Advertise on podcast: Defending and Commending the Faith With Dr. Joe L. Mott, inviting the atheist, agnostic and skeptic to examine for themselves

References: (1) Allow me to refer to what Tom DeRosa said in his book Evolution’s Fatal Fruit.  “The stunning diversity of plants and animals that Darwin observed on his voyage [on the Beagle] made him ask the question: Why are there so many types of turtles, lizards, birds, insects, etc., to be observed across the world? And why do these kinds of animals and plants all SEEM to be perfectly ADAPTED to their geographic environment? As he toured the Galápagos Islands, he struggled to understand why these islands had such UNIQUE creatures, which nonetheless ROUGHLY correspond to animals observed on the continent. He discovered in South America the fossils of GIANT EXTINCT ANIMALS, such as an 18-foot-tall SLOTH and a 5-foot-long ARMADILLO. These exciting finds led to more questions about why the  body plan of these extinct animals so closely corresponded, except for size, to their contemporary COUNTERPARTS.” (2) “The conclusion Darwin came to from all this was that change is taking place through time, which is [the simplest definition] of evolution. ‘It was evident,” Darwin wrote in his Autography, ‘that such facts as these, as well as many others, could ONLY BE EXPLAINED on the supposition that species GRADULLY MODIFIED; and the subject HAUNTED ME.” (3) Then DeRosa makes his own comments: “These modifications that “haunted” Darwin can be BEST EXPLAINED, not as evolution, but as VARIATION within the sloth or armadillo kind. Could the huge size of these fossils be due to GIGANTISM? The tallest man in medical history measured 8 feet 11 inches, while the smallest tribe of pygmies, from Zaire, Africa, can be as small as 4 feet 1 inch. Despite the size range, both are STILL HUMAN.” (4) What about the modifications in the plumage or beak size of birds? Is this evolution? How would we KNOW? If we do not know how to define a SPECIES, how can we know when enough change takes place to constitute “transmutation,” which is Darwin’s term for evolution from one species into another.” That is, what Darwin means is MACROevolution. It is certainly a change WITHIN A SPECIES so it is MICROevolution. My question becomes: Is a species the same as what Genesis calls a kind? (5) The point of controversy is whether modifications may be SO EXTENSIVE that microevolution leaps beyond the SPECIES BOUNDARY and at some point becomes MACROevolution. But here is the fly in the buttermilk, since “species” is NOT DEFINED, it is IMPOSSIBLE to say when the SPECIES BARRIER IS BROKEN. This VAGUE DEFINITION makes it possible to say that small changes or large changes can be said to produce a new “species.” But how can that conclusion be CERTAIN? (6) DeRosa points out: “These “facts” include Darwin’s MISTAKEN ASSUMPTIONS that later had to be CHANGED. So, how RELIABLE are Darwin’s assertions that are based on inferences that can’t be tested? On what BASIS can he assert that his “facts” will bring to light to that “mystery of mysteries” — the origin of species? (7) Niles Eldredge claims that finches beak changes are one of the MOST COMPELLING ARGUMENTS that led Darwin to his theory of evolution. Really? There is no evidence whatsoever that finches changed to another species. They still remained FINCHES. In fact, the finches DO NOT SUPPORT EVOLUTION at all, but are great examples of variation WITHIN a kind. DeRosa reports that the Princeton zoologist Carl Wieland reported in Creation magazine vol. 14 (3): pp. 22-23 that after years of study the Galapagos finch population DID CHANGE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS. During drought years, finches with larger, deeper beaks grew in number. This was because the traditional finch food supply of smaller seeds was soon depleted, which favored finches with beaks built to succeed when the food supply changed. But what happens when the rain returns? Does beak size change again? The answer is yes. What Darwin observed was an INCOMPLETE PICTURE. It was not possible for Darwin to get an ACCURATE ASSESSMENT of how finch beaks varied based on just ONE VISIT. (8) Professor Louis Bounoure of biology at the University of Strasbourg, author of the 1957 book “Determinism and Finality,” declared, “Evolution is a FAIRY TALE for grown-ups. This theory has HELPED NOTHING in the progress of science. It is USELESS.” He also said: “Evolutionism would appear as theory WITHOUT VALUE.” (9) Ray Comfort, a New Zealand evangelical minister living in America, author of several books, television host, and the founder of The Way of the Master remarked in his book “Scientific Facts in the Bible, “We are continually told that evolution is SCIENTIFIC, that it is a PROVEN FACT, and that the Bible is merely a COLLECTION OF MYTHS. However, strange though it may sound, it is EVOLUTION that is a collection of myths and the Bible is a proven fact.” (10) Ray Comfort said, “Evolution is INTELLECTUAL SUICIDE. It is an EMBARASSMENT.” (11) The theory of punctuated equilibrium by Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldridge incorporates the Cambrian Explosion that suggests periods of RAPID CHANGE followed by long periods of STASSIS or stability. In my mind that REFUTES  gradualism. The microbiologist from Lehigh University Michael Behe determined that his concept of irreducible complexity of organisms clearly refutes gradualism. This is episode 294.

References: (1) Supposedly 6 factors show how the process of Darwinian evolution works. These 6 factors are: (A) Common descent with modifications, (B) Spontaneous generation, (C) Random mutation, (D) Natural selection, How can natural selection be an explanation of life when natural selection ASSUMES the existence of LIVING ORGANISMS with a capacity to REPRODUCE? (E) Time, (F) Genetics/heredity. (2) How is a species defined? Perhaps the most classic definition is a group of organisms that can BREED with each other to produce fertile offspring, an idea originally set forthin 1942 by evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr. While elegant in its simplicity, this concept has SINCE COME UNDER FIRE by biologists, who argue that it DIDN’T APPLY to many organisms, such as single-celled ones that reproduce asexually, or those that have been shown to breed with other distinct organisms to create hybrids. (3) The discovery of DNA's double helix prompted the creation of yet another definition, one in which scientists could look for minute genetic differences and draw even finer lines denoting species. Based on a 1980 book by biologists Niles Eldredge and Joel Cracraft, under the definition of a phylogenetic species, animal species now can differ by just 2 percent of their DNA to be considered separate. (4) In the wake of these and other paradigm-shifting discoveries, Ernst Mayr’s original concept of species is rapidly falling apart. (5) Let us turn to comments from Geoffrey Simmons, a medical doctor with over 40 years of medical practice experience, author of eight books including the book “What Darwin Didn’t Know.” Simmons writes in another of his books the story of chance development of life. In his book “Millions of Missing Links”Simmons observes that the current scientific evidence reveals Darwinism’s most FATAL FLAW — the billions of missing links. (6) Simmons says, “. . . . the arguments supporting the theory of evolution is SHAKY at best, while, on the other hand, nearly every aspect of science is COMPATIBLE with Intelligent Design.” (7) The Bible says that wisdom is justified by all its consequences (Matt. 11:19; Luke 7:35). How, then, does one justify Darwinian evolution? I don’t think we CAN justify Darwinism because of its flagrant FLAWS. (8) In Episode 286 I referred to an article from gotquestions.org that indicated that FLAWS in the theory of evolution can be separated into 3 BASIC AREAS. In that episode I discussed 2 areas: (A) There is the apparent CONTRADICTION between “punctuated equilibrium” advocated by Stephen Jay Gould and Nyles Eldridge and “GRADUALISM” advanced by Charles Darwin. Punctuated equilibrium considers events like the CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION in the fossil record and attempts to INCORPORATE it into the Darwin theory. But there are flaws with punctuated equilibrium as well. (B) Second area into which flaws can be separated is the problem in projecting “MICRO-evolution” plus CHANCE into “MACRO-evolution.” Macroevolution has NEVER BEEN observed. So it is more than a flaw; it is an overactive IMAGINATION. Current  scientific evidence reveals Darwinism’s most FATAL FLAW — the billions of missing links. Let us return to the third basic area into which flaws of evolution are separated. I have added a fourth and a fifth category. (9) The third basic area is the way Darwinian evolutionary theory has been used to SUPPORT IDEAS from POLITICAL SYSTEMS like Nazism which caused the Holocaust thereby destroying over 6 million Jews and maybe 10 million Christians. Josef Stalin left seminary after having read Darwin’s book becoming an ATHEIST AS A RESULT. Ultimately over 18 million Russians were killed under Stalin’s regime in the USSR. Marxism/communism in China destroyed over 100 million Chinese. Marxism/communism was responsible for Pol Pot’s killing fields in Cambodia whereby over half of the population of Cambodia were destroyed. (10) The goal of socialism is communism. The are some young people in America who are attracted to socialism because they are completely IGNORANT of the history of deaths in communist regimes and of the FAILURES OF SOCIALISTIC GOVERNMENTS throughout the history of the world. (11) The fourth basic area against Darwinian theory is to observe that it is unable to cope with Michael Behe’s concept of irreducible complexity disclosed in his book Darwin’s Black Box. Behe, a biochemistry professor at Lehigh University, is an evolutionists. He acknowledges a powerful challenge to Darwinian evolution. He gives a simple example of irreducible complexity: a mousetrap. The mousetrap has 5 major components that make it functional. If any one of these components is missing, it will not function. It becomes WORTHLESS as a mousetrap. (12) The fourth basic area against Darwinian theory is to observe that it is unable to cope with Michael Behe’s concept of irreducible complexity disclosed in his book Darwin’s Black Box. Behe, a biochemistry professor at Lehigh University, is an evolutionists. He acknowledges a powerful challenge to Darwinian evolution. He gives a simple example of irreducible complexity: a mousetrap. The mousetrap has 5 major components that make it functional. If any one of these components is missing, it will not function. It becomes WORTHLESS as a mousetrap. (13) In particular, the human eye is an irreducibly complex organ. the eye cannot be reduced to anything LRSS than what it is. It has thousands of CO-EQUAL FUNCTIONS to make it work. If we take away just one of those functions the rest of the eye is WORTHLESS as a seeing mechanism. How can chance, natural selection, and random mutation, the only basic mechanisms within Darwin’s theory, accomplish the whole picture of sight when all functions had to be present at once. This is episode 293.

References: (1) In an article entitled, “Quotes from Scientists on Evolution” compiled by Sean D. Pitman, M. D. quotes what several scientists had to say about evolution. (2) How you answer the question of origins, whether you are an accident or a UNIQUE CREATION OF GOD, will ultimately determine EVERYTHING ELSE in your life. It will determine your VALUE in terms of every other human being. It will determine your basis of MORALITY, your MEANING and PURPOSE in life, and your ultimate DESTINY. This is one of the most fundamental questions you can ever ask. (3) I have been exploring WHAT evolution IS and WHY it is one of the GREAT FALSEHOODS BEING PERPETRATED in our time. For several episodes of this program I have listed 8 evidences against evolution. You should get the IMPRESSION, perhaps to your own dismay, that the Darwinian view is FALSE. Therefore it all points to the fact that your existence is NOT AN ACCIDENT, but instead you are a unique creation of God. (4) In November 7, 1977 Time magazine had a cover story entitled “How Man Became Man” in which this theme was announced as the ONLY PLAUSIBLE SCIENTIFIC REASON for man being man. In that issue appeared an advertisement for the TIME/LIFE book series The Emergence of Man, which I am told is now found in practically every public schools and libraries throughout the United States. The ad included the following statement: “. . . . you share, with every other creature that ever lived, the SAME ORIGINS — the same ACCIDENT that led to the SPONTANEOUS CREATION of the first single-celled algae 3.5 billion years ago.” No supporting evidence was given. That means what was stated is merely an OPINION. (5) But unfortunately, this view has become the BASIS OF EDUCATION throughout the UNITED STATES and most of the world today. (6) The November 20, 1989, issue of Newsweek had an article expounding the theory of evolution entitled “ We’re All Lucky to Be Here.” Here is an excerpt: “It is a PICTURE we all carry in our heads, the most powerful ICON of the Age of Secular Humanism: the line of [the] ascent of Man. It begins with the BACTERIA, just barely across the threshold of life, a TENUOUS SCUM on the primeval seas. Then, climbing the LADDER of COMPLEXITY. . . . .protozoa, invertebrates, the fishes and early reptiles. Followed by the first MAMMALS, which knocked off the DINOSAURS, the early PRIMATES and their HOMINID DESCENDANTS huddled around a cave fire. Three billion years of PROGRESS directed toward the PRODUCTION of Man.” (7) The notion that living beings originated from inanimate materials comes from the Ancient Greeks, primarily from Aristotle — from the theory known as SPONTANEOUS GENERATION. Aristotle also states that living things DO ARISE and HAVE ALWAYS ARISEN from LIFELESS MATTER. Aristotle’s theory remained the DOMINANT IDEA on origin of life from the ancient philosophers to the Renaissance thinkers (outside that of a deity as a causal agent). With the birth of modern science, experimental refutations emerged. (8) We know that Louis Pasteur et al refuted the idea of spontaneous generation. Nevertheless, evolutionary biologists believed that SOME KIND of spontaneous generation, different from the simple Aristotelian doctrine, MUST HAVE WORKED for the emergence of life. In other words, the evolutionary biologists are REFUSING TO ACKNOWLEDGE that Pasteur and others did not successfully DISPROVE spontaneous generation even though the rest of the scientific community ACCEPTED that spontaneous generation was disproven. This is episode 292.

References: (1) Evolution has become the foundational basis of education throughout most of the world today. I doubt that it is possible to attend any biology class at any state university or public school without being exposed to the theory of evolution. That is acceptable to me if it is presented as a THEORY, but it is unlikely that it is presented as a theory, but more likely it is presented as a FACT. And anyone who believes otherwise is ridiculed. Almost every biology textbook presents evolution as the only INTELLECTUAL POSSIBILITY for life. That’s what bugs me. (2) What is the fruit of evolution? What are the children of evolution? What are its ramifications? (3) Let’s check the history of  Adolf Hitler in Germany, Josef Stalin in USSR, Mao Zedong in China, Pol Pot in Cambodia. They are responsible for mass murders of millions of people in the 20th century. Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust which eliminated over 6 million Jews and the multitude of deaths of soldiers in WWII. Stalin murdered over 18 million Russians during his regime. Mao caused the murder of over 100 million Chinese people. Pol Pot destroyed over half the population of Cambodia in his Killing Fields. (4) Social Darwinism, Eugenics, Nazism, communisn, secularism all have their roots in Darwinian evolution. (5) If we begin with NO GOD, then there is NO ONE to whom we are accountable. Moreover, there is NO SUCH THING as absolute standards by which can measure right and wrong. MORALITY is simply floating on the sea of PERSONAL PREFERENCES. Why have RULES if there is NO RULES ENFORCER? Why have MORALS if there is NO BOSS ruling the universe? (6) There you have it, the PERFECT FORMULA for ANARCHY and the COLLAPSE of a nation: no rules, no authority, no funding for the police, no laws with any real authority against crime, no prosecutions of criminals, no morals, no consequences, and no God. (7) This situation is like Judges 17:6 which says, “In those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.” When will we wake up to reality? (8) A presupposition is a statement TACITLY ASSUMED BEFOREHAND at the beginning of a philosophical or a scientific argument, a preconceived paradigm that you bring to the table in forming your opinion regarding any debatable topic. (9) Evolution begins with the presupposition that there is NO GOD. Therefore, human beings and all other living things are products of MERE CHANCE. Consequently, this world and its inhabitants are the result of a COSMIC ACCIDENT, a COINCIDENCE that came as a result of the Big Bang. We are all the product of RANDOM, CHAOTIC, IMPERSONAL, HAPPENSTANCE. The evolutionist would say to believe otherwise is IGNORANT,  NAIVE, and FANATICAL. (10) Richard Dawkins, the most famous atheist in the world and a stalwart supporter of Darwinian evolution, said, “It is ABSOLUTELY safe to say that if you meet someone who claims NOT to believe in EVOLUTION, that person is IGNORANT, STUPID, or INSANE (or WICKED, but I’d rather not consider that).” (That quotation is found in  Ignorance Is No Crime, in the Free Inquiry magazine; Dawkins said this first in a book review for the NY Times on April 9, 1989.) (11) Evolutionists believe that chance plus time plus matter will generate life from non-life. When they run into problems with their theories, they just add a few more billions of years to their hypothesis or they change their hypothesis to include the solution to the objection. And still they claim that evolution is a FACT, and keep on going as if nothing ever happened. That is the HEART of the evolutionary process. (12) The notion that living beings originated from inanimate materials comes from the Ancient Greeks, primarily from Aristotle — from the theory known as spontaneous generation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation). Aristotle also states that living things DO ARISE and always HAVE ARISEN  from LIFELESS MATTER. Aristotle’s theory remained the DOMINANT IDEA on origin of life (outside that of deity as a causal agent) from the ancient philosophers to the Renaissance thinkers in various forms. With the birth of modern science, experimental refutations emerged. Italian physician Francesco Redi demonstrated in 1668 that maggots developed from rotten meat only in a jar where flies could enter, but not in a closed-lid jar. Redi concluded: “All life comes from life.” (13) The French chemist Luis Pasteur’s experiment in 1859 is generally regarded as giving the DEATH BLOW to spontaneous generation. He showed that microbes cannot grow in STERILIZED WATER, unless it is exposed to AIR. The experiment won Pasteur the Alhumbert Prize in 1862 from the French Academy of Sciences French Academy and he concluded: "Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation RECOVER from the mortal blow of this simple experiment." This is episode 291.

References: (1) This fifth evidence is the CONTRADICTION between “gradualism” advocated by Charles Darwin and the theory of “PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM” developed by Stephen Jay Gould and Nyles Elderedge in 1972. Punctuated equilibrium allows for the SUDDEN appearance for many new species like in the Cambrian Explosion. (2) “Blind Watchmaker” by Richard Dawkins. (3) Sixth evidence: Some Darwinian evolutionists claim that evolution is the CAUSE of the universe. But Dallas Willard, the UCLA professor of philosophy, has pointed out that Darwinian evolution CANNOT be a theory of ORIGINS of the universe because it requires ENTITIES, BEHAVIORS, and AN ENVIRONMENT that includes propagating organisms that natural selection can CHOOSE its offsprings for SURVIVAL. Until a functional biological entity EXISTS, there is NOTHING for natural selection to ACT ON. (4) The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics goes against Darwinian evolution. The second law says that in the natural course, things begin to DEGENERATE by going FROM an ordered state to a DISORDERED STATE. The universe is RUNNING DOWN, not EVOLVING UPWARD as Darwin’s theory claims. (5) “Evolution’s Blunders, Frauds and Forgeries” by Jerry Bergman. (6) The best known examples of fraud include the Piltdown Man, which proved to be a composite of a human skull and an ape jaw. The evidence for the Nebraska Man turned to be a pig’s tooth. (7) In 1980 the magazine Newsweek announced a conference titled “Macroevolution,” held at Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History. Paleontologists told biologists what they LEAST WANTED TO HEAR, namely, that the fossil record does NOT, and never WILL, support the Darwinian scenario of a smooth, continuous progress of life forms, nicely graded from simple to complex. Instead the rocks show a PERVASIVE PATTERN OF GAPS: new life forms appear suddenly, with NO TRANSITIONAL FORMS leading to them, followed by long periods of stability during which they show little or NO CHANGE at all. Stephen Jay Gould called this “the trade secret of paleontology.” (8) “Total Truth” by Nancy Pearcey. (9) A widely circulated claim in the 21st century suggested that human DNA was 99% identical to chimpanzee DNA. While the similarities are high, later research revealed that the actual genetic OVERLAP is LOWER than originally stated, and differences in the regulation of genes are significant. (10) The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics goes against Darwinian evolution. The second law says that in the natural course, things begin to DEGENERATE by going FROM an ordered state to a DISORDERED STATE. The universe is RUNNING DOWN, not EVOLVING UPWARD as Darwin’s theory claims. (11) Humans were no longer the PINNACLE of creation; they were no longer the CENTER of the living world, created beings made in the image of God. They were not the PRODUCT of a Divine Plan because evolution has NO PLAN. The Origin of Species SHATTERED the 19th century belief in human’s traditional role. (12) I remember when I was in college that some atheist was ridiculing those who believed the Bible was trustworthy saying there was NO EVIDENCE that there was the nation of the Hittites. But since around 1905 there was in a museum at the University of Chicago exhibiting artifacts of the Hittite dynasty. Atheists will do anything, no matter how devious, to try to prove there is no God, and evolutionist will do the same thing to try to prove that Darwinism is true. (13) Several branches of creationism, including intelligent design people like Stephen C. Meyer, Philip Johnson, Michael Behe, and David Berlinsky argue that the idea of life being directly designed by intelligence is AT LEAST AS SCIENTIFIC as evolutionary theory, and should therefore be TAUGHT IN PUBLIC EDUCATION. (14) The scientific community does not recognize such objections as valid, pointing to detractors' misinterpretations of such things as the scientific method, evidence, and basic physical laws. That seems to me to be a real stretch of imagination scraping at the very bottom of the barrel of objections while at the same time closing their eyes to the truth. This is episode 290.

References: (1) The Miller-Urey experiment used a mixture of organic chemicals presumably MIMICKING a PRIMORDIAL SEA despite the fact that no one has ever SEEN or ANALYZED the contents of the primordial sea. (2) But the Miller-Urey experiment FALSELY led people to think that scientists could CREATE LIFE in a test tube because the experiment could create SOME of the building blocks of life. But these building blocks produced by the experiment was only a FEW amino acids FAR REMOVED from what is needed for life. Nevertheless the myth of the Miller-Urey experiment still remains in school textbooks COMPLETELY OVERLOOKING  the problems with this experiment. (3) The medical doctor Geoffrey Simmons and author of the books  What Darwin Didn’t Know and Billions of Missing Links used the fact of MISSING TRANSITIONAL LINKS and the SHAKINESS of Darwin’s claims to say that Darwin’s claims NO LONGER RISES the level of a theory but perhaps only to a proposal of historical importance. (4) Drawing on the most recent research  and on years of clinical work Simmons tells the REAL STORY about the human body’s amazing complexity. The book “What Darwin Didn’t Know” pictures the wonders of the human body in their TRUE CONTEXT — a marvelous system fashioned by an infinitely wise DESIGNER. (5) In the book Billions of Missing Links Simmons reveals how interdependent structures and systems — massive complexity upon massive complexity —  apparently came about ALL AT ONCE, WHOLE AND ENTIRE. There are NO PRECEDENTS, NO IN-BETWEENS, NO MISTAKES, NO FIRST TRIES. So there is NO HINT of things happening by CHANCE. (6) Simmons is not particularly fond of Darwin’s personality. He says, “Much of Darwin’s work reflects prejudices, false assumptions, assumed natural laws, and feigned research projects, as well as the reasonable thoughts of unnamed colleagues. Among the notables who have adopted his conclusions have been Hitler, Marx, and Stalin.” To those I would add Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Nicholas Madura, and Pol Pot. (7) The Bible says that wisdom is JUSTIFIED by all its CHILDREN. In other words, things like accepted cultural ideas, myths, worldviews, philosophies, politics, etc. enter to give a fuller picture of the character of a person. (8) The eugenics movement will forever be associated with Adolf Hitler, whose quest to build an Aryan MASTER RACE during the 1930s and '40s culminated in the Holocaust, the extermination of 6 millions Jews as well as all the deaths of multitudes of soldiers in WWII. That is a child of Darwinism. (9) For over 40 years Dr. Jerry Bergman, with 7 graduate degrees in biology, chemistry, psychology, and evaluation and reseasrch, has chronicled the weakness and absence of evidence supporting the theory of Darwinian evolution. Don’t you think that Bergman with those credentials deserves an audience? (10) The American eugenics movement received extensive funding from various CORPORATE FOUNDATIONS including the Carnegie Institution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_Institution), Rockefeller Foundation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Foundation), and the Harriman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Henry_Harriman) railroad fortune. In 1906, J.H. Kellogg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J.H._Kellogg) provided funding to help found the Race Betterment Foundation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_Betterment_Foundation) in Battle Creek, Michigan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_Creek,_Michigan). The Eugenics Record Office (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_Record_Office)(ERO) was founded in Cold Spring Harbor, New York (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_Spring_Harbor,_New_York) in 1911 by the renowned biologist Charles B. Davenport (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_B._Davenport), using money from both the Harriman railroad fortune and the Carnegie Institution. (11) Eugenics allowed some people to JUSTIFY THEIR BIGOTRY who then would take things a STEP FURTHER by claiming that "lesser" races needed to be PHASED OUT. In this way, SOCIAL DARWINISM became a means to construct a supposed HEIRARCHY of race — and ensure that Caucasian people (and their genes) remained the ideal standard. This idea of heirarchy of races affected Hitler where he thought the Aryan race was the MASTER RACE. Eugenics and Social Darwinism are the children of Darwinism. (12) Before Hitler took eugenics to its DEADLY EXTREMES of executing millions, many people considered at least some eugenics-related ideas to be COMPLETELY LEGITIMATE — despite their SERIOUS MORAL IMPLICATIONS. (13) What is the lesson learned here? Here is one: Any bias can be taken to extremes, hatred can ensue, and people can lose their lives. We see it now in the Trump DERANGEMENT SYNDROME which has precipitated multiple assassination attempts against the president of the United States. We saw it Charlie Kirk’s murder. We see it in school, places of worship, and drive-by shootings. It manifests itself when a few radical nations want to wipe out another nation. We see it exhibitions of genocide. (14) When will the world recognize that hatred can destroy everything we hold dear? Rather than supporting eugenics that removes people, we need to excise the cancer of hatred. This is episode 289.

References: (1) Charles Darwin’s 1859 book “Origin of Species” produced a REVOLUTION in human thinking perhaps more profound in science than anything before or since. The 16th century Copernican revolution removed the EARTH from its privileged position at the center of the universe, but the Darwinian theory removed GOD from His privileged position as the Creator of the universe and of all life, most notably of human life. (2) We are asked to believe that, first, a tiny BACTERIUM had come from non-living matter, and then, second, that it has evolved into 1.7 million highly complex species. The evidence supporting evolution would have to SPAN A VERY LARGE GAP between non-life and human life. Is the evidence strong enough? I am trying to show that it does not. (3) Now, thanks to the scientific work of Albert Einstein and other scientists, the beginning of the universe has been confirmed. That proves that a BEGINNER, a Creator, exists. Thanks to space probes and high-powered telescopes, we can determine the age of the universe to be about 13.7 or 13.8 billion years old. General relativity has been confirmed also. (4)”Not by Chance” by Lee Spetner. (5) “The Blind Watchman” by Richard Dawkins. (6) The 1952 article in “American Scientist” by Richard Goldsmith says, “Evolution of animal and plant world is considered by all those entitled to judgment to be a FACT for which NO FURTHER PROOF is needed.” (7) The mechanisms — natural selection, random mutations, and abiogenesis — have to work correctly in order for what is claimed to really occur. (8) The transfer of one species to another has NEVER BEEN OBSERVED, and how life came from non-life is still a MYSTERY. (9) It seems to me that the bridge of evolution is a failure. (10) In the case of evolution, the entire sequence of evidence must be strong or Darwin’s theory will fall apart. One broken element in the evolutionary span is all it takes for the theory to be a FAILURE. (11) “A Skeptics Search for God” and “Dismantling Evolution” by Ralph Muncaster. (12) Darwin himself identified 37 problems of evolution that needed to be defended. (13) I began to list key elements of evidence against Darwinian evolution although it is almost universally accepted. This is episode 288.

References: (1) “Lamarck, the Founder of Evolution” by Alpheas Packard. (2) Questions: What hard-science evidence is there that Darwinian evolution is true? Why are there no true transitional links? Since there are no transitional links to test, is it possible to demonstrate hard evidence of DNA mutational change? (3) “Dismantling Evolution” by Ralph Muncaster. (4) Given that neo-Darwinism requires GRADUAL CHANGE over long periods of time, how do evolutionists explain the sudden appearance of many new life forms on earth in the Cambrian Explosion? (5) Muncaster continues, “The existence of ‘transitional’ species would imply that a creature was in a STATE OF DEVELOPMENT between two species. For example, it might be a reptile with a partially formed feather, not a wholly developed one; or a creature with a part of an eye that didn’t yet ‘work.’ Now, even though millions of fossils have been found since Darwin’s time, we still can’t IDENTIFY transitional species — let alone ’countless numbers’ of them. In fact, in the fossil record body parts and systems are either FULLY FORMED or NON EXISTENT.” (6) What is harder to understand is WHY this 150-year-old theory (though somewhat modified) is STILL BEING TAUGHT as a FACT in light of recent discoveries? (7) However, change BETWEEN species has NEVER BEEN SUBSTANTIATED. (8) “Now, having much recent evidence that was UNAVAILABLE to Darwin, how do MODERN EVOLUTIONISTS support their theory? It seems that, often, either they attempt to hold onto OUTDATED IDEAS by the simple ASSUMPTION that evolution is a FACT — or else the evidence is simply IGNORED. In other cases they explain the theory’s many problems by REACHING INTO OUTER SPACE for answers. . . . Are evolutionary theorists now so FRUSTRATED that they look to extraterrestrials as possible SOLUTIONS to problems about the origin of life that can’t be resolved? Moreover, this just puts the difficulties one step FURTHER AWAY. It doesn’t answer the question, ‘How did these extraterrestrials come to be?’” (9) The third area into which flaws of evolution can be separated is the way Darwinian evolutionary theory has been used as the FOUNDATIONAL BASIS for POLITICAL SYSTEMS like Nazism and communism. Those governmental regimes adopted the idea of atheism. (10) What were the consequences of the governmental regimes of Nazism and communism? Nazism caused the Holocaust thereby destroying over 6 million Jews and perhaps 10 million Christians. Josef Stalin left seminary after having read Darwin’s book becoming an atheist in the process. Ultimately over 18 million Russians were killed under Stalin’s regime in Russia. Marxism/communism in China under Mao destroyed over 100 million Chinese. Marxism/communism was responsible for Pol Pot’s killing fields in Cambodia whereby over half of the population of Cambodia were destroyed. (11) Darwin’s theory of evolution also was the FOUNDATION for theories like SOCIAL DARWINISM and EUGENICS. You may know that eugenics advocates for the elimination of individual people DEEMED SOCIALLY UNFIT. The theories of social Darwinism and eugenics have been used to JUSTIFY DISCRIMINATION and have contributed to some of the most RACIST social programs over the last 167 years. (12) “Darwin’s Black Box” by Michael Behe. This is episode 287.

References: (1) Ever since Darwin first published his Origin of Species, his defenders’ favorite TACTIC against critics have been to use the process with a Latin name ad hominem which means attack against the person. For example, Sir Richard Dawkins, the indefatigable defender of evolution and former professor of biology at the University of Oxford, wrote: “It is absolutely SAFE TO SAY that if you meet someone who claims NOT TO BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION, that person is IGNORANT, STUPID, or INSANE (or WICKED, but I’d rather not consider that).” (2) In the book “Darwinism Under the Microscope” by James P. Gillis, MD and Tom Woodward, PHD and in the chapter by Dr. Mark Hartwig called “Challenging Darwin’s Myths” is stated that “Darwin himself used [this tactic] against some of the greatest scientists of his day, accusing them of SUPERSTITION and RELIGIOUS BIAS.” (3) Hartwig continues, “Time has not been kind to Darwinism, however. Paleontologists have certainly found more fossils, but these fossils have only DEEPENED THE PROBLEM. What paleontologists discovered was NOT GRADUAL CHANGE, but STABILITY AND SUDDEN APPEARANCE. It seems that most fossil species APPEAR ALL AT ONCE, FULLY FORMED, and CHANGE VERY LITTLE THROUGHOUT THEIR EXISTENCE. (4) Even Oxford zoologist and prominent Darwinist Richard Dawkins has remarked, “It  is as though they were JUST PLANTED THERE, without ANY EVOLUTIONARY HISTORY. . . . Darwinists, of course, express CONFIDENCE that future discoveries will clear up the mysteries. But so far, the research has only deepened them.” I would say confidence is NOT EVIDENCE. (5)  An article from gotquestions.org indicates that FLAWS in the theory of evolution can be separated into 3 BASIC AREAS. I have added a fourth category. (6) Generally in the first edition of The Origin of Species Darwin made claims with NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE. How can that version of Darwinian evolution be a SCIENCE if it does not use the scientific methodology? (7) Survival of the fittest on a short time line, is UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED. But this is more about MAJOR TRANSITIONS. No scientist has ever observed a natural collection of organic chemicals SPONTANEOUSLY linking up to form a PROTEIN, or thousands of different proteins, fats, sugars, and minerals combining to CREATE A FUNCTIONAL CELL, or millions of different cells FUSING INTO A JELLYFISH, or anything remotely similar to an AMPHIBIAN, or a frog transitioning to a lizard, of a bear transitioning to a whale, or an ape GIVING BIRTH to a human. (8) The philosopher and historian Stephen Meyer writes, “Intelligent agents have unique CAUSAL POWERS that nature DOES NOT . When we observe effects that we know only agents can produce, we rightly INFER the presence of a PRIOR INTELLIGENCE even if we did not observe the ACTION of the particular agent responsible. Since DNA displays an effect (namely, information content) that in our experience only agents can produce, intelligent design (and not apparent design) stands as the best explanation for the information content in DNA.” This is episode 286.

References: (1) Many people have been taught evolution as an UNQUESTIONABLE FACT while being UNAWARE of the numerous historical errors, frauds, exaggerations, and premature conclusions that have appeared in its defense. (2) Remember Science is performed by fallible people. A PREDETERMINED BIAS can influence scientific conclusions. Incorrect ideas sometimes remain in textbooks for decades. Scientific consensus does not guarantee the truth. (3) Darwin acknowledged that there were “a crowd of difficulties” with his theory and stated, “Some of them are SO SERIOUS that to this day I can HARDLY REFLECT on them without being in some degree STAGGERED; but, to the best of my judgment, the greater number are ONLY APPARENT, and those that ARE REAL are not, I think, FATAL to the theory.” (4) Notice one thing about Darwin’s response at the end of the above quotation: Objections to his theory are not fatal. He offers no evidence for that claim. That relegates his response to just an OPINION. Here is basic fact in my mind: Opinions DO NOT SOLVE scientific problems. (5) The consequences for man — of Darwins’ theory — were clear. Man was no longer at the center of the living world. The human was not a created Being made in the image of God. Neither was the human the product of a Divine Plan — evolution does NOT have a plan. (6) E. J. Larson, author of the 2002 book The Theory of Evolution: A History of Controversy writes on p. 58 “that Darwin did what he could to document his view that natural selection was a PLAUSIBLE MECHANISM — not necessarily the BEST mechanism, but at least a plausible one, because he needed at least SOME MECHANISM that was better than Lamarck’s theory, in order to have people buy into his theory of evolution. His mechanism was natural selection.” (7) Of course, artificial selection no more PROVES evolution than the fact that humans have built computers proves that a computer can evolve solely by natural means without intelligence. (8) Most surprisingly, Darwin RETREATED BACK to the DISCREDITED theory of evolution due to Lamarck, which postulated that biological characteristics acquired during one’s lifetime could be passed onto one’s offspring. (9) B. Houston, author of the 2012 book Natural God: Deism in the Age of Intelligent Design, wrote that for Darwin, even the term “evolve” itself evolved. In the first edition of Origin of the Species published in 1859, [Darwin] uses only forms of the word “descent” rather than “evolution.” Not until the sixth edition, published in 1872, does Darwin use the word evolution (found on p. 124 of Natural God). (10) Cambridge University professor Peter Vorzimmer wrote in an article entitled “Charles Darwin and blending inheritance” in Isis vol. 54, 1963, p. 371 that “the evolutionary writings of Charles Darwin. . . . in the latter part of his life, when CONTRASTED with the Origin of Species in 1859, indicate a considerable CHANGE in his evolutionary thought over the intervening years . . . . the overall CHANGE effected appears GREAT and the resultant view nearly ANTITHETICAL to that of the first edition of the Origin, . . . . [and] such a RADICAL CHANGE could not be looked upon merely as a MODIFICATION of an earlier view, but as an ADOPTION of a DISTINCTLY new one.” (11) In the introduction to a 1971 edition of Darwin’s book, the biologist L. Harrison Matthews observes, “The fact of evolution is the BACKBONE of biology, and biology is thus in a PECULIAR POSITION of being a science founded on an UNPROVED THEORY — is it then a SCIENCE or a FAITH? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus EXACTLY PARALLEL to belief in SPECIAL CREATION — both are CONCEPTS which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, had been able to prove.” (12) Michael Behe is the American microbiologist who introduced the concept of irreducible complexity in his book Darwin’s Black Box. He argues that some biological systems, like the eye, are IRREDUCIBLY COMPLEX — that is, they consist of multiple interacting parts, ALL OF WHICH ARE NECESSARY for the system’s PRESENT FUNCTION. According to Behe, such systems could not have arisen through the GRADUAL ACCUMULATION of small, beneficial mutations envisioned by Darwinian evolution because the system would not function until ALL THE PARTS were present. For example, all parts of a mouse trap must be present for it to work as a mouse trap. If even one part is missing, it will not work. (13) I would say there is no conceivable way to account naturally for their development. Therefore, there must be an INTELLIGENT DESIGNER. This is episode 285.

References: (1) Question 8. Does the Cambrian Explosion prove Darwin’s theory of evolution? (2) Darwin predicted that in the fossil record we would find EVIDENCE that life would begin SIMPLY and would progress into BIG DIFFERENCES. But the Cambrian Explosion refutes that prediction and thus DOES NOT SUPPORT DARWIN’s THEORY of evolution. (3) Question 9. Was there a gradual transition from an ape to human? (4) Despite the illustrations in textbooks showing a march of beings in an ascending row that displays a gradual transition from a small chimpanzee to a regular sized ape to an even larger transition figure and eventually to a human, no evidence is offered to support that illustration because it is NOT THERE. Virtually every “missing link” or “find” has turned out to be APE-LIKE and NON HUMAN, not a transition kind of an ape-man. In fact, some so-called “finds” were deliberate HOAXES. (5) Charles Darwin was worried that the fossil record did not show what his theory predicted. In the 6th edition of The Origin of Species he wrote: “Why is not EVERY GEOLOGICAL FORMATION which can be urged and EVERY STRATUM full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this is the most obvious and serious OBJECTION which can be urged against the theory.” (6) This means that Darwin’s theory is REFUTED. In EVERY OTHER SCIENTIFIC DOMAIN — in mathematics, physics, chemistry, astronomy, computer science, and perhaps in geology, meteorology, oceanography, and even in philosophy — if such a counterexample is displayed against their theory, then the theory would be abandoned. But not so in Darwinian theory. THAT is NOT SCIENCE; that’s burying your head in the sand and keeping your mind closed. The mind is like a parachute; it only works when it is open. (7) However, if different kinds had been created SEPARATELY, the fossil record should show creatures appearing ABRUPTLY AND FULLY FORMED. That is what the Cambridge Explosion shows. Shouldn’t the general public and the scientific community be open to the possibility of creation? (8) Richard Leakey, in his time the world’s foremost paleoanthropologist, said, “If pressed about man’s ANCESTRY, I would have to UNEQUIVOCALLY SAY that all we have is a HUGE QUESTION MARK. . . . If, further pressed, I would have to state that there is MORE EVIDENCE to suggest an ABRUPT ARRIVAL of man rather than a GRADUAL PROCESS of evolving.” (9) The renowned Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote in the book Evolution Now: A Century After Darwin edited by John Maynard Smith, p. 140: “The ABSENCE of fossil evidence for INTERMEDIATE STAGES between major transitions in organic design, indeed in our INABILITY, even in our IMAGINATION, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a PERSISTENT AND NAGGING PROBLEM for gradualistic accounts of evolution.” (10) You might recall that Gould is the one who said, “Evolution is a fact, fact, fact.” It seems to me that he should have considered the fossil record before making that comment. If he had, then he should have said, “ Evolution is dubious, dubious, dubious.” This is episode 284.

References: (1) An important topic in any discussion of Darwinian evolution is the major problem of blunders, frauds, and forgeries made by evolutionists. How can anyone consider Darwinian evolution to be TRUE if it is characterized by frauds? Would you purchase an insurance policy if the company has a record of frauds? No, but many people accept Darwinian evolution despite its connection with frauds and forgeries. (2) Question 4: Does the Miller-Urey experiment prove that LIFE can be built by natural process? (3) No, the conclusions drawn from the Miller-Urey experiment are no longer considered RELEVANT by the scientific community. In fact, the experiment has been CRITICIZED FOR UNREALISTIC ASSUMPTIONS about early earth atmospherical conditions, methodological FLAWS, and LIMITED APPLICABILITY to the actual origin of life. When it comes to the Miller-Urey experiment things continue to go WRONG and its significance for the origin-of-life question is now perceived as an INVALID EXPERIMENT and IRRELEVANT in terms of justifying the origin of life. The scientific CONSENSUS VIEW of early earth’s atmospheric constituents has CHANGED since the 1950s. (4) Question 5: Do all scientists accept Darwin’s theory of evolution at the cellular level? (5) At present, the scientific mainstream accepts evolutionary mechanisms as the BEST-SUPPORTED EXPLANATION for the diversity and complexity of life, while recognizing that IMPORTANT QUESTIONS — especially concerning the origin of life and the detailed evolutionary history of some molecular systems — REMAIN ACTIVE AREAS of investigation. The disagreement is therefore not over whether cells are extraordinarily complex (they are), but over whether known evolutionary mechanisms are SUFFICIENT TO EXPLAIN how that complexity arose. (6) Question 6. Do the changes in finch beaks, or the changes due to selective breeding, prove Darwin’s theory of evolution? (7) Finch beaks changing is only microevolution which all agree is true. Selective breeding is not “environmental natural factors” as required by Darwin’s theory. Darwin’s theory includes macroevolution where species lead to new species. This has never been observed. (8) Question 7. Does the fossil record support Darwin’s theory of evolution? (9) No, Darwin predicted that IF his theory were correct, there should be evidence that simple life forms gradually developed into more and more complex organisms. Paleontologists generally state that the fossil record does NOT SUPPORT Darwin’s theory in 2 major ways: (a) Animal types tend to appear SUDDENLY (as in the Cambrian Explosion) not gradually, as Darwin predicted. Therefore, each animal type is missing its link to its former ancestor. (b) Animals tend to remain UNCHANGED throughout their time on earth (NOT SLOWLY DEVELOPING into new forms as Darwin predicted). This is episode 283.

References: (1) The first 5 tenets appeared in Darwin’s magnum opus “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection” in 1859. The subtitle of which is the “Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life.” (2) One of the biggest weaknesses in Darwin’s original theory was that he lacked a correct mechanism for heredity. He did not know about genes or DNA. (3) Darwin’s father, considering the 16-year-old a wastrel interested only in game shooting, sent him to study medicine at Edinburgh University in 1825. Later in life, Darwin gave the impression that he had LEARNED LITTLE during his two years at Edinburgh. In fact, it was a FORMATIVE EXPERIENCE. There was no better science education in a British university. He was taught to understand the chemistry of cooling of rocks on the primitive earth and how to classify plants by the modern “natural system.” (4) The young Darwin LEARNED MUCH in Edinburgh’s rich intellectual environment but not MEDICINE: he loathed anatomy and (pre-chloroform) surgery sickened him. The university’s radical students exposed the teenager to the latest Continental sciences. But his father, realizing that the CHURCH was a better calling for an aimless naturalist, switched him to Christ’s College, Cambridge, in 1828. (5) Sometime later Darwin jumped at the suggestion of a voyage to Tierra del Fuego, at the southern tip of South America aboard the HMS Beagle. On December 27, 1831, Charles Darwin left Devonport, England, aboard Her Majesty’s Ship Beagle. As Darwin set sail, he says he was a Bible-believing creationist. In his words recorded in The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, vol. 1. p. 45, he said, “I did not then in the least DOUBT the strict and literal TRUTH OF EVERY WORD in the Bible. . . .” (6) On the last leg of the voyage Darwin finished his 770-page diary, wrapped up 1,750 pages of notes, drew up 12 catalogs of his 5,436 skins, bones, and carcasses — and yet he still was interested in scientific questions. He wondered, for example: Was each Galapagos mockingbird a naturally produced variety? Why did ground sloths become extinct? He sailed home with PROBLEMS ENOUGH TO LAST HIM A LIFETIME. When he landed in October 1836, his interest in being a vicar had faded, the gun had given way to the notebook, and the supreme theorizer — who would always move from small causes to big outcomes — had the courage to LOOK BEYOND the conventions of his own Victorian culture for NEW ANSWERS. (7) With his voyage over and with a 400 pounds annual allowance from his father, Darwin now settled down among the urban gentry as a geologist. He was making adult decisions about his life and was looking beyond the present to his lifetime work. (8) With a 1,000 pound Treasury grant, obtained through the Cambridge (https://www.britannica.com/place/Cambridge-England) network, he employed the best experts and published their descriptions of his specimens in his Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. Beagle (1838–43). Darwin’s star had risen, and he was now lionized in London. (9) Darwin formulated his bold theory of evolution in private in 1837–39, after returning from the voyage around the world. But it was not until two decades later that he finally gave it full public expression in the 1859 book “On the Origin of Species,” a book that has deeply influenced modern Western society and thought. (10) Michael Ruse also said that evolution is a RELIGION and that Richard Dawkins  and his New Atheists friends’ “treatment of the religious viewpoint is PATHETIC to the point of non-being. Richard Dawkins in “The God Delusion” would FAIL any introductory philosophy or religion course. Proudly he criticizes that whereof he knows nothing.” [I think Dawkins may have failed any introductory logic course as well.] (11) Allow me to answer questions commonly posed concerning evolution. Question 1: Is Darwin’s theory of evolution a fact? No, I think not. It has not been PROVEN and cannot be REPLICATED in a laboratory and some claims would have happened millions of years ago. It has gone through many changes over the years since 1859 to conform to the evidence, and many scientific issues still remain. (12) Question 2: Is there any PROOF that evolution happened? That depends on what you mean by “evolution.” If you mean evolution is “change over time,” then you see it all the time. People are born, grow, age, and die. (13) There are 4 common ways evolution is used: microevolution, macroevolution, Universal Common Descent, and Natural selection (or survival of the fittest.) (14) I am unashamedly critiquing evolution and pointing out some of its flaws. The STRANGLEHOLD of evolution’s  capture of public thought is PROFOUND, and is a BARRIER to the Gospel for millions of people. Once people understand the SCIENTIFIC WEAKNESSES of evolution and how it UNDERMINES the Gospel, it need not be as big a JUGGERNAUT it MASQUERADES as. (15) Question 3: Is the Big Bang good news or bad news for Darwin’s theory of evolution? In my opinion, it’s BAD NEWS. Why? Darwin’s theory requires extremely long periods of time to produce the necessary changes in living forms. However, the Big Bang theory says there was a beginning of the universe now reckoned to be about 13.7 billion years ago. That does not provide enough time to support Darwin’s theory of evolution. According to most calculations, a universe of 100 billion years is NOT OLD ENOUGH for the development of a single cell. The Big Bang theory is consistent with the biblical account of Genesis which affirms that God created the world ex nihilo, out of nothing. Some thinkers dislike the Big Bang theory because it appears to be like biblical creation. This is episode 282.

References: (1) Random mutations do not occur very OFTEN, and most mutations are DAMAGING to an organism. Yet POSITIVE mutations are NECESSARY to give rise to a surviving new creature. 99% of mutations are DELETERIOUS and 1% have no effect at all. No useful mutation has ever BEEN OBSERVED. (2) I think Darwin may have believed that natural selection effectively had a MIND OF ITS OWN and would ARBITRARILY SELECT which individuals thrive. But natural selection is an UNGUIDED PROCESS. Therefore it is not a CONSCIOUS MECHANISM. It has no consciousness with which to select the best from the mutations that arise. Even IF the most useful structure is selected by natural selection, this state of affairs will still bestow NO NEW STRUCTURE. Fast running antelopes survive while the slower are hunted down by prey. But this process will NEVER TURN antelopes into leopards. (3) It is impossible for natural selection to act according to a PREDESIGNED PLAN. That would be to claim that natural selection is conscious. It’s a GRAVE ERROR to maintain that RANDOM, UNGUIDED EVENTS are actually conscious. But in order to escape the embarrassing effect of their claims of CHANCE, Darwinists try to give the impression and deceive people into thinking that natural selection is CONSCIOUS. (4) Darwinian evolutionists claim that natural selection must plan an organ such as the eye before any such thing exists, know all the properties it must have BEFOREHAND and bring all the requisite stages according to a plan, while NEVER MAKNG AN ERROR. It must do all this until an eye emerges. It must produce a succession of perfect structures, create a BRAIN that sees the image and a consciousness to INTERPRET what it sees. (5) Darwin himself said in chapter VI of On the Origin of Species, “Is it possible that an animal having, for instance, the structure and habits of a bat, could have been formed by the modification of some other animal with widely different habits and structure? Can we believe that natural selection could produce, on the one hand, an organ of trifling importance, such as the tail of a giraffe, which serves as a fly-flapper, and, on the other hand, an organ so wonderful as the eye?” (6) The evidence from BIOCHEMISTRY regarding Michael Behe’s IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY of the cell gives Darwinism ADDITIONAL PROBLEMS. Behe gives a mouse trap as an example. If any of the parts of the mouse trap are missing it is NONFUNCTIONAL. (7) The human eye is irreducibly complex and cannot have been evolved. The eye cannot gradually accumulate all the specific parts between each attainment because at each developing stage the eye will not give human sight. The eye has to be constructed in one GIGANTIC CONSTRUCTION. This suggests it had to have been designed. Who or what designed it? (8) The 5th tenet of Darwinian evolution is Time. Thus, the process needs time and LOTS and LOTS of it! Since the earth is NOT ETERNAL, and its AGE is approximately 13.7 billion years old, it seems UNLIKELY that there is ENOUGH TIME to account for all the creatures to occur from random mutations. I have not at this time given an argument for what I just claimed, but I am willing to if you think you need it. (9) The 6th tenet of Darwinian evolution is Genetics/heredity. Genetics — the study of heredity — is MARRIED to Darwinism to come up with NEO-DARWINIAN evolution, the sum of all biological processes by which characteristics are transmitted from parents to their offspring. To this list of 6 tenets of Darwin’s theory we possibly could add: variation, adaptation, gradualism, and the “tree of life.” (10) Ernst Mayr, the renowned German-American biologist mentioned previously and author of many books and articles including the book Toward a New Philosophy of Biology, says the CENTRAL CORE of evolution is generally defined as CHANGES IN TRAIT OR GENE FREQUENCY in a population of organisms from one generation to the next. This has been dubbed the STANDARD GENETIC DEFINITION of evolution. (11) In an article under the label of Copilot Search on the internet says that natural selection is involved in producing LIFE. It is the PROCESS THAT DRIVES EVOLUTION, leading to the adaption of species to their environments. So that means, without Copilot Research realizing it, that microevolution PRODUCES LIFE. That is WRONG, DEAD WRONG, LUDICROUSLY WRONG. That claim completely OVERLOOKS the fact that the FINE-TUNING of the fundamental physical constants of the universe were set at the very beginning of the Big Bang. This means that the so-called specific INITIAL CONDITIONS were already in play pointing to the possibility for life to transpire. So life can’t be ATTRIBUTED to natural selection because fine-tuning EXISTS PRIOR TO THE TIME when natural selection came on the scene. This is episode 281.

References: (1) “On the Origin of Species” by Charles Darwin. (2) The scientists  Fransesco Redi, John Needham, and Louis Pasteur DISPROVED spontaneous generation. (3) Cliff Knecktle says: atheists believe in 6 miracles: (a) Life comes from non-life. (b) Existence comes from non-existence (from the Big Bang). (c) Order comes from chaos. (d) Personal comes from non-personal. (e) Reason comes from non-reason. (f) Morality comefrom matter. In terms of the 6th miracle, do atheists really believe that a stone  can give the 10 Commandments? (4) Despite their obvious differences, creationists and evolutionists do AGREE on several things. For example, they both agree that (a) the universe and life came into existence in the past; (b) these origins were one-time EVENTS, not repeatable by humans, nor were they OBSERVED by any human witness; (c) we do not have and probably never will obtain DIRECT KNOWLEDGE of how these origins occurred, regardless of how many ways we demonstrate that they could have occurred; and (d) individual variation and MICRO-evolution have occurred. (5) But the agreement DISAPPEARS when we bring up the subject of MACRO-evolution. Perhaps it’s advantageous to recall the definitions of these 2 terms. Microevolution refers to SMALL-SCALE evolutionary changes, typically within a SINGLE POPULATION, that occur within a population or species over a relatively short period of time.  In CONTRAST, macroevolution refers to SIGNIFICANT evolutionary changes that occur over LONG PERIODS, often resulting in the emergence of NEW SPECIES. Microevolutionary changes are often DIRECTLY OBSERVABLE and can be EXPERIMENTALLY TESTED, such as coloration of a population. Macroevolutionary changes are typically INFERRED from the fossil record, comparative anatomy, and molecular data, making them LESS directly observable. (6) Darwin ASSUMED the basis of life — the cell — was UNCOMPLICATED, maintaining the cell was essentially a BLOB of material enclosed by a membrane, called PROTOPLASM. But Darwin did not know all the FUNCTIONS of the cell. Neither did he know about DNA. (7) One of the most important causes of the creation/evolution CONTROVERSY is the MISUNDERSTANDING OF WORDS. The word EVOLUTION causes much confusion because of its several meanings, implications, and misuses. When someone asks, “Do you believe in evolution?” Are they asking about the scientifically DEMONSTRABLE changes WITHIN a species (called MICRO-evolution) or of the UNDEMONSTRATED theory of evolution where NEW SPECIES develop over millions of years (MACRO-evolution), or are they asking for both? (8) There is NO CONFLICT between creationists and evolutionists with regard to the 2 lower levels of evolution (that is, individual VARIATION and MICRO-evolution). There is, however, a DEFINITE CONFLICT with regard to MACRO-evolution. (9) I believe it was Stephen Jay Gould, the Harvard paleontologist, who said “Evolution is FACT,FACT, FACT. But if no supporting evidence to substantiate that claim, then it is merely OPINION, OPINION, OPINION. (10) The 3rd tenet of Darwinian evolution is Random mutation. (11) But here is the TRUTH: most mutations are HARMFUL to a creature. So a LARGE NUMBER of mutations would be necessary in order to increase the CHANCES that the mutation would be BENEFICIAL. This increase will give more mutations, but I suspect that the increased number of mutations will actually make it LESS PROBABLE that mutations would be beneficial. (12) The fourth point of the 6 factors is Natural selection.  Darwin observed a STRUGGLE for survival in which the stronger creatures SURVIVED and the weaker ones DIED OFF. This is what he called NATURAL SELECTION. My question is: How do we know the survivors were stronger? With all this RANDOMNESS going on, could it not be that the survivors were just RANDOMLY SELECTED for survival? Could it not be that what looks like STRENGTH actually covers a WEAKNESS? (13) In the 4th chapter of the book “The God Delusion” Richard Dawkins says that natural selection is the ONLY KNOWN SOLUTION to the unanswerable RIDDLE of where the information [of the origin of life, etc.] COMES FROM. Dawkins  also said, “Natural selection not only EXPLAINS the WHOLE of life; it also raises our CONSCIOUSNESS to the power of SCIENCE to explain how organized complexity can EMERGE from simple beginnings without any deliberate GUIDANCE.” Dawkins continues, “But Darwinian evolution, specifically natural selection, …. SHATTERS the ILLUSION OF DESIGN within the domain of biology, and teaches us to be SUSPICIOUS of any kind of DESIGN HYPOTHESIS in physics and cosmology as well.” (14) So Dawkins claims that natural selection is the explanation for the existence of life! That is a STRANGE CLAIM — natural selection only operates after living organisms have produced offsprings. (15) I asked Britannica.com the question: Can natural selection explain the origin of life. Here is their answer: “Natural selection cannot explain the origin of life. The theory of natural selection is a process that explains how SPECIES EVOLVE over time through the ADAPTATION of organisms to their environments.” This is episode 280.