|
Original Message
|
A case against Evolution
************************
1.) Opening Quotes
2.) The Case for Conspiracy
3.) Basic Laws of Science
4.) Transitional Fossils
5.) Quotes by Evolutionists
6.) Cambrian Explosion
7.) Final Thoughts
*****************
1) Opening Quotes
*****************
"Let us henceforth be no more like children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to decieve." ... Ephesians 4:14
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." ... Joseph Goebbels
"I view all beings not as special creations, but as the lineal descendants of some few beings" ... Charles Darwin
"And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after his kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and God saw that it was good."... Genesis 1:25
"The important thing is to not stop questioning." ... Albert Einstien
"You tell me that it's evil-oution, well you know, we all want to change the world." ... John Lennon
************************
2) The Case For Conspiracy
************************
First, I'd like to make the case of how evolution got to become the unchallengable argument it is today. A hundred years ago, intelligent people could debate evolution, and we still can, but not within the power structures of science, academia or the media. Anyone who challenges evolution today is called a religious zealot, a "creationist", uneducated, stupid or crazy and their opinon is considered unworthy of consideration and dismissed.
Fraud, forgeries and bad evidence were a significant part of beating down the opposition to evolution early on. Many times these wrong interpitations or outright fakes were not admitted to or acknowledged for decades, and some still appear in text books today. It's my belief these claims of false evidence were presented in a top-down fashion to broaden the base for which the next claim could be launched from, so in time, based upon nothing but ideas, assumptions and conjecture, this bad information helped evolution become instilled as unchallengable fact in people's minds. This is how the world shapes "truth". I'll give a brief description of some of these fakes or mis-interpitations.
*************
The embryo drawings of Ernst Haeckel:
[link to www.darwinismrefuted.com]
Haeckel basically made this up, he added features that weren't there, removed others, changed the scale to make them appear the same size. Darwin was not an embryologist, and he based a lot of his work on Haeckel's. Haeckel had been promoting a theory that human embryos underwent a basic "evolution" inside the womb, first having the characteristics of a fish embryo, then a reptile, then finally a human. He fudged his drawings to reflect this.
His bogus drawing was challenged almost immediately, and he later admitted he had faked it, In some accounts of his admission, his defense interestingly enough was that other evolutionists had faked stuff too.
The point here is this drawing was accepted and taught as legitimate for the next century. It still appears in some text books today.
*
In 1912 ametuer palentologist Charles Dawson announced in Piltdown, England the discovery of what Darwinists needed to further their case, a discovery which was basically the "missing link" to man from apes. For the next 40 years scientific publications hailed it as such. The problem was, it was discovered to be a complete forgery, an old human skull with an orangutan jaw which had been chemically treated to look old, the teeth had also been filed down to make them appear human. It is believed that Dawson was the hoaxer, although others were suspected as well. Interestingly, the excavation site was adjancent to a golf course, perhaps the people behind this fraud didn't want to have to walk very far to see how their project was going prior to Dawson's shocking discovery.
It doesn't matter that is was proven to be a fraud, it was a victory for evolution, Evolutionists were able to beat opponents over the head with the faked skull for 40 years. The long overdue retractions were not nearly as publicized as the original discovery was.
*
Nebraska man was a similar fraud based on a tooth of a rare pig.
*
Java man, same story, initally hailed as a great discovery, then quietly retracted.
*
The infamous horse poster can no longer be found today sadly, but I found many references to it. It's origns were from a 1905 museum display. These posters showing the supposed evolution of the horse were widely displayed and used to promote evolution for decades. They seemingly have been rounded up and destroyed due to their embarrassing nature. I wish I could have found an original to post, but I could not. Like Haeckel's forged embyros, they were in large part made up.
*
In 1953 a great experiment had been conducted by Stanely Miller and Harold Urey. Hailed as "Life in a Bottle" it was an apparent attempt to recreate the "genesis" of life on early earth. Combining the right gases in a flask and shooting it with electricity they had created amino acids, the building blocks of life. It appeared that it wouldn't be long before scientists would be able to create living organisims. This appeared to be validation of evolution.
Ah, 1953, The TV age had begun, the greatest propaganda tool ever to fall into the hands of men. People who had tried to hold on to the creation story were shocked and saddened by the news. Many hung their heads and gave up, evolution must be true, the TV had said so.
But there was a problem, scientists were never able to get past the simpliest amino acids, and by 1970 scientists had concluded early earth's atmosphere was much different than what Miller and Urey had assumed, making their experiment completely worthless.
*
Orce man, Found in the Spanish town of Orce in 1982, and called the oldest human remains ever found in Europe. Scientists had said the skull belonged to a 17 year old man who lived a million years ago and even had very detailed drawings done to represent what he would have looked like. The press ran with the story. One year later officials admitted the skull fragment was not human but probably came from a donkey.
**
There are many more examples of false or faked evidence that has been used to help the case of evolution over the years, more than I can delve into. Perhaps I've found the best cases, perhaps not, I've only given this three days of research, regardless, it's time to move on to my next point.
*******************
3.) Basic Laws of Science
*******************
#1 The law of cause and effect: This law states that every effect must have an adequate cause, makes sense. What started life?. This prevents evolution from working within the established laws of science. Evolution's unkown cause would have to be something that operates above and beyond science's laws, above and beyond man's understanding, more on this later.
#2 Mendel's Law: This states that living organisms can only come from their own kind, horses come from horse, cows come from cows, etc. Science has never been able to produce an example that contradicts Mendel's Law.
#3 Law of Biogenesis: This states that living organisms can only come from living organisms. Where did the first life come from? For evolution to work within the laws of science, that first life has to come from somewhere, and that somehwere could only be from beyond the laws of science. Evoultion doesn't want to go there, but it needs something miraclous too.
#4 The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics: This states that organisms wind down, become less organized over time. Evolution contradicts this because it is supposed to be doing the opposite, becoming more organized over time. I've heard the examples of sand dunes and snowflakes becoming organized as a way to deflect this, but that is very weak argument. Snowflakes and sand dunes are not complex living organisms, and they only stay "organized" very briefly, before quickly returning to a disorganized state, right back in accordance to the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
*****************
4.) Transitional Fossils
*****************
This is THE hot button topic. Every place I've visited that questions evolution this the most common complaint, there are not enough transitional fossils, if ANY.
Almost every search I've done for "transitional fossils" has returned either the claim there isn't enough, OR defensive counter claims answering the charges that there isn't enough.
By and large, what I HAVEN'T found, charges and counter charges aside, is any significant information detailing the evidence of very many transitional fossils.
This is puzzling. There should be just as many "transitional" fossils as any other type of fossil. In fact, just the notion that we are having to call them "transitional fossils" should sound an alarm bell.
The idea that species slowly and linearly change from one form to another should mean that all fossils should be of equal impoortance and number, without the need to label them "transitional". For the sake of argument an example would be that if a fox really evolved into a horse, then it would be reasonable that if we found 500 fox fossils and 500 horse fossils, then we should also find 500 of every stage between foxes and horses, which would be much more than the 1,000 fossils of foxes and horse combined.
I've read the reasoning behind the lack of "transitional fossils" from the evolution side, and they make no sense to me. It isn't good enough to say they may have found one here or there, there should be a LOT.
Not only does there seem to be a missing link between ape and man, but almost every species seems to have a missing link in the fossil record.
From all that I read, this debate over transitional fossils, the claims and counter claims, were pretty much non existant prior to 1990, the internet may have really heated things up. I'm just talking about what I was able to find. However, I did find many calmer statements about transitional fossils, or the lack of, prior to 1990, which takes me to the next section.
***************************
5.) Quotes by Evolutionists
***************************
"Lastly, looking not to any one time, but to all time, if my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking closely together all the species of the same group, must assuredly have existed. But, as by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?" ... Charles Darwin
*
"I fully agree with your comments about the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them … . I will lay it on the line-there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument." ....Dr Colin Patterson, senior paleontologist of the British Museum of Natural History, author of "Evolution"
*
"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution".....renowned evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould
*
"The earliest and most primitive members of every order already have the basic ordinal characters, and in no case is an approximately continuous series from one order to another known. In most cases the break is so sharp and the gap so large that the origin of the order is speculative and much disputed"....paleontologist George Gaylord
** I found many similar quotes prior to 1990 from evolutionists, but for the sake of space I only included these four which pertain to transitional fossils. Darwin seemed to assume a mass amount of transitional fossils would be found in the future, but apparently they have not. He admitted that without them, his theory would be proven incorrect.
** Some additional quotes by Evolutionists that pertain to the beforementioned laws of science that evolution seems to break.
*
"The Entropy Law (2nd law of thermodynamics) says that evolution dissipates the overall available energy for life on this planet. Our concept of evolution is the exact opposite. We believe that evolution somehow magically creates greater overall value and order on earth"...Jeremy Rifkin
*
"In the complex course of its evolution, life exhibits a remarkable contrast to the tendency expressed in the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Where the Second Law expresses an irreversible progression toward increased entropy and disorder, life evolves continually higher levels of order" .... Evolutionist J. H. Rush
*
"Yet, under ordinary conditions, no complex organic molecule can ever form spontaneously, but will rather disintegrate, in agreement with the second law. Indeed, the more complex it is, the more unstable it will be, and the more assured, sooner or later, its disintegration."....George Stravropoulos, as stated in the
evolutionist journal American Scientist.
***********************
6.) Cambrian Explosion
***********************
The Cambrian explosion is a term given that describes the sudden burst of life that appears in the Cambrian layer of sediment, thought to have happened 530 million years ago. So sudden and complete is the appearance of fossils that Scientific American has called it life's "big bang". This is a big contradiction to what evolution says. What makes it worse is what appears below this layer, almost nothing, and the fossils that appear above this layer become gradually less and less.
Instead of the tree of life that evolution predicts, growing upward and branching out, the Cambrian layer suggests the opposite, it stands the tree on it's head.
To quote Darwin once again:
“There is another and allied difficulty, which is much more serious. I allude to the manner in which species belonging to several of the main divisions of the animal kingdom suddenly appear in the lowest known fossiliferous rocks.” (The Origin of Species, p. 348)
*******************
7.) Final Thoughts
*******************
I can tell you the notion that anyone who challenges evolution is just pushing a relgious agenda is simply not true. I feel I've barely scratched the surface in what I've presented, and in all that I've read, roughly half has come from scientists and biologists who question evolution without any mention of creation, or without any other religious agenda. I've witnessed two very real things at work, religion versus science, and in equal part, science versus science.
I was an inadequate person to accumalte and present this information. I only took on the challenge due to the conviction that the truth was on my side.
|
