Page 464 - Atlas of Creation Volume 3

DARWINISM'S CRUMBLING MYTHS AND

THE CORRECT DEFINITION OF SCIENCE

f today's journalists, writers, philosophers, scientists, academics or university students were surveyed

as to why they believe in the theory of evolution and what the evidence for it is, most of their answers
I would be unscientific myths. We can list the most common of these myths, together with why they are
erroneous:
1. Proponents of evolution claim that scientific experiments have shown that life came into being spon-

taneously, as the result of chemical reactions. But in fact, no scientific experiment supports this claim and,
moreover, it has been shown to be theoretically impossible.
2. They think that the fossil record proves that there has been a process of evolution on Earth. On the
contrary, however, all fossils reveal a natural history completely at odds with Darwin's theory: Species did

not come into existence by stages through any process of evolution, but were created in all their perfection
in one instant.
3. They think that the celebrated Archaeopteryx fossil proves their thesis that birds evolved from rep-
tiles. But it is now known that Archaeopteryx was a true bird, capable of flight, and no reptile ancestor has

ever been found. Not a single piece of evidence remains to support the evolutionists' claim that birds
evolved from reptiles.
4. For years, "the evolution of the horse" was portrayed as one of the best documented proofs of the the-
ory of evolution. Four-legged mammals that had lived in different periods were set out in order of size,

from small to large, and this "horse series" was exhibited in museums of natural history. Research in recent
years, however, has shown that the creatures in the sequence are not one another's ancestors, that the se-
quencing is seriously flawed, and that creatures depicted as the ancestor of the
horse actually emerged after it.

5. They believe that England's famous Industrial Revolution
moths offer a proof of evolution by natural selection. However,
the color change that occurred in moths during the Industrial
Revolution has been proven not to be the result of natural se-

lection. These butterflies did not change color; it was only that
there were more pale moths at first but environmental condi-
tions diminished their numbers, while the number of dark-col-
ored moths increased. After this claim was realized to be a

scientific fraud, evolutionists lost one more of their so-called
proofs.
6. They claim that in fossil remains, there are traces of "ape
men" proving that human beings are descended from a com-

mon ancestor with apes. However, all claims in this regard
rest only on prejudiced assumptions, and even evolutionists
are forced to admit that there is no fossil evidence for human
evolution. For example, Richard Leakey, an evolutionist pale-

oanthropologist, writes:

David Pilbeam comments wryly, 'If you brought in a smart scien-
This fossil crab approximately 54 to 37 mil-
lion years old is no different from present-
day living crabs.

462 Atlas of Creation Vol. 3