Still, "
In
The
Beginning..."
Charles Darwin, after publishing his "Origin of the Species" in 1859, admitted that available fossils did not fully support his THEORY of gradual evolutionary development through natural selection,, but he was confident that new discoveries would fill the gaps.
Today, after 144 years, the gaps remain. Professor N. Heribert-Nilsson of Lund University, Sweden stated: "The fossil material is now so complete that the lack of transitional series cannot be explained. The deficiencies are real; they will never be filled."
The late Harvard Professor Stephen J. Gould, for many years, perhaps America's foremost evolutionist, advanced a new explanation for the mechanics of evolution to account for this complete lack of transitional forms between species. Called punctuated equilibrium, this revision supposes rapid bursts of evolutionary change followed by long periods of stability.
It seems the THEORY itself is evolving. Every time a new hole is poked in the THEORY of evolution there is a new song and dance composed and choreographed to distract from the latest hole. It reminds me of the Scriptural account of the Philistine god of stone that kept falling to pieces in the presence of the Ark of the Covenant containing the Ten Commandments. The Philistines kept standing their god of stone back up and patching it back together.
If the evolutionary THEORY has such problems, why is acceptance so widespread?
Consider this objective remark from George
Wald, a 1967 Nobel Prize winner:
"When it comes to the origin of life on this
earth, there are only two possibilities: Creation or spontaneous
generation [evolution]. Spontaneous generation was disproved 100
years ago, but that leads us only to one other conclusion: that of
supernatural Creation. We cannot accept that conclusion on philosophical
grounds; therefore, we choose to believe the impossible: that life
arose spontaneously by chance."
However, not everyone believes so strongly in philosophy.
Sir Ernst Chain, co-winner of the 1945 Nobel Prize for developing penicillin, stated: "These classical evolutionary theories are a gross oversimplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily and for such a long time by so many scientists."
Paleontologist Niles Etheridge of the British Museum has remarked: "Nine-tenths of the talk of evolution is sheer nonsense, NOT FOUNDED ON OBSERVATION AND WHOLLY UNSUPPORTED BY THE FACTS....In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species."
Professor Louis Bounoure, Director of Research for the Natural Center of Scientific Research has said "Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless."
Consider this statement by Dr. T. N. Tahmisian of the Atomic Energy Commission: "Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever."
Or consider what Sir Arthur Keith wrote in
the foreword to the 100th edition of Origin of the Species:
"Evolution is unproved and unprovable."
Or consider what the founder of evolutionary theory himself, Charles Darwin, said in his 'Origin of Species': "To suppose that the eye . . . could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."
In the 16th century when Galileo proposed through true scientific observation that the earth revolved around the sun, the Roman Catholic hierarchy had him imprisoned because they taught the masses that the earth was the center of the physical universe. In this 20th century the pendulum has swung to the other extreme; science and reason are so elevated by the 'enlightened' masses that they are forcing many of the denominations through their fear of abandonment to promote a blind, mystical worship of a so-called science that comes as a wolf in sheep's clothing; and true science is forced to take a back seat to subjective opinion alongside God's Word. Now, it seems, the masses, through secular scientific speculation, have been so indoctrinated to believe that they evolved from monkeys that in 1996 the Roman Catholic hierarchy came out officially and publicly embracing evolution; and once again the true science of evidence, observation, and experimental investigation is imprisoned by the pendulum of public opinion and blind religious fiat without a fair trial.
Somehow, the idea seems to have permeated the thinking of the masses that if observation or evidence seems to support a Scriptural tenet, that alone is sufficient reason to exclude it from being offered as an alternative theory of origins in our universities and public schools or even in public debate. Is it any wonder, following this logic, that our public schools, and, indeed, our country and the whole world is in such a state of crises seeing that teachers can't teach that murder and stealing are wrong because God says so in His Ten Commandments? How can it be that in this age, as men and women seem to be growing more fearful with each passing day, we extol knowledge while denying the Source, not only of knowledge, but of love, comfort, and wisdom?
If the Basis and Authority of Spirituality and the Power to perform within the boundaries of Spirituality's Laws is taken away, what is left? Without a higher Power, all that is left is selfishness and weakness; and men and women are left to do only what is right in their own eyes, which is whatever pleases them at any given time. Doing what's right, then, becomes based only on convenience or on survival of the fittest.
Consider this elegant argument presented by Dr. Werner von Braun, father of manned space flight at NASA, in a letter to the California State Board of Education: "We in NASA are often asked what the real reason was for the amazing string of successes we had with our Apollo flights to the moon. I think the only honest answer we could give was that we tried not to overlook anything. It is in that same sense of scientific honesty that I endorse the presentation of alternative theories for the origin of the universe, life and man in the science classroom. IT WOULD BE AN ERROR TO OVERLOOK THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE UNIVERSE WAS PLANNED RATHER THAN HAPPENED BY CHANCE."
Albert Einstein concluded that the splitting of the atom is in reality creation in reverse. For if man can turn matter into energy, could not the Creator have turned energy into matter? If one really thinks about it in this way, does not the splitting of the atom make belief in the Scriptural record not at all difficult?
Is it not embarrassing for the evolutionary proponent of Carbon-14 dating when the following C-14 dating results are considered?:
* A freshly killed seal dated by C-14 method
showed it had died 1300 years ago.
~~ Antarctic Journal, vol. 6, Sep-Oct. '71,
pg. 211.
* Living mollusk shells were dated at up to
2300 years old.
~~ Science, vol. 141 (1963), pg. 634-637.
* Living snails shells showed they had died
27,000 years ago.
~~ Science, vol. 224 (1984), pg. 58-61.
* Coal from Russia from the "Pennsylvanian
period" supposedly 300 million years old,
was C-14 dated at 1680 years old.
~~ Journal of Radiocarbon, vol. 8, 1966.
* Many more examples could be considered, but
you should get the point unless you
are totally close-minded; but, unfortunately,
many are, just as they were in Jesus'
day when He said: If they hear not
Moses and the prophets, neither will they
be persuaded, though one rose from the
dead. Luke 17:31.
The serious problems of C-14 dating and the
lack of true scientific EVIDENCE for it prompted a respected anthropologist
to state: "THE TROUBLES OF THE RADIOCARBON DATING METHOD ARE UNDENIABLY
DEEP AND SERIOUS.... IT SHOULD BE NO SURPRISE, THEN, THAT FULLY HALF
OF THE DATES ARE REJECTED. THE WONDER IS, SURELY, THAT THE REMAINING
HALF COME TO BE ACCEPTED."
~~ R.E. Lee, 1981, 'Radiocarbon, Ages In Error',
Anthropological Journal of Canada,
vol. 19, No. 3, pg. 9.
Perhaps, these are just a few of the reasons
that the late Stephen Jay Gould, for many years America's foremost evolutionist,
always refused to debate any scientist who believed in creation.
...God created the
heaven
and the earth." Genesis
1:1.