Handy Dandy Evolution Refuter
|Chapter 11 - The Core Scientific Argument for Creation and against Evoluton|
|We have now considered the major fields of biological evidence pertinent
to the creation/evolution controversy. We can see that a crucial problem confronts members
of the secular scientific establishment. They assume for themselves, and wish to prove to
us all, that amoeba-to-man evolution is a fact of earth history. Their problem is posed by
the unnumbered complex biological designs displayed by all micro-organisms, plants and
animals. How could such marvels of high technology applied to solve hard problems have
come into being entirely by chance, without a Master Designer? Just a few of these wonders
are described in Chapter 2 of this book. There is no testable
scientific theory that explains the evolution, for example, of a hair follicle, the immune
system, or the organ of Corti in the mammalian ear. Nor is there fossil evidence to prove
that they evolved.
It is our view that this central failure of evolutionary science provides the basis for the most powerful argument against evolution and for creation. It is the argument from design in modern form. It is given below in outline, supported by recent references to the pertinent scientific literature. Our readers are invited to use this argument with anybody who will listen. It can be photocopied or otherwise reproduced and circulated wherever it may help open minds to the claims of Jesus Christ by whom the Father "made the worlds."1
A. What the theory of evolution proposes
|1. In some
ancient puddle, lake or ocean, life began when chance chemical reactions produced the
first single-celled organism, some kind of self-reproducing bacterium.
2. These bacteria were able to reproduce themselves by cell division, but with occasional very slight changes(called mutations) from generation to generation.
3. Very gradually, very slowly, this process of change was able to "create" new complex biological designs.
4. In some three billion years the original single-celled organisms were able to change step-by-step as follows:
single cell -- many-celled worm without a backbone -- worm with a backbone -- fish -- amphibian -- reptile with scales -- mammal with hair -- ape -- university professor.
5. This process obviously had to "create," one after the other, thousands of new, complex designs, in order to change a bacterium into a university professor.
6. Evolutionary science must prove this happened and explain how. The origin of complex new biological designs is the crucial problem facing evolutionary scientists.
B. What is required to prove the case of evolution to you and to me?
|1. Show us
thousands of fossil series to prove that a slow process of evolution "created,"
one after the other, thousands of new complex biological designs. For example, show us a
series of fossils to document the gradual step-by-step evolution of a backbone. Or a
series of fossils to show the step-by-step evolution of reptile scales into mammals' fur
or bird feathers. In fact, show us just one such fossil series anywhere in the fossil
record. We need more than just one or two "missing links" to stick in the middle
of a huge gap in the fossil record.
2. Devise an experimentally testable theory of evolution to explain how mechanisms of genetics and embryonic development "created" a backbone or changed reptile scales into mammals' fur or bird feathers.
3. Show us the evolution of complex new biological designs happening in nature today. After all, supposedly "[t]he unifying theory of biology is evolution."2 So why can't we see it happening today? Why can't we see new complex biological designs in the process of evolving in living species?
C. Have the requirements of Section B above been achieved by evolutionary science?
1. The beginning of life has been neither explained theoretically nor demonstrated experimentally.3
2. Not even one sequence of fossils has been found which demonstrates that slow, gradual evolutionary change ever "created" a single new complex biological design.4,5,6
3. There is no experimentally testable theory to explain the "creation" of complex new biological designs by evolution.7
4. The required theories and the mechanisms of genetics and embryonic development that "create" new biological designs have not been identified and demonstrated experimentally.8,9
5. The "creation" of complex new biological designs by evolution has not been observed in nature. All that is observed is limited variations of what already exists.10
|So long as the required reproducible scientific evidence continues to elude evolutionist enthusiasts, their grand evolutionary scenario -- from amoeba to man -- remains a faith proposition. Furthermore, all of their failures constitute circumstantial evidence for faith in divine special creation of the complex biological designs of living things. Secularist persecution and exclusion of Christian believers in creation should cease at once in the halls of academia -- in the interest of correct, philosophically neutral science. And in the science classrooms at all levels there should be an end to indoctrination in darwinian dogmas. Everything in science must be perpetually open to critical evaluation.|
|Table of Contents / Previous Page / Next Page|