Evolutionary myth teaches that highly-formed, complex, self-reproducing, symmetrical machines (human bodies) self-assembled from water and minerals (eroded rocks) over long periods of time.

Related Video: Lies In The Textbooks

In my entire 43 years of living, I have never heard a more ridiculous, preposterous, and downright stupid (I don't often use this coarse word) myth.

After studying people and their behavior for most of my life, it is perfectly clear to me that the only reasons people believe such blatantly illogical and impossible fairy tales is:

• (1) They are willing to subvert logic and reason to accommodate their own desire to eliminate the obvious implications of responsibility associated with the existence of the otherwise obvious Creator,
• (2) They desperately grasp onto the global flood of false science and hollow propaganda to ease their conscience so reason #1 (above) is less painful, and
• (3) They have succumb to the onslaught of chemicals (MSG, mercury, fluoride, etc.) and propaganda (museums, mass-media, junk-science, etc.) used to dumb down the middle and lower classes preventing them from understanding how fundamental physical rules prohibit evolutionary myths from having even an ounce of viability.

It is no wonder the promoters of the evolution tale have no respect for the masses, and that they desire to dispose of the Christians who study the book that so clearly explains these propagandistic processes and how they would be used in this historical time to deceive many.

A word to the wise and courageous.

---

"I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it."

—H. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138.


"The hold of the evolutionary paradigm [theoretical system] is so powerful that an idea which is more like a principle of medieval astrology than a serious twentieth century scientific theory has become a reality for evolutionary biologists."

—Michael Denton, Molecular Biologist, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1985), p. 306


"In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to `bend' their observations to fit in with it (evolution)."

—H. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138.



"Paleontologists [fossil experts] have paid an exorbitant price for Darwin's argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we almost never see the very process we profess to study."

—Steven Jay Gould, The Panda's Thumb (1982), pp. 181-182 [Harvard professor and the leading evolutionary spokesman of the latter half of the twentieth century].


"I have always been slightly suspicious of the theory of evolution because of its ability to account for any property of living beings (the long neck of the giraffe, for example). I have therefore tried to see whether biological discoveries over the last thirty years or so fit in with Darwin's theory. I do not think that they do. To my mind, the theory (of evolution) does not stand up at all."

—H. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physic Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138.


"I can envision observations and experiments that would disprove any (every) evolutionary theory I know."

—Stephen Jay Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory," Discover 2(5):34-37 (1981).


"The theory of evolution is totally inadequate to explain the origin and manifestation of the inorganic world."

—Sir John Ambrose Fleming, F.R.S., quoted in H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation (1966), p. 91 [discoverer of the thermionic valve].


"I am not satisfied that Darwin proved his point or that his influence in scientific and public thinking has been beneficial . . [color:"brown"]the success of Darwinism was accomplished by a decline in scientific integrity[/color]."

—W.R. Thompson, Introduction to *Charles Darwin's, Origin of the Species [Canadian scientist].



"One of the determining forces of scientism was a fantastic accidental imagination which could explain every irregularity in the solar system without explanation, leap the gaps in the atomic series without evidence [a gap required by the Big Bang theory], postulate the discovery of fossils which have never been discovered, and prophesy the success of breeding experiments which have never succeeded. Of this kind of science it might truly be said that it was `knowledge falsely so called.' "

—David C.C. Watson, The Great Brain Robbery (1976).



"I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning, consequently assumed it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption . . The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics; he is also concerned to prove there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do . . For myself, as no doubt for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality. [color:"brown"]We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom[/color]."

—Aldous Huxley, "Confessions of a Professed Atheist," Report: Perspective on the News, Vol. 3, June 1966, p. 19 [grandson of evolutionist Thomas Huxley, Darwin's closest friend and promoter, and brother of evolutionist Julian Huxley. Aldous Huxley was one of the most influential liberal writers of the 20th century].



"Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless."

—Bounoure, Le Monde Et La Vie (October 1963) [Director of Research at the National center of Scientific Research in France].



"The problem of the origin of species has not advanced in the last 150 years. One hundred and fifty years have already passed during which it has been said that the evolution of the species is a fact but, without giving real proofs of it and without even a principle of explaining it. During the last one hundred and fifty years of research that has been carried out along this line [in order to prove the theory], there has been no discovery of anything. It is simply a repetition in different ways of what Darwin said in 1859. This lack of results is unforgivable in a day when molecular biology has really opened the veil covering the mystery of reproduction and heredity . .

"Finally, there is only one attitude which is possible as I have just shown: It consists in affirming that intelligence comes before life. Many people will say this is not science, it is philosophy. The only thing I am interested in is fact, and this conclusion comes out of an analysis and observation of the facts."

—G. Salet, Hasard et Certitude: Le Transformisme devant la Biologie Actuelle (1973), p. 331.



"As by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed. Why do we not find them embedded in the crust of the earth? Why is not all nature in confusion [of halfway species] instead of being, as we see them, well-defined species?"

—Charles Darwin, quoted in H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation (1966), p. 139.



"The theory of evolution suffers from grave defects, which are more and more apparent as time advances. It (evolution) can no longer square with practical scientific knowledge."

—Albert Fleishmann, Zoologist



"I argue that the `theory of evolution' does not take predictions, so far as ecology is concerned, but is instead a logical formula which can be used only to classify empiricisms [theories] and to show the relationships which such a classification implies . . these theories are actually tautologies and, as such, cannot make empirically testable predictions. They are not scientific theories at all."

—R.H. Peters, "Tautology in Evolution and Ecology," American Naturalist (1976), Vol. 110, No. 1, p. 1 [emphasis his].



"With the failure of these many efforts, science was left in the somewhat embarrassing position of having to postulate theories of living origins which it could not demonstrate. After having chided the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the unenviable position of having to create a mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort, could not be proved to take place today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past."

—Loren Eisley, The Immense Journey, (1957), p. 199.



"The irony is devastating. The main purpose of Darwinism was to drive every last trace of an incredible God from biology. But the theory (of evolution) replaces God with an even more incredible deity—omnipotent chance."

—T. Rosazak, Unfinished Animal (1975), pp. 101-102.



"The evolution theory can by no means be regarded as an innocuous natural philosophy, but that it (evolution) is a serious obstruction to biological research. It obstructs—as has been repeatedly shown—the attainment of consistent results, even from uniform experimental material. For everything must ultimately be forced to fit this theory. An exact biology cannot, therefore, be built up."

—H. Neilsson, Synthetische Artbuilding, 1954, p. 11.



"My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed. At least I should hardly be accused of having started from any preconceived anti-evolutionary standpoint."

—H. Nilsson, Synthetic Speciation (1953), p. 31.



"The creation account in Genesis and the theory of evolution could not be reconciled. One must be right and the other wrong. The story of the fossils agreed with the account of Genesis. In the oldest rocks we did not find a series of fossils covering the gradual changes from the most primitive creatures to developed forms, but rather in the oldest rocks developed species suddenly appeared. Between every species there was a complete absence of intermediate fossils."

—D.B. Gower, "Scientist Rejects Evolution," Kentish Times,
England, December 11, 1975, p. 4 [biochemist].



"The theories of evolution, with which our studious youth have been deceived, constitute actually a dogma that all the world continues to teach; but each, in his specialty, the zoologist or the botanist, ascertains that none of the explanations furnished is adequate . . It results from this summary, that the theory of evolution is impossible."

—P. Lemoine, "Introduction: De L' Evolution?" Encyclopedie Francaise, Vol. 5 (1937), p. 6.



"Evolution is baseless and quite incredible."

—John Ambrose Fleming, President, British Association for Advancement of Science, in The Unleashing of Evolutionary Thought



"Unfortunately, in the field of evolution most explanations are not good. As a matter of fact, they hardly qualify as explanations at all; they are suggestions, hunches, pipe dreams, hardly worthy of being called hypotheses."

—Norman Macbeth, Darwin Retried (1971), p. 147.



"This general tendency to eliminate, by means of unverifiable speculations, the limits of the categories Nature presents to us, is the inheritance of biology from The Origin of Species. To establish the continuity required by theory, historical arguments are invoked, even though historical evidence is lacking. Thus are engendered those fragile towers of hypothesis based on hypothesis, where fact and fiction intermingle in an inextricable confusion."

—W.R. Thompson, "Introduction," to Every Man's Library issue of *Charles Darwin's, Origin of Species (1956 edition).



"The theory [of evolution] is a scientific mistake.' "

—Louis Agassiz, quoted in H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation, (1966), p. 139. [Agassiz was a Harvard University professor and the pioneer in glaciation.]



"It has been estimated that no fewer than 800 phrases in the subjunctive mood (such as `Let us assume,' or `We may well suppose,' etc.) are to be found between the covers of Darwin's Origin of Species alone."

—L. Merson Davies [British scientist], Modern Science (1953), p. 7.



"Unfortunately for Darwin's future reputation, his life was spent on the problem of evolution which is deductive by nature . . It is absurd to expect that many facts will not always be irreconcilable with any theory of evolution and, today, every one of his theories is contradicted by facts."

—P.T. Mora, The Dogma of Evolution, p. 194.



"The over-riding supremacy of the myth [of evolution] has created a widespread illusion that the theory of evolution was all but proved one hundred years ago and that all subsequent biological research—paleontological, zoological and in the newer branches of genetics and molecular biology—has provided ever-increasing evidence for Darwinian ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth.

—Charles Darwin, quoted in *N.C. Gillespie, Charles Darwin and the Problem of Creation (1979), p. 2 [University of Chicago book].



"I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science."

—Charles Darwin: In a letter to Asa Gray, a Harvard professor of biology