If you have not read Stories Versus Truth, you may want to read that before reading this.
The Problems With the Molecules-to-Man Evolution Conjecture / Fabrication
There are many problems with the molecules-to-man evolution conjecture / fabrication. One of the major problems is the fact that Evolutionists go to such great lengths to make sure that the problems of Evolution will not be talked about. They will oppose teaching the entire truth in the Schools. They will engage in legal terrorism, using the courts for coercion just to stop the message from getting out. Entire companies are started with the intent of maintaining cloak of silence. They resort to ridicule. They do everything that the scientists did to Galileo when they didn't want him to talk about the earth not being the center of the universe. They will spend huge sums of money to keep the truth from being told. Why?
Here, we would like to list some to the top-level problems with the molecules-to-man evolution conjecture / fabrication.
Darwin came up with the concept of natural selection as being the way that simple things proceed to become complex things. However, Darwin didn't know that there is no way to add new information by natural processes. In fact, he didn't even know that it would be necessary, because he didn't understand that the cells have information in them. (Read the latest science on the subject: Without Excuse by Werner Gitt, a description of the scientific Laws of Universal Information. See also: Information Theory Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4. Here is another interesting article.) More is constantly being learned about information and about the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Evolutionists tend to hide in the weeds of the unknown with an argument from ignorance: "If you can't prove, by empirical science, that evolution is impossible, then it happened." By empirical science alone, we can only prove probabilities. The probabilities show the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story to be a bazaar hypothesis, a story that is so improbable that it should not be considered. However, empirical science is not a tool that can prove anything to be true or false absolutely. For absolute proof, we have revelation. (See Basic and Concise Guide to Practical, Useful Logic and Reasoning). God says that He created everything. He is the One Who enforces the laws of nature. He is the One Who will judge all of us in the end. We know that because we know Him presonally through the indwelling Presence of Jesus Christ and the moment-by-moment instruction of the Holy Spirit.
Natural Selection only selects from what is already there. It may explain the survival of the fittest, but it cannot explain the arrival of the fittest. The Bible explains the arrival of the fittest. Evolution's stories do not explain the arrival of the fittest so Evolutionists use various methods of deception to compensate. One kind of living thing does not turn into another kind of living thing in the real world. There is great variation within kinds of living things, but within limits. It is deceptive to call such variation micro-evolution and to imply that small changes lead to big changes over long periods of time, since we cannot see this happening at all in the fossils that were laid down during the great global flood. What we see is many family trees and no mixing between the families.
God really put in a lot of information into living things originally so that we can have so much information to draw from. There is a new science of baraminology that is classifying living things and noting that there is not one tree of life but rather a forest of trees that are disconnected from each other at the roots--just like as if they were created kinds. What a surprise!
The idea that natural selection could possibly create new innovative genetic information of the type needed for even the smallest advance in so-called molecules-to-man evolution was soon shown to be silly since selection can only consider what is already there and has no way of producing new innovative genetic information of the type needed for even the smallest advance in so-called molecules-to-man evolution. (see video below)
Evolutionists proposed that chance mutations may have added the new genetic information needed for progression from the simple to the complex. This idea of adding new genetic information by chance mutations was soon shown to be just as silly as the idea of adding new genetic information by natural selection as experiment after experiment proved that chance mutations always destroy information rather than adding new innovative genetic information of the type needed for even the smallest advance in so-called molecules-to-man evolution.
New innovative genetic information of the type needed for even the smallest advance in so-called molecules-to-man evolution would need to be generated by natural means. It never happens.
The following chart makes it plain that every instance of supposed increase of information that is used by Evolution's evangelists is an example of NO increase in information. Evolutionist's claims for adding information fall into three categories. These are the 3 Rs of Evolution: Rearrange information, Remove information, and Ruin information. See: The 3 Rs of evolution
Using an analogy of a train, Evolution hopes to go from Missouri in Central U.S. to California. However, the train is going the wrong direction toward New York, with each small change being the result of a loss of information or simply a rearrangement of what is already there. The evolution train’s a-comin’
Now, Evolutionists just keep repeating the same old presuppositions but have never come up with a working hypothesis by which evolution could possibly have taken place.
All of science tells us of a creator who created everything from nothing and a world-wide flood that buried many animals and people creating many fossils.This is the only scientific explanation that actually fits the facts.
Astronomy
Astronomy and Astrophysics (evidence for design, big bang problems, dark matter, seeing distant starlight)
