Sunday, 3 June 2007

Those Typing Monkeys Don't Prove Evolution

Attempts have been made to support evolution by appealing to mathematics to justify long ages. For example, Nobel prize winner, George Wald, wrote, "Time is the hero of the plot. Given enough time anything can happen - the impossible becomes probable, the improbable becomes certain." (1)

Thomas Huxley ("Darwin's Bulldog") used this technique in Oxford, in 1860, while debating Samuel Wilberforce. He stated that if monkeys randomly strummed typewriter keys for a long enough time, then sooner or later Psalm 23 would be printed out. Huxley used this argument to demonstrate that life could have originated on Earth by chance. (2)

Julian Huxley (1887-1975) repeated this analogy to 'prove' that long periods of time could allow impossible evolution to occur. In his analogy, given enough time, monkeys randomly typing on typewriters could eventually type out the complete works of Shakespeare. (3)

Stephen Hawking used the monkey story in 1988. He proposed that if there was a horde of typing monkeys, then "very occasionally by pure chance they will type out one of Shakespeare's sonnets." (4)

When all these outlandish statements were made "... no evolutionary scientist or mathematician who knew better raised a single objection." (5) So as a result, these statements have convinced many people that 5 billion years is enough time for life to evolve on Earth.

This ruse has been very convincing because most people have difficulty comprehending very small and extremely large numbers. For example, how long would it take someone to count to 1 billion, non-stop? (Answer on the bottom of the last page)

Just how logical is this monkey story? In simple terms, if every square foot of the earth's surface was covered with monkeys randomly typing on typewriters, at the rate of ten characters per second (about 5 times the realistic speed) they could not do the job. Even if they typed non-stop for 30 billion years there would not be the slightest chance that one of them would type even a single five word sentence of 31 characters, with spaces and punctuation in the correct place. The probability for them to achieve this is less than one chance in a trillion. (6)

Richard Dawkins also appeals to the monkeys to convince his readers that evolution by natural selection is plausible. He believes that a thousand such monkeys could type Shakespeare's sentence, "Methinks it is like a weasel." However, the probability of them typing this six-word sentence (including spaces), is one chance in 1039. (7)

It has been calculated that it would be statistically impossible to randomly type even the first 100 characters in Shakespeare's "Hamlet". If the monkeys typed only in lower case, including the 27 spaces in the first 100 characters, the chances are 27100 (ie. one chance in 10143). (8)

"If each proton in the observable universe were a typing monkey (roughly 1080 in all), and they typed 500 characters per minute (faster than the fastest secretary), around the clock for 20 billion years, then all the monkeys together could make 5x1096 attempts at the characters. It would require an additional 3x1046 such universes to have an even chance at success." (9)

Recently, the reality of this last statement has been so damaging to the support for Darwinian evolution, that many evolutionists have taken up the "additional universes" scenario as a way out. They change the analogy and invent an unimaginably large number of universes that are all full of monkeys. They believe that under these new conditions, sooner or later one of the monkeys will succeed. This is the basis of the Anthropic Principle (see my lecture notes #8, "The Anthropic Principle", for a refutation of this theory).

There is a second counter-argument to the mathematical impossibility of evolution. It suggests that when a monkey types the correct key it stays, but when an incorrect key is hit it is 'rubbed out'. This reasoning is based on the assumption that evolution has proceeded in a positive direction, always upwards. As evolution isn't always positive (ie. devolution can also occur), this argument is not valid. (10)

A third counter-argument considers what is called cumulative selection. In it, the monkeys type in stages, stopping to check their work, saving what is close to the target sentence. This process is repeated until the monkey's random typing reproduces the sentence. (11)

This description of evolution is also false because evolution never has anything to aim at. "Nature presents life with no targets. Life shambles forward, surging here, shuffling there, the small advantages accumulating on their own until something novel appears on the broad evolutionary screen - an arch or an eye, an intricate pattern of behaviour, the complexity characteristic of life." (12)

Returning to the mathematics, Michael Behe estimates the probability of just getting the 30,000 gene pieces required for blood clotting in the right sequence as 10-18. To get the genes plus the clotting activator working together by chance has the probability of 10-36. (13)

Fred Hoyle estimates the following probabilities for chance, random arrangement of amino acids:- (14)

  • 10-19 for a ten amino acid polypeptide
  • 10-20 for a functional enzyme
  • 10-130 for the histone H4 molecule
  • 10-40,000 for all of life's 2,000 enzymes

This last value (10-40,000) shows the probability that a very, very tiny part of evolution could have happened. This probability is more unlikely than the monkey's chance typing (viz 10-143) which have been used to 'prove' evolution.

Bear in mind that Mathematical Zero is 10-50. Any value smaller than this is relegated by mathematicians to the realm of 'never happening'.

"No matter how large the environment one considers, life cannot have had a random beginning. Troops of monkeys thundering away at random on typewriters could not produce the works of Shakespeare, for the practical reason that the whole observable universe is not large enough to contain the necessary monkey hordes, the necessary typewriters, and certainly the waste paper baskets required for the deposition of wrong attempts. The same is true for living material". (15)

To sum up this mathematical analysis of the monkey analogy, the monkeys could not succeed. Therefore, if the monkeys couldn't succeed, the analogy predicts that evolution could not have succeeded.

Time then, actually destroys the assumptions of evolution.

Bearing in mind that the evolution of life requires the evolution of genetic information, let's look at the monkey analogy from an information perspective. Is it appropriate to use typing monkeys as proof of the origin of life, including its genetic information?

Richard Dawkins used a computer program in his attempt to prove that the typing monkeys would succeed. Information expert Werner Gitt describes Dawkins' conclusions as feeble-minded and fallacious. Gitt says that "the goal will always be reached, because the programming is fixed. Even the number of letters is given in advance. It is obvious that no information is generated, on the contrary, it has been predetermined". (16)

Analysing the monkey analogy using information theorems will help to see if the information necessary for life (ie. DNA) could have evolved. Specifically:- (17)

  • Information Theorem #2 "Information only arises through an intentional, volitional act.";
  • Information Theorem #11 "A code system is always the result of a mental process - it requires an intelligent origin or inventor.";

and

  • Information Theorem #16 "If a chain of symbols comprises only a statistical sequence of characters, it does not represent information."

So it turns out that chance, random events cannot create information - which includes DNA (the information storage facility in living things).

If a six word Shakespearian sentence could not be typed in more time than the earth is believed to have existed, How could DNA have evolved by random events? Remember, the DNA in human cells contains approximately 1.5 gigabytes of data, equivalent to the information in 12,000 books. (18)

The typing monkey analogy, therefore, has no bearing on information, or on life, as it is impossible for DNA information to be created by chance, random events. (19)

from: www.unmaskingevolution.com

Offer Without Answer

Dr. Hovind's $250,000 Offer
Author: Dr. Kent Hovind

Formerly $10,000 offered since 1990

I have a standing offer of $250,000 to anyone who can give any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000 offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more than a religious belief.

Observed phenomena:

Most thinking people will agree that..

  1. A highly ordered universe exists.
  2. At least one planet in this complex universe contains an amazing variety of life forms.
  3. Man appears to be the most advanced form of life on this planet.

Known options:

Choices of how the observed phenomena came into being..

  1. The universe was created by God.
  2. The universe always existed.
  3. The universe came into being by itself by purely natural processes (known as evolution) so that no appeal to the supernatural is needed.

Evolution has been acclaimed as being the only process capable of causing the observed phenomena.

Evolution is presented in our public school textbooks as a process that:

  1. Brought time, space, and matter into existence from nothing.
  2. Organized that matter into the galaxies, stars, and at least nine planets around the sun. (This process is often referred to as cosmic evolution.)
  3. Created the life that exists on at least one of those planets from nonliving matter (chemical evolution).
  4. Caused the living creatures to be capable of and interested in reproducing themselves.
  5. Caused that first life form to spontaneously diversify into different forms of living things, such as the plants and animals on the earth today (biological evolution).

People believe in evolution; they do not know that it is true. While beliefs are certainly fine to have, it is not fair to force on the students in our public school system the teaching of one belief, at taxpayers’ expense. It is my contention that evolutionism is a religious worldview that is not supported by science, Scripture, popular opinion, or common sense. The exclusive teaching of this dangerous, mind-altering philosophy in tax-supported schools, parks, museums, etc., is also a clear violation of the First Amendment.

How to collect the $250,000:

Prove beyond reasonable doubt that the process of evolution (option 3 above, under "known options") is the only possible way the observed phenomena could have come into existence. Only empirical evidence is acceptable. Persons wishing to collect the $250,000 may submit their evidence in writing or schedule time for a public presentation. A committee of trained scientists will provide peer review of the evidence offered and, to the best of their ability, will be fair and honest in their evaluation and judgment as to the validity of the evidence presented.

If you are convinced that evolution is an indisputable fact, may I suggest that you offer $250,000 for any empirical or historical evidence against the general theory of evolution. This might include the following:

  1. The earth is not billions of years old (thus destroying the possibility of evolution having happened as it is being taught).
  2. No animal has ever been observed changing into any fundamentally different kind of animal.
  3. No one has ever observed life spontaneously arising from nonliving matter.
  4. Matter cannot make itself out of nothing.

My suggestion:

Proponents of the theory of evolution would do well to admit that they believe in evolution, but they do not know that it happened the way they teach. They should call evolution their "faith" or "religion," and stop including it in books of science. Give up faith in the silly religion of evolutionism, and trust the God of the Bible (who is the Creator of this universe and will be your Judge, and mine, one day soon) to forgive you and to save you from the coming judgment on man’s sin.

*NOTE:

When I use the word evolution, I am not referring to the minor variations found in all of the various life forms (microevolution). I am referring to the general theory of evolution which believes these five major events took place without God:

  1. Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
  2. Planets and stars formed from space dust.
  3. Matter created life by itself.
  4. Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves.
  5. Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e., fish changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles changed to birds or mammals).

Answers to Commonly Asked Questions about the $250,000 Offer

Students in tax-supported schools are being taught that evolution is a fact. We are convinced that evolution is a religion masquerading as science and should not be part of any science curriculum. It has nothing to do with the subject of science. There are at least six different and unrelated meanings to the word “evolution” as used in science textbooks.

  1. Cosmic evolution- the origin of time, space and matter. Big Bang.
  2. Chemical evolution- the origin of higher elements from hydrogen.
  3. Stellar and planetary evolution- Origin of stars and planets.
  4. Organic evolution- Origin of life from inanimate matter.
  5. Macroevolution- Origin of major kinds.
  6. Microevolution Variations within kinds- Only this one has been observed, the first five are religious. They are believed, by faith, even though there is no empirical evidence to prove them in any way. While I admire the great faith of the evolutionists who accept the first five I object to having this religious propaganda included in with legitimate science at taxpayer’s expense.

Even a quick review of a typical public school textbook will show that students are being deceived into thinking all six types of evolution above have been proven because evidence is given for minor variations called micro-evolution. The first five are smuggled in when no one is watching.

This deception is a classic case of bait and switch. One definition of evolution (such as “descent with modification”) is given and the others are assumed to be true by association. The first five meanings are believed by faith, have never been observed and are religious. Only the last one is scientific. It is also what the Bible predicted would happen. The animals and plants would bring forth “after their kind” in Genesis 1.

Many have responded to my offer of $250,000 for scientific proof for evolution. The terms and conditions of the offer are detailed very clearly on my web site www.drdino.com. Here are some answers to some commonly asked questions.

  1. The offer is legitimate. A wealthy friend of mine has the money in the bank. If the conditions of the offer are met, the money will be paid out immediately. My word is good.
  2. The members of the committee of scientists that will judge the evidence are all highly trained, have advanced degrees in science as well as many years of experience in their field. For example: there is a zoologist, a geologist, an aerospace engineer, a professor of radiology and biophysics, and an expert in radio metric dating to name a few. They are busy people and do not wish to waste time on foolish responses. Nor do they wish to waste time arguing with skeptics and scoffers who seem to have nothing else to do than ask silly questions when they really don’t want answers (so far this has been the typical response to the offer). I will not reveal their names for this reason. Any legitimate evidence will be forward to them and they will respond. At that time they may identify themselves if they choose. The merit of the evidence presented and the reasonableness of their response does not depend on who they are.
  3. Evidence of minor changes within the same kind of plant or animal does not qualify as evidence and will not be sent to the committee to waste their time. For example, doubling the chromosome number of a sterile hybrid does not add additional genetic information; it duplicates what is already present in the parent plant. Because of the absence of additional genetic information the resultant plant can't be classified as different or new species. The plant may differ in a number of ways - bigger, vigorous as observed in any polyploid plants. Such easily recognizable phenotypic changes have confused many. Some evolutionists have jumped to the conclusion that a new species has been evolved. The key is that no new genetic information has been added. Even a new “species” is not proof for evolution as the offer calls for. See the conditions of the $250,000 offer on the web site. Some have insisted on a precise definition of the word “kind”. The Bible defines “kind” as those that are able to “bring forth” or reproduce. Those animals that were originally able to reproduce were of the same kind. There may be diversity now, 6000 years later, that could cause some varieties of the original kind to not be able to reproduce now. For example, I understand that rabbits from Alaska cannot breed with rabbits from Florida yet they are still the same kind of animal. It is obvious that a dog and a wolf are the same “kind” of animal (they are currently classed as different “species” yet are inter-fertile-- hmmm, what is the precise definition of “species”?) where a dog and a fish are not. While there may be some blurry areas that would be worthy of research in defining the original kinds, rather than muddy the issue with these type questions it would be wise to focus on the obvious cases like the dog/fish comparison. These are obviously different “kinds” of animals. So, for the sake of clarity, prove the dog and the fish evolved from a common ancestor. The honest scientist would be wise to admit that no evidence exists that could begin to prove the dog and the fish have a common ancestor. He may believe that they are related but that is not science and that is my point in the offer. Some believe this type of evolution happens but it should not be presented to innocent students as a “fact”. Further, it certainly is not evidence that the other four definitions of evolution have occurred.
  4. The idea that the majority of scientists believe in the theory is not evidence either. Majority opinion is often wrong and must be corrected. History is full of examples.
  5. Anonymous letters will be ignored.

Rather than simply sending in scientific evidence for evolution, some have wasted lots of their time and mine sending letters demanding to know who is on the committee, what bank account the money is in, asking Bill Clinton type questions about the definition of words like “is”, etc. When I do not respond the way they want me to they post notices on their web sites claiming that I owe them the money or that the offer is a sham! It is obvious they are using the Red Herring tactic to draw attention away from the fact that they have no evidence to support the religion of evolution. I tell everyone who inquires, if you have some evidence, send it in, don’t beat around the bush. Give us the best you have on the first try please to save time.

Many have offered evidence of microevolution and assumed that the other 5 meanings of the word are somehow magically connected. They don’t seem to realize that they are blinded to the obvious. Treat the $250,000 offer as a lawyer would treat a ‘who-done-it’ case. It is your job to prove that what is being taught to our kids as fact (all six meanings of the word evolution above), is indeed a fact. If this cannot be done then it should be admitted that evolution is a religion but not a science. Some say it is unfair to define evolution including the origin of the universe. They say it only has to do with “change in gene frequency over time.” All you need to do is read your local textbook and see that all 6 meanings of the word are part of what is taught as evolution theory. If these nay Sayers are agreeing that it should not be included then they should help me get it out of the books, if they are genuine.

Over the years I have heard many evolutionists say, “Evolution is a theory like gravity is a theory. Don’t you believe in gravity?” They repeat this mantra as if repetition will make it true. Their example is silly of course. We can all observe gravity every moment of our lives. We can do tests and experiments to verify the theory of gravity. No one has ever seen an exception to it. By the same token, no one has ever observed evolution nor been able to demonstrate any evolution beyond minor variations within the kind. To try to make evolution science by associating it with theories like gravity is ridiculous.

Nearly all responses to my $250,000 offer go something like this: “Of course no one can prove evolution, can you prove creation?” This response is what I expected and wanted. Neither theory of origins can be proven. Both involve a great deal of faith in the unseen. So my next logical question is: “Why do I have to pay for the evolution religion to be taught to all the students in the tax supported school system?” Since all taxpayers are being forced to pay for evolution to be taught exclusively in public schools and evolutionists have had the last 130 years and billions of dollars in research grants to prove their religion, the burden of proof is on them to supply proof of their theory.

I do not have time or interest in getting involved in long e-mail debates, but I will talk to anyone by phone or debate with any qualified scientist (even a panel of evolutionists) in a public forum at a university, on radio or TV, as long as there is equal time for each position not each person. If you call, please have a list of topics to discuss or questions to ask and feel free to record the conversation if you like. Just inform me that you are recording please. I hope this response is satisfactory.

I have taught for years that evolution is nothing but a religion mixed in with real science. Many have been duped into believing in it. There is no evidence that any plant or animal ever can or did change to any other kind or creature. It is time that intelligent people the world over began to admit that the king has no clothes! There is no evidence for changes between kinds of animals. The Bible teaches that God made them to “bring forth after their kind.” This is all that has ever been observed. The same Bible teaches that everyone will face the Creator one day to be judged for everything they have said, done or thought. I recommend that everyone prepare for that day by taking advantage of God’s mercy and forgiveness afforded through the free salvation offered to any who will confess their sin and receive Jesus Christ as their Lord. If you are interested in learning more about becoming a Christian, please call me. I travel a lot but always take time for calls when I am in the office. I am most often in Wednesday through Friday at 850-479-3466. Check my itinerary on my web site for my location if you need to talk with me while I am out speaking. If possible, attend a seminar. Seminars are free and we always have a question answer time for those who attend.

Sincerely,
Kent Hovind

from: www.drdino.com

Holes in evolution theory

"WHY EVILUTION!
As Ray Charles on BBC Hard Talk said, when asked by Lyse Doucet if he believed in God, he wisely answered: "Y'know, when I look at the universe, I just can't get myself to believe that it all fell into place by itself!" Wise old Ray! "Yeah" Evilutionists (evolutionist tax-sponsored scientists by humanist and antichrist governments) will say, "That's because Mr. Charles doesn't know a thing about Science!" What they mean is that he doesn't know a thing about Evolutionist Pseudo science based on their false premises and wishful thinking theories.
Evolution first and foremost has to do with the "brainwashing" of the masses! The reason for the theory of Evilution is NOT first and foremost science, but a theorem designed to destroy religious thought, authority, ans especially Christianity.
You could classify Evilution as one of the major weapons in the De-christianisation wars of the (secular) Humanists, the Atheists, the Socialists, the Communists, the Anarchists, the Existentionalists, the Nihilists, the Materialists, and most other ists! All these "isms" are supported by the Gold barons that own all the world's national governments right now, through impossible to pay back loans--like Argentina for example! The BMB's (Big Money Boys), Banking Moguls, like Morgans, Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Warburgs, etc, etc.
And why? These top world families are not at all interested in these isms per sé, but use them only as tools in their war to take over this world not just financially, but totally. They are the spring, the coil, the driving force behind all Globalism, the U.N., the One Worlders, the One World Government or New World Order, and they are Antichrist. They're against dear Jesus and His philosophy, His Father, the God of Love.
Amongst many, Evilution is by far the best weapon in their war on the God of Love, as this theorem--totally endorsed and promted by their media, CNN, BBC,ABC, NBC, Newsweek, Times, Life, Spiegel, Stern, Paris Match, National Geographics, etc. etc. --"undermines" all "credibility" of true spirituality: the belief in and existence of spirits, ghosts, creation, God, Jesus, life after death, etc. Even reducing Near Death Experiences, and Spiritual experiences with the departed "dead" or angels, saints, God, Jesus, etc., f.x. meeting/seeing/communicating with them, as at the Chicago Darwinian Centennial in 1959 Sir Julian Huxley addressed his speech to the congregation of 2,5OO delegates, and said, "Evolution has no room for the supernatural..."

Of course that is one of the great flaws of evolution, it, by nature a materialistic philosophy, can never ever explain spiritual phenomena, like the well-documented intercession by angels, well-documented Near-Death Experiences, well-documented After Death Communications, and even Professor J.H. Huxley himself, the famous agnostic, as he lay dying suddenly looked up at some sight invisible to mortal eyes, and staring awhile, whispered at last, "So it is true."
Poor dimwit! Like these few "Christian" who claim you can believe in both! Evolution was never designed that way. It is designed to drive Mankind into the arms of gross Materialism, that we are in no way subject to a spiritual world anymore, as Jesus claimed, for the "simple reason": "that there just ain't no such thing!"

This Public Opinion belief in Evolution has so festered, that even if great men of thousands of years of history would be alive today and speak their faithful statements of yesteryear, they would be "wiped of the worldly science or art or public life map", so to speak. Believers of God like the following famous VIPs of yore, would have all been hooted down as "religious dupes", "scientific dimwits", "fundamentalists", or at best "pre-humanists thinkers", "deluded pre-historical medeavalians!" Hell NO! What travesty of truth! What disinformation!
We, nor these greats from the not too distant past, will never be indicted, silenced, nor dictated by this failing, faulty, selfpropelling, statistically impossible, tax supported, wishful thinking organised hoax and pseudo-science, (theory is too big a word) of politicaly correct Evilution! If they were dead, they would turn themselves around in their graves, and because they are not they are in the spiritual forefront to help the poor deluded world, even from the other side, to open their deceived eyes to see that the Emperor, indeed has no clothes on whatsoever.

EVOLUTION EXPOSED!
I get so irritated to see BBC spew this falseness, like "We are seeing dinosaurs alive when we see birds flying!" Then this little 3D animated flick flashes over the screen of some hopping autodedactylecticosauris, suddenly sprouting wings, turning into a cleptomanicladectilipiposaurus and finally into a little sparrow. Ugh!
You can't fight Pseudo Science on its own terms, as the theorem spiderweb has spread so bad, that their semantics have become self sustaining, every little latest theory held up by hundreds of former little theorems.
Like the "proof" that fruitflies have begun to "speciate", just because separated groups of them don't want to fuck anymore and produce offspring together, is based on all kinds of presupposed presumptuous, protheses of preconceived prepositions, that lead a life all of their own. Like their debate what constitutes a species to set their own playing field in order to be able to prove that some kind of life is speciating... If you set the definition different they DON'T speciate!
And thus you would have to get down into their fecal matter with them, to prove that all their little fecal piles actually smell like, look like, taste like, behave like, stink like what it really is: SH*T!

There are some brave creationist scientists--labeled "STRICT creationists!" by these damn STRICT Evilutionists (They sure know how to propagandise you & make 'em all sound like a bunch of "fundies") who have made it their vocation to wade through all their shit with them, to fight them on their own field with their own weaponry! But when you happen to read their stuff, don't be intimidated by all their jargonology and semantics, as it is all so minimal and spurious, it wouldnt hold up in a courtcase! Although perhaps they would, having tax supported or heavily funded top lawyers at their beck and call.
The best way is to ridicule them, as was the only way in the sixties & seventies to fight the Marxists and their selfsustained theory & jargon of wrong-foundation wishful thinking in university.
"If Communism is so wonderful, why don't you go live in Russia?" Answer, "Russian Communism is a non-ideal form, because they have leaders still fighting the revolutionary stage. But the TRUE Marxist state will be a result of a long evilutionist (!) process of education to realise anti-authoritarian humans who won't NEED any leaders!"
It would cause laughter with the verbally outwitted. Through their theories the Marxists had hijacked the leadership of many students and student organisations, through intimidation, unholy practices, being aided by Marxist peer-pressure of lecturers and upheld by masonic Marxist professors, that other political confessions hardly dared to open their darn mouths anymore. Even if only out of fear they would be beat up outside the lecture halls. And were they ever authoritarian! Intimidating beardy, dark eyed, fierce looking Trotsky look alike Baader Meinhof types, often ready at a moments notice to sacrifice you on the altar of "the great principle of dialectic materialism!" "Death to the rich Western bourgeois masses!"
They would categorically deny that such a holocaust was going on in the Sovjet Union, that pales the one the Jews suffered. Yet History did prove how 80-100 million Ukrainian and Russians, mostly Christians were massacred, by torture, liquidation, starvation and slave labour in Siberia. A TRUE clash of civilisations! But those students of yore now man the turrets of the media, and prefer to silence that part of history and drive it from TV screens, as it just ain't politically correct. Apt to confuse the poor bewildered masses! You??? When will you wake up? And stand up?

FECAL MATTER ANALYSIS BY EVOLUTIONISTS THEMSELVES
Most people today have been so deceived into believing that the theory of Evolution is true, that it never even occurs to them to question or doubt it! Even many so-called Christians automatically believe the "high priests" of the modern "sacred cow" of science and swallow the lie of Evolution, ignorant of the Biblical advise to "avoid the profane and vain babblings and oppositions of science falsely so called!"--1Tim. 6:2O. which is a direct prohetic verse about the theory of Evolution, for Evolution is not true science at all!
The World has become so buffaloed, so totally deceived, that Evilution is now referred to in most textbooks as "the Great Principle" of biology. But according to the dictionary, a "principle" means a "foundation truth", a "FACT". But there is NO proof for the theory of Evolution!--Therefore it must be believed by FAITH. Yet at the Chicago Darwinian Centennial in 1959 when Sir Julian Huxley addressed his speech to the congregation of 2,5OO delegates, he said, "Evolution has no room for the supernatural...We all accept the FACT of Evolution... Evolution of life is no longer a theory. It is a FACT...the basis of all our thinking."
A "fact" that can't be PROVEN, however, is NOT a fact!- We point out why Evolution is not a fact, but a mere theory instead.
At the core of Evolutionary theory is the big assumption that LIFE somehow arose from NON-LIFE by pure blind CHANCE.--That "there simply `happened' to be the right chemicals in the right place, in the right arrangement, it was just the right time and conditions, and then suddenly!--Presto! Some unknown electro-chemical process took place and LIFE created ITSELF!"--Evolutionists dogmatically assure us. But as Princetown University Professor of Biology, Edwin Conklin, said, "The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged DICTIONARY resulting from an EXPLOSION in a printing shop."
As for the so-called "simple cell", from which the Evolutionists say all living creatures have evolved, "Look" magazine stated, "The cell is as COMPLICATED as NEW YORK CITY!" Evolutionist Loren Eisley likewise admitted in his book, "The Immense Journey": "Intensified effort has revealed that even the supposedly simple amoeba is a complex self-operating chemical factory. The notion that it was merely a simple blob turned out to be, at best, a monstrous caricature of the truth!"
Can you imagine: A dictionary or a chemical factory...or New York City coming into existence by itself--Poof!--Without any assistance from an intelligent designer, planner or creator? Such is the "logic" of Evolution's assumption that the infinitely complex "simple" cell accidentally came TOGETHER, then became ALIVE by blind, unguided chance!
Commenting on this, the British biologist Woodger said, "It is simply DOGMATISM--asserting that what you WANT to believe, did in fact happen!"
According to the Biblical scenario, all of today's plant and animal forms belong to FIXED SPECIES, of which each was individually created by God and has remained in its present form since Creation! Evolution, however, states that all life forms are constantly CHANGING and "EVOLVING" into different, "more advanced" life forms, and that therefore there really is no such thing as a set "SPECIES", since all life forms are related, having evolved from the same basic ancestor, and are even now still in a constant state of change!--So say the Evolutionary theorists!
This is in direct contradiction to God's Word which states that God created all living creatures "after their KIND" and able to bring forth seed or fruit "after their kind." ("Kind" is the King James Bible translation of the Hebrew word "min", today translated more accurately as "species".)
We have never heard yet, & they've never proved yet that any DOG ever became a CAT or a CAT a DOG! There are all kinds of dogs and all kinds of cats, but there are no dog-cats or cat-dogs! Because God created everything "after its own kind" and they can't possibly get OUT of that kind!
These facts even disturbed Darwin, who questioned: "Why, if species have descended from the other species by fine gradation, 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?" The answer to his question is simple! All he had to do was read Genesis chapter one, and he could have known that species have not descended from OTHER species, but were CREATED by GOD in orderly, set "kinds", and THAT'S why all nature is not in confusion!
But some people question: "Haven't the scientists working with genetics produced new species of hybrid plants and animals? Doesn't this prove that entirely new species could evolve from interbreeding between different parent species?" No. The accepted definition among the scientific community of a "species" is: "A group of organisms that freely interbreed and produce fertile offspring." The rare hybrids that can be produced are not "fertile offspring", but are STERILE! As the Collegiate encyclopedia acknowledges: "The infertility of species hybrids is one mechanism by which species can remain distinct."
God Himself has placed the barrier of sterility against the mixing up of His original appointed "kinds". A good example of this is the MULE, which is a species hybrid between a male ass and a female horse. Although outwardly appearing to be a new species, or "kind", it is impossible for a male and female mule to reproduce mule offspring. The only way is to continually cross a male ass with a female horse. That God-ordained biological principle was even verified by the Evolutionary professor of zoology, Richard B. Goldschmidt, who wrote, "Nowhere have the limits of the species been transgressed, and these limits are separated from the limits of the next good species by the unbridged gap, STERILITY."
You might ask, "But what about the extensive RADIATION EXPERIMENTS that have produced actual MUTATIONS and CHANGES in creatures such as the fruitfly? Isn't this ample evidence to prove that similar mutations could be the 'chief building blocks of Evolutionary change' as Sir Julian Huxley has called them, and as most scientists and educators today claim them to be?"
The answer to this is that though fruit flies have been the subject of countless experiments in which they are bombarded with radiation, resulting in many mutations, the mutations produce DEFORMITIES, only dwarfed bodies, shriveled wings etc.--They never produce a new "kind"!
None of the many thousands of scientific experiments with mutations have EVER produced a new species of animal or plant!--NEVER! All of the geneticists and Evolutionists, with all their knowledge, and under "perfect" laboratory conditions...using modern radiation equipment (which multiplies the occurence of mutation a MILLION-fold), have utterly failed to mutate or to change one "kind" into another! They can't even do it when they DELIBERATELY attempt to under IDEAL conditions!--Yet these same Evolutionists SOMEHOW expect us to BELIEVE that blind, unguided CHANCE has produced the millions of beautiful, varying and complex forms of life on Earth today!
To illustrate the effect of gene mutations on an organism, H. Kalmus stated in his book "Genetics", "A popular comparison would be with a watch; if a part of the mechanism is altered by some change, it is very unlikely that the watch will be improved by the accident."
A clear-cut example of the negative effects of gene mutations occurred in HIROSHIMA and NAGASAKI, Japan, at the end of World War II. The members of the populace that escaped immediate death from the hellish atomic bombs used against these cities were subjected to varying degrees of atomic RADIATION--resulting in thousands of mutations. NONE of these mutations produced any new superior, advanced forms of human beings as Evolution might lead us to expect. Instead, the poor victims of these gene mutations suffered deformities, damage & death!
Another crucial point is, if this complicated, fabricated framework of fiction called Evolution were TRUE, then there should be more MISSING LINKS dug up than anything else!--Right? If billions of years of Evolution had taken place, we'd be up to our ears in missing links! But in over 13O years of archaeological and paleontological excavations, literally HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of fossils have been extracted from all fossil-bearing rock strata and NONE of them are "transitional forms" or missing links--they all obviously belong to a definite species! It is estimated that over 1OO,OOO different, distinct species of fossils have been found and categorised!--Yet NO "LINKS"!
A.S. Romer, professor of zoology at Harvard University, recently summed up the present situation when he said, "'Links' are missing just where we most FERVENTLY DESIRE them, and it is all too probable that the `links' will CONTINUE to be missing."
There are NO man-apes and NO ape-men, and all that baloney you read about and see pictures of in most biology textbooks is just hellish tommy-rot! Darwin claimed that "The Simiadae (monkeys) branched off into 2 great stems, the New World and the Old World monkeys; and from the latter,
at a remote period, Man proceeded." However, scientists soon found it impossible to reconstruct a halfway believable Evolutionary chain showing Man rising directly from the ape family, so they cooked up a new theory!:
MODERN Evolutionists now claim that Man came not from the apes, but from a more primitive primate who was the common ancestor of both apes and Man! But as the prominent Evolutionists who wrote the book "The Primates" confessed, "Unfortunately, the early stages of Man's Evolutionary
progress along his individual line remain a TOTAL MYSTERY." And as "The Scientific American" added, "The nature of the line leading to living Man remains a matter of PURE THEORY."
Despite all this, most modern Evolutionists INSIST that Man descended from primates. To "prove" their theory, they point to the AUSTRALOPITHECINES ("southern manapes")--whose fossils have been unearthed in Africa in recent years, and they hail them as "the missing link". A close look at the Australopithecines, however, reveals that they were not "human" at all! For example, their brains were only a THIRD as large as Man's, yet some Evolutionists THEORISE that they were toolmakers, and
therefore Men.-But even this is highly disputed within Evolutionary circles! Famed anthropologist J.T. Robinson claims that the toolmaking was NOT done by these so-called "man-apes" at all, but by TRUE men.
Evolutionist LeGros Clark warned: "There is NO certain evidence that they possessed ANY of
the special attributes which are commonly associated with the human beings of today. Evolutionist R.L. Lehrman wrote: "Australopithecus" was merely an upright intelligent ape, not a man. The small braincase bearing heavy ridges over the eyes was like that of any ape."
22. Next on the list is "PITHECANTHROPUS ERECTUS", affectionately known as "Java Man" for short. He was "discovered" by Professor E. Dubois, follower of Ernest Haeckle (a German Evolutionist who concocted and was caught in several scientific frauds. Haeckle praised and perpetrated Evolutionary theory as a means by which he hoped to destroy Christianity and was the first to dream up the imaginary Evolutionary "Family Tree".)
23. Little does the uninformed person realise that Java Man was "reconstructed" from only a small fragment of a skullcap, 3 teeth and one thighbone--found over 5O feet apart in an old riverbed in Java! Neither do Evolutionists tell you that after the World had accepted this "link", Dr. Dubois himself confessed that `Java Man' was not a "primitive man", but a giant, tree-walking GIBBON! Yes, after FURTHER STUDYING his fossils, Dubois came to the honest conclusion-and announced with CERTAINTY--that "Java Man" was merely an EXTINCT ape and NOT half-ape, half-man! He was NOT the
"missing link" after all!
Next: The "PILTDOWN MAN" or EOANTHROPUS DAWSONI!: The "Encyclopedia Britannica", 1946 edition reported: "The discovery which ranks next in importance was made by Mister Charles Dawson at Piltdown, Sussex, between the years 1911 and 1915. He found the greater part of the left half of a deeply-mineralised human skull, also part of the right half; the right half of the lower jaw carrying the first and second molar teeth.--Amongst British authorities there is now agreement that the skull and the jaw are parts of the same individual."
However, it was later found out that the resurrection of the Piltdown Man involved considerable "monkey business"! "Science Newsletter" tells us: "One of the most famous fakes exposed by scientific proof was Piltdown Man, found in Sussex, England...and thought by some to be 5OO,OOO
years old. After much controversy it turned out to be not a primitive man at all, but a composite of a skull of a modern man and the jawbone of an ape...The jawbone had been 'doctored' with bichromate of potash and iron to make it look mineralised." The skull was taken from a Medieval graveyard!
Even the teeth had been filed down to look older! As "Reader's Digest" pointed out: "Every important piece proved a forgery. Piltdown Man was a fraud from start to finish!"
Since Evolutionists theorise that we evolved from the before-mentioned Australopithecines, they "logically assume" that these apes must've evolved into some brutish form of sub-human "Man" before
becoming mo dern Man. And what would such a non-existent creature look like? Why, more or less HUMAN, but very hairy and with thick brows, walking with a stoop and very moronic-looking!--Just exactly what you'd EXPECT a "missing link" to look like!
So when scientists discovered some very ancient HUMAN SKELETONS in the Neander Valley in Germany, they immediately called it "Neanderthal Man" and "reconstructed" his body and appearance to comform to what they thought a sub-human "Man" SHOULD look like!
But "The Collegiate Encyclopedia" wrote: "Neanderthal Man is traditionally pictured as having a bull neck, knock knees, a stooped gait, and a rather bestial appearance. The TRUTH is that Neanderthal Man had NONE of these traits, he walked erect, and his appearance was as pleasant as that of contemporary Man!" In other words, "Neanderthal Man" looked just like US! And WHY?--Because so-called "Neanderthal Man" IS modern Man! The World has been deceived into believing that the ancient human skeletons they've excavated were the remains of a more "primitive" Man, when they are ACTUALLY the remains of MODERN Man who lived long ago! But Evolutionists would never admit that!
The Encyclopedia continues: "A remarkable fact about Neanderthal Man is that in males, brain volume varied between 1,425 cc and 1,641 cc with an AVERAGE of 1553 CC. The average brain volume of MODERN Man is about 135O CC. Thus, the average size of the brain in Neanderthal Man was SUBSTANTIALLY GREATER than it is in contemporary Man." So to theorise that Neanderthal Man "was a more primitive, less intelligent subhuman species" is absolutely ABSURD!
Another disturbing problem for Evolutionists is that the remains of modern-type Man have been found in the SAME rock strata as the so-called "prehistoric" Men!--Proving that Man existed at the SAME TIME as these upright apes as well as Neanderthal Man. Other remains of modern-type men found in a LOWER, OLDER layer than their supposedly more primitive "prehistoric ancestors" were unearthed in 1947 at Fonte Chevade, France. "The Collegiate Encyclopedia" states: "In `Fonte Chevade Man' we have the evidence that Homo Sapiens (modern Man) actually PRECEDED Neanderthal Man in order of appearance."
So here the Evolutionists have to admit that "Homo Sapiens", normal modern-type human beings, were running around at the same time as the so-called Pithecanthropines, and before the Neanderthals--both of whom we are "supposed" to have evolved from!--HA! In other words, Man DIDN'T descend from apes, but they CO-EXISTED at the SAME time as DIFFERENT, DISTINCT SPECIES! Man is the same NOW as he was THEN and these apes would be too, except that they have become extinct!
It takes more faith to believe Evolution--this incredible, fictitious, confused, self-contradicting fairy tale of Man's origins--than it does to accept God's simple, inspired explanation in His Word! What about YOU? What do YOU believe?--The TRUTH of GOD?--Or Evolution's foolish fables?
Most people today don't know WHAT to believe! They don't know WHERE they're going. They don't have any focal point of reality and don't know what life is all about or who they are, or if their being alive has any purpose or value! Since the devilish theory of Evolution has eroded the only sure foundation of Truth in their minds and hearts, they're left with nothing to base their lives on.
34. If you want God's plain simple TRUTH, all you have to do is humble yourself as a little child and ask Jesus to open your eyes and come into your life. This is why Jesus said, "Except ye be converted, and become as little CHILDREN, ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of
Heaven!"--Matthew 18:3.
The God of Love is the only One Who can give MEANING to the Universe and PURPOSE to the planets and LOVE to our hearts and PEACE to our minds and REST to our spirits and HAPPINESS to our lives and JOY to our souls and the WISDOM to know that "the fear of GOD is the beginning of wisdom" (Proverbs
9:1O), and "the wisdom of this World is FOOLISHNESS with God"!--1Corinthians 3:19. Jesus said, "If ye continue in MY Words, ye shall know the TRUTH, and the Truth shall make you FREE!"--John 8:32. Free from sin, self, hypocrisy and the damnable lies which deceive and delude so many!--Like Evolution! WHY EVOLUTION IS AN UNBELIEVABLE LIE!

WHY EVOLUTION IS AN UNBELIEVABLE LIE!
(1) The word "science" literally means "to KNOW". Therefore, Evolution is NOT a TRUE science, because it canNOT be proven or "known"!
Margaret Mead, the famed Evolutionist, said in the introduction to her book, "We as honest scientists must confess that there is NOT ONE IOTA of concrete evidence to support the theory of Evolution."
(2) Evolution is merely a philosophical set of BELIEFS that must be accepted by FAITH. In seeking to explain the origin of the Universe, the World, and the origin and nature of Man, it is literally a RELIGION!
(3) Evolution is anti-God! HITLER used it as his excuse for NAZISM, and KARL MARX stated that "Evolution is "the CORNERSTONE of COMMUNISM!" "By their FRUITS you shall KNOW them" (Matthew 7:2O), and Evolution's "fruit" is godless regimes, war and death!
(4) GOD created the many forms of animal and plant life within definite, well-defined "species", and as science has REPEATEDLY PROVEN--CONTRARY to Evolutionary belief--they cannot get OUT of their set
species!
(5) Evolution claims that CHANCE MUTATIONS are "the basic building block of Evolutionary change". Despite MILLIONS of tests, however, Evolutionists have failed to beneficially alter even a single fruitfly!
(6) Not ONE single "missing link" between Man and ape has EVER been found!
(7) Evolution claims that all of Creation is constantly evolving into more complex forms. This assumption, however, is directly CONTRARY to a universally accepted, PROVEN LAW of Physics known as THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS which states: "ALL processes (left to themselves) go toward
a greater state of DISORDER, DISORGANISATION, DISARRANGEMENT and LESS complexity." Even it that law was talking about temperatures, it applies to the fact that all matter behaves that way anyway too!
(8) If you don't believe that the Genesis account of Creation is historically accurate and divinely authoratative, neither can you trust the writers of the Old and New Testament--who frequently QUOTED it--nor even JESUS Himself, Who quoted it in Matthew 19:4-5! (See also Luke 16:31.) But the Bible IS true!--GOD'S unfailing WORD!--Therefore we canNOT believe the Devil's lie of Evolution!

From: home.pages.at/slush/evol/evilut.htm