HOW DOES THE COLLAPSE OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION DEMONSTRATE THE TRUTH OF CREATION?

When we ask how life on Earth emerged, we find two different answers:

One is that living things emerged by evolution. According to the theory of evolution, which makes this claim, life began with the first cell, which itself emerged by chance or by some hypothetical natural laws of "self-organization." Again as a result of chance and natural laws, this living cell developed and evolved, and by taking on different forms gave rise to the millions of species of life on Earth.

The second answer is "Creation." All living things came into existence by being created by an intelligent Creator. When life and the millions of forms it takes, which could not possibly have come into existence by chance, were first created, they had the same complete, flawless, and superior design that they possess today. The fact that even the simplest-looking forms of life possess such complex structures and systems that could never have come about by chance and natural conditions is a clear proof of this.

Outside these two alternatives, there is no third claim or hypothesis today regarding how life emerged. According to the rules of logic, if one answer to a question with two alternative possible answers is proved to be false, then the other must be true. This rule, one of the most fundamental in logic, is called disjunctive inference (modus tollendo ponens).

In other words, if it is demonstrated that living species on Earth did not evolve by chance, as the theory of evolution claims, then that is clear proof that they were formed by a Creator. Scientists who support the theory of evolution agree that there is no third alternative. One of these, Douglas Futuyma, makes the following statement:

Organisms either appeared on the earth fully developed or they did not. If they did not, they must have developed from pre-existing species by some process of modification. If they did appear in a fully developed state, they must indeed have been created by some omnipotent intelligence.

The fossil record provides the answer to the evolutionist Futuyma. The science of fossils (paleontology) shows that all living groups emerged on Earth at different times, all at once, and perfectly formed.

All the discoveries from excavations and studies over the last hundred years or so show that, contrary to evolutionists' expectations, living things came into existence suddenly, in perfect and flawless form, in other words that they were "created." Bacteria, protozoa, worms, molluscs, and other invertebrate sea creatures, arthropods, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals all appeared suddenly, with complex organs and systems. There are no fossils that show any so-called "transition" between them. Paleontology bears the same message as other branches of science: Living things did not evolve, but were created. As a result, while evolutionists were trying to prove their unrealistic theory, they by their own hands produced proof of creation.

Robert Carroll, an expert on vertebrate paleontology and a committed evolutionist, comes to admit that the Darwinist hope has not been satisfied with fossil discoveries:

Despite more than a hundred years of intense collecting efforts since the time of Darwin's death, the fossil record still does not yield the picture of infinitely numerous transitional links that he expected.

The Cambrian Explosion is enough to tear down the theory of evolution

The world of living things is divided by biologists into such fundamental groups as plants, animals, fungae etc. These are then subdivided into different "phyla." When designating these phyla, the fact that each one possesses completely different physical structures should always be borne in mind. Arthropoda (insects, spiders, and other creatures with jointed legs), for instance, are a phylum by themselves, and all the animals in the phylum have the same fundamental physical structure. The phylum called Chordata includes those creatures with a notochord or, most commonly, a spinal column. All the large animals such as fish, birds, reptiles, and mammals that we are familiar in daily life are in a subphylum of Chordata known as vertebrates.

There are around 35 different phyla of animals, including the Mollusca, which include soft-bodied creatures such as snails and octopuses, or the Nematoda, which include diminutive worms. The most important feature of these phyla is, as we touched on earlier, that they possess totally different physical characteristics. The categories below the phyla possess basically similar body plans, but the phyla are very different from one another.

So how did these differences come about?

Let us first consider the Darwinist hypothesis. As we know, Darwinism proposes that life developed from one single common ancestor, and took on all its varieties by a series of tiny changes. In that case, life should first have emerged in very similar and simple forms. And according to the same theory, the differentiation between, and growing complexity in, living things must have happened in parallel over time.

According to Darwinism, life must be like a tree, with a common root, subsequently splitting up into different branches. And this hypothesis is constantly emphasized in Darwinist sources, where the concept of the "tree of life" is frequently employed. According to this tree concept, one phylum must first emerge, and then the other phyla must slowly come about with minute changes over very long periods of time.

That is the theory of evolution's claim. But is this really how it happened?

Definitely not. Quite the contrary, animals have been very different and complex since the moment they first emerged. All the animal phyla known today emerged at the same time, in the middle of the geological period known as the Cambrian Age. The Cambrian Age is a geological period estimated to have lasted some 65 million years, approximately between 570 to 505 million years ago. But the period of the abrupt appearance of major animal groups fit in an even shorter phase of the Cambrian, often referred to as the "Cambrian explosion." Stephen C. Meyer, P. A. Nelson, and Paul Chien, in an article based on a detailed literature survey, dated 2001, note that the "Cambrian explosion occurred within an exceedingly narrow window of geologic time, lasting no more than 5 million years."

Before then, there is no trace in the fossil record of anything apart from single-celled creatures and a few very primitive multicellular ones. All animal phyla emerged completely formed and all at once, in the very short period of time represented by the Cambrian Explosion. (Five million years is a very short time in geological terms!)

The fossils found in Cambrian rocks belong to very different creatures, such as snails, trilobites, sponges, jellyfish, starfish, shellfish, etc. Most of the creatures in this layer have complex systems and advanced structures, such as eyes, gills, and circulatory systems, exactly the same as those in modern specimens. These structures are at one and the same time very advanced, and very different.

Richard Monastersky, a staff writer at Science News journal, states the following about the Cambrian explosion, which is a deathtrap for evolutionary theory:

A half-billion years ago, ...the remarkably complex forms of animals we see today suddenly appeared. This moment, right at the start of Earth's Cambrian Period, some 550 million years ago, marks the evolutionary explosion that filled the seas with the world's first complex creatures.

Phillip Johnson, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley who is also one of the world's foremost critics of Darwinism, describes the contradiction between this paleontological truth and Darwinism:

Darwinian theory predicts a "cone of increasing diversity," as the first living organism, or first animal species, gradually and continually diversified to create the higher levels of taxonomic order. The animal fossil record more resembles such a cone turned upside down, with the phyla present at the start and thereafter decreasing.

As Phillip Johnson has revealed, far from its being the case that phyla came about by stages, in reality they all came into being at once, and some of them even became extinct in later periods. The meaning of the emergence of very different living creatures all of a sudden and perfectly formed, is creation, as evolutionist Futuyma has also accepted. As we have seen, all the available scientific discoveries disprove the claims of the theory of evolution and reveal the truth of creation.

Address card · Send PM · Send email ·
fivedoughnut Posted: Feb 3 2007, 09:24 AM Report this post · Quote


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1197
Joined: 13-November 05

Positive Feedback: 65.63%
Feedback Score: 13
View/Add Feedback New
Warn: (20%)

Bio(nutbox)logist,

Collapse of evolutionary theory??? ... you must be having a laugh! .... the only likely collapse is one in which your head implodes because of the lashings of vacuum present.

What caused the Cambrian Explosion?
Understanding why the Cambrian explosion happened when it did revolves around three major themes: i) extrinsic forcing events such as environmental change; ii) intrinsic mechanisms such as the acquisition of complex genomes; and iii) intrinsic mechanisms such as the natural consequences of metazoan ecology.


Go bash a bible somewhere else 'faecal material' fer brains.


--------------------

"Twinkle twinkle little star, how I wonder what you are? "
Address card · Send PM · Send email ·
Alpha Posted: Feb 3 2007, 09:44 AM Report this post · Quote


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 337
Joined: 27-June 06

Positive Feedback: 68.18%
Feedback Score: 21
View/Add Feedback New
Warn: (20%)

QUOTE (Biologist @ Feb 3 2007, 01:35 PM)
Outside these two alternatives, there is no third claim or hypothesis today regarding how life emerged.



Woah woah woah, the most insane subforum with most insane idiots on the block.

If there are 2 "possible alternatives", then why not 100 or 1000???
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma


QUOTE
According to the rules of logic, if one answer to a question with two alternative possible answers is proved to be false, then the other must be true..





Look at my first point.

I can only guess at why you have such a heavy cognitive disorder, but thanks for the laugh anyway.

This subforum is always worth visiting.

/edit
Just incase you will ignore my post and a link which i supplied, because of your stupidity, possible inability to read, and an absence of critical thinking, i will post an important block of text from the link for everyone to see:


QUOTE (Wiki)
During legal battles in the creation-evolution controversy in the United States, the dichotomy between creationism and the theory of evolution has been noted as another instance of false dilemma and also termed a contrived dualism.See, for example, the 2005 opinion in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, where Judge John E. Jones III writes "ID (intelligent design) is at bottom premised upon a false dichotomy, namely, that to the extent evolutionary theory is discredited, ID is confirmed. (5:41 (Pennock)). This argument is not brought to this Court anew, and in fact, the same argument, termed “contrived dualism” in McLean, was employed by creationists in the 1980's to support “creation science.” The court in McLean noted the “fallacious pedagogy of the two model approach” and that “[i]n efforts to establish ‘evidence’ in support of creation science, the defendants relied upon the same false premise as the two model approach . . . all evidence which criticized evolutionary theory was proof in support of creation science.”



This post has been edited by Alpha on Feb 3 2007, 10:12 AM


--------------------

"Intelligence is easy to gauge. People who have it are smarter than people who do not."

Uncle Al
Address card · Send PM · Send email ·
DiscipulusIgnorantus Posted: Feb 3 2007, 10:07 AM Report this post · Quote


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 57
Joined: 31-October 06

Positive Feedback: 100%
Feedback Score: 1
View/Add Feedback New
Warn: (0%)

QUOTE (Biologist)
When we ask how life on Earth emerged, we find two different answers:

One is that living things emerged by evolution. [...] The second answer is "Creation." [...] Outside these two alternatives, there is no third claim or hypothesis today regarding how life emerged. According to the rules of logic, if one answer to a question with two alternative possible answers is proved to be false, then the other must be true.


Can anyone say "false dichotomy?"
Before you say, "Proffer your alternative hypothesis," let me remind you that the burden of proof lies with the claimant - in this case, that creation MUST be true if evolution isn't (which you claim is the case).

Just because you and a tiny minority of other biologists cannot believe that evolution by natural selection has taken place does not mean that is hasn't. To accept it because of the fact that the vast majority of experts accept it is certainly a more appropriate appeal to authority than one made on the basis of scripture or some other ancient text (by the way, Biologist, which creation myth would you have us believe?)

Remember, an argument from incredulity is no argument at all.

This post has been edited by DiscipulusIgnorantus on Feb 3 2007, 10:36 AM
Address card · Send PM ·

ashken,
Let's get this straight; it is the LAW of evolution (this is to straighten out your lack of understanding of the language and semantics of science). Secondly, evolution has not "collapsed", whatever that is supposed to mean. ALL fossills are transitional, as indeed is all life today.
Physfan

ashken




No, it does not, in fact the chemicals of life were at first very much simpler than a cell. Self replicating molecules are all that is required for evolution to begin. Cells came about much later. Google "RNA world".

Even if our current understanding of evolution is flawed(and we still have much to learn), the evolution of life on Earth is still a fact that cannot be denied by anyone with any knowledge of life's history.

Grumpy