Modern Mythology

The theory of Evolution reads like an ancient legend:

"Eons ago, long before the first man walked the earth, there was nothing. And then, after many years, there was something. Creatures were formed which were so strange that to even look upon them would strike fear into the hearts of men. They began as small plants, but through the magical powers of the passage of time, the plants would spawn small creatures.

As time went by, the small creatures would beget larger creatures, and creatures that walked on land, swam in the sea, and flew through the air. And these creatures would beget creatures stranger still, and they would sometimes reproduce after their own kind. After many billions of years (because time and necessity are the keys to physical change), man was created, the greatest of all animals, the spawn of the monkeys and the monkeys' children.

By pure chance, and the providence of the almighty absolutely nothing, a human was spawned of the opposite gender somewhere nearby. The humans mated and reproduced after their own kind, despite the natural laws that would have rendered them impotent, and after many thousands of years, man (from the house of Monkey) filled the earth and formed a thriving species.

Man's attempts to Evolve always met with disaster. They came up with names for their own attempts at Evolution: they called their spawn which would be better suited for life than themselves such things as challenged, deformed, and retarded. The new super-humans were not treated as great triumphs, but rather as beings to be pitied."

"And that is how, by the all-sufficient grace of the omnipotent,
omniscient absolutely nothing, man came to be on the earth."

The unproven theory (more like a hypothesis) of Evolution has been the subject of debates since it was first conceived by Charles Darwin. It has a tendency to crumble under close inspection, and was even doubtful in its creator's mind. Even the Father of Evolution could not convince himself of the truth of his assertions! Obviously, an assertion with as many fallacies as Evolution has cannot have a place in true science.

And yet, it is treated as though it were truth. Those who accept the THEORY of Evolution and thus ridicule Creationism are, in the name of logic and reason, forsaking logic and reason. Those who accept Darwinism or any other form of the THEORY of Evolution are placing their faith in something less observable (for observation is part of the scientific method) than the existence of God.

Let's go over a few things about Evolution.

Evolution requires massive amounts of time (even under the punctuated equilibrium theory). However, there is a stifling lack of evidence supporting an old earth. Truthfully, all methods of dating the earth either require excessive amounts of guesswork and assumptions (such as carbon dating), or they reach the conclusion of a young earth (amount of helium in the atmosphere, amounts of rock or water).

Evolutionists also love relying on anecdotes to prove their case. Ask for a missing link, they point to Lucy or Homo habilis. They don't point to a species; they instead refer you to individuals that have been pieced together to an incomplete skeleton from shattered bone fragments. Why is it that we can find lots of trilobites, and lots of dinosaurs, and lots of coelacanths, but when it comes to missing links, we can only find individuals? And most of all, why is anecdotal evidence considered sufficient in this supposedly scientific theory?

Let's go back to the Coelocanths for a second... Why is it that they have gone for (according to Evolutionists' numbers) 400 million years, and not changed? Isn't it high time they became frogs or something?

Now, talk to any Creationist, and he'll tell you he believes in evolution on a small scale. Survival of the fittest and the genetic variations that are already present and possible within a creature's DNA make it and its offspring more likely to survive. The Evolution that Darwin suggested would require a major change in genetic information, as well as the creation of enough new genetic information to actually keep the new organism alive and capable of reproducing. Only problem is that this has never been done. Such drastic genetic changes always kill the organisms.

It would be a very exact touch to have an animal evolve and be capable of reproduction. The most minute problems in the gametes (which help organisms reproduce and transfer genetic information to their offspring) can cause great damage to the offspring, which are never considered to be "Evolved." One extra chromosome and you've got a child with Down's Syndrome. Missing a chromosome, and they've got Turner's Syndrome. Try adding or taking away other chromosomes and genes, see what happens. Neither an increase nor a decrease in genetic information will result in a healthy individual, much less one that is better suited for survival. The only beneficial genetic "changes" that have been recorded for any living organism are the changes that are already built into that organism's genetic information. The color of a human's eyes, the color of the peppered moths, or selective breeding are all examples of this. However, these characteristics can change for as long as you want, but they will never yield a new species.

Even the very foundation of Evolution is flawed. The Big Bang theory requires that somehow, miraculously, vast amounts of order spring from complete disorder. So essentially, Evolutionists would rather believe their own THEORY than a longstanding LAW (the Second Law of Thermodynamics). This is, again, hardly worthy of the label of "science." Any school of thought that would rather disregard an accepted scientific law than challenge its own theory (which requires a great amount of faith, I might add) cannot possibly be called "science."

There has been no Evolution observed. Evolution has not been experimented with. Evolution has not been proven to have taken place in the past. Evolution contradicts at least one proven natural law. There is, therefore, nothing scientific about Evolution. It is pure philosophy, and is commonly accepted simply because it provides a (deeply flawed) alternative to the possibility that there might be something out there that's greater than us.

God forbid that there should actually be a God.