Evolution’s Myth Of Forces

In physics, objects “experience” force. For example, a paper clip “experiences” the force (pull) of a magnet and the oceans “experience” the gravitational pull of the sun. These forces manifest themselves in changes in physical objects. They exist in the physical world.

In evolutionary theory, all of the so-called forces have no existence in the physical world. There are no evolutionary entities that act on physical objects. Evolution, natural selection, and adaptation, which are the so-called forces of evolution, do not pull on paper clips or pull on the oceans. They don’t exist. What are they then? They are extrapolations (imaginations logically but not experimentally associated with reality). Thus, the whole system of evolutionary thinking rests on pure imagination .

Evolutionists Trying To Pull A Big Trick On Everyone

As evolutionists have seen their position weaken they are trying to pull a big trick on everyone. They are:

Trying to change the definition of evolution to hide the fact that they include human beings.

Instead of saying:

All species from one species

They are now saying:

One species from one species

Not so fast you rotten bums (forgive my language). You have:

Over a century and a half of grief and societal disruption to pay for.

The Evolutionist Assumption

We will, for now, treat adaptation as a reality. Evolutionists assume:

Because adaptation has occurred with a few species, it has occurred with all species .

Is Evolution A Threat? (Breakthrough Article)

Evolution, a mere hypothesis, is not a threat. What is a threat is the teaching that evolution disproves the Bible. The linchpin (“something that holds an account together”) of the Genesis account is the fact that God created man in less than 24 hours. This directly contradicts the ape-to-human component of the evolutionary schedule.

Well, first, the idea of creation , according to the Bible, is not necessarily instantaneous but can involve the passage of time (see Genesis 2). Second, the idea of creation can be a history rather than an event (see Genesis 2). A history is a sequence of events. In addition, creation can be synoptic (a summary) rather than journalistic (a precise report) (see Genesis 1).

The key thing here is that creation can be synoptic (a summary). Genesis 1 states that God created the first female, which apparently is a single event, but Genesis 2 says that the creation of the first female involved two events (skeletal amputation followed by skeletal transformation). So, obviously, Genesis 1 was synoptic; that is, only presenting a summary .

What we have proven is that Genesis 1 contains synoptic content. This means that the whole Genesis creation account may have been synoptic. This, in turn, means that there could have been billions of years of creation. And, finally, billions of years of creation could mean that the human body evolved over time then on a certain day, the “sixth day,” God gave the human body a soul.

What does all of this prove?

It proves that evolution does not disprove the Bible.

Now, was a day a day or was it billions of years? We don’t know and it doesn’t matter, scientifically speaking. And, remember, science isn’t necessarily truth. In terms of truth, a day was a day.

Finally, we still oppose evolution because it is unprovable. It is unprovable because it is experimentally unverifiable. And, remember, adaptation, called also “microevolution,” is not evolution. Evolution must, forever, remain a hypothesis or, at best, at some distant time in the future, a theory.

Evolutionists Fail Drone Survey

10,000 evolutionists were surveyed by Drone. They were asked 3 questions.

Question 1: Is evolution a force or an event?

Q1 Results: 99.6% of evolutionists replied that evolution is a force.

Sorry, Charlie. Darwin said that evolution is an event.

Question 2: Is natural selection a force or an event?

Q2 Results: 98% of evolutionists replied that natural selection is a force.

Sorry, Charlie. Darwin said that natural selection is an event.

Question 3: Is adaptation a force or an event?

Q3 Results: 99% of evolutionists replied that adaptation is a force.

Sorry, Charlie. Darwin said that adaptation is an event.

Conclusion: Given the survey results, why do we give evolutionists so much credit for being smart people?

How Evolutionists Stretch The Truth

Evolutionists stretch the truth. A yellow butterfly gives birth to an orange butterfly (adaptation). Therefore, evolutionists say, “A cow gave birth to a horse (hyper-adaptation).”

Is Evolution A Threat? (Breakthrough Article)

Featured

Evolution, a mere hypothesis, is not a threat. What is a threat is the teaching that evolution disproves the Bible. The linchpin (“something that holds an account together”) of the Genesis account is the fact that God created man in less than 24 hours. This directly contradicts the ape-to-human component of the evolutionary schedule.

Well, first, the idea of creation , according to the Bible, is not necessarily instantaneous but can involve the passage of time (see Genesis 2). Second, the idea of creation can be a history rather than an event (see Genesis 2). A history is a sequence of events. In addition, creation can be synoptic (a summary) rather than journalistic (a precise report) (see Genesis 1).

The key thing here is that creation can be synoptic (a summary). Genesis 1 states that God created the first female, which apparently is a single event, but Genesis 2 says that the creation of the first female involved two events (skeletal amputation followed by skeletal transformation). So, obviously, Genesis 1 was synoptic; that is, only presenting a summary .

What we have proven is that Genesis 1 contains synoptic content. This means that the whole Genesis creation account may have been synoptic. This, in turn, means that there could have been billions of years of creation. And, finally, billions of years of creation could mean that the human body evolved over time then on a certain day, the “sixth day,” God gave the human body a soul.

What does all of this prove?

It proves that evolution does not disprove the Bible.

Now, was a day a day or was it billions of years? We don’t know and it doesn’t matter, scientifically speaking. And, remember, science isn’t necessarily truth.  Now, in terms of truth:

A day was a day.

Finally, we still oppose evolution because it is unprovable. It is unprovable because it is experimentally unverifiable. And, remember, adaptation, called also “microevolution,” is not evolution. Evolution must, forever, remain a hypothesis or, at best, at some distant time in the future, a theory.

Is It Time To Start Killing Evolutionists?

Is it time to start killing evolutionists? The answer is, first, no and, second, it will never be time to start killing evoluionists. We understand how infuriating their ignorance and muleheaded stubbornness is but such killing is never justified (see the Bible and The Accidental Vigilante).

However, there may be a lesser form of martialism possible. We are working on this question.

Why Our Website Was Down Yesterday For Several Hours

Our website was down yesterday for several hours very simply because certain software (well-known software) did not perform as advertised (as happens from time to time with software).

Do We Want Evolution To Die?

Do we want evolution to die? No, but we wouldn’t shed any tears if it did. What we want is for evolution to be treated realistically; that is, it is an hypothesis, not a theory, and you may use hypotheses in the laboratory but you don’t teach them in science classes.

Guess Which Political Party Promotes The Theory Of Evolution

Well, we have documented the fact that it is the Democratic Party that promotes the theory of evolution.

Evolutionists Are Two-Faced

In daily life, evolutionists go about saying evolution is a fact but before the Supreme Court they say evolution is merely a theoretical model.

Where Are All The Prehumans?

Why is it that the prehumans so conveniently disappeared off the face of the earth? There should, at least, be one continent inhabited by billions of prehumans. What happened? We’ll tell you what happened. There never were any prehumans. What about all of the prehuman fossils? It is interesting that all…all…of these fossils are described as “within the range of probability of 70% to 75%.” In other words, evolutionists have no certainty, only probability. But its even worse than that for evolutionist probability is closed-system probability; that is, it is based on a mental model of biological reality and not on biological reality itself.

How Evolutionists Think

Evolution is not merely a belief, it is a lifestyle. Whenever an evolutionist is confronted with facts that contradict their cherished belief their first response is, “How can I make the facts fit my belief?”

Reverse Evolution

Something that everyone overlooks is that if an ancient ape were to give birth to a prehuman or a prehuman were to give birth to a human being, who would they have offspring with since there would be no one else of their kind. The prehuman would have to mate with an ancient ape but that would result in reverse evolution. The human being would have to mate with a prehuman but that, too, would result in reverse evolution. Reverse evolution means:

Evolution could never move forward.

The Gorilla-Human Mating Blocker

God, in his wisdom, created his living creations so that they cannot interbreed. A gorilla has 24 pairs of 48 chromosomes. A human being has 23 pairs of 46 chromosomes. This makes it organochemically impossible for a gorilla and a human being to have offspring together.

Why Did God Make Some Animals Superficially Resemble Human Beings?

Why did God make some animals superficially resemble human beings?

Image

One reason is to highlight the difference between animal and human life. The orangutan, gorilla, chimpanzee, and bonobo have only one/vigintillionth (1/1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000th) the IQ of a newborn baby. So-called demonstrations of intelligence are programmatic inteligence, like programming a computer. As far as any so-called proofs of creative, problem-solving intelligence, in every case, the animal used heuristic (trial-and-error) neural net processing. In other words, the animals are simply biological neural nets. Whereas a human being transcends neural net processes by a factor of Rayo’s number.

In insanely oversimplified terms, a gorilla can peel a banana while a human being can tell you the molecular composition of the banana in Chinese.

The Dumbest Evolutionists

The dumbest evolutionists will tell you that it doesn’t matter if we call adaptation “evolution.” Such lack of precision is unscientific, which makes these evolutionists unscientific. They are not serious evolutionists. They are casual evolutionists. Don’t waste your time on them.