Biblical Creation vs. Evolution

[Soldier4Christ]

'm wondering how many living scientists will look like total buffoons.

Oops ...  to late!

It's also true that untold hosts rejected Christ and the Holy Bible because of junk science.

That is the sad part including themselves.

[Soldier4Christ]

Evolutionists do all they can to suppress ideas that are in conflict with their beliefs. Yes, I said beliefs because that is what evolution is. It is a belief and not a provable fact. They do so because they are afraid that the truth fo their false belief will become known and they will no longer have a leg to stand on. I have some startling news for them. This has already happened and it will become more prevalently known with every discovery made. Through the actions of evolutionists it can be seen that they are a fish floundering out of water and no the fish is not growing legs, it is dying.

In recent "finds" evolutionists have been grasping at straws in an attempt to come up with more "evidence" to support their beliefs. In each and every case it has been miniscule evidence that they have formulated through twisting and guessing into a supposed "large find" that is all based on the presupposition that there is no God.

This "evidence" that they have come up with has not been sufficient, nor will it ever be, to convince those with enough intelligence and desire to learn to think their way. In fact this "evidence" has turned more and more people to understand that they have been lying all along. As more evidence comes out it is becoming more and more apparent that there is in fact a God and that the Biblical accounts are accurate.

These finds of evidence range from archaeological finds through geoligical finds to all other fields of true science. As we see in the many articles that we have placed in this thread, science supports God and His word in the Bible. Without God there is no true science, it simply becomes another false, unverifiable belief. A belief that has men dying in their sins instead of accepting Jesus Christ as their Saviour and having eternal life. Now that is true science!



One thing that I find to be quite curious is that most evolutionists today tout that only scientists that support evolution are performing good science and that creationists, being just religious people, do not have a right to say anything in regards to science. After all evolutionist scientists are the only ones with a proper degree to make such determinations. Something that most people do not realise is that Charles Darwin's only academic degree was in Theology not in any field of what is considered to be traditional science today. He couldn't even get Theology down right. Charles Darwin broke away from the traditional church at that time and started a religion of his own. He was shunned by the church and by scientists as being to eccentric. Yet evolutionists say that science and religion cannot mix.

Today, evolutionists revere Darwin and his theology as though he were a god and his theology on the origins of all life were a written law that dares not be broken and mankind must adhere to. It has all the earmarks of a cult.

[biblebeliever58]

Greetings to all.  I am new to this forum, but not new to the debate of Creationism vs. evolution.  I have for years debated with evolutionists about their beliefs, and it almost always ends the same way,  they cant explain the fact of "missing links" just not being there.  I heard a  pastor about 24 years ago make a statement in his message, and it was this "Do you know why they cant find the missing link?  IT IS MISSING!"  How true.  I usually tie in evolution with  the age of the earth, as according to the evolutionists, these changes would have had to occur over millions of years, and yet the old age believers, dont have a leg to stand on if they look at what happened at Mt. St Helens where layerization took place over a very short period of time.  One not familiar with this would have said the oldest layer now visible on the side of Mt St.Helens would have to be at least 50 million years old if not older and yet it all took place in less than 6 months.  If evolution was true we would have seen drastic changes in most animals in the past 6,000 years of recorded history and yet it isnt there.  I have a file that is at least one inch thick on the debunking of evolution and that by very well known scientists who have studied for years and find no proof of evolution at all and very strong proof of Intelligent design. I say Praise God for all of your strong support for our God who created ALL things.      yours truly
James

[Soldier4Christ]

Hi James,

Welcome to Christians Unite. Yes, there is a lot of evidence to support the Biblical story of Creation. What we have posted here is just barely touching the subject. We don't debate evolution here. We just support the only truth there is and that is the truth of the Bible.

[nChrist]

Hello BibleBeliever58,

I see that you are new, so WELCOME!! I sincerely hope that you enjoy Christians Unite.

I've read about many so-called missing links, and every last one of them was a hoax. It seems there has never been a shortage of so-called scientists who were desperate to prove the theory of evolution, even if it took fraud to do it. It's too late now for even fraud to help, even though several generations have been taught nothing but lies in public schools. All it takes is some logic and exposure to the truth. The REAL TRUTH of the CREATION is nothing but the HOLY BIBLE!

Love In Christ,
Tom

Psalms 104:24 NASB  O LORD, how many are Your works! In wisdom You have made them all; The earth is full of Your possessions.

[Soldier4Christ]

Dr. Kent Hovind for 15 years worked as a high school science teacher. His love for science sparked his interest in creation vs evolution. He saw the tremendous need for exposing evolution as a dangerous, religious world-view, and for arming Christians with scientific evidence that there are no contradictions between true science and the Bible. In response to these needs, shortly after finishing his Ph.D. in education, he began the full-time ministry of Creation Science Evangelism.

Since its beginning in 1989, his ministry continues to grow as Dr. Hovind speaks over 700 times each year in public and private schools, churches, universities, and on radio and television broadcasts. His humerous, fast-paced, illustrated seminars provide documented evidence against the unscientific theory of evolution. Dr. Hovind's goal is to strengthen the faith of believers and to confound and convict evolutionists. He offers $250,000 to anyone with emperical evidence (scientific proof) of evolution. He lives in Pensacola, Florida with his wife and their three children.

Dr Hovinds Creation Science Seminar can be seen on-line or downloaded to your computer for free at:

http://www.biblebelievers.com/hovind/

This is an excellant video that shows proof of Creation and dispels all the myths of evolution.

[airIam2worship]

Is it just me or are we have a few bugs? I am not getting the full stats on the board index and for some reason I got logged off.

[Shammu]

Is it just me or are we have a few bugs? I am not getting the full stats on the board index and for some reason I got logged off.

Thats Admin, trying to get the bugs out sister. I got logged off as well, and didn't know it till a few minutes ago.

[Soldier4Christ]

Is it just me or are we have a few bugs? I am not getting the full stats on the board index and for some reason I got logged off.

Thats Admin, trying to get the bugs out sister. I got logged off as well, and didn't know it till a few minutes ago.

Such things as this always takes time.

[Soldier4Christ]

One of the things that evolutionists find themselves in is a situation where they date fossils according to the strata they are in yet then they in turn date the strata according to the fossils that are in it. This is called circular reasoning and gets them no where except on a bad merry-go-round trip. This is done to substantiate the age of both fossils and strata. No definite conclusion can be made using this method.

The fossils used to employ this method  are referred to as index fossils. One of these index fossils are known as trilobites. If a trilobite is found in a rock layer, the rock layer is said to have formed 500 million years ago. You think the rock with the trilobite is 500 million years old? Well, I have a question. How come somebody found a human shoe print where somebody with a shoe on had stepped on a trilobite? They asked geologists all over, how could a human step on a trilobite? I mean trilobites lived 500 million years ago, man didn’t get here until three million years ago and he didn’t start wearing shoes until five thousand years ago. How can this be? One geologist said, "Well, maybe aliens visited the planet 500 million years ago." Yes, that will do it every time. Another guy said, "Maybe there was a larger trilobite shaped like a shoe that fell on a small one." Oh there are some big ones, but they are not shaped like a shoe.

      Anyway, if you took this fossil and showed it to any University professor who believes in evolution, and said, "Sir, how old is this rock?" He’d say, "Ah, this is an easy one. This contains an index fossil. That index fossil is in graptolite, and the graptolites lived 410 million years ago. It’s the New York State fossil." That’s what they said until 1993 when they found that graptolites are still alive in the South Pacific. Oops. Well, now, think about it. If they are still alive, maybe they lived between 400 million years ago and today. Maybe they could be found in any rock layer. Maybe all of the dating we’ve done by geologic positioning is bologna, and it is by the way. By the way, there is good indication that some trilobites are still alive in the Deep Peruvian Trench. In the Pacific Ocean.

Other Evidences

     "Dinosaur blood found in bone. Medical pathologists examined dinosaur bone under a microscope and found dinosaur blood inside the bone." (Earth June 1997) How could the blood survive seventy million years? Well, it couldn’t but they don’t want to admit that. Eighteen million-year-old Magnolia leaves from Idaho shale were still green when the rock was cracked open. Kind of interesting don’t you think? Folks, those layers are not different ages and if you’ve been taught that the earth is millions or billions of years old, you have been either lied to or deceived. Hopefully, the teacher doesn’t know they are lying to you. But they are regardless. It’s a lie. The earth is not millions of years old. Those layers are not different ages.

[Soldier4Christ]

Another instance in proof that dating of strata layers are found in petrified trees. Petrified trees are found standing straight up running through many layers of rock strata. Now, think about it for a minute. If those layers are different ages, you’ve only got two choices: the tree stood there for millions and millions of years and didn’t rot or fall down, or it grew through seventy-five feet of solid rock looking for sunlight. Which do you prefer? Petrified trees standing straight up are found all over the world, folks. They are called Polystrate fossils. Evolutionists have no explanation for this. I’ve seen lots of them. Petrified trees standing up. How can this be?

Well, according to evolution, this is a real problem. They call it a geologic enigma. (enigma=something hard to understand or explain) Because it doesn’t fit the theory. Sometimes the petrified trees are upside down running through many rock layers. Explain that one, would you please? The tree grew upside down for millions and millions of years? "That sun is up there somewhere, we’ve just got to find it, boys—keep growing!" I don’t think so.

No, this geologic column does not exist anywhere in the world. But in spite of that it has had a profound influence. It has changed people’s worldview. The geologic column was accepted in the early 1830's—long before there ever was any carbon dating. That was done in 1950. But it turned people away from a Biblical worldview. Up until that time people accepted the Bible as God’s word and the earth is about 6,000 years old and the world was destroyed by a flood. It was just a common, accepted worldview. This geologic column is one of the primary things that changed people’s minds about the authority of God’s Word. And it is still taught in your textbooks today, by the way, in earth science and geology classes.

The Geologic Column and Charles Darwin

     Especially this had a very profound influence on Charles Darwin. Charles Darwin graduated from Bible College to be a preacher. The only degree he ever got, by the way. Charlie Darwin, at age 22, fresh out of Bible College, couldn’t get a job. So his dad pulled a few strings and got him on board HMS Beagle. He was going to sail around on this ship for five years collecting bugs and birds for somebody back in England.

Where Darwin Went Wrong

While he sailed around on that voyage, he brought with him some books to read. He brought his Bible (he had just gotten out of Bible College) and he brought with him this book, Principles of Geology. As Charles Darwin read this book, Principles of Geology, it absolutely changed his life forever. Later in life he said, "Lyell one of my favorite authors, has made a profound influence on my life." As he read that book, Charles Darwin began to doubt the Bible and began to think the earth is millions and millions of years old. That’s the book that changed his life. Studying about Geology. And it’s amazing how many kids go through seventh or eighth grade in regular public school and they are taught in their earth science book that the earth is millions of years old and it destroys their faith in the Bible and they don’t even realize it. It undermines it. Cuts it right out from under them. That’s where it all starts.

Later in life Darwin said, "Disbelief crept over me very slowly. I felt no distress." By the way, he did not repent on his deathbed. His wife started the rumor that he did and that rumor still circulates today. But the best research says he did not repent on his deathbed. He remained loyal to his atheism right up to the end. But that is the book that changed Charles Darwin’s life.

[Soldier4Christ]

Is this cave millions of years old?

If you have ever visited a large cave, you may have heard the guide warn you, "Don't touch the formations! They took millions of years to form!" Hanging from the ceiling of the cave were probably many beautiful pointed rock hangings, called stalactites. They are formed by mineral deposits left by dripping water over time.

The guide may even have told you that it takes a thousand years to grow a stalactite an inch. Carlsbad Caverns is supposed to have taken 250 million years to grow. But is it true? If so, the world must be millions of years old, and the Genesis account of creation completely wrong.

Dr. Kent Hovind, in his video "The Age of the Earth," offers many surprising facts demonstrating that the world cannot possibly be this old.

Among them is a photo of stalactities, some 50 inches in length, that have been formed by dripping water under the Lincoln Memorial, built in 1922. These stalactites have grown nearly 2/3 inch per year! So much for the "thousand years per inch" idea.

Hovind also shows a photo of a bat covered by flowstone in a cave before he could rot. Imagine how long this bat would have had to lie here dead, without rotting, for this flowstone to cover him as it has! Obviously, these mineral deposits occur much more rapidly than we are led to believe.

If in fact God created the world 6,000 years ago, and then destroyed it by a flood 4,400 years ago, we should expect to find many of the oldest things in the world to be somewhat less than 4,400 years old.

Hovind, in his seminar, offers many examples, including:

    * The Great Barrier Reef, the oldest and largest reef in the world, has been determined to be 4,200 years old.
    * The world's oldest tree is 4,300 years old.
    * Minerals being washed into the ocean by erosion would bring the salt content of the ocean to its present level in less than 5,000 years!

[Soldier4Christ]

Beetle Warfare
Little Bugs That Evolutionists
Would Like to Forget!

Beetle Warfare

Did you ever notice how sometimes big surprises can come in little packages? Well, such is the case of the surprising little bombardier beetle. The bombardier beetle is a small insect that is armed with an impressive defense system. Whenever threatened by an enemy attack, this spirited little beetle blasts irritating and odious gases, which are at 212ºF, out from two tailpipes right into the unfortunate face of the would-be aggressor.

Hermann Schildnecht, a German chemist, studied the bombardier beetle to find out how he accomplishes this impressive chemical feat. He learned that the beetle makes his explosive by mixing together two very dangerous chemicals (hydroquinone and hydrogen peroxide). In addition to these two chemicals, this clever little beetle adds another type of chemical known as an "inhibitor." The inhibitor prevents the chemicals from blowing up and enables the beetle to store the chemicals indefinitely.

Whenever the beetle is approached by a predator, such as a frog, he squirts the stored chemicals into the two combustion tubes, and at precisely the right moment he adds another chemical (an anti-inhibitor). This knocks out the inhibitor, and a violent explosion occurs right in the face of the poor attacker.

Could such a marvelous and complex mechanism have evolved piecemeal over millions of years? The evolutionist is forced to respond with a somewhat sheepish “yes,” but a brief consideration of this viewpoint will reveal its preposterous nature.

According to evolutionary “thinking” there must have been thousands of generations of beetles improperly mixing these hazardous chemicals in fatal evolutionary experiments, blowing themselves to pieces. Eventually, we are assured, they arrived at the magic formula, but what about the development of the inhibitor? There is no need to evolve an inhibitor unless you already have the two chemicals you are trying to inhibit. On the other hand, if you already have the two chemicals without the inhibitor, it is already too late, for you have just blown yourself up. Obviously, such an arrangement would never arise apart from intelligent foresight and planning.

Nevertheless, let us assume that the little beetle somehow managed to simultaneously develop the two chemicals along with the all-important inhibitor. The resultant solution would offer no benefit at all to the beetle, for it would just sit there as a harmless concoction. To be of any value to the beetle, the anti-inhibitor must be added to the solution.

So, once again, for thousands of generations we are supposed to believe that these poor beetles mixed and stored these chemicals for no particular reason or advantage, until finally, the anti-inhibitor was perfected. Now he is really getting somewhere! With the anti-inhibitor developed he can now blow himself to pieces, frustrating the efforts of the hungry predator who wants to eat him. Ah, yes, he still needs to evolve the two combustion tubes, and a precision communications and timing network to control and adjust the critical direction and timing of the explosion. So, here we go again; for thousands of generations these carefree little beetles went around celebrating the 4th of July by blowing themselves to pieces until finally they mastered their newfound powers.

But what would be the motivation for such disastrous, trial and error, piecemeal evolution? Everything in evolution is supposed to be beneficial and have a logical purpose, or else it would never develop. But such a process does not make any sense, and to propose that the entire defense system evolved all at once is simply impossible. Yet, nature abounds with countless such examples of perfect coordination. Thus, we can only conclude that the surprising little bombardier beetle is a strong witness for special creation, for there is no other rational explanation for such a wonder.

The water beetle is also equipped with an impressive—although different—defense mechanism. He manages to escape his enemies by secreting a detergent substance from a gland. Ejecting the detergent accomplishes two things. Firstly, it serves to propel the beetle forward quickly so that he is out of the immediate danger. Secondly, the detergent causes the surface tension of the water to break down, and the pursuing insect sinks into the water. How true are the words of the psalmist who wrote: "O Lord, how manifold are they works! In wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches" (Ps. 104:24).

[Soldier4Christ]

Scientists Admit:
Evolution Not Supported By Facts!

"Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless," says Professor Louis Bouroune, former President of the Biological Society of Strasbourg and Director of the Strasbourg Zoological Museum, later Director of Research at the French National Centre of Scientific Research, as quoted in The Advocate, March 8, 1984.

On many campuses, any professor who admits having doubts about the "factual" nature of evolution would be laughed off the campus (and out of his job). But today, more and more courageous scientists are publicly admitting what they have known privately for years: believing in evolution requires an act of blind faith.

Does evolution square with the facts? Here are the statements of several scientific leaders as found in The Quote Book, published by Creation Science Foundation Ltd.

Evolutionists Great Con Men

"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution we do not have one iota of fact." (Dr. T.N. Tahmisian. Atomic Energy Commission, The Fresno Bee, August 20, 1959.

"...most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument made in favor of Darwinian interpretation of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true." (Dr. David Raup, Curator, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago. Quoted from "Conflicts between Darwin and paleontology," Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, Vol. 50 (1), 1979.)

Do Fossils Prove It?

"...I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transition in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them...Yet Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils...I will lay it on the line--there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument." (Personal letter from Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in London, to L. Sunderland.)

"Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides a means of ‘seeing' evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists, the most notorious of which is the presence of ‘gaps' in the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them..." (David B. Kitts, Ph.D. -- Zoology, Head Curator, Department of Geology, Stoval Museum, and well-known evolutionary paleontologist. Evolution, Vol. 28, Sept. 1974.

But What About Those Bones?

"...not being a paleontologist, I don't want to pour too much scorn on paleontologists, but if you were to spend your life picking up bones and finding little fragments of head and little fragments of jaw, there's a very strong desire to exaggerate the importance of those fragments..." (Dr. Greg Kirby in an address given at a meeting of the Biology Teachers Association of South Australia in 1976. Dr. Kirby was the Senior Lecturer in Population Biology at Flinders University and was giving the case for evolution.)

"A five million year old piece of bone that was thought to be the collarbone of a humanlike creature is actually part of a dolphin rib...The problem with a lot of anthropologists is that they want so much to find a hominid that any scrap of bone becomes a hominid bone." (Dr. Tim White, anthropologist, University of California, Berkeley, quoted in New Scientist, April 28, 1983.

But the World Is So Old...Isn't It?

"All the above (radiometric) methods for dating the age of the earth, its various strata, and its fossils are questionable, because the rates are likely to have fluctuated widely over earth history...It is obvious that radiometric techniques may not be the absolute dating methods that they are claimed to be. Age estimates on a given geological stratum by different radiometric methods are often quite different (sometimes by hundreds of millions of years). There is no absolutely reliable long-term radiological ‘clock.' The uncertainties inherent in radiometric dating are disturbing to geologist and evolutionists..." (W.D. Stansfield, Ph.D., Instructor of Biology, California Polytech State University, The Science of Evolution, Macmillan, 1987.

Carbon-14 Will Tell Us...Won't It?

"When the blood of a seal, freshly killed at McMurdo Sound in the Antarctic was tested by carbon-14, it showed the seal had died 1,300 years ago." (From W. Dort Jr., Ph.D. -- Geology, Professor, University of Kansas, quoted in Antarctic Journal of the United States, 1971.

"The hair on the Chekurovka mammoth was found to have a carbon-14 age of 26,000 years but the peaty soil in which is was preserved was found to have a carbon-14 dating of only 5,600 years." (Radiocarbon Journal, Vol. 8, 1966.)

When Did Dinosaurs Really Live?

The existence of dinosaurs long before man came along has been almost a basic tenet of faith for the evolutionist. But what if the footprints of both man and dinosaur were found together?

In the Journal of Geological Education, Vol. 31, 1983, David H Milne and Steven D Schafersman tell us "Such an occurrence, if verified, would seriously disrupt conventional interpretations of biological and geological history and would support the doctrine of creationism and catastrophism."

Well gentlemen, not only have both man and dinosaur prints been found together in Mexico, New Mexico, Arizona, Missouri, Kentucky and Illinois, but other U.S. locations as well.

Why Do They Do It?

"One is forced to conclude that many scientists and technologists pay lip-service to Darwinian theory only because it supposedly excludes a Creator." (Dr. Michael Walker, Senior Lecturer in Anthropology, Sydney University, quoted in Quadrant, October, 1982.)

Since the facts do not prove evolution, since the fossil record does not show any transition from one species to another, since "scientific" dating methods have been proven unreliable, let us remember that for those who desperately desire to reject God, evolution is a religion of last resort. If there is no Creator, there can be no sin, and no need of a Saviour.

A. Lunn summed up the curious faith of the evolutionist as follows: "Faith is the substance of fossils hoped for, the evidence of links unseen." (The Collapse of Evolution, by Dr. Scott Huse.) Those supposedly omniscient scientists who still teach evolution as though it were fact are finally seen for what they are...frail men willing to believe a lie because it helps them avoid the truth.

[Soldier4Christ]

How did marsupials get to Australia?

Noah was charged with building the vessel to safeguard certain animals during this massive and complex worldwide disaster; not with distributing them afterwards. Once Noah released the animals on Mount Ararat, natural instincts and climatic conditions determined how the redistribution of the animal population took place. As subsequent generations of animals spread across the globe, territorial prowess or chance movements would send certain groups in certain directions. Those animals least suited for of least able to defend a territory would either be forced further from the landing site or exterminated. An immediate consequence of the worldwide flood was a brief but severe ice age which locked ocean water into vast ice fields. This lowered ocean levels and created a land bridge to Australia. A similar land bridge connected Asia to Alaska during this period of Earth history allowing free movement of man and animals between these continents. Land movements during the ice age or subsequent melting of the ice cut off the connection between Australia and Asia effectively isolating the unique animal life to Australia.