Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
In order for a theory to be "scientific", it must be
falsifiable - that is, one must be able to prove that it
is false if it is. In other words, you have to be able
to TEST the theory.
We creationists have contended for decades that
evolution is not falsifiable - that the myth of
evolution is very much like water - it will conform
to whatever shape you pour it into. The evolution
myth will conform to whatever evidence you give it.
For example, we are pointed to the homology of
bird, horse, whale and human limb bones being
similar, and thus allegedly evidence of evolution.
We're told this makes sense because these
creatures all DIVERGED from a common,
unknown amphibian ancestor which presumably
had a limb with similar limb bones. This is called
divergent evolution: the organisms all came from the
same ancestor, and so they each kept some of the
traits of the common ancestor.
Please notice that this evidence can also be
interpreted within the context of a common
designer - in other words, the bird, horse, whale
and human have similar bones because they were
all designed by the same designer.
However, we find countless examples of similar
traits between organisms that do NOT have an
alleged common ancestor with the same trait! For
example - the developing circuity in the noses of
fruit flies and humans!
Fruit flies and humans
are far, far apart from each other on
the evolutionary tree. Their common ancestor did
not have the same circuitry. So while this evidence
still makes sense if they had a common designer,
the puzzle pieces don't fit together for evolution.
[swoosh]
[swoosh]
Suddenly evolutionary theory has no explanation
for the evidence - and so a NEW form of evolution
is invented: CONVERGENT evolution. Evolution
is assumed to be a fact, therefore humans and the
fruit flies must have each developed the same
circuitry completely on their own. If the evidence
does not fit, make it fit.
[swoosh]
[hammer banging]
[hammer banging lots]
[swoosh]
The evolution myth, instead of being falsified by the
evidence, simply CONFORMS to the evidence.
Darwin even admitted that the eye was
mind-bogglingly complex, and struggled with an
explanation for how ONE eye arose:
Yet forget about THE eye evolving by chance
processes and natural selection - according to
conventional evolutionary thinking,
"complex, image-forming eyes evolved some 50 to
100 times..."
But if you read further on down the article, you find
out what they mean:
"Whether one considers the eye to have evolved
once or multiple times depends somewhat on the
definition of an eye."
Wait a minute here: not only is it downright
impossible to evolve an eye, you need to do it as
much as 100 times??? This doesn't make the
impossible more possible, it makes it more
IMpossible, because now you have to do the
impossible multiple times!
There is none so blind as those who do not know
what an eye is.
But speaking of sight - evolution and natural
selection does not have any FOREsight....until its
needed, and then evolution once again
CONFORMS to the evidence. The bacterial
flagellum is an inboard/outboard motor on a
bacteria. Composed of mutliple parts, all of which
are essential to the system, it is irreducibly complex;
if you remove any one part of the system, the
whole system fails to do its job of propulsion.
While such systems are readily explained by an
intelligent designer, what could this system evolve
from? If any part had not yet evolved, the whole
system doesn't work. So the ancestor has to make
parts for something that doesn't yet exist! Even
though there's no reason why an organism would
do this, this is precisely what is claimed with
PRE-adaptation, also known as co-option or
exaptation!
When evolution does not have an explanation for
the evidence, evolution is still ASSUMED! And
thus not falsified - a NEW form of evolution must
be invented to save the evolution myth.
If the pieces of the puzzle don't fit - make them fit.
[swoosh]
>>Narrator The evidence wasn't quite adding up.
The pieces fit together so well, that they were in an
impossible position. The perfect fit was an illusion.
But all was not lost.
[sound of grinder grinding]
The scientist determined that he could restore the
pieces to their original shape. He cut the damaged
pieces and put them back together the way they
were before the pieces got damaged. It was a
tricky job, but after restoring the pieces, the jigsaw
puzzle looked exactly like we expected. As you
can see when we compare the puzzle to one that
we know was created and designed, we can tell
that our puzzle had no intelligent designer, but was
the result of chance processes.
[swoosh]
Onwards upwards evolution is supposed to gain
new genetic information - new biological and
physical traits. But of course, as I showed in
CrEvo rant #78, we know that we are continually
LOSING genetic information - we are
deteriorating; we are losing functions. For
example, axolots, newts and zebrafish can grow
back damaged or lost tissue and appendages. But
yet close "evolutionary relatives" cannot do this.
Dr. Kenneth Poss said:
Well does that then mean evolution has been
falsified? Oh of course not! Haven't you learned
yet? Evolution is assumed true, no matter what the
evidence shows - if the evidence shows the
opposite of evolution, give it a fancy name and call
it evolution - in this case, REDUCTIVE evolution!
So as you can see, it does not matter what the
evidence is - it is interpreted within the evolutionary
paradigm, and then claimed to be proof of the
evolutionary paradigm! A perfect circular argument.
You either have Devoted divergence, convenient
convergence perfect preadaptation or random
reduction! Obviously evolution is not falsifiable,
therefore it is not a scientific theory. It is
mythology. In the meantime, all the evidence can
be interpreted easily within the intelligent designer
paradigm. There is no force fitting required of the
evidence, and in fact in cases like irreducible
complexity, if you saw a vehicle or electric motor
somewhere, you would ASSUME it was
intelligently designed.
But who is that intelligent designer? Our best minds
and talent on planet earth cannot produce anything
even vaguely resembling the complexity and
incredible efficiency of the bacterial motor and
flagellum. Someone designed it who had the
capability to design a motor so small you could fit 8
million of them on the tip of one of your hairs!
Who is that Creator? It's none other than Jesus
Christ, who also created a body to sacrifice for
your sins and mine - but it comes with a price: you
must give him your life in return - withholding
nothing. And through Him you can enter into the
new heaven and the new earth, and eternal life.
Why don't you call upon Him to recreate you anew
today?