MYTH #2 Evolution is Science with Abundant Evidence

Exposing The Myths of Evolution

Part II of the series, “Exposing the Great Myths of Evolution”

“We should follow the science” has been a clarion call made by many political figures who have dominated the news media recently. This phrase has caused much confusion and controversy, leading to people questioning the meaning of science, especially in understanding contagious viruses like Covid-19.

Science has enjoyed the status of being trustworthy and essential in modern society but now is being challenged, mainly when it is limited to finite man who makes mistakes. We must remember that science is not absolute. It is merely an attempt to understand the world around us. Unfortunately, those who make their careers in this essential academic pursuit that advances our civilization tend to become prideful and arrogant in their foolishness and forget that all truth is found in Christ and His Word. On the other hand, evolution has been accepted as a science throughout the western world as explaining the origin of life and the universe without any question. Biblical Creation is omitted in any discussion regarding the origins of life and the cosmos’ formation. Atheistic evolution is only a theory taught in an authoritarian method as evolutionists describe it as an essential part of science. It has found its home in secular western culture as many have drifted from the biblical worldview that comes from the Holy Spirit’s inspiration found in the Bible. Over time God’s Word has been torn apart by theologically liberal critics and replaced with man’s frail and fatally flawed words, giving naturalism’s evolution a permanent home.

Ironically, we know that the country we live in was given birth on the foundation of basic Christian principles found in God’s Word, including the biblical account of Genesis. Our fundamental human rights include the right to religious liberty, which is clearly stated in the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion and prohibiting the free exercise.”

The other freedoms followed, such as freedom of speech, press, petition, and assembly. It is essential to notice that the first of those freedoms was religion, which protected the freedom to follow God’s Word, which begins with the account of the origins of life.

The Con of the Decades
Today, everything is upside down, including the discussion around the origins of the biological and physical universes. The western world over the years became skeptics of God’s Word and wanted to be free from His law that keeps order in the universe. When Charles Darwin’s publication, On the Origin of Species by Means by Natural Selection, was printed in late 1859 in London, it sold out in a few days. The intellects of the day were ready to accept a new theory that defied the Genesis account in every way. Darwin’s bulldog, Thomas Huxley, became a notable spokesman for Darwinian evolution. He preached evolution along with Agnosticism, a term he coined in 1869, defined as the belief that God is unknown. God would be excluded from the conversation of how things came to be, and in its place would be Darwin’s evolution. It provided a pathway to give all the credit to nature as the Creator, which Agnostics and Atheists applauded; we have seen this malignant thinking growing in our higher education institutions for several decades. Darwinian evolution is embraced as science today, even though its mechanism is still questioned. Most evolutionary scientists acknowledge that Darwin’s natural selection theoretically cannot work by itself. Evolution, by its definition, needs an enormous amount of time to make copious transitional incremental changes that cannot be observed or quantified. Yet most have fallen for this mythical idea that living things continually change, somehow moving upward from the amoeba to the homo sapiens.

This is exemplified by prestigious science organizations like the National Academies of Sciences who has broadly proclaimed on their website in the section Evolution and Society that “Biological evolution is one of the most important ideas of modern science.” And in the following sentence that: “Evolution is supported by abundant evidence from many different fields of scientific investigation.”1

To define evolution as being science with abundant evidence is a statement that needs to be challenged. It is propagandized everywhere in our schools and among the most scientific community in their journals without considering other viewpoints from the same data but pointing to the Bible. We believe this is a fallacy that the public needs to be aware of, especially for Christians who want to articulate their faith with the gospel of Jesus Christ. Our goal this year is to give you tools to share the hope you have in Christ with others.

MYTH #2: Evolution is Science with Abundant Evidence
Evolution is widely accepted as indisputable scientific fact when, in truth, it is not based on scientific evidences which are measurable by the scientific method. We don’t know factually any conditions under which evolutionary processes began. Evolution fails to meet the basic requirements of the scientific method.

1. Both Creation and Evolution took place in the past and rely on the same evidence.
Science is defined as a systematic methodology of gathering information from both the physical and biological world using the tools of observation, collection of data quantitatively and qualitatively, experimentation, interpretation of data, and logical conclusions. The definition encompasses a dynamic process that takes place in the present. Evolution happened in the past. How do you observe evolution when it happens in small infinitesimal changes over millions and billions of years? You can’t!

Our ministry is involved in excavating fossils of Ice Age creatures in the Peace River located in Arcadia, Florida, also known as Bone Valley. It is famous for its phosphate used in the agriculture industry for plant fertilizer. In this same area, there is an abundance of fossils dating from the Ice Age. Like evolutionists, we found fossils in this area, including the remains of a herd of Columbian Mammoths. Both creationists and evolutionists examine the same evidence, whether it is the fossils, the rock strata, or genetics. Both groups even use the same instruments such as mass spectrometers, electron microscopes, all kinds of analyzers, and the list goes on. Our conclusions are based on biblical history, not evolution’s assumption. In the areas of science that examine the past, such as evolutionary biology, paleontology, and geology, subjectivity is automatically introduced. Since no one was there to observe, experiment, and investigate the actual phenomena, especially if it had happened in the evolutionary time frame of millions or billions of years, it is always subject to error. Creationists claim that there was a witness in the form of their Creator and Savior who gave testimony represented in the Word of God.

2. The conclusion is based on presumptions of a belief system or a personal worldview when interpreting past events.
Evolution relies on a mechanism based on natural origins without any outside intelligence over long periods of evolutionary time. It is a coordinated and passionate belief that the fossil record is old because long periods of time are required to make evolution work. Darwinian evolution depends on gradual change to produce complex systems with many assumptions built on a predetermined mindset that biological change in organisms can only come from within.

Jean-Baptist Lamarck (1744-1829) introduced the first formal theory of evolution. He proposed that organisms adapted to the pressures of the environment acquiring new traits such as long necks on giraffes because they had to stretch them to reach their food over deep time. 

Darwin used a different mechanism of natural selection in which organisms that had the superior traits would survive, weeding out the weak. Like Lamarck, he would need the environment and deep time to make these critical changes. Both these evolutionists eliminated any outside intelligence but depended on nature’s forces to operate over deep time.

Evolution demonstrates a bias with a zealous belief that time, and nature are the power that changes molecules to man. Lamarck exemplifies this as he wrote in 1809 in his Philosophie Zoologique stating,

Oh, how very ancient the earth is! And how ridiculously small the ideas of those who consider the earth to be 6,000 years old. Time is unimportant and never difficult for nature. It is always at her disposal and represents an unlimited power in which she accomplishes her greatest and smallest tasks. This antiquity will appear even greater when he realizes the length of time and the conditions which were necessary to bring all living species into existence.

The above statement of faith by Lamarck demonstrates his religious passion for nature, his ultimate Creator. He believed that nature’s deep time could produce all life with its vast array of plants and animals that existed in the past, present, and future. His theory was based on bias against God’s Word as he stated, “how ridiculously small the ideas of those who consider the earth to be 6000 years.” Lamarck felt his scientific argument had better rationale than the Genesis Account, which declared that God was the Creator of all life, including the different kinds he stated 10 X “after (his, its, their) kind.” From his writings, one can conclude that he had a materialistic worldview and therefore would have an internal bias against the conclusion that there is a Creator of all things.

It was decades before Lamarck’s theory of evolution that the idea of deep time was proposed by James Hutton (1726-1997), a Scottish geologist, who radically changed the field of Geology (the study of rocks as it relates to the study of the past and present earth’s structure and processes) by establishing the uniformitarianism movement. He proposed that rock strata are dependent on nature’s laws that we observe in the present that also operated in the past. Hutton inferred the rocks were laid down very slowly over time, suggesting that the earth is ancient. His conclusion was not made by direct observation but assumed that rocks were continually recycled for indefinitely long periods of time.

Hutton’s interpretation of the rocks did not allow for a catastrophic event like the Bible’s account of Creation in Genesis 1, and the worldwide flood referred to in Genesis 6:1 – 9:17. Creationists used the same evidence and determined that the fossil record is enormously incomplete with an overwhelming number of missing transitional fossils. We observe that 95% of the fossil record is from oceans and continents covered by sedimentary rocks transported by water.

Numerous fossil graveyards all over the earth demonstrate massive burials of animals and plants that happened quickly with unusual conditions to preserve animals moving and found on all levels of the fossil record. Rock layers that contain fossils are located on the older foundational rocks with millions and billions of years missing all over the earth. The answer is tremendous erosion which points to a worldwide flood.

When it comes to looking at actual evidence in the present and then attempting to explain the past, there is always inference, interpretations, extrapolations, conjectures, and conclusions because the best evidence is an eyewitness account. It comes down to whether we believe in man’s word or God’s Word as described in Psalm 119:160,

“The entirety of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever.”

Biblical Creationists rely on God’s Word for truth, while evolutionists seek man’s ideas that worship nature.

3. Censorship occurs in our schools, only allowing the evolutionary viewpoint on origins. 
If you are being taught the same story repeatedly and find it written in your science textbook that evolution is a scientific fact, you will believe it. Why should it be questioned unless you have a belief system that opposes it? Many Americans still believe that God is their Creator. There are many unanswered scientific questions that demonstrate the foolishness of Darwinian evolution, and these questions need to be exposed.  
Unfortunately, unlike other subjects, teaching evolution critically is difficult for most instructors. Not many teachers have the skills and awareness of the fundamental problems of evolution because they went through a higher education system that never exposed these issues. They were taught to accept Darwinian evolution as a science approved by prestigious organizations such as the National Academies of Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science, National Science Teachers Association, and many more who promote teaching evolution in our schools. Students are not trained to think critically about the subject because it is a dogma of naturalism of how everything came to be. God, Creator, or Intelligent Designer is not mentioned because He censored out the definition of science.  
There have been many efforts by parents and students to counter this naturalistic definition of our origins. Creationists have found themselves battling in the legal system without success. Unfortunately, today judges have been educated with the same dogmatic system of education in which evolution was taught as a scientific fact.

The courts over the years have ruled to discourage the teaching of Creation or Intelligent Design as an alternative to the question of origins.

Ironically, this nation was founded on fundamental freedoms, including the first mentioned freedom of the exercise of religion, and cannot refer to God as the Creator in the public arena of education. But our Declaration of Independence refers to the Creator who endowed humans with these freedoms as penned by Thomas Jefferson, “that all men are created equal, and that the Creator endows them.”

The next generation is only getting one religious viewpoint of origins, the naturalistic one, which promotes the absence of God and His law, leading to instability and chaos in our culture. In America, there is a grave misunderstanding of the idea of Thomas Jefferson’s introduction of the “separation of church and state.” As mentioned above, this nation was formed with the fundamental freedom of religion which is the right to believe in God the way we choose. Jefferson believed in this principle and wanted to remind us that the state should never adopt one religion, excluding the others with this expression. This is not happening today in our classrooms. What we observe is just the opposite: the dogmatic teaching of evolution where naturalism reigns. It is not only a way of thinking but a practice of worshiping the God of nature where all things come to be. No wonder it is so dogmatic and cannot be questioned. It is on a pedestal to be worshiped.