Teachinghearts | Creation Science Male and female created He them. (Genesis 1: 27) "Explore the World. Meet the Word" |
Home | Contact | Become a Christian | Lessons | 700+ New Messianic Prophecies | Modern Science In The Bible

"Looks like you slithered, crawled and walked on all fours, old chap! We took the express route."
The Basics |  | Creation Story | The Flood | Scientific Method | The Love of God | Summary
Types of Evidence |  | Mathematical, Statistical | Circumstantial | Scientific | Common Sense | Anecdotal
Bible Evidence (Summary) |  | Periodic Table in the Bible! | DNA Replication | Genetic Code | Mitosis | Photosynthesis
Grand Unified Theories | Battery | Magnetosphere | Databases | Rainbows
Creation Theories |  | Creation Flood Model | Catastrophism | Body Symmetry | Pleochroic Halos | Turbidity Currents
Male and Female | Intelligent Design | Cosmic Dust | A Young Earth | Requirements And Similarities
Evolution Theories |  | Evolution Tree of Life | Evolution Eras | Evolution of Man | An Old Earth
Evo Devo | Taxonomy | Documentary Creation in Science | By Special Creation
Evolution Barriers | Evolution Hoaxes | Long Time | Missing Link | Disproving Evolution
The Sciences |  | Physics | Chemistry | Astronomy | Biology DNA | Geology
The Speed of Light | Radioactive Dating | The Four Forces | Paleontology | Geologic Column
Children's Science |  | Solar System | The Atmosphere | The Weather | The Human Body | Caring for God
Cosmogony Legends |  | World Tree | Yggdrasil | Cipactli | The Cosmic Egg | Capacity of the Ark

| Prayer "before you call I will answer"
Dear God. Help me to understand. Reason with me so that I can see you clearly. Help me to see the truth by your Spirit of Truth. Thank you.

> Regrets? "I have asked myself whether I may not have devoted my life to a fantasy. I ... am ready to cry with vexation at my blindness and presumption." Charles Darwin (evolutionist), quoted by Herbert Wendt in 'From Ape to Man' page 59.

The subject of creation is covered under Bible prophecy because the issue of who is the creator will become important in the final days. One of the last prophetic messages to the world, tells mankind to love God and worship Him because He is the creator. This message was supposed to begin around the time of the end after a great persecution. At that time the corrupt religion would fall and knowledge would increase. This increase in knowledge also led to the theories of evolution. This describes the years after 1798.
» Worship the Creator. So we find a warning message to the world to turn back to God as the creator began at a time when evolution was being proposed.
... Fear God and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come. Worship Him who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and the springs of waters. (Revelation 14: 7)
» Beast Becomes Man. The series of prophecies in Daniel also point to a beast who evolves into a man who tries to become God at the end of time. One wonders if the prophet was symbolizing an important end time issue because, not only will we have the theory of evolution, we will have people claiming that we can evolve beyond humanity into deity. We shall become as gods.
There are several theories which propose how life began on earth or how everything we observe came into being.

1. Creation. Life and everything we observe was placed here by a powerful supernatural being

   | Evolution
   --- | ---
   What Do you Think You Know?
   If I asked you to clearly articulate one piece of evidence that convinces you that the theory of evolution explains your existence, 99% of you would be mute. Is science your God? Are you accepting its theories by faith?
   Or, do you think that if you choose not to know anything that you cannot be held accountable for it?

2. Evolution. Life and everything we observe began by chance with a series of physical and chemical reactions spanning billions of years.
3. Alien Colonization. Life began by a race of intelligent, superior beings who either colonized the earth or started the process. Ultimately, the same problem exists - Where did those beings come from. This may sound laughable now, but I believe that in their desperation not to believe in God, this is the theory to which people will turn. It is as easily viable as creationism. Only it does not come with those pesky moral rules that Christianity seems to be saddled with. God himself says, that because people refuse to believe, he will send (allow to be sent) a "strong delusion" so that they will believe a lie.

Ultimately, all these theories have a problem with the initial cause and what was in existence before. We do not have enough facts and we may never have the capability or access to determine the facts.

| Creation
--- | ---
Who Do you Think You Know?
If I asked you to clearly articulate what your God says about Himself and your relationship with Him, how many of you would rely on what someone else said or your feelings? You cannot walk through life like a dumb animal. You were created in His image with great love. You did not evolve from a wild animal. Do you respect your God? Then search for Him with all your heart.

However, in evaluating both theories, we will use the ground rules of science and logic. We will abide by the scientific method.

You Can Understand
Many people have accepted the theory of evolution because of a combination of reasons. Scientists seem to have proved it, and the best and brightest seem to have accepted it. In October 1996 and as far back as 1950, even the Catholic Church has come to declare it as truth.
But the biggest reason why people accept it is because they do not understand it. It is too complicated. And besides, most intelligent people believe it.
Since this is important for your understanding of God it is important for you to try to gain enough information so that you can make an informed decision. Besides, there is one compelling argument that I believe you can understand even if the others are still unclear.
So come and learn something.

Your Internal Model Of Evolution Is Like Building Mr Potato Head
The uncommon expression of recessive genes and the horrific examples of mutations leads the public to believe that evolution involves the accumulation of such drastic physical changes.

| Your "Mr. Potato Head" Model of Life. On Becoming A Man
--- | ---
» Overgrowth syndrome lengthens arms. » Hypertrichosis grows body and facial hair. » Unertan Syndrome bends the spine. » The insides are all the same.

Underlying the belief of most people is the concept that evolution involves superficial, exterior changes. People are unable to grasp that their model of the "scientific" and logical argument for evolution is based on what they presuppose about the creature that is evolving. So evolution is as simple as dressing Mr. Potato Head. Hair or no hair, scales or skin, differences in color, tail or no tail. For example, take a look at some extraordinary mutations and rare genes and let us make a monkey and a mermaid out of a man.

- Hypertrichosis ("Wolf Man Syndrome"). This causes the excessive growth of hair.
- Overgrowth Syndrome. A form of gigantism in which any part of the body is oversized. This could happen to one finger or both legs.
- Proteus Syndrome. An overgrowth syndrome.
- Unertan Syndrome. A birth defect or learning disability that causes humans to walk on all fours.
- Sirenomelia ("Mermaid Syndrome"). The legs are fused at birth.
- Ectrodactyly ("Lobster Claw Hand"). Fingers are fused, giving a claw-like appearance.
- Skin. There are viral diseases that can cause the skin to grow like a tree bark or genetic mutations that cause the skin to look dry and scaly.
- Tail. Sometimes humans are born with a soft fatty tissue that has muscle and blood vessels but no bones.

In the best case their basic concept of genetics is that all it takes is a simple mutation to change from one to the other and in the worst case they seem to believe that living things are all carved out of the same "potato" substance so that all changes are basically superficial structural and cosmetic changes which can be triggered in one generation by a mutation. Something grows bigger or smaller and changes color, texture and appearance.
They do not consider the dependent relationships that must be addressed. They assume male and female exist or are evolving the changes simultaneously. They assume that the programmable genetic structure already exists. They assume that changes on one creature is happening to other creatures. And they assume that it happens in one life time.
They do not understand the difficulties behind what they assume already exists.
When evolutionists are making their case to the public they appeal to this erroneous, internal model.

Proofs And The Scientific Method
We will approach this debate as an examination of the quality of evidence that exists.

The Process Of The Scientific Method. The basis of the scientific method is asking questions and then trying to come up with the answers, based on logic.

- Hypothesis. Make a good guess based on a few observations
- Theory. Do experiments based on your guess and find other patterns.
  1. State the question. How did the universe originate and how did life begin?
  2. Form a hypothesis based on observations.
  3. Do experiments. Gather evidence in the form of measurable data.
     This step produces the impartial data that will guide personal opinion or interpretation.
  4. Interpret data and draw conclusions from the values and figures your experiments generated
  5. Revise theory (go back to step 2).

  The Whole Earth Laboratory
  It is difficult to design and conduct experiments which prove evolution. We do not know how to introduce the effects of time. We can only guess at the environmental conditions. It is impossible to make the earth and the cosmos into one gigantic laboratory where we can change the variables. And a small model may not be adequate.

- Principle Or Law. If the theory stands the test of time and is proven over and over, and can create true predictions for different situations, has uniformity and is universal it becomes a law.
  This is my first problem with the proponents of evolution. They claim that it is no longer a theory but I do not know of any laboratory experiments that have proven it or any reproducible experiments that demonstrate it, mainly because the theory assumes hundreds of thousands of years passage in time before small changes may be noticeable. The theory cannot be proven because it cannot be measured!
  All science has done is to describe laws that exist, but cannot articulate why or how they exist.

Logical Reasoning And Limits To The Scientific Method
The scientific method is a rational, logical thought process that is used to figure out facts (the raw data) and sometimes truths (the actual meaning). All of the answers must be able to be proven. However, there are serious limitations.

- Inability To Measure The Very Distant Past.
  We are finite. Things deteriorate and some processes might not be observable to us as changing and therefore fully measurable. Some examples are:
  - Processes that have a long life cycle.
  - The activity curve of some processes will affect what we observe at different times.
    In their earlier stages, some processes change along an exponential line, but as they get older, the activity starts to decay along an almost flat line. This will not be observable as a change in the later stages if you can only observe a small period of its final stages.

  | The Scientific Method
  --- | ---
  What do you think you know?
  Name any reproducible experiment that proves biological evolution.
  Next learn all you can about the details of the experiment from evolutionary science. What did they measure? What did they recreate? What did they assume? Could they reproduce the experiment? What basic science did they rely on?
  Then read about any rebuttal evidence from creationists.
  If evidence of biological evolution is a problem then try other branches of evolution.

- Senses. Our ability to recognize data to measure is limited by our senses. We assume that only what we can see, touch, hear, smell, taste and quantify are the whole set of collectable data.
- What Is Known. Our experiments are limited by what we know and what we believe is knowable. After all, from the outset we are only measuring what is observable and what we think is possible.
- Technological Abilities. This affects our ability to make more precise tests and gather specimens that might be evidence.
- Measurement Of The Physical Universe. Our ability to measure and interpret what we measure is limited by our instrumentation (which we use to extend the limits of our senses).
- Instrument Limitations. Our instrumentation is basically an enhancement of our senses. We therefore do not know what else is measurable and how to gather the data. Taking this into perspective, if everyone was blind and only blue frogs from a few square miles of the Amazon rain forest could see, we would be missing a large part of our world because we do not know that we are lacking something and we cannot deduce that this sense exists because we have not been able to hypothesize that it exists from things that are available to us. We could not guess the existence of color or of sight. Even now, knowing about color, it would be difficult for you to envision a brand new color. The best you could do is recognize that this is possible but anything you thought about would be an existing color. You cannot even guess what it could be like by mixing colors. Who ever thought that yellow and blue would be green. Green does not seem to be half way between both colors.
- Corroborating Evidence. Until we know most of the facts and how things really work, we are not even sure what else could be corroborating evidence.
- False Assumptions. We assume that everything can be measured. We assume that we ought to be able to measure God if he exists. We assume that the scientific method is fool proof. We assume that our senses and instrumentation are adequate. We assume that we have the technology and the ability to solve these issues.
- The Human Factor. Despite the scientific obligation to be loyal only to the facts, the reality is that politics and prejudice do override our thought processes. This is why universities are not funding research on a young earth. They are there to foster learning. They are not a church for evolutionists.
- Scope. How can you tell that a law is universal when you have not traveled to all points in space and time, and you have not seen all scenarios under which it reacts. Such declarations are presumptuous.
- Circular Reasoning. Using an unproven idea to prove itself or using an unproven idea as fact in another unproven idea. Circular reasoning (also called "reasoning in a circle") is the basis of at least two evolutionary concepts: "natural selection" and "survival of the fittest."
  Tautology. A "tautology" means the useless repetition of an idea in different words, or a statement that is true because it includes all possibilities. ("Either it will rain tomorrow or it will not.") So tautologous thinking is a related way to describe some of the logical flaws in circular reasoning.
  These last two points show problems with logic and reasoning.

Ultimately this method is based on our limited knowledge about what is proof, what is provable and how a fact can be verified.
Instead of endless philosophical discussions to prove a point, experiment becomes the final arbitrator of truth, a successful approach. The issue becomes a bit sticky when discussing origins. How do we test the theory of evolution? We do not have the luxury of having a miniature universe with aeons of time in the corner of a laboratory. So this leaves both evolutionists and creationists in the same boat. No absolute way to objectively test their assertions. No eyewitnesses. Both are left to propose a model and then compare it with nature for consistency.

Types Of Evidence And Testimony.
The scientific approach is to arrive objectively at truth by examining the evidence without bias.

> Examine the Evidence. "We (evolutionists) have been telling our students for years not to accept any statement on its face value but to examine the evidence, and, therefore, it is rather a shock to discover that we have failed to follow our own sound advice." John T. Bonner (evolutionist). Quoted by Henry Morris (Creationist). 'The Twilight of Evolution' page 91

Eyewitness Evidence
In the case of creation versus evolution, there are no eyewitness, unless you count God as an eyewitness, but He is not a trustworthy witness for those who believe in evolution. Therefore, we have no reliable, impartial eyewitness that either side will agree upon.
God, rocks, atoms, water. 4000 year old trees witness to the time after flood

In conducting experiments and gathering data and formulating proofs, there are several types of evidence available. Some are more trustworthy than others because they are more objective and less open to personal interpretation. These are the major types of evidence:

Eyewitness. Testimony from someone or something that was actually there when an event occurred. This may seem to be the most reliable evidence, but sometimes under highly emotional state and depending on the length of time from the incidence to the recording of the testimony, the truth may not be as accurate.
For example, if your eyewitness is human, people age and forget things and in cases of trauma, your mind may protect you from the facts. But something impartial and unemotional may record some of the facts but not all of the truth.

Eyewitness and Forensic Bible Evidence
As of 21 December 2008, God has given me the documented evidence for the Bible as a scientific record of His creation. The Torah contains a model of the periodic table, DNA replication, magnetosphere and many other scientific processes in mathematical detail and description written by Moses 3500 years ago!
The sanctuary design and Passover Seder are the 3500 year old documentary evidence from the ancients about modern scientific discoveries of the past 200 years!

For example, a video camera could show all the visual and audio effects, but they cannot record feelings and motives or previous history.
So eyewitness evidence is not considered to be superior to the more objective scientific evidence, because the vessels that record the event (the human mind) are automatically subject to scrutiny that the vessels of scientific experiments are not (test tubes, flasks, thermometers, chemicals).
» True Confession. The person responsible is the best eyewitness and takes credit and explains in an uncoerced confession. God gave His allocution in Genesis 1, declaring that this is the plain truth. He is responsible for creating the world in seven literal days.
» Material Witness. A person who may have information relevant for solving a case.
Scientific (Forensic, Direct, Real, Physical). This is the equivalent of a scientific eyewitness. It is based on the examination of physical evidence left behind. Based on our ability to measure certain materials and knowledge about its rate of change under certain conditions, or statistical information on its frequency of occurrence. we can make very good guesses about what is most likely to have occurred. But it still involves some degree of circumstantial evidence evaluation because we must still interpret the meaning of the scientific facts.

Forensic Evidence
This is one of the methods used by scientists today. The types of forensic evidence we have are, bone fragments, rocks, permanent geologic formations and layers. The closest thing we have to a forensic eyewitness are: Atoms. They may be unchanged. Rocks. Those that were not formed from any other geological material. Any other biological findings are not eyewitnesses because they have changed chemically over the years. Atoms and rocks are a good source of evidence because they probably existed from the beginning. If we can determine what to measure and what it really means, then we can use this data scientifically.
Turbidity current, Surtsey Island, pyroclastic flow, Mt. St. Helen's eruption, pleochroic halos, polystrata fossils

» Empirical, Direct, Real, Physical. Any physical evidence that can be objectively described by the five senses in the same way by any person with the same senses.
» Forensic Evidence. This is high value physical evidence about which we have acquired a lot of information so that we have greater confidence about what the specimen means and how it acquires meaning. Therefore, fingerprints are no longer dirty smudges or abstract designs that may be useful for a quilt pattern. Fingerprints can be traced to one person.
Mathematical. Use trusted chemical and mathematical formulas to calculate outcomes based on the assumptions of the theories. Calculations will show the possibility of events in the past conforming to current observations.
Statistical. This can probably be viewed as "mathematical" forensic evidence. Given all the data, the calculations are based on how likely an event will occur. DNA is statistical forensic evidence. The flaw is, we may not have all the data. But from experience (common sense) we may infer that given certain sets of facts that are based on common everyday occurrences, that only a rare unlikely event could change the conclusion.
In recent discussions with evolutionists, I have heard news personnel mention the phrase "mathematical evidence" or "statistical evidence" and dismiss it as irrelevant. They never say what the evidence is, they just say the two words in a derogatory way. But our mathematical and statistical evidence are a logical scientific method to bring evidence out of the realm of faith and speculation. The type of statistical evidence we present is not one that is a photo finish or that can be argued with. It is evidence that is in the realm of possible versus impossible, not "likely" or "some chance".

Experimental Evidence
This is one of the methods used by scientists today. This type of investigation can only demonstrate how a situation could have occurred, not that it actually happened in that way.
Male and female, turbidity currents

Experimental. With this method one tries to reproduce the facts by creating a similar situation and measuring conditions before the experiment and after. If it succeeds you may have proven that under the conditions of your experiments that certain events can occur. However, although experimental evidence could show that certain actions can produce certain effects, it cannot prove that in the past this situation existed, especially if the situation is highly unlikely and never observable in modern times. If it were possible to conduct all possible experiments to rule out the impossible then we could say with certainty what happened.
Mother Nature Testifies (Crime Scene Examination). Rare natural processes observed in real time could also be counted as an experimental environment that is conducted by nature itself in the presence of eyewitnesses. They have the added testimony that this is a possibility, since it is not an artificial environment set up in a laboratory.
Demonstrative Evidence. This type of experimental evidence illustrates a point through charts, graphs, maps, illustrations and reenactments. It tends to simplify complicated situations or illustrate and assist verbal testimony.
Circumstantial. Examining what remains after the fact. The interpretation of facts based on the physical evidence found after the incidence has happened and the original participants are gone. There is a danger that we could use current thinking and understanding to interpret the data.

Circumstantial Evidence
The science of evolution is largely based on circumstantial evidence. Bones in a cave, bits of pottery, garbage, writings on the wall can become a fanciful tale of culture, funeral rites, relationships and lifestyle. It is never simply a burial site, home or a temporary shelter.
Jews, biblical archaeology, geologic column

This is because the interpretation of circumstantial data is based on assumptions, common sense and all known experimental data.
Documentary Evidence. The eyewitness is a document in written or printed form. This document must be authenticated or have a trustworthy origin and chain of custody. Most legal documents are authenticated by signatures and eyewitnesses to the transaction. Anecdotal evidence may once have been documentary evidence for the ancient people. So the problem with this type of evidence is time. The more time has elapsed, the less confidence exists in their authenticity and veracity because of the issue of chain of custody and dead eyewitnesses.

Expert Witness
Evolutionists would say that through their science and training they are the expert witnesses. But they cannot be the witnesses for the very fact that we are disputing. Creationists would argue that we are not experts, we do not know enough information to make an informed decision.

The Torah and the Bible are treated as anecdotal documentary evidence that are useful for cultural amusement but not statements of fact. Because modern man chooses not to believe in God, they choose to believe that these document are false ignoring the fact that they rely on such statements for historical documents.
Expert Witness (Forensic People). Experts sometimes utilize hearsay and routinely express opinions. Through training and experience, they are better qualified to form an opinion. However, their knowledge is limited by the limits of science and their own capabilities. They are at best interpreting forensic and circumstantial evidence.
Common Sense (An Expert Common Man). At first this may seem to be emotionally based and possibly limited by our knowledge and flawed interpretations. But it is not a private interpretation. Common sense therefore, is helpful as an arbiter over all the forensic and experimental evidence because it is based on years of experience shared by every one. Whatever gives the expert witness the right to speak about complicated scientific evidence, also gives every man the right to speak about common everyday occurrences.

Hearsay Evidence
In the case of creation versus evolution, the Bible is the hearsay evidence and the documentary evidence, but both sides will not agree that it is reliable.
Bible

Hearsay Evidence. A potential eyewitness who cannot be cross-examined. Hearsay evidence consists of statements made out of court by someone who is not present to testify under oath. The problem with this type of witness is that people can lie or misinterpret the meaning of a message.
For example, in considering ancient writings or descriptions about a topic - one cannot rule out the fact that these could be scientific observations, mythology, novels, stories for entertainment or religion, or if the account of the fact was influenced by their popular culture or beliefs. In addition, the interpretation of the artifacts may be influenced by our desires, our culture and our beliefs.
Anecdotal. A type of hearsay evidence. These are facts you can guess by examining stories passed down from various people. These may not be eyewitness accounts. However, this does not tell you if the stories are based in reality or if it was crafted for entertainment or other purposes. Sometimes a true event is interpreted based on the people's religious beliefs or fears or knowledge of the world around them. These conclusions will often enter the stories as facts, but they are only the people's interpretation of the event. However, you can get certain information.

Anecdotal Evidence
We have anecdotal information in the form of similar flood stories. However, these do not prove that the flood occurred. They might prove that the stories originated from a common source, but we cannot tell if it was just a folk tale. The anecdotal creation stories are even more diverse and prove nothing.
Flood stories, folk tales, legends, myths

- Similarities in Stories from widely separated cultures could suggest that the story originated from one source to which they both had contact sometime in the past. This does not mean that the stories were real events. It only means that they may have one common origin and this fact has value.
- Scientific Observations that do not change perceptibly over the centuries, could give you a relative measurement of the amount of change or the cycle of the phenomena. For example, comets and other astronomical events.

Testimonial Evidence. This is anecdotal evidence by an eyewitness or a recommendation because of personal experience. Currently most celebrity testimonials are not based on any experience but based on the reputation or public appeal of the presenter.
Evidence By Analogy. In every type of evidence we reach a conclusion by comparing an identifying set of characteristics to a known set of standards which are unique to the item either as a group or alone. DNA identification is done in this manner. In evaluating evidence by analogy we compare the features and properties of an unknown to a known in order to quantify the number or percentage of similarities.
When the values compared are mathematical we classify it as direct, real or physical evidence. When the values compared are more subjective like mood, feelings, function and purpose we tend to require more points of similarity to assign some significance. When a new species of animal is found, it is a process of analogy that we use to narrow its identify. Does it have wings, feet, number of legs, hair, roots, backbone and color. What is its behavior, habitat and life cycle?
Mostly by mathematical evidence and then by characteristics we can prove that the Periodic Table and Particle physics are modeled by the Mishkan design in the Bible.
Rebuttal Evidence. This is not a separate type of evidence. This is evidence used to contradict other evidence. Generally, the rebuttal evidence should be of similar or higher reliability than the evidence disputed. Therefore, anecdotal evidence should not be used to rebut experimental evidence.

> There is Evidence of God. "And when we examine the respective evidences still more closely ... we shall find that there are almost insuperable difficulties with the evolutionary explanation of each of the different evidences. They can all be understood much better in terms of special creation than in terms of evolution." Henry Morris (Creationist). 'Evolution and the Modern Christian' page 19

Weighing The Evidence
Therefore, using a simple system based on the scientific method we can devise a plan for evaluating the importance of each type of evidence we see.
To evaluate the evidence we need to look at a minimum of two different dimensions.

Quality Points
Letter Grade | Numerical Grade | Meaning
--- | --- | ---
A | 4 | Excellent
B | 3 | Good
C | 2 | Fair
D | 1 | Poor
F | 0 | Fail

1. Type Of Evidence. We can evaluate the type of evidence based on agreement about their relative importance. This is called the "weight". Even with such a standard, opposing groups might differ as to how important one type of evidence is over the other. Therefore, in this evaluation, I have used what I believe scientists would agree with. As I creationist I am not afraid of science because it is based on the laws that God invented.
2. Quality Of The Supporting Data.
   To give a perspective on quality we will use the old ABC grading method. But any determination is based on personal judgment.

To combine both evaluations into a single score, we will use the following formula:

> Total Score = Type of evidence X Numerical quality points

Problems.

1. Double Dipping. Some discoveries fit more than one category of evidence. You could potentially drive up the score by placing them in every category. Therefore, we will only take one score from the highest category, but mention them where they apply.
2. Negative Evidence. We have not factored in the effect of contradictory claims.

Conclusion. But what remains in nature is circumstantial evidence and the forensic information we can gather from the evidence left behind. We can conduct experiments to try to mimic a mechanism that caused the event but we cannot be certain that the environment is correct. We can only say that if the experiments worked, then this is only one way it COULD have worked. Finally, taking all the evidence we can impartially gather through science, we are left with statistical methods and common sense to interpret the data so that we can become "experts".

Evidence | Weight | Comment
--- | --- | ---
Subjective evidence based on Personal Evaluation
Eyewitness to Past Events | 0 | Ideally this should have been 10, but because there is no mutually accepted eyewitness and because Bible prophecy hints at a breaking into history of the lying spirits so that you can no longer trust what you see, I give no credence to eyewitness evidence
Documentary | 0 | Bible
Anecdotal | 1 | Scientific stories and observations from the past
Hearsay | 3 | I will take only ancient scientific observations. No prophets.
Common Sense | 5 | Observations based on the subjective evaluation of reasonable, ordinary people.
Circumstantial | 6 | Often based on the subjective evaluation of experts
Expert | 6 | Subjective and scientific evaluation of trained or experienced people.
Objective evidence based on scientific evaluation
Statistical | 9 | Conclusions based on mathematical evidence and possibilities.
Experimental | 9 | Observable laboratory experiments or natural event
Forensic | 10 | Conclusions based on known, reliable scientific experiments and processes applied to discoveries of ancient artifacts.
Eyewitness to Current Events | 10 | Conclusions based on observed processes in nature by scientists.

Creation - The Biblical Account (Water, Water Everywhere!)
Creation is the belief that a supernatural being, God, created the universe and everything in it in six real days. True creationism is based entirely, on the truth of the story as written in the Bible. Creationists believe creation is the only explanation of the perfect conditions we are situated in and that science (man's observations of the physical world) and the Bible agree 100%. There are some theories which attempt to reconcile creation with evolution, but these either ignore or twist what the Bible says. So, when we talk about creation in this discussion, we affirm that we believe the Genesis account to be 100% factual.

The story of creation is found in Genesis 1 and 2. Genesis 2 also gives more detail about the sixth day of creation. The creation began at sunset on Saturday.

| Genesis 1 - The Physical Universe (Water Not Gas!) Day 1 - Sunday (Electromagnetism, Physics, Chemistry)
The Second Day of Creation
Separating the Waters
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. Day 2 - Monday ( Space ) Then God said, "Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters." God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so. God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day. Day 3 - Tuesday ( Geology and Botany ) Then God said, "Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear"; and it was so. God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good. Then God said, "Let the earth sprout vegetation: plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them"; and it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. There was evening and there was morning, a third day. Day 4 - Wednesday ( Astronomy ) Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. Sun. God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, Moon. and the lesser light to govern the night; Stars. He made the stars also. God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. There was evening and there was morning, a fourth day. Day 5 - Thursday ( Biology Of Oceans And Birds ) Then God said, "Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens." God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good. God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." There was evening and there was morning, a fifth day. Day 6 - Friday ( Biology Of Land Animals And Humans ) Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so. God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them; and God said to them, " Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth." Then God said, "See, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food"; and it was so. God saw all that He had made, and see, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. Genesis 2 - The Spiritual Universe Day 7 - Saturday ( Social, Psychological And Spiritual Foundations ) Genesis 2 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made. This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made earth and heaven.

God also made time. One the first day, He established the cycle of night and day. On the fourth day, He made the year. On the seventh day, He made the week.

Changes
Less than 130 years after the creation, God was forced to separate Himself from direct contact with His creation. Adam and Eve sinned. God immediately instituted some changes after sin. Most were environmental, but one seemed to be a structural change in one specie.

- Species Change? Then the Lord God said to the serpent, "because you have done this cursed are you more than all cattle, and more than every beast of the field. On your belly you will go, and dust you will eat all the days of your life. (Genesis 3: 14)
  For the first and only time we have a possible reference to structural change in one species that occurred quickly. The conclusion is that the snake could walk or fly and could only crawl after sin because of an act of God. It used to be classified as one of the "cattle", now it is a creeping and crawling creature.
  Here is a reference to a creature that might be an extinct species, or a lizard deformed by a birth defect or a two legged reptile such as a salamander.

  > A Snake With Legs (Walking Snake). In 2006, the fossil remains of a primitive snake were discovered in Argentina. It shows a three feet long (92 cm) crawling creature with a sacrum and two legs which they claimed lived 90 million years ago.
  > There is also a reference to a fossilized snake with hind legs found in a stone quarry in Israel.

- Spiritual Change. God withdrew from regular, direct physical contact with humans.
- Biological Change. Child birth became more painful (Genesis 3: 16).
- Social Change. Eve must now submit to the rule of her husband (Genesis 3: 16).
  The existance of certain behaviors such as carnivores, parents eating their young, sexual cannibalism and behaviors that cause death show that the effect of sin caused a biological and social change. To the extent that any of these behaviors are genetic, it shows that sin damaged the DNA and salvation involves a repair of the DNA.
- Environmental Change. Thorns and other non-beneficial plants more easily replaced the good plants (Genesis 3: 17).
- Climate Change. It did not rain before the flood but it rained after the flood.
- Diet Change. Humans and animals ate carnivorous diets after the flood, possibly after sin.

Most of these changes can account for the climatic, geological and genetic catastrophe that we witness today.

Flood - The Biblical Account. (Water, Water Everywhere!)
The flood is included in these discussions, because it is crucial to the creationist view. It explains the catastrophic observations we see in geology. The entire story of the Flood can be found in Genesis 6 through 8. Genesis 2:5-6 tells of the eco-system before the flood.

No Rain
There was no rain before the flood according to Genesis 2: 5. By faith, Noah, being warned by God about things not yet seen, prepared an ark for the salvation of his family. (Hebrews 11: 7)
Genesis 2 -The EcoSystem Before The Flood No Rain. Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the LORD God had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground. But a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground. Genesis 7- The Flood Water From Below And Above For 40 Days A Meteor Impact or A Verneshot on Lag B'Omer? In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened. Pressurized Water from Beneath the Earth. The rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights. On the very same day Noah and Shem and Ham and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife and the three wives of his sons with them, entered the ark, they and every beast after its kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth after its kind, and every bird after its kind, all sorts of birds. So they went into the ark to Noah, by twos of all flesh in which was the breath of life. Those that entered, male and female of all flesh, entered as God had commanded him; and the LORD closed it behind him. Global Tsunamis. Then the flood came upon the earth for forty days, and the water increased and lifted up the ark, so that it rose above the earth. The water prevailed and increased greatly upon the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. The water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains everywhere under the heavens were covered. The water prevailed fifteen cubits higher, and the mountains were covered. All flesh that moved on the earth perished, birds and cattle and beasts and every swarming thing that swarms upon the earth, and all mankind; of all that was on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died. Thus He blotted out every living thing that was upon the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky, and they were blotted out from the earth; and only Noah was left, together with those that were with him in the ark. Submerged for 150 days. The water prevailed upon the earth one hundred and fifty days.
Earth | Preach | Door Closed | Wait |  | Tsunami | Submerged | Ararat |  |  |  |  | Wait | Exit
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
1536 Years | 120 Years | 7 Days | Flood | 150 Days (Water) | 150 Days (Wind) | 70 Days
2-10 | 2-17 | 40 Dys | 3-27 | 110 Dys | 7-17 | 10-1 | 40 days | 21 Dys | 12-1 | 12-17 | 1-1 | 2-27
1656 Years | 1 Year (370 Days)
Genesis 8: Wind For 150 Days But God remembered Noah and all the beasts and all the cattle that were with him in the ark; and God caused a wind to pass over the earth, and the water subsided. Also the fountains of the deep and the floodgates of the sky were closed, and the rain from the sky was restrained; and the water receded steadily from the earth, and at the end of one hundred and fifty days the water decreased. During the Feast of Tabernacles. In the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat. The water decreased steadily until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains became visible. Then it came about at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made; and he sent out a raven, and it flew here and there until the water was dried up from the earth. Then he sent out a dove from him, to see if the water was abated from the face of the land; but the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, so she returned to him into the ark, for the water was on the surface of all the earth. Then he put out his hand and took her, and brought her into the ark to himself. So he waited yet another seven days; and again he sent out the dove from the ark. The dove came to him toward evening, and look, in her beak was a freshly picked olive leaf. So Noah knew that the water was abated from the earth. Then he waited yet another seven days, and sent out the dove; but she did not return to him again. New Year's Day. Now it came about in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, on the first of the month, the water was dried up from the earth. Then Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and look, the surface of the ground was dried up. Conditions Lasted For Approximately 370 Days In the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry. Then God spoke to Noah, saying, "Go out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and your sons' wives with you".

Creation Theories
Several theories have been proposed that are related to either the creation or the flood stories. Some of these theories were proposed to describe the biblical event while others were proposed in order to reconcile theology with science.

Short Day Theory
This theory say that the days of creation were actual twenty four hour periods. It is supported by the Bible which does not speak of thousand year periods of creation. This article is written in support of the short day theory. So whenever I speak about creation I am not talking about the other hybrid models.

Canopy of Water | Rain
--- | ---
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Sabbath | ... | Sin | Flood
Unknown Source of Light | Light from the Sun, Moon and Stars
Light and Time (Day) | Sky | Sea | Land |  |  |  |  |  |  | Rest | ... | Death
Created Containers | Filled Containers | Creation Completed | Rebellion

Bible Arguments
If you claim to believe in God but believe in anything less than creation in six literal days then you have to disbelieve the bible stories of our origin as symbolic fables. And you have to question what other fairy tales are in the blessed Book? » Death. If evolution and death existed before Adam sinned then the Genesis story is a lie. Death did not come because Adam and Eve sinned but because it is part of God's trial and error evolutionary process. » Order of Creation. The sun, moon and stars were created after vegetation. Photosynthesis would not have occurred as plants die during millions of years of darkness. » Sabbath. It existed at creation and was established there. Every time we remember this day in honor of creation we are reminded that the creation day was really 24 hours long. If the creation has rested for one symbolic age that would not be prudent. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant, your cattle or your visitor who stays with you. For in six days the Lord made the Heavens and the Earth and the Sea and all that is in them and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the seventh day and made it holy. (Exodus 20: 8-11).

» The Canopy Theory. It says that before the Genesis flood the air above the earth was filled with a humid, watery vapor that rose from the ground and watered the earth in vapor form (Genesis 2:6). This made the climate very mild and suitable for many types of animals. After the flood, rain began to regularly fall on the earth and the climate changed to one with more extremes. This might have helped to cause the extinction of some species This theory does not contradict the Bible, nor do we need it to support any creationist argument.

Long Day Theory
This "day" is an unknown length (millions of years old). They believe that these "days" were "ages" and were symbolic. Where do they get their support? 2 Peter 3: 8 says "One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." However, does the passage talk about creation? No. It is simply talking about the timelessness of God. Moreover, if that were the case, vegetation might have died (if the ambient light was not strong enough) because God created the sun moon and stars after vegetation. Proponents of this theory must also reject the order of creation as presented by God.
In any case, if we use prophetic time in which a day is a year then creation lasted for seven years. If we use Peter then creation lasted 7000 years. But if he was talking about the light part of the day not just the 24 hour period, then each day was 2000 years and creation week was 14,000 years. None of these is enough time to support evolution.

The Gap Theory
This is a variation of the Long Day Theory, it says that there was a long period of time between Genesis 1:1 (In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.) and Genesis 1:2 (Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.) What might have happened during that gap of time was the destruction of the "first creation" during the fall of Satan (as described in Isaiah 14:12 - 17). That time could have been an infinite amount of time. And, then, after the gap, of course, God resumed his creation work as described in the rest of Genesis 1. None of this is in the Bible. It does not talk about a creation that was destroyed before ours. And nothing suggests a gap of time between the two verses.

There are many responses among the Christian community in reconciling Creation and evolution.

1. Belief. Genesis is fact. There is not any evidence to support evolution and we do not know enough. Besides, if this account is not factual, what else is God lying about?
2. Disbelief. Genesis is a story that does not tell any scientific facts.
3. Theistic Evolution. God used evolution to create everything. According to the pope God gave a soul to man (the ape). Some use the Long Day Theory to explain creation.

   The Origin of The Day
   The bible teaches that the concept of the day was not established at creation with the revolution of the earth with respect to the sun on the fourth day. Rather, they were created to mimic a concept that already existed.

   » Strange Light. One variation of this theory is that the first three days were long periods of time. The period we experience as day and night only occurred after the fourth day when God created the sun and the moon. Proponents of this theory ignore that fact that what God was actually teaching is that there was a source of light before the sun that marked the light and dark cycles of the day. The sun and the moon only worked with this preexisting law and would be used when sin entered to mark these times for a quarantined world. God designed the system to sustain us after we sinned. The evidence is that after sin is destroyed the sun and moon are no longer used to mark the day. And after sin, the creation suddenly lost a covering of light that hid their nakedness. God Himself is the source of this light.
   » Immeasurable Time Before Sin And 6000 Years After Sin.
   According to this latest theory Adam and the creatures enjoyed eternal life for unknown billions or trillions of years before sin. He did not have children but the other animals did. When sin began and death was instituted then the counting of years began because such counting was meaningless for creatures with eternal life.
   Adam and Eve had Seth when he was 130 years old. They had two other sons before this and after sin began. So sin began at least 130 years after the creation. They have to make up the story that the other animals had children to account for fossil findings that are claimed to be billions of years old. Then they have to make up the theory that Adam and Eve did not have children before sin because it is a huge theological problem if these people were subject to death and they did not sin. Still unexplained is the million year old human fossils.
   » Progressive Creation. God intervened at various points in the process of evolution. As proposed by Dr. Hugh Ross it states:
   - The "Big Bang" origin of the universe occurred 16 billion years ago; death, bloodshed, and disease existed before Adam and Eve.
   - The days of Creation were long periods.
   - Noah's Flood was a local event.
   - Sin has only a regionally limited effect on the world.
   - Creatures that behaved much like humans, and painted on cave walls, existed before Adam and Eve, but did not have a spirit and thus had no salvation.
     » Pre-Adamic Age. Some believe that there was a previous creation in which Satan was in charge of earth before the "Adamic Age". Then Satan was thrown out with one third of the angels and God restarted with Adam. Now we believe that this expulsion of Satan was after Adam, not in any preexistance of the earth.
   - The record of nature is just as perfect as the Word of God. (This assumes that you know enough information to interpret the record of nature).
   - Over millions of years, God created new species as others kept going extinct.
   None of this hogwash is in the Bible and some of this actually contradicts the word of God.
   » Psalm 104 (The Purpose For The Creation). Proponents go on to say that other accounts of creation prove their theories, particularly Psalm 104. This Psalm is written in the approximate order of the creation and it shows that the wisdom of the original creation provided for a time when sin would exist and God would have to withdraw His direct contact.
   The original creation provides for the needs of the fallen earth and for each day God shows the purpose for which they were made, not that He made everything that day.
   The Wisdom of God. O Lord, how many are Your works! In wisdom You have made them all; the earth is full of Your possessions. (Psalm 104: 24)
   - Day 2 (Rain Waters). They claim that it proves that there was rain, but it shows the separation of the waters at the sound of God. God creates the rivers and streams to provide drink for His creation.
     Water For The Thirsty. They gave drink to every beast of the field; the wild donkeys quench their thirst. (Psalm 104: 11)
   - Day 3 (Mountains and Goats). On this day God made the earth and the trees.
     A Mountain Refuge. The high mountains are for the wild goats; the cliffs are a refuge for the shephanim. (Psalm 104: 18)
     This Psalm says that He made the mountain for the goats, not that both were created the same day or that the creation of goats preceded day four.
   - Day 4 (Sun, Moon and Stars Revealed). They claim that these were revealed in this period after a thick canopy was removed, not that they were made on this day.
   - Day 4-5 (Predators). On this day God created the sun and moon to mark time that was already being marked since the first day. The creation of the sun and the appearance of day and night since the beginning proves that God made the creation with systems that were needed during the fall. At the end there will be no night, so day and night were created to accommodate behaviors such as sleep, rest and predatory acts.
     Predators. The young lions roar after their prey and seek their food from God. When the sun rises they withdraw and lie down in their dens.
     Rest. Man goes forth to his work and to his labor until evening. (Psalm 104: 21-23)
     The wisdom is that man is asleep and secure while the predators are active.
   None of the other creation accounts contradict the Genesis account. You just have to understand what else the account is trying to teach.

Creation Theory: Periodic Creation Days. We can now show that in the process of creation, each period of the Periodic Table corresponds to each day of creation and the elements which were made on each day. The elements were made by the hydrogen fusion nuclear reaction which produces light as it generates each element up to nickel in the fourth period. During the fourth period, or fourth day, the light producing reactions stop and the sun amd moon were created to produce light since that day.

The Creation Flood Model
Creationists have proposed a model for the present conditions of the earth that is based on creation and the devastating effects of the flood. The following short description is mostly taken from a special edition of the Insight magazine (1990 Volume 21. Number 14).
The Hydroplate theory of Dr. Walt Brown is a more comprehensive explanation for this observation.

| Earth Before The Flood : The earth before the flood was probably like it is today - full of life. There probably were no great mountains over 9000 feet (2820 m) or great oceans, but underground rivers and lakes called aquifers, together with a mist supplied the earth with needed water in a world where rain was unknown. The absence of great bodies of surface water or oceans would guarantee that huge thunderclouds could not form. There was no rain.
Earth Before The Flood
| The Flood Begins: The floating plates of rock that made up the land areas began to sink, compressing the aquifers and causing great earthquakes. This could have been precipitated by huge asteroids. Huge volcanoes erupted violently (verneshots). Great walls of water rushed in from the sea. Thundering fountains of water and huge rocks burst from deep underground. Huge craters around the world, tectonic plates and the tilted earth.
Water Bursts From The Earth
| The Duration: While the flood continued, great currents dumped layer after layer of mud over the submerged land. Different types of sediments were laid down one on top of the other in rapid sequence. Turbidity currents observed in 1929.
Layers of Sediment
| The Flood Ends: As the land areas slowly became visible, the receding waters scoured the land. Newly formed soft earth was shaped and reshaped by the rushing currents. Some water was trapped in great inland seas. It eventually broke through small land barriers and formed magnificent canyons through erosion.
Currents Reshape Mud
| What We Observe: The earth is crushed in on one side and has the motions of a wobble. Like the wobble of a spinning toy as it is about to stop rotating. The theory is that a great meteorite probably hit the earth, helping to break the great 'fountains of the deep'. The effect was so great, that it tilted the earth slightly on its axis and caused this wobble which is still measurable today.
The Earth Today
The Aftermath: Erosion continues to wear away at rock layers, exposing more evidence of the greatest catastrophe the world has ever known. Circumstantial Evidence. Trees trapped standing straight up in between layers of rocks of different ages. Human remains caught in the deepest layers of rock below animals that became extinct before humans. Fish on top of mountains. This is what we observe.

Pangea (Pangaea)
The geography of Pangea looks similar to the description of the New Jerusalem when the orientation is adjusted for the current tilt of the earth. Mountains. Mountain ranges in the north and south. Sea. Sea in the east and west. Eden. The central location of the Garden of Eden in Iraq at the mouth of the bay in Pangea.
New Jerusalem
How did the Bible describe a land that has the same physical features as Pangea?

Catastrophism
Catastrophism attempts to describe our geography on the basis of a global flood. It is the belief that many geological features were a result of catastrophic formation rather than slow formation over millions of years (Uniformitarian).

The Supercontinent: Pangea
There is one area in which we agree with evolutionists. At one time the earth was one large continent. In 1912 Alfred Wegner proposed this theory and he named this land Pangea ("all the earth"). He became the father of the Continental Drift Theory. Pangea broke apart into Laurasia in the north and Gondwana in the south. They slowly drifted apart into the land formations we see today at the rate of 2.5 cm (1 inch) per year. They also claim that there was an earlier formation named Rodinia, which broke up 750 million years ago.
Creationists also believe there was one land mass 6000 years ago which broke up by a combination of continental submersion and continental drift. But the continental drift was rapid or the current topography could simply be a result of submerged continents.
Several permanent conditions occurred as a result of the catastrophic break up.

- Rain. Our oceans are responsible for the weather system and cloud formation. Therefore a large land mass covering the earth would not allow rain to form. The bible states that there was no rain.
- The Tilt of the Earth. The earth was tilted after the flood, so the true north is tilted to the east.
- Layers of Mud. The layers of mud that resulted should be mixed with creatures of many species.

The Hydroplate Theory
Dr. Walt Brown proposed that the continents of Europe, Africa and Asia were once closer together fitting at the base of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge but not quite like the model of Edward Bullard. The original Jig Saw model of the continents actually removed most of Mexico and central America, shrunk Africa by 40% and rotated the continents to obtain this fit.

Before Flood | - | After Flood |
Lake | Earth | - | Earth | Ocean | Earth | - | - | - | -
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Fresh Water Aquifer | Basalt | - | Plants
Basalt Rock |  | Oil | -
Granite Rock Crust | Granite Rock Crust
Mid-Atlantic Ridge | Rupture
Salt water "Deep" | Lava
Basalt Rock
Mantle
Core

According to the theory, above the mantle, ten miles (16 Km) under the surface was a layer of salt water 0.625 miles (1 Km) thick above basalt rock and below a granite crust. It contained 50% of the ocean.
Increasing pressure in the subterranean water ruptured the granite crust for 46,000 miles (73,600 km) in the Atlantic. After the flood, the continents slid east and west, away from the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Vegetation drifted on the flood waters and were rapidly buried. The buried layers of plants were heated and compressed to create coal and oil.
Experimental Evidence (Thermal Depolymerization). This process shows that vegetation under moderate pressure (600 pounds) and temperature (500ºF) produces oil from organic material in hours when water is used to convey the heat. These are the conditions after the flood. So the great coal beds and oil fields could have been created after the flood in a short time.
Eyewitness Evidence. Unexpectedly, a salt water layer was found at a 2.1 mile (3.4 km) borehole in Oberpfalz, Germany. Fossils were found at 4.2 miles (6.7 Km).

The Theory Of Evolution
Evolution is the theory that life evolved from nothing through a series of continuous process of natural selection and mutations over billions of years. Mutation supplies the variations and changes, but natural selection through survival of the fittest decides which variations will survive and breed.
Evolution proposes various theories and mechanisms from the different branches of science to explain the processes within those systems. Theories supporting evolution are proposed in order to explain how a process is occurring or how an event was started.
These processes require a significant amount of time to increase the possibility that they might occur. According to the theory, everything started with a big bang and light appeared.
The elements were created from nothing!
Hydrogen formed and from this several other complex gases formed. These grouped together to create the planets.
Earth was created and flooded by the sea. Eventually sea life and plants appeared, then insects and birds, finally animals and man. Man evolved from bacteria, worms, fish, frogs, reptiles, mice, monkeys, apes and chimpanzees.

These theories arose in the age of enlightenment in the wake of the French Revolution as people everywhere began to abandon the oppression of religion while charting a new course where they were masters of their own destiny. The period was one of immorality, new scientific discoveries, the conquest of new nations and peoples as empire building relied on the slave trade. While the religious found biblical reasons to enslave others, politicians and law makers found economic reasons to justify slavery, and scientists found logical reason to separate people into different classes. This was the environment into which the pioneers of evolution lived. If science could prove that we evolved without the assistance of God, then there are no moral absolutes. Morality evolves with our own needs. If science could prove that one race was superior to another, then we would have proved the natural order ordained by God or nature and we could enforce this natural order without guilt.
Charles Darwin's book "The Origin of the Species" was released in 1859 just prior to the Civil War. It was originally titled "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life"?" In it he refered to Africans as savages that would become extinct. Although he was a "product of his times" scientific discovery is supposed to be above personal opinions.

> A Social Order in Search of Justification. Racism, as we would characterize it today, was explicit in the writings of virtually all the major anthropologists of the first century, simply because it was the generally accepted view." Roger Lewin (Evolutionist). 'Bones of Contention' page 307

> A Social Order in Search of A Theory. We must note then that when Darwin wrote his paper, Origin of Species, he had no skulls, his contemporaries were filled with racism as they tried to find the less than humans, and his Co-founder, Wallace, decided against the theory. Roger Lewin (Evolutionist). 'In the Age of Mankind'

The Big Splash?
Physicists from the Brookhaven National Laboratory released the results of a three year experiment in April 2005. The experiment that was supposed to demonstrate that a gas was formed at the big bang produced a liquid! So what does that do to the theory of expanding gases rushing out into space? Slows it down quite a bit! The experiment disproved the big bang hypothesis! They should have read the Bible. The Bible describes the abyss as being covered with liquid!

Summary Of The Major Theories
There are many theories to explain many mechanisms of evolution. For this discussion we will only focus on the theories which propose the origin of matter in the universe and the evolution of life.

- The Big Bang Theory. It states that everything once exploded out of nothing. The nothingness gathered itself into one place and got so thick and dense that it exploded and formed gas, hydrogen and helium, which, through later explosions, changed into the heavier elements.
  Something from Nothing! That is illogical. Even creation says that what we see came from things that were invisible. Things that got together because of the sound of the voice of God. Electromagnetic waves! But to be fair, creation cannot explain the origin of God either because this goes outside the realm of what we know in our universe.
  Experiments. Scientists are on the verge of crashing two protons travelling in opposite direction at the speed of light to demonstrate what happened seconds after the big bang. The experiment is to be done at a 17 mile long (27.52 km) particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland. Publicized as proof of evolution at its inauguration on 10 September 2008, it is merely a basic science experiment. It is no more proof of the big bang than making water in the lab from hydrogen and oxygen is proof of how water evolved.
  - Inflationary Universe Theory (1984). The universe began as a single infinitesimal particle in a "cold big whoosh" stage. When it was 5 inches wide (12.5 cm) it got hot and blew up in a "hot big bang" stage.
  - Oscillating Universe Theory. When the universe runs down, all matter will collect in a tiny point and another Big Bang will restart it again. This time the Big Bang will be out of something.
  - Steady State Universe Theory (1948). New matter is constantly appearing out of nothing in the space between galaxies.
  » Theories Of The Origin Of The Solar System
  - Nebular Hypothesis (Planetesimal Theory). Circulating gas contracts and forms the planets and the sun.
    » Satanic Origin. Emanuel Swedenborg was attracted to the occult after the death of his father, leading him to try to communicate with the dead. Spirit beings in seance confirmed his theory of origins of the stars and planets. as part of a series of revelations undermining the creation account, the Torah, Jesus Christ and Paul. The origin of this theory is interesting, showing the roots of evolution.
  - Fission Theory. The sun burst and sent the planets and the moon flying out.
  - Capture Theory. The planets and moon were wandering around and were captured by the gravity of the sun.
  - Accretion Theory. Small chunks of material stuck together forming planets and moon.
  - Planetary Collision. The moon was created when the earth collided with another planet.
  - Stellar Collision Theory. Two stars collided and produced our planets and moons.
  - Gas Cloud Theory. The sun's gravity pulls gas clouds from outer space and they form planets and moons and begin circling each other.
  The major problem with these theories is that the objects formed are not from the same material and why they began rotating around each other if the explosion sent them flying apart from each other in several directions.
- The Theories And Mechanisms Of Biological Evolution
  Spontaneous Generation. After observing magots and worms growing on dead tissue scientists postulated that living things grew out of dead tissue. That theory prevailed until the science of microbiology and the "germ theory" began to take hold with the work of Louis Pasteur in 1862.
  Now, the theory of evolution proposes several mechanisms by which the process of biological evolution is occurring and how life began on earth.
  1. The Basic Theory Of Evolution (Lamarckism). 1801 Proposed by Jean Baptiste Lamarck based on three concepts.
     - Theory of Need. If an organism needs an organ, evolution will eventually provide one.
     - Theory of Use and Disuse. If an organ is used by an organism, it will continue to live by evolution, but if an organ is not used by an organism, it will stop evolving.
     - Theory of Inheritance by Acquired Characteristics. If an organ is needed by a living organism, it will continue to survive in the offspring.

       Theory or Hypothesis?
       If the basic theory has not been proven, and contradicts modern observation, why have scientists declared that evolution is a theory and not an hypothesis? Some have even declared it a law. If it is a law, results like the Brookhaven experiment would not have happened.

     No Eyewitnesses. None of these theories have been proved by reproducible experiments or observation of generations of natural offsprings or what is known about the mechanisms of genetics and inheritance. They have simply been proposed by observing what exists, namely we have organs that work together.
     No evolutionist has ever seen a new organ evolving or seen an old one devolving. Neither has any evolutionist sprouted retractable wings because he thought it would be a cool thing to have. We can conceive of and design airplanes because we are intelligent, but we cannot tell our bodies to grow wings.
  2. Darwinism. 1859. Theories proposed by Charles Darwin.
     - Natural Selection. Accidental changes that produce improvements.
     - Survival of the Fittest. Only the strong will survive.
     - Mutations. Changes in the genes produce improvements one by one causing natural selection.
  3. Modern Theories. Faced with the fact that slow mutation over millions of years cannot produce new species, scientists are proposing theories that involve instantaneous evolution.
     - Monster Mutations or Quantum Speciation. Proposed by Richard Goldschmidt. Many beneficial mutations occur at once. His theories were popularized by Gould.
     - Punctuated Equilibrium and Macroevolution. Proposed by Steven Gould and Miles Eldridge. After long periods of no change, millions of positive mutations suddenly occur in one egg, forming a new creature. The changes happened so fast that they did not leave any missing links in the fossil record.
       » The Sexes. Interestingly, one requirement added to this theory is that a male and female must be produced in this incredible accident.
       Biological Laws. Do you wonder why? This sounds like a very intelligent set of accidents. Two mutually beneficial monster mutations occurring at the same time every 50,000 years to produce a new pair of species (male and female) leaving no transitional forms.

       Macroevolution
       Macroevolution says that a new pair of creatures suddenly appeared leaving no transitional forms. mmm ... Now where have I heard that ridiculous notion before ...? Oh yes, it is called the theory of creation!

       How convenient? It is a theory that supports the problems with evolution, yet it is untestable because it does not leave any fossil evidence and it violates known biological laws. Common sense tells us that this is a fishy story. The ship is sinking and the drowning evolutionists are clutching at a straw man.
  4. Panspermia. Biological seeds of life were carried to the earth by a meteor or asteroid. This was proposed by the atheist Francis Crick. Realizing that the DNA double helix was too complex and too designed, he preferred to propose that an intellegent extraterrestrial in space ships brought life on earth.
- Microevolution. These are small changes that switch back and forth that show the variation within species. Most evolution assumes large scale physical changes called macroevolution which cause the formation of new species. The fact that microevolution switches shows that no changes at the DNA level have occurred. In fact the popular evidence given for microevolution is the change in beak size during periods of famine and plenty for Darwin's finches on the Galapagos Islands.
  - Variation. In fact nothing about these finches disprove that this was only a variation within the species like eyebrows in humans. Further observations showed that these 14 families of finches were actually cross breeding.
  - Grooming. Since the beak is made of the same material as finger nails, the birds simply grew longer beaks during times that they need to reach further for food because a change in behavior created the effect, not a genetic mutation. Perhaps their normal grooming habits are to sharpen and file down their beaks or the search for food during times of plenty naturally cause more wear and tear on their beaks. So less food means less friction and longer beaks (within reason). Otherwise it is part of the genetic instructions of the parent.
  - Malnutrition. Lack of proper food affects beak growth and strength.
  - Epigenes. Nuclear genes can be affected by "tags" which switch genes on and off. However, they are restored to factory settings (nuclear genes) after the stress is removed and may last up to three or four generations or longer.
  So there is no evolution occurring. There are only temporary changes in gross external physical characteristics caused by a change in the environment not by nuclear genes.
  - Color. Changes in color could be due to diet as in the pink flamingo.
  - Dead Tissue. Changes in dead skin such as nails, hair and feather can be due to changes in life style and activity.
  - Living Tissue. Changes in living tissue could be due to nutrition or aging or environmental factors such as chemicals or radiation.
  As long as the environment is changed, the body of each new offspring will respond to the change like their parents. But it is not due to traits passed on by changed DNA. This is why they appear to "switch back" when the cause is removed. Microevolution that does not switch back is due to cross breeding or the expression of recessive genes.

Genetics 101 - Not Microevolution. Genetic Inheritance Driven Migrations. There are other phenomena that people claim to be microevolution which really are not. As long as "evolution" means a genetic change through a modification of the biological material in response to stimulus from the environment, then there is no such thing. What really happens is the inherited characteristics make it possible for one variation of a species to thrive while others die out in an extreme environment that accentuates their differences. Eventually, the stronger line becomes the dominant forms of the genes, especially if the group is in isolation. I will take some common examples to explain why different versions of the species predominate in some areas.

- Bears. Why are polar bears white and their tropical cousins darker? It is not because the cold climate triggered a genetic response or because they "developed" white fur as a camouflage. Could it be that a mixed group of bears existed in the frigid climates but as the years went by the darker skin bears stood out like a sore thumb against the white snow and became the principal target of predators? Meanwhile, the population became more and more white, not because their genes were responding biologically to the environment by manufacturing a camouflage outfit but because they ALREADY had these genes. Therefore, predatory selection was already making the population a white majority. Eventually those with white fur genes became the dominant genetic population simply because the brown bears were not passing on their genes to the next generation as frequently because they were dying out at a faster rate. Within a few generations the brown genes were bred out.
- People. Why do whites generally live in cold climates and darker skin people live near the equator? Is it because the sun changed their genes? No. Actually, most of the earth's population lived in the moderate climates. It was only recently that migration led them north. This was migration triggered by wars and conquering empires, not from a genetic need to escape the sun or a genetically-induced capacity to tolerate the sun. Genetics could play a part in that lighter skin people found it easier to live in the colder climates because they were easily sun burned in the tropics. The sun did not select who lived in it and made it possible by triggering genetic alterations. Genes that people already had made it easier to live in one climate or another. If the sun got too hot year after year then you simply moved north out of the sun.
  Whites living in the tropics will simply get a permanent suntan, not modified genes. Blacks living in the north will be less sunburned but they will not get white. Their offspring can only get white by marrying into the white genes and producing lighter skin offspring. Eventually, when the original black population dies out, the mixed race generations will get lighter and lighter only if they are dispersed among the white population through interracial marriages. Otherwise only a pool of brown people remains which may occasionally produce a near white or almost black offspring even if they only intermarry among themselves.

The proposed theories demonstrate the problem with evolution - time. Because biological systems need to be formed with all their parts working, single step by step mutation would not have worked. New organs would have been of no use. This violates the theory of use and disuse.

The Theory of need has a lot of built in assumptions and immense foresight. To work, this implies great intelligence and planning that is beyond the capability of a ball of slime in a mud pool.
How could that single celled creature envision an eye and plan one and build one and tell the offspring to pass it on? We have no known mechanism by which superficial changes are passed on to our children. We also have evidence that changes imposed at the gene level do not last beyond the second generation. Physical changes can suppress the expression of the genes until the pressure is removed. Changes at the physical level are not transmitted to the genes. If I liposuction and botox myself to death, my children will still have my fat genes.

Taxonomy Classification

Biblical Classification
"Enmity" (Hormonal Changes?) Fear, Aggression | Thorns, Thistles
--- | ---
Genetic Damage and Changes
Man | Clean | Unclean | Clean | Unclean | Clean | - | Fruit | Pods | Herbs
Split Hoof | Cud | Paws | Crawls | Walks | - | Jumps | - | Prey | Shell | Smooth | Scales | Seed
4 Legs | Many Legs | 4 Legs | 2 Legs | No Fins | Fins | Plants
Cattle | Beasts | Creeping | Insects | Birds | Fish | Green Plants
Animals | Plants
Land | Air | Water | Land
Day 6 | Day 5 | Day 3
Need Light and Air and Water

This is the classification of species based on evolution of ancestors. There are several taxonomy systems in evolution and none in creation because each species did not evolve from an ancestor.
However, the Bible does classify living things according to their purpose and by day of creation.
After sin, certain genes were expressed or damaged, pointing to a mutation of the endocrine system in the parents and their unborn eggs and sperm. Women's child bearing changed, both lost a covering of light when they realized that they were naked and the snake lost its legs. Thorns and thistles came in plants and "enmity" in animals were expressed in the creation. This enmity may be aggressive behavior. Sharper teeth and claws in the animal kingdom were like thorns in the plant kingdom.
Experiments in breeding for tame foxes and domesticated dogs shows that hormonal changes are linked to genetic changes in hair color and teeth. These traits emerge in one generation with the right parents.

Five Kingdom Taxonomic Model
Kingdom | Phylum | Class | Order - Family - Genus - Species
--- | --- | --- | ---
Animal 1,326,239 | Vertebrate (Backbone) | Mammals [5,676+] | Warmblooded, female species possess mammary glands and bear young which are nourished by milk, hair, sweat glands, four chambered heart
Theria | Bear living young
Eutheria (Placental Mammals) | Babies are nourished before birth through a placenta which attaches the embryo to the uterus
Proboscidea. [3] Elephant
Perissodactyla (Odd-Toed Hoofed). [17] Horse, zebra, rhinoceras
Artiodactyla (Even-Toed Hoofed). [220] Deer, sheep, cattle, giraffe, okapi, camel, llama, pig
Primates. [414] Man, ape, monkey, lemur
Carnivora. [260] Cat, bear, dog
Lagomorpha. [80] Rabbit, hare
Dermopetera. Colugos [2] Flying lemur
Edentata. [29] Sloth, anteater, armadillo
Pholidota. [7] Pangolins, scaly ant eaters
Rodentia. [2,277] Beaver, mice, chipmunk, squirrel
Scandentia. [1] tree shrews, tupais, and dendrogales or tree squirrels
Insectivora. [375] Mole, hedgehog, shrew
Tubulidentata. [1] Aardvark
Hyrax. [7] Bush hyrax, tree hyrax, rock hyrax, dassies
Chiroptera. [1,100] Bat
Cetacea. [78] Dolphin, whale
Sirenia. [4] Manatee, dugong
Pinnipedia. [33] Seals, sea lions, walruses
Metatheria (Marsupials) | Marsupials or pouche mammals. Their young are born very immature and complete development in the mother's pouch
Marsupialia. [295] kangaroos, wallabies, wombats, opossums, dunnarts, bandicoots, cuscuses
Prototheria (Monotremes) | [5] Lay eggs. Echidnas and platypus
Reptiles [8950] | Cold-blooded, with dry-scaly skin, internal fertilization, lay eggs on land that has a leathery outer covering
Crocodilia | [23]. Crocodiles and Alligators
Squamata | [7390]. Lizards [4,470] and Snakes [2,920]
Chelonia | [300]. Turtles [295], Tortoises
Rhynchocephalia | Tuatara [2]. Species only found in New Zealand
Amphibians [6,894] | Animals with smooth, moist skin which aids in respiration during the adult stage of their life.
Anura | [6,090] Frogs and toads. 4 legs, no tail, strong hind legs used for jumping
Caudata | [615] Salamanders. No tail. Four or two short weak legs
Apoda | [189] Caecilians or Gymnophiona. They have no legs, resemble large earthworms
Aves (Birds) [10,000] | Warmblooded vertebrates that have wings and feathers
Carinates | Perching/Song Birds: Passeriformes [5,000] Columbiformes [300] Pigeons, doves Galliformes [250] Pheasants, turkey, grouse, quail, chicken Psittaciformes [330] Parrots Cuculiformes [126] Cuckoos, roadrunners, anis Apodiformes [400] Swifts, hummingbirds Coraciiformes [144] Kingfishers Piciformes [400] Woodpeckers, barbets Strigiformes [130] Barn owls, typical owls Caprimulgiformes [90] Goatsuckers (nightjar)
Water Birds: Gavliformes [250] Loons Charadriiformes [350] Plovers, oystercatchers, stilts/avocets, sandpipers/phalaropes, gulls/terns, auks Procellariiformes - Albatross, Shearwaters, Petrels Pelecaniformes - Tropical birds, boobies/gannets, pelicans, cormorants, anhingas, frigatebirds Ciconiformes - Herons/Bitterns, ibises, storks Gruiformes [190] Rails, limpkins, cranes Anseriformes [161] Waterfowl (ducks, geese, swan) Phoenicopteriformes [1] Flamingos Podicipediformes [20] Grebes
Birds of Prey: Falconiformes [290] vultures, ospreys, hawks, falcons
Ratites | Flightless birds [12]: Ostrich, emu, cassowary, rhea, kiwi
Fish | Fish are cold-blooded aquatic vertebrates with fins and gills. Osteichthyes (Bony Skeletal Fish) [21,000] Tuna, bass, salmon, and trout, Chondrichthyes (Cartilaginous-skeleton fish) [700] sharks and rays, Agnatha (Jawless Fish) [60] lampreys and hagfish
Invertebrate (No Backbone) | Molluscs [85,000] | Soft, fleshy body with a hard shell
Gastropods | [70,000] Univalves: snails, slugs, limpets and whelks
Bivalves | [20,000] Clams, mussels, scallops, oysters and shipworms
Cephalopods | [900] Squids and octopuses
Arthropods | Arthropods have a hard external shell called an exoskeleton made up of chitin
Crustaceans | [50,000] Crabs, lobsters, and barnacles
Arachnids | [100,000] 4 pairs of walking legs. Spiders [40,000], scorpions [5,051], mites and ticks [50,000], other [5,000]
Insects | [1,000,000+] 3 pairs of walking legs. Butterfly/moth [175,000], beetle [400,000], fly [150,000], wasps/bees/ants [130,000]
Chilopoda | [3000] Centipedes
Diplopoda | [10000] Millipedes
Echinoderm | [6000] Animals with external spines. Sand dollar, starfish, sea urchin, Portuguese-man-of-war, sea cucumber
Cnidaria | [9000]: Hydras [2700], jellyfish [200], box jelly [20], sea anemones-corals [6000]
Porifera | Sponges [10,000]
Worms [6000] | Platyhelmintes (flat worms), Nematoda (round worms), Annelida (segmented worms), Nemerffna (ribbon worms)
Plant 270,000 | Eukaryots | Multicellular | Makes nutrients by photosynthesis | Mosses, ferns, trees, woody and non-woody flowering plants
Fungi 100,000 | Multicellular filamentous | Absorbs nutrition | Fungus, molds, mushrooms, yeasts, mildews, smuts
Protista 250,000 | Single-celled | Makes nutrients by absorption, ingestion, photosynthesis | Protozoans and algae
Monera 10,000 | Prokaryots | Single-celled | Absorbs nutrition | Bacteria, blue-green algae, and spirochetes
Numbers listed are the total known species.

The classification system does affect creation or evolution, because it is based on similarities and common features and order of evolution. Creation generally agrees with the same order of appearance.

The Evolution Of Man And The Primates

MYA | Creature | Findings | Adam, I hear that the Troglodytes are swingers. They are certainly not our "kind"
--- | --- | --- | ---
0.10-0.012 | - | Homo Floresiensis | 7 skeletons
0.16 | - | Homo Sapiens idaltu | 3 craniums
0.15-? |  | Homo Sapiens sapiens | Modern man
0.25- |  | Homo Sapiens (Cro-Magnon) | Painting, flint tools, Europe
0.30-0.12 | - | Homo Rhodesiensis | Few
0.35-0.3 |  | Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis | ★ music, clothes, flint |
MYA | Taxonomy | Chimpanzee | Human | Human Features
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
1400 | Domain | Eukarya | "Good nuclei"
800 | Kingdom | Animalia | Cannot make food
500 | Phylum | Chordata | Elongated bilateral symmetry
Subphylum | Vertebrata | Internal skeleton
125 | Class | Mammalia | Conceive young inside reproductive tract and give milk
Subclass | Eutheria | Placenta
70 | Order | Primata | 5 fingers, 5 toes, thumb, collar bone
Suborder | Anthropoidea | Eyes in front
5 | Family | Hominidae (hominin) Humans, great apes | "S" shaped spine, no tail, 2 legs, walk
4.5 | Genus | Pan | Homo | Upright posture
.40 | Species | troglodytes | sapiens | Intelligence
0.4-0.195 |  | Homo Sapiens Archaic | Step before modern man
0.60-0.35 | - | Homo Heidelbergensis | ★ Jawbone
0.80 | - | Homo Cepranensis | One skull cap found in Italy
0.80-0.52 | - | Homo Antecessor | 2 sites
1.80-1.60 | - | Homo Ergaster | ★ many
1.90-1.25 | - | Homo Georgicus | "Dmanisi Man" of Russia
1.90 | - | Homo Rudolfensis | Skull 1470
2-0.40 |  | Homo Erectus | ★ Walked upright
2.20-1.60 |  | Homo Habilis | ★ used crude stone tools
3.00-1.20 | - | Paranthropus (Australopithecines) | 4.26-4.59 feet tall (130-140 cm). Tool makers
P. aethiopicus, A. africanus (3-2), A. robustus (2.2-1.6), A. boisei (2.1-1.1)
3.00-1.60 |  | Australopithecus (Australopithecines) | Was man's oldest ancestor. All the early apes were the size of a chimpanzee
4.20-2.70 | A. anamensis (4.2-3.9), A. afarensis (Lucy) (4.4-2.7)
3.50-3.20 | - | Kenyathropus platyops | Hominini | Partial cranium. Distorted skeleton, features not clear
4.4 | - | Ardipithecus ramidus | 4 feet, 110 lbs. Walks upright. Earliest ancestor of humans
5.80-5.20 | - | Ardipithecus kadabba | Teeth, skeleton fragments
6.10-5.80 | - | Orrorin tugenensis | "Millennium Man" from Kenya is the earliest human branch. Fragmentary arm, thigh bones, lower jaws, and teeth
7-5 | - | Sahelanthropus tchadensis | The last common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees. Cranium, fragmentary lower jaw and teeth, ape-like features
5 |  | Ramapithecus | Few teeth, jaw fragments, palate. An extinct relative of the orangutan
10 | Oreopithecus bambolii | Teeth and pelvis remains. An extinct relative of a monkey. Walked on all fours
15 | Dryopithecus | Lower jaw fragment. An extinct relative of the orangutan
20 | Proconsul | An extinct relative of the chimpanzee or gorilla
25 | Pliopithecus | An extinct relative of the gibbon
47.8 | - | Darwinius Masillae | "Ida". Has nails, opposable thumb. Introduced May 2009. 95% complete skeleton, the size of a small cat, found in Messel pit, Frankfurt Germany
MYA. Million Years Ago | Hominids: Species first placed in the line up of the evolution of man
★ Many specimens found

The growing consensus that all the species from Homo erectus to modern humans are all variants of Homo sapiens and their features can be observed among modern peoples today. It is also a misrepresentation to use skull size as an indication of intelligence. A smaller cranial capacity just indicates smaller people like Pygmies.
The Australopithecus genus is also being removed from the human branch because they are apes and the claim that they walked upright is no longer accepted. In addition, Homo Habilis is now believed to be a species of ape from the Australopithecus genus.

The Evolutionary Tree Of Life

MYA | Plants and Fungi | Animals
--- | --- | ---
10 K | Agriculture | - |  | Homo Sapiens | Homo Sapiens, hobbit
5 | - | - |  | Sahelanthropus | Ancestors of humans and the chimpanzee split
13 | Herbs Weeds | Chimpanzee | Ancestors of humans and the great apes split
15 |  | Apes | Ancestors of humans and the gibbon split
25 | Catarrhini | Catarrhini split into two branches: Old world monkeys and apes. Butterflies, ants
30 | - | Platyrrhini Catarrhini Haplorrhini | Haplorrhini split into 2 branches in the continental drift. Catarrhines (old world monkeys) stayed in Africa. Platyrrhines (New world monkeys) migrate 4500 km across the Atlantic on a vegetation raft to South America
40 | Rose | - |  | Primates | Ancestors of humans
65 | Grasses |  | Euarchonta | Nocturnal, tree climbing, insect eating. Dinosaurs extinct
100 | Angiosperms (Flowers) |  | Mammal (Eomaia scansoria) | A common genetic ancestor of mice and men. Bees Oil Formed. Global deposits of oil rich black shale
130 | Coal Forests
170 | - |  | Birds, insects | -
220 | Cycads |  | Cynodonts | Teeth, mammal jaws, dinosaurs
256 | Ginkgos | Diapsida | Synapsida | Synapsida evolves into mammals
300 | Lycopods | Club Mosses Horsetail |  | Hylonomus | Reptiles
315 | Conifers |  | Acanthostega | Amphibians with limbs
360 | Seed Ferns |  | Cockroaches, winged insects
400 | Gymnosperms | - |  | Coelacanth | Scorpions, centipedes and millipedes move to land. Living coelacanth specimens found in 1938
475 | Plants move to land | Fungi
480 | Mosses Liverworts |  | Placodermi | Jawed fish
505 | Primitive plants Bryophytes | Ostracoderm | Jawless fish. Vertebrates
530 | Pikaia | Ancestor of chordates and vertebrates
540 | Acorn worms | Link to vertebrates and invertebrates
550 | Flatworms | Brain, organs, bilateral symmetry
580 | Cnidarians | Nerves and muscles
600 | Sponges (Porifera) | Multicellular. Ozone layer forms
900 | Algae | Molds | Choanoflagellates | Ancestors of the animal kingdom
1200 | Sexual reproduction evolves
3900 | Archaebacteria | Protista
3500 | Bacteria

The Evolutionary Time Frame

Era/Epoch | Years | Period |
| What Emerged | Day
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Neolithic | 6,000 | Quaternary | Adam, Eve and the universe were created. Last ice age |
- | 74,000 | Mt. Toba eruption. Human adult population now 2000+
Paleolithic | 250000 | Homosapiens, evolutionists. Early stone age
Pleistocene | 1.8mya | Homoerectus. The great ice age
Pliocene | 5 mya | Tertiary | Australopithecines, whales. Human-chimpanzee split. Colorado river erodes the Grand Canyon
Miocene | 20 | Planet cools. Southern Ice cap, Himalayas, Red Sea
Cenozoic | 54 | Dogs, herbivores, carnivores, flowering plants, fish
Eocene | 65 | Cat, greenhouse climate change. No polar ice caps
Cretaceous-Teritary (KT) Boundary | Dinosaurs disappear, small mammals appear
| 65 | Mesozoic "The Age of Dinosaurs" Coal Forests | 60% Mass extinction by Chicxulub meteor and the Deccan Traps supervolcano in India. Dinosaurs extinct. Colorado basin plateau uplifted the Grand Canyon
Cretaceous | 100 | Pangea broke up
120 | Insects, flowering plants, mammals | 6
| 144 | Mass extinction by meteor kills dinosaurs
Jurassic | 170 | Large dinosaurs, first mammals, birds, fish, insects
| 208 | Triassic Extinction 20% Manicougan crater in Canada and the Central Atlantic Magmatic Province supervolcano near Sierra Leone
Triassic | 225 | Dinosaurs, reptiles, plants (gymnosperms)
| 251 | Permian-Triassic Extinction 96% Wilkes Land, or Bedout High meteor and Siberian Traps supervolcano
Permian | 270 | Paleozoic "Ancient Life" | Amphibians, seed plants, coral, sponges, fish. Pangea | 5
Carboniferous | 295 | Reptiles, fern forests, cockroach. Pangea (350-260)
Pennsylvanian | 300 | The last trilobite died
| 364 | Devonian Extinction 70%. Frasnian-Fammian. Siljan crater in Sweden. Pripyat-Dniepr-Donetsk supervolcano
Devonian | 395 | Fish, ferns and other seed plants. Land vertebrates, wingless insects and spiders. New types of fish
Silurian | 425 | Fish continued to evolve
Ordovician | 440 | Ordovician Extinction. A supernova destroyed the upper atmosphere allowing UV rays to cook life | 4
500 | Vertebrate sea life. Plants moved to land
Cambrian | 540 | Cambrian Extinction. 50% die from glaciation
545 | Planets, early invertebrate sea life. Tapeats sandstone
Neoproterozoic | Precambrian | 900- 540 Oldest known animal fossils | 3
Paleoproterozoic | 2500-1600 Photosynthesis. Rodinia super continent. 3500-1500 Transition to oxygen atmosphere (200 billion tons) made by stromatolytes (blue-green algae)
Archaen (3.9-2.5) | 2500 | 3900-2500 Oceans, blue-green algae, fossils, rocks | 2
3500 | Granite crust made from super heated water on basalt
Hadean (4.5-3.9) | 3800 | Late Heavy Bombardment. Comets with water form oceans for 400 million years
3800 | 4500-3800 earth has a molten hellish environment
13,700 Million | The Big Bang | 1, 4

The Chicxulub impact generated enough rock to fill mount Everest.

A Curious Observation
With the exception of the creation of the planets of our solar system on day four, the creation order in Genesis shows the same order. Now, why would a story conceived by illiterate and superstitious people show such scientific order?
And, just like the process of sexual reproduction is so out of character with the theory of evolution. Is it possible that we can find some evidence in the seemingly misplaced events of the fourth day of creation? The time between events (72 hours) may be too short to measure any odd events, but I am currently limited by what I know. Plants were created before the sun, moon and stars. The earth was also created before them. Is there something in stellar physics that shows that the earth is older than the sun, even though it is such a short time?

The Fourth Day of Creation
I think we can show that some planets were created on the fourth day. The seven periods of the periodic table seem to correspond to elements available on each of the seven days of creation. Some of the elements that are prevalent on the moon belong to the fourth period.

I posed the above question about nine years ago when I first wrote this article in 2000. Then in 2008 God gave me a partial answer. I can use physics to prove why the sun was created on the fourth day and that it must have been created after the earth. But showing a reason why is not the same as proof that something occurred.
Even the statement that God created it all out of nothing sounds a lot like the Big Bang theory. And this itself is another odd statement. How could illiterate people say that something came out of nothing. They would at least have said that it came from some part of God. Instead, the Bible says God spoke everything into existence. Electromagnetic waves started it all. This is another odd coincidence you see, because the core of all life, the smallest particles are electromagnetic waves.

Basic Requirements For Both Theories

Similarities
Out of Nothing. God created the world out of nothing visible. He spoke and it happened. So electromagnetic waves became matter. This is totally consistent with particle physics. The Big Bang theory says that matter came out of nothing after the explosion. There is no explanation of how that happened. Something cannot come out of nothing. At least the nothingness of God was electromagnetism. Light Before the Sun. There was light on the first day, before the Sun was created. There is a microwave light or background radiation that bathes the universe. The universe consists of 4% atoms, 23% of an unknown dark matter (gravitational force) and 73% of a mysterious dark energy that causes the universe to expand. Out of Water. Current space explorations are showing that the planets in the universe were born out of water. The Brookhaven experiments in 2005 showed that the Big Bang produced liquid, not gas. One Land. Pangea and the original earth were one land formation. And the physical features of Pangea just happen to look like the description of the New Jerusalem. And it verifies the flood story that the earth was broken up. Order. The order of creation is almost the same as evolution. The only exception is the creation of the sun and stars. This is what the Bible teaches.

Requirements For Evolution To Occur
In order for evolution to occur several conditions and possibilities must be present

1. Long Time. Evolution is dependent on long periods of time to overcome the statistical problems of one system accidentally and randomly changing to another or enhancing itself.
2. Subspecies Change. Evolution requires that one creature should be changed into another through some mechanism.
3. Reproduction. The emerging new species MUST be able to reproduce AND transmit the new beneficial changes to the offspring.
4. Male and Female. Since this is the design that exists, male and female evolution must occur simultaneously so that the species can survive.

Requirements For Creation To Occur
In order for creation to occur several conditions and possibilities must be present.

1. Short Time. The earth must be approximately 6000 years old.
2. God (Intelligent Designer). A creator must exist. He is the mechanism by which all these events occurred. At the minimum, some being of higher intelligence and more technologically advanced must exist.
3. Reproduction. The creation account explains the simultaneous existence of male and female and the variety of species.

Requirement | Evolution | Nature | Creation
--- | --- | --- | ---
Time | Long time | Short time. Simultaneous development of related systems | Short time
Subspecies Change | Mutation | DNA Barrier is not compatible with evolution | Creation by design
Reproduction | Theory 1. Simultaneous male and female mutation. Theory 2. No explanation | Simultaneous development of male and female | Simultaneous male and female creation

Scientific Evidence
There are several sciences which are prominent in the theory of evolution and each has developed laws which contribute to the theory. Remember, from the scientific methodology that a law has greater status than a theory because it appears to be universal and it is reproducible. A list of some of the theories proposed for each of the scientific discipline is given. Because I am not familiar with the science, not all theories will be covered in this article. However, I have listed them so that you can research on your own.

Evidence And Theories For Creation And Evolution
Science | Description | List of Evolution Theories | Science Laws | Creation
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
| Physics | Study of matter, energy and atoms | Big bang theory, inflationary universe theory, oscillating universe theory, steady state universe theory Creation Theory. Periodic creation of elements | E=MC2, gravity, motion, thermodynamics laws, chemical laws, nucleosynthesis, half life, mathematics | Documentary Model Particle physics Periodic table DNA
| Chemistry | Study of Atoms and molecules and how they react
| Cosmology | Study of space | Stellar Evolution: Nebular Hypothesis (Planetesimal Theory), Fission Theory, Capture Theory, Accretion Theory, Planetary Collision Theory, Stellar Collision Theory, Gas Cloud Theory. Creation Theory. Light trails | Mathematical
| Astronomy | The study of planets
| Oceanography | The study of the oceans | Late heavy bombardment by snow comets | Mathematical
| Geology | The study of the earth and rocks | Uniformitarianism, geologic columns, continental drift, peat swamp model of coal formation, isostasy Creation Theory. Catastrophism, hydroplate, canopy, floating-mat tree bark model of coal formation, breached dam | Fluid dynamics Sedimentation tanks | Forensic, experimental, eyewitness, natural, circumstantial, anecdotal
| Botany | The study of plants | Natural Selection, Monster Mutation, Punctuated Equilibrium, spontaneous generation, convergent evolution, macroevolution, parallel evolution. Theory of use and disuse | DNA, genetics, reproduction, cell division, biological clock, mitosis, meiosis Carbon dating | Documentary, common sense, mathematical, statistical, experimental
| Biology | The study of animals (living things)
| Paleontology | The study of bones and fossils (dead things)
Tests and testing environments

Scientific Method: Do Experiments. Evolution has no repeatable experiments in any branch of science that will verify the theory. Evolution cannot verify through experiment that any process will change or has changed any object into a predictable end product because we will not live long enough to see the results or any perceptable change occurring with that experiment. If evolution could demonstrate such dramatic changes in real time, then they would only be verifying creation and the flood.
What evolution has done to circumvent this critical step of the scientific method is to find more specimens and fit them into their theories. But they cannot use any laws that they have discovered to demonstrate how they can affect changes to demonstrate evolution by manipulating the variables of the law.
PV = nRT. For example, we can use the gas law to demonstrate that pressure, volume and temperature can be manipulated in a very precise way on a certain amount of gas. It will work on Mars, in Russia or California. I could discover the sequence of DNA codes that make feathers and so find the "law on feathers", but I cannot take a frog and demonstrate that I can turn it into a chicken by the forces that drive evolution.

- Biology and Botany. So all of biological evolution is an unprovable theory. The best that biological scientists can show is similarity in skeletons which cannot prove evolution.
- Geology. Virtually all evolutionary geology has been discredited by observed natural processes which prove creationists account of the flood.
- Chemistry and Physics. Neither evolution nor creation can prove these disciplines anymore than they can prove mathematics. These are just descriptions of laws, not explanations of how they were formed.
- Astronomy. So far, our interaction with outerspace is based on the knowledge of mathematics and physics. However, we have not proven that these extraterrestial bodies emerged through an evolutionary process. The best arguments in this field are based on the speed of light and the short time of creation, but we have proposed arguments and Bible facts to explain these.

Scientific Method: Creation's Reproducible Experiments. Creationists cannot prove the existence of God. We cannot even consistently prove by statistical evidence that we can affect our world by appealing to God. The last age of miracles was 2000 years ago and God promises another period of miracles near the end of time. Until then, what we can show is that what God says can occur could have occurred within the time He says it did and that certain design features require intelligent planning. In addition, creation science can disprove evolution by showing that the long time requirement of evolution makes some processes impossible.

Scientific Method: Evolution's Reproducible Experiments. Scientists are very good at designing experiments to uncover natural laws. Unfortunately, evolutionary science cannot design an experiment to prove evolution because it would take a long time to produce the data.

Theory | Science | Pillars
--- | --- | ---
Monster Mutation | None | DNA: Male, Female
Punctuated Equilibrium | None | Missing Links
Natural Selection | Mutation | Species change
Geologic Column | Dating Methods | Long Time
Primitive Environment | Stanley Miller | Life Chemicals
Big Bang Theory | - | Building Blocks
Constant Speed of Light

Disproving Evolution
I began this project with the assumption that I could disprove evolution or make a strong case for creation by one or more of these tactics.

- Knocking Down the Pillars. Since evolution is supposed to be a series of building blocks progressing from the simple to the complex, I should be able to organize the theories of evolution in a series of dependent and linked blocks so that it would be easier to conquer its proofs by concentrating on the foundation proofs. However, while the normal physical laws are related and codependent across all science, this is not the case with evolutionary theories. The theories of evolution are not stacked like a tower, they lie flat like a jigsaw puzzle.
  Within a branch of science the relationships cannot be proven. e.g. in biological evolution the missing links are missing but that fact does not disprove the theory in the mind of scientists because the evidence for evolution is subjective. The evidence, observations and theories are isolated blocks that can be swapped out for better theories. So knocking down a pillar does not affect the theories above because the new theory incorporates what the connecting theories need, even if it is stupid and unproven. Generally, all they need to connect the theories is to say "long time". My only offense is to point out the lack of evidence. A theory is not fact.
- Reinterpret the Evidence. Are there observations and conclusions that could have other interpretations? The geologic evidence is best explained by catastrophic events. Paleontology and biology fall victim to the biological clock.
- Invalidate the Proofs. There is no piece of evidence that constitutes proof or laws. To prove evolution, science needs to demonstrate by experiment or visible process these things.
  - Long Time. They must be able to measure the passage of long time between artifacts from different ages and show the effect of passage of time on their preferred evolutionary clock. Only radioactive dating comes close to a reliable clock and it is affected by the speed of light, sun spot activity and water. It only works with carbon life forms.
  - Subspecies Change. If there are no experiments or observations to prove this, then the circumstantial evidence would be missing links.
  - Information Transmission. It must demonstrate how information about design change triggered by the environment is passed to the offspring or demonstrate that it occurred.
  - Reproduction. It must show how reproduction occurred while male and female were developing, especially in complex animals.
  - Male and Female. The theory must demonstrate how male and female developed simultaneously and within a short time.
  - Building Blocks. It must demonstrate how the building blocks formed in the primitive environment of each branch of science. This is the stage in which all branches of evolutionary science exists so the theory could not possibly be a law.
- Invalidate the Methods. The only scientific method designed to prove a pillar of evolution is the carbon dating method. Other methods are just basic science which neither prove nor disprove either creation or evolution. Some methods begin with the assumption that evolution is correct.
- Invalidate the Theory. There are no proofs and the one method is questionable so what remains is to examine the theories with existing laws. This is what we have done.
- Validate the Contradicting Evidence. We also relied on explaining creation evidence.

Biology and Zoology - The Study Of Animals And Living Things

| Mutation A Failed Experiment The Case of the Stubborn Gypsy Moths
Radiation is known to cause genetic mutations. So Richard Goldschmidt attempted to induce genetic changes in the gypsy moth through this method. After 25 years of experiments he concluded that it did not work. Any changes he produced were usually undone in the next two generations. The gypsy moth would not cooperate. They changed back to their earlier form. He concluded that changes were strictly within species and that they were a temporary adaptation to a local condition. Major changes did not occur. Monster Mutation. So he proposed the theory of monster mutations. A set of mutations so life changing that the creature was essentially changed in an instant and could not revert. And he threw in the requirement of a male and female monster emerging at the same time. Why? He is old enough and clever enough to know about the birds and the bees and that Mr. Monster needs a Mrs Monster. It is just hog wash! Beam me up Scotty!
Drosophilia Melanogaster. It is ideal because it lives 10-12 days and only has four chromosomes. But after eighty years of irradiation and millions of generations and over 1000 mutations, the fruit fly is still a fruit fly!

> Creation is Unacceptable. "Evolution itself is accepted by zoologists, not because it has been observed to occur or can be proved by logical coherent evidence, but because the only alternative -- special creation -- is clearly incredible." D.M.S. Watson (evolutionist) Quoted by B.G. Ranganathan (Creationist). 'Origins' page 22

There are currently four related theories concerning the method by which life emerged. It is interesting to note that the later theories were proposed because scientists could not escape the need for decreased time in which critical leaps are needed. Let us look at the theories.
Natural Selection. Accidental changes in plants and animals will always produce improvements which will keep changing each species of plant and animal into new and larger ones. But observations did not support the theory. Changes only occurred within species and these were slight changes. No living plants or animals ever produced a different kind of plant or animal. Fossil records do not show changes between species. They show minor variations within the same species.
The next new wave of theories attempted to explain how the accidental changes occurred, because no one ever changed any physical or structural body part by force of mind.
Mutations. The next wave of theories declare that it is mutations (changes in the genes) which have made the changes from one species to another.
But changes between species still proved illusive. One specie simply did not change into another. A dog never became a cat. And to make matters worse, experiments shows that even non-lethal mutations within species tended to revert back to the original form once the foreign agent causing these slight changes were removed. These are probably not genetic mutations, but chemical changes like immunity that can be passed from mother to child during breast feeding or across the placenta during gestation or epigenetics. Mutations only weaken, damage, sterilize, or kill the creatures in which they occur. Beneficial mutations just did not occur, and any changes were too small and too slow.

Limits of Mutation. The massive radiation exposure at Chernobyl, Nagasaki, Hiroshima and the thousands of irradiated gypsy moths of experiments did not produce new species.
What we actually observe is that only single mutations occur. And over 99% are harmful, and 90% are deadly. And the experiments of Goldschmidt showed that a string of single mutations does not produce changes in groups.
Scientists claim that sickle cell anemia is a beneficial mutation that occurred in response to malaria.
DNA Barrier and Genetic Laws. The cloning and genetic experiments being done at the moment demonstrate that even with a 99% to 1% mixture of genes across species lethal mutations often occur and in those who survive other problems surface. Species cannot migrate from one form to another by mutation.

| The Hopeful Monster
--- | ---
Theory. A new species emerges after millions of irreversible, positive simultaneous mutations occur in one egg, producing a male and female.
Implications. The theory basically teaches that it is possible for a fish to give birth to a male and female frog from the same egg.
Proof. None. It violates all know genetic and biological laws and observations.
Rebuttal
» Biology. It is impossible for one egg to produce two genders. » Genetics. Most mutations are never positive. Mutations never produce new species. » Statistics. It is impossible for such a series of complex lucky coincidences to occur twice in one day and 13 million times.
Key Proof. The issue of male and female must be explained by all theories of biological evolution because, if the species does not reproduce, the progress of evolution ends.

Monster Mutations. A theory developed by Richard Goldschmidt, when, after 25 years of failed mutation experiments on the gypsy moth (or fruit fly) he concluded that evolution by mutation did not work with the gypsy moth. Whenever he obtained observable variations, they immediately changed back to the previous form by the second generation, or died or became sterile. So he had to conclude that for evolution to occur, large mutations must have occurred in the past. These mutations were so overwhelming, the creature could not change back to an original form.
Gypsy Moth Experiments. I had always heard, and continue to hear on educational channels about the famous gypsy moth experiments that 'proved' that mutations occurred that proved evolution. But they also forgot to mention that the mutations failed and that even the scientists who did the experiments concluded that they did not work. So much for truth in science!
The Saltation Or Leap Theory. Proposes that simultaneous, multi million positive monster mutations would occur once every 50,000 years. Millions of favorable mutations would occur in one egg, and it would hatch into a totally new creature which he called the 'hopeful monster'. All evolution occurred by immense mutational leaps from one life form to another. Therefore, a fish did change instantly into a bird!
In addition, the theory states that a male and female must emerge from this incredible egg.

Scientific Evidence. Do you wonder why scientists have to propose those last two theories? Because they cannot get around the problem of time and the number of coincidences that must happen at the same time for a new species to develop.
And, being smart scientists, they know about the theory of the birds and the bees.

Fraternal Twins. Only identical twins can be produced from one egg. This theory violates all genetic and cell division laws. The same egg cannot produce a male and female.

Species Barrier. The genetic instructions are so clear that cells only produce their own kind. Unrelated species cannot reproduce with each other. You cannot naturally mix half of human genes with half of the genes from a bird and produce a human who can fly. Species cannot change from one form to another through cross species reproduction. Modern observations also show that even in species that are very closely related, cross breeding produces sterile offspring in most cases. A banana cell never produced a toe nail.

Biological Clock. While rocks and stones and basic elements never die, biological systems do. A biological clock is in place for every component or process.

Sexual Anomalies
Parthogenesis. The ability of an unfertilized egg to hatch usually producing a female because the mother only has "X" chromosomes. Hemizygous. Male bees develop from unfertilized eggs and have 16 chromosomes while females have 32. Hermaphrodite. An organism with both sexes, usually external characteristics. Turner's Syndrome. This disease is caused when an egg loses an "X" or "Y" chromosome. If a male egg loses a "Y" chromosome, he genetically becomes an "XO" female with one "X" chromosome.
Mutations and cross breeding within the same species only leads to infertility

- Age. 70 - 100 years in humans. Ten days in fruit flies.
- Reproduction. 30 years in humans. Hours in fruit flies.

Gender Mutations. As far as we know, mutations or defects produce sterile creatures or females only.
Turner's Syndrome is an anomaly that comes closest to the monster mutation theory, yet it only occurs in females and does not produce a male. But theoretically, if this occurs in one of two identical twin boys, then we could have a case when identical twins would be male and an infertile "female"! The result is still infertility.
Parthogenesis usually produces females. So far, some form of parthogenesis produces male bees.
In complex creatures, hermaphrodites do not have the ability to impregnate themselves because it is generally a structural defect that does not produce two complete sets of working parts.
Plants also populate by sexual reproduction. Usually this occurs with the male and the female parts on the same plant. But there are even plants that have the male part and the female part on separate trees. Imagine that!

Common Sense Evidence For Intelligent Design

| Amazing Creatures The Bombardier Beetle
--- | ---
This creature defends itself by shooting a hot, noxious and caustic chemical out of two jets at the base of its abdomen as fast as 500 times per second.
The beetle uses five chemicals to produce quinine, a bad smelling chemical, and heat to create explosive pressure. » Two Chemicals. Hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinine. They must be stored separately to prevent a violent reaction. » Inhibitor. This is needed to prevent the two chemicals from reacting when they are first mixed. » Two Enzymes. Catalase and peroxidase. They accelerate the reaction to an explosive rate. » Combustion Chamber. A place to mix all chemicals before firing. » Delivery System. A chemical cannon must be constructed to deliver the product before the reaction makes the beetle explode. » Other Systems. Sphincter muscles to separate chambers, firing system muscles, chemical manufacturing plant, nerve systems and a reuptake and enzyme manufacturing system.
» Pop Goes the Beetle! At almost every stage the beetle would blow itself up or poison itself, setting back and removing all knowledge of any evolutionary changes that it accidentally discovered. The best we can hope for is one lucky and unrepeatable shot or one dead bug. » Internal Steam Bath. At 212ºF, the heat generated by the reaction is greater than boiling point. The beetle must develop a chamber that can withstand heat, high pressures and caustic chemicals. » Poison. Peroxidase and hydroquinine are poisonous. » Useless and Dangerous. At every step of evolution, the beetle creates an unfinished, complex system that is useless and dangerous that must have wiped out the species billions of times. So the last time it succeeded that must have been an incredibly lucky series of beetles and a persistent random, complicated design. » Lucky Bug! How many different chemicals would have been tried before there was success? One fortunate bug with several winning lottery tickets must have avoided all these errors and mishaps.

Although we classify this as common sense evidence, it is actually based on accepted scientific laws. Intelligent design says that the complex systems and interrelated parts show evidence that some intelligent designer must have coordinated the process. We will look at three cases in our common experience to demonstrate the signs of intelligent intervention.
First, we will list some problems with evolution. Your common sense would agree with these observations:

- No Excess Body Parts. If evolution was a random process, we should have many excess, left over, asymmetrical parts. We should have grown body structures as randomly as trees grow branches. Yet we are symmetrical in design and we have no excess parts.
  At one point scientists thought that the appendix was useless and was a left over from evolution. They said this because they did not know what it did. So they dressed up the theory of evolution with more stuff that they claim is evidence. I regularly boil water and put stuff in it, but I don't call it food.
  » Vestigial Organs. Evolutionists once claimed that 180 vestigial organs were useless body parts left over from evolution. So we can get rid of them without any consequences.
  - Thyroid. Produces major hormones.
  - Tonsils. Destroys harmful bacteria.
  - Appendix. Now, they believe that the appendix is part of the immune system. It processes good bacteria for digestion and fights infection in early life.
  Today, no organs are regarded as vestigial, yet some text books still make the claim.
  » Junk DNA. Scientists find huge amounts of DNA for which they have not discovered the use. In their arrogance they make the same claims about the purpose of these unknown DNA.
- The Theory of Use and Disuse. Their own theory says that if a structure was not needed then it would not evolve. They probably had to propose this theory to explain the total lack of extra, useless body parts.
  However, this same theory makes it impossible for useless developing structures to continue to exist generation after generation over millions of years before they become useful.
- Random Design. Since many body systems cannot function without all structures and chemicals, one must admit that as it was evolving, the system seemed to be working towards a specific design. However, since evolution says that no intelligent life guided this process then we must have accidentally created everything we need. Also, with body parts that have an identical copy, the same random, lucky design must have happened in a place that makes them look visually appealing. If not, we would have one eye on our face and the other on our neck!. That is the reality of random design.
- Beneficial Changes. In some creatures, the developing system remained useless and dangerous for millions of years before it could have become useful. The bombardier beetle must have self-destructed many times before it randomly created a useful defense mechanism. And each intrepid, thrill seeking bug after that cannot learn from the mistake of the last exploding next door neighbour. Because then we do not have the problem of how to transmit useful instructions to our next generation, we have the problem of current generation learning from the autopsy results of the mad scientist next door and then transmitting the changes to our next generation. Otherwise millions of exploding bugs must be developing millions of different combinations of systems by trial and error and few succeeded. Then those few become millions before they attempted another evolutionary leap without a safety net.
  All for what purpose? They seem to be working towards a design that will be ready for use in millions of years by walking through a minefield with poison ivy and under sniper fire. But if the design goal is to make a system to defend against a predator, then each step must have produced something that assisted in its defense next week, not in a million years.
- Communication. The progress made towards evolution, must have a mechanism by which it could be communicated to the babies, in addition, we must also tell the baby not to get rid of the new structure because it will be useful in a million years! If this type of communication did not occur, then the mechanism that regulated the theory of use and disuse would quickly destroy the useless structure. Because intelligent design is certainly not telling us to hang on to the useless part because it fits into a plan. A plan indicates an intelligent design.
  Of course we see no such communication with our unborn babies, if we have a mole the baby is not born with one.
  » Sperms and Eggs. There is also one big problem. When we are born we have already stored all the eggs we will use for reproduction. In the nineteenth week, the ovaries of the fetus have about 6 million rudimentary eggs. These are reduced to 1 million by birth. Only about 500 - 600 are released in forty years of ovulation. Therefore, the chance that we could have changed the information in them to pass on to the next generation is lower because these cells are not spontaneously generated at the time of reproduction by polling information from all cells everywhere to get the most recent changes. So, if the skin is mutating from scales to hair, the eggs have no known mechanism to incorporate those changes into the DNA sequence where skin instructions are located. Besides, I repeat, we have no evidence of this happening now. Our bodies do not change the genetic structure of our eggs at will.
- Current Changes. We have never seen any evidence of any structural changes happening now. As far as we know there have been no physical changes in 10,000 years.

The Mr Potato Carver. What is the signature of a designer? How do experts evaluate paintings of the masters? It is similarity in style, technique and the prevelance of common features. In addition, mathematical precision, symmetry, aesthetic beauty, cohesion between systems, intelligence are all evidence of a master plan and a designer. It is not evidence for random chaos.
The reason why Mr. Potato seems to be interchangeable with a monkey is because the same cellular design and genetic components are used. The presence of four legs does not indicate that monkeys and dogs are related. Similar hormones, genes and chemical signals do not prove evolution. The evidence also points to a designer.
What is the signature of random evolution?

Case Study: Male and Female (A Pair of Impossibilities)

| Sexual Reproduction A Crazy Design
This crazy design runs contrary to the evolutionary theory of "survival of the fittest". It seems illogical, that the very mechanism that a specie needs to perpetuate itself should have such a big design flaw. And that this design should be the norm in over 99% of the species - not the exception. Asexual reproductive systems would be easier to evolve and easier to maintain, ensuring survival of the species. Not sexual reproduction.

... male and female, He created them. (Genesis 1: 27)
It started when I read the words in Genesis 1: 27. It dawned on me that two impossible occurrences must take place in order to reproduce the species and that this impossible event must be repeated in every species.
Apparently, God designed species reproduction to be done almost entirely by sexual reproduction (requires two cooperating beings), not by asexual means. But the logical conclusion for the theory of evolution is that asexual reproduction (reproduction through one person only) should have been the process favored by natural selection. Sexual reproduction only makes the process more complicated and less likely to happen. Yet sexual reproduction occurs in 99.99% of all living things in animals and plants and mothers and fathers.
So, as I researched both theories, I specifically looked for answers to this question. What did I find? Scientists have no explanation. They just simply, casually throw in a critical requirement into a stupid theory. And they think we would not notice?!
The embarrassing statement that a male and female must be produced from the same egg with each monster mutation every 50,000 years is a joke.
Fortunately, reproduction is a process that even a six year old understands. Scientists cannot pull the wool over your eyes in this situation. You may not understand the theory of relativity. You may not understand the law of mass action. You may not understand mitochondria and DNA and semipermeable membranes, but you do understand what it takes to make a baby. And thanks to God it is the biggest stumbling block of this house of cards called evolution.
Everyone should be able to see through this fable because of this single issue. You have no excuse.
This argument is so simple, you might find it unbelievable. Yet it does not take scientific knowledge to understand it. Whenever I propose this people look at me as if I were a couple of brain cells short of a logical thought. It can't be that simple. Scientists admit defeat and run away from me, refusing to hear any more scientific evidence. Bastards!

Where is the Sweet Mrs Potato Head? Humans do not evolve from buds on a spud. This model is unable to explain where Mrs Potato Head came from. Not even a single mutation can explain this.

In Every Species
Scientists claim that sexual evolution occurred about 1200 million years ago before the first ancestor of the animal kingdom arrived. A scientific sleight of hand is occurring here. As they propose the miraculous event of the birth of a pair of hopeful monsters, they appear to want to leave the impression that this occurs only one time and every subsequent species benefits from this knowledge of how to become male and female.

How Babies are Made. First of all, before we look at what it would take to produce this feat in evolution, let us look at the delicate reproductive process and the problems of infertility. I have a sister who lost nine babies before birth - I know about infertility.
Despite the unwanted pregnancy rate, the fact is that the odds are against a pregnancy occurring. Several structural, biochemical, geographical, chronological and physiological situations must converge to make this event happen and to maintain the pregnancy that results.

- Chronological Events: There are just a few days within a 30 day period in which the average woman can conceive. And within her lifetime there are just an average of 35 years within which she may have a child.
- Structural or Anatomical: Several anatomic and biological components must be in place for a successful pregnancy to occur. The tilt of the womb, the type of hormones and concentration, the Fallopian tubes and its structure.
- Geographical Events (Proximity): Since it takes two separate individuals to complete this action, they must be within close proximity of each other in a narrow window of time. We have not perfected sperm beaming technology yet!
- Complementary Systems:
  How did they coordinate the design of their opposite systems? One would have had to be a male and the other a female. And supposedly, these events happened by chance, yet they just happened to produce a male and a female. The male and female must have structures that complement each other, to deliver the sperm where the egg can be fertilized. They must have biochemistry that complement each other. The sperm must have a precise shape. The egg and sperm must deliver exactly one half of the gene material, no more, no less. We have never seen a case of one egg producing both a male and a female. It is genetically impossible. If one egg produces twins it is always of one gender. Yet the Monster mutation theory requires one egg to produce a male and a female.
  This is what scientists are asking you to believe. They mock faith. Yet this takes more than faith to believe. It is downright stupidity!

  The Match Maker
  How did two independent creatures know that they must produce opposite yet complimentary systems? A designer must be in charge.

  So, when these twin miracles were born, they must have come from separate eggs. But even if they emerged from the same egg, how did they know to make exactly half of what each needs or to create structures different in design that would fit the other? Remember, we do not have thousands of years to figure this out, the biological clock is ticking! 35 years for humans and hours for fruit flies.
  When the female organ was being shaped like a tunnel, who told the male organ to be shaped like a tube?

  | The Scientific Method
  --- | ---
  Consequences of Repeated Design Failure
  Nature must also follow the scientific method. Every time the design fails to sustain the next generation, the accident that produced the two hopeless monster parents must be repeated with instructions to fix the fatal flaw or occur randomly again. » Mother Nature. There are no proven biological methods or processes by which a system can repair itself by creating a new structural design or learn and send instructions to the next generation. They are hoping that the genes will do it but they have not proven how this is done or how specific, useful instructions are sent by the egg and sperm to the next generation. Newly acquired immunity is not passed through the genes to the next generation. It is passed through breast milk or possibly from blood to blood across the placenta. » Stumbling Block. There is also a big stumbling block. How can the new hopeful monster send instructions to the next generation if the flaw involves the inability to create a viable next generation? » Father Time. Time and hope are running out for our little monster. By the time the flaw is discovered, they are now adults with eggs already formed. How can they transmit what they know? The fact is that we need billions of these remarkable pair of failures to have a chance one that is perfect.

  How did the female know that the new baby would need milk from her breasts because the environment could not feed the new baby? How and why did milk production occur? What happened to babies while milk production was in the design phase? Unlike rocks, a single baby does not have millions of years to wait for the perfect design. They have three to five days.
  If the reproduction system and support system is flawed the baby will die. If that prototype baby dies of malnutrition, the same wonderful accident must be repeated over and over again, from the beginning. Tick ... tick ... tick ...
  How did the sperm know that it should have just one half of the genes for the baby? How did the female egg know that it must have the other half of the genes.
  How did the sperm know that it needed a tail to swim the rest of the way up the Fallopian tube to meet the egg?
  How did the egg know that it must immediately change its surface after it is first penetrated so that only one sperm can enter?
  How else can we fix these design flaws except by repeating the incredible accident and fixing the known flaws?
  Who coordinated all these events from different systems and structures all over the body? In fact from two different bodies. Who brought the male and female together at the same time and place? Who repeated this same set of improbable events from the beginning in every creature?
  Someone with intelligence and a plan. God did.
- Biochemical Systems: It requires the cooperation of the glandular, hormonal and immune systems in different parts of the body, for the process to proceed successfully. The hormones must be at the right concentration, the pH inside the uterus must be perfect for the sperm to survive. After the pregnancy the woman's body must fight all the internal mechanisms that are attempting to kill the foreign object ... her baby.
- Environmental Factors: They also play a role. Some plants mimic the natural hormones and can affect the success of a pregnancy. Others inflict chromosome damage. It is estimated that chromosome abnormalities occur in 26% of human eggs and 10% of sperm. This further reduces the odds of a viable pregnancy.

  | Amazing Creatures The Bat and the Dolphin
  --- | ---
  The bat hunts at night when vision is poor. It does not see in the dark like other nocturnal creatures, instead it "sees" with its ears through a process called echo location which works like sonar. The bat emits a high frequency sound through its mouth or nose. This sound bounces off the object and is reflected back to the bat. The reflected sound is processed by the brain to create the image. The bat achieves sight with reflected sound the way other animals use reflected light to see.
  Normally, nocturnal creatures have more rods to see black and white images. If a creature was going to evolve into a night life club-hopping freak you would think that the easiest path for evolution would be a straight line through the mine field of rods at the back of the eye. The creature would simply have evolved more rods in an already functioning eye. However, our basically bored bat decided to evolve a system so ingenious and complicated, that our wireless telecommunications, radar and sonar systems are based on this design.
  » Crash Helmets or Crash Dummies? How many bats suffered serious concussions and deadly brain injuries before they stopped running in trees? » Wrong Number! How did they settle on a frequency that would not interfere with other frequencies in the environment except by trial and error? » Channel Surfing. How did the latest generation keep a track of all the failed frequencies? If they just stumbled on one that works, why did this random process stop trying? » Google My Brain. How did the brain know how to interpret the signals? The ears need to process sound the way the rods and cones process light. This system is even more complicated because it has to determine depth, and angles, not just interrupted signals. » Air Traffic Control GPS Navigation. As the bat is flying at high speeds and the prey is also flying, the bat must also adjust the location calculator by comparing the three dimensional location and speed and direction of travel for itself and the prey and the elapsed time in order to determine the next probable location when it strikes. Bat calculus?

- Cell Complexity. At the cellular level, cells are too complicated with thousands of interrelated working parts that function like a well-managed walled city.

  > Power plants generate the cell's energy. Factories produce proteins, vital units of chemical commerce. Complex transportation systems guide specific chemicals from point to point within the cell and beyond. Sentries at the barricades control the export and import markets, and monitor the outside world for signs of danger. Disciplined biological armies stand ready to grapple with invaders. A centralized genetic government maintains order. -Peter Gwynne, Sharon Begley, and Mary Hager, "The Secrets of the Human Cell," in Newsweek, August 20, 1979, page 48.
  > "The complexity of the simplest known type of cell is so great that it is impossible to accept that such an object could have been thrown together suddenly by some kind of freakish, vastly improbable, event. Such an occurrence would be indistinguishable from a miracle."- Michael Denton, Evolution: Theory In Crisis (1985), page 264.

- Complex Creatures: Even if you could assume that this might work in simpler life forms or freak accident, every complex creature that evolved would face all of the same problems because of the issue of male and female. Nothing that could be learned or inherited from the parents compensates for the need to evolve two different creatures at the same time.
- Contradicts Evolution: Evolution also says

  > The evolutionary happenings ... are unique, unrepeatable and irreversible.

  The statement itself places the theory above the basic requirement of the scientific method that the process must be repeatable. So evolution is an hypothesis that cannot be proven by the scientific method! So it is not a science in the traditional meaning.
  But It needs to be repeatable for new species to evolve! For each species it must be repeated twice to produce male and female. And for all species is must be repeated over 200 million times to reproduce the same system design in both male and female. And if you consider all biological systems and all the unique chemicals and structures, the evolutionary processes must have been independently copied or repeated trillions of times to produce the same basic design in all species. And if we consider all the errors and false starts and fatal flaws that terminate the process which are statistically significantly greater than the successes, the impossible process must have been repeated zillions of times in less than one life time of a biological organism!

This crazy design runs contrary to the evolutionary theory of "survival of the fittest". It seems illogical, that the very mechanism that a species needs to perpetuate itself should have such a big design limitation. And that this design should be the norm not the exception. Asexual reproductive systems would be easier to evolve and easier to maintain, ensuring survival of the species. Not sexual reproduction.
Since I am a stupid idiot and possibly a lower order of creature, I tried asexual reproduction by doubling in size with the full intention of splitting in two. I merely got fatter!

Reproductive Models
Evolution claims that sexual reproduction evolved 1200 million years ago.

Evolution of the Frog
Pink - female Blue - male Green - asexual Pink and blue - Hermaphrodite Evolution Process After species formed. Before species formed.

Under the theory of evolution, the first model would have been asexual. But asexual reproduction does not occur in complex biological systems, as I discovered. Therefore, the question is, how could sexual reproduction occur under the evolutionary process? There are at least two possibilities, each one affects the time at which each species adapted this method of reproduction. Let us use the example of a fish evolving into a frog. The two life forms could have emerged at these points in evolution:

1. After Speciation. The male and female specialization occurred after the asexual version of the new species appeared. An asexual frog became a male and female frog. After the world was full of asexual frogs, cats, dogs, butterflies and bees, each of these creatures evolved into male and female.
2. Before Speciation. The male and female occurred in an earlier prototype of all biological species, most likely living at the same time as their asexual cousins until they came to dominate the species. Therefore, an asexual fish became a male and female frog.
3. After Sexual Specialization. Simultaneously, a male fish evolved into a male frog and a female fish evolved into the female frog. Then they met at the local watering hole over drinks and had babies because of unprotected sex.

Reproductive change before or after speciation has the same time and statistical problems. Neither one makes it easier. Because just a tiny change would take thousands of years and this requires complementary mass changes in a short period of time in two independent creatures of every species of plant and animal life form. Even if the creature was fertile for its entire lifetime that would still give us no more than 100 years per specie. And THIS is THE mechanism by which a living creature survives - reproduction. Without reproduction the life cannot proceed and evolutionary changes cannot proceed. Evolution does not have the luxury of long periods of time to develop a working reproduction method. This is because biological systems die quickly.

| Male and Female Created He Them
Women! Can't live with them. Can't live without them!
Scientists are stuck between a rock and hard place. Between a uterus and a sperm sac. Every time an impossible gigantic mutation occurs in an egg, it must produce a male and female. Over thirteen million times! Every time a new lion emerged he must have his lioness within a few years. When the fruit fly emerged his mate must be born within the hour and she had better produce boys and girls or the species will die. Do you think that this sounds impossible? Then why would you believe it? Your heart tells you that this requires intelligent intervention. Your mind tells you that intelligent design is the only logical explanation. That reasoning is not religion. It is science!

The Problem Of Time And The First Prototype
Scientists often throw in billions of years for any perceptible evolutionary change to occur. The problem is, with the case of reproduction, you have at the most 35 to 40 years in humans, a couple of hours in the case of fruit flies!. If both males and females do not develop simultaneously, then one would be a mutation that could not survive because it could not reproduce itself. In this instance time is the enemy. Immortality becomes a problem. The biological clock keeps ticking.

The Verdict
This is the grandfather of all the laughable theories evolutionists want you to believe. We have biological evidence, common sense evidence and statistical evidence that says that males and females are required to produce over 99% of all biological life on this earth.
Baby or Slimy Bath Water? Biological evolution comes to a screeching halt if children cannot be produced in real time.
Leaping Lizards! It's a Miracle! To their credit Goldschmidt and Gould recognized the great flaw in the theory of evolution. The fact that they had to propose their wild faith-based theories is circumstantial evidence that they came to the conclusion that slow one by one mutation could not have brought about evolution of new species. Long time is now the enemy of biological reproduction.
A Quantum Leap of Faith. Common sense evidence tells me that to propose that every 50,000 years that an incredible evolutionary quantum leap occurred is equivalent to believing in the tooth fairy. And if this were not enough, to propose that this occurred more than once in over 13 million species is asking me to believe in both the tooth fairy and the Easter bunny and little green men from mars.
Two Miracles for the Price of One. And there is the lucky coincidence of male and female hatching from this miracle egg. Then I would have to believe that the sky is pink and full of blue dots and fluffy marshmallow clouds and that the moon is made of green cheese. I refuse to believe it.
Eyewitness, Expert, Scientific, Forensic and Experimental Evidence.
By the way, this violates all known biological processes. It is nonsense. If twins emerge from the same egg they must be the same gender. How could they propose a theory that violates such a solid law of science? By ignoring such solid science, they ignored the scientific method. They are desperate. The issue of the coexistence of male and female is extremely important.
Psychic Communication? Statistical and common sense evidence says that two independent eggs could not have communicated to each other about the design of their very different reproductive systems. But since these different structural and chemical systems match each other perfectly the eggs must have communicated intelligently some how.
Biological evidence says that all systems must be working properly from the start or no reproduction would occur. The hopeless monster species would die out.
Common sense says that such a complicated design could not have occurred instantly.
Common sense evidence also says that these impossible and independent occurrences could not have conveniently occurred flawlessly 26 million times in 13 million pairs of different species.
Statistics and probability says that the chance of forming only 2000 proteins in the single cell amoeba is one in 1040,000. Imagine the possibilities of randomly forming all the chemicals and body parts in 26 million creatures and doing it in a short time.

Case Study: The Evolution Of The Eye
Proponents of intelligent design argue that biological systems are too interconnected and complex to be the result of random accidents.

This is even more evident in critical coordinated biological systems that involve more that one creature and mean life or death for the species.
Statistically, many coordinated evolutionary requirements are impossible, especially when they require two dependent creatures. End of story.
Let us take a look at a less complex system than the reproductive system. It's function is not dependent on the evolution of another human being. We will look at the problems with the evolution of the eye.

We know that the trilobite, who is at the bottom of the evolution ladder, has eyes that are as complex as ours. So, how did the eye evolve?
Why did it evolve? We do not need eyes to survive. Did the creature believe that it would benefit from it? How could it have guessed that?

Parts of the Eye
130 million rods to see black and white Seven million cones to see three color pigments Over ten muscles Over twenty primary structures Chemicals Rhodopsin or "visual purple" ( scotopsin and 11-cis-retinal ) - converts light to signals that the brain can interpret. 6 other chemicals are formed as it reacts with light. metarhodopsin II ( Activated rhodopsin ) Color pigments ( retinal and photopsins ). There are three color pigments. Each cone is sensitive to one of these colors. The mixture of these colors creates many other colors. Red sensitive pigment Green sensitive pigment Blue sensitive pigment Melanin Tears Vitreous humor Aqueous humor Blood vessels Eye brows, eye lashes, eye lid Optic nerve Brain Must merge two images from each eye Must reverse the image. Must interpret the color based on the ratio of each color activated. Blink Evaluate depth perception Show image in three dimensions

- The Spots that would not go away. One day a spot appeared on the little creature. It could not see the spot but it could feel it. The spot was sensitive to light. But the creature knew that it might not have long to live but it was curious about this spot, so it sent instructions to the eggs so that the spot would show up on the baby. But of course we need two spots. They must be symmetrical. I do not know why I know that, but I do. Plastic surgeons and Hollywood have not evolved yet.
  Instead of saying "out, out damned spot", the two spots started to grow a hole and covered it with a clear cover. Why clear and not skin colored? Just a lucky guess.
- I Experience The Light, Some Day I Will See It! Eventually, rods and cones developed at the back of this hole. Why? I don't know, the brain might be able to do something with it 500,000 years from now. And somehow, we guessed that to be efficient we need only three color sensitive pigments so that we can make all colors. Colors, which by the way, we have no reason to believe exists. But we have already figured out that we need only three colors to make all colors.
  The alternative to this is that we developed pigments for all colors first, then reduced it to three colors later. One other alternative is that we developed black and white vision first, then evolved color vision later.
  Oh yes, and the left eye decided to do the same thing as the right eye, somehow.
  So far, the theory of use and disuse is extremely useless. It kept a totally useless organ for hundreds of thousands of years.
- The Brain ( I See the Light ). At some point, these two useless spots must have convinced the brain that there is something good about to happen in a few hundred thousand years. So the brain worked on all the chemicals and mathematical calculations needed to merge two images, ignore the blind spot, reverse the image (realize that the image is reversed) and fill in the right color and make us aware of the image on the outside using only chemicals. That brain is one smart Michaelangelo!
  All without a design. All random events. I am proud of this randomly developed super computer with artificial intelligence. Oops! Sorry no intelligence! The same lucky, random, lottery jackpot winners every day.
- Spare Parts. Many parts developed even before we could see. Why? I do not know. They might be useful in 100 thousand years. Why did we make eye lids? How did we know that it would work! How many random designs failed? Did any of them destroy the sightless eye? Why that random design? When did we realize that we needed it? If only we were guided by a design. But that might mean God and that is impossible! God comes with rules that I do not like.
- Garbage In, Garbage Out. If it was random, we must have had many mistakes so we got rid of all the useless parts. And by the way, something just as miraculous was happening in other parts of the body.
  Where is the evidence of all the rejects and bad designs?
  People, this is ridiculous. Statistical evidence is not so trivial after all!

Case Study: Body Symmetry And Cosmetics: Two Arms And Two Legs

Random Growth | Symmetry
--- | ---
Accident | Design
Octopus Man | Adam

God must have been a cosmetic surgeon. He was not only concerned with form and function, He was concerned with beauty. Body symmetry occurs on the outside, not inside the body. That is a sign of design.
Evolution now claims that bilateral symmetry evolved around 550 million years ago in the flat worm. When the miraculous evolutionary change was occurring, how did two eyes, arms, ears and legs form? When the creature decided to develop eyes and the cells started changing in one part of the face, how did the same, exact thing occur on the other half of the face?
Why do we not see more creatures with one eye, one arm, one leg and one ear? Why did we not grow arms and legs randomly like trees grow branches?
When the first leg bud was being formed. how did the body "know" to place another one on the opposite side? And how did these two legs communicate to each other so that they would have a similar design that were mirror images of each other?
Where are the trillions of mistakes? Statistically, there should be more of these. If two eyes are better than one, then certainly a third eye would give three dimensional view.
Why are we so perfectly divided into two identical halves on the outside? I can see why hop-along Cassidy might want to have more leg coordination, but who told that first creature that it was ugly and needs to move that errant left eye brow 4 centimeters down and 2 centimeters to the right?
Because we were not randomly formed, we were designed!

Our conclusion must be intelligent design. Common sense evidence tells us. Randomness leads to chaos not such order.

The Unisex Potato? Whatever the basic armless, legless, unisex or sexless spud looked like, it had to develop external characteristics in symmetric pairs for every appendage. Why? The Great Potato carver is at work again.

The Symmetry Of The Heavens
This observation is even clearer when looking at biblical symbolism. Have you ever wondered what perfect timing it takes for the full moon to always rise at sunset and set at sunrise so that the greatest light the moon can give occurs exactly during the two endpoints of the darkness?

Layer | Depth (km) | ºC | Composition
--- | --- | --- | ---
Lithosphere | Crust | - | Earth | 7 | 100ºC | Sedimentary rock
Conrad Discontinuity | Granite
Ocean | 35 | - | Basalt, Gabbro
| 50-70 | 1000ºC | Basalt
Mohorovicic Discontinuity (Moho)
Mantle | Upper | 10-400 | - | Peridotite, olivine
Asthenosphere | 200-300 | Magma
Mesosphere | Lower | 650-2890 | 4800ºC | Rigid
Core | Core | Outer | 2890-5150 | Liquid iron
Inner | 5150-6370 | 6900ºC | Solid iron, nickel

Geology

The Composition Of The Earth
The radius of the earth is 6370 km but we have only drilled to a depth of about 12 km. Scientists have made a guess about the composition of the interior of the earth based on indirect evidence of the behavior of seismic waves. Basic assumptions about the interior are that temperature, pressure and density increase with depth and that the interior is composed of different materials at different levels. They also believe that the core must be metallic in order to generate a geomagnetic field. However, even that theory collapses under the great distances of the field and unexpected observations on other planets.
Boreholes
The evidence from deep boreholes revealed "how far from truth scientific theory can roam".

| After Flood | Before Flood
- | - | Ocean | Earth | - | - | Lake | Earth | - | Earth | Lakes | Earth | -
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Earth | - | Fresh Water Aquifer
Rock | Oil | Rock Supports
Granite Rock Plates
Salt water "Deep" | Rock
Basalt Rock
Rock | Deep | Rock | - | Rock | Rock | Water | Tar
Metal

- Kola Peninsula, Russia (12262 m). They expected to find granite from 4.7 to 7 km below and basalt below that. But the granite appeared from 6.8 to 12 km and no basalt was ever found. They were wrong in their interpretation that the observed seismic reflection at 7 km in the continents represented a change from granite to basalt.
- Oberpfalz, Germany (9101 m). They discovered several unexpected things. A hot, salty, potassium rich water at 3.4 km. This was unexpected and the source is a mystery to them. Fossils from at least 24 species at 6.7 km that were not destroyed by the pressure. At 4.7 km density decreased instead of increasing as expected and seismic waves did not increase as expected. The rock is more porous. Folded rocks that did not show up in the seismic surveys. The conclusion is that you cannot rely on seismic waves to predict internal composition.
- Pacific Ocean (2000 m). There is evidence of large submerged continents in the ocean. The expected layer of gabbro was never found. It is supposed to be 5 km thick at about 1-3 km below a layer of basalt. Plate tectonics also requires the crust below the ocean to be from young rocks but older rocks were found.

Pleochroic Halos (An Amazing Discovery!)
Evolutionists claim that the foundation rocks under our planet started out like molten lava and slowly cooled over millions of years and formed base rocks like granite. Again we find this process needs to add millions and millions of years to the age of the earth to fit the theories of evolution. After all, in nature we do see these rocks cooling at a slow rate and we still have molten rock in the form of lava deep within the earth. So we do not question their conclusions.
The Formation Of Granite. Since the 1800's scientists have noticed circular rings in the granite but they did not know what caused them.
You must also understand why granite is important. It is a base rock, no other rocks can form granite. Even if granite melts, it is changed into another type of rock called rhyolite when it cools. So even granite cannot form granite.
So if you see granite, then it is in the original form that it had when it first appeared. This is not difficult to understand when you realize that coal and diamond are the same thing! Diamond is just squeezed together more.
Then came Dr. Robert Gentry who examined these halos and found four different rings trapped in the granite. They were all caused by radioactive particles and the granite had become solid during the time they were radioactive. His discovery showed the following halos:

| Quick Freeze Jello Can you make Instant Jello?
Have you ever made Jello with fruit in it? If you put the fruit in while the Jello is at room temperature then all the fruit will sink to the bottom. Why? Because gravity pulls the fruit to the bottom of the bowl faster than your refrigerator can freeze the Jello. How could you freeze the fruit in the middle of the Jello while it is at room temperature (without suspending it on a string)? There are two ways: 1. Slow down the rate at which the fruit falls. (If you can control gravity). 2. Freeze the Jello before the fruit reaches the center. If you had a tub of Jello 32 feet deep, it would take half a second for the fruit to reach the middle. Find a quick freeze refrigerator that will freeze the Jello in less than half a second.
This is the equivalent of what Dr. Gentry discovered. He found radioactive particles with a half life of three minutes embedded in granite. Granite is supposed to have cooled slowly over thousands of years. But, the halos must have been trapped within the rock during the three minutes they lived or they would have disappeared before the rock cooled. Therefore, the rocks became solid in less than three minutes!

• 210Polonium - half life of 138.4 days
• 214Polonium - half life of 164 micro seconds
• 218Polonium - half life of three minutes
• 238Uranium
He did further tests to show that the rings were not formed from solutions leaking into the granite, but were present in the rock before it became solid.
Because of the process of decay in each type of particle, he concluded that only 218Polonium could be used as a clock. How could a particle that existed for less than three minutes be trapped in a rock that cooled over 300 million years?
The Sudden Creation Of Granite. Dr. Gentry discovered that granite was formed from liquid to solid in less than three minutes, probably 1.5 minutes, not over millions of years.
He proved that they suddenly came into existence in their present from not from the cooling of lava. It disproves all of stellar and geological evolution and showed that the earth came into existence suddenly at one time.
Based on his findings, he reclassified granite. He called it 'Genesis' rock. Since scientists had assumed that it was formed from lava, it has been classified as igneous rock.
Let us take another lesson in radioactive particles by looking at how Jello is made. (See the insert on the right of this page). If you can understand what happens when Jello or ice freezes, then you can understand Dr. Gentry's work.
Reputable scientists have found the research work of Robert Gentry to be beyond reproach, and his conclusions unimpeachable. These praises come from evolutionists and creationists. The work was so carefully done and so comprehensive, that no one has ever been able to refute it. One group tried and failed. His experiments were reproducible. The scientific method was working. The work was so basic and fundamental and verifiable (one requirement of the scientific method) that the conclusions are beyond reproach. But it is a hidden secret in our universities.
So, why is this not news? I have known about it since 1980 while I was studying chemistry. It would tear apart the very foundations of evolution. I suspect that evolutionists are hoping against hope that they can come up with some explanation for this. But over 30 years of hope is now faith.
Doctor Gentry tried to do these studies at Georgia Tech university but he was denied three times, because the brilliant minds in those sacred halls of learning do not want to have any graduate students do any studies that might affect their pet theory. And this theory is a mongrel. I apologize to all mongrels for that remark.

Scientific Method: Reproducible Experiments and Data. These experiments did not create rocks instantly. However, reproducible experiments verifies the existence of this phenomenon with no other reasonable explanation about how they could have been formed.

The Verdict
The theory of evolution says that granite formed over 300 million years! Dr. Gentry says 3 minutes. Again we have another giant time discrepancy. Less than 3 minutes or 300 million years. Dr. Gentry has verifiable and reproducible experiments, others have theories that they cannot prove in their life time. Using the scientific method, this experiment is verifiable and reproducible. Evolution states that these must have cooled over thousands of years and the hot earth slowly cooled. If that were true, then no radioactive particles with short half lives should have been trapped in the rock.
Experimental and Forensic. So based on the results of experiments on the forensic evidence in granite, it leads to the inescapable conclusion that granite was formed in less than three minutes. It was created. God exists!
It is easy to say a process occurred over millions of years and we have no way of disproving it because the changes are so small or events are so scarce or inaccessible they would be hard to measure in several life times - until a freak event occurs in nature.

Turbidity Currents
Scientific Eyewitness (Grand Banks Earthquake). On 18 November 1929, a 7.2 earthquake under the Atlantic Ocean off the south coast of Newfoundland caused a flow of mud travelling at speeds up to 129 km/h (80 mph). It snapped 12 transatlantic telegraph cables covering 200 miles in 59 minutes and 500 miles in 13 hours and 17 minutes. If mud and silt build up under water, they can break loose and slide just like an avalanche. These layers move very quickly and spread an even layer of sediment over very large areas. So scientists realized that formations once thought to have occurred over tens of thousands of years can actually occur in days or minutes.

Turbidity Currents
Dr. Gentry's experiments were based on both physics and geology. He found physical particles trapped in geologic rocks. There are other geological arguments that throw doubt on the theory of evolution.
Geologists look at the different layers of rocks and conclude that each layer was formed over millions of years. As each new geologic age approached, it deposited layers of earth and rock over the previous ones. Of course creationists claim that these layers were formed during the flood when the water subsided and the heavier particles settled first. You can demonstrate this yourself by putting different weights of rocks, sand and mud in a clear glass jar. Shake them well and let them settle. Immediately, the heavier rocks will settle first and the lightest ones will remain suspended for hours until they finally settle on top leaving clear liquid and different layers of dirt. Creationists claim that the same types of events happened after the violent shaking of the earth during the flood.
For a long time scientists claimed that such large formations could not occur in weeks or months but over thousands of years - until they observed turbidity currents with their own eyes.

Turbidity currents are underwater mud flows. By looking at how fast sediments normally build up today, scientists concluded that these layers needed millions of years to form. But by studying how these layers build up under water scientists noticed something amazing when an earthquake caused a mud slide under water. They have duplicated this in sedimentation tanks.

» Pyroclastic Flows. After the Mount St. Helen's eruption, scientists also discovered that pyroclastic flows (hot mud and ashes and fluidized slurries of volcanic debris travelling at hurricane speeds) also build up layers that are sorted by size. These slurries can be gas charged or water charged.

The Verdict
Using the scientific method, modern geologic processes have demonstrated that rock strata can be formed in days or minutes. This unusual process occurs under water. Therefore, the geologic columns may not be an evidence of slow evolution but instead point to evidence of a great flood.

The Geologic Column

| The Perfect Geologic Column 100 Miles Thick (160 km)
--- | ---
Theory. Layers of earth were laid down in a series over billions of years and can be used as a clock to demonstrate evolution from simple to complex species.
Proof. The layers show a progression from simple to complex forms

Rebuttal
» Circumstantial. These layers also appear in reverse order, and beside each other and the entire column has never been seen. » Eyewitness. Turbidity currents can also create similar layers in days. » Common Sense (Misplaced Fossils). Evidence of humans should only appear in the top layers above the red line. Finding evidence of human activity below this line is like finding a television set in the Triassic layer in the stomach of a dinosaur. » Common Sense (Polystrata Fossils). Objects that deteriorate in a short time should not be found across layers that are millions of years old unless they were buried rapidly and the layers are the same age

Evolution claims that the layers of the 100 mile geologic column were formed over millions of years. However, there is no place on earth where a complete rock strata layer exists. The theory is proposed from combining observations made at different locations, none of which are over one mile deep. The Grand Canyon is the deepest location.
The layers are used as a type of clock, because the theory states that only certain species should appear at different layers. So, human skeletons and human artifacts should not be found in layers older than four million years when humans emerged.
Rebuttal Evidence. However there were several natural phenomena that were observed that totally destroyed the speculations of evolutionists. Processes occurred in hours that were only supposed to occur over millions of years. Also the forensic evidence in the geologic column tells quite a different story.

Turbidity Currents. In 1929, a flow of mud caused by an earthquake under the sea covered 200 miles in 59 minutes and 500 miles in 13 hours and 17 minutes.
This proves that layers of mud can be formed in days, if the mud slide occurs under water.
Scientists insisted that this takes millions of years, until this was observed.
Multilayer (Polystrata) Fossils. Rapid burial is required for fossils to be made and most fossils are embedded in deposits made by water. Fossils of trees were buried across layers that were hundreds of million of years apart.
Common sense and forensic tells us that this is impossible. The tree would have decayed long before the first layer was formed. Therefore, all the layers must have formed at the same time the tree or animal was buried. Scavengers, bacteria, erosion, weathering would have decayed the soft parts in months and the exposed hard parts in years. We see things decay every day so we know that a tree cannot slowly become a fossil while millions of years of dust accumulate around it. So if all layers had to be formed at the same time how can they show millions of years difference in age? So something is wrong with the dating method and the assumptions.
Mount St. Helen's Eruption. The eruption of Mt. St. Helen on 18 March 1980, created conditions in hours that scientists thought took millions of years to develop. In nine hours huge geologic changes occurred that rewrote our understanding of how many formations occurred.

- Stratified Rock Layers (3 Hours). On June 12, pyroclastic flows at hurricane speeds created 25 feet (762 cm) of rock built up by about 100 layers in three hours. Observations demonstrated that gas charged slurries and water slurries can create these layers.
  Contrary to our reasoning, these fast pyroclastic flows did not "mix up" the dirt and ash, instead it separated the hot ash and pumice into coarse and fine particles and laid them down in distinct layers between one to 36 inches thick (2.5 to 92 cm).
- Canyons Formed in 5 Months. Evolutionists claim that it took 100 million years to form the Grand Canyon by slow stream erosion of the Colorado River. The 700 feet deep (21336 cm) Step Canyon and the smaller Loowit Canyon are two canyons, with creeks flowing through, which were formed by mud and pyroclastic flows in five months, cutting through 100 feet of rock (3048 cm).
  » Little Grand Canyon of the Toutle River. It is one-fortieth the size of the Grand Canyon and was created by a breached dam in one day!
- River System Formed in 9 Hours. On 19 March 1982, two years later, a second explosion occurred. The original explosion had buried the river and highway 150 feet (4572 cm) and cut off the river to the Pacific Ocean. It melted a large snow pack and caused a mudflow that carved out a drainage system in nine hours, eroded the Little Grand Canyon up to 140 feet deep (4267 cm) and opened a path to the ocean.

  | The Sign on Specimen Ridge
  --- | ---
  On Specimen Ridge in the petrified forests of Yellowstone National Park evolutionists said that there is a forest "rooted in 27 different layers". There used to be a sign that said:
  "Buried within the volcanic rocks that compose the mountain are twenty-seven distinct layers of fossil forest that flourished 50 million years ago."

  Spirit Lake explained Specimen Ridge. The sign is gone because it is a lie.
- Spirit Lake Petrified Forest. In days scientists observed the conditions that they claimed took 50 million years and several layers of forest growth. The eruption stripped the trees and buried them upright in Spirit Lake, showing how petrified forests are formed during the next ten years. A million trees were stripped of their branches and bark. Then, when they became waterlogged, they sank and the ones with roots oriented themselves upright under water like a forest in a random manner, not clumped together. Sedimentation quickly covered them. Since the trees were deposited at different times, their roots were at different layers, creating a stratified forest effect. Over 19,500 upright trees remain in that position today and demonstrate how the multiple layers were created with objects trapped between them by the rapidly flowing turbidity currents.
- Peat and Coal Beds. Barks stripped from the floating mat of trees settled at the bottom and have begun to form several inches of peat, the first stage in the formation of coal. Only heat is needed to form coal from peat. Scientists assumed that an inch of coal took 1000 years to form. They also looked at the slow formation of peat in swamp to come to their erroneous conclusions. The missing information was the presence of tree bark. An analysis of the coarse texture of coal beds show that they were made from tree barks not swamp peat which produces fine textured coal.
- Badlands Formed in 5 Days. Badlands topography form when loose material has washed away from rock formations. Evolution claims that they were caused by slow water erosion over hundreds of years.
  » Steam Explosion Pits. However, the same landscape was formed by steam explosion caused when hot ash buried snow and ice and they flashed to stem when melted.
  This is another example of arrogant, ignorant scientists standing on a stack of bibles with their mud-stained boots, swearing that they know how a process worked and that their way is the only way it could have worked and everything else is the fairy tales of ignorant people who believe in a stupid book written by non-existent gods.
- Radioactive Dating. Since radioisotope dating is used for igneous rocks which are formed from molten material, creation scientists took a specimen of rock from the lava dome that was ten years old and had it dated by several labs with the Potassium-Argon method. The specimen was ground to a powder and sent as the whole rock and the separate components. The results ranged from 340,000 years for the whole rock to 2.8 million years.

Reverse Evolution. There are hundreds of examples of sites where the strata is in reverse order. Simpler forms are above more complex creatures. Often layers are beside each other or out of sequence.
Fossil Graveyards. Animals of many species were found buried together or on top of mountains as if they were escaping a flood.
Misplaced Artifacts. Modern human beings were supposed to emerge about 50,000 years ago and their ancestors split from apes five million years ago. Therefore, they should not appear in earlier geologic columns. But these are the facts about what was found (Powell).

- 4 MYA (Pleistocene). Human skull and skeletons.
- 5.5 MYA (Pleistocene). Human pelvis, jaw and arm bone.
- 7 MYA (Piocene). Human skull, jaw, foot prints, sandal prints.
- 26 MYA (Miocene). Human skull (California), jaw (Italy), shoe prints (Gobi Desert).
- 50 MYA (Eocene). Human skull (Germany) and tooth (Bear Creek, Montana).
- 70 MYA (Paleocene). Hand made cast iron cube (Wolfsegg, Austria).
- 190 MYA (Jurassic). Human leg, foot bones (Spring Valley, Nevada) and foot prints (Parkersbury, WV).
- 310 MYA (Pennsylvanian). Human foot prints, tools, gold chain, iron pot.
- 350 MYA (Devonian). Human foot prints, and a precision pattern.
- 500 MYA (Ordovician). Human skeleton, sandal prints and metal hammer.
- 600 MYA (Cambrian). Human foot prints, sandal prints, fish scales and iron artifacts.

Rock Strata Data
Rock strata data can only tell us that these items were buried at the same time. If organic material exists in fossilized form, it also tells us that the burial was rapid and under great pressure.

Surtsey Island. On 15 November 1963 a new island appeared in the North Atlantic through a volcanic eruption. It had mature beaches within months, not millions of years as scientists preached! All volcanic activity had ceased by 5 June 1967. It was 560 feet (174 meters) tall and 1.5 Km in diameter. Sigurdur Thorarinsson a geophysicist from Iceland wrote this about his observations.

> Only a few months have sufficed for a landscape to be created which is so varied and mature that it is almost beyond belief ... Here we see wide sandy beaches and precipitous crags lashed by breakers of the sea. There are gravel banks and lagoons, impressive cliffs resembling the White Cliffs on the English Channel. There are hollows, glens, and soft undulating land. There are fractures and faulted cliffs, channels and rock debris. There are boulders worn by the surf, some of which are almost round, and further out there is a sandy beach where you can walk at low tide without getting wet.

Coelacanth Fish (Latemaria). It was once thought to be a vital link in the evolution of fish and was used to date rocks to 70 million years. Until it was caught by a fisherman in 1965 and several times later off the coast of Africa!

Scientific Method: Reproducible Experiments and Data.

Evolution: Theory or Fact
I have a huge problem with the proponents of the theory. Evolution has not and at this stage cannot be proven in the lab with repeatable experiments. Therefore, it will forever remain a theory. What scientists have actually done is to propose a theory, then defend it until a rare natural observation destroys their conclusion. That is neither science, nor the scientific method. In some cases, the evidence is so profound and they still hold on to the untested theory believing that there must be another explanation for the rare natural event. That is not science!

Slow and continuous sedimentation over long periods are not the only processes that can form stratified layers. Laboratory experiments proved the destructive potential of the global flood. Flow experiments in sedimentary tanks show that high velocity gas-charged or water-charged slurries of pyroclastic flows separate into coarse and fine particles which produce distinct layers that form rapidly. Scientific method verifies the Bible.

The Verdict
The forensic evidence in the geologic columns testify to the fact that the layers were formed in months or days, not millions of years.
Eyewitnesses to natural processes are a laboratory model of what happened in the past. Turbidity currents, the formation of islands and the arrangement of the trees after the Mt. St. Helen's eruption visibly demonstrated that processes that evolutionists swore could only occur over hundreds of millions of years could occur in hours! Why did the theory stray so far?
Scientists said emphatically, "millions of years", but nature says conclusively, "hours or days". One can only conclude that the statements about time are also an unproven theory.
Other evidence such as sea life on mountain tops may not point to mountains slowly emerging from the sea, but that the mountains were once covered by the waters of a flood. Therefore, forensic evidence and current eyewitness testimony of turbidity currents point to just as strong an evidence for a great flood.

Paleontology - Bones Of Contention

> If Bones Could Talk. "... objective examination has rarely been the object of Darwinist paleontology. The Darwinist approach has consistently been to find some supporting fossil evidence, claim it as 'proof' for 'evolution', and then ignore all the difficulties." Phillip Johnson (Creationist). 'Darwin on Trial' page 84

The evidence from paleontology of life forms found in rocks that were supposedly formed 500 million years before that life form evolved shows that these species existed at the time the rock was formed.

Early Man?

Good News! Bad News!
There are no apes in the family tree. But there may be a scientist or two.

There are two prehistoric species said to be human, but none of these are a transitional form from ape to human.
Neanderthals. Not in my family tree! DNA studies show that they are a totally different species which are not related to any human race. They lived in caves and their remains are found mostly in Europe. Physically, their skulls are larger and they had the characteristic bow legs (curved thigh bones) and large eyebrow ridges They are probably a species of apes. The DNA study is a brand new discovery. I wonder how long it will take to stop those "educational" programs that talk about our Neanderthal cousins.
CroMagnon Man. Normal humans, some were over six feet tall, with a cranial capacity somewhat larger than our own. They show no evidence of transition from ape to man and mitochondrial DNA are not the same as humans.
Old Bones
I bet you are wondering what happened to all those bones - millions of years old. All those cave men and women. The ones that were part ape and part human. Well, it seems as if they were all ape and one was a pig. Really! The others were modern human - and wonder of wonders some of them were hoaxes made up by lying scientists desperate to produce a missing link. The truth is there has never been a complete skeleton found. And the sum total of all the different types of bones found for all these discoveries could not cover a table. In one case one tooth was found and was magically transformed into a human complete with background, family and psychiatric problems!
Evolutionists state that humans have lived here for one to three million years and then, stopped evolving 100,000 years ago. Yet actual historical dates go back less than 5,000 years to about 2250 BC. Even using the inaccurate carbon 14 dating system, the earliest dates for evidence of mankind extend back about 15,000 years not one million years.
Observation conflicts with the theory. Human remains have been found in rock strata that supposedly formed hundreds of millions of years before humans existed. The footprints of humans and dinosaurs have been found together even though dinosaurs were supposed to have been extinct millions of years before. These same footprints show that early humans were giants and therefore their coexistence with dinosaurs does not seem so unbelievable.

Possible Evidence Of Early Man
According to evolution, mankind appeared one to three million years ago and stopped evolving 50 - 100,000 years ago. The following evidence shows humans and signs of human activity buried in rock strata formation that is supposed to be over 125 million years and human foot prints are found with prints of animals who were supposed to be extinct millions of years before.

Discovery | What Was Found | What It Was
--- | --- | ---
Fossil | Misplaced Skeletons
» | Guadeloupe Woman | 1812 - human skeleton without head and feet | Found in rock 25 million years old
» | Caveras Skull | 1876 | Found in the two million year old Pliocene strata. Perfectly human
» | Castinedolo Skull | Perfect human skulls | -
» | Moab Skeletons | Two skeletons | Cretaceous rock, 100 million years old
Foot Prints | Human Footprints in Unexpected Places
» | Laetoli Tracks | 1977 Kenya, Mary Leakey | Dated 3.75 million years ago
» | Gediz Track | 1970 Turkey | 250,000 years old
» | Burdick Track | Texas, 6.5 x 14 inch long footprint in Cretaceous rocks discovered by Clifford Burdick | Made by a person 7 feet tall
? | Glen Rose Tracks | Texas. Over 80 foot prints found in situ. 15 and 21.5 inch long tracks in Cretaceous rocks (150 million year old rock) | Made by people about 8.3 - 11.8 feet tall (253-360 cm). They were also found with dinosaur tracks and below the dinosaur tracks
» | Antelope Springs Tracks | Utah 1968, William J. Meister Sr. He split open Cambrian rock while searching for trilobites | 545 million year old rock with human foot print in sandals (10.25 X 3.5 inch) (26x9 cm), stepping on trilobites
» | Alamogordo Tracks | New Mexico, 13 giant tracks 22 inches long | Giant humans once lived
» | Arizona Tracks | 1960, Northern Arizona | Barefoot human child beside dinosaur tracks
Tools | Glen Rose, Texas | An iron hammer with a wooden handle all inside of limestone Cretaceous rock
» | Inca Burial Stone | Engraved on the stone is a human riding on the back of a triceratops | Drawing made before dinosaurs were discovered, might prove that the Incas saw dinosaurs

Evolutionists claimed that the Burdick track must have been a carving. So in 1990 researchers looked for the original site found it in the Cross Branch stratum, a tributary of the Paluxy River in Glen Rose, Texas. After finding the original site they also cut through the artifact and found the contours of pressure lines, proving that the print was not carved but made by foot prints impressed in soft trilobite mud. Researchers have since found many other tracks on the site with dinosaur tracks.
» Paluxy Debunked. Research concluded from the evidence they examined is that the human foot prints are badly degraded footprints of dinosaurs that are incorrectly interpreted. They also cut apart prints and found that some were fakes carved by locals during the Depression. They were making these just like fake "feathered dinosaur" fossils were being created in China and fooled the National Geographic magazine in 1999.
Why so many mistakes?
The skulls of both baby apes and giant monkeys can look like the skulls of immature humans.

The Missing Link And Lack Of Transitional Forms.

Creation or Evolution
There are no links between plants, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals. There are no links between monkeys and man.

There is no evidence in the fossil records that one creature has become another creature. There are no transitional forms found in the fossil records of animals or in plants or in living species. This means that they cannot show a skeleton where one animal is changing into another. There are no fins changing to wings. Neither do we find creatures with partially developed body structures. If evolution occurred there would be more of these missing links and mistakes than the final product. But there are none. There are no missing links.
Darwin thought the absence of missing links would be the "most obvious and gravest objection" against his theory because the number of transitional links "must have been conceivably great".
The Mathematical Problem. Evolution should have littered the planet with more transitional forms than final species. The embarrassment is not only that there is not one or maybe one possible transitional form, it is that there are not many.
What could allow for the absence of so many failed creatures in the fossil record? Under which conditions could such a profound lack of evidence occur?

Macroevolution (Creation in Disguise)
Scientists are trying to sneak through the back door what they are ridiculing at the front gate. Creation states that the male and female of every species were suddenly created and there are no transitional forms. Macroevolution claims male and female suddenly emerged without any transitional forms.
Just like creation, evolution cannot be proved by the scientific method

Macroevolution: Evolution By Special Creation?
To explain the lack of transitional forms and other serious problems some enterprising scientists came up with the theory of macroevolution, punctuated equilibrium, male and female in one egg and monster mutation to explain the gap, but these are at best merely theories of creation now disguised as evolutionary science and in the worst case myths and legends and fairy tales created by frightened primitive men who cannot explain their environment.

> Creation is Unacceptable. "Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation which is unthinkable." Arthur Keith (evolutionist), Quoted by B. G. Ranganathan (Creationist). 'Origins?' page 22

Although I ridicule these theories I do respect the efforts of these scientists, if not their conclusions. Their theories point to the fact that they acknowledge the glaring problems with the theory. They are more honest than those who continue to spout these theories despite the lack of evidence and the impossibility of the development of critical stages like sexual reproduction. Macroevolution attempts to explain the following:

- Missing Links. There are no transitional forms when there should be many.
- Sexual Reproduction. The need for a simultaneous evolution of male and female.
- Short Time. Certain processes need to be completed without errors in a very short time.
- Long Time. However, to fit the theory back into evolution they include long, dormant periods.

» Making Up For Lost Time? These new theories mix the requirements of sudden creation with long gaps of evolution during which nothing happened. However, they are now on the same playing field of creationists. How did these critical and extremely complex events happen in such a short time without intelligent intervention?
In addition, I suspect that the reason the original proponents of evolution threw in the requirement of long periods of time was not because they had measurements, but because they needed long periods of time to make slow evolution mathematically possible! Now we have returned to the realization that biological evolution was sudden and complete. So when evolution really counted, it required short periods of time!
But now they have the requirement of long time as a left over from the original theory. So they throw it back in as time where nothing occurred. If they left this out then we are back to the Genesis account of creation.
» Designed By Perfection. So I am left with this question. If punctuated equilibrium and macroevolution relies on the mechanism of sudden creation, what prevents the gap between each species from being 24 hours or less?

Time | Day 4 | Day 5 (Twisted Thursday) | Day 6 (Freaky Friday) | Day 7
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Method | Create | Rest | Create | Rest | Create | Rest | Create | Rest | Create | Rest
1 | Creation |  | < 24 Hours |  | < 24 Hours |  | < 24 Hours |  | < 24 Hours |  | Sabbath
2 | Evolution | 600 MYA | 215 MYA | 60 MYA | 40 MYA | Now

Spontaneous Generation Part Deux? Whatever sudden infusion of energy, luck or intelligence that made such profound changes quickly, would more likely occur one time and produce all species, than to occur several times over billions of years.

» Perfection By Design. Only with a designer could there be a lack of many failed designs. A designer works out problems on the blackboard of his or her mind in thoughts, then on paper in symbols. Only when a working prototype is worth the expense will a physical model be produced.
Evolution is a random, accidental process with no brain, no designer, no mental playground only a physical landscape to work out every failed design path without the benefit of a learning curve. Creating and using a learning curve requires an intelligent mind and a storage facility for historical data. The planet should be littered with evidence of failures and successful transitional forms. But there are none.

For a while they thought that the Archaeopteryx was a link between birds and reptiles. That is until someone found a complete skeleton with the bones of a bird that it had eaten. What stands out in this and so many other fossil discoveries is that they are willing to make such definitive statements based on such little evidence. They completely subvert any scientific process and their own colleagues do not object until decades later when the public has absorbed the hogwash.

Convergent Evolution: Through The Looking Glass.

Parallel Evolution (Parallelism)
Similar development in anatomical feature of different species lines after divergence from a common ancestor that had the initial feature common to both.
Cat Ancestor (Paws and Whiskers)
Lion | Tiger | Leopard | Cat

Evolution also promotes a spurious argument that because physical structures look alike, it means that the animals are related. Such reasoning is based on parallelism.
However genetic studies on fish in two nearby lakes (Lake Malawi and Lake Tanganyika) with similar structural and cosmetic features show that they could not predict relationship by looking at physical appearance.
The original theory proposes that at one time the lakes were joined and there were common ancestors. As the water levels lowered and the lakes separated new lines developed that looked alike. But genetic studies showed that these look alike species of fish were not related because their mitrochondrial DNA was so different.
Across the planet, in species that lived together scientists discovered that look-alike species were not related. So they proposed the new theory of convergence to explain this phenomenon.

Convergent Evolution
Similar development in anatomical feature of different species lines without a common ancestor.
Cosmetic Development: Stripes
Placental Mammal Ancestor (No Stripes) | Ancestor (No Stripes)
--- | ---
Zebra | Tiger | Cat | Zebra Butterfly (Stripes)
(Stripes)
Structural Development: Wings
Common Ancestor (No Wings)
Bat | Bird | Dragonfly | Butterfly
(Bones) | (Fluid Pressure)

Convergent Evolution (Convergence). Similarities (Analogies) that occur when two species develop similar traits which are not due to emergence from a very distant common ancestor. They claim that parallelism and convergence are due primarily to separate species lines experiencing the same kinds of natural selection pressures over long periods of time.
If we combine this new theory with macroevolution, it proposes that after a series of stationary phases followed by rapid evolution, that different lines of random evolutionary processes converged and designed the same solution. In the case of butterfly wings and bird wings, they accomplished the same design through different physical mechanisms.

The Verdict
This new theory concluded that looks can be deceiving. You cannot conclude that species have an immediate common ancestor because they look alike. So the search for a missing link which involves looking for fossils that are between the structural features of the ancestor and the modern creature is not a solid method. The science of determining relationships solely on the fossil record is bogus! We need other evidence to arrive at this conclusion.
What we do have is different variations of the same type of animals and structural similarities by intelligent design. Take a look at all the different types of cats and people. No one would dare say that one is changing to some other kind of animal because the shape of the nose or the size of the feet are different. They are just cats. Big ones, small ones, striped ones and spotted ones. But they are still cats. Nothing else. Your cat is not changing into a lion. And no self-respecting cat would be caught dead changing into a dog. Cats are superior to dogs.

Evolutions' Hoaxes, Frauds, Retractions And Mistaken Identities

Discovery | What Was Found | What It Was
--- | --- | ---
| Java Man | 1891-92 by Eugene Dubois in Java on the Solo river. A skull cap, fifty feet away a femur, and, later in another location, three teeth. | Hoax. They were the skull of a gibbon and a human leg bone. They were found a year apart but not in the same spot
| Neanderthal | 1908, France-Germany, described as totally human. | Deformed vertebra from arthritis. 2000 DNA studies show no link to any human groups. They are considered human by some
| Piltdown Man Eoanthropous ("Dawn Man") | 1911-12, England. Named Eoanthropus Dawsoni (Dawson's Dawn Man). 500,000 years old | Hoax. Discovered in 1953 after 45 years. It was believed for 40 years. It was a fraud by a group of scientists. A human skull and the jaw of an ape were stained to look old
The fate of "dawn man" was to slink off into the sunset of shame
| Peking Man | China 1920, original bones lost. Found in a cave with thousands of animal bones. The human bones appeared to be cannibalized | Hoax or Retraction? Bones from a garbage dump. No evidence of transitional forms. Unable to verify claims because the evidence is "lost"
| Rhodesian Man | 1921, declared to be one million years old | Mistaken Identity. Modern person with dental problems from a modern diet and a hole in his skull from either a bullet or a crossbow (both modern weapons)
| Nebraska Man | Midwest 1922, Single molar tooth, used as evidence in the Scope's Monkey trial along with Java man, Piltdown man and Neanderthal man | Retraction. Tooth of an extinct pig. Living specimens of the same pig were found in Paraguay in 1972. It used to be in many museums as proof of evolution
The Scopes Monkey Trial (July 10-25, 1925). It removed the teaching of creation from schools and replaced it with evolution by the testimony of "scientific proof" that was based on erroneous identification of fossils and two deceitful hoaxes (Java man and Piltdown man), the bones of a pig and a monkey
| Australopithecines | The Southern Ape from Africa | Most experts say they are all apes. Others claim that they are our ancestors
| Taung African Man | Australopithecus Africanus. South Africa 1924, "Skull" | A young ape with immature features
| Australopithecus boisei "Nutcracker Man" | 1959, set of mismatched bones discovered by Louis Leakey at the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania | Retraction. The discoverer conceded that it was the skull of an ape
| Ramapithecus | 1961. A few teeth and a jawbone. From this they deduced that it walked upright | Ancestor of an orangutan. An extinct baboon
| Skull 1470 | 1973, 2.8 million year old skull by Richard Leakey | Mistaken Identity. A modern person (such as a teen) with a small brain
| Lucy (Australopithecus Afarensis) | 1974, Ethiopia. A fossil skeleton 40% complete. 42 inches tall. Bones found miles apart at different depths. The hip was cut and reglued so that it looked like she walked upright | Fraud. An orangutan. Still in dispute but they are apes that were just as bipedal as other monkeys. A fraud was also committed to make it appear like the missing link
| Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis | 1999, China. The missing link between the bird and reptiles | Hoax. Dinosaur glued to a bird
| Archaeopteryx | Bones that were thought to be the missing link between the bird and reptiles. They are tiny creatures the size of a bird | It is a bird, not a missing link. A complete skeleton and the femur of a bird were later found
Microraptor | Reptile or bird with wings on its hind legs
October 15, 1999. National Geographic Society began to advertise a "feathered dinosaur" found in China. Is that supposed to be the new missing link? Or is it just an animal with feathers or another big bird that appears to have 4 wings? National Geographic Printed: 1999 November. Retracted: March 2000 Hoax ("Piltdown Chicken"). Xu Xing, a Chinese paleontologist initially fooled, discovered that there is a market for creating fossil fakes after finding a second with a mirror image duplicate of the tail but a different body
| Mungo Man | 1974, in New South Wales Australia, declared to be 56,000 to 68,000 years old | Oldest DNA from skeletal remains
It challenges the "Out of Africa" 100,000 years ago theory. It also points out the danger of building a theory on so little evidence. A buried skeleton does not guarantee that it is the oldest, or it or its ancestors are from the area where it is found
| Hobbit (Homo Floresiensis) | Flores, Indonesia. Female, 3 feet tall and multiple individuals and animals in a cave. New human species. Lived 18000 years ago. Date of bones ranged from 18000, 37000 and 74000 years | A pygmy with a brain shrinking disease. Locals claimed they were short, hairy people called the Abu-Gogo who lived in caves at the time of their grandparents. The 56000 year difference in age suggests an error in our dating methods

This is a summary of some famous discoveries and what eventually became of them. Those that are not frauds are either apes or human. There is no reason to think that any of those apes are human ancestors except in the wishful thinking of anthropologists. There is no DNA or missing links that prove this relationship.

Biochemists Allen Wilson and Vincent Sarich discovered that the first people had to originate less than 200,000 years ago and could only have come from an original two people. After fifteen years, the paleontologists reluctantly accepted the evidence from biochemists, Richard Leakey said:

> "We anthropologists were forced to admit we had been wrong and that Sarich and Wilson were closer to the right track than any of us had even imagined."

While it was desperate scientists who perpetrated the hoax, it is still good science that exposed them. However, they have a fatal flaw due to their bias and wishful thinking. They want evolution to be true. I want to have rich parents.
Why do these people insist on making these spectacular claims without any scientific evidence or review. Apparently most of these skulls are not even carbon dated. Even after eleven 'old' human skeletons were radiocarbon dated and found to be less that 5000 years old scientists did not test the remaining bones. Is it possible that they are afraid they would not have a leg bone to stand on?

Scientific Method: Reproducible Experiments and Data. There are no experiments that prove transition from one specie to another or even one body part to another. All arguments are based on interpretation of observation. Scientists have said that there is more genetic variation between two chimpanzees of the same family than any two human beings from any race!

The Verdict
The evidence here is one of great embarrassment to scientists. Finding no evidence of transitional species - they invented one.
This evidence from evolution fails to meet the scientific methodology because their theories did not make accurate predictions. Human bodies are found where they should not. Species are found living together that should not. For all the fragments of bones and teeth found - every one points to modern men or real apes. Their own carbon dating denies the ages that their theories impose on these bones. So they resort to telling us how old these are things by the unreliable rock-strata clock method instead of using the scientific tools that they have.
Rock strata dating is an example of circular reasoning. Scientists use it to prove evolution dates, yet the method itself is full of serious errors based on the assumption of what each layer means.

Creation Hoaxes, Frauds, Retractions And Misrepresentations
There may have been hoaxes and exaggerated claims related to the discovery of Noah's ark, but I do not know of a deliberate hoax that was manufactured to try to prove creation. Evolutionists simply dismiss the claims and do not examine them thoroughly to expose fraudulent activity. They claim inaccuracies in interpretation of data, ignorant reasoning and misrepresentation of their information.
So as far as I can tell, the Mount St. Helens eruption did produce the effects we reported, the mixed up evidence in the fossil records do exist, the coelacanth fish is alive and well and vacationing in the Pacific.

DNA Evidence For Evolution
DNA is the mechanism through which we inherit physical characteristics. Evolutionists point to at least three reasons why DNA shows the process of evolution.

- Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). This is DNA passed from mothers to daughters. Studies of 147 people from five geographic populations show that we all came from one woman who lived 200,000 years ago. Current theory is that our most recent common female ancestor, Mitochondrial Eve, lived 143,000 years ago. Similar studies of the "Y" chromosome in males show that it came from one man 59,000 years ago (some sources say 80,000 years).
  Rebuttal: (Adam and Eve). So what? Creationists also claim that we all came from one pair of common ancestors. This study does not "prove" that slow changes in DNA occurred. They are simply discovering the laws of genetics.
  However, the early fathers of evolution were really trying to prove that certain races descended from apes and were not human. This evidence proves the creation account.
- DNA Similarities Between Primates.
  - Quantity Of Genes. Before they finally started measuring the content of genes, scientists used to point to the similarity in the number of genes as proof of a relationship. Humans and hares have 46 chromosomes. Rabbits have 44. Chimpanzee, rhesus monkey, cabbage, tobacco and potato all have 48 chromosomes. Ants have 2, kangaroos have 12, amoeba have 13, shrimp have 254 and cows have 60.
    So quantity is neither an indication of evolutionary superiority or relationship.
  - Quality Of Genes. Now that we have the genome project, we can look at the content. Humans and mosquitos have a 43% similarity. Humans and daffodils have a 35% similarity. Humans differ from gorillas by 1.62%, from orangutans by 1.63%, and from chimpanzees by 1.24%. All of these are less than had been expected. At one point they agreed that chimpanzee and human genes were 98.5 percent identical, now that has been revised to only 95 percent genetic material similarity.
    » The Myth Of 1%. Some scientists now report that the 1% similarity is based on comparing a small section of genes. When the entire gene is compared the difference is closer to 24% - 30%!!
  Rebuttal: ("Intelligent Design"). Suppose 98% similarity is true. What a difference 2 to 5% makes! The fact is that even with this close margin cross species breeding cannot be achieved, the one thing needed to continue the species. The "oh so close" but "oh so far" relationship also points to a similar intricate balance of forces in the atom. Such precision is required to maintain the balance that one can only conclude that intelligent intervention prevents the chaos.
  What scientists have basically demonstrated is that biological systems are built from the same building blocks: carbon, amino acids and DNA. They did not prove that one became the next.
  Here is an analogy of the difficulties they are ignoring. Hydrogen has one proton and neutron, silver has forty seven and gold has seventy nine. You cannot create gold by joining 79 hydrogen atoms or adding 32 hydrogens to silver very easily. It is theoretically possible, but it takes a tremendous amount of energy to break and reassemble the nuclear bond. Doing so is extremely destructive. It is making a nuclear bomb. It is not a spontaneous or natural event.
  Similarly, cross breeding between different species appears to be as difficult as joining atoms at the nucleus. What a difference 2% makes!
- Retroviruses and Recombinant DNA. Because the building blocks are similar and appear to follow similar laws, scientists are moving sections of genes from one species to another, switching off and switching on genes. So they now claim that retroviruses are the result of integration events that took place 5 to 50 million years ago and these remnants of ancient viral infections are in the primate lineage at the same DNA sites.
  Rebuttal. This is like claiming that we evolved from remnants of an apple because the same protein in the apple is found in all primate muscles. Again, they are illustrating that they can move basic building blocks around with tremendous energy. But it is just the same as eating an apple and breaking down the protein to use in building muscle. I have never seen them join a group of viruses to create a flea!
  However, a designer used similar building blocks and provided plants to resupply these renewable resources to biological systems.
  After the diet changed at the flood and the average age dropped from 700 to 70, I have often wondered if integrating animal genetic material like nutrients might have contributed to the problem. Similarly, the obsession of God with faithfulness in marriage and the rules about marrying a close relative of a dead husband could be related to the exchange of genetic material that somehow causes a permanent change.
  Scientists are playing god. They are experimenting with systems without appreciating the consequences in the same way that physicists played with the atom without realizing the dangers of radiation exposure.
- Dinosaur DNA. Scientists have been able to recover blood vessels from the bones of 80 million year old dinosaurs. Other scientists were skeptical because they believed that soft living tissue could not exist over 10,000 years. So it could not be found in one million year old creatures. Yet here was the evidence. However, instead of reconsidering their assumptions about the age of the dinosaur, they choose to believe that soft tissue can survive for 80 million years. They could be correct, but their bias is obvious. How can they test this new observation except by living millions of years?

Mr Potato World. The Mr Potato Head model relies on simple genetic mutations. However, the debate about creation and evolution is being fought long before these complex structures exist. The question is not IF external characteristics are determined by genetics, the burning question is how a series of fortunate interrelated accidents can occur in such a short time and so many times.
Your Mr. Potato Head model is erroneus because when you talk about single cosmetic genetic changes, you are appealing to systems that can exist on their own and do not really affect other systems. So what? If the Mr Potato develops a tail he is still a potato, not a monkey. You can string a series of cosmetic changes together and you will still get a potato, a weird-looking potato.
Mr. Potato Head can continue to flaunt the values of the rest of society for as long as possible with his abberant dress code, but when the changes reach a certain threshold, simple single system mutations are useless. He cannot cross over.
If a female does not exist the first time Mr Potato decides to grow a penis, the monkey is dead.
Take any complex dependent system, chances are it takes a series of genes on different chromosomes to create their structure and regulate their function. They could not have randomly developed to any useful rudimentary form in a single lifetime.

Evolutionary Developmental Biology (Evo Devo) And The DNA Tree Of Life
Scientists discovered that the same genes that create a fly, create humans. It all depends on what is turned off or on. This was a surprise. They had expected the opposite. But somehow the spin doctor Frankensteins are claiming that this is what evolution predicted.
A new wrinkle in their theory was presented in a PBS documentary in December 2009. The diversity of life on earth is caused by the number of possible combinations of the genes. So scientists set out to discover what the genes did. The Human Genome Project (1990-2003) attempted to identify the three billion letters in our DNA and concluded that humans have 23000 protein coding genes, not the 80-100,000 predicted. In addition, chickens also have 23000 genes and corn has more. So the theory has confined itself to understanding how we use the genes that we have.
» Descent With Modification. Scientists' theories are now concluding that genes already carried around by a prehistoric common ancestor could be reconfigured to create all new species!
So a common ancestor, like an ancient fish have the genes to create legs and air breathing lungs and hair that can produce the modern man. A Mr Potato Head design.
» Evolution by Accidental Design. I could not believe that they were concluding that ancient animals carried all these possible future designs by accident. This is not only saying that a pile of metals became a car in 10 years. This is saying a pile of metals suddenly became a computer or a iPhone with millions of apps. This is the monster mutation theory at work again, concluding that all the design instructions accidentally occurred at once without intelligent direction. This is how the documentary was misleading.

- Throw Mud At Creation. First, the documentary dismissed creation by misquoting the position by saying, "What God had made was perfect and could not change". Then it labeled Darwin's findings as "based on fact and observation" not ancient superstition. So immediately if you can show that slight changes in genes produce different physical characteristics then you have proved that creatures do change.
  What we say is that the theory of evolution cannot prove that gross changes from one totally different creature to another occurred because the environment triggered these changes. A mushroom did not become a dog because of environmental pressures. It also implied that we do not acknowledge the genetic variation that is obvious. Any idiot who has children knows that each child is a unique combination of parents. So species have a wide variety of features that produce differences in color, sizes, texture and other characteristics. We merely state that no one by strength of will or force or wishful thinking or running from a predator can acquire blonde hair and blue eyes genetically because society favors those traits.
- Mysterious Questions. Then they posed questions with seemingly unknowable answers. How could each of the Galapagos Islands produce distinct varieties of finches and turtles? They concluded that evolution made the different beaks because of the type of food found on the island and ignored all the problems implied in that one statement. How did the short beaked finch tell its offspring to grow a long beak? How did this need trigger a beneficial mutation before all the hungry finches died? There are billions of possible mutations that could have occurred if there is no gene mutation pathway to complement the environment. So all the hungry finches die and there are billions of chances for the new generation to have the fatal beak design. Alas! No finches! All gone!
  Why not choose the simple answer. Birds with a particular beak found it easier to survive on a particular island. Others flew elsewhere or died off. As birds of a particular type became the majority, the process of genetics ensured that their children would be more like them.
- Gene Switches. Then the documentary explained how newly discovered parts of the genes work. I have no problem with this because it proves intelligent planning and design. Experiments on embryos have shown that 98% of our genes do not code for proteins and the race was on to determine what these "inactive genes" do. "Body Plan" genes throw switches that indicate front, back, left, right, top, bottom, inside and outside. "Body Pattern" genes tell how the outer surface should be colored, structured and patterned. These switches also tell "body stuff" genes what to do, when to start growing, when to stop, how long and how intense and where the body parts go and what form they take. These genes make the individual organs and parts that distinguish each creature.
- Species Diversity. It took one of creation's arguments and claimed it as their own. We claimed their theory of one by one, accidental and random accumulation of mutations cannot account for the wide diversity. They simply argue from the finished design and say that this is how the diversity occurred. They ignored the fact that the opposite has been and still is their prevailing theory and did not explain how this vast diversity suddenly appeared.
- The Psychic DNA (Designer Genes). We want them to show how the design occurred, not tell us what it obviously does. How was DNA, a biological chemical with a short life span, created with so much engineered and programmed intelligence and psychic ability? How or why did the fly gene include instructions for creating human hands and legs 350 million years before the environmental stresses reveal the trapped human design?
- Sleight of Hand. They simply declare that genetic differences are proof of evolution in action without proving that it occurred. That is not proof, that is a description of what exists as designed. Left unanswered are the very same statistical and design questions. How does a fish running from a prey develop a set of features like armor, camouflauge colors or legs that is passed down to the next generation? Instead, I am left with a new question.
- Do you think that I am stupid? ... Really!!?. How could the ancient creature have within its programming the intelligence to create structures required for environments and challenges that it has never seen and will only encounter billions of years in the future? Only a designed system does that! In fact the simplicity of the design is brilliant. Four codes formed 23000 genes, creating so much diversity.
  » Sudden Evolution (Creation's Rare Traits Emerge). It seems that the original meaning of "evolution" is itself evolving.
  Now, experiments are showing that changes occurred abruptly in one generation. But they are still calling the process "evolution" as they try to find what change agent triggered the change. Knowing that there is no process by which such complex systems can be chemically changed and passed to the egg in one generation, they still cling to this myth of the forces of environment that causes change. Instead, they need to speak about the environment that wipes out changes that cannot survive. Then we are still left with the big issue of how the programming for those changes were originally designed and made.
  » The Taming Of The Fox. Scientists on a 1950s fox farm in Siberia wondered how the dog was domesticated from the wolf and they wondered if they could get a domesticated species of foxes. Nothing worked for years until they decided to select and mate the least aggressive foxes by selecting for tameness alone. Suddenly, the change emerged in one generation and with it came another set of linked changes. In 10 years there was a new variety of color, floppy ears, barking, playful and they answered to names. It was discovered that the hormones leading to aggression and flight were linked to melatonin.
  Yet, they call this evolution when the environment did not cause the genetic changes or produce a new species. The genetic programming was already there and the environment (scientists), through intelligent intervention (selective breeding) produced the characteristics they wanted and protected the tame foxes. The aggressive environment kills off or drives away the changes that cannot survive. Environment does not induce changes without intervention.
  Sudden "evolution" is the original program of creation at work. Species mate and produce offspring with their genetic characteristics. Rare traits survive under exceptional conditions, passing unnoticed for many generations until two rare parents unite.
  This is neither evolution nor mutation. Mutation is only passed on if the eggs are changed.
  This disagrees with Darwin's Theory which predicts that it would take long periods of time in a slow process of evolution to turn the wolf into a dog. Darwin said that nature does not go in leaps ... things do not happen fast, they happen gradually." He is wrong! So these changes cannot emerge abruptly, they must take long periods of time. He said this because the original meaning of evolution is based on the environment randomly creating the species from the first simplest chemicals to the most complex. So all scientists have shown so far is that when the complex system emerges it has so much pre-programmed variation, that new traits can emerge with every generation. This is intelligent creation and this new branch of observable evolution is operating within the creation timelines.
  » Intelligent Selection. So here is my theory. As sexual reproduction produced a rare trait, the offspring survived if the trait gave it more advantage in the environment. It if had less advantage, the offspring survived if it was protected or moved to a new location to survive or a natural accident wiped out its competitors. All of this occurs in one generation with created beings. This is not the classic Darwinian evolution.

In this sleight of hand trick we are being entertained with the designed capabilities of the finished product without being told how the product was constructed from first atom to complex structure.

Creation | Evolution
--- | ---
Six Days | - | - | Billions of Years
All Species | Slow Chemical Evolution
DNA | DNA Blackbox
6000 Years of Breeding (Variations Emerge) | Slow Biological Evolution
Fast Biological Evolution | Slow Evo-Devo
Many Years of Breeding (Evo-Devo)

By showing how creatures are different they ignored the problem of how so much perfection could be suddenly designed by accident. You are left with the impression that this black box design engine does it and you never realize that you were never told how. It is the classic sleight of hand and bait and switch Ponzi scheme. You see the dollars pouring out of one end and the pennies going into the other and you never thought to question the middle. Their one by one mutation was more reasonable. It is based on how knowledge grows and accumulates and is adapted.
So, sudden mutation with the built in subroutines is like telling me that a computer game designed itself. In fact it is saying that there is one computer game that is so dynamic that it can become any computer game simply by throwing electronic switches that give instruction on how to change the configuration. And this magic game came all at once by accident with graphical images that resemble unknown, future creatures.

The Verdict
Experimental Evidence: Falling Foundations. Falling Pillars. Once again, real experiments disprove evolution in the critical area of long time, but this does not deter them from calling evidence of sudden creation, "sudden evolution" - the very opposite of Darwin's description.

Mr Computerized Potato. So the answer to Darwin's question about what produced this great diversity of life actually is showing that it came from an initial design that includes the instructions for all possible life. Faced with the biological facts they are now arguing for this programmable potato that can become a carrot or a sheep. Ignoring the question of which factory has the manufacturing rights to this ancestral potato and who designed this intelligent biological program.

Physics
The First Law Of Thermodynamics
This law is also called the Law of Conservation of Mass or Energy. Matter or energy cannot by itself be created or destroyed. Matter or energy may be changed from one form into another, but the total amount remains unchanged.
Evolution requires matter to be made from nothing in the Big Bang. This violates the first law.

Everything is Falling Apart
My dishes will not wash themselves. I tried. I failed. Essentially, everything in the universe is like a wound-up clock that is running down. Wood rots, steel rusts, buildings fall apart, chemical compounds deteriorate, mold grows on my dirty dishes, paint peels, people grow old and die, the sun will eventually burn itself out, the oceans will evaporate, my boobs will sag. Left to itself, everything eventually falls apart. It takes work and energy to maintain these systems. And it takes intelligence to do it correctly.

The Second Law Of Thermodynamics
The law is also called the Law of Increasing Entropy (a state of disorder). Left by themselves, systems will go into a state of disorder and decay, they would not increase in complexity.
More complexity can occur if energy, mostly in the form of work is used to bring order. For example, a pile of flour, butter, sugar and eggs will never turn into a round shaped cake with icing and the words 'Happy Birthday' on top unless someone with intelligence works to make this happen. Although the second law requires a source of energy to bring order out of chaos, I submit that with some processes intelligence must be at work to direct the random and destructive application of pure energy. I guess it is possible that under very unusual circumstances such as a long violent earthquake that could mix together the ingredients. If it was then followed by heat for a certain length of time, then a cake could be baked. But what kind of cake? One with egg shells in it, without shape or form. But definitely, no icing on top, and surely not the birthday greeting.
Evolutionists state that creationists misrepresent this law, because there is always a source of energy (like the sun) that could provide the energy for complex organization to occur. But just like the burnt, fuzzy cake with the egg shells in it, most processes require not just energy but such a perfect timing of events and coincidences that it demands intelligent supervision to direct this energy into useful work. Use your common sense.

A Similar Design
The basic design for most systems is that of a central nucleus surrounded by other orbiting bodies. We find this design from the smallest planet up to the largest galaxies. Let us take a look.

- Atoms. An atom is the smallest universe, It consists of a nucleus which has positively charged protons and neutrons (which have no charge). Orbiting the nucleus are negatively charged electrons.
- Cells. One of the smallest units of a living creature is the cell. The cell also has a nucleus. Surrounding the nucleus is the cell body with a cell wall as a boundary.
- Solar System. Solar systems have a sun at the center. Orbiting the sun along a precise path are other planets.
- Galaxies. Galaxies are a collection of solar systems which also revolve around a central core.

The Four Basic Forces
The precise balance of the forces of nature are a strong argument that it was designed. A small change in either of these forces would mean that the earth could never be formed or would be destroyed.
These relations, distances, and factors that are crucial to life is called the Anthropic Principle in the Universe. These are the basic forces of nature:

1. Gravity. The attraction between different bodies. It is the weakest force in the universe.
   The universe, as we know it, would be destroyed if gravity was not in perfect balance. We would fly off the earth, the planets could collide or we could drift away from the sun and freeze. But I would weigh less!
   Photon to Baryon Ratio. The photon to baryon ratio is crucial to gravitational attraction of stars and galaxies. Photons are the smallest unit of light energy. Baryons are particles whose weight is equal or greater than protons.
2. Electromagnetic Force. No chemical bonds could form if it were different. DNA would not form, proteins and enzymes - nothing that a biological system needs could be formed.
3. Nuclear Force (Strong Force). This force holds atoms together. A two percent change in this force would eliminate protons and life would not exist. If it were stronger there would be no hydrogen. If it were weaker there would be no heavy elements and life would not exist.
4. Proton to Neutron Ratio (Weak Force). Within the nucleus of an atom the proton always weighs slightly less than the neutron. But the neutron can exceed the weight of the proton by no more than twice the weight of an electron. If this were different the universe would not exist because the atoms would not form.

The Big Bang theory requires all these forces to be the same strength during and immediately after the big bang. Yet the strongest force is billions and billions and billions and billions and billions of times stronger than the weakest force. Yet these four basic forces must be in balance or the universe would either fly apart or collapse and destroy itself.
Nature had only one chance to get it right and these forces operate from the tiniest atom to the largest galaxy. Yet the theory states that atoms and planets were supposedly formed hundreds of millions of years apart. Natural selection or mutation or some other slow process could not have produced these basic properties of matter. You cannot be a little bit pregnant or almost pregnant. You either are or you are not. Similarly, the atoms had to be formed perfectly at the moment they came into existence or they would not be here. Long periods of time are the enemy. These processes must happen simultaneously.

Decay Curve
Speed | 18 12 6 0 |
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Years
Time
Period | Changes in Speed | Average
--- | --- | ---
A | Speed changes from 18 to 12 in 500 years | 1.2
B | Speed changes from 5 to 3 in 1000 years | 0.2
C | Speed changes from 2.5 to 2 in 500 years | 0.1
D | No detectable change in 1000 years (1.9) | 0

The Speed Of Light
The speed of light is said to be one of the constants of nature. It occurs in many calculations, in particular those that affect radioactive dating. Suppose the assumption that the speed of light is a constant is incorrect? We have no way of proving what it was in the past, except for evidence that many scientists reject. The evidence is that the speed of light was faster in the past and is slowing down.
Decay Curve. If a process has a similar decay path (the rate at which it changes over time) as the picture shows, then in the earlier periods a significant change is noticeable over a shorter period of time. While in later years, there is no observable change over a long period of time. If you compare section "A" to section "D", in 500 years, the speed changes from 18 to 12, while in Section "D" the measurement shows no observable change in over 1000 years.
This type of curve is known in many chemical reactions such as Henderson-Hasselbach. There is a steep curve at the beginning, but as time increases the process slows down or reaches equilibrium. If the speed of light follows a similar decay curve, then we can only say it is now a constant because in the current period of 300 years in which it has been measured we have not noticed a difference. But this is possible if we are in the ending stages of its decay cycle. Therefore, it is quite possible that it was much faster in the past. This is science, not faith.

| Inflation Theory
--- | ---
Theory. Proposed in 1981 by Alan Guth, it is the theory that the universe expanded from the atomic scale to the cosmic scale in a fraction of a second, far faster than light. In one trillionth of a second it expanded from a marble to all observable space. Then it expanded at a more gradual phase proposed by the Big Bang theory.
Implications. Surprise, surprise! After ridiculing Norman and Setterfield and swearing on a stack of evolution bibles that there is nothing faster than the speed of light, scientists are discovering that waves traveled faster than the speed of light for a very short time in the past! Existing Particles. Experimental results released by CERN in September 2011, have determined that neutrinos travel faster than light.

The Speed Of Light Was Faster In The Past. The work of Norman and Setterfield includes documentation of 163 measurements by 16 different methods over a 300 year period between 1675 and 1975. They show a decrease in rate from 307600 km/s to 299792.458 km/s. Even allowing for experimental error and differences in instrumentation there is still a decrease. It might have reached a constant in 1960, or the changes are so small that it may take another thousand years to notice the trend. Scientists have discarded this evidence as incorrect measurements due to primitive instruments. I guess that scientists in future days will think our readings are inaccurate and primitive when they do not agree with the theory of the month.
The speed of light is treated as a constant which never changes and it affects many calculations, especially those involving time and distance. Other known 'constants' are also affected by the speed of light. This is a possible phenomenon that scientists would soon rather ignore.

Environmental Clocks And Radioactive Dating
Radioactive dating depends on the speed of light. Science needs the speed of light to be a constant because tiny changes in the speed of light gives enormous changes in dates.

| A Million Dollars or a Penny Which do you prefer?
A penny a day doubled every day for one month would give the following:
Week 1 - | $1.27
Week 2 - | $81.92
Week 3 - | $10,485.76
Week 4 - | $1,342,177.28
Take the penny! Small amounts can add up very quickly.

We can explain that reality by asking you what would you prefer? A million dollars now, or a penny a day doubled every day for a month? Take the penny.
Radioactive dating methods are based on the half life of an atom. Each element has a specific half life, a rate of decay in which it loses half of its particles as it turns into a more stable form. Let me explain it in terms of a block of ice. Suppose it takes a block of ice one hour to melt away eight ounces of water. So, if you suddenly come across a piece of ice and a puddle of water measuring twenty four ounces then you can deduce that the ice has been melting for three hours. To work as a measurement tool, the theories rely on knowing or measuring the following:

- Input. Know the amount and what it breaks down from (ice, atoms, other chemicals)
- Output. Know the amount and what it breaks down into (water, electrons, other chemicals)
- Remains. Measure either the amount of breakdown product or the material remaining.
- Rate. Know the rate at which something changes (melts, breaks down, decays or grows)

To be a reliable clock, the rate of melting must never change and there can be no change in the environment that will affect the rate of change or any of the byproducts. What are the problems with these theories?

- Initial Conditions. How can we know how big the block of ice was before it started melting?
- Unknown Start Time. How did we know when the melting started? There might have been freezing temperatures for a long time.
- Rate of Change. How can we establish the rate of change during the period?
- Intermediate Conditions. How can we tell that some event in the past did not speed up or slow down the rate of decay? For example, the room got hotter and the block of ice started melting faster.
- Contamination (Closed System). How do we know that there is not contamination of the byproducts? For example, did water from another source spill into the same area as the water from our melting ice. Or did the cat walk by and drink some of the water? The item being mesaured must not get in or leak out.
- Incomplete Knowledge. Do we know all the processes that could cause this breakdown? Heat will melt ice, but pressure will do that also.

Dating Methods. Instead of a block of ice, scientists use radioactive materials to measure rates of decay. The assumptions are that these atoms have always been in existence and that they are slowly changing from one form to another at a predictable rate. So, if we can measure how much decay has occurred we can measure time.
The number of neutrons usually equal the number of protons, but occasionally an atom has more neutrons than it needs. This excess particle makes it radioactive. And the time it takes to get rid of one half of its particles is called the half life. There are several dating methods used by scientists:

| Radioactive Elements The Ultimate Weight Loss Plan
Having two identical dictionaries would be the same as two atoms of the same element. Suppose you added 50 blank pages to the end of one book. It would still be a dictionary, still have the same useful information - it would be the same book, just heavier. This is the way radioactive isotopes are. They have excess, useless information that they are constantly trying to discard.

1. Carbon-14. Radioactive Carbon dating. Half life 5,730 years. Dates carbon-based objects less than 50,000 years old (plants).
2. Uranium-Thorium-Lead. Half life 713 million years.
3. Fission Track Dating. U238 trapped in volcanic glass decay and leave a damage trail that is the "daughter". These tracks are sensitive to heat.
4. Rubidium-Strontium. Radioactive dating. Half life is 48.8 billion. Dates rocks over 100 million years old.
5. Potassium-Argon. Radioactive dating. Potassium-40 decays into argon-40 with a half-life of 1.3 billion years.
6. Amino Acid Dating. These have problems with changes in moisture and temperature having a dramatic effect on the reported age of a sample.
7. Racemic Dating. Amino acid dating of left handed amino acids. As an animal decays, the amino acids convert to the right handed variation.
8. Buried Forest Strata Dating. Trees buried upright in various levels of rock are said to prove long ages. However, they only prove that the flood buried these forests rapidly and that the layers must have been deposited before the tree decayed. It proves rapid burial because trees decay and would not remain intact and upright while a slow process of millions of years covers them with dust. The very fact that you can see them upright in their full form across the layers that represent millions of years shows that they were buried quickly and totally not gradually. So the layers must have been made at the same time. Go look at a rotting tree. Tell me if it is standing or not and how much of it has fallen to the earth.
9. Tree Ring Dating. This is affected by the rain cycle. Normally, trees produce a different ring for each concentrated period of annual rain fall. Technically, the rings show number of periods of rainfall - not age. But if we assume two annual periods of rainfall then two rings represents a year.
10. Stratigraphy. Study how deep a fossil is buried. Older layers are lower.
    Then other methods are used to date the artifacts with the built in assumptions about the order of formation of the layers.
    These assumptions become erroneous if the layers were created by catosprophic events.
11. Index Fossil Dating. A method of dating rocks by the fossils found in them. Certain fossils are used to determine dates (e.g. ammonites (245-65), brachiopods (540-500, graptolites (540-320), trilobites (540-245) and nanofossils). It relies on the assumption that the creature lived only during a certain period of time. This method is used to date rocks. The coelacanth fish debacle shows the serious problems with this method. Fossil bearing sedimentary rock cannot be directly dated by radioisotopes. So radioisotope dating methods are used on igneous rocks which are formed from molten rock material. But experiments at Mount St. Helen proved that this is bogus science.
12. Ocean Core Dating. Foraminiphera species absorb two forms of oxygen from the sea water while forming shells, Oxygen-16 or Oxygen-18 which is more abundant in cold water. By measuring the ratio between these two, they can determine average ocean temperature. Each change in average temperature produces a different color and banding effect in the layers.

    | The Legendary Lost Squadron
    Ice cores in Greenland are used for dating, based on the belief that layers containing varying isotope ratios were laid down, like the rings of a tree, over tens of thousands of years. On 15 July 1942, six P-38 and two B-17 were caught in a blizzard over Greenland and had to crash land. In 1980 a salvge mission went thinking that all they had to do was "shovel snow off the wings". In 1988 they found it buried 250 feet (75 meters), three miles from their original location by glacial flow. 13 expeditions from 1983 searched for the airplanes and retrieved it by 15 July 1992. The common impression of the general public of 'millions-of-years' of core measurements, makes the conclusion that the buildup of glacial ice takes a very long time periods of thousands of years for just a few metres.

13. Other Methods. Astronomical dating, ice core dating, varve dating, reef dating, peat dating, thermoluminescence dating and stalactite formation. They all have problems based on assumptions that cannot be verified and some have been proven to form more rapidly than scientists predicted.
14. Creation Clocks. Creation points to other natural clocks that are based on either the rate of accumulation or the rate of evaporation of substances based on current observed rates. These clocks have the same problem with the assumption of conditions at the starting point, but because evolution has such long periods of time the creationists can point to the fact that even in the worst case the clock should have run out and there should be more evidence for substances that accumulate or less evidence for substances that evaporate.
    - Helium Clock. It shows that the earth is no more than 10,000 to 15,000 years old. Helium gathers in the outer atmosphere and the current amount is one million times too low.
    - Hot Earth. The earth loses heat at the rate of 1x1027 calories per second and it is 118ºF a mile below the surface. Outer space is 0ºF. Even if we assume that the average temperature is 109ºF, the earth should be cooler by now since it is sitting inside a refrigerator.
    - Population Study. The current population is too low and only accounts for 4,000 years of growth at very low birth rates (0.5%). Current growth rate is 2%.
    - Receding Moon. The moon moves away from the earth at the rate of 2 inches (5 cm) per year. At this rate the moon would have touched the earth 2 billion years ago when the oceans were formed.
    - Land and Sea Topsoil Formation. The rate of formation minus the rate of erosion indicates how long they existed. Formation rates are 1 inch (2.52 cm)/300-1000 years. Erosion rates are listed as 6 to 1900 cm per 1000 years.
    - Continent Erosion. At the current rates of erosion, even if you adjust for mountain building activity, the continents should have eroded away in 10 million years.
    These clocks do not measure the age of individual objects, but global earth systems.

It is still unclear to me if all objects and fossils have been dated by several dating methods including radioactive dating. It would be nice to see a table of all the fossil finds and the date from several samples from each object using several dating methods. That is the scientific method.

Fossils | Radioactive Dating | Amino Acid | Racemic | Buried Forest | Tree Ring | Index Fossil | Other
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
C14 | U-Th | Rb-Sr | K-Ar
Ramapithecus | Jaw |  | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |  | ? | ?
Tooth |  | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |  | ? | ?
Homo Habilis | Bone? |  | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |  | ? | ?
Tool | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |  | ? | ?
Skull 1470 | Skull |  | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |  | ? | ?
Lucy | Knee |  | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |  | ? | ?
Skull |  | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |  | ? | ?
Leg |  | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |  | ? | ?
Foot Print | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |  | ? |  | ? | ?
Tool | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |  | ? |  | ? | ?
Wooden Artifact | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ?
Rock |  | ? | ? | ? |  |  |  |  | ? | ?
N/A. The test is not applicable for this material | ? Waiting to find experimental data

It would also be nice to see samples of different materials set aside for years, subjected to different environments and then testing them over the years to detect changes in date.

Problems With Radioactive Dating

Fossils Submerged Under Water |
--- | ---
600 Million Years | 70 Million Years | 25 Million Years | 5 Million Years | 100,000 Years | 5000 Years
Antedeluvian World (Before and During the Flood) | After Flood

Signs of human activity can only be dated within the last 5000 years or around the time of the flood. All objects during the flood and objects that existed before the flood were submerged under water. These objects are of two types, those who were killed and immediately buried during the flood and those that died and deteoriated before the flood. These objects show long ages.

1. Scientists do not really date old fossils. They cannot. What they date is the rocks above and below where the fossil was found. This is so bogus. The dating method is based on circular reasoning, relying on evolutionary assumptions about when rocks were formed.
2. Since each method will give vastly different dates, scientists select a dating method based on their assumption about how old the object is. This is built in bias, it is subjective and designed to support circular reasoning. Because of this Skull 1470 gave extremely different ages, even with the same dating method. Leaky's initial estimate was 2.9 million years, but the skull was first dated from 212-230 million years old. Many other dates were obtained during the next ten years (0.52-2.4, 8.43-17.5, 2.9 and 1.9). Leaky rejected all until he found the date that agreed with his theory, first 2.9 million then 1.9 million years. Is that science? Really!
3. Carbon 14 in specimens older than 50,000 years should be undetectable. Yet all coal, which is supposed to be about 10-100 million years old, still contains measurable carbon 14.
4. Water changes the rate of decay of Carbon 14. This is important when you consider the flood.
5. Calculations show that if the speed of light was greater in the past then radioactive decay occurred very rapidly. If we accounted for this difference then we would get dates less than 10,000 years - not millions of years.
6. If the earth were warmer in the past and had more moisture then the rate of decay would slow down drastically and register as longer periods of time.
7. Rate of decay is also affected by neutrino decay and sunspot cycles.
8. We do not know how much of each (parent or daughter) was present so that we can accurately start the clock.
9. Known inaccuracies:
   - Freshly killed seals were dated as living 1300 years ago!
   - Samples dated from different parts of the same material show different dates.
   - Other dating techniques give very different ages from the same material, sometimes millions of years difference!

Astronomy - The Study Of Planets
Cosmic Dust
Before astronauts landed on the moon, scientists worried that the accumulated cosmic dust might swallow up the landing vehicle. So they designed special pads on the lunar module to distribute the weight of the craft and allow them to land safely. What did they find? Not enough dust to sneeze at.
Why did they believe there would be a thick layer of dust?

- The moon had no atmosphere to blow the dust like it would on our planet.
- There was no solar wind to drive the dust away
- Cosmic dust fell at a predictable rate

Since dust does not melt, and there is no wind to blow it away, it was assumed that it would just accumulate over time.
If the moon had been in existence for the number of years the theory claimed, then simple calculations could predict how much dust would accumulate. This is the same type of reasoning and calculations used by meteorologists to predict the number of inches of snow after a snow fall.

But instead of several yards of dust they barely found a fraction of an inch. The moon is young.
Evolutionists claim that creationists misquoted the rate of precipitation of the dust. But that still does not explain why NASA was concerned about the lunar craft sinking into the dust on the moon and designed special landing pads to help the craft to stay afloat. Their actions are circumstantial evidence that they once believed in a faster rate of dust precipitation. No matter how much they deny it now.

Scientific Method: Reproducible Experiments and Data. These experiments only uncover physical laws but cannot prove or disprove either evolution or creation.

The Verdict
Circumstantial evidence points to the fact that scientists probably believed that the astronauts would sink into the dust on the moon - but they now deny this. If the level of accumulation of dust is so much less than their model predicts, then the moon is much younger than they imagined. But since they deny that they believed this and that creationists misquoted them and since I do not have the time to go and chase down forty year old documents or news articles - I will call this one a draw. You decide for yourself.
Dust Fall Rate. Currently, the revised values are that cosmic dust falls to the earth at the rate of 18,000-25,000 tons per year (an evolution apologist). The Earth Institute at Columbia University and Science journal (28 July 2006) cite 40,000 tons. Evolutionists claim that some creationists use a misleading figure of 14 million tons per year.

Chemistry

| Biogenesis A Failed Experiment Soup Anyone?
In 1953, Stanley Miller attempted to demonstrate that life could be produced from the primitive chemicals in the original environment. Using glass tubes, gases, non-water solvents (ammonia and methane), no oxygen and continuous sparks he created amino acids. I guess lightning does strike twice. In fact hundreds of times in the same place. He showed how life could have originated, but he never produced any of the essential amino acids. And what he produced was not alive. Even when the essential amino acids are made in laboratory experiments, they can only produce a mixture of 50% left and 50% right handed chemicals. But animals can only live with the left handed amino acids. The right handed version are poisonous to life. He also had to remove the amino acids because the electric sparks destroyed them! The truth is, life cannot be produced by zapping sea water or mud or piles of dirt with electricity. For all the failed experiments, we have essentially created the most expensive dish of salty protein soup.
He used intelligent intervention and an unrealistic environment to produce 85% tar, 13% carboxylic acid and 2% amino acids.

The formation of the basic chemicals of life require hydrogen, oxygen and carbon. These must combine to form the basic building block of proteins called amino acids. These amino acids combine to form twenty essential proteins. They are called 'essential' because they cannot be formed from each other but they can be combined to form other compounds needed. Proteins combine to form DNA which is the basic building block of genes. Genes determine how tall or short we are, what color eyes, if we have eyes, and whether or not we are a carrot or a butterfly.
Genes accomplish these things by creating proteins which form enzymes and other chemicals necessary for life. We have not created even the essential amino acids with billion dollar labs and omnipotent scientists.
These complicated chemical compounds must have a precise structure, shape and chemical bonding ability to make the right compound.
The precise nature of life became apparent when scientists accidentally discovered stereochemistry. It seems that chemical reactions not only produce complex molecules that contains hundreds of atoms, they produce twin, mirror images of these chemicals. These are produced in the right handed and left handed versions. And although they are similar in content and structure they do not react the same. One compound will react, while the twin version does nothing! The good twin and the bad twin, interesting! It seems that nature prefers the left handed version of these compounds, and produces only left handed amino acids in animals. They appear to change to right handed versions when we die.
The problem with experiments in a lab is that they will produce both kinds in equal proportions. And none of these experiments have ever produced any of the twenty essential amino acids. Not even with intelligent intervention using all the right compounds, people, equipment and knowledge.
There is apparently a reason for this protective design. There is less probability of mutation if the chemical cannot be copied or mimicked very easily. The improbability of making these chemicals points to the inescapable fact that it was virtually impossible to produce these as a path towards evolution. The preference for L-stereoisomers suggests a deliberate design decision.
The Slime Pit Of Despair: (The Primitive Environment Of Evolution).
All that was available in nature was seawater, hydrogen, oxygen, carbon and possibly electricity. Yet within a laboratory with every chemical known to man, sophisticated equipment, people, resources and continuous strikes of lightning we cannot produce the basic chemicals or combine these basic elements in ways that will produce life.
Cloning takes something that is already living and produces another living creature through an unnatural means. Scientists have never created life.

Problems With The Primitive Environment
There are several problems with the sea water and the atmosphere needed to create the environment that could form the first essential amino acid. And this chemical has a very long way to go before it could even represent anything that is living or become the mold on my dirty dishes.

1. Oxygen is Deadly. The atmosphere cannot contain oxygen, because it would destroy the amino acid.
2. But We Need Oxygen. But the new life would need oxygen the moment it was created.
   - But water is made from oxygen, therefore oxygen must be present.
   - If oxygen were absent, there would be no ozone to protect the atmosphere and the ultraviolet rays would destroy the new compound.
3. Water is Needed. Sea water does not contain all the elements needed to create all the chemicals of the simplest single cell life form, but it contains some.
4. But Water is Deadly. Some chemicals could only remain if the water was removed. These just happen to be the chemicals that life needs - proteins, fats, sugars and nucleic acids. If this were to happen in real life you would need a scientist with a lot of expensive equipment to separate the chemicals before they are destroyed. We need intelligence to get around the need for the short time and logistical problems that we have.
5. Continuous Energy. We need a continuous source of energy to keep the process going. Lightning is proposed as the source. The problem is (and you know this from experience) lightning is random and almost never strikes the same place twice. Even if it did every ten years, it would not be a continuous source.
6. Destructive Energy. The second problem with lightning is that it has so much energy it always destroys what it strikes. So even if lightning struck the mixture of acids every second, it would destroy it. The same energy that created the amino acid destroys it. So Miller had to separate it and store it. This ruins his experiment because he proved that you had to use intelligent intervention!
7. Chemicals. Seawater is too diluted. At the critical moment, all the chemicals needed must be present at the same location for the reaction to take place when that fateful bolt of lightning hits.
   - There are essential chemicals that are either missing or lacking in concentration, for example, phosphorous.
   - Other chemical reactions would act to destroy the new chemical created.
8. Result. Even if we created one amino acid, there are nine essential amino acids. There is still no life if we had all nine. We are also missing key chemicals such as enzymes and fatty acids. If you thought the proteins seem hard to create, wait until you try to create these without a billion dollar laboratory. Then try to create an organ and negotiate its connection to other organs.
   Finally, as each chemical is created it must remain at the correct concentration without degrading until all chemicals have been randomly created in nature's pharmacy and introduced at the right time. Creation is not a pot of mystery stew, randomly stirred by mother nature.

The Verdict. Scientists are currently unable to reproduce the simplest protein based on their model of the primitive environment. However, this does not mean that they are wrong. It just means that they might not have discovered the mechanism by which it occurred (if there was one).
But based on current chemical reactions, and based on the impossible conditions needed for the primitive environment and the new environment needed immediately after the new chemical is formed, it is my conclusion that it is statistically impossible for all these independent events to occur because all the laws of physics and chemistry and biology and astronomy are fighting the survival of one chemical compound. It is even more radical to believe that, having survived, that the other nineteen essential amino acids could have formed, then proteins, then DNA, then enzymes, then fatty acids, then cells, then creatures with intelligence. All these systems are not independent of each other. It requires intelligent intervention to stop the forces of nature from destroying the individual components of the new life.
The chemistry of evolution is statistically impossible without intelligent intervention.

The Evidence
Evidence For A Young Earth And A Young Galaxy
Evolution says it all happened gradually over hundreds of millions of years.
Creation says God did it in seven days.
Science and common sense says that biological evolution must have happened within the lifetime of the creature. During its fertile period.
Forensic evidence says that the foundation rocks were formed in less than three minutes.
Science and common sense agrees with creation.

- Young Rocks. Forensic evidence from Dr. Gentry has shown that rocks were formed in less that three minutes not over millions of years.
- The Air Brakes on the Planet. The spin of the earth is slowing down because of friction. It is now about 1000 miles per hour. If we assume the earth is millions of years old and if we use these numbers to predict how much the earth rotation has been affected by friction, we arrive at this conclusion. The earth should have stopped spinning by now. If not, then it must have been spinning so fast in the past that it would have flattened like a pancake before this because of the forces that would have ripped it apart.
- 4,000 Years of Activity. The geologic evidence points to a flood and a young earth.
  - 4,000 Year Old Sequoias and 4,700 Year Old Bristle Pine Cone. Since individual animals do not live for hundreds of years, we must look at trees since a single tree can exist for thousands of years. Sequoias are never older than 4,000 years, yet they are the oldest, continuous living thing in our world. This age closely correlates with the end of the flood and the beginning of new growth. The oldest Sequoia cut down in the Yosemite national forest is 3264 years.
  - Human Activity. No verifiable records from civilization is before the date 3000 BC. The oldest written documents may be the Ebla Tablets (˜ 3000-2400 BC) and the black stele of Hammurabi (˜ 1780 BC). Since scientists claim that writing was not developed by the time of Moses, he could not have written the Torah. Yet the existence of these ancient writings demolishes their theories about the development of written language.
  - Land Soil Formation (7-8 inches/17-20 cm). Topsoil forms at the rate of one inch every 300 to 1,000 years. The average depth of topsoil is about eight inches (20 cm). Therefore the earth is between 2400 and 8000 years old. This is far different than millions of years old.
  - Sea Soil Formation. Soft mud from dead plants and animal life form on the floor of the oceans at the rate of about one inch every 1,000 to 5,000 years. The depth of ooze indicates that the earth is young.
  - Rock Strata Formation. Turbidity currents build up layers of rocks in hours and days, not millions of years.
- Earth's Magnetic Field. Although the magnetic field fluctuates, since the first measurement in 1835, results indicate that the field is decreasing. It has a half life of 1400 years. If this is correct, then the earth would have been a powerful magnetic star 10,000 years ago.
- Young Galaxy. The galaxy is very young.
  - Clean Universe. There is not enough cosmic dust particles on the earth or the moon to show that they have been accumulating dust for millions of years. The universe is quite clean. Note that since the revision of the rate of dust fall, this argument may be useless.
  - Shrinking Sun. The shrink rate of the sun shows that it cannot be millions of years old. If it were it would have swallowed up all the planets of our solar system.

Evolution's Evidence For An Old Earth

Evolution | Creation's Response
--- | ---
Sedimentation and Rock Strata | Turbidity currents prove that the layers can take minutes to form under water, not thousands of years. Fossils trapped between multiple layers are a proof that they formed at the same time. Index Fossil. This method of dating rocks is circular reasoning and bogus science
Continental Drift | Catastrophic events of the flood when the "fountains of the deep" burst open, tearing apart the surface of the earth. Based on the amount of movement seen during earthquakes it is possible for the continents to move 2000 miles (3332 km) in 400-500 years at the rate of 3-6 feet per hour. Earthquakes move over 400 times faster in solid rock
Radioactive Decay Rates | Change in the speed of light and lack of verification of the primitive environment to establish an accurate clock. Flood conditions changes decay rates.
Expanding Universe | Light from distant stars are billions of years away, not 6000 years. We should only be able to see light that has been travelling for six thousand years if creation is correct. » Creation Theory: Faster Speed of Light. These time measurements are based on the speed of light which could have been faster in the past so the light from these stars could have arrived here. » Creation Theory: Stars Created Before. The Genesis story says that the sun and moon were created on the fourth day. However, it is not clear that the stars were created that day, only that God created them also. Therefore they could have been travelling billions of years before the creation. » Creation Theory: Light Trails. However, if the stars were created on the fourth day we would only be seeing light from those that are only 6000 years away. Hence the theory of light trails. The theory says that when God created the stars He also laid down the light trails to the earth. Some creationists have a problem with the theory that God made the light trails that are millions of light years away arrive sooner than calculated because "God would not cheat". This argument does not recognize the fact that everything seems to have been created with built-in maturity. Adam and Eve were created as adults with built in abilities like language and ability to procreate immediately. My problem also is that we are the ones who chose to use the speed of light as a clock, because God is using the stars exactly for the purpose that they were designed. Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years." (Genesis 1: 14) » Light. He created the sun and moon for this purpose. But He never created the light as a clock. » Day, Night and Year Time. He created the revolutions of the sun and moon to measure time. » Seasons. God created the seasonal revolutions to serve as a calendar. By placing the revolution of the earth along the ecliptic God was able to guarantee that certain star formations would appear at exact times during the year. » Signs. He created them for signs. He can use them as signs if He calibrated their arrival time. So managing the light trails like Christmas lights on a timer would be perfectly legitimate. Certain star formations were seen at the birth of Christ, there will be others around the Second Coming. The evidence is that God was synchronizing our world and our time with something that was already in existence. For example, the 24 hour "day and night" already existed before He created the sun and moon. That is not cheating, that is calibration.
Linguistics | Tower of Babel. An act of God produced the variations. The number of existing languages is consistent with 4200 years of development. Three original languages can become 7500 languages in 4000 years
Bacteria Develops Resistance | They are still bacteria. Minute changes to environmental stress occurs, usually reverts back in two generations to the original forms and have NEVER produced a new creature. Human beings also have systems that allow us to develop resistance. But we are still human and complex
Horse Evolution |
Eohippus (hyracotherium) "Dawn Horse" | Mesohippus 3 Toes | Merychippus 2 Toes | Equus 1 Toe
--- | --- | --- | ---
55 mya | 40 mya | 17 mya | 4 mya
They used to say with just as much certainty that fossil records show the evolution of the horse in a 1879 article in the "American Journal of Science". They are quietly not talking about that any more and have hidden away the models in a British museum, and slowly removed the pictures from school books. Want to know why? It is not true. Three toed "horses" were found living with one-toed "horses" (pliohippus) and horses of many sizes exist today.
DNA Similarity. Humans and chimpanzees are 97% common | What a difference 3% makes! Tobacco also has the same number of genes as a chimpanzee. Number of genes mean nothing. We are 85% similar to the mouse. Apparently close genetic similarity does not guarantee reproductive compatibility. Genes are a all-or-none system. Similar design caused genes to be the method of transmitting characteristics. Mutations produce lethal results not subspecies change. Cross species reproductive incompatibility and the problem of Male and female simultaneous evolution demonstrate the precise nature of genes.

Documentary Evidence Of Creation
When I first wrote this article in 2000-2001 I never believed that I could appeal to documentary evidence to prove the sciences from the Bible. I always believed that as part of the mandate of the first angel's message to demonstrate that God is the creator, we would eventually be able to show that the miracles that the Bible described were possible when the miraculous gifts return for a short time. But even under that scenario, I never dreamed that the following type of evidence existed in the Bible. God explained this to me starting on 21-25 December 2008.
The Bible Evidence On Chemistry And Particle Physics

Sanctuary
West
Most Holy Place S Block (7x2)
H | P Block (6x6) | He
--- | --- | ---
Li | Be | B | C | N | O | F | Ne
Na | Mg | Al | Si | P | S | Cl | Ar
K | Ca | Ga | Ge | As | Se | Br | Kr
Rb | Sr | In | Sn | Sb | Te | I | Xe
Cs | Ba | Tl | Pb | Bi | Po | At | Rn
Fr | Ra | Uut | Uuq | Uup | Uuh | Uus | Uuo
La | F Block (2x14) Holy Place
Zn | Cd | Hg | Uub
--- | --- | --- | ---
Cu | Ag | Au | Uuu
Ni | Pd | Pt | Uun
Co | Rh | Ir | Mt
Fe | Ru | Os | Hs
D Block (4x10)
Mn | Tc | Re | Bh
Cr | Mo | W | Sg
V | Nb | Ta | Db
Ti | Zr | Hf | Rf
Sc | Y | Lu | Lr
Roof (4x10) (c)teachinghearts | Ac
Ce | Th
Pr | Pa
Nd | U
Pm | Np
Sm | Pu
Eu | Am
Gd | Cm
Tb | Bk
Dy | Cf
Ho | Es
Er | Fm
Tm | Md
Yb | No
Most Holy Place. There are 6 boards on the west wall with 2 supporting the corners. There are 6 boards on the north and south walls. Holy Place. There are 14 boards on the north and south walls. This model does not show the "S" block on both ends (north-south)

We discuss this evidence in detail in another article. Here is a model of the portable sanctuary that Moses introduced about 3500 years ago. It shows that the design of the boards and walls of the sanctuary is an outline of the Periodic Table. It has the same number of rows and columns as all the blocks in the quantum number periodic table and the materials reflect the properties of the elements (solid or gas).

Periodic Table
S Block (7x2) | (c)teachinghearts
H | He | P Block (6x6) | He
--- | --- | --- | ---
Li | Be | D Block (4x10) | B | C | N | O | F | Ne
Na | Mg | Al | Si | P | S | Cl | Ar
K | Ca | Sc | Ti | V | Cr | Mn | Fe | Co | Ni | Cu | Zn | Ga | Ge | As | Se | Br | Kr
Rb | Sr | Y | Zr | Nb | Mo | Tc | Ru | Rh | Pd | Ag | Cd | In | Sn | Sb | Te | I | Xe
Cs | Ba | Lu | Hf | Ta | W | Re | Os | Ir | Pt | Au | Hg | Tl | Pb | Bi | Po | At | Rn
Fr | Ra | Lr | Rf | Db | Sg | Bh | Hs | Mt | Uun | Uuu | Uub | Uut | Uuq | Uup | Uuh | Uus | Uuo
F Block (2x14) | La | Ce | Pr | Nd | Pm | Sm | Eu | Gd | Tb | Dy | Ho | Er | Tm | Yb | -
Ac | Th | Pa | U | Np | Pu | Am | Cm | Bk | Cf | Es | Fm | Md | No

- "S" Block Metals [7x2] (Walls). The north and south side of the Most Holy place has 2 walls with 7 rows made with gold covered boards.
  » Hydrogen and Helium (2 Back Boards). The two boards on the corner of the western end of the sanctuary stick out of the top corners of the model just like hydrogen and helium.

  2A | 3A | 4A | 5A | 6A | 7A | 8A | 1A
  --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
  He | P Block (6x6) | H
  Be | B | C | N | O | F | Ne | Li
  Mg | Al | Si | P | S | Cl | Ar | Na
  Ca | Ga | Ge | As | Se | Br | Kr | K
  Sr | In | Sn | Sb | Te | I | Xe | Rb
  Ba | Tl | Pb | Bi | Po | At | Rn | Cs
  Ra | Uut | Uuq | Uup | Uuh | Uus | Uuo | Fr

  The Bible version obeys the quantum number design. Helium is in Group 2A, making the "S" block 2 electrons in each of seven layers.
  I believe that Group 1A and 2A are the north and south walls and the elements in between from Boron to Neon are the 6x6 grid. This does not violate the Periodic table design since it can be viewed as a cylinder which is split open between Group 8A and 1A or 1A and 2A.
- "P" Block Semi-Solids [6x6] (Most Holy Place). The internal space, which is made mostly of air and some gold covered boards, is lined by a 6x6 grid formed by the three walls.
- "D" Block Soft Metals [4x10] (Roof). The roof has four layers of fabric which represents malleable metals. The first layer is made with ten panels.
- "F" Block Metals [2x14] (Holy Place). The two walls each have 14 boards made with gold covered boards. Although IUPAC uses 15 elements, the atoms fill the "F" shell with 14 electrons as other periodic table designs recognize.

Documentary Evidence. So we have evidence from the bible of a pattern for a structure seen in heaven that was supposed to represent how God creates and recreates. A primitive outline of the "S" and "P" blocks was discovered by Dmitri Mendelejeff in 1869 and the final model was agreed on around 1929. Yet, of all the possible formulations, the popular model looks like the pattern that God gave Moses!. Skeptics cannot say that we wrote this in the Bible after the fact.
Although this model shows us what was chemically created on each day of creation, this documentary evidence does not prove that the earth was created in seven days. But it proves that the Bible has modern scientific knowledge that is unexplainable according to our assumptions.
Statistical Evidence. It takes 48 boards, ten strips of blue linen to construct the portions of the sanctuary which make the periodic table. The other construction materials are the bases, bars and rings to tie these boards together, but do not alter its shape or design. How many other designs could all these materials make? What are the odds that it is made into the structures that match the four blocks of the periodic table? I calculate 1.24 x 1061 ways to uniquely organize 48 boards which must touch at least one other board and form only straight lines or 90º angles.
Experimental Evidence. The process of nucleosynthesis proves that the first three days of creation could have occurred in the time and order in which Genesis says that it did. I explain this in the periodic creation of elements theory.

The Mishkan Model of Science
Larger Image Sanctuary Construction Animation
The Science In The Temple

Standard Model Of Particle Physics
This science is not as complete as chemistry, yet the sanctuary model has more to say about the relationship of sub atomic particles than all the theoretical physicists combined You see, it turns out that the same model that explains chemistry also explains physics. The details are in the same article but here is a summary of the preliminary findings which are subject to revision because all the particles have not been found or understood.

- Quarks and Antiquarks [6+6] (Most Holy Place). They are paired with 6 positive and 6 negative charges, just like the north and south walls.
  » Baryons (3 Walls). Baryons are based on an observation of the behavior of the particles they see in the nucleus and may not really be new particles. Quarks are found organized in groups of three called baryons. These are the 3 walls in the Most Holy Place (the nucleus).
- Leptons [12-14] (Holy Place). The evidence is still incomplete, but there about 12 to 14 paired with positive and negative charges. I predict that 14 pairs or energy states will be the final count.
- Strong Force [6+2 Gluons] (Western Wall). The 8 boards of this wall are grouped in 6 and 2, are unpaired and hold up two walls. Gluons are unpaired, 6 are charged, two are neutral and they hold the nucleus together. Wow!
- Electromagnetic Force (Bars and Rings). The bars and rings holding the north and south wall together are designed like the photons and magnetic force as pictured by the right hand rule.
- Weak Force (Columns, Fabric Roof). The literature is too confusing and too minimal for me to be absolutely certain which structure they represent. Both are asymmetric and allow radioactive decay. Both the fabric roof and the fabric doors allow things to pass through, allowing the property of radioactive decay.
  The Z force is probably the two sets of columns (four and five) at the two doors.
  The W force is the fabric roof, the first layer is ten panels and the second is eleven panels.
- Gravity. The other two layers suggest that there is another force or more to be learned about the weak force. They suggest that there is something magnetic and radioactive about it. I believe that the force is gravity.
- Mass and The Higgs Boson. Mass is more complicated than the theoretical Higgs Boson. There are several particles that represents the properties of mass (inertia, density, center of mass, attraction, energy). Mass also involves a calculation of the volume of the particles.

Documentary Evidence. Finding this type of scientific evidence in the Bible is more compelling than finding the blueprints of an aeroplane in the Bible. At least that would be based on observations of birds in nature. But finding the structure and relationships of microscopic and subatomic particles that have no similar pattern or equivalent in observable nature is simply incredible!

Event | Possibility
--- | ---
Taxes for an honest working middle class person in the United States | 100%
Death | 99%
Struck by lightning | 1 in 600,000
Ice forming at the North Pole this year | 99.999%
San Francisco falls into the Pacific Ocean | Possible
You live on the moon for one week by 2020 | Less than 1%
Winning 100 Million in the lottery | Less than 1%
Winning 100 Million in the lottery every week for forty years | Impossible
Tomorrow your great grandmother goes to mars on the space shuttle for 6 months | Impossible
A pile of metal and rubber turning into a luxury car by itself in two trillion years | 0.01 x 10 -(1 trillion trillion)
A pile of metal and rubber turning into a luxury car by itself in ten years | Zero - Impossible
Separate piles of metal and rubber turning into a fleet of luxury cars in seventy years
A wind blowing through a forest creates the Taj Mahal

Mathematical Evidence
Mathematical Definition Of Impossible
According to mathematicians, any event that has less than one chance in 1050 of occurring is impossible. That is equivalent to about twenty related events occurring. The chance of randomly assembling a system with 24 related parts is one in 1073 and with 200 related parts is one in 10375. The human eye is more complicated.

Speaking about the probability of evolution, I have actually heard evolutionists claim that "you might not think that a wind blowing through the forest could create the Taj Mahal ... but it did"!
Now that is faith!
Even when they make this argument you are led to believe that evolution is a case of creating one Taj Mahal by a miracle. Not so!
You are being asked to believe that this wind built 26 million Taj Mahals equipped with a private airplane and a fleet of luxury cars, pizza and 72 virgins from New York.

| Ark Science Mathematics
--- | ---
Evidence. There are 30 million species, there is not enough time to load the ark. In addition the clean animals went in pairs of seven!
Proof. It would take 347 days to load one pair per second into the ark
The Creation Rebuttal. ★ Total Species. The evolution numbers are grossly misleading. 30 million is a high estimate and includes all plant species and bacteria. We have only found and named 1.4 million and actually estimate 13 million species. If we take the 13 million estimate, then Noah did not load 320,000 pairs of plants or 1.5 million pairs of fungi or 600,000 pairs of protista or 1 million pairs of bacteria at all or one by one! » Clean Animals. Of the 224 ruminant species, only 194 are clean. » Fewer Kinds. One pair of cats could account for the 37 species we have. So each species originated from fewer kinds. 300 species of doves and pigeons may originate from two. 400 breeds of dogs came from one. ★ Storage. The number of large animals are very small and they create the logistical problems of loading, storage and feeding. He loaded about 30,000 species (118,952 animals). » Undiscovered Land Species. These are probably mostly microscopic and will not affect our storage very much. » Smallest Size. Babies or eggs were stored instead of adults. ★ Loading: Multiple Lines. The misleading calculation assumes loading 30 million animals one pair at a time. There were many lines. » Rate. With 10 queues, 345,000 pairs can be loaded in one day. Consider the problem of filling a 65,000 seat stadium in 3 hours. » Birds. They fly in on their own. » Larger Animals. Noah only needed to load the large animals. He did not load a pair of bacteria or insects one at a time. Bacteria and insects could be attached to the ark at any time.
It is dishonest and deceptive to grossly misstate the mathematical problem as the science education channels did. In the worst case, Noah probably cared for the following air breathing pairs whom God caused to come to the ark:
Species | Type | On Ark
--- | --- | ---
1 | Humans |  | 8
194 | Clean animals |  | 2726
4806 | Unclean animals |  | 9612
5000 | Clean birds * |  | 70000
5000 | Unclean birds |  | 10000
7925 | Reptiles |  | 15850
5378 | Amphibians |  | 10756
Total | Animals, reptiles | 38,952
Birds | 80,000
The following are not loaded by hand
663,120 | Insects |  | 1326240
1000000 | Bacteria |  | 1000000
The following are not on the ark
Fish, worms, sponges |  | 193,726
Plants |  | 630,000
* Clean birds were over estimated » 300 species of Columbiformes » 250 species of Galliformes » 5400 species of mammals

Statistics And Probabilities
Without getting into the mathematical details, statistics and probabilities try to predict how likely an event will occur. The chances of success increase under the following conditions:

Time. Given enough time and resources an event that is possible might be possible.
For example, If you play the lottery long enough or bet enough to cover a larger percentage of the number of combinations you are more likely to win.
But if the event is impossible from the start, time cannot allow it to occur.
Simplicity. The simpler the tasks (the number of events or steps are smaller) the more likely it is to occur, making it statistically possible.
For example, if a lottery is based on picking three numbers you are more likely to win than if it were based on picking ten numbers because there are more combinations.
Independence. The less events are dependent on the successful completion of a preceding event the more likely it will occur.
For example, if twelve people at different points are taking a bus to the same location, more of them would most likely get to the destination if they all used separate buses than if they all waited their turn for the same bus. One bus might break down, but it is unlikely that all twelve buses will breakdown in a normal situation.
Intervention. If an outside source intervenes, then random events have a greater chance of occurring successfully. For example, cheating could make you win a game. Intelligent intervention could cause unlikely natural events to occur.
» The Number of Cats and Dogs on the Ark. The intervention of man allowed the dog to develop an estimated 40 working types before the industrial revolution into over more than 400 recognized breeds in only 150 years! The same potential has existed in the genes since creation, but the variations did not emerge naturally in 6000 years. But they are the same species, capable of interbreeding.
So 400 dogs did not enter the ark, only one pair did. The same can be said for cats.

Therefore, the likelihood of an event occurring decreases if there is less time and resources, it is more complicated and more inter-dependent. Sexual reproduction is an unwise route for evolution.

Time: The Number One Enemy Of Evolutionists
Time, which every evolutionist needs to give their theories a chance to survive is not on their side when it comes to starting and maintaining the basic chemicals that could lead to life in a million years - biogenesis. Time is needed to make the slow process of evolution statistically possible. But if an event is impossible, time will never change the outcome.
Time is not on their side when it comes to reproduction and survival of the full grown species.
From what we know about the biological sciences, time is the enemy. Current knowledge demands that all systems are fully operational. Even the theory of evolution seems to suggest that if an organ is not useful it will perish. So how long must a Fallopian tube wait for a uterus to be developed? How does it know that it needs a uterus? How does it know that it needs a new reproductive design and that all these hundreds of working parts and chemicals are needed? And why would the offspring carry around this useless information for millions of years before it becomes useful? It seems that survival of the fittest would demand that the body get rid of all these excess parts that were not functioning.

Time: Observed Time
This scientific evidence shows short time of development. Whereas evolution only has its theories, creation has hard evidence of observable processes in nature which take extremely short times to create the conditions and environment. In some cases it only requires several more years of heat and pressure to create what we see.

Scientific Evidence for Creation
Event or Location | Object | Creation Time Observed | Evolution Years
--- | --- | --- | ---
Sexual Reproduction | 7 Days | Male and Female | Hours (insects) - 40 Years (humans) | Millions
Pleochroic Halos | Granite Rock | 3 Minutes | 300 million
Nucleosynthesis | Elements | 3 Minutes | 1000 million
Turbidity Currents | 1929 | Sedimentary Rock | ★ 13 Hours 17 Minutes (sea) Mudslide: 200 km3 /48 miles3 Sedimentary Tanks | Several Years of Heat and Pressure | > 100 million
☆ Polystrata Fossil | Flood | Fossils Embedded in Rock | ★ Hours | Millions
1980 Mt. St. Helen's Eruption Coal Deposits in Powder River Basin, Wyoming | 1980 | Stratified Rock | ★ 3 hours (25 ft/762 cm) deep (Pyroclastic Flow - 100 layers) | Millions
Stratified Rock | 400 feet (12192 cm) in 6 years | Millions
Peat-Coal Beds | ★ 8 Months (Steam and wood under pressure) | 1000 years/inch
Layered Sedimentary Rock | 600 feet (180 metres) built up in months | Millions
River System | 9 Hours | -
Badlands | 5 days | 100s-1000s
Canyon | 5 Months (1.5 x 2.0 mile) 100-700 feet deep | 100 Million
Petrified Forest | ★ Months of sinking logs | 100-1000 years to petrify | 50 Million
☆ Specimen Ridge | Flood | Aged (Petrified) Forests | 10 Years of sinking logs | 50 Million
☆ Washington Scablands | Scablands | 2 days (Revised estimate) 16000 miles2 | Millions
☆ Grand Canyon | Canyon | Months. 1218 acres/1904 miles2/4931 km2 Cavitation by 100 feet per second water flow | 100 Million
Surtsey Island | 1963 | Mature Landscape | Months. 2.8 km2 (2100x1500 m) | Millions
Thermal Depolymerization |  | Oil Formation (500 barrels) | 15 minutes - 24 hours 290 tons turkey waste | 600 psi 500ºF | Millions
Ashes, Graphite, Carbon Powder | Artificial Diamonds | 16 Hours | 50000 atm 1000ºC | Millions
Teepee Fountain, Thermopolis WY | Stalagmite in calcium carbonate mineral water forms travertine | 1903-Now (Over 20 ft high, 20 ft wide) | 50000 atm 1000ºC | 100,000s
Malachite | 12x12 inch stalactites form on wire scaffold | 3 months | - | Millions
Precious Opal | 1 cm opal to maturity | Opals in months, not 1 cm in 6 million years | 5 - 6 Million
Copper Sulphate Crystals | Supersaturated solution and catalyst | Seconds | - | Millions
Buried In Ice Core As A Dating Method? | 1942 | Lost Squadron, Greenland | 250 feet by 1988 under the north pole ice | 100,000s
1911 | Flag, tent and sledge left | 40 feet under the ice at the south pole | 100,000s
☆ Revised estimates for natural formations. All other entries are observed phenomena
★ The amount of time to assemble the components that will make the feature. Only pressure and heat needed
Processes duplicated in the laboratory or nature. Turbidity currents were duplicated in sedimentary tanks

7 Days | 1656 Years | 1 Year | 10 Years | 400 Years |  | 4000 Years
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Creation | Antedeluvian | Flood | After the Flood | Archaeology
Sex | Tar Pits Forests | Turbidity Currents, Pyroclastic Flow | Logs Sink | Heat and Pressure | Decay, Fossils
Pleochroic Halos | Polystrata Fossils, Petrified Forest, Diamond, Oil, Coal, Gas, Magma
Grand Canyon, Specimen Ridge, Washington Scablands

Nature agrees with the time requirements and reproductive design of creation.

Time And Biodiversity

Average Years of Evolution Per Creature
Major Groups | (A) Million Years Evolved | (B) High Estimated Number | (C) Years per Pair | (D) Pairs Every 50,000 Years
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Viruses | 545 | 400,000 | 1363 | 37
Bacteria | 545 | 1,000,000 | 545 | 92
Fungi | 545 | 1,500,000 | 363 | 138
Protozoa | 545 | 200,000 | 2725 | 18
Algae | 545 | 400,000 | 1363 | 37
Plants | 545 | 320,000 | 1703 | 29
Nematodes | 545 | 400,000 | 1363 | 37
Crustaceans | 545 | 150,000 | 3633 | 14
Arachnids | 395 | 750,000 | 527 | 95
Insects | 170 | 8,000,000 | 22 | 2363
Mollusks | 170 | 200,000 | 850 | 59
Vertebrates | 120 | 50,000 | 2400 | 21
Others | 545 | 250,000 | 2180 | 23
Estimated | 545 | 13,620,000 | 40 | 1250
Total Named | 545 | 1,750,000 | 311 | 160
Column C = A/B | Column D = B/ (A / 50000)

There is too much life on earth. This is a mathematical problem. Given the amount of time scientists claim since biological evolution began, 50,000 years between species is not enough to account for the estimated biological diversity. There is too much life on planet Earth. There are about 2 - 100 million species on the planet. 1,400,000 have been named. It is estimated that the correct count may be at least 13,000,000.
» Sequential Monster Mutations Per Group. I was generous in my calculation. This chart does not show the overlapping simultaneous mutations and rejects and the time to evolve male and female. This assumes that a perfect mutation occurred every time which produced a male and female simultaneously and the evolution has been occurring until now.
Even if we gave every creature the maximum time of 545,000 million years to evolve - one would have to evolve every 40 years to produce the estimated 13 million species. And, just in case evolutionists say that we are manipulating the numbers - it would require one monster mutation every 311 years to produce the 1,750,000 species we have identified and named! This is vastly different from the 50,000 years per specie required by the monster mutation theorists.
» Simultaneous Monster Mutations Per Group. So I calculated the last column to see how many simultaneous monster mutation miracles must be occurring in each group to average 50,000 years per specie per group. We cannot observe or verify such rates of change today.

Simplicity And Statistics: The Mathematics Of Evolution
With that definition, let us look at some calculations that are based in the theory of evolution.

System | Mathematics and Statistics
--- | ---
The Eye | All The parts must begin to work at once or the whole eye is useless. There are muscles, nerves, blood vessels, retina, lens, tear ducts, tears, 130 million cells to detect black and white, eyelashes, seven million cells which detect color. Blinking and depth perception. A brain to interpret the signals, and reverse the upside down image.
Genetics | Biochemists who studied the rate of change of genetic material concluded the following.
Group | Mutation | KYA | Region
--- | --- | --- | ---
African Eve | 143 | East Africa
Genetic Adam | 80 | East Africa
| A | M91 | <80 | East Africa
- | BT | M94 | 75 | East Africa
| - | B | M60 | <75 | East Africa
| - | CT | M168, M294 | 60 | Eurasia
- | - | - | J | M304, S6, S34, S35 | - | Middle East
- | - | - | - | J2 | M172 | - | Jew, Arab, Kurd ...
- | - | - | F | M89, M213 | 45 | Iraq, Europe
- | - | - | G | M201 | 30 | Caucasus, Iran
- | - | - | H | M69 | - | India, Gypsies
- | - | - | I | M170, M258 | 25 | Europe, near east
- | - | - | K | M9 | 40 | South Asia, Iran
- | - | - | N | LLY22g, M231 | 40 | Finns, Hungarian
So far, there seems to be three main groups to which males can be traced (A, B and CT). Groups B and CT are the two main branches of BT. Most groups who migrated out of Africa belong to the BT group. Haplogroups A and B come from Sub-Saharan Africa.
» Mitochondrial Eve (African Eve). Mitochondrial DNA is only passed from mothers to daughters. The entire human race came from one woman who lived either in north east Africa or the Middle East about 143,000 years ago. The human race migrated from eastern Africa into the Middle East, then to southeast and southern Asia, New Guinea and Australia, and finally to Europe and Central Asia. » Y-Chromosomal Adam (Genetic Adam). A common mutation in the Y chromosome that exists in all males can be traced back to one man in Africa to about 80,000 years ago. According to the theory, this was not the first male, but he was the only male at that time whose offspring survived to repopulate the earth. The date ranges of genetic Adam and Eve vary as much as 84,000 years. But why are they different? All women are descended from Eve so, the mitochondria should date back to her. The Y chromosome is different. The analysis is based on mutation and these can be traced back to the man with that change. The Y Chromasome passes unchanged from father to son, except for mutations. These rare mutations can be used to trace the origins of different families. » Out of Africa. The 50000 year DNA migration has been traced from the San Bushmen of East Africa to the Mongo of South east Australia to the Mongolians in Central Asia. They split into the Europeans and the Chukchi of Siberia who crossed the Bering Straits as the ancestors of the Native American tribes 13000 years ago. » The Three Sons of Noah. All males can be traced back to the variations in the three sons of Noah, after the flood which occurred 1656 years after Eve. Noah was the "Y-Chromosomal Adam". Shem ("Semitic"). E3b/E1b1b (Semitic), J2 (Semitic), F, J (Mediterranean, Middle East) Ham ("African"). A, B (Pygmies, San Bushmen), T, E, E3a/E1b1a (African-American) » ("Asian"). C (Eurasia, Oceania, Japan, North America), D (Japan, Tibet), F, L (Asia), O (Taiwan), Q (North Asia), Q3 (Native American), N, O, P (Asia, Siberia). » ("South Pacific"). M (New Guinea, Melanesia), S (New Guinea), K (Iran, South Asia, Australia, New Guinea) Japheth ("European"). F, N (Siberia), R (Europe, West Asia) R1b (Western Europe), R1a (Eastern Europe), I (Nordic). » ("Indo-Aryan"). G (Indo-Aryan, Caucasus, India, Asia, Europe, Middle East), H (India), F (South India, Sri Lanka, Korea) Conclusion. We disagree with the ages assigned, but we agree with the concept of migration out of the area of the Middle East-East Africa and tracing genetics to one woman and one man.
DNA | One chance in 10167,625. Probability of forming simple DNA. The simplest protein found so far is 400 linked amino acids and DNA is much more complex with at least 75 proteins each having 2000 to 3000 amino acids
Bacteria | One chance in 1011. At a 1966 conference, scientists determined the probability of forming a bacteria under the most ideal conditions. Take an existing bacteria and break it up into its chemicals, let none escape and let no other chemicals in. So the odds of this occurring naturally must be much worse.
Amoeba | One chance in 1040,000. Probability of forming 2000 proteins in the single cell amoeba (Fredrick Hoyle)
Monkey Business | Monkey typing the word "EVOLUTION". (1 in 25,429,503,680,000)
181,479,392 x 1054. The probability of accidentally typing out Genesis 1:1
Monkey laying out 20 cards in order (1 in 2,243,902,008,176,640,000)
Voodoo Math | Monkey typing 200 letters in order on the first try (1 in 10375). If a monkey could type 200 letters randomly at the rate of 1 billion trials per second for 30 billion years he would only type 5 in 10104 times. This is much less than the 10375 chances needed to get the right combination of 200 letters one time. If evolution states that the big bang occurred 13.7 billion years ago and the first plant life appeared 545 million years ago and a random process cannot even create a living protein in 30 billion years, what are the odds that there is enough time for evolution to occur within the life span of the single creature that is developing these evolutionary changes? And what are the chances that it could pass on these incomplete instructions to the next generation? It is mathematically impossible. The simplest protein is made of 400 amino acids, not 200. The probability of accidentally forming one protein is not the same as a monkey typing one letter. What chance does it take to create more complex molecules such as DNA, organs, coordinate functions between organs and sexual reproduction?
Punctuated Equilibrium |
(A) Change Rate | (B) #Years Egg Exists | (C) Total Changes
--- | --- | ---
11,758/hour | 1 Year | 103 x 106
392/hour | 30 Years
294/hour | 40 Years
5.6/day | 50,000
An unrefrigerated egg usually spoils in a month, definitely in six months
A/ hour = C / (B * 365 * 24)
This is not a calculation of probabilities of an event happening. This is a calculation to see how much work has to be done to change from one species to another. How many changes would turn a chimpanzee into a human or a frog's egg into a lizard's egg if everything happened perfectly? The DNA molecule in humans have about 3.3 x 109 base pairs in about 20,500 to 30,000 genes. Assume that the critical difference between species is 3% of the DNA as it is in humans and chimpanzees, then 99 million base pairs must change. If we also assume that only 1 in 23 changes needs to be made (the sex genes) to produce the next gender then 4.30 million changes must be made to produce the mate. This is a total of 103 million changes in the base pairs. The theory says that after an average of 50,000 years without any changes, a pair of creatures emerged after a monster mutation rally. So the changes began and were completed in a short time. Let us assume the change was in the egg, then the time to change would last as long as the egg was viable. How long can an egg last without decaying? How many changes could occur in that time? How fast? If we assume one year then we need to make 103 million changes in a year. This is 11,758 base pair changes per hour! We are ignoring the difficulty of creating a base pair and the production of the second gender and the mechanism by which it knows to produce a second gender. We are also assuming that all changes are beneficial and perfect and that the change occurs in the egg, because that is the only way changes can be transmitted to the next generation.
Population | The global population is too low to account for evolution of more than ten thousand years.
Grand Canyon | The Grand Canyon is about 277 miles long (446 km), 4 to 18 miles wide (6.4 to 29 km) and 6,000 feet/1,829 m at its deepest point and there is no evidence of erosion between its layers. Evolutionists used to claim that the Colorado river cut through the canyon 70 million years ago before it was uplifted. But the new claim is that it was created over a 5.4 million year period. » Breached Dam. It would take months for a breached dam to cut through soft mud at the flood. Creationists claim that the rock currently missing from the Grand Canyon would take 71,000 years to erode at the present rate. I am not sure how they calculated this time and if sedimentation was taken into consideration. But if the exact methodology can be worked out it is a mathematical argument. Soil erodes at 6 to 1900 cm per 1000 years. Many things like running water, tree roots, soil composition, slope and rainfall affect the rate of erosion. If we chose a barren landscape like the grand canyon with heavy rains during the summer, what would the values say?
- Ocean | » Creation Theory: The Source of Water. The source of water is a mystery to evolutionists. I believe that water was created from the simple reaction of hydrogen and oxygen on the second day. The elements available on the second day created air and water. 4H + 5O + C + 2N H2O + N2 + CO2 + H2 + O2. The favorite theory of evolutionists is that extraterrestrial comets laden with 5% water kept striking the earth for over 400 million years, four billion years ago. I have not seen the argument yet, but I bet that they will say that we passed through a comet debris field because the precipitation rates are so high, it borders on unbelievable. ★ Volume of Water on Earth. (1.38 x 109 km3) = Oceans (1.37 x 109 km3) + Fresh (5.212 x 105 km3) ★ Volume of Earth. (1,097.5095 x 109 km3) ★ Mass of Earth. 5940 x 1021 kg ★ Mass of Earth Water. 1.37 x 1021 kg ★ Time to Fill. 400,000,000 years ★ Density of Water. 1 gm/cm3 or 1 gm/mL ★ Density of Meteorite. Stony Meteorite (95.6%): 3.5 gm/cm3. Iron Meteorite: 8.0 gm/cm3 ★ Average Content of Water per Meteor. 5% (I am not sure if this is by volume or by weight) Its Raining Rocks. I calculated about 15 truck-sized comets per minute before I researched. Evolutionists claim that about 20 snow comets (20 to 40 tons (40,000 to 80,000 lbs) (18,000-36,000 kg) must strike the earth every minute for 400 million years to fill the oceans. Does this sound excessive or overly optimistic to you? 4.2048 x 1015 large meteorites fell. 28,800 per day. Planet Killers. I am concerned about several things. The high rate of large meteor precipitation, the composition of the other 95% material and the impact on the earth. If a quarter mile asteroid can destroy the earth in its current size, what about so many large meteorites every day over 400 million years? Earth should be vaporized.
  Size of a Truck | (20x10x7) feet (610x305x213) cm
How Much Water. 5% Water By Weight. The mass of water on earth is 1.35 x 1021 kg. Therefore, if the water content is 5% then the total mass of meteorites that fell to earth is 25.65 x 1021 kg. ☆ Weight Of Earth Before Meteors. Since the mass of the entire earth is 5940 x 1021 kg. Then before the asteroid bombardment, the earth weighed 5913 x 1021 kg. 5% Water By Volume. ☆ Average Volume Meteor Precipitation per Year. (3.426 km3 per year) or 0.82 mile3 Annual Number of Meteors (100% Water by Volume) [Size of a Truck]. 398,112 ☆ Number of Truck-Sized Meteors (5% Water). 7,962,249 per year ☆ Rate of Meteorite Shower. 21,814 per day (910 per hour) (15 per minute) ☆ Total Meteorites (400,000,000 Years). 3.2 x 1015 ☆ Weight Of Meteorites. 443.840880 x 1021kg (Stony) - 1,014.493440 x 1021kg (Iron) ☆ Weight Of Earth Before Meteorites. 5497 x 1021 kg (Stony) - 4926 x 1021 kg (Iron)
Rotation of the earth | Have you ever been at a carnival where they had a "gravity" ride based on centripetal and centrifugal forces? At certain speeds you could not move. The earth slows down 0.83 seconds per year. Like a spinning toy, the rate at which it spins and the rate at which it slows down would have been faster in the past. At the higher speeds, the centripetal force would be stronger so that at a certain point you would not be able to move. How do you think that would effect evolution? Everything not anchored would fly off in space and probably become the seeds of life elsewhere (panspermia). Anything anchored or plastered against a solid wall would be stuck there. Food would have to evolve in your mouth for you to survive. How about sexual reproduction? Male and female would really have to evolve beside each other because it would take their entire lives to find each other for the first date! At certain speeds everything would fly off the earth. 70 million years ago, wind speeds would be 5,000 miles per hour (8000 kph).
Time (Years) | Event | Minutes lost | Day Length | Rotations in one Day | Using the rate at which the earth slows down, 6000 years ago everything would still be normal and reasonable. But it would be staggering for the dinosaurs. Maybe vertigo made them become extinct.
Now | Year 2002 | 0 | 1440 minutes | 1
6000 | Creation | 100 | 1340 minutes | 1.075
240,000 | Homo sapiens | 400 | 1040 minutes | 1.38
1,800,000 | Chimps and man split | 30,000 | 68.6 minutes | 21
180,000,000 | Dinosaurs | 3,000,000 | 41 seconds | 2100
360,000,000 | Insects | 6,000,000 | 20.5 seconds | 4200
Receding Moon | The moon is 384,403 Km (238,857 miles or 15,133,979,520 inches) from the earth as the earth's rotation speed slows. Now it is moving away at the rate of 2 inches (5 cm) per year. If that rate was constant, the moon would be touching the earth 7.5 billion years ago. A 2009 History channel report says that the moon is receeding at the rate of 1.5 inches (3.8 cm) per year. But calculated reports say that 2 billion years ago they would be touching. These lower values probably account for the change in speed and other effects as the moon is closer. So, did the moon crash into the earth either 2 or 7.5 billion years ago?
The Shrinking Sun | In 1979, scientists Eddy and Boornazian announced that the sun is shrinking at the rate of almost six feet per hour in its diameter. After much denial and debate, one conclusion may be that the sun is shrinking at the rate of one foot (30 cm) per hour. But stellar theory says that a star should expand as it gets older. If we assume that it shrinks at the rate of five feet each hour (152 cm), then this is one mile in 44 days or 8.3 miles (13.3572 km) in one year (4.1 miles on each edge). The earth is 93 million miles from the sun. According to evolution, the earth is over 500 million years old. At that time the sun would have been 4100 million miles larger. At that distance it would have swallowed up the earth and been closer to Neptune. Early man appeared five million years ago. The sun would have been 20.5 million miles closer to earth. We would have been burned up.

The Shrinking Sun

Planet | Sun | Mercury | Venus | Earth | Mars | Jupiter | Saturn | Uranus | Neptune | Pluto
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Current location in Millions of Miles from the sun | 36 | 67 | 93 | 141 | 483 | 887 | 1783 | 2794 | 3664
Where was the sun in the past? It was swallowing the earth at the time these creatures were emerging | Radius | 20.5 | 37.35 | 66.4 | 93.4 | 141 | 481 | 888 | 1784 | 2793 | 3664
Millions of years | 5 | 9 | 16 | 22.5 | 34 | 116 | 214 | 430 | 673 | 883
What evolved? |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Oldest fossils

The theory of evolution states that life was being formed on earth at a time when the earth would have been swallowed up by the sun. According to the above calculations, 22.5 million years ago the sun was at the current position of the earth if it shrinks five feet in diameter.

- 900 million years ago - oldest known fossils - but the sun is beyond the position of Pluto.
- 425 million years ago - fish were evolving - but the sun was now at the position of Uranus.
- 20 - 50 million years ago. Hot dog! When cats and dogs were supposed to be evolving, the sun was beyond the position of Mars.
- 5 million years ago, when monkey man was being formed, the sun was close enough to burn off the atmosphere and boil the sea.
- 6000 years ago, the sun would have been only 24,600 miles closer to the earth. There are no disastrous effects on the earth.

The shrink rate of the sun and the orbit of the planets around it is more compatible with a 6000 year age of the earth. The fact is, the planets would have moved even further away from the sun as the gravitational force decreased while it was shrinking.
Mr Potato Menu. Boiled, mashed, baked or fried potato.

Complexity And Statistics: The Improbability Of Evolution

Biological Complexity
Encyclopedia |  | Creature
--- | --- | ---
Electronic Books | Living Creature
Books | Dead Creature
Book | Organ
Chapter | Chromosome
Paragraph | Operon
Sentence | Gene
Words | Codons
Letters | Amino Acids
Ink, pen, paper | Chemicals
Monkey Shine. Give a monkey some paper and a type writer (intelligent intervention?) and make him type all the books of the encyclopedia without copying them. That is the scope of the problem of evolution, except for supplying ink and paper

Evolution minimizes the complexity of biological systems by treating the problem as the random creation of a ladder rather than a problem that is even more complex than the creation of a set of encyclopedia.
Stairs can be created from stacking several copies of one building block. Books cannot.
A useful book requires the representation of ideas that have meaning in a written language. The ideas are represented by an intelligent set of building blocks including chapters, paragraphs, sentences, words and letters. Even the concept of creating a book is based on the existence of spoken language and intelligence which provide the original meaning and the current design. Otherwise a book is merely a collection of useless symbols and markings that may only have value as art if arranged intelligently and garbage if compiled by random forces.
Imagine compiling any simple book by randomly throwing letters in the air, or giving a monkey a typewriter, or letting the wind blow through a pile of letters. It is impossible because it is not the lucky accident of one event, but a series of trillions of related events that interoperate with many other series of related events. Each event is a unique item, not simply a replaceable rung in a ladder.

Evolution's Mass Extinctions
Event | When | %
--- | --- | ---
Mt. Toba Eruption | 75,000 | -
Chicxulub | 65 million | 60%
Triassic-Jurassic | 200 million | 20%
Permian-Triassic Siberian Mantle Plume Eruptions | 251 million | 96%
Frasnian-Fammian | 364 million | 70%

The Global Population
While there is too much biological life on planet earth to account for the relatively short evolution time, there are too few humans to account for the length of time evolutionists say we have been on earth. In other words, if humans emerged over 250,000 years ago or even 50,000 years ago, the population should have been much larger. Using very conservative growth rates, the current population of 6.3 billion in 2004 would have been reached 4200 years after the first two parents emerged. The fact that the population is so low, points to a young earth or human evolution within the past 4200 years or several human mass extinctions. One of which must have occurred within the last 4000 years.

Modern Mass Extinctions.

- The Flood. The bible records one mass extinction 4000 years ago during the flood with only eight surviving. Of these, only three couples produced children. Even with a repopulation of only 2.2 children surviving in each generation after the flood the current population is still very low. So other population reductions must have occurred after the flood.
- Java Volcano. A natural disaster probably caused when a volcanic eruption split the island of Java and formed Sumatra. It caused nuclear winter conditions between 535 and 546 AD, killing many plants and animals and reducing global population by as much as 50%.

  Mass Human Extinction (The Mt. Toba Eruption)
  The Mt. Toba eruption on Sumatra about 75,000 years ago, produced a volcanic winter for six years and a 1000 year ice age where temperatures dropped 12 degrees centigrade. Only 2,000 to 10,000 adults remained. Since this is before the appearance of modern man 50,000 years ago, according to the theory, it does not affect our calculations.
  Of course creationists would say that this event happened within the last 6000 years, in the first 2000 years.

- The Dark Ages. The brutal Roman empire, the global environmental disaster between 535 and 546 AD, the purges of the Dark Ages, the Barbarian invasions and the European plagues decimated the population.
  If the population had maintained a ten percent growth every sixty years since the dark ages began, then the population would have been 2.6 billion at the beginning of the revolution instead of 745 million. Persecution and the plague removed over 75% of the projected population. Since a part of that calculated percentage is due to loss of projected children under ideal conditions, the number killed may be closer to 50%. So, what happened to one billion people? If the event in 545 AD killed up to 50%, then we started the period with a low population. History records that the plague killed 30% of Europe, about forty million. Mongol wars killed about 55 million. Therefore persecution killed the rest. So an estimate of 100 to 200 million martyrs is very reasonable. Although that sounds like a large number, it represents martyrs over a 1260 year period. This is an average of 80,000 to 160,000 people per year in all the known world.

Year | History | 1 Estimated | Growth Rate | 2 Population | 3 Population | 4 Population | 5 Population
--- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---
250000 | Homo Sapiens |  | 0 | 2
73000BC | Mt. Toba Eruption | 90% died. (2,000-10,000 remain)
50000BC | Modern Man | 2 | 333 x 1082
45000BC | Evolving ... | 75,395 | 391 x 1083
40000BC | Evolving ... | 1039 x 106 | 460 x 1085
35000BC | Evolving ... | Creation Population Estimates | 14 x 1012 | 549 x 1087
30000BC | Global migration | Our position is that the total global population is very low because the earth began to be populated about six thousand years ago and was reduced to eight 4000 years ago. Evolution must accept a mass global extinction within the last six thousand years to account for this low population. The anecdotal stories in many cultures about a great flood provides an answer. They should not dismiss it or call it a local phenomenon. | 19 x 1016 | 633 x 1089
25000BC | Evolving ... | 27 x 1020 | 744 x 1091
20000BC | Evolving ... | 374 x 1023 | 873 x 1093
11000BC | Agriculture | 106 x 1031 | 464 x 1097
10500BC | Cities emerged | 274 x 1031 | 747 x 1097
4000 BC | Man Created | 2 | - | 2 | 2 | 659 x 1037 | 366 10100
2574 BC | Flood | 15,000,000 | .03 | 15,000,000 | 33,500,000 | 999 x 1037 | 142 x 10101
2574 BC | After the Flood | 8 | - | 8 | 8 | - | -
2474 BC | Tower of Babel | 111 | 1.4 | 111 | 112 | 121 x 1038 | 157 x 10101
1900 BC | Abraham | 262,000 | .07 | 262,000 | 1,800,000 | 361 x 1038 | 271 x 10101
1491 BC | Exodus | 39,319,716 | .065 | 39,319,716 | 2 x 109 | 788 x 1038 | 400 x 10101
1015 BC | First Temple | 57,742,000 | .05 | 57,742,000 | 15 x 1012 | 195 x 1039 | 630 x 10101
597 BC | Babylon | 98,759,000 | .05 | 98,759,000 | 9 x 10 14 | 433 x 1039 | 939 x 10101
1 | Jesus Christ | 138,964,000 * | .05 | 138,964,000 | 4.04 x 10 18 | 135 x 1040 | 166 x 10102
80 | Roman empire | 145,999,000 | .025 | 145,999,000 | 1.51 x 10 19 | 157 x 1040 | 179 x 10102
500 | Dark Ages begin | 191,563,000 | .025 | 191,563,000 | 3.3 x 10 22 | 350 x 1040 | 267 x 10102
1000 | 1000 | 260,000,000 | .04 | 630,000,000 | 1.35 x 10 26 | 909 x 4038 | 430 x 10102
1100 | Crusades | 277,000,000 | .025 | 800,000,000 | 7.5 x 10 26 | 110 x 1041 | 473 x 10102
1200 | Inquisition | 276,000,000 | -.015 | 1,016,000,000 | 4.33 x 10 27 | 133 x 1041 | 520 x 10102
1300 | Plague | 327,000,000 | .07 | 1,289,000,000 | 2.5 x 10 28 | 161 x 1041 | 572 x 10102
1400 | Inquisition | 426,000,000 | .013 | 1,637,000,000 | 1.38 x 10 29 | 195 x 1041 | 630 x 10102
1500 | Reformation | 470,537,000 | .04 | 2,075,000,000 | 8.3 x 10 29 | 236 x 1041 | 692 x 10102
1600 | Reformation | 745,000,000 | .1 | 2,636,000,000 | 4.4 x 10 30 | 285 x 1041 | 762 x 10102
1700 | Revolution | 930,000,000 | .1 | This is the first column without adjustments. It is the expected population without the deaths in the dark ages. It uses a very low growth rate of 0.1 during that time | 2.6 x 10 31 | 345 x 1041 | 838 x 10102
1800 | Scientific | 1,170,000,000 | .1 | 1.42 x 10 32 | 418 x 1041 | 922 x 10102
1900 | Industrial, Antibiotics | 1,630,000,000 | .1 | 7.3 x 10 32 | 505 x 1041 | 101 x 10103
1950 | Baby Boom, Vaccines | 2,555,360,972 | .57 | 227 x 10 31 | 556 x 1041 | 1064 x 10102
1970 | Sexual Revolution Birth Control | 3,707,475,887 | .50 | 321 x 10 31 | 578 x 1041 | 1084 x 10102
2002 | 6,226,933,918 | .62 | 454 x 10 31 | 614 x 1041 | 1118 x 10102
2003 | Birth Control | 6,299,763,405 | .01 | 462 x 10 31 | 615 x 1041 | 1119 x 10102
2004 | Birth Control | 6,372,797,742 | .012 | 470 x 10 31 | 616 x 1041 | 1120 x 10102
The global population will reach 7 billion between 31 October 2011 (UN) and 12 February 2012 (US Census Bureau)
This is a formula for the calculation of population growth. It does not consider the effect of mass extinctions.
Column | Formula 1 (Average Births) Pn = (2(Cn - x + 1) (Cx-1)) / (C - 1) Pn = Population n = Number of generations x = Average number of generations alive c = Half the number of children per family | Formula 2 (Growth Rate) Py = Py1 + (Py1 * r) * (n) Py = Current population Py1 = Population in the previous period r = Average annual growth rate n = Number of generations between periods
1 | Population and growth rate calculated to fit estimates from many sources. US Census Bureau (1950-2004) In 1790, the total US population was 4 million
2 | Expected population without the high death rates during the Roman empire and the dark ages
3 | From creation. 4 children per family. One generation every 40 years. 3 generations alive after the flood
4 | From 50,000 BC. 2.2 children per family and one generation every 50 years and three generations alive
5 | From 250,000 BC. 2.2 children per family and one generation every 50 years and three generations alive
* The scholarly concensus is that the global population in 1AD was about 200-300 million with 30-45 million in the Roman empire. So I was very generous in not over-inflating the figures to make my case better. Since the numbers are so different, I believe that I made my point. But some of these numbers were the average over time. The rates were chosen to make the best fit to the population estimates.

The Population Formula
I saw a criticism about the "supposed low population growth rate". This was how the calculations were characterized. The article went on to say that high death rates, disease and other factors reduced the population. They used disparaging words but no hard numbers to make their argument. The implication was that the creation values are deceptive and did not account for these misfortunes.
However, when I did my calculations I took all these factors into consideration. Based on the limitation of the formula I could not use less than two children per family because it caused a division by zero error. However the population values it gave were extremely low.
Using the table on the right, we see that over 50,000 years since modern man supposedly emerged, if the growth rate was 2.0404 children per family surviving to adulthood, then we would have the current population of six billion. What does this mean? How does this unreasonable population growth rate perform? With an initial population of two people, after 5,000 years there are only 43 people! That number sounds unreasonably low, but that is the value I used. I had the impression that if all species teetered on the edge of such low population growth for so many thousands of years that many would be extinct.
2.2 Children per Family. This means that for every ten families the population increased by one every fifty years. That is an annual growth rate if 0.2%.

Total | Year
--- | ---
Children | 0 | 2500 | 4200 | 5000 | 6000 | 50000
2.5606 | 2 | 1.1 x 106 | 6.33 x 109 | 257 x 109 | 36 x 1012 | 1.96 x 10112
2.3814 | 31,395 | 14 x 106 | 193 x 106 | 6.35 x 109 | 3.53 x 1079
2.20 | 642 | 18,049 | 75,395 | 507,218 | 6.16 x 1043
2.18 | 410 | 8,376 | 30,510 | 170,993 | 4.66 x 1039
2.16 | 261 | 3,860 | 12,245 | 57,074 | 3.22 x 1035
2.14 | 165 | 1,766 | 4,873 | 18,857 | 2.05 x 1031
2.12 | 104 | 802 | 1,923 | 6,167 | 1.18 x 1027
2.10 | 66 | 362 | 752 | 1,995 | 6.25 x 1022
2.08 | 41 | 162 | 292 | 639 | 3.00 x 1018
2.06 | 26 | 72 | 112 | 202 | 1.31 x 1014
2.04 | 16 | 32 | 43 | 63 | 5.18 x 109
2.0404 | 16 | 32 | 43 | 65 | 6.35 x 109
2.02 | 10 | 14 | 16 | 20 | 1.86 x 105
The first column is the birth rate of children
0 | Two people existed in the initial year
2500 | Number of people just before the flood
4200 | Number of people since the flood (Our current population)
6000 | Number of people since the creation (assuming no flood)
50000 | Number of people since modern man evolved

With a growth of 2.2, there would be a population of 75,395 in 5000 years. That is an average of 15 new people per year. This is our supposed deceptive values. I believe that they are extremely low and that it takes into account extremely high death rates.
I used the values of one generation every fifty years, three generations alive and 2.2 children per family. If I had used twenty years per generation, which is reasonable, we would have much higher values. Therefore, at every step we used extremely pessimistic numbers that are not in our favor. My argument does not disprove evolution. What it says is that evolution must factor in one or more mass extinctions of the human population to account for the current low population.
At a reasonable growth of 2.5606, the population would reach the current six billion if there was a mass extinction 4,200 years ago. There are not enough people if the evolution timetable is correct.

The Exodus Population
Using the first formula and the knowledge that the Israelis were more fertile, stayed in Egypt for ten generations and started with seventy ancestors we can calculate how many were liberated in the Exodus. Assume six children per family. Twelve sons would produce two million children. But 35 pairs of parents would produce six million children. Since it is unlikely that there were equal numbers of male and female, let us assume twenty pairs. The total would be 3,499,200 in the exodus. This may be correct because the total number of adult males over 20 years old at the exodus was over 603,550. (Numbers 2: 32). This is an average of six people per family. This is a very conservative number. Even with the attempted male genocide in the last generation, the bible says that the population grew more.
The Bible says that they left in the fourth generation (Genesis 15: 16). However that only meant that when they left, the fourth generation would still be alive. Moses was eighty when the Exodus began. He was the fourth generation. He was younger than his brother and sister and they all had children.

Total Population
Some estimates say that the total population on earth since modern man appeared over 50,000 years ago has been 106.4 billion. In my calculation, the total population during the flood may have been 15 to 33 million but many people say 4 billion or more. The total population since creation is about 8 to 12 billion in my low estimates based on 6000 years.

Other Populations. We should be able to find other animal populations and calculate the approximate time their parents appeared. The American buffalo seems like a good candidate. It has no significant natural predators and it has lived in relative isolation in the unknown world. Before the Americans hunted them to near extinction, huge buffalo herds, numbering in the millions roamed the central part of the country in the seventeenth century.

Scientific Method: Reproducible Experiments and Data. Mathematical calculations show that the current population must have started with few people about 4500 years ago.

The Verdict
Short Time. The theory of evolution requires lots of time. Time for rocks to cool. Time for the layers of the earth to form. Time for small but positive mutation changes to accumulate into a significant new system or creature.
Creation on the other hand requires only six days for the major events to occur and one year for the devastated earth to be saturated during the violent convulsions of the flood so that it can reshape itself after the flood.
Biological systems must be developed in a very short period of time.
There are too few people on earth to account for hundreds of thousands of years of growth.
There is too much life on earth to account for the number of years of evolution.
Complex Biological Systems. Evolution is statistically impossible. Slow mutation alone cannot bring about subspecies change. Sudden creation favors current biological system dependencies. We need an intelligent designer. The theory cannot propose how a living creature could predict and plan and make complicated structures. It does not explain how this new structure will be integrated into the other systems like the brain. And it cannot explain how it can coordinate its design with a separate, unique and independent system. It just simply says that over millions of years it happened. But time cannot make an impossibility happen.
And I must repeat this point so that you can get the full implication of the problem. How did 13 million pairs of animals randomly and independently evolve the same complicated solutions to their problems within the short span of their lives? Systems we cannot duplicate in our billion dollar laboratories?
Dependent Biological Systems. Observable biological and physical nature of matter favor immediate formation of systems. Without all systems operating at the same time all would fail. So according to the expert testimony of medical doctors and cell biologists, biological systems cannot haphazardly form over millions of years.
Intervention. The only conclusion that we can reach is that the process needs the intelligent intervention and supervision of a master Planner, Designer and Engineer.

Anecdotal Evidence

Anthropological Records
Number of Stories | Location
--- | ---
59 | North America
46 | Central and South America
31 | Europe
17 | Middle East
23 | South Sea Island, Australia
7 | Africa
| Eight
--- | ---
Vessel | Mouth
| Chinese Symbols Vessel - Blue symbol Eight - Purple symbol Mouth - Red symbol
Boat = vessel + eight + mouth

There is other, less reliable evidence that points to the flood or a catastrophic event that accounts for the condition of the earth and the common memories stored in legends.

Similar Flood Stories. Stories from over 300 groups point to a great flood (Mitchell). These stories might point to an event that happened when man was located in one place on the earth. As the population grew, the descendants spread across the face of the earth and carried the story of the great flood with them.
It does not prove creation, it might not even prove a global flood but it does prove a flood that affected all the ancestors of modern men. These stories can be found all around the world. In some the only remaining similarity is a flood event, in others the name of the hero sounds similar to the name of Noah and in others the rest of the details are the same. There are two notable stories:

1. Gilgamesh Epic. The version in the famous Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic is slightly similar to the Bible. Those who hate the Bible claim that the story was copied from the Babylonian version. Whatever they choose to believe, these stories (anecdotal evidence) points to a catastrophic flood that affected all of mankind. At a minimum each region experienced a catastrophic flood at some point and the similarity of the details that survived says that the events were the same.
2. The Miao People of South China. The legend of the Miao people says there was a man named NuWah (Nuah) with his wife (Gawboluen) three sons (Lo Han, Lo Shen and Jah-Hu) and three daughters who escaped the flood in a ship. The flood happened around 2300 BC.

   Names of the Patriarchs
   Bible Names | Miao Legend
   --- | ---
   1 | Adam | Dirt
   The word Adam means dirt
   2 | Seth | Se-Teh
   3 | Enos | Lusu Gehlo
   4 | Cainan
   5 | Mahalaleel
   6 | Jared
   7 | Enoch
   8 | Methuselah
   9 | Lamech | Lama
   10 | Noah | Nuah
   » | Shem | Lo Shen
   » | Ham | Lo Han
   » | Japheth | Jah-Hu

   After the flood they built a tower and their speech were broken up into six languages.
   The sons of Noah had sons who had similar sounding names as the sons of the Miao legend.
   » Shem: Lo-Shen (Sons were Elan and Ngashur). Bible: (Elam and Asshur).
   » Ham: Lo-Han (Sons were Cu-Sah and Mesay). Bible: (Cush and Mizraim).
   » Japheth: Jah-Hu (Son is Gomen). Bible: (Gomer).
   The Miao are descended from Gomer.
   In other Chinese legends the wife is named Nuwa and her husband were two of the first three patriarchs who populated the earth after a global flood.
   » Chinese Characters. The Chinese symbol for ship is (vessel + Eight + mouth). There were eight people on the ark.

The Temple Of Karnak. Around the year 2345 BC, something occurred that caused the earth to tilt on its axis. Ancient religious sites that were aligned with the sun and angle measurements recorded from ancient vertical markers called gnomons do not agree with modern observations. The ancient measurements show a consistent deviation which has been traced to a point around 2345 BC.
In the Temple of Karnak, records indicate that only on the day of the equinox, the sun would strike a small window and illuminate the interior. However, today this never happens and calculations show that the tilt of the earth has changed at least 30 since those days. The phenomenon is said to be caused by an asteroid hitting the earth just before the flood. The force was so great, it shattered the crust, tilted the planet and caused the water stored underground to rush to the surface. The impact caused the earth to tilt and then wobble as it is restoring itself to a more stable position. Scientists measuring the wobble have also traced the initial event to about 2345 BC, the time of the flood.
This is an example of several types of evidence. The position of the artifacts is circumstantial evidence about the alignment of the earth in the past. Mathematical evidence calculated the force and the lasting effects of the wobble. Anecdotal evidence described the purpose of these structures.

The Marketing Of Evolution

Common Sense
It is logical. A certain level of sophistication requires an intelligent designer or intelligent intervention.

Evolution guarantees its place in society by ridiculing the opposition, barring it from schools, controlling the media and by introducing it to young children in a fun way. The dinosaur is a most effective method of propaganda. The ages of the dinosaurs directly competes with the message of creation. Parents often do not answer these questions because they cannot. So they ignore the issue or repeat the speculations of other uninformed people or blame Satan. At the same time their children are learning this subtle message.
"Dinosaurs are science. The Bible is a collection of fairy tales".
Dinosaurs ("Terrible Lizard" or "Nice Cartoon" or "Cute Stuffed Toy")
The first dinosaur bone was discovered in 1822 when the tooth and few bones of an iguanadon were found in Sussex, England.

- Created by God or Satan? Some people claim that Satan either created the dinosaur or created the skeleton to trick us. Since Satan could not create life it is impossible for him to create the dinosaur. While creating and planting misleading fossils may be a possibility, there are better answers. Satan is stupid. God created them.
- The Size of the Dinosaur. In one generation medium sized animals can produce both a dwarf and a giant! Interbreeding between different species of cats (lion and tiger) shows that in one generation the offspring could be a massive creature. Crossbreeding a female tiger and a male lion always produces the giant liger. It may stand up to 12 feet tall and weigh 1000 lbs (3.7 meters and 454 kg). While breeding the female lion and the male tiger always produces the small tigon which is always a dwarf that is smaller than the parents. So the dinosaur and the modern lizards could have been produced from the same family of reptiles in one year.
- How Did they Fit on the Ark? Some claim that God killed all the dinosaurs in the flood. Since Noah was instructed to bring one of every kind of creature let us assume that he must have brought the dinosaur on board. So how did he do it? Most dinosaurs were the size of a chicken. Very few were huge. He could have brought their eggs or babies.
- The Age of the Dinosaur. They are about six thousand years old. The dating method scientists use are already biased towards the assumption of long ages. Carbon dating changes greatly when the object is submerged by water. This is what happened to the vast majority of Dinosaurs. They were rapidly submerged after the flood. Their larger population on the American continent and in China shows that they stayed away from the habitat where humans were dominant in the Middle East.
- Is there Evidence for Creation. Evolution claims that the last dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago, before man. Modern man is supposed to have appeared 50,000 years ago and their monkey ancestors five million years ago. However there is evidence of human foot prints walking beside dinosaurs prints. There is ancient art from Mexico that shows humans riding on the back of a triceratops.
- Are there Dinosaurs in the Bible? The bible does mention huge creatures.
  - Behemoth. This is a vegetarian animal with a huge tail and strong limbs that lived on the land and it fits the description of a dinosaur like the brachiosaurus. Some claim that the bible is describing either an elephant or a hippopotamus, but this cannot be correct because they both have a tiny tail. There are no living creatures with huge tails, except for the reptiles and lizards which have tails that are as large as their bodies.
    Has a Big Tail. Behold now, Behemoth which I made as well as you. He eats grass like an ox. ... He bends his tail like a cedar. ... His bones are tubes of bronze; his limbs are like bars of iron. (Job 40: 15-18)
    So the Bible describes him as having strong bones and a huge tail.
  - Leviathan. This animal lived in the sea. It may be a great fish with thick skin.
    Can you draw out Leviathan with a fish hook? ... Can you fill his skin with harpoons? Lay your hand on him; remember the battle; you will not do it again. (Job 41: 1, 7-8)
  - Dragon. The dragon is mentioned mainly in prophecy and is a symbol of Satan. But in Daniel, there is mention of four series of creatures that are based on real animals. Lion, bear, leopard and a terrible creature. The fourth creature may be based on the dinosaur.
    ... a fourth beast, dreadful and terrifying and extremely strong ... (Daniel 7: 7)
    Daniel could not identify this creature because it was now extinct. But God used an extinct creature that is described as part bronze and iron because the fate of the brutal bronze and iron powers that represent this creature is extinction.
- Dinosaur Extinction. The footprint evidence may show that they coexisted with humans in America. They must have become extinct after that. The majority of skeletons that we see probably died in the flood, because those conditions were suitable for preservation.

Dinosaur | Period | Location | Size | Record
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Argentinosaurus Hincutensis "Argentinian lizard" | 60% Mass Extinction. Chicxulub meteor. 60% of all life and 100% of all dinosaurs
Cretaceous | Argentina | 35-45m (114-146 ft) 100 tons | Largest dinosaur
Giganotosaurus Cardinii "Giant southern lizard" | Argentina | 13.5-14.3m (44-46 ft) 7-8 tons | Largest carnivore
Tyrannosaurus Rex "Tyrant Lizard" | North America, East Asia | 10-14m (32-45 ft) 6-7 tons | -
Ankylosaurus Magniuentris "Bent/ Crooked lizard" | Texas, Utah, Argentina, Antarctica | 4-9m (13-29 ft) | Widest
Ornithomiminee "Bird mimic" | Canada, Colorado, Utah | 3-3.5m (10-11 ft) 100-175kg | Fastest (40-50mph)
Troodontids "Wounding tooth" | Canada, Montana, Wyoming | 2-3.5m (6.5-11 ft) 50kg | Smartest (largest brain to body ratio)
Raptorex | North China | 25-29m (8-9 ft) 175 Lbs | Tiny T-Rex
Mamenchisaurus "Mamenchi lizard" | 20% Mass Extinction.
Jurassic | China | 22-25m (71-81 ft) Neck 10m (33ft) | Longest neck
Stegosaurus "Roofed lizard" | Colorado, Utah, Wyoming | 9m (29 ft) 1.8 tons | Dumbest. Walnut sized brain
Allosaurus "Different/ strange lizard" | Colorado, Australia, Tanzania | 5-10 m (16-32 ft) 1-5 tons | -
Compsugnathus Longipes "Delicate jaw" | France, Germany | 60 cm (24 inch) 5.5 kg | Smallest
Eoraptor Lunensis "Dawn plunderer" | 96% Mass Extinction.
Triassic | Argentina | 1 m (39 inch) | Earliest

| How to Present an Argument Honestly
--- | ---
Evidence. Summarize the evidence or theory clearly.
Proof. List the best evidence
Rebuttal. Attack the evidence. Explain your rebuttal or opposing evidence.
Conclusion. Make a decision based on the preponderance of evidence or overwhelming evidence.

The Politics Of Evolution
Whenever I have heard evolutionists talk about the theory of creation on television or radio, I have never heard anyone address any of the arguments and tell what specific laws they violate or what was wrong with the research. Instead, they ridicule creationism in certain ways, leaving the audience with the perception that it is nonsense accepted by people through blind "faith", which involves no scientific proof.

- Not Scientific. This label is used constantly, but they never say which evidence violates which laws and how. They will say "created in 6000 years" in disparaging tones.
- Not Important. I once heard an interviewer mention that "creationists point to statistical arguments" but then said that these arguments are "not important". No one mentioned what the statistics were based on and what percent probabilities were being claimed. So, because most of you are afraid of mathematics, statistics seems to be in the Twilight Zone of mathematical theory so you breathe a collective sigh of relief and ignore the argument. If creation is that complicated, then it must be false or a matter of personal opinion.

  | How to Present an Argument
  --- | ---
  Light from Distant Stars
  Evidence. Light from distant stars proves that the galaxy is billions of years old.
  Proof. Since light travels at a constant speed, we should only be able to see starlight that has been travelling for 6000 years. If we can see light that has traveled from distant stars that are millions of light years away it proves that the stars could not have been created 6000 years ago on the fourth day.
  Creationist Rebuttal. ☆ The speed of light is slowing down. It was faster in the past. ☆ The distant stars are part of what existed before our creation. ☆ Creation Theory. God created the light trails with the distant stars.
  The evolutionist's proof is based on mathematical calculations based on reliable laws. It is the stronger proof if God created all the stars on the fourth day. The creationist's proof is based on ancient measurements that show that the speed of light may not be a constant and on what God actually said He did on the fourth day. God definitely created the sun and the moon on the fourth day. But for the stars it said, "He created the stars also". This either means that He created them that day or He also created what we see at an earlier time. So God is actually saying, I created the sun and moon on the fourth day. And, by the way, the stars that you see, I created them too. So in that case the argument is moot. We agree that starlight is older but not sunlight.

- Not Supported. For two hours I listened to a report that was supposed to show proof against creationism but again, specific proofs, weak or strong, were not discussed and torn apart. Instead, most of the time was spent in saying that people are abandoning the theory in droves and no reputable person supports it and it is not "science". You were left with the impression that they had explained the evidence, but you had somehow missed it and now they are presenting the rebuttal.
  You never knew what this mysterious "it" was, only that "it" was ridiculous, unsupported nonsense.
- Not Acceptable. Although it is not a scientific position, a belief in creationism is unacceptable for many personal and social reasons.

  > Creation is Intolerable. "... there is an important difference between going to the empirical evidence to test a doubtful theory against some plausible alternative, and going to the evidence to look for confirmation of the only theory that one is willing to tolerate." Phillip Johnson (Creationist). 'Darwin on Trial' page 28

  Evolutionists do not want God to exist. But ignoring evidence of His existence is not scientific reasoning.
- Incompetent Representation. I have never seen a creationist expert on television news show who was competent at explaining the position. I have never seen the "expert" take one argument and explain it. Such appearances are so rare that I am not sure if the problem is the amount of time, or the interview is edited, or the questions asked or the fact that the evolutionist and the news people are acting as a team whose mission is to discredit the other guest by not allowing them to present their own case. I have never heard them explain their case or an argument, I have only heard them defend their right to teach it.
  I mean, how long does it take to say that "Dr. Robert Gentry has demonstrated that granite was formed in less than three minutes, not millions of years". Four seconds!
- Defamation of Character. In the area of Dr. Gentry's work I did find a response on the internet and it goes something like this:
  - Dr. Gentry is not a reputable or honest scientist.
  - His samples are contaminated.
  - They will find an explanation for his findings.
  - No reputable scientific journal will publish his papers. This is important to the scientific community. It is the equivalent of saying that no reputable newspaper will carry his report, only magazines like the National Enquirer (the ones that show pictures of half human and half alien babies).
  - They are highly suspicious of where he got his samples.
  Fortunately, I had read his careful studies and I was shocked at the dishonesty and subtle innuendoes. The fact is that they have tried to disprove his work with their reputable scientists and their untainted samples, and they cannot!

  | How to Misrepresent an Argument
  --- | ---
  The Formation of Granite
  Evidence. Pleochroic halos in granite prove that the rock was formed in less than three minutes.
  Proof. Since the radioactive particle that caused the halo disappears in less than three minutes, the rock in which it is trapped must have become solid in less than three minutes.
  Evolutionist Rebuttal. Never mention the evidence and its proof. Attack the people, then impugn the evidence. ☆ The samples are contaminated. ☆ He must be a crackpot. ☆ No one will publish his work.
  Although the research has been verified and available for over thirty years, it is never mentioned as an argument in favor of creationists and our universities produce geologists who have never heard this information

  Doctor Gentry's work was reproducible, meticulous and universal. It met the criteria of the scientific method. They did not address the science in their response. They resorted to ridicule of the man. By doing that, they left the impression that his work was not good and not based on science. His work is as useless as he is. This is an emotional reaction. The fact is that they did reproduce his work. One group even tried to discredit it and had to abandon the project. Another has been trying to create granite from molten rock for decades and has failed.
  Yet, in March 2008, a documentary on Discovery Channel talked about "molten rocks forming granite".
- Ignorant. Evolutionists claim that creationists misstate and twist the Second law of Thermodynamics. But when I read their description of what the law states, it was not what I had learned. What I learned is exactly as quoted by the creationists and my text books.
  Order is not created out of chaos without intelligence.
- Faith-Based Reasoning. They will imply that all our reasoning and proofs are based on faith and that there is not one shred of science or logic in the argument. But you will never hear the details of the argument.

  > Faith Based Evolution. "The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone." T.L. Moor Quoted by B.G. Ranganathan (Creationist). 'Origins' page 22

- Laughter and Ridicule. They will mention the phrase "creation science" or "6000 years" or some phrase that supposedly represents our position with laughter. And that is all you will remember about our position. Laughter.
  So the creationist position is discredited not by argument but by insinuation, by association with ridicule, ignorance and unpopularity.
  Ridiculing an opposing position does not prove your position. You could both be wrong.

  > Peer Jeer Fear. "... the only reason why most people seem to believe in evolution is either because they want to believe in it or else because they have been cowed into accepting it out of fear of being called ignorant or reactionary or some such fearful name." Henry M. Morris (Creationist). 'The Twilight of Evolution' page 92

Evaluate Us. Did we avoid the tough questions by employing the same tactics.

- Molehills and Mountains. Did we attack the weak points of a theory without considering the strong evidence? Or did we attack very important supports of the theory?
- Science. Did we appeal to science and use science in our arguments? Did we present our own arguments that are based in good science?
- Diversion. Did we avoid discussing clear evidence by throwing mud at the people or other irrelevant issues?
- Bait and Switch. Did we stray from the topic so that we skillfully avoided answering the questions?
- Personal Attacks. Did we resort to personal attacks to avoid confronting the issue?
  I confess that on the issue of monster mutation I did get personal, but I also admitted that this attempt to find an explanation based on the evidence is one of the clearest proofs that the original theory was greatly flawed. If Gould and Goldschmidt had not proposed their theories scientists would still be chanting the same old lies, burying their heads in the geologic column, closing their eyes, crossing their fingers and hoping that they will come up with a better theory before the public discovers this massive fraud. Something is awfully wrong with the theory. My ridicule is that Gould, Goldschmidt and their supporters could not bring themselves to admit that he was proposing the very facts of creation. The very facts that they constantly ridicule. But they have my respect.

  > Difficulties of Evolution. "The incessant repetition of this unproved claim glossing lightly over the difficulties, and the assumption of an arrogant attitude toward those who are not easily swayed by fashions of science, are considered to afford scientific proof of the doctrine." Richard Goldschmidt, geneticist (evolutionist). Quoted by John Whitcomb (Creationist). 'The Early Earth' page 21

- Honesty. Did we fairly represent the opponents theory, pointing out the strong points or did we just concentrate on the weaker links? Were the weaker links a deal breaker?
  Did we avoid clear evidence that absolutely proves evolution?
- Definitive Evidence. I admit that I could not let go of the issue of male and female. It trumps everything!
- Faith. Is it more likely that an intelligent force created the complexity that we see or is it more likely that an innumerable series of co-dependent random accidents produced it, given the time constraints? My faith is much more reasonable than your mathematics.

The Stupidity Of Evolution. In recent years, I have heard the most ridiculous reasoning by scientists and journalists about the mysterious force of evolution called "Adaptation".

- Saving the Polar Bears. As global warming melts ice packs and more polar bears are stranded, drowned and starving I have actually heard people talk about how nature will save them, through the process of evolution. They kept talking about the fact that the polar bears will "adapt" through evolution. I wanted to ask, "how"?!! How will the polar bear, get to eat enough fish so that they can store enough fat if they do not have enough time to fish? How will the polar bear swim across miles of water instead of walking across ice in its emaciated condition? And as their numbers dwindle while they die trying each year, waiting to "adapt", what organ or appendage or fishing equipment will the last polar bear grow to make him overcome these obstacles and adapt to the new temperatures?
  Less Talk, More Action! We need intelligent intervention. Rescue the polar bears, you idiots!
- Why Humans Sleep. As scientists recognize the importance of adequate sleep for all creatures, they struggle to understand why evolution would make us vulnerable for one third of the time. It seems that being unconscious for so long would make us exposed, an easy target for insomniacs looking for food. Sleep, like sexual reproduction makes no logical sense for the fittest to survive. Yet it is a necessity in all animals, causing death within five days if avoided.

The Future Of Evolution. Eventually, the testimony of the prophets is that God will present a serious blow to all theories that challenge His claim to be the creator and the Messiah redeemer.
Those who err in mind will know the truth, and those who criticize will accept instruction. (Isaiah 29: 24)
That challenge has already begun.

Summary
There are several accepted laws and processes that work against the theory of evolution. These affect either the available time span or the possibility of a critical event occurring. Evolution is dependent on a series of major accidents that ultimately survive until they dominate the population. In the end, evolution ultimately brings order out of chaos and builds more complex systems from simple ones, without any intelligence or guidance but by a series of great accidents.

The Results

Evidence | Weight | Creation and Flood | Evolution
--- | --- | --- | ---
Quality | Evidence | Quality | Evidence
Eyewitness to Past Events | 0 | - | None, God | - | None
Documentary | ? | A | Bible | - | None
Documentary | ? | A | Sanctuary is the periodic table | - | None
Documentary | ? | A | Sanctuary models particle physics | - | None
Anecdotal | 1 | A | Temple of Karnak, Flood stories | - | None
Hearsay | 3 | 0 | None | - | None
Common Sense | 5 | A | Sexual reproduction, sleep | - | None
Circumstantial | 6 | A | Intelligent design, Glenrose tracks | D | Similar bone structure
Expert | 6 | - | Failed mutation experiments | C | Stanley Miller experiments
| Biology | 6 | A | Cell complexity | F | Neanderthals
6 | A | Species barrier DNA barrier | D | Mutation
6 | A | Short time | F | Long time
| Chemistry | 6 | B | Primitive atmosphere | - | None
| Physics | 6 | B | Four Forces in balance | - | None
| Geology | 6 | A | Turbidity currents. Surtsey Island. Geologic column anomaly | B | Geologic column
| Cosmology | 6 | C | Cosmic dust | - | None
Statistical | 9 | A | Number of species (Biodiversity) | - | None
A | Sexual reproduction | - | None
A | Body Symmetry | - | None
A | Biological clock | - | None
Experimental | 9 | A | Pleochroic halos Sun shrink rate Big Bang experiments | C | Radioactive dating
Forensic | 10 | A | Pleochroic halos | - | None
Eyewitness to Current Events | 10 | A | 1980 Mount St. Helen's eruption Turbidity currents, Surtsey Island | - | None
Final Score | 408 | Winner | 86 | Loser
Only one piece of evidence in each category is used to score

I did this chart last after trying to find the scientific data for evolution. I found one on the age of ice samples. It was a house of cards. Proofs were based on other faulty proofs, circular reasoning and unreliable methods. Nevertheless, I initially gave Neanderthals an "A" grade as proof because I could find no evidence other than their assertions. However, I came across DNA studies (an approved scientific method) that show no relation to humans. The Neanderthals made a monkey out of me! Therefore, I will never trust any fossil proofs again.

The Love Of God - He Shares With us
The book of Genesis says God made us in His own image. He gave us the ability to think, reason and create. He also gave us the right to be rulers of this planet. He shared His nature with us. Throughout the Bible God declares how valuable we are. He even counts the hairs on our head. He notices the death of a common sparrow and the fading of a flower. He is interested in the smallest detail about you.
He loves you.
On the seventh day He called all the creation together to rest with Him. This is unlike other religions where the gods made slaves out of humanity and took pleasure in tormenting them. But not this God. His first official act was to declare a time for everyone to come together in fellowship. He gave a party, and invited all of us. At the party He gave us a gift. He made a promise to give us rest.
God used to enjoy spending personal time with Adam and Eve - until they sinned. And, even then, it was Adam and Eve who turned away from God. God did not turn away from them. He came searching for His new friends. They were hiding.
Not giving up on His friends, God then decided to share our grief and sorrow and death and in return He has promised to give us a new life.
We are greatly loved. You are greatly loved.

Summary

Church and State and Science
I am a strong supporter of the separation of church and state. And I am also suspicious of the intention of the church to bring religious instruction into the schools under the banner of a legitimate scientific argument in favor of an intelligent designer. The practical rituals of religion belong in the home and church because we cannot agree on whose religion to teach in schools or what is the appropriate response to God. Therefore, that debate is best left in the private sector. Science and politics and religion cannot tell us whose interpretation of God is correct. However, the unbiased scientific evidence for the theory of creation is not a matter of religious practice. The Bible just happens to be a book where Someone claims to be the creator. Correctly understood, real science is a result of the work of the creator. The two are not mutually exclusive. Therefore, evidence of an external source of the origin of the planet and life ought to be presented and not unfairly excluded simply because it points to evidence of intelligent external intervention. Religion identifies the source of creation as god or aliens from outerspace and whether or not this god wants us to sacrifice chickens or torture us forever. This is the point at which separation of church and state ought to intervene. But science simply reports the findings whether or not they lead to proof of intelligent design or incredible luck. It seems that proponents of evolution want the debate to ignore a designer because it ultimately leads us back to the question of how we should respond to this Person and what is our social and cultural responsibility. They can then choose atheism or agnosticism or global karma or Elvis.

What is the evidence that moves evolution from hypothesis to theory?
Scientists laugh at faith and appeal to the ideal of the scientific method. But when you analyze their theories we find dismal failures. It takes more than faith to believe that male and females occurred in the way scientists explain. They just happened to evolve at the same time and this unbelievable coincidence happened with every species. From two million to thirteen million living things. Thirteen million males and thirteen million females having this same unbelievable lucky accident! And these numbers apply if they get everything right the first time.
I call this faith in evolution.
I have heard journalists ridicule the mathematical evidence without saying what it is and implying that it is insignificant and without merit. I am beginning to hear evolutionists use analogies similar to this "It is improbable that a wind blowing through a forest could created the Taj Mahal, But it did!". Unbelievable. This is not only what you believe, they believe it created over thirteen million Taj Mahals in independent events.
As for the scientific method, they totally bypassed it and declare the unverified theory of evolution to be a fact.
The fact is, that they can only demonstrate minor variations within the same species - not a change from one species to another.
The fact is, that they have not been able to produce mutations that last in the lab.
The fact is, that they totally ignore real, basic scientific evidence that disproves their case.
The fact is, that many scientists are too afraid of the consequences to say that the theory does not hold. Many are personally abandoning the theory, but publicly teaching it for fear of reprisals. As teachers of truth, may God forgive them for the harm they are doing.
The fact is, that Dr. Robert Gentry proved using basic science that rocks were formed instantaneously.
The fact is, that the biological clock does not give species the luxury of slow evolution. It imposes a forty year reproduction limit and a seventy to one hundred year life time limit.
The fact is, that most of their facts are based on interpretation of circumstantial evidence gathered from their observations. No experiments or other independent evidence has proved their case. The reality is that the creation model is more consistent with active processes that have been observed in nature. These are events that scientists thought were impossible to accomplish in a short time.
The fact is, the theory of evolution is still a hypothesis. No experiments, natural phenomenon or measurable data proves it.
The fact is, that there is natural phenomenon, measurable data and experiments that prove creationism.
The fact is that the Bible is a book of modern science, being the first to describe the very simple and elegant unified field model that describes the fundamental particles and relationships of quantum chemistry and physics. God showed me the "God particle", gravity and other unknown forces. I have proved it by a direct revelation from God since 2008.
The truth is that God created the universe in seven 24-hour days, almost 6,000 years ago.

> A Young World. "We cannot disprove that it (the universe) was created in 4004 BC ..." George Simpson (Evolutionist)

Imagine the power it takes to harness the energy in the atom. Imagine the creative genius it takes to design the universe. Imagine the biological programming language written in the DNA. Imagine the wisdom it takes to risk it all on freedom of choice!
O God, you have taught me from my youth, and I still declare your wondrous deeds. And even when I am old and gray, O God, do not forsake me, until I declare your strength to this generation, your power to all who are to come. For your righteousness, O God, reaches to the heavens, You who have done great things. O God, who is like You? (Psalm 71: 17-19)

For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother's womb. I will give thanks to You for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Psalm 139: 13, 14 The very hairs on your head are all numbered Matthew 10:30 | Statistics: Time: 500 minutes Print: 97 pages
Copyright Updated : September 28, 2004. August 2010 Author: Laverna Patterson (Biochemistry, B.S. 1982.) Editor: Patterson (March 2008) Credits: The information was compiled from various sources. • Insight magazine (1990 Volume 21. Number 14). (turbidity currents) • A creationist's View of Dinosaurs and the Theory of Evolution by Jim Pinkoski (1997). (Definition of impossible, symmetry) • The case for Creationism - Colin Mitchell (1994). (Temple of Karnak, flood stories) • The Atomic Constants, Light, and Time. Barry Setterfield and Trevor Norman. URL: http://www.ldolphin.org/setterfield/report.html • Creation's Tiny Mystery. Dr. Robert V. Gentry. URL: http://www.halos.com/book/ctm-toc.htm • Chapter 18: Ancient Man. Evolution Encyclopedia. Volume 2. URL: http://evolution-facts.org • Evolution: The Truth? Ronald Powell Th.D. www.biblebelievers.com/powell2.html (Geologic Column, "Monkey Business" statistics) • The Big Bang and Stellar Evolution. Chapter 2c. URL: http://evolution-facts.org Theories of The Origin of the Solar System. • Bore holes. Mysteries of the Inner Earth. David Pratt. URL: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/inner1.htm • U.S. Census Bureau Total Midyear Population for the World: 1950-2050. URL: http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldpop.html • Formula 1. Average Birth. "World Population Since Creation." URL: http://www.spiritrestoration.org/Church/Research History and Great Links/World_Population_since_Creation.htm • Extinction percentages. URL: http://www.apocalypse-soon.com/verneshot.htm • Answers in Genesis. URL: http://www.answersingenesis.org • Earth Science Associates. Pleochroic Halos. URL: http://www.halos.com • Periodic Table Formulations. Chemgenesis Web Book. URL: http://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/35_pt/pt.html • Echos From the Past. URL: http://www.biblepath.com/fossilpictures.html • Pictures of artifacts. URL: http://www.creationevidence.org • Paleontology quotes. http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/evid4.htm • Human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup.Wikipedia: Human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup. URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Y-chromosome_DNA_haplogroup • Mitochondrial Eve. URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve • Hauri yDNA Project. URL: http://www.hauridna.com/haplogroups • "Journey of Man". 2009 Public television documentary of the genetic migration. • Dogs that Changed the world. Nature PBS 2010 documentary. • Geography of Pangea. www.scotese.com/pangeanim.htm • Catastrophism and The Fossil Record (Petrified Forests). URL: http://www.amazingdiscoveries.org/catastrophy.html • Fossils. URL: http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/ • The Hydroplate Theory. Dr. Walt Brown. URL: http://www.cryingvoice.com/Evolution/Hydroplate1.html • Mt. St. Helens and Catastrophism. Steven H. Austin. URL: http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=261 • 7 Wonders of Mount St. Helens. Lloyd & Doris Anderson. URL: http://www.creationism.org/sthelens/MSH1b_7wonders.htm • Thermal Depolymerization. URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization • Pressure Used to Create Artificial Diamonds. URL: http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1998/IleneWeintraub.shtml • Timeline of evolution. URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_evolution • Timeline of human evolution. URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution • Human evolution. URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution • Transitional Human Fossils. Richard White. URL: hominid.htm • Hominid Species. Jim Foley. URL: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/species.html • What Is Evo Devo? URL: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/beta/evolution/what-evo-devo.html • Quotes by evolutionists and creationists compiled in "Bias Towards Evolution". URL: http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/bias.htm • The creation model diagrams were drawn using the Insight magazine pictures. • Walking Snake. URL: http://adcommunications.org/evidence%20page.htm quoted from the book, The Stones Cry Out by Dr. Randall Price • Mr. Potato Head™. A Hasbro toy with the body of a potato and removable and interchangeable body parts. • See the creation and evolution Web sites on my links page. All images were created by Laverna Patterson and are the property of teachinghearts.org
My Own Observations, Revelations and Discoveries. » Male and Female. Around fall of 1994 I was wondering what scientific evidence could disprove evolution. Then in my mind I heard, "Male and female created He them" Genesis 1: 27. By 2000 I could not find creation arguments using this point online. Years later I saw single line references to "origin of sexual reproduction" without much explanation. It was their description of the problem. » Documentary Science Evidence. This is my own creation, taught to me by God. URL: teachinghearts.org/dre17httscience.html » Ark Science Mathematics. I used a stop watch to estimate speed of travel. Used a tape measure to estimate cage sizes for animals and calculated the space requirements for the ark for three sizes of animals and the speed at which it could be loaded for various types of animals. » Population Calculation. I had heard this argument about a low population, but saw no hard data or numbers to back it up. So I found population formulas and just used a spreadsheet to calculate, estimating growth rate from expected population figures. • Total Midyear Population for the World: 1950-2050 URL: http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldpop.html • The Human World Population since Creation. Lambert Dolphin. URL: http://www.spiritrestoration.org/Church/Research%20History%20and%20Great%20Links/World_Population_since_Creation.htm • Average Years of Evolution Per Creature • Linguistics. I calculated the number of languages based on the observed rate of change of the Germanic languages. » Evolutionary Tree. I actually pieced together these three lists from dozens of sources over many years, but I gave credit to wikipedia because it finally put a similar list together that I found in 2009. » Types of Evidence. After deciding to present the data as quality of evidence, I found no definitive list or sources. Instead I relied on memory to create a list from mystery novels and detective stories (eyewitness, rebuttal, material, forensic, expert) and chemistry lab (experimental). The words "anecdotal" may have been from Colin Mitchell's book and "documentary evidence" was from the History Channel. So I do not know if all the terms are acceptable or if there is another name to describe them. Some definitions are my own. » Amazing Discoveries: Age of The Earth (Grand Canyon). Dr. Walter Veith. URL: http://www.amazingdiscoveries.org/ageoftheearth-p2.html » Historical Timeline. URL: http://mirrorh.com/timeline.html