Four Facts That Crack the Evolutionary Wall

Since the 1925 Scopes Trial, the debate between evolution and creation has probably received more media coverage and raised the ire of more educators and scientists than any other apologetic issue (although it’s not the most important apologetic issue). The power of law has sided mostly with evolution, mandating that evolution is science and creation religion. Many people believe evolution should be taught in public schools while creation can be preached to the credulous from the pulpit.

However, law does not make evolution true anymore than it would make creation true. The issue is one of scientific evidence, not law. Which model of origins does the scientific evidence support: creation or evolution? There are four fallacious assumptions that form the foundation on which naturalistic evolution rests. If any one of them is false, evolution, as popularly understood, crumbles.

Something came from nothing. The entire edifice of naturalistic evolution rests on the assumption that the universe exploded into existence out of nothing (the Big Bang). The problem is the laws of physics only show that out of nothing, nothing comes. There is not a shred of scientific evidence that demonstrates the Big Bang was a self-caused event arising out nothingness. It is only speculation, often based on a misunderstanding of quantum physics. And if one believes the Big Bang was a self-caused event, they must explain where the laws of physics came from that allowed it occur. Who lit the fuse that ignited the Big Band?

Order evolved from disorder. Allegedly, out of the chaos and disorder of the Big Bang, our perfectly balanced, fine-tuned universe accidently “evolved” by pure chance. However, there are many dozens of (some astrophysicists say over a hundred) “constants” in place throughout the entire universe, any one of which were absent the universe couldn’t exist (speed of light, gravitation factors, expansion of the universe, etc.). The odds of such constants developing by random coincidence are beyond preposterous—and as with the Big Bang, no laws of physics explain how order could evolve out of disorder.

Life emerged from non-life (abiogenesis). This assumption amounts to chemical evolution. The idea is that inorganic, non-living chemicals accidently formed in such a way that a single-celled, self-replicating organism emerged, which eventually evolved into all the diverse life forms on earth. Besides the fact that it has been demonstrated the earth isn’t old enough for even the simplest organism to evolve through random processes, there is no physical evidence to support the theory. It has never been observed in nature or achieved in a laboratory. And the existence of an alleged primordial soup, where this miracle supposedly took place, has been debunked as never existing on the primitive earth. And finally—and a huge problem for evolutionists—where did the vast amount of information housed in the DNA of even simple organisms come from? Information is immaterial and therefore can only come from an intelligent source and purposefully programmed into DNA (think computers). There is no evolutionary pathway to account for such information. If science one day created life in a laboratory, it would only prove that intelligent design was necessary.

Lack of transitional fossils. Darwin recognized there were no transitional fossils in his time—and admitted his theory would collapse if none were found. More than one hundred fifty years and hundreds of tons of fossils later, and still no transitional specimens between major categories of animals have been found (arthropods, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals). And there should be countless thousands. For example, it’s estimated that it would take at least 50,000 transitional stages, over many millions of years and with many thousands of species at each stage, for a land mammal to evolve into a whale. Not one such transitional fossil has ever been found. Likewise, no half scale/ half feather or half foreleg/ half wing have ever been found between reptiles and birds. And what survival value would any such appendage have anyway, since it would have no function. Without function there is no survival value and therefore nothing to drive evolution. The fact is when major categories of animals appear in the fossil record, they are always fully formed and functional with no credible ancestral fossil evidence.

Bottom line: It takes more faith to believe in naturalistic evolution than divine creation! ©

* This article is adapted from my book, The Christian Combat Manual; Helps for Defending Your Faith: A Handbook for Practical Apologetics, where I devote a chapter for each of these four topics.