Skip to content

Today's Creation Moment

Were Dinosaurs Warm Blooded?
Psalm 147:2-3
"The LORD builds up Jerusalem; He gathers together the outcasts of Israel. He heals the broken hearted and binds up their wounds."
Dinosaur fossil hunters and paleontologists have long debated whether dinosaurs were warm-blooded or cold-blooded. With reptile characteristics, it was expected that dinosaurs would be cold-blooded....

Is Richard Dawkins Wicked?

"It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that)." - Richard Dawkins (The Blind Watchmaker)

This famous quote from one of the world's leading atheists makes a lot more sense with a few words changed: "It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, and that's the most likely explanation)."

Are evolutionists ignorant, stupid or insane? Many are ignorant because they've never examined the evidence in favor of creationism and contrary to evolution. Others must be stupid because they've never actually thought about the scientific flaws of evolution. And still others show signs of being insane when they look at the complexities of DNA or the eye or the process involved in the clotting of blood and just keep repeating over and over, "It only appears to be designed. It only appears to be designed."

But the main reason why so many atheists like Dawkins believe in evolution is because they are just plain wicked ... or, as the Bible calls them, unrighteous. Romans 1:18-19: "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness, suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them."

Those are our thoughts. What are yours?


Evolution is a religion, and Dawkins is the high-priest.

Evolutionists are willfully ignorant, just as Peter describes them when he talks about who repudiate God and deny the Flood.

I teach English at a junior college. I recently assigned a definition essay to my class on the topic of "Evolution: Fact or Fiction?" My students asked me to define evolution for them. I said, "It's the theory that all living matter came from nonliving matter, but it does not explain how the matter got there in the first place. It's the theory that all things came from something in common, although it does not explain what." The kids looked confused. They knew I was describing evolution accurately, but it sounded so implausible ... just like fiction. They asked me for more definition. "The Big Bang theory is not a part of the evolutionary theory," I said. "Evolution has no explanation for how life began, but says life developed, accidentally, into varied forms. Evolution says that all life came from one unspecified, nonliving source. All living and unliving matter, according to the theory of evolution, are therefore related." When they still wanted more explanation, since evolution did not sound at all factual, I clarified, "Essentially, evolution postulates that we are related to bananas."

The students could not argue with what I was saying, because it really described evolution. But hearing it stated so starkly like that gave some of them pause. It sounded like I was relating a fictional fairy tale, but all I was doing was reporting what evolutionary theory actually is.

Interestingly, none of them had any more information to offer on evolution than I did, because they really don't have any. All they're taught in school is to "believe" in evolution. They're not taught what it really is.