Teachinghearts	Creation Science Male and Female Created He Them "Explore the World. Meet the Word"	Statistics: Time: 300 minutes Print: 56 pages

"Looks like you slithered, crawled and walked on all fours, old chap! We took the express route."
The Basics	Creation Story	The Flood	The Evidence	The Love of God	Summary
	Scientific Method	Types of Evidence	Limits	Statistics	Impossibilities
Creation Theories	Creation Model	Catastrophism	Body Symmetry	Pleochroic Halos	Turbidity Currents
	Male and Female	Intelligent Design	Cosmic Dust	A Young Earth	Requirements And Similarities
Evolution Theories	Evolution Model	Evolution Barriers	Evolution Hoaxes	Time: The Enemy
The Sciences	Physics	Chemistry	Astronomy	Biology	Geology
	The Speed of Light	Radioactive Dating	The Four Forces	Paleontology	Geologic Column
Children's Science	Solar System	The Atmosphere	The Weather	The Human Body	Caring for God
Cosmogony Legends	World Tree	Yggdrasil	Cipactli	The Cosmic Egg	The Capacity of the Ark

Prayer "before you call I will answer"

Dear God. Help me to understand. Reason with me so that I can see you clearly. Help me to see the truth by your Spirit of Truth. Thank you.

The subject of creation is covered under Bible prophecy because the issue of who is the creator will become important in the final days. One of the last prophetic messages to the world, tells mankind to love God and worship Him because He is the creator. This message was supposed to begin around the time of the end after a great persecution. At that time the papacy would fall and knowledge would increase. This increase in knowledge also led to the theories of evolution. This describes the years after 1798.
» Worship the Creator. So we find a warning message to the world to turn back to God as the creator at a time when evolution was being proposed.
» Beast Becomes Man. The series of prophecies in Daniel also point to a beast who evolves into a man who tries to become God at the end of time.

Creation is the belief that a supernatural being, God, created the universe and everything in it in six real days. True creationism is based entirely, on the truth of the story as written in the Bible. Creationists believe creation is the only explanation of the perfect conditions we are situated in and that science (man's observations of the physical world) and the Bible agree 100%. There are some theories which attempt to reconcile creation with evolution, but these either ignore or twist what the Bible says. So, when we talk about creation in this discussion, we affirm that we believe the Genesis account to be 100% factual.

Evolution What Do you Think You Know? If I asked you to clearly articulate one piece of evidence that convinces you that the theory of evolution explains your existence, 99% of you would be mute. Is science your God? Are you accepting its theories by faith?

There are several theories which propose how life began on earth or how everything we observe came into being.

1. Creation. Life and everything we observe was placed here by a powerful supernatural being
2. Evolution. Life and everything we observe began by chance with a series of physical and chemical reactions spanning billions of years.
3. Alien Colonization. Life began by a race of intelligent, superior beings who either colonized the earth or started the process. Ultimately, the same problem exists - Where did those beings come from. This may sound laughable now, but I believe that in their desperation not to believe in God, this is the theory that people will turn to. It is as easily viable as creationism. Only it does not come with those pesky moral rules that Christianity seems to be saddled with. God himself says, that because people refuse to believe, he will send (allow to be sent) a "strong delusion" so that they will believe a lie.

Creation Who Do you Think You Know? If I asked you to clearly articulate what your God says about Himself and your relationship with Him, how many of you would rely on what someone else said or your feelings? You cannot walk through life like a dumb animal. Do you respect your God? Then search for Him with all your heart.

Ultimately, all these theories have a problem with the initial cause and what was in existence before. We do not have enough facts.
However, in evaluating both theories, we will use the ground rules of science and logic. We will abide by the scientific method.

You Can Understand
Many people have accepted the theory of evolution because of a combination of reasons. Scientists seem to have proved it, and the best and brightest seem to have accepted it. In October 1996, even the Catholic Church has come to declare it as truth.
But the biggest reason why people accept it is because they do not understand it. It is too complicated. And besides, most intelligent people believe it.
Since this is important for your understanding of God it is important for you to try to gain enough information so that you can make an informed decision. Besides, there is one compelling argument that I believe you can understand even if the others are still unclear.

Creation - The Biblical Account (Water, Water Everywhere!)
The story of creation is found in Genesis 1 and 2. Genesis 2 also gives more detail about the sixth day of creation.

Genesis 1 - The Physical Universe (Water not Gas!) Day 1 - Sunday (Electromagnetism, Physics, Chemistry) The Second Day of Creation Removing the Water In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. Day 2 - Monday ( Space ) Then God said, "Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters." God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so. God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day. Day 3 - Tuesday ( Geology and Botany ) Then God said, "Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear"; and it was so. God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good. Then God said, "Let the earth sprout vegetation: plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them"; and it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. There was evening and there was morning, a third day. Day 4 - Wednesday ( Astronomy ) Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. Sun. God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, Moon. and the lesser light to govern the night; Stars. He made the stars also. God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. There was evening and there was morning, a fourth day. Day 5 - Thursday ( Biology of Oceans and Birds ) Then God said, "Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens." God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good. God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." There was evening and there was morning, a fifth day. Day 6 - Friday ( Biology of Land Animals and Humans ) Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so. God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them; and God said to them, " Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth." Then God said, "See, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food"; and it was so. God saw all that He had made, and see, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. 2 The Spiritual Universe Day 7 - Saturday ( Social, Psychological and Spiritual Foundations ) Genesis 2 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made. This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made earth and heaven.

God also made time. One the first day, He established the cycle of day and night. On the fourth day, He made the year. On the seventh day, He made the week.

Changes
God immediately instituted some changes after sin. Most were environmental, but one seemed to be a structural change in one specie.

• Species Change? Then the Lord God said to the serpent, "because you have done this cursed are you more than all cattle, and more than every beast of the field. On your belly you will go, and dust you will eat all the days of your life. (Genesis 3: 14)
  For the first and only time we have a possible reference to structural change in one species that occurred quickly. The conclusion is that the snake could walk or fly and could only crawl after sin because of an act of God. It used to be classified as one of the "cattle". Here is a reference to a creature that might be an extinct species, or a lizard deformed by a birth defect.

  A Snake With Legs. In 2006, the fossil remains of a primitive snake were discovered in Argentina. It shows a three feet long (92 cm) crawling creature with a sacrum and two legs which they claimed lived 90 million years ago.

• Spiritual Change. God withdrew from regular physical contact with humans.
• Biological Change. Child birth became more painful (Genesis 3: 16).
• Social Change. Eve must now submit to the rule of her husband (Genesis 3: 16).
• Environmental Change. Thorns and other non-beneficial plants more easily replaced the good plants (Genesis 3: 17).
• Climate Change. It did not rain before the flood but it rained after the flood.
• Diet Change. Human and probably animals ate carniverous diets after the flood.

Flood - The Biblical Account. (Water, Water Everywhere!)
The flood is included in these discussions, because it is crucial to the creationist view. It explains the catastrophic observations we see in geology. The entire story of the Flood can be found in Genesis 6 through 8. Genesis 2:5-6 tells of the eco-system before the flood.

No Rain There was no rain before the flood according to Genesis 2: 5. By faith, Noah, being warned by God about things not yet seen, prepared an ark for the salvation of his family. (Hebrews 11: 7) Genesis 2 -The EcoSystem before the Flood No Rain. Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the LORD God had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground. But a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground. Genesis 7- The Flood Water from below and above for 40 days A Meteor Impact. In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened. Pressurized Water from Beneath the Earth. The rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights. On the very same day Noah and Shem and Ham and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife and the three wives of his sons with them, entered the ark, they and every beast after its kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth after its kind, and every bird after its kind, all sorts of birds. So they went into the ark to Noah, by twos of all flesh in which was the breath of life. Those that entered, male and female of all flesh, entered as God had commanded him; and the LORD closed it behind him. Global Tsunamis. Then the flood came upon the earth for forty days, and the water increased and lifted up the ark, so that it rose above the earth. The water prevailed and increased greatly upon the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. The water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains everywhere under the heavens were covered. The water prevailed fifteen cubits higher, and the mountains were covered. All flesh that moved on the earth perished, birds and cattle and beasts and every swarming thing that swarms upon the earth, and all mankind; of all that was on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died. Thus He blotted out every living thing that was upon the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky, and they were blotted out from the earth; and only Noah was left, together with those that were with him in the ark. Submerged for 150 days. The water prevailed upon the earth one hundred and fifty days. Earth Preach Door Closed Wait Tsunami Submerged Ararat Wait Exit 1536 Years 120 Years 7 Days - 150 Days (Water) 150 Days (Wind) 70 Days 2-10 2-17 40 Days 3-27 110 Days 7-17 10-1 40 days 21 days 12-1 12-17 1-1 2-27 1656 Years 1 Year (370 Days) Genesis 8: Wind for 150 Days But God remembered Noah and all the beasts and all the cattle that were with him in the ark; and God caused a wind to pass over the earth, and the water subsided. Also the fountains of the deep and the floodgates of the sky were closed, and the rain from the sky was restrained; and the water receded steadily from the earth, and at the end of one hundred and fifty days the water decreased. Tabernacles. In the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat. The water decreased steadily until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains became visible. Then it came about at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made; and he sent out a raven, and it flew here and there until the water was dried up from the earth. Then he sent out a dove from him, to see if the water was abated from the face of the land; but the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, so she returned to him into the ark, for the water was on the surface of all the earth. Then he put out his hand and took her, and brought her into the ark to himself. So he waited yet another seven days; and again he sent out the dove from the ark. The dove came to him toward evening, and look, in her beak was a freshly picked olive leaf. So Noah knew that the water was abated from the earth. Then he waited yet another seven days, and sent out the dove; but she did not return to him again. New Year's Day. Now it came about in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, on the first of the month, the water was dried up from the earth. Then Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and look, the surface of the ground was dried up. Conditions lasted for approximately 370 days In the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry. Then God spoke to Noah, saying, "Go out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and your sons' wives with you".

Creation Theories
Several theories have been proposed that are related to either the creation or the flood stories. Some of these theories were proposed to describe the biblical event while others were proposed in order to reconcile theology with science.

Short Day Theory
This theory say that the days of creation were actual twenty four hour periods. It is supported by the Bible which does not speak of thousand year periods of creation. This article is written in support of the short day theory. So whenever I speak about creation I am not talking about the other hybrid models.

1	2		3		4	5		6		Sabbath	...	Sin
Unknown Source of Light					Light from the Sun, Moon and Stars
Light and Time (Day)	Sky	sea	Land							Rest	...	Death
Created Containers				Filled Containers						Creation Completed

Long Day Theory
This "day" is an unknown length (millions of years old) They believe that these "days" were "ages" and were symbolic. Where do they get their support? 2 Peter 3: 8 says "One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." However, does the passage talk about creation? No. It is simply talking about the timelessness of God. Moreover, if that were the case, vegetation might have died (if the ambient light was not strong enough) because God created the sun moon and stars after vegetation. Proponents of this theory must also reject the order of creation as presented by God.
In any case, if we use prophetic time in which a day is a year then creation lasted for seven years. If we use Peter then creation lasted 7000 years. But if he was talking about the light part of the day not just the 24 hour period, then each day was 2000 years and creation week was 14,000 years. None of these is enough time to support evolution.

The Gap Theory
This is a variation of the Long Day Theory, it says that there was a long period of time between Genesis 1:1 (In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.) and Genesis 1:2 (Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.) What might have happened during that gap of time was the destruction of the "first creation" during the fall of Satan (as described in Isaiah 14:12 - 17). That time could have been an infinite amount of time. And, then, after the gap, of course, God resumed his creation work as described in the rest of Genesis 1. None of this is in the Bible. It does not talk about a creation that was destroyed before ours. And nothing suggests a gap of time between the two verses.

The Canopy Theory
It says that before the Genesis flood the air above the earth was filled with a humid, watery vapor that rose from the ground and watered the earth in vapor form (Genesis 2:6). This made the climate very mild and suitable for many types of animals. After the flood, rain began to regularly fall on the earth and the climate changed to one with more extremes. This might have helped to cause the extinction of some species This theory does not contradict the Bible, nor do we need it to support any creationist argument.

There are many responses among the Christian community in reconciling Creation and evolution.

1. Belief. Genesis is fact. There is not any evidence to support evolution and we do not know enough. Besides, if this account is not factual, what else is God lying about?
2. Disbelief. Genesis is a story that does not tell any scientific facts.
3. Theistic Evolution. God used evolution to create everything. Some use the Long Day Theory to explain creation.
   
   

   The Origin of The Day The bible teaches that the concept of the day was not established at creation with the revolution of the earth with respect to the sun on the fourth day. Rather, they were created to mimic a concept that already existed.

   Strange Light. One variation of this theory is that the first three days were long periods of time. The period we experience as day and night only occurred after the fourth day when God created the sun and the moon. Proponents of this theory ignore that fact that what God was actually teaching is that there was a source of light before the sun that marked the light and dark cycles of the day. The sun and the moon only worked with this preexisting law and would be used when sin entered to mark these times for a quarantined world. God designed the system to sustain us after we sinned. The evidence is that after sin is destroyed the sun and moon are no longer used to mark the day. And after sin, the creation suddenly lost a covering of light that hid their nakedness. God Himself is the source of this light.
4. Progressive Creation. God intervened at various points in the process of evolution. As proposed by Dr. Hugh Ross it states:
   • The "Big Bang" origin of the universe occurred 16 billion years ago; death, bloodshed, and disease existed before Adam and Eve.
   • The days of Creation were long periods.
   • Noah's Flood was a local event.
   • Sin has only a regionally limited effect on the world.
   • Creatures that behaved much like humans, and painted on cave walls, existed before Adam and Eve, but did not have a spirit and thus had no salvation.
   • The record of nature is just as perfect as the Word of God. (This assumes that you know enough information to interpret the record of nature).
   • Over millions of years, God created new species as others kept going extinct.

The Creation Model
Creationists have proposed a model for the present conditions of the earth that is based on creation and the devastating effects of the flood. The following short description is mostly taken from a special edition of the Insight magazine (1990 Volume 21. Number 14).
The Hydroplate theory of Dr. Walt Brown is a more comprehensive explanation for this observation.

	Earth Before the flood : The earth before the flood was probably like it is today - full of life. There probably were no great mountains over 9000 feet (2820 m) or great oceans, but underground rivers and lakes called aquifers, together with a mist supplied the earth with needed water in a world where rain was unknown. Note that the absence of great bodies of surface water or oceans would guarantee that huge thunderclouds could not form. There was no rain.
Earth Before the flood
	The Flood Begins: The floating plates of rock that made up the land areas began to sink, compressing the aquifers and causing great earthquakes. This could have been precipitated by huge asteroids. Volcanoes erupted violently. Great walls of water rushed in from the sea. Thundering fountains of water burst from deep underground. Huge craters around the world, tectonic plates and the tilted earth.
Water Bursts From the Earth
	The Duration: While the flood continued, great currents dumped layer after layer of mud over the submerged land. Different types of sediments were laid down one on top of the other in rapid sequence. Turbidity currents observed in 1929.
Layers of Sediment
	The Flood Ends: As the land areas slowly became visible, the receding waters scoured the land. Newly formed soft earth was shaped and reshaped by the rushing currents. Some water was trapped in great inland seas. It eventually broke through small land barriers and formed magnificent canyons through erosion.
Currents Reshape Mud
	What we observe: The earth is crushed in on one side and has the motions of a wobble. Like the wobble of a spinning toy as it is about to stop rotating. The theory is that a great meteorite probably hit the earth, helping to break the great 'fountains of the deep'. The effect was so great, that it tilted the earth slightly on its axis and caused this wobble which is still measurable today.
The Earth Today
The Aftermath: Erosion continues to wear away at rock layers, exposing more evidence of the greatest catastrophe the world has ever known. Trees trapped standing straight up in between layers of rocks of different ages. Human remains caught in the deepest layers of rock below animals that became extinct before humans. Fish on top of mountains. This is what we observe.

Pangea (Pangaea)
The geography of Pangea looks similar to the description of the New Jerusalem when the orientation is adjusted for the current tilt of the earth. Mountains. Mountain ranges in the north and south. Sea. Sea in the east and west. Eden. The central location of the Garden of Eden in Iraq at the mouth of the bay in Pangea.
New Jerusalem
How did the Bible describe a land that has the same physical features as Pangea?

Catastrophism
Catastrophism attempts to describe our geography on the basis of a global flood. It is the belief that many geological features were a result of catastrophic formation rather than slow formation over millions of years (Uniformitarian).

The Supercontinent: Pangea
There is one area in which we agree with evolutionists. At one time the earth was one large continent. In 1912 Alfred Wegner proposed this theory and he named this land Pangea ("all the earth"). He became the father of the Continental Drift Theory. Pangea broke apart into Laurasia in the north and Gondwana in the south. They slowly drifted apart into the land formations we see today at the rate of 2.5 cm (1 inch) per year. They also claim that there was an earlier formation named Rodinia, which broke up 750 million years ago.

Creationists also believe there was one land mass 6000 years ago which broke up by a combination of continental submersion and continental drift. But the continental drift was rapid or the current topography could simply be a result of submerged continents.
Several permanent conditions occurred as a result of the catastrophic break up.

• Rain. Our oceans are responsible for the weather system and cloud formation. Therefore a large land mass covering the earth would not allow rain to form. The bible states that there was no rain.
• The Tilt of the Earth. The earth was tilted after the flood, so the true north is tilted to the east.
• Layers of Mud. The layers of mud that resulted should be mixed with creatures of many species.

The Theory of Evolution
Evolution is the theory that life evolved from nothing through a series of continuous process of natural selection and mutations over billions of years. Mutation supplies the variations and changes, but natural selection through survival of the fittest decides which variations will survive and breed.
Evolution proposes various theories and mechanisms from the different branches of science to explain the processes within those systems. Theories supporting evolution are proposed in order to explain how a process is occurring or how an event was started.
These processes require a significant amount of time to increase the possibility that they might occur. According to the theory, everything started with a big bang and light appeared.
The elements were created from nothing!
Hydrogen formed and from this several other complex gases formed. These grouped together to create the planets.
Earth was created and flooded by the sea. Eventually sea life and plants appeared, then insects and birds, finally animals and man. Man evolved from bacteria, worms, fish, frogs, reptiles, mice, monkeys, apes and chimpanzees.

The Big Splash? Physicists from the Brookhaven National Laboratory released the results of a three year experiment in April 2005. The experiment that was supposed to demonstrate that a gas was formed at the big bang produced a liquid! So what does that do to the theory of expanding gases rushing out into space? Slows it down quite a bit! The experiment disproved the big bang hypothesis! They should have read the Bible. The Bible describes the abyss as being covered with liquid!

Summary of the Major Theories
There are many theories to explain many mechanisms of evolution. For this discussion we will only focus on the theories which propose the origin of matter in the universe and the evolution of life.

• The Big Bang Theory. It states that everything once exploded out of nothing. The nothingness gathered itself into one place and got so thick and dense that it exploded and formed gas, hydrogen and helium, which, through later explosions, changed into the heavier elements.
  Something from Nothing! That is illogical. Even creation says that what we see came from things that were invisible. Things that got together because of the sound of the voice of God. Electromagnetic waves! But to be fair, creation cannot explain the origin of God either.
• The Theories and Mechanisms of Biological Evolution
  The theory of evolution proposes three mechanisms by which the process of biological evolution is occurring: There are several theories which propose how life began on earth.
  1. The Basic Theory of Evolution. 1801 Proposed by Jean Baptiste Lamarck based on three concepts.

     Theory or Hypothesis? If the basic theory has not been proven, and contradicts modern observation, why have scientists declared that evolution is a theory and not an hypothesis? Some have even declared it a law. If it is a law, results like the Brookhaven experiment would not have happened.

     • Theory of Need. If an organism needs an organ, evolution will eventually provide one.
     • Theory of Use and Disuse. If an organ is used by an organism, it will continue to live by evolution, but if an organ is not used by an organism, it will stop evolving.
     • Theory of Inheritance by Acquired Characteristics. If an organ is needed by a living organism, it will continue to survive in the offspring.
     None of these theories have been proved by reproducible experiments or observation of generations of natural offsprings or what is known about the mechanisms of genetics and inheritance. They have simply been proposed by observing what exists.
  2. Natural Selection. 1859 Proposed by Charles Darwin. Accidental changes that produce improvements.
  3. Survival of the Fittest. Proposed by Charles Darwin. Only the strong will survive.
  4. Mutations. Proposed by Charles Darwin. Changes in the genes produce improvements one by one.
  5. Monster Mutations or Quantum Speciation. Proposed by Richard Goldschmidt. Many beneficial mutations occur at once.
  6. Punctuated Equilibrium. Proposed by Steven Gould. After long periods of no change, millions of positive mutations suddenly occur in one egg, forming a new creature. Interestingly, one requirement added to this theory is that a male and female must be produced in this accident.
     Do you wonder why? This sounds like a very intelligent set of accidents. Two mutually beneficial monster mutations occurring at the same time every 50,000 years to produce a new pair of species (male and female).
     How convenient? Common sense tells us that this is a fishy story.
  7. Panspermia. The biological seeds of life were carried to the earth by a meteor or asteriod.
• Microevolution. These are small changes that switch back and forth that show the variation within species. Most evolution assumes large scale physical changes called macroevolution which cause the formation of new species. The fact that microevolution switches shows that no changes at the DNA level have occurred. In fact the popular evidence given for microevolution is the change in beak size during periods of famine and plenty for Darwin's finches on the Galapagos Islands.
  • Variation. In fact nothing about these finches disprove that this was only a variation within the species like eyebrows in humans. Futher observations showed that these 14 families of finches were actually cross breeding.
  • Grooming. Since the beak is made of the same material as finger nails, the birds simply grew longer beaks during times that they need to reach further for food because a change in behavior created the effect, not a genetic mutation. Perhaps their normal grooming habits are to sharpen and file down their beaks or the search for food during times of plenty naturally cause more wear and tear on their beaks. So less food means less friction and longer beaks.
  • Malnutrition. Lack of proper food affects beak growth and strength.
  So there is no evolution occuring. There are only temporary changes in gross external physical characteristics caused by a change in the environment not by genes.
  • Color. Changes in color could be due to diet as in the pink flamingo.
  • Dead Tissue. Changes in dead skin such as nails, hair and feather can be due to changes in life style and activity.
  • Living Tissue. Changes in living tissue could be due to nutrition or aging or environmental factors such as chemicals or radiation.
  As long as the environment is changed, the body of each new offspring will respond to the change like their parents. But it is not due to traits passed on by changed DNA. This is why they appear to "switch back" when the cause is removed.

The proposed theories demonstrate the problem with evolution - time. Because biological systems need to be formed with all their parts working, single step by step mutation would not have worked. New organs would have been of no use. This violates the theory of use and disuse.

The Theory of need has a lot of built in assumptions and immense foresight. To work, this implies great intelligence and planning that is beyond the capability of a ball of slime in a mud pool.
How could that single celled creature envision an eye and plan one and build one and tell the offspring to pass it on? We have no known mechanism by which superficial changes are passed on to our children. We also have evidence that changes imposed at the gene level do not last beyond the second generation. Changes at the physical level are not transmitted to the genes. If I liposuction and botox myself to death, my children will still have my fat genes.

The Evolution of Man

Million Years	Creature	Findings
0.10-0.012	Homo Floresiensis	The Hobbit
0.25-Present	Homo Sapiens Sapiens	Modern man
0.25-	Homo Sapiens	Cro-Magnon
0.16	Homo Sapiens Idaltu	3 craniums	MYA Taxonomy Human Features 1400 Domain Eukarya "Good nuclei" 800 Kingdom Animalia Cannot make food 500 Phylum Chordata Elongated bilateral symmetry Subphylum Vertebrata Internal skeleton 125 Class Mammalia Conceive young inside reproductive tract and give milk Subclass Eutheria Placenta 70 Order Primata 5 fingers, 5 toes, thumb, collar bone Suborder Anthropoidea Eyes in front 5 Family Hominidae "S" shaped spine, no tail, 2 legs, walk 4.5 Genus Homo Upright posture .4 Species Sapiens Intelligence
0.23-0.03	Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis	They have no genetic link to modern humans
0.30-0.12	Homo Rhodesiensis	-
.4-.2	Homo Sapiens Archaic	-
0.60-0.25	Homo Heidelbergensis	-
0.80-0.35	Homo Antecessor	-
0.80	Homo Cepranensis	Only one skull cap found
1.25-0.30	Homo Erectus	Walked upright
1.90-1.25	Homo Georgicus	"Dmanisi Man" found in Russia
1.80-1.60	Homo Ergaster	-
1.90	Homo Rudolfensis	Skull 1470
2.50-1.50	Homo Habilis	Used crude stone tools
3.00-1.20	Paranthropus	4.26-4.59 feet tall (130-140 cm)
3.50-3.20	Kenyathropus	Distorted skeleton, features not clear
4.00-1.80	Australopithecus	All the early apes were the size of a chimpanzee
5.50-4.40	Ardipithecus	Walks upright most of the time, lives in trees
6.10-5.80	Orrorin	"Millennium Man" from Kenya is the earliest human branch
7-5	Sahelanthropus	The last common ancestor of humans and chimpanzee

The Evolutionary Tree of Life

MYA	Plants and Fungi		Animals
10 K	Agriculture	-		Homo Sapiens	Homo Sapiens, hobbit
5	-	-		Sahelanthropus	Ancestors of humans and the chimpanzee split
13	Herbs Weeds			Chimpanzee	Ancestors of humans and the great apes split
15				Apes	Ancestors of humans and the gibbon split
25				Catarrhini	Catarrhini split into two branches: Old world monkeys and apes. Butterflies, ants
30	-		Platyrrhini Catarrhini Haplorrhini		Haplorrhini split into two branches in the continental drift. Catarrhines (old world monkeys) stayed in Africa. Platyrrhines (New world monkeys) migrate 4500 km across the Atlantic on a vegetation raft to South America.
40	Rose	-		Primates	Ancestors of humans
65	Grasses			Euarchonta	Nocturnal, tree climbing, insect eating. Dinosaurs extinct
100	Angiosperms (Flowers)			Mammal (Eomaia scansoria)	Bees A common genetic ancestor of mice and men Oil Formed. Global deposits of oil rich black shale
130		Coal Forests
170	-			Birds, insects	-
220	Cycads			Cynodonts	Teeth, mammal jaws, dinosaurs
256	Ginkgos		Diapsida | Synapsida		Synapsida evolves into mammals
300	Lycopods	Club Mosses Horsetail		Hylonomus	Reptiles
315	Conifers			Acanthostega	Amphibians with limbs
360	Seed Ferns				Cockroaches
400	Gymnosperms	-		Coelacanth	Scorpions, centipedes and milipedes move to land. Living coelacanth specimens found in 1938
475	Plants move to land	Fungi
480		Mosses Liverworts		Placodermi	Jawed fish
505	Primitive plants Bryophytes		Ostracoderm		Jawless fish. Vertebrates
530			Pikaia		Ancestor of chordates and vertebrates
540			Acorn worms		Link to vertebrates and invertebrates
550			Flatworms		Brain, organs, bilateral symmetry
580			Cnidarians		Nerves and muscles
600			Sponges (Porifera)		Multicellular. Ozone layer forms
900	Algae	Molds	Choanoflagellates		Ancestors of the animal kingdom
1200	Sexual reproduction evolves
3900	Archaebacteria		Protista
3500			Bacteria

The Evolutionary Time Frame

Era/Epoch	Years	Period		What Emerged	Day
Neolithic	6,000	Quaternary		Adam, Eve and the universe were created. Last ice age	6
-	74,000			Mt. Toba eruption. Human adult population now 2000+
Paleolithic	250000			Homosapiens, evolutionists. Early stone age
Pleistocene	1.8mya			Homoerectus. The great ice age
Pliocene	5 mya	Tertiary		Australopithecines, whales. Human-chimpanzee split
Miocene	20			Planet cools. Southern Ice cap, Himalayas, Red Sea
Cenozoic	54			Dogs, herbivores, carnivores, flowering plants, fish
Eocene	65			Cat, greenhouse climate change. No polar ice caps
KT Boundary				Dinosaurs disappear, small mammals appear
	65	Mesozoic "The Age of Dinosaurs" Coal Forests		60% Mass extinction by Chicxulub meteor and the Deccan Traps supervolcano in India. Dinosaurs extinct
Cretaceous	120			Insects, flowering plants, mammals. Pangea broke up
	144			Mass extinction by meteor kills dinosaurs
Jurassic	170			Large dinosaurs, first mammals, birds, fish, insects
	208			20% Mass extinction. Manicougan crater in Canada and the Central Atlantic Magmatic Province supervolcano near Sierra Leone
Triassic	225			Dinosaurs, reptiles, plants (gymnosperms)
	251			96% Mass extinction by Wilkes Land, or Bedout High meteor and the supervolcano in the Siberian Traps
Permian	270	Paleozoic "Ancient Life"		Amphibians, seed plants, coral, sponges, fish. Pangea	5
Carboniferous	295			Reptiles, fern forests, cockroach. Pangea (350-260)
	364			70% Mass extinction. Frasnian-Fammian. Siljan crater (Sweden). Pripyat-Dniepr-Donetsk supervolcano (Ukraine)
Devonian	395			Fish, ferns and other seed plants. Land vertebrates, wingless insects and spiders. New types of fish
Silurian	425			Fish continued to evolve
Ordovician	500			Vertebrate sea life. Plants moved to land	3
Cambrian	545			Planets, early invertebrate sea life
Neoproterozoic		Precambrian		900- 540 Oldest known animal fossils
Paleoproterozoic				2500-1600 Photosynthesis. Rodinia continent. 3500-1500 Transition to oxygen atmosphere (200 billion tons) made by stromatolytes (blue-green algae)	2
Archaen (3.9-2.5)	2500			3900-2500 Oceans, blue-green algae, fossils, rocks
	3500			Granite crust made from super heated water on basalt
Hadean (4.5-3.9)	3800			Late Heavy Bombardment. Comets with water form oceans for 400 million years
	3800			4500-3800 earth has a molten hellish environment
13,700 Million				The Big Bang	1, 4

The Chicxulub impact generated enough rock to fill mount Everest.

A Curious Observation
With the exception of the creation of the planets of our solar system on day four. The creation order in Genesis shows the same order. Now, why would a story conceived by illiterate and superstitious people show such scientific order?

And, just like the process of sexual reproduction is so out of character with the theory of evolution. Is it possible that we can find some evidence in the seemingly misplaced events of the fourth day of creation? The time between events (72 hours) may be too short to measure any odd events, but I am currently limited by what I know. Plants were created before the sun, moon and stars. The earth was also created before them. Is there something in stellar physics that shows that the earth is older than the sun, even though it is such a short time?

Even the statement that God created it all out of nothing sounds a lot like the Big Bang theory. And this itself is another odd statement. How could illiterate people say that something came out of nothing. They would at least have said that it came from some part of God. Instead, the Bible says God spoke everything into existence. Electromagnetic waves started it all. This is another odd coincidence you see, because the core of all life, the smallest particles are electromagnetic waves.

Basic Requirements for Both Theories

Similarities Out of Nothing. God created the world out of nothing visible. He spoke and it happened. So elecromagnetic waves became matter. This is totally consistent with particle physics. The Big Bang theory says that matter came out of nothing after the explosion. There is no explanation of how that happened. Something cannot come out of nothing. At least the nothingness of God was electromagnetism. Light Before the Sun. There was light on the first day, before the Sun was created. There is a microwave light or background radiation that bathes the universe. The universe consists of 4% atoms, 23% of an unknown dark matter and 73% of a mysterious dark energy. Out of Water. Current space explorations are showing that the planets in the universe were born out of water. The Brookhaven experiments in 2005 showed that the Big Bang produced liquid, not gas. One Land. Pangea and the original earth were one land formation. And the physical features of Pangea just happen to look like the description of the New Jerusalem. And it verifies the flood story that the earth was broken up. Order. The order of creation is almost the same as evolution. The only exception is the creation of the sun and stars. This is what the Bible teaches.

Requirements for Evolution to Occur
In order for evolution to occur several conditions and possibilities must be present

1. Time. Evolution is dependent on long periods of time to overcome the statistical problems of one system accidently and randomly changing to another or enhancing itself.
2. Subspecies Change. Evolution requires that one creature should be changed into another through some mechanism.
3. Reproduction. The emerging new species MUST be able to reproduce AND transmit the new beneficial changes to the offspring.
4. Male and Female. Since this is the design that exists, male and female evolution must occur simultaneously so that the species can survive.

Requirements for Creation to Occur
In order for creation to occur several conditions and possibilities must be present.

1. Time. The earth must be approximately 6000 years old.
2. God. A creator must exist. He is the mechanism by which all these events occurred. At the minimum, some being of higher intelligence and more technologically advanced must exist.

Creationists cannot prove the existence of God. We cannot even consistently prove by statistical evidence that we can affect our world by appealing to God. The last age of miracles was 2000 years ago. What we can show is that what God says can occur within the time He says it did.

Proofs and the Scientific Method
We will approach this discussion as an examination of the quality of evidence that exists.

The Process of the Scientific Method. The basis of the scientific method is asking questions and then trying to come up with the answers, based on logic.

The Whole Earth Laboratory It is difficult to design and conduct experiments which prove evolution. We do not know how to introduce the effects of time. We can only guess at the environmental conditions. It is impossible to make the earth and the cosmos into one gigantic laboratory where we can change the variables. And a small model may not be adequate.

• Hypothesis. Make a good guess based on a few observations
• Theory. Do experiments based on your guess and find other patterns.
  1. State the question. How did the universe originate and how did life begin?
  2. Form a hypothesis based on observations.
  3. Do experiments. Gather evidence in the form of measurable data.
  4. Interpret data and draw conclusions from the values and figures your experiments generated
  5. Revise theory (go back to step 2).
• Principle or Law. If the theory stands the test of time and is proven over and over, and can create true predictions for different situations, has uniformity and is universal it becomes a law.
  This is my first problem with the proponents of evolution. They claim that it is no longer a theory but I do not know of any laboratory experiments that have proven it.

Logical Reasoning and Limits to the Scientific Method
The scientific method is a rational, logical thought process that is used to figure out facts (the raw data) and sometimes truths (the actual meaning). All of the answers must be able to be proven.

The Scientific Method What do you think you know? Name any reproducible experiment that proves biological evolution. Next learn all you can about the details of the experiment from evolutionary science. What did they measure? What did they recreate? What did they assume? What basic science did they rely on? Then read about any rubuttal evidence from creationists.

• Inability to Measure the very Distant Past.
  Things deteriorate and some processes might not be observable to us as changing and therefore fully measurable. Some examples are:
  • Processes that have a long life cycle.
  • The activity curve of some processes will affect what we observe at different times.
    In their earlier stages, some processes change along an exponential line, but as they get older, the activity starts to decay along an almost flat line. This will not be observable as a change in the later stages if you can only observe a small period of its final stages.
• Senses. Our ability to recognize data to measure is limited by our senses. We assume that only what we can see, touch, hear, smell, taste and quantify are the whole set of collectable data.
• What is Known. Our experiments are limited by what we know and what we believe is knowable. After all, from the outset we are only measuring what is observable and what we think is possible.
• Technological Abilities. This affects our ability to make more precise tests and gather specimens that might be evidence.
• Measurement of the Physical Universe. Our ability to measure and interpret what we measure is limited by our instrumentation (which we use to extend the limits of our senses).
• Instrument Limitations. Our instrumentation is basically an enhancement of our senses. We therefore do not know what else is measurable and how to gather the data. Taking this into perspective, if everyone was blind and only blue frogs from a few square miles of the Amazon rain forest could see, we would be missing a large part of our world because we do not know that we are lacking something and we cannot deduce that this sense exists because we have not been able to hypothesize that it exists from things that are available to us. We could not guess the existence of color or of sight. Even now, knowing about color, it would be difficult for you to envision a brand new color.
• Corroborating Evidence. Until we know most of the facts and how things really work, we are not even sure what else could be corroborating evidence.
• False Assumptions. We assume that everything can be measured. We assume that we ought to be able to measure God if he exists. We assume that the scientific method is fool proof. We assume that our senses and instrumentation are adequate. We assume that we have the technology and the ability to solve these issues.
• The Human Factor. Despite the scientific obligation to be loyal only to the facts, the reality is that politics and prejudice do override our thought processes. This is why universities are not funding research on a young earth. They are there to foster learning. They are not a church for evolutionists.
• Scope. How can you tell that a law is universal when you have not traveled to all points in space and time, and you have not seen all scenarios under which it reacts. Such declarations are presumptuous.
• Circular Reasoning. Using an unproven idea to prove itself or using an unproven idea as fact in another unproven idea. Circular reasoning (also called "reasoning in a circle") is the basis of two evolutionary concepts: "natural selection" and "survival of the fittest."
  Tautology. A "tautology" means the useless repetition of an idea in different words, or a statement that is true because it includes all possibilities. ("Either it will rain tomorrow or it will not.") So tautologous thinking is a related way to describe some of the logical flaws in circular reasoning.
  
  These last two points show problems with logic and reasoning.

Ultimately this method is based on our limited knowledge about what is proof, what is provable and how a fact can be verified.
Instead of endless philosophical discussions to prove a point, experiment becomes the final arbitrator of truth, a successful approach. The issue becomes a bit sticky when discussing origins. How do we test the theory of evolution? We do not have the luxury of having a miniature universe with aeons of time in the corner of a laboratory. So this leaves both evolutionists and creationists in the same boat. No absolute way to objectively test their assertions. No eyewitnesses. Both are left to propose a model and then compare it with nature for consistency.

Types of Evidence. In conducting experiments and gathering data and formulating proofs, there are several types of evidence available. Some are more trustworthy than others because they are more objective and less open to personal interpretation. These are the major types of evidence:

Eyewitness Evidence In the case of creation versus evolution, there are no eyewitness, unless you count God as an eyewitness, but He is not a trustworthy witness for those who believe in evolution. Therefore, we have no reliable, impartial eyewitness that either side will agree upon. God, rocks, atoms, water. 4000 year old trees witness to the time after flood

Eyewitness. Testimony from someone or something that was actually there when an event occurred. This may seem to be the most reliable evidence, but sometimes under highly emotional state and depending on the length of time from the incidence to the recording of the testimony, the truth may not be as accurate.

For example, if your eyewitness is human, people age and forget things and in cases of trauma, your mind may protect you from the facts. But something impartial and unemotional may record some of the facts but not all of the truth.

For example, a video camera could show all the visual and audio effects, but they cannot record feelings and motives or previous history.


Hearsay Evidence In the case of creation versus evolution, the Bible is the hearsay evidence, but both sides will not agree that it is reliable. Bible

Hearsay Evidence. A potential eyewitness who cannot be cross-examined. Hearsay evidence consists of statements made out of court by someone who is not present to testify under oath. The problem with this type of witness is that people can lie or misinterpret the meaning of a message.
For example, in considering ancient writings or descriptions about a topic - one cannot rule out the fact that these could be scientific observations, mythology, novels, stories for entertainment or religion, or if the account of the fact was influenced by popular culture or beliefs. Or if the interpretation of the artifacts is influenced by our desires, culture and beliefs.
Anecdotal.

Anecdotal Evidence We have anecdotal information in the form of similar flood stories. However, these do not prove that the flood occurred. They might prove that the stories originated from a common source, but we cannot tell if it was just a folk tale. The anecdotal creation stories are even more diverse and prove nothing. Flood stories, folk tales, legends, myths

A type of hearsay evidence. These are facts you can guess by examining stories passed down from various people. These may not be eyewitness accounts. However, this does not tell you if the stories are based in reality or if it was crafted for entertainment or other purposes. Sometimes a true event is interpreted based on the people's religious beliefs or fears or knowledge of the world around them. These conclusions will often enter the stories as facts, but they are only the people's interpretation of the event. However, you can get certain information.
• Similarities in stories from widely separated cultures could suggest that the story originated from one source to which they both had contact sometime in the past. This does not mean that the stories were real events. It only means that they may have one common origin.
• Scientific observations that do not change perceptibly over the centuries, could give you a relative measurement of the amount of change or the cycle of the phenomena. For example, comets and other astronomical events.
Testimonial Evidence. This is anecdotal evidence by an eyewitness or a recommendation because of personal experience. Currently most celebrity testimonals are not based on any experience but based on the reputation or public appeal of the presenter.
Documentary Evidence. The eyewitness is a document in written or printed form. This document must be authenticated or have a trustworthy origin and chain of custody. Most legal documents are authenticated by signatures and eyewitnesses to the transaction. Anecdotal evidence may once have been documentary evidence for the ancient people. So the problem with this type of evidence is time. The more time has elapsed, the less confidence exists in their authenticity and veracity.
The Torah and the Bible are treated as anecdotal documentary evidence that are useful for cultural amusement but not statements of fact. Because modern man chooses not to believe in God, they choose to believe that these document are false.


Experimental Evidence This is one of the methods used by scientists today. This type of investigation can only demonstrate how a situation could have occurred, not that it actually happened in that way. Male and female, turbidity currents

Experimental. With this method one tries to reproduce the facts by creating a similar situation and measuring conditions before the experiment and after. If it succeeds you may have proven that under the conditions of your experiments that certain events can occur. However, although experimental evidence could show that certain actions can produce certain effects, it cannot prove that in the past this situation existed, especially if the situation is highly unlikely and never observable in modern times. If it were possible to conduct all possible experiments to rule out the impossible then we could say with certainty what happened.

Rare natural processes observed in real time could also be counted as an experimental environment that is conducted by nature itself. They have the added testimony that this is a possibility, since it is not an artificial environment set up in a laboratory.
Demonstrative Evidence. This type of experimental evidence illustrates a point through charts, graphs, maps, illustrations and reenactments. It tends to simplify complicated situations or illustrate and assist verbal testimony.


Circumstantial Evidence The science of evolution is largely based on circumstantial evidence. Bones in a cave, bits of pottery, garbage, writings on the wall can become a fanciful tale of culture, funeral rites, relationships and lifestyle. It is never simply a burial site, home or a temporary shelter. Jews, biblical archaeology

Circumstantial. Examining what remains after the fact. The interpretation of facts based on the physical evidence found after the incidence has happened and the participants are gone. There is a danger that we could use current thinking and understanding to interpret the data. This is because the interpretation of circumstantial data is based on common sense and all known experimental data.
Common Sense. At first this may seem to be emotionally based and possibly limited by our knowledge and flawed interpretations. But it is not a private interpretation. Common sense therefore, is helpful as an arbiter over all the forensic and experimental evidence because it is based on years of experience shared by every one. Whatever gives the expert witness the right to speak about complicated scientific evidence, also gives every man the right to speak about common everyday occurrences.


Expert Witness Evolutionists would say that through their science and training they are the expert witnesses. But they cannot be the witnesses for the very fact that we are disputing. Creationists would argue that we are not experts, we do not know enough information to make an informed decision.

Expert Witness. Experts sometimes utilize hearsay and routinely express opinions. Through training and experience, they are better qualified to form an opinion. However, their knowledge is limited by the limits of science and their own capabilities. They are at best interpreting forensic and circumstantial evidence.
Scientific (Forensic, Direct, Real, Physical). This is the equivalent of a scientific eyewitness. It is based on the examination of physical evidence left behind. Based on our ability to measure certain materials and knowledge about its rate of change under certain conditions, or statistical information on its frequency of occurrence. we can make very good guesses about what is most likely to have occurred. But it still involves some degree of circumstantial evidence evaluation because we must still interpret the meaning of the scientific facts.

Forensic Evidence This is one of the methods used by scientists today. The types of forensic evidence we have are, bone fragments, rocks, permanent geologic formations and layers. The closest thing we have to a forensic eyewitness are: Atoms. They may be unchanged. Rocks. Those that were not formed from any other geological material. Any other biological findings are not eyewitnesses because they have changed chemically over the years. Atoms and rocks are a good source of evidence because they probably existed from the beginning. If we can determine what to measure and what it really means, then we can use this data scientifically.


Mathematical. Calculations that show the impossibility of events in the past conforming to current observations.
Statistical. This can probably be viewed as "mathematical" forensic evidence. Given all the data, the calculations are based on how likely an event will occur. DNA is statistical forensic evidence. The flaw is, we may not have all the data. But from experience (common sense) we may infer that given certain sets of facts that are based on common everyday occurrences, that only a rare unlikely event could change the conclusion.

In recent discussions with evolutionists, I have heard news personnel mention the phrase "mathematical evidence" or "statistical evidence" and dismiss it as irrelevant. They never say what the evidence is, they just say the two words in a derogatory way. But our mathematical and statistical evidence are a logical scientific method to bring evidence out of the realm of faith and speculation. The type of statistical evidence we present is not one that is a photo finish or that can be argued with. It is evidence that is in the realm of possible versus impossible, not "likely" or "some chance".
Rebuttal Evidence. This is not a separate type of evidence. This is evidence used to contradict other evidence. Generally, the rebuttal evidence should be of similar or higher reliability than the evidence disputed. Therefore, anecdotal evidence should not be used to rebut experimental evidence.

Weighing the Evidence
Therefore, using a simple system based on the scientific method we can devise a plan for evaluating the importance of each type of evidence we see.
To evaluate the evidence we need to look at a minimum of two different dimensions.

Quality Points
Letter Grade	Numerical Grade	Meaning
A	4	Excellent
B	3	Good
C	2	Fair
D	1	Poor
F	0	Fail

1. Type of Evidence. We can evaluate the type of evidence based on agreement about their relative importance. This is called the "weight". Even with such a standard, opposing groups might differ as to how important one type of evidence is over the other. Therefore, in this evaluation, I have used what I believe scientists would agree with.
2. Quality of the Supporting Data.
   To give a perspective on quality we will use the old ABC grading method. But any determination is based on personal judgment.

To combine both evaluations into a single score, we will use the following formula:

Total Score = Type of evidence X Numerical quality points

Problems.

1. Double Dipping. Some discoveries fit more than one evidence categories. You could potentially drive up the score by placing them in every category. Therefore, we will only take one score from the highest category.
2. Negative Evidence. We have not factored in the effect of contradictory claims.

Evidence	Weight	Comment
Subjective evidence based on Personal Evaluation
Eyewitness to Past Events	0	Ideally this should have been 10, but because there is no mutually accepted eyewitness and because Bible prophecy hints at a breaking into history of the lying spirits so that you can no longer trust what you see, I give no credence to eyewitness evidence
Documentary	0	Bible
Anecdotal	1	Scientific stories and observations from the past
Hearsay	3	I will take only ancient scientific observations. No prophets.
Common Sense	5	Observations based on the subjective evaluation of reasonable, ordinary people.
Circumstantial	6	Often based on the subjective evaluation of experts
Expert	6	Subjective and scientific evaluation of trained or experienced people.
Objective evidence based on scientific evaluation
Statistical	9	Conclusions based on mathematical evidence and possibilities.
Experimental	9	Observable laboratory experiments or natural event
Forensic	10	Conclusions based on known, reliable scientific experiments and processes applied to discoveries of ancient artifacts.
Eyewitness to Current Events	10	Conclusions based on observed processes in nature by scientists.

Conclusion. But what remains in nature is circumstantial evidence and the forensic information we can gather from the evidence left behind. We can conduct experiments to try to mimic a mechanism that caused the event but we cannot be certain that the environment is correct. We can only say that if the experiments worked, then this is only one way it COULD have worked. Finally, taking all the evidence we can impartially gather through science, we are left with statistical methods and common sense to interpret the data so that we can become "experts".

Scientific Evidence
We will look at this evidence from each branch of science.
There are several sciences which are prominent in the theory of evolution and each has developed laws which contribute to the theory. Remember, from the scientific methodology that a law has greater status than a theory because it appears to be universal and it is reproducible. A list of some of the theories proposed for each of the scientific discipline is given. Because I am not familiar with the science, not all theories will be covered in this article. However, I have listed them so that you can research on your own.

Science		Description	Theories
	Physics	The study of matter, energy and atoms	Big bang theory
	Chemistry	The study of Atoms and molecules and how they react
	Cosmology	The study of space	Stellar Evolution: Nebular Hypothesis, Fission Theory, Capture Theory, Accretion Theory, Planetary Collision Theory, Stellar Collision Theory, Gas Cloud Theory
	Astronomy	The study of planets
	Geology	The study of the earth and rocks	Geologic Columns, Continental Drift
	Botany	The study of plants	Natural Selection, Mutation, Monster Mutation, Punctuated Equilibrium, Spontaneous Generation. Theory of use and disuse
	Biology	The study of animals (living things)
	Paleontology	The study of bones and fossils (dead things)

Mutation A Failed Experiment The Case of the Stubborn Gypsy Moths Radiation is known to cause genetic mutations. So Richard Goldschmidt attempted to induce genetic changes in the gypsy moth through this method. After 25 years of experiments he concluded that it did not work. Any changes he produced were usually undone in the next two generations. The gypsy moth would not cooperate. They changed back to their earlier form. He concluded that changes were strictly within species and that they were a temporary adaptation to a local condition. Major changes did not occur. Monster Mutation. So he proposed the theory of monster mutations. A set of mutations so life changing that the creature was essentially changed in an instant and could not revert. And he threw in the requirement of a male and female monster emerging at the same time. Why? He is old enough and clever enough to know about the birds and the bees and that Mr. Monster needs a Mrs Monster. It is just hog wash! Beam me up Scotty! Drosophilia Melanogaster. It is ideal because it lives 10-12 days and only has four chromosomes. But after eighty years of irradiation and millions of generations and over 1000 mutations, the fruit fly is still a fruit fly!

Biology - The Study of Animals
There are currently four related theories concerning the method by which life emerged. It is interesting to note that the later theories were proposed because scientists could not escape the need for decreased time in which critical leaps are needed. Let us look at the theories.
Natural Selection. Accidental changes in plants and animals will always produce improvements which will keep changing each species of plant and animal into new and larger ones. But observations did not support the theory. Changes only occurred within species and these were slight changes. No living plants or animals ever produced a different kind of plant or animal. Fossil records do not show changes between species. They show minor variations within the same species.

The next new wave of theories attempted to explain how the accidental changes occurred, because no one ever changed any physical or structural body part by force of mind.
Mutations. The next wave of theories declare that it is mutations (changes in the genes) which have made the changes from one species to another. But natural selection only produced further adaptation within those changed species.
But changes between species still proved illusive. One specie simply did not change into another. A dog never became a cat. And to make matters worse, experiments shows that even non-lethal mutations within species tended to revert back to the original form once the foreign agent causing these slight changes were removed. Mutations only weaken, damage, sterilize, or kill the creatures in which they occur. Beneficial mutations just did not occur, and any changes were too small and too slow.
» Limits of Mutation. The massive radiation exposure at Chernobyl, Nagasaki, Hiroshima and the thousands of irradiated gypsy moths of experiments did not produce new species.
What we actually observe is that only single mutations occur. And over 99% are harmful, and 90% are deadly. And the experiments of Goldschmidt showed that a string of single mutations does not produce changes in groups.
Scientists claim that sickle cell anemia is a beneficial mutation that occurred in response to malaria.
» DNA Barrier and Genetic Laws. The cloning and genetic experiments being done at the moment demonstrate that even with a 99% to 1% mixture of genes across species lethal mutations often occur and in those who survive other problems surface. Species cannot migrate from one form to another.

The Hopeful Monster Theory. A new species emerges after millions of irreversible, positive simultaneous mutations occur in one egg, producing a male and female. Implications. The theory basically teaches that it is possible for a fish to give birth to a male and female frog from the same egg. Proof. None. It violates all know genetic and biological laws and observations. Rebuttal » Biology. It is impossible for one egg to produce two genders. » Genetics. Most mutations are never positive and never produce new species. » Statistics. It is impossible for such a series of complex lucky coincidences to occur twice in one day and 13 million times. Key Proof. The issue of male and female must be explained by all theories of biological evolution because, if the species does not reproduce the progress of evolution ends.

Monster Mutations. A theory developed by Richard Goldschmidt, when, after 25 years of failed mutation experiments on the gypsy moth (or fruit fly) he concluded that evolution by mutation did not work with the gypsy moth. Whenever he obtained observable variations, they immediately changed back to the previous form by the second generation, or died or became sterile. So he had to conclude that for evolution to occur, large mutations must have occurred in the past. These mutations were so overwhelming, the creature could not change back to an original form.

I had always heard, and continue to hear on educational channels about the famous gypsy moth experiments that 'proved' that mutations occurred. But they also forgot to mention that the mutations failed and that even the scientists who did the experiments concluded that they did not work. So much for truth in science!
The Saltation or Leap Theory. Proposes that simultaneous, multi million positive monster mutations would occur once every 50,000 years. Millions of favorable mutations would occur in one egg, and it would hatch into a totally new creature which he called the 'hopeful monster'. All evolution occurred by immense mutational leaps from one life form to another. Therefore, a fish did change instantly into a bird!
In addition, the theory states that a male and female must emerge from this incredible egg.

Do you wonder why scientists have to propose those last two theories? Because they cannot get around the problem of time and the number of coincidences that must happen at the same time for a new species to develop.
And, being smart scientists, they know about the theory of the birds and the bees.

» Species Barrier. The genetic instructions are so clear that cells only produce their own kind. Unrelated species cannot reproduce with each other. You cannot naturally mix half of human genes with half of the genes from a bird and produce a human who can fly. Species cannot change from one form to another through cross species reproduction. Modern observations also show that even in species that are very closely related, cross breeding produces sterile offspring in most cases. A banana cell never produced a toe nail.

» Biological Clock. While rocks and stones and basic elements never die, biological systems do. A biological clock is in place for every component or process.

Sexual Anomalies Parthogenisis. The ability of an unfertilized egg to hatch usually producing a female because the mother only has "X" chromasomes. Hermaphrodite. An organism with both sexes, usually external characteristics. Turner's Syndrome. This disease is caused when an egg loses an "X" or "Y" chromasome. If a male egg loses a "Y" chromosome, he genetically becomes an "XO" female with one "X" chromosome. Mutations and cross breeding within the same species only leads to infertility

• Age. 70 - 100 years in humans. Ten days in fruit flies.
• Reproduction. 30 years in humans. Hours in fruit flies.

» Gender Mutations. As far as we know, mutations or defects produce sterile creatures or females only.
Turner's Syndrome is an anomaly that comes closest to the monster mutation theory, yet it only occurs in females and does not produce a male. But theoretically, if this occurs in one of two identical twin boys, then we could have a case when identical twins would be male and an infertile "female"! The result is still infertility.
Parthogenesis usually produces females. So far, some form of parthogenesis produces male bees.
In complex creatures, hermaphrodites do not have the ability to impregnate themselves because it is generally a structural defect that does not produce two complete sets of working parts.
Plants also populate by sexual reproduction. Usually this occurs with the male and the female parts on the same plant. But there are even plants that have the male part and the female part on separate trees. Imagine that!

Common Sense Evidence for Intelligent Design
Although we classify this as common sense evidence, it is actually based on accepted scientific laws. Intelligent design says that the complex systems and interrelated parts show evidence that some intelligent designer must have coordinated the process. We will look at three cases in our common experience to demonstrate the signs of intelligent intervention.
First, we will list some problems with evolution. Your common sense would agree with these observations:

• No Excess Body Parts. If evolution was a random process, we should have many excess, left over, asymmetrical parts. We should have grown body structures as randomly as trees grow branches. Yet we are symmetrical in design and we have no excess parts.
  At one point scientists thought that the appendix was useless and was a left over from evolution. They said this because they did not know what it did. So they dressed up the theory of evolution with more stuff that they claim is evidence. I regularly boil water and put stuff in it, but I don't call it food.
  Now, they believe that the appendix is part of the immune system. It processes good bacteria for digestion.
• The Theory of Use and Disuse. Their own theory says that if a structure was not needed then it would not evolve. They probably had to propose this theory to explain the total lack of extra, useless body parts.
  However, this same theory makes it impossible for useless developing structures to continue to exist generation after generation over millions of years before they become useful.
• Random Design. Since many body systems cannot function without all structures and chemicals, one must admit that as it was evolving, the system seemed to be working towards a specific design. However, since evolution says that no intelligent life guided this process then we must have accidentally created everything we need. Also, with body parts that have an identical copy, The same random, lucky design must have happened in a place that makes them look visually appealing. If not, we would have one eye on our face and the other on our neck!. That is the reality of random design.
• Communication. The progress made towards evolution, must have a mechanism by which it could be communicated to the babies, in addition, we must also tell the baby not to get rid of the new structure because it will be useful in a million years! If this type of communication did not occur, then the mechanism that regulated the theory of use and disuse would quickly destroy the useless structure. Because intelligent design is certainly not telling us to hang on to the useless part because it fits into a plan. A plan indicates an intelligent design.
  Of course we see no such communication with our unborn babies, if we have a mole the baby is not born with one.
  
  There is also one big problem. When we are born we have already stored all the eggs we will use for reproduction. Therefore, the chance that we could have changed the information in them to pass on to the next generation is very low. Besides, I repeat, we have no evidence of this happening now. Our bodies do not change the genetic structure of our eggs.
• Current Changes. We have never seen any evidence of any structural changes happening now. As far as we know there have been no physical changes in 10,000 years.

Case Study: Male and Female

Sexual Reproduction A Crazy Design This crazy design runs contrary to the evolutionary theory of "survival of the fittest". It seems illogical, that the very mechanism that a species needs to perpetuate itself should have such a big design flaw. And that this design should be the norm in over 99% of the species - not the exception. Asexual reproductive systems would be easier to evolve and easier to maintain, ensuring survival of the species. Not sexual reproduction.

... male and female, He created them. (Genesis 1: 27)
It started when I read the words in Genesis 1: 27. It dawned on me that two impossible occurrences must take place in order to reproduce the species and that this impossible event must be repeated in every species.
Apparently, God designed species reproduction to be done almost entirely by sexual reproduction (requires two cooperating beings), not by asexual means. But the logical conclusion for the theory of evolution is that asexual reproduction (reproduction through one person only) should have been the process favored by natural selection. Sexual reproduction only makes the process more complicated and less likely to happen. Yet sexual reproduction occurs in 99.99% of all living things in animals and plants and mothers and fathers.

So, as I researched both theories, I specifically looked for answers to this question. What did I find? Scientists have no explanation. They just simply, casually throw in a critical requirement into a stupid theory. And they think we would not notice?!
The embarrassing statement that a male and female must be produced with each monster mutation every 50,000 years is a joke.

Fortunately, reproduction is a process that even a six year old understands. Scientists cannot pull the wool over your eyes in this situation. You may not understand the theory of relativity. You may not understand the law of mass action. You may not understand mitochondria and DNA and semipermeable membranes, but you do understand what it takes to make a baby. And thanks to God it is the biggest stumbling block of this house of cards called evolution.
Everyone should be able to see through this fable because of this single issue. You have no excuse.

This argument is so simple, you might find it unbelievable. Yet it does not take scientific knowledge to understand it. Whenever I propose this people look at me as if I were a couple of brain cells short of a logical thought. It can't be that simple.

In Every Species Scientists claim that sexual evolution occurred about 1200 million years ago before the first ancestor of the animal kingdom arrived. A scientific sleight of hand is occurring here. As they propose the miraculous event of the birth of a pair of hopeful monsters, they appear to want to leave the impression that this occurrs only one time and every subsequent species benefits from this knowledge of how to become male and female.

How Babies are Made. First of all, before we look at what it would take to produce this feat in evolution, let us look at the delicate reproductive process and the problems of infertility. I have a sister who lost nine babies before birth - I know about infertility.
Despite the unwanted pregnancy rate, the fact is that the odds are against a pregnancy occurring. Several structural, biochemical, geographical, chronological and physiological situations must converge to make this event happen and to maintain the pregnancy that results.

• Chronological Events: There are just a few days within a 30 day period in which the average woman can conceive. And within her lifetime there are just an average of 35 years within which she may have a child.
• Structural or Anatomical: Several anatomic and biological components must be in place for a successful pregnancy to occur. The tilt of the womb, the type of hormones and concentration, the Fallopian tubes and its structure.
• Geographical Events (Proximity): Since it takes two separate individuals to complete this action, they must be within close proximity of each other in a narrow window of time. We have not perfected beaming technology yet!
  How did they coordinate the design of their opposite systems? One would have had to be a male and the other a female. And supposedly, these events happened by chance, yet they just happened to produce a male and a female.
  
  This is what scientists are asking you to believe. They mock faith. Yet this takes more than faith to believe. It is downright stupidity!
• Complementary Systems: The male and female must have structures that complement each other, to deliver the sperm where the egg can be fertilized. They must have biochemistry that complement each other. The sperm must have a precise shape. The egg and sperm must deliver exactly one half of the gene material, no more, no less. We have never seen a case of one egg producing both a male and a female. It is genetically impossible. If one egg produces twins it is always of one gender. Yet the Monster mutation theory requires one egg to produce a male and a female.