Basic flaws in the theory of evolution
We update studies as the Lord Jesus leads us. You can find the latest update of this study at ChurchAges.net
There is no scientific evidence of the so-called first life on earth, whatever that was.
Human self-deception is involved when making definite statements like, “Evolution is a proven fact”.
Life is very complex and there are certain facts that seem to favour the theory of evolution. But like all theories of life, the theory of evolution is too simplistic to explain everything.
As a result there are also other facts that seem to contradict the theory.
Many evolutionists exist who feel that if you do not believe as they do, then you should be forced to comply or else be dismissed as stupid. This type of behavior is where freedoms go to die. You must be free to believe your inner convictions. You must not be forced to submit to the will of evolutionists just because they think that they are superior in intelligence. After all, brilliant men in the field of evolution disagree radically with each other.
So, if deep down you do not believe that you evolved from some type of animal, then this essay may help you.
But please remember, if there is one fact that a theory cannot explain, then that theory is neither good nor complete as a theory. It becomes a false theory.
So, in order to “Consider your Verdict” , let us see if there are any facts that evolution cannot explain.
- Life depends on proteins. How proteins were first made is a mystery. Proteins can only be made by enzymes, but enzymes are also made from proteins.
So what made the proteins that made the first enzymes? Science has no answer.
In addition, proteins need DNA to form them, but DNA cannot form without existing proteins.
- The minimum set of 239 protein molecules is needed for the smallest theoretical life.
Only 20 -22 amino acids out of the known 250 amino acids make up human beings.
To this day no scientist can tell us why only 20 ( and the recently discovered extra 2 ) amino acids out of the 250 or more available amino acids make up our bodies.
- The ability to speak that humans have is a mystery. All languages are complex. Try learning one. There are no simple languages that evolved into a complex language.
Thus humans have always needed a lot of intelligence to learn any language.
- The "bottomless pit of complexity" that is a living cell baffles our best scientists.
The whole of New York city is less complicated than a living cell. A cell is complexity upon complexity. That is why we struggle to cure cancer and AIDS and antibiotic resistant super germs. The cells seem to keep changing.
Even more complex is the mammal’s nervous system. Neurologists are some of our top specialists but spend much time guessing as they try valiantly to cope with nervous diseases like Parkinsons and Alzheimers.
- By far the most complex organism in the universe is the human brain that produces the human mind.
Your brain controls your body.
How does the brain form when it is far more complex than anything else that can form it? This is a puzzle.
But what put your body together in your mother’s womb before you even had a brain? Science has no answer.
- Nobel winner Francis Crick who discovered the DNA molecule said in 1965 that in five or 10 years we will be able to artificially make an enzyme. It is now 2018. Fifty years later no scientist even talks about making an enzyme artificially. They have since discovered how much more complex it is.
- Where did consciousness or self-awareness come from?
What makes you aware that you are alive? No scientist can answer this question.
It is one of the biggest unsolved mysteries in life.
Your mind, working in your brain, then produces conscience, memory, reasoning, emotions, and imagination.
No scientist can explain where these come from.
- Mankind has free will. You can make your own decisions. No one can explain where that ability comes from. Animals live by instinct. Free will gives man the ability to believe in an invisible God or deny that there is a God.
- What enables us to believe in the unseen?
- How can God read our thoughts when we make a silent prayer?
- How can God look after me when there are 7 thousand million other people that He has to help and keep an eye on?
- Evolution is empty when we search for meaningful answers.
It cannot tell you where you came from ( some unknown creature). Darwin's book "On the Origin of the Species" never tells us what the origin of the species was.
Evolution cannot tell you where you are going to.
It cannot tell you why you are here and thus offers you no purpose in life.
It cannot help you when you suffer and die. And that is when you really need help.
- If evolution is true, then animals died before man ever sinned.
But sin is the cause of death, and animals do not sin. So why did they die?
- Evolution cannot explain how living creatures grow. This is a problem that scientists cannot solve. They cannot put an artificial heart in a person who is less than about 17 years old, because younger people grow too fast and the artificial heart does not. Scientists cannot make a heart that grows bigger.
- Scientists cannot make a human hair or a human tooth or any part of the human body. It is simply too complex. They just replace body parts with bits of metal or plastic or ceramic or porcelain. If top scientists cannot make any real-life body parts because they are far too complicated, then how can the our incredibly complex bodies be made by chance?
- Darwin’s theory says that we humans and Nature live in a ruthless struggle for the fittest to survive to get hold of the available food.
As an example, only 1 in a 1000 Loggerhead sea turtles reach adulthood. Their life is a constant and ruthless struggle to survive. So Darwin said it is like that for us humans too.
But human children are helpless for too long a time. The young have to be protected by family, tribe, and society even though they add to the food eaters. A Darwin man, to maximise his own chances of survival would simply eat his rivals. But cannibalism is rare in human history. Humans have an inborn instinct not to kill.
So Darwin’s theory cannot apply to us humans.
But if all these baby turtles lived, they would hopelessly overpopulate the region and then die of lack of food anyway. So nature has to keep itself in check.
- But there is also much symbiosis in nature where creatures peacefully co-exist rather than kill.
Tickbirds eat the ticks off cattle. This stops cattle dying of tick bite fever which is dangerous. Tickbirds and cattle had to evolve together.
In lichens (sea weed), which consist of fungus combined with bacteria that absorb light during photosynthesis, the fungal partners cannot live on their own.
Clownfish eat small creatures that harm the sea anemone plants. Their body waste feeds the sea anemone. The clownfish is immune to stinging cells of the sea anemone which protects the clownfish from predators. The butterfly fish eats the sea anemone but is chased away by the high pitched sound that the clownfish makes.
The roots of a pea plant have nodules or lumps that are full of bacteria that can absorb nitrogen out of the air for the plant to grow.
The human body is only about 43 % made of human cells. Very recent research has found that the other 57 % consists of bacteria and viruses that dominate our digestive tracts so that we can process our food.
Plants use fungus to extract water and nutrients from the ground.
The shrimp is almost blind. It makes a hole or burrow that it shares with the Goby fish. When the shrimp is outside and a predator comes that the shrimp cannot see, the Goby fish touches the shrimp with its tail. They both flee back to the safety of the burrow.
The tube worm lives under the sea near hot water vents. It has no digestive tract, just bacteria. The tube worm collects the poison gases for the bacteria as food and relies on the bacteria to digest the poison gases and make them into nutrients for the tube worm.
- The complexity of living things is incredible. No living thing is simple.
The complexity of simple things like insects is astonishing
Look at the head of a female mosquito. The round circles form the compound eye. The female needs mammal blood to provide protein for its offspring.
A female mosquito detects humans in the dark by sensing the carbon dioxide gas that humans breathe out. This is done by means of two different sensors that work together. Either sensor on its own will not work. And the two sensors are different to each other. So the two different sensors had to evolve simultaneously, only in the female, not in the male mosquito that feeds on plant nectar. In addition, a special gland had to develop an anti-clotting enzyme in her saliva which the female has to inject into the blood so that it would not block her thin needle-like proboscis if the blood congeals. This enzyme makes the mosquito bite itch.
Two different sensors working together and an anti-clotting enzyme all had to evolve randomly at exactly the same time. And a female mosquito is unlikely to live longer than a month. Male mosquitos live for about one week. Mating has to happen during the week that the male is around. Both male and female had to evolve separately and yet meet up in such a short time period. For all this to happen by chance is simply impossible. Once again, the complexity of life defeats the too-simplistic viewpoint of the theory of evolution
- The complexity of photosynthesis is astonishing. Scientists know every step in the process but cannot duplicate the process. We still have to rely on plants to produce our food. We simply do not know what the plants know. They are still way ahead of us.
- The biggest mystery that evolution has failed to answer is how life started. Top scientists admit that the origin of life remains very much a mystery.
Darwin published his book “On the origin of the species” in 1859 but this title was false because nowhere did he tell us what the origin of life was.
No scientist can tell us where the first living creature happened to come alive, or what it could eat seeing that there was nothing else that was living.
So to get evolution going, the scientists have to claim a miracle that they cannot reproduce in the laboratory.
Dead chemicals somehow came alive.
There is no law of chemistry whereby this can happen.
So scientists have to break the laws of chemistry to start their theory of evolution.
Thus evolution is not a scientific theory as it breaks the laws of Science at the start.
These are different guesses that have been put forth as “facts” in order to explain where life started.
- In a “soup” of chemicals in a shallow pond when lightning strikes.
- In clay.
- In the sea.
- Under the sea at a hot vent as heat energy bubbles up.
- Now some claim that astrochemical analyses hint that quantities of these compounds might have originated in space and fallen to Earth in comets,
But in good science you can always repeat an experiment and get the same result. But scientists have never been able to get dead chemicals to come alive. Thus evolution is not good science.
21. A baffling problem is how a protein molecule and a DNA molecule is folded up in all its intricacies.
The DNA in your body, if unraveled, would travel from the earth to far beyond the sun. Yet it is somehow folded up into such a small and compact space that it amazingly fits into out tiny bodies.
22. Stephen Jay Gould, a famous professor from Harvard University, and one of the best known evolutionists, pointed out that there are no fossils to fill the gaps between different species.
So the main claim of evolution, that each species slowly changed into something else by small steps, is rejected by him.
His study of the fossil record showed that fossils were stable ( showing that small changes due to micro-evolution in the laboratory do not accumulate to produce macro-evolution of a different species ).
Fossils hardly change from their first appearance in the rocks to when they go extinct.
Then a quite different fossil will appear suddenly, fully formed out of nowhere.
Evolutionists cannot explain this dramatic new species that just appears, fully formed. They do not dare use the word miracle, but they have no other way of explaining it.
An evolutionist admitted, "Yet Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils”. ( fossils that lie in between two existing species). These intermediate steps have no advantages and thus would not be selected.
Gould showed that when there were changes in the fossil record, these occurred rapidly in an “explosion” of new species that suddenly appeared fully formed. Gould, a pre-eminent evolutionist, used this evidence to disagree with the “gradual change” theory of Darwin, who was the famous original evolutionist.
But Gould was also unable to explain these sudden changes in the fossils.
23. Bacteria are still around from the beginning of time.
For every human being on earth there are a billion, trillion bacteria. These bacteria would be some of earth's oldest inhabitants according to the theory of evolution and yet here they still are, in all their countless numbers, unchanged after four billion years.
The latest research shows that 57 % of our bodies are made up of bacteria and viruses. These seem to be the basics of life so they cannot change too much.
Cockroach fossils that are claimed to be 250 million years old are not very different from modern cockroaches.
The fossils of most species enter the evolutionary order fully formed and then depart unchanged.
There are not thousands of fossils, each one slightly different to the last one, as a cat changes into a dog, for example.
The trilobite is claimed to be the oldest fossil as it is found in the oldest Cambrian rock layer. Yet it has the most sophisticated eye lenses ever produced by nature. Why has nature never evolved a better eye lens in all the hundreds of millions of years since then? How did such a perfect eye lens evolve so soon, right at the beginning of the evolutionary process?
(Lisa J Schawver "Trilobite Eyes" Science News Vol 105 2 Feb 1974 p 72)
The Coelacanth was claimed to be extinct for about 70 million years. It had downward pointing fins that were thought to be developing legs so that it could begin to crawl onto land. The fossil was referred to as the "Fish that walked". Then it was discovered in 1938, very similar to the fossils. But it is a deep sea fish living some 200 metres below the surface and swells up and dies when it comes to the surface. Those downward pointing fins were never meant for land. Scientists wrongly interpreted the fossil evidence to “prove” that a fish was preparing to walk on land.
Above is a typical Coelacanth fossil that was declared by evolutionists to be “The Fish that Walked”. They seriously misjudged their interpretation of the fossil.
The Gingko tree in Japan looks very similar to the fossils that are dated 270 million years old.
Evolutionists admit that it seems improbable that a single species may exist for many millions of years without chnging, but the Gingko tree has.
- Evolution moves upwards from the simple to the complex. But a virus is simpler than a cell. However a virus is a parasite and cannot exist on its own. Thus a virus could not come before the cell.
If the virus evolved from the cell, then its evolution is degenerative.
Some viruses reproduce every half hour. In ten years 17 500 generations of a virus were studied but they remained viruses.
Research done in 2013 indicated that there are at least 320 000 different viruses that infect the 50 000 different species of mammals.
So viruses, produced by degenerative processes, are doing better than the mammals.
A virus can mutate and change, but it remains a virus. This is called microevolution.
Every species, in order to survive, can undergo limited internal changes
Napoleon’s scientists increased the sugar content in sugar beet from 5% to 17%.
Then the process of change just seemed to stop.
The bulldog was bred to have a stronger jaw but this weakened its ability to breathe.
So as one part of an animal gets improved, another part deteriorates.
This puts a limit on the amount that something can change.
Fruit flies breed very rapidly and can go from egg to adult in about two weeks. Thus many generations of fruit fly can be cross-bred in a short time under controlled conditions in a laboratory. All sorts of physical changes, called mutations, can be observed from generation to generation ( micro-evolution ) but by the time that endless generations of fruit flies have come and gone, despite all the changes to their physical bodies, they still remain fruit flies.
So macro-evolution is not observed in fruit flies despite their rapid life cycle and the many generations of fruit fly that have been bred in laboratories. More than 3000 generations have been bred over 90 years.
Many of these mutant fruit fly species die out as it is difficult for them to survive 50 generations. Thus they tend to survive for a while in a laboratory but not in the real world where these mutant flies are soon eliminated in a population that has free competition with normal fruit flies. Mutation tends to cause degeneration.
When two species that are very close, like a horse and a donkey, then they can produce an in-between stage, a mule.
But mules are infertile and cannot breed to produce offspring.
Left to themselves, the mules will just die out.
So if the donkey evolved and tried to become a horse, then when it got close enough by becoming a mule it would end up infertile and die out.
Thus species have to be kept separate if they are to retain their breeding strength over a long space of time.
Mixing up two species makes them stronger in certain ways like producing drought resistant seeds and producing more seeds per plant, but it makes them significantly weaker as far as reproduction is concerned.
- How flowering plants developed is a mystery to evolutionists. You need male and female and pollen at the same time. Then bees must develop with them.
Bees need the pollen for honey, flowers need the bees for pollination.
40 000 worker bees, 200 drones, and one queen bee are needed to make a hive that can survive. All these had to evolve together. Worker bees only live for seven weeks in summer as they are very busy. In winter there is less to do and they can survive for 6 months. Thus the three types of bee and the flowering plants all had to evolve simultaneously within a 6 month period of time. There is no realistic chance of this ever happening.
- Evolutionists claim that the giraffe got a longer neck and survived by endlessly stretching to eat the leaves higher on trees, that are out of reach to other animals, when food was scarce. But every other animal has a short neck and all of these other short-necked animals survived.
So a long neck was not essential for survival.
Secondly, the giraffe only eats the leaves of acacia trees ( thorn trees ). Other animals stay away from thorn trees so the giraffe has no real competitors for its food.
The neck of the male giraffe is two feet longer than the female. So if the male only survived because of its long neck, the shorter females would have starved to death.
So evolution cannot tell us why a giraffe developed a long neck.
- There are about 50 varieties of the stickleback fish in the Northern Hemisphere. The ocean variety has a spiky armour plate made up of 35 bony plates as protection. The fresh water species in lakes does not have this armour plate and moves much faster. Despite all the internal changes observed in all 50 varieties, all these fish, with all their differences, still remain stickleback fish. The saltwater fish can adjust to fresh water in a few years by losing their armour plate as there is only one gene, acting as a switch, that stops the armour plate developing. This is not slow-and-gradual evolution as it simply using an existing switch in the gene pool of the fish. It then results in the loss of all the bony plates. Again this results in no gain of information, just a loss of what the fish once had. Devolution.
So finding variations in a fossil does not mean it is on its way to forming a new species.
Notice the great change in the spines on the back, but both fish remain one species, the stickleback fish.
Having a number of changes in the skeleton does not make it a different species.
- European robins have a protein in their eye that can detect changes in the earth’s magnetic field which allows them to “see” the magnetic field and thus migrate over big distances.
Scientists cannot duplicate this process and have no idea how this protein developed.
Some types of hummingbirds migrate and other types of hummingbirds do not migrate.
Thus migration was not essential for hummingbird survival. Yet some do go through the difficulties of migration even though it is not always necessary. We do not know why.
- Roaming the surface of a planet, evolution wanders blindly, having forgotten where it has been, unsure of where it is going.
Yet you can’t improve on a shark, an eagle, or a cheetah. They are at the peak of their design.
Scientists cannot suggest any improvements to these creatures.
Shark fossils go back millions of years.
How did the shark get so perfect, so soon?
- The identification of the thirteen varieties of Galapagos Island’s finches as different species is impossible to maintain once it is admitted that they can interbreed and produce fertile young, as recent research has proven. Thus Darwin was wrong to use these species of finches as proof for one species turning into another species. All these finches interbreed and thus belong to the same species.
The average length of finch beaks might increase by a millimeter — or decrease, depending on weather patterns. Thus all these variations are microevolution. Changes within a species so that it can better adapt to its surroundings.
- The Peppered moth populations have moved from mostly light-coloured to mostly dark — and then back again. But they always remained moths. When indusrial soot darkened the landscape then the whitish moths stood out and got eaten. The darker moths, who were the minority then survived better and multiplied. As the air in England got cleaned up, there was less soot scattered on the landscape. So the white moths were better camouflaged and they multiplied. The black moths stood out more obviously and got eaten more often.
- Bacterial populations may grow more resistant to antibiotics but they remain bacteria.
Bacteria have been around since the beginning of life on earth.
- There is too much precision that life on earth needs,
- The sun has got just the right size so that there is not too much dangerous ultraviolet radiation. Only 6 % of the sun's radiation is ultraviolet. It creates vitamin D in the skin and kills microorganisms when washing is hung up to dry. Too much ultraviolet causes skin cancer and cataracts in the eyes.
- The earth is just the right distance from the sun so that temperatures are suitable for life. Your body temperature is about 37 degrees Celsius. At 40 degrees Celsius, human protein begins to degrade. Thus we have a very narrow temperature "window" for life on earth.
- The huge Jupiter planet is at the right distance outside of earth in our solar system so that it attracts comets and asteroids that are being pulled in by the sun. Otherwise these would have a good chance of smashing into the earth.
- Earth is the only planet with a large supply of liquid water near planet’s surface. Our average temperature on earth ranges between 0 and 30 degrees Celsius. Only water can exist as a solid, liquid, and gas in this temperature range.
- Earth has the right kind of ocean, in terms of pH, salt content, temperature, and volume.
- Earth has the right breathable atmosphere of 21% oxygen and 78 % nitrogen to maintain adequate temperature, and pressure for plants and animals
Nitrogen is an inert gas and stops fires burning out of control.
- Earth has just enough mass to retain its atmosphere and ocean so that they do not disappear out into space.
- The earth has the right tilt of 23,5ᵒ so that the seasons not too severe.
- The moon has enough gravitational pull to stir up the nutrients in the sea, but not enough pull to make dangerous waves.
“As the late John von Neumann, perhaps the cleverest mathematician of all time, pointed out, a machine that replicates itself can, with some difficulty, be imagined; but such a machine that could originate itself offers a baffling problem which no one has yet solved.”
“Is it any wonder that Von Neumann himself, and many others, have found the origin of life to be utterly perplexing?”
People are amused by the intense anger that a person incites by simply not being persuaded with commonly accepted arguments of evolution.
Clever evolutionists disagree on what the evidence from fossils is telling them.
Look at a typical chart to show the evolution of a horse from the original Eohippus.
But in another chart to illustrate the evolution of the modern horse, Eohippus is considered a “dead end” that never turned into a horse.
A big St Bernard dog and a tiny lap dog also have many differences in their bones but both are still dogs. The lap dog did not evolve into the St Bernard. So horses with slightly different bone structures have not necessarily evolved into each other.
In this diagram above Merychippus (looking a bit like a donkey) evolved into Pliohippus (who looks very much like a horse).
In the next diagram below I have left out all the names and just put in the lines that represent the lifespan of the different fossil bones.
Please note. None of these lines run into each other. They basically run next to each other or have obvious gaps where no fossils have been found.
Thus none of these fossils turned into a horse. So claiming them to be ancestors of the horse makes no sense.
In the chart below neither Merychippus nor Pliohippus is an ancestor of the horse as both their lines just end without going anywhere. So 3 0f the 4 supposed ancestors of the horse in the above diagram are actually not ancestors of the horse.
In this chart above Merychippus looks very much like a horse with slight differences in its ankle bones. (Remember the Stickleback fish that had 2 spines or 9 spines but were still the same species).
In the previous diagram Merychippus looked more like a donkey. In this diagram Merychippus looks more like a horse.So scientists play games as they describe the bodies that they imagine fitted onto the fossil bones. Only the bones survived in the fossils. As soon as they put flesh, skin, hair, and colour onto the bones, the scientists are guessing. Artistic licence is not science.
The line of Merychippus is completely separate from Pliohippus. The one line does not run into the other line. Thus Merychippus did not turn into Pliohippus.
Hipparion is claimed to be an ancient ancestor of the horse.
I looked up different internet sites on “Hipparion” and noted the dates they gave for these Hipparion fossils which indicate the very distant years ago that they claim that this “horse ancestor” lived.
Hipparion 23 million years – 780 000 years
Hipparion 20 million years - 2 million years
Hipparion 13 million years – 9 million years
Hipparion 10 million years to - 3 million years
These are typical dates that appear on different evolutionary charts for the horse.
From the differences, it is obvious that the evolution of the horse is not an exact science.
An evolutionary nightmare, the duck-billed platypus from Australia.
Its bill and webbed feet are similar to a duck. It has the tail of a beaver and the body and fur of an otter. What is very unusual for mammals, it is like certain shrews as it is venomous with sharp stingers on the heels of the rear feet and can use them to deliver a strong toxic blow to any foe.
The platypus is also like the spiny anteater as they are the only mammals that lay eggs instead of giving birth to live young.
One creature that is like a duck, a beaver, an otter, a shrew, and a spiny anteater as it is a mammal that lays eggs like a reptile. No evolution can explain all this.