“Evolution is a fairy tale for adults,” says Professor Louis Bouroune, president of the Strasbourg Biological Society, director of the Strasbourg Zoological Museum and director of the French National Center for Scientific Research. In other words, believing in evolution requires one to throw rationality out the window.
Charles Darwin’s “theory of evolution” is based on faulty observations and data. In fact, there is much evidence that contradicts this teaching. In fact, evolution is not really a theory, a law, or even a science. Theories can be tested. Scientific law is proven and can be proved by experimentation; not so with evolution. As we will see, evolution is closer to blind illusion than science.
Consider an illustration:
A man was chatting with his new neighbor in his garage. The man asks, “Did I tell you about my watch?” The neighbor responds: “No. What is the story?” “One day, I was here in the garage looking for a flashlight. My daughter left her skates outside and I slipped into the tool box. Springs and bolts flew everywhere! When I regained consciousness, I looked at the mess and all that. things had come together to make this watch. “
In this scenario, a complicated machine (the clock) was assembled by random accident. Evolution happens the same way. According to Darwinists, all life on earth began with “primordial sludge” or sludge caught by lightning or some other source of energy, causing the building blocks of life’s basic chemicals. Over the course of billions of years, these components somehow evolved into single-celled organisms, eventually evolving into all living things on earth through random mutations.
Unfortunately for evolutionists, scientific law cannot allow this to happen. The second law of thermodynamics states that natural processes progress in a direction that increases the total entropy (disorder) in the universe. In nature, nothing becomes more orderly or complex in structure than where it comes from. Nothing can create something more complex than himself.
Many people assume that the main evidence for evolution is in the fossil record. We often hear reports of discoveries of new species. Dinosaur skeletons, “ape-men” and other finds seem to prove that evolution occurs. Scientific-sounding explanations from experts make the arguments seem even stronger.
The fossil record is also opposed to evolution. There are no fossils of animals in transition phases. The “new” species just appear. For example, there are no fossils showing the development of wings to link reptiles and birds.
Man’s oldest ancestor is said to be a species identified by a skeleton known as “Lucy.” It is not commonly known, but in most biological circles, Lucy is considered to be a chimpanzee (1). Neanderthals have been found to be “anatomically correct humans who were pathologically altered by iodine deficiency diseases” (2, 3). Articles published in the journal Science in 1996 admitted that Neanderthals, Cro-Magnon man, and modern man lived during the same time period (4, 5). Furthermore, there are not enough fossils to support the idea that the earth was inhabited by various forms of life for hundreds of millions of years.
The effectiveness of carbon 14 dating has been questioned. For example, the blood of a seal that had just died in Antarctica was tested. He indicated that the seal had been dead for 1,300 years (6).
There are many reasons for rejecting the claims of evolution, in addition to those that we have briefly reviewed in this essay. Seeing that there is no clear scientific or rational reason to accept Darwin’s theories as fact, those who deny the truth choose to “believe” in evolution. British physicist HS Lipton says: “Evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to ‘bend’ their observations to fit it.” Instead of believing in a Creator who made humans and the rest of the universe for a purpose, they make time and chance their creators. Believing in something that cannot be seen, proven, or even proven will be considered by many to be a religious faith.
Sources:
1) Science News, col. 123, February 5, 1983, p. 89
2) John Noble Wilford, New York Times, December 1, 1999
3) Guy Gugliotta, Washington Post, May 24, 1999
4) Science, vol. 276, May 30: 1331 and 1392, and Science, vol. 274, dec.
December 13, 1996: 1841 and 1870
5) Science, vol. 274, December 13, 1996: 1873-1873
6) W. Dort Jr., Ph.D., Antarctic Journal of the United States,
September-October 1971, p. 211