• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

There it was, glinting in the sand, something catching the searing sub-Saharan sun. The half conscious, desperately thirsty British airman first thought he was hallucinating. As he staggered toward the shiny object, he prayed it was something liquid, something that would cool his parched throat. But it wasn’t; as he grasped it in his hand and shook the sand away, he realized he was holding a watch.

A watch!

And not just a watch; soon after, when he’d been rescued and returned to England, he showed it to his superior officers and then to scientific experts. At first, no one could identify the maker or even how old the timepiece was. Nothing quite like it had ever been seen. It was fashioned of finest 24-karat gold, the design magnificent, the face a gloriously transparent crystal, the wristband intricate and obviously very expensive. And the most amazing feature: The sweep second hand was moving gracefully in one fluid motion around the Roman numerals – keeping absolutely perfect time – and it seemed to need no winding or even motion to keep it running!

Eventually, Darwinian scientists concluded that this exquisite artifact had not been manufactured; it had evolved, starting as a primitive sun dial from prehistoric times, swept and carried along and burnished by howling winds and abrasive sands, colliding over the millennia with other whirling objects and substances, melting and freezing and morphing finally into this magnificent timepiece, purely by happenstance. And, because of its primary ingredients and millennial buffeting by the elements, it now was so in tune with the universe that it kept atomic clock-type time!

Anybody gullible enough to believe that sappy saga? No? Well, how about one even more farfetched and absurd?

The vast universe, operating in such dependable precision we can confidently send human beings a quarter million miles into space, all the way to the surface of the moon, and back, safely. Our earth, moving in quiet orbit around the sun, so perfectly placed that life of all kinds flourish, while just a little distance closer or farther away, and the globe would not support life at all. And the human body, to say nothing of the mysterious brain, is made of such a myriad collection of mechanisms and infinitesimal organisms, all functioning in unexplainable synchronicity, that all the scientists who’ve ever lived have yet to understand more than a fraction of its workings. And all of this just “happened.” No blueprint, no design, no intelligence, no creator or creation process. Just blind chance, and something called “evolution.”

As absurd, as nonsensical as this concept is, it’s being swallowed whole and taught to our kids by college-educated, highly intelligent professors, encouraged by the National Education Association and militantly defended by the ACLU. Not one of these Ph.D.s can explain what started it all, where the mass and energy (the basic ingredients of which all things consist) began or came from. They posit a “primordial ooze,” little one-celled organisms, some cataclysmic “big bang” explosion from which our unfathomable universe was created, and buy into a fantastic theory in which millions of life forms “evolved” into what we now see all around us – and apparently on only this one relatively small rock in all of space. Nowhere else.

And not one Ph.D. I’ve ever heard – totally aware of one of the basic laws of science, “every action creates an equal and opposite reaction” – can hope to explain what the “action” was that created the “equal and opposite reaction” we call matter.

In his wonderful book, “Darwin’s Black Box,” author Michael Behe details the current “biochemical challenge to evolution.” As true science has developed and modern technology is ever more able to peer deeply into the whirling universe of subatomic particles, the concept that life marched forward, mutation by mutation, from “simple” cell to complex organism has been knocked into the proverbial cocked hat. There is no “simple” cell, and never has been. Behe describes, even depicts, the “irreducible complexity” of the most microscopic living cell, which is in itself enormously complex and populated by intricate subsystems – all necessary for cell function.

The more powerful and probing our microscopes become, the more diverse and dizzyingly complicated the simplest building blocks become; each is a tiny pulsing universe in itself!

Consider this. In 1925, in the infamous Scopes “Monkey Trial,” ACLU attorney Clarence Darrow took the position that it was bigotry to teach just one view of human origins! He was defending the right of the science teacher to offer the theory of evolution as an alternative to the long-accepted account of creation. And now, that same ACLU is instituting lawsuits all over America wherever anybody dares to offer Intelligent Design or any other alternative to the theory of evolution! What blatant hypocrisy!

Here’s one more pertinent consideration, never reported by the most devoted Darwinian: Charles Darwin’s own statements of doubt about his theory. He openly acknowledged “the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe … as the result of blind chance or necessity.” His subsequent disciples evidently dismiss that thought. Doesn’t fit the “Theory.”

With his “The Origin of Species” about to be released, he wrote to fellow British biologist George Bentham, “Thank you heartily for what you say about my book; but you will be greatly disappointed; it will be grievously too hypothetical. It will very likely be of no other service than collocating some facts; though I myself think I see my way approximately on the origin of species. But, alas, how frequent, how almost universal it is in an author to persuade himself of the truth of his own dogmas. My only hope is that I certainly see very many difficulties of gigantic stature.”

Exactly. Charles Darwin birthed a flawed theory, and he knew it from the time of its first publication.

Now, “Icons of Evolution” author, the noted biologist Dr. Jonathan Wells, states flatly, “I think in 50 years, Darwinian evolution will be gone from the science curriculum. People will look back on it and ask how anyone could, in their right mind, have believed this, because it’s so implausible when you look at the evidence.”

But 50 years could be enough to destroy the faith of two generations of our young, enough to replace it with a bankrupt false religion. Will we have the courage, the gumption, to make sure that doesn’t happen?



Related special offers:

“The Case Against Darwin”

“Tornado in A Junkyard: The Relentless Myth of Darwinism”

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.