Skip to comments.Scientific Facts Proving Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution is Wrong, False and Impossible
Posted on 02/14/2009 10:55:11 AM PST by chuck_the_tv_out
The Theory of Evolution is not a scientific law or a law of biology. A scientific law must be 100% correct. Failure to meet only one challenge proves the law is wrong. This web page will prove that the Theory of Evolution fails many challenges, not simply one. The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is wrought with errors. This is why it is called a theory, instead of a law.
The cheetah in Africa is an example of an animal in the cat family with very limited variety in the DNA. Each cheetah looks like an identical twin. The cheetah DNA is so identical that the skin from one cheetah can be grafted into another cheetah without any rejection by the body.
Life did not start with a bolt of lightning striking a pond of water as claimed by evolutionists. That is pure childish fantasy. Evolution is simply a myth.
The universe is slowing down to a lower state, not higher. The genes of plants, insects, animals and humans are continually becoming defective, not improving. Species are becoming extinct, not evolving. Order will always move naturally toward disorder or chaos, unless changed by an intelligent being.
(Excerpt) Read more at biblelife.org ...
Complete misunderstanding of what a Scientific Theory is, right out of the gate.
Save your brains cells and don't read any further.
I will say nothing further until this is moved out of religion forum.
What on earth are you talking about? Why, just last week, I saw a fence lizard, flopping around on useless protowings, planning an escape from fire ants in a few million years. < /sarc>
Don’t forget the example of the yucca moth and the yucca plant.The plant can’t survive without the moth and vice versa,yet supposedly they developed millions of years apart,
I’m kinda in agreement. There are some points worth discussion, but to simply toss the whole Darwin debate out the front door...just won’t work.
Most folks would like a tidy...one-answer-explains-all concept, and it becomes difficult. By the time you toss in magnetic variation, the simple wobble of the earth, and a thousand other odd characteristics of this planet and its inhabitants...one is lead back to a wonderfully imperfect world with evolution at various points.
The Southern Baptist Council on Family Life found 88% of children raised in evangelical homes leave the church after high school, never to return.
If this is the nonsense that you are feeding them, it’s not too hard to see why.
The stats on rejection of macroevolution after high school are rather impressive, too.
It’s also not hard to see why.
What a horrible statistic to use to suit your purpose. Quite nasty. Par for the couse from evolutionists. No rational or scientific argument, so all you have left is smears and nastiness.
There are many factors, not the least of which is the brainwashing they receive from leftist educators.
Evolution cannot become a law because it is too complex to be simplified to a concise verbal or mathematical statement of a relation that is always under the same conditions.
I still don’t follow how those other statements refute evolution.
“I still dont follow how those other statements refute evolution”
An admission of ignorance! That’s a start. :) Why not start by reading the page, then if you have any specific questions, ask them.
These things are pretty complex, and can’t generally be summed up in a few paragraphs.
I started floating off the ground when Newton's theory on gravity were proved to be incomplete.
That's not at all unusual among Leftwingtards and pseudoscientists (and maybe some others), so it's time for a "correction".
The word originally came into use as a comprehensive description of Protestant, Reform Church, and Anabaptist movements.
That's pretty much what it still means.
If 88% of Evangelicals left Evangelical "church" AFTER becoming adults, the Evangelicals would have disappeared 5 centuries ago.
You may well be confusing the term with "Holy Roller".
BTW, when you get into figuring out what "Holy Rollers" are, don't confuse them with "Snake Handlers". Those bad boys actually handle snakes ~ it's not just a metaphor with them.
In fact, let me encourage you to visit a Snake Handler church. You might learn something ~ like how to hold a rattle snake such that you don't get bit too many times ~ always good thing to know.
“A scientific law must be 100% correct. Failure to meet only one challenge proves the law is wrong
I started floating off the ground when Newton’s theory on gravity were proved to be incomplete.”
Gravity didn’t fail to meet a challenge. Although the anomalous acceleration of the Pioneer spacecraft indicates our understanding may need some adjustment.
Yes, all Bible-believing Christians should homeschool.
The best arrangement must be to get together with a few likeminded christian friends, although that isn’t always possible
And what I see is devolution, not evolution. (Unless the concepts are interchangeable?)
Look at Congress.
Darwin is wrong but many of the skeptics are just as wrong.
Which means that at some point almost all cheetahs were killed, and the existing cheetahs are descendents of a very few related individuals.
Life did not start with a bolt of lightning striking a pond of water as claimed by evolutionists.
A bald-faced lie. The theory of evolution does not and is not intended to explain the overall origin of life.
The universe is slowing down to a lower state, not higher. The genes of plants, insects, animals and humans are continually becoming defective, not improving.
Most changes in a genome will be to the detriment of the individual. A very few will lead to an increased survivability. The fact that the former will greatly outnumber the latter is consistent with the theory of evolution.
Species are becoming extinct, not evolving.
First, if a species' environment changes more rapidly than the species can adapt, it will die out. Again, this is not inconsistent with the theory of evolution. Secondly, on what basis is the assertion "Species are becoming extinct, not evolving." asserted? Where is the evidence for this.
Order will always move naturally toward disorder or chaos, unless changed by an intelligent being.
The first phrase is a restatement of the laws of thermodynamics. But localized increase in order (e.g., the creation of a honeycomb) need not be directed by intelligence, unless you think for example that honeybees are sentient.
Agreed. It takes someone as belligerently ignorant as Ben Stein even to come up with something like that. Certainly not something a biologist would claim.