50 Reasons to Leave Evolution as a Faith

Reason #1. The Complete Lack Of Fossil Evidence

I love science. The further it advances, the more it disproves "Darwinian" evolution. In fact, science has advanced to the point that  almost all secular scientists have completely abandoned "Darwinian" evolution in favor of "rapid mutation", "radial symmetry", "punctuated equilibrium", or variations of this far-out theory. It is the only explanation (in their minds) for the complete lack of fossil evidence (despite literally millions of  discovered fossils) of any specie changing into another. There is no such thing as macro-evolution. Micro-evolution, however, is very possible and is in fact explained in the Bible. "...all their "kinds" and all their variations." In other words, species adapt, sometimes quite quickly. However, a finch is still a finch (irony intended) after adapting. A lizard is still a lizard and a monkey is still a monkey ! Charles Darwin himself summed it up best in his "book." "Noting the abundance of fossils, numerous transitional [fossils] must be found to prove my theory." Enough said !

Science, real science—the work that ferrets out empirical facts about the nature that surrounds us—has been co-opted by an ancient philosophical/religious doctrine the origins of which can be traced back to at least 400-700 years before Christ. Known today variously as scientism, evolutionism, metaphysical naturalism, and Darwinism, this doctrine has been so effectively interlaced with science that it is often difficult for the scientist, much less the layperson, to separate the two.

Reason #2. The Missing Link Remains Missing

The research dealing with mans "evolution" from the apes (or to be specious, ape-like ancestors) begins with the assumption that man did in fact evolve from the apes. No observations or interpretations are allowed to question this apriori assumption. What has been sought in paleo-anthropology then are the transitional stages from ape-like animals to man. Transitional forms have proven as elusive here, however, as between any other plants or animals. In short, the missing link remains missing.

Reason #3. Missing Link Past mistakes

Piltdown Man -- Eanthropus dawsoni or "dawn man." Discovered in 1912 by Charles Dawson, a medical doctor and amateur paleontologist who discovered a mandible and a small piece of a skull in a gravel pit near Piltdown England. The jaw-bone was ape-like but the teeth had human characteristics. The skull piece was very human-like. These 2 specimens were combined to form dawn man, which was supposedly 500,000 years old. However, the whole thing turned out to be an elaborate hoax.

Nebraska Man -- Hesperopithecus haroldcookii.  Discovered in 1922 in the Pliocene deposits of Nebraska by a mysterious "Mister Cook" and made famous by Henry Osborn of the American Museum of Natural History. This tooth was being heavily promoted by the press at the Scopes "monkey" trial in 1925 as irrefutable evidence of the animal ancestry of man. A "picture" of Nebraska Man and his wife were published in the London Daily News. All from a tooth ! When other parts of the skeleton were found in 1927, it quickly became clear that it was nothing more than the tooth of an extinct pig !!! From this colossal screw-up, evolution is being taught as fact in public schools.

Ramapithicus -- This animal was long believed to be the 1st branch from that line of apes which evolved into man about 14 million years ago. Noted scientist Dr. Elwyn Simons stated confidently, "The pathway can now be traced with little fear of contradiction from generalized hominids -- to the genus HOMO." The crucial importance of Ramapithicus as an  early ancestor of hominids is evident in this comment by Simons in Time magazine (Nov. 7, 1977):
"Ramapithicus is ideally structured to be an ancestor of hominids. If he isn't, we don't have anything else that is." How true a statement ! From what evidence are these conclusions drawn in the 1st place ? Once again a few teeth and a jaw bone. From this many drawings have been made of Ramapithicus walking upright. Ridiculous 
 

Australopithecus -- Donald Johanson in his book "Lucy" refers to the "australopithecine mess" - and it definitely is that. The very word Australopithecus means "southern ape" because the first fossils were found in South Africa. The discoverer was Dr. Raymond Dart, professor of anatomy at Witwatersrand University in Johannesburg.
Dart was convinced that some teeth were man-like and thus concluded it represented a transitional between apes and man. His opinions on the matter were largely scorned by the scientists of his time (1924) who considered it nothing more than a chimpanzee.

Australopithecus Afarensis "LUCY" -- Discovered in 1974 by Donald Johanson was a half complete skeleton he named after the Beetle's song "Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds". A year later 13 more similar skeletons were found. Remarkably the skull was even more ape-like than other australopithecenes.
 

Homo Habilis -- The taxon Homo habilis had an illegitimate birth when Mary Leakey discovered some badly shattered skull fragments in 1959. Her husband Louis made the comment that it was nothing more than a "damned australopithecine". His attitude soon changed however when he found stone tools near the site of Homo habilis. Jumping into the fire, he quickly named it Homo and publicized the find widely. He was soon discredited when other australopithecenes were found in Africa, also with stone tools. Homo habilis was "demoted" to australopithecine.

In conclusion, it seems there is no end to the speculation over the bestial ancestry of man and it would appear that all scientific caution has been thrown to the wind. However, with today's scientific advantages and advances we will see evolution falling farther by the wayside scientifically and advanced as fact philosophically to our children. There is more than ample evidence for mans sudden and abrupt appearance-creation if you will-and absolutely none for a long gradient process or evolution. It takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does creation. One is easily proven and apparent while the other is frauds and tricks.

Reason #4. Reverse geology

The geologic table shows that rocks are in a sequential layer from pre-cambrian upward to the earth's crust. However, no place on earth has this sequential pattern from "oldest" to "youngest". In fact, there is a rock in Alberta that no evolutionist will discuss without resorting to outright lying. This pre-cambrian rock is 350 miles long by 15 miles wide by 7 miles deep. How did it get to the top if it's one of the oldest. Any scientist will tell you it's impossible to move something of this mass through the earth. Also, there are no "up-thrust" marks anywhere on this rock. In conclusion, there is no geologic table-just a tool for "duping" innocents. Want to see even more great examples ?

Reason #5.  Paraconformity 

This describes rock layers that are missing. "Gaps" in the geologic table where one layer of rock is on top of the other with one missing in between - sometimes 100's of millions of years without any of the gullying or weathering generally used as an excuse for this behavior. At several places in the Baltic region, clays of Pleistocene age rest directly on clays of cambrian age fossils - a gap of over 400 million years. Yet, in the same region, layers can hardly be located, so similar are the two clays.

Reason #6. Oil and coal

When the carbon-14 test was young they used to date all sorts of things. The main 2 were oil and coal. Tests of these 2 substances using the carbon-14 method reveal them to be just several thousand (10-14) years old, instead of the millions they were thought to be by evolutionists. After these early dates were found, scientists stopped using it to date these substances as it threw everything out of kilter. The production rate of C-14 in the atmosphere exceeds the decay rate by about 30% When this non equilibrium data is used instead of the unwarranted evolutionary assumption of equilibrium, computed dates of all the organic materials fall within 10,000 years. If the atmosphere really were old, by now, these two rates would be in equilibrium. Thus, the disparity in the two rates confirms a young atmosphere. Oil, coal, natural gas, and other items evolutionists suppose are very old have been dated by C-14. But, this should not be possible because this dating method is no good past about 50,000 years. So, the ability to date coal, oil, etc., shows these materials are recent.

Reason #7. Stasis

This field of observation studies the fact that most animals have remained the same, despite millions of years of time to evolve. Many fossils from older rocks, when compared to their modern counterparts, are often identical in form. Not one type of change into another has ever been recorded, yet evolution is regarded in most circles as fact.

Reason #8 Transitionals

If life has always been in a state of continual transmutation from one species to another, as evolutionists insist, then we would expect to find many fossil intermediates between all the species. However evolutionists must explain the following gaps: non-living matter to protozoan, protozoan to metazoan, metazoan to invertebrates, invertebrates to fish, fish to amphibians, amphibians to reptiles, reptiles to birds, reptiles to fur-bearing quadrupeds, quadrupeds to apes and apes to man.

Reason #9.  Petrified trees

This represents an enormous enigma to evolutionists. They speak of a different kind of burial than is going on today. They also point to a catastrophic event, rather than slow burial. Their bark remains intact, indicating a very different method of  deposition than we now currently know. This speaks of an event of enormous power.

Reason #10. Polystratic plants

These are fossilized plants or trees that extend through several layers of rock, oftentimes through as many as 20 feet of rock, representing  many, many years of deposition according to evolutionists. However, there is 1 even more amazing specimen. It is a club moss extending 120 feet through several different rock layers, representing 300-400 million years in the evolution model. Evolutionists have often passed this of as a reburial event but this can hardly be the case if the rock comes right up against the trunk of the tree. There is another example of this at Spirit Lake in Washington state. Check it out. Evolutionists will point to the coal and peat deposits in Nova Scotia. These examples are no more than 5 feet tall and are in a moderately young layer of rock. Ask them to explain the club moss in Texas over 120 feet tall!

Reason #11. Ephemeral markings

These are marks such as ripple-marks, rain imprints, worm trails and animal tracks. In fact one of the most amazing specimens was found by Dr. Carl Baugh at Glen Rose, Tx. A whole worm fossilized half in and half out of the rock. When you put water on it, it even turns pink. This hard evidence flies in the face of what evolutionists would have you believe about deposition and soft skin!! It should be totally impossible to find such a fossil, let alone the thousands of animal tracks, rain drop patterns,etc.

Reason #12. Soil layers

This is another huge area of concern for evolutionists - the lack of extensive soil layers in the fossil record. With all these layers exposed for millions of years, you would expect to find numerous soil layers. Even in extreme desert environments these should build up. Yet in the fossil record there is very scant evidence of any build-up. Selected areas of soil layers is exactly what you would expect for the geology of a world-wide flood.

Reason #13. The first Law of Thermodynamics

It states: There can be no creation or annihilation of mass/energy.  One form of energy can be converted into another, one state of matter can be converted into another, and there can even be matter/energy conversions. However the total amount of matter and energy remains constant. What does this mean? The universe could not just spring into existence by accident.

Reason #14. The Second Law of Thermodynamics

This is my all-time favorite. To refute this law, you either have to be a liar or ignorant of science totally. This law tells us that anything which is organized , tends with time, to become disorganized. Any physical system left to itself will decay, or , lose energy and organization within the system. Instead of being highly organized like our earth's system, everything tends to become gradually disorganized. Chemical processes will reach equilibrium then become inert. In other words, this law says the increase of information required for a life form to evolve could not happen as this increase in information by itself violates the law. Evolutionists would have you believe in a constant increase in order strictly by chance millions of times. Not possible!! In fact, evolutionists have cited ice cubes and bridges as an example of this law being violated. Absurd! Both of these things reach a peak of "order", but from then on are degrading. Besides, these things are "created", so of course they would tend to start off "ordered". Neither of these things, or anything else, can assemble itself from raw materials.
   

ASIDE: Evolutionists commonly object that the Second Law applies to closed, or isolated systems, and that the Earth is certainly not a closed system (it gets lots of raw energy from the Sun, for example). However, all systems, whether open or closed, tend to deteriorate. For example, living organisms are open systems but they all decay and die. Also, the universe in total is a closed system. To say that the chaos of the big bang has transformed itself into the human brain with its 120 trillion connections is a clear violation of the Second Law.

Reason #15. Biogenetic law

This law has 2 provable concepts to it: (a) Life can only come from life. (b) Like kinds always give rise to like kinds. In all the years of observing nature, scientists have never seen this law broken or violated.

Reason #16. Angular momentum

The sun should have 700 times more angular momentum than all the planets combined. Instead the planets have 50 times more angular momentum than the sun. What this means is that this planetary system was not made in an evolutionary pattern by particles gravitating together.

Reason #17. Poynting-Robertson Effect

The sun acts as a giant vacuum sweeping up about 100,000 tons of inflow per day. The sun's radiation pressure serves to push small interplanetary dust particles outward into space. If the solar system is really billions of years old, the solar system should have been swept clean by now - yet there are billions of particles in our solar system.
 

Reason #18. Magnetic Field

Over the past 150 years, careful measurement by scientists have shown that the earth's magnetic field decreases by half every 1400 years. Extrapolating backwards, it is shown that the earth only 10-12,000 years ago would have been a magnetic star, totally incapable of supporting any life - even the most simple. Please  click here for a more detailed explanation.

Reason #19. Super Novas

When stars run out of gas they explode. During the course of the life of the galaxy there should be a number of super nova remnants visible from earth. Accordingly, for galaxies this size, there should be 7,250 super nova remnants visible using the evolution model. In reality, there are only 205 - very much in line with the creation model.

Reason #20. The Human Eye

Darwin said that the human eye made him shudder in terms of the evolutionary process - and rightly so. In his day almost nothing was known about the complexity and sophistication of this organ. In fact, we still don't know everything. It is able to do 100,000 separate functions each and every day, then while you sleep, do its own maintenance work. Truly one of the wonders of GOD. Considering the amount of complex structures that went into the eye, as well as the highly integrated synchronization, it is difficult to understand how the evolutionists can believe the eye came from a natural trial and error process. The eye is well known to be useless unless fully developed. It is ridiculous to think that any organism could live, let alone develop, during the thousands of years evolutionists say it would take to develop an eye. That's not all, however. The eye did not develop once. There are five different types of eyes (that we know of) - man's, squids, vertebrates, arthropods, and trilobite eyes. Enough said! 

Reason #21. Sea Slugs

The sea slug is an truly impressive design that can be used to show evolution false. Sea slugs feed on the sea anemone. What makes this so impressive is that the anemones have poison harpoons that stick out and would paralyze anything that came in contact with it. The sea slug however, is able to put these darts inside its own stomach to store and use for its own defense. You would have to have all of these abilities from the start or the organism would die the 1st time it came in contact with the dart. A slow evolutionary process would have been deadly!

Reason #22. Flight

Insects are the only invertebrates with the ability to fly. Their flight is different from other fliers in that it involves a sculling motion similar to rowing a boat, where other fliers use straight flapping (one exception is the hummingbird). What makes flight so interesting for creationists is that flight did not "evolve" just one time as evolutionists would have you believe. There are 4 different fliers in the fossil record. The odds of parallel evolution is a statistically impossible number. The different groups are: reptiles, as represented by pterodactyls, modern birds, mammals, as represented by the bat and flying insects. There are too many different characteristics for all of these to come from a common ancestor. 

Reason #23. Laetoli Footprints

These footprints were found in the same strata as the "Lucy" bones. Johanson and other evolutionists have claimed these were made by lucy-like animals, yet when studied by foot doctors, both secular and non-secular, they found them to be completely human and modern.

Reason #24. Fossil Horse Series

This is still taught to our children today as proof of evolution. However there are a number of problems with this series. (a) A complete series of horses has never been found in any rock anywhere in the world. (b) The sequence of small toes to big toed horses does not exist anywhere in the fossil record. (c) All of the teeth found are either grazing or browsing types. There are no transitional teeth. (d) Two modern horses have been found at the same level as that of the very earliest types. None of this proves evolution! Just the opposite!

Reason #25. Vestigial Organs

These are organs that were formerly thought by evolutionists to be remnants of our past evolution and not needed any more. In fact, at one time, it was believed we had over 200 vestigial organs. In actuality, all the organs have been found to have important bodily functions. This is true for the appendix also. Doctors have quit removing it willy-nilly-, as it has been proven to be a great aid in digestion. None of this proves evolution!

Reason #26.  Peppered Moths

This lame argument has long been used to prove evolution. It does describe a form of evolution, just not the way evolutionists would have you think. This study simply shows micro-evolution, or change within a kind, not a new kind coming into existence.. It boils down to: when the trees are white, there are more white moths - conversely, when the trees are dark, such as from pollution, more of the dark moths survive to pass this trait along. The moths are still moths. They don't become a whole new creature. 

Reason #50.  Mica In Granite

Anywhere on earth where granite is found, no matter what depth (remember the geologic column is a lie-granite is found at varying levels), it contains mica. Mica is composed of 3 different isotopes - polonium-210, polonium-218 and polonium-214, without any p-238 halos. The shortest lived of these isotopes has a half-life of .00162 seconds. The longest half-life is 3 minutes. This means that the granite was fully formed and "recording" in a maximum of 21 minutes and a minimum of less than 1/2 second. Granite did not take 300 million years to form as evolutionists would have you believe. Science disproves this ridiculous notion.

Top of Page