F.B. Scott of the Smithsonian institute said: "We are not just missing a few links, but WHOLE CHAINS." Margaret Mead in the introduction of her high school and college textbooks says: "Though I am a confirmed evolutionist, I must admit as an honest scientist that there is NOT ONE IOTA OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION!"
Evolution is a direct contradiction of the 2nd law of thermodynamics. This law states that all processes (left to themselves) go toward a greater state of disorder, disorganization, disarrangement and less complexity (#31). Evolution suggests that things are evolving toward more orderly, organized states, with increasing complexity (life). Now the 2nd law of thermodynamics has been PROVEN WHEREVER AND WHENEVER it has been tested or applied (#32 ). We have just seen that evolution has NO PROOF. Here again we see the folly of the majority of the world's "intellectuals": That which has NO PROOF is believed, and that which IS PROVEN is ignored (WILLINGLY IGNORANT - 2 Peter 3:5). Jesus summed it up in one sentence when talking to the devil's children: Because I tell you the truth ye believe me not." (John 8: 43-47).
Evolution is supposed to advance by a "natural selection" of the best and most advantageous GENE MUTATIONS (a "mutation" is a change, and the good changes are supposed to have a greater chance of existence than the bad ones ) (#33, #34 ) . But the FACTS are this: "Almost ALL mutations are HARMFUL". "Well over 99 per cent are HARMFUL" . "Mutations are of a disorganized nature" (2ND LAW of THERMODYNAMICS.). "Like trying to improve a T.V. picture by ripping wires out by chance" (35, #36) "The process of mutation also produces ill-adapted types. The result is a LOWERING of the average fitness of a population" (#37, #38). These statements are from leading world authorities on gene mutation.
Evolution is really getting around to the idea that things started off by themselves. (Amos 6.13, Isaiah 45:9) If "all things continue as they were from the BEGINNING of the creation", then "creation is no different than what is going on now, and we don't need a Creator (Isaiah 30:11). This idea of things creating themselves is called "Spontaneous generation". The only problem with spontaneous generation is that it is impossible. A French Scientist, Charles Eugene Guye calculated that the chance of one protein MOLECULE coming together by itself would be once in 10 to the 243rd power years (this number is 10 followed by 242 zeros, or one trillion multiplied by itself 20 times). Now the so called "simple cell" is composed of MILLIONS of these MOLECULES and each one is just as hard to come by. Then after you stretch your imagination far enough to swallow that vast improbability, you still have to be able to imagine all those MILLIONS of molecules getting together at the same PLACE, and in the SAME TIME and in a certain DEFINITE PATTERN necessary for life. But then you would still have ONLY ONE CELL, and a dead one because LIFE is not a physical arrangement of chemicals, but the BREATH OF GOD! (Genesis 2:7, Job 34:14-15, Revelation 11:11. "One has on1y to contemplate the magnitude of the task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible" -Wald (#39). If man with his knowledge of chemistry and physics, working along with "CHANCE" for the past 40 centuries, have failed to produce life, HOW DID CHANCE DO it by ITSELF?
The date of creation (4160 B.C.) does not have to be altered to agree with enormous ages that "science" comes up with. It is generally admitted that "MOST of the work done before 1950 along these lines was erroneous", especially the "lead age methods" (#40, #41, #42, #43, #44). And these were supposed to be "INFALLIBLE" in their day. Radiocarbon 14 datings are based upon the amount of cosmic ray effected carbon that is found in the remains of plants and animals (#45). Carbon dating is based on ASSUMPTIONS: "There are two basic assumptions in the Carbon 14 method. One is that the carbon 14 concentration in the carbon dioxide cycle is constant. THE OTHER is that the cosmic ray flux has been essentially constant: -- AT LEAST ON A SCALE OF CENTURIES" (#46). FIVE MORE ASSUMPTIONS can be found by referring to #47. C.B. Hunt, president of the American Geological Institute has CAUTIONED: "The limits of usefulness of the radiocarbon age determinations are NOT YET KNOWN or understood" (#48). For other serious problems in Carbon 14 dating, see (#49, #50, #51, #52). Also, atmospheric condition were vastly different before the FL00D (Genesis 1:6-7, 2.5:6).
What most people fail to see is that the original creation already appeared to have AGE the first week it was made (Genesis 2:4-7) . If someone walked up to Adam with a Geiger counter the day after he was created, they would probably say that he was 20 years old. The stars were created WITH their light rays already reaching the earth (Genesis 1:15, Psalm 136:9). A scientist and telescope on the 4th day (of creation), would say that it took 5 million years for the light from a certain star to get here. (For new ideas on light, time, space, and rejection of Einstein's theory, see #53). Lead and radium found side by side on the 2nd day would have been assumed by scientists to be decaying for centuries. The earth already looked old when it was made, so scientific dates will always be larger (Isaiah 44:25, 29:14). Can you imagine counting the rings in a tree the day after it was made? (Genesis 2:5).
"The great dates (30,000 B.C.) found in history books ARE NOT KNOWN. In fact, it's only about the time of the first dynasty in EGYPT that the last historical date of any real certainty has been established, about 5000 years. ago." (#54).