if you take a jar filled with water, earth and sand, and shake it up, and let it settle, it will settle into layers in just a few minutes. Gravel at the bottom, then sand above that, then silt, then clay and then the water with plant material floating on top. This is called hydrologic sorting. After the flood of Noah, the whole earth was very much like this jar. Layer after layer of sediment formed quickly by lots of water and little time. That is how the Grand Canyon formed. Coal, oil and natural gas formed from the flood of Noah. The Grand Canyon formed from the flood also. It was a breech in the dam -- a washed out spill way. Grand Lake and Hopi Lake got too full. But the evolutionist believes that it formed slowly by a little water and lots of time. "Over millions of years the Colorado River has carved out the Grand Canyon from solid rock." (Prentice Hall, General Science, 1992, p.174). The problem with this thinking is that the Kyabab Uplift is higher than the top or source of the river by 4000 feet. The Bible predicted these scoffers who say, "all things continue as they were" -- long slow gradual processes -- Uniformitarianism (2 Pet. 3:3-4). "If the geologic column existed in one location it would be 100 miles thick" (Biology, p.385 A Beka Books). "If there were a column of sediments deposited continuously since the formation of the earth, the entire history of the planet could be reconstructed. Unfortunately no such column exists." (H.B.J. Earth Science, 1989, p.326). "Why are there no erosion marks between layers of the Grand Canyon (they're all level and straight) if the layers are different ages? It must have rained once or twice every ten thousand years. (Merrill, Earth Science, 1993, p.149). "The 'geologic column' is more of a concept than a reality. Eighty to eighty-five percent of the Earth's land surface does not have even three (of the ten) 'geologic periods' appearing in 'correct' consecutive order. It becomes an overall exercise of gargantuan special pleading and imagination for the evolutionary-uniformitarian paradigm to maintain that there ever were geologic periods." (Dr. John Woodmerappe, geologist "The Essential Non-Existence of the Evolutionary Uniformitarian Geologic Column" CRSQ Vol. 18 No.1, June 1981 pp.46-71) Even the walls of the Grand Canyon include only about five of these 'periods'. "One of the ironies of the evolution-creation debate is that the creationists have accepted the mistaken notion that the fossil record shows a detailed and orderly progression and they have gone to great lengths to accommodate this 'fact' in their flood geology." (Raup, David M. "Evolution and the Fossil Record" Science vol. 213 [July 17, 1994] p.244).

The fossil layers are not found in the ground in the nice neat clean order that evolutionists illustrate them to be in their textbooks. There is not one place on the surface of the earth where you may dig straight down and pass through the fossil layers in the order shown in the textbooks. The neat order of one layer upon another does not exist in nature. The fossil bearing layers are actually found out of order, upside down (backwards according to evolutionary theory), missing (from where evolutionists would expect them to be) or interlaced (“younger” and “older” layers found in repeating sequences). “Out of place” fossils are the rule and not the exception throughout the fossil record.

Circular Reasoning Used To Date Sediment Layers -- "Professing Themselves Wise... (They) Become Fools"

"Radiometric dating would not have been feasible if the geologic column had not been erected first." (O'Rourke, J.E. "Pragmatism versus Materialism in Stratigraphy, American Journal of Science, vol. 276 [Jan. 1976], p.54). "Apart from very 'modern' examples, which are really archaeology, I can think of no cases of radioactive decay being used to date fossils." (Ager, Derek v., "Fossil Frustrations," New Scientist, vol. 100 [Nov. 10, 1983] p.425.) How then are fossils dated? "The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply, feeling the explanations are not worth the trouble as long as the work brings results." (J.E. O'Rourke, American Journal of Science, 1976 276:51). Index fossils, we are told, give us the age of the sedimentary layers. But the layers tell us the age of the bones they contain. Isn't this circular reasoning? "The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists on using only temporal concepts, because circularity is inherent in the derivation of time scales." (-- O'Rourke, J.E. "Pragmatism vs. Materialism in Stratigraphy" American Journal of Science, vol. 276 [Jan. 1976] p.53). "And this poses something of a problem: if we date the rocks by their fossils, how can we then turn around and talk about patterns of evolutionary change through time in the fossil record?" (Miles Eldridge, p.12). The geologic column contains limestone scattered throughout in at least four different ages. How do you tell the difference between 100 million year old Jurassic limestone and 600 million year old Cambrian limestone? By index fossils. Yet all over the world we find petrified trees standing up running through multiple rock layers (Bob Jones Earth Science, p.306). Wyoming, Tennessee, Nova Scotia, Spirit Lake (from Mt. Saint Helens 1982) in Oregon, and Alabama, all have petrified vertical trees piercing through multiple layers of earth. They would rot and fall down if the layers were deposited over millions of years. It takes about 14 years for a tree to petrify. More on index fossils later.

Samples of Known Age Disprove Carbon 14 Dating -- "Professing Themselves Wise... (They) Become Fools"

Carbon 14 can be heard and measured with a Geiger counter. The half-life of C-14 is 5730 years. During photosynthesis, plants breathe in CO2 and make it part of their tissue. Some of that is C-14 mixed in. Animals then eat plants. If the atmosphere is .0000756% C-14, then plants should have the same percentage. When an organism dies, the C-14 in that organism starts to decay. Although this dating method sounds reasonable, there are certain assumptions required to use it. The first assumption is that the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere has always been the same (see www.arky.org). The second assumption is that the earth is older than 30,000 years. Therefore it must have reached equilibrium by now (filling and leaking are balanced). But there is more C-14 in the atmosphere today than ten years ago proving that the earth has not yet reached equilibrium and is less than 30,000 years old. At present "Radiocarbon is forming 28%-37% faster than it is decaying" (R.E.Taylor et al., "Major Revisions in the Pleistocene Age Assignments for North American Human Skeletons by C-14 Accelerator Mass Spectrometry," American Antiquity, vol. 50,, No. 1, 1985, pp. 136-140). A third assumption is that the rate of decay has always been the same as today. If you find a fossil in the dirt, the amount of C-14 can be measured and the rate of decay can be determined. But that is all. How much C-14 was in it at death and whether or not the decay rate has been constant are not provable. Also, after four or five half-lives C-14 can't be measured. Coal beds, we are told, are millions of years old. Yet they still have measurable C14 levels. So do diamonds. This is a problem for evolutionists since they believe that all C-14 atoms should have been lost 50,000 years ago.

Living mollusk shells were carbon-dated at 2,300 years old (Science vol.141, 1963, p.634-637). A freshly-killed seal was carbon dated as having died 1,300 years ago (Antarctic Journal, vol.6, Sept.-Oct. 1971, p.211). Shells from living snails were carbon dated as being 27,000 years old (Science, vol.224, 1984 p.58-61). "One part of the Vollosovitch mammoth carbon dated at 29,500 years old and another part at 44,000." (Quaternary Stratigraphic Nomenclature in Unglaciated Central Alaska, Troy L. Pewe Geologic Survey professional paper 862). Living penguins have been dated at 8,000 years old. "If a C-14 date supports our theories, we put it in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put it in a footnote. And if it is completely 'out of date,' we just drop it." (T. Save-Soderbergh and I.U. Olsson [Institute of Egyptology and Institute of Physics respectively, Univ. of Uppsala, Sweden], C-14 Dating and Egyptian Chronology in Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology." Proceedings of the Twelfth Nobel Symposium, New York 1970, p.35). "The troubles of radiocarbon dating are undeniably deep and serious. Despite 35 years of technological refinement and better understanding, the underlying assumptions have been strongly challenged and warnings are out that radiocarbon dating may soon find itself in a crisis situation. Continuing use of the method depends on a 'fix-it-as-we-go' approach, allowing for contamination here, fractionation there, and calibration whenever possible. It should be no surprise, then, that fully half the dates are rejected. The wonder is, surely, that the remaining half, have come to be accepted. No matter how 'useful' it is, though, the radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results. There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates. This whole blessed thing is nothing but 13th century alchemy, and it all depends upon which funny paper you read." (Robert E. Lee, "Radiocarbon Ages In Error" Anthropological Journal of Canada, vol. 19 (3), 1981, pp.9-29).

Anything that we dig up that is supposedly more than 250,000 years old should have absolutely no radiocarbon in it whatsoever. But instead, we find it in everything that is dug up – even dinosaur bones. This is clear evidence that the “millions of years” theory is simply untrue.

It’s long been known that radiocarbon (which should disappear in only a few tens of thousands of years at the most) keeps popping up reliably in samples (like coal, oil, gas, etc.) which are supposed to be ‘millions of years’ old. For instance, CMI has over the years commissioned and funded the radiocarbon testing of a number of wood samples from ‘old’ sites (e.g. with Jurassic fossils, inside Triassic sandstone, burnt by Tertiary basalt) and these were published (by then staff geologist Dr Andrew Snelling) in Creation magazine and Journal of Creation. In each case, with contamination eliminated, the result has been in the thousands of years, i.e. C-14 was present when it ‘shouldn’t have been’. These results encouraged the rest of the RATE team to investigate C-14 further, building on the literature reviews of creationist M.D. Dr Paul Giem.

In another very important paper presented at this year’s ICC, scientists from the RATE group summarized the pertinent facts and presented further experimental data. The bottom line is that virtually all biological specimens, no matter how ‘old’ they are supposed to be, show measurable C-14 levels. This effectively limits the age of all buried biota to less than (at most) 250,000 years.

Samples of Known Age Disprove Potassium-Argon Dating

"In conventional interpretation of K-Ar age data, it is common to discard ages which are substantially too high or too low compared with the rest of the group or with other variable data such as the geological time scale." (Hayatsu, A., K-Ar Isochron Age of the North Mountain Basalt, Nova Scotia, "Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, vol. 16, April 1979, pp.973-975.) "As much as 80% of the potassium in a small sample of an iron meteorite can be removed by distilled water in 4.5 hours" (Rancitelli, L.A. and D.E. Fischer, "Potassium-Argon Ages of Iron Meteorites," Planetary Sciences Abstracts, 48th Annual Meeting, p.167). Lava from the 1801 Hawaiian volcano eruption gave a K-AR date of 1.6 million years old. (Dalyimple G.B. 1969 40AR/36AR analysis of historic lava flows Earth and Planetary Science Letters 6-47,55; See also Impact #307 Jan. 1999) Basalt from Mt. Kilawea Iki, Hawaii (in 1959) gave a K-AR age of 8,500,000 years old (Impact #307, Jan 1999; See also Creation Ex Nihilo Dec. 1999 p.18).

Basalt from Mt. Etna, Sicily (in 1972) gave a K-AR age 350,000 years old (Impact #307, Jan. 1999) Mount Saint Helens new lava dome that formed in 1982 was dated at 350,000 (whole rock) to 2.8 million years old (Pyroxene). "In the last two years an absolute date has been obtained for (the Ngan dong beds above the Trinil beds) and it has the very interesting value of 300,000 years plus or minus 300,000 years." (-- Birdsell J.B. Human Evolution [Chicago: Rand McNally, 1975] p.295)

In 1770 George Buffon said the earth was 70,000 years old (Integrated Principles of Zoology 1996 p.151). In 1905 the age of the earth was officially 2 billion years old (Newsweek July 20, 1998 p.50). When astronauts landed on the moon, they said the earth and moon are 3.5 billion years old (Minneapolis Tribune, Monday Aug. 25 1969) using K-AR dating. Today we are told it is 4.6 billion years old.

Haeckel's Fake Embryology Drawings -- "Professing Themselves Wise... (They) Become Fools"

Earnst Haeckel read the Origin of Species in 1860 and this was the turning point in his thinking. He took a drawing of a dog embryo and a drawing of a human embryo and made them look alike. Nobody caught him or stopped him so he made more drawings of various other animals to make them look like the human embryo and published them in 1874. Most people didn't have microscopes to check up on him. He travelled all over Germany trying to convert Germans to a belief in evolution. This led to the "favored races" theory (part of Darwin's book title) of Germans later on. "Darwin considered this 'by far the strongest single class of facts in favor of' his theory" (Icons of Evolution, p.82) "A set of 19th century drawings that still appear in reference books ... are badly misdrawn, says an embryologist in Britain. Haeckel confessed in 1875, "A small percent of my embryonic drawings are forgeries; those namely, for which the observed material is so incomplete or insufficient as to FILL IN AND RECONSTRUCT THE MISSING LINKS by hypothesis and comparative synthesis." "I should feel utterly condemned ... were it not that HUNDREDS of the best observers, and biologists LIE UNDER THE SAME CHARGE." (Records from the University of Jena trial in 1875, Dr. Edward Blick, Blick Engineering, Norman OK). "Although Haeckel confessed to drawing from memory and was convicted of fraud at the University of Jena, the drawings persist. 'That's the real mystery,' says Richardson." (of St. George's Hospital Medical School in London) (New Scientist Sept. 6, 1997, p.23). Haeckel's fake drawings are still in use in 1999 at University of West Florida (Evolutionary Analysis 1998, p.28) and many other places. "Surely the biogenetic law is as dead as a doornail." (Keith Stewart Thomson, "Ontogeny and Phylogeny Recapitulated," American Scientist, vol. 76, May-June 1988, p.273) "Moreover, the biogenetic law has become so deeply rooted in biological thought that it cannot be weeded out in spite of its having been demonstrated to be wrong by numerous subsequent scholars" (Walter J. Bock, Dept. of Biological Sciences, Columbia University, "Evolution By Orderly Law," Science, vol. 164, 9 May 1969, pp.684-685). "The 'biogenetic law' as a proof for evolution is valueless" (W.R. Thomson, Foreword to the 1956 edition of Origin of Species).

Many biology textbooks also mention "gill slits" of human embryos that are supposedly similar to fish embryos. These four arches in the human embryo never have anything to do with breathing. They become bones in the ear and glands in the throat. (Asking About Life, Tobin and Dusheck 1998 p.381).

"The evolutionary idea that [Sickmind] Freud relied on most heavily in the manuscript is the maxim (from Haeckel) that 'ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny,' that is, that the development of the individual recapitulates the evolution of the entire species." (Lost Paper Shows Freud's Effort to Link Analysis and Evolution. New York Times, Feb. 10, 1987, p.C4)

"Ape-Men" are a Fraud -- "How Long Will You Turn My Glory Into Shame"? (Ps. 4:2)

"There are not enough fossil records to answer when, where and how Homo Sapiens emerged." (Takahata, Molecular Anthropology, Annual Review of Ecology & Systematics 1995, p.355) "Fossil evidence of human evolutionary history is fragmentary and open to various interpretations. Fossil evidence of chimpanzee evolution is absent altogether." (Return to the Planet of the Apes, Henry Gee, Nature, vol. 412, 12 July 2001, p.131) Nebraska Man was based on one tooth which turned out to be an extinct pig tooth. Piltdown Man was the top part of a human skull combined with the jawbone of an orangutan. It was given an acid bath to make it look old and then stained. The teeth were filed down. (The Great Piltdown Hoax, October 1956) Java Man was an ape's skull cap, three human teeth plus a human thigh bone (found a year later and 50 feet away). The archaeologist in charge hid the fact that he found two human skulls in the same area. (Bones of Contention by Marvin Lubenow, p. 86). Peking Man was found in a lime pit where humans killed monkeys to eat their brains. When the hill collapsed, the people were buried and fossilized. The mixture of bones was used to create an ape-man. The original specimens were lost in World War 2. Zinjanthropus was just an ape skull of recent date. Neanderthal Man was "an old man who suffered from arthritis." (Dr. A.J.E. Cave at Int'l. Congress of Zoology in 1958). His back was curved over. A Neanderthal with 5-7% differences from average DNA is still human. Their brain size was 230 cc larger than the average modern man. The bones in a person's forehead get thicker as he grows older. The eyebrow ridges grow all your life. Facial bones never stop growing (Buried Alive, Jack Cuozzo). Therefore, since people who lived right after the flood generally lived to be over 100, they probably had thicker forehead bones and looked like "Neanderthal Men." Cro-Magnon's brain size was larger than modern man. He left elaborate paintings on cave walls in France. He could be a pre-flood man. Australian aboriginees are not some missing link. They live and function normally in today's modern world. The skeleton known as "Lucy" is actually 40% of a skeleton 3'6" tall found in 70 square meters of earth. One knee joint of "Lucy" was found a year earlier, many meters lower and over a mile away. No feet or hand bones were found. "The various australopithecines are, indeed, more different from both African apes and humans in most features than these latter are from eachother." (Dr. Charles E. Oxnard in Fossils, Teeth and Sex -- New Perspectives on Human Evolution, University of Washington Press, Seattle and London, 1987, p.227. He spent 16 years studying Lucy. "Lucy" is not a missing link. It is just the skeleton of a monkey. The real "missing link" is not between apes and men, but between men and God. This "missing link" is our Lord and Savior -- YESHUA. He is missing from evolutionist's lives and that is their real problem.

Archaeopteryx -- A Bird With Teeth and Claws -- Not Feathers

A half-legged, half-winged dinosaur can't walk and can't fly, so it would die. A lizard hip has to turn around backward to become a bird hip. Did "feathers evolve from scales"? Of course not. Both are made from the same protein -- keratin -- but that is the only similarity. They came from different genes and are both completely different structures. "The [evolutionary] origin of birds is largely a matter of deduction. There is no fossil evidence of the stages through which the remarkable change from reptile to bird was achieved" (W.E. Swinton, British Museum of Natural History, London). "But there are plenty of other reasons to refute the dinosaur-bird connection, says Feduccia. 'How do you derive birds from a heavy, earth-bound, bi-pedal reptilethat has a deep body, a heavy balancing tail, and foreshortened forelimbs?' he asks. 'Biophysically, its impossible.'" (Jurrasic Bird Challenges Origin Theories." Geotimes, vol. 41, January 1996, p.7) Lungs are totally different. Scales and feathers attach differently to the body. They come from different genes on the chromosome. Birds have a four-chambered heart, most reptiles have three. Birds lay calcium-covered eggs. Reptiles lay a leather egg.

Archaeoraptor has been proven to be a fake. "From a remote province in China, an unusual fossil made a mysterious journey from the hands of Chinese smugglers to National Geographic Society. It is modern paleontology's greatest embarrassment. They found out it sprouted its remarkable tail not 120 million years ago, but only shortly after being smuggled out of China. It's the tale of a tail that has children believing in dinosaurs that never existed. This one was added by an entrepreneurial Chinese farmer. It appears to have fooled another group of scientists as well as editors of the British journal -- Nature. Source Olsen, curator of birds at the Smithsonian Institute, turned the spotlight on the whole mess. Those involved with the scientific gaffe agreed that Olsen tried to warn officials at National Geographic in aletter of November 1st but they wouldn't listen. Both of the fake fossils were intended to support the theory that birds evolved from dinosaurs. Olsen still believes in evolution, but doesn't buy into the fossils they're being shown. He says these have been discredited." (Dinosaur Bird Link Smashed in Fossil Flap, USA Today 1-25-2000)

"It is not at all clear that the 'feathers' found in fossils purportedly belonging to feathered dinosaurs are bird feathers at all, albeit primitive ones. On the contrary, there is a considerable body of evidence that these fossil traces, known as 'dino-fuzz', have nothing to do with bird feathers.... Having studied most of the specimens said to sport proto-feathers, I and many others, do not find any credible evidence that those structures represent protofeathers. Many Chinese fossils have that strange halo of what has become known as dino-fuzz, but although that material has been 'homologized' with avian feathers, the arguments are far less than convincing.... this dino-fuzz also appears in fossils that have absolutely nothing to do with birds." (Dr. Alan Feduccia). Other therapods found in other parts of the world don't have this dino-fuzz. Why? Is it frayed filaments of the fibers of the skin sticking out?

"Honest disagreement as to whether Archaeopteryx was or was not a forgery was possible until 1986, when a definitive test was performed. An x-ray resonance spectrograph of the British Museum fossil showed that the material containing the feather impressions differed significantly from the rest of the fossil slab. The chemistry of this 'amorphous paste' also differed from the crystaline rock in the famous fossil quarry in Germany where Archaeopteryx supposedly was found. Few responses have been made to this latest, and probably conclusive evidence." (see www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/faq/archaeopteryx.shtml). The Archaeopteryx is a bird fossil that has claws on both wings and teeth in his beak. These may be "reptilian" features, but some reptiles don't have teeth and some don't have claws. Some mammals have teeth and claws and some fish have teeth. There are 12 living birds today that have claws on their wings: Hoatzin, swan, ibis, ostrich, etc. ("What is Hoatzin?" Scientific American, vol. 261 (Dec. 1989) p.30). "The Hummingbird has 48 teeth" in its beak (National Geographic 1991). "Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth-bound feathered dinosaur. But its not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that." (Alan Feduccia -- a world authority on birds from UNC, Chapel Hill, quoted in "Archaeopteryx: Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms" Science Feb. 5 1994 p.764-5).

The Percent of Black Moths and White Moths Vary With A Changing Environment

Suppose a population of moths begins with 95% white and 5% black moths. Then the industrial revolution turns trees black with soot. Black moths are camoflaged by the soot. White moths are easily visible against their surroundings. Birds eat more of the white moths. Now the moth population is 95% black and 5% white. This was variation within species, not evolution into some new species. No new characteristics were created.

There Are No Vestigial Organs or Structures -- "Professing Themselves Wise... (They) Become Fools"

The TONSILS are two small glands in the back of your throat help protect you against infections. The human alimentary canal is a long tube leading from mouth to anus. Near each opening, the Designer placed an organ to protect your entire gastrointestinal tract from pathogenic invasion while you were an infant. The APPENDIX was crucial during your first months, and your TONSILS during your first several years. In later years, you do not have as urgent a need for either your TONSILS or your APPENDIX as you did while you were a small child. "Long regarded as a vestigial organ with no function in the human body, the APPENDIX is now thought to be one of the sites where immune responses are initiated." (Roy Hartenstein, Grolier Encyclopedia 1998) "Its removal also increases a person's susceptibility to leukemia, Hodgkin's disease, Cancer of the Colon and Cancer of the ovaries," (In the Beginning, Walt Brown, p.18). "The appendix is required to activate killer B cells in your immune systems like your thyroidactivates killer T cells." (Dr. Ron Allard). "Just imagine whales walking around. Its true." (Whales & Dolphins, Eyes on Nature 1994, p.6) Now they supposedly have vestiges of these "hind legs." These WHALE PELVIC BONES or "leg bones" are essential to hold muscles to perform the reproductive function. Without those bones and muscles the whale can't reproduce. It has nothing to do with walking on land. Furthermore, the male and female whale anatomy of these PELVIC BONES are very different. Boa and Python snakes each have two claws attached to two bones near their rear ends used in mating. These are not vestigial hind legs. Humans have a TAILBONE. We are told that this COCCYX is the "remains of bones that once occupied the long tail of a tree-living ancestor" (Health Biology, 1991, p.264) This is "all that is left of the tail that most mammals still use" (Discover Magazine June 2004). Man used to have a tail but lost it because he didn't need it? Who couldn't use a third hand? The truth is that there are nine little muscles that attach to the human tailbone without which you could not have a bowel movement, walk or sit upright. Male nipples are purely for sexual stimulation and since the woman was created in man's image, she also has breast nipples for sexual stimulation (1 Cor. 11:7). But her breasts also supply milk.

We are led to believe that somehow "life" learned how to reproduce itself. But why would any organism need to reproduce? Why would it even want to reproduce since that creates more competition for food? Why not instead just live for the moment? There is no necessity in the creature itself to be replaced by a similar form of life when it dies. Existence of reproductive apparatus cannot be accounted for by the pressure of necessity. Reproductive organs are not required to survive. Children are a hindrance to survival. Yet reproductive organs are not vestiges -- they work perfectly.

There Are No Index Fossils -- "Professing Themselves Wise... (They) Become Fools"

The COELACANTH is an index fossil for 325-410 million-year-old rock (p.404 Biology). The University of Chicago says the fish is "325 million years old" yet it is still alive off the coast of Madagascar. Found in 1938. Roy Mackel traveled to Africa to research DINOSAURS -- 70 million-year old index fossils -- still alive in Congo. He showed the natives a PATASAURUS drawing which they identified as "Mokele-Embembe." "He's not friendly, don't get close" they said. Jeanne Thomas, a missionary in Congo, talks about a DINOSAUR being killed and eaten by natives. Nessi in Scotland and another in Lake Okanogan B.C. Accounts of TYRANOSUARUS REX in China can be found in Marco Polo's writings. In 1925 a dinosaur washed up on a California beach. "A medical pathologist examined a dinosaur bone under a microscope and found dinosaur blood inside the bone." (Earth June1997 p.55-57) A T-Rex bone with blood doesn't last 70 million years. "Trilobite fossils make good index fossils. If a trilobite such as this one is found in a rock layer, the rock layer was probably formed 500 to 600 million years ago." (Holt Modern Earth Science 1989, p.290). But there is a human shoe print with a squashed TRILOBITE inside. It was found by William Meister of Kearns, Utah June 1, 1968. Dr. H.H. Dowling of Utah's Geological Survey verified it was not a mistake. (Bob Jones Earth Science 1993, p.305)(Readers Digest Mysteries of the Unexplained p.38). "TRILOBITE eyes have the most sophisticated eye lenses ever produced by nature." (Lisa Sawver, Science News, Feb. 1974, p.72) "The eyes of early TRILOBITES ... have never been exceeded for complexity or acuity" (Stephen J. Gould Natural History Feb. 1984, p.23). This means they weren't primitive. There are certain isopods still alive which are very similar to trilobites except they have one shell rather than three. Deep sea Isopod crustaceans are found in coastal waters of Florida and Mexico. (For information about living Trilobites, see The Evolution Cruncher, p.52). GRAPHTALITES, are index fossils for 410 million year-old rocks (Earth Magazine Sept. 1993) Yet they live in the South Pacific today.

If dinosaurs really are tens of millions of years old, why have scientists found dinosaur bones with soft tissue still in them? The following is from an NBC News report about one of these discoveries. "For more than a century, the study of dinosaurs has been limited to fossilized bones. Now, researchers have recovered 70 million-year-old soft tissue, including what may be blood vessels and cells, from a Tyrannosaurus rex." (AP, Washington, March 24, 2005).

Mutations and Natural Selection Have No Creative Abilities

Paul told us to avoid "oppositions of science falsely so called" (1 Tim. 6:20). God said that each animal reproduces "after its kind." Mutations only scramble existing information, but do not increase genetic complexity. There are no mutations that increase genetic information. Why don't textbooks ever give an example of a beneficial mutation? Because mutations are NEVER BENEFICIAL or NEW. New or better changes from mutations have never been observed or demonstrated. They don't create something new. A five-legged calf (only four being usable). A four-winged fruit fly that can't fly. A two-headed turtle. Short-legged sheep. These are the first ones the wolf will catch. It is a LOSS of correct information. Mutations are harmful. There are no good mutations. God created everything PERFECT. People with Sickle-cell Anemia can't get Malaria; just as those with amputated legs can't get athlete's foot. "No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution." (Pierre-Paul Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms, 1977, p.88). "Fruit flies refuse to become anything but fruit flies under any circumstances yet devised." (Lane Lester PhD. in Genetics, The Natural Limits of Biological Change, 1989, p.89). You can nuke them, microwave them, X-ray them (see In The Beginning, by Walt Brown, p.34). But all mutations observed produced flies that were INFERIOR to the original fly. Therefore, they concluded, fruit flies must have evolved as far as they can go. That was their own conclusion. Natural Selection just keeps the species strong. It has no creative properties. Natural Selection can only select from existing varieties. It is quality control by removing defective organisms. "Natural selection may have a stabilizing effect, but it does not promote speciation. It is not a creative force as many people have suggested." (Daniel Brooks "A Downward Slope to Greater Diversity" Science vol. 217, 24 Sept. 1982, p.1240). "Natural selection can act only on those biologic properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptational needs." (Parasitology, 6th ed. Lea & Febiger, p.516). Survival of the fittest does not explain arrival of the fittest. How do you know it is the fittest? Because it survived. Why did it survive? Because it is the fittest. (Tautology). Often it is just the survival of the luckiest. For instance, when a whale swims through a school of sardines and eats 80% of them.

But don't bacteria become resistant to drugs? To advance their view, evolutionists have long pointed to mutations with beneficial effects. The most common example given: mutations sometimes make bacteria RESISTANT to antibiotics (germ-killing drugs). And so the argument goes, "If mutations can make the bacteria STRONGER, they must be able to do the same for other creatures." Dr. Spetner points out that this is based on a misunderstanding, for the mutations that cause antibiotic resistance still involve INFORMATION LOSS. For example, to destroy a bacterium, the antibiotic streptomycin attaches to a part of the bacterial cell called ribosomes. Mutations sometimes cause a structural DEFORMITY in ribosomes. Since the antibiotic cannot connect with the MISSHAPEN ribosome, the bacterium is RESISTANT. But even though this mutation turns out to be beneficial [for the moment], it still constitutes a LOSS of genetic INFORMATION, not a gain. No "evolution" has taken place; the bacteria are NOT STRONGER. In fact, under normal conditions, with no antibiotic present, they are WEAKER than their non-mutated cousins" (from Case Against Darwin, ch. 2)."Lynn Margolis is a Distinguished University Professor of Biology at the University of Massachusetts ... At one of her many public talks she asks the molecular biologists in the audience to name a single, unambiguous example of the formation of a new species by the accumulation of mutations. Her challenge goes unmet." (M.J. Behe, Darwin's Black Box, 1996, p.26).

Most evolutionists tell you that macro-evolution is just micro-evolution over longer periods of time. This is a myth. "The central question of the Chicago conference was was whether the mechanisms underlying microevolution can be extrapolated to explain the phenomena of macro-evolution.... the answer can be given as a clear, No." (Roger Lewin, "Evolution Theory Under Fire," Science, vol. 210, Nov. 21, 1980, p.883)

How can we explain the creation of new information that is required for one animal to turn into another animal? No evolutionary process has ever been shown to be able to create new biological information. One scientist described the incredible amount of new information that would be required to transform microbes into men this way. “The key issue is the type of change required — to change microbes into men requires changes that increase the genetic information content, from over half a million DNA ‘letters’ of even the ‘simplest’ self-reproducing organism to three billion ‘letters’ (stored in each human cell nucleus).


DNA Codes Require a Code Writer

DNA is so incredibly complex that it is absolutely absurd to suggest that such a language system could have “evolved” all by itself by accident. When it comes to storing massive amounts of information, nothing comes close to the efficiency of DNA. A single strand of DNA is thousands of times thinner than a strand of human hair. One pinhead of DNA could hold enough information to fill a stack of books stretching from the earth to the moon 500 times. Although DNA is wound into tight coils, your cells can quickly access, copy, and translate the information stored in DNA. DNA even has a built-in proofreader and spell-checker that ensure precise copying. Only about one mistake slips through for every 10 billion nucleotides that are copied.

Can you solve the following riddle by Perry Marshall? 1) DNA is not merely a molecule with a pattern; it is a code, a language, and an information storage mechanism. 2) All codes are created by a conscious mind; there is no natural process known to science that creates coded information. 3) Therefore DNA was designed by a mind. If you can provide an empirical example of a code or language that occurs naturally, you’ve toppled my proof. All you need is one.

The physical creation obeys coded mathematical laws of fractal design (snowflakes; snail shells; ferns; brocolli; ram's horns; trees; mountains; coastline; spiral galaxies). These fractal formulas create repetitious and perfect beauty. Why? It's not necessary for survival. Abstract laws of mathematics don't evolve. There is no mechanism for abstract algorythms or laws of mathematics to evolve. Where are the intermediate steps? Where are the random accidents and transitional forms? If fractal mathematics proves that nature is already perfect, why does evolution say it is in transition? Perfection in beauty doesn't just happen by accident. The Word took 22 Hebrew letters and spoke all creation into existence. "O LORD, your word is established in heaven forever" (GW; Ps. 119:89). "He is before all things, and by him all things consist" (Col. 1:17) "and upholding all things by the word of his power" (Heb. 1:3). Some of our Lord's algorythms may have looked like this: Zn2 + C = Zn + 1 or Zn3 + C = Zn + 1

"After its Kind"

According to evolutionists, the Ancient Greenling Damselfly last showed up in the fossil record about 300 million years ago. But it still exists today. So why hasn’t it evolved at all over the time frame? Nobody has ever observed macroevolution take place in the laboratory or in nature. In other words, nobody has ever observed one kind of creature turn into another kind of creature. The entire theory of evolution is based on blind faith.

Evolutionist Jeffrey Schwartz, a professor of anthropology at the University of Pittsburgh, openly admits that “the formation of a new species, by any mechanism, has never been observed.” Even evolutionist Stephen J. Gould of Harvard University has admitted that the record shows that species do not change. The following is how he put it during a lecture at Hobart & William Smith College. “Every paleontologist knows that most species don’t change. That’s bothersome….brings terrible distress. ….They may get a little bigger or bumpier but they remain the same species and that’s not due to imperfection and gaps but stasis. And yet this remarkable stasis has generally been ignored as no data. If they don’t change, its not evolution so you don’t talk about it.”

As a school teacher, you don't have to teach evolution. "Teachers can teach Creation Science in the classroom" by Robert L. Simonds Th.D. (Impact Oct. 1989). Two states, Arkansas and Louisiana, passed laws REQUIRING that Creation be taught. Both were struck down. It has to be voluntary on the teacher's part. It has never been against the law to teach Creation. "No statute exists in any state to bar instruction in 'Creation Science'. It could be taught before, and it can be taught now." -- Stephen Jay Gould, The Verdict on Creationism, New York Times, July 19, 1987 p. 34. If you destroy a child's faith in the Bible by teaching Evolution, Jesus said, "Whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the sea" (Matt. 18:6).

Symbiotic Relationships Require Separate Organisms Coming Into Existence at the Same Time, or Neither Species Would Survive

Which evolved first, the termite that eats wood but can't digest it; or the bacteria in the termite's gut that digests the wood but needs the termite as a host? Which evolved first, the bees that pollenate the flowers or the flowers that provide the food for bees? Which evolved first, plants that give off oxygen which animals need or animals that give off carbon dioxide which plants need? In fact, plants and animals are so interconnected and harmonious in their symbiotic relationships that it is as if they were all DESIGNED for eachother from the beginning. Complex living systems cannot evolve piece by piece (see Darwin's Black Box by Michael Behe). They are too interconnected and dependent on eachother. "Irreducible complexity." (i.e. a mousetrap) "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous successive slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down" (Bombardier Beetle, blood clotting system, genetic system) -- Charles Darwin. Even the human eye ball could not evolve in small consecutive Darwinian steps. The eye ball can only be used when it is perfect -- otherwise it is perfectly useless and vestigial. "To suppose that the eye ... could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree" (-- Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, 1859, p.217). A half wing half leg will be poorly adapted for either purpose and will be eliminated by natural selection.

Which evolved first: blood, the heart, or the blood vessels for the blood to travel through? Which evolved first: the mouth, the stomach, the digestive fluids, or the ability to poop? Which evolved first: the windpipe, the lungs, or the ability of the body to use oxygen? Which evolved first: the bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or the muscles to move the bones? In order for blood to clot, more than 20 complex steps need to successfully be completed. How in the world did that process possibly evolve?

"The atheist's nightmare: A banana. A close study of a banana reveals three ridges on the far side and two ridges on the near side. If you get your hand ready to grip a banana you will notice there are three grooves on the far side of your hand and two grooves on the near side. The banana and the hand are perfectly made one for the other. The Maker of the banana made it with a non-slip surface. Inward contents are color-coded: green, too early, black, too late, yellow just right. God placed a tab at the top. When you pull the tab, the contents don't squirt in your face. The wrapper, which is bio-degradable, has perforations. Notice how gracefully the segments sit over the human hand. There's a point at the top for ease of entry. Just the right shape for the human mouth. Its chewy, easy to digest. Its even curved toward the face to make the whole process so much easier. Seriously, the whole creation testifies to the genius of God's creative hand." -- Ray Comfort. Is it to a living banana's advantage to be killed and eaten by a man to benefit him? Is it to a chicken's advantage to have its living eggs eaten to benefit man? Etcetera.

The Fruit of the Evolutionary Tree

"A corrupt (evolutionary) tree bringeth forth evil fruit" (Matt. 7:17). "You are an ANIMAL and share a common heritage with EARTHWORMS" (Biology: Visualizing Life, Holt, 1994). "Adolf Hitler's mind was captivated by evolutionary thinking ... Evolutionary ideas ... lie at the basis of all that is WORST in Mein Kampf and in his public speeches." (Darwin, Before and After, Robert Clark 1948, p.115). "A direct line runs from Darwin, through the father of the Eugenics movement -- Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton -- to the extermination camps of Nazi Europe." (Martin Brookes, "Ripe Old Age", New Scientist 161 (2171). "75% of all children raised in Christian homes who attend public schools will REJECT the Christian faith by their first year of college" --Caryl Metritiane author. ("Let My Children Go" video -- Jeremiahfilms.com) "I myself have little doubt that in England it was long-age uniformitarian geology and the theory of Evolution that changed us from a Christian to a PAGAN nation" (F. Sherwood Taylor, "Geology Changes the Outlook," Curator of the Museum of the History of Science, Oxford England). Philosopher David Hull of Northwestern University wrote, regarding the implications of theistic evolution on the character of God, that: "Whatever the God implied by evolutionary theory and the data of natural history may be like, He is not the Protestant God of waste not, want not. He is also NOT a LOVING God who CARES about his productions. He is not even the awful God portrayed in the Book of Job. The God of Galapagos is CARELESS, WASTEFUL, INDIFFERENT, almost DIABOLICAL. He is certainly not the sort of god to whom anyone would be inclined to pray." (David L. Hull, "The God of Galapagos," review of Darwin on Trial by Phillip Johnson, Nature, vol. 352 [Aug. 8, 1991], p.486 as cited by Henry Morris p.416). But God's work is "PERFECT" the first time (Deut. 32:4) while the god of evolution is DECEITFUL (Heb. 11:3) and CRUEL. "Thus from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of higher animals, directly follows" (Origin of Species, p.243). Jacques Monrod, a Nobel-Prize-Winner in biology, when commenting on theistic evolution, stated that: "Natural selection is the BLINDEST and most CRUEL way of evolving new species, and more and more complex and refined organisms ... The struggle for life and elimination of the weakest is a HORRIBLE PROCESS, against which our whole modern ethics revolts. An ideal society is a non-selective society, one where the WEAK IS PROTECTED; which is exactly the REVERSE of the so-called natural law. I am surprised that a Christian would defend the idea that this is the process which God more or less set up in order to have evolution." (Jacques Monrod, "The Secret of Life," Interview with LaurieJohn, Australian Broadcasting Company, June 10, 1976). Did man bring death into the world or did death bring man into the world?
"Evolution is a fairy tale for grownups. The theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless." (Professor Louis Bounoure, Director of the Strasbourg Zoological Museum)
"Let men thoroughly believe that they are the work ... of CHANCE; that NO SUPERIOR INTELLIGENCE concerns itself with human affairs; that all their improvements PERISH FOREVER at death; that the weak have NO GUARDIAN, and the injured NO AVENGER; that there is NO RECOMPENSE for sacrifices to uprightness and the public good; that an oath is UNHEARD in heaven; that secret crimes have NO WITNESS but the perpetrator; that human existence has NO PURPOSE, and human virtue NO UNFAILING FRIEND; that this brief life is everything to us, and death is total, EVERLASTING EXTINCTION; once let them thoroughly abandon religion, and who can conceive or describe the extent of the desolation which would follow? ... selfishness and sensuality would absorb the whole man." (Religion the Only Basis of Society by William Channing, p.285, McGuffy's 5th Eclectic Reader).

Why Do So Many Believe in Evolution?

"Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation, and that is unthinkable." (Sir Arthur Keith) (It doesn't support our wicked lifestyle). Haeckel claimed 'spontaneous generation' must be true because otherwise "it would be necessary to believe in a Creator." (Records From the University of Jena Trial in 1875, Dr. Edward Blick, Blick Engineering, Norman OK). "I suppose the reason why we leapt at the Origin of Species was that the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores" (Sir Julian Huxley -- head of UNESCO and one of the world's leading evolutionists in a TV interview). "I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian... evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today" (Dr. Michael Ruse, Professor of Philosophy and Zoology at the University of Guelph). "Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution we do not have one iota of fact." (Dr. T.N. Tahmisian, a physiologist for the Atomic Energy Commission, USA). "The theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless." (Louis Bounoure, Professor of Biology at the University of Strasbourg, Determinism and Finality, edited by Flammarion, 1957, p.79). "(Evolution) is a general postulate to which all theories, all hypotheses ... must henceforth bow ... in order to be thinkable and true. Evolution is a light which illuminates all facts, which all lines of thought must follow." (Pierre T. de Chardin, as quoted by F.J.Ayala, Journal of Heredity 68:3-10 (1977)). "The theory of evolution ... will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future" (Malcolm Muggeridge -- journalist and philosopher, Pascal Lectures, University of Waterloo, Ontario Canada). "And they bend their tongues like the bow for lies: but they are not valiant for the truth upon the earth; for they proceed from evil to evil, and they know not me, saith the Lord" (Jer. 9:3).

A watch is proof of a watchmaker. A building is proof of a builder. A painting is proof of a painter. The creation is proof of a Creator. "As they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind" (Rom. 1:28). "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie" (2 Th. 2:11). God's wisdom and power are evident by observing his creation, "so they are without excuse ... Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man, and birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.... Who exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever " (Rom. 1:20-25). "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them who believe not" (2 Cor. 4:4). Proverbs 19:27 warns us to "cease to hear (evolutionary) instruction that causes thee to err from (Bible) knowledge." "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ" (Col. 2:8). Don't "set (any) ... wicked thing before" your eyes (Ps. 101:3). "Whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea" (Matt. 18:6). "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with ... all thy mind" (Matt. 22:37).