17 reasons why you shouldn't believe in Darwinian evolution
Old Science, Evolutionary Tree, DNA Complexity, Aliens or God, The Simpsons Satire, Lucy the Ape (missing link), Chimp DNA, Ape-Human Breeding, Piltdown Man Hoax, Nebraska Man Hoax, Lack of Transitional Creatures, Ancon Sheep Blunder, Heavy Peacock Tails, Eyeball Complexity, Bears-to-Whales Evolution, Worthless Body Parts, Fruit Fly Zapping Mutations, Right vs Wrong, Darwin's Superior Race, and more . . .
Does modern science support Evolution or Creation?
How did life begin?
Did it happen by chance?
Did God create us?
Did we evolve from lower life forms over billions of years?
Does the scientific evidence point to a creator or random chance?
Both Christians and secular people ask these same questions. Yet both sides look at the same evidence and bring in their preconceived world view to support evolution or creation.
This article focuses primarily on the biology of evolution, not cosmology or the Big Bang — the origin of the universe, planets, etc.
First, what is Evolution?
The underlying premise for evolution is that all living organisms descended from a single-celled common ancestor over billions of years. In short, it's particles-to-people. New species evolve through processes like “random mutation” and “natural selection”, where advantageous traits help organisms survive and reproduce.
What Evolution is not: Evolution does not explain the origin of life (first living cell), which scientists are still actively researching. Evolution only explains how life changes and diversifies after it begins.
Credit: Answers In Genesis
What is Creation?
Creationists believe in the divine creation of the whole universe and all life forms by the deliberate, direct and supernatural act of the God of the Bible.
Creationists generally agree with “natural selection”, but only as merely redistributing or reducing preexisting genetic information which allows them to adapt in many ways. They don't believe natural selection generates brand new genetic information like evolutionists believe.
A traditional, “young-earth” timeframe for creation is thousands of years, not billions of years.
What Creation is not: Creationists don’t believe in upward evolving “mutations” since science shows most genetic mutations are detrimental, not beneficial.
Darwinian Theory is old science
How old? Charles Darwin was born the same day as Abraham Lincoln in 1809 – when people knew very little about modern science
Charles Darwin was born on February 12, 1809, the same day Abraham Lincoln was born. He wrote a book called “On The Origin Of Species By Means Of Natural Selection” in 1859.
Before that, in 1831 he went on a five-year voyage with a friend on a ship called the Beagle. One of his stopping points was the Galapagos Islands, where he is most known for his work on a bird, the finch, and how its beak was adapted to its environment.
He was an agnostic (it’s not possible to know if God exists). He said he saw so much misery in the world, there couldn’t be a creator. So he looked for an alternative way to describe how the world came into existence.
Darwin’s core beliefs about evolution
-
Assumed life already existed
-
Tree of Life (all have a common ancestor)
-
“Micro” Evolution (gradualism or small changes)
-
“Macro” Evolution (big changes, reptile to bird)
-
Natural Selection (survival of the fittest)
-
Sexual Selection (mate with the most beautiful)
-
Mutation by randomness
Darwin’s hand-drawn notes of the “Tree of Life” no longer makes sense based on DNA
Credit: Wikipedia Public Domain, Answers In Genesis
The evolutionary theory goes that life starts out simple with things like bacteria that leads to plants, and then progresses upwards to fungi, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals, primates, and humans.
If humans are higher than fish on the evolutionary tree, why do humans have 3 billion pairs of DNA yet a marbled lungfish has 133 billion?
You can see how fish DNA contradicts this idea of the Tree of Life. Our DNA should be more complicated than a fish, not the opposite. However, a lungfish has over 40 times more DNA base pairs than a human? The marbled lungfish has about 133 billion pairs of DNA in its genome while humans only have about 3 billion.
DNA refutes Darwin's simple-to-complex tree theory since evolutionists would have expected fish to have less DNA than humans.
Your DNA is so complex; it would make 88,000 round trips to the moon if stretched out
Darwin thought a cell was just a lump of jelly — he was wrong
Darwin didn’t know about DNA since it hadn’t been discovered yet. He thought a cell was just a lump of jelly.
In reality, each cell has about 6 feet of DNA if stretched it out. If you uncoiled each DNA strand in your body and placed them end-to-end, the resulting strand would be 42 billion miles long—that’s about as long as 88,000 round trips to the moon.
Or, if your entire DNA was stretched out end-to-end, it would circle the earth over a million times.
Back in the 1800’s, low-powered microscopes could not see the complexity of the cell. Darwin’s misunderstanding of the cell comes from a fellow named G.H. Lewes who described the cell as a “microscopic lump of jelly-like substance” with “no trace of organization”.
Both Darwin and Lewes were very wrong about cell complexity, but they lacked the information we know today.
Evolution can’t explain how life began, how DNA appeared suddenly, and how it could be so complex.
The Origin of Life: Aliens or God?
DNA co-discoverer, Dr. Francis Crick, essentially said DNA is so complex, it’s almost a miracle — probably from aliens
Dr. Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of DNA, in his book Life Itself, insists that the probability of life’s chance origin simply defies calculation.
Crick, an anti-Christian humanist, says:
“What is so frustrating for our present purpose is that it seems almost impossible to give any numerical value to the probability of what seems a rather unlikely sequence of events. . . . An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle.” Incredibly, Crick concludes that the first living organisms on earth may have been “seeded” in our oceans by intelligent beings from another planet!
So you have to decide, did life come from aliens or God because the probability it happened by evolution defies calculations? And if from aliens, who created the aliens?
The Simpsons cartoon satire on DNA by chance
One of “The Simpsons” cartoon episodes pokes fun at the improbability of evolution by showing monkeys typing random letters hoping to recreate a Charles Dickens’ novel
Mr. Burns has 1,000 monkeys typing at 1,000 typewriters, claiming they will eventually write the greatest novel, “A Tale of Two Cities” by Charles Dickens. When he checks their work, he finds one has typed “it was the best of times it was the blurst of times”. Mr. Burns screams, “You stupid monkey” after reading the misquoted opening line. (“Last Exit to Springfield” episode)
What is this gag referencing? It’s actually a nod to the “infinite monkey theorem,” a famous math-based thought experiment to explain how DNA could have happened by chance. The theory argues that an infinite number of monkeys given an infinite number of typewriters would inevitably end up writing every combination of letters, including the collected works of Shakespeare.
So is it realistic to think DNA could come about by chance, random mutations? To actually type out the genetic letters in the human genome found in just one cell, a person would have to randomly type 60 words per minute, 8 hours a day, for about 50 years and not make one mistake!
DNA happening by chance is so ridiculous that even Hollywood poked fun at the idea.
Lucy the ape is NOT the “missing link” between man and ape
Museums falsely portray Lucy as partially human when the fossil evidence shows she was just an ape
Credit: Genesis Apologetics
In 1974, the fossil remains of a southern ape were discovered in Ethiopia, Africa. She quickly grew to be known as the supposed “missing link” between man and ape. She was named Lucy after the Beatles’ song, “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds”, which was often playing back at camp.
Only 23% of the skeleton was found, so evolutionists and museums have fabricated the gaps to fit their narrative of evolution and even ignored some of the bones they did find.
1. Skull size too small. Lucy's skull was only one-third the size of a human, which is chimpanzee size. Evolutionists artificially filled in the skull’s missing pieces on models to make it look larger like a human.
Credit: Genesis Apologetics
2. Wrong spinal cord angle. Lucy’s spinal cord did not match a human. Instead, it entered the skull at an angle to facilitate walking hunched-over on all fours making it easier to tilt her head down to see the ground over her protruding jaw.
3. Pelvis manipulated. Her partial pelvis bone was shaped more like a chimp. So the scientists then cut it up and reshaped it to match a human. They said Lucy had broken her pelvis when she fell from a tree causing her death and it fused back incorrectly as it fossilized.
4. Locking wrists. Lucy’s bones had locking wrists which meant she was a knuckle walker like other apes. She did not have the open, swivel wrists like a human.
5. Curved fingers. Lucy had curved fingers designed for swinging in trees like other apes, not straight finger bones like humans.
6. Still a tree swinger. Lucy had many broken bones likely from a traumatic fall. Evolutionists think she died swinging from a tree at 35 mph and falling 40 feet to her death based on her broken bones. Since she was evolving, apparently she was not very good at swinging from trees any more.
7. Fake feet in museums. Deceitful museum models show Lucy with human hands and feet. However, no feet bones were found, so museums put human feet on her to make her appear more human-like.
8. Fake upright walking. Some museum models show Lucy walking upright and removed her hair to make her look more human.
Credit: Genesis Apologetics and Answers In Genesis
9. Exaggerated height. Museum models of Lucy made her appear over 5 feet tall, which is much taller than the bones they found. However, Lucy was only 3 feet 7 inches tall and about 60 pounds.
10. Fake eye color. Museum models show fake white sclera around Lucy’s eyes to make her look more human. But apes, chimpanzees and gorillas don’t have white sclera, only humans.
Final Conclusion – Lucy was just an ape
Dr. Zuckerman, head the Department of Anatomy of the University of Birmingham in England, studied Australopithecus (Lucy) fossils for 15 years with a team of scientists and concluded that they were just apes.
For a better understanding of Lucy and other "Missing Links", visit our Creation page with sermons, teachings and Q&A on Creation versus Evolution.
Misleading claims that chimp DNA is 98-99% similar to humans — it’s more like 85%
Credit: Answers In Genesis and National Geographic
A National Geographic article said we're 99% similar to chimps when it's actually more like 85% similar since they left out the sections of DNA that don't match up
Evolutionists ignored 25% of the human DNA and 18% of the chimp DNA to arrive at a 98% similarity.
-
Human DNA: 25% doesn’t line up with chimps.
-
Chimp DNA: 18% doesn’t line up with humans.
-
Chimp DNA is 6% larger than humans.
Evolutionary-oriented scientists leave these differences out of their calculations to make it appear that humans are more similar to chimps in order to convince us that chimps are a common ancestor. The actual difference in DNA amounts to about 400 million to 900 million base pair differences.
For reference, all humans have 99.6% similar DNA with eachother. It makes sense that all mammals share some DNA since they all have to digest food, breathe, pump blood, etc. For example, DNA/gene comparisons with humans show approximate similarities with cats at 90%, dogs 82%, cows 80%, rats 69%, mice 67% and chickens 60%.
For a better understanding of DNA and the somewhat misleading comparisons with chimp DNA, visit our Creation page with sermons, teachings and Q&A on Creation vs Evolution.
Ape and human breeding attempted to prove evolution — it failed
A Russian scientist in the early 1900’s attempted to create an ape-human hybrid to advance the idea that ape-to-human evolution was possible.
Human sperm was used to inseminate female apes. They were never able to produce any hybrids.
It wouldn’t have worked anyways as they didn’t know about DNA at the time. Apes have 48 chromosomes. Humans have 46 chromosomes. An ape’s egg of 24 chromosomes can’t combine with human sperm of 23 chromosomes.
Despite the obvious ethical issues of creating an ape-human hybrid, it shows the great lengths scientists have taken to try to prove evolution.
Piltdown Man hoax - this supposed evolutionary ancestor was just a 130-year-old human skull spliced with an orangutan jaw
Credit: Institute of Creation Research, Wikipedia Public Domain
In 1912 Charles Dawson introduced Piltdown Man, supposedly 100,000 to 500,000 years old. However, they did flouring tests and radio carbon testing and at most, the bones were only a few hundred years old.
The skull has now been proven to be from a modern human. A similar skull was reported to be missing around 1900 from a museum to which Dawson had close connections.
The lower jaw was from a juvenile female orangutan. The canine teeth had been filed down to look like human teeth. The skull was stained with potassium bichromate to appear more primitive.
The Piltdown Man skull was kept under restricted access for over 40 years to prevent other scientists from analyzing the skull, until the hoax was exposed in 1953. It is estimated that some 500 scholarly articles were published about Piltdown during its 40-year-lifespan of lies, which then made it into thousands of textbooks stating the validity of evolution.
In this case, an evolutionist fabricated the evidence to support their preconceived world view. As a result, the fraudster helped brainwash a generation of people that evolution is believable.
The Nebraska Man hoax – was actually just a single pig’s tooth
Credit: Wikipedia Public Domain, Institute of Creation Research
Evolutionists dug up a single tooth. From that, they drew up all kinds of pictures of apelike men to further substantiate their evolutionary agenda. Years later they found more teeth in the same area where the first tooth was found and determined all the teeth belonged to a pig. Here again another hoax was exposed.
Once again, evolutionists were looking desperately for evidence to support their preconceived world view and didn’t find it.
Darwin had a serious problem with the lack of fossil evidence for missing links
Credit: BibleSurf.com
No evidence of transitional creatures — Darwin said, “this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory”
He was very concerned that there was no fossil evidence of one creature transitioning to another creature. He viewed it as the most serious objection someone could use against his theory.
If human evolution was true, we should also find many “in-between” creatures alive today. But the score for these “transitional forms” today is zero. Not one creature lives today that can be branded half-ape and half-human.
No wonder people declared Lucy, Piltdown and Nebraska Man as transitional creatures (ape-to-man) to overcome Darwin’s missing link dilemma.
Darwin stated, “Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.” (C.R. Darwin, Origin of Species, 3rd edition, 1861, London: John Murray, p. 303)
The Ancon Sheep short-legged blunder
A mutation of a sheep born with short legs was used by Darwin to substantiate rapid evolution — but it was just a genetic disease
The short-legged Ancon sheep appeared in 1791 and was thought to be an advantage to sheep owners since they couldn’t jump over fences and were less active so they got fatter.
Evolutionists used the Ancon sheep to argue for a theory of rapid evolution (or “macroevolution”) as opposed to gradual evolution.
This solved two problems:
(1) the lack of intermediate fossil records, and
(2) the evolutionary timeline for animals was too short if there were only gradual changes.
Darwin included the Ancon sheep is his writings since he needed evidence of big jumps in evolution.
It turns out the sheep had a genetic disease called achondroplasia. It was a form of dwarfism where cartilage failed to develop between joints. Many of the dwarf lambs died before reaching two months of age. They also had thyroid gland lesions, abnormal spines, and crooked and short forelegs that appeared as if their legs were broken.
It had so many major health problems that it became extinct decades ago and is now considered a deformity. Yet, Ancon sheep still appeared in textbooks as evidence for big evolutionary jumps as recently as 2005.
The Ancon sheep is an example of a “rescuing device” used by evolutionists where they desperately look for something to solve a dilemma they have with their theory. Darwin needed fast evolution and Ancon sheep came to the rescue, until it didn’t.
A heavy peacock tail contradicted Darwin’s “natural selection” theory
Credit: Siegfried Poepperl, Zed Akxis
It made Darwin feel so sick when he saw a peacock, he invented the “sexual selection” theory to rescue his “natural selection” theory
Darwin’s “natural selection” theory says traits in animals exist because they give them a distinct survival advantage over those animals that do not have that trait. The fastest and strongest survive.
However, there are animal features that actually contradict natural selection. A male peacock is an example that has a long, heavy tail (maybe 6 feet long), that impedes its flying ability, slows the animal down when trying to escape predators, and requires much energy to grow and drag around.
Darwin had such a huge problem with the heavy peacock tail that every time he gazed at it, it made him feel sick. So he came up with an additional theory called “sexual selection”. The better the male feathers look, the more females they will attract, and the more offspring they will create. It was his rescuing device to save his theory.
To test Darwin's “sexual selection” theory, between 1995 and 2001, researchers in Tokyo mapped 268 mating peacock pairs and analyzed tail quality (number of eyespots) during the tail-fanning breeding season. They found the females were just as likely to mate with drab-tailed peacocks as with flashy-tailed ones.
They concluded tail quality was not related to female attraction. Darwin’s “sexual selection” theory failed in this test case.
A better explanation is that God created the beautiful peacock, including the uniform spacing of about 170 eyes on its tail feathers that couldn't have happened by chance, random mutation.
Complex eye components all developing simultaneously seemed absurd to Darwin
Credit: BibleSurf.com
The pupil, lens, retina, tear ducts, eye muscles and optic nerve would disappear if they evolved individually since they would be useless
Darwin questioned how the lens, responsible for focusing light, and the retina, responsible for detecting it, could have evolved in slow, incremental order, as one is useless without the other.
In Darwin’s book, “Origin of the Species”, in chapter 6, page 186, Darwin says, “To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”
Darwin was right. It was absurd to think that all eye components mutated simultaneously? There was no rescuing device to save him from this problem with his theory.
Darwin said bears evolved into whales
He was ridiculed so much he removed it from his subsequent books
Credit: BibleSurf.com
Darwin said whales came from bears that went into the water and used their mouth to eat flies. Since whales were mammals, they had to start out on land and then evolved into water dwellers.
He was so widely criticized that the statement was shortened in subsequent editions of his book until whale origins was banished altogether in the last edition published during his life.
Later, evolutionists believed whales evolved from a four-legged, land-dwelling mammal called Pakicetus that lived about 50–55 million years ago. Their heads and tails were more like those of dogs. They had bodies covered with fur, and they had four legs. This, of course, is pure speculation as they only found a skull and a few bones of this imaginative creature.
Credit: Institute of Creation Research
Did a whale actually evolve from Pakicetus like evolutionists speculate in school textbooks. Read below to see just a few of the random mutations that needed to take place and decide for yourself how plausible they are.
Evolve from 100 pounds to 400,000 pounds?
In regard to size alone, the change is not very believable. You have to believe a dog-like creature (Pakicetus) of about 100 pounds evolved into 50,000 pounds, or more (blue whales can weigh over 400,000 pounds).
Fur changes to blubber?
Fur supposedly gradually disappeared. And you have to believe it was replaced by blubber (fat) under the skin as much as two feet thick. Blubber is needed to help hold in heat, keeping the whale warm.
Front legs turn into flippers?
The whale’s front legs had to evolve into flippers which guide the body while diving and turning.
Back legs disappear?
Their back legs had to disappear altogether. And their tails widened to become the broad, fan-shaped flukes which whales stroke up and down to propel themselves through the water.
Nostrils move up and become blowholes?
The nostrils, which had been at the tip of the nose as they are with all land animals, moved to the top of the head and became blowholes.
Hold their breath longer?
They had to develop an enormous lung capacity for long dives.
Withstand high eye pressure?
Their eyes had to evolve to see properly in water with its far higher refractive index and to withstand high pressure.
Breast milk squirted, not sucked?
Whales had to evolve a specially fitting mouth and nipples so the baby can breast-feed underwater. Milk is squirted into the baby’s mouth, not sucked or drawn by the baby like land dwellers.
Hearing changed to sonar?
Whales had to evolve their hearing to use sound echolocation. They have a sonar system which is so precise that it’s the envy of the US Navy. It can detect a fish the size of a golf ball 230 feet away. (Sarfati 1999, 69–70)
It was only as recently as 2009 that scientists now feel that hippos, not Pakicetus, may have a common ancestor to whales due to similarities in their genetics and DNA. (Smithsonian Magazine)
So somewhere in the past, you have to believe one creature branched off in the Tree of Life and the hippo developed a small tail (about one-foot long), and the second branch produced a whale that developed a large tail (up to 25 feet wide) with its legs disappearing.
DNA discoveries keep changing the narrative for evolutionists as their previous ideas of evolution get smashed against scientific evidence like DNA.
The supposed evolution of a whale’s features requires the introduction of an incredible amount of new genetic information, yet random mutations are incapable of this.
It is quite obvious that whales were created by an intelligent designer.
View a Whale Evolution video (2 minutes) from ICR.org on Vimeo by clicking here.
Darwin’s “worthless” tailbone and appendix as evidence of evolution has been proven wrong
Science shows the human tailbone and the appendix do serve a purpose — sitting for long periods and immunity
Darwin said we have leftover, useless (vestigial) organs from an earlier evolutionary period. He said things like the tailbone and the appendix were no longer needed. Once again, Darwin was wrong.
You do need your tailbone if you like to sit down and relax. When people have their tailbone removed, they have a hard time sitting down for long periods of time. Why? The tail bone creates a tripod like structure with our two leg bones to give us stability so we can sit comfortably longer.
Also, the tailbone is the anchor point for the muscles that form the entire pelvic diaphragm. Without the muscle attachment point of the tailbone, people have a hard time passing bowel movements.
You need your appendix too! The appendix is now known to be an important source of antibody-producing blood cells and thus an integral part of the human immune system. It may also serve as a reservoir for beneficial bacteria to help “reboot” the digestive system after severe diarrhea or infection. So the appendix is not useless at all.
Darwin’s useless organ argument is proven false by today’s science and puts another nail in the coffin of Darwinian evolution.
“Good” mutations are needed to substantiate evolution — but science experiments have failed
Fruit flies were zapped for 100 years to accelerate mutations — but they're still just fruit flies
Upward or good mutations are needed for evolution to work. In order try to prove beneficial mutations, scientists tested fruit flies since they have a short lifespan and you could observe many generations in a short time. They zapped them with everything they could think of like radiation and chemicals to accelerate mutations.
They were able to create fruit flies with extra wings, but they couldn’t fly because they had no muscles. They created a leg in place of antennae that was useless. No progress was made to accelerate “evolution” by ramping up their mutations. In 2010, marking 100 years of lab torture, they’re still just fruit flies.
For humans, most genetic mutations are also neutral or are harmful with about 60-100 new mutations occurring in every generation. Since beneficial mutations are rare to none, they fail as a viable means to create complex new traits like the human eye as we previously discussed.
Evolutionists have looked for a good rescuing device to support “good” mutations and have failed.
Who determines right or wrong if we are just here by random mutations over millions of years
And what about superior races — are some people more advanced than others like pygmies when one was put in a zoo cage
As evolutionist’s mindset is we’re only here by chance. We’re not here for a purpose. There is no right or wrong other than what people think is right or wrong for them. With survival of the fittest, what’s wrong with me stealing from someone if I’m stronger than they are?
Or, what if my race is smarter and more evolved than your race? Darwin classified his own white race as more advanced than those “lower organisms” such as pygmies. Even Darwin's most famous book Origin of the Species, the second half of the book title that is rarely mentioned is, The Preservation Of Favoured Races In The Struggle For Life.
Such evolutionary thinking of an inferior race was largely responsible for an African pygmy being displayed, along with an orangutan, in the monkey house in the Bronx zoo in 1904. He was 23 and had already been married twice. After many protests and legal threats, he was let out of his cage and allowed to walk around the zoo with guests and visitors. (J. Bergman, Ota Benga: the man who was put on display in the zoo! Creation 16(1):48–50, 1993.)
Darwin was wrong about higher and lower levels of the human race
There's only one race — the human race
Humans are not divided into various races at higher and lower levels of evolution. The Bible says God created mankind in His image. We are all descendants of Adam, “the first man”, and Eve, “the mother of all living”. So there’s only one race — the human race.
(1 Corinthians 15:45, Genesis 3:20)
A quick summary of the major problems with Darwinian evolution
Modern science and biology show the improbability of evolution
-
The big issue: How did life begin? Evolution doesn't question it — it assumes life already existed
-
Evolution is particles-to-people — where a single cell evolved into a human over billions of years
-
Darwinian theory is old science; before anyone knew about DNA — Charles Darwin was born the same day as Abraham Lincoln in 1809
-
DNA refutes Darwin's simple-to-complex Tree of Life — the lungfish has 40 times more DNA than humans
-
Your DNA is so complex; it would make 88,000 round trips to the moon if it were stretched out end-to-end — yet Darwin thought a cell was just like a lump of jelly
-
The co-discoverer of DNA says DNA is so complex, it's almost a miracle — probably from aliens
-
Hollywood even poked fun at the improbability of evolution happening by chance — the television cartoon, “The Simpsons”, showed 1,000 monkeys typing randomly hoping to recreate a Charles Dickens novel
-
Lucy was not the “missing link” between man and ape — she was only 3.5 feet tall and had locking wrists and curved finger bones like an ape
-
Museums falsely display Lucy as more human — with human-like hands, feet, white eyes, and walking upright like a human
-
Human DNA is about 85% similar to chimp DNA, not 98% like evolutionist claim — they mislead us by ignoring the sections of DNA that don't match up
-
Ape and human breeding attempted to prove evolution — it failed because apes have two extra chromosomes
-
The Piltdown Man missing-link hoax — turned out to be a human skull spliced with an orangutan jaw
-
The Nebraska Man missing-link hoax — was invented from a single pig's tooth
-
Darwin had a serious problem with the lack of fossil evidence for missing links
-
No “in-between” ape-to-human creatures are alive today — but they should exist if evolution was true
-
The mutation of a sheep born with short legs was used by Darwin to substantiate “rapid evolution” — but it was just a genetic disease and they went extinct
-
The sight of a heavy-tailed peacock made Darwin feel sick because it violated “natural selection” — so he invented “sexual selection”
-
Complex eye components all mutating simultaneously into existence seemed absurd to Darwin — but he ignored it
-
Darwin was ridiculed for saying bears evolved into whales — so he removed it from subsequent books
-
Does anyone really believe a 400,000-pound whale evolved from a 100-pound, dog-like creature — but evolutionist do
-
Darwin's “worthless” tailbone and appendix from past evolution is false — they're needed to sit for long periods and immunity
-
Fruit flies were zapped for 100 years to create “good” mutations — but they failed
-
Philosophically, who determines right or wrong — if we are only here by random mutations over millions of years
-
Darwin classified his own white race as more advanced — than “lower organisms” like pygmies
So, are we here by random mutations? Or is there an intelligent designer — God the creator?
With evolution being against all odds, a seismic shift is taking place with how people understand the origin of life and recognize intelligent design
The older generation generally believed the evolutionary propaganda found in their school textbooks. It didn't appear that illogical, fraudulent or misleading at the time. But now, the younger generation is being exposed to the evidence against evolution and are making up their own minds on what to believe.
The Bible says the knowledge of God is revealed through nature, and no one can claim ignorance of His existence. The intelligently engineered DNA, the complexity of the eye, and the beautiful peacock are all divinely created and are not the result of random mutations. See verses below.
Romans 1:19-20 says “. . . because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.”
Romans also says that all men are without excuse. If you look at a watch, you know it was intelligently designed; not by chance. Deep down inside, all of us know that the earth, the plants and animals are all so intelligently designed, that there must be a creator. So is the creator Aliens or God? Unlike some scientists in the past, hopefully you'll decide it's the God of the Bible.
If you've never believed in Jesus Christ as your savior, today is the day! Learn more about Salvation here.
Explore more Biblical topics
Continue your study of God's Word with these related topics on BibleSurf.com
Age of the Earth – What are the various views
Top questions on Creation – Dinosaurs, Noah's Flood and more
Popular videos on Creation and Evolution – See all
Heaven & Hell – Understand your eternal destination
End Times – What does the future hold; four views
False Teachings – Learn to identify deceptions
Salvation – Find out how to go to heaven
Evangelism – Equip yourself to share the gospel
Questions & Answers – Get Biblical answers to life's big questions
Christian Movies – Free Christian movies and Bible stories
For all of our recommended videos and teachings on Creation vs Evolution, visit our Creation page at BibleSurf.com.
Copyright to images, content and text shown in this article is retained by the respective owners and has been procured from various websites, including but not limited to AnswersInGenesis.org, ICR.org, GenesisApologetics.com, BibleSurf.com, Bible Content Ministries, Wikipedia Public Domain, YouTube, Vimeo and other sources primarily found through the links on the BibleSurf.com page on Creation.