"Micro" evolution — adaptation within species — is applied science, observable and repeatable. "Macro" evolution — the origin of species from common descent — is unproven speculation accepted purely as a matter of faith.
Charles Darwin himself acknowledged in "The Origin of Species" that the fossil record should eventually reveal the vast numbers of "missing link" transitional forms his theory required. After 165+ years of intensive fossil research on every continent, no unambiguous transitional forms have emerged. The fossil record shows the sudden appearance of fully-formed species (the "Cambrian Explosion") — exactly what special creation would predict, and the opposite of what Darwinian gradualism would predict.
The mathematical probability of even a single functional protein arising by random chance is so astronomically small as to be, for all practical purposes, impossible. Nobel laureate Sir Fred Hoyle calculated the probability of life arising spontaneously as comparable to "a tornado sweeping through a junkyard and assembling a Boeing 747." Macro evolution requires not one such miracle, but countless billions of them — each building precisely on the last, each producing a survival advantage, over billions of years.
Belief in Macro evolution as the origin of species is accepted by its adherents purely as a matter of faith — exactly as any religion accepts its foundational beliefs. The difference is that Macro evolution presents itself as "science" while suppressing the scientific evidence that contradicts it.
God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1). The evidence of design in the universe is overwhelming and universal. "The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork" (Psalm 19:1).
--- INTRIGUING QUESTIONS ---
Is Earth more than an insignificant speck of dust lost in the universe?
Or is our planet the product of intelligent and purposeful design?
Is life on Earth the product of purely undirected processes such as time, chance, and natural selection?
Or can the origin and diversity of living things be traced back to an intelligent cause?
For more than a century, Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection has defined biology.
Yet today, a growing number of scientists are seriously questioning evolution's ability to explain the origin of life on Earth.
Presenting an anti-"MACRO" evolution position, not a Scientific position of Creationism.
"One of the peculiar sins of this century that we have developed to a very high level is the sin of credulity (naïveté). It has been said that when human beings stop believing in God, they will believe in nothing. The truth is much worse: they believe in ANYTHING and EVERYTHING!"
Malcolm Muggeridge
The modern "religion" called Evolution, based on the "Origin of Species," was imagined or speculated to be the result of evolution.
(Also known as: "Macro" Evolution)
The main proof… that humanity (humans) did NOT "evolve" from apes is that inbreeding (interbreeding) is only possible when different species both have a common ancestor somewhere in their distant past (up to millions and millions of years ago). Without a common ancestor, interbreeding between offspring is genetically impossible.
Since it's a fact that apes and humanity (human beings) cannot interbreed, this fact is the most compelling proof that humanity (human beings) did NOT evolve from apes.
Too bad, Darwin!
FIRST…
…. you must distinguish between "MICRO" evolution and "MACRO" evolution.
Attempting to discuss this matter without that distinction is entirely FALSE! and tends towards confusion since the position of the term "evolution" alone is vague at best.
Using the word "evolution" as a single term is generally considered an exercise in deliberate obfuscation, intended to baffle or stupefy any religious opposition, obscuring people's understanding, leaving them perplexed, without concrete descriptive terminology. It deceives them within a pathetically clueless appearance, like fools or buffoons lacking a firm grasp of the concept of what is, in reality, an obvious nickname.
"Evolution" as a single descriptive term is completely undescriptive. A lack of distinction between "MICRO" and "MACRO" evolution is the main stumbling block in the discussion of the issue.
Microevolution explains how existing species, including various fortunate or opportunistic mutants, adapt, evolve, and even evolve through natural selection, both of which are supported by observation and the fossil record. Microevolution occurs within species, producing varied or different forms of that same species.
The teaching of applied "MICRO" evolution should not be problematic even for zealous religious people, supposedly because it is clearly differentiated from theoretical and unproven "MACRO" evolution.
But here, the various religious zealots maintain that the high cause is due to the inconvenient, problematic, and embarrassing fact that the field of astrophysics today, as currently taught throughout academia, completely conforms to the exact order of the first ten (10) creation events outlined in the Bible in the Book of Genesis. Strange as it may seem, they are splendidly in remarkable agreement.
And despite the fact that astrophysicists today developed their considered views on the origin of the universe (and the formation of the earth) without writing, the Book of Genesis in the Bible predates modern astrophysical texts by not a few millennia.
While "macro" evolution was (and is) a theoretical attempt to explain the origin (creation) of species through natural selection, it is not supported by the fossil record. Among the fossils, no observation has ever been made concerning any evolution of species into something entirely new, different, or unique. Anyone who claims there is verifiable scientific evidence for "macro" evolution is, to put it politely, a propagandist.
The term "Natural Selection" is a misnomer when used in reference to the origin (creation) of species. Natural Selection can only select from existing life forms; it cannot select (out of thin air) a non-existent life form ("life form" – the morphological characteristics of an organism that matures into existence). A species' genome (chromosomes) already contains all the available genetic variations from which nature selects, much like an artist's palette of basic colors that offers countless options, mixtures, and combinations – millions of hues, tints, and shades – while offering no possibility of entirely new basic colors.
The process of Natural Selection favors and protects existing biological systems. No new genetic or biological information is produced or created by Natural Selection. Natural Selection prevents macroevolution, preventing the emergence of new species at the phylum level, while allowing existing species to evolve micro-evolve through small changes within their existing ranges.
Species must first exist in order to be "Naturally Selected"—otherwise, you're simply talking about the same inexplicable "Magic" attributed to supernatural creation by the God of Abraham. So, if someone is willing to believe in nature employing pure magic to create new and unique species out of nothing, that believer in "Miracles" should also be able to accept the similar magic of a truly ruling Creator God.
There are no "Laws of Nature" or "Natural Laws"—there are only the "Laws of God."
And, along with the entire universe, nature obeys the Laws of God.
The concept of "macro" evolution as the origin (creation) of species is a violation of the second law of thermodynamics, the law of entropy. The notion that such random functionality could create complex and intricate order has never been observed anywhere in the entire universe, much less on Earth.
The current academic expression of "MACRO" theoretical evolution assumes (a position without proof) that in the briefest possible time, most primitive life forms in our most distant past somehow "evolved" from amino acids and nucleic acids that developed from chemicals extracted from Pre-Cambrian rocks by rains of unknown components and uncertain composition, generating a "primordial soup" of prebiotic carbon compounds and pyrophosphite enzymatic catalysts to produce the basic building blocks of life forms (nucleobases, necessary ingredients in the creation of DNA), facilitating the development of the first reproducing molecules, producing cells with unlimited creative flexibility, similar to the creative acts attributed to God, and guiding organisms in their self-reproduction.
Scientists and academics believe (I imagine) that ROCKS contain the chemical ingredients they think are essential for life.
Does this indicate that the scientific position of modern theoretical "MACRO" evolution teaches that… …we evolved from ROCKS?
Watch: "NOVA: Life's Rocky Start"
How did life begin?
Are rocks the spark of life?
What is the secret link between rocks and minerals, and every living thing on Earth?
Rocks were essential to advancing life on Earth billions of years ago.
Yes! We evolved from rocks!
Season 43; Episode 2 - First aired: January 13, 2016
On: PBS (English) - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/earth/life-rocky-start.html
On: IMDb (English) - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5341406/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
Or should we instead take at face value what the Bible says about Adam being stoned together with 200 pounds of clay?
Or perhaps Adam was armed with the dust he eroded from those same Precambrian rocks?
However, the existence of NOS fossil evidence shows a later Cambrian explosion in the number of species. The fossil record shows a rapid appearance of level-to-edge differences in a sudden period of time (a few million years), rather than a long history of gradual divergence from a common ancestor (billions and billions of years). Darwin's fictitious conception of the "Tree of Life" is not supported by the fossil record. The emerging picture of the Cambrian explosion has uprooted Darwin's conceptual tree. An overwhelming collection of the Cambrian-era fossil record shows this rapid appearance of these level-to-edge differences in a period of time too short to be true and verifiable.
Complex life appeared early and abundantly across the planet during the Cambrian period. Modern science explains this explosion of Cambrian phylum-level life forms in a way very similar to the fifth day of creation in the book of Genesis 1:20-23.
As early as 1831, Darwin was well aware of the fossil record that revealed the Cambrian explosion. He was also aware that older strata of Pre-Cambrian rock contained no transitional forms that could have been considered the ancestors of the many creatures that first appeared during the Cambrian period.
These inconvenient facts are fatal to the theory of descent through slow modification by the process of natural selection. Darwin's dilemma, as he himself stated in "On the Origin of Species," is that any rapid appearance of phylum-level biota necessarily points to special creation by God (by an intelligent designer).
Darwin's Galápagos finches…
and their different bird-beak variations are purported (claimed) to be great proof of evolution.
But, due to his very short visit to the Galápagos islands, what Darwin failed to observe was that (even today) all the different Galápagos finch chicks produce a variety of beak styles each nesting season on all of the many Galápagos islands.
In nests containing two or more juvenile birds, there has never been a Galápagos finch nest where all the young birds have the same beak style. More birds are born with the wrong beak style than there are birds born with the correct beak style on each island of their birth.
The variety of all the different beak styles present throughout the Galápagos finch genome means that no matter how many parents have the same identical (and correct) beak style, the clutch of young finches will still have varieties of different beak styles, dooming more than 50% of the juvenile birds to failure in their struggle for survival on each island.
The firm belief in theoretical "macro" evolution, as if it were a real fact, is eerily similar to how the "Big Bang" theory expresses the "beliefs" of most scientists today; i.e.,
"First, nothing existed. Then, it exploded."
This is to say that the universe created itself,
that the universe is omniscient,
that the universe is God!
Are you so sure you can faithfully believe in THAT too?
No one has demonstrated or proven the Big Bang theory as a fact.
Scientists only "think" it—AS IF it were true.
But the Big Bang theory is nothing more than a BELIEF!
It is a belief based on faith that scientists WANT to believe!
That subjective conjecture (which only exists in the imagination) is not a convincing argument, and it is not very intellectually satisfying.
It is neither clear, concise, nor comprehensive.
Belief (faith, trust) in "MACRO" evolution is pure metaphysics,
the teleological doctrine of causality,
a "Religion!"
"Macro" evolution is a "religion" eagerly led by elementary school teachers and university instructors who faithfully follow the theological doctrines of "macro" evolution and are disciplined by its clergy, the high priest of Darwinism in white laboratory robes.
"Macro" evolution has been religious dogma for so long that many people now consider it an inevitable fact that life arose through random processes.
Due to a complete lack of a probable, demonstrable, scientifically or archaeologically evidenced objective for "MACRO" evolution, any belief in "MACRO" evolution as the origin (creation) of species is purely a matter-based faith (religious) to the same degree that belief in Christ Jesus as the Savior (Messiah) is a matter-based faith.
There is actually far more evidence for Jesus Christ than for "macro" evolution. For this very reason, Charles Robert Darwin proposed "macro" evolution as a theory, rather than as a disillusioned notion.
Evolutionists are a prolific source of erroneous scientific speculation. In academia, evolutionary speculation (conjecture) is often worthy and extolled as theory. Some proponents of modern evolutionary thought have made themselves look foolish and misguided by proposing the false and misleading claim that a scientific theory carries the same weight as a proven law of science, as if theories (conjectures) have evolved into actual facts.
Consult your dictionary and note the possible uses of the word "THEORY".
"In theory" refers to a situation that has not been proven.
With a "theory," everything is possible… Anything!
Since a "theory" is a mere conjecture (speculation), ALL fantasy (delusions) can be added to it…
And the new theoretical fantasy, then, "Evolves," entering a new reality that has a life of its own, to invent a "NEW" fact out of nothing.
There is evidence for evolution… fantasies evolve into facts.
Faced with insufficient experimental evidence to support his theory, Darwin resorted to speculative arguments, whereas today, the argumentation used by evolutionists, which contains only biased and intellectually impoverished jargon, is limited to personal convictions (faith, belief) and mere possibilities (conjecture, speculation, fantasy, delusion), and are all presented AS IF personal faith and conjecture were valid arguments in favor of the theory, AS IF unfounded beliefs and speculation were valid evidence supporting the theory.
Assumptions (what if?) and wishful thinking (imagine if?) by idealistic dreamers have fueled theoretical speculations and conjectures that have been repeated so many times, so strongly, and for so long that assumptions and delusions have transformed into common knowledge and evolved into facts.
"A lie becomes the truth if it is told often enough."
- Vladimir Lenin
Predictions (or assumptions) originating within the field of comparative anatomy have produced a major thesis of "macro" evolutionary theology: the doctrine of a mythical fossil sequence, the tetrapod-to-reptile-to-mammal sequence. This predicted fantasy sequence does not exist in nature and is not derived from evidence found in the fossil record (no such evidence exists), but is imagined (conjectured) to have occurred simply because it MUST have occurred.
Some people have great faith that the mythical fossil sequence must have happened, despite the lack of any proof.
In the REAL world, such logic is called HALLUCINATORY
and is dismissed as "Wishing Thinking."
Self-deception was once the perspective only of children and fools. While in the rarefied atmosphere of scientific endeavor, and in the "Ivory Towers" of academia, the disillusionment of anxious thoughts has gained enough attraction to have EVOLVED! into facts (truths) with no stigma of buffoonery, foolishness or idiocy attached.
Unwavering faith, belief, and trust in predictions, assumptions, fantasies, and disillusionments is the foundation of the scientific and academic position supporting the acceptance of unproven, improbable, and theoretical "MACRO" evolution.
The molecules-to-human theory has no direct evidence, just as evolution is blind speculation supported by nothing more valid than evolutionary bias. Interpretations of empirical science are by no means free from evolutionary philosophical bias. The following is an example of evolutionary bias:
Richard Dawkins, the celebrated British ethologist, evolutionary biologist, popular science writer, and atheist, declared:
"We don't need proof for evolution, we just need to know that evolution is true."
That's not a scientific statement, in fact; that's a statement of faith!
Oddly enough, in accordance with Dawkins' previous pronouncements,
"Faith is belief that is not based on evidence; faith is one of the great evils of the world."
And Dawkins also declared that
"Religion is a malignant influence on society."
Richard Dawkins is credited with first publishing the concept of "meme" in his 1976 book, *The Selfish Gene*.
This is the same Richard Dawkins who has stated that he believes in the possibility of extraterrestrials planting seeds of human life on Earth, showing that evolutionists are willing to accept the concept of an intelligent designer (extraterrestrials?) while firmly refusing to accept the God of Abraham as the creator.
SEE: "Richard Dawkins" --- on Wikipedia
Even Carl Sagan, while at Stanford University in 1962, produced a controversial article funded by a NASA research grant concluding that ancient alien intervention may have led to human civilization.
SEE: "Carl Sagan" --- on Wikipedia
Many neo-evolutionary scientists are correctly referred to as "pre-conceptual" scientists, which is similar to "politically correct" scientists (PC scientists). "Pre-conceptual" science consists of reaching a conclusion before conducting any research, followed by research that is only intended to confirm pre-conceived notions, and simply dismissing anything contrary to those pre-conceived ideas, even when the research provides no evidence for the pre-conceived notions and (especially) when the research demonstrates the pre-conceived notions to be completely wrong.
"Pre-conceptual" scientists suffer from the plague of "confirmation bias." Confirmation bias (my bias) refers to a type of selective thinking whereby "pre-conceptual" scientists tend to notice and seek out information that confirms their beliefs, and ignore, fail to seek out, or underestimate the importance of information that contradicts their preconceived notions. It is a tendency for people to prefer information that confirms their preconceived notions, regardless of whether those preconceived notions are true or not.
This tendency to give more attention and weight to data that supports scientists' "pre-conceptual" beliefs than to data that contradict them is especially pernicious when scientists' "pre-conceptual" beliefs are little more than prejudices.
While "pre-conceptual" scientists ignore certain archaeological facts and continue to accept evolutionary speculation as if theories were facts, they can prove ANYTHING to their own satisfaction. By doing this, "pre-conceptual" scientists become idealistic idealists (dreamers) living in a self-deceptive "dream world."
"It is a fundamental mistake to theorize before you have data.
Without realizing it, you begin to twist the facts to fit the theories,
instead of the theories fitting the facts."
- Arthur Conan Doyle
Science is the ultimate systematic pursuit of truth through hypothesis and prediction, experimentation and observation, drawing conclusions and establishing facts. But it falls to us to navigate the space between prejudice and assumption, abandoning the rhetoric of perceived certainty and mere insinuation, in order to get as close as possible to determining what is objective and true. If we neglect this challenge posed by scientific inquiry, we are left only with the indulgence of what confirms our preconceived or unreasoned prejudices, which are nothing more than our preconceptions and fantasies.
Current scientific logic holds that since change has occurred throughout Earth's history, that change must have been the result of (and proof of) "macro" evolution—this highly flawed circular reasoning, rooted in Darwinian theology, allows for no other possible explanation or competing theory, coldly dismissing an all-powerful God as a supernatural creator. For academics and scientists, the God of Abraham doesn't even qualify as a superhero comic book character, at least not their superhero.
Non-existent…
The fossil record contains those much-discussed "Missing Links" that Darwin had hoped would "appear" or be "unearthed" over time. In his masterpiece, "On the Origin of Species," Darwin frequently admitted that the "imperfect" and "incomplete" fossil record (at the time) did not support the "Origin" of the theoretical concept of (today) "MACRO" evolution at its most basic level.
Darwin never claimed that "MACRO" evolution as the origin (of creation) of species was true; he only hoped that the geological record would eventually establish his speculation as a verifiable fact.
Although Darwin expressed great faith that future progress in the fledgling science of archaeology would "discover" the "Missing Links" required to validate his theory, Darwin's own opinion was that this "MACRO" evolution as the origin of species was pure fiction since it could not be demonstrated or proven at that time. (mid-1800s ca.)
Nothing has changed in that model since Darwin's time. "MACRO" evolution remains unproven in the fossil record and remains a mere theory-based belief, like "religious" conjecture, falling short of the level of a solid hypothesis.
"Macro" evolution is accepted by some, dismissing a lack of facts purely as a matter of "faith." It is not accepted by many others because it is highly improbable based on established facts.
Everyone has the right to their own opinions,
but NOT to their own facts.
"There is something fascinating about science.
One gains as much from conjecture
based on a negligible investment as from facts."
— Mark Twain
Should one ambitiously strive for a "Well-Rounded" education, it would be incumbent upon one to read, at the very least, Darwin's Introduction to "On the Origin of Species," along with Chapter 6 - "Difficulties Concerning the Theory," and to carefully study the summaries of the various chapters found throughout the entire volume. Several mysteries and much confusion concerning the word "Evolution," as a spurious descriptive term, could be dispelled and set aside by having all those concerned with "Evolution" open their minds to, and become informed by, Darwin's own concerns.
Despite the abundant scientific evidence for the creation of the Intelligent Design model, evolutionists are unwilling to believe or accept Intelligent Design without including the nonsense that evolutionists refer to as the Chance Modification Continuum (a continuum that is pure fantasy).
In contrast, evolutionists invest all their "faith" in conjectures and speculations (mere theories).
The inexplicable, monolithic, dogmatic, intolerant popularity of "MACRO" evolution cannot be fully understood without considering the presence of an anti-God factor. It is impossible that such a flawed, unproven theory of "MACRO" evolution could dominate current scientific opinion (as theology) and prevail throughout academia (as doctrine) without taking into account the significant Satanic presence behind the scenes. The falsehood of becoming truth (a fact) is a specialty of the Satanic side of the spiritual spectrum, as modern-day naturalists and neo-Darwinist atheists continue to demonstrate.
It is purely "religious" to support the belief that "macro" evolution is responsible for the creation of any species. This requires a significantly profound level of tremendously intense faith (an admirable faith!) to appreciate the "belief" that "macro" evolution had or has a part in the origin (creation) of species through (unholy) natural selection.
This author does NOT possess enough "Faith" to believe in "MACRO" evolution for the creation of any species.
As expressed today, "MACRO" evolution (aka: neo-Darwinism) is inherently an atheistic, and naturalistic philosophy.
Teaching "MACRO" evolution as a fact, of the origin of species, is indoctrination in a "Religion".
Because it is the "Religion" of evolution that truly expresses "Scientific" Creationism.
And that "religious" indoctrination is based on a "blind" faith!
Because evolution is faith (belief) in the impossible!
This author has READ Darwin's "Origin of Species" --- Have YOU?
Click Here - Read Darwin's "On the Origin of Species"
Online --- In HTML Format --- In English.
Coming Soon - Online
Darwin, CR - The Origin of Species - In Spanish
Translated by Enrique Godinez, 1877. Madrid and Paris: Perojo Library
Available next year.
Darwin, CR 1859.
"On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection,
or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life."
London: John Murray. 1st edition, 1st issue – In English.