RSS

5 Misconceptions About Evolution–Rebuttal

22 Mar

I haven’t spoken about evolution for a while and McGrath’s image at the following link

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2015/03/five-misconceptions-about-evolution.html

is a good place to return to the topic.  I have gotten to the point where I do not like reading evolutionists anymore. Not only does their ‘answers’ keep changing but they cannot truly agree with each other and for the most part, all they are saying are ideas that are fabrications from their own wild imaginations. The ‘Neanderthal’ myth has been the final straw for me as the evolutionist continues to talk about that ‘identity’ as if those people were real when in reality, the neanderthals are faker than a character from Disneyland or Aesop’s fables.

#1. It Is Just a Theory- In every day language theory might mean a hunch or a guess. For scientists, theory refers to a well supported explanation.

Two things, first, if the unbeliever doesn’t like the meaning of the word, they change the definition to one more to their liking and which supports their false efforts. A theory is a guess or a hunch until it is proven true yet do not tell that to evolutionists because they do not like being told that they are wrong or doing science the wrong way.

Second, a well supported ‘explanation’ doesn’t mean they have the correct answer nor that they are even close to the truth. An explanation is something that you tell someone when you want to lie to them until they pin you down and make you tell them the truth.  It takes a lot to pin an evolutionist down and get them to admit that their theory doe snot work and never will function as they claim. It has happened but it is rare and usually done when the conversation is done in private and will not go beyond those people seated at the table.

Then, you cannot tell the evolutionist that we have an explanation and it is found in God’s word. They won’t accept because that true explanation includes God and is not ‘scientific’ but there is no law that states that an explanation has to be scientific. The evolutionary explanation is not well supported but again you cannot tell evolutionists that for they do not want their apple cart upset.

#2. Survival of the Fittest- Fit organisms live & thrive to pass their genetic material to the next generation. Fitness depends on reproducing & ensuring the survival  of the population rather than strength, speed or length.

First, no one talks about strength, speed or length as the essence of survival of the fittest though those characteristics would help any species survive and pass on their genetic material. Second, if the species is not ‘fit’ nor can reproduce quickly enough to sustain a population then that group of plants or animals die out, never to be heard from again.

Third, survival of the fittest really refers to the anarchy the makes up the environment surrounding these reproducing species. We say it is a jungle out there because the mentality is ‘kill or be killed’. There are no rules of right and wrong, morality governing animals or plant life. Those species depend upon the human to look after them and when the humans choose to follow sin then the plants and animals are out of luck.

So, yes, survival of the fittest does describe the theory of supposed evolution.  There are no rules to help the animals and plants to survive and that has been made clear by every evolutionist out there.

#3. Humans descend From Chimps– Evolution holds that all life on Earth share common ancestry. Descent with modification means that we humans are unique as a species and we share many characteristics with other species.

First, this is one of the many changes that has come to the theory of supposed evolution. I know this because I was a teenager when the evolutionist camp still promoted the theory that humans evolved from monkeys. I will say monkeys just to be general. In fact, one of the most published images was this one

https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=A0SO8zftQA5VhVkAfStXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzdjc0cTYwBGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDVklQNTgyXzEEc2VjA3Nj?p=Evolutionary+Chimp+Man&fr=yfp-t-901-s

At one point, the evolutionist did believe in the chimp to man variation of evolution.Once the evolutionist found that they could not prove that descent they began seeking an alternative way to present their false idea. That alternative took time to develop because those stalwart creationists were refuting every solution the evolutionist came up with. Now we are stuck with the indirect ‘common ancestor’ idea, which is equally illogical and hard to verify as the chimp to man suggestion.

Second, there are shared characteristics because God was providing 1 environment for humans and most of the animals to live in. Except for some water animals, we all breathe the same air, eat basically the same food, drink the same water thus our characteristics to digest and maintain the physical body, etc., must be the same in all those creatures.

The truth escapes the evolutionist because they do not want it.

#4. No One Was There & It Cannot Be Proven- Scientists operate like detectives. With a few pieces of evidence about an event the investigator searches for clues that would legitimize or refute a claim.  Where is the evidence to support evolution coming from?

First, the initial point is quite correct, the evolutionist cannot prove their theory and must take everything they say about it by faith. There is no other alternative for them. BUT what makes matter worse for them is that they have no idea what was the original common ancestor, the original environmental conditions, nor do they know anything about the process itself, its origin, how it got to earth, or how it actually works.

Everything about their processes of evolution and natural selection are: 1. made up & 2. taken by faith because neither process has physical properties that can be studied, felt, seen and so on.

Second, there is nothing in the supposed evidence that  excludes any other process or divine Being from being the source of all things. Nothing points to evolution or natural selection as being responsible for what we see on Earth today. It is all attributed to those processes not shown for a fact.

Third, there is nothing that states that the supposed evidence being used to support the evolutionary theory is actually evidence for that process or that it is the items that are to be used. Those ‘pieces of evidence’ are all selected by evolutionists and then declared to be evidence. Nothing ties them to the theory of supposed evolution.

Fourth, the scientist is not being a detective trying to find and put together clues. He or she is more like a tall tale or fable story-teller who is making it all up as they go. Then when people see through their charade, they turn into bullies and force others into learning their lies while bashing those who disagree with them. There is nothing ‘detective’ about their work.

Fifth, to answer that ending question, the supposed evidence is coming from the creative imaginations of the evolutionist. It is all a fabrication and not real evidence.

Sixth, that image refers to the peer review process as if it was infallible, omniscient, and the final word on the topic. It isn’t. It is simply a way for evolutionists to hide from the truth while promoting their lies to the world. It is a false standard created by evolutionists to rubber stamp their theory and nothing else. The supposed peer critics, by the way, usually are all evolutionists, people of like minds thus it would be difficult and rare to get an honest opinion about any secular evolutionary experiment.

#5.Darwin Was Wrong- Darwin lived in a different time

First, this is just an excuse for why the evolutionary theory does not resemble the one that Darwin proposed in his book Origin of the Species. If Darwin was correct, the modern theory would be exactly like Darwin’s or very close to it and the evolutionist would have found the original ancestor that started it all. They would also be able to replicate the spawning of descendents from that original ancestor.

Second, the scientific talk used in that image is just that–talk. it means nothing and doe snot take into account the reality of how life actually works. Nor does it take into account the corruption, disease and imperfection that entered the world at Adam’s birth. So what the evolutionist describes as ‘mutation’, ‘change’ or ‘evolution at work’ is merely the result of God’s genetic design working under the stress of imperfect influences that corrupt their mechanisms.

The evolutionist will ignore the fact that some diseases are hereditary and are passed down from generation to the next and this process is not ‘evolution in action’ but the corruption at work in people’s lives.

Third, again, evolution used to deal with the origin of life until the evolutionist found out that they cannot reproduce life as they claimed so instead of saying their theory was wrong and God is right, they simply just cut that part of their theory out and say it never took place. The theory of evolution has been proven wrong and impossible, probably a million times by now, yet the evolutionist is stubborn or God has given them over to that sin thus they stick to it no matter what.

It is sad to see so many people claiming to be Christian jumping on that bandwagon because there is not one shred of truth or God in that theory. It doesn’t exist and never has. We can only shake our head and see that the Bible is right when it says

For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false,(2 Thess. 2:11 NASB)

Jeremiah 10:8 is quite interesting as well:

But they are altogether stupid and foolish In their discipline of delusion—their idol is wood! (NASB)

For the most part, science and evolution are the idols of the evolutionist, (any variety). We can only pray that God will soften the hearts of those still reachable and that we will be able to turn them back to the truth and Jesus.

Advertisements
 
Comments Off on 5 Misconceptions About Evolution–Rebuttal

Posted by on March 22, 2015 in academics, Bible, creation, faith, Genetics, history, leadership, science

 

Comments are closed.

 
%d bloggers like this: