Book Review: The Evolution Handbook
When we started to read The Evolution Handbook, we figured we’d just skip through all the superfluous material and read the “good stuff.” After all, who has time to read a 992-page book from cover to cover?
We soon discovered, however, that every chapter was just as interesting – and informative – as the chapter before it. Before we knew it, we had read all 992 pages and had underlined hundreds of passages for future reference. Yes, that’s how good it is.
We were delighted to find dozens of fascinating examples of design seen in the animal kingdom – remarkably similar to those we bring you in our “Creation Moments” radio program.
The chapters on fossils, mutations, ancient man and the global flood were particularly informative. So, too, were the thousands of scientific facts that refute evolution, the dozens of evidences that the earth is only a few thousand years old, and the hundreds of quotes from evolutionists that are remarkably frank … and damaging to the cause of evolution!
That’s why Creation Moments is offering The Evolution Handbook for a donation of any amount. We’re offering it through the end of October or while supplies last, so request your copy by calling 1-800-422-4253 or by making a donation online.
Tags: book, creation, evidence, evolution, evolution handbook, review, young earth
December 9th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
This book is full of stupid lies.
December 10th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
You can call me stupid, and be right!
You can call me a liar and be very right!
But how can a Humming bird be stupid, and a liar? It is what it is! Even though we don’t understand how a Humming Bird does what it does means we are stupid. The Humming Bird, for example, is unique. No other Bird has the characteristics like the Humming Bird.
Man tries to deny what is plainly stated in the Bible. That all things are created by Him and everything that exists was created by HIM.
How can the Humming Bird evolve? Where is the evidence for each animal evolving? There is no evidence for each animal evolving. No not in the rocks. Each fossil that has been found is very simular to species found today, and fully formed and functioning.
When we question and doubt some one who made a thing, you would think he knew what he made, right. Somebody who makes pencils, knows what is in a pencil. He knows the pencil did not evolve because he got the materials and assembled the pencil. Yes someone else can pick up the pencil and say it evolved but would he be right? or stupid???
Thus it is with Creation! God was there!, by His word did he create EVERYTHING, as he said he did. There is no evidence of millions of years for creation. There is too much energy, too little sediment on the ocean floors, too little dust on the Moon. With all creation pointing that Scripture is supported in its existence, we are the fools in doubting the WORD of GOD.
December 10th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
What’s stupid is to deny God’s word. His word is substantiated by real, observable science, while evolution is not.
What we find in the fossil record is gaps where there should be transitional forms. If evolution is true, if gradual evolution of species occurred, you would find the fossil record replete with intermediate forms. But it isn’t.
The “Cambrian” geological column, for example, shows highly complex creatures, all appearing without evolutionary ancestors. There was no gradual evolution, but a co-existence of distinct and separate creatures.
Since Darwin’s time, evolutionists have unearthed hundreds of fossils … and nowhere is there evidence of a fish eventually turning into a bird. There just aren’t the transitional forms to show it.
Sure, you might go to a museum and find artistic renderings of transitional forms. You’ll even find that scientists now claim that fossils belonging to creatures they originally said had scales now suddenly have sprouted feathers instead (if in any doubt, look at the clay model), so that they can be deemed transitional.
But reclassifying fossil finds to fit changing presuppositions doesn’t produce evidence any more than my saying the moon is blue and altering a photo digitally to reflect a blue tint on the lunar surface does.