About     ENCOURAGEMENT     Abortion     Bible Versions     END TIMES     Online Books     Homosexuality     ATHEISM     Evolution     Catholicism

FAQ's     Islam     FAMILY     Marriage & Divorce     Pornography     Doctrine     Cults & False Doctrines     SERMONS     Various     Self-Help

Evolution is Stupid
by Brian Price 2/27/2012

"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good." - Psalms 14:1

Evolution is not just a false teaching... it is just plain stupid. Not trying to be politically correct here. It's dumber than a box of rocks.

To say human beings evolved from a common ancestor with that of apes is plain ignorance of science and, quite frankly, it's just stupid. To say that all lifeforms share a common ancestor is dumb. The only common ancestor that all forms of life share is God.

"24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;

25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;

26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation." - Acts 17:24-26

Did you know that the Bible teaches that all human beings share a common ancestry? And trust me, those ancestors are completely human. And yet evolution teaches that humans and dogs share a common ancestor. Which one makes the most sense?

This is what one source says in regards to evolution:

"Universal common ancestry (UCA) is a central pillar of modern evolutionary theory." - Douglas L. Theobald, A Formal Test Of The Theory Of Universal Common Ancestry (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture09014.html)

You see, we Christians also believe in a Universal Common Ancestor. We call him God. To believe that this Universal Common Ancestor is a cess pool of cells, or a single celled organism is absolutely ludicrous.

The same article goes on to freely admit:

"Although UCA is widely assumed, it has rarely been subjected to formal quantitative testing and this has led to critical commentary emphasizing the intrinsic technical difficulties in empirically evaluating a theory of such broad scope." -
Douglas L. Theobald, A Formal Test Of The Theory Of Universal Common Ancestry (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture09014.html)

You bet we give critical commentary on such an assumption. The atheistic scientific community fails to provide enough EVIDENCE to support such a speculation. Hence the term, The THEORY of Evolution. The term theory implies a requirement of belief. Something that science (real science) claims it does not need since all science must be testable and verifiable. Yet here we have the "intellectual community" making bold claims and presumptuous statements saying evolution is a fact, such as the statements below:

"Evolution is a theory. It is also a fact." - Paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould, (1981-05-01). "Evolution as Fact and Theory". Discover 2 (5): 34–37, http://www.stephenjaygould.org/libra...nd-theory.html.

"It is time for students of the evolutionary process, especially those who have been misquoted and used by the creationists, to state clearly that evolution is a fact, not theory." - Lewontin, R. C. (1981). "Evolution/Creation Debate: a time for truth". Bioscience 31: 559. Reprinted in: Zetterberg, Peter, ed. (1983-05-01). Evolution Versus Creationism: the public education controversy. Phoenix AZ: Oryx Press. ISBN 0897740610.

"Today, nearly all biologists acknowledge that evolution is a fact. The term theory is no longer appropriate..." - Campbell, Neil A.; Reece, Jane B. (2002-02-05). Biology 6th ed.. Benjamin Cummings. p. 1175. ISBN 0805366245

If its a fact, then why do we have to believe in it? And why does the scientific community condemn itself in saying such things as Douglas L. Theobald has said in that they cannot come up with a good way to test this theory?

Theories imply there is doubt. Facts imply absolute certainty. If scientists are so sure that evolution is a fact, then why not change the term of "The Theory of Evolution" to state "The Fact of Evolution." You know why? Because they cannot prove such a theory is true.

"But it's just a theory," you say.

No, that's not what we are taught. On the contrary. We are taught in schools that evolution is not "just a theory," but rather it is taught as a non-disputable fact. In our society, if you are anything but an atheist who believes in evolution, you are viewed as sub-par, unintelligent, weak minded, easily deceived, and just plain STUPID. But are we stupid, or are they?

"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools." - Romans 1:22

Indeed, scientists and college professors all SEEM to be wise, right? I mean, they are educated. They're successful. They're rich. Why wouldn't they be smart?

Perhaps it is because of pride. They are so full of themselves that they can't see the truth. The truth that God really did create this whole world, and that they are totally wrong in rejecting him.

I mean, really, if you are so smart, then tell me what the point of living is? To live a brief life of 70 years, and then pass on?

Why bother living an honest, moral life? Why stay faithful to your spouse?

What's the point?

Why not live like there is no tomorrow? Eat, drink, borrow thousands of dollars in credit card loans, and never pay them back. Why not? Who cares?

There's no heaven. No hell. No God. Right?

We'll get there in a minute, but for now I want to discuss the lack of evidence for evolution. First of all, there is no empirical evidence for evolution. No transitional fossils, no real geologic column, no eye witness accounts. NOTHING. There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE for evolution. The transitional fossils we have are fabricated, the geologic column is based on circular reasoning, and every eye witness account is based on micro, not macro evolution.

Even Darwin himself ADMITS there is no proof:

"Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record." - Darwin, Charles (1859). On the Origin of Species. John Murray. ISBN 0801413192. p. 280–313, 4th edition of 1866, p. 359–360

Let me also say that when I am speaking of evolution, I am refering to evolution on a macro scale. Going from ape to human is quite a leap of impossibility. And the Geologic Column offers no evidence whatsoever that would even come close to verifying such a ridiculous theory even is possible.

Number 2, not only is there absolutely no transitional fossils, but there are no records of eye witness accounts that verify evolution. Speciation is not proof for evolution. I'm sorry, but show me where a cat has ever given birth to a bird. I've seen a cat eat one, but I have never seen a cat give birth to one. Or show me where a fish ever grew legs and walked on land. Or a wolf growing fins and diving into the water to live in its new adapated environment. You can't.

For example. If a black horse ever gave birth to a zebra striped horse, this is not evolution. This is simply a small change.

There are so many different examples of speciation, yet not one example of true macro evolution. TRUE speciation would occur if an offspring of, say, a lion and a horse were possible. This would create an entire new kind of animal (call it species if you will). Or TRUE macro evolution would occur if a horse gave birth to a lion. Lions and tigers can mate, yet lions and horses cannot. Donkeys and horses can mate, yet lions and horses cannot. It is safe to say that somewhere in the distant past, a horse and a donkey had a common ancestor. It is stupid to say that the horse and lion had a common ancestor. The proof for this impossibility of true speciation lies in the ability for animals to reproduce. Sexual reproduction is proof for animals of the same kind to bear offspring, and it is proof that a new kind of animal cannot be created by purely natural means of evolution.

"Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." - Hebrews 11:3

The Bible clearly says that things which are seen were not made by things which do appear. A cat was not made by two mice. A house was not made by a dog. Houses can only be made by people. And all things were made by God.

Which brings me to my next point.

Evolution should be classified as a creation myth.

All of the entire world from ages past until present has always had an explaination for the creation of the world. Only one story is true and factual.

Below is a condensed list of creation myths in the world:

Enûma Eliš
Greek cosmogonical myth
Jamshid creation account
Ainu creation myth
Cherokee creation myth
Maya creation of the world myth
Debate between sheep and grain
Barton cylinder
Ancient Egyptian creation myths
Enûma Eliš
Greek cosmogonical myth

See List of creation myths by Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_creation_myths)

Of course, the only creation myth in this list that is not found is the creation myth of evolution. The "Nothing Creation Myth." That's what evolution should be called since according to scientists and renown atheists nothing created our universe.

Boy, from looking at this list there are so many myths to choose from. Let's just go with the most illogical one. Evolution. That seems to be the logic of atheists.

"How long halt ye between two opinions?" - 1 Kings 18:21

I tell you what. I'm not going to believe a lie. I am not going to believe "Nothing" created this world. You might as well put that silly idea up there with the Mayan creation myth.

I'll tell you what I believe. I believe the truth. The Bible tells us EXACTLY how this world was made.

"For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." - Exodus 20:11

The Bible is THE most authoritative and empirical evidence this world has. It is a book written by eye witnesses who saw God do wonders and miracles, and saw things happen that only God could do. It is by this book that we can believe the truth about the creation of our world.

"For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." - 2 Peter 1:16-17

"1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us)
3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." - 1 John 1:1-3

"1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word." - Luke 1:1-2

"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness." - John 3:11

Evolutionists have zero evidence to prove their theory as fact. As for Christians, we have the most widely read and published book in all of world history as evidence. Not to mention there is supernatural and extra-biblical historical proof as well. The supernatural proof being that God has proved himself to be real through casting out demons through the name of Jesus, as well as supernatural healings in the name of Jesus, and various other signs and miracles. The extra-biblical historical proof being evidence such as the ancient King of Nineveh, Ashurbanipal, states that he had the privaledge of reading texts from before the Great Flood, saying, "I had the joy of reading inscriptions on stone from the time before the flood." - Creation Ministries International, Who Said It? http://creation.com/who-said-it-answer-ashurbanipal

Believe what you want, but as for me, I will believe the truth. I believe the Bible.

"Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever." - Psalms 119:160