"…How could a division of the organic world into discrete entities be justified by an evolutionary theory that proclaimed ceaseless change as the fundamental fact of nature?”

 

Stephen J. Gould, professor of geology and paleontology, Harvard University

Adherents of abiogenesis and macro-evolution (the beliefs that all life evolved from inanimate matter and then continued to evolve to become the living creatures that exist today) accuse creationists of being “unscientific”. The implication is that creationism is not reasonable or logical. What evolutionists don’t know or fail to mention is that science itself informs us that the origin of the universe is “unscientific”.

 

It is the opinion of many evolutionists that there is nothing outside of the physical universe (though it is impossible to disprove a supernatural realm), but scientists are left with the problem: if we go back in time to the moment of the Big Bang, we are dealing with an immensely dense material object that is about to explode and become the physical universe as we know it, but…where did this object come from and how did it get there? Science can’t answer this question. How does something come from nothing?

 

If we try to avoid this problem by postulating a universe that has always existed, we violate the  rule that every effect must have a cause.

 

Considering the problems inherent in the beginning of our universe, the “scientific” bias against creationism is clearly illogical. Once we get beyond this unfair and illogical bias, we are free to look objectively at the physical evidence, to determine whether abiogenesis and macro-evolution are supported by the evidence.

 

A truly objective look at the evidence unveils significant problems:

 

• The simplest cells that we know of are incredibly complex, so how did they evolve from inanimate matter in the first place?

 

• Very complex forms appeared suddenly in the fossil record. The fossil evidence does not support the theory that living things evolved gradually

 

• The mutations that we know of are neutral, harmful, fatal, or provide only a temporary (superficial) advantage.

 

• All mutations had to occur by chance (accident). An organism’s DNA cannot somehow sense what changes are needed in its code. DNA is a neutral carrier of information.

 

• How did complex organs and organisms “evolve” by chance when they require a number of specific parts that work together like the pieces of a complex puzzle? How did all of these pieces occur together, randomly and by accident, when the separate pieces cannot function by themselves and are therefore meaningless on an individual, piece by piece basis?

 

 

To view the full-length article, please go to the next page.