|
Fossils are not formed under normal conditions. So, why do we have so many fossils around the world?
Scientifically, the fossil record we have must have been created by one or more great catastrophes involving water. This lines up well with the fact that many cultures around the world have stories of a great flood that have been passed down from the ancient past.
The Epic of Gilgamesh may be the most well-known, but Greeks, Mexicans, the Choctaw people, and the Chinese Miao also have ancient flood legends, along with the account that is given in the book of Genesis in the Christian Bible.
While these stories differ, they all have some key things in common. So many historical accounts of a great flood from such a variety of distinct, widely separated cultures make it likely that there was indeed a great, worldwide flood at some time in the past.
This matches the evidence that we see in the fossil record quite well.
Often, fossils appear out of place or rock layers are upside-down from what geologists expect. These discrepancies are typically just explained away, because they don't match the predetermined evolutionary timetable.
There is also the well-documented Cambrian explosion, a relatively brief period during which most major species of animals suddenly appeared in the fossil record. This also fits well with the idea of a global flood.
If there was a great flood, all types of animals and people would have been buried simultaneously, while the significant amount of water would have created massive sediment deposits and rock formations.
Even short-lived local floods can quickly reshape land formations, so it is easy to see how a global flood would be so catastrophic that it would massively reshape rock formations all over the world.
Therefore, if we consider the plain evidence and keep an open mind to all possibilities, the worldwide geological evidence actually fits much better with the idea of a global flood where animals and people were buried together, in a great catastrophe, all at the same time, as opposed to a long evolutionary history.
In view of a global flood where most of the fossils we have were buried together, the fossil record no longer supports Darwin's theory of evolution.
|
|
If there have been one or more great catastrophes in Earth's past, dating methods become useless. Even though they appear to give very old ages for rocks, those already questionable methods assume that processes on Earth have always been as they are now, with no great catastrophes.
It is a well-known fact that no transitional fossils exist. If Darwinian evolution were true, one would expect to find millions of fossils of in-between species. Darwin himself expected that future paleontologists would find many transitional fossils, but that simply has not happened. The few that have supposedly been found were later proven to be either fake or the product of a wild imagination.
Images often shown in science textbooks (such as Miller's experiments involving how life could form in a supposed early-Earth atmosphere or the similar-looking embryos that Haeckel drew of various species) have been shown by later scientists to be patently wrong. However, these images are among those still used in many science textbooks as supposed evidence of Darwinian evolution.
Natural selection presents perhaps the biggest obstacle for Darwin's theory. Natural selection that we observe always, without exception, results in information being lost. There is never any new information gained.
How, then, could natural selection account for simple lifeforms developing into more complex lifeforms? Quite simply, it can't.
In his well-known book, "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life", Charles Darwin stated, "To suppose that the eye...could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree."
Still, Darwin believed his theory was true, and he thought that future scientists would make new discoveries that would alleviate his concern.
Instead, new scientific discoveries (such as DNA and the complexity of the cell) have made his theory of evolution even more absurd.
It is also sadly true that Darwin's theory of evolution provided inspiration to Hitler during World War II as he sought to purify the German race. He believed Germans were the evolutionary favored race, an idea that came from Darwin (notice the full title of Darwin's book above, which is seldom used today).
Other atrocities such as eugenics and abortion find their roots in the Darwinian theory of evolution as well. How can any of those things be wrong if we randomly evolved from nothing, if life is meaningless, and if only the fittest survive? Evolution has become a strange kind of religion, with many devoted followers who refuse to look at plain scientific evidence with an open mind.
For evolutionists, anything that might go against the theory of evolution cannot be considered. Clear evidence is simply ignored while reasonable alternative explanations are ridiculed.
|
|
In 1764, Erasmus Darwin (grandfather of Charles Darwin) founded the Lunar Society in Great Britain, with an intended purpose of pushing the Bible out and creating a more secular society rooted in socialism.
The Lunar Society then founded the Royal Society. One of its well-known members was Charles Lyell, considered by many to be the father of modern geology. Lyell's theory of uniformitarian geology states that the earth's processes have remained basically unchanged over time, negating a great catastrophe like a global flood.
Unfortunately, these men were not neutral scientists. They were intentionally looking for ways in which they could undermine the Bible's influence on society.
They knew that the Bible, along with those who believe it, was the most significant hurdle in their path to creating a secular, socialist society.
Since their time, influential people in society have continued along the same lines, promoting ideas such as uniformitarian geology and Darwinian evolution and ignoring the massive amount of compelling evidence to the contrary.
They aren't necessarily concerned with the science being correct, which explains why images that supposedly provide evidence for Darwinian evolution continue to appear in science textbooks decades after being proven wrong. Instead, they are more concerned with accomplishing their goals for society.
Of course, socialism has failed every time it has been tried, and it has accounted for roughly 100 million deaths in the twentieth century. Still, those in the "progressive" elite of our day are thirsty for power, and eager to push God out of society.
The most effective tool at their disposal is the public school system, along with many colleges and universities, where those in influential positions continue to push false ideas. They teach that evolution is a proven fact, along with other ideas like capitalism is bad and socialism is good. All the while, they are rendering our young people ignorant of true history.
Make no mistake: Public schools, colleges, and universities are not neutral. They are intentionally pushing a secular humanistic vision for the future, based in questionable ideas from science that are pushed as fact with no room for questions or debate.
Hopefully this brief article left you with some things to ponder. In closing, consider this quote:
"Our schools may not teach Johnny to read properly, but the fact that Johnny is in school until he is 16 tends to lead towards the elimination of religious superstition. The average American child now acquires a high school education, and this militates against Adam and Eve and all other alleged myths of alleged history." (Paul Blanchard, "Three Cheers for Our Secular State", Humanist Magazine, March/April 1976)
|
|
The following excerpt is from the landmark book The Genesis Flood by John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris (pages 328-330), after the authors present a very plausible framework for interpreting geology from a Biblical perspective. In the end, it is really more of a philosophical and religious issue than a scientific issue.
We realize that such a thorough reorganization of the geologic data raises many questions and must be subject to modification and revision in many details. Nevertheless, we believe that this type of analysis comes much more realistically to grips with all the basic data than does the commonly accepted theory of uniformitarianism.
But the latter theory will undoubtedly die hard, mainly because it is the chief bulwark of evolutionism, and evolution is the great "escape mechanism" of modern man. This is the pervasive philosophic principle by which man either consciously or sub-consciously seeks intellectual justification for escape from personal responsibility to his Creator and escape from the "way of the Cross" as the necessary and sufficient means of his personal redemption.
...in the last analysis, it is likely that on questions so fundamental and basically emotional and spiritual as these, each man will continue to believe as he "wants" to believe. We can only show that those who want to believe the Bible can do so in full confidence that the actual data of geology are consistent with such a belief, even though the apparent weight of scholarly opinion for the past century has been on the side of those who want to believe otherwise.
The words of Dr. Leonard Carmichael, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, in the Phi Beta Kappa address at the 1953 meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science are worth noting in this connection:
"...This point of view had not previously characterized all great scientists. Such a giant in logic as Sir Isaac Newton saw no inconsistency between a thoroughly scientific cosmology and great reverence for the dogmas and customs of the orthodox Christian tradition."
The decision between alternate theories does not therefore depend only on the scientific data but is ultimately a moral and emotional decision. Dr. Barrington Moore, senior research fellow at the Russian Research Center at Harvard University, has said:
"Few people today are likely to argue that the acceptance of scientific theories, even by scientists themselves, depends entirely upon the logical evidence adduced in support of these theories. Extraneous factors related to the philosophical climate and society in which the scientist lives always plays at least some part."
|
|
This short introduction to the topic was primarily influenced by these four books. I recommend them for further reading on this subject:
Public Education Against America by Marlin Maddoux
The Evolution Conspiracy by Carl Matrisciana and Roger Oakland
The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel
The Genesis Flood by John Whitcomb and Henry Morris
Or, if you are looking for free online resources, check out Answers in Genesis
|
|