Evolution debate will soon be history?

Evolutionists will try to say that Darwin was not racist. Yet Darwin never made a comment in any of his writings or book in defense of any human of a different race. He made racist comments himself and had friends that were outspoken racists. The fact is, if you are not racist you don’t make racist comments and hang around racist people. Darwin was not naive, he was living in a time when racism and slavery was everywhere. So he knew what his idea would do in fueling of current feelings towards other races. And to this day you can see what Darwin’s idea has done and that racism is still very much a part of it. White man is always the end of every human evolution chart. It would be unthinkable for a black man to be the final human evolution result because evolution makes the white man superior.

Don’t believe that evolution is about racism? Point these facts out to any evolutionist and see how they respond. Instead of saying they made a mistake and that this should not be repeated. They will “defend” the past actions of these people and try to make it sound justified. This is also why you won’t ever see this racist history printed in any evolution text along with why this should not be done or repeated. Or an apology to any race that was hurt due to these actions. So if evolutionists are not racist then what is their problem of making sure their idea is never used for that purpose and to expose the ones who did in past history as an example of what not to do? It’s because they would have to admit that even Darwin was involved and have to face the fact that their theory may not recover in the people’s eyes if they knew all this. So this history is omitted from every textbook that teaches evolution. I find it ironic that evolutionist are quick to point out everyone Else’s bad past history yet hide their own. I believe that’s called being a hypocrite.

Also the way they try to debunk evidence that does not support evolution. Instead of acknowledging this, they go into attack mode. First attacking the creditability of the person who discovered it, then making false accusations along with numerous deceptions and lies. Where is the science in doing all that? No where. So anyone whom has any credibility they have built up over many years risks getting it destroyed if they dare challenge evolution. So through fear and intimidation evolution gets to stay top dog. Real truth and reality does not need all these tactics to protect it. that’s because real truth can stand on its own.

Does anyone know why evolutionists always look right? It’s because there philosophy of how science is supposed to work allows them to be right and wrong at the same time. Example: Let’s say today a evolutionist uses evidence on a major tv debate between me and him and more or less says I’m lying because this evidence is a true proven fact. Tomorrow that same evidence gets proven wrong, who was really lying? But yet what will be the excuse instead of “we wrong”? It will be: “That’s how science works”. And even though they called me a liar with that now proven wrong evidence, this accusation never has to be retracted and no public apologies made. But instead the creationist will always look like the one whom was wrong regardless. So even their lies and deceptions are true. Now if they can tweak this ability to look right all the time to the point to where everyone is too stupid to realize it, then yes the debate could be over in 15-30 years.

Evolutionists like to claim evolution is so observable. Yet when a film illustrating how evolution works how much of it has to be animated in order to show people how it works? Over 90% of it has to be animated. Is animation now empirical evidence because the animation can be repeated in a lab? Want an illustration on how much animation is needed to show evolution is any evolution video? Go to YouTube and just type in evolution into their search engine and see for yourself. Or here is an example:

Video

Yep, evolution is now proven because we can see it through animation. And I can make a very long list of all this stuff that has nothing to do with science that is called science and proof of evolution. There is a reason that only evolutionists are allowed to interpret evolution evidence. It’s because evolutionists want to make sure that they always 100% get evidence to support evolution. And doing it this way while barring any whom would disagree ensures this 100% of the time. Their interpretation is the only one that counts or will ever be accepted. Being that atheist-evolutionist control science and control all interpretations and what is accepted as evidence and what is rejected means they have absolute control. Control to this level can only breed corruption. Besides what would be wrong with having outside sources look into things to make sure everything was being done right? It’s because they would be exposed so that would never happen. And to make sure that never happens they have an unwritten rule that states regardless of your education, if you don’t agree with evolution  you will never be accepted in scientific circles. As one professor said:

So proven by scientific discovery, or bias through absolute control and corruption?





Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
Meet Delilah, another one of the Ararat Ridge Zoo’s new residents! She’s a seven-foot-long, 12-year-old Taiwan beauty snake, and she’s made her debut in our daily animal shows here at the Ark Encounter. 

This species is native to Taiwan, and they are also invasive on the island of Okinawa, Japan. They are known as beauty snakes because of their striking coloration, which changes pattern at the end of their bodies. 

Although she’s very long, she is harmless to people and enjoys climbing on her zookeepers while they walk around the zoo to meet guests!

Meet Delilah, another one of the Ararat Ridge Zoo’s new residents! She’s a seven-foot-long, 12-year-old Taiwan beauty snake, and she’s made her debut in our daily animal shows here at the Ark Encounter.

This species is native to Taiwan, and they are also invasive on the island of Okinawa, Japan. They are known as beauty snakes because of their striking coloration, which changes pattern at the end of their bodies.

Although she’s very long, she is harmless to people and enjoys climbing on her zookeepers while they walk around the zoo to meet guests!
... See MoreSee Less

Can you guess who is coming to the Ararat Ridge Zoo? 

Site development is hard at work finishing up our newest outdoor exhibit! Any guesses what new species will be arriving within the next few weeks?

Hint: that is netting over the top of the habitat and there is a river flowing.

Can you guess who is coming to the Ararat Ridge Zoo?

Site development is hard at work finishing up our newest outdoor exhibit! Any guesses what new species will be arriving within the next few weeks?

Hint: that is netting over the top of the habitat and there is a river flowing.
... See MoreSee Less

Genesis seems to suggest there was originally only one continent. Our seven continents are a result of the global flood.

Genesis seems to suggest there was originally only one continent. Our seven continents are a result of the global flood. ... See MoreSee Less

What about the geological column?

Originally, the geological column was conceived in the context of uniformitarianism. Not all uniformitarian assumptions are true and useful, and this is shown in the idea of the “geological column.” Uniformitarianism states that everything develops or changes gradually and slowly. In order to discredit creation, some naturalists applied this idea to geology and then Darwin applied this idea to biology.*

But not all interpretations are so straightforward. Geologists in the early-to-mid 1800s developed a sequence of changing organisms with time, reflected in the geological column. The time scale with its millions and billions of years was added later by various dating methods. The column was first developed mainly in the United Kingdom and then applied to the whole world. The geological column makes a lot of sense locally and regionally, but it must be shown to be a global sequence, including the ocean bottom sediments. We need to get away from the Grand Staircase and the Grand Canyon as the “proof area.”

Modern science has shown that the fossil changes between layers in the geological column is not an evolutionary progression, as secular scientists once hoped, assuming fossils changed from simple to complex with time. Modern science has shown that all these organisms are very complex—they are just different organisms, although a few general patterns are revealed. For instance, one of the earliest organisms in the geological column, the trilobite, had very complex eyes. Moreover, there is a lack of transitions between major kinds of organisms, as expected in the creation model (Bergman, 2017). The fossil record merely shows sudden appearances, stasis, and then disappearances.

Creation scientists view most fossils as having been buried in Noah’s Flood. Then is the geological column a useful interpretation? Creation scientists are divided on this issue. Even we are divided on the issue. That is why we attempted to resolve the issue, or at least start to resolve this issue, by publishing a forum on the subject (Reed and Oard, 2006). In this forum, advocates who believed the geological column was a precise, global burial sequence of Noah’s Flood; those who believed we should reject the geological column; and those in between, all wrote up their evidence. Then each participant read the papers of the others, and they were required to provide answers to their challenges. It was all done in charity, the way it should work, but unfortunately the question was not resolved. The project showed how to approach such problems. It will take much work and an ability to separate the wheat from the chaff in the literature. At a minimum, respecting each other’s opinions is required until more progress is made. Maybe another published forum is in order?

* Uniformitarianism was an arbitrary assumption developed to discredit and replace biblical history (Oard and Reed, 2017; in press). It seemed plausible in the 1800s, based mainly on three specific geological arguments that supposedly contradicted the Flood. These were: (1) volcanic deposits, (2) the erosion of valleys, and (3) the presence of thick sedimentary rocks. In retrospect, those arguments were simplistic, false, and better explained by the Flood (Oard and Reed, 2018).

In addition to significant logical shortcomings (Reed, 2010), uniformitarianism has run afoul of reality from its inception. Evidence of catastrophes in the rock record are indisputable, including the Ice Age, the Lake Missoula flood, and meteorite or comet impacts. After first rejecting these catastrophes, geologists now claim they are a part of the “uniform history” of earth, proving that self-contradiction is alive and well today. Despite such evidence, rocks and fossils are interpreted within a uniformitarian framework. But many characteristics of rocks and fossils demand a catastrophic interpretation. Sandstones are a good example (Reed and Oard, in press). Are there any aspects of the rock record that demand uniformitarianism? We might see a few. We must weigh possibilities using the principle laid down in 1 Thessalonians 5:21 (NASB): “But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.”

-----
This Why Geology Matters column (What Uniformitarian Interpretations Should Creation Scientists Accept?) by CRS board members Mike Oard and John Reed appeared in Creation Matters, Vol. 24, No. 4, July/August/September 2019.

Learn more about creation  www.creationresearch.org

What about the geological column?

Originally, the geological column was conceived in the context of uniformitarianism. Not all uniformitarian assumptions are true and useful, and this is shown in the idea of the “geological column.” Uniformitarianism states that everything develops or changes gradually and slowly. In order to discredit creation, some naturalists applied this idea to geology and then Darwin applied this idea to biology.*

But not all interpretations are so straightforward. Geologists in the early-to-mid 1800s developed a sequence of changing organisms with time, reflected in the geological column. The time scale with its millions and billions of years was added later by various dating methods. The column was first developed mainly in the United Kingdom and then applied to the whole world. The geological column makes a lot of sense locally and regionally, but it must be shown to be a global sequence, including the ocean bottom sediments. We need to get away from the Grand Staircase and the Grand Canyon as the “proof area.”

Modern science has shown that the fossil changes between layers in the geological column is not an evolutionary progression, as secular scientists once hoped, assuming fossils changed from simple to complex with time. Modern science has shown that all these organisms are very complex—they are just different organisms, although a few general patterns are revealed. For instance, one of the earliest organisms in the geological column, the trilobite, had very complex eyes. Moreover, there is a lack of transitions between major kinds of organisms, as expected in the creation model (Bergman, 2017). The fossil record merely shows sudden appearances, stasis, and then disappearances.

Creation scientists view most fossils as having been buried in Noah’s Flood. Then is the geological column a useful interpretation? Creation scientists are divided on this issue. Even we are divided on the issue. That is why we attempted to resolve the issue, or at least start to resolve this issue, by publishing a forum on the subject (Reed and Oard, 2006). In this forum, advocates who believed the geological column was a precise, global burial sequence of Noah’s Flood; those who believed we should reject the geological column; and those in between, all wrote up their evidence. Then each participant read the papers of the others, and they were required to provide answers to their challenges. It was all done in charity, the way it should work, but unfortunately the question was not resolved. The project showed how to approach such problems. It will take much work and an ability to separate the wheat from the chaff in the literature. At a minimum, respecting each other’s opinions is required until more progress is made. Maybe another published forum is in order?

* Uniformitarianism was an arbitrary assumption developed to discredit and replace biblical history (Oard and Reed, 2017; in press). It seemed plausible in the 1800s, based mainly on three specific geological arguments that supposedly contradicted the Flood. These were: (1) volcanic deposits, (2) the erosion of valleys, and (3) the presence of thick sedimentary rocks. In retrospect, those arguments were simplistic, false, and better explained by the Flood (Oard and Reed, 2018).

In addition to significant logical shortcomings (Reed, 2010), uniformitarianism has run afoul of reality from its inception. Evidence of catastrophes in the rock record are indisputable, including the Ice Age, the Lake Missoula flood, and meteorite or comet impacts. After first rejecting these catastrophes, geologists now claim they are a part of the “uniform history” of earth, proving that self-contradiction is alive and well today. Despite such evidence, rocks and fossils are interpreted within a uniformitarian framework. But many characteristics of rocks and fossils demand a catastrophic interpretation. Sandstones are a good example (Reed and Oard, in press). Are there any aspects of the rock record that demand uniformitarianism? We might see a few. We must weigh possibilities using the principle laid down in 1 Thessalonians 5:21 (NASB): “But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.”

-----
This Why Geology Matters column (What Uniformitarian Interpretations Should Creation Scientists Accept?) by CRS board members Mike Oard and John Reed appeared in Creation Matters, Vol. 24, No. 4, July/August/September 2019.

Learn more about creation www.creationresearch.org
... See MoreSee Less

Early bird discount ends TOMORROW! The Bible is the most loved —and most hated—book of all time. Join us for a lineup of wonderful speakers to see how you can respond to the objections raised against it. Register today for the online conference: http://www.livingwaters.com/why-the-bible

Early bird discount ends TOMORROW! The Bible is the most loved —and most hated—book of all time. Join us for a lineup of wonderful speakers to see how you can respond to the objections raised against it. Register today for the online conference: www.livingwaters.com/why-the-bible ... See MoreSee Less

Caleb the African crested porcupine has made his debut in our animal shows! You can see he walks on a harness and leash like a dog and has been doing great on stage in front of guests.

Don’t worry—porcupines cannot shoot their quills...that’s a myth! Caleb was born right here at the Ararat Ridge Zoo and is very accustomed to people. You may get to see him in our shows during your visit to the Ark Encounter!

Caleb the African crested porcupine has made his debut in our animal shows! You can see he walks on a harness and leash like a dog and has been doing great on stage in front of guests.

Don’t worry—porcupines cannot shoot their quills...that’s a myth! Caleb was born right here at the Ararat Ridge Zoo and is very accustomed to people. You may get to see him in our shows during your visit to the Ark Encounter!
... See MoreSee Less

Todd White has repented…or has he?

Will Smith’s wife, admits to cheating, but not sinning.
... See MoreSee Less

Do you see the beautiful rainbow over our Rainbow Gardens? 🌈

Do you see the beautiful rainbow over our Rainbow Gardens? 🌈 ... See MoreSee Less