Chapter Nine - The Evidence of Creation from Science and the Bible (Cont'd)
¡@
1. INTRODUCTION
The believer will possibly find that the Evolution view of the origins of animals is a problem challenging to his faith. It will be our task in this chapter to provide a good biblical apologetic as a response to those who proclaim this incorrect world view, which is contrary to the biblical position.
Genesis 1:31 teaches that the creation of land animals took place on the sixth day of creation. As we read in Genesis 1:20-23, the birds of the air were created on the fifth day. There are many animals that live on the land and fly in the air, and we will study some of the most interesting ones. Dinosaurs are special, because many of them were so large, and so strange, and different from anything living on the earth today. An entire chapter - chapter 10 - will be devoted to the dinosaurs. In this chapter, we will learn more about amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and birds and the scientific evidence related to their origin.
This chapter, divided into four major divisions, is a brief consideration of the latest scientific evidences and the biblical truth to support for the Creation of animals by the God:
the creation of sea animals;
the creation of land animals;
the creation of flying animals; and
the creation of man.
¡@
2. THE CREATION OF SEA ANIMALS
2.1 The Fallacy of the Evolutionists' Imagined Model
Evolutionists believe that over a period of 100 million years, one or more of the invertebrates evolved into fishes, which they believe were the first vertebrates. Evolutionists can't agree as to whether a worm, or a sea urchin, or a sponge evolved into a fish - and not one single fossil intermediate between an invertebrate and a fish has ever been found! If an invertebrate evolved into a fish over 100 million years, billions of the intermediates must have lived and died during that vast stretch of time. Our museums ought to contain many thousands of fossil transitional forms.
2.1.1 No fossil evidence to support the evolution model
Vast numbers of the fossil invertebrates have been found; vast numbers of fossil fish have been found. But absolutely nothing, in between, has ever been found! The fossil evidence shows that every one of the many different kinds of fishes appear fully formed, and distinct.
2.1.2 The intermediates would have been extremely vulnerable
If the intermediates or transitional forms were existed, they would have been extremely vulnerable in either of the worlds they theoretically were bridging, therefore they could not survive.
2.2 The God Created the Sea Animals on the Fifth Day
"And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven."
"And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good."
"And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth."
"And the evening and the morning were the fifth day." (Genesis 1:20-23)
2.2.1 God created the invertebrates
All kinds of creatures live in the sea - some of the smallest and some of the largest, some that are very beautiful, and some that are bizarre, or odd. The smallest creatures that live in the sea are tiny, microscopic, single-celled forms of life, such as bacteria, protozoa, and algae. Sea dwellers also include many kinds of complex invertebrates, such as sponges, jellyfish, clams, oysters, sea urchins, starfish, trilobites (now believe to be extinct), worms, snails and others.
Many billions times of each of these creatures exist in the seas today. Some are simply soft-bodied, like worms and jellyfish, while others, such as clams, oysters, and brachiopods, have shells on the outside, and soft inner parts. Others, such as lobsters and the now-presumed-extinct trilobites, have a tough external outer covering, called an exoskeleton, with soft inner parts. All of these creatures are very complicated with specialized organs for digestion, reproduction and locomotion.
2.2.2 God created the vertebrates
We all know about the many different kinds of fish that live in the seas, lakes and streams. They, too, are numerous. It has been estimated that there are a billion billion herring in the seas today. Fish, like amphibians, reptiles, and mammals, have an internal skeleton, and are thus said to be vertebrates. There are also mammals that live in the sea. These include whales, dolphins, porpoises, seals, sea lions, and sea cows. Mammals include those creatures that are warm-blooded, give birth to their babies alive, and suckle their young.
Where did all of these marvelous creatures come from? How can we account for the existence of such a tremendous variety of creatures? The Bible tells us that these creatures were created by God, according to His own desire. By His unlimited knowledge, wisdom, and power, He conceived, designed, engineered, and made all of these creatures.
2.2.3 God created the sea mammals
Most mammals, including humans, horses, cows and cats live on land. However, some mammals live in the sea - whales, dolphins and sea lions.
2.2.3.1 Evolutionists' proposed transitional forms is false
Evolutionists believe that these "marine mammals" evolved from mammals that used to live on the land. Some believe that many millions of years ago, a hairy, four-legged mammal ventured into the water in search of food, or sanctuary. The tail gradually changed into flukes; the hind legs slowly disappeared; the front legs changed into flippers; and finally, over eons of time, these creatures became what we know today as the whale. One evolutionist suggested that the ancestor of whales and dolphins may have resembled a cow, a pig, or a buffalo.
Let us suppose that the ancestor of the whale was a cow, and for some reason, this cow ventured into the ocean. For some strange reason, her tail started to evolve into the broad flukes of a whale. That is, genetic mistakes, or mutations, just happened to gradually change her tail into flukes. Other genetic accidents caused her hind legs to start to get smaller and smaller. Another strange thing began to happen - genetic mistakes started to change her front legs into flippers. And very, very strangely, her nostrils began to move from the end of her snout towards the top of her head.
2.2.3.2 Such transitional forms would have been extremely vulnerable
Her tail is only partway flukes. It is no longer good for switching flies when she goes ashore, which she must do, often, because she is only part whale, and still has to spend much of her time on land, and it is not much help yet for swimming. Her hind legs are surely a great embarrassment. They are getting shorter and shorter. Her front legs are surely a mess, too. They are halfway between ordinary feet, and legs, and flippers.
This poor thing is at a tremendous disadvantage, while on land. She can't walk, or if she can, it would be terribly awkward. When she is in the water, she looks awfully silly trying to swim, with those part front feet - part flippers, and with a part tail - part flukes. Where does she have her babies, in the water or on the land? If she has them in the water, how does she keep them from drowning, and how does she nurse them? Such transitional forms would have been extremely vulnerable in either of the worlds they theoretically were bridging, therefore they could not survive. The whole idea that some hairy, four-legged mammal ventured into the water and gradually changed into a whale, during millions of years, is absurd.
2.2.3.3 No fossil evidence to support the evolution model
A creature - part cow and part whale - would have none of these special characteristics, and would be unable to live either on the land or in the water. Furthermore, paleontologists cannot find a series of transitional forms in the fossil record between whales and some imaginery, hairy, four-legged ancestor.
2.2.3.4 A whale is marvelously designed for life in the water
A whale is marvelously designed for life in the water. Mother whales are especially made so that they not only can give birth, but they also can nurse their babies under water. Their nostrils are on top of their heads so they can breathe when they are on the surface of the water. The ears of whales are so specially designed that they not only can hear under water, they also can stand the great pressure when they dive to a depth of 100 feet or more.
2.2.4 God created the marine reptiles
The same is true for the marine reptiles, the plesiosaurs, ichthyosaurs, and others. The ichthyosaurs, although they were air-breathing reptiles with internal skeletons, like land-dwelling reptiles, in many ways looked quite fish-like. Evolutionists believe marine reptiles evolved from four-legged reptiles that lived on land. Paleontologists have found many fossils of the plesiosaurs - with paddles instead of feet and legs, and they have found many fossils of the fish-like ichthyosaurs. They also have found many fossils of reptiles that lived on the land, but they have yet to find a single fossil of a part-land, part-marine reptile.
Evolutionists believe that it took millions of years for a land reptile to evolve into a marine reptile. If this is true, fossils of transitional forms should have been found in abundance. Their complete absence from the fossil record is contradictory to evolution, thus giving marvelous confirmation of the fact that God created the fish of the seas and whatsoever passes through the paths of the sea.
¡@
3. THE CREATION OF LAND ANIMALS
3.1 The Fallacy of the Evolutionists' Imagined Model
3.1.1 Evolutionists imagined the origin of land animals
Evolutionists believe that animal life began in the sea. They believe the first kinds of animals that lived on the land were amphibians. The word "amphibian" is used to refer to something that spends time both on land and in the water. Modern-day amphibians include frogs, toads and salamanders. These creatures like to live near the water, and the mother lays her eggs in the water, where they hatch to become larvae (the early form of an animal, such as a frog).
3.1.2 Evolutionists imagined the origin of amphibians
From what do evolutionists believe amphibians evolved? Evolutionists believe that fish evolved into amphibians. They believe that more than 400 million years ago, a fish began to crawl out of the water onto land, and gradually evolved into an amphibian. A lot of changes would have to take place in a creature that is designed to spend all of its time in the water, in order to convert it into a creature that spends much of its time on land.
Fins would have to evolve into feet and legs, such as those possessed by a salamander, for instance. Also, lungs would have to develop, and many other things would have to change.
3.1.3 No fossil evidence to support the evolution model
We need to look for a series of transitional forms in the fossil record which supposedly show fins gradually changing into feet and legs, in order to support evolution. Evolutionists believe a fish evolved into amphibians over millions of years, so it is logical to assume that many billions of those intermediates must have lived and died during those years. Surely scientists ought to be able to find thousands of fossils of the intermediates showing, for example, 95 % fins, 5 % feet and legs, 80 % fins, 20 % feet and legs, 50 % fins, 50 % feet and legs, and so forth.
We have many fossils of the one type of fish that evolutionists believe was the ancestor of amphibians. He was 100 % fish, with a lovely set of fins designed for balancing, steering, and moving in the water. We have fossils of what evolutionists believe is the oldest amphibian ever discovered. This fossil amphibian does not show part feet, and part legs, and part fins. He has 100 % feet and legs - the kind of feet and legs found on all such amphibians.
No one has ever found a single fossil of an intermediate with part fins, part feet, and part legs. If evolution is true, scientists ought to be able to find many, many thousands of fossils of the intermediates. But absolutely none have been found!
3.2 The God Created the Land Animals on the Sixth Day
"And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: And it was so."
"And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and everything that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good." (Genesis 1:24-25)
3.2.1 God created the amphibians
We are all familiar with a larval frog, the tadpole. At this stage, the baby frog has gills, like fish, and swims and lives in the water. Then, at just the right time, the gills disappear, lungs develop, front and hind feet begin to form, and the tadpole changes into a frog. This process is called metamorphosis (a change into a different physical form).
3.2.1.1 Metamorphosis is an embarrassment to evolutionists
Some people believe that metamorphosis is evidence for evolution - that a swimming tadpole "evolves" into an animal that has legs and spends most of its time on the land.
Actually, the process of metamorphosis is an embarrassment to evolutionists. It defies any explanation based on evolution. During metamorphosis, fins do not "evolve" into feet and legs, and gills do not "evolve" into lungs. All of the information or instructions to form the tadpole and the adult frog are present in the fertilized frog egg, and nothing has to accidentally come into existence by mutations. In fact, if a mutation does take place in the egg, the tadpole dies, or produces a crippled frog. Let's examine this metamorphosis.
The egg first develops into a tadpole. This tadpole has gills, so it obtains oxygen from the water, just like a fish does. When the tadpole begins to change into a frog, the gills disappear, and the lungs develop from an entirely different place, as do the legs. The lungs and legs do not form or "evolve" from pre-existing gills and fins, but are said to form de novo, meaning "from something new"or "from something original."
Evolution is faced with an animal that lives and swims in the water, obtaining oxygen from water through its gills. Then suddenly the old creature disappears and the animal has legs, lives out on the ground much of the time, and has a marvelous set of lungs for breathing air - a creature that wasn't even hinted at in the structure of the tadpole.
3.2.1.2 Problems of the evolution model
Evolutionists cannot answer the following questions:
How does an animal made for life in the water change into an animal that is made to live and breathe out of the water, with feet and legs, while at the same time retaining all of its former characteristics?
If it has "evolved" into a frog, how does its reproductive genes "remember" how to be a tadpole?
How could it "evolve" legs, and at the same time live and swim in the water?
Why would it "evolve" lungs, when the gills were doing a perfectly good job of obtaining oxygen from the water?
What advantage would it be for a tadpole to start evolving feet and legs?
How did everything get perfectly timed so this creature had everything happen just at the right time to make him a tadpole, and then all those other things happen just at the right time to change him into a frog?
3.2.1.3 Metamorphosis supported that the God created the amphibians
Metamorphosis is evidence of a complexity of functions that only the infinite Designer could have conceived. The frog has brought forth "after its kind" since the sixth day of creation, and, indeed, God has chosen a fascinating, unique way to accomplish this.
3.2.2 God created the reptiles and mammals
There are many different kinds of mammals on the earth today - those that live in sea (whales, dolphins, sea cows) and those that fly (bats). All mammals are warm-blooded, and mammals, alone among all creatures, produce milk for their young. Most mammals have a covering of hair, or fur, and most all give birth to their babies alive (the spiny anteater and duck-billed platypus lay eggs).
3.2.2.1 Evolutionists' proposed transitional forms could not survive
Evolutionists believe that mammals evolved from reptiles. That would require many complex changes, and it seems ridiculous that all of those incredible changes could be brought about in such a way that each creature intermediate between the reptile and mammal not only survived, but was even superior to the animal that preceded it.
3.2.2.2 Mechanism to regulate body temperature cannot be developed by chance
Evolutionists must somehow believe a cold-blooded animal changed into a warm-blooded animal. This involves much more than developing a mechanism to warm up the blood. The temperature must also be very carefully regulated. If the body temperature gets too warm, an animal dies; if the body temperature is too cool, an animals is sluggish, and cannot function well. Therefore, if evolution is true, some means had to be invented, by trial and error and chance mutations to regulate body temperature, while at the same time changing the degree of body temperature and adjusting all the systems in the body to operate in accord with that particular temperature. Sensing devices, methods for expanding and contracting blood vessels, sweating or panting (for cooling purposes), or shivering (for emergencies when cold), had to be developed by blind chance.
3.2.2.3 Method of reproduction cannot be developed by chance
Consider, also, that the method of reproduction in most all mammals is very different from that of reptiles. Reptiles lay eggs, but most mammalian offspring are born alive. This means the mother must have a very special and complicated means of nourishing and carrying the developing baby until it is born.
3.2.2.4 Circulatory system of unborn baby cannot be developed by chance
The unborn child must also have unique features. Until a baby is born, he does not use his lungs. Therefore, there is no need for blood to circulate to the lungs in order to absorb oxygen from the lungs. Thus the circulatory system of the unborn baby is so constructed that most of the blood bypasses the lungs. There is a circular muscle at a key location on the large blood vessel that carries the blood as it bypasses the lungs. At birth, this muscle contracts and closes off the bypass, causing the blood to flow through the vessels that go to the lungs. This only happens once in the entire lifetime of the creature! How could the supposed evolutionary process work that out? How could a series of genetic mistakes produce such a delicately balanced event, and how does a mutation anticipate the needs for an apparatus without which the creature dies?
Here is undoubted evidence of a brilliant engineering feat produced by the Master Engineer.
"I will praise Thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: Marvelous are Thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well." (Psalm 139:14)
3.2.2.5 The organ of Corti cannot be developed by evolution
Peculiar to mammals and the essential organ of hearing (in the middle ear), has 3,000 adjacent arches forming a tunnel. Until complete, or nearly complete, this complicated organ and its supply of hundreds of nerves would be useless. All mammals, living or fossil, have 3 bones in the ear (and the Organ of Corti!), while each reptile, living or fossil, has a single bone in the ear. No one has ever found a single intermediate with 2 bones in the ear. Furthermore, no one can reasonably explain how the intermediates managed to hear, while all of the necessary restructuring was taking place and the Organ of Corti was being developed.
3.2.2.6 Mammals did not evolve from reptiles
Paleontologists have found fossils of creatures they call "mammal-like reptiles." These creatures have some structures found in reptiles and some that are found in mammals. Evolutionists claim that these creatures are intermediates between reptiles and mammals. None of the structures or features found in these creatures is part mammal, part reptile structure, however. In whatever creature they are found, they are complete, fully functional structures. Creationists are not suprised to find certain structures, or organs, in two different kinds of animals. After all, a certain structure or feature that is needed in mammals might also be very useful in reptiles. There are a lot of things found in a television that are also found in a radio, but television sets did not evolve from radios.
¡@
4. THE CREATION OF FLYING ANIMALS
4.1 The Fallacy of the Evolutionists' Imagined Model
4.1.1 Evolutionists imagined the origin of flying animals
Evolutionists believe flying animal evolved from a non-flying animal. Converting a non-flying animal into a flying animal requires some very big changes. Thus, the intermediates, if they can be found as fossils, should be easy to recognize as partway between the non-flying animal and the flying animal. In each case, evolutionists believe, it took millions of years for the non-flying animal to evolve into the flying animal, and since four different kinds of flying animals supposedly evolved, there certainly should be adequate evidence of transitional forms in the fossil record.
4.1.2 No fossil evidence to support the evolution model
If evolution is true, scientists ought to be able to find many, many thousands of fossils of the intermediates between flying and non-flying animals. But absolutely none have been found!
4.2 The God Created the Flying Animals on the Fifth Day
"And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven." (Genesis 1:20)
"And the evening and the morning were the fifth day." (Genesis 1:23)
4.2.1 God created the insects
Evolutionists are still arguing, among themselves, about what, on a non-flying insect evolved into wings. If we could find even one single transitional form, we would be able to know, immediately, what structures on the non-flying insect evolved into wings.
4.2.1.1 No transitional form has been found
But not one single transitional form has ever been found! Their total absence is remakable testimony to the fact of creation.
It is not scientists cannot find fossils of insects - there are many! Recently, for example, fossils of insects supposedly 380 million years old have been found. The scientist who found them said they were so perfectly preserved they looked like they had died just yesterday. These fossils included those of spiders, mites and daddy longlegs. They haven't changed much in that supposed 380 million years as claimed by the evolutionists! (note: The age of the earth is actually a few thousand years old as I have mentioned it in chapter 7.)
4.2.1.2 Fossil cockroaches looked similar to modern cockroaches
Not long ago, some fossil cockroaches were discovered. They are also supposed to be 350 million years old, but the scientist who studied them said they looked disgustingly similar to modern cockroaches. She said that cockroaches apparently haven't changed much in 350 million years. What the evolutionist sees as an insect unchanged over millions of years, the creationist sees as an insect not unlike those created on the sixth day of creation, by God.
4.2.2 God created the flying reptiles
Evolutionists believe that flying reptiles evolved from non-flying reptiles.
Flying reptiles were strange creatures, indeed. There were several kinds of flying reptiles. Rhamphorhynchus was only about one and one-half feet long. He had a long tail with a rudder on the end. In Texas paleontologists found fossil remains of a flying reptile, Pteranodon, with a wingspread of about 52 feet. The Pteranodon had a long, toothless beak; a long bony crest extending backward, and he was very large - as were many of these creatures. All these flying reptiles had at least one thing in common - an enormously long fourth finger, which was the main support for the wing membrane.
What had to happen if these creatures were to have evolved? Many millions of years ago there would have been no such thing as a flying reptile - just ordinary reptiles. Evolutionists assume that the fourth fingers on these reptiles got longer, and longer, during millions of years and via many mutations. And at the same time, other genetic mistakes generated the wing membrane, the flight muscles, caused teeth and jaws to evolve into a long toothless beak (in the case of Pteranodon), and caused the bones to become hollow, to make them lighter, for flight.
4.2.2.1 Evolutionists' proposed transitional forms could not survive
Imagine one of those reptiles at an intermediate stage. he has only partial wings, so he can't fly. But, on the other hand, he can only walk, very awkwardly, if he can walk at all. Such a creature could not eat properly, or fly, or run around on the ground to catch prey. But evolution teaches that these were the superior forms which gave rise to new species! As one can see, the above scenario is ridiculous! God created flying reptiles, fully formed, able to fly, and to eat, and to reproduce after their kind.
4.2.2.2 No transitional form has been found
And this is exactly what the fossil record proves. There is not even a trace of a transitional form between non-flying and flying reptiles. They appear in the fossil record fully formed, and when they disappear from the fossil record, they are the same magnificent creatures.
4.2.3 God created the bats
Bats are mammals. Evolutionists believe that these flying mammals evolved from a non-flying mammal, similar to a rat. As in the case of the flying reptiles, a mutation had to lengthen the fingers in order for the bat to evolve. With the bat, however, almost all of the fingers are very long, and support the wing membrane. So, a mutation was necessary that would lengthen almost all of the fingers. Evolution teaches struggle for existence, all the while fingers getting longer and longer, and wing membranes and flight muscles developing magically.
4.2.3.1 Bats' marvelous sonar system could not have evolved
It was also necessary for these mutations to produce an extremely complicated sonar system, "de novo." That is, there was nothing in the bat's supposed ancestor, from which the sonar system could have evolved. This sonar system is truly marvelous. Each bat sends out a series of very rapid signals which bounce off objects and return to the ear of the bat. From the intensity and direction of these signals that return, the bat can recognize each object within sonar range and fix its exact location.
4.2.3.2 Fossil bat is essentially identical to a modern bat
The world's oldest fossil bat is supposed to be 50 million years old. This fossil was discovered in Wyoming, and was studied by Dr. Glenn Jeppsen, a vertibrate paleontologist. This bat is essentially identical to a modern bat. It had the marvelous sonar system just described. He appears in the fossil record without a trace of any earlier ancestors or intermediate forms - a powerful testimony to the fact of creation, and totally contradictory to evolution theory.
4.2.4 God created the birds
Evolutionists believe a reptile evolved into birds over millions of years. They claim that Archaeopteryx was a transitional form between reptile and bird. They point to the fact that this bird had claws on its wings, teeth, and other features that seem to be reptile-like. Some might suggest these features indicate that Archaeopteryx evolved from a reptile.
4.2.4.1 The presence or absence of teeth do not support evolution
It is true that modern birds do not have teeth. However, some ancient birds did have teeth. By the same token, it is also true many ancient birds did not have teeth. The point is, no fossils have ever been found that show a gradual disappearance of teeth in birds. They either had teeth, or they didn't! This is not surprising, because it is also true of all other vertebrates. Some fishes have teeth, some reptiles have teeth and some mammals have teeth. But there are fishes, reptiles and mammals with no teeth! Because of this, the presence or absence of teeth do not support evolution.
4.2.4.2 Claws on the wings are not evidence of a transition between reptiles and birds
Are claws on the wings evidence of a transition between reptiles and birds? There are at least three birds living today that have claws on the wings, they are:
Hoatzin;
Touraco; and
Ostrich.
No one would dare suggest that any of these birds are intermediates between reptiles and birds because they are very much alive and well today.
4.2.4.3 Archaeopteryx was not an intermediate between reptiles and birds
A few years ago, a paleontologist found the fossils of a modern bird and concluded, from the evidence, that it had lived at the same time as Archaeopteryx. Archaeopteryx cannot be the ancestor of birds, if modern birds and Archaeopteryx lived at the same time.
More recently, paleontologists found fossils of a bird in Texas that is supposed to have lived 75 million years before Archaeopteryx. If evolutionary thinking is followed, this bird should be more reptile-like than Archaeopteryx. But it is more bird-like than Archaeopteryx! Scientists conclude that Archaeopteryx was not an intermediate between reptiles and birds, but was a bird, especially created by God and preserved for us in the fossil record.
¡@
5. THE CREATION OF MAN
5.1 The Fallacy of the Evolutionists' Imagined Model
5.1.1 Evolutionists imagined the origin of man
Evolutionists believe that humans evolved from ape-like creatures, beginning millions of years ago. Evolutionists' faith in their theory makes it necessary for them to believe that a tooth, or a piece of a skull, or a jawbone, or some other fossil bone came from a creature partway between ape and man.
5.1.2 Evolutionists are bias
When a person believes in something very strongly, he often "sees" evidence that supports his belief, even though it doesn't really exist, and he pays little attention to things that contradict what he believes. Evolutionists believe that people have evolved from apes, so they expect to find evidence to support that theory. Oftentimes they are certain they have found evidence that a fossil is from a creature partway between an ape and a human, but they are badly mistaken. Let us look at some example:
5.1.3 The Piltdown hoax
In 1912, Charles Dawson, a lawyer and amateur fossil hunter, discovered a few fragments of a jawbone and pieces of a skull in a gravel pit near Piltdown, England. The jawbone appeared to be quite ape-like, but the teeth and the skull appeared to be quite human-like. Dawson and the English scientists with whom he consulted were certain that all of these fossil bones were from a single individual - a creature combining human-like and ape-like features. They declared that these fossils were from a creature intermediate between ape and man that existed 500,000 years ago. This creature was given the official name of Eoanthropus dawsoni (Eoanthropus means "Dawn-man") and he became known as the famous Piltdown Man.
But in 1950, it was shown that Piltdown Man was a hoax - a fake! Someone had taken the jawbone of an ape and the skull of a modern human, treated them with chemicals to make them look old, filed the teeth with a file to make them look human-like instead of ape-like, planted the "fossil" bones in the gravel pit, and fooled the world's greatest experts! The evolutionists cannot answer the following questions:
Why did it take the experts almost 50 years to detect the fraud?
Why didn't they see the scratch marks on the teeth made by the file when they first looked at the teeth?
Why didn't they notice, right away, that the brown stain on these bones was only in a thin, outer layer?
Why were they able to "see" human characteristics in the ape's jaw, and why did they "see" ape-like characteristics in the human skull?
All of this happened because evolutionists believed so strongly in evolution that they saw the things they expected to find, and failed to see things they did not want to see.
5.1.4 The Nebraska man
In 1922, a single tooth was discovered in western Nebraska. The tooth was shown to one of America's foremost fossil experts, Dr. Henry Fairfield Osborn, professor at Columbia University. He declared that certain characteristics intermediate between ape and man could be seen in that tooth. In fact, he wasn't quite sure whether it was from an ape-like man or man-like ape. He was given the official name of Hesperopithecus, became popularly known as Nebraska Man, and was presented as evidence that man had evolved from apes.
A few years after the discovery of the tooth, some additional bones of the creature were discovered and Nebraska Man turned out to be a pig! That's right - Nebraska Man was nothing more than a pig's tooth!
5.1.5 The Neanderthal man
In 1860, the first few fossil fragments of Neanderthal Man were found in the Neanderthal Valley, in Germany. In 1908, a nearly complete skeleton was found in France. The Neanderthal people manufactured tools and weapons, and they buried their dead just like modern-day people. Furthermore, their brains were somewhat larger than those of modern-day humans. All of this indicated that they were fully human, Homo sapiens. They did, in some ways, however, appear to be rather primitive. Their skulls were flatter than ours, some of them had rather heavy eyebrow ridges, and the skeleton in France appeared to be hunched over, as if Neanderthal Man did not walk completely upright like you and I. Based on these findings, the Neanderthal people were declared, by evolutionists, to be subhuman ancestors of man, and were given the official name of Homo neanderthalensis.
A famous anatomist, Dr. Rudolph Virchow, declared, many years ago, that the primitive features of the Neanderthal people were not due to the fact that these people were subhuman, but were due to diseases, or pathological conditions. He pointed out that the skeleton discovered in France was of an old man who couldn't walk upright because he had a bad case of arthritis! Dr. Virchow declared, further, that all of these people suffered severely from rickets (a condition caused by the lack of Vitamin D) which causes bones to become soft and deformed.
Eventually, other skeletons of Neanderthal people were found that were fully erect, and it was established, by medical research, that the skeleton found in France was, indeed, that of an arthritic old man. X-rays of the fossil bones and teeth showed, just as Dr. Virchow had declared, that all of the Neanderthal people had rickets. Scientists finally concluded that all of the so-called primitive features of the Neanderthal people were due to pathological conditions, or diseases.
5.1.6 Java man, Peking man, Cro-Magnon man
Dr. Duane Gish, where he collaborated with former Nobel Prize winners in various projects, is listed in American Men of Science and Who's Who in the West, is a member of the American Chemical Society, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and is a Fellow of the American Institute of Chemists. In his book, Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record (Master Books, El Cajon, California), he describe in detail why he believe that Java Man and Peking Man were not the ancestors of man, but were apes.
In fact, Dr. Eugene Dubois, the discoverer of Java Man and the one who first claimed that Java Man was an ancestor of man, changed his mind about 15 years before he died, and declared that Java Man was nothing more than a giant ape - more particularly, a giant gibbon.
In addition, scientists now agree that the once loudly proclaimed Cro-Magnon Man was identical to a modern European.
5.1.7 Man did not evolve
Lord Zuckerman (Dr. Solly Zuckerman), a famous British anatomist, was for many years the head of the Department of Anatomy at the medical school of the University of Birmingham, in England. He was first knighted for his distinguished scientific career (becoming Sir Solly Zuckerman), and later became Lord Zuckerman. After many years of research, he published a book, Beyond the Ivory Tower, in 1970. On page 64 of this book, Lord Zuckerman makes a very important admission. He says that if we exclude the possibility of creation, then, obviously, man must have evolved from an ape-like creature; but if he did, there is no evidence for it in the fossil record. He admitted that there is simply no evidence in the fossil record to support the notion that man has evolved. Other scientists have come to somewhat similar conclusions.
5.1.8 Apes from man?
Recently, an astounding development has taken place. In the last few years, several evolutionists have declared they now believe that rather than man evolving from apes, apes evolved from humans! This theory is exactly opposite of the evolutionary idea that man evolved from apes. The reason two such contradictory theories can be arrived at from the same set of evidence, is that these scientists begin with a basic assumption that is wrong - that is, that evolution has taken place. If fossil evidence is viewed in the light of creation, such contradictions and problems vanish.
5.2 The God Created Man on the Sixth Day
"And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness: And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He Him; male and female created He them." (Genesis 1:26-27)
"And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: And He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made He a woman, and brought her unto the man." (Genesis 2:7, 21, 22)
5.2.1 God created man in the image of God
Did God create man in the image of an ape? No, He created man in the image of God. Thus, from what the Bible says, we know that evolution cannot possibly be correct. People did not evolve from apes.
God first created man by taking the elements found in the dust of the ground and forming Adam. We note that Adam did not become a living person until God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. Then God made the first woman, Eve, in a very special way, by removing one of Adam's ribs, from which He created Eve.
Why did God create woman in this way? God did it that way to impress upon mankind the closeness and dependence of the wife upon her husband, and of the husband upon his wife.
5.2.2 Evidence from the New Testament
In the New Testament, we find further proof of this special way that God created woman. In 1 Corinthians 11:8, we read, "For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man." The Apostle Paul, in his letter to the Corinthians, was referring to that special moment in history when God created man and woman. The first man (Adam) was not born of a woman, but Adam was first specially created, and then Eve was created from Adam. Today, of course, we are all born from a woman - we all have mothers.
The Bible very clearly states, in unmistakable language, that God created man and woman in a very special way. The facts of science, as found in the fossil record, provide powerful positive evidence to support the Biblical record of creation.
5.2.3 Evidence from Embryology
Evolutionists teach that the facts of embryology support evolution - that the human embryo has gill slits just like fish, and this proves that hundreds of millions of years ago, we had a fish as our distant ancestor. This theory is called the theory of embryological recapitualation. According to this idea, as the human embryo develops, it recapitulates its evolutionary ancestry. That is, it resembles each evolutionary ancestor in the correct order of evolution. Thus, the human embryo starts our as a single cell. Later, it supposedly looks like a fish (with gill slits), then it looks like a tadpole (the larval stage of an amphibian). Then, later, it resembles a reptile, then an ape, and finally, becomes human. This theory was very popular during Darwin's time.
5.2.3.1 Recapitulation is no longer believed by evolutionists
Today, the theory of embryological recapitulation is no longer believed by most evolutionists, and certainly not by embryologists. Dr. Ashley Montagu, at Princeton University, a foremost evolutionist, admitted that the theory of embryological recapitulation had been proven to be wrong, and that no evolutionist should ever use this discredited theory to support evolution.
The human embryo has no gill slits. It does have a series of bars and grooves in the neck region which looks like gill slits of a fish embryo. However, the so-called gill slits in the human embryo are in reality pharyngeal pouches that develop into the lower jaw, parts of the middle ear and certain glands. None of these structures ever open into the throat to become slits, and none ever develop into gills.
5.2.3.2 Fetoscope shows that human embryo is totally human
Furthermore, in the human embryo, the tongue develops before the teeth, the heart before the blood vessels, and the brain before the nerve cords. This is the opposite order that would be expected if the embryo were repeating the supposed evolutionary process. Just recently, an instrument has been developed called a fetoscope, which can be inserted into the mother's uterus to observe and photograph the embryo as it develops. Using this instrument, scientists discovered that at every stage of its development, the human embryo is totally human. God has programmed the embryo of each creature to start out as a single cell, and to develop into a new-born creature completely prepared to survive and thrive in the world into which it is born.
"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." (Jeremiah 1:5)
5.2.4 Evidence from vestigial organs
Evolutionists have also claimed that within our bodies are structures and organs which now have no function, but which were useful to our evolutionary ancestors. These organs and structures are called vestigial organs, the idea being that now they are only useless vestiges of once-useful structures. Approximately 100 years ago, a German scientist named Wiedersheim listed 180 structures and organs in man which he thought were now useless. He included, for example, the pituitary gland, the thymus gland, the pineal gland, the tonsils, the appendix, and the coccyx, or tailbone.
After a century of medical research, we now know that all of these structures have an important function in man, and, in fact, without many of them, we cannot live. The pituitary, thymus, and pineal glands are vital to our existence. The tonsils and the appendix are now known to be, among other things, important disease-fighting organs. The tailbone serves to anchor certain pelvic muscles. You cannot sit comfortably without it, and it protects the end of the spinal column. In a scientific journal, not long ago, an evolutionist published an article in which he declared that supposed vestigial organs offer no support for evolution.
5.3 Wives for Cain and Abel
Many questions have been raised about the Biblical history of man, such as:
Where did Cain and Abel get their wives?
How did all the different human races come into existence if we all came from Adam and Eve?
Cain and Abel married their sisters. This was not wrong in the very beginning of the human race, for three reasons:
Marriage of close relatives was permitted by God.
God did not create many couples, He created one, Adam and Eve, so it was necessary for their children to marry among themselves.
In the beginning, there were no health problems caused by intermarriage.
5.3.1 Adam and Eve Were Created Perfect
Adam and Eve were created perfect (Genesis 1:31). They had no bad genes to pass on to their children, such as the genes that cause sickle-cell anemia, diabetes, blindness, sterility, and many other crippling conditions.
5.3.2 Most of the Bad Genes are Recessive
Most of the genes that cause genetic diseases, such as sickle-cell anemia, are recessive. Thus, if one of these "bad" genes is inherited from one parent, but the same gene that is normal is inherited from the other parent, the normal gene is dominant, and the child will be healthy. If one or more bad gene exists within a family, and if a sister would marry a brother, or if first cousins marry, there is a likely possibility that each parent, even though healthy, will be carrying the bad gene, and the child will be a victim of the genetic disease.
This is why inter-marriage within today's families is not only strongly discouraged, but is, unlawful, in most countries of the world. Marriage of close relatives was later forbidden by God (Leviticus 18:6, 9).
5.3.3 After Adam and Eve Sinned, the World Came Under God's Curse
Of course, this situation did not exist in the family of Adam and Eve. When God created them, all of their genes were perfect. After Adam and Eve sinned, the whole world came under God's curse, bringing about death, disease, pain, and suffering.
Scientists know that bad genes are caused by mutations. Mutations occur when a good gene is changed slightly, due to the effect of x-rays, cosmic rays, ultraviolet light, radioactive substances, chemicals, etc. Mutations began to occur after the curse, but because of the strength of the genetic code created by God, it was many generations after Adam and Eve before bad genes became a problem. Although Cain, Abel, and Seth are the only children of Adam and Eve mentioned by name in the Bible, Genesis 5:4 tells us they had "sons and daughters." Taking into consideration the longevity of man in the pre-Flood world, there would have been an ample population, even among Adam and Eve's own children, from which to choose a spouse.
5.4 Origin of Human Races
5.4.1 Evolutionists Had No Explanation for the Origin of Human Races
A prominent evolutionist mentioned that it was astounding that more than 100 years after Darwin, evolutionists still had no explanation for the origin of human races. If evolution is true, it ought to be a rather sample matter to put the pieces of the genetic jigsaw puzzle together, using evolutionary theory. The problem is, the pieces don't go together, according to evolutionary theory.
5.4.2 Creationists Can Provide Satisfactory Answer to the Origin of Human Races
Creationists can provide satisfactory answer to the origin of human races. Creationists start with just two people, Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were not white, black, Oriental, or of any other particular race. They, no doubt, were what we understand today as racially mixed. Their children were all likewise a mixture of the genetic traits that have subsequently produced the races. Among these offspring, one would be able to see tendencies toward various races, but since all marriages were mixed, no races emerged.
Even after the Flood (Genesis 6-8), all humans on the earth were the descendants of the 3 sons and 3 daughters-in-law of Noah and his wife, and so they, too, must have been racially mixed. As they and their descendants repopulated the earth, all peoples intermarried freely, and there was no isolation of genetic characteristics that would produce features inherent in one particular race.
5.4.3 At the Tower of Babel God Split the Human Population into Small Groups
"Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth." (Genesis 11:9)
At the Tower of Babel, however, God split the human population into small groups, by "confounding" the one language they spoke into many different languages. Each group of people spoke only the language that God gave them. They could no longer talk to the people in the other groups, so, of course, they no longer intermarried with them.
Soon the various groups began to migrate to other parts of the world, and became geographically isolated from one another. Thus, there was necessarily a lot of intermarriage within each group. That is, it was necessary to find marriage partners from the few people within one's own group, and the children of such marriages also had limited choices. When there are marriages of this kind, a concentration of certain genes is developed. If, for example, the group had a concentration of genes for dark skin and negroid features, then a negro people would result. If the group had a concentration of genes found in Oriental people, then the group would give rise to one of the Oriental races. If, on the other hand, the group had a concentration of genes for fair skin and blue eyes, one of the Scandinavian races would emerge.
5.4.4 Evolutionists admit that inbreeding can produce races
Evolutionists, themselves, admit that in order for "races" - or sub-species - to arise, a population must be split into small, isolated groups, leading to "inbreeding." What better way to do this than what occurred at the Tower of Babel, as described in Genesis, Chapter 11? To evolutionists, the origin of races still remains an unsolved problem. Creationists, however, utilizing modern genetic studies and the facts of history recorded in the Bible, do have the true explanation for the origin of races.
5.5 Conclusion - No Contradiction Between Science and the Bible
There are no contradictions between the facts of science and the truth recorded in the Word of God, though there are contradictions between the theory of evolution and the Bible. Furthermore, utilizing many facts revealed in the Bible helps us to solve some important scientific problems.
¡@
6. REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER STUDY
The Amazing Story of Creation from Science and the Bible, Institute for Creation Research, 1990, by Duane T. Gish, PhD.
The Young Earth, Master Books, Creation-Life Publishers, 1994, by Morris D. John, PhD.
Scientific Creationism, Master Books, Institute for Creation Research, 2nd Edition, 1985, by Morris M. Henry, PhD.
What is Creation Science, Master Books, Creation-Life Publishers, Revised Edition, 1987, by Morris M. Henry and Parker E. Gary.
The Genesis Flood, The Biblical Record and Its Scientific Implications, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 39th Printing, 1995, by Whitcomb C. John, and Morris M. Henry, PhD.
The World That Perished, Grand Rapids, Baker House, Revised Edition, 1988, by Whitcomb C. John.
The Genesis Record, A Scientific and Devotional Commentary on the Book of Beginnings, Grand Rapids, Baker House, 26th Printing, 1994, by Morris M. Henry, PhD.
¡@
¡@