Is Evolution a Scientific Fact?

www.creationstudies.org

Evolution is widely accepted as indisputable scientific fact when, in truth, it is a system of belief.
Our everyday lives revolve around science and technology. The cars we drive, the food we eat, and the vitamins we take are the result of the application of some scientific principle. Just as science is important to everyday life, so it sets foundational principles by which evidence is acquired, analyzed, and transmitted.

Science is a process in which we procure knowledge from empirical data. The data are from what we observe and record with our senses. Science is a systematic study of the world around us based on observations, classifications, and descriptions that can lead to experimental investigation and theoretical explanations. Both deductive and inductive reasoning are employed in the scientific process. The National Academy of Science in the 1998 publication, Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science, confines the activity of science to empirical evidence, stating that, “Explanations that cannot be based on empirical evidence are not a part of science.” (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press p. 27)

Valid science must have integrity, dependability, reliability, and be trustworthy. How can you come to true conclusions with experimental data is falsified? Testing and measuring are also important tools for verification. When scientific research is reported in scientific journals, it should be written so that experimental procedures can be repeated, since repeatability is another tool used for verification.

Science relies on observation, fact, hypothesis, theory, and law. These can be defined, briefly as follows.

Observations: Describing or measuring what one senses.

Fact: Based on repeated observations that can be confirmed.

Hypothesis: A statement that can be tested so that inferences and conclusions can be explained.Theory: A general explanation into which facts and experimental conclusions can be incorporated, so as to allow for predictions to be made.

Law: A functional generalization that has stood the test of time and can be relied on to make accurate predictions.Creationists and evolutionists do science the same way—with one very important exception. Creation scientists bring to their investigation the presupposition, based on God’s Word, that man is finite and fallible and in need of the revelation contained in God’s Word. Along with evolutionists, the creationist agrees on the importance of peer review and self correction by means of the scientific process detailed above. However, the two camps differ because the creationist brings to his scientific endeavor a belief in the absolute truth of the Word of God.

Science, by definition, only deals with material things. It is said to be naturalistic. Therefore scientific evidence explains material questions about the universe. Science is not a worldview. By itself, it is a neutral mechanism that gives us tools to acquire and examine evidence. Both creationists and evolutionists depend on science to acquire, analyze, and transmit data to build working models to support theories and laws.

“The raw materials of science are our observations of the phenomena of the natural universe. Science—unlike art, religion, or philosophy—is limited to what is observable and measurable and, in this sense, is roughly categorized as materialistic” (CURTIS, HELENA and BARNES, N. SUE: Biology, Worth Publishers, Inc., New York 1989, p 17)

Science is a tool that gives a glimpse of truth. It is limited because it excludes man’s inner spirit, motivations, and goals. It fails desperately in defining inner qualities, such as truthfulness, generosity, and love. Man’s spiritual nature—the repository of his faith, convictions, and worldview—is not susceptible to scientific inquiry. Science’s reality is the material world only. It is not competent to reach conclusions about realms beyond.

Science, however, is not naturalism. Naturalism is a belief system that states that all truth can be found only through empirical data—by the investigation of the material universe. Naturalism eliminates God, the Bible, and the spiritual nature of man. Only what can be observed in the material world is said to bring us to ultimate truth. Naturalism can be classified as a worldview, because it is a framework for understanding reality that arises not from observation but from an a priori conviction about what is real (the material universe) and what is not real (God). Naturalism is the philosophical underpinning to evolution—one which evolution assumes but cannot prove. Nor does it make the attempt. Rather, naturalism is simply adopted, without evidence or argument, as the self-evidently correct worldview.

Evolutionists hold tenaciously to this belief system because it is so necessary and congenial to the idea of upward and gradual change from atoms and molecules to complex living systems. Naturalism supports the evolutionist idea that natural random mechanisms without a plan or outside intelligence assembled reality. It eliminates the work of God and is implicitly atheistic.

Naturalism does not explicitly deny the mere existence of God, but it does deny that a supernatural being could in any way influence natural events, such as evolution, or (communicate with natural creatures like ourselves. Scientific naturalism makes the same point by starting with the assumption that science, which studies only the natural, is our only reliable path to knowledge. A God who can never do anything that makes a difference, and of whom we can have no reliable knowledge, is of no importance to us (JOHNSON, PHILLIP E: Darwin on Trial, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois 1991, p 115.)

Evolution disguised as science promotes the religion of naturalism, an idea which when applied, has led, as will be demonstrated in chapter five, to horrible pain, suffering, and the death of millions. The Basic IdeasIn summary, it is important to remember the following about evolutionary presuppositions: First, evolution assumes slow and gradual change over unimaginable eons—millions of years for life and billions of years for the heavenly universe. Many different explanations, without consensus, are offered to explain how this process took place. Second, evolution assumes that the organizing force for life is internal and depends on random chance, a presupposition that eliminates any outside intelligent creative force. Third, evolution dismisses intelligence and assumes random chance to be the mechanism responsible for material reality—which, owing to its naturalistic presupposition, is the only reality there is. Evolution, therefore, is an irrational belief.

The basic premise of creationism is that all living and nonliving systems have their origins from an outside source with infinite intelligence. This infinite intelligence is referred to as Christ the Creator, the One who spoke everything into existence. Long periods of time are not needed. The events of creation are recorded in the Bible’s Genesis account. The physical evidence indicates that the cosmos is the work of an intelligent designer and planner. Creation, again, is a unique event that cannot be repeated and therefore cannot be observed in the present. Finally, creation, because it relies on an intelligent Creator is a rational belief that presupposes the existence of a Creator God.

Recommended Resources: The Biblical Basis for Modern Science

https://www.denarionline.com/DonorServices/TEMPLATEPAGE.ASPX?COMP_REF=_Creation&PART_REF=_24112D7CS&CONTENT=PREMIUM

Big Bang or Big Bust

http://www.creationstudies.org/Key Concept: Big Bang Cosmology violates fundamental scientific principles and cannot be classified as an observable event.

The Big Bang is the popularized version of evolutionary cosmology. It states that matter, energy, and space were all compressed many billions of times smaller than a proton and then exploded for some undetermined reason to create an expanding universe which continues to spread today. There are presently some 50 theories proposed by cosmologists to explain the Big Bang, all of which are nothing but mathematical models. Why so many theories? It is apparent that the verdict is still out.

If the Big Bang is true as presented by the cosmologists, they must have scientific ground to stand on. To propose that the universe came about by a big explosion has far-reaching implications that affect every human being. For cosmic evolution to be accepted the questions below must be answered not just with speculative theory or creative mathematical formulations, but with hard empirical evidence.

1. What causes particles of matter to coalesce into heavenly bodies?

This basic question has to be answered. If the Big Bang caused matter and energy to separate and move outward at tremendous speeds, at some time that matter had to coalesce and come together. The explanation offered is that as cooling occurs; particles slow down and clump together. The problem is, however, that these celestial objects are moving at relatively high speeds away from each other. There is no empirical evidence to support the star formation theory proposed by evolutionary cosmologists. No star or galaxy has ever been seen to form in space from star gas. As the Harvard astrophysicist, Abraham Loeb stated, “The truth is that we don’t understand star formation at a fundamental level.” (Abram Loeb, as cited by Marcus Chown, “Let there be Light,” New Scientist, vol. 157, February 7, 1998 p.30)

2.Can an explosion produce order?

The second law of thermodynamics, as noted above, tends to bring a system to disorder. The cosmos is not exempt from the second law. When one observes the universe, the second law is apparent everywhere. The sun is wearing down slowly; stars are burning out and even exploding. It is obvious that the second law of disorder is here to stay.

Big Bang theory contradicts the Second Law because it requires particles to organize and cohere on a cosmic scale. There is no scientific evidence for this claim. It is much like the expectation that dropping a nuclear bomb on a mountain will yield neat piles of earth rather than utter destruction. What we see in the universe is directly opposite to the expectation of evolutionary cosmologists. We observe a decaying universe whose order of complexity is in decline. Evolution Cosmology directly defies this great law of science.

3. What was before the Big Bang?

While some say that matter and energy are eternal and were always present, the question remains: Where did everything come from? It had to come from an outside source. How did it begin? Again, the answer is that an outside source initiated it. Everything observed has a beginning and an end. Matter and energy are no exceptions. The beginning came from an outside source: God.

4. Is expansion of the universe observable?

Red shifts – the movement of light coming from objects in space to the red end of the spectrum – are regarded as evidence for the expansion of the universe. However, there are some 50 models for the process of expansion. There is confusion and little consensus on this issue. That is not surprising. After all, one is dealing with a gigantic universe from a limited frame of reference. There are no clear answers at this time, just creative speculation. This is illustrated by cosmology’s concept for the beginning—what has been termed the “cosmic egg.”

Never observed, the cosmic egg idea for the origin of the universe takes the universe backwards in time and shrinks all matter down many billions of times smaller than a single proton. The idea that all matter and energy could be collected in one place staggers the imagination, and, of course, has no empirical foundation. Yet, there are mathematical models that depict the precise fraction of a second when this took place. This is presented as scientific fact and needs to be challenged.

Recommended Resource: Dismantling the Big Bang

https://www.denarionline.com/DonorServices/TEMPLATEPAGE.ASPX?COMP_REF=_Creation&PART_REF=_23S13Q3YQ&CONTENT=PREMIUM

World views at War

www.creationstudies.org

Conflict of “World Views”
Arguments about Creation versus Evolution inevitably boil down to what is called one’s “world view”. There is one “camp” who believe that life as we know it was created by a superior being, a deity which most would call God. There is another camp who has bought into the concept of “evolution”, popularized by the works of Charles Darwin in his 1959 book “Origin of Species”.

The creationist camp believes that life started “high” (in terms of complexity and function) and has gradually deteriorated over time through disease, destructive mutations and extinctions.

The evolutionist camp believes that life started “low” (chance combination of chemicals) and evolved through undirected forces of nature and beneficial mutations to become ever more complex over eons of time. There are many confused people somewhere in the middle who perhaps want to believe the former (after all, the existence of God gives us a sense of purpose in this life and a hope for eternal life), but through decades of indoctrination have perhaps come to put some degree of faith in the teachings of evolution.

The teaching of evolution has been one of the most cunning, subversive and deceitful tools employed by the secular world in its “War on God”, and its attempt to undermine Christianity in particular.

A Shifting Public Mindset

2008 marks the release of a major motion picture “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”, starring Ben Stein. In this documentary-style movie, we see that public science policy and dogma is forged by the elite few who control our media, and our institutions such as universities, museums, and of course, organizations like the NAS. We begin to realize that perhaps our science institutions are home to many quiet dissenters who dare not speak up for fear of losing their very livelihoods.

But here’s the interesting statistic: Based on a 2005 poll, 64% of Americans believe they were created directly by God. Only 22% fully buy into the theory of evolution. When compared with a similar poll taken nearly a decade earlier, we see that public opinion has been slowly shifting toward creation and away from evolution. This, despite gargantuan efforts to brainwash the public over many decades that evolution is a “fact”, the outright censorship of the creation message, and attempts to paint “creationists” as a fringe group of simple-minded, uneducated fanatics.

The stance being taken by the NAS is a huge gamble for them, because evidence and logic are simply not on their side, as we’ll illustrate in the pages to follow. It is by no means certain that the NAS will win the battle for public “mind share” over the long term. If they lose this battle they’ve so purposefully picked, then the price they pay for it could be devastating.

The Word of God versus The Word of Man

Let’s be clear: the Theory of Evolution stands in direct defiance to the Word of God as recorded in the Holy Bible. There can be no middle ground. The two concepts are polar opposites. Although many confused souls try to do so, logically one cannot believe in both the God of the Bible and in evolution, any more than one could believe in both atheism and creation.

CREATION aligns itself with BELIEF AND FAITH IN GOD, EVOLUTION aligns itself with ATHEISM!

There are well over 100 passages in the bible that speak of God’s creation. The NAS publication, despite taking aim at the inherently biblical subject of creation, totally ignores what the Word of God has to say on this subject. Not one verse from the bible is even examined in their document. Our purpose is to set the record straight from both a biblical and scientific standpoint.

We believe our scientific arguments are sound enough to stand on their own strengths, as we realize (sadly, in today’s world) that many skeptics will simply reject biblical testimony as being irrelevant. However we cannot simply brush aside what the Bible has to say on this matter that – by its very nature – has biblical teaching at its core. So we will include biblical references to reinforce, without diminishing, our scientific analysis.