you're reading...

Evolutionary paradox

Large-scale evolution (one species to another) is something that has never been observed, and could never really be observed without a time machine.  Evolutionists use empirical data from small-scale variations within species (that are observed and completely Biblical), couple that with an unverifiable interpretation of the fossil record, and problematic dating methods to speculate our supposed history.  Most people do not realize that it is not the evidence that shows evolution, it is the scientist’s conclusions based on the evidence.  Then the layman is left to decide whether or not to believe the conclusions.  Most people decide that the consensus of scientists is authoritative and give them the benefit of the doubt.  But since when does popular opinion equal fact?  Isn’t this still just a belief system?  Believing in something we cannot see:  large-scale evolution.  Just like creation, it requires faith.

Just for fun, let’s suppose we found actual physical modern undeniable evidence for large-scale evolution.  Let me ask you hypothetically – would that prove anything about the past?  Is evidence of something today proof that it’s always been that way?  Of course not.  To hold to that belief, you would become a uniformitarian.  And doesn’t uniformitarianism seem to contradict the very essence of evolution… change?  Actually uniformity of nature is quite a good evidence for God and a creation that has continued since the beginning of time.  This is quite a paradox that evolutionists are not willing to address.



About Tim



Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: