Skip to content
Unfortunately like so many evolutionists, you fail to understand the sciences. [Micro] evolution is a Creationist concept that was fine-tuned by Edward Blyth around 1835 who was the first to devise current nomenclature for breeding, varieties, natural selection, radiation, adaptation and etc. His novel descriptions were published in peer-reviewed journals that stated these mechanisms were only limited to mechanisms of preservation and were incapable of biological innovation for creating any new species. It was Darwin who stole or plagiarized Blyth's work, perverting it to fit his evolutionist doctrine.
The result, there can be no gradualism for [macro] evolution since Blyth's studies showed there is never any new or novel information or structure which arises from mutations, while those mutations most often lead to degeneration. This was later reconfirmed by G. Mendel and his Law of Genetics or Inheritance (the founder of modern genetics). His conclusions, which have been tediously varied in countless experiments, proved there cannot be any transmutation of species because DNA has mutational limits that cannot be crossed.
Again, this had been reconfirmed by more recent studies which developed the law of recurrence that shows there is a limitation to the variability of mutations.
Ever notice how modern evolutionists attempt to focus attention to the [micro] evolution aspects, instead of the [macro]? This is because of the countless studies, scientists are completely aware that species are incapable of branching into an advanced species. All they may do is to create new varieties of that species thru breeding, natural selection and adaptation. All genomes are constrained to how much they may change.
Thus, there is no gradualism for speciation nor is there any common ancestry for species other than to those limited in their respective species as different varieties of the species (i.e., no transitional links, no new life forms or structure).
However, evolutionists refuse to publicly announce these studies or findings, but do not hesitate to promote something which they may contort to fit their falsified theories as if it were truth. Again, the promulgation of such material is not based on science. To the contrary, it is solely based on religious aspirations that pretend to use science in support of a falsified theory. But evolutionary scientists already know this and many have begun to express concerns over the lack of proof of Darwinism. They want it removed from the books.
Because of the "faith", they are still evolutionists. However they fully realize Darwinism needs to be abandoned. Even the National Science Foundation [NSF], the National Center for Science Education [NCSE], and the National Academy of Sciences acknowledge this, but each have stated they are not willing to publicly abandon theory due to public reaction that would open the door to Creationism being taught in school as a replacement.
This has never been about science!! Only the misinformed believe that. Instead, this has always been about religion, and many evolutionary scholars, government leaders and the UNESCO (the U.N.'s branch that controls the world's education systems) have admitted this.
More information about formatting options
Copyright 2014 Creation Moments. All Rights Reserved.
August Ash, Inc. -
Minneapolis Web Design