The consequences of "Evolution is false"

Why Is evolution the biggest lie of atheists and agonosticsTHE BIG LIE of Evolution - DOCTRINE OF DELUSION EXPOSED!Proof That Evolution Is A HoaxEvolution Is A Hoax - Documented!"The success of this lie can only be explained as a work of Satan ... Evolution is a lie despite its scientific trappings""Anyone can know that evolution is a lie by just studying the facts. But now anyone can also know that evolution is a double-damned lie. It has never been “secular” science as the world has been led to believe. Rather, it has been a long labor of a Cabal of Pharisee Religionists to destroy the Bible’s credibility from Creation to Jesus to Heaven."EVOLUTION AND GENOCIDE: "The Theory of Evolution is a lie which is popularly believed not because it is "scientific" so much as because the empires of the world have found the idea helpful in buttressing thier power and extending their genocidal domination."EVOLUTION IS A LIE: Evolutionists believe that evolution takes place as a result of two separate events that occur simultaneously, called "mutation" and "natural selection". This, actually, is an illogical belief and it does not have any scientific basis."Letters on Evolution from Grandpa" --- My Dear Grandchildren: In my last letter, I said I'd tell you why evolution is a lie. Evolution is a lie not only because the Bible (God's Word) ascribes the establishment of all living and inanimate matter and all scientific laws and phenomena to our almighty God's creation, but it is also a scientific lie. Evolution is a lie. I frequently receive e-mails from people who accuse me of being ignorant of science. Science? There is NOT one shred of evidence in support of evolution that has stood up to the scrutiny of legitimate science."Since evolution is a lie there can be no proof that evolution has ever occurred as the theory requires it to."Evolution a lie: "Evolution is a LIE,designed by the ungodly to convince you to believe that there is no Creator-God."I HATE EVOLUTION ... Praise the Lord that evolution is a lie and the Bible is true."A Historical Lie: The Stone Age" ... No matter how much Darwinists strive to keep their ideology alive, the mounting evidence shows that evolution is a lie and that Creation is a fact that cannot be denied. I must say, I’m embarrassed for people who try so hard to live a lie in the face of overwhelming scientific proof. THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF....EVOLUTION IS A LIE."I now know that evolution is a lie from the devil. I now know that what we are being taught as fact about the past is fiction"However, after reading the information contained on this website and others; I think that you will agree that evolution is a lie. It is not a misunderstanding, ignorance etc... It is a lie.However, the information on giants that we learn from the Bible and factual fossil evidence once again proves evolution to be a "giant" LIE.Evolution is a LIEOnce again true science proves that evolution is a lie."That's right, Lucy. There's no such thing as evolution. Evolution is a lie. Darwin was a liar. Darwinists are liars."Answers in Genesis have their say: “In its bearing upon religion this vain notion is, however, no theme for mirth, for it is not only deceptive, but it threatens to be mischievous in a high degree. There is not a hair of truth upon this dog from its head to its tail, but it rends and tears the simple ones. In all its bearing upon scriptural truth, the evolution theory is in direct opposition to it. If God’s Word be true, evolution is a lie.And Henry Morris, founder of the ICR has this to say: Assuming Satan to be the real source of the evolutionary concept, how did it originate in his mind? . . . A possible answer to this mystery could be that Satan, the father of lies, has not only deceived the whole world and the angelic hosts who followed him--he has even deceived himself! . . . He therefore deceived himself into supposing that all things, including himself and including God, had been evolved by natural processes out of the primordial stuff of the universe ... Satan himself is the originator of the concept of evolution." And here's Kent Hovind : "Secondly, the Creationists are not rejecting science; they are rejecting lies and things that have been proven wrong."Edited by Dr Adequate, : Fixed links.

Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin.--- Albanian Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina; Australian Academy of Science; Austrian Academy of Sciences; Bangladesh Academy of Sciences; The Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium; Academy of Sciences and Arts of Bosnia and Herzegovina; Brazilian Academy of Sciences; Bulgarian Academy of Sciences; The Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada; Academia Chilena de Ciencias; Chinese Academy of Sciences; Academia Sinica, China, Taiwan; Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences; Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences; Cuban Academy of Sciences; Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic; Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters; Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt; Académie des Sciences, France; Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities; The Academy of Athens, Greece; Hungarian Academy of Sciences; Indian National Science Academy; Indonesian Academy of Sciences; Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran; Royal Irish Academy; Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities; Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy; Science Council of Japan; Kenya National Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic; Latvian Academy of Sciences; Lithuanian Academy of Sciences; Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Academia Mexicana de Ciencias; Mongolian Academy of Sciences; Academy of the Kingdom of Morocco; The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences; Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand; Nigerian Academy of Sciences; Pakistan Academy of Sciences; Palestine Academy for Science and Technology; Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru; National Academy of Science and Technology, The Philippines; Polish Academy of Sciences; Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal; Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Singapore National Academy of Sciences; Slovak Academy of Sciences; Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Academy of Science of South Africa; Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain; National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka; Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences; Council of the Swiss Scientific Academies; Academy of Sciences, Republic of Tajikistan; Turkish Academy of Sciences; The Uganda National Academy of Sciences; The Royal Society, UK; US National Academy of Sciences; Uzbekistan Academy of Sciences; Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela; Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences; The Caribbean Academy of Sciences; African Academy of Sciences; The Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS); The Executive Board of the International Council for Science (ICSU). *Teaching religious ideas mislabeled as science is detrimental to scientific education: It sets up a false conflict between science and religion, misleads our youth about the nature of scientific inquiry, and thereby compromises our ability to respond to the problems of an increasingly technological world. Our capacity to cope with problems of food production, health care, and even national defense will be jeopardized if we deliberately strip our citizens of the power to distinguish between the phenomena of nature and supernatural articles of faith. "Creation-science" simply has no place in the public-school science classroom.--- Nobel Laureates Luis W. Alvarez, Carl D. Anderson, Christian B. Anfinsen, Julius Axelrod, David Baltimore, John Bardeen, Paul Berg, Hans A. Bethe, Konrad Bloch, Nicolaas Bloembergen, Michael S. Brown, Herbert C. Brown, Melvin Calvin, S. Chandrasekhar, Leon N. Cooper, Allan Cormack, Andre Cournand, Francis Crick, Renato Dulbecco, Leo Esaki, Val L. Fitch, William A. Fowler, Murray Gell-Mann, Ivar Giaever, Walter Gilbert, Donald A. Glaser, Sheldon Lee Glashow, Joseph L. Goldstein, Roger Guillemin, Roald Hoffmann, Robert Hofstadter, Robert W. Holley, David H. Hubel, Charles B. Huggins, H. Gobind Khorana, Arthur Kornberg, Polykarp Kusch, Willis E. Lamb, Jr., William Lipscomb, Salvador E. Luria, Barbara McClintock, Bruce Merrifield, Robert S. Mulliken, Daniel Nathans, Marshall Nirenberg, John H. Northrop, Severo Ochoa, George E. Palade, Linus Pauling, Arno A. Penzias, Edward M. Purcell, Isidor I. Rabi, Burton Richter, Frederick Robbins, J. Robert Schrieffer, Glenn T. Seaborg, Emilio Segre, Hamilton O. Smith, George D. Snell, Roger Sperry, Henry Taube, Howard M. Temin, Samuel C. C. Ting, Charles H. Townes, James D. Watson, Steven Weinberg, Thomas H. Weller, Eugene P. Wigner, Kenneth G. Wilson, Robert W. Wilson, Rosalyn Yalow, Chen Ning Yang. *Evolutionary theory ranks with Einstein's theory of relativity as one of modern science's most robust, generally accepted, thoroughly tested and broadly applicable concepts. From the standpoint of science, there is no controversy.--- Louise Lamphere, President of the American Anthropological Association; Mary Pat Matheson, President of the American Assn of Botanical Gardens and Arboreta; Eugenie Scott, President of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists; Robert Milkey, Executive Officer of the American Astronomical Society; Barbara Joe Hoshiazaki, President of the American Fern Society; Oliver A. Ryder, President of the American Genetic Association; Larry Woodfork, President of the American Geological Institute; Marcia McNutt, President of the American Geophysical Union; Judith S. Weis, President of the American Institute of Biological Sciences; Arvind K.N. Nandedkar, President of the American Institute of Chemists; Robert H. Fakundiny, President of the American Institute of Professional Geologists; Hyman Bass, President of the American Mathematical Society; Ronald D. McPherson, Executive Director of the American Meteorological Society; John W. Fitzpatrick, President of the American Ornithologists' Union; George Trilling, President of the American Physical Society; Martin Frank, Executive Director of the American Physiological Society; Steven Slack, President of the American Phytopathological Society; Raymond D. Fowler, Chief Executive Officer American Psychological Association; Alan Kraut, Executive Director of the American Psychological Society; Catherine E. Rudder, Executive Director of the American Political Science Association; Robert D. Wells, President of the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology; Abigail Salyers, President of the American Society for Microbiology; Brooks Burr, President of the American Society of Ichthylogists & Herpetologists; Thomas H. Kunz, President of the American Society of Mammalogists; Mary Anne Holmes, President of the Association for Women Geoscientists; Linda H. Mantel, President of the Association for Women in Science; Ronald F. Abler, Executive Director of the Association of American Geographers; Vicki Cowart, President of the Association of American State Geologists; Nils Hasselmo, President of the Association of American Universities; Thomas A. Davis, President of the Assn. of College & University Biology Educators; Richard Jones, President of the Association of Earth Science Editors; Rex Upp, President of the Association of Engineering Geologists; Robert R. Haynes, President of the Association of Southeastern Biologists; Kenneth R. Ludwig, Director of the Berkeley Geochronology Center; Rodger Bybee, Executive Director of the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study; Mary Dicky Barkley, President of the Biophysical Society; Judy Jernstedt, President of the Botanical Society of America; Ken Atkins, Secretary of the Burlington-Edison Cmte. for Science Education; Austin Dacey, Director of the Center for Inquiry Institute; Blair F. Jones, President of the Clay Minerals Society; Barbara Forrest, President of the Citizens for the Advancement of Science Education; Timothy Moy, President of the Coalition for Excellence in Science and Math Education; K. Elaine Hoagland, National Executive Officer Council on Undergraduate Research; David A. Sleper, President of the Crop Science Society of America; Steve Culver, President of the Cushman Foundation for Foraminiferal Research; Pamela Matson, President of the Ecological Society of America; Larry L. Larson, President of the Entomological Society of America; Royce Engstrom, Chair of the Board of Directors of the EPSCoR Foundation; Robert R. Rich, President of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology; Stephen W. Porges, President of the Federation of Behavioral, Psychological and Cognitive Sciences; Roger D. Masters, President of the Foundation for Neuroscience and Society; Kevin S. Cummings, President of the Freshwater Mollusk Conservation Society; Sharon Mosher, President of the Geological Society of America; Dennis J. Richardson, President of the Helminthological Society of Washington; Aaron M. Bauer, President of the Herpetologists' League; William Perrotti, President of the Human Anatomy & Physiology Society; Lorna G. Moore, President of the Human Biology Association; Don Johanson, Director of the Institute of Human Origins; Harry McDonald, President of the Kansas Association of Biology Teachers; Steve Lopes, President of the Kansas Citizens For Science; Margaret W. Reynolds, Executive Director of the Linguistic Society of America; Robert T. Pennock, President of the Michigan Citizens for Science; Cornelis "Kase" Klein,President of the Mineralogical Society of America; Ann Lumsden, President of the National Association of Biology Teachers; Darryl Wilkins, President of the National Association for Black Geologists & Geophysicists; Steven C. Semken, President of the National Association of Geoscience Teachers; Kevin Padian, President of the National Center for Science Education; Tom Ervin, President of the National Earth Science Teachers Association; Gerald Wheeler, Executive Director of the National Science Teachers Association; Meredith Lane, President of the Natural Science Collections Alliance; Cathleen May, President of the Newkirk Engler & May Foundation; Dave Thomas, President of the New Mexicans for Science and Reason; Marshall Berman, President (elect) of the New Mexico Academy of Science; Connie J. Manson, President of the Northwest Geological Society; Lydia Villa-Komaroff, Vice Pres. for Research Northwestern University; Gary S. Hartshorn, President of the Organization for Tropical Studies; Warren Allmon, Director of the Paleontological Research Institution; Patricia Kelley, President of the Paleontological Society; Henry R. Owen, Director of Phi Sigma: The Biological Sciences Honor Society; Charles Yarish, President of the Phycological Society of America; Barbara J. Moore, President and CEO of Shape Up America!; Robert L. Kelly, President of the Society for American Archaeology; Richard Wilk, President of the Society for Economic Anthropology; Marvalee Wake, President of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology; Gilbert Strang, Past-Pres. & Science Policy Chair of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics; Prasanta K. Mukhopadhyay, President of the Society for Organic Petrology; Howard E. Harper, Executive Director of the Society for Sedimentary Geology; Nick Barton, President of the Society for the Study of Evolution; Deborah Sacrey, President of the Society of Independent Professional Earth Scientists; J.D. Hughes, President of the Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers; Lea K. Bleyman, President of the Society of Protozoologists; Elizabeth Kellogg, President of the Society of Systematic Biologists; David L. Eaton, President of the Society of Toxicology; Richard Stuckey, President of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology; Pat White, Executive Director of the Triangle Coalition for Science and Technology Education; Richard A. Anthes, President of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research. *

Well then.Why do the piles of evidence mean nothing to you?

So, these "prestigious folks"?Is it that:(1) You know more about science than they do?(2) They know that you are right, but they are lying about it?

Faith, as an admin, suspended herself, because if you people want to be martyred round here, damn, you've got to do it yourselves.

Yes.I'm sorry that it makes you sad.

No. If for, example Noah's Flood had actually happened, the rules of science, which are not arbitrary, would permit you to prove it. You claim that "many" evolutionists are "tailoring the evidence"?(1) Please name and shame the guilty men.(2) In what way are they "tailoring" the evidence? Are they faking fossils? Lying about DNA sequences? Moving species about the globe so that they fit the Sarawak Law? Genetically engineering species so that their morphology fits with Darwinian ideas? What?(3) How come you found this out and all the scientists I cited haven't noticed? Are they all less knowledgeable of science than you are, or are they all in on the plot? But they aren't looking at the same evidence. Wasn't it you (or was it Faith, I forget?) just the other day, who was telling me that scientists agreed that chimps were closer to macaques then to men? I don't know where you got this from, but clearly we are not looking at "the same evidence". When Buzsaw tells me about tropical zebras frozen in ice in the Arctic circle, we are not looking at "the same evidence". When whathisname tells me that Turkana Boy had a cranium comparable to modern humans, we are not looking at "the same evidence". When whoever it was (I forget) informed me that every hominid fossil had been proved fraudulent, we are not looking at "the same evidence". When a creationist tells me that Archaeopteryx has all the anatomical features of a modern bird, we are not looking at "the same evidence".When I read a creationist one day saying:The links are missing. Nearly all the fossils are just our present animals, and the links between them are just not there. Few scientists today are still looking for fossil links between the major vertebrate or invertebrate groups. They have given up! The links just do not exist and have never existed. *--- and the next day I read about Tiktaalik and Gogonasus --- then we are not looking at "the same evidence".Here's a creationist telling me what Stephen Jay Gould thinks:Stephen Jay Gould in an often quoted statement calls the lack of transitional forms the "trade secret" in paleontology. *Here's Stephen Jay Gould telling me what Stephen Jay Gould thinks:[T]ransitions are often found in the fossil record ... Faced with these facts of evolution and the philosophical bankruptcy of their own position, creationists rely upon distortion and innuendo to buttress their rhetorical claim. If I sound sharp or bitter, indeed I am ”- for I have become a major target of these practices ... it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationists -- whether through design or stupidity, I do not know -- as admitting that the fossil record includes no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but they are abundant between larger groups. *The creationist and I are not looking at "the same evidence".But also, I find again and again that the facts I would cite as evidence for evolution are simply stuff creationists have never heard of. It's not that they're looking at these facts a different way, it's that they've never heard of them.Take a look at my recent post in the "Humor II" thread --- those quotations about things that "evolutionists can't explain". Are the authors of these amusing clangers looking at "the same evidence" as I am?And finally, I usually find that usually not only are creationists not looking at the same evidence as I am, but they are not evaluating the same theory.I have issued this challenge five or six times now on this forum: I shall issue it again. Can anyone find me a creationist site which does not mis-state the theory of evolution? No.Obviously, scientists have not abandoned legitimate scientific inquiry.And obviously creationists cannot abandon a position they never held.To take an example: you do not suppose, do you, that the creationist nonsense about the Second Law Of Thermodynamics was invented by a professor of thermodynamics who'd gone rogue and decided to lie about it? It was not. It was invented by someone who'd read a half-baked explanation of what entropy is in a pop science book. The words "integral delta Q over T" meant nothing to him.And, I might add, he was not looking at "the same evidence" as real scientists.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : Speeling.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : More speeling.

Of your pal Mr Miller I know nothing except that your previous statements about him have proved to be wrong.I should like to see your evidence that Henry Morris was ever an atheist; he was certainly never an "evolutionist", since his writings make it plain that he neither knows what the theory of evolution is nor the arguments in favor of it.

You have missed my point: creationists frequently cite as "evidence" stuff which has no basis in fact.Like this: How confidently you announce that these "tropical zebras" exist! With what massive complacency you assure me that there is "no conjecture in that". One would almost suppose that you had some actual knowledge.We are clearly not looking at "the same evidence". A piece of evidence which contradicted the predictions of the theory of evolution could not be "reinterpreted" so that it did. Evidence is evidence. But he did not say that. He said there are no intermediate forms and that scientists have given up looking for them. If he knows better, he is a liar. It is only charitable to suppose that he knows no better, and is in fact merely totally ignorant of the subject he's discussing.

But it makes my point beautifully. In this case, we should compare the predictions made by the two theories to find out who is right.For example, if you hypothesise that the whole world was tropical before the flood, and that the flood is the cause of fossils, then we should find only tropical animals preserved as fossils. This can be tested. It is false.Again, the theory of plate tectonics makes the prediction (for example) that the continents should still be in motion. We have instruments today sensitive enough to measure this directly, and they are.The difference between a creationist "interpretation" and a scientific interpretation is that the scientist is not allowed to stick in suppositions ad hoc: every hypothesis has to have its predictions checked against reality. We are talking about scientists: they know this: this is their job.

A description of Spitzbergen when it was tropical, from sidelined's link: Now, if someone could find, say, a tiger in the Carboniferous strata, there would be no way to "reinterpret" that: it would be goodnight Darwin. But on the contrary, the rocks show us just what we would expect to find: first primitive fish, then an age of amphibians, then reptiles.Meanwhile, the tropical pre-deluge Earth takes another knock. We do not find anything corresponding to modern tropical fauna in the fossil record: nor indeed a single set of fauna and flora.

Agaun, you make my point beautifully. This is wildly inaccurate.The poles certainly do shift. This is not an alternate theory to that of continental drift; both are true. No-one has ever advanced the shift in the poles as an explanation for fossils of tropical plants in an arctic region. How could it be?You are not looking at "the same evidence" as me, you're looking at half-baked tripe. Where did you get this stuff from? Who told you this nonsense?

And yet in fact we find that whereas creationists do have philosophical views in common, supporters of real science have widely disparate philosophies. That is a strong assertion. Again, I ask you to name and shame the guilty men. Which scientists have been behaving without integrity? What actions have they committed which lacked integrity? Is that a new term for "failure"? Ah, yes, Michael Denton:It is important to emphasize at the outset that the argument presented here is entirely consistent with the basic naturalistic assumption of modern science - that the cosmos is a seamless unity which can be comprehended ultimately in its entirety by human reason and in which all phenomena, including life and evolution and the origin of man, are ultimately explicable in terms of natural processes. This is an assumption which is entirely opposed to that of the so-called "special creationist school". According to special creationism, living organisms are not natural forms, whose origin and design were built into the laws of nature from the beginning, but rather contingent forms analogous in essence to human artifacts, the result of a series of supernatural acts, involving the suspension of natural law. Contrary to the creationist position, the whole argument presented here is critically dependent on the presumption of the unbroken continuity of the organic world - that is, on the reality of organic evolution and on the presumption that all living organisms on earth are natural forms in the profoundest sense of the word, no less natural than salt crystals, atoms, waterfalls, or galaxies. (Nature's Destiny, pages xvii-xviii). Who on earth told you that?Good grief, you'll swallow anything, won't you?Are we looking at "the same evidence"? I think not.Your sole example of the "exodus" appears to be a man who has, in fact, become an evolutionist.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : 'Cos I still can't spell.

There is no reason to think that, since their arguments against ID are the same as those of theist scientists.

The legend that evolution is just about to collapse has been handed down from generation to generation. The Imminent Demise of Evolution: The Longest Running Falsehood in CreationismIt doesn't get any truer, does it?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.