The mainstream media tell us and much of

The mainstream media tell us, and much of the scientific community believe, that human beings are the product of a long unguided development process called Darwinian Evolution. The Bible teaches that human beings are a special creation by God. • • Does this really matter? Can a Christian believe in evolution and also the God of the bible? Is there any evidence for gradual evolution? Is there any evidence that life has been created? What are the consequences of an evolutionary worldview? Why are the most ardent evolutionists also atheists? Could God have used evolution to create life?

Does belief in evolution matter for a Christian or for non-Christian? YES! For a Christian, theory of evolution contradicts Genesis Chapter 1. God says that he directly created the universe and all life. No random processes or gradual development was needed to produce mankind. For a non–Christian, believing in evolution means that God is not involved in mankind’s existence. Therefore we are not accountable to him even if he is thought to exist. There is no need to believe in God as a creator, judge and saviour of mankind if we are here only because of lucky accidents over millions of years.

How did this evolution idea start? The history of evolutionary ideas long predates Darwin and his theory. The Greek philosopher Heraclitus [500 B. C. E. ] believed that change was a fundamental property of the universe. His successor, Empedocles (c. . 392– 432 B. C. E. ), suggested a theory that the origin of life had taken place in a manner similar to evolution. Belief in species change, or transmutationism, slowly began to emerge during the Enlightenment [18 th century]. The French naturalist Comte de Buffon (1707 – 1788) was one of the first to question the fixity of species and to suggest a transmutationist theory with a startling resemblance to Darwinian evolution. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck [1744 – 1829] proposed the inheritance of acquired traits. Darwin's grandfather Erasmus Darwin, published a book “Zoonomia”, a medical text which also outlined a theory that life originated from “one living filament”.

Charles Lyell promoted theory of uniformitarianism. This proposes that the Earth is millions of years old, and that rock layers were deposited gradually rather than rapidly due to a flood. The theory assumes that conditions on Earth have been the same for millions of years. Lyell was a great friend of Darwin. The long geological timescales implied by his theory enabled Darwin to propose that natural selection could change species very gradually. Lyell wrote three volumes called the “Principles of Geology”. Darwin had volume on his voyage aboard the Beagle. Alfred Russel Wallace was a naturalist and biogeographer who went to the Amazon in 1848 to try and find evidence for his own ideas of organic evolution. In 1858, whilst suffering from malarial fever in Borneo, he formulated the idea of “the survival of the fittest”. He immediately wrote to Charles Darwin explaining his ideas. They published a joint paper on this topic. The next year, Darwin published “On The Origin of Species”. Charles Darwin observed many examples of artificial selection [breeding] and natural selection in action. These produced fairly minor changes to existing characteristics in organisms. He thought that natural selection could, over long timespans, produce entirely new creatures and organ systems by acting on small variations in populations. He never observed “true evolution” in action. Inspired by his research, reading and contemporaries, Darwin finally published his Book in 1859.

Charles Darwin Born at Shrewsbury February 12 th 1809, his father was a doctor An inquisitive young man at school Darwin married his 1 st cousin Emma Wedgewood in 1839. They had ten children, two of whom died in infancy, but their eldest daughter Anne died of a fever at age 10 in 1851 Emma was a quite devout Unitarian, but after Annie’s death Charles Darwin lost any remnants of his faith. At age 16, Darwin went to Edinburgh University for two years and then on to Cambridge where he studied natural history. After graduation in 1831, his tutor secured him a position as a naturalist aboard HMS Beagle for a five year voyage around the world. The Galapagos Islands

What was Darwin’s BIG IDEA? Darwin was in contact with Edward Blyth, an English zoologist, and was familiar with his ideas. Blyth wrote articles describing how natural selection could maintain the purity of a species by weeding out any inferior specimens through the struggle for survival. Blyth’s idea was simply that any species would stay as it was due to the process of natural selection [he did not coin that phrase]. The few inferior specimens then could not pass on any genetic defects. Darwin turned this idea on its head! He proposed that in any population there will be “fitter” individuals who will therefore have a better chance of survival. These individuals will produce more offspring thus improving the whole population. New species could be produced by this means. So in Darwin’s theory, natural selection does not select against inferior specimens but selects for superior specimens.

Darwin’s idea has an immediate and severe problem……………. . You cannot breed a dog into a horse – which is artificial selection. So this will never happen in the natural world due to natural selection. So a new “theory” was proposed to overcome this problem. This incorporated discoveries in genetics as well as eventually DNA.

All living things are made from cells Research since WW 2 has uncovered many secrets of cell function. Crick and Watson famously discovered DNA in 1953. This is located in the nucleus of a cell and is the information storage centre. 1. Nucleolus 2. Nucleus 3. Ribosome (little dots) 4. Vesicle 5. Rough endoplasmic reticulum 6. Golgi apparatus (or "Golgi body") 7. Cytoskeleton 8. Smooth endoplasmic reticulum 9. Mitochondrion 10. Vacuole 11. Cytosol (fluid that contains organelles) 12. Lysosome 13. Centrosome DNA contains the information needed to synthesise proteins plus all the instructions for the growth, development and control of a complete organism. It is a multi-layer code. Each cell contains sophisticated mechanisms to maintain the integrity of the DNA code e. g. repair enzymes.

Modern Neo-Darwinism According to this theory, evolution is driven by chance. Chance mutations affect one or a few base pairs of DNA per occurrence. Bigger changes come from recombination, a genetic process in which longer strands of DNA are swapped, transferred, or doubled. These two processes, mutation and recombination, create new meaning in DNA by lucky accidents. a base pair The mutations and recombinations are thought to be the source of the new genetic information needed to transform one species into another. Normally, highly specific coded information is the product of an intelligent mind and is non-random. Once mutations exist, it is assumed that natural selection can ensure that the “improved” members of a population will preferentially survive. Hence the phrase: SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST This is the basic idea behind modern evolution.

This means that a bacterium could over millions of years change into a ………………. biologist 1013 specialised cells [roughly] 3 x 109 DNA base pairs bacterium single cell one million [106] DNA base pairs This process has to rely on chance mutations and natural selection to produce the quite precisely coded extra DNA – no intelligence needed.

Scientifically theory of evolution has very serious problems. • The vast, vast majority of all mutations are fairly neutral [unselectable] or harmful. • If a beneficial mutation could be produced, its effects would be masked by the previous accumulation of near neutral and harmful mutations. • The high “cost” of harmful mutations could ensure extinction of a species before any possible beneficial mutations had any significant effect. All significant developmental changes to an organism would require a set of very precise DNA changes which would have no benefit until they were all present. Mutation/selection could only produce these changes one or two at a time. • • DNA is not a “linear” code. It can be read in many ways so a mutation just might possibly develop one function of the organism but would wreck several others. • Natural selection is a crude mechanism and trying to produce better DNA by this means is like trying to improve the performance of a computer with a hammer. • Even if the mutation/selection model worked, there is not enough time – even over millions of years for necessary changes to fix in a population.

Haldane's Dilemma Evolution requires the substitution of new beneficial mutations into the population, to create new biological adaptation. Haldane calculated that organisms with low reproduction rates, such as cows, could substitute a new beneficial mutation no more frequently than one per 300 generations. In ten million years, an ape-human-like lineage could substitute no more than 1667 beneficial mutations. In evolutionary genetic literature, it is undisputed that Haldane’s calculations, if correct, would indicate such a limit. All the necessary data, theory, and claims, come from evolutionists. The calculation is: Allow 10 million years for an ape-man lineage. (This figure allows far more time than is available. ) Divide by 20 years effective generation time. (This figure is from evolutionary geneticists Divide by 300 generations per beneficial substitution. (This figure is from Haldane’s calculations. ) Equals a maximum of 1667 beneficial mutations substituted into that ape-man lineage. (Plus some limited number of neutral mutations, which do nothing to improve adaptation. ) If human/chimp DNA is 2% different, this is 60000000 base pairs - a bit more than 1667?

IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY Virtually all biological systems are IRREDUCIBLY COMPLEX: many component parts must be in place for proper functionality. Just like a bicycle…. . every part must be in place and working for the machine to be rideable. You could not develop a bicycle gradually. No-one would buy a machine without a saddle or wheels. The human ear is just the same. All parts are needed for hearing to take place. You could not develop the ear system gradually, since without all the parts we would be deaf. The biochemical pathway responsible for blood clotting is an irreducibly complex mechanism. All the cells/proteins must be present for activation. A subset of these would not be a viable clotting mechanism, so gradual development is not possible. Stepwise mutation/selection cannot produce complex organs or biochemical pathways. NATURAL SELECTION HAS NO INTELLIGENCE OR FORESIGHT.

The other problem is that natural selection works at the level of the whole organism. Survival and reproductive success are normally based on a number of different factors, so selection FOR a particular advantageous genetic change is really impossible. Natural selection can only work on the PHENOTYPE [whole characteristic]. What is really need for evolution to work is selection of the GENOTYPE [precise and specific DNA changes]. “the survival of the fittest” "Genetics has no proofs for evolution. It has trouble explaining it. The closer one looks at the evidence for evolution the less one finds of substance. In fact theory keeps on postulating evidence, and failing to find it, moves on to other postulates (fossil missing links, natural selection of improved forms, positive mutations, molecular phylogenetic sequences, etc. ). This is not science. " Written by Professor Maciej Giertych, Head of Genetics Department, Polish Academy of Science, Institute of Dendrology, Poland. Quoted in Creation Ex Nihilo, Vol. 13 No. 3, 1991 p: 17

There is an even bigger problem that evolutionists WILL NOT admit to! Darwin’s theory cannot deal with the origin of the first cell. A cell is incredibly complex, and needs to use very large and complicated molecules. The jump from simple chemicals to proteins and DNA/RNA is immense; the probability of finding a functional protein by chance is so remote that it would never happen within the lifetime of the “Big Bang” universe, even if one possible protein was tried every second. The jump from bio-molecules to a functioning cell structure is just as immense – with no plausible chance mechanism even proposed. NO scientist in the world, if given basic chemicals and a laboratory, could make proteins or DNA or indeed create a living cell. SO HOW COULD THESE HAPPEN BY CHANCE IN A HOSTILE WORLD?

Doesn’t the fossil record prove evolution though? In fact the nature of the fossil record is peculiar: Pliocene Miocene Oligocene There are massive fossil deposits in the so called Cambrian layer with most animal groups appearing – but very little before this. So no gradual development is evidenced. Eocene Paleocine Cretacious If Noah’s flood is true then we would expect to see all creatures buried together and then covered with further sedimentary layers. Jurassic Triassic Permian Carboniferou s If evolution is true then there should be a multitude of intermediate fossils e. g. dino-birds and walking whales!! Devonian Silurian Ordovician Cambrian Precambrian Almost all major animal groups [phyla] found here

Evolutionists have dreamed up a “tree of life” based on known creatures. This claims to show all living things evolved from the earliest living things. This evolution would require many thousands of transitional forms as evolution proceeded. When the fossil record is studied………. THERE ARE NO TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS All so called ape/men fossils are fiction made from incomplete skeletons and bone fragments.

TWO KINDS OF “EVOLUTION” Charles Darwin was interested in pigeon breeding and noticed that by selecting desired characteristics for mating pairs, different varieties could be produced. This process happens in nature also, as in the beak size/shape of Galapagos finches. The process happens due to the expression of pre-existing genes. This is often called MICROEVOLUTION Microevolution is an observed process. However, to transform a dinosaur into a bird significant DNA changes are required to produce brand new genes. Simple changes in pre-existing gene expression will simply not do it. This is often called MACROEVOLUTION Macroevolution is an unobserved process. Evolutionists often use examples of microevolution to “prove” macroevolution.

Many evolutionist scientists will claim that they have seen real evolution in action when in fact they have only observed genetic drift or badly mutated insects. This is not the same as species/species transition.

NATURAL SELECTION – by a committed evolutionist “To understand the origin of whales, it's necessary to have a basic understanding of how natural selection works. Natural selection can change a species in small ways, causing a population to change colour or size over the course of several generations. This is called "microevolution. " But natural selection is also capable of much more. Given enough time and enough accumulated changes, natural selection can create entirely new species, known as "macroevolution. " It can turn dinosaurs into birds, amphibious mammals into whales and the ancestors of apes into humans. ” By Ker Than, Live Science Contributor | May 13, 2015 10: 58 pm ET This is typical of how modern pseudo-scientists present evolutionary ideas. Natural selection is portrayed as a creative force, almost having intelligence, so that it can carefully select any improved individuals in a species and ensure that they preferentially reproduce and survive. This relies on “enough time” and the availability of definite positive changes in complexity. The truth is somewhat different…………….

The philosophical problems with theory of evolution Most committed evolutionists are also atheists and philosophical naturalists. This means that from their viewpoint the material Universe is all there is. This presents huge logical problems: If someone believes in evolution they evolved to do that and so their opinion is not the result of a free thinking person. If matter is all there is then a human being is just a very complex chemical reaction - a sort of programmed robot. All opinions and beliefs result from chemistry or random events in the brain. Within a material framework there is no means to explain our self awareness, our consciousness and our innate moral sense. We can have no soul or spirit. Biological systems give the appearance of being carefully designed so an evolutionist must ascribe this to the “power of natural selection” which has no intelligence or foresight.

Darwin Quote: "But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind, [if developed by evolution], are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there any convictions in such a mind? " [Letter to W. Graham, July 3 rd, 1881] An unkind but revealing cartoon of Darwin

SETI searches for ET

SO WHY DO EVOLUTIONSTS CLING TO SUCH A FLAWED THEORY? ? Simply because there is no alternative - we are here so we must have evolved They think that apes and men are so similar that apes gradually evolved into men and women. The basic biochemistry and physiology is very similar – you have to believe the evidence of your own eyes! This is the same as realising that in fact the sun goes round the Earth…. . You have to believe the evidence of your own eyes!

Is there any evidence that life has been created? There can be no direct scientific proof as this is a one off historical event. [Evolution is just the same – unrepeatable events in the past] HOWEVER The theories of historical science don’t work. The Big Bang theory has serious flaws. Evolution is a non-starter. The Universe and the Earth seem to be “fine tuned” for life to exist. The whole of the biosphere is an integrated system and is irreducibly complex, and therefore screams “ I was designed”!

E coli bacteria have a remarkable organ called a FLAGELLUM which propels them. It has a proper biochemical rotary motor with many parts, all of which are needed for it to work. This rotor system is irreducibly complex, take away any part and it won’t work. It is very difficult to see how it could possibly have evolved in small steps, since until the last step, it can’t work. A venus fly trap also catches insects It traps them on its leaves which then close and digest the insect. Evolutionists believe that this plant developed gradually, but if its insect catching system was only half developed, how did it feed and survive? From a creationist viewpoint, the biosphere on Earth has been designed as a complete system: • Atmospheric composition and control which regulates temperature and gas composition and provides a cosmic ray shield [together with the Earth’s magnetosphere]. • A plant kingdom which stores solar energy to act as a fuel source for animals and man. • A complete recycling system using bacteria, fungi and insects etc. • All life conforms to a similar, successful biochemical blueprint.

Why do the media love evolution? This because religion [e. g. biblical Christianity] is seen as old fashioned and unenlightened and as inspiring as an old Victorian church on a rainy day. Science on the other hand is seen as modern, exciting and relevant. Science is perceived as the origin of truth today The huge success of modern science in its application to medicine and technology has given some scientists the opportunity to state opinions as facts. We read or hear the phrase “scientists think that” followed by pure speculation. Science can only ever discover the rules and principles that govern the material world. It relies on assuming an orderly and predictable Universe [i. e. created by God]. Science can only discover mechanisms not reasons. It does not explain things but provides detailed descriptions [often mathematical] of natural phenomena.

The Church of Scientism The pursuit of science will lead us into all truth Great High Priests DARWIN We are all advanced apes, descended from microbes. We were not created by God. SAGAN The Cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be. There is nothing supernatural. DAWKINS Religion and belief in God are delusions. Teaching children religion is child abuse.

William B. Provine (1942– 2015) was the ‘Andrew H. and James S. Tisch Distinguished University Professor’ at Cornell University and was a professor in the Departments of History, Science and Technology Studies, and Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. Dr William B. Provine, Professor of Biological Sciences, Cornell University “Belief in modern evolution makes atheists of people. One can have a religious view that is compatible with evolution only if the religious view is indistinguishable from atheism. ” “Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear … There are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end for me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning to life, and no free will for humans, either. ” Reference: Provine, W. B. , Origins Research 16(1), p. 9, 1994.

If you are an atheist evolutionist If you are a creationist Christian Life has no ultimate meaning or purpose. Life was created by God for a purpose. You are just an advanced animal. Mankind is much more than an animal. There is no way to determine right from wrong – apart from arbitrary choice. God has told us what is right and wrong via the ten commandments. Human beings do “bad” things because they are still really animals. Human beings do wrong because of our sin and separation from God. Suffering happens due to random events. Suffering happens because we live in a fallen world, we have rejected God. Freewill and love are just illusions caused by chemicals in the brain. When you die there is only oblivion. Eventually the whole Universe will extinguish in a heat death. Our emotions and feelings are real. After death our spirit lives on and we will give account to God for our lives. God will create a new Heaven & Earth.

Could God have used evolution to create human life? NO Otherwise there would have been life and death struggles for survival over millions of years. No perfect creation or fall. At what stage would God have “ breathed life” into man? Studies of mitochondrial DNA, which is good science, appear to indicate that ALL human beings currently alive are descended from one female. Estimations from current mitochondrial DNA mutation rates indicate that this woman lived only thousands of years ago. So modern science has in part verified the truth of Adam and Eve.

What does God himself tell us through the bible writers? Genesis chapters 1 & 2 John 1 v 1 -3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. Job 38 v 4 “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Psalm 104 v 24 How many are your works, Lord! In wisdom you made them; all the earth is full of your creatures. Psalm 33 v 6 By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, their starry host by the breath of his mouth. Isaiah 45 v 12 It is I who made the Earth and created mankind on it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; Romans 1 v 20 Isaiah 42 v 5 Isaiah 40 ALL For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. This is what God the Lord says—the Creator of the heavens, who stretches them out, who spreads out the earth with all that springs from it, who gives breath to its people, and life to those who walk on it:

Evolution is: • Pitiless • Purposeless • Pointless • Wrong Only the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob has the power and intelligence to create life, and the power to destroy life, and the power to redeem man through the death of his son Jesus Christ

EXTRAS

DNA structure

Crick and Watson Who discovered the structure of DNA in 1953

“The theoretical size of the sequence space, i. e. the total number of possible protein sequences is, for all practical purposes, infinite. Assuming that an average protein length is 300 amino acids, there can be 20300 different protein sequences, a number that is much greater than, for example, the number of protons in our Universe. Our current theoretical understanding of protein folding is insufficient to estimate the total possible number of protein structures, but one suspects it is also vast”. A simple 150 amino acid protein has, if subject to random sequence selection, about a 1 in 1077 chance of finding a useful functional form. In context, there about 1080 particles in the Universe, and the Universe has existed for about 1018 seconds [Big Bang model]. 73 specific proteins are needed just for the ribosomes in our cells to function.