mainbanner

Theory of Evolution

Ahhh, the theory of evolution. Where does one even start with this madness ? This theory is exactly that a theory, and not a very good one. It has been proven false on so many fronts its absolutely ridiculous, but yet the mainstream holds on to it like it is written in stone. The education system, right through to its highest level teach this absurd concept as fact when it is nothing more than sheer nonsense. Evolution in it's entirety all hinges on the heliocentric model (The Globe) and the Big Bang theory which we will discuss in the this section.

Our government funded education system teaches us that the fossil record furnishes proof of evolution, but where are the fossils of half-evolved dinosaurs and/or other countless numbers species.? The fossil record contains fossils of only complete and fully-formed species, there are no fossils of partially-evolved species to indicate that a gradual process of evolution ever occurred. Even among evolutionists there are diametrically different interpretations and reconstructions of the fossils which then are used to support human evolution from a supposed ape-like ancestry. Even if evolution took millions or billions of years, we should still be able to see some stages of its process. But we simply Do Not observe any partially-evolved fish, frogs, lizards, birds, dogs, cats or any other species on the earth. Every species of plant and animal is complete and fully-formed.

Another problem is how could partially-evolved plant and animal species survive over millions of years (as they proclaim) when their basic organs and tissues were still in the process of evolving.? How, for example, were animals breathing, eating, and reproducing if there respiratory, digestive, and reproductive organs were still evolving.? The fact that animal and plant species are found fully formed and complete in the fossil record is powerful evidence for creation because it is evidence that they came into existence fully formed and complete, which is only possible by creation.

Evolutionists claim that the genetic and biological similarities between species is evidence of common ancestry. However, that is only one interpretation of the evidence. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that the comparative similarities are due to an intelligent designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes in all the various forms of life.? I will at this point aim us back at the Golden Ratio as evidence of this exact concept, which shows us that proof of intelligent design is indeed abundantly evident.

Variations across biological kinds such as humans evolving from ape-like creatures and apes, in turn, evolving from dog-like creatures and so on, as Darwinian evolutionary theory suggests, are not possible unless nature has the capability of performing genetic engineering or genetic code manipulation. Evolutionists consider mutations to be a form of natural genetic engineering. However, the very nature of mutations precludes such a possibility. Mutations are accidental changes in the sequential structure of the genetic code caused by various random environmental forces such as radiation and toxic chemicals. Which in virtually every case takes away from the sequential structure and NEVER does a mutation add or change the genetic code so that it becomes superior to the original.

Also there is this little known (but never mentioned) fact about what is commonly referred to as "Missing Links". These missing links (as they like to call them) have never been found and the few times which they have supposedly found one or two have turned out to be nothing more than hoaxes which have been put together by a few overzealous scientists who needed these things to be real in order corroborate their evolutionary belief system. While it seems that some scientists will go to unimaginable lengths in order to make evolution real, the fact still remains that all of this is still nothing more than a theory. And as I had mentioned earlier, Not A Very Good One, in fact when we start to look at it with any type of critical thinking we find that nothing within this theory even begins to make sense, let alone prove anything.

We will discuss this further in the "Missing Links" section.

However, I seriously urge everyone to take a look at this information that is conveniently left out. As I firmly believe that what you will witness should at the very least Shock And At The Same Time Anger You, As this is what they pass off as scientific fact in our education system today.

My friends, if you have had to endure the teachings of this false paradigm in your life and are questioning it's validity, I can only say that this theory is nothing more than man's first attempt at a pseudoscientific theory. I think what people need to understand is that most science of today is NOT SCIENCE at all, but rather pseudoscience. Pseudoscience is defined as: a set of ideas that presents itself as science, while it does not meet the criteria to be properly called such and does not conform to ANY of the known scientific methods. Which means, it is something that they want to be real, but it holds no basis to reality at all, and is nothing more than specualation at best...

Nikola Tesla (one of the brightest minds ever) said this about the scientists of today... "Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality."

I Rest My Case.