Dakotas Christian Believers Arena
Come on in and browse 
   Home      Creation/Evolution
{There are 32 articles on this page}
This section contains thoughts presented in an actual discussion on creation and evolution with evolutionists on a Christian forum. The thoughts are a bit raw but we wanted to present them in their unedited form to maintain the context as best as we could.
1. Just speak the truth, ignore the sinful words of those who do not believe because they do not have the truth regales of how much science they claim supports their false theory. There is no science which supports evolution--none whatsoever--but be careful as the evolutionist will twist things to try and confuse the believer.

God's word is true, it is correct and we do not have to waste time and money 'investigating origins' because we already have the answer. It is found in the Bible starting with Gen. 1.

All that the evolutionists, TEs, PCs and other alternative holding people are doing is disobeying God and following after that which is constructed by unbelievers. You have God to support you, you do not need the secular version of science and you do not need lies.

Evolutionists are fighting a defeated battle and are on the losing side; do not be persuaded by their myths and false teachings.

2. It's a Miracle

Far too often too many evolutionists define their supposed process as 'change'. They say if you have 'change' then you have evolution and that evolution is defined as 'changes in a. frequencies...' but there is a problem with their ideology on this issue.

In looking at the definition of the word 'change' you will notice in the quote below that it is implied, inferred or expected that there are intelligent outside forces initiating any changes in life. It is also implied that those outside forces have reasons for making changes and that cognitive thought and hands on action are used as well.

Definition of CHANGE

transitive verb

1a: to make different in some particular: alter <never> b: to make radically different: transform <can> b : to make a shift from one to another : switch <always> c : to exchange for an equivalent sum of money (as in smaller denominations or in a foreign currency) <change> d : to undergo a modification of <foliage> e : to put fresh clothes or covering on <change>

intransitive verb

1: to become different <her>

2of the moon : to pass from one phase to another

3: to shift one's means of conveyance : transfer <on>

4of the voice : to shift to lower register : break

5: to undergo transformation, transition, or substitution <winter>

6: to put on different clothes <need>

7: exchange, switch <neither>

— chang·er noun

— change hands

: to pass from the possession of one owner to that of another <money>

Origin of CHANGE

Middle English, from Anglo-French changer, from Latin cambiare to exchange, probably of Celtic origin; akin to Old Irish camm crooked

First Known Use: 13th century

Synonym Discussion of CHANGE

Change, alter, vary, modify mean to make or become different. Change implies making either an essential difference often amounting to a loss of original identity or a substitution of one thing for another <changed>. Alter implies a difference in some particular respect without suggesting loss of identity <slightly>. Vary stresses a breaking away from sameness, duplication, or exact repetition <vary>. Modify suggests a difference that limits, restricts, or adapts to a new purpose <modified>.

The evolutionist would have everyone believe that evolution was able to apply 'changes' to life forms without any intelligence, forethought, study of environments, cognitive reasoning, appendages and so on.

These supposed changes in life form came with hands off by some 'process' that has no physical attributes to actually make said claim changes to life forms and that it was to be able to develop these life forms to match the every changing atmospheric environment randomly, without thought or considerations to what changes would be needed to meet the ever changing surrounding conditions.

In other words, the evolutionists have to rely upon miracles, done constantly and in all life forms, to make their theory work. Of course they hate miracles when God and Jesus do them condemning the Christian who say 'God did it'. The evolutionist applies a double standard and allows for 'evolution did it' even though they have no empirical evidence that this supposed process has the ability to cause change, any physical properties to initiate change nor the reason to calculate which changes are needed.

It is all done magically and without logic or scientific methods. Change requires intelligence, thought, desire, lust, greed, all of which are not products of this evolutionary process and which have no reason to exist if the theory of evolution was true.

I now ask the evolutionists to produce empirical scientific evidence of this supposed process initiating changes and they cannot turn to modern day examples (from Darwin on up) because all of those claimed evolutionary experiments use outside forces applying ingredients to already existing and mature molecules, genes, etc., and using an environment not present when those claimed historical changes took place. In fact none of those factors were present when those historical claimed changes took place thus we have to challenge the proclaimed conclusions of the evolutionist as non-evolutionary resulting from non-evolutionary experiments.

They also need to show the physical properties of this supposed process enabling it to initiate and guide changes throughout the claimed historical advance from origin of life to the modern age. Detailing the cognitive reasoning it would need to meet the challenges of each change in the surrounding environment.

It is one thing to take fully developed species, genes etc., already existing in a common and non-changing environment, give them different ingredients to react to then claim their theory is correct because they were able to use a pseudo-science and predict the outcome when an educated guess would do the same thing but it is another to actually demonstrate the reality of the process in action throughout the different claimed historical changes and different environments without outside interference and manipulation.

3. I do not know which is worse

Republican Christians or evolutionists?

I really can't decide. On the one hand you have people who are uneducated, listen to lies, can't see the truth and are over-zealous for the wrong things. On the other...oh...wait...you have the same thing.

Spending time in the Social/Ethics/Political forum has done nothing but demonstrate that many 'Christians' have a long ways to go to be near the truth of the Bible just like their evolutionary counterparts on this forum.

It is not science we are to pursue, it is not scientific conclusions we are to adhere to and it is not the republican party we are to pursue nor the republican party ideology we are to adhere to, it is the truth and getting to the truth means pruning away the lies of the world and using faith.

Christians cannot be the light of the world if they follow the secular world's thinking, join their ideology, compromise what the Bible says, and do the same things as the secular world does.

To be the light we stand with God and Jesus shunning evolutionary thought and ideas, Republican Party ideologies and goals and present the truth regardless of the reaction of those who do not believe.

The truth is we use faith to believe God's word and He said He created the world in 6 days without using any form of non-existent evolutionary processes. That is it people, a choice, with faith as the criteria, nothing else

4. To all Christians out there

Ignore the evolutionists demands for evidence. We do not serve the evolutionist nor does God thus their demands mean nothing. They are not in charge, do not get to make the rules and do not get to say what is true or not.

We obey God and that means we obey His rules and those consist of faith God and believers do not humble themselves to the sinner, they are to humble themselves to God which means that they must abide by God's rules. They are in no position to demand anything as they are lost.

God does not provide evidence to appease the evolutionist or other sinners, he provides evidence to shore up the believers' faith. If the evolutionist cannot accept that fact then they have made their choice and have rejected Jesus and His ways. The Christian does not follow the sinner, nor is a servant to them.

If the evolutionist doesn't want to climb aboard the ark of salvation because they want proof of the upcoming judgement, the Christian doesn't get off the 'ark' to meet their demand. They stay aboard it following God's way to salvation.

If the evolutionist doesn't accept God's rules then too bad, the believer doesn't stop following God because some sinner doesn't want to go along.

Let them whine and cry, they have made their choice don't let them get you to disobey God and ruin your lives

5. What evolutionists need to do

in their weak and futile attempts to prove their theory correct:

#1. Provide the original conditions which initiated life on this planet then replicate that feat using the original conditions.

Of course the evolutionist will whine and cry that their work doesn't deal with that aspect of life but guess what, if they cannot demonstrate their theory of origination of life then they have no process to work with.

#2. Provide the original ancestor then replicate evolutionary changes as historically claimed.

Of course the evolutionists will whine and cry that there is not enough time to do that but guess what, they then cannot claim that evolution is true because they cannot demonstrate the process in action and that A). They have it correct and B). Their work is actually evolutionary.

#3. Prove that their laboratory experiments are actually evolutionary.

Of course the evolutionists will whine and cry that they have to interfere and use unnatural conditions and manipulations to prove their theory exists but such experiments only support God's work in creating everything and do nothing to support the theory of evolution.

#4 Properly respond and, if possible, refute a previous post of mine that contains a list of items the evolutionists must meet to be able to declare their theory correct and in existence.

of course the evolutionists will whine and cry about that one as they are too lazy to find that post and will say it is impossible. If it is impossible then their theory is wrong and does not exist.

6. The Evolutionist's mistake

Creating a false authority, science, and a false standard, (peer review, observation, etc) then claiming everything else is false because it doesn't meet their humanly created criteria.

Basically evolutionists rely on circular reasoning for all their supposed support of their false theory. The claim, 'Our theory is true because our version of science says so and our version of science is supported by our own standards that we have set up and designed to exclude contradictory thought and the truth.'

In such a closed system, which excludes data and relies upon non-factual attitudes like assumption, guesswork, conjecture but not fact and truth, it is no wonder they miss the mark and create false ideas.

The real crime is when they force their beliefs upon unsuspecting students in a forced monopoly. Lying to children, to high school students, to anyone is very wrong <edit>. As Jesus said it would be better for them if they did so. Turning people's belief in Jesus away to a lie does not go over well with Him.

7. Evolution is only personal opinion

They try to cloak it in scientific mumbo-jumbo but it never works. They cannot hide the fact that their whole theory is built upon opinion and not fact. They throw in a lot of assumptions, conjecture, guesswork and so on but it all boils down to the same thing---what they think not what they can prove.

Of course they cannot prove one thing about their false theory but need to use avoidance along with personal attacks to distract from that fact. They make it up as they go because they have no real history to support their allegations and they have nothing from the ancient world to support their views either.

There is nothing in this world that operates per evolutionary thinking or its supposed process and they cannot produce one real evolutionary experiment to show that the supposed theory is true.

With creation, we do not need test tubes, time, advanced degrees or manipulations to see the Bible is correct. We can verify creation via the results at any time we want without spending millions of dollars or 4 years or so chasing a piece of paper. It is there every day, available when we want it or need it.

Evolutionists can't do that and they will never be able to verify one thing they said or say

8. Which is the greater fairy tale?

1. Millions of species (maybe billions) since the supposed evolutionary beginning of life all being spawned from a one celled common ancestor and randomly throughout time given changes to adjust to their supposed environment (something evolutionists cannot prove or produce) then on the off chance a male randomly meets a female with the exact same gene development (something the evolutionist cannot prove or replicate) to pass on to their little ones who randomly repeat the process over millions or billions of years (something that the evolutionist cannot prove). Then through these random changes, guided by some unknowing, unintelligent, unpossessing, process, that one celled common ancestor produced the variety of all life forms we see today and our ancestors witnessed in their lifetimes.


2. God protecting 2 of every kind of animal and 8 people who he helped guide in constructing their ark, helped collect the animals and all the food they would need to survive a global flood meant as punishment for sin.

Do not get into comments about 'what is a kind' it is not germane to this thread. Just put a 1 or a 2 in your post and then say why it is the biggest fairy tale.

9. TE & PC do not work (Theistic Evolution & Progressive Creationism)

As explanations for origins simply because it provides a weak God who compromised His own abilities and endured a long wait to see His work come to frutation. No one would believe in such a incapable supernatural being because such a God would not have demonstrated His power to show His creation that He was all powerful and could take care of all problems.

Using such methods would also open God up to the accusations of 'if He is so powerful, why didn't He create instantly?' (we can't say 'in 6 days' as that concept would not be in existence if God used a form of evolution)

Clearly God and His true followers cannot win with those who have decided to disbelieve God's word. Nothing will be good enough for them, not evidence, not examples nothing, that would compel the unbeliever to change their minds or be convinced that He exists and was the creator.

God knew that attitude would be present and He knew that physical evidence would not survive the thousands of years of life which is why he made faith the criteria for His work. It would be redundant and useless for God to come back to earth every few years and do another creative act just to appease a small percentage of the world's population for that would make God subservient to man's demands and the adherents of the many false religions would strengthen their hold on their false beliefs, not turn to God or Jesus for salvation.

Man is to humble themselves to God and by faith believe His words not the other way around but since secular man wants to be the top dog, they refuse to do this simple act and set about creating their own ideas about what took place in the past. Sadly, too many people who call themselves followers of God get lead astray by the devil and seek secular ideas and ways and ignore what God has said.

They commit sin in their pursuit of their own ways and ideas, which makes it harder for true Christians to make an impact for Christ. Jesus said, 'to obey is better than to sacrifice' but the TEs & PCs and other religious adherents to alternatives to creation do not even obey as they run after science and its philosophies in hopes of marrying the secular with the Holy.

There is only one origin and it is found in the Bible, there is only one way to be a Christian and it is found in the Bible (John 3), all others are false and lead people to destruction

10 I am still waiting for evolutionists to...

produce scientific, empirical, verifiable , ancient corroborated evidence for the existence of bodily gases which result in the often repulsive bodily expulsion commonly called farts.

Why did the supposed process 'guide' life to create and then expel such odorous fumes in both a noisy and silent manner? When did it provide the information to the genetic code to adapt it into life's biological function? Why is it necessary to expel such gas or have it exist?

Please provide the explanation with clarity, empirical and scientific evidence which also marks the exact time when it appeared in the fossil record or life. Make sure you have ancient documentation that shows you have the calculations and original environment, etc. correct and that you are consistent with the historical claims made by evolutionists about the supposed work of the supposed evolutionary process.

Failure to do so removes any right to demand any evidence, empirical or otherwise, from creationists about the Biblical accounts. If you demand it then you need to be prepared to put up for your claims or shut up.

11 A person once said eye-witness testimony has been discredited

Well that is good news to hear for evolutionary science relies heavily upon 'eye-witness testimony' and they trumpet all day long how evolution in action has been 'observed' by 'eye-witnesses' {evolutionary scientists}.

That means all observations of evolutionary science are thrown out and cannot be used as evidence for evolution's existence or action. This also means that all of Darwin's observations are moot and discredited meaning that there is no such thing as the evolutionary process.

That person. has done the world a great favor with his statement and undermines evolutionary science once again. It is a good thing that God requires faith and not observation

12 Please present evidence for evolution here

Of course there will be some ground rules.

1. The evidence must first prove the original conditions that started the original life form.

2. The evidence must show the original conditions that spawned the process called evolution and show how it attached itself to the life form and subsequent life forms.

3. The evidence must follow the claims evolutionist made about the historical process in action. In other words no false modern experiments extrapolated backwards. Actual historical claims must be demonstrated and observed. No fudging.

4. The evidence must be verifiable by ancient documentation and experiments not modern ones attributing the results to the supposed evolutionary process.

5, No excuses and no generalities. The historical claims must be replicated by using original conditions with no outside intelligent being's manipulation or guidance and all experiments must demonstrate random change as claimed. The evolutionist cannot hide behind the broad and useless term 'change' for that is a distortion of that word not a scientific piece of evidence.

6. No cheating is allowed. The evolutionist cannot use a modern experiment then attribute what they see to the supposed process of evolution. They must verify by independent judges that they have the correct ingredients, conditions and methods then show that they did the experiment exactly like they claim their supposed evolutionary process worked in the past.

Since evolution is supposed to be repeatable then there should be no problem for the evolutionist to scientifically show that it is. They should have access to the original conditions, the original union of the supposed process of evolution and the life form, they should be able to set this up and demonstrate how the supposed process of evolution randomly produced these claimed historical changes.

Prediction is not allowed for that does not eliminate other sources for the claimed results nor does it rest upon real science. The evidence must support the historical claims and show that they are correct and that the evolutionists have the correct method, conditions, etc.

The excuse that there is 'no time' is not accepted for that is an escape route for the evolutionist to avoid producing actual and real scientific evidence for their supposed evolutionary process.

13 For Christians--

If you say the Bible is God's word and you say that the Bible is true, how can you say that Darwin is right and God is wrong when it comes to Origins.

To say Darwin (and subsequent evolutionists) were/was/are correct you are saying that you do not believe God and if you do not believe God, then you do not believe Jesus; so how can you believe Jesus when it comes to salvation when you say you do not believe Him?

It is the same book written by the same author thus if He is correct when it comes to John 3:16 and other salvation passages then God must be correct when it comes to Genesis 1 and other creation passages. You cannot have it both ways and you cannot serve two masters--you have to choose the truth with God including Genesis 1 or the lie of the devil, including the lie of evolution.

You can't have both.

14 To TEs PCs and other supposed

Christians who think they can hold to alternatives and continue to call themselves Christian.

Unless you are newly converted you cannot hold to Christian teaching and evolution in any form. You have to choose one or the other. If you do not then you are considered a false teacher who brings a different gospel than Jesus & the disciples did & Paul has cursed you.

You have to give up the sinful to be with God {1 John} and evolutionary non creation thinking and beliefs are sinful and not of God. The word Christian means 'Christ-like' but to be Christ-like you have to hold to creation as taught in Gen. 1 and the rest of scriptures. That is what Jesus and the disciples taught along with the OT writers.

There is no other option for you, as Jesus said, and evidence by _______, if you do not believe Moses how will you believe me? (slight paraphrase). I have seen this over and over throughout the years. Those who hold to partial alternatives dismiss much of the NT and much of the Old.

There was only one way creation took place--heb. 11:1ff; Gen. 1; and other scriptures--and if you want to be a follower of God then you must proclaim what God did and said without changing any of the words (warnings in both Deut. and Rev.) to suit your desires.

15 The evolutionists are not here to build up the flock and shore up faith but to seek and destroy those weak willed people who will disobey God and listen to the deceived unbeliever.

It is not wrong to use or study science. Believers can use it just like the unbeliever but what is wrong is if the Christian listens to and follows the secular world in their pursuit of scientific discovery and exploration.

That is not what God said to do thus the christian must do what God wants in the field not what the secular would like to see. As it stands, the unbelieving version of science cannot produce answers but God is a God of answers thus the Christian must produce the answers that God wants the world to hear.

Even in science, the Christian is to follow the Holy Spirit to the truth and stand with the truth for God and Jesus are the truth. There are no exception clauses and the theory of evolution is a lie and has no place in the Christian's life or thinking. It is not correct no matter how many studies the evolutionist throws your way.

You need to remember the words of the devil to Eve in Gen. 3:3--'...you will be like God...' Those are the same words he is using to deceive many scientists as they seek to be a god by creating their own history and origin. They also want to use genetics to play God, and this is supported by the following:

The combination of nuclear transfer and genetic modification used to create her [Dolly] have much broader applications in human medicine that could prevent a great deal of suffering. They may help to prevent the birth of children with devastating genetic diseases

{After Dolly pg. 249}

In other words, they wish to say who can be born and who cannot be, robbing people the right to life and a chance to go to heaven. Now of course they may try to fix those diseases and the child still may be born but they are still inserting themselves into the situation as God determining how a child should come out of the womb.

Neither scenarios are right and it is up to the Christian to get God's morality, right and wrong back over-seeing the field of science so that saner heads may prevail, to stop such stupidity on the part of the evolutionist and genetic scientist.

On page 258, we see more interference by those who are not content with what God has given to a couple. Read this;

Other issues have to do with whether a couple who are blind or deaf, for example, can use PGD to select an embryo with a matching disability

What parent would want to do that and have their child robbed of a chance to be born free of disability? Clearly the evolutionist wants to tinker with God's Gods design and will because they want to be master of all and they cannot do that.

This reminds me of the temptation of Jesus where the devil offers Jesus all the kingdoms of the world , if only He would bow to him. The evolutionist has taken the offer and now seek to rule over what children get to be born among other things.

The author was honest and stated the many limitations that are faced by geneticists right now but those limitations are just a minor stumbling block as they seek to overcome such problems and take control of reproduction.

The temptation is great for those who study science and the Christian who enters the field must be strong, mature and in tune with God so that their light can shine, with wisdom, on the evil that exists in modern science and keep morality in the minds of those who wish to be free from its restrictions.

Christians need to be humble, non-compromised, they cannot hold to evolution in any form and always seek the truth with the help of the Holy Spirit. So the rest of the world can see the difference and have a real choice.

Christians also should fight (with God' help) to get the evolutionist out of the science classroom so the students are not brainwashed and can hear the truth that God wants them to learn. Evolution is a lie and does not exist. It should not be taught any student. Jesus was quite harsh on those who sought to turn His followers away from belief in Him and Christians need to take that warning very seriously communicating it to the authorities relentlessly.

Over the few weeks that I have been here I have sought to bring the truth to this forum as God wants you all to learn that though science is not wrong, it is the thinking behind it that is and Christians are not to listen to the ungodly scientist no matter how many degrees they have or how much experience they possess. The truth depends upon God nothing else.

Yes we can do science but it is done God's way not secular man's, which means you will have to go against the grain to get the truth out but the secular world hates the truth, they hate Jesus so they will hate you. You have to be strong and follow Jesus on how to defend against these attacks because if the Christian fails, or changes sides, there is no one else to bring the truth to the needy world.

16 I see God at work in genes providing no doubt that He was the creator of all things, even on the microscopic level and the requester attributes what he sees to evolution. But that is the way it is with evidence. No one has different evidence and this is very clearly illustrated in archaeology. On one side you might have KA Kitchen, James Hoffmeier, Craig Evans look at the evidence and see the Bible verified or supported while on the other you may have Israel Finkelstein, William Dever, Eric Cline who, after looking at the same evidence declare something else in opposition to the Bible.

The reason for this is very understandable. The unbelieving side does not have the Holy Spirit leading them to the truth and their unbelief dictates what they see and how it should be applied. Deception is no joke people, and many people die in their sins because of the work of evil which blinds their mental and spiritual vision.

Prayer is needed to help thwart the advances of evil because there are so many believers out there who do not take the time to research or do not know how to have the Holy Spirit guide them to the truth or once they reach the truth, stay with it.

As you can see on this board, the attacks are relentless no matter how much truth a believer posts or how much error they expose in their enemies arguments. The Bible tells us that these unbelievers are 'willfully ignorant' which means they choose to be that way even though they know they do not have the truth.

You cannot discuss with them because the refuse to accept any evidence that contradicts their state of denial. I have seen this take place with Phillip Davies, who on one documentary was shown real evidence that proved there was an ancient Israelite nation and all Davies could do is shake his head and kept repeating 'it did not take place'.

It is not easy getting a person out of that state which is why you need to learn when to pray for repentance and when to walk away from the discussions. I have remained as long as I have as there was a lot to teach and point out to help you all remain in the truth.

Don’t let the evolutionist fool you with their supposed support from science. There is none and a little research will show you how absent scientific support is from their theory. If evolution were true, then there would never have been or be any of these discussions because God would not exist and people would not have a choice to make.

Evolution does not provide choice, only God does and that fact alone demonstrates that evolution does not exist and that God does. If evolution were true then there would be no crime for there would be no moral law to break. Evolution has no morality and no ultimate law thus what anyone does is right and doesn't matter for there is no existence after death.

Because God exists, and because he established right and wrong, the law and morality, crime exists. Crime exists because God gave humans the right to freely choose; in evolution there would be no choice, and nothing in this world that would drive men to commit evil for there would be no devil to tempt men with lust, greed, etc. Men would have an easy life.

Evolution can't explain one thing that exists in the world today but God's existence can. The Bible fills us in on the details on how all things came to be, even our sin nature but the theory of evolution is void of such explanations for it did not produce one thing we see in life today.

Ignore the evolutionist for they are not of God, this includes those who hold to the many variations of the theory, and stick with the Bible.

17 In modern day supposed evolutionary experiments the motivation sparking the scientist behind the different experiments is fueled by 'curiosity'. They want to know how a gene works, they want to know how life reacts to different environments, they want to know this, that and so on.

But in modern experiments you have different elements involved. There is supposed intelligent life forms conducting the experiments, manipulating the environment and ingredients being used to determine the results and you have 'curiosity'. You also have purpose and a direction.

Now if you look at the way evolutionists describe what the process of evolution really is you will see that it does not have intelligence, it does not know how to manipulate the environment or ingredients and it does not possess any form of curiosity. It just 'changes'. It also has no purpose nor direction in its work of 'changing life forms'

Several things become evident. First, since there are no ancient records or scientific papers to draw from, the modern day evolutionary scientist has no idea if his involvement is the correct formula and that they achieved the correct change. Their conclusion can only be attributed or assumed to be evolutionary.

They have no way of verifying their results and without verification they cannot know they have the truth. Repeating the same experiments and getting the same results does not mean they have it correct. It just means that they did the same experiment correctly over and over. Nothing they produce proves or can be construed as evidence for their process.

Second, they are not working with perfect evolutionary life forms. They are taking already developed animals and genes and applying their curiosity to them and seeing what results they can come up with. According to the evolutionist, the process cannot and did not do that thus their experiments are hardly evolutionary but a means to support their unbelief in the truth of the Bible.

Third, basically a sub-point of #2, the materials they are working with are already subject to sin and corruption thus their work is tainted before they even start their modern experiments. They cannot hope to produce anything similar to what their process is claimed to have done because their product is not coming from the same source.

They are using supposedly evolved life forms at their supposed peak but their process started out with a one celled common ancestor and had to make continual changes through supposedly billions or millions of years. The modern day evolutionist is cheating and then claiming that evolution is true even though they are not doing the exact same work.

What you have with the evolutionary theory and practice is not science and scientific evidence but a manipulated field used to 'prove' evolution true when it cannot do so. In other words, you are being hoodwinked {look it up if you do not know what it means} by evolutionists who make claims they cannot substantiate and abuse a tool for their own sinful purpose.

There is nothing true about evolution and no matter how hard they try,

18 The more I study genetics...

the more I see evolution cannot be true. Here are some quotes which describe the evolutionist to a 'T':

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and carry on as if nothing ever happened--Winston Churchill

A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.-- Max Planck

Evolutionists are presented with the truth every day. If not by Christians who know what they are talking about , then by God who continually reveals things to them that very few people get to see yet they 'pick themselves up' and ignore the message, continuing their lives as if they never heard a thing.

That is live action evidence proving the Bible true as it states that the unbelieving world are' WILLFULLY deceived'. They do not want the truth no matter the expense to their own lives, their families lives and their integrity and Christians need to be discerning as scientists do not want to be handcuffed by God's morality, God's right and wrong but be 'free' to do whatever their little heart’s desire because to them 'the end justifies the means'. That is not a biblical teaching but one that allows the scientist to sleep at night.

This little truth became very evident as I was reading the book, After Dolly by Ian Wilmut and Roger Highfield. Throughout its pages the same theme was mentioned and that was unrestricted scientific work in the name of curing diseases. That is wrong for we will never rid ourselves of all diseases, if any, because God didn't suspend death in light of scientific research.

Corruption is outside the scope of science as its cure is and unbelievers fool themselves if they think they can cheat death by curing a disease. There is a thread on this board which supports this point as it talks about bacteria becoming immune {though they call it evolution, it is not that but the evolutionist is desperate for proof of their lie}.

Genetics proves the evolutionist wrong every day and the complexity that is contained even in what the geneticist calls blastocyst, the very beginning of humans, demonstrates that evolution could not produce it no matter how hard it tried, if it actually existed.

Genetics is a fascinating subject and the wonders of God's creative work is evident on this level. The detail that when into designing is far beyond secular human comprehension, and the authors kept saying how they don't know it all or how it works and other such knowledge limiting phrases.

Evolution is not true and science proves it.

19 Constantly evolutionists ask for scientific evidence for creation but let's take a look at origins in Genesis for a moment:

God spoke and it was. Hmmm....How can you adapt that to the science currently being practiced by unbelievers? You can't because modern science is purposefully constructed to omit the supernatural.

The unbeliever demands evidence based upon their version of what they think science is and God just doesn't operate that way thus Christians will never meet the demands of the unbeliever because God didn't work in the manner of the unbeliever nor in the way they want it to be done.

The believer does not have to provide any scientific evidence to meet the demands of the unbeliever. You present the truth and make sure the unbeliever is aware of the fact that faith will always be part of the equation.

God and the believer do not humble themselves to the unbeliever, they have to humble themselves to God and accept His words.

20 The peer review process

Much is made by evolutionists about publication and the peer review process that supposedly is to precede publication. Yet they always gloss over what really takes place in the process of publication as it is rife with problems and would undermine their strategy of using publication as a means of defense.

Here is just one article's point of view:

Discouraging reviews, including insulting, unhelpful or unqualified reviewers; editors who seem to give equal weight to good, poor, ambiguous and contradictory reviews; the rejection of papers that are quite favorably reviewed.

Dishonest reviews, including reviewers who express prejudices, have conflicts of interest or have not read the paper carefully or thoroughly enough.

Impossible requirements, when reviewers or editors are expected to detect any dishonest science, such as fabrication, falsification or plagiarism.


More problems:

Some scenarios taken from real cases suggest otherwise:

A novice submits a naive paper to the field's foremost journal that is rejected with two reviews that feel more like a poke in the eye than useful feedback. After revisions, the manuscript is submitted to an obscure journal and accepted, conditional on responding to good suggestions by reviewers.

A young researcher submits a complex, carefully developed paper to a leading journal. It is rejected with suggestions of significant further research needed before the paper is publishable. A year later, a nearly identical paper is published in another top journal, by a well-known, well-connected researcher who happens to be on the previous journal's review board. In the interests of damage control, the young researcher does not complain and moves on to another research project.

A manuscript is published with flawed methodology and an introduction that is largely plagiarized - problems that are identified later by a reader.

21 Having a discussion with an evolutionist

usually ends in frustration unless they are truly seeking the real answers. The ones here on this forum and those who do not want the truth are not looking for what God did and to discuss with them is futile for they use a different version of science, they use a different mindset and they do not have, for the most part, the Holy Spirit leading them to what is the correct answer. How could he, they have rejected genesis 1 and all of the creation passages so where would he lead them?

Christians need to be aware of the fact that if the science disagrees with the Bible then it is wrong and not of God. But they must be sensitive to the Holy Spirit to make sure they do not cast off a genuine unbeliever seeking answers simply because they accept evolution.

But to have a scientific discussion with a harden evolutionist is impossible simply because they do not accept any alternative to their false theory and dismiss anything that shows that they are wrong. Christians come with answers, the evolutionist doesn't want them. They want the mystery not life, they want the puzzle not the answers, they want confusion not peace thus it is impossible to present anything to them for they will never be satisfied and they refuse to include faith in the equation.

Christians go by faith, we do not need evidence because we believe God. Thomas got evidence because he was going to believe once he saw it, most evolutionists are not going to believe after being shown the evidence.

For example, if we discover the real ark, the evolutionist will say 'so what? Where are the bones of Noah to prove it is the ark?'

It will always take place people. The evolutionist will always demand more, even though he or she cannot provide any for their claims. Their hypocrisy does them in.

22 I used to take evolutionists seriously

But as I learned their arguments, or lack of them, I have a great disrespect for them as they treat those who oppose or contradict them like animals. There is no freedom of thought or choice with evolutionists, if you do not do things their way they bully you, or insult among other despicable things which shows that they do not have the truth at all.

They have to make up for their lack of support, their foundation is sand, by being as abusive as they can in hopes of quieting the opposition who sees through their lies and exposes them for what they are false teachers bringing a false message.

They cannot escape the reality of life and know they are going to hell thus they want to take as many true believing Christians with them if they can. Don't worry when they say things like, 'Objective reality...' or 'We do real science...' or 'Creation is not science...' and so many other such comments because they do not do science at all, they do not have evidence and are not an authority that gets to say what is or isn't science.

Plus the fact that there is no such thing as 'objective reality'. God put a stop to that idle talk when He said 'You are either for me or against Me' There is no middle ground here and those who want to combine evolution with God are against God because they are teaching more lies and saying things that God did not do.

Christians do not take what the world says and apply it to Scripture or their lives, they need to consider the source and remember the verses in the Bible warning believers not to follow after the ungodly. They are deceived but like any good con artist, they will include enough of the truth to try and get you hooked into their lies and entrap you so you cannot produce for God.

Be careful, be wise and be knowledgeable.

23 Why do Christians talk to evolutionists?

The answer can be summed up in a very few words, "We warned those wretched men because the life of their souls was precious to us."

{Taken from The Christian in Complete Armour, Vol. 2, By William Gurnall, 1655, pg. 133,}

Even though the evolutionist may not believe in souls or that they have one, we Christians know the truth and strive to provide some truth to their lives so that they still have a chance to convert, and even though that the many evolutionists on this board have hardened their hearts and may not convert, we still tell them the truth just in case God has mercy upon their lives.

24 It has been claimed that ERVs are evidence for a common ancestor. I would like to show you how ludicrous that idea is with a simple illustration.

"An evolutionist goes to a city and marvels at all the different structures he/she finds within its limits. After a while, he/she decides to search out the source of all those wonderful buildings using his or her version of science, which means he/she toss out all original architect's drawings, calling them old and a myth even though they clearly lay out the answer and saves the evolutionist years of work. He wants to find out the answer using his or her version of science which means that he or she will not look at the drawings but do 'experiments' to find the answer, even though those experiments are not even close to the reality of how the buildings were constructed.

Try as they might, the people of the city kept telling the evolutionist how the buildings came into existence. 'Nonsense' declared the evolutionist, 'I and my science knows better than you.' The people of the city brought out the original architect and His plans to try and convince the evolutionist that he/she was wrong and looking in the wrong places for the supposed answers. The evolutionist dismissed all with a wave of a hand claiming, 'I am a scientist and I know better than you and only I am intelligent.'

After a while, the evolutionist declares that all the buildings evolved from one common building ancestor over large amounts of time in spite of the city's records clearly stating that the city was built a short time before. But the evolutionist in his or her arrogance dismissed such evidence demanding that the people provide more and more proof that they were correct and he or she was wrong. The real records just were not good enough for him or her.

In making his/her argument the evolutionist points to something he/she called 'ERVs', a term that he/she made up to sound important and looked like he/she knew what he/she were talking about. He/she said to the city people, 'you see, all these buildings have the same things in the same places and there is only 2% difference between them thus they must all be related and come from a common building ancestor.'

These 'ERVs' were: The foundation, the basements, the flooring, the walls etc., and some held flaws in the exact same location as another building. Ignoring the instruction of the city building about how those things came to be, the evolutionist declared he/she was right and that only he/she knew the answer and could determine it for them. Calling the city people hicks, unintelligent, and other nasty terms the evolutionist began to teach his theory of how the city came into existence.

Because it sounded interesting and despite the evidence against his/her theory and the history supporting the city people, some of the townspeople changed their views and followed after the evolutionist, arguing with the rest of the city people and continued to present mythical evidence for their new theory, even though this new theory originated long after the truth had been told for generations upon generations.

Soon the city people began to fight amongst themselves destroying their beautiful city while the evolutionist sat at a sidewalk cafe drinking his or her coffee satisfied in a job well done. He or she fabricated a new theory and ruined a beautiful place.

***The moral of the story:

ERVs do not indicate common ancestry. That is all an assumption made up by those who do not want the truth and ignore the rational and logical explanations made by those who do know the truth. They get away with their lies because they attached a credible research field's name (science) to it and fight to usurp authority over the field oppressing all who would dare disagree with them.

Having supposed ERVs in the exact same location does not prove evolution nor is it evidence for the process because you are missing important data from the research. That important data willfully omitted of course does prove the theory of evolution wrong but the evolutionist doesn't care because now they have an option to follow that does not include the Original Architect's work and truth.

They want to rewrite history their way regardless of the truth and evidence presented to them clearly demonstrating how false their theory is and they seek to get into the public science classrooms to brainwash all they can, hiding behind 'science' as their shield knowing the courts will be impressed by the mumbo jumbo they produce because they invent and use words that sound impressive but say nothing.

ERVs are not the result of a common ancestor but are the results of a common designer, God, and are the results of the sin and corruption that entered the world at Adam's fall. But the evolution will dismiss that reality and truth because it means that they have to acknowledge the Original Architect and His requirements plus they have to acknowledge that they are headed for the lake of fire, something they do not want to think about because it spoils their pursuit of fun.

You cannot look at something after the fact, say an old Volkswagen beetle and an old Mazda and declare because they have similar parts and problems it came from a common ancestor. Such is mere speculation. One needs historical corroboration to back such claims up and the evolutionist does not have any historical support whatsoever. Their theory took root in the 19th century and is not supported in any way shape or form in any ancient myth, legend, bed time story or official document.

The evolutionist has nothing but assumption, guesswork, conjecture and lies. There is no science behind their theory at all but the make it seem like there is so they can con those who do not want God or the truth

25 Hans Kung on Origins

He is an interesting read and I have been reading his works for 30 years now. He is quite misguided in his thinking on origins but then what do you expect from those who reject the truth. Even Hans Kung has rejected Genesis one and he is supposed to be a top theologian.

I will be taking some quotes from his book, The Beginning of All Things (2005) , and commenting on them.

First one comes from Page 72:

No information-generating process has so far been discovered. Can physics ever discover it? Or to put it more clearly: Isn't it asking too much of physics as the theory of basic structures and processes of change in matter and energy to venture to give an ultimate explanation of reality with its means, namely, observation, experiment and mathematics?...Or do people still want to solve the riddle of the world, as some scientists have attempted in their Sturm und Drang phase?

The first part he is okay. There is no information generating process and no information generating being outside of God but he is merely asking questions as to the capability of physics (science) of ever discovering such a thing. Of course, unless it is hidden in the bowels of the world or the deepest depths of the sea, there is no such thing as an evolutionary information generating process as the unbelieving scientist has looked just about everywhere and has not found it.

It is the second part, riddle of the world that troubles me for Dr. Kung knows better as a theologian. There is no 'riddle of the world' when it comes to origins. We already know what took place, when it took place and how. God has told us and if he hadn't, we would never know because the beginning is lost in time past never to be recovered again.

Unbelievers cannot use science to 'look back into time' for that time is gone and no human or tool can see it again. The Bible speaks upon this when it talks about a man's life being but a brief moment once it is gone it is like they never were. I forget the passage off hand right now but the point is evolutionist fool themselves if they think they can see back in time, especially if the look at another planet that has no life on it.

Second one is from Page 79:

However, often pseudo-mysteries--sometimes constructed by theologians or produced by popular piety, but hardly acceptable to science (original sin, immaculate conception, biological virgin birth, two natures in Christ...-- conceal access to the true mystery

He explains what he means by the words 'true mystery' but that is not the focus of this commentary. The main point is the words 'hardly acceptable to science'. This is where science goes bad because they feel they have to have everything fit their parameters or it isn't valid.

This is a big mistake for it is arrogance and sin plus it is trying to make science king over all when it is nothing but a simple tool. Unbelieving scientists forget that God doesn't care what is acceptable to science for science's standards are not God's way nor his plan of salvation. If science or the scientists involved reject God's way then it is they who suffer for it is God who makes the rules not science, and it is God who is the authority, not science.

God has laid it all out and people have a simple choice to make. It doesn't matter if science accepts the miraculous or not, it and scientists are not masters of the earth or universe nor are either their creation or property. They all belong to God and He is the master of all. Thus it is His rules everyone, science is not given a pass here, must adhere to if they wish to see eternal life.

Those who listen to science over God are listening to the wrong people for science cannot save your souls nor can you serve two masters. It is either God or the devil and if you reject Genesis 1 then you are not believing God and your salvation is in jeopardy.

Third, from Page 137

We still do not know for certain how life first arose from the inanimate. We do not know for certain what precise events introduced biogenesis. But we do know one thing: however this transition to life is explained in detail, it rests on biochemical regularities and thus on the self-organization of matter, the molecule.

Of course he is wrong on all points. We do know how life arose--God created and it was; there was no process, no transitional species anything of that sort. He gave humans reproductive organs and told them to multiply and fill the earth; which they did.

We do know the precise event which introduced biogenesis, in God's definition not evolution's, God created it to function in a certain way and it does even though sin and corruption works their destructive ways on people and animals.

The last part is so very wrong and relies purely upon a random act repeated billions of times which is utterly impossible. Evolution misses the mark completely even though it stares at the answers on a daily basis. He goes on to say:

And just as ever more complex molecules and systems formed from the primal matter through electric charges, so life based on carbon formed from nucleic acids and proteins

Complete hogwash. First, he said back on page 72 no information generating process has been found yet now he states there was one in action in the beginning. Well if evolution were true, it would have been found by now unless it is hiding from the evolutionist as some sort of sick game.

If evolution were true, the primal matter could still be found and lightning strikes would be giving birth to life all over the world as we speak. There would be no problem in finding the right conditions for they would still be present to start life anew and prove that evolution was the way life developed.

As it stands the original conditions for creation still exist and we see life replicating itself every hour of the day in all forms of life existing on this planet. You cannot say the same for evolution which requires the assumptions of the elite to declare that it exists and operating yet no one else can know it, understand it, see it nor has the life span to verify it.

Quite a difference between truth and error. The truth, we see all the time, the error is absent in all forms of life and inanimate objects. Geology has its evolutionary minds who guess and make statements about the eras of time for formation but they only use their unbelief and cannot verify the time frame nor replicate the process they claim took place.

Evolution is false and always will be false.

26 I just want to point out one main thing and that is evolution has no science behind it and you do not have to be afraid of the unbeliever who tries to hide behind the word 'science'.

If God wanted His followers to use science to discover the origin of man and the universe, etc., He and Jesus would have instructed us to do so in the Bible and they would have had the disciples teach it as they went. It is not that we do not use science, there is a proper place for it but not in origins.

God has already told us where we came from, why we are here and why the universe is so big. We do not need to waste time or money seeking something that has already been revealed in the Bible.

Now to the unscientific nature of evolution. You will notice on this and other boards that contain this type of forum that many posters will post the results of experiment after experiment and they all go something like this:

"Well, we find the same mutation, (or whatever) in both humans and animals thus this proves common descent via evolution." {This is a very simple version} OR We find 'A' in both B & C thus that = D.

To illustrate this type of logic consider the following: Evolutionists would look at the Mona Lisa by Da Vinci and a painting by Monet and test it. Then they would find out that both painters used paint thus both paintings descended from a Van Gogh. That is the logic that is behind these supposed evolutionary experiments.

They say that a mutation found in both animals and humans proves common descent but they can't prove that at all. That is an assumption without merit because they are missing vital data to continue that logic. All they have shown is that the Bible is true and that the sin and corruption that entered the world at Adam's sin affects all of creation and has nothing to do with development of man or species.

There has not been one evolutionary experiment that disproves the Bible or God's act of creation. There has not been one evolutionary experiment that can be considered scientific or done under 'objective reality'. The latter is impossible to obtain and Amy-Jill Levine has said this as have other scholars and the former has to ignore its own rules to allow for evolutionary experiments to take place.

Remember that there can be no verification of the evolutionary claim and no way for the evolutionist to prove the process went the way they say. They do not even know if they have the theory and process correct, let alone be able to label it scientific.

It is all a guess with them but they prefer the guess over the Bible simply because they do not want God or Jesus as the deception is more appealing to them. be wise Be careful, be knowledgeable when talking with evolutionists, they will distort, mis-quote, lie and other sinful acts to get you turned away from Christ and be as lost as they are.

27 God showed me...

Why evolutionists do not leave this forum or any other Christian one. I will explain through a series of quotes.

First, "...humanistic man has no place for God, love or freedom", "Humanistic man has no answers for anything" and "The humanist has no way to say which things are right or wrong. He has no absolutes and is left only with the arbitrary."

(Francis Schaeffer, How Shall We Then Live)

These quotes set the foundation for evolutionists and those who practice their version of science have no room for God and do not want Him a part of their lives or work. Thus we can say that all evolutionists are humanists, who have no absolutes and have no idea of right and wrong. This is borne out in the philosophy 'all science is good science' and other statements which omit God and His morality from their field of research.

Second, we have, "In a brilliant parable written over a hundred years ago, Friedrich Niezsche saw it all. A culture cannot lose its philosophical center without the most serious of consequences, not just to the philosophy on which it was based but to the whole superstructure of culture and even each person's notion of who he or she is. Everything changes. When God dies, both the substance and the value of everything else dies with it."

In evolution we have God 'dying' and replaced by a non-existent process which has no absolutes and everything has changed for the evolutionist. There is nothing of value in anything anymore, including human life thus it is easy for people like Stalin to arise and murder millions. He is not destroying something of God, of value, but something that is useless and in the way.

It is not hard to see why and how Christians accuse evolutionists for destroying education, the students and the country, etc., for all meaning and value is removed and replaced by nothing when the evolutionist teaches their philosophy.

Third, adding fuel to the fire, "For a Theist, God is the foundation of values. For a naturalist, values are manmade...If there was no consciousness prior to humans, then there was no prior sense of right and wrong."

This is supported by some Deist thinking, " This position really ends in destroying ethics. If whatever is, is right, then there is no evil."

So the evolutionist is no left in a corner. They have no sense of right and wrong, no ethics and nowhere to turn to get them. They have effectively given birth to anarchy and everyone is allowed to do 'what is right in their own eyes.'

How do these points relate to the evolutionist hanging around Christian websites, etc.? The answer is coming:

Fourth, "Indeed, they propose alternative universes. Yet both poems (Ps. 8 & Stephen Crane's 'A Man said to the universe') reverberate in the minds and souls of people today. Many who stand with Stephen Crane have more than a memory of the psalmist's great and glorious assurance that God's hand in the cosmos and his love for his people. They long for what they no longer can truly accept. The gap left by the loss of a center of life is like the chasm in the heart of a child whose father has died. How those who no longer believe in God wish something could fill this void."

(All quotes not previously mentioned come from the book 'The Universe Next Door' by James W Sire)

The bolded words are underscored by Bart Ehrman’s words in an interview with Hershel Shanks in the book, 'Scholars on Record', he said "I wish I could believe again."

That is why the evolutionists remain on Christian sites.

28 This reminds me of present day evolutionists

I am reading Paul De Kruif's book, Microbe Hunters and it is quite interesting. I want to quote a couple passages that remind me of evolutionists I have debated with over the years, including those here, and of Darwin.

Needham and Buffon got on famously...These two men then set about to invent a great theory of how life arises, a fine philosophy that everyone could understand, that would suit devout Christians as well as witty atheists. The theory ignored Spallanzani's cold facts, but what would you have? It came from the brain of the great Buffon and that was enough to upset any fact, no matter how hard, no matter how exactly recorded

This passage reminds me of the evolutionists because they ignore any fact that is presented to them which shows their theory in error and because they sit around trying to design a theory for everyone regardless of the fact it isn't true. It is something that only came from their minds. They called it the 'Vegetative Force'. Now the next part also reminds me of evolutionists , especially Dawkins because they do not produce real evidence but drown the world in words:

But what could Spallanzani do? needham and Buffon had deluged the scientific world with words--they had not answered his facts, they had not shown where Spallanzani's experiment of the sealed flasks were wrong The Italian was a fighter, but he liked to fight with facts and experiments and here he was laying about him in this fog of big words and hitting nothing

Much like modern day evolutionists who use big words and endless sentences that say nothing. They also do not answer the cold hard facts of creation and God. Now to what reminded me of Darwin:

...in Paris he fell in with the famous Count Buffon. This count was rich ; he was handsome; he loved to write about science; he believed he could make up hard facts in his head...

Just like Darwin after him, this count made things up as he went along and declared them science. Darwin had no proof for anything he said but made up his ideas as he went along in his brain. He had no supporting evidence from the then modern world or the long past ancient one. He thought he could invent a new science and a new history just by thinking it up.

I find it interesting that evolutionists or unbelievers try so hard to create a theory that can be accepted by devout Christians. They ignore the fact that devout Christians have the answer and do not need an alternative theory. They have accepted the truth as found written in Genesis 1 and throughout the Bible.

Science, done by evolutionists and other unbelievers, is wrong and needs to be rejected by all those who claim to follow Christ. If you claim to follow Christ then you preach what Christ preached and taught--creation not alternatives.

29 I posted a question

not too long ago and no evolutionist could answer it. Even Dawkins could not respond to the question when it was put to him by another person. Now I have 2 more questions to ask and I am sure I will get the usual responses that avoids the issue but before I say more let me ask the questions:

1. Where did the actual process come from and what brought it into existence?

2. Since it possesses nothing that any species possesses, how could it create change in a species and develop it?

Now for the first question, I am expecting to hear the usual whine that evolution is not into origination of any life form but the process is not a life form thus they need to know where it came from, how it came into existence to prove it actually exists and actually made the changes over time.

The second question is a little more complex than it seems as it deals with the cruelty dealt those species who were born with one wing and one leg, no mate and surrounded by a bunch of predators with no way to defend itself. Plus it deals with the capabilities of this supposed process.

Of course here I expect the usual complaints that I do not understand evolution. The problem for the evolutionist is that I do and see far too many holes in their non-existent process and that it takes a very irrational person to accept such pathetic ideas.

I also expect to not receive one honest, straight-forward answer but let's see if the evolutionist can be honest, polite and informative without condescending attitudes or their stupidity.

The Bible tells us that these people are WILLFULLY ignorant which means they choose to be that way (they do it on purpose) which makes them very irrational and illogical and very unscientific. I have another Francis Schaeffer quote but I think I will save it for another time.

p.s. Oh and if they cannot prove the origin of their process that means they use faith that it actually exists, nothing else for there is nothing in science itself that points to the existence of their process.

30 Evolutionists are not doing science

A quote from the late Francis Schaeffer:

"Conditioned to accept the objectivity of scientists regardless that their opinions have been influenced by those scientists’ personal beliefs or views"

It is a partial quote but it provides the gist of the attitude of unbelievers today. People think and are lead to believe that scientists are objective but in reality they are not. All the evolutionary scientific work are unduly influenced by the presuppositions, personal beliefs and bias of the scientist who accepts evolution.

In fact, we can go as far as to say that all evolutionary science is influenced by the personal belief of Darwin and has never been objective or scientific. Science is being manipulated to say what the evolutionist wants it to say. If it were objective then there would be no problem with alternatives to the theory of evolution and no opposition to those who accept and follow such alternatives.

Objectivity demands that all sides to the issue, whether they agree or not, are heard honestly and have uninhibited equal time to present their views. Then the presentations are honestly discussed and analyzed.

Since it is only the unbelievers who claim objectivity, the Christian, who believes in Genesis 1 as written, does not have to meet the demands made by objectivity but the unbelievers do.

This also means that the secular definition for science has to be thrown out and an honest one put in its place

31 Here is how it goes

I. Evidence-

Time and again the evolutionist keeps demanding proof or evidence. Time and again, the evolutionist keeps rejecting any evidence that is presented. In this post I will quote from 2 books which provide more evidence from around the world.

1. The Flood by Dr. Rehwinkel pgs. 178ff:

Human reason was made the measure of all things. Whatever could not be harmonized with reason was rejected. Even the Bible was subjected to this treatment. This meant the removal, as acceptable truth, of everything which partook of the miraculous or of any direct interference with the affairs of men or the universe on the part of a personal, omnipotent God

In biology, Rationalism led to the revival of the ancient Greek theory of evolution as an explanation of the origin of the life that is found in the universe. The Biblical flood story could, of course, not be made to fit into such a mechanistic scheme any more than the story of Creation as related in Genesis...the modern theory of geology, which is evolutionistic in its basic principle, took their place. And yet even modern geology and other sciences have unwittingly contributed much to confirm the Biblical account of the Flood...

...The evidence of such fissures have been found in so many places of the earth, some of them measuring from 140 to 300 feet in depth. They were filled with debris which drifted into them soon after they opened...Such fissures have been found in England, France, southern Spain, Germany, Russia and elsewhere. The interesting feature of these fissures is the debris found in them, for they are filled with the remains of animals, among them those of the elephant, the rhinoceros, the hippopotamus, the reindeer, the horse, the hog, and the ox.. The bones found in them cannot be animals which fell in alive or were buried there, for no skeleton is complete. They cannot have been brought there by streams, for those who examined them found no signs on them of having been rolled. Neither could the bones have been exposed to the weather for a long time, for none of them show marks of weathering...

Again, it has been observed by such a competent geologist as Prestwich that these ossiferous fissures are usually found upon isolated hills of considerable height, places on which we might expect animals to gather in seeking safety from an approaching flood...

Post 2.

2. Path of the Poles by Dr. Charles Hapgood pages 280ff:

The evidence from South America will be found as strong or even stronger. In this chapter we shall present a number of aspects of this evidence. They include evidence of a geological revolution having to do not so much with ice caps and ice ages as with the upheaval of half a continent in which the deaths of millions of animals resulted from extensive volcanic eruptions and vast floods.

Outstanding among the unsolved problems of the recent geological history of South America are those connected with the part of Cordellera where Bolivia and Peru meet. There, in the heart of the Andes at an average of 12,300 ft. , extends the highest lacustrine basin in the world, the Meseta or Altiplano, on the floor f which occurs a succession of remarkable lakes. The largest of these, Lake Titicaca, is navigable, being some 110 miles long, 35 miles wide and 890 feet deep at its maximum. Its waters are only slightly brackish and support the only species of seahorse (Hippocampus) known to live in a land locked body of water. Hippocampo is a typically marine creature and with Allorchestes and a few other oceanic forms inhabiting this lake, strongly suggests that the present fauna of Lake Titicaca has survived from a time when the lake communicated directly with the ocean.

The discoveries of vast quantities of animal remains in almost every part of South America have invariably been made in recent formations...Burmeister says, "the diluvial deposits containing bones of animals of this age extends over the whole Brazilian plain, from the flanks of the Cordilleras to the borders of the Atlantic." They have also been found abundantly in Bolivia on the great plateau; and also west of the mountains both in Peru and Chili...A contemporary, Augistin de Zarate, probably referred to the same discovery when he mentioned that Juan de Holmos, a native of Truxillo, excavating near that place, exhumed enormous teeth, a huge rib, and other bones, all of which were, of course, assigned to the legendary giants.

The block contained a human skull, teeth and other bones, together with fragments of shells, some of which still retained traces of their original colors. Remains of several hundred other human skeletons were dug out of similar clacareous tufa at the same place where the presence of serpulae in the rock suggested that all the remains were deposited through marine action, for as Lyell observed the shell would not have been brought so far inland by natives for food

In a limestone cavern on the borders of the Lagoa do Sumidouro, some three leagues from Santa Lucia, Dr. P.W.Lund excavated the bones of more than thirty individuals (human) of both sexes and various ages. The skeletons lay buried in hard clay and were found mixed together in such great confusion- not only with one another but with the remains of the Meatherium and other Pleistocene mammals- as to preclude the idea that they had been entombed by the hand of man. All the bones, whether human or animal, showed evidence of having been contemporary with one another.. In other caves investigated by Lund, bones of ancient man were found alongside those of the formidable Smilodon, a giant feline which became extinct during the last Pleistocene times. Referring to the evidence from these and other Brazilian fossiliferous caves, the marquis de Nadaillac wrote: "...doubtless these men and animals lived together and perished together, common victims of catastrophes, the time and cause of which are alike unknown."

Two further cases are of particular interest. The first of these concerns the discovery, by Savage-Landor, of the remains of primitive humanoid mammals, associated with the bones of creatures regarded by him as gigantic saurians, in volcanic ash and lava deposits encountered in Matto Grosso State. The second case relates to the occurrence of the remains of mastodons, camels and an extinct species of horse in beds of volcanic ash high in the Andes near Punin in Ecuador. Associated with those mammalian bones was the fossilized skull of a woman of Australoid type...The presence of an Australoid type in Ecuadorian South America during geological recent times poses questions about prehistoric human populations in the continent...

There is more but the evolutionist must read it for themselves. I submit that the continual discoveries of supposed new species by evolutionists are merely a desperation move to distract the world from the real evidence that has been discovered over the centuries.

II. The Final Court of Appeal-

1. Too many people have decided that this court resides not with scripture but with science. Unfortunately those who claim to be Christian yet accept and follow the lies of evolution have promoted, along with their sinful atheistic friends, that science is now the final court of appeal.

They have many reasons for making this switch. But in today's world there was the fad sweeping across the churches called WWJD and if one is honest they will not that Jesus did not use science as His final court of appeal. Nor did He teach that His followers are to use science as their final court of appeal.

What He used, and what He taught was the scriptures are the only final court of appeal. He would say to the devil and others- 'It is written...' referring His listeners back to scripture, telling them as John Stott has said- 'there is no negotiation, no discussion, no debate on this matter.'

The same goes for the debate of evolution verses creation. All the Christian has to do is say- 'It is written, In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth...'- telling those who want alternatives to Genesis 1 and other creation passages that there is no negotiation, there is no discussion, there is no debate on this matter.

God created via His word and no process was involved or exists today that would change what God declared good. So True Christians, forget about using science to defend the Bible, use the final court of appeal for the unbeliever cannot do anything against the truth-God created and evolution does not exist.

III. The Truth-

John 14:23-24 and John 5: 45-48

I have spoken the truth only during my time on CARM but it has been rejected and the cruelty imposed upon me leads me to shake the dust off my internet feet of this place upon all administrators, moderators and owners plus the evolutionists and those people who falsely claim Christianity while accepting and following lies.

It applies if you do not repent and change your ways and only to those who are not true Christian or are innocent.

What Evolutionists Have To Do…


…to prove their theory is correct.


For decades now the evolutionist has declared that they have gigantic amounts of scientific proof demonstrating that their theory is correct. They point to countless evolutionary experiments and thousands of published articles in scientific journals to support their claim.


They also point to the hundreds of museums which display the artifacts discovered as even more evidence for the validity of their theory. They even go as far as changing the structure of the theory getting distance from the error prone and filled ideas of Darwin.


But those actions do not help them for their work is not honest nor legitimate. Their work has a reliance upon working in the wrong direction to prove their point. Because science is constructed to look for natural answers only, the evolutionist is looking for the wrong answers, in the wrong places and walking down the wrong paths to get to their conclusions.


One such example, and it is a fact* that exposes the charade put on by evolutionary supporters. That fact is that the evolutionist is doing its experiments in the wrong direction. They are taking already developed genes and DNA which are already corrupted by Adam’s sin then introducing fully developed ingredients which are also corrupted by the fall of man, then claiming they have done an evolutionary experiment whose results prove their theory correct.


This is actually cheating on the part of the evolutionist as they do not do their experiments according to their historical claims of how the process of evolution was supposed to have worked over the supposed millions of years timeline said needed to make such changes occur.


There has not been one real evolutionary experiment in the history of man. All that has taken place is the evolutionist changing the names of the process and giving credit to a false theory. What does the evolutionist need to do to prove their theory is correct and true? The following points lay out their work for them.


#1. They need to discover and verify the original conditions of the world at the time they claim life began and this supposed process interacted with that life.


#2. They need to discover and verify the original life form they say all living creatures came from.


#3. They need to discover and verify the actual properties of this supposed process. Saying it is simply just ‘change’ is not good enough. Such a claim is far too broad and allows for accreditation when such credit cannot be proven nor can be shown that the process was actually responsible for said change.


#4. They need to place all 3 major players in a box or large room seal it so no tampering can be done then sit back and wait to see if their process responds as per their claim. They cannot be involved at all, they cannot introduce any foreign material to help the process, they cannot do anything but silently film and observe.


#5. They must make their predictions prior to putting all the major players together and record them so that all can see if they were correct or not. No changing of the predictions is allowed, the evolutionist must be honest in their work.


#6. The evolutionist must not interfere at any point during the experiments since their process had NO human intervention in its supposed guidance of all species in reality.


Anything other than total adherence to the claims made for the process of evolution immediately invalidates their work and demonstrates that their theory is not correct. There would also be no reference to modern evolutionary work because such was done under pristine modern environmental conditions with the aid of intelligent life which undermines every claim made by the evolutionist for their process.


If the evolutionist cannot or refuses to do this then we know that they cannot prove their theory correct, verify their claims, or produce any evidence to support their ideas.  To be fair, we know that they cannot do evolutionary experiments the correct way because we know their theory is false and the evolutionist has no idea what the original conditions were when life originated on this planet.


They have no idea of the properties of their supposed process, and they need to keep its description general in order to make their claims work. By stating that change is evolution means that they are relieved of the problem proving that a non-thinking, non-aware, non-possessing, non-knowing, non-wise, non-moral, non-physical entity (and the ‘nons’ continue) was able to produce species that have sight, smell, touch, emotions, needs, desires, morals and physical attributes, to only mention a few, that all species possess today.


In other words, they avoid the problem of the impossibility of their process and theory and can pursue it happily wasting precious resources, time and money on something that does not exist save to provide an alternative to God’s creation and the supernatural method in which He brought everything into existence.


Evolution is a deception to draw people away from the truth and that is proven true by the dishonest methods the evolutionist has to use to continue their myth, including doing non-evolutionary experiments instead of real evolutionary experiments, to deceive the unsuspecting world.


The unbeliever has designed the field of science to ignore the truth and they did so by usurping its proper authority and placing themselves at its head. There is a good science but it is over-shadowed by the secular version as the good science discovers the truth about what God created not replace it with a different version of events.


Secular science proves 2 Timothy 3 true, especially verse 13 as it is a field run by deceived people who want others deceived as well. These people do not want the truth and refuse to allow the truth to be taught to public school students. Secular science and its adherents are wrong and it is time to bring the truth back to the public.