EVOLUTION: THE TRUTH?
By Ronald Powell, Th.D.
INDEX
Preface
| Evolution: A Cult
| A Look at the
Universe | Monkey
Business | A
Few Last Facts
This short work,
"Evolution: The Truth" can be used to lead someone to Jesus Christ.
It was originally done in an English/Chinese Mandarin version and first
published in 1994. From the first four thousand copies there were four hundred
and five Chinese that wrote back that they had received the Lord Jesus Christ
as their Savior! Six thousand more were printed and
from the first five hundred of those there have been an additional one hundred
and fifty-five plus saved. As of the end of September 1997, 653 people have
written the author and stated that they were saved from reading this
anti-evolution book.
Ron Powell, Th.D., has published seven books with all of them being
given away except for six hundred which were sold, to help print another book. Brother
Powell has over 72,000 books in print with 71,400 of those being given away for
free. Yes, no charge to the recepients. He believes
the Gospel is to be free. To see a list of Dr. Powell's books,
click here.
Since Dr. Powell gives
almost everything away he operates on a shoe-string budget. He has no funds to
reprint with. Dr. Powell has been wanting to reprint
his books, but no one has seen the need to help the last two years. If you
would like to help print some of his books, you may contact him at:
Web site: Philippine Baptist Mission Ron Powell D.R.E., Th.D. (President and Founder) Mailing
address:
Dr. Powell's e-mail address is: ron_37354@yahoo.com
PREFACE
The purpose of this small
book is to allow the Chinese people to read information that is available to
the English speaking world concerning evolution.
There are
quite an extensive use of quotes from scientific books within this small work. This is to
establish the fact that evolution is not really even a theory, not a fact, and
to show you, the Chinese people, that in the circles of higher education,
especially in
You will not learn that
evolution is false at your local
This cult of evolution has
become a religion in many places of higher education. Yes, a religion built
upon faith! You have a religion or a cult when you add "faith". It is
faith when what you believe cannot actually be proven. If evolution is correct,
then Genesis 1:1 is not true. If Genesis 1:1 is not true, then there is not a
God. If there is not a God, then we are animals that do not need to worry about
eternity, hell, heaven, and judgment for the way we live our lives. Thus
evolution is one of the many cults of Satan built upon faith. After you finish
reading this book I believe that you will come to see that, indeed, scientific
evidence does not support evolution.
You now have in your hands
a small book that will open up a new world to you about the god of the false
scientific community.
CHAPTER ONE
EVOLUTION: A CULT
The theory of evolution is
a theory that all living things have arisen by a materialistic evolutionary
process from a single source, which itself arose from a dead, inanimate world.
This theory is also called the molecule-to-man theory.
The Creation model, on the
other hand, postulates that all basic animal and plant types were brought into
existence by acts of a supernatural Creator using special processes which are
not in operation today.
Thus what we have are two
different and very conflicting ideas of how everything came about.
Many modern scientists [?]
accept evolution as a fact. When the widely-known
geneticist and evolutionist, Dr. Theodosius Dobzhansky
was alive he said, "The occurrence of the evolution of life in the history
of the earth is established about as well as events not witnessed by human
observers can be." 1
Almost all text books in schools assert that evolution is a proven fact beyond
argument. They believe it unthinkable to even think that evolution is anything
but a pure science. On the other hand there is much scientific support against
evolution. Strictly speaking evolution does not even qualify as a theory!
What qualifies a theory to
be accepted as scientific? The famous evolutionist, George Gaylord Simpson,
said, "It is inherent in any definition of science that statements that
cannot be checked by observation are not really about anything . . . or at the
very least, they are not science." 2
In other words it is
impossible to observe evolution in action, therefore it is impossible to
establish it, not only as fact, but impossible to establish it even as a
theory!
Straight and simple: To
believe in evolution you need blind, rabid, faith in something that is not only
impossible to prove, but in which true scientific facts are found to not even
remotely support! Remember, to be true scientifically it must be observed!
The Chinese people are
taught from childhood that persons in authority are always right: their school
teachers; their leaders; etc. When a young Chinese student hears a teacher put
forward evolution as established fact, the student will usually believe the
teacher. After all, isn't the teacher always right? The Chinese do not realize
until about the second or third year of college that their teachers were wrong
many times in many ways. The girls, especially realize
this after a teacher has tried to force them into doing something they do not
wish to do or has given them a undeserved bad grade for not cooperating. Thus
the students awake to the many contradictions in his or her society, but most
never get over the brain washing effect that evolutionary teaching has had on
their minds.
You must think for
yourself. Below are some thought provoking questions to make you start thinking
for yourself again.
What does an evolutionist
actually believe? He or she believes that all kinds of life came from one
common ancestor which came from dead chemicals. In turn these dead chemicals
themselves arose from a dead world, which arose after being in an explosion
which came from a cloud of gas which formed itself from a voidless
nothing! Tsk, tsk!
Question: How can anything come to life if it
is dead? While laughing at the resurrection of Jesus Christ, they believe in a
resurrection of all life from nothing! Tsk, tsk.
Question: Better yet, can anything come to
life of itself when it never was?
Question: How can an explosion create
anything but chaos?
Question: Are you saying a gigantic explosion
will not kill?
Question: Do you really expect me to believe
an explosion was the deciding factor in the creation of life? I thought
explosions, of the magnitude that would send planets flying through the
universe, would kill life, not create it!
Question: Before the gas cloud exploded [Gas
becoming billions of tons of rocks?] how did it form? The gas had to have a
beginning, didn't it?
Question: If it came from nothing how can something come from nothing? Isn't that faith?
Question: When you have faith don't you have a
religion?
Question: How can 0 + 0 equal life when it
does not even equal one? If it did equal one then how
can one female produce offspring? Okay, how could one male produce offspring?
Oh, a single cell became two? Then somewhere along the evolutionary trail you
had to have male and female.
Question: Which one came first, the male or
the female? How could one male produce? How could just one female produce? If evolution
is correct then somewhere in history there had to be just one whale, one
monkey, one lizard, right? Was that one, a male or female?
Question: Do both fish and man have eyes because
man evolved from a fish or because both man and fish needed to see, in order to
fulfill their intended creative purpose?
With simple, basic,
reasoning we can see that evolution has more than a few major problems!
What about me? No problem.
I claim to have faith in a God that created everything from nothing. Where did
God come from? I do not know. I believe by faith! Isn't that what the
evolutionists believe by, faith? It is a whole lot easier to believe a God
created all of this precision in the universe, diversity of life, and with such
intricate design, than to believe a typhoon could create a Mercedes by blowing
through a junk yard!
The evolutionists probably
believe in some kind of "New Math" because they can take nothing and
come up with, not only one, but literally thousands and thousands of life forms
on the earth! Pure, rabid, blind, faith. A real cult!
Let us suppose that somehow
modern scientists did produce life or a totally different species. Would that
not prove that there was a hand guiding and controlling the creation? Yes, it
would prove that it had to be created and could not evolve of itself from dead
matter! They would succeed in only proving Creation to be true!
Please forgive me if I am
speaking too plain for you, but I am an American and we do speak somewhat more blunt than other peoples. This false theory has been
pushed down the throats of the Chinese people long enough and it is long past
time to put the truth into the Chinese language.
"A definition of
science given by the Oxford Dictionary is:
A branch of study which is
concerned either with a connected body of demonstrated truths or with observed
facts systematically classified and more or less colligated by being brought
under gen- eral laws, and
which includes trustworthy methods for the discov- ery of new truths within its own domain." 3
Thus, many who believe in
evolution insist that since Creation [God creating everything] cannot be
proven, cannot be demonstrated, cannot be observed, and has not been witnessed
by human observers, that Creation should be refused consideration.
They fail to see that
evolution also fails to meet all of these criteria. For example it is obvious
that there were no humans living long enough to observe the evolutionary
changes that they claim should have taken place. Evolution has never been
demonstrated in a laboratory and never will be because of the time, they
themselves say, that is required for natural selection to occur. It is obvious
that there were no human observers to witness the creation of the natural
universe or the beginning, whatever that is to an evolutionist. No one has ever
observed an amphibian turning into an ape or any other creature. Yes, evolution
has been put forward as a fact when it actually requires more faith than it does
to believe, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."
[Genesis 1:1].
Even Dobzhansky,
as quoted earlier, who is totally committed to faith in evolution has said,
"Evolution has not been witnessed by human observers." 4
Another rabid evolutionist,
Richard B. Goldschmidt said, "It is true that nobody has thus far produced
a new species or genus, etc., by macromutation. It is
equally true that nobody has produced even a species by the selection of micromutations." 5
The very item that the
evolutionist claims the Creationist cannot prove, is
also the item that proves evolution cannot ever be a proven fact! That item is:
To be a scientific fact it must be demonstrated! Evolution cannot possibly
qualify as a scientific fact. This is admitted by Dobzhansky
when he says,
"These evolutionary
happenings are unique, unrepeatable, and irreversible. It is impossible to turn
a land vertebrate into a fish as it is to effect the reverse transformation.
The applicability of the experimental method to the study of such unique
historical processes is severely restricted [Editor's note: I'll say! A real understatement!] before all
else by the time intervals involved, which far exceed the lifetime of any human
experimenter. And yet it is just such impossibility that is demanded by
anti-evolutionists when they ask for 'proofs' of evolution which they would magnanim- ously accept as
satisfactory." 6
Do you realize what this
poor lost soul is crying about? He has plainly admitted that his cult of
evolution cannot be proven and he is hurt and upset because people like me are
asking him to meet the same criteria that he demands from us. That is: proof,
demonstrable proof, human observance now and at the original creation. He wants
we Creationists to meet his standards for proof, but
when he is asked to meet his own standards, he cries in his beer admitting that
he cannot!
Matthews, a British
biologist and evolutionist, in his introduction to a 1971 publication of
"The fact of evolution
is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of
being a science founded on an unproven theory - is it then a science of faith?
Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special
creation - both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to
the present, has been capable of proof." 7
Many famous scientists are
now openly expressing their doubts concerning evolution. "Dr. G. A. Kerkut, Professor of Physiology and Biochemistry,
'The attempt to explain all
living forms in terms of an evolution from a unique source, though a brave and
valid attempt, is one that is premature and one that is not satisfactorily
supported by present-day evidence.'" 8
There it is! Their system
is built upon faith. Their leaders, in the know, realize this fact and admit to
it! And not only admit that they believe by faith, but that the evolution
theory cannot possibly be proven. It is the lower ones, like the school
teachers, the college professors that are unaware that they, themselves, are
teaching a system built upon faith and one that cannot be proven. Thus the poor
students are taught by teachers, by Hollywood movies, by their leaders trying
to act educated, that evolution is true and they also grow up believing this
terrible lie. There is nothing so stupid as an
educated fool!
The evolutionist,
though claiming not to believe in miracles, actually do. Their own kind of miracle.
They say that Creation of
God cannot be right because: FROG t = instantaneous = PRINCE = FAIRY TALE
Yet, they will say, if
given enough time, [300 million years] anything is possible!
FROG t = 300 million years
= PRINCE = SCIENCE 9
Time is the miracle worker
for the cult of evolution. If given enough time they believe that anything is
possible!
The very intellectual
evolutionist French zoologist Dr. Pierre P. Grasse
attacked evolution in one of his books and Dobzanhansky
when trying to defend Darwinism said this,
"The book of Pierre P.
Grasse is a frontal attack on all kinds of
'Darwinism'. Its purpose is 'to destroy the myth of evolution, as a simple,
understood, and explained phenomenon,' and to show that evolution is a mystery
about which little is, and perhaps can be known. Now one can disagree with
Scott M. Huse B.S., M.S., M.R.E., Th.D.,
and Ph.D. in his book "The Collapse of Evolution" has this to say,
"The irony of this
whole situation is that the very concept of organic evolution is completely
absurd and impossible. It is ab- solutely
astonishing that an idea which is so devoid of any legit- imate
scientific evidence could have attained a position of such prestige in the name
of science." 11
So what is the answer?
Easy, just read the first verse of the Bible: "In the beginning God
created the heaven and the earth." Creation [sometimes called Creationism]
is the only alternative.
FOOTNOTES: CHAPTER ONE
1 Quoted in "Evolution:
The Challenge of the Fossil Record" by Dr. Duane T. Gish,
Creation-Life Publishers,
2 Quoted in
"Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record" ,
by Dr. DuaneT. Gish,
Creation-Life Publishers,
3 Quoted in
"Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record" ,
by Dr. Duane T. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers,
4 Quoted in
"Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record", by Dr. Duane T. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers,
5 Ibid. p. 13.
6 Ibid. p. 14.
7 Quoted in
"Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record", by Dr. Duane T. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers,
8 "The Natural
Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution", by A. E. Wilder-Smith, Master Books,
A Division of CLP Publishers, San Diego, CA, USA, 1981, p. viii.
9 Quoted in
"Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record", by Dr. Duane T. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers,
10 Quoted in
"Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record", by Dr. Duane T. Gish, Creation-Life Publishers,
11 Scott M. Huse, "The Collapse of Evolution", Baker Book
House,
CHAPTER TWO
A LOOK AT THE UNIVERSE
Albert Einstein said,
"Everyone who is
seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is
manifest in the laws of the universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man,
and one in the face of which we with modest powers must feel humble." 1
Immanuel Kant, the noted
Philosopher said,
"In the world
everywhere we find clear signs of an order which can only spring from design,
an order realized with the greatest wisdom, and in a universe which is indescrib- ably varied in content and in extent,
infinite." 2
"If the world's finest
minds can unravel only with difficulty the deeper working of nature, how could
it be supposed that those workings are merely a mindless accident, a product of
blind chance?" 3
"Sir Fred Hoyle,
British mathematician and astrophysicist, was an atheist for much of his life.
In 1981 he published a book with Chandra Wickramasinghe
entitled, "Evolution from Space". Both Hoyle and Wickramasinghe
came to the conclusion that the high degree of order and specificity in the
universe demanded a preexisting intelligence. Said Hoyle and Wickrasmasinghe, 'Once we see, however that the probability
of life origination at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it
becomes sensible to think that the favorable properties of physics, on which
life depends, are in every respect deliberate. It is, therefore almost
inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher
intelligence . . . even to the limit of God'".4
"Astronomers have
discovered a gigantic collection of galaxies that they say is the biggest
structure ever seen in the universe. The structure, which they call The Great
Wall, is so difficult to explain that it raises new questions about theories on
origin and structure of the universe. The researchers reported their discovery
in Friday's issue of the journal, "Science".
The galaxies that make up
The Great Wall form a sheet at least 500 million light-years long,* and it is
200 million light-years wide and 15 million light years thick.
By comparison, the Earth's
Milky Way galaxy is 100,000 light-years across.
Ms. Margaret Geller, one of
the co-discoverers said, "No one knows of a force [Editor's note: How
about God?] that could have produced a structure so
big in the time since the universe was formed." 5
Then a few months later. .
. Astronomers discovered more than a dozen evenly distributed clumps of galaxies
stretching across vast expanses of the heavens, suggesting a structure to the
universe that is so regular and immense that it defies current theories of
cosmic creation and evolution!
"Nature"
scientists said the newly found pattern of clumped galactic matter, if
confirmed by further observations, dwarfs the long sheet of galaxies, dubbed
the 'Great Wall', that was reported last fall to be the largest structure in
the universe.
"They were surprised
to see so many large clumps and in such a uniform distribution of matter on
such a large scale. But they were astonished to find the clumps so evenly
spaced, each either 400 million or 800 million light-years apart.
'The regularity is just
mind-boggling,' said Dr. David C. Koo, an astronomer
at the
It's as if we pierced an
extremely narrow needle through the universe and hit one wall after another',
said Alexander S. Szalay, an astronomer at John
Hopkins University in Baltimore and a member of the discovery team.
'The clumps should be
randomly distributed and they're not. that's the
biggest surprise.'" 6
Evenly spaced suggests an
intelligence created them this way whereas randomly spaced suggests an
explosion like the evolutionary example of the Big Bang.
How does this affect
evolution theories? Let the evolutionists themselves continue to speak:
"In a commentary on the report, also published in "Nature", Marc
Davis, an astrophysicist at the University of California at Berkeley,
concluded, 'It is safe to say we understand less than zero about the early
universe.'" 7
What he means is that the
discovery of the "Great Wall" and a few months later of the other
walls, along with their spacing, means that the planets cannot have come from a
'Big Bang'. He means that the very foundation of evolution is completely wrong!
With evolution on the
defensive in Europe and
WHAT ABOUT LIFE ON OTHER
PLANETS?
In his book,
"Scientific Creationism" the eminent scientist Dr. Henry Morris says,
"Not only has no
evidence been found that life has ever evolved elsewhere in the solar system,
but all previous theories of the evolution of the solar system itself have
encountered overwhelming problems as new data have come in."
Creationists, of course,
had predicted this all along, on the basis of the creation model. ** For
example, some of the definite pre- dictions from the creation model are as
follows:
1. Since the earth, moon
and planets were each created for a specific purpose, each would have a
distinctive structure. They would not all be of essentially the same
composition and structure, as would be the case if they had all evolved
together from a common source.
2. Only the earth would be
found to have a hydrosphere capable of supporting life as we know it.
3. Only the earth would be
found to have an atmosphere capable of supporting life as we know it.
4. Evidence would be found
of decay and catastrophism on other planets and
moons, but not of evolutionary growth in order and complexity.
All of these predictions
have been clearly confirmed by the moon landings and by the probes to the
various planets and their satellites. Although some scientists still cling to the
hope that evidence might yet be found which would support the existence of life
in the distant past or distant future on one of these planets, the fact is that
no such evidence has been found.
None of the planets has any
measurable amount of liquid water and not one has an oxygen atmosphere, both of
which are ab- solute essentials for life as we know
it.
Clearly the widely
published photographs of the moon's surface, as well as of Mars, show signs of
past deterioration, even of a catastrophic nature, from whatever their original
forms may have been. The asteroid fragments, meteors and meteorites breaking
up, and decaying comets all add their testimony of catastrophism
and deterioration. Nowhere in the entire solar system is found any evidence at
all of a building process, either of the planetary bodies themselves or of the
complexity of the chemical and phy- sical systems that are found on them.
Finally, the moon landings
have permitted man actually to study the composition and structure of some of
the materials from at least one extraterrestrial body. Enough has been found to
permit the firm conclusion that the earth and its moon are of vastly different
structure and therefore could not have the same celestial evolutionary
'ancestor.'"8
"To the surprise of
scientists, the chemical makeup of the moon rocks is distinctly different from
that of rocks on earth. This difference implies that the moon formed under
different conditions, . . . and means that any theory
on the origin of the planets now will have to create the earth and the moon in
different ways." 9
This important discovery
should be taught in the classrooms. The moon and the earth have different
structures and therefore different origins!
IS THE EARTH OLD OR YOUNG?
The fact that erroneous
results can be and often are derived from dating techniques has been
experimentally verified. For example, living snails have been dated as 2,300
years old by the carbon-14 method. 10 Wood
taken from growing trees has been dated by the carbon-14 method to be 10,000 years
old. 11 Hawaiian lava flows
which are known to be less than 200 years old, have been dated by the
potassium-argon method at up to 3 billion years old! 12
In his book, "The
Collapse of Evolution", Dr. Scott M. Huse says,
"Considering the
unreliability of these dating techniques, there is no valid scientific reason
why one should place any conf- idence in them
especially since there is such an immense amount of extrapolation involved.
Consequently, we will not consider other process which can also be used to
measure time and thus date the earth." 13
Dr. Huse
continues,
"A significant amount
of research has been accumulated which suggests that the earth and solar system
are relatively young and not ancient as evolutionists have assumed. The next two
processes are usually selectively screened out by evolutionists, who choose to
ignore or discard them, because they indicate a relatively young age for the
earth and solar system."
The Earth's Magnetic Field
The strength of the earth's
magnetic field has been measured for well over a century. This provides
scientists with exception- ally good records. In an important recent study, Dr.
Thomas G. Barnew has shown that the strength of the
earth's magnetic field is decaying exponentially at a rate corresponding to a
half-life of 1,400 years. That is to say, 1,400 years ago the magnetic field of
the earth was twice as strong as it is now. If we extrapolate back as far as
10,000 years, we find that the earth would have had a magnetic field as strong
as that of a magnetic star!
This is, of course, highly
improbable, if not impossible. Thus, based on the present decay of the earth's
magnetic field, 10,000 years appears to be an upper limit for the age of the
earth.
Finally evolutionists
believe that the earth's magnetic field is due to circulating electric currents
in its core. If we extrapolate back- ward about 20,000 years, we find that the
estimated heat produc- ed by
the currents would have melted the earth. Clearly, the tes-
timony of the earth's magnetic field is strongly in
favor of a relative- ly young earth, not an ancient
one." 14
Meteoritic Dust And The Age Of The Earth
On the subject of
meteoritic dust Dr. Huse says,
"Scientists have known
for some time now that cosmic dust particles enter the earth's atmosphere from
space at an essentially constant rate. Eventually these dust particles settle
down to the earth's surface. Hans Petterson has made
accurate measurements of this influx, and has determined that the earth
receives about 10 million tons per year. Now, if it is true that the earth is
around 5 billions years old, as evolutionists insist, there should be a layer
of meteoritic dust that is about 182 feet thick all over the world! No such
dust layer exists anywhere, of course. Even on the moon where it should at
least be this thick, little sign of it was found by the astronauts (about 1/8
of an inch). The fear that the astro- nauts would sink into such a layer of meteoritic dust over
20 feet deep when they landed on the moon proved to be com-
pletely unwarranted.
Evolutionary geologists
might be tempted to argue that erosion- al and mixing processes can account for
the absence of the meteoritic dust layer. However, this explanation is unsatisfac- tory. It is easily
refuted because the composition of meteoritic dust is very distinctive,
particularly in its content of nickel and iron. For example, nickel is a very
rare element in the earth's crust and even more scarce in the ocean. But the
average nickel content of meteoritic dust is approximately 300 times as great
as in the earth's crust! Calculations based on the relatively small amount of
nickel found in the earth's crust and ocean indicate
an age for the earth of only a few thousand years." 15
A further blow to the
dating techniques was presented by Dr. John L. Anderson at the 161th American Chemical Society meeting in
Petroleum And Natural Gas
Petroleum and natural gas
are contained at high pressures in underground reservoirs by relatively
impermeable cap rock. In many cases, the pressures are extremely high.
Calculations based upon the measured pressures could not be maintained for much
longer than 10,000 years in many instances. Thus, the generalization that such fossil-fuel deposits have been confined for
millions of years, have not leaked out through their cap rock, is preposterous.
16
Furthermore, recent
experiments have demonstrated conclusively that the conversion of marine and
vegetal matter into oil and gas can be achieved in a surprisingly short time.
For example, plant-derived material has been converted into a good grade of
petroleum in as little as 20 minutes under the proper temperature and pressure
conditions. Wood and other cellulosic material have
also been converted into coal-like substances in just a few hours. These
experiments prove that the formation of coal, oil, and gas did not necessarily
require millions of years to form as evolutionary geologists have assumed and
taught.17 That is
the problem with the evolutionists. They have built their house upon complete
assumptions!
We creationists believe
that the great coal deposits of the world are the remains of the world after
being destroyed by the flood in the days of Noah. This catastrophic
interpretation is further supported by the presence of polystrata
fossils*** in the coal beds which indicate rapid formation. Also, the type of
plants involved and the texture of these deposits testify of turbulent waters,
not a stagnant swamp.
Evolutionists propose that
coal was formed millions of years before man evolved. However, human skeletons
and artifacts, such as intricately structured gold chains, have been found in
coal deposits. In Genesis 4 we learn that metal working was already highly
developed. The flood of Noah's time buried the world in the layers of mud that
later became the top-most rocks of the earth's outer crust.
Then there are the fissures
found in many areas of the world where animals from dry climates, wet tropical
forests, and cold areas are all buried together. Only water could have
transported the many thousands there to be deposited for us to find later. Even
Woolly Mammoths, Saber Toothed Tigers, and Human have been found together in
crevices of the mountains as if they were fleeing to higher ground!
Or what of the Mammoths
that were found by the millions that were so suddenly frozen that some still
had their tongues out with the vegetation still on it and not damaged, except
for being suddenly frozen! Even the hair, skin, and food undigested in the
stomachs. What clamity could have frozen them so
suddenly? Most of them so suddenly frozen that they were left still standing!
How about the earth titling suddenly under the weight of the water of Noah's
time? Isn't the earth still tilted? The Age Of The Earth By
Looking At Our Population Evolutionists believe that mankind has been on
the earth for at least one million years. Creationists believe that mankind has
been here for about 6,000 years. So which possibility is true? Dr. Huse continues,
"Dr. Henry M. Morris
has calculated that an average growth of only 1/2% per year, which is 1/4 of
the actual rate, would yield the present population in just 4,000 years. This
allows ample room for periods of time when, be- cause of war or disease, the
population growth rates were far below the normal averages. Dr. Morris points
out that it is statistically inconceivable that the present population could
have resulted from one million years of evolutionary history. Even if the
population increased at only 1/2 % per year for a million years, the number of
people in the pre- sent generation would exceed 10 to the 2,100th power! To
further appreciate the utter absurdness of the evolution model you need to know
that only 10 to the 130th power electrons can be packed into the entire known
universe!" 18
This, of course, is an
utter impossibility. Evolution is again proven to be false! Just because people
believe in something does not make it true. Facts do not lie, but people do!
The Rotation Of The Earth
The rotation of the earth
is gradually slowing due to the gravitational drag forces of the sun, moon, and
other factors. If the earth is billions of years old, as evolutionary
geologists insist, and it has been slowing down uniformly, then its present
rotation should be zero! Furthermore, if we extrapolate backwards for several
billion years, the centrifugal force would have been so great that the continents
would have been sent to the equatorial regions and the overall shape of the
earth would have been a flat pancake. But, as is commonly known, the shape of
the earth is spherical; its continents are not confined to the equatorial
regions, and it continues to rotate on its axis at approximately 1,000 miles
per hour at the equator. The obvious conclusion is that the earth is not
billions of years old, but only a few thousand! Evolution, wrong again! 19
As more and more evidence
is gained about the universe the evolutionists involved in acquiring this
information are dropping their theories of evolution. Dr. Sir Fred Hoyle has
dropped his own widely-believed theory and, although not a Christian, does
believe in God. The leaders have all dropped the big-Bang theory. So where are
evolution's leaders now? They are there, but they are keeping very quiet as
they try to figure out another way to get around the judgment of God upon sin
in this world!
FOOTNOTES: CHAPTER TWO
1 "Journal", A
publication of Summit ministries, March 1989, P.O. Box 207, Manitou Springs,
CO, USA, p.2.
2 "Journal",
1989, p. 2.
3 Ibid. p. 2.
4 Ibid. p. 2.
5 "Associated
Press", November 18, 1989.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
8 Dr. Henry Morris,
"Scientific Creationism", Master Books, P. O. Box 1606, El Cajon,
CA., USA , 92022, pp. 79-80.
9 Jerry E. Bishop,
"New Theories of Creation", "Science Digest", Vol. 72
(October 1972), p. 42.
10 Keith and Anderson,
"Radiocarbon Dating: Fictitious Results with Mollusk Shells,"
"Science", Vol. 141, 1963, p. 634.
11 B. Huber,
"Recording Gaseous Exchange Under Field Conditions,
" "The Physiology of Forest Trees", Ronald Publishers,
12 W.E. Lammerts,
"Why Not Creation?", Baker Book House,
13 Dr. Scott M. Huse, "The Collapse of Evolution", Baker Book
House Company,
14 Ibib. p.
21-22.
15 Ibid. p. 22-23.
16 Dr. R. E. Kofahl, "Handy Dandy Evolution Refuter", Beta
Books,
17 Dr. Henry M. Morris, Dr.
Duane T. Gish, and Dr. George M. Hillestand,
"Creation: Acts, Facts, Impacts", Creation-Life Publishers,
18 Scott M. Huse,
Op.cit. p. 28.
19 R. L. Wysong, "The Creation-Evolution Controversy",
Inquiry Press,
* To understand how huge
this wall is you must realize that light travels at the speed of 186,282.397
[299,792.458 kilometers] miles per second. To better understand this
extraordinary speed you need to realize that light would travel around the
world 7.451 times in only one second! At this speed light would travel
11,176,943.82 miles [18,140,179.819 kilometers] in only one minute! In one hour
light would travel 670,616,629 miles [1,088,410,789 kilometers]! In one day
light travels 16,094,799,096 miles [26,121,858,932.8 kilometers]. By now the
size of this Great Wall is beginning to become too much for our comprehension
even though we can see and measure it! If you were 20 years old and could
travel from one end of The Great Wall to the other at the speed of light, and
you started on January first 1995, by the end of the first year you would have
traveled 5,874,601,660,180 miles [9,535,478,494,472.14 kilometers - This is
exactly 234,984,066.4 trips around the world in just the first year!] For you
to travel the length of this wall at the speed of light, you would need to live
an additional 499,999,999 years of life! Read on, because a few months later
astronomers discovered a series of walls, evenly spaced one behind the other,
and so big that they make The Great Wall look small!
** God placed humans on
only one planet and this planet is the only one capable of supporting life as
we know it.
*** Polystrata
fossils are usually trees that are standing up or even sometimes up-side-down
through millions of years of different rock layers [Strata] or coal. Did they
live for this long or did a flood pour tons of mud around them which later,
under great pressure, formed rocks? Of course, they did not live this long, so
the Geological column is completely wrong!
CHAPTER III
MONKEY BUSINESS!
What fool would think that
his ancestors were monkeys? I remember seeing a cartoon in a magazine or
newspaper once of two monkeys in a tree looking down at two queer fags boogering each other. One monkey looked over to the other
one and said, "Even we will not do that." So where does this put the
queer in the evolutionary chain? What he does is degenerative, not normal, and
perverse! God's creation was not Adam and Steve, but Adam and Eve. Monkeys will
not do things that are unnatural!
Although the primates are
supposed to have evolved from an insectivorous ancestor, there are no series of
transitional forms connecting primates to insectivores. Elwyn
Simons, one of the world's leading experts in the field of primates, must admit
that, "In spite of recent finds, the time and place of origin of order
primates remains shrouded in mystery." 1
We can see, at the very
outset that, according to evolutionists, the true origin of the man cannot be
discovered or found in the fossil record.
Since it cannot be proven,
then what are all of these monkey men doing standing in the science museums of
the world? Well, I will tell you the truth. They are all the figments of
evolutionists' imaginations. For example how can you make a monkey man from a
pig's tooth? Well, if you were the evolutionist that concocted Nebraska Man you
could. Not only did a scientist [?] construct the complete skeleton from a
pig's tooth, but he actually put meat, facial features, muscle, and hair on the
skeleton. The same thing as is in your local museum.
Yes, all untrue. Lies, made up lies.
According to evolutionists
the South American or New World monkeys gave rise to the
"Little is known,
unfortunately, of the fossil history of the South American monkeys," 2
"When these animals
first appear in the fossil record they are just what they are today -
monkeys!" 3
* "When Romer is asked to give his opinion of the origin of the
chimpanzee and gorilla he says,
'Our knowledge of the
fossil history of these higher apes and of presumed human ancestors on this
level is tantalizing poor.'"
"What can
anthropologists say about man's ultimate origin from his imagined ape-like
ancestor? Pilbeam says,
'It has come to be rather
generally assumed, albeit in a rather vague fashion, the pre-Pleistocene
hominid ancestry was rooted somewhere in the Dryopithecinae.'"
When a scientist is forced
to 'assume' something 'in a rather vague fashion,' it is obvious that he is
resorting to wholly unscientific methods to establish what he cannot do by the
usual accepted scientific method."
Most people should know is
that anthropologists and paleontologists are subject to the same desires for
fame as the rest of us. They can lie, cheat, steal, even murder [As in the case
of Dr. Dian Fossey by her colleage
in order to steal her research material to claim as his own], and steal
another's research in order to gain fame!
With this in mind let us
deal with some of the more famous instances of the products of lies.
Java Man
"A Dutch physician by
the name of Dubois became convinced that the "missing link" in man's
evolutionary origin would be found in the
About a year later and 50
feet from where he had found the skull-cap, Dubois found a human thigh bone.
Dubois assumed, without any real justification, that the skull-cap
and human thigh bone were from the same individual. He placed them together and
called the association Pithecanthropus erectus [erect ape-man]. At about the
same time Dubois found two molar teeth which he included in his original
announcement. In 1898 he discovered a tooth which he believed should also be
included with the first finds. The collection came to be know
as Java Man. Evolutionists have estimated the age of the fossils to be about
500,000 years old.
Dubois exhibited these
fossils at the International Congress of Zoology at
What they all did not know
is that Dubois had concealed the fact that he had also discovered at nearby Wadjak and at approximately the same level, two human
skulls [Know as the Wadjak skulls] with a cranial
capacity of about 1550-1600 cc, somewhat above the present human average. To have revealed this fact at that time would have rendered it
difficult, if not impossible, for his Java Man to have been accepted as a
"missing link". It was not until 1922 when a similar discovery was
about to be announced, that Dubois revealed that he had possessed the Wadjak skulls for over 30 years! His failure to reveal this
find to the scientific world can only be considered as an act of dishonesty and
calculated to obtain acceptance of Pithecanthropus as an ape-man.
Before his death, but after
he had convinced most evolutionists as to the man-like affinity of
Pithecanthropus, Dubois declared that his Java Man was nothing more than a
large gibbon!" He admitted he had lied and cheated to gain fame and make
money! Java Man was a complete hoax! Are you still
taught that Java Man was in man's evolutionary
history? You are being taught something that the inventor of which said, over
72 years ago, was a lie! Now to the Chinese people's
claim to fame. [?]
Peking Man
"If one accepts
uncritically the evidence usually present in books on Peking Man,
the case for the existence of near-man, or ape-man would seem to be established.
For example the skull model and flesh reconstructions based on this model
reveal a remarkable resemblance to modern man and could hardly be called
anything less that human. But a close examination of
the reports related to Peking Man, however reveal a tangled web of
contradictions, highly subjective treatment of the data, a peculiar and
unnatural condition of the fossil bones, and the loss of essentially all of the
fossil material. If you went into a court of law without any evidence would you
win or loose? Peking Man's fossils have disappeared
and probably because the fraud was close to being found out!
At Choukoutien,
about 25 miles from
Later all evidence [?] for
Peking Man disappeared. Nothing remains today. Someone
destroyed it. The only ones that had control of it were the evolutionists. Why
would they destroy their own evidence....unless it had been fabricated!
We will now look at what
Dr. Patrick O'Connell had to say about the Peking man. He was in
When a display was
organized in 1954 in
"In his book O'Connell
points out that little attention has been paid to the fossil remains of 10
modern humans found at the same exact site!
After finding ape skulls,
Davidson Black claimed to have found the rest of the ape-man, but descriptions
of the partial skulls found and later clay models differed very much.
Teilhard de Chardin
said, 'Peking Man resembles the great apes closely.' "
So what is the difference?
By 1936 instead of being
like an ape they have changed to look very human. What we have here is a slow
changing of the way the Peking Man actually looked and
by 1936 he is what you see today in the Science Museums of the world. The only
evolution was from the first tooth until 1936! Tsk, tsk! Pure fabrication on the part of the paleontologists!
"O'Connell concludes
that Peking Man consisted of skulls of either large
monkeys or baboons killed and eaten by workers at an ancient quarry. There does
seem to be considerable evidence that a lime-burning site was buried under rock
and debris at Choukoutien. Whether monkey or baboon
skulls, they were monkey-like according to Boule. Boule and others had leaned toward the belief that Peking Man had been killed and eaten by true man. O'Connell terms
the representation of Peking Man, "as a
near-man", an outright fraud. We believe at the very least a combination
of prejudice, preconceived ideas, and a zeal for fame have been responsible for
the elevating of a monkey to the status of an ape-like man. This is the same
combination that produced Nebraska Man from a pig's tooth, Piltdown Man from a modern ape's jaw, and Leakey's East African
Ape-Man from a Southern Ape!"4
Nebraska
About the same time as the
Peking Man was produced you have the Nebraska Man and
the Piltdown man.
In 1922, a tooth was
discovered in western
Dr. Osborn and his
colleagues could not decide whether the original owner of this tooth should be
designated as an ape-like man or a man-like ape. He was commonly called
Nebraska Man. These paleontologists then took the one tooth and built a jaw,
then built a skull, then a complete skeleton. They then placed facial features
and put the meat upon the thing and in the "London Illustrated News"
showed him looking very similar to modern man. In 1927 after further collecting
and studies had been carried out, it was decided that Nebraska Man was neither a ape-like man or a man-like ape, but a pig! Yes, these
dummies had taken a pig's tooth and constructed a complete man! Tsk, tsk!
Piltdown Man
In 1912, Arthur Smith
Woodward, Director of the
He was named Dawn Man, but
became popularly know as Piltdown Man. He was judged to be about 500,000 years
old. Although a few experts, such as Boule and Henry
Fairfield Osborn, objected to the association of this very ape-like jaw with a
human-like skull, the consensus of the world's greatest authorities was that
Piltdown Man was indeed an authentic link in the
evolution of man.
However, by 1950 a method
had become available for sometimes determining age to some fossil bones. This
method is dependent on the amount of fluoride absorbed by bones from the soil.
When the Piltdown Man bones were tested it was
discovered that the jawbone contained practically no fluoride and thus was no
fossil at all. It was hardly older than the day it was found! The skull did
have some fluoride and it was judged to be a few thousand years old, not the
500,000 as previously stated!
With this beginning to look
like a fraud a more critical examination was performed upon the bones. It was
discovered that the bones had been treated with iron salts to make them look
old, and scratch marks were detected on the teeth, indicating that they had
been filed! In other words, Piltdown Man was a
complete fraud! A modern ape's jaw and a human skull had been made to resemble an
ape-man, and the forgery has succeeded in fooling most of the world's greatest
experts.
According to M. Bowden,
". . . and the person
responsible for placing the faked fossils in the pit at Piltdown was Teihard de Chardin S.J.." 5
Teilhard was the author of several
philosophy books and plac- ed
the evidence to help evolution. Philosophy teachers are well known to believe
and promote the cult of evolution.
You should know that the
Piltdown Man was viewed in stately museums and studied
in major textbooks for several generations. What will today's "Facts"
of human evolution turn out to be in the near future? Proven to be more lies
from people faking evidence in order to gain fame and riches for themselves!
This demonstrates that many
modern scientists are prone to find what they want to find even when it is not
there!
Neanderthal Man
Neanderthal Man was first discovered over a century ago in a cave in the
F. Lucy
The credit for this
discovery [?] goes to D.C. Johanson. His team
discovered 40% of a skeleton during digging from 1972 to 1977 in
"The angle of the
thigh bone and the flattened surface at its knee joint end . . . proved she
walked on two legs."
What you were not told is
that the knee joint end of the femur was severely crushed; therefore, Johanson's conclusion is pure speculation; guess work!
Anatomist Charles Onard, using a computer technique
for analysis of skeletal relationships, has concluded that Lucy did not walk upright,
as least not in the same manner as humans. In this connection, it should be
mentioned that the chimpanzee spends a considerable amount of time walking
upright. Thus, there is no valid scientific basis for a conclusion that Lucy
was anything more than some kind of monkey or chimpanzee!
Lucy has other problems:
- Almost all of the evolutionists that investigated the
40% skeleton have changed their minds at least once or more times!
- No one has yet found a skeleton that had a skull! Yes,
parts from different areas of the dig were put together to form Lucy! She
was not found with a skull that could definitely be said to be her own.
How many of the tribes do you think ate and killed monkeys? This alone
would disqualify this find from being given any serious accreditation
because of the monkey skeletons laying around.
- Drs. Stern and Susman point
out the many ape-like features of Lucy such as: A. The
hands and feet. B. The heavy muscled foot with the proper curve needed for
climbing. C. Long curved hands with heavy muscles needed for climbing and
living in trees. D. The angle of the shoulder blades showing that the
muscles were attached in such a way as you would find in a tree dwelling
monkey. E. The shape and angularity of the pelvic bone shows the animal to
be ape, not human. 6
Question: What walks like a monkey, has heavy
muscled curved hands and feet like a monkey, has shoulder blades like a monkey,
and a pelvic angle showing that it lived in trees like monkeys? Well, if you
are an evolutionist you might think man! Tsk, tsk! Come on, there must be a limit to how stupid a person
can be!
Richard Leakey and His Lake Turkana Specimens
His parents, both of whom
earned doctorates, were famous evolutionists very well known to the scientific
world. His father, Louis became famous for his excavations in the Olduvai Gorge in
Richard Leakey, though,
only got fame through a series of skulls and partial skeletons that his team
found, though not he himself, in the area of Lake Turkana,
in Kenya, just south of the Ethiopian border from 1972 through 1978. Leakey
never went to college let alone earned any kind of degree. His fame came on the
find of another man, Bernard Ngeneo, one of the
Kenyans in Leakey's team.
His find, like all of the
others before it, have now been scientifically laid in the grave beside the
other false claims.
For example:
- He had now learned how to move quickly to fame by using
the mass media. The media wants to sell newspapers and T.V. time slots to
advertisers. The only way to get people to watch is to come up with
something new. As in new programs every year or so. He called a press
conference and made unfounded statements without any scientific investigation
having been done at all. Now he was famous!
- Afterwards when given time to examine the fossils Drs.
Charles Oxnard and F. Peter Lisowski found that:
A. The reconstruction of the foot bones had been done in such a way as to make
them look like they belonged to a human, when they actually did not fit
together well until they were moved into their proper positions and then
were found to be those of a monkey!
Since the evolutionists all
say that man's earliest ancestors were on the earth about 2 to 3 million years
ago, what do you do when you find a perfectly preserved human skull,
footprints, and sandal prints in rock that the evolutionists claim is 7,000,000
years old[ The Pliocene age]. What do you think they did? They covered up the
truth and tried to keep it from being printed! Liars! Better yet, what do you
think the evolutionists did when they found sandal prints, footprints and human
forged iron bands in Cambrian rock [Which is supposed to be 600 million years
old, according to them!]? After all, this is, according to evolutionists, 597
million years before man was on the earth! They tried to keep the information
from going public. If you were honest you would realize that the way the
evolutionists date things is wrong and that man and dinosaur were living
together as recently as 4,000 years ago [The time of the worldwide flood]!
The Plant World [Botany]
Since there is more plant
life than human life upon the earth, and if evolution is correct, there should
be intermediate forms between the plants. Yes, missing links in the plant
world. That should be easy to find.
With all of this in mind
concerning the lies and frauds that have been committed what would an honest
botanical evolutionist say? Professor E. J. H. Corner of the
"But I still think
that to be unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special
creation." 6
There you have it. An
eminent evolutionist saying that God created everything!
In their book on the principles
of paleontology, the two evolutionists, Raup and
Stanley say,
"Unfortunately, the
origins of most higher categories are shrouded in
mystery; commonly new higher categories appear abruptly in the fossil record
without evidence of transitional forms." 7
What he means is that he
does not find any missing links in the plant world. The plants just suddenly
appear! They did not evolve!
DuNouy, another evolutionist, has
described the evidence in this way,
"In brief, each group,
order, or family seems to be born suddenly and we hardly ever find the forms
which link them to the preced- ing
strain. When we discover them they are already completely differentiated. Not
only do we find practically no transitional forms, but in general it is
impossible to authentically connect a new group with an ancient one." 8
Dr. Olson said,
"A third fundamental
aspect of the record is somewhat different. Many new groups of plants and
animals suddenly appear, apparently without any close ancestors. Most major
groups of organisms and even classes have appeared in this way . . . The fossil
record which has produced the problem, is not much help in its solution . . . .
Most zoologists and the majority of paleontologists feel that the breaks and
the abrupt appearances of new groups can be explained by the incompleteness of
the record, but some disagree and believe that theses events tell a story not
in accord with the theory [of evolution] and not seen among living
organisms." 9
These are plain admissions
that the missing links in plants life, animal life, and human life cannot be
found. Especially admitting, that everything suddenly appeared; that the more
fossils they find the more questions arise about their evolutionary theory.
Instead of finding answers they find more problems with their theory! This
means the more that they find, the more proof they find for creation by design!
Yes, looks like the Bible is right when it states that God created all life!
Evolution is a cruel hoax!
They even admit again that
they cannot find any missing links for any of the animal life forms. The famous
evolutionist, Dr. Clark says,
"No matter how far
back we go in the fossil record or previous animal life upon earth, we find no
trace of any animal forms which are intermediate betwen
the various major groups." 10
Later on in the same book
he says,
"Since we have not the
slightest evidence, either among the living or the fossil animals, of any
intergrading types following the major groups, it is a fair supposition that
there never have been any such intergrading types."
Even the famous horse
series commonly shown in some science museums is false. In 1993 evolutionists
publicly admitted that the many small horses were not one group evolving upward
into larger sized horses, but were all along, different families of horses!
This is admitted years before by the evolutionists when Dr. Du-
Nouy, one of their leading spokesmen says,
"We find that the
transitional forms between major types are missing. Each one of these
intermediaries seems to have appeared suddenly, and it has not yet been
possible, because of the lack of fossils, to reconstitute the passage between
these intermediaries.......The continuity, we surmise, may never be established
by facts." 11
To make up for the total
lack of evidence in the fossil record for transitional forms [Intermediates,
missing links] some evolutionists have went so far, as to be crazy, by saying
that since new types suddenly appear, without any missing links, maybe a
dinosaur laid an egg and a bird hatched from it instead of evolving! The height
of stupidity at work is when a modern evolutionist tries to think up ways to
justify his position when all the evidence in the fossil records point to a
sudden creation of all animal and plant life!
The major predictions by
the creationists were:
- The abrupt appearance of highly complex and diverse
forms of life with no evidence of ancestral forms.
- The sudden appearance of basic plant and animal kinds
or the "created kinds" of Genesis, without evidence of
transitional forms between the basic kinds.
The fossil record reveals:
- The abrupt appearance of a great variety of highly
complex forms of life. No evolutionary evidence for ancestors for these
animals can be found anywhere on the earth.
- The sudden appearance of higher categories of plants
and animals with no evidence of transitional forms between these basic
kinds.
Not only does the fossil
record provide excellent evidence for special creation [God creating everything
as the Bible says], but the fossil record, at the same time, shows that
evolution could not possibly have occurred! I will close this chapter quoting
from Kerkut, who is not a creationist. He says,
"There is a theory
that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which
itself came from an inorganic form. This theory can be called the 'General
Theory of Ev- olution' and
the evidence that supports it is not sufficiently strong to allow us to
consider it as anything more than a working hypothesis." 12
It is difficult to add
anything to that: plainly admitting that evolution does not even rate enough to
be a theory let-alone a fact!
Here we have it from the
mouths of the evolutionists themselves; admitting that evolution cannot be
proven and some even saying that special creation [God creating] has the most
evidence!
Question: What do you get when you cross a
donkey with a rock? An evolutionists with the
stubbornness of a jackass and the intelligence of a rock! Tsk,
Tsk.
Question: If you believe something that cannot
be proven, isn't that faith? Doesn't faith constitute a religion or a cult?
FOOTNOTES: CHAPTER III
1 E. L. Simons,
"Annals
2 A. S. Romer
"Vertebrate Paleontology", 3rd edition 1966, The University of
Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA p. 221.
3 Dr. Duane T. Gish, "Evolution: The Fossils Say No",
Creation-Life Publishers,
4 Dr. Duane T. Gish, "Evolution: The Fossils Say No"
Creation-Life Publishers,
5 Dr. Duane T. Gish, "Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil
Record", Creation-Life Publishers,
6 E.J.H. Corner, "Contemporary
Botanical Thought", A. M. MacLeod and L.S. Cobley,
eds., 1961, Quadrangle Books,
7 D. M. Raup
and S. M. Stanley, "Principles of Paleontology", 1971, W. H. Freeman
and Co.,
8 L. DuNouy,
"Human Destiny", The New American Library, 1947,
9 Dr. E. C. Olson,
"The Evolution of Life", The New American
Library, 1965,
10 A.H. Clark, "The
New Evolution: Zoogenesis", 1930, Williams and
Wilkins,
11 L. DuNouy,
op. cit. p. 74.
12 G.A. Kerkut,
"Implications of Evolution", Pergamon
Press, 1960,
* Let the reader know that
I will now quote from Dr. Guish's book for a few
pages and will put his words in quotes and leave mine without quotes. When the
next footnote is noted that will be the end of the information from his book from
here to there.
CHAPTER IV
A FEW LAST FACTS
According to Leakey, and a
few others, man has been around about 3 to 10 million years. Most evolutionists
[They are divided in their beliefs.] believe man has been around 1 million
years. We will give them the benefit of a doubt [They will certainly need it]
and use Leakey's figure of 3 million years or so.
Evolutionists say that
Dinosaurs died out, disappeared, about 65 to 70 million years ago. This means
that dinosaurs had been dead at least 62 million years before man's earliest
ancestor appeared, if you take Richard Leakey's figures as fact.
Enough proof has already
been given in this book to show anyone, who is honest, that evolution is not
true, but what if dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time? If this can be
proven then the complete time table, on which evolution is based, is thrown
out, and with it, evolution!
An authentic report came
out of
A few miles away from the
many dinosaur footprints at Glen Rose,
Also In
a Cretaceous limestone formation near Glen Rose,
Glen Rose is located in
north central
I, Dr. Ron Powell, the
author of this small work, would like to take time out to give you the
following very, very, important information and then shall continue. This same
information and more was published in "The Great Dinosaur Mistake" in
the early 1990s, but I was somewhat apprehensive about using it in this edition
as I did in my original first edition of "Evolution: The Truth?". The present situation with the dinosaur and human
tracks now is that the elements or possibly someone has changed the human
tracks to the degree that they cannot for certain be claimed to be human
tracks.
Now though, the reason I
have decided to use this information of the finding of dinosaur and human
tracks together is that in searching the internet I came across the same
information being discovered and used in another book many decades before
Evolution: The Truth? and The Great Dinosaur Mistake
were printed! This was an, on the site, personal eye witness account, [when the
tracks were easily identifiable as human], of the Paleontologist and evolutionist
Dr. Roland T. Bird!
Now, continuing on:
Clifford L. Burdick, a mining geologist, and *Roland T. Bird, a paleontologist
with the American Museum of Natural History, carefully examined and reported on
the foot- prints.
Dr. Bird said, after examining
the footprints for himself,
"Yes, they apparently
are real enough. Real as the rock could be . . . the strangest things of their
kind I had ever seen. On the surface of each was splayed the near-likeness of a
human foot, perfect in every detail. But each imprint was 15 inches long!"
3
The present writer is over six feet 1 inch [18.4 dm] tall and has a foot that is 11 inches [27.95 cm] in length. The Glen Rose tracks are 15 inches [38.1 cm] long, and were probably made by people 8.3 feet [25.38 dm] tall. During his research at the Paluxy Riverbed near Glen Rose, Bird found not only