Answering the Evidence

Are Science and the Bible compatible or diametrically opposed?

There are Four Questions that create our worldview [1]:

Who am I and what am I worth?

Where did I come from?

Why am I here?

What happens when I die?

Everyone seeks to answer these questions as they form the basis for understanding our existence. Although there are many worldviews that people may hold there are 2 that are most prevalent: The Modern Scientific Consensus and God. It is these 2 that we will focus on. The purpose of this study is to examine the data from both perspectives , compare the 2 to see if they are compatible, and if not, determine an explanation for the disparity. This is not an exhaustive study and does not seek to answer every question. We will simply be looking at a few major examples (with links to sources for further study).

Can God exist alongside science? Are they even opposed at all? Is our understanding of God and the Bible incorrect? Have we misinterpreted Science? Can we really find all the answers?

“Our belief is not a belief. Our principles are not a faith. We do not rely soley upon science and reason, because these are necessary rather than sufficient factors, but we distrust anything that contradicts science or outrages reason. We may differ on many things, but what we respect is free inquiry, openmindedness, and the pursuit of ideas for their own sake.” - Christopher Hitchens (author, journalist, educator)

Definition of Science:

The systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained.

Definition of Faith:

Complete trust or confidence in what is yet to be observed in someone or something based on previous observations which have confirmed that trust. It cannot be proven because it has not yet happened, but it does grant good reason to believe it will.

These definitions are not contrary to each other and in fact go hand-in-hand. Faith comes from science. That is, our trust in what will come from our observations on what has already occurred. This study is not meant to dismantle Science or prop up blind Faith (which Christians should not have) but to show that they are not diametrically opposed (as some may believe).

“It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that).” - Richard Dawkins (evolutionary biologist)

The Question is not so much, “Can God exist alongside science?”, but rather, “Is our understanding of God or science incorrect?”, leading to these opposed views. Are the Bible and science compatible? Does the evidence prove evolution true and the Bible false? Is Faith devoid of evidence? Do we misunderstand the Bible or the Evidence? Many people do not wish to closely examine these topics as they feel much too unqualified to speak about such things. Afterall, an astronomer should know much more about the universe than your average person. Who are we to object to their observations? The same can be said of biblical scholars and their stances on scripture.

Yet, we must remember that all humans are fallible, carry their own biases, and may misinterpret data either with malicious intent or simple slips in judgment. We may not be the top scientists or scholars but we are just as capable to observe and examine the evidence as they are. Everything can be broken down into simpler terms and ideas with which anyone can more easily pick apart. We are all capable of evaluating the evidence and the conclusions of those who have presented it.

Summary of the Theories we will be looking at:

The Big Bang Model and Modern Evolutionary Theory (these are not all part of one theory but most people lump them all together when talking about Evolution so, we will examine them together as such)

1. The Big Bang (birth of the Universe)

2. Cosmic evolution (including the Formation of the Earth)

3. Abiogenesis (life from non-life)

4. Microevolution (adaptation)

5. Macroevolution (change of species/kinds)

The accepted age of the universe is 13.8 billion years (based on the speed of light, distance between stars, and the acceleration of the expansion of the universe,, an analysis of the microwave background from the big bang, and measurements of radioactive decay) [2] The accepted age of the earth is 4.54 billion years (according to current radiometric (radiation) dating of rocks)

The Earth is within our solar system,

which is inside of the Milky Way Galaxy,

inside of the local group of galaxies, 

which are contained within the Virgo supercluster,

itself contained within the Pisces-Cetus Supercluster Complex,

all within the vast expanse of our observable universe.

See Also: The Scale of the Visible Universe

“I can see how it might be possible for a man to look down upon the earth and be an atheist, but I cannot conceive how a man could look up into the heavens and say there is no God.” -Abraham Lincoln

The Big Bang

“The Big Bang theory says that the universe came into being from a single, unimaginably hot and dense point (aka, a singularity) more than 13 billion years ago. It didn’t occur in an already existing space. Rather, it  initiated the expansion—and cooling—of space itself.” [3]

Simply put, there was nothing and then it exploded (into something).

“The Universe has not existed forever. It was born. Around 13.82 billion years ago, matter, energy, space – and time – erupted into being in a fireball called the Big Bang. It expanded and, from the cooling debris, there congealed galaxies – islands of stars of which our Milky Way is one among about two trillion. This is the Big Bang theory.” [4]

What was the Mechanism?

Of course, our first question is what could have caused such a thing? A birth requires one who birthed it.  So, an emerging universe must have come from somewhere, right?

"Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to ... set the Universe going." - Stephen Hawking (theoretical physicist) [5]

The quantum vacuum has been described as a ghostly presence, a source of infinite potential, and a gateway to the unknown. It is believed to be the origin of the universe, and it is thought to be the source of dark energy and dark matter… The quantum vacuum is the state of absolute nothingness that exists between particles at the quantum level. It is a realm of pure emptiness, with no particles or energy present…In classical mechanics the “vacuum” is nothingness. In contrast, the vacuum of quantum mechanics is a pure uncontrolled energy. [6]

The idea is as follows, because particles pop in and out of existence (something from nothing) at the quantum level, it is possible for the universe to be birthed in very much the same way. With Gravity being the reason for such order, according to Hawking.

"And the fact that particles can pop in and out of existence, over time, as those fields rearrange themselves, is not a whit more mysterious than the fact that fists can pop in and out of existence, over time, as my fingers rearrange themselves. And none of these poppings — if you look at them aright — amount to anything even remotely in the neighborhood of a creation from nothing." - David Albert (Professor of Philosophy) [1.1]

As you may have noticed in the previous quote, the quantum vacuum is not actually a true void. As David Albert points out, there exists energy that must simply rearrange itself to form something. It may be a vast space of great distance between actual particles but it is still filled with something, from which it can muster up something else. Put frankly, something cannot come from nothing.

Biblical Response:

In order for the universe to come into existence, something that is spaceless, timeless, immaterial, and has infinite energy potential had to create it; seeing as space, time, and matter all came into existence at this point (energy proceeding it as it is what caused it).

Psalm 90:2

“Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.”

We also know that whatever created the universe had to have the ability to never create anything in eternity past and then suddenly create, giving it a will. This would make it a being rather than a natural process or phenomena. We would call this being God.

Objection:

A scientist still may reject this notion, as they will tout another possibility. An infinitely existing universe. One which resides in various states of expansion and compression. This is known as Conformal Cyclic Cosmology. The universe cycles from the Big Bang to a maximally empty state, collapsing in a Big Crunch, leading back into the same Big Bang, creating the very same universe again and again [1.2]

This idea is highly speculative. The universe is rapidly expanding to a point where it seems extremely unlikely to collapse back into a “Big Crunch”. It then hinges on the idea of photon decay and Hawking radiation, both of which have never been observed. As of now it has far too many flaws to be considered as anything other than a speculative hypothesis. The biggest problem with any Godless origin of the universe lies in the issue of morality. Objective morality requires an eternal moral being by whom the standard is derived from. Natural processes, biological imperatives, and survival instincts cannot lead to objective moral Truth.

Cosmic Evolution

How do we determine the age of the Universe?

Astronomers estimate the relative age of the universe in 2 ways:

1) Looking for the oldest stars, and thus using the oldest things in the universe to guess its age.

The life cycle of a star is determined by its mass. The greater the mass of the star, the quicker it burns out (like blue stars). The inverse is also true, with less massive stars lasting much longer as they fail to burn as bright (like red dwarfs). “The star's mass tells us how much fuel the star had when it was born, and the star's brightness tells us how fast it is burning that fuel.” [7]

2) Measuring the rate of expansion of the universe and working backwards, at speed, to the point where it all came from, the Big Bang.

“Cosmologists date the Big Bang back to [13.8 billion years ago] by looking at how rapidly it has expanded and calculating how long it would therefore take for the incredibly hot and dense early universe to expand and cool into ours. The process is actually not dissimilar to calculating how long ago a car started a race by looking at its speed and the length of the racetrack.” [8]

One evidence scientists give for an old universe is the distance of stars and the length of time it takes for light to travel. If light from the farthest known star in the farthest corner of the observable universe is visible on Earth and the speed of light is set at a certain speed; assuming we know the distance from us to that star, we can estimate with relative certainty how long the universe must have existed based on how long that light must have traveled.

Biblical Response:

Isaiah 42:5 

“Thus saith God the Lord, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:”

If the light started near the Earth and God stretched it out and away to all corners of the universe then what we are left with is the appearance of billions of years for something that took only moments to occur (We will touch on this later on when we talk about cosmic inflation). We also know that God did not create anything in its infancy. 

Question: At what age were Adam and Eve created as?

As fully grown and fully matured Adults. To an outside observer, one may conclude that they must have been alive for years to reach this stage, yet they were simply created already at this stage.

This concept applies to all things created by God in the beginning. Every star, tree, animal, and rock formation was created at a certain maturity level that it would have otherwise taken years to reach. God created the Universe with what one might call, built-in age.

Strange Anomalies:

Blue Stars

• These should have burned out long ago (as blue stars burn extremely quickly)

Comets

• There shouldn’t be any space debris left billions of years later

Backward Spin

• The law of conservation of angular momentum states that objects should spin out the same way in which they were originally spun. Meaning all planets and galaxies should spin the same way (anticlockwise). Yet, there are planets, like Venus, and galaxies, like NGC 4622, that spin contrary to that (what ginormous force could cause it to spin contrary?)

These don’t make much sense in an evolutionary view of the universe. it’s almost as if God wished for us to know it was designed and not naturally formed over billions of years.

Issues with estimates:

“We know how bright a star looks, but to know how bright it really is, you have to know how far away it is: is it like a headlight a mile away or an airport beacon 10 miles away? In the dark of the nighttime sky with no reference points, it's pretty hard to tell…Taken together, the uncertainty in the observations and the uncertainty in the relevant theoretical physics probably lead to an uncertainty of 10 percent to 20 percent in our estimate of the absolute ages of the globular clusters.” [7]

“Even well-studied stars surprise scientists every now and then. In 2019 when the red supergiant star Betelgeuse dimmed, astronomers weren’t sure if it was just going through a phase or if a supernova explosion was imminent. (Turns out it was just a phase.) The sun also shook things up when scientists noticed that it wasn’t behaving like other middle-aged stars. It’s not as magnetically active compared with other stars of the same age and mass. That suggests that astronomers might not fully understand the timeline of middle age.” [9] 

These are also built on the assumption that stars burn at a steady rate, without outside influence and have a set and known lifespan that we can measure.

See also: The problem of Blue Stars [10] https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/stars/blue-stars/

Thought Experiment: 

https://creation.com/the-parable-of-the-candle

Summarized Simply: There are certain factors we just cannot know and so we make assumptions about certain things based on lacking information.

In Summary so far:

Science is observation and experimentation and Faith is trust based on past observation

The Big bang is the birthpoint of the universe where all time, space, and matter came into existence from an extremely hot and dense point

The accepted age of the universe is 13.8 Billion years old, based on the speed of light, life cycle of stars, expansion of the universe, and cosmic background radiation

God created the universe with built-in age. Just as Adam and Eve were created in maturity, so too were the mountains, trees, stars, and galaxies

Strange anomalies like blue stars, comets, and backward spinning planets and galaxies lean towards a young and designed universe

Scientist’s estimates and understanding of the universe is limited and prone to error, specifically when it comes to the age of the universe and all things therein

Problems with the Big Bang Theory

“First, in the standard Big Bang model, galaxies grow by gravitationally pulling in matter. But if this were the only thing going on, it would take much longer than 13.82 billion years for them to form.

Astronomers fix this by postulating that the visible stars and galaxies are outweighed by a factor of six by invisible ‘dark matter’, the extra gravity of which speeds up galaxy formation.

That is, galaxies do not have enough gravitational pull to form within the timeframe accepted by scientists for our universe. So, they have postulated an extra force dubbed ‘dark matter’ (which we will touch on later).

Second, the basic Big Bang predicts that the gravitational attraction between the galaxies acts like a web of elastic, slowing cosmic expansion. However, in 1998, astronomers discovered that the Universe’s expansion is speeding up. 

They fix this by postulating the existence of ‘dark energy’, which is invisible, fills space and has repulsive gravity.

Another issue with the model being “fixed” with a hypothetical force (which we will also examine soon).

A final tweak to the basic theory is needed to explain why the Universe has the same temperature everywhere. 

To account for this, astronomers think that the Universe early on was smaller than expected, then underwent a super-fast expansion in its first split-second – an ‘inflation’. This was driven by an ‘inflationary vacuum’, a high-energy version of the vacuum that exists in space today.” [4]

As we can see, Scientists postulate an unknown, unseen, and unconfirmed source of energy to account for the unexplainable.

Dark Energy and Dark Matter:

“Dark energy makes up approximately 68% of the universe and appears to be associated with the vacuum in space. It is distributed evenly throughout the universe, not only in space but also in time – in other words, its effect is not diluted as the universe expands. The even distribution means that dark energy does not have any local gravitational effects, but rather a global effect on the universe as a whole. This leads to a repulsive force, which tends to accelerate the expansion of the universe. The rate of expansion and its acceleration can be measured by observations based on the Hubble law. These measurements, together with other scientific data, have confirmed the existence of dark energy and provide an estimate of just how much of this mysterious substance exists.” [11]

Dark energy can be seen as a sort of anti-gravitational force which instead of attracting, it repels, and so this repelling force is what is causing the mass acceleration of our universe.

“Dark matter makes up over 80% of all matter in the universe…without it, the behavior of stars, planets and galaxies simply wouldn't make sense.” [1.3]

The formation of galaxies seems to be impossible with the amount of visible mass within and so scientists theorize there must be some unobservable matter that also exerts gravity to aid in this process (outweighed by a factor of 6). Yet, just because they need it, doesn’t mean they have it. This almost sounds like a God of the gaps argument.

Issues with Dark Energy and Dark Matter:

“Dark energy is a hypothetical form of energy that is proposed by physicists to explain why the universe is not just expanding but is doing so at an accelerating rate.” [1.4]

We should note that some believe this could be a flaw with the theory of General Relativity and so look to Einstein’s other modified theory on gravity, Unimodular Gravity (which seems to not need dark energy to explain the universe). [1.5]

“Scientists have not yet observed dark matter directly. It doesn't interact with baryonic matter and it's completely invisible to light and other forms of electromagnetic radiation, making dark matter impossible to detect with current instruments.” [12]

Neither dark energy or dark matter have been directly observed. Based on our current models, there are certain factors we cannot currently account for and so many invoke the need of a “fifth force”.

The 5 Forces being:

1. Gravitation

2. Electromagnetic Force

3. Weak Nuclear Force

4. Strong Nuclear Force

5. Unknown, not directly observed, hypothetical

Colossians 1:16-17

“16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.”

It does not make sense for the universe to form naturally with the amount of matter and energy which we can observe. It’s almost as though there must be some sort of invisible hand behind the scenes or the universe was created in a mature state, similar to how the Bible describes.

Cosmic Inflation:

“Around 13.8 billion years ago, the universe expanded faster than the speed of light for a fraction of a second, a period called cosmic inflation…Cosmologists think inflation explains many aspects of the universe we observe today, like its flatness, or lack of curvature, on the largest scales. Inflation may have also magnified density differences that naturally occur on space’s smallest, quantum-level scales, which eventually helped form the universe’s large-scale structures.” [1.6]

“But all this leaves unanswered the question of what powered inflation. One difficulty in answering this question is that inflation was over well before recombination, and so the opacity of the Universe before recombination is, in effect, a curtain drawn over those interesting very early events.” [13]

Inflation, Dark Matter, and Dark Energy are all theorized to have occurred or still exist but we have no way to verify this. Put frankly, there is still so much about our universe that we just don’t know for certain and even our best models have flaws. Many things such as dark matter and dark energy exist only in theory. Yet, “they must exist” and therefore they are treated as such. This is due to the fact that they do not want to accept any other model as they believe this is the best one they currently have.

Question: Is there an alternative explanation that explains all the evidence?

Yes, “In the beginning God”

Interestingly enough, the idea of inflation falls very much in line with God stretching out the heavens (as we discussed earlier); making the universe quickly expand outward far quicker than could be possible by natural travel.

We must note:

It may be possible that the Universe can be dated as extremely old due to built-in age, or that dark matter and dark energy do actually exist and exercise forces on our universe. We should not hold that these things are not possible or even probable. Our issue lies less with the observations and more with the conclusions. They state as fact what they do not know for certain and many claim that there is no need for God as science explains it all, all the while they cannot explain it all.

Age of the Earth

Refresher Question: What is the accepted age of the earth?

4.54 billion years.

Why do scientists believe this is the case?

“The geologic time scale is the “calendar” for events in Earth history. It subdivides all time into named units of abstract time called—in descending order of duration—eons, eras, periods, epochs, and ages. The enumeration of those geologic time units is based on stratigraphy, which is the correlation and classification of rock strata. The fossil forms that occur in the rocks, however, provide the chief means of establishing a geologic time scale, with the timing of the emergence and disappearance of widespread species from the fossil record being used to delineate the beginnings and endings of ages, epochs, periods, and other intervals.” [15]

In simple terms: the fossils are the best way to date the rocks (keep this in mind for later).

Relative Dating

“This technique can reveal which layers are older or which events happened before others if the layers of sediment have remained in sequential order. Layers can be rearranged, bent, or contain inconsistencies. However, stratigraphy yields no exact age for those layers or events.” [16]

Radiometric Dating

“Radiometric dating calculates an age in years for geologic materials by measuring the presence of a short-life radioactive element, e.g., carbon-14, or a long-life radioactive element plus its decay product…”

“Radiometric decay occurs when the nucleus of a radioactive atom spontaneously transforms into an atomic nucleus of a different, more stable isotope.” [1.7]

The 3 Main Methods of Radiometric Dating:

Radiocarbon dating

“Over time, carbon-14 decays in predictable ways. And with the help of radiocarbon dating, researchers can use that decay as a kind of clock that allows them to peer into the past and determine absolute dates for everything from wood to food, pollen, poop, and even dead animals and humans.” [17]

Potassium–argon dating

“This dating method is based upon the decay of radioactive potassium-40 to radioactive argon-40 in minerals and rocks; potassium-40 also decays to calcium-40. Thus, the ratio of argon-40 and potassium-40 and radiogenic calcium-40 to potassium-40 in a mineral or rock is a measure of the age of the sample.” [18]

Uranium–lead dating

“U-Th dating is based on the activity ratios of parent (Uranium) and product (Thorium) isotopes, by calculating the disintegration of the parent to the daughter over time. This is done by the detection (mass spectrometry) of both the parent (234U) and daughter (230Th) products of decay.” [19]

All these were discovered around the late 1800’s - early to mid 1900’s before being put into practice relatively recently. Radiometric dating has only been used in about the past 100 years. (We will examine some issues with radiometric dating later on when we look at fossils).

Based on Assumptions

“The geologic time scale began to take shape in the 1700s. Geologists first used relative age dating principles to chart the chronological order of rocks around the world.” [20]

There is a period of about 200-250 years in which Geologists concluded the Earth must be old based on physical observations with no way to date and thus test their theories. This is to say that old ages were already assumed, based on the preposition that the theory of Evolution was True.

Regarding Carbon-14:

“The method has limitations: Samples can be contaminated by other carbon-containing materials, like the soil that surrounds some bones or labels that contain animal-based glue. Inorganic materials can’t be dated using radiocarbon analysis, and the method can be prohibitively expensive. Age is also a problem: Samples that are older than about 40,000 years are extremely difficult to date due to tiny levels of carbon-14. Over 60,000 years old, and they can’t be dated at all.” [17]

Old age is already assumed when dating rocks, so those assumptions are used to calculate rock ages. If you believe something to be billions of years old, you will tailor your methods to match this presupposition. [21] Another issue we find is with dating these Isotopes. Scientists constantly make the assumption that the rate at which something is currently observed is the rate at which it has always been going. This assumption is also made with regard to radio-isotope dating. Yet, there is evidence that a global catastrophic event could cause the radio-isotopes to decay at an accelerated rate, thus giving the appearance of great age but being due to extreme outside pressures (much like how rock dates get reset as they are recycled within the Earth.) [22]

Biblical Response:

Built-in Age

Exodus 20:11

“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.”

Again we must acknowledge that Adam and Eve were created as full matured adults, and there is still an indeterminate amount of time between the creation of Adam and Eve and the first Marriage and the Fall of man. This applies to all of creation. Trees were not created as saplings, nor birds as eggs, nor Stars as proto-stars. All these were made at a certain point in what would otherwise be a longer lifespan, yet they were created instantaneously at this observed point. This is why we believe the Earth is thus estimated to be roughly 6,000 years old according to lists of ages (genealogies) given within the Bible.

The Flood

One of the main criticisms of the Bible revolves around the flood. This conflict has even led many to believe it was a small and localized disaster and not a worldwide cataclysm as the Bible seems to indicate.

Mars canyon vs Grand Canyon

Mars:

“The findings suggest that catastrophic geologic processes may have had a major role in shaping the landscape of Mars and other worlds without plate tectonics… So we think this style of catastrophic overflow flooding and rapid incision of outlet canyons was probably quite important on early Mars’ surface.” [23]

Grand Canyon

“Oddly enough, the Grand Canyon is located in a place where it seemingly shouldn’t be. Some twenty miles east of Grand Canyon Village, the Colorado River turned sharply ninety degrees, from a southern course to a western one and into the heart of the uplifted Kaibab Plateau. . . . It appears to cut right through this uplifted wall of rock, which lies three thousand feet above the adjacent Marble Platform to the east.” [24]

There are several oddities with the Grand Canyon:

the overall stability of the cliffs (still coated in desert varnish, which takes 50-200 yrs to form, how have the cliffs not broken enough after millions of years to be more exposed or unstable?)

lack of debris under the cliffs within the canyons (especially in areas further away from river contact)

a lack of debris found at the end of the river from the great amount of erosion. Almost 1,000 cubic miles of material has been eroded to form the Grand Canyon (see Source [24] for more in depth analysis of these features).

All these call the canyon's formation by the Colorado River into question. These oddities are what we would expect to find within a relatively young formation. As they show that very little has changed in this formation since it was carved. It is much more likely that, just like with the Martian canyon and several other geologic formations on Earth, that the Grand Canyon was formed by a swift and rapid flood which rushed into Northern Arizona and carved out the rock. It is possible for things to happen extremely quickly that otherwise would have taken many millennia to happen. Think of the eruption of Mt St Helens or Pompeii or even the large mines we carve out for minerals. With enough force, pressure, and power, what would once take long could be severely shortened in time.

The Flood would also explain the flat layers of rock, the bent sections (as they would have been muddy and pliable before hardening into stranger formations), the sea life on mountaintops, the formation of mountains (such as Mt Everest), and the dispersion and creation of fossils all across the globe.

What about Pangea?

“From about 300-200 million years ago (late Paleozoic Era until the very late Triassic), the continent we now know as North America was contiguous with Africa, South America, and Europe. They all existed as a single continent called Pangea.” [1.8]

“Pangea first began to be torn apart when a three-pronged fissure grew between Africa, South America, and North America. Rifting began as magma welled up through the weakness in the crust, creating a volcanic rift zone” This continued to push apart the continents for millions of years as it spewed out hot volcanic ash and debris until the landmasses eventually settled.

See Also: Continental Drift from Pangea to Today

A biblical Response:

Psalm 136:6

“To him that stretched out the earth above the waters: for his mercy endureth for ever.”

When God created the Earth He put the land over the water, meaning that vast amounts of it was stored underneath the surface.

Genesis 7:10-12

“10 And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth.

11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.”

Genesis 7:18-19

“18 And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters.

19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.”

Genesis 8:1-3

“1 And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters assuaged;

2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;

3 And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.”

The Flood waters shooting out of the deep, forming volcanoes and cracks in the Earth (Faults) could easily account for the shape and structure of our continents, by pushing them away and causing devastating shifts. We already know that the Earth has vast amounts of subterranean water and before the flood it would have been even greater.

Another thing to note is that the continents ARE connected. Under the surface of the Ocean is more land. If we were to increase or decrease the oceans height by a few miles we would see a drastic change in the look of our continents. Plate Tectonics could account for long and slow separations of the top of our continents but a catastrophic event such as the Flood could easily account for a quick formation and dispersion. This would also explain the parallel nature of mountain ranges with the mid atlantic ridge and various other global features [25] & [26]

See Also: Fountains of the Deep Flood Animation & Hydroplate Theory - Dr. Walt Brown

Flood stories across the world [27]:

Mesopotamians and The Epic of Gilgamesh

Aztecs and the flood story of Nata and Nena

Greeks and the flood story of Prometheus’ son

Hindus and the flood story of Manu

China and the flood story of 2 surviving children who repopulate the Earth

Norse flood story of 2 surviving frost giants

OJIBWE/CHIPPEWA TRIBE (Native American) and the flood story of Waynaboozhoo (or Nanabozho)

Most of these stories include a  great deity’s unhappiness with the evil of mankind, a message about an incoming flood, the use of an ark to survive, and even the resting of the boat on a mountain top

Oldest Living Individual Organism:

“Bristlecone pines are a small group of trees that reach an age believed by many scientists to be far greater than that of any other living organism known to man -- up to nearly 5,000 years…Over 4,789 years old, the age of Methuselah was determined by the measurement of core samples taken in 1957.” [29]

Interesting to note that the oldest individual living organism is estimated to have started growing around the time The Flood started to subside

In Summary so far:

Dark matter, dark energy, and cosmic inflation 

The Fifth Force, “by him all things consist”

Job 38:4-6

“4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;”

Job 26:7

“He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, [and] hangeth the earth upon nothing.”

The accepted age of the Earth is 4.54 Billion Years

The geologic time scale is created using relative dating, radiometric dating, and fossil forms

The 3 main methods of radiometric dating are: Radiocarbon, Potassium-argon, and Uranium-lead dating.

Issues with radiometric dating: contamination, assumed constant rate of decay, organic samples can only be accurately dated to about ~5,700 yrs

The Grand Canyon formation oddities, the breakup of pangea, the mid atlantic ridge, flood stories from around the world, and the oldest living organism all point to a global flood

The Fossil Record

It can be somewhat difficult to guess what an animal looks like based on its skeleton. There are parts of creatures that decompose much faster than the rest and so feathers, fatty tissue, skin, fur color, scale patterns, tongue length, ear size, special protrusions, etc. can not be fully determined. If this is how hard it is with animals whose appearances we know, imagine how far off our assumptions are on extinct animals.

See Also: Interesting Drawings of Animals based solely on their skeletons

What Does the Fossil Record tell us?

“The fossil forms that occur in the rocks, however, provide the chief means of establishing a geologic time scale…” [15]

Where certain Fossils were buried within certain strata. That’s it. It’s a record of death. We cannot dig up the past. The past is passed. We merely dig up what is still left in the present with all its missing information. We find the bones, most being just small fragments that we use to “guesstimate” the overall structure of a creature, and date them depending on the rock layer they're in and the rate of radioactive decay.

Issues with Dating Fossils

Poisson Exponentially Weighted Moving Average (PEWMA) Dating method Findings [1.9]

1. The method’s true-positive rate ranges from 20–90%, with the most realistic rates being between 30 and 50%.

2. The method’s false positive error rate is approximately 10%.

3. Increasing the number of radiocarbon dates used to date the time-series above five had no noticeable effect on the true- or false-positive rates.

Put simply, dating involving anything within Humanity’s perceived time on Earth can be reliably dated; while anything supposed to occur long before that cannot be reliably dated with carbon-14. Funnily enough we actually do find carbon-14 in Dinosaur fossils but scientists believe this must be from contamination as they already know dinosaurs to be millions of years old. [30]

Side Note:

Poisson:

a probability density function that is often used as a mathematical model of the number of outcomes obtained in a suitable interval of time and space, that has its mean (middle most distribution of points) equal to its variance (the variations of these distribution of points) that is used as an approximation to the binomial distribution (probability function that gives the probability of an outcome occurring repeatedly in succession).

A major problem with dating fossils is that we cannot reliably utilize other radiometric dating methods that would produce older dates because these isotopes aren’t present in Fossils that form in Sedimentary rocks which can also not be reliably dated.

“The half-life of carbon-14 is only 5,730 years, so carbon-14 dating is only effective on samples that are less than 50,000 years old. Dinosaur bones, on the other hand, are millions of years old -- some fossils are billions of years old. To determine the ages of these specimens, scientists need an isotope with a very long half-life. Some of the isotopes used for this purpose are uranium-238, uranium-235 and potassium-40, each of which has a half-life of more than a million years. Unfortunately, these elements don't exist in dinosaur fossils themselves. Each of them typically exists in igneous rock, or rock made from cooled magma. Fossils, however, form in sedimentary rock -- sediment quickly covers a dinosaur's body, and the sediment and the bones gradually turn into rock. But this sediment doesn't typically include the necessary isotopes in measurable amounts.” [31]

So to get the ages of fossils we must look at neighboring strata that have layers made up of igneous rocks, which are the only rocks we can reliably date [32]

Issues with Dating Rocks

Issues with Potassium-Argon Dating

contamination issues can make dating unreliable [33]

Issues with Uranium-Lead Dating

leakage adjustments make it consistent but not necessarily accurate [34]

So scientists use one type of rock to date all others, as well as to date fossils. They then use these dates for fossils to date other rock layers, which they again use to date fossils…

“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately” (J.E. O'Rourke, American Journal of Science, Vol. 276, p.53)

This is circular reasoning!

This means that old age for fossils all rests upon one singular type of rock and 1 primary type of radiometric dating, which we then use to date the rocks!

(which, as we talked about previously, are based on many assumptions that we simply cannot know are accurate, even if it can be made consistent) [See the above section on the Geologic Time Scale].

Unreliable Radiometric Dates?

• A freshly killed seal was carbon dated as having died 1300 years ago! Antarctic Journal vol. 6 Sept-Oct. 1971 p.211

• Living mollusk shells were dated at 2300 years! Science vol. 141, 1963 p. 634-637

• “One part of the Vollosovitch mammoth carbon dated at 29,500 years old and another part at 44,000.” Troy L. Pewe, Quaternary Stratigraphic Nomenclature in Unglaciated Central Alaska, Geological Survey Professional Paper 862

• “One part of Dima [a baby frozen mammoth] was 40,000, another part was 26,000 and the ‘wood immediately around the carcass’ was 9-10,000.” Troy L. Pewe, Quaternary Stratigraphic Nomenclature in Unglaciated Central Alaska, Geological Survey Professional Paper 862 (U.S. Gov. printing office, 1975) p. 30

• “The lower leg of the Fairbanks Creek mammoth had a radiocarbon age of 15,380 RCY (radio carbon years), while its skin and flesh were 21,300 RCY.” Harold E. Anthony, “Natures Deep Freeze,” Natural History, Sept. 1949, p. 300

• “The two Colorado Creek, AK mammoths had radiocarbon ages of 22,850 plus or minus 670 and 16,150 plus or minus 230 years respectively.” Robert M. Thorson and R. Dale Guthrie, “Stratigraphy of the Colorado Creek Mammoth Locality, Alaska.” Quaternary Research, Vol. 37, No. 2, March 1992, pp. 214-228

• Eleven human skeletons, the earliest known human remains in the western hemisphere, have been dated by the accelerator mass spectrometer. All eleven were dated at about 5,000 radiocarbon years or less! Taylor, “Major Revisions In The Pleistocene Age Assignments for North American Human Skeletons by C-14 Accelerator Mass Spectrometry”. American Antiquity, Vol. 50, No. 1, 1985, pp. 136-140

• Lava from the 1801 Hawaiian volcano eruption gave a K-Ar date of 1.6 Millions years old. Dalyrmple, G.B., 1969 40Ar/36Ar analysis of historic lava flows. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 6-47, 55. [33]

• Basalt from Mt. Kilauea Iki, Hawaii (AD 1959) gave K-Ar age of 8,500,000 years old. Impact #307, Jan. 1999

• Basalt from Mt. Etna, Siciliy (AD 1972) gave K-Ar age of 350,000 years old. Impact #307, Jan., 1999

Conclusion:

If you use radiometric dating on samples of a KNOWN AGE, it DOES NOT SEEM TO WORK.

If you use radiometric dating on samples of UNKNOWN AGE, it is ASSUMED TO WORK. [35]

Why is fossilization so rare today? Doesn’t it take millions of years?

“Probably only about 100,000 of the estimated 1,239,129 living species of animals have a good chance of fossil preservation. This means that only 8% of the living species of animals have a likelihood of being preserved in sedimentary rocks as fossils” [36]

“Fossilization is rare. Most organisms decompose fairly quickly after they die. For an organism to be fossilized, the remains usually need to be covered by sediment soon after death. Sediment can include the sandy seafloor, lava, and even sticky tar.” [37]

Sediments being firmly packed on top of animal carcases helps to seal out oxygen and slow the decaying process. This is extremely rare and not likely to happen. One reason scientists believe we find so many fossils is because the Earth has been around for so many millions to billions of years that a few fossils forming every so often over such a long time are bound to accumulate to what we find now.

But is there an alternative explanation?

Scientists have discovered a new way to simulate the fossilization process in a lab in about 24 hours. They take materials like feathers, lizard feet, and leaves and cook them in a lab oven under heat and pressure conditions that mimic what real fossils undergo. [38]

This means that under the right conditions, if some sort of event were to occur that would cause quick burial of animals, with lots of sediments, swelling flood waters creating massive pressure, and receding flood water settling out multiple layers of ripped up and malleable rock, fossils of all sorts could form nearly instantaneously. Scientists hold to the view of an old Earth, so they do not take this alternative view seriously. Although a biblical worldview can still answer all the questions one may have based on our observations of our universe and world around us (as we have looked at throughout this lesson), one’s presuppositions of what they already believe to be true can cloud their views on what is possible.

What about Dinosaurs?

Q: Haven’t they been extinct for millions of years? If humans lived with Dinosaurs wouldn’t we have evidence of such a thing? Do Dinosaurs disprove the Bible?

Let’s Examine 3 Theories on Dinosaurs:

Theory 1.) Dinosaurs existed millions of years before humans

According to the modern accepted scientific theory, Dinosaurs existed millions of years ago until they were suddenly wiped out by a massive meteorite that ravished the world. This would put them long before humans and act as evidence against the creation account in Genesis which would have them created alongside mankind at the beginning of creation until they died out due to any number of reasons (this is why some people may us the Gap Theory to help explain Dinosaurs existing before humans and still hold to a Biblical worldview).

Theory 2.) Dinosaurs Never existed at all

An interesting thing to note is that Dinosaur bones weren’t discovered until soon after the term was created. There are also very few, if any, completed fossil forms. In fact most fossils of any kind are just a collection of fragments of bones that Paleontologists find and then put together to form what they believe the dinosaur may have looked like. We have already seen previously how faulty this can be as they cannot date fossils directly, nor can they know if the bones they find clustered together are even from the same creature. Fossil recreation is broadly an artistic field founded on interpretations based on assumptions. [39]

Theory 3.) Dinosaurs existed alongside humans (previously known as Dragons)

Sir Richard Owen came up with the name Dinosaur in 1842 [which means terrible Lizard]. Dragon comes from the Latin Draconem, meaning “Huge serpent” which came from the Greek Drakon, meaning “serpent/giant seafish”. The literal sense of Drakon is suggested to mean “the one with the deadly glance”. It came to English in the 13th Century (1200’s AD) In different cultures around the world, there have been stories of dragons; Monstrous creatures of great size and strength that were feared, hunted, and revered by humanity. China, with the largest collection of Dragon stories, even prescribed Dragon bones for medicine and still have Dragons as part of their calendar alongside, otherwise, real animals. Marco Polo even describes what seem to be Dragons in his journals about his exploration into East Asia. [40] & [41] & [42]

It seems very odd for so many cultures to have such similar stories of such similar creatures and to treat them as though they were observable facts. The Bible even has mention of 2 creatures that seem very much like Dinosaurs:

Behold Now Behemoth

Job 40:15-24

“15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.

16 Lo now, his strength [is] in his loins, and his force [is] in the navel of his belly.

17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.

18 His bones [are as] strong pieces of brass; his bones [are] like bars of iron.

19 He [is] the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach [unto him].

20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.

21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.

22 The shady trees cover him [with] their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.

23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, [and] hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.

24 He taketh it with his eyes: [his] nose pierceth through snares.”

Some have stated this could be a hippo or an elephant. Although they are large and strong, they do not have a tail like a cedar. Others state it could be a crocodile. While crocodiles have cedar-like tails, they do not eat grass like an ox or feed in the mountains (neither do hippos). Sauropods (long-neck dinosaurs) fit all these descriptions. They were the biggest land animals on Earth, with massive tails, plant-eating habits, and big enough to, poetically, drink up a river. Dreadnoughtus, the largest of the titanosaurs, being a likely candidate. Being 85 ft tall and weighing 65 tons (130,000 lbs). This is roughly the height of the drop on the Jurassic World ride at Universal studios and roughly as heavy as a Boeing 737 aircraft.

See Also: Behemoth Can’t Be a Sauropod? 

Canst Thou Draw Out Leviathan?

Job 41:1-6, 18-21, 33

“1 Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down?

2 Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn?

3 Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words unto thee?

4 Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant for ever?

5 Wilt thou play with him as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens?

6 Shall the companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among the merchants?”

15-21

15 His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal.

16 One is so near to another, that no air can come between them.

17 They are joined one to another, they stick together, that they cannot be sundered.

18 By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.

19 Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.

20 Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.

21 His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.”

33 

“Upon earth there is not his like, who is made without fear.”

We do not know what kind of creature leviathan was exactly (as no known living or extinct creatures fit this description precisely and fossilization is indeed rare). We can, however, see that it was a terrifying sea creature, with strong scales, the ability to spew a fire-like substance, making it an unapproachable beast.

In reference to leviathan’s fire-spewing ability: 

• Some deep sea copepods can drop bioluminescent depth charges that produce time-released flashes

• Platytroctidae (tubeshoulder fish) can eject bioluminescent cells when threatened

• Electric eel can produce 500 volts of static electricity that can kill a grown human being

• Bombardier beetle can fire a chemical “bomb” that explodes from its body at 212°F

“If a deep sea copepod can drop depth charges that produce time-released flashes, if a Platytroctidae (tubeshoulder fish) can eject bioluminescent cells when threatened, if an electric eel can produce 500 volts of static electricity that can kill a grown human being, and if a bombardier beetle can fire a chemical “bomb” that explodes from its body at 212°F, why would it be difficult to believe that Leviathan could breathe smoke and fire?” [2.1]

See Also: Tricks of the Light

Were Dinosaurs on the ark?

Q: How could they even fit on there with such massive size?

The big Dinosaurs were definitely big, but the little ones were little. It does not say Noah brought fully matured adult animals on the ark but simply a male and female. They could very easily have been young. Some may ask then how do you care for the babies without their mothers? Perhaps they nursed them all, or they were old enough to be weaned off, or I don’t know, the God who stopped the Lions from eating Daniel could provide a way of survival for some animals and a family in a boat!

What happened to the Dinosaurs?

They probably went extinct like many large animals did. We hunted them all, they lost their food source, or couldn’t adapt quickly enough to their changing environment. Just like we hunted all the grizzly bears in California or killed off all the Dodo birds, dinosaurs were these terrifying creatures that people hunted for safety, sport, glory, or food.

Living Fossil?

The Coelacanth was a prehistoric fish that was believed to have gone extinct 65 million years ago. In fact it was once used as an index fossil to help date other fossils around it at a similar age. Surprisingly enough, some fisherman off the coast of madagascar caught a live one in 1938 and now many more have been discovered since.

What were the scientists' response?

These creatures must have miraculously survived extinction events for 65 million years! Rather than a more plausible answer, which would be that our dating of fossils may be drastically off, simply because THEY KNOW that dinosaurs could not exist in human history.

“Now here’s the point. No fossils of coelacanths have ever been found in the same layers as human fossils, but they have been found in the same layers as dinosaur fossils—yet we know coelacanths and humans do live together, because they do so in the present world.”

Remember, fossilization is very rare and just because we don’t find fossils of certain creatures or plants together with humans in the fossil record, it doesn’t mean we did not live together. It really means, we just didn’t happen to die together.

In Summary so far

Skeletons can be hard to identify and leave out a lot of key details about the creatures they belonged to.

The Fossil Record is a record of death that simply tells us where something was buried within certain strata

All forms of radiometric dating have issues. Whether it be contamination, leakage adjustments, half-life limits, or assumptions of a constant rate of decay.

“The fossil forms that occur in the rocks, however, provide the chief means of establishing a geologic time scale…“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately”

Fossilization is extremely rare but under the right conditions (high pressure/heat) it can happen extremely quickly

It seems that Dinosaurs were once known as Dragons, existed alongside humans (like Behemoth/Leviathan), were indeed on Noah’s ark and eventually were all driven off, hunted, or died due to changing environments.

The Theory of Evolution

Charles Darwin is known today as the founder of modern evolutionary thought, as he first proposed the idea of minor adaptations in species slowly forming them into other kinds of animals; publishing his famous book in 1859. Before him there were various “evolutionary” thoughts, such a transmutation (animals morphing into new animals). He simply proposed a “better” version, Darwin’s Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. Darwin specifically proposed the idea that species can change over time, new species come from preexisting species, and all species share a common ancestor. Within this large umbrella theory are 5 minor theories that all build on each other.

His five theories: [2.2]

1. Evolution as such: The world is not constant nor recently created nor perpetually cycling but rather is steadily changing and organisms are transformed in time.

2. Common descent: Every group of organisms descended from a common ancestor, and all groups of organisms, including animals, plants, and microorganisms, ultimately go back to a 'Single origin of life on earth.’

3. Gradualism: Evolutionary change takes place through the gradual change of populations and not by the sudden…production of new individual's that represent a new type. 

4. Multiplication of species: Explains the origin of the enormous organic diversity [there is an estimated 8.7 million living species of plants and animals]. It postulates that species multiply, either by splitting into daughter species or by ''budding,'' that is by the establishment of geographically isolated founder populations that evolve into new species.

5. Natural selection: Evolutionary change, comes about through the abundant production of genetic variation in every generation. The relatively few individuals who survive, owing to a particularly well-adapted combination of inheritable characters, give rise to the next generation [also known as the survival of the fittest].

Darwin’s Evolutionary Thought

On the Origin of Species

…by Means of Natural Selection,

…or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life

He stated that the result of sexual selection is for men to be, “more courageous, pugnacious and energetic than woman [with] a more inventive genius. His brain is absolutely larger [...] the formation of her skull is said to be intermediate between the child and the man”. He was also convinced that evolution was progressive, and that the white races—especially the Europeans—were evolutionarily more advanced than the black races, thus establishing race differences and a racial hierarchy. [2.3] He also believed in eugenics (a study of how to arrange reproduction within humans to increase the occurrence of “desirable” traits and avoid or force out “undesirable” traits through selective means). Something some people would still like to do even now. Today, many are again looking into the intelligence and genetic differences between races and sexes and what that may mean. Evolution necessitates inequality, as some will progress and others will be left behind as unfit.

See Also: What is Immoral about Eugenics?

A Biblical Response

Acts 17:26 

“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;

Galatians 3:28 

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

God formed mankind and all of us are created in His image, regardless of our race, gender, intelligence, disabilities, health issues, social or economic status. Under God, we are all inherently valuable and our lives are worth something despite our circumstances.

No One Understands Evolution: https://youtu.be/i6remrJNyNk [timestamp 0:00-3:55]

Abiogenesis: Life From Non-life

The theory is as follows: 

As the Earth formed, it began to cool from its molten state and it rained on the surface. These rains created massive oceans filled with complex chemicals. Lightning struck the chemical waters and formed a primordial soup; the first forms of life.. “...the underlying principle governing the emergence of life on the Earth can in its broadest sense be specified, and may be stated as follows: all stable (persistent) replicating systems will tend to evolve over time towards systems of greater stability.” [45]

The Infamous Miller-Urey Experiment

In 1953, at the University of Chicago, chemists Stanley Miller and Harold Urey created a system to mimic the conditions of early Earth. By utilizing a sparking device to simulate lightning storms interacting with certain chemical gasses, the pair seemed to recreate the hypothesized “primordial soup” which gave way to life. The resulting amino acids seemed to prove that the building blocks of life could have come from non-life. Abiogenesis! Amino acids form proteins, which form cells, which form organisms. However, after later discoveries changed our understanding about the gasses in Earth’s early atmosphere, the experiment was no longer seen as an accurate model.  He excluded oxygen, which would have been present, used ammonia which is destroyed by UV light (itself protected from UV light by oxygen in the atmosphere), and only struck the chemicals once, so as to not destroy what he just created (unlike any indiscriminate lightning storm found in nature). So, in 1983, Miller repeated his experiment, now using the correct combination of gasses, and it failed. [2.4]

Side Note:

Magma is rich in iron, and the oxidation state of iron in the rocks (essentially the chemical composition of its rust) gives scientists an indication of what the Earth's early atmosphere was like, and how much oxygen was available at the time. [2.5] Scientists determine the makeup of the early atmosphere by the materials and elements they expect would be present on a newly formed planet. These are assumptions.

5 Major Problems [47]

Problem 1: No Viable Mechanism to Generate a Primordial Soup. (see Miller-Urey Experiment issues above)

Problem 2: Forming Polymers Requires Dehydration Synthesis. “Two amino acids do not spontaneously join in water. Rather, the opposite reaction is thermodynamically favored.”

Problem 3: RNA World Hypothesis Lacks Confirming Evidence. Have modern theorists explained how this crucial bridge from inert nonliving chemicals to self-replicating molecular systems took place? Not at all…

For one, the first RNA molecules would have to arise by unguided, non-biological chemical processes. But RNA is not known to assemble without the help of a skilled laboratory chemist intelligently guiding the process. …

Second, while RNA has been shown to perform many roles in the cell, there is no evidence that it could perform all the necessary cellular functions currently carried out by proteins.

Third, the RNA world hypothesis can’t explain the origin of genetic information.

Problem 4: Unguided Chemical Processes Cannot Explain the Origin of the Genetic Code. This system cannot exist unless both the genetic information and transcription/translation machinery are present at the same time, and unless both speak the same language.

Problem 5: No Workable Model for the Origin of Life. The Origin of Life. This problem is one of the big ones in science. It begins to place life, and us, in the universe. Most chemists believe, as do I, that life emerged spontaneously from mixtures of molecules in the prebiotic Earth. How? I have no idea… “[I]t has to be true that we really don’t have a clue how life originated on Earth by natural means.”... “What creates life out of the inanimate compounds that make up living things? No one knows. How were the first organisms assembled? Nature hasn’t given us the slightest hint. If anything, the mystery has deepened over time.”

Mathematically Impossible

Life has never been created by non-life. This has never been observed or done in a lab. The most famous studies conducted (the Miller-Urey experiments) were faulty and the conditions set for the experiments were proven incorrect years ago. It is simply not possible. “The sudden appearance of a large self-copying molecule such as RNA was exceedingly improbable. … [The probability] is so vanishingly small that its happening even once anywhere in the visible universe would count as a piece of exceptional good luck.” [46]

No One Understands Abiogenesis: https://youtu.be/i6remrJNyNk [timestamp 3:56-10:05]

The Evolutionary model is the only model accepted and respected by popular science today. Everyone merely accepts it as true and points to the easy parts as proof of the difficult parts. They believe there is no good alternative and so they cling to this as the only viable model that they will eventually figure out. “Though no evidence worth anything has as yet, in my opinion, been advanced in favour of a living being, being developed from inorganic matter, yet I cannot avoid believing the possibility of this will be proved some day in accordance with the law of continuity.” (Charles Darwin, “To Daniel Mackintosh 28 February 1882,” Darwin Correspondence Project, letter 13711,) [2.6] We are still, to this day, looking for this very same evidence to prove life can and has come from inorganic matter. Yet, still, we find no viable mechanism.

A Viable Mechanism for the Origin of life (the only viable option)

Hebrews 11:1-3

“1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

2 For by it the elders obtained a good report.

3 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.”

We cannot find the origin of life on this planet by natural means, because it was created supernaturally. Spontaneous and supernatural creation is the only viable option. Consider proteins and Ribosomes (protein factories which are made of proteins and create proteins). How could a self-replicating system, that creates the very same building blocks that are needed to create it , come into being? There is only one option.

Unchecked Bias

“New approaches to investigating the origin of the genetic code are required. The constraints of historical science are such that the origin of life may never be understood.”  …That is, they may never be understood unless scientists are willing to consider goal-directed scientific explanations like intelligent design. [47]

In Summary so far

Darwin is the founder of modern Evolutionary thought, publishing his book, origin of species, in 1859

His main Theory is composed of 5 minor theories: Evolution as such, common descent, gradualism, multiplication of species, and natural selection

He believed in the evolutionary superiority of certain races over others, as well as men over women, and also believed in eugenics

God formed us all in His image, from one couple and in Christ there is no such superiority. We are all inherently valuable regardless of our circumstances.

The Miller-Urey experiment was faulty and later debunked but many still hold to it as a good example of life from non-life

Problems include:

1. No Viable Mechanism to Generate a Primordial Soup

2. Forming Polymers Requires Dehydration Synthesis (amino acids don’t form in water)

3. RNA World Hypothesis Lacks Confirming Evidence (RNA can’t perform all functions in the cell, where’d it come from?)

4. Unguided Chemical Processes Cannot Explain the Origin of the Genetic Code

5. No Workable Model for the Origin of Life

No one seems to understand evolution, specifically abiogenesis and the mechanism that sets it all into motion. God is the only viable mechanism

Microevolution

Microevolution is simply a change in gene frequency within a population. Evolution at this scale can be observed over short periods of time — for example, between one generation and the next, the frequency of a gene for brown coloration in a population of beetles increases. Such a change might come about because natural selection favored the gene…, because the population received new immigrants carrying the gene, because of mutation, or because of random genetic drift from one generation to the next. [48]

Speciation vs Kinds

Most scientists will point to speciation when they talk about Micro and Macro Evolution, while most Bible-believing Christians will refer to speciation and Kinds as two different things. Speciation is what we observe within all types of animals. There is the Zebra species and the Horse Species and the Donkey species, but we would refer to these as being the equine-kind. This is because although they may be different, they are still largely able to breed and produce viable offspring. These do seem to share a common ancestor. More simply put, they look alike, are designed alike, and can interbreed.

A Biblical Understanding

Genesis 6:19-20

“19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.

20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.”

This is the issue with calling different kinds of creatures different species. It makes them seem like they’re some new kind of creation rather than a variation of an already existing creature, like a small beaked bird vs a big beaked bird. If we were to look at all the different humans on Earth and classify ourselves the same way, we would consider each race or ethnic group to be a different species. The wording is the main issue.

It is an observable fact that things DO change over time, just look at dogs now vs the past. We have so many different breeds and even the breeds we have now look different then they used to in the past. This selective breeding is a prime example of how animals can develop different distinguishing traits that make them unique from one another. This, however, doesn’t disprove God in the slightest. It merely shows that He made His creations malleable enough to adapt to our different and changing environments. We would call this adaptation. The same reason we have so many different kinds of people in different parts of the world, better suited to their environment (dark skin to handle more sunlight, more hairy to handle colder climates, etc).

But what about Mutation?

Is it not possible for a creature to mutate into something completely new?

It’s interesting to note that even though selective dog breeding has been around for centuries we still have yet to get a flying dog or a dog with gills. Even though we have made all sorts of new and different breeds we still only get dogs. No matter how much a creature may change, it only has the genetic code (building instructions) for its specific type. This is why we see two-headed or six-legged animals. They are only creating the same information erroneously.

Are there Beneficial Mutations? Do they have the ability to make creatures better?

“A single mutation can have a large effect, but in many cases, evolutionary change is based on the accumulation of many mutations with small effects. Mutational effects can be beneficial, harmful, or neutral, depending on their context or location. Most non-neutral [that would be beneficial or harmful] mutations are deleterious [making them mostly harmful]. In general, the more base pairs that are affected by a mutation, the larger the effect of the mutation, and the larger the mutation's probability of being deleterious.” [49] T

he theory of evolution suggests that we should see new genetic material being added as simpler life forms evolve into more complex ones, yet their main purported mechanism, mutation, is most often deleting genetic material, not creating it! This would mean that evolution by mutation of genetic code is not only impossible but would actually have the opposite effect and make creatures less complex and more broken down.

An Interesting example of what many scientists call a Beneficial mutation:

“Italian researchers studying the population of the African country of Burkina Faso found a protective effect associated with a different variant of hemoglobin, named HbC [a variant of sickle-cell anemia]. People with just one copy of this gene are 29% less likely to get malaria [loss of blood cells that cause horrible health problems and death], while people with two copies enjoy a 93% reduction in risk. And this gene variant causes, at worst, a mild anemia, nowhere near as debilitating as sickle-cell disease.” [50]

One of the best examples of a beneficial mutation is the contraction of a disease that reduces your risk of another disease… That’s like saying people who are deaf have a 100% reduction in risk for loud noises damaging their ears, people with their breasts removed are at a lower risk of developing breast cancer, or leg amputees will never get athlete’s foot. This is not a benefit but a somewhat positive byproduct of an otherwise terrible condition. We must also note that we live in a fallen world. Sin has affected every aspect of our world and our being. We should expect to see mutations, loss of functions, and an overall degradation from the Garden of Eden until now. This however does not prove that we came from simple and less evolved creatures and have gotten better and more complex over time, but rather the opposite. This degradation points to an overall worsening and loss of material, not a gaining and evolution into something better

“Nonetheless, most studies of recent evolution involve the loss of traits, and we still understand little of the genetic changes needed in the origin of novel traits.” [2.7]

Mutation is not a viable mechanism for creatures to change from one kind into another.

Macroevolution

“Macroevolution generally refers to evolution above the species level…Macroevolution encompasses the grandest trends and transformations in evolution, such as the origin of mammals” [51]

Is this true? Those bones sure do look similar enough (especially when color coded;) Is it possible for animals to slowly develop into other KINDS of animals? How can we explain these similarities?

The Fossil Record Shows it all

[2.8] One frequently cited "hole" in the theory: Creationists claim there are no transitional fossils, aka missing links. Biologists and paleontologists, among others, know this claim is false. [2.9] Many will point to transitional species in the fossil record as clear evidence of evolution, yet it faces Two major problems: Moeritherium (supposed elephant ancestor)

1. Lack of undisputed transitional fossils

“Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?” -Darwin, C. 1902. On The Origin of Species… [3.1] We have evidence of dog ancestors into dogs but not single celled organisms all the way down to us nor even fish into reptiles. If animals truly evolved, one would expect to see them all over at different points in their evolutionary process, showing some evidence of slight modification between fossils of different kinds; but so far we have found no undisputed transitional fossils (some may claim otherwise, so we will address this in the next point). [3.2]

1. Transitional fossils can't be verified

How can you know that one fossil is related to another? Or that one fossil is an intermediate of another? One bird may have a long beak and one a short one. Does a bird fossil with a medium sized beak mean it is a missing link between the two or did it adapt separately? We can't possibly know (refer back to the section above: What does the Fossil Record tell us). This is why we say there are no undisputed transitional fossils, because they cannot be proven. Again, we are seeing claims based on assumptions that cannot be verified. This looks a lot like the kind of faith scientists disprove of. Tapirs are small mammals shaped similarly to a pig and with a small malleable snout, similar to an elephant trunk. Should we conclude that Tapirs are the ancestors of elephants? Or perhaps elephants slowly evolved into small Tapirs?

In fact, the depiction of the Moeritherium looks much more similar to the Tapir. Perhaps it is the ancestor of these creatures instead. Just because animals may have some similar features does not mean they are related. A dog and cat share 4-legs and a tail. Must we conclude that they thus necessitate a common cattish-dog or doggish-cat ancestor? It’s all based on assumptions. Because they believe everything came from nothing, they must believe in common ancestry. The alternative would be that everything spontaneously came into being which would necessitate a creator as natural processes cannot cause such an event. This of course is something evolutionists are unwilling to accept.

However, there is something we do see in the Fossil Record…

Cambrian Explosion

Said to have occurred 250 million years ago, a wide variety of animals exist in the fossil record, seemingly out of nowhere, with traits and features far different then what was seen in strata previous. Thus making, what appears to be, a sudden explosion of new life forms. Darwin “argued that the incompleteness of the fossil record gives the illusion of an explosive event, but with the eventual discovery of older and better-preserved rocks, the ancestors of these Cambrian taxa would be found.” [3.3] How do scientists address this mystery? They merely hand wave this away as solved and a non-issue because there must be transitional species because some older fossils look similar and they probably had enough time to evolve. 

So, without fossil evidence and while still lacking a mechanism to allow creatures to transition from one kind into another, they believe new creatures must have formed from old ones. Again we see the assumption that similar features prove common ancestry and that a sudden appearance of vastly different creatures must have evolved (even though we do not have any transitional fossils to back this up). Once more, we see God is the only viable mechanism for the diversity of life, in all its various forms (with the flood accounting for this rapid burial of different life forms, looking like they appeared from nowhere  [3.4]).

What about Survival of the Fittest?

Survival of the fittest, “Also known as “natural selection,” it is a simple statement of the fact that in dangerous circumstances, only those individuals most adapted to their environment survive”. Survival of the fittest is not necessarily true. This is another assumption. Many times it is the lucky who survive in nature. Some animals were hunted to extinction, not because they were weak or undeveloped but because they could not account for human weaponry. The animals who are killed by other animals aren’t always the sick, weak, young or old but the unlucky ones that trip over debris, get cornered in a ravine, are on the outside of the pack, and/or are unable to overcome multiple predators alone.

Ecclesiastes 9:11 

“I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.”

This would not then automatically lead to the most evolved life forms throughout time, but a lucky few survivors which don’t necessarily have better traits but just better luck. 

What is the Mechanism? 

“An organism’s genome is the sum total of all its genetic parts, including all its chromosomes, genes, and nucleotides. A genome is an instruction manual that specifies a particular form of life. The human genome is a manual that instructs human cells to be human cells and the human body to be the human body. There is no information system designed by man that can even begin to compare to the simplest genome in complexity.” John C. Sanford, Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome, third edition (Waterloo, NY: FMS Publications, 2008), p. 1, emphasis in the original. [2.3]

There is genetic code specific to each creature that allows for change (like being taller or hairier) or even mutation, such as 4 limbs or 6 fingers, but there is no genetic code for new things that the creature simply does not already possess. A bird has the code for wings and so can have the variance of larger wings, but does not have the code for human legs and thus cannot produce this because it has no instructions to do so.

No matter how many outside pressures there may be on creatures, they will never be able to transform into other kinds of creatures. Not in a million years! (Quite literally). What benefit would a fish have to develop half lungs and half gills over a land creature or water creature? What creatures would it mate with to pass on this trait? How could it survive by itself when nothing like it would be with it to keep it alive. How could something so inefficient and rare have a chance to become the dominant trait owner within its species? It would need to evolve with a halfway trait it has no code for, with other creatures that also get this same trait to pass on and somehow make this a dominant trait and then survive beyond whatever came before multiple trillions of times to get to us humans (not to mention the mystery of the formation of immaterial consciousness). TALK ABOUT BLIND FAITH!

In summary:

Microevolution is simply a change in gene frequency within a population. Evolution at this scale can be observed

Confusion of definitions between Speciation vs Kinds has led to many pointing to adaptation as evidence for macroevolution.

We would classify horses, zebras, and donkeys as different species in the equine-kind, which is separate from the canine-kind, which also has different species/breeds of dogs.

Most mutations are deleterious, making the main proposed mechanism for evolution a simplifier with negative affects and not one that makes more complex organisms.

Macroevolution is the gradual change from one kind of animal into another kind (i.e. reptile into bird).

The Fossil Record does not show transitional fossils because that simply cannot be gleaned from bones. It is based on assumptions.

The Cambrian explosion is a good example of a large number of creatures with no evolutionary ancestor (contrary to the common notion)

Survival of the fittest is not necessarily the norm. It is the lucky who survive, fit or not.

“A genome is an instruction manual that specifies a particular form of life. The human genome is a manual that instructs human cells to be human cells and the human body to be the human body.”

Example:

Many changes would have been necessary to convert a land-mammal into a whale, including:

1. Emergence of a blowhole, with musculature and nerve control

2. Modification of the eye for permanent underwater vision

3. Ability to drink sea water

4. Forelimbs transformed into flippers

5. Modification of skeletal structure

6. Ability to nurse young underwater

7. Origin of tail flukes and musculature

8. Blubber for temperature insulation

Animals cannot change into different kinds of animals. How can a fish with gills adapt into a lizard with lungs? What would drive such a change? It would be worse on land than in the water and yet still worse in the water than before its changes, thus killing it before it could change. Even if it did survive it would need multiple other compatible fish to go through the same changes in the same area so they could all propagate and further evolve. It's not only improbable but statically impossible.

No One Understands Macroevolution: https://youtu.be/i6remrJNyNk [timestamp 10:06-12:55]

Universal Common Descent

Embryology

“Embryos of many different kinds of animals: mammals, birds, reptiles, fish, etc. look very similar and it is often difficult to tell them apart. Many traits of one type of animal appear in the embryo of another type of animal. For example, fish embryos and human embryos both have gill slits.” [52]

Does Similar Design = Common descent?

It has nothing to do with evolution and all to do with limitations. You see, there are certain parameters in place that make certain designs the most efficient and certain other designs not even possible. When God created this universe, He created it with certain laws. Laws such as Gravity, conservation of angular momentum, thermodynamics, and so on. These limitations He set in place made certain similar designs among a broad array of creatures the most logical outcome. We shouldn’t look at common design and think of universal common descent, but rather a universal common designer.

The Biblical Understanding of Common Descent

We do believe that some animals share a common ancestor. Horses and Zebras, Crocodiles and Alligators, or Wolves and Dogs all came from a common ancestor, but that ancestor was just like them, a horse-kind, gator-kind, or dog-kind. These ancestors came off the Ark after the flood and began to adapt and change as they spread over the Earth. They never received new information to turn into a different kind of animal but they did have minor changes to eventually differentiate themselves from each other.

Design not as similar as some may think

The Embryos in the infamous Haeckel drawings were made to look especially alike to prove evolution. Haeckel’s drawings were later proven misleading and inaccurate. He cherry-picked stages that looked similar and completely ignored how they actually started out. M.K. Richardson and staff’s photographs clearly show they are much more different than people think.

Yet even the aspects that appear similar are in fact completely different:

Human Gill slits?:

Many will point to the similar looking “gill slits” as evidence of evolution but fail to accurately identify what they are talking about. Pharyngeal arches (incorrectly referred to as “gill slits”) and their functions in the formation of  humans: “Humans never have “gills”, and our “gill slits” don’t normally open up the way that fish gill slits do. But we definitely do have the same basic structures, the pharyngeal arches, that go on to form gills in fish.” [53] The area and look of the pharyngeal arches may appear similar but are merely folds in the skin of the embryo that hold developing body parts. They’re basically storage sacks.

Embryology simply does not prove evolution in any sense. Of course we should expect some embryos to similarly develop the head and spine before the rest of the body, as these are the most crucial structures that the entire body builds off of. “In summary, evolution has produced a number of changes in the embryonic stages of vertebrates including:

1. Differences in body size

2. Differences in body plan (for example, the presence or absence of paired limb buds)

3. Changes in the number of units in repeating series such as the somites and pharyngeal arches

4. Changes in the pattern of growth of different fields (allometry)

5. Changes in the timing of development of different fields (heterochrony)

These modifications of embryonic development are difficult to reconcile with the idea that most or all vertebrate clades pass through an embryonic stage that is highly resistant to evolutionary change. This idea is implicit in Haeckel’s drawings, which have been used to substantiate two distinct claims. First, that differences between species typically become more apparent at late stages. Second, that vertebrate embryos are virtually identical at earlier stages. This first claim is clearly true. Our survey, however, does not support the second claim, and instead reveals considerable variability — and evolutionary lability — of the tailbud stage, the purported phylotypic stage of vertebrates.” [54]

In summary, evolution has made things so different that they no longer seem similar at all. Embryos are in fact considerably distinct at early stages and even more obviously different in later stages. There is no reason to think they are similar enough to entertain universal common descent based on these findings.

Vestigial Structures

Many scientists will point to these “supposedly” useless structures as parts of a creature that were left behind during its evolutionary process. Remnants from its less-evolved evolutionary ancestor that we can actually live without. Firstly, just because you are able to live without something does not mean it is unnecessary. You can live without your arms and legs, but that does not mean you do not need them. Some will give the example of the pelvis and little bony protrusions in snakes and whales as an example of such leftover parts. However, they fail to understand (whether ignorantly or on purpose) that these do serve a function. Snakes and whales use these small bones to reproduce. Without these bone structures, they could not mate with any degree of success because they would just be flopping their bodies around hoping for the best.

The Tailbone is another example commonly given. Yet this part of our pelvis is not without purpose. It is the anchor point for the muscles that form all around our pelvis, including holding the anus in place. Not quite so unnecessary if you ask me. [55] Just because you can live without something, does not mean it is unnecessary (the appendix for example, produces and stores good microbes for the human gut).

See Also: https://answersingenesis.org/human-body/vestigial-organs/setting-the-record-straight-on-vestigial-organs/

What about Lucy? Evidence for Australopithecus

AL 288-1, commonly known as Lucy or Dinkʼinesh (Amharic: ድንቅ ነሽ, lit. 'you are marvellous'), is a collection of several hundred pieces of fossilized bone comprising 40 percent of the skeleton of a female of the hominin species Australopithecus afarensis…discovered in 1974 in Ethiopia…dated to about 3.2 million years ago. Human-like Lucy Recreation   | Actual Lucy Fossil |   Ape-like Lucy Recreation. Artist renditions have influenced our views on Lucy. Just as we saw in our animal skeleton activity, the way Lucy looked when alive is just not possible to fully know (especially given the little amount of remains we have available). They also assume that Lucy walked like a human because they found footprints that look just like humans, but they believe that humans couldn’t have existed back then so it must belong to our ape-like ancestors. [43] Notice how they show her eye color, human-like lips, give her a thinking look, more hair than most humans but less than most apes, and a human stride.

Lucy has been noted to have “relatively long and curved fingers, relatively long arms, and funnel-shaped chest.” (Nature, Vol 404:339-340, 3-23-00.)

“The conclusion is that Lucy’s erect posture is unlike that seen in modern humans and is still a mystery. Not enough fossil data are yet available to make a final judgement on the nature of her erect posture. … Prevailing views of Lucy’s posture are almost impossible to reconcile. When one looks at the reconstruction proposed by Lovejoy and by Weaver, one gets the impression that her fleshed reconstruction would be a perfectly modern biped. But when one looks at the preliminary reconstruction recently shown at the Smithsonian, one gets the impression of a chimpanzee awkwardly attempting to stand on its hindlimbs and about to fall on its front limbs. … To resolve such differences, more anatomical (fossil) evidence is needed. The available data at present are open to widely different interpretations. Until more fossils are recovered and until we have a better interpretation of human and non-human primate positional behavior, there is likely to be a continuing debate on the subject of Lucy’s posture and locomotion. Lucy’s erect posture still is a mystery.” [2.2]

But Chimps are 99% similar to Humans in our DNA!

“Humans and chimps share a surprising 98.8 percent of their DNA…Human and chimp DNA is so similar because the two species are so closely related.” - American Museum of Natural History. This is what most people teach, what most have heard, and tends to be the first thing you see when you look into this matter. DNA proves common ancestry and thus evolution is clearly seen. Yet, this is based not on fact but an incorrect examination of the data.

6.29% had no alignment to the chimp assembly

5.01% was in CNVs relative to chimp [copy number variants that appear multiple times in one genome but fewer in the other]

1.11% differed due to SNPs in the one-to-one best aligned regions [where one or a few nucleotides differ]

0.28% differed due to indels within the one-to-one best aligned regions [small sections of DNA that has been added or removed]

The percentage of nucleotides in the human genome that had one-to-one exact matches in the chimpanzee genome was 82.34%. [2.4] This may make us similar to apes in many ways, as we are both mammals with hair, live birth, similar facial features and bodies; yet, we are still vastly different in terms of our body structure, muscle-type, behaviors, brain-size and capacity, etc. I would postulate the reason God made apes so similar to man was to show what we would truly be, were we merely animals.

What about Neanderthals?

As for Neanderthals, they were just ancient humans. We have archeological evidence that they made tools, makeup, jewelry, and made cave paintings. These are extremely human behaviors. [44] Of course they have differences from us now and even differences from other humans back then. People come in all sorts of different shapes and sizes. Having 2 different dominant types of people is no different then the very dominant types we have now (such as those of euro-asian, african, indigenous american, or middle eastern descent). Neanderthals thought, acted, lived, and bled the same as you and I. Even reproducing with other ancient humans to the point where everything about them is just as human as anyone could be (slight physical differences aside). As we have continually seen, more assumptions are made, more leaps are taken, and more errors occur when trying to explain the evidence from an evolutionary worldview. 

See Also: Genetics confirms recent supernatural creation

What Does it All Mean?

Can the Bible and Evolution live in harmony?

Put simply. No. Though there are aspects that we may agree on, like certain observations about perceived age, adaptation, and speciation (microevolution), the broad assertion that All things came from a common ancestor that evolved overtime from a planet and universe that did so as well is just NOT feasible with a Biblical worldview nor the actual evidence!

The only part we hold to is that the universe came into being in a miraculous event with built-in age and that creatures are malleable enough to adapt. Modern evolutionary theory is supposed to build upon itself to prove it as truth and yet we see the contrary. The entire theory is based on assumptions and lacks any working mechanism to create and shape the universe, create life, or prove the common origin of our many kinds of creatures. The Bible is clear on how God made all things. Either God is true or He is not.

Romans 3:4

“...let God be true, but every man a liar…”

Colossians 2:8

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."

Colossians 1:16-17

"16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist."

See also: Can We Trust the Bible?

The evidence proves the need for God as its mechanism. Intelligent design is the only viable option.

What’s the big deal? It’s just a theory

Joseph Stalin and Charles Darwin were both Christians, studying to become priests, who lost their faith after they were convinced of Evolution. Today, many people find themselves in a similar situation. [56] [57] 

1 Peter 3:15

“But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:”

There is a reason why many evolutionists don’t believe in God or the Bible, the two cannot properly mix. This is why it is important to know the issues with the theory and be able to point them out in order to help others from losing their faith.

Ecclesiastes 12:13-14

“13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this [is] the whole [duty] of man.

14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether [it be] good, or whether [it be] evil.”

The overwhelming evidence for the resurrection of Christ and the reliability of scripture, along with the clear reality of the evidence around us backing it up, points to God and not evolution as the best source for how creation came to be.

Sources:

[1] Kent Hovind, The Age of the Earth

https://youtu.be/LaHcHwPj4sw

[2] Age of the Universe

https://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_age.html#:~:text=Astronomers%20estimate%20the%20age%20of,the%20holes%20in%20a%20wall.

[3] How did the Universe Begin?

https://thesciencebehindit.org/how-did-the-universe-begin-how-will-it-end/#:~:text=The%20Big%20Bang%20theory%20says,and%20cooling%E2%80%94of%20space%20itself.

[4] What was before the Big Bang?

https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/what-was-before-the-big-bang-everything-you-need-to-know/

[5] No God Needed To Create Universe, Hawking Says

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2010/09/03/129625729/no-god-necessary-to-create-universe-hawking-says-your-thoughts#:~:text=%22Because%20there%20is%20a%20law,Excerpt%20via%20the%20Associated%20Press.)

[6] Unlocking the Mysteries of the Quantum Vacuum

https://meroli.web.cern.ch/blog_vacuum.html#:~:text=The%20quantum%20vacuum%20has%20been,dark%20energy%20and%20dark%20matter.

[7] How do scientists determine the ages of stars? Is it accurate?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-do-scientists-determi/#:~:text=%22It%20is%20impossible%20to%20determine,basic%20types%20of%20star%20cluster.

[8] Calculating the age of the Universe 

https://www.quora.com/Why-cant-our-universe-be-8-quadrillion-years-old-instead-of-13-8-billion/answer/Samuel-Green-44?ch=17&oid=202102014&share=469ffbcd&srid=ugVUZ&target_type=answer

[9] How do scientists calculate the age of a star?

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/star-age-calculation-astronomy-life-cycle

[10] Blue Stars

https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/stars/blue-stars/

[11] Dark Matter and Dark Energy

https://home.cern/science/physics/dark-matter#:~:text=The%20rate%2https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/have-we-detected-dark-energy-cambridge-scientists-say-its-a-possibility#:~:text=%E2%80%9CLarge%2Dscale%20experiments%20like%20XENON1T,way%20gravity%20pulls%20objects%20around.0of%20expansion%20and,of%20this%20mysterious%20substance%20exists.

[12] Dark Matter Not Directly Observed

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/dark-matter#:~:text=Scientists%20have%20not%20yet%20observed,to%20detect%20with%20current%20instruments.

[13] What Powered the Big Bang?

https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-powered-the-big-bang

[14] Finding the Age of the Earth by Meteorites

https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html#:~:text=There%20are%20more%20than%2070,and%204.58%20billion%20years%20ago.

[15] Geologic Time Scale

https://www.britannica.com/science/geologic-time

[16] Radiometric Dating

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/how-did-scientists-calculate-age-earth/

[17] Radiocarbon Dating

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/radiocarbon-dating-explained#:~:text=Inorganic%20materials%20can't%20be,t%20be%20dated%20at%20all.

[18] Potassium-argon Dating

https://www.britannica.com/science/potassium-argon-dating

[19] Uranium-lead Dating

https://isobarscience.com/u-th_dating/#:~:text=U%2DTh%20dating%20is%20based,230Th)%20products%20of%20decay.

[20] Geologic Time

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/geotime.htm#:~:text=The%20geologic%20time%20scale%20began,of%20rocks%20around%20the%20world.

[21] Examining Thermoluminescence Dating

https://www.icr.org/article/examining-thermoluminescence-dating

[22] Radio-Isotope Dating

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/radioisotope-dating-of-rocks-in-the-grand-canyon/

[23] Floods on Mars rapidly formed Canyons

https://news.utexas.edu/2018/11/16/overflowing-crater-lakes-carved-canyons-across-mars/

[24] The Oddities of the Grand Canyon

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/grand-canyon-facts/when-and-how-did-the-grand-canyon-form/

[25] Mountain Formation during the Flood

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/plate-tectonics/plate-tectonics/making-more-mountains/

[26] Kent Hovind, the Flood

https://youtu.be/sfV_2h6bwHI

[27] Flood Stories

https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blog/a-flood-of-myths-and-stories/

[28] Biblical Timeline for the Earth and Flood

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/timeline-for-the-flood/

[29] Oldest Living Individual Organism

https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2011/04/21/methuselah-bristlecone-pine-thought-be-oldest-living-organism-earth

[30] Carbon-14 Found in Dinosaur Fossils

https://www.icr.org/article/carbon-14-found-dinosaur-fossils

[31] How Do Scientists Determine the Age of Dinosaur Bones?

https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geology/dinosaur-bone-age.htm

[32] How do Geologists know how old a Rock is?

https://geology.utah.gov/map-pub/survey-notes/glad-you-asked/glad-you-asked-how-do-geologists-know-how-old-a-rock-is/

[33] Potassium Argon Dating not reliable?

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=cf64327ef983c9cc6fbde63dca1d3bcdf55392b6

[34] Trouble with Uranium-Lead Dating

https://newsarchive.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/09/16_uranium.shtml#:~:text=The%20problem%20with%20using%20microscopic,crystal%2C%20throwing%20off%20the%20analysis.

[35] Issues with Carbon-14 Dating

https://sepetjian.wordpress.com/2011/10/17/carbon-14-dating-an-unlikely-young-earth-apologist/

[36] Likelihood of Fossilization

https://www.jstor.org/stable/24319494#:~:text=Probably%20only%20about%20100%2C000%20of,in%20sedimentary%20rocks%20as%20fossils.

[37] Fossilization process

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/fossil/

[38] Fossilization within 24 hours

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180726090043.htm#:~:text=Scientists%20have%20discovered%20a%20new,mimic%20what%20real%20fossils%20undergo.

[39] Dinosaurs never existed?

https://techreader.com/top-ten/top-ten-scientific-flaws-in-the-theory-of-prehistoric-dinosaurs/

[40] Dinosaurs are Actually Dragons?

https://wsau.com/2017/07/06/%E2%80%8Bthe-myth-of-dinosaurs-the-reality-of-dragons/

[41] Dinosaur-like Dragons depicted in History

https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/dragon-legends/dragon-legends-truths-behind-the-tales/

[42] Marco Polo’s Dragons

https://apologeticspress.org/marco-polos-dragons-2867/

[43] Did Lucy Walk like us?

https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/lucy/lucy-did-she-walk-like-us/

[44] Neanderthal, ancient Human

https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/neanderthal/

[45] The Origin of Life (Abiogenesis) 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3718341/

[46] RNA could not suddenly appear

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-simpler-origin-for-life/

[47] Five Problems with the current Origin-of-Life Theories

https://evolutionnews.org/2012/12/top_five_probl/

[48] What is Microevolution?

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolution-at-different-scales-micro-to-macro/what-is-microevolution/

[49] Genetic Mutation

https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/genetic-mutation-1127/#:~:text=Most%20non%2Dneutral%20mutations%20are,mutation's%20probability%20of%20being%20deleterious.

[50] Four “Beneficial” Evolutionary Mutations in Humans

https://bigthink.com/surprising-science/evolution-is-still-happening-beneficial-mutations-in-humans/

[51] What is Macroevolution?

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolution-101/macroevolution/what-is-macroevolution/

[52] Similarities of Embryos

https://necsi.edu/similarities-of-embryos#:~:text=Embryos%20of%20many%20different%20kinds,embryos%20both%20have%20gill%20slits.

[53] Do Human Embryos have gill slits?

https://www.quora.com/Do-human-embryos-have-gill-slits

[54] Misuse of Embryology to argue for Evolution

https://evolutionnews.org/2010/06/current_textbooks_misuse_embry/

[55] Function of the Coccyx (Tailbone)

https://www.spine-health.com/conditions/spine-anatomy/anatomy-coccyx-tailbone#:~:text=Function%20of%20the%20Coccyx,person%20in%20the%20seated%20position.

[56] Joseph Stalin almost became a priest (click on where was he educated)

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Joseph-Stalin

[57] Joseph Stalin influenced by Evolution

https://evolutionnews.org/2020/07/how-darwin-shaped-the-young-joseph-stalin/

[1.1] On The Origin of Everything, Review by Philosopher David Albert

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=1

[1.2] Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (Something from “Nothing”)

https://theconversation.com/how-could-the-big-bang-arise-from-nothing-171986

[1.3] What is Dark Matter?

https://www.space.com/20930-dark-matter.html

[1.4] What is Dark Energy?

https://www.space.com/dark-energy-what-is-it

[1.5] What is Dark Energy? Our Expanding Universe.

https://science.nasa.gov/universe/the-universe-is-expanding-faster-these-days-and-dark-energy-is-responsible-so-what-is-dark-energy/

[1.6] Cosmic History

https://science.nasa.gov/universe/overview/#futur

[1.7] Radiometric age dating

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/radiometric-age-dating.htm

[1.8] What was Pangea

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-was-pangea#:~:text=From%20about%20300%2D200%20million,a%20single%20continent%20called%20Pangea.

[1.9] Radiocarbon dating uncertainty and the reliability of the PEWMA method

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5774753/

[2.1] Behemoth and Leviathan Figurative or Literal Part 2

https://apologeticspress.org/behemoth-and-leviathan-figurative-or-literal-part-2-5687/

[2.2] Darwin’s Five Theories of Evolution

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781400854714.755/pdf?licenseType=restricted#:~:text=The%20five%20theories%20were%3A%20(1,in%20treating%20them%20as%20such.

[2.3] Darwin, race and gender

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2672903/

[2.4] Miller-Urey Experiment

https://www.britannica.com/science/Miller-Urey-experiment

[2.5] Unlocking the Secrets of Earth’s Early Atmosphere

https://www.anl.gov/article/unlocking-the-secrets-of-earths-early-atmosphere#:~:text=Magma%20is%20rich%20in%20iron,was%20available%20at%20the%20time.

[2.6] Darwin to Daniel Mackintosh, 28 February 1882

https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/DCP-LETT-13711.xml

[2.7] A golden age for evolutionary genetics? Genomic studies of adaptation in natural populations

https://www.cell.com/trends/genetics/abstract/S0168-9525(10)00168-X

[2.8] Transitional Fossils are not Rare

https://ncse.ngo/transitional-fossils-are-not-rare

[2.9] Fossils Reveal the Truth about Darwin’s Theory

https://www.livescience.com/3306-fossils-reveal-truth-darwin-theory.html

[3.1] Darwin’s Remark on Lack of Transitional Species

Darwin, C. 1902. On The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection: or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, 6th Edition. New York: P. F. Collier & Son. 233.

[3.2] 150 Years Later, Fossils Still Don’t Help Darwin

https://www.icr.org/article/a-150-years-later-fossils-still-dont-help-darwin

[3.3] Darwin on the Cambrian Explosion

D. Erwin, “The Cambrian Conundrum: Early Divergence and Later Ecological Success in the Early History of Animals,” Science 334, no. 6059:1091–1097,

[3.4] Researchers Devise Alternate Theory for Cambrian Explosion

https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/fossil-record/researchers-devise-alternate-theory-cambrian-explosion/?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjwmYCzBhA6EiwAxFwfgHBe-p1kumOkMfnuMKyBYZ6rhxyQKqKZUTjGssY7Ycv7fCCwueNhOhoCHvAQAvD_BwE

[3.5] My Pilgrimage to Lucy’s Holy Relics Fails to Inspire Faith in Darwinism

https://evolutionnews.org/2009/02/my_pilgrimage_to_lucys_holy_re/

[3.6] Neanderthal Our Worthy Ancestor

https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/neanderthal/our-worthy-ancestors/

[3.7] How similar are Human and Chimpanzee Genomes?

https://richardbuggs.com/2018/07/14/how-similar-are-human-and-chimpanzee-genomes/

For More Information and Study:

Topics to Lookup that we did not fully talk about but are still very interesting 

Origin of Consciousness 

Irreducible complexity

Evidence for the flood and humans and dinosaurs coexisting (the grand canyon, and sealife on mountain tops)

The Cambrian explosion (and others)

The origin of information (DNA code)

The origin of consciousness/that which is experienced beyond the material

Lucy Pelvic Bone readjusted controversy

Creatures somehow evolving together with other creatures, plants, or natural disasters (bees and flowers, termites and stomach bacteria, pine cones and forest fires)

Dinosaur and Human footprints found together

[001] Kent Hovind, Problems with evolution 

https://youtu.be/6uw777dfC5U

[002] Hubble Captures 3 Faces of Evolving Supernova in Early Universe

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2022/hubble-captures-3-faces-of-evolving-supernova-in-early-universe

[003] Have we Detected Dark Energy

https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/have-we-detected-dark-energy-cambridge-scientists-say-its-a-possibility#:~:text=%E2%80%9CLarge%2Dscale%20experiments%20like%20XENON1T,way%20gravity%20pulls%20objects%20around.

[004] Limitations of Thermoluminescence

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0031920171900525

[005] Planets Spinning Backwards

https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/extrasolar-planets/goofy-planet-is-backwards/

[006] “Spontaneous Creation”: Meyer on Stephen Hawking’s Category Error

https://evolutionnews.org/2018/03/spontaneous-creation-meyer-on-stephen-hawkings-category-error/

[007] How Old is the Earth (Answers in Genesis)

https://answersingenesis.org/age-of-the-earth/how-old-earth/

[008] Transition from Belief in Young Earth to Old Earth

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/geohist.html

[009] How did plants survive the Flood?

https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/how-did-plants-survive-the-flood/

[010] The Flood makes quick what would otherwise, left alone, take long

https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/death-valley-stream-shows-geologic-changes/

[011] Geologic Evidence for the Flood

https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/geologic-evidences-for-the-genesis-flood/

[012] Fossil Order doesn’t mean old Earth?

https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/fossil-record/doesnt-order-of-fossils-in-rock-favor-long-ages/

[013] Kent Hovind Dinosaurs and the Bible

https://youtu.be/LCavM96A2p0

[014] Adam and Eve: Sole-Genealogical Progenitorship

https://peacefulscience.org/articles/three-stories-on-adam/

[015] Genetics Confirms Recent Supernatural Creation

https://answersingenesis.org/adam-and-eve/genetics-confirms-recent-supernatural-creation-adam-and-eve/

[016] What is Immoral about Eugenics?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1129063/#:~:text=The%20most%20common%20arguments%20against,or%20inequities%20that%20might%20arise