At this juncture, I don't believe I can justify calling the Darwinian world-view a “theory”. Rather, this set of postulates [i] is based on wrong conclusions and outright fraud, is better defined as “fantasy” - at best, “B”-grade science fiction. A viable theory is based upon empirical [ii] fact, but as we see, Evolution has never been observed to occur (although “natural selection” is a viable, demonstrable fact). We observe the data, and see that no transitory life forms such as “ape men” have been found as fossils, and those that are said to be “Man's early ancestors” have all proven to be something other than what was claimed, or outright frauds, such as “Piltdown Man”. 

            The basic tenet of Evolution is based upon the false premise that Earth is “billions of years old”, as modern science textbooks in the grade schools and universities still teach. If anyone was to proffer [iii] solid and irrefutable scientific evidence that the Earth and / or the universe is NOT “billions” or even “millions” of years old, then all of the other arguments pro-Evolution would be moot, since the eons of time over which the alleged “random mutations” allegedly occurred, simply did not exist. Therefore, if Earth is young, any of these Evolution events would have been observed by ancient peoples, and we would have tons of folklore mythology to accompany it. By the way, almost all of the cultures and civilizations of ancient times, have a legend about a devastating global flood. 

            It can be shown by a variety of observations, that the Earth is NOT millions of years old; billions of years is certainly out of the question, as we shall see. I am confident that future data will bear out this fact, but the following should suffice: 

            The first and second laws of thermodynamics cover a lot of territory having to do with energy. The first law says basically, that energy and matter cannot be created nor destroyed; they can only be converted into other forms. [iv] The second law states that any process that operates on energy or matter cannot be 100% efficient; some energy or matter is always “lost” to the ambient environment. The second law also dictates that no order can arise out of “random” natural processes. Order; what is required for even the simplest life form to exist, can only be the product of (intelligent) design. 

            It is the Second Law of Thermodynamics that properly interpreted, absolutely prohibits the existence of a “perpetual motion machine”, which the Earth and the universe would have to be, if the universe is “billions of years old” as the Big-Bangers and Evolutionists claim. 

            At the atomic level, we are told that electrons orbit the nucleus of the atom continuously. An atom is really, mostly empty space. The electrons move in their orbits, but scientists cannot explain where the energy comes from to keep those particles in motion. Albert Einstein's famous equation E=MC² shows the relationship of energy (E) to mass (M), and the speed of light (C). Science has recently discovered that the speed of light has been slowing down. The energy that propels the electrons around in their orbits has been postulated to come from “empty space”; what has come to be called the “Zero-Point Energy” The empirical observation of the slowing down of light’s speed over the last150 years or so, is proof that the universe at large, is not exempt from the second law of thermodynamics, and it creates further evidence for a younger (and smaller) universe, and a young Earth. This in turn, destroys the basis upon which Darwinian Evolution is founded, and completely negates the time factor; an essential component without which the Evolutionist religion [v] crumbles. 

            Without an Earth that has been relatively stable for “millions of years”, (at least), Evolutionists have insufficient time within to claim that their postulated process could operate. Never mind that such a process has never been observed, and could never be duplicated experimentally in a laboratory; Evolutionists conceal this fantasy process behind “billions of years”, and “long, slow, gradual processes”, which evaporate under logical, rational scrutiny. 

The Earth spins on its axis, and makes a complete revolution once every twenty-four hours - give or take a nanosecond or two. This rotation gives us night and day. Since we observe that there are no rocket motors pointing their exhaust westward causing the Earth to spin, we must concede that the energy to set it spinning must have been imparted to the Earth at the start. We might say with confidence, that “The Earth has been spinning from the beginning”, and for purposes here, it really does not matter whether it was set spinning by the “Big Bang”, or by the hand of God; our observation is that the Earth is spinning (the relative speed to an imaginary fixed point is approximately 1,000 MPH at the equator), and that there is no energy source that we can see or measure, keeping it in motion. This is also true for Earth's orbit around the sun, and it applies to the entire solar system, and the universe, as well.

             We must keep in mind that the laws of physics apply to atoms, planets and galaxies, as equally as it does to objects and forces on Earth. There is no such thing as a “perpetual motion machine”, whether it is a child's toy top or gyroscope, your car, the Earth, or the universe. Up until relatively recently, small increments of time could not be measured. We now know via repeatable experiments that time - the very passage of time - is relative to both the speed of the observer, and the intensity of a gravitational field. We won't get into detail on that here; suffice it to say that the reader can verify this on his / her own, by researching Einstein's Theory of Relativity et al.

             Therefore we must, having only the knowledge of the laws of physics, postulate that all of the universe, without a directed input of energy, must fall victim to entropy, [vi] and that our observation that “things have been like this practically forever” [vii] (see 2 Peter 3:1-6), is fundamentally and scientifically flawed. The age of the Earth is an extremely important question not only theologically, but also scientifically. Science that is based on wrong conclusions (or outright lies) ceases in time, to be science (“Science” comes from the Greek word “scio”, which means “to know”). The advent of the instruments that are sensitive enough to measure natural phenomena accurately, is threatening the world-view of Evolutionists. 

            The rotational speed of the Earth has now been accurately measured. It has been also observed to be slowing down at the rate of approximately 1 second every 18 months. In other words, it took one second longer for the Earth to make a complete rotation on its axis on June 30, 2004 (the 24-hour day was actually one second longer) than it did on January 1, 2002.

             Using 1 second per 18 months, we can project that a “day” only 6,000 years ago, would have been 17.33 hours long. Just 12,000 years ago, a “day” was only 10.67 hours long (see “Scoffers” on www.Net4TruthUSA.com/NS-Scoffers.htm). If the “day” was shorter, the Earth had to be spinning faster. Taking the calculations past this point, we see that we have to subtract approximately 1.1 hours from the “day” for every 1,000 years we go into the past, and conversely, we must add 1.1 hours to the “day” for every 1,000 years into the future. This means that in the year 2900 or so, all of your expensive Rolex watches will be obsolete collector's items, since we will have 25-hour days - If we're still around. The point here is, that much past the 6,000-year age of the Earth (according to the Bible), Earth could not support any life at all. Twelve thousand years ago, with a 10.67-hour day, the Earth would have been spinning twice as fast. This would make the relative speed at the equator over 2,000 MPH, causing massive storms and hurricane-force winds as “normal” climate. (Note: the energy imparted to a storm by the Coriolis effect is a square of the rotational speed of the Earth - this is empirical, substantiated fact).  

The internal friction of the Earth around its molten core (which would tend to, by reason of inertia, remain stationary - like water in a basketball) would cause volcanic activity which no life form could survive (like the Genesis Planet in the movie “Star Trek: The Search For Spock”). Therefore, it follows that if life could not survive, it could not “evolve” (and if it didn't “evolve”, then how did we, and all the other life on Earth get here?).

             The slowing of Earth's rotation, albeit by a very small amount each year, is empirical proof of its youth. It can no longer be reasonably argued that the Earth's rotation is constant; it is not. Therefore, we see that the Earth and the universe, is not exempt from the entropy laws on a cosmic scale, and it is not exempt from these laws on the atomic scale, either. Evolutionists have merely created the apparency [viii] of “millions” or “billions” of years in order to foist off their stupid pagan religion as “science”. 

            Now we can get into circular arguments about the motives that started the Evolutionist fantasy; it seems to have originated with Charles Lyle, in his book “Principles of Geology”, and seized upon by a preacher-cum-atheist by the name of Charles Darwin, who wrote an equally preposterous book titled “The Origin Of Species by Natural Selection”. The argument is moot, because the age of the Earth is not the “billions”, or even “millions” of years that Evolutionists and Big-Bangers claim. We are therefore back to the original postulate...”In the beginning God created...”. Therefore we see that the credibility of the Genesis account, despite its paucity, [ix] and the thousands of assaults against it by the “science falsely so-called” of the Darwinists and secular humanists, stands as accurate, scientific fact. Genesis was not written as “proof of God”; the Bible assumes that the reader would have already come to the obvious and reasonable conclusion from the evidence at hand.

             Make no mistake about this - “Evolution” is not science; it is a pagan religion masquerading as science, and there is not one iota of evidence to support that Evolution in the Darwinist sense, has ever occurred. There is no evidence in the fossil record of whales with legs, but some biology textbooks in America's grammar schools teach that whales have a “vestigial pelvis”, and once “walked around” on land. There is nothing inherently wrong with fairy tales, or science fiction, for that matter (I am an avid Sci-Fi fan). It is true that some of today's science fiction is tomorrow’s science fact (note the resemblance of “flip” cell phones to the Star Trek communicator), and it is good to exercise the imaginations of young children - so long as they are told, and know what they're reading or watching is fantasy. However, Evolution - whales walking around on land, Man evolving from monkeys, and all life ultimately arising from “prebiotic soup”, does not even make for a good Boy Scout campfire story, and it certainly is not “science” by any stretch of the imagination! However, this nonsense is still taught in schools today; it was taught to me 45 years ago, and I attended a Catholic grammar school.[x] 

            On the one hand, we were taught “...God created...”, and we had textbooks that said “millions of years ago...”, which has since “evolved” much like the proposed primitive life forms, into “billions”, and “Big Bangs”. 

            Well, folks, you can forget about what they say concerning the fossil record. The Earth, and therefore the “evidence” it contains, cannot be “millions” or “billions” of years old (even 50,000 would be stretching it). Therefore, even if it were possible for random mutations and natural selection to produce superior (and more complex) life forms, there is demonstrably not enough time for the process - even if it could happen - to operate. Sorry, Evolution is “a dog that just won't hunt”. You can believe it if you want to; just don't lie and call it “science”; call it what it is - a pagan religion, and a pretty stupid [xi] one at that. And while you evolutionists are at it, what you might want to do is come up with a symbol for your religion; you know, ancient Buddhists used the swastika (later adopted by Adolf Hitler), modern Buddhists have a Buddha, Muslims have a star and the crescent moon (Illahi aka: Allah - the Pagan moon god of the Kaaba), and Christians have the cross (symbol of Jesus Christ), and Scientology has an eight-pointed cross (the 8 dynamics of life).  

Evolutionism is the only religion on Earth without a symbol. This is very disturbing, since it is a religion according to the standards that have been accepted in courts worldwide, as the definition of “religion”. May I suggest that as your symbol, you use a Roulette wheel, sans the marble, since your religion demands that things that could not have happened by chance actually did happen by chance. Therefore, a Roulette wheel without a marble is as symbolic a thing as I can think of for what you believe, except perhaps a bologna sausage or a slimy rock. 

            The death knell for Evolution has sounded. My faith - my born-again Christian faith, is based on irrefutable, empirical fact; it cannot be shaken by indulgences in fantasy, Evolution, on the other hand, is based on pure conjecture, [xii] incorrect conclusions, and outright fraud and deceit. It is high time America purges this garbage from school textbooks - never mind teaching it “side by side” with Creation. Let’s put real science in the classroom, and leave the fairy tales in Kindergarten. 

            Perhaps some enterprising Christian Constitutional lawyer who reads this, will see the opportunity I see here... to incorporate under the law, the Worldwide Church of Darwin (or some-such name) as a legitimate § 501 (3 (c)) tax-exempt corporate church, using the writings of Charles Lyle, Charles Darwin, and Ernst Haeckel, and perhaps my book “The Book of NeoGenesis” as its “holy scripture”. The ball -less Roulette wheel or a pair of weighted dice could be the church icon, and perhaps a gorilla with a banana in one hand, and a fount     in pen in the other could be the official coat of arms. The church could adopt all of the school textbooks as its “apocrypha”, and once this was done, it would be a simple matter for any Christian parent to bring a class action Federal lawsuit under USC § 1983, claiming a violation of Constitutional rights, and a violation of “Separation of Church and State”, because the public schools would now be teaching a religion. The tort action would fall under the same precept by which the atheists removed God and the Pledge of Allegiance from the classrooms. Once Evolution is an “official” religion, the case would be stare decisis.[xiii] 

            Make no mistake about it - both the Creationist and Evolutionist world-views are ultimately religious; the Creationists cannot say where God came from (He “always was”), or if God was created by someone / something else, ad infinitum.[xiv] 

            The Evolutionists on the other hand, cannot say where all the matter in the universe came from, and how it came to be so highly organized without a directed effort of a sentient and intelligent organized. At the nexus of the two, are two postulates which are diametrically opposed: “In the beginning, God...”, and “Once upon a time, nothing exploded...”

             In Creationism, there is only one “leap of faith” required - that is that the existence of order; complexity beyond imagination, and the presence of information in DNA, is indicia of a designer; i.e.: if there is design, or a purpose or goal, there must be a sentient[xv] designer. 

            In Evolutionism, an interminable litany[xvi] of “leaps of faith” are required, and rationalizations that negate the immutable laws of nature; the laws of entropy and statistical probability, must be postulated. 

            The determination of good science can be made by examining one of the “logics” of Scientology:

   “The workability of a postulate [science, or theory] is established by the degree to which it explains existing phenomena [which is] already known; by the degree that it predicts new phenomena which when looked for, will be found to exist, and by the degree that it does not require that phenomena which do not exist in fact, be called into existence for its explanation.” [xvii] - Id at 636, Logic #19 (brackets mine).

             By the definition of science in Scientology,[xviii] Evolution does not, by any means, explain exiting phenomena. It does not predict any new phenomena, that when looked for, is found to exist, and it does require that a litany on non-existent phenomena (billions of years, random beneficial mutations, life from rocks) is called into existence (by ignorance, bad data, wrong conclusions, and outright fraud) for its explanation.

            Via the identical definition, Creationism (according to the Biblical account) does explain existing phenomena (creation / order arises from intelligence; a higher order of creation is required as complexity increases), it predicts phenomena that is found to exist (prophesy in both the clear text, and Equidistant Letter Sequence codes is fulfilled, even when attempts are made to avoid it), in addition, it predicts what will not be found to exist (“missing links”, hybrid speciation) and it does not require any conjuring-up of non-existent phenomena to explain it.

             I rest my case (for now), for the debunking of Evolution.

۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩