False Ideas About Truth - Part 31 - Continuation of Reasons Against Evolution

References: (1) In previous episodes I have listed 14 reasons against Darwin’s theory of evolution. Some of these reasons came from either an article from Earth’s Epic Tales, the book Fast Facts on False Teachings by Ron Carlson and Ed Decker, and other facts I have previously discussed. (2) Ron Carlson and Ed Decker say, “Another major problem for the evolutionists is biochemical REPRODUCTION. Every cell (no matter how simple) in plants, animals, and human beings has what is called a ‘COMPLEX METABOLIC MOTOR.’ This is the ability of the cell to EXTRACT ENERGY from its environment in order to SUPPLY ENERGY for the reproduction of the cell and other cell needs. For life to exist, you must have this metabolic motor. But this metabolic motor can only be produced by LIFE!” (3) “The riddle then becomes: ‘How, when NO LIFE EXISTED, did substances come into being which are ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL FOR LIFE, but which CAN ONLY BE PRODUCED BY LIFE?’” (4) ”For example, DNA CAN ONLY BE PRODUCED BY LIFE. When NO LIFE EXISTED, how did DNA come into existence?” (5) Some evolutionists, such as the late astronomer Carl Sagan, the original host for the television production of Cosmos, offer vast periods of time as ANSWER to the dilemma of the complexity of nature. Such evolutionists believe that chance plus time will generate increased complexity. So they regularly add more billions of years to their evolutionary hypotheses. But the laws of physics state, “The greater the time span, the greater the CHAOS AND DISORGANIZATION.” Things do not EVOLVE UPWARD as evolution requires. Then Carlson and Decker say, “Random impersonal chance DOES NOT produce complexity and organization, only greater CHAOS.” (6) Again, the response of the evolutionists to this is, “Well, we must assume by FAITH that, CONTRARY to mathematical laws of probability, SOMEHOW, it occurred.” (7) All of a sudden the evolutionists have lost their AIR OF SCIENTIFIC SUPERIORITY and have jumped onto the FAITH BANDWAGON. Where is Sir Richard Dawkins, the eminent British biologist who is strongly opposed to “BLIND FAITH,” now that we need him to refute that last assertion about assuming by faith? (8) At some point in the life of every serious person we each begin to ask some of the ultimate questions. This scenario usually begins with some sort of claim about God. Some years ago, Encyclopedia Britannica published a 55-volume series entitled The Great Books of the Western World. Mortimer Adler, a noted philosopher, legal scholar, educator, encyclopedist, author, and lay theologian, was the co-editor of this series. When he was asked why the “God” section was the largest section of these books, he observed that it was because MORE IMPLICATIONS flow from the subject of God than from any other subject. (9) The disparaging phrase, “God of the Gaps” is formulated by skeptics to describe a weakened version of a God who stands for those things which SCIENCE CANNOT YET EXPLAIN. The cardinal ERROR is that every scientific advance reduces the room given to this “God of the gaps.” (10) God TRANSCENDS even our best thoughts about Him: “God will manifest in His own time, He who is blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who ALONE has IMMORTALITY, dwelling in UNAPPROACHABLE LIGHT, whom NO MAN has seen or can see, to whom be HONOR AND EVERLASTING POWER. Amen” (1 Tim. 6:15-16). (11) “For in Him we live and move and have our being . . . . For we are also His offspring. Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the DIVINE NATURE is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man’s devising. Truly, these times of IGNORANCE God OVERLOOKED, but now COMMANDS all men everywhere to REPENT, because He has APPOINTED a day on which He will JUDGE the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ORDAINED. He has given ASSURANCE of this to all by raising Him from the dead” (Acts 17:28-31). This is episode 298.

References: (1) Ron Carlson and Ed Decker, authors of “Fast Facts on False Teachings” report that the Newsweek magazine article of March 29, 1982, produced a story entitled ‘Mystries of Evolution’ containing the following ADMISSION: “a professional EMBARRASSMENT for paleontologists: [namely] their INABILIITY to find the fossils of TRANSITIONAL FORMS between species, the so-called ‘missing link.’” (2) “Paleontologists have DEVOTED WHOLE CAREERS to looking for examples of gradual transitions over time, and with few exceptions they have FAILED.” (3) To sum up: We have NEVER observed evolution in the FOSSIL RECORD, and we have never observed evolution in the NATURAL WORLD. Evolution is a theory that exists ONLY in the lMAGINATIONS OF EVOLUTIONISTS. (4) Does life arise spontaneously by chance, as evolution teaches? No! The basic axiom of all biology is BIOGENESIS: Life only arises from life; it does not come from nonliving matter. Does this more logically fit with evolution or creation? The answer should be obvious — with creation. (5) Carlson and Decker remark: “It never ceases to AMAZE us that when we were in KINDERGARTEN they taught us that a FROG turning into a PRINCE was a NURSERY FAIRY TALE, but when we got to college they told us that a frog turning into a prince was SCIENCE! The Bible says that only a fool says in his heart , ‘There is no god’ (Psalm 14:10). By following evolution we have literally become a NATION OF FOOLS following a false, unscientific idea.” (6) Critics argue that certain aspects of Darwin's theory are reminiscent of Lamarckian INHERITANCE, which posits that ACQUIRED CHARACTERISTICS like 6-pack abs CAN BE INHERITED by offsprings. This idea has been largely DISCREDITED in modern biology as there is LITTLE EVIDENCE to support it. Yet if you compare Darwin’s first and the sixth editions of Origin of Species you realize that Darwin has now FULLY ADOPTED Lamarckism. How can one continue to advocate the ORIGINAL VERSION of evolution if Darwin himself has ABANDONED it? (7) Some critics argue that if humans evolved through SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST, it JUSTIFIES IMMORAL BEHAVIOR as a means to survive and reproduce. We are rearing a generation of young people to believe that there is NO GOD and humans are just ACCIDENTS evolved from ALGAE in a probiotic soup. (8) But here is the quandary we should ponder: What does this belief do to the VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE and the BASIS OF MORALITY? If you teach people they are nothing but EVOLVED ANIMALS, then why should WE BE SURPRISED that they START ACTING LIKE ANIMALS? (9) The authors Carlson and Decker say, “The TRAGEDY is that the evolutionary philosophy of the 19th century has been DESTROYED by 20th century science.” For instance, the Big Bang reveals that the universe had a beginning, and the Kalam Argument can be extended to prove that the first cause of the universe is the God of the Bible, Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. (10) What created the MATTER AND ENERGY necessary to create the universe? The evolutionist has NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, so he says, ‘You must ASSUME BY FAITH THAT SOMEHOW IT OCCURRED!’ (11) “The PROBLEM, of course, is that the evolutionist has NO ANSWER to where this bubbling, inorganic soup CAME FROM. They always say, ‘You must ASSUME BY FAITH that SOMEHOW it was there!” (12) “The PROBLEM, of course, is that the evolutionist has NO ANSWER to where this bubbling, inorganic soup CAME FROM. They always say, ‘You must ASSUME BY FAITH that SOMEHOW it was there!” This is episode 297.

References: (1) In the last 2 centuries challenges to the Christian worldview have increased in both intensity and sophistication. The skeptic’s criticism of Scripture, atheism touts that its worldview is the only scientific option, and socialism’s relentless push for political power have created a beachhead in the war of ideas. (2) This verse John 17:17 is interesting because Jesus did not use an adjective alethinos or alethes for “true,” which we might have expected Jesus to say, “Your word is true.” Rather, Jesus uses the noun aletheia (truth), to say that God’s word is not simply “true,” but it is truth itself. (3) Wayne Grudem says in his book Bible Doctrine, p. 41, “The difference is SIGNIFICANT, for this statement encourages us to think of the Bible not simply as being ‘true’ in the sense that it conforms to SOME HIGHER STANDARD OF TRUTH, but rather to think of the Bible as itself is the FINAL STANDARD of truth. . . . Thus, we are to think of the Bible as. . . . the REFERENCE POINT by which every other claim to truthfulness is to be MEASURED. Those assertions that conform with Scripture are ‘true’ while those that do not conform with Scripture are not true.” (4) “Pluralism is one aspect of an entire contemporary view of the world called postmodernism. Postmodernism would not simply hold that we can never find absolute truth; it would say that there is NO SUCH THING as absolute truth. All attempts to claim truth for one idea or another are just the result of our own background, culture, biases, and personal agendas (especially our desire for power). Such a view of the world is of course DIRECTLY OPPOSED to a biblical view, which sees the Bible as truth that has been given to us from God.” (5) This war of ideas has been raging for centuries, and has now reached a near eruption. C. S. Lewis, the great Christian apologist around the time of the WWII, recognized what is at stake in the battle of ideas when he declared, “To be ignorant and simple now — not to be able to meet the enemies ON THEIR OWN GROUND — would be to throw down our WEAPONS, and to BETRAY our . . . . brethren who have under God, NO DEFENCE . . . . against the INTELLECTUAL ATTACKS of the heathen. Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because BAD PHILOSOPHY needs to be ANSWERED.” (6) Today there are 2 competing philosophies on the issue of the question of ORIGINS including the origin of LIFE and the origin of MORALITY. One is the theory of evolution, which says that all human beings are merely an ACCIDENT, evolved from a slimy ALGAE in the PRIMORDIAL SOUP. The other view is Gen. 1:1, which informs us, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” So the challenge is between either evolution or creation. (7) Evolution is one of those bad philosophies that needs to be answered. Evolution can be disputed by several lines of evidence, including a fossil record indicating NO CHANGE OVER TIME, and confirmation that MUTATIONS CANNOT ACCUMULATE. (8) Darwinism claims that the SMALL CHANGES seen in ADAPTATION can ACCUMULATE and lead to LARGE CHANGES over eons of time. In macroevolution, one kind of organism (such as a reptile) supposedly can become another kind of organism (such as a bird), requiring entirely new FEATURES, new body TYPES, and an entirely new DNA. But there is NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE for macroevolution. (9) Darwinian theory SPECULATES that species will PROGRESS, transitional links will be FOUND, so that new species will DEVELOP. That’s the evolutionist’s HOPE, but I will show when we discuss the book Darwin’s Bluff by Robert Shedinger that it has all turned out to be a PIPE DREAM because Darwin could not produce the evidence that he claimed he would eventually produce. (10) The information I share now was informed by an article from Earth’s Epic Tales, the book Fast Facts on False Teachings by Ron Carlson and Ed Decker, and other facts I have already discussed. a) We already know that spontaneous generation was refuted by Luis Pasteur et al. That is one tenet of Darwinian evolution that is refuted. b) Several fossil observations display a contradiction between gradualism and punctuated equilibrium, the Cambrian Explosion, and Michael Behe’s concept irreducible complexity. c) Lack of transitional links are missing from the fossil record. d) Some critics argue that Darwin's theory CONTRADICTS the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which states that natural systems tend to DEGENERATE DOWNWARD over time rather than EVOLVE UPWARD into more complex forms. They claim that this law suggests that life should become LESS DIVERSE and SPECIALIZED instead of MORE SO, making it difficult for evolutionary processes to explain the complexity observed in living organisms today. e) Some biological systems are too complex to have evolved by natural selection. Intelligent design proponents argue that certain biological systems, such as the EYE or BLOOD CLOTTING MECHANISM could not have evolved by natural selection. f) The former philosophy professor at UCLA Dallas Willard, says, “Evolution, whether cosmic or biological, CANNOT be a theory of ORIGINS. The operation of evolution PRESUPPOSES certain ENTITIES with specific BEHAVIORS and an ENVIRONMENT that operates on the entities in a prescribed manner. The entities, behaviors, and environment did not come about by evolution.” g) Teleological argument: Critics argue that the APPARENT DESIGN or PURPOSEFULNESS observed in living organisms suggests an INTELLIGENT DESIGNER rather than a random, natural process like DARWINIAN EVOLUTION by natural selection. They claim that this raises questions about the SUFFICIENCY of Darwin's theory to account for the COMPLEXITY and ORDER seen in nature. This is episode 296.

References: (1) When Darwin published On the Origin of Species in 1859, evolutionists combined the system of Carole Linnaeus developed in 1735 of classifying organisms based on the idea that common body structures belong in the same category. Humans have elbows as do apes, chickens, dogs, and bats — so Lennaeus placed them all in the same category. Darwin APPLIED Linnaeus’s classification, but MODIFIED it to support his own thesis that the species with organisms with similar body plans have the same COMMON ANCESTOR. (2) Muncaster continues, “Since evolution is based on Darwin’s concept of NATURAL SELECTION, it’s not surprising that evolutionists now use such similarities — even such ANTIQUATED ONES as those proposed 300 years ago by Linnaeus — as EVIDENCE for evolution today. But does this MAKE SENSE? It’s actually CIRCULAR REASONING — we assume that commonality of body parts means common ancestors, because of [Linnaeus’] classification system that takes as its basis commonality of body parts.” I don’t see the circularity here, but I do believe it is CONFUSED THINKING. (3) “Just because bats, chickens, dogs, [apes,] and men all have elbows, does that imply that they all come from the same ancestor? Isn’t it MORE LIKELY that a Designer DECIDED, that ‘elbows work’? Might not such a Designer decided to apply them to several types of mechanisms? For instance, human design engineer might say something like, ‘Let’s apply wheels to roller skates, bicycles, and cars — that system works for those things.’ Sometimes we try to make SIMPLE THINGS too complex.” (4) Muncaster suggests 3 KEY QUESTIONS about Darwin’s evolutionary tree and the geological column: (a) Is there any scientific basis for the neo-Darwinian tree of life? Or is it simply ARBITRARY? (b) Does the fossil record SUPPORT the TREE OF LIFE? Does it start with a few very primitive organisms from which others gradually appear over time? (c)Is the geologic column a TRUSTWORTHY GAUGE of time to begin with? (5) Muncaster begins to answer his 3 questions: (a) Is the tree of Life Scientific? Although the tree of life enjoyed much support for many years, recent knowledge from molecular biology and the analysis of species has CALLED INTO QUESTION the idea that evolution followed the path shown by it. (Muncaster wrote his book Dismantling Evolution in 2003. In that book he said, “However, textbooks have not yet caught up with this.” In my own experience, it is likely to still be true today.) Muncaster says, “Based on the above remarks, one would EXPECT the neo-Darwinist Mayr to REFUTE THE IDEA OF EVOLUTIONARY TREE OF LIFE.” However, in 1991, Mayr boldly stated, “There is probably no biologist left today who would QUESTION that all organisms now found on the earth have descended from a single origin of life.” Muncaster reports that in the years since Mayr made this statement, the support for it has been SHATTERED. He addresses the molecular problems in depth in 2 chapters of his book, “The Complexity of Living Cells” and “Chirality: There’s No Solution in Sight.” Due to limited time, I will not address these 2 chapters at this time. (b) The second question is whether or not the fossil record supports the concept of the evolutionary tree of life. Even in Darwin’s day, fossil evidence had been REVEALED that the Cambrian Explosion of life showing that a vast introduction of life included a broad variety of many FULLY FORMED phyla and classes of animals. Darwin was troubled by this revelation. He observed in his 1859 book Origin of Species: “IF numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life ALL AT ONCE, the fact would be FATAL to the theory of descent with slow modification through natural selection.” Well, that is exactly what has happened. Many paleontologists are NOW CONVINCED that the major groups of animals REALLY DID APPEAR ABRUPTLY in the Cambrian Explosion. The fossil evidence is SO STRONG, and the EVENT SO DRAMATIC, that the Cambrian Explosion has now become known as “biology’s big bang.” (c) Can we trust the geologic column as a gauge of time? The concept of the geologic column is mostly OBSERVATION. Though it is found in many textbooks, the interesting thing is that there really is NO SINGLE OBSERVABLE GEOLOGICAL COLUMN. (6) Since Darwin recognized the problems in substantiating his theory of evolution from the fossil record, so he tried a different tack. He hypothesized that evidence of EMBRYONIC SIMILARITIES would support his claims. Darwin and his followers believed that the basic life forms which existed in our past multi-million years of evolution are REPEATED IN HUMAN EMBRYOS during the first few months between conception and birth. In other words, as the human embryo develops, it passes through most of the major past evolutionary STAGES from which it was believed to have evolved. And almost by miracle the German biologist Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919) gave drawings that seemed to show similarities between embryos of various species. From the drawings, CONCLUSIONS were made that supported Darwinian evolution. (7) Since Darwin recognized the problems in substantiating his theory of evolution from the fossil record, so he tried a different tack. He hypothesized that evidence of EMBRYONIC SIMILARITIES would support his claims. Darwin and his followers believed that the basic life forms which existed in our past multi-million years of evolution are REPEATED IN HUMAN EMBRYOS during the first few months between conception and birth. In other words, as the human embryo develops, it passes through most of the major past evolutionary STAGES from which it was believed to have evolved. And almost by miracle the German biologist Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919) gave drawings that seemed to show similarities between embryos of various species. From the drawings, CONCLUSIONS were made that supported Darwinian evolution. (8) Since Darwin recognized the problems in substantiating his theory of evolution from the fossil record, so he tried a different tack. He hypothesized that evidence of EMBRYONIC SIMILARITIES would support his claims. Darwin and his followers believed that the basic life forms which existed in our past multi-million years of evolution are REPEATED IN HUMAN EMBRYOS during the first few months between conception and birth. In other words, as the human embryo develops, it passes through most of the major past evolutionary STAGES from which it was believed to have evolved. And almost by miracle the German biologist Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919) gave drawings that seemed to show similarities between embryos of various species. From the drawings, CONCLUSIONS were made that supported Darwinian evolution. (9) This theory — also commonly known by what Haeckel’s called “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.” This NOTION later became known simply as RECAPITULATION or THE BIOGENIC LAW. Let me state the law in different words: individual development repeats evolutionary descent, which means the development of the individual repeats the evolution of the RACE. The biogenic law was cited as one of the MAJOR PROOFS of Darwinian evolution for over a century. But as I have previously said these drawings and conclusions were shown to be FRAUDULENT. Mid-20th century discoveries in embryology and re-evaluation of the evidence showed that Haeckel’s theory was completely without foundation, and is now discarded by embryologists. Don’t you think that is appropriate to discard a theory when it is a fraud? This is episode 295.

References: (1) Allow me to refer to what Tom DeRosa said in his book Evolution’s Fatal Fruit.  “The stunning diversity of plants and animals that Darwin observed on his voyage [on the Beagle] made him ask the question: Why are there so many types of turtles, lizards, birds, insects, etc., to be observed across the world? And why do these kinds of animals and plants all SEEM to be perfectly ADAPTED to their geographic environment? As he toured the Galápagos Islands, he struggled to understand why these islands had such UNIQUE creatures, which nonetheless ROUGHLY correspond to animals observed on the continent. He discovered in South America the fossils of GIANT EXTINCT ANIMALS, such as an 18-foot-tall SLOTH and a 5-foot-long ARMADILLO. These exciting finds led to more questions about why the  body plan of these extinct animals so closely corresponded, except for size, to their contemporary COUNTERPARTS.” (2) “The conclusion Darwin came to from all this was that change is taking place through time, which is [the simplest definition] of evolution. ‘It was evident,” Darwin wrote in his Autography, ‘that such facts as these, as well as many others, could ONLY BE EXPLAINED on the supposition that species GRADULLY MODIFIED; and the subject HAUNTED ME.” (3) Then DeRosa makes his own comments: “These modifications that “haunted” Darwin can be BEST EXPLAINED, not as evolution, but as VARIATION within the sloth or armadillo kind. Could the huge size of these fossils be due to GIGANTISM? The tallest man in medical history measured 8 feet 11 inches, while the smallest tribe of pygmies, from Zaire, Africa, can be as small as 4 feet 1 inch. Despite the size range, both are STILL HUMAN.” (4) What about the modifications in the plumage or beak size of birds? Is this evolution? How would we KNOW? If we do not know how to define a SPECIES, how can we know when enough change takes place to constitute “transmutation,” which is Darwin’s term for evolution from one species into another.” That is, what Darwin means is MACROevolution. It is certainly a change WITHIN A SPECIES so it is MICROevolution. My question becomes: Is a species the same as what Genesis calls a kind? (5) The point of controversy is whether modifications may be SO EXTENSIVE that microevolution leaps beyond the SPECIES BOUNDARY and at some point becomes MACROevolution. But here is the fly in the buttermilk, since “species” is NOT DEFINED, it is IMPOSSIBLE to say when the SPECIES BARRIER IS BROKEN. This VAGUE DEFINITION makes it possible to say that small changes or large changes can be said to produce a new “species.” But how can that conclusion be CERTAIN? (6) DeRosa points out: “These “facts” include Darwin’s MISTAKEN ASSUMPTIONS that later had to be CHANGED. So, how RELIABLE are Darwin’s assertions that are based on inferences that can’t be tested? On what BASIS can he assert that his “facts” will bring to light to that “mystery of mysteries” — the origin of species? (7) Niles Eldredge claims that finches beak changes are one of the MOST COMPELLING ARGUMENTS that led Darwin to his theory of evolution. Really? There is no evidence whatsoever that finches changed to another species. They still remained FINCHES. In fact, the finches DO NOT SUPPORT EVOLUTION at all, but are great examples of variation WITHIN a kind. DeRosa reports that the Princeton zoologist Carl Wieland reported in Creation magazine vol. 14 (3): pp. 22-23 that after years of study the Galapagos finch population DID CHANGE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS. During drought years, finches with larger, deeper beaks grew in number. This was because the traditional finch food supply of smaller seeds was soon depleted, which favored finches with beaks built to succeed when the food supply changed. But what happens when the rain returns? Does beak size change again? The answer is yes. What Darwin observed was an INCOMPLETE PICTURE. It was not possible for Darwin to get an ACCURATE ASSESSMENT of how finch beaks varied based on just ONE VISIT. (8) Professor Louis Bounoure of biology at the University of Strasbourg, author of the 1957 book “Determinism and Finality,” declared, “Evolution is a FAIRY TALE for grown-ups. This theory has HELPED NOTHING in the progress of science. It is USELESS.” He also said: “Evolutionism would appear as theory WITHOUT VALUE.” (9) Ray Comfort, a New Zealand evangelical minister living in America, author of several books, television host, and the founder of The Way of the Master remarked in his book “Scientific Facts in the Bible, “We are continually told that evolution is SCIENTIFIC, that it is a PROVEN FACT, and that the Bible is merely a COLLECTION OF MYTHS. However, strange though it may sound, it is EVOLUTION that is a collection of myths and the Bible is a proven fact.” (10) Ray Comfort said, “Evolution is INTELLECTUAL SUICIDE. It is an EMBARASSMENT.” (11) The theory of punctuated equilibrium by Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldridge incorporates the Cambrian Explosion that suggests periods of RAPID CHANGE followed by long periods of STASSIS or stability. In my mind that REFUTES  gradualism. The microbiologist from Lehigh University Michael Behe determined that his concept of irreducible complexity of organisms clearly refutes gradualism. This is episode 294.

References: (1) Supposedly 6 factors show how the process of Darwinian evolution works. These 6 factors are: (A) Common descent with modifications, (B) Spontaneous generation, (C) Random mutation, (D) Natural selection, How can natural selection be an explanation of life when natural selection ASSUMES the existence of LIVING ORGANISMS with a capacity to REPRODUCE? (E) Time, (F) Genetics/heredity. (2) How is a species defined? Perhaps the most classic definition is a group of organisms that can BREED with each other to produce fertile offspring, an idea originally set forthin 1942 by evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr. While elegant in its simplicity, this concept has SINCE COME UNDER FIRE by biologists, who argue that it DIDN’T APPLY to many organisms, such as single-celled ones that reproduce asexually, or those that have been shown to breed with other distinct organisms to create hybrids. (3) The discovery of DNA's double helix prompted the creation of yet another definition, one in which scientists could look for minute genetic differences and draw even finer lines denoting species. Based on a 1980 book by biologists Niles Eldredge and Joel Cracraft, under the definition of a phylogenetic species, animal species now can differ by just 2 percent of their DNA to be considered separate. (4) In the wake of these and other paradigm-shifting discoveries, Ernst Mayr’s original concept of species is rapidly falling apart. (5) Let us turn to comments from Geoffrey Simmons, a medical doctor with over 40 years of medical practice experience, author of eight books including the book “What Darwin Didn’t Know.” Simmons writes in another of his books the story of chance development of life. In his book “Millions of Missing Links”Simmons observes that the current scientific evidence reveals Darwinism’s most FATAL FLAW — the billions of missing links. (6) Simmons says, “. . . . the arguments supporting the theory of evolution is SHAKY at best, while, on the other hand, nearly every aspect of science is COMPATIBLE with Intelligent Design.” (7) The Bible says that wisdom is justified by all its consequences (Matt. 11:19; Luke 7:35). How, then, does one justify Darwinian evolution? I don’t think we CAN justify Darwinism because of its flagrant FLAWS. (8) In Episode 286 I referred to an article from gotquestions.org that indicated that FLAWS in the theory of evolution can be separated into 3 BASIC AREAS. In that episode I discussed 2 areas: (A) There is the apparent CONTRADICTION between “punctuated equilibrium” advocated by Stephen Jay Gould and Nyles Eldridge and “GRADUALISM” advanced by Charles Darwin. Punctuated equilibrium considers events like the CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION in the fossil record and attempts to INCORPORATE it into the Darwin theory. But there are flaws with punctuated equilibrium as well. (B) Second area into which flaws can be separated is the problem in projecting “MICRO-evolution” plus CHANCE into “MACRO-evolution.” Macroevolution has NEVER BEEN observed. So it is more than a flaw; it is an overactive IMAGINATION. Current  scientific evidence reveals Darwinism’s most FATAL FLAW — the billions of missing links. Let us return to the third basic area into which flaws of evolution are separated. I have added a fourth and a fifth category. (9) The third basic area is the way Darwinian evolutionary theory has been used to SUPPORT IDEAS from POLITICAL SYSTEMS like Nazism which caused the Holocaust thereby destroying over 6 million Jews and maybe 10 million Christians. Josef Stalin left seminary after having read Darwin’s book becoming an ATHEIST AS A RESULT. Ultimately over 18 million Russians were killed under Stalin’s regime in the USSR. Marxism/communism in China destroyed over 100 million Chinese. Marxism/communism was responsible for Pol Pot’s killing fields in Cambodia whereby over half of the population of Cambodia were destroyed. (10) The goal of socialism is communism. The are some young people in America who are attracted to socialism because they are completely IGNORANT of the history of deaths in communist regimes and of the FAILURES OF SOCIALISTIC GOVERNMENTS throughout the history of the world. (11) The fourth basic area against Darwinian theory is to observe that it is unable to cope with Michael Behe’s concept of irreducible complexity disclosed in his book Darwin’s Black Box. Behe, a biochemistry professor at Lehigh University, is an evolutionists. He acknowledges a powerful challenge to Darwinian evolution. He gives a simple example of irreducible complexity: a mousetrap. The mousetrap has 5 major components that make it functional. If any one of these components is missing, it will not function. It becomes WORTHLESS as a mousetrap. (12) The fourth basic area against Darwinian theory is to observe that it is unable to cope with Michael Behe’s concept of irreducible complexity disclosed in his book Darwin’s Black Box. Behe, a biochemistry professor at Lehigh University, is an evolutionists. He acknowledges a powerful challenge to Darwinian evolution. He gives a simple example of irreducible complexity: a mousetrap. The mousetrap has 5 major components that make it functional. If any one of these components is missing, it will not function. It becomes WORTHLESS as a mousetrap. (13) In particular, the human eye is an irreducibly complex organ. the eye cannot be reduced to anything LRSS than what it is. It has thousands of CO-EQUAL FUNCTIONS to make it work. If we take away just one of those functions the rest of the eye is WORTHLESS as a seeing mechanism. How can chance, natural selection, and random mutation, the only basic mechanisms within Darwin’s theory, accomplish the whole picture of sight when all functions had to be present at once. This is episode 293.

References: (1) In an article entitled, “Quotes from Scientists on Evolution” compiled by Sean D. Pitman, M. D. quotes what several scientists had to say about evolution. (2) How you answer the question of origins, whether you are an accident or a UNIQUE CREATION OF GOD, will ultimately determine EVERYTHING ELSE in your life. It will determine your VALUE in terms of every other human being. It will determine your basis of MORALITY, your MEANING and PURPOSE in life, and your ultimate DESTINY. This is one of the most fundamental questions you can ever ask. (3) I have been exploring WHAT evolution IS and WHY it is one of the GREAT FALSEHOODS BEING PERPETRATED in our time. For several episodes of this program I have listed 8 evidences against evolution. You should get the IMPRESSION, perhaps to your own dismay, that the Darwinian view is FALSE. Therefore it all points to the fact that your existence is NOT AN ACCIDENT, but instead you are a unique creation of God. (4) In November 7, 1977 Time magazine had a cover story entitled “How Man Became Man” in which this theme was announced as the ONLY PLAUSIBLE SCIENTIFIC REASON for man being man. In that issue appeared an advertisement for the TIME/LIFE book series The Emergence of Man, which I am told is now found in practically every public schools and libraries throughout the United States. The ad included the following statement: “. . . . you share, with every other creature that ever lived, the SAME ORIGINS — the same ACCIDENT that led to the SPONTANEOUS CREATION of the first single-celled algae 3.5 billion years ago.” No supporting evidence was given. That means what was stated is merely an OPINION. (5) But unfortunately, this view has become the BASIS OF EDUCATION throughout the UNITED STATES and most of the world today. (6) The November 20, 1989, issue of Newsweek had an article expounding the theory of evolution entitled “ We’re All Lucky to Be Here.” Here is an excerpt: “It is a PICTURE we all carry in our heads, the most powerful ICON of the Age of Secular Humanism: the line of [the] ascent of Man. It begins with the BACTERIA, just barely across the threshold of life, a TENUOUS SCUM on the primeval seas. Then, climbing the LADDER of COMPLEXITY. . . . .protozoa, invertebrates, the fishes and early reptiles. Followed by the first MAMMALS, which knocked off the DINOSAURS, the early PRIMATES and their HOMINID DESCENDANTS huddled around a cave fire. Three billion years of PROGRESS directed toward the PRODUCTION of Man.” (7) The notion that living beings originated from inanimate materials comes from the Ancient Greeks, primarily from Aristotle — from the theory known as SPONTANEOUS GENERATION. Aristotle also states that living things DO ARISE and HAVE ALWAYS ARISEN from LIFELESS MATTER. Aristotle’s theory remained the DOMINANT IDEA on origin of life from the ancient philosophers to the Renaissance thinkers (outside that of a deity as a causal agent). With the birth of modern science, experimental refutations emerged. (8) We know that Louis Pasteur et al refuted the idea of spontaneous generation. Nevertheless, evolutionary biologists believed that SOME KIND of spontaneous generation, different from the simple Aristotelian doctrine, MUST HAVE WORKED for the emergence of life. In other words, the evolutionary biologists are REFUSING TO ACKNOWLEDGE that Pasteur and others did not successfully DISPROVE spontaneous generation even though the rest of the scientific community ACCEPTED that spontaneous generation was disproven. This is episode 292.

References: (1) Evolution has become the foundational basis of education throughout most of the world today. I doubt that it is possible to attend any biology class at any state university or public school without being exposed to the theory of evolution. That is acceptable to me if it is presented as a THEORY, but it is unlikely that it is presented as a theory, but more likely it is presented as a FACT. And anyone who believes otherwise is ridiculed. Almost every biology textbook presents evolution as the only INTELLECTUAL POSSIBILITY for life. That’s what bugs me. (2) What is the fruit of evolution? What are the children of evolution? What are its ramifications? (3) Let’s check the history of  Adolf Hitler in Germany, Josef Stalin in USSR, Mao Zedong in China, Pol Pot in Cambodia. They are responsible for mass murders of millions of people in the 20th century. Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust which eliminated over 6 million Jews and the multitude of deaths of soldiers in WWII. Stalin murdered over 18 million Russians during his regime. Mao caused the murder of over 100 million Chinese people. Pol Pot destroyed over half the population of Cambodia in his Killing Fields. (4) Social Darwinism, Eugenics, Nazism, communisn, secularism all have their roots in Darwinian evolution. (5) If we begin with NO GOD, then there is NO ONE to whom we are accountable. Moreover, there is NO SUCH THING as absolute standards by which can measure right and wrong. MORALITY is simply floating on the sea of PERSONAL PREFERENCES. Why have RULES if there is NO RULES ENFORCER? Why have MORALS if there is NO BOSS ruling the universe? (6) There you have it, the PERFECT FORMULA for ANARCHY and the COLLAPSE of a nation: no rules, no authority, no funding for the police, no laws with any real authority against crime, no prosecutions of criminals, no morals, no consequences, and no God. (7) This situation is like Judges 17:6 which says, “In those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.” When will we wake up to reality? (8) A presupposition is a statement TACITLY ASSUMED BEFOREHAND at the beginning of a philosophical or a scientific argument, a preconceived paradigm that you bring to the table in forming your opinion regarding any debatable topic. (9) Evolution begins with the presupposition that there is NO GOD. Therefore, human beings and all other living things are products of MERE CHANCE. Consequently, this world and its inhabitants are the result of a COSMIC ACCIDENT, a COINCIDENCE that came as a result of the Big Bang. We are all the product of RANDOM, CHAOTIC, IMPERSONAL, HAPPENSTANCE. The evolutionist would say to believe otherwise is IGNORANT,  NAIVE, and FANATICAL. (10) Richard Dawkins, the most famous atheist in the world and a stalwart supporter of Darwinian evolution, said, “It is ABSOLUTELY safe to say that if you meet someone who claims NOT to believe in EVOLUTION, that person is IGNORANT, STUPID, or INSANE (or WICKED, but I’d rather not consider that).” (That quotation is found in  Ignorance Is No Crime, in the Free Inquiry magazine; Dawkins said this first in a book review for the NY Times on April 9, 1989.) (11) Evolutionists believe that chance plus time plus matter will generate life from non-life. When they run into problems with their theories, they just add a few more billions of years to their hypothesis or they change their hypothesis to include the solution to the objection. And still they claim that evolution is a FACT, and keep on going as if nothing ever happened. That is the HEART of the evolutionary process. (12) The notion that living beings originated from inanimate materials comes from the Ancient Greeks, primarily from Aristotle — from the theory known as spontaneous generation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation). Aristotle also states that living things DO ARISE and always HAVE ARISEN  from LIFELESS MATTER. Aristotle’s theory remained the DOMINANT IDEA on origin of life (outside that of deity as a causal agent) from the ancient philosophers to the Renaissance thinkers in various forms. With the birth of modern science, experimental refutations emerged. Italian physician Francesco Redi demonstrated in 1668 that maggots developed from rotten meat only in a jar where flies could enter, but not in a closed-lid jar. Redi concluded: “All life comes from life.” (13) The French chemist Luis Pasteur’s experiment in 1859 is generally regarded as giving the DEATH BLOW to spontaneous generation. He showed that microbes cannot grow in STERILIZED WATER, unless it is exposed to AIR. The experiment won Pasteur the Alhumbert Prize in 1862 from the French Academy of Sciences French Academy and he concluded: "Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation RECOVER from the mortal blow of this simple experiment." This is episode 291.

References: (1) This fifth evidence is the CONTRADICTION between “gradualism” advocated by Charles Darwin and the theory of “PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM” developed by Stephen Jay Gould and Nyles Elderedge in 1972. Punctuated equilibrium allows for the SUDDEN appearance for many new species like in the Cambrian Explosion. (2) “Blind Watchmaker” by Richard Dawkins. (3) Sixth evidence: Some Darwinian evolutionists claim that evolution is the CAUSE of the universe. But Dallas Willard, the UCLA professor of philosophy, has pointed out that Darwinian evolution CANNOT be a theory of ORIGINS of the universe because it requires ENTITIES, BEHAVIORS, and AN ENVIRONMENT that includes propagating organisms that natural selection can CHOOSE its offsprings for SURVIVAL. Until a functional biological entity EXISTS, there is NOTHING for natural selection to ACT ON. (4) The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics goes against Darwinian evolution. The second law says that in the natural course, things begin to DEGENERATE by going FROM an ordered state to a DISORDERED STATE. The universe is RUNNING DOWN, not EVOLVING UPWARD as Darwin’s theory claims. (5) “Evolution’s Blunders, Frauds and Forgeries” by Jerry Bergman. (6) The best known examples of fraud include the Piltdown Man, which proved to be a composite of a human skull and an ape jaw. The evidence for the Nebraska Man turned to be a pig’s tooth. (7) In 1980 the magazine Newsweek announced a conference titled “Macroevolution,” held at Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History. Paleontologists told biologists what they LEAST WANTED TO HEAR, namely, that the fossil record does NOT, and never WILL, support the Darwinian scenario of a smooth, continuous progress of life forms, nicely graded from simple to complex. Instead the rocks show a PERVASIVE PATTERN OF GAPS: new life forms appear suddenly, with NO TRANSITIONAL FORMS leading to them, followed by long periods of stability during which they show little or NO CHANGE at all. Stephen Jay Gould called this “the trade secret of paleontology.” (8) “Total Truth” by Nancy Pearcey. (9) A widely circulated claim in the 21st century suggested that human DNA was 99% identical to chimpanzee DNA. While the similarities are high, later research revealed that the actual genetic OVERLAP is LOWER than originally stated, and differences in the regulation of genes are significant. (10) The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics goes against Darwinian evolution. The second law says that in the natural course, things begin to DEGENERATE by going FROM an ordered state to a DISORDERED STATE. The universe is RUNNING DOWN, not EVOLVING UPWARD as Darwin’s theory claims. (11) Humans were no longer the PINNACLE of creation; they were no longer the CENTER of the living world, created beings made in the image of God. They were not the PRODUCT of a Divine Plan because evolution has NO PLAN. The Origin of Species SHATTERED the 19th century belief in human’s traditional role. (12) I remember when I was in college that some atheist was ridiculing those who believed the Bible was trustworthy saying there was NO EVIDENCE that there was the nation of the Hittites. But since around 1905 there was in a museum at the University of Chicago exhibiting artifacts of the Hittite dynasty. Atheists will do anything, no matter how devious, to try to prove there is no God, and evolutionist will do the same thing to try to prove that Darwinism is true. (13) Several branches of creationism, including intelligent design people like Stephen C. Meyer, Philip Johnson, Michael Behe, and David Berlinsky argue that the idea of life being directly designed by intelligence is AT LEAST AS SCIENTIFIC as evolutionary theory, and should therefore be TAUGHT IN PUBLIC EDUCATION. (14) The scientific community does not recognize such objections as valid, pointing to detractors' misinterpretations of such things as the scientific method, evidence, and basic physical laws. That seems to me to be a real stretch of imagination scraping at the very bottom of the barrel of objections while at the same time closing their eyes to the truth. This is episode 290.

References: (1) The Miller-Urey experiment used a mixture of organic chemicals presumably MIMICKING a PRIMORDIAL SEA despite the fact that no one has ever SEEN or ANALYZED the contents of the primordial sea. (2) But the Miller-Urey experiment FALSELY led people to think that scientists could CREATE LIFE in a test tube because the experiment could create SOME of the building blocks of life. But these building blocks produced by the experiment was only a FEW amino acids FAR REMOVED from what is needed for life. Nevertheless the myth of the Miller-Urey experiment still remains in school textbooks COMPLETELY OVERLOOKING  the problems with this experiment. (3) The medical doctor Geoffrey Simmons and author of the books  What Darwin Didn’t Know and Billions of Missing Links used the fact of MISSING TRANSITIONAL LINKS and the SHAKINESS of Darwin’s claims to say that Darwin’s claims NO LONGER RISES the level of a theory but perhaps only to a proposal of historical importance. (4) Drawing on the most recent research  and on years of clinical work Simmons tells the REAL STORY about the human body’s amazing complexity. The book “What Darwin Didn’t Know” pictures the wonders of the human body in their TRUE CONTEXT — a marvelous system fashioned by an infinitely wise DESIGNER. (5) In the book Billions of Missing Links Simmons reveals how interdependent structures and systems — massive complexity upon massive complexity —  apparently came about ALL AT ONCE, WHOLE AND ENTIRE. There are NO PRECEDENTS, NO IN-BETWEENS, NO MISTAKES, NO FIRST TRIES. So there is NO HINT of things happening by CHANCE. (6) Simmons is not particularly fond of Darwin’s personality. He says, “Much of Darwin’s work reflects prejudices, false assumptions, assumed natural laws, and feigned research projects, as well as the reasonable thoughts of unnamed colleagues. Among the notables who have adopted his conclusions have been Hitler, Marx, and Stalin.” To those I would add Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Nicholas Madura, and Pol Pot. (7) The Bible says that wisdom is JUSTIFIED by all its CHILDREN. In other words, things like accepted cultural ideas, myths, worldviews, philosophies, politics, etc. enter to give a fuller picture of the character of a person. (8) The eugenics movement will forever be associated with Adolf Hitler, whose quest to build an Aryan MASTER RACE during the 1930s and '40s culminated in the Holocaust, the extermination of 6 millions Jews as well as all the deaths of multitudes of soldiers in WWII. That is a child of Darwinism. (9) For over 40 years Dr. Jerry Bergman, with 7 graduate degrees in biology, chemistry, psychology, and evaluation and reseasrch, has chronicled the weakness and absence of evidence supporting the theory of Darwinian evolution. Don’t you think that Bergman with those credentials deserves an audience? (10) The American eugenics movement received extensive funding from various CORPORATE FOUNDATIONS including the Carnegie Institution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_Institution), Rockefeller Foundation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Foundation), and the Harriman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Henry_Harriman) railroad fortune. In 1906, J.H. Kellogg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J.H._Kellogg) provided funding to help found the Race Betterment Foundation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_Betterment_Foundation) in Battle Creek, Michigan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_Creek,_Michigan). The Eugenics Record Office (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_Record_Office)(ERO) was founded in Cold Spring Harbor, New York (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_Spring_Harbor,_New_York) in 1911 by the renowned biologist Charles B. Davenport (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_B._Davenport), using money from both the Harriman railroad fortune and the Carnegie Institution. (11) Eugenics allowed some people to JUSTIFY THEIR BIGOTRY who then would take things a STEP FURTHER by claiming that "lesser" races needed to be PHASED OUT. In this way, SOCIAL DARWINISM became a means to construct a supposed HEIRARCHY of race — and ensure that Caucasian people (and their genes) remained the ideal standard. This idea of heirarchy of races affected Hitler where he thought the Aryan race was the MASTER RACE. Eugenics and Social Darwinism are the children of Darwinism. (12) Before Hitler took eugenics to its DEADLY EXTREMES of executing millions, many people considered at least some eugenics-related ideas to be COMPLETELY LEGITIMATE — despite their SERIOUS MORAL IMPLICATIONS. (13) What is the lesson learned here? Here is one: Any bias can be taken to extremes, hatred can ensue, and people can lose their lives. We see it now in the Trump DERANGEMENT SYNDROME which has precipitated multiple assassination attempts against the president of the United States. We saw it Charlie Kirk’s murder. We see it in school, places of worship, and drive-by shootings. It manifests itself when a few radical nations want to wipe out another nation. We see it exhibitions of genocide. (14) When will the world recognize that hatred can destroy everything we hold dear? Rather than supporting eugenics that removes people, we need to excise the cancer of hatred. This is episode 289.