Please outline why the theory of evolution is not so?

Question

When God creates a species do they suddenly appear in a puff of smoke?

Answer 1

A theory remains a theory until disproven, or until it is proven and becomes a law.
So, it still being a theory, hasn't been disproven.

Your question regards a matter of faith, and belief, something that cannot be proven or disproven by science. (at this point in time)

Answer 2

Welcome to "Rob's page," which my thumbs-down shrunk to about 10% of its original size.

Rob, if there were a way to convert words to their equivalent in hot air, I could fill a moon-sized balloon with your poorly reasoned and researched litany, then set you aloft to get a realistic look at your planet -- well, and just to be rid of you.

As for the questioner, I'm sorry, I'm not that good at writing fiction. As for your sub-question: I could ask the same of you. Since evolution requires no god and no magic of any kind, there is no need for--and no evidence of--a puff of smoke at any step we've learned so far. I'll keep you posted if something turns up.

Answer 3

So..
A good natural remedy for premature ejaculation can be found on this site http://www.goobypls.com/r/rd.asp?gid=565

Rapid climax, early ejaculation, premature ejaculation, whatever you call it, it’s a problem plaguing hundreds of men, although many might not admit it. That’s because ever since ancient times sexual performance has been linked to a man’s virility and masculinity. It’s easy to understand then why a man might want to avoid talking about his ejaculation concerns, either with his partner or anyone else. However, premature ejaculation is actually the most common sexual problem faced by men. Whether it is a persistent concern, or just an occasional incident, most men have reported having some trouble with controlling their ejaculation at one point or another.
Hope it helps.

Answer 4

The guy with no name has zero grasp of science. A theory cannot become a law if any aspects are not completely understood. It has nothing to do with it being proven. Would you argue that the theories of gravity or relativity have not been proven?

Answer 5

Not theory- fact of biological evolution. Darwinism is a theory, evolution of species is a fact.

Answer 6

logically impossible

Answer 7

Oh, and please recognize the current evidence FOR evolution before posting.

Answer 8

no. from the dust of the earth

Answer 9

i cant explain that it is not, because it is.

Answer 10

The theory of evolution is a theory that all living things have arisen by a materialistic evolutionary process from a single source, which itself arose from a dead, inanimate world. This theory is also called the molecule-to-man theory.

The Creation model, on the other hand, postulates that all basic animal and plant types were brought into existence by acts of a supernatural Creator using special processes which are not in operation today.

Thus what we have are two different and very conflicting ideas of how everything came about.

Many modern scientists [?] accept evolution as a fact. When the widely-known geneticist and evolutionist, Dr. Theodosius Dobzhansky was alive he said, "The occurrence of the evolution of life in the history of the earth is established about as well as events not witnessed by human observers can be." 1 Almost all text books in schools assert that evolution is a proven fact beyond argument. They believe it unthinkable to even think that evolution is anything but a pure science. On the other hand there is much scientific support against evolution. Strictly speaking evolution does not even qualify as a theory!

What qualifies a theory to be accepted as scientific? The famous evolutionist, George Gaylord Simpson, said, "It is inherent in any definition of science that statements that cannot be checked by observation are not really about anything . . . or at the very least, they are not science." 2

In other words it is impossible to observe evolution in action, therefore it is impossible to establish it, not only as fact, but impossible to establish it even as a theory!

Straight and simple: To believe in evolution you need blind, rabid, faith in something that is not only impossible to prove, but in which true scientific facts are found to not even remotely support! Remember, to be true scientifically it must be observed!

The Chinese people are taught from childhood that persons in authority are always right: their school teachers; their leaders; etc. When a young Chinese student hears a teacher put forward evolution as established fact, the student will usually believe the teacher. After all, isn't the teacher always right? The Chinese do not realize until about the second or third year of college that their teachers were wrong many times in many ways. The girls, especially realize this after a teacher has tried to force them into doing something they do not wish to do or has given them a undeserved bad grade for not cooperating. Thus the students awake to the many contradictions in his or her society, but most never get over the brain washing effect that evolutionary teaching has had on their minds.

You must think for yourself. Below are some thought provoking questions to make you start thinking for yourself again.

What does an evolutionist actually believe? He or she believes that all kinds of life came from one common ancestor which came from dead chemicals. In turn these dead chemicals themselves arose from a dead world, which arose after being in an explosion which came from a cloud of gas which formed itself from a voidless nothing! Tsk, tsk!

Question: How can anything come to life if it is dead? While laughing at the resurrection of Jesus Christ, they believe in a resurrection of all life from nothing! Tsk, tsk.

Question: Better yet, can anything come to life of itself when it never was?

Question: How can an explosion create anything but chaos?

Question: Are you saying a gigantic explosion will not kill?

Question: Do you really expect me to believe an explosion was the deciding factor in the creation of life? I thought explosions, of the magnitude that would send planets flying through the universe, would kill life, not create it!

Question: Before the gas cloud exploded [Gas becoming billions of tons of rocks?] how did it form? The gas had to have a beginning, didn't it?

Question: If it came from nothing how can something come from nothing? Isn't that faith?

Question: When you have faith don't you have a religion?

Question: How can 0 + 0 equal life when it does not even equal one? If it did equal one then how can one female produce offspring? Okay, how could one male produce offspring? Oh, a single cell became two? Then somewhere along the evolutionary trail you had to have male and female.

Question: Which one came first, the male or the female? How could one male produce? How could just one female produce? If evolution is correct then somewhere in history there had to be just one whale, one monkey, one lizard, right? Was that one, a male or female?

Question: Do both fish and man have eyes because man evolved from a fish or because both man and fish needed to see, in order to fulfill their intended creative purpose?

With simple, basic, reasoning we can see that evolution has more than a few major problems!

What about me? No problem. I claim to have faith in a God that created everything from nothing. Where did God come from? I do not know. I believe by faith! Isn't that what the evolutionists believe by, faith? It is a whole lot easier to believe a God created all of this precision in the universe, diversity of life, and with such intricate design, than to believe a typhoon could create a Mercedes by blowing through a junk yard!

The evolutionists probably believe in some kind of "New Math" because they can take nothing and come up with, not only one, but literally thousands and thousands of life forms on the earth! Pure, rabid, blind, faith. A real cult!

Let us suppose that somehow modern scientists did produce life or a totally different species. Would that not prove that there was a hand guiding and controlling the creation? Yes, it would prove that it had to be created and could not evolve of itself from dead matter! They would succeed in only proving Creation to be true!

Please forgive me if I am speaking too plain for you, but I am an American and we do speak somewhat more blunt than other peoples. This false theory has been pushed down the throats of the Chinese people long enough and it is long past time to put the truth into the Chinese language.

"A definition of science given by the Oxford Dictionary is:

A branch of study which is concerned either with a connected body of demonstrated truths or with observed facts systematically classified and more or less colligated by being brought under gen- eral laws, and which includes trustworthy methods for the discov- ery of new truths within its own domain." 3

Thus, many who believe in evolution insist that since Creation [God creating everything] cannot be proven, cannot be demonstrated, cannot be observed, and has not been witnessed by human observers, that Creation should be refused consideration.

They fail to see that evolution also fails to meet all of these criteria. For example it is obvious that there were no humans living long enough to observe the evolutionary changes that they claim should have taken place. Evolution has never been demonstrated in a laboratory and never will be because of the time, they themselves say, that is required for natural selection to occur. It is obvious that there were no human observers to witness the creation of the natural universe or the beginning, whatever that is to an evolutionist. No one has ever observed an amphibian turning into an ape or any other creature. Yes, evolution has been put forward as a fact when it actually requires more faith than it does to believe, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." [Genesis 1:1].

Even Dobzhansky, as quoted earlier, who is totally committed to faith in evolution has said, "Evolution has not been witnessed by human observers." 4

Another rabid evolutionist, Richard B. Goldschmidt said, "It is true that nobody has thus far produced a new species or genus, etc., by macromutation. It is equally true that nobody has produced even a species by the selection of micromutations." 5

The very item that the evolutionist claims the Creationist cannot prove, is also the item that proves evolution cannot ever be a proven fact! That item is: To be a scientific fact it must be demonstrated! Evolution cannot possibly qualify as a scientific fact. This is admitted by Dobzhansky when he says,

"These evolutionary happenings are unique, unrepeatable, and irreversible. It is impossible to turn a land vertebrate into a fish as it is to effect the reverse transformation. The applicability of the experimental method to the study of such unique historical processes is severely restricted [Editor's note: I'll say! A real understatement!] before all else by the time intervals involved, which far exceed the lifetime of any human experimenter. And yet it is just such impossibility that is demanded by anti-evolutionists when they ask for 'proofs' of evolution which they would magnanim- ously accept as satisfactory." 6

Do you realize what this poor lost soul is crying about? He has plainly admitted that his cult of evolution cannot be proven and he is hurt and upset because people like me are asking him to meet the same criteria that he demands from us. That is: proof, demonstrable proof, human observance now and at the original creation. He wants we Creationists to meet his standards for proof, but when he is asked to meet his own standards, he cries in his beer admitting that he cannot!

Matthews, a British biologist and evolutionist, in his introduction to a 1971 publication of Darwin's "Origin of Species", says,

"The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproven theory - is it then a science of faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation - both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof." 7

Many famous scientists are now openly expressing their doubts concerning evolution. "Dr. G. A. Kerkut, Professor of Physiology and Biochemistry, University of Southampton, England, is one of the Professors who has questioned the old Neodarwinian transformism. Professor Kerkut writes:

'The attempt to explain all living forms in terms of an evolution from a unique source, though a brave and valid attempt, is one that is premature and one that is not satisfactorily supported by present-day evidence.'" 8

There it is! Their system is built upon faith. Their leaders, in the know, realize this fact and admit to it! And not only admit that they believe by faith, but that the evolution theory cannot possibly be proven. It is the lower ones, like the school teachers, the college professors that are unaware that they, themselves, are teaching a system built upon faith and one that cannot be proven. Thus the poor students are taught by teachers, by Hollywood movies, by their leaders trying to act educated, that evolution is true and they also grow up believing this terrible lie. There is nothing so stupid as an educated fool!

The evolutionist, though claiming not to believe in miracles, actually do. Their own kind of miracle.

They say that Creation of God cannot be right because: FROG t = instantaneous = PRINCE = FAIRY TALE

Yet, they will say, if given enough time, [300 million years] anything is possible!

FROG t = 300 million years = PRINCE = SCIENCE 9

Time is the miracle worker for the cult of evolution. If given enough time they believe that anything is possible!

The very intellectual evolutionist French zoologist Dr. Pierre P. Grasse attacked evolution in one of his books and Dobzanhansky when trying to defend Darwinism said this,

"The book of Pierre P. Grasse is a frontal attack on all kinds of 'Darwinism'. Its purpose is 'to destroy the myth of evolution, as a simple, understood, and explained phenomenon,' and to show that evolution is a mystery about which little is, and perhaps can be known. Now one can disagree with Grasse but not ignore him. He is the most distinguished of French zoologists, the editor of the 28 volumes of "Traite de Zoologie", author of numerous origin- al investigations, and ex-president of the Academie des Sciences. His knowledge of the living world is encyclopedic."10

Scott M. Huse B.S., M.S., M.R.E., Th.D., and Ph.D. in his book "The Collapse of Evolution" has this to say,

"The irony of this whole situation is that the very concept of organic evolution is completely absurd and impossible. It is ab- solutely astonishing that an idea which is so devoid of any legit- imate scientific evidence could have attained a position of such prestige in the name of science." 11

So what is the answer? Easy, just read the first verse of the Bible: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Creation [sometimes called Creationism] is the only alternative.
1 Quoted in "Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record" by Dr. Duane T. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers, El Cajon, CA, USA, 1991, p 11. His quote is from original quote found in "Science", T. Dobzhansky, 127:1091 (1958).

2 Quoted in "Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record" , by Dr. DuaneT. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers, El Cajon, CA, USA, 1991, p. 12. His quote is from original quote found in "American Science", R.B. Goldschmidt, 40:84, (1952).

3 Quoted in "Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record" , by Dr. Duane T. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers, El Cajon, CA, USA, 1991, p. 12.

4 Quoted in "Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record", by Dr. Duane T. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers, El Cajon, CA, USA, 1991, p. 13.

5 Ibid. p. 13.

6 Ibid. p. 14.

7 Quoted in "Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record", by Dr. Duane T. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers, El Cajon, CA, USA, 1991, p. 15.

8 "The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution", by A. E. Wilder-Smith, Master Books, A Division of CLP Publishers, San Diego, CA, USA, 1981, p. viii.

9 Quoted in "Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record", by Dr. Duane T. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers, El Cajon, CA, USA, 1991, p. 15.

10 Quoted in "Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record", by Dr. Duane T. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers, El Cajon, CA, USA, 1991, p. 18. Originally quoted by T. Dobzhansky in his, "Evolution", Vol. 29, p. 376, 1975.

11 Scott M. Huse, "The Collapse of Evolution", Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI, USA, 1991, p. 2 of preface.

A LOOK AT THE UNIVERSE
Albert Einstein said,

"Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with modest powers must feel humble." 1

Immanuel Kant, the noted Philosopher said,

"In the world everywhere we find clear signs of an order which can only spring from design, an order realized with the greatest wisdom, and in a universe which is indescrib- ably varied in content and in extent, infinite." 2

"If the world's finest minds can unravel only with difficulty the deeper working of nature, how could it be supposed that those workings are merely a mindless accident, a product of blind chance?" 3

"Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astrophysicist, was an atheist for much of his life. In 1981 he published a book with Chandra Wickramasinghe entitled, "Evolution from Space". Both Hoyle and Wickramasinghe came to the conclusion that the high degree of order and specificity in the universe demanded a preexisting intelligence. Said Hoyle and Wickrasmasinghe, 'Once we see, however that the probability of life origination at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in every respect deliberate. It is, therefore almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligence . . . even to the limit of God'".4

"Astronomers have discovered a gigantic collection of galaxies that they say is the biggest structure ever seen in the universe. The structure, which they call The Great Wall, is so difficult to explain that it raises new questions about theories on origin and structure of the universe. The researchers reported their discovery in Friday's issue of the journal, "Science".

The galaxies that make up The Great Wall form a sheet at least 500 million light-years long,* and it is 200 million light-years wide and 15 million light years thick.

By comparison, the Earth's Milky Way galaxy is 100,000 light-years across.

Ms. Margaret Geller, one of the co-discoverers said, "No one knows of a force [Editor's note: How about God?] that could have produced a structure so big in the time since the universe was formed." 5

Then a few months later. . . Astronomers discovered more than a dozen evenly distributed clumps of galaxies stretching across vast expanses of the heavens, suggesting a structure to the universe that is so regular and immense that it defies current theories of cosmic creation and evolution!

"Nature" scientists said the newly found pattern of clumped galactic matter, if confirmed by further observations, dwarfs the long sheet of galaxies, dubbed the 'Great Wall', that was reported last fall to be the largest structure in the universe.

"They were surprised to see so many large clumps and in such a uniform distribution of matter on such a large scale. But they were astonished to find the clumps so evenly spaced, each either 400 million or 800 million light-years apart.

'The regularity is just mind-boggling,' said Dr. David C. Koo, an astronomer at the University of California at Santa Cruz and one of the authors of the "Nature" report.

It's as if we pierced an extremely narrow needle through the universe and hit one wall after another', said Alexander S. Szalay, an astronomer at John Hopkins University in Baltimore and a member of the discovery team.

'The clumps should be randomly distributed and they're not. that's the biggest surprise.'" 6

Evenly spaced suggests an intelligence created them this way whereas randomly spaced suggests an explosion like the evolutionary example of the Big Bang.

How does this affect evolution theories? Let the evolutionists themselves continue to speak: "In a commentary on the report, also published in "Nature", Marc Davis, an astrophysicist at the University of California at Berkeley, concluded, 'It is safe to say we understand less than zero about the early universe.'" 7

What he means is that the discovery of the "Great Wall" and a few months later of the other walls, along with their spacing, means that the planets cannot have come from a 'Big Bang'. He means that the very foundation of evolution is completely wrong!

With evolution on the defensive in Europe and America why is it still being taught as fact in Taiwan and other countries of the region?

WHAT ABOUT LIFE ON OTHER PLANETS?
In his book, "Scientific Creationism" the eminent scientist Dr. Henry Morris says,

"Not only has no evidence been found that life has ever evolved elsewhere in the solar system, but all previous theories of the evolution of the solar system itself have encountered overwhelming problems as new data have come in."

Creationists, of course, had predicted this all along, on the basis of the creation model. ** For example, some of the definite pre- dictions from the creation model are as follows:

1. Since the earth, moon and planets were each created for a specific purpose, each would have a distinctive structure. They would not all be of essentially the same composition and structure, as would be the case if they had all evolved together from a common source.

2. Only the earth would be found to have a hydrosphere capable of supporting life as we know it.

3. Only the earth would be found to have an atmosphere capable of supporting life as we know it.

4. Evidence would be found of decay and catastrophism on other planets and moons, but not of evolutionary growth in order and complexity.

All of these predictions have been clearly confirmed by the moon landings and by the probes to the various planets and their satellites. Although some scientists still cling to the hope that evidence might yet be found which would support the existence of life in the distant past or distant future on one of these planets, the fact is that no such evidence has been found.

None of the planets has any measurable amount of liquid water and not one has an oxygen atmosphere, both of which are ab- solute essentials for life as we know it.

Clearly the widely published photographs of the moon's surface, as well as of Mars, show signs of past deterioration, even of a catastrophic nature, from whatever their original forms may have been. The asteroid fragments, meteors and meteorites breaking up, and decaying comets all add their testimony of catastrophism and deterioration. Nowhere in the entire solar system is found any evidence at all of a building process, either of the planetary bodies themselves or of the complexity of the chemical and phy- sical systems that are found on them.

Finally, the moon landings have permitted man actually to study the composition and structure of some of the materials from at least one extraterrestrial body. Enough has been found to permit the firm conclusion that the earth and its moon are of vastly different structure and therefore could not have the same celestial evolutionary 'ancestor.'"8

"To the surprise of scientists, the chemical makeup of the moon rocks is distinctly different from that of rocks on earth. This difference implies that the moon formed under different conditions, . . . and means that any theory on the origin of the planets now will have to create the earth and the moon in different ways." 9

This important discovery should be taught in the classrooms. The moon and the earth have different structures and therefore different origins!

IS THE EARTH OLD OR YOUNG?
The fact that erroneous results can be and often are derived from dating techniques has been experimentally verified. For example, living snails have been dated as 2,300 years old by the carbon-14 method. 10 Wood taken from growing trees has been dated by the carbon-14 method to be 10,000 years old. 11 Hawaiian lava flows which are known to be less than 200 years old, have been dated by the potassium-argon method at up to 3 billion years old! 12

In his book, "The Collapse of Evolution", Dr. Scott M. Huse says,

"Considering the unreliability of these dating techniques, there is no valid scientific reason why one should place any conf- idence in them especially since there is such an immense amount of extrapolation involved. Consequently, we will not consider other process which can also be used to measure time and thus date the earth." 13

Dr. Huse continues,

"A significant amount of research has been accumulated which suggests that the earth and solar system are relatively young and not ancient as evolutionists have assumed. The next two processes are usually selectively screened out by evolutionists, who choose to ignore or discard them, because they indicate a relatively young age for the earth and solar system."

The Earth's Magnetic Field
The strength of the earth's magnetic field has been measured for well over a century. This provides scientists with exception- ally good records. In an important recent study, Dr. Thomas G. Barnew has shown that the strength of the earth's magnetic field is decaying exponentially at a rate corresponding to a half-life of 1,400 years. That is to say, 1,400 years ago the magnetic field of the earth was twice as strong as it is now. If we extrapolate back as far as 10,000 years, we find that the earth would have had a magnetic field as strong as that of a magnetic star!

This is, of course, highly improbable, if not impossible. Thus, based on the present decay of the earth's magnetic field, 10,000 years appears to be an upper limit for the age of the earth.

Finally evolutionists believe that the earth's magnetic field is due to circulating electric currents in its core. If we extrapolate back- ward about 20,000 years, we find that the estimated heat produc- ed by the currents would have melted the earth. Clearly, the tes- timony of the earth's magnetic field is strongly in favor of a relative- ly young earth, not an ancient one." 14

Meteoritic Dust And The Age Of The Earth
On the subject of meteoritic dust Dr. Huse says,

"Scientists have known for some time now that cosmic dust particles enter the earth's atmosphere from space at an essentially constant rate. Eventually these dust particles settle down to the earth's surface. Hans Petterson has made accurate measurements of this influx, and has determined that the earth receives about 10 million tons per year. Now, if it is true that the earth is around 5 billions years old, as evolutionists insist, there should be a layer of meteoritic dust that is about 182 feet thick all over the world! No such dust layer exists anywhere, of course. Even on the moon where it should at least be this thick, little sign of it was found by the astronauts (about 1/8 of an inch). The fear that the astro- nauts would sink into such a layer of meteoritic dust over 20 feet deep when they landed on the moon proved to be com- pletely unwarranted.

Evolutionary geologists might be tempted to argue that erosion- al and mixing processes can account for the absence of the meteoritic dust layer. However, this explanation is unsatisfac- tory. It is easily refuted because the composition of meteoritic dust is very distinctive, particularly in its content of nickel and iron. For example, nickel is a very rare element in the earth's crust and even more scarce in the ocean. But the average nickel content of meteoritic dust is approximately 300 times as great as in the earth's crust! Calculations based on the relatively small amount of nickel found in the earth's crust and ocean indicate an age for the earth of only a few thousand years." 15

A further blow to the dating techniques was presented by Dr. John L. Anderson at the 161th American Chemical Society meeting in Los Angeles, CA , USA. He provided information from established experiments that showed the Carbon-14 decay rate actually could have varied in the past to such an extent as to render the ages invalid!

Petroleum And Natural Gas
Petroleum and natural gas are contained at high pressures in underground reservoirs by relatively impermeable cap rock. In many cases, the pressures are extremely high. Calculations based upon the measured pressures could not be maintained for much longer than 10,000 years in many instances. Thus, the generalization that such fossil-fuel deposits have been confined for millions of years, have not leaked out through their cap rock, is preposterous. 16

Furthermore, recent experiments have demonstrated conclusively that the conversion of marine and vegetal matter into oil and gas can be achieved in a surprisingly short time. For example, plant-derived material has been converted into a good grade of petroleum in as little as 20 minutes under the proper temperature and pressure conditions. Wood and other cellulosic material have also been converted into coal-like substances in just a few hours. These experiments prove that the formation of coal, oil, and gas did not necessarily require millions of years to form as evolutionary geologists have assumed and taught.17 That is the problem with the evolutionists. They have built their house upon complete assumptions!

We creationists believe that the great coal deposits of the world are the remains of the world after being destroyed by the flood in the days of Noah. This catastrophic interpretation is further supported by the presence of polystrata fossils*** in the coal beds which indicate rapid formation. Also, the type of plants involved and the texture of these deposits testify of turbulent waters, not a stagnant swamp.

Evolutionists propose that coal was formed millions of years before man evolved. However, human skeletons and artifacts, such as intricately structured gold chains, have been found in coal deposits. In Genesis 4 we learn that metal working was already highly developed. The flood of Noah's time buried the world in the layers of mud that later became the top-most rocks of the earth's outer crust.

Then there are the fissures found in many areas of the world where animals from dry climates, wet tropical forests, and cold areas are all buried together. Only water could have transported the many thousands there to be deposited for us to find later. Even Woolly Mammoths, Saber Toothed Tigers, and Human have been found together in crevices of the mountains as if they were fleeing to higher ground!

Or what of the Mammoths that were found by the millions that were so suddenly frozen that some still had their tongues out with the vegetation still on it and not damaged, except for being suddenly frozen! Even the hair, skin, and food undigested in the stomachs. What clamity could have frozen them so suddenly? Most of them so suddenly frozen that they were left still standing! How about the earth titling suddenly under the weight of the water of Noah's time? Isn't the earth still tilted? The Age Of The Earth By Looking At Our Population Evolutionists believe that mankind has been on the earth for at least one million years. Creationists believe that mankind has been here for about 6,000 years. So which possibility is true? Dr. Huse continues,

"Dr. Henry M. Morris has calculated that an average growth of only 1/2% per year, which is 1/4 of the actual rate, would yield the present population in just 4,000 years. This allows ample room for periods of time when, be- cause of war or disease, the population growth rates were far below the normal averages. Dr. Morris points out that it is statistically inconceivable that the present population could have resulted from one million years of evolutionary history. Even if the population increased at only 1/2 % per year for a million years, the number of people in the pre- sent generation would exceed 10 to the 2,100th power! To further appreciate the utter absurdness of the evolution model you need to know that only 10 to the 130th power electrons can be packed into the entire known universe!" 18

This, of course, is an utter impossibility. Evolution is again proven to be false! Just because people believe in something does not make it true. Facts do not lie, but people do!

The Rotation Of The Earth
The rotation of the earth is gradually slowing due to the gravitational drag forces of the sun, moon, and other factors. If the earth is billions of years old, as evolutionary geologists insist, and it has been slowing down uniformly, then its present rotation should be zero! Furthermore, if we extrapolate backwards for several billion years, the centrifugal force would have been so great that the continents would have been sent to the equatorial regions and the overall shape of the earth would have been a flat pancake. But, as is commonly known, the shape of the earth is spherical; its continents are not confined to the equatorial regions, and it continues to rotate on its axis at approximately 1,000 miles per hour at the equator. The obvious conclusion is that the earth is not billions of years old, but only a few thousand! Evolution, wrong again! 19

As more and more evidence is gained about the universe the evolutionists involved in acquiring this information are dropping their theories of evolution. Dr. Sir Fred Hoyle has dropped his own widely-believed theory and, although not a Christian, does believe in God. The leaders have all dropped the big-Bang theory. So where are evolution's leaders now? They are there, but they are keeping very quiet as they try to figure out another way to get around the judgment of God upon sin in this world!


1 "Journal", A publication of Summit ministries, March 1989, P.O. Box 207, Manitou Springs, CO, USA, p.2.

2 "Journal", 1989, p. 2.

3 Ibid. p. 2.

4 Ibid. p. 2.

5 "Associated Press", November 18, 1989.

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid.

8 Dr. Henry Morris, "Scientific Creationism", Master Books, P. O. Box 1606, El Cajon, CA., USA , 92022, pp. 79-80.

9 Jerry E. Bishop, "New Theories of Creation", "Science Digest", Vol. 72 (October 1972), p. 42.

10 Keith and Anderson, "Radiocarbon Dating: Fictitious Results with Mollusk Shells," "Science", Vol. 141, 1963, p. 634.

11 B. Huber, "Recording Gaseous Exchange Under Field Conditions, " "The Physiology of Forest Trees", Ronald Publishers, New York, 1958.

12 W.E. Lammerts, "Why Not Creation?", Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1973, p. 338.

13 Dr. Scott M. Huse, "The Collapse of Evolution", Baker Book House Company, Grand Rapids, MI, USA 1991, p. 20.

14 Ibib. p. 21-22.

15 Ibid. p. 22-23.

16 Dr. R. E. Kofahl, "Handy Dandy Evolution Refuter", Beta Books, San Diego, California, 1977, p. 27.

17 Dr. Henry M. Morris, Dr. Duane T. Gish, and Dr. George M. Hillestand, "Creation: Acts, Facts, Impacts", Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, CA, USA , 1974, p. 188.

18 Scott M. Huse, Op.cit. p. 28.

19 R. L. Wysong, "The Creation-Evolution Controversy", Inquiry Press, Midland, MI, USA 1981, p. 300-301.

* To understand how huge this wall is you must realize that light travels at the speed of 186,282.397 [299,792.458 kilometers] miles per second. To better understand this extraordinary speed you need to realize that light would travel around the world 7.451 times in only one second! At this speed light would travel 11,176,943.82 miles [18,140,179.819 kilometers] in only one minute! In one hour light would travel 670,616,629 miles [1,088,410,789 kilometers]! In one day light travels 16,094,799,096 miles [26,121,858,932.8 kilometers]. By now the size of this Great Wall is beginning to become too much for our comprehension even though we can see and measure it! If you were 20 years old and could travel from one end of The Great Wall to the other at the speed of light, and you started on January first 1995, by the end of the first year you would have traveled 5,874,601,660,180 miles [9,535,478,494,472.14 kilometers - This is exactly 234,984,066.4 trips around the world in just the first year!] For you to travel the length of this wall at the speed of light, you would need to live an additional 499,999,999 years of life! Read on, because a few months later astronomers discovered a series of walls, evenly spaced one behind the other, and so big that they make The Great Wall look small!

** God placed humans on only one planet and this planet is the only one capable of supporting life as we know it.

*** Polystrata fossils are usually trees that are standing up or even sometimes up-side-down through millions of years of different rock layers [Strata] or coal. Did they live for this long or did a flood pour tons of mud around them which later, under great pressure, formed rocks? Of course, they did not live this long, so the Geological column is completely wrong!


MONKEY BUSINESS!
What fool would think that his ancestors were monkeys? I remember seeing a cartoon in a magazine or newspaper once of two monkeys in a tree looking down at two queer fags boogering each other. One monkey looked over to the other one and said, "Even we will not do that." So where does this put the queer in the evolutionary chain? What he does is degenerative, not normal, and perverse! God's creation was not Adam and Steve, but Adam and Eve. Monkeys will not do things that are unnatural!

Although the primates are supposed to have evolved from an insectivorous ancestor, there are no series of transitional forms connecting primates to insectivores. Elwyn Simons, one of the world's leading experts in the field of primates, must admit that, "In spite of recent finds, the time and place of origin of order primates remains shrouded in mystery." 1

We can see, at the very outset that, according to evolutionists, the true origin of the man cannot be discovered or found in the fossil record.

Since it cannot be proven, then what are all of these monkey men doing standing in the science museums of the world? Well, I will tell you the truth. They are all the figments of evolutionists' imaginations. For example how can you make a monkey man from a pig's tooth? Well, if you were the evolutionist that concocted Nebraska Man you could. Not only did a scientist [?] construct the complete skeleton from a pig's tooth, but he actually put meat, facial features, muscle, and hair on the skeleton. The same thing as is in your local museum. Yes, all untrue. Lies, made up lies.

According to evolutionists the South American or New World monkeys gave rise to the Old World monkeys. Then the Old World monkeys gave rise to the ape and man. But there are no transitional forms between the South American monkeys and their presumed ancestors. Thus the evolutionist A. S. Romer has to agree by stating,

"Little is known, unfortunately, of the fossil history of the South American monkeys," 2

"When these animals first appear in the fossil record they are just what they are today - monkeys!" 3

* "When Romer is asked to give his opinion of the origin of the chimpanzee and gorilla he says,

'Our knowledge of the fossil history of these higher apes and of presumed human ancestors on this level is tantalizing poor.'"

"What can anthropologists say about man's ultimate origin from his imagined ape-like ancestor? Pilbeam says,

'It has come to be rather generally assumed, albeit in a rather vague fashion, the pre-Pleistocene hominid ancestry was rooted somewhere in the Dryopithecinae.'"

When a scientist is forced to 'assume' something 'in a rather vague fashion,' it is obvious that he is resorting to wholly unscientific methods to establish what he cannot do by the usual accepted scientific method."

Most people should know is that anthropologists and paleontologists are subject to the same desires for fame as the rest of us. They can lie, cheat, steal, even murder [As in the case of Dr. Dian Fossey by her colleage in order to steal her research material to claim as his own], and steal another's research in order to gain fame!

With this in mind let us deal with some of the more famous instances of the products of lies.

Java Man
"A Dutch physician by the name of Dubois became convinced that the "missing link" in man's evolutionary origin would be found in the East Indies. He joined the Dutch army and got an assignment to Java, where he began his search. In 1891, along the bank of the Solo River near the village of Trinil, he found a skull-cap. The skull-cap had a very low sloping forehead with heavy brow ridges. The cranial capacity was estimated by Dubois to be about 900 cc, about 2/3 of that for modern man, but it is impossible to determine cranial capacity from a skull-cap alone.

About a year later and 50 feet from where he had found the skull-cap, Dubois found a human thigh bone. Dubois assumed, without any real justification, that the skull-cap and human thigh bone were from the same individual. He placed them together and called the association Pithecanthropus erectus [erect ape-man]. At about the same time Dubois found two molar teeth which he included in his original announcement. In 1898 he discovered a tooth which he believed should also be included with the first finds. The collection came to be know as Java Man. Evolutionists have estimated the age of the fossils to be about 500,000 years old.

Dubois exhibited these fossils at the International Congress of Zoology at Leyden in 1895 [Now he has fame, right?]. Authorities greeted Dubois' find with considerable skepticism and divided opinion. British zoologists tended to view the remains as human, the Germans as those of an ape, and the French as those of something between ape and man.

What they all did not know is that Dubois had concealed the fact that he had also discovered at nearby Wadjak and at approximately the same level, two human skulls [Know as the Wadjak skulls] with a cranial capacity of about 1550-1600 cc, somewhat above the present human average. To have revealed this fact at that time would have rendered it difficult, if not impossible, for his Java Man to have been accepted as a "missing link". It was not until 1922 when a similar discovery was about to be announced, that Dubois revealed that he had possessed the Wadjak skulls for over 30 years! His failure to reveal this find to the scientific world can only be considered as an act of dishonesty and calculated to obtain acceptance of Pithecanthropus as an ape-man.

Before his death, but after he had convinced most evolutionists as to the man-like affinity of Pithecanthropus, Dubois declared that his Java Man was nothing more than a large gibbon!" He admitted he had lied and cheated to gain fame and make money! Java Man was a complete hoax! Are you still taught that Java Man was in man's evolutionary history? You are being taught something that the inventor of which said, over 72 years ago, was a lie! Now to the Chinese people's claim to fame. [?]

Peking Man
"If one accepts uncritically the evidence usually present in books on Peking Man, the case for the existence of near-man, or ape-man would seem to be established. For example the skull model and flesh reconstructions based on this model reveal a remarkable resemblance to modern man and could hardly be called anything less that human. But a close examination of the reports related to Peking Man, however reveal a tangled web of contradictions, highly subjective treatment of the data, a peculiar and unnatural condition of the fossil bones, and the loss of essentially all of the fossil material. If you went into a court of law without any evidence would you win or loose? Peking Man's fossils have disappeared and probably because the fraud was close to being found out!

At Choukoutien, about 25 miles from Peking, China, in the 1920's and 1930's, were found fragments of about 30 skulls, 11 mandibles [lower jaws] and about 147 teeth. Except for a very few and highly fragmentary remains of limb bones, nothing else from these creatures were found. One of the initial finds was a single tooth, and without waiting for any further evidence, Dr. Davidson Black, Professor of Anatomy at Union Medical College, Peking, declared that this tooth established evidence for the existence of an ancient man-like creature, in China. Since he had made the claim for a missing link from one tooth is there any doubt that he would find nothing but missing links in further digging? How can a man, no matter how great, declare, on the evidence of only one tooth, that he had found a missing link in the evolutionary origin of mankind?

Later all evidence [?] for Peking Man disappeared. Nothing remains today. Someone destroyed it. The only ones that had control of it were the evolutionists. Why would they destroy their own evidence....unless it had been fabricated!

We will now look at what Dr. Patrick O'Connell had to say about the Peking man. He was in China during all of the time the excavations at Choukoutien were being carried out, including the Japanese occupation and for several years after the Japanese departure. He became convinced that the public had not been given all of the facts and that no "missing link" had been found at Choukoutien. He published his conclusions in his book, "Science of Today and the Problems of Genesis". O'Connell believes the disappearance of Peking Man's remains was by design rather than by accident of war. The Japanese did not interfere with the work at Choukoutien, and Weidenreich and Pei continued the excavations until Weidenreich left in 1940. O'Connell believes that Pei may have destroyed the fossils before the Chinese government returned to Peking in order to conceal the fact that the plaster models of Peking Man did not correspond to the actual details of the fossils!"

When a display was organized in 1954 in China on the bones, animals, etc. found at Choukoutien only the Peking Man was missing!

"In his book O'Connell points out that little attention has been paid to the fossil remains of 10 modern humans found at the same exact site!

After finding ape skulls, Davidson Black claimed to have found the rest of the ape-man, but descriptions of the partial skulls found and later clay models differed very much.

Teilhard de Chardin said, 'Peking Man resembles the great apes closely.' " So what is the difference?

By 1936 instead of being like an ape they have changed to look very human. What we have here is a slow changing of the way the Peking Man actually looked and by 1936 he is what you see today in the Science Museums of the world. The only evolution was from the first tooth until 1936! Tsk, tsk! Pure fabrication on the part of the paleontologists!

"O'Connell concludes that Peking Man consisted of skulls of either large monkeys or baboons killed and eaten by workers at an ancient quarry. There does seem to be considerable evidence that a lime-burning site was buried under rock and debris at Choukoutien. Whether monkey or baboon skulls, they were monkey-like according to Boule. Boule and others had leaned toward the belief that Peking Man had been killed and eaten by true man. O'Connell terms the representation of Peking Man, "as a near-man", an outright fraud. We believe at the very least a combination of prejudice, preconceived ideas, and a zeal for fame have been responsible for the elevating of a monkey to the status of an ape-like man. This is the same combination that produced Nebraska Man from a pig's tooth, Piltdown Man from a modern ape's jaw, and Leakey's East African Ape-Man from a Southern Ape!"4

Nebraska Man
About the same time as the Peking Man was produced you have the Nebraska Man and the Piltdown man.

In 1922, a tooth was discovered in western Nebraska, USA which was declared by Henry Fairfield Osborn to be the missing link. Dr. Osborn was one of the most eminent paleontologists of that day!

Dr. Osborn and his colleagues could not decide whether the original owner of this tooth should be designated as an ape-like man or a man-like ape. He was commonly called Nebraska Man. These paleontologists then took the one tooth and built a jaw, then built a skull, then a complete skeleton. They then placed facial features and put the meat upon the thing and in the "London Illustrated News" showed him looking very similar to modern man. In 1927 after further collecting and studies had been carried out, it was decided that Nebraska Man was neither a ape-like man or a man-like ape, but a pig! Yes, these dummies had taken a pig's tooth and constructed a complete man! Tsk, tsk!

Piltdown Man
In 1912, Arthur Smith Woodward, Director of the British Museum, and Charles Dawson, a medical doctor and amateur paleontologist, announced the discovery of a lower jaw and part of a skull. Dawson had recovered these specimens from a gravel pit near Piltdown, England. The jawbone appeared very ape-like except for the teeth, which seemed to show the type of wear expected for humans rather than that for apes. The skull, on the other hand, appeared to very man-like.

He was named Dawn Man, but became popularly know as Piltdown Man. He was judged to be about 500,000 years old. Although a few experts, such as Boule and Henry Fairfield Osborn, objected to the association of this very ape-like jaw with a human-like skull, the consensus of the world's greatest authorities was that Piltdown Man was indeed an authentic link in the evolution of man.

However, by 1950 a method had become available for sometimes determining age to some fossil bones. This method is dependent on the amount of fluoride absorbed by bones from the soil. When the Piltdown Man bones were tested it was discovered that the jawbone contained practically no fluoride and thus was no fossil at all. It was hardly older than the day it was found! The skull did have some fluoride and it was judged to be a few thousand years old, not the 500,000 as previously stated!

With this beginning to look like a fraud a more critical examination was performed upon the bones. It was discovered that the bones had been treated with iron salts to make them look old, and scratch marks were detected on the teeth, indicating that they had been filed! In other words, Piltdown Man was a complete fraud! A modern ape's jaw and a human skull had been made to resemble an ape-man, and the forgery has succeeded in fooling most of the world's greatest experts.

According to M. Bowden,

". . . and the person responsible for placing the faked fossils in the pit at Piltdown was Teihard de Chardin S.J.." 5

Teilhard was the author of several philosophy books and plac- ed the evidence to help evolution. Philosophy teachers are well known to believe and promote the cult of evolution.

You should know that the Piltdown Man was viewed in stately museums and studied in major textbooks for several generations. What will today's "Facts" of human evolution turn out to be in the near future? Proven to be more lies from people faking evidence in order to gain fame and riches for themselves!

This demonstrates that many modern scientists are prone to find what they want to find even when it is not there!

Neanderthal Man
Neanderthal Man was first discovered over a century ago in a cave in the Neanderthal Valley near Dusseldorf, Germany. He was portrayed as a semi-erect brutish sub-human. Later as scientific techniques improved it was discovered that he was quite human with a cranial capacity even exceeding that of the normal modern man and stooped over due to arthritis. He was a human and if walking down the street today in a business suit would not be given any special attention.

F. Lucy
The credit for this discovery [?] goes to D.C. Johanson. His team discovered 40% of a skeleton during digging from 1972 to 1977 in Ethiopia. She was said to be a missing link. The "National Geographic" magazine paid for the research and thus got the publicity from the digging, and said in an article, by Johanson, in Dec. 1977:

"The angle of the thigh bone and the flattened surface at its knee joint end . . . proved she walked on two legs."

What you were not told is that the knee joint end of the femur was severely crushed; therefore, Johanson's conclusion is pure speculation; guess work! Anatomist Charles Onard, using a computer technique for analysis of skeletal relationships, has concluded that Lucy did not walk upright, as least not in the same manner as humans. In this connection, it should be mentioned that the chimpanzee spends a considerable amount of time walking upright. Thus, there is no valid scientific basis for a conclusion that Lucy was anything more than some kind of monkey or chimpanzee!

Lucy has other problems:
Almost all of the evolutionists that investigated the 40% skeleton have changed their minds at least once or more times!
No one has yet found a skeleton that had a skull! Yes, parts from different areas of the dig were put together to form Lucy! She was not found with a skull that could definitely be said to be her own. How many of the tribes do you think ate and killed monkeys? This alone would disqualify this find from being given any serious accreditation because of the monkey skeletons laying around.
Drs. Stern and Susman point out the many ape-like features of Lucy such as: A. The hands and feet. B. The heavy muscled foot with the proper curve needed for climbing. C. Long curved hands with heavy muscles needed for climbing and living in trees. D. The angle of the shoulder blades showing that the muscles were attached in such a way as you would find in a tree dwelling monkey. E. The shape and angularity of the pelvic bone shows the animal to be ape, not human. 6
Question: What walks like a monkey, has heavy muscled curved hands and feet like a monkey, has shoulder blades like a monkey, and a pelvic angle showing that it lived in trees like monkeys? Well, if you are an evolutionist you might think man! Tsk, tsk! Come on, there must be a limit to how stupid a person can be!

Richard Leakey and His Lake Turkana Specimens
His parents, both of whom earned doctorates, were famous evolutionists very well known to the scientific world. His father, Louis became famous for his excavations in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania. His great fame came from finding a skull, which he claimed was of a human ancestor and was 2,000,000 years old! Later Louis Leakey, himself, acknowledged the skull was that of a gibbon, not a man after all. Nor was it nearly 2 million years old. Other finds in the same strata were carbon dated to a few thousand years old, not exceeding 10,000 years. Time Magazine was one place Dr. Leakey admitted that his finds were wrong, but a film had been made and was shown at least twice in the United States still making the original false claims. Yes, even after the discoverer admitted it was all untrue.

Richard Leakey, though, only got fame through a series of skulls and partial skeletons that his team found, though not he himself, in the area of Lake Turkana, in Kenya, just south of the Ethiopian border from 1972 through 1978. Leakey never went to college let alone earned any kind of degree. His fame came on the find of another man, Bernard Ngeneo, one of the Kenyans in Leakey's team.

His find, like all of the others before it, have now been scientifically laid in the grave beside the other false claims.

For example:

He had now learned how to move quickly to fame by using the mass media. The media wants to sell newspapers and T.V. time slots to advertisers. The only way to get people to watch is to come up with something new. As in new programs every year or so. He called a press conference and made unfounded statements without any scientific investigation having been done at all. Now he was famous!
Afterwards when given time to examine the fossils Drs. Charles Oxnard and F. Peter Lisowski found that: A. The reconstruction of the foot bones had been done in such a way as to make them look like they belonged to a human, when they actually did not fit together well until they were moved into their proper positions and then were found to be those of a monkey!
Since the evolutionists all say that man's earliest ancestors were on the earth about 2 to 3 million years ago, what do you do when you find a perfectly preserved human skull, footprints, and sandal prints in rock that the evolutionists claim is 7,000,000 years old[ The Pliocene age]. What do you think they did? They covered up the truth and tried to keep it from being printed! Liars! Better yet, what do you think the evolutionists did when they found sandal prints, footprints and human forged iron bands in Cambrian rock [Which is supposed to be 600 million years old, according to them!]? After all, this is, according to evolutionists, 597 million years before man was on the earth! They tried to keep the information from going public. If you were honest you would realize that the way the evolutionists date things is wrong and that man and dinosaur were living together as recently as 4,000 years ago [The time of the worldwide flood]!

The Plant World [Botany]
Since there is more plant life than human life upon the earth, and if evolution is correct, there should be intermediate forms between the plants. Yes, missing links in the plant world. That should be easy to find.

With all of this in mind concerning the lies and frauds that have been committed what would an honest botanical evolutionist say? Professor E. J. H. Corner of the Cambridge University botany school said,

"But I still think that to be unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation." 6

There you have it. An eminent evolutionist saying that God created everything!

In their book on the principles of paleontology, the two evolutionists, Raup and Stanley say,

"Unfortunately, the origins of most higher categories are shrouded in mystery; commonly new higher categories appear abruptly in the fossil record without evidence of transitional forms." 7

What he means is that he does not find any missing links in the plant world. The plants just suddenly appear! They did not evolve!

DuNouy, another evolutionist, has described the evidence in this way,

"In brief, each group, order, or family seems to be born suddenly and we hardly ever find the forms which link them to the preced- ing strain. When we discover them they are already completely differentiated. Not only do we find practically no transitional forms, but in general it is impossible to authentically connect a new group with an ancient one." 8

Dr. Olson said,

"A third fundamental aspect of the record is somewhat different. Many new groups of plants and animals suddenly appear, apparently without any close ancestors. Most major groups of organisms and even classes have appeared in this way . . . The fossil record which has produced the problem, is not much help in its solution . . . . Most zoologists and the majority of paleontologists feel that the breaks and the abrupt appearances of new groups can be explained by the incompleteness of the record, but some disagree and believe that theses events tell a story not in accord with the theory [of evolution] and not seen among living organisms." 9

These are plain admissions that the missing links in plants life, animal life, and human life cannot be found. Especially admitting, that everything suddenly appeared; that the more fossils they find the more questions arise about their evolutionary theory. Instead of finding answers they find more problems with their theory! This means the more that they find, the more proof they find for creation by design! Yes, looks like the Bible is right when it states that God created all life! Evolution is a cruel hoax!

They even admit again that they cannot find any missing links for any of the animal life forms. The famous evolutionist, Dr. Clark says,

"No matter how far back we go in the fossil record or previous animal life upon earth, we find no trace of any animal forms which are intermediate betwen the various major groups." 10

Later on in the same book he says,

"Since we have not the slightest evidence, either among the living or the fossil animals, of any intergrading types following the major groups, it is a fair supposition that there never have been any such intergrading types."

Even the famous horse series commonly shown in some science museums is false. In 1993 evolutionists publicly admitted that the many small horses were not one group evolving upward into larger sized horses, but were all along, different families of horses! This is admitted years before by the evolutionists when Dr. Du- Nouy, one of their leading spokesmen says,

"We find that the transitional forms between major types are missing. Each one of these intermediaries seems to have appeared suddenly, and it has not yet been possible, because of the lack of fossils, to reconstitute the passage between these intermediaries.......The continuity, we surmise, may never be established by facts." 11

To make up for the total lack of evidence in the fossil record for transitional forms [Intermediates, missing links] some evolutionists have went so far, as to be crazy, by saying that since new types suddenly appear, without any missing links, maybe a dinosaur laid an egg and a bird hatched from it instead of evolving! The height of stupidity at work is when a modern evolutionist tries to think up ways to justify his position when all the evidence in the fossil records point to a sudden creation of all animal and plant life!

The major predictions by the creationists were:
The abrupt appearance of highly complex and diverse forms of life with no evidence of ancestral forms.
The sudden appearance of basic plant and animal kinds or the "created kinds" of Genesis, without evidence of transitional forms between the basic kinds.
The fossil record reveals:
The abrupt appearance of a great variety of highly complex forms of life. No evolutionary evidence for ancestors for these animals can be found anywhere on the earth.
The sudden appearance of higher categories of plants and animals with no evidence of transitional forms between these basic kinds.
Not only does the fossil record provide excellent evidence for special creation [God creating everything as the Bible says], but the fossil record, at the same time, shows that evolution could not possibly have occurred! I will close this chapter quoting from Kerkut, who is not a creationist. He says,

"There is a theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form. This theory can be called the 'General Theory of Ev- olution' and the evidence that supports it is not sufficiently strong to allow us to consider it as anything more than a working hypothesis." 12

It is difficult to add anything to that: plainly admitting that evolution does not even rate enough to be a theory let-alone a fact!

Here we have it from the mouths of the evolutionists themselves; admitting that evolution cannot be proven and some even saying that special creation [God creating] has the most evidence!

Question: What do you get when you cross a donkey with a rock? An evolutionists with the stubbornness of a jackass and the intelligence of a rock! Tsk, Tsk.

Question: If you believe something that cannot be proven, isn't that faith? Doesn't faith constitute a religion or a cult?


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


FOOTNOTES: CHAPTER III
1 E. L. Simons, "Annals New York Academy of Sciences", (1969), Vol. 167, p. 319.

2 A. S. Romer "Vertebrate Paleontology", 3rd edition 1966, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA p. 221.

3 Dr. Duane T. Gish, "Evolution: The Fossils Say No", Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, CA, USA , 1977, p. 74.

4 Dr. Duane T. Gish, "Evolution: The Fossils Say No" Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, CA, USA 1977 pp. 88-103

5 Dr. Duane T. Gish, "Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record", Creation-Life Publishers, El Cajon, California, USA, 1991, pp. 157-159.

6 E.J.H. Corner, "Contemporary Botanical Thought", A. M. MacLeod and L.S. Cobley, eds., 1961, Quadrangle Books, Chicago.

7 D. M. Raup and S. M. Stanley, "Principles of Paleontology", 1971, W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco, p. 306.

8 L. DuNouy, "Human Destiny", The New American Library, 1947, New York, p. 63.

9 Dr. E. C. Olson, "The Evolution of Life", The New American Library, 1965, New York p. 94.

10 A.H. Clark, "The New Evolution: Zoogenesis", 1930, Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, MD, USA p. 189.

11 L. DuNouy, op. cit. p. 74.

12 G.A. Kerkut, "Implications of Evolution", Pergamon Press, 1960, New York, p. 157.

* Let the reader know that I will now quote from Dr. Guish's book for a few pages and will put his words in quotes and leave mine without quotes. When the next footnote is noted that will be the end of the information from here to there.

A FEW LAST FACTS
According to Leakey, and a few others, man has been around about 3 to 10 million years. Most evolutionists [They are divided in their beliefs.] believe man has been around 1 million years. We will give them the benefit of a doubt [They will certainly need it] and use Leakey's figure of 3 million years or so.

Evolutionists say that Dinosaurs died out, disappeared, about 65 to 70 million years ago. This means that dinosaurs had been dead at least 62 million years before man's earliest ancestor appeared, if you take Richard Leakey's figures as fact.

Enough proof has already been given in this book to show anyone, who is honest, that evolution is not true, but what if dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time? If this can be proven then the complete time table, on which evolution is based, is thrown out, and with it, evolution!

An authentic report came out of Russia, "1500 dinosaur imprints had been found, with what appeared to be human imprints in the same strata." 1 According to modern evolutionists, man's earliest ancestors were on the earth 62 to 65 million years after the dinosaur died! How could the tracks have been found together?

A few miles away from the many dinosaur footprints at Glen Rose, Texas was found a human skeleton of a woman that was 210 cm tall [7 foot tall]! 2

Also In a Cretaceous limestone formation near Glen Rose, Texas, are to be found some remarkable footprints. They are the tracks of giant men! You can go look at them for yourself. [But when you arrive, ask one of the old timers to tell you where to look. As soon as they are exposed to the elements, they gradually begin eroding away.]

Glen Rose is located in north central Texas, about 40 miles southwest of the Fort Worth-Dallas metropolitan area. The area has little rainfall; and, for several months each year the Paluxy River is completely dry. From time to time the river changes its course. This occurs at those times when the quiet river becomes a raging torrent. Because the river has such a steep slope [a drop of 17 feet -51.8 dm- per mile], it is the second swiftest river in Texas and quite dangerous in time of heavy rainfall. It was after the terrible flood of 1908, when the river rose 27 feet [82.3 dm], that the prints began to be noticed. The new riverbed brought to view a flat rock bottom with animal and human prints in what was once wet mud which had turned to stone.

I, Dr. Ron Powell, the author of this small work, would like to take time out to give you the following very, very, important information and then shall continue. This same information and more was published in "The Great Dinosaur Mistake" in the early 1990s, but I was somewhat apprehensive about using it in this edition as I did in my original first edition of "Evolution: The Truth?". The present situation with the dinosaur and human tracks now is that the elements or possibly someone has changed the human tracks to the degree that they cannot for certain be claimed to be human tracks.

Now though, the reason I have decided to use this information of the finding of dinosaur and human tracks together is that in searching the internet I came across the same information being discovered and used in another book many decades before Evolution: The Truth? and The Great Dinosaur Mistake were printed! This was an, on the site, personal eye witness account, [when the tracks were easily identifiable as human], of the Paleontologist and evolutionist Dr. Roland T. Bird!

Now, continuing on: Clifford L. Burdick, a mining geologist, and *Roland T. Bird, a paleontologist with the American Museum of Natural History, carefully examined and reported on the foot- prints.

Dr. Bird said, after examining the footprints for himself,

"Yes, they apparently are real enough. Real as the rock could be . . . the strangest things of their kind I had ever seen. On the surface of each was splayed the near-likeness of a human foot, perfect in every detail. But each imprint was 15 inches long!" 3

The present writer is over six feet 1 inch [18.4 dm] tall and has a foot that is 11 inches [27.95 cm] in length. The Glen Rose tracks are 15 inches [38.1 cm] long, and were probably made by people 8.3 feet [25.38 dm] tall. During his research at the Paluxy Riverbed near Glen Rose, Bird found not only human footprints, but also by them trails of large three-toed carnivorous dinosaurs and the tracks of gigantic sauropods. Each print was 24 x 38 inches [60.9 x 96.5 cm] in size, 12 feet [36.57 dm] apart, and sunk deeply into the mud! Both man and dinosaur were apparently running.

In 1938, under Bird's supervision, a trail of Brontosaurus tracks were taken from the bed and shipped to the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. C. L. Burdick's findings were published in the spring 1957 issue of "The Naturalist".

The so-called "Cretaceous Period" is the only time when the dinosaurs were supposed to have lived. It is said to have spanned 70 million years, dating from 135 million to 65 million years ago.

Man is said to have appeared no earlier than 4 million years ago. The "Glen Rose Formation," as it is known by geologists, is dated as "Early Cretaceous," or 120 million years ago.

This formation is described as limestone, alternating with clay, marl, and sand, and in various shades of brownish yellow and gray. Its thickness is 40 to 200 feet [121.9-602.6 dm].

Preservation of such tracks in limestone provides conclusive proof of rapid formation. As soon as the tracks were made, a layer of clay, sand, and gravel washed in and filled them so they would not dissolve away. Also, if the tracks were not quickly covered they would erode away. There is no room here for hundreds or millions of years. The prints were made and covered and preserved fast! It may well be that the prints were being covered by rising turbulent water which, after covering them with sediments, washed out temporarily as the earth may have moved up or down. It was time of geologic catastrophe on a massive scale.

Tracks are found in several of the layers of limestone, as they are exposed by river erosion. Man tracks have been found in layers BELOW that of the dinosaur prints! Fossils from land, seashore, and open sea have all been found here. Human footprints are found above, with, and below prints of bears, saber-toothed tigers, mammoths, and dinosaurs.

Another striking evidence of the genuineness of these tracks is called "mud push-up." These footprints show "mud up-push" where the toes pushed up the mud in front and on the sides. This would not occur if these were "erosion Markings," as some evolutionists claim.

Lamination markings, indicating that the foot pressed through different colored clays beneath it, are also to be seen on many of the human and animal tracks. Over a hundred human footprint trails have been studied in the Paluxy River area. Most of the footprints are unshod, but some appear to have some kind of covering on the foot. Some marks are of children's feet, but always going somewhere with adults. Some are of giants. Each one will have length of strides to match the footprint size. Quite a few of the tracks are 16 inches [40.64 cm] in size, but several of the trails are of a man with a seven-foot [21.3 dm] stride and footprint of 21 inch [54.6 cm] tracks by 11.94 foot [36.39 dm] tall people.

C. N. Dougherty, a local chiropractor in the Glen Rose area, wrote a book, Valley of the Giants, in 1967. He has located, described, and photographed many of the human prints. 4

A miner fell through a hole in Italy many years ago and found an 11 ft. 6 inch [348 cm] tall complete, perfectly preserved human skeleton. 5 The Bible says in Genesis 6:4,

"There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown."

These sons of God are fully explained in the introduction to the book, "Biblical Answers for Pentecostals and Charismatics" published in Taiwan Sept. 1994. Ask your local Christian bookstore for a copy. I do believe that they are here now occassionaly being seen traveling in their U.F.O.s.6

Scientists tell us that Cretaceous rocks are about 135 million years old, but at Glen Rose Texas there has been found an iron hammer with a wooden handle all inside of limestone which is recognized by evolutionists as being 135 millions years old! How could the rock have formed around the hammer 135 million years ago? There is a picture of it in the book, The Great Dinosaur Mistake.

Answer: Their method of dating is completely wrong and the rock was obviously formed after the hammer was made, no doubt, under great pressure. Such as water, from a flood, that completely covered the earth. Yes, the same way that our oil was formed!

And what about the Archaeopteryx? He is claimed to be the earliest ancestor of the birds. This was disproven a few years ago when in 1977, James Jensen the famous discoverer of the huge dinosaurs called 'Supersaurus' and Ultrasaurus', discovered a complete Archaeopteryx, but in the same rock he also discovered the femur of a bird. Simply put, the Archaeopteryx and the bird lived at the same time and the poor bird was probably the last meal of the Archaeopteryx! 7

Index Fossils
"How are geological formations really dated? One method for determining the age of rocks containing fossils is known as the Index Fossil Method. The type of fossil remains discovered in the geological layer are first examined. Then, according to the fossil content of the formation, the age of the rocks are determined. If, for example, dinosaur bones, eggs, or footprints appear in a geological formation, the geologist assumes that the formation involved orig- inated during the lifetime of dinosaurs, at least 70 to 120 million years ago.

If a rock formation contains a fossilized trilobite this information must, by the same considerations, be about 300 million years old, for trilobites became extinct about 300 million years ago according to evolutionary theory. Consequently, if a formation contains human bones, it must be about 3 million years or so of age because Richard Leakey has said that man earliest ancestors did not live much earlier than this date. This index fossil method is considered by most modern geologists to be absolutely authoritive." 8

When you ask a geologist how old a certain rock is he will say, "Ah, it has a trilobite fossil in it, so it came from the Pennsylvanian period of about 300 million years ago." If you then ask the fossil hunter how old the fossil is he will say, "Ah, it is from Pennsylvanian rock so it is 300 million or so years old." Yes, circular reasoning. What a mess!

Since scientists claim that the last trilobite died about 300 million years ago, it would be impossible to find a trilobite crushed inside the footprint of a human. After all, I have not seen many 297 million year old trilobites crawling around lately? But that is exactly what was found by Dr. Clifford Burdick on Swasey Mountain, west central Utah, at an altitude of about 2,000 feet. 9

On the next couple of pages I shall document evidence of human skeletons, leg bones, skulls, and man made objects that have been found in the different geological time periods all the way back to 600 million years! These prove the geological time column is completely wrong! A lie, made up by men, to further their own false beliefs in their cult religion of evolution!

How could a human skeleton have been found in rock that has been supposedly dated to 500 million years and evolutionary scientists say our earliest ancestors were not alive until 3 million or so years ago? Yes, you have been cheated in one of the greatest frauds in human history! You believed a lie! The devil has a trap and religion [evolution is a religion based on faith] for every one!

Here are human and human made artifacts found in the false "Geological Column" of the evolutionists.10 The Chart: by the very talented Dr. Carl Weiland, of Adelaide, Australia.

Mid-Pleistocene [4 million years ago]
Human skull found in Olmo, Italy

Human skeleton found in Clichy, France

Human skeleton found in Gary Hill, England

Lower-Pleistocene [5.5 million years ago]
Human pelvis found in Natchez, U.S.A.

Human jaw found in Abbeville, France

Human upper arm bone found in Kanapoi, Africa

Piocene [7 million years ago]
Human skull found in Calveras, California, U.S.A.

Human skull found in Castenedolo, Italy

Human skull found at Table Mt., California, U.S.A.

Human jaw found at Fox Hall, England

Huma footprints found at Laetolil, Africa

Human footprints found at Tulsa, OK, U.S.A.

Sandal prints found at Carson City, Nevada, U.S.A.

Miocene [26 million years ago]
Human skull found at Stanford, California, U.S.A.

Human jaw found at Tuscany, Italy

Human shoe print found at Gobi Desert in China

Eocene [50 Million years ago]
Human skull found at Germany

Human tooth found at Bear Creek, Montana, U.S.A.

Paleocene [70 million years ago]
A human made cast iron cube found at Wolfsegg, Austria

Jurassic [190 million years ago]
Human leg and footbones found at Spring Valley, Nevada, U.S.A.

Human footprint found at Parkersbury, West Virginia, U.S.A.

Pennsylvanian [310 million years ago]
Human footprints found at Bera, Kentucky, U.S.A.

Human made iron pots found at Oklahoma, U.S.A.

Human made tools found at Aixen-provence, France

Human made gold chain found in Illinois, U.S.A.

Devonian [350 million years ago]
Human footprints found in Missouri, U.S.A.

Precision pattern found at Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.

Silurian/Ordovician [500 million years ago]
Human skeleton found at Franklin county, Missouri, U.S.A.

Human sandal prints found at Lake Windermere, England

Human made metal hammer found at London, Texas, U.S.A.

Cambrian [600 million years ago]
Human footprints and sandal prints found at Antelope Springs, Utah, U.S.A.

Human made iron bands found at Lochmaree, Scotland

Man made artifacts and footprints cannot be in rock older than man himself! Obviously evolutionary dating is wrong! No other conclusion can be drawn! Any honest person could see this because this is a no-brainer.

Another quick example of the error found in the fossil index is of the Coelacanth [Latimeria] fish. This fish was used to date rocks to 70 million years of age, because it was generally recognized that this fish became extinct some 70 million years ago. The Coelacanth was regarded as a vital link in the evolution of fish. Well, it was . . . until it was caught by fisherman in 1965 and since then has been caught many more times off of the coasts of Africa and it is identical to the fossilized remains of those previously thought to have been 70 million years old! 10 This shows that the rock and fossilized remains of this fish, previously dated to 70 million years, was in fact, a fish and rock that could only by the wildest stretch of the imagination be dated to a few thousand years! The present geological age! If you believe evolution you have believed a lie! It is important to realize that nowhere in the world does the geological column actually occur. It exists only in the minds of the evolutionary geologists. It is simply an idea, an idea of geological systems, and not an actual column of rocks that can be observed at a particular locality. Even the Grand Canyon includes less than half of this man-made column. Yes, you have been lied to. Some of you are Christians and you too actually believed the lie. Shame on you for not believing God created everything in seven days.

Deoxyribonucleic Acid [DNA] More complex living things are composed of a tremendous number of specialized cells, and within each cell is an intricate complex of specialized protein molecules. Each protein molecule is a particularly organized structure composed of about twenty different amino acids, and each amino acid is made up of the four elements hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon (in two cases a sulfur atom is also present).

These complex systems are all, in the case of every known organism, reproduced and assembled on the basis of the "instructions" already built into the DNA molecular system. DNA is composed of six simple molecules; these consist of four bases, the arrangement of which specifies the message, made up of nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, and carbon, along with a deoxyribose sugar molecule and a phosphate molecule which hold the bases in place.

The DNA molecular system is so great that not only does it hold the correct information for the synthesis of the specific protein molecules needed by the cell, but also that are needed for its own duplication forever!

On paper, using our alphabet system, this human genetic information on one human zygote would fill over 1,000 volumes each of 500 pages, a total of 500,000 printed pages. And all 500,000 printed pages enclosed in a thing as small as a grain of dust! The zygote is a masterpiece of miniaturized information, storage, and retrieval. One such zygot contains all of the necessary information required to build an entire human being and also that is required to synthesize all of his offspring forever!

MATHEMATICS
"The probability of being struck by lightening is 1 in 600,000. That is one out of every 600,000 people will be hit by lightening, although they may not die, they will be struck! So you can rest assured that you probably will not be struck by lightening. The mathematical probability of a monkey striking a typewriter and typing out the correct spelling for the word "EVOLUTION" is one in 25,429,503,680,000 chances. Your chances are 42,382,505 times more likely to be hit by lightening!

Consider taking 20 cards numbered from 1 to 20 and ask the monkey to lay them out in order. The chances of this happening are 1 in 2,243,902,008,176,640,000. The probability of accidentally typing out Genesis 1:1 is 181, 479, 392 to the 54th power . The probability of typing out 200 letters all in a desired order. This is getting to be compared to living things. The chances of this happening are 1 in 10 to the 375th power on the first trial. What if he keeps on trying different combinations again and again? Will he ever find the correct combination?

Let the monkey type out all 200 at the rate of 1 billion trials per second for 30 billion years. Even giving such liberal conditions [The earth is not 30 billion years old according to evolutionists] the number or trials that can be performed is only 5 x 10 to the 104th power. This is still far too short of the needed 10 to the 375th power . Simply stated the chance is nonexistent!

And yet this 200 part system is ridiculously primitive compared with living systems. Modern research by NASA has shown the most basic type of protein molecule that could be classified living is composed of at least 400 linked amino acids. Each amino acid, in turn, is made up of a specific arrangement of four or five chemical elements, and each chemical element is itself a unique combination of protons, neutrons, and electrons! Golay had demonstrated that the chance formation of even the simplest replicating protein molecule is 1 in 10 to the 450th power . Wysong has calculated the probability of forming the proteins and DNA for the smallest self-replicating entity to be 1 in 10to the 167,626th power, even giving generous amounts of billions of years.

Now, can you imagine the chance formation of a more complex structure or organ such as the human brain? It contains over 10,000,000,000 cells each of which is carefully arranged according to a specific design, and each of which is fantastically complex in itself! " 11

Evolutionists insist that highly complex systems consisting of almost unmeasurable components can arrange themselves in such a way as to have created a human! Give me a break!

The famous Dr. Colin Patterson, who was then the Senior Paleontologist at the London Museum of Natural History and an evolutionist, in his opening remarks in an address given at the Amer- ican Museum of Natural History, New York City on November 5, 1981 said, to the gathered evolutionists,

"Last year I had a sudden realization that for over twenty years I thought I was working on evolution in some way. One morning I woke up and something had happened in the night and it struck me that I had been working on this stuff for twenty years and there was not one thing I knew about it! That's quite a shock to learn that one can be misled for so long. Either there was something wrong with me or there was something wrong with evolutionary theory." 12 [Emphasis by the editor]

Now answer the question for yourself - Is evolution the truth? It will take a lot of "faith" to believe it is, and that faith must be placed in scientists. But if you have come to believe evolution is false, will you place your faith in the Creator? For the Bible says, "through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." [Hebrews 11:3] God made all things by His divine power and for His own good purpose. God even made you. By faith you can believe this, and by faith you can approach your Creator. "But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." [Hebrews 11:6]

Believe in God, that He is the Creator, and hear His way of salvation. God the Father gave all power of creation unto his son, "All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made." [John 1:3] He ". . . formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life." [Genesis 2:7] Man was made in God's image, innocent and free from the knowledge of sin, but man willfully sinned, and ever since, mankind has needed forgiveness from God. You are no different, "for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God", [Romans 3:23] and your need of forgiveness may be greater than you think, "for the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." [Romans 6:23] This Jesus is the Son of God, come to earth in the form and fashion of a man, born of a virgin, conceived by the Spirit of God. He lived His life being "...in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin," [Hebrews 4:15b] Then He preached to His people Israel until they would hear no more; and though He came to be their Saviour, they called for His death. The unthinkable happened; Jesus Christ was crucified. The Creator was put to death by His own creation, and God allowed it for a purpose. The death of Jesus Christ paid for every sin mankind would ever commit, even your sins. So He died and was buried, but on the third day He arose again from the grave. Death was the penalty for sin, so Christ gave His life as the perfect sacrifice for us, and being sinless He arose as the Author of eternal life, that you and I might live forever with Him.

And what must you do to receive this glorious salvation from sin's eternal penalty of death? Believe in Jesus Christ, our Saviour and Creator. Place your faith in His sacrifice; lay your burden of sin upon His shoulders. There is no sin He has not paid for and no sinner He will not accept. God asks no more of you than faith. You can not work for your salvation, "but to him that worketh not, but believeth on him [Jesus Christ] that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." [Romans 4:5] This matter of salvation must be settled in your heart, "for with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." [Romans 10:10] Speak unto God; He will surely hear you and for Christ's sake forgive you for all your sins. It is His gift of eternal life for your soul, given in love - "For by grace are ye saved through faith: and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast." [Ephesians 2:8-9]

God has done His part. Will you believe now? Will you pray and ask God to forgive your sins and receive Jesus Christ as your only Saviour? Now you must decide: will you or will you not receive Jesus Christ?

If you will sincerely pray this prayer or something similar you will be saved. "God I know I am a sinner. I believe that Jesus was born, crucified, died, and resurrected for my sins. I now, by faith, ask you to forgive my sins. Please forgive me for being such a terrible sinner. I ask you to save me and I want You to know that I now trust Jesus to be my righteousness. I do not trust myself for righteousness, because I am full of sin. God Please save me and forgive me for Jesus' sake. In Jesus' name I pray, Amen." 13

1 Reported in Sydney Morning Herald, Australia, Nov. 21, 1983, P. 1, late edition - Fuller details are given in Moscow News, No 24, p. 10, 1983 Cr. V. Rubtsov.

2 op. cit, Carl E. Baugh,Clifford A. Wilson, Dinosaur, 1991, Promise Publishing Co., Orange, Ca. U. S. A., 92667, page # P.

3 Roland T. Bird, Thunder in His Footsteps, in Natural History, May 1939, p. 255. For more documentation see: R. T. Bird: Natural History 1939, p. 96, 225, 261, 302. cj also A. E. Wilder Smith: Man's Origin, Man's Destiny, Hanssler Verlag, Neuhausen, D-7303, Stuttgart, W. Germany. See also: Taylor: Footprints in Stone. Films for Christ Assn. at North Eden Road, Elmwood, Il. in 1974. This is quiet a bit of information from eyewitness accounts when the footprints were in much better condition.

4 http://www.pathlights.com/cr_encyclopedia/13anc07.htm This information found January 6, 1998 at this internet address. The information that I got from this internet address is found starting with the last paragraph on page 39 and continues on with part of my page 40, and all of pages 41 and 42.

5 op. cit, Carl E. Baugh ,Clifford A. Wilson, page # B.

6 These sons of God were in the beginning with God before and when the earth was being made. [Job 38:7] These sons of God had the power to come before the VERY throne of God. When they did Satan was also among them. Thus, they are connected with Satan. [Job 1:6 and 2:1] These sons of God are so powerful that they came to the earth from the heavens and took human wives and no one could stop it [Genesis 6:2]. They did marry earth woman and had offspring. These that were born were giants and great men. [Genesis 6:4] They are foretold to be back during the great tribulation when they shall practice genetic engineering trying to reproduce with we humans. Really! In Daniel two you have the last kings in the tribulation and here are some kind of creatures trying to mingle their seed with the seed of men. They are the iron and we are the clay [Daniel 2:43]. Jesus foretold this They when he mentioned them in Matthew 24:38. The times just before the second coming is shown to be just like the times before the flood with Noah. Who were here when Noah was? Right, the sons of God. They will be back in the tribulation when they shall marry and eat and drink again. Now do not you see why it is so strange to say, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark.? It is not strange for humans to eat and drink and marry. We have always done this. But . . . sons of God have not! I believe that they were here with Noah and will be back again, just like Jesus refers to! These sons of God are the ones in I Thessalonians 5:3 when they arrive [probably in their flying saucers] they shall proclaim peace to the world. Humans have always said, peace in our time, peace with honor. The thing that makes this so unusual is that the sons of God themselves arrive [this is in the tribulation because the rapture has just occurred a few verses before] proclaiming "peace" to all mankind [You know, "we have come to save you from yourselves".]. Their technology will be as great as before, if not greater by now, when they took them wives of all that they chose [Gen. 6:2]. This will also explain Greek mythology and why many cultures left behind drawings in stone of men in spaceships. They were here when the judgment by water came, and will be here again in the judgment of the tribulation right after the rapture of the Church. Hope this helps you understand why Satan is setting everything up now with all of the space movies and the sightings of aliens and their taking blood from cattle and kidnapping humans.

7 Dr. Clifford Wilson, Creation or Evolution: Facts Or Fairy tales?, 1991, Pacific College Incorporated, pp. 17-18.

8 AE Wilder Smith, The Natural Sciences Know Nothing Of Evolution, 1981, Master Books, P.O. Box 15666, San Diego, California 92115, pp. 103-104.

9 AE Wilder Smith, The Natural Sciences Know Nothing Of Evolution, 1981, Master Books, P.O. Box 15666, San Diego, California 92115 p. 99. Quoting Basis for a New Biology. Telos Verlag [Neuhausen-Stuttgart, 1975] p. 217 ff.-Personal communication. cf Science News, Feb. 2, 1974, Vol. 105, p. 72.

10 The Chart graciously supplied by Dr. Carl Weiland, of Adelaide, Australia and found in the book Creation or Evolution: Facts or Fairy Tales? , 1991, Pacific College, Inc., pp. 32-33.

11 AE Wilder Smith, The Natural Sciences Know Nothing Of Evolution, 1981, Master Books, P.O. Box 15666, San Diego, California 92115 p. 104 quoting, Science News, March 27, 1965: New Scientist, May 27, 1976, Vol. 70, p. 456.

12 Scott M. Huse, The Collapse of Evolution, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI, USA 1986, pp. 66-68.

13 Dr. Clifford Wilson, Creation or Evolution: Facts Or Fairy tales?, 1991, Pacific College Incorporated, p. 16.

14 Much thanks to Bill Green of International Christian Ministries for his help with the last two pages of this book. Bill and his wife, Wanda, are the greatest writers that I have ever read. They put out very sound soul-winning tracts [in many languages] that lead souls to Christ and books in Russian and Japanese. I have handed out over 200,000