June 22, 2012
The Big Bang Theory Summarized

The Big Bang theory has been accepted by a majority of scientists today. It theorizes that a large quantity of nothing decided to pack tightly together and then explode outward into hydrogen and helium. This gas is said to have flowed outward through frictionless space (frictionless, so the outflowing gas cannot stop or slow down) to eventually form stars, galaxies, planets, and moons.

The originator was George Lemaitre, a Belgian, who struck on the basic idea in 1927. George Gamow, R.A. Alpher, and R. Herman devised the basic Big Bang model in 1948. But it was Gamow, a well-known scientist and sci-fi writer, that gave it its present name and then popularized it (Isaac Asimov, Asimov’s New Guide to Science, 1984, p. 43). Campaigning for the idea enthusiastically, he was able to convince many other scientists. He used quaint little cartoons to emphasize the details. The cartoons really helped sell the theory.

According to the theory, in the beginning, there was no matter, just nothingness. Then this nothingness condensed by gravity into a single, tiny spot and it decided to explode.

That explosion produced protons, neutrons, and electrons which flowed outward at incredible speed throughout empty space; for there was no other matter in the universe.

As these protons, neutrons, and electrons hurled themselves outward at supersonic speed, they are said to have formed themselves into typical atomic structures of mutually orbiting hydrogen and helium atoms.

Gradually, the outward-racing atoms are said to have begun circling one another, producing gas clouds which then pushed together into stars.

These first stars only contained lighter elements (hydrogen and helium). Then all of the stars repeatedly exploded. It took at least two explosions of each star to produce our heavier elements. Gamow described it in scientific terms: In violation of physical law, emptiness fled from the vacuum of space and rushed into a superdense core that had a density of 1094gm/cm2 and a temperature in excess of 1039 degrees absolute. That is a lot of density and heat for a gigantic pile of nothingness, especially when we realize that it is impossible for nothing to get hot. Although air gets hot, air is matter, not an absence of it.

Where did this “superdense core” come from? Gamow solemnly came up with a scientific answer for this; he said it came as a result of “the big squeeze,” when the emptiness made up its mind to crowd together. He named this solid core of nothing “ylem” (pronounced “ee-lum”). Numbers were provided to add an additional scientific flair: This remarkable lack-of-anything was said by Gamow to have a density of 10 to the 145th power g/cc, or one hundred trillion times the density of water.

Then all that packed-in blankness went boom!

That is the theory.

June 20, 2012
Orce Man Debunked

At last, one of our half-ape ancestors had been found in the Andalusia region of Spain. Certified as the “oldest man in Europe” by a distinguished team of paleontologists, it made the headlines as invitations were mailed to scientists throughout the continent to attend a meeting where they could deliver learned papers about the matter.

But then scientists in Paris discovered that it was a skull fragment of a four-month-old donkey. Spanish officials had to quickly mail 500 letters canceling the meeting (“Ass Taken for Man,” London Daily Telegraph, May 14, 1984).

June 20, 2012
Religious Persistence of Evolutionists in the 1980s

The increasing despondency among evolutionists over their inability to use natural selection or mutations to provide even the slightest evidence of cross-species evolution eventually led large numbers of scientists in the 1980s to switch over to the concept that millions of beneficial mutations occur once every 50,000 years to two creatures, a male and female, who are living near each other—thus producing a new species pair.

Any theory to rationalize their religious belief.

June 20, 2012
1969 Moon Landing

By the 1950s, scientists were able to predict that if the moon were billions of years old, it would have a thick layer of dust many miles thick. This is due to the fact, as R.A. Lyttleton explained, that the lunar surface is exposed to direct sunlight; and strong ultraviolet light and X-rays from the sun gradually 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. In 5 to 10 billion years, this would produce 20-60 miles [32-97 km] of dust (R.A. Lyttleton, quoted in R. Wysong, Creation-Evolution Controversy, p. 175).

Because of this, NASA first sent an unmanned lander, which made the discovery that there is very little dust on the moon’s surface. In spite of that, Neil Armstrong feared that he and Edwin Aldrin might suffocate when they landed. But because the moon is young, they had no problem. Landing on July 20, 1969, they found an average of 3/4 inch [1.91cm] of dust on its surface. That is the amount one would expect if the moon were about 6000-8000 years old (at a rate of 1 inch every 10,000 years).

June 20, 2012
Amino Acid Synthesis (1953)

When Stanley Miller produced a few amino acids from chemicals amid a continuous small sparking apparatus, newspaper headlines proclaimed, “Life has been created!” But evolutionists hid the truth: The experiment had disproved the possibility that evolution could occur. The amino acids were totally dead, and the experiment only proved that a synthetic production of them would result in equal amounts of left- and right-handed amino acids. Since only left-handed ones exist in animals, accidental production could never produce a living creature (R. Milner, Encyclopedia of Evolution, 1990, p. 274).

June 20, 2012
Piltdown Skull Debunked

This piece of skull and separate jaw was the only clear evidence that man was descended from an apelike creature. In 1953, Kenneth Oakley (British Museum geologist), Joseph Weiner (Oxford University anthropologist), and Le Gros Clark (anatomy professor at Oxford) managed to get their hands on the Piltdown skull and jaw—and proved it to be a total forgery. The newly developed fluorine test revealed the bones to be quite recent. Additional research showed the bones had been stained with bichromate, to make them appear aged. Drillings into the bone produced shavings instead of ancient powder. The canine tooth was found to have been filed and stained. Weiner published a book about the Piltdown forgery in 1955 (William L. Straus, Jr., “The Great Piltdown Hoax,” Science, February 26, 1954; Robert Silverberg, Scientists and Scoundrels: A Book of Hoaxes, 1965).

June 20, 2012
Nebraska Man Debunked

In 1922 a single molar tooth was found and named Hesperopithecus, or “Nebraska Man.” An artist was told to make an “apeman” picture based on the tooth, which picture then went around the world. Nebraska Man was a key evidence at the Scopes trial in July 1925. Grafton Smith, one of those involved in publicizing Nebraska Man, was knighted for his efforts in making known this fabulous find. When paleontologists returned to the site in 1928, they found the rest of the skeleton, only to discover that the tooth belonged to “an extinct pig.” (R. Milner, Encyclopedia of Evolution, 1990, p. 322). In 1972, living specimens of the same pig were found in Paraguay.

June 19, 2012
Charles Darwin (1809 - 1882)

Charles Darwin was born into wealth and able to have a life of ease. He took two years of medical school at Edinburgh University and then dropped out. It was the only scientific training he ever received. Because he spent the time in bars with his friends, he barely passed his courses. Darwin had no particular purpose in life, and his father planned to get him into a nicely paid job as an Anglican minister. Darwin did not object.

But an influential relative got him a position as the unpaid “naturalist” on a ship planning to sail around the world, the Beagle. The voyage lasted from December 1831 to October 1836.

It is of interest that, after engaging in spiritism, certain men in history have been seized with a deep hatred of God and have then been guided to devise evil teachings that have destroyed large numbers of people, while others have engaged in warfare which have annihilated millions. In connection with this, we think of such known spiritists as Sigmund Freud and Adolf Hitler. It is not commonly known that Charles Darwin, while a naturalist aboard the Beagle, was initiated into witchcraft in South America by nationals. During horseback travels into the interior, he took part in their ceremonies and, as a result, something happened to him. Upon his return to England, although his health was strangely weakened, he spent the rest of his life working on theories to destroy faith in the Creator.

After leaving South America, Darwin was on the Galapagos Islands for a few days. While there, he saw some finches which had blown in from South America and adapted to their environment, producing several sub-species. He was certain that this showed cross-species evolution (change into new species). But they were still finches. This theory about the finches was the primary evidence of evolution he brought back with him to England.

Darwin, never a scientist and knowing nothing about the practicalities of genetics, then married his first cousin, which resulted in all seven of his children having physical or mental disorders. (One girl died after birth, another at 10. His oldest daughter had a prolonged breakdown at 15. Three of his children became semi-invalids, and his last son was born mentally retarded and died 19 months after birth.)

Darwin’s book, Origin of the Species, was first published in November 1859. The full title, On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, reveals the viciousness of the underlying concept. This concept led directly to two of the worst wars in the history of mankind.

In his book, Darwin reasoned from theory to facts, and provided little evidence for what he had to say. Modern evolutionists are ashamed of the book, with its ridiculous arguments but Darwin’s book had what some men wanted: a clear, out-in-the-open, current statement in favor of species change. So, in spite of its laughable imperfections, they capitalized on it. Here is what you will find in his book:

  • Darwin would cite authorities that he did not mention. He repeatedly said it was “only an abstract,” and “a fuller edition” would come out later. But, although he wrote other books, try as he may he never could find the proof for his theories. No one since has found it either.
  •  When he did name an authority, it was just an opinion from a letter. Phrases indicating the hypothetical nature of his ideas were frequent: “It might have been,” “Maybe,” “probably,” “it is conceivable that.” A favorite of his was: “Let us take an imaginary example.”
  •  Darwin would suggest a possibility, and later refer back to it as a fact: “As we have already demonstrated previously.” Elsewhere he would suggest a possible series of events and then conclude by assuming that proved the point.
  •  He relied heavily on stories instead of facts. Confusing examples would be given. He would use specious and devious arguments, and spent much time suggesting possible explanations why the facts he needed were not available.


Here is an example of his reasoning: To explain the fossil trans-species gaps, Darwin suggested that species must have been changing quickly in other parts of the world where men had not yet examined the strata. Later these changed species traveled over to the Western World, to be found in strata there as new species. So species were changing on the other side of the world, and that was why species in the process of change were not found on our side!

With thinking like this, who needs science? But remember that Charles Darwin had very little science instruction.

Here is Darwin’s explanation of how one species changes into another: It is a variation of Lamarck’s theory of inheritance of acquired characteristics (Nicholas Hutton III, Evidence of Evolution, 1962, p. 138). Calling it pangenesis, Darwin said that an organ affected by the environment would respond by giving off particles that he called gemmules. These particles supposedly helped determine hereditary characteristics. The environment would affect an organ; gemmules would drop out of the organ; and the gemmules would travel to the reproductive organs, where they would affect the cells (W. Stansfield, Science of Evolution, 1977, p. 38). As mentioned earlier, scientists today are ashamed of Darwin’s ideas.

In his book, Darwin taught that man came from an ape, and that the stronger races would, within a century or two, destroy the weaker ones. (Modern evolutionists claim that man and ape descended from a common ancestor.)

After taking part in the witchcraft ceremonies, not only was his mind affected but his body also. He developed a chronic and incapacitating illness, and went to his death under a depression he could not shake (Random House Encyclopedia, 1977, p. 768).

He frequently commented in private letters that he recognized that there was no evidence for his theory, and that it could destroy the morality of the human race. “Long before the reader has arrived at this part of my work, a crowd of difficulties will have occurred to him. Some of them are so serious that to this day I can hardly reflect on them without in some degree becoming staggered” (Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species, 1860, p. 178; quoted from Harvard Classics, 1909 ed., Vol. 11). “Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a phantasy” (Charles Darwin, Life and Letters, 1887, Vol. 2, p. 229).

June 19, 2012
Founders of Modern Theory of Evolution

Most were mere philosophers. Hardly one of them ever set foot in field research or entered the door of a science laboratory, yet they founded the modern theory of evolution.

Emmanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772) was a do-nothing expert. In his 1734 book, Principia, he theorized that a rapidly rotating nebula formed itself into our solar system of sun and planets. He claimed that he obtained the idea from spirits during a séance. It is significant that the nebular hypothesis theory originated from such a source.

Comte de Buffon (1707-1788) was a dissolute philosopher who, unable to improve on the work of Linnaeus, spent his time criticizing him. He theorized that species originated from one another and that a chunk was torn out of the sun, which became our planet. As with the other philosophers, he presented no evidence in support of his theories.

Jean-Baptist Lamarck (1744-1829) made a name for himself by theorizing. He accomplished little else of significance. He laid the foundation of modern evolutionary theory, with his concept of “inheritance of acquired characteristics,” which was later given the name Lamarckism. In 1809, he published a book, Philosophie Zoologique, in which he declared that the giraffe got its long neck by stretching it up to reach the higher branches, and birds that lived in water grew webbed feet. According to that, if you pull hard on your feet, you will gradually increase their length; and, if you decide in your mind to do so, you can grow hair on your bald head, and your offspring will never be bald. This is science?

Lamarck’s other erroneous contribution to evolution was the theory of uniformitarianism. This is the conjecture that all earlier ages on earth were exactly as they are today, calm and peaceful with no worldwide Flood or other great catastrophes.

Robert Chambers (1802-1883) was a spiritualist who regularly communicated with spirits. As a result of his contacts, he wrote the first popular evolution book in all of Britain. Called Vestiges of Creation (1844), it was printed 15 years before Charles Darwin’s book, Origin of the Species.

Charles Lyell (1797-1875). Like Charles Darwin, Lyell inherited great wealth and was able to spend his time theorizing. Lyell published his Principles of Geology in 1830-1833; and it became the basis for the modern theory of sedimentary strata, even though 20th-century discoveries in radiodating, radiocarbon dating, missing strata, and overthrusts (older strata on top of more recent strata) have nullified the theory. In order to prove his theory, Lyell was quite willing to misstate the facts. He learned that Niagara Falls had eroded a seven-mile [11 km] channel from Queenston, Ontario, and that it was eroding at about 3 feet [1 m] a year. So Lyell conveniently changed that to one foot [.3 m] a year, which meant that the falls had been flowing for 35,000 years! But Lyell had not told the truth. Three-foot erosion a year, at its present rate of flow, would only take us back 7000 to 9000 years, and it would be expected that, just after the Flood, the flow would for a time have greatly increased the erosion rate. Lyell was a close friend of Darwin, and urged him to write his book, Origin of the Species.

Alfred Russell Wallace (1823-1913) is considered to be the man who developed the theory which Darwin published. Wallace was deeply involved in spiritism at the time he formulated the theory in his Ternate Paper, which Darwin, with the help of two friends (Charles Lyell and Joseph Hooker), pirated and published under his own name. Darwin, a wealthy man, thus obtained the royalties which belonged to Wallace, a poverty-ridden theorist. In 1980, Arnold C. Brackman, in his book, A Delicate Arrangement, established that Darwin plagiarized Wallace’s material. It was arranged that a paper by Darwin would be read to the Royal Society, in London, while Wallace’s was held back until later. Priorities for the ideas thus having been taken care of, Darwin set to work to prepare his book.

In 1875, Wallace came out openly for spiritism and Marxism, another stepchild of Darwinism. This was Wallace’s theory: species have changed in the past, by which one species descended from another in a manner that we cannot prove today. That is exactly what modern evolution teaches. Yet it has no more evidence supporting the theory than Wallace had in 1858, when he devised the theory while in a fever.

In February 1858, while in a delirious fever on the island of Ternate in the Molaccas, Wallace conceived the idea “survival of the fittest” as being the method by which species change. But the concept proves nothing. The fittest—which one is that? It is the one that survived longest. Which one survives longest? The fittest. This is reasoning in a circle. The phrase says nothing about the evolutionary process, much less proving it.

In the first edition of his book, Darwin regarded “natural selection” and “survival of the fittest” as different concepts. By the sixth edition of his Origin of the Species, he thought they meant the same thing, but that “survival of the fittest” was the more accurate. In a still later book (Descent of Man, 1871), Darwin ultimately abandoned “natural selection” as a hopeless mechanism and returned to Lamarckism. Even Darwin recognized the theory was falling to pieces. The supporting evidence just was not there.

Wallace eventually separated from Darwin’s position—a position he had given Darwin—when Wallace realized that the human brain was far too advanced for evolutionary processes to have produced it (Loren C. Eiseley, “Was Darwin Wrong about the Human Brain?” Harpers Magazine, 211:66-70, 1955).

Thomas Huxley (1825-1895) was the man Darwin called “my bulldog.” Darwin was so frail in health that he did not make public appearances, but remained secluded in the mansion he inherited. After being personally converted by Darwin (on a visit to Darwin’s home), Huxley championed the evolutionary cause with everything he had. In the latter part of the 19th century, while Haeckel labored earnestly on the European continent, Huxley was Darwin’s primary advocate in England.

The X Club was a secret society in London which worked to further evolutionary thought and suppress scientific opposition to it. It was powerful, for all scientific papers considered by the Royal Society had to be first approved by this small group of nine members. Chaired by Huxley, its members made contacts and powerfully affected British scientific associations (Michael Pitman, Adam and Evolution, 1984, p. 64). “‘But what do they do?’ asked a curious journalist. ‘They run British science,’ a professor replied, ‘and on the whole, they don’t do it badly’” (R. Milner, Encyclopedia of Evolution, 1990, p. 467). In the 20th century, U.S. government agencies, working closely with the National Science Federation and kindred organizations, have channeled funds for research to universities willing to try to find evidence for evolution. Down to the present day, the theorists are still trying to control the scientists.

Sir Francis Galton (1822-1911) was Charles Darwin’s cousin who amplified on one of the theory’s logical conclusions. He declared that the “science” of “eugenics” was the key to humanity’s problems: put the weak, infirm, and aged to sleep. Adolf Hitler, an ardent evolutionist, used it successfully in World War II (Otto Scott, “Playing God,” in Chalcedon Report, No. 247, February 1986, p. 1).

Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), along with certain other men (Friedrich Nietzche, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, John Dewey, etc.), introduced evolutionary modes and morality into social fields (sociology, psychology, education, warfare, economics, etc.) with devastating effects on the 20th century. Spencer, also a spiritist, was the one who initially invented the term “evolution” (R. Milner, Encyclopedia of Evolution, 1990, p. 159; cf. 424). Spencer introduced sociology into Europe, clothing it in evolutionary terms. From there it traveled to America. He urged that the unfit be eliminated so society could properly evolve (Harry E. Barnes, Historical Sociology, 1948, p. 13). In later years, even the leading evolutionists of the time, such as Huxley and Darwin, became tired of the fact that Spencer could do nothing but theorize and knew so little of real-life facts.

Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919), a teacher at the University of Jena in Germany, was the most zealous advocate of Darwinism on the continent in the 19th century. He drew a number of fraudulent charts (first published in 1868) which purported to show that human embryos were almost identical to those of other animals. Reputable scientists repudiated them within a few years, for embryologists recognized the deceit. Darwin and Haeckel had a strong influence on the rise of world communism (Daniel Gasman, Scientific Origins of National Socialism: Social Darwinism in Ernst Haeckel and the German Monist League, 1971, p. xvi).

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) was a remarkable example of a man who fully adopted Darwinist principles. He wrote books declaring that the way to evolve was to have wars and kill the weaker races, in order to produce a “super race” (T. Walter Wallbank and Alastair M. Taylor, Civilization Past and Present, Vol. 2, 1949 ed., p. 274). Darwin, in Origin of the Species, also said that this needed to happen. The writings of both men were read by German militarists and led to World War I. Hitler valued both Darwin’s and Nietzche’s books. When Hitler killed 6 million Jews, he was only doing what Darwin taught.

It is of interest that a year before he defended John Scopes’ right to teach Darwinism at the Dayton “Monkey Trial,” Clarence Darrow declared in court that the murderous thinking of two young men was caused by their having learned Nietzsche’s vicious Darwinism in the public schools (W. Brigan, ed., Classified Speeches).

Asa Gray was the first leading theistic evolutionist advocate in America, at the time when Darwin was writing his books. Gray, a Presbyterian, worked closely with Charles W. Eliot, president of Harvard, in promoting evolution as a “Christian teaching,” yet teaching long ages and the book of Genesis as a fable.

Karl Marx (1818-1883) is closely linked with Darwinism. That which Darwin did to biology, Marx with the help of others did to society. All the worst political philosophies of the 20th century emerged from the dark cave of Darwinism. Marx was thrilled when he read Origin of the Species; and he immediately wrote Darwin and asked to dedicate his own major work, Das Kapital, to him. Darwin, in his reply, thanked him but said it would be best not to do so.

In 1866, Marx wrote to Frederick Engels that Origin of the Species contained the basis in natural history for their political and economic system for an atheist world. Engels, the co-founder of world communism with Marx and Lenin, wrote to Karl Marx in 1859: “Darwin, whom I am just now reading, is splendid” (C. Zirkle, Evolution, Marxian Biology, and the Social Scene, 1959, p. 85). In 1861, Marx wrote to Engels: “Darwin’s book is very important and serves me as a basis in natural selection for the class struggle in history” (op. cit., p. 86). At Marx’s funeral, Engels said that, as Darwin had discovered the law of organic evolution in natural history, so Marx had discovered the law of evolution in human history (Otto Ruhle, Karl Marx, 1948, p. 366). As Darwin emphasized competitive survival as the key to advancement, so communism focused on the value of labor rather than the laborer. Like Darwin, Marx thought he had discovered the law of development. He saw history in stages, as the Darwinists saw geological strata and successive forms of life.

William Grant Sumner (1840-1910) applied evolutionary principles to political economics at Yale University. He taught many of America’s future business and industrial leaders that strong business should succeed and the weak perish, and that to help the unfit was to injure the fit and accomplish nothing for society (R. Milner, Encyclopedia of Evolution, 1990, pp. 59, 446, 72). Millionaires were, in his thinking, the “fittest.” Modern laissez-faire capitalism was the result (Gilman M. Ostrander, The Evolutionary Outlook: 1875-1900, 1971, p. 5).

William James (1842-1910) was another evolutionist who influenced American thinking. His view of psychology placed the study of human behavior on an animalistic evolutionary basis.

George Darwin, son of Charles Darwin, wanted to come up with something original, so he invented the Tidal Hypothesis Theory, which states that four million years ago the moon was pressed nearly against the earth, which revolved every five hours. Then one day a heavy tide occurred in the oceans, which lifted it out to its present location! Later proponents of George’s theory decided that the Pacific Basin is the hole the moon left behind, when those large ocean waves pushed it out into space.

June 19, 2012
Accomplishments of 18th and 19th Century Scientists

All of these men were Creationists.

Louis Agassiz (1807-1873): glacial geology, ichthyology.
Charles Babbage (1792-1871): actuarial tables, calculating machine, foundations of computer science.
Francis Bacon (1561-1626): scientific method of research.
Robert Boyle (1627-1691): chemistry, gas dynamics.
Sir David Brewster (1781-1868): optical mineralogy, kaleidoscope.
Georges Cuvier (1769-1832): comparative anatomy, vertebrate paleontology.
Sir Humphry Davy (1778-1829): thermokinetics.
Jean Henri Fabre (1823-1915): entomology of living insects.
Michael Faraday (1791-1867): electric generator, electro-magnetics, field theory.
Sir John A. Fleming (1849-1945): electronics, thermic valve.
Joseph Henry (1797-1878): electric motor, galvanometer.
Sir William Herschel (1738-1822): galactic astronomy, double stars.
James Joule (1818-1889): reversible thermodynamics.
Lord William Kelvin (1824-1907): absolute temperature scale, energetics, thermodynamics, transatlantic cable.
Johannes Kepler (1571-1630): celestial mechanics, ephemeris tables, physical astronomy.
Carolus Linnaeus (1707-1778): classification system, systematic biology.
Joseph Lister (1827-1912): antiseptic surgery.
Matthew Maury (1806-1873): hydrography, oceanography.
James C. Maxwell (1831-1879): electrical dynamics, statistical thermodynamics.
Gregor Mendel (1822-1884): genetics.
Samuel F.B. Morse (1791-1872): telegraph.
Isaac Newton (1642-1727): calculus, dynamics, law of gravity, reflecting telescopes.
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662): hydrostatics, barometer.
Louis Pasteur (1822-1895): bacteriology, biogenesis law, pasteurization, vaccination, and immunization.
Sir William Ramsey (1852-1916): inert gases, isotropic chemistry.
John Ray (1627-1705): natural history, classification of plants and animals.
John Rayleigh (1842-1919): dimensional analysis, model analysis.
Bernhard Riemann (1826-1866): non-Euclidean geometry.
Sir James Simpson (1811-1870): chloroform, gynecology.
Sir George Stokes (1819-1903): fluid mechanics.
Rudolph Virchow (1821-1902): pathology.

June 19, 2012
18th and 19th Century Scientists

Prior to the middle of the 1800s, scientists were researchers who firmly believed that all nature was made by a Master Designer. Those pioneers who laid the foundations of modern science were Creationists. They were men of giant intellect who struggled against great odds in carrying on their work. They were hard-working researchers.

In contrast, the philosophers sat around, hardly stirring from their armchairs, and theorized about everything while the scientists, ignoring them, kept at their work.

But a change came about in the 19th century, when the philosophers tried to gain control of scientific endeavor and suppress research and findings that would be unfavorable to their theories. Today’s evolutionists vigorously defend the unscientific theories they thought up over a century ago.

William Paley (1743-1805), in his 1802 classic, Natural Theology, summarized the viewpoint of the scientists. He argued that the kind of carefully designed structures we see in the living world point clearly to a Designer. If we see a watch, we know that it had a designer and maker; it would be foolish to imagine that it made itself. This is the “argument by design.” All about us is the world of nature, and over our heads at night is a universe of stars. We can ignore or ridicule what is there or say it all made itself, but our scoffing does not change the reality of the situation. A leading atheistic scientist of our time, Fred Hoyle, wrote that although it was not difficult to disprove Darwinism, what Paley had to say appeared likely to be unanswerable (Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space, 1981, p. 96).

Carl Linn (Carolus Linnaeus, 1707-1778) was a scientist who classified immense numbers of living organisms. An earnest Creationist, he clearly saw that there were no halfway species. All plant and animal species were definite categories, separate from one another. Variation was possible within a species, and there were many sub-species. But there were no cross-overs from one species to another (R. Milner, Encyclopedia of Evolution, 1990, p. 276).

Heinrich von Helmholtz stated the law of conservation of energy: the sum total of all matter will always remain the same. This law refutes several aspects of evolutionary theory. Isaac Asimov calls it “the most fundamental generalization about the universe that scientists have ever been able to make” (Isaac Asimov, “In the Game of Energy and Thermodynamics You Can’t Even Break Even,” Journal of Smithsonian Institute, June 1970, p. 6).

R. J. E. Clausius stated the law of entropy: all systems will tend toward the most mathematically probable state, and eventually become totally random and disorganized. In other words, everything runs down, wears out, and goes to pieces. This law totally eliminates the basic evolutionary theory that simple can evolve into complex. Einstein said the two laws were the most enduring laws he knew of (Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy: A New World View, 1980, p. 6).

Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) was a Creationist who lived and worked near Brunn (now Brno), Czechoslovakia. He was a science and math teacher. Unlike the theorists, Mendel was a true scientist. He bred garden peas and studied the results of crossing various varieties. Beginning his work in 1856, he concluded it within eight years. In 1865, he reported his research in the Journal of the Brunn Society for the Study of Natural Science. The journal was distributed to 120 libraries in Europe, England, and America. Yet his research was totally ignored by the scientific community until it was rediscovered in 1900 (R.A. Fisher, “Has Mendel’s Work Been Rediscovered?” Annals of Science, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1936). His experiments clearly showed that one species could not transmute into another one. A genetic barrier existed that could not be bridged. Mendel’s work laid the basis for modern genetics, and his discoveries effectively destroyed the basis for species evolution.

Louis Pasteur (1822-1895) was another genuine scientist. In the process of studying fermentation, he performed his famous 1861 experiment, in which he disproved the theory of spontaneous generation. Life cannot arise from non-living materials. This experiment was very important, for up to that time, a majority of scientists believed in spontaneous generation. (They thought that if a pile of old clothes were left in a corner, it would breed mice. The proof was that, upon later returning to the clothes, mice would frequently be found there.) Pasteur concluded from his experiment that only God could create living creatures. But modern evolutionary theory continues to be based on that outdated theory disproved by Pasteur: spontaneous generation (life arises from non-life). Why? Because it is the only basis on which evolution could occur. As J. Edison Adams notes, “With spontaneous generation discredited [by Pasteur], biologists were left with no theory of the origin of life at all” (J. Edison Adams, Plants: An Introduction to Modern Biology, 1967, p. 585).

August Friedrich Leopold Weismann (1834-1914) was a German biologist who disproved Lamarck’s notion of “the inheritance of acquired characteristics.” He is primarily remembered as the scientist who cut off the tails of 901 young white mice in 19 successive generations, yet each new generation was born with a full-length tail. The final generation, he reported, had tails as long as those originally measured on the first. Weismann also carried out other experiments that buttressed his refutation of Lamarckism. His discoveries, along with the fact that circumcision of Jewish males for 4,000 years had not affected the foreskin, doomed the theory (Jean Rostand, Orion Book of Evolution, 1960, p. 64). Yet Lamarckism continues today as the disguised basis of evolutionary biology. For example, evolutionists still teach that giraffes kept stretching their necks to reach higher branches, so their necks became longer. In a later book, Darwin abandoned natural selection as unworkable, and returned to Lamarckism as the cause of the never-observed change from one species to another (Randall Hedtke, The Secret of the Sixth Edition, 1984).

June 19, 2012
Two Premises on Which the Various Theories of Evolution Are Based

EVOLUTIONARY FORMULA FOR MAKING A UNIVERSE:

  • Nothing + nothing = two elements + time = 92 natural elements + time = all physical laws and a completely structured universe of galaxies, systems, stars, planets, and moons orbiting in perfect balance and order.

EVOLUTIONARY FORMULA FOR MAKING LIFE:

  • Dirt + water + time = living creatures.

June 19, 2012
"As by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed. Why do we not find them embedded in the crust of the earth? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of being, as we see them, well-defined species?"

— Charles Darwin (1866), quoted in Evolution or Creation, p. 139, by H. Enoch

June 19, 2012
"Unfortunately, in the field of evolution most explanations are not good. As a matter of fact, they hardly qualify as explanations at all; they are suggestions, hunches, pipe dreams, hardly worthy of being called hypotheses."

— Atheist Norman Macbeth, Darwin Retried (1971), p. 147.

Liked posts on Tumblr: More liked posts »