Why I don't Believe in Evolution:

As you probably know by now, I don’t believe in evolution. Now, I’ve heard some people say, “I don’t just believe in evolution, I know it as a fact. It is just science.” So let me be clear: I don’t believe in the molecules-to-man evolution myth. So why don’t I believe it? Do I think the science community has created a massive, insidious conspiracy against truth and God? No. I believe the vast majority of modern scientists are very competent, objective and unbiased in how they approach their work. In fact, the overwhelming majority of science work done has nothing or little to do with the origins controversy. For example, developing a new rocket, curing cancer, even studying and observing fossils can be done without any opinion on how human life arose. When people like Bill Nye (the Science Guy) claim that the creationist core of America is holding us back in the scientific realm, I laugh (not really though). He says we need our children to grow up believing in evolution (he calls it science) so we can grow engineers and scientists to keep our edge in science and innovation.

 

Perhaps the Science Guy never heard the global broadcast from the Moon in which the Apollo 11 astronauts read the Genesis creation account after they accomplished what no other human being had ever done. Or maybe he never learned about Galeleo, Kepler, Newton, or Faraday: their scientific contributions and creationist beliefs. Their belief in a creator did not stop them from revolutionizing science forever. I suggest instead that what is holding us back in science is our lack of quality education for our young people—math and science (true sciences like biology, chemistry, physics, etc) are both areas that take effort and drive to excel in. Our young people (thankfully there are still plenty of exceptions out there) in general seem more content to free-load than to contribute, more content to pass than to excel, and more apt to cut corners than to go the extra mile. There is reason for concern in regards to our nation’s scientific and innovative health, but how one interprets the billions of dead things found buried all over our globe has nothing to do with one’s ability to conduct good science and to innovate.

I believe the Bible gives the best explanation as to how the universe came into being. So how do I think today’s scientific community with all their great minds has come to the wrong conclusion? Science has handicapped itself in the search for truth by tying one hand behind its own back. The scientific community has leant itself to searching out naturalistic causes for what we see today. This makes complete sense! But this also means that even the thought or consideration of a designer or God being responsible for anything we see is completely dismissed as non-science and discarded. If faced with a conundrum, science will always either come up with a very improbable but perhaps plausible explanation or even say “we don’t know” rather than “maybe God did it”. Science has given itself a very narrow field of view when it comes to origins, only accepting naturalistic causes and forsaking anything that is outside this realm. What is wrong with that? Well, I don’t really have a problem with that, except that they claim to have come the correct answer and refuse to consider anything other than their answer. Science tries to find plausible natural causes, not the truth. A lot of the time a plausible natural cause IS the truth. However, when science can’t explain the first life (life coming from non-life defies the law of biogenesis ) or how matter was created out of nothing (defying the law of conservation of matter), science will never provide the truth. However, as it stands today, if you believe anything other than the religiously scientific community’s conclusion on the matter, you are dumb and probably also believe that the world is flat (that is what they seem to say more often than not, haha). I suggest that the science community’s answer for the origin of life and the universe should come with the caveat “considering only naturalistic causes we believe … may have happened”. I believe “Science” needs to be put back in its place, seeing as it has in a way taken the place of God in our society. Evolution is not just a theory today, it is also a worldview in which there is no moral absolute and no God to live for, just yourself and humanity. In contrast, past leading scientists used science to know God the creator better. Johann Kepler viewed science as “thinking God’s thoughts after Him”.

So why has molecules-to-man evolution over billions of years become so widely accepted in the scientific community? I tell you it is not for evidence that this is the theory of popular choice, but for it being the most palatable (remember, science has to explain everything without God). How else might someone explain the human brain or eye coming together without a designer? The ONLY way to make a natural cause even somewhat believable is if you break the development up into tiny, palatable bites to be eaten over a very long period of time.

But there must be evidence for evolution, right?

If evolution were true, the fossil record should be chalked full of intermediate species and missing links. Actually, if evolution were true, we should see a continuum of species from least to most complex, with such small, subtle differences between “species” that one couldn’t even categorize them except by time of existence. Rather, what we have seen is evolutionists and paleontologists failing to find any suitable “missing links” and instead either faking finds, or using very incomplete fossils to inspire an artist’s rendition of what the creature could have looked like, etc. The severe problem of not finding intermediate fossils in the record has not caused the evolutionists to lose faith! Instead they suppose that the changes from one kind to another were so rapid that the fossil record had no time to capture the intermediates. The proof of this concept is that there is no proof! Instead of deducting that since there is no evidence for evolution, it didn’t happen, they come up with a new theory that doesn’t need the evidence. Because remember, evolution is a known fact and if you don’t believe it, you are an idiot and probably don’t believe in gravity either (I will admit, that is a dangerous unbelief). And if you work for a school or scientific organization with any dignity, you can expect to be fired, shunned and never hired into another similar organization again (watch Expelled if you don’t believe me).

Evolution is cute and all, some random mutation that so-happens to give the creature an advantage over the others, thus preserving and transmitting this new improvement to future generations. But how practical is this? In order for humans to be what we are today, rather than still being simple pond scum, natural selection needs to be a stronger force than mutation is a negative force. Birth defects (bad mutations) in the heart, brain, respiratory system, immune system, reproductive system, etc, must be less substantial than mutations that create a better heart, brain, respiratory system, immune system, reproductive system, etc. So since evolution is fact and all, why do people get genetic screenings for their kids? Is it to check out and see all the cool new gizmos and gadgets their kids will bring to the human race? No! Reality check: if given the choice between having a kid with 1000 mutations (a genetic copy error) or 0 mutations, parents would always choose 0. People don’t really believe in evolution. Evolutionary scientists tell people evolution happened and people are too trusting (or lazy) to think for themselves with any sort of rational thought. Dr. John Sanford, a geneticist, professor at Cornell University, and creationist explains human evolution as down, not up (Start this short video at the 1:30 mark). These genetic copy errors, or mutations are polluting our race at a great rate and this is bringing about more genetic problems for each new generation. Makes sense, right? If you keep copying information over and over, random copying errors add up to detract from the original message, not improve it.

So then, what is the evidence for the earth being billions of years old? Doesn’t radiometric dating prove that the rocks on planet Earth are millions and billions of years old? Radiometric dating is extremely limited when it comes to dating new rocks. Instances of rocks with known recent ages (recently formed in observed volcanic eruptions) have been assigned ages in the hundreds of millions of years using radiometric dating methods. Radiometric dating will NEVER show a rock to be 6,000 years old. Watch the following 10 min video for more details and how radiometric dating works. I am sure I will write more about this topic as well as Carbon-14 dating in the future.

I am not suggesting that evolution is a giant conspiracy created to destroy religion. Although sometimes it does seem that way, I believe that the vast majority of evolutionists are operating out of pure intentions and are just trying to be successful in their fields. Today’s science community should learn from past history and not be so quick to dismiss anyone who dissents from the majority opinion as being wrong or deceitful. Science has been wrong in the past, why should we think that it won’t happen again? What about you? Have you objectively looked at the “data” available to you from all sides and made an informed decision? Have you, like science, disregarded any possibility of God being the answer? Or perhaps you have been raised as a Christian and have tried to avoid anything to do with dinosaurs, evolution or the origins debate for fear that it would weaken your faith. If the Bible is true, we should only be reassured when we investigate God’s creation, past and present. I have researched many different topics and issues in the origins debate and I must testify that I am continually blown away at how accurate and complete the Bible is when it comes to our planet’s history. The only explanation for this is that the Bible truly is God’s word, given to us that we might know our creator personally and live our lives in grateful appreciation for what He has done for us.

I plan to write plenty more on this issue, highlighting certain issues or topics as I come across them. If you have any questions or recommendations for future topics, let me know! In the near future I plan to write about why we can trust the Bible as accurate (discussing supposed contradictions and other commonly leveled accusations), and also why Christians should not accept molecules-to-man evolution.

Thanks for reading!