C r e a t i o n ,  P a g e  5
-
-
Evolution
Schools unfortunately teach Evolution as an article of blind faith; that it must have happened.
    "The problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by skeptics or cynics whose horizons are limited by the obvious realities. We need men who can dream of things that never were." ...John F. Kennedy.
    I think evolutionists only understood the last line of President Kennedy's comment.

In this the entire purpose of education-(the word means 'to bring forth from within the innate essential characteristics of the spirit that makes us what it is we are as individual human beings').
    Evolution is the only field in science where an answer is decided upon, then evidence is searched for to support the answer selected. Evolutionists can only come up with evidences for evolution to someone who already believes in evolution. It's really a religon and a blind one at that!
    It's really a 'kids fable' for those whose thinking processes are in a primary stage of development. It's in the same category as.Goldilocks and the Three Bears. Like hello, why is it some evolutionists seem unable to progress beyond this primary stage. What has school done to them? Them seem unable to think! Consider.(from CRS): 1) No parents, no evolution. A species would have to jump from a primitive form to a fully developed male and female, each with the ability and instinct to mate; 2) Did the first animal develop 10% of complete veins, then 20%, and on up to 100%, with veins throughout its entire body and brain? Then how did the heart slowly develop in the animal and get attached to the veins in the right spot? How did the blood enter the system? The blood could not enter before the veins were complete or it would spill out. Where did the blood come from? Did the blood have red corpuscles, white corpuscles, platelets, and plasma? At what point in this process of development did the heart start beating? How did it start beating? What caused it to start beating? Why does it beat in the way it does? 3) Did the animal develop a partial stomach, then a complete stomach? After the stomach was formed, how did the digestive juices enter the stomach? Where did the hydrochloric acid as part of the digestive juices come from? What about its kidney and bladder? The animal better not eat anything prior to this. How did the animal survive during these changes? (And over thousands of years?) Of course, at the same time the animal's eyes must be fully developed so it can see its food and his brain must be fully developed so the animal can control its body to get to the food; Like the heart, brain, veins, and stomach, all of the organs and systems in the first animal's body must be fully functional in the first moments of life. This indicates that evolution couldn't occur, and the fossil record indicates that it didn't occur!!! In other words, if you cannot come up with a detailed, feasible scenario of how the first animal developed, the whole evolutionary theory goes out the window, because it never could have even gotten started!

A theory is only true until the process fails. In the case of evolution where every single one of the processes have failed, we must consider that 'doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result' is a sign of insanity. Why are we allowing children to be taught an insane theory? Are those who still accept it as being true also insane? Why do we 'keep hugging a long since dead horse? Are there no proven truths to move into?
    Or are there other reasons for hiding the dead horse away and telling others that it's still alive and showing a 'piece of hair from its mane' as authenticity? Jobs maybe? Habit? Something to laugh about after people accept it as being true, like pulling a joke on someone? or, maybe just craziness resulting from entrenched mass mind programming.

Many evolutionists believe that all adaptations begin with time and chance.(it's obvious little, if anything regarding statistical probability is considered by the 'gung ho' evolutionist), that is, with random changes in DNA and hereditary traits called mutations.
    In evolutionary theory, those chance mutations that suit an organism better to its environment are preserved by the process called natural selection. But the 'invisible god' called natural selection cannot act until the favored traits arise by mutation, i.e., by time and chance.
    Evolutionists beginning in the 19th century argued that design could be explained on the basis of time, chance, and properties of matter that did not require a Designer. Can you believe they actually were that stupid back then? Evolution is not good science. Evolution is not bad science. Fact is, there's absolutely no real science at all to it. It's simply a fable for unthinking adults.

In order to perpetuate the fraud of evolution, miseducation or disinformational mental training is indispensable, analytical thinking is to be sidestepped and inculcation of doctrine is achieved through avoidance of maxims such as "repeating what others have said, requires education, challenging it requires brains."

Scientific American Magazine: "Chance plays a part in evolution.(for example, in the random mutations that can give rise to new traits), but evolution does not depend on chance to create organisms, proteins, or other entities. Quite the opposite: natural selection, the principal known mechanism of evolution, harnesses nonrandom change by preserving "desirable".(adaptive).features and eliminating "undesirable" (nonadaptive) ones." [SA 81]
    What this part of the article is saying – 'We dedicated fanatically religious evolutionists do indeed believe with all faith, assurance, hope, conviction and pride – that, evolution is on such solid ground it doesn't have to depend upon 'any little ol thing like chance'.
    Evolutionary zealots consider evolution the 'be all end all' wonderful answer endowing-peons with belief necessary for comprehension of origins, existence and life all encompassing – that is, it envelopes, it blankets, it covers, it enwraps, it surrounds, it achieves, it constitutes, it includes, it encircles everything about life. Wow! We evolutionists are so excited! We just love it! 
    'But to believe so radically, we evolutionists really have to bypass the fact that our beloved natural selection-corpus of doctrines provides an inept explanation regarding the origins of complex self reproducing life forms – and we, the most highly trained, the most throughly educated, the most remarkably and specially focused educated elite the world has ever seen, really have no way to explain this essential step in our evolutionary belief of life, but hey, what the hell, we're so indoctrinated in evolution we believe it anyway!' Gung ho brother! Praise Darwin!

A sincere scientist's goal must be to weigh all the relevant evidence to determine which is the more logical inference from the weight, on balance, of scientific observations.

Evolution precludes God having a purpose for humans. Evolution places human destiny in man's hand.
    Evolution is based on an ancient ugly primordial soup mankind is supposed to have come from, perhaps something like the movies of the 'living dead' staggering out from a swamp. Contrast God, who created mankind after making such a beautiful garden for them to inhabit.
    Evolution's proselytizers sincerely believe it's ok to teach the religion of evolution as many of them have been duped into thinking it's objective science. Not believing in the devil makes it easy for them to be subject to his tricks.

Under the following headings Darwinian evolution
is examined, molecularly, anatomically,
and genetically.
Some of the following remarkable information comes from Darwin's Black Box, a book by Michael Behe, Professor of Biochemistry. 'Black Box' because many of the component parts are unknown, as Darwin himself admitted.

Perhaps you too may shake your head in wonder after reading all this.(about 15-18 hours if you follow all the links, dictionary explanations, etc.).that in an age providing quantitative information, why there is such incomprehensible ignorance? In fact after reading it all, or a good chunk of it, you may want to entirely forget the word evolution in its connotation regarding its pathetic attempts in accounting for existence, because you will be-awed by how fantastically brilliant the mind of the Great Engineer--the living God is!
    But, evolutionary scientists have another story...

Rather than proofs of evolution, all that evolutionists can come up with are evidences for evolution to some other unthinking soul who already has accepted evolution as true? 

Hey! 4 nights TV for most of you! And I guarantee you'll have infinitely more knowledge than you'll get watching the stupor-box, unless, of course, you watch the channels and/or programs where you can really learn something interesting that broadens your perspective of life and that which supports and/or affects it in some way – like Discovery Channel, The Learning Channel, PBS, Access Channel-(in Alberta), HGTV Canada-(Home and Garden Television channel)-where they have such an incredible program called-The Secret World of Gardens, all about the habits of insects, snakes, etc. inhabiting your garden. What was brought out was astounding! The photography in this program is incredible and the presentation is entirely first class. Most highly recommended! One of the most interesting and enjoyable presentations ever seen on television; a critically acclaimed television series, nominated in 6 categories at the upcoming Gemini Awards including Best Documentary Series, Best Nature/Environment/Science Program and Best Direction in a Documentary Series.

In here you'll find out why evolutionists rely upon qualitative- assumptions, when quantitative scientific information is readily available.-...continues to I n d e x


Subject Sampler_List of Topics_Search
A_B_C_D_E_F_G_H_I_J_K_L_M_N_O_P_Q_R_S_T_U_V_W_XYZ
Questions Lists_Free Stuff_Entrance
-
Why do scientists call it research when looking for something new?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.