Is evolution a fact of science? Scientists, professors, and television personalities talk as if it is. What is the truth about evolution?
One fact of science that they may not know is that many of the "scientific proofs" of evolution have been proven invalid? Despite this, science books today still use the disproved proofs as proof of evolution. Here are four examples.
The Miller Experiment
Stanley Miller in 1953 contended that the early atmosphere of earth was made up of a hydrogen-rich mixture of methane, ammonia, and water vapor. He came up with an experiment that shot electricity through this mixture and produced amino acids, the building blocks of life. Evolutionists claim that this proves the validity of evolution.
The problem with the Miller Experiment is that there is no evidence that the early atmosphere was a methane-ammonia atmosphere. Scientists now think that the early atmosphere was carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and water vapor. Running electricity through this mixture does not produce amino acids.
Another problem is that much more is needed than amino acid to produce life.
Darwin's Tree of Life
Darwin's theory and his drawing of a tree of evolving species illustrates species that slowly evolve from one species to another over billions of years. But the fossil record does not show this. It shows an explosion of species in the Cambrian age.
Haeckel's Embryos
Ernst Haeckel's sketches of fish, salamander, tortoise, chicken, hog, calf, rabbit, and human embryos appear side-by-side in textbooks to prove the validity of evolution because the embryos are strikingly similar. It has been proven that Haeckel's sketches are fakes. They were drawn to look similar to the other embryos even though the actual embryos are not.
The Archaeopteryx Missing Link
The discovery of archaeopteryx fossils was given as scientific proof of a missing link between dinosaurs and birds. As more archaeopteryx fossils were found and further study was done it was revealed that the archaeopteryx was simply an extinct bird and not a reptile. No missing links between any species have yet to be found in the millions of fossils found.
These four examples are not the sole evidence for Darwinism, but their fate is illustrative of what happens time after time when evolution is put under the microscope of scrutiny. The case for Darwinian evolution is bankrupt. The evidence is not only grossly inadequate, it is systematically distorted. What is often hidden today is that not only does science not support the theory of evolution but science points strongly towards the existence of God.
Science Points to God
Evolutionists are quick to exclude God from science but science actually points to God. Here are six examples.
1. The fact that most scientists now believe that energy, matter, space, and time had a beginning, points to something outside of the physical world that started it. It could not have been started by itself.
2. Anthropic fine-tuning - the fundamental laws and parameters of physics conspire in a mathematically incredible way to make life in the universe possible. This points to purpose and a creator of the universe and not chance and randomness. For example, if the expansion rate of the universe were changed one part in a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion faster or slower, the universe would not be capable of supporting life. The universe is full of these miraculous parameters.
3. When life came into existence the information it needed to exist also came into existence stored in DNA and protein molecules. This computer-like data requires an intelligent creator.
4. The complex systems that exist in molecules (which include signal transduction circuits, sophisticated motors, and all kinds of biological circuitry) cannot be explained by Darwinian natural selection. Natural selection cannot build these biological machines because natural selection only preserves things that perform a function. The irreducibly complex systems in molecules do not perform any function until all the parts are present and working together in close coordination with one another. These systems can only come from an intelligent designer.
5. The Cambrian explosion in the fossil record is lacking in progressive steps between simple organisms and complex organisms. It all appears in the fossil record in a short span of time. This is what you would expect from a creation not from evolution.
6. Science cannot account for the human capacity for self-reflection, representational art, language, and creativity merely from the interaction of physical matter in the brain. It points to a divine source.
When scientific evidence and biblical teaching are correctly interpreted, they can and do support each other. If you doubt this, don't throw sticks and stones at the God-believer and accept the words of the atheist. Investigate the evidence yourself. It points to God.
To learn more about the above points, read The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel. The preceding points were taken from that book.
Creation Proofs Unanswered for Decades
One thing that evolutionists have been silent on is answering their opposition. They are good at calling creationists names and making fun of them but when it comes to proving with science that the things mentioned above are wrong, they are strangely silent. Books dating back over a hundred years have set out scientific arguments for the existence of God for all evolutionists to answer. None have.
Some Scientists but Not Science
When an evolutionist ignoring all scientific evidence says that evolution agrees with science and creation does not, he is being deceptive or ignorant. What he really means is that there are scientists who say that evolution is scientific and so that, in their eyes, makes it scientific. One problem with this is that there are also scientists that say that creation fits science better than evolution. Does that make it scientific? No, just because a scientist says it is scientific does not make it so. It must be supported by science not scientists.
Evolution from one species to another has never been reproduced in a science experiment (many have tried). No evolution links between species have been found in the fossil record. Science does not support evolution.
Every once in a while a scientist will be honest with science and admit that evolution is an impossibility. I remember as a young adult watching a scientist admit on television that this world could not have come into existence without a god but he was quick to add, "but it was not the same god as the God of Christianity". Another scientist more recently admitted after working with DNA that evolution could not have produced DNA but he also says that God could not have produced DNA either because God is not that smart. I wonder who is that smart than? That scientist? Even these somewhat honest scientists still seem to hold animosity to the God who created their science and to the Christian scientists who made the discoveries before them. They so much want God not to exist.
Don't look for approval from scientists. Look for approval from science. Everyone, even evolutionists, need to be honest with science.
Commonsense Considerations
When you think about evolution and compare it with the way things really are, it does not make sense. In fact, it is hard to see how anyone, especially scientists, would even consider it. Here are some things to think about.
Consideration #1 - Erase your knowledge of the final result and start from the beginning with nothing but evolution. How would things most likely progress? What would this world look like if species did evolve without the guidance of a creator? Wouldn't some people have eyes on their toes, some in their armpits, and some in their palms? Surely they would not end up in the best location, near the top of their head. What about ears, noses, skin, and arms? Wouldn't this world look a lot different if it did evolve? Wouldn't there be a lot of weird looking mutants walking around?
Consideration #2 - If you disassembled a Swiss watch, put the parts in a bag, and let it sit for a billion years, what would happen? Would it put itself together? Would it wind itself and start keeping time? Would it then grow arms and legs? Evolution says something much more spectacular and complex than that happened all by itself: this wonderful world constructed itself from a cloud of dust.
Consideration #3 - Take a car, a machine, or even a pair of glasses. Would a sane person think that they just came into being without a designer or a manufacturer? Did a pile of dirt somehow change into metal and plastic, then form into parts, and self-assemble into a car? That would be ridiculous. It is an insult to the manufacturer of that item to even suggest it. Yet evolutionists insist that is how the human body came into being. What attributes of a car show that it was made by a designer? Doesn't the human body have those same attributes?
Consideration #4 - What caused the universe to start moving? The fact that the universe is moving requires that something outside of this universe started it. How else could it have started moving? If you say there was an explosion, what caused the explosion? If you say a vacuum caused the explosion, what caused the vacuum? Eventually you have to go outside of the universe to start the first action. If something outside of this universe started it moving, isn't it likely that it also created, designed, and maintains the universe?
Step outside of the evolution box that the godless world put you in and look at reality. Think. If you dare to think and look at the facts, it will become clear that evolution is nonsense.
The Underlying Motivation for Evolution
Why do schools that teach evolution refuse to be fair and also teach creationism? Why must atheists use lies, distortions, and ignorance to prop up their dead theory of evolution? I believe it is because evolution is their last hope. If their lies and distractions can't keep evolution alive, the foolishness of their atheism will be exposed.
Scientists stubbornly refuse to accept what science and all of nature point to. God is real. The old-fashioned Christians were right. They will not accept this truth and so, no matter what science finds in favor of God, they will distort it or ignore it so they can worship at the altar of their self-made god, NoGod.
The Real Product of Science
An amazing thing about science is that every field of science shows God. Even mathematics proves the existence of God.
An examination of science without the closed mind of the atheist reveals what God is like, how big He is, how smart He is, and much more.
For example, how smart is God? Consider how smart of a person it would take to make a human being. You can measure this by looking at the efforts that have already been made to make human-like robots, to replicate sight, hearing, touch, body parts, etc. Add up the people, the man hours, the money, and computer power that were used in these efforts. Then figure in what it would take to make a self-sufficient bird. As you go through all of the other elements of creation, you start to see that God is millions of times smarter than the smartest human. Because He is so smart, He was able to create this world. He did a great job. It is foolish and an insult to God to say it all happened by chance.
"Because the known fact of God is apparent in them. God made it apparent to them. When the invisible things of Him are comprehended by thinking about the things He does, starting with creating a world, even His eternal power and the divinity are clearly seen. They are without excuse" (Romans 1:19-20).
Evolutionists do not want people to find God through science. So they pull the evolution curtain closed over God and science then exclaim, "See, God is not here."
Our society has been duped by evolution.
The truth about evolution is that it is an elaborate lie that calls itself scientific even though it is not and that tries to justify the foolish idea that there is no god. It hides the fact that everywhere you look science reveals the power and nature of God.