Many people nowadays seem to treat evolution as fact. However, it lacks scientific proof, and many scientists will even tell you it is impossible.
According to Science Digest, the number of scientists who reject evolution has been growing for the past 30 years. "Scientists who utterly reject Evolution may be one of our fastest-growing controversial minorities," the magazine said in a 1979 article. "Many of the scientists supporting this position hold impressive credentials in science."
So if evolution is a lie, then how did we get here?
Big Bang theory
Most scientists believe in the Big Bang theory, which proposes that the universe was nothing and burst in a something and is constantly expanding. This is similar to the biblical account of creation (Genesis 1) but not the same.
However, there is a new version of the theory that suggests that everything was here and then collided to cause the bang. This is anti-biblical.
From that point, evolutionists say life arose by molecules turning into organic molecules, which became DNA, which then transformed into complex cells and so on. But is this true? Could matter have organized itself to create cells that could then multiply into large animals that can function and reproduce?
The answer is no because that defies the laws of science, particularly the second law of thermodynamics. Thermodynamics studies heat power and energy; the second law states that everything decays and that energy in the universe decreases.
Because of this, we know that all natural systems decay when left alone. Science has proven that when chemical compounds are left alone, they break down into simpler compounds, rather than grow into more complex ones.
Spontaneous generation
However, many evolutionists believe in spontaneous generation, which is the idea that creatures can be created naturally by other substances. They believe this despite the accepted biological fact that every living thing is created from a parent of some sort.
Evolutionists believe spontaneous generation started in Earth's earliest days in the water, which contained no life, just minerals and chemicals. They base their belief on two assumptions: 1. Earth had no oxygen in the atmosphere because if it did, the oxygen would destroy the possibility of life arising naturally and 2. The water must have had ammonia, nitrogen, hydrogen, water vapor and methane in it.
Still, these two things aren't enough to create life, so they theorize that there must have been some bolt of energy that sparked the spontaneous creation of life.
In the 1950s, chemists Stanley Miller and Sidney Fox attempted separate experiments to try to prove this. They mixed the ingredients and used electric sparks as lightning to try to create life. However, all they created were amino acids - the simplest form of protein.
And these amino acids were not even the correct ones to create life. They were "right-handed" amino acids. All known life uses only "left-handed" amino acids. Having a combination of the two would destroy life rather than produce it.
DNA
Another argument against evolution is DNA. DNA is what contains an organism's genetic information.
Each organism has a very complex DNA code, in which a frog is a frog, a dog is dog and so on. It's this precise code that aligns cells to create functioning beings and realigns those cells in the reproductive cycle to create another animal exactly like the parent.
Many scientists believe DNA is so complex that it cannot be produced by chemistry alone. Evolutionists have yet to provide a credible explanation for the origin of such complex structures.
Fossils
Yet another argument against evolution is the fossil record. An enormous amount of fossils has been found to date, and these discoveries do not support evolution.
Even a former evolutionist recognizes this.
"Fossils are a great embarrassment to Evolutionary theory and offer strong support for the concept of Creation," says Dr. Gary Parker, who is a biologist and paleontologist.
The reason fossils support creationism and not evolution is because animals rarely fossilize unless they are buried deeply and quickly. (If not, other conditions like scavengers, bacteria and weather would destroy the carcasses.)
These conditions, obviously, are not common, so that fact combined with the evidence of fossilized animals generally found grouped in large numbers suggest that a disaster struck quickly as opposed to the animals dying out slowly.
Also, most fossils found are very similar to animals that are still alive. If, as evolution suggests, animals die off as their species advances, then wouldn't the fossils discovered be different from current animals?
Evolutionists talk of "the missing link" and try to proclaim that they have found fossil evidence that bridges the gap between one species and another. This was the case with the Archaeopteryx, which evolutionists said was the missing link between dinosaurs and birds.
However, the scientific community widely agrees that the Archaeopteryx was a true bird and not a transitional animal. In addition to physical characteristics inferred from it, the fossil was also found alongside both dinosaurs and birds. How could it be a transition animal if it lived at the same time as the others?
Theistic evolution
Theistic evolution is the claim by some Christians that God used evolution to create things. They believe that the seven days of creation are symbolic days and that they actually represent millions of years.
This is the worst of all possibilities.
First, as Genesis 1:24-25 specifically says, God created all animals according to their kinds. As discussed previously, DNA is designed for reproduction of it's own specific kind. It does not morph into something else.
Next, the Bible states in Genesis 1:5 that God made lightness and darkness and called it day. This shows that God means a day to be a literal 24-hour period and not a symbolic term.
Finally, a merciful and loving God does not have to go through millions of mistakes, mutations and misfits to perfect his creation. Rather, God creates his perfect creations spontaneously (Genesis 2:7).
Jacque Monod, a Nobel Prize-winning evolutionist, put it best when he said, "[Natural] selection is the blindest, and most cruel way of evolving new species...The struggle for life and elimination of the weakest is a horrible process, against which our whole modern ethic revolts. [...] I am surprised that a Christian would defend the idea that this is the process which God more or less set up in order to have evolution."
Microevolution
Though macroevolution (evolving from one species to another) could never happen, the Bible does allow for microevolution (evolution within a species).
Evolutionists try to argue that our appendix, which they claim is an essentially useless organ, is evidence of evolution. In reality, though, this information supports creationism.
Even if the appendix isn't as important to the human body as it once was, it is still in our DNA and still passed on because DNA does not change. If evolution were true and if our appendix were truly unnecessary, it would have disappeared from our bodies. That we still have an appendix is proof against evolution.
Another example of microevolution is spraying ants with pesticide. Some survive, and of those, some may pass that gene of immunity to their offspring. This is not turning the ant into a new species; it is making a small change within the existing species.
In conclusion, science does not support evolution.
The laws of science have discredited evolution from the beginning, and only now are some evolutionists beginning to realize this. It's gotten to the point where some of them will no longer hold open debates with creationists because they know that their theory of evolution cannot hold up to scientific criticism.
As Dr. Louis Bounoure, the former director of research at the French National Center for Scientific Research, bluntly states, evolution is "a fairy tale for grown-ups."
For more information about creationism and the lies of evolution, go to christiananswers.net/creation, which is where the bulk of information in this article can be found.
You can also visit the Creation Museum near Cincinnati. Founded by Answers in Genesis (answersingenesis.org), it has a variety of exhibits and frequent guest speakers that provide scientific explanations refuting evolution.
