Evolution: a theory in crisis
It seems as if evolution has completely infiltrated all of science. The bias towards evolution is extremely obvious. Simply juxtaposing two wikipedia articles side by side—intelligent design and evolution—clearly shows this bias. It’s talked about today like it’s a proven fact and that anything that hints at the thought of intelligent design is completely false and “already debunked”. Films such as “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” goes to show that even the discussion of intelligent design isn’t worthy of being taught in schools and universities across the country and that it’s not even up for debate. “It’s already been decided,” evolutionists say, “Our arms are crossed and the books are published. You can’t undo decades of research.”
What’s sad is that they are in denial at the very least and delusional at the very worst. Evolutionary thought is a retardation for real science. Yet, because religion has caused a lot of people to stumble and become disillusioned with God, they won’t give creation or intelligent design a second thought because of the implications that believing it would have on them.
Darwin came up with his theories over 100 years ago. People forget that we’ve come a long way in the past 20 years, nevermind 100 years. If Darwin knew how complex the human cell was, he may have thought twice about some of his findings and surely he would have doubts.
Today, evolutionists cannot come up with a single test that proves it exists. As the last step of the scientific method, a test is required to prove that the theory is sound. Yet one cannot test something that takes “millions” of years to observe. Their own scientific method works against them. Some use examples such as the lenski experiments to prove that we can see small amounts of evolution by cross breeding wolves and getting dogs. This example is horrible because wolves and dogs are both in the species of canidae. No “new” species was created. It was simply a different breed, which we see all the time. We have hundreds of breeds of dogs, but we all look at them and know they are dogs.
Another example used is mutations. However, evolutionists should already know that no mutation has ever been to the benefit of any creature. It’s most all the time to its detriment, and it’s not carried along to its offspring.
Yet another example is the psuedoscience of vestiges. We were taught that certain parts, such as the appendix, has no use. The more we learn about science, the more we learn how very wrong we were about our understanding of how things work, and how utterly complicated things are. We have now grown to understand that the appendix has a very important use. According to wikipedia: “New studies propose that the appendix may harbor and protect bacteria that are beneficial in the function of the human colon.”
We have amazing technology such as the electron microscope which can show us close up images of countless tiny little machines within the human cell that work together, and cannot work together without each other.
Yet the foolishness is more prevalent than ever. Evolutionists are pulling out all the stops and publishing documents that are “peer reviewed”, which is somehow more solid proof that evolution is true. Within the constructs of the paradigm of their choosing—you must play by their rules. They are blind because they are keeping a theory alive based on centuries-old evidence. The evidence has changed with each passing year of further findings yet because they view everything assuming that evolution is true—INSTEAD what they should be doing is compiling the evidence and looking at it and asking the right questions. But they will never get the answers to the questions they refuse to ask.
And that question is: Who PUT the rules in places for the universe to operate within. Even if everything began at the big bang and evolution is 100% accurate, they will never be able to explain away the order of which things are placed. Why does 1+1=2? Why does the law of thermodynamics exist? Who created the concept of logic, or right and wrong? If we evolved from apes, why do they still exist today? Who created metaphysical concepts such as pain and pleasure? Who wrote the DNA code? Because they assume it all came from nothing, the questions are never asked.
And so no matter how much evidence—such as irreducible complexity and fine-tuned universe—that they are presented with, the veil will remain over their eyes until they can think outside the box.
If one is to believe that the law of conservation of matter is true—this means that matter must have always existed in one form or another. Yet, contradicting themselves, they believe that before there was the universe as we know it today, there was a singularity that exploded and that’s what created all of the cosmic elements. According to wikipedia, it’s called a model or theory, and you can even see there where a subtle attempt is made to use other words than “model” to explain it. Now phrases like “dense” and “hot state” are used, but they don’t tell you what consisted of this hot state. What gravity caused everything to be together? What created the elements such as hydrogen and oxygen? What caused galaxies to be set up in perfect order with planets circling them perfectly when all the matter from the big bang was supposedly pushing in all different directions? Everything about the big bang defies all scientific logic. Even young kids in class in school who could think for themselves could understand these questions. Yet when they are asked, all that the persons asking the questions get for answers are ad hominmen—personal attacks against how OUR logic is wrong for even asking the question in the first place.
Something is clearly wrong.
So, back to the law of conservation of matter. Explain this to me. If matter cannot be created or destroyed, you’ve got a major problem. Because based on the 2nd law of thermodynamics, everything in the universe is going towards decay….rendering evolution false immediately. But even more scary is that since matter cannot be created, how can this law be broken for the creation of matter IN IT’S FIRST EXISTING STATE? Of course, the hypocrisy is astounding. It would have been easier for matter to have not existed in the first place than for it to have existed because it takes more energy for it to exist than for it not to exist. By all rights, there should BE nothing.
So it takes as much faith to believe in the big bang theory…if not more…then to believe in God…who is EVERYTHING and CREATED everything in its perfect working order…who ALWAYS existed, and HAD to have (therefore obeying the law of conservation of matter)…and the proof of his creation is seen in the complexity of the cell, atoms, DNA, and bacteria.
Our God is simply amazing.