The debate about the origins of everything has been raging for a very long time. But especially since the advent of the Theory of Evolution by Charles Darwin in 1859 with the publishing of his book “On the Origin of the Species..”. The Evolutionary world-view, sometimes called Naturalism, is mass inculcated in the way most people think about the world today. The idea of special creation by A special Creator is dismissed as preposterous and mocked as an intellectually inferior position. The loss of faith on a massive scale of the historicity and authenticity of the Mosaic Genesis Creation account have effected the way people view the entire Bible and questioning the very existence of God the creator. The modern Scientism paradigm is very damaging to many peoples faith in the Bible when their told science disproves the first passage of the Bible. (Gen 1:1 In the Beginning God created the Heaven and the earth). This video is intended to show the believers of scientism that their beloved Theory of Evolution is completely baseless, and ridiculous in light of the evidence. Furthermore, that it’s a complete abuse of the Scientific Method and to entertain in as a fact of life is very naive and unscientific.
Genesis 1: In the Beginning God created the Heaven and the earth,
The first chapter of the Bible may be hard to imagine but it’s not hard to understand, it’s as straight forward as it gets, no beating around the bush.
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep and the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
The account goes on to give details about the creation week and when read carefully and properly we are left with only being able to understand it literally.
The biblical creation story of Genesis chapter one is regarded by literary scholars as a written account of history. The text was written by Moses and Moses is regarded as one of the most authoritative writers of the Bible the Bible is considered the word of God. the Bible says God created everything in 6 days and rested on the 7th. This is the creationism position.
Historicity of Genesis
The word Genesis means ‘beginnings’ or even ‘origin’. The book of our origins was written long before Darwin and it’s the beginning of the Bible. The Bible is full of prophecy and history and it has proven itself to be very consistent and precise I’ve heard some preachers call the Bible a ‘perfect book’ and I can’t say I disagree. Jesus and The apostles refer to the Genesis account many times in the New Testament so it’s clear they must have regarded as history. Almost all scientists before Darwin regarded it as history and conducted science with that world-view.
Postmodernity, Skepticism and Athiesm
The world today is Postmodern, Post-Christian in a lot of ways. Atheism and skepticism seem to be on the rise. The National Geographic article: The World’s Newest Major Religion: No Relgion says:
“The religiously unaffiliated, called “nones,” are growing significantly. They’re the second largest religious group in North America and most of Europe. In the United States, nones make up almost a quarter of the population. In the past decade, U.S. nones have overtaken Catholics, mainline protestants, and all followers of non-Christian faiths.”
After the Protestant Reformation officially began in 1517 with Martin Luther’s legendary 95 theses, the Catholic Church got quick to work on a Counter-Reformation. The Council of Trent and the establishment of the Jesuit Order in 1534 started off a massive military effort to reeducate the Protestant World. Starting with schools of thought such as higher criticism of the divine revelation of scriptures. This Counter-Reformation has done everything it can to make sure you and your kids don’t believe in the Creator and the blessings he promised you. They want to make sure you think your an animal so they can keep you like a slave. I often remind my atheist friends that atheistic, humanistic governments killed over 150 million people in the 20th century and the Protestants started free civilization. Many of these indoctrinated people are not interested in history of philosophy they believe that science is where we get truth and that’s the only place it can be found.
Scientific Method – Uses and Limits
It’s very important for us to understand just what the scientific method is and what it is not. Ess entially the Scientific Method is a number of steps that lead us to a conclusion. These steps are such: 1 Ask a question 2 Do research and form hypothesis 3 Do experiments in order to observe your hypothesis 4 study the data from the experiment and come to a conclusion. Essentially the scientific method does not prove anything it provides one with
a working theory that could be disproven or improved upon tomorrow.
Since science is such an amazing thing as to make us deny our creator let us ask what is science? Returning to In Six Days, an article by scientist Jeremy L. Walter:
“Science is the human enterprise of seeking to describe accurately and quantitatively the nature and processes of our universe through observation, hypothesis, and experimental validation. Certain axiomatic principles must be accepted by faith for this method to be valid, the first of which is the expectation of order in the universe. A specific corollary of the order principle is the law of causality or “cause and effect” relationships. This law states that one cause can have many effects, but no effect can be quantitatively greater of qualitatively superior to its cause. Observed effects are assumed to have cause occurences. The inquisitive mind will speculate on the cause of an observed effect and then seek to recreate and test the cause experimentally. That is the essence of the so called scientific method.”
This is passage From Gordon Clark’s Work: “The Philosophy of Science and the Belief in God”
Karl Popper has written several books on the philosophy of science in which he argues that science, rather than consisting of a body of proven truths as many believe, consists of nothing but guesses and refuted guesses. Popper writes:
‘First, although in science we do our best to find the truth, we are conscious of the fact that we can never be sure whether we have got it… We know that our scientific theories always remain hypotheses…In science there is no ‘knowledge’, in the sense in which Plato and Aristotle understood the word, in the sense which implies finality; in science, we never have sufficient reason for the belief that we have attained truth…Einstein declared that his theory was false, he said that it would be a better approximation to the truth that Newton’s, but he gave reasons why he would not, even if all predictions came out right, regard it as a true theory [Popper Selections, edited by David Miller, Princeton University Press, 1985, 90, 91, 121; emphasis is Popper’s].
A Perfect example of the scientific method at work in an everyday situation would be something like this: When it rains the sidewalk becomes wet, if the sidewalk is wet then it must have rained. The question is why is the sidewalk wet? This is answered when rain is observed. Then the assumption becomes that sidewalks become wet from rain. If we wait for it to rain the sidewalk will be wet thus proving our hypothesis true.
Bertrand Russell a famous English writer and Statesman said this about Inductive arguments in his 1931 work “The Scientific Outlook’ (pg 77) :
“All inductive arguments in the last resort reduce themselves to the following form: ‘If this is true, that is true: now that is true, therefore this is true.” This argument is, of course, formally fallacious. Suppose I were to say: ‘If bread is a Stone and stones are nourishing, then this bread will nourish ; now this bread does nourish me ; therefore it is a stone and stones are nourishing. If I were to advance such an argument, I should certainly be thought foolish, yet it would not be fundamentally different from the arguments upon which all scientific laws are based.”
Wikipedia defines Natural Selection as:
“…the differential survival and reproduction of individuals due to differences in phenotype. It is a key mechanism of evolution, the change in heritable traits of population over time. Charles Darwin popularized the term Natural Selection. He compared it with artificial selection, which is intentional, whereas natural selection is not.
Natural selection assumes there is not intelligent design involved in the furtherance of the species. Furthermore, most scientists agree that the changes that occur happen at random. Natural selection relies heavily on mutations of cells in order for the species to evolve or improve, This is a huge problem for the evolutionary theory as mutations are almost always a very bad thing.
Mutations Never Good
From the Book “Not By Chance” by Dr. Lee Spetner “But in all the reading I’ve done in the life sciences literature, I’ve never found a mutation that added information… All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not to increase it.”
Stephen Jay Gould states in his 1989 work “Wonderful Life, The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History” that even if evolutionary history on earth repeated itself a million times, he doubts whether anything like homo sapiens would ever develop again.
The complexity of life is an astounding thing. To entertain the idea that intelligent life arose from chance mutations that selected positive traits over a very long period of time becomes very unnlikely in light of the facts. Let’s examine the building blocks of life:
RNA, DNA, and Proteins. These are the building blocks of our human bodies.
In the work “In Six Days: why fifty scientists choose to believe in creation’ Science educator Jerry R. Bergman quotes scientist Hickman
“Cells are the fabric of life. Even the most primitive cells are enormously complex structures that form basic units of all living matter. All tissues and organs are composed of cells interact, each performing its specialized role in an organized community. In single-celled organisms all the functions of life are performed within the confines of the microscopic package. There is no life without Cells”
Bergman goes on…
“Even most bacteria require sev,eral thousand genes to carry out the functions necessary for life. E. Coli has about 4, 639,221 nucleotide base pairs, which code for 4,288 genes, each one of which produces an enormously complex protein machine.”
From J. W. Porters work “Evolution a Menace” :
“Lord Kelvin, of England, who, at the time of his death, a few years since, was perhaps, the worlds greatest scientist, said: ‘It is not in dead matter that men live, move and have their being; but in creative and direct power, which science compels to accept as an article of faith. Is there anything so absurd as to believe that a number of atoms, by falling together of their own account, could make crystal, a microbe, or a living animal?’”
Evidence of Irreducible Complexity
The Trilobite is said to be one of the earliest group of arthropods and the complexity of this creature is insane. Biologist Andrew Snelling says this about the Trilobites:
“Indeed, some scientists believe that the aggregate eyes of some trilobites were the most sophisticated optical system ever utilized by any organism. The shizochroal eye is a compound eye, made up of many single lenses, each specifically designed to correct for sherical aberration, thus allowing the trilobites to see an undistorted image under water. The elegant physical design of trilobite eyes also employs Fermat’s principle, Abbe’s sine law, Snell’s law of refraction, and compensates for the optics of birefringent crystals. Such vision system has all the evidence of being constructed by an exceeding brilliant designer!
The trilobite’s extraordinary complexity hardly warrants the creature being called primative, but herein lies the dilemma for evolutionists. There are no possible evolutionary ancestors to the trilobites in the rock layers beneath where the trilobites are found, for example, in the Grand Canyon. In fact, the trilobites appear in the geological record suddenly, fully-formed and complexly integrated creatures with the most sophisticated optical systems every utilized by any organism, without any hint or trace of an ancestor in the many rock layers beneath. There is absolutley no clue as to how the amazing complexity of trilobites arose, and thus they quite clearly argue for design and fiat creation, just as we would predict from the biblical account in Genesis.”
Birds also display evidence for irreducible complexity. Dr. of Mathematics Andrew Macintosh has this to say:
“Bird’s wings are made of feathers. A Feather is a marvel of light-weight engineering. Though light, it is very wind resistant. This is because there is a clever system of barbs and barbules. Each barb of a feather is visible to the naked eye and comes off the main stem. What is not generally realized is that on either side of the barb are further tiny barbules which can only be seen under a microscope. These are of different types, depending on whether they are coming from one side of the barb or the other. On one side of the barb, ridged barbule will emerge, while on the other side, the barbules will have hooks. Thus, the hooks coming out of one barb will connect with ridges reaching in the opposite direction from a neighboring barb. The hooks and ridges act velcro, but go one stage further, since the ridges allow a sliding joing, and there is thus an ingenious mechanism for keeping the surface flexible and yet in tact.”
He says later on…
“As one might expect, however, the story does not end there either, for a bird can fly only because it also has an exceedingly light bone structure, which is achieved by the bones being hollow. Many birds maintain skeleton strength by cross members within the hollow bones. Such an arrangement began to be used in the middle of the century for aircraft wings and is termed the “Warrens’s truss arrangement.” Large birds, such as an eagle or a vulture, would simply break into pieces in midair if there were some supposed halfway stage in the skeletal development where they had not yet developed such cross members in their bones.”
LAW OF CAUSALITY
The Law of Causality holds that there has to be a first cause for things to happen, especially concerning the creation and existence of humans. The Christian causality is very simply what is written in the Bible, that God, the Creator did it. But the Naturalistic view is much more difficult and mysterious. To believe in naturalistic evolution one would ultimately have to believe in Abiogenesis; that life somehow came from non life. This would be a huge leap of faith but people who call themselves scientific or empirical do every day and never think twice. The Basic assumptions of the Naturalist position is that life came from non-life and that all life is related back to some long ago ancestor.
Bergman says “The idea that life can come from non-life is called abiogenesis, which is assumed by evolutionists to have occurred only once or a few times at most in earth history. This conclusion is not a result of evidence, but is obtained because the current dominant world view in Western science, naturalism (athiesm) require a chance spontaneous origin of life. The naturalistic view requires a set of unknown conditions to have existed in the distant past that operated to produce the fist “living thing”.”
Bergman goes on to quote the famous astronomer Fred Hoyle,
“There is not a shred of objective evidence to support the hypothesis that life began in an organic soup here on the earth. Indeed, Francis Crick, who shared a Nobel prize for the discovery of the structure of DNA, is one biophysicist who finds this theory unconvincing. So why do biologists indulge in unsubstantiated fantasies in order to deny what is so patently obvious, that the 200,000 amino acid chains, and hence life, did not appear by chance?
The answer lies in a theory developed over a century ago, which sought to explain the development of life as an inevitable product of the purely local natural process. It’s author, Charles Darwin, hesitated to challenge the church’s doctrine on the creation, and publicly as least did not trace the implications of his ideas back to their bearing on the origin of life. However, he privately suggested that life itself may have been produced in “some warm little pond”, and to this day his followers have sought to explain the origin of terrestrial life in terms of a process of checmical evolution from the primordial soup. But, as we have seen, this theory simply does not fit the facts. (Hoyle, 1983, p.23)”
1ST & 2ND LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS
The Laws of Thermodynamics causes a lot of problems for the Naturalist world view. The first law is called the law of conservation maintains that the amount of energy available in the universe is at a constant and energy can’t be created or destroyed only transformed. The second Law states that net increase in entropy will result in a final stable equilibrium where all processes cease.
Professor of mechanical engineering John M. Cimbala says this about it:
“Now consider the entire universe as one giant closed system. Stars are hot, just like the cup of coffee, and are cooling down, losing energy into space. The hot stars in cooler space represent a state of available energy, just like the hot coffee in the room. However, the second law of thermodynamics requires that this available energy constantly change to unavailable energy. In another analogy, the entire universe is winding down like a giant wind up clock, ticking down and losing available energy. Since energy is continually changing from available to unavailable, someone had to give it available energy in the beginning. Who or what could have produced energy in an available state in the first place? Only someone or something not bound by the second law of thermodynamics. Only the creator of the second law of thermodynamics could violate it and create energy in a state of availability in the first place.”
This brings me to the point of the differences between the Antediluvian and Postdiluvian worlds. An online article called Did more oxygen and pressure in the pre-flood world have health benefits? says: “Modern scientific discoveries may give us some clues as to why the pre-flood world was so different. Scientists have discovered air bubbles that have been trapped in fossilized amber (tree sap). As the tree sap rolled down the side of the tree, it captured the atmosphere in these air bubbles, which when analyzed reveals an earlier atmosphere had about 35 percent oxygen compared to today’s 21 percent.
In addition to the increased oxygen, other studies have suggested that there was a greater air pressure as well. New Scientist magazine, which comes from an evolutionary perspective, explains:
One implication is that the atmospheric pressure of the Earth would have been much greater during the Cretaceous Era, when the bubbles formed in the resin. A dense atmosphere could also explain how the ungainly pterosaur, with its stubby body and wingspan of up to 11 meters, could have stayed airborne. The spread of angiosperms, flowering plants, during the Cretaceous era could have caused the high oxygen levels.”
Just as a side note, higher levels of oxygen would be incredibly detrimental to the ‘evolutionary primordial soup’ theory as oxygen is very destructive.
Oxygen double edged sword we need it we breathe it but it can also kill us Tells us:
“Neurons in the brain are especially energy sensitive, and even minutes of oxygen starvation lead to rapid neuron death.
“On the other hand, as a moment’s reflection reveals, oxygen is extremely corrosive. A fine new automobile, left to the mercies of oxygen, will eventually rust down to a pile of dust. Oxygen spoils food, turns butter rancid, even eats the granite in our grandest mountains. Given the slightest opportunity, moreover, oxygen will burn to cinders anything flammable.
LACK OF ‘TRANSITIONAL SPECIES’
Another major problem with the theory of evolution is the complete and utter lack of transitional species in the fossil record. Darwin himself was well aware of this and even admitted it in his famous work Origin of Species:
“Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection that be urged against my theory.”
Piltdown man is another devastating blow the credibility of the Theory of Evolution, the Evolutionary paradigm and the scientific community in general. From a History.com article titled: Piltdown Man Hoax, 100 Years Ago:
“On December 18, 1912, at a packed meeting of the U.K.’s Geological Society, amateur archaeologist Charles Dawson and Arthur Smith Woodward of the British Museum announced findings that caused a sensation around the world. After a three-year excavation of the Piltdown gravel pit in Sussex, England, Dawson had unearthed human-like skull fragments and a jaw with two teeth, along with a variety of animal fossils and primitive stone tools. Dawson and Woodward announced that one of the skulls and the jaw belonged to a primitive hominid, or human ancestor, who lived some 500,000 to 1 million years ago. The scientific community celebrated Dawson’s discovery as the long-awaited “missing link” between ape and man and the confirmation of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. As the decades passed and new information came to light, however, it became clear that the Piltdown Man was not what he seemed.
By the time of Dawson and Woodward’s historic announcement, the search for a missing link to prove Darwin’s still-controversial theory had grown intense. Significant evidence of early humans in the British Isles had not yet been found, and the success of the Sussex dig was a major headline-grabber. Woodward, who was the curator of the British Museum’s paleontology department, dubbed the discovery Eoanthropus dawsoni, or “Dawson’s Dawn-man,” but he was more commonly known as the Piltdown Man.
The first doubts about Piltdown Man’s legitimacy surfaced in the 1920s and ’30s, with the discovery of other early human remains around the world (such as the Taung skull in South Africa, now known as Australopithecus). None of them showed the large brain and ape-like jaw of Piltdown Man; instead, they suggested that jaws and teeth became human-like before a large brain evolved. New dating technology based on fluorine testing emerged in 1939, but the Piltdown remains had been locked away after Dawson’s death in 1916 and were not extensively tested until a decade later. At that time, fluorine testing revealed that the remains were a good deal younger than had previously been claimed, closer to 50,000 than 500,000 years old. (Later, carbon-dating technology showed that the skull was actually no more than 600 years old.)
But that wasn’t all: Upon closer examination of the Piltdown Man, scientists found that the presumed hominid’s skull and jaw actually originated from two different species, a human and an ape (possibly an orangutan). A microscope revealed that the teeth within the jaw had been filed down to make them look more human, and that many of the remains from the Piltdown site appeared to have been stained to match each other as well as the gravel where they were supposedly found. In November 1953, authorities of the British Natural History Museum announced these findings and publicly called Piltdown Man a fraud.”
There is evidence that a Jesuit named Pierre Teilhard de Chardin had connections with Dawson and this man could have played a role in perpetrating this fraud to help buttress the theory of evolution and the naturalistic world view. I’m not going to go into that here but I’ll include all information in the description of this video.
This article from Scientific America called – Baffling Genetic Barrier Prevents Similar Animals From Interbreeding admits that a tiny change in DNA creates a completely separate species that is reproductively exclusive to its own kind.
“In new research published in June in the journal Science, Wolf’s team has found that a surprisingly small chunk of DNA may hold the answer. A comparison of the carrion and hooded-crow genomes showed that the sequences are almost identical. Differences in just 82 DNA letters, out of a total of about 1.2 billion, appear to separate the two groups.
Almost all of them are clustered in a small part of one chromosome. “Maybe just a few genes make a species what they are,” said Chris Jiggins, a biologist at the University of Cambridge in England, who was not involved in the study. “Maybe the rest of genome can flow, so species are much more fluid than we imagined before.”
The findings are striking because they suggest that just a few genes can keep two populations apart. Something within that segment of DNA stops black crows from mating with gray ones and vice versa, creating a tenuous mating barrier that could represent one of the earliest steps in the formation of new species. “They look very different and prefer to mate with their own kind, and all of that must be controlled by these narrow regions,” Jiggins said.
Problems With Radiometric Dating
Radiometric dating has been used for finding out how old a particular fossil or rock is but Radiometric dating has a few issues, namely the fact that it’s effectiveness is built upon a number of assumptions as is most science as we’ve seen. Dr. Walter Veith in his work The Genesis Conflict goes into some detail on this issue.
“A radioactive element is capable of changing into a new element by the emission of a charged particle. The parent isotope is thus transformed into a daughter particle. This process will continue until a stable element is produced. The rates of decay vary from elemt to element and the rate is measured in half-lives. For example, if an element has a half-life of 5730 years, as is the case for carbon-14, then after 5730 years, only have the original amount of carbon-14 will be left in any non-living-carbon-containing object after this time period. In order to determine the age of a substance, it is vital that the amount of parent element and its daughter product together with the half-life criteria then enables one to calculate the age of the sample. Of course, one can only determine the quantity of the parent element in the present sample; the quantity of the parent element in the past must be estimated. Knowing the decay rates and using the assumption these decay rates have remained constant over time, the age of the material can be determined. In other words, all methods of radioactive dating rely on some a priori assumptions, which may not necessarily be true. These are:
1. The rate of radioactive decay and half-lives has remained constant over time. This assumption has the backing of numerous scientific studies and is relatively sound; however, conditions may have been different in the past and could have influenced the rate of decay or formation of elements.
2. The assumption that the clock was set to zero when the study material was formed. This requires that only the parent isotope be initially present or that the amount of daughter isotope present at the beginning is known so that it can be subtracted.
3. The assumption that we are dealing with a closed system. No loss of either parent of daughter elements has occurred since the study material formed.
LIMITATIONS CONCERNING THE FOSSIL RECORD
Dr. Walter Veith in The Genesis Conflict tells us that the Mesozoic period ends with massive extinction that coincides with the catastrophism model. Many of the species that lived then are still alive and much the same today as well. As a matter of fact there is more evidence if devolution as apposed to evolution because many species were bigger and even more complex in the Antediluvian world.
LIMITATIONS CONCERNING GEOLOGIC EVIDENCE
Evidence for the flood
Dr. Walter Veith gives us a couple compelling geological evidences for the flood in his work The Genesis Conflict:
1. Massive fossil graveyards with evidence of plants and animals being washed into position.
2. Huge Sedimentary deposits (nearly three quarters of the earth’s exposed surface is covered with sedimentary rock deposits.)
3. The chalk deposits of the world are universal. Chalk is formed from the skeletons of marine unicellular protozoans and algae, and can only settle out of relatively shallow water. In deep oceans, the calcium carbonate shells dissolve on the way down to the floor. The chalk deposits are thus an indication of worldwide coverage of a relatively shallow sea. Chalk deposits of the same age are found in many areas of North America, Australia, Europe, Asia, and Africa, and all of these deposits are resting on the same type of glauconitic sandstone. For these factors to be so universal the same conditions must have existed universally.
4. The vast coal and oil fields of the world are further evidence of a vast flood catastrophe. No process occurring today can even remotely approach the magnitude of the catastrophe necessary to account for such a vast scale of universal burial of plants and other organic material.
Geologist Andrew Snelling gives us more evidence for catastrophism in his essay from In Six Days…
“There is impressive evidence that fossil deposits and rock strata were formed catastrophically. There are also many indications that there were not millions of years, or even thousands, between various rock units. The rock sequence in the Grand Canyon is a case in point. Not only can it be shown that each of the rock units exposed in the walls of the canyon must have formed very rapidly under catastrophic water conditions, but there are not significant time gaps between the various rock layers. Thus, the total time involved to put in place some 4,000 feet thickness of rock strata is well within the time constraints the Bible stipulates for the flood event.
What is also spectacular about the Grand Canyon area in northern Arizona is the scale and magnitude of the rock units and the awesomeness of the canyon itself. One can physically walk up and down the sequence of rock units that go back before the Flood, and then right through the Flood event up until post-Flood time. While the sequence is not complete, there are a few places where such a complete sequence is not complete, there are a few places where such a complete sequence is so fully exposed and so much evidence for the Flood and its catastrophic nature.
No geologist denies that the oceans once covered the land, since rocks containing marine fossils may be found at elevations about sea level today anywhere from one to five miles…”
DARWIN HIS GRANDFATHER AND FREEMASONRY
It’s well known that Charles Darwin was a Mason. Anyone who has studied the Masons and secret societies know what they are really all about. Charles grandfather Erasmus Darwin had done work on the theory of evolution as well. The theory of evolution is nothing new even Aristotle thought life had come about by way of natural process. The freemasons and Counter-Reformation stooges have used science to turn historically Protestant America into an atheist, socialist-communist hellhole ripe for a political dictatorship. Charles Darwin was just another one of their stooges.
SPIRITUAL IMPLICATIONS OF EVOLUTIONISM
Darwin’s popular theory has effected history in a massive way. Eugenics was inspired by the Darwinian paradigm because Darwinism believes in a superior race, one that is more evolved than the rest, which helped to inspire Nazism in a big way.
The Jesuit priest Muckerman was one who published work in Germany before WWII called Eugenic. These ideas would ultimately lead to the enslavement and death of some 6 million people in concentration camps. The Jesuit of the short robe Dr. Mengele and all the torturous evil experiments he did with the little Jewish children, these men will come up with any excuse to butcher people if it can’t be religious then it will have to be scientific, after all, science seems to be the new modern religion anyway.
The Church is dead because most people believe they are evolved monkeys flying though infinite space on a spinning ball therefore the Bible is a dead book to them and the whole idea of creation is childish.
Moral relativism has taken over where the Golden rule and 10 commandments once stood strong. The family unit is collapsing as equalitarian beliefs destroy the natural roles of men and women because women are too busy evolving into goddesses or something to be a mother and keep a house hold.
The fabric of society that was built by the Reformation and higher learning is being torn apart because people have refused to learn the truth about their creator.
I want to thanks you for listening to my presentation on the many problems with the theory of evolution. I want to remind everyone to make sure subscribe to this channel, and hit the bell for updates, like this video, share this video, if you would like to get ahold of me email me at firstname.lastname@example.org Please consider making a donating to me at my paypal link in the description I would greatly appreciate that. Thanks everyone for the support and until Next time God Bless you All!