Pages: 1 2 3

Photo credit: atheism (Creative Commons)

Evolution: Why it’s wrong and why it matters (Part 1a)

Advertisement-content continues below

Last time I wrote about why evolution is wrong, and I was planning here to show why this matters. Some readers, however, were kind enough to take the time to write lengthy comments to my article, so I thought it important here to respond to their comments. Perhaps the fact that I said evolution was wrong without qualifying that statement with such mitigating phrases as, “why I believe evolution is wrong,” or, “in my opinion, ….” had something to do with the content of their comments.

One reader was thoughtful enough to include a scientific flowchart to show how science works. My article simply mentioned such things as observing, measuring, and repeatable experiments.

Science is certainly very good at what it is made to do; but after reading all the comments, I still believe it is safe to say that evolution does not fit with the scientific method.

What kind of repeatable experiment would we conduct? Fill a Petri dish half full with amino acids, top it off with water, place it on the ground where it can get adequate sunlight, and then check it in a million years or so for signs of life?

Advertisement-content continues below

I think it is safe to say that evolution does not meet the requirement of repeatable experiment. Nor that of observation. Science can’t give an experiment of evolution. By this I mean, either the origin of life or the transition from one species to another. And even if it could, that wouldn’t prove anything, because the whole point of evolution is that all this was supposed to have happened by itself, without any intelligent help. If a scientist did think that he proved evolution by his experiment, it would actually be more of a support for the existence of God, because it would show that these things needed intelligence to put it all together, not blindless, random mutations.

And since no intelligence is involved in the process, evolution should have been going on continuously ever since it started. It wouldn’t have noted that now that we have human beings, its work is done. There is nobody to do the thinking.

And the fact that we still have all these intermediate species, like birds and fishes and reptiles, would suggest that this evolutionary process is still at work. Yet all these species appear to be finished products. If evolution were true, as I said before, every living thing now would be in some transitional state, a work in progress. Now it looks like everything is complete in its own kind.

One reader had a question about the origin of the earth. Did God create it or did it come about through entirely natural means? Neither alternative is easy. Either would require an act of faith. However, I have read too much about the wonders of the world to think that everything just came about by chance. Why would water expand when it freezes, unlike everything else that contracts, thus permitting life below the water’s surface to survive in winter?

Pages: 1 2 3

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

Don't Miss Out. Subscribe By Email Or Facebook