It seems that the more we learn as scientific and archaeological finds come to light, the less people believe in Evolution. Scientist summarizing Darwinism tell us as follows: “Life on earth evolved gradually beginning with one primitive species — perhaps a self-replicating molecule — that lived more than 3.5 billion years ago; it then branched out over time, throwing off many new and diverse species; and the mechanism for most (but not all) of evolutionary change is natural selection.”(Jerry A. Coyne, Why Evolution Is True (New York: Viking, 2009), p. 3.)
Yet there are no not one piece of evidence found of a gradual change from a "self-replicating molecule" to all the different species. There are no evidence of gradualism or that later species should have traits that make them look like the descendants of earlier ones. We don't find a fish changing to land crawler or a lizard changing to bird, in fact there is no evidence whatsoever of the ancestors or fossils that would show the lineage of any species. You cant put them in a way to support this as one scientist says, “The idea that one can go to the fossil record and expect to empirically recover an ancestor-descendant sequence, be it of species, genera, families, or whatever, has been, and continues to be, a pernicious illusion.”(Gareth Nelson, “Presentation to the American Museum of Natural History (1969),” in David M. Williams & Malte C. Ebach, “The reform of palaeontology and the rise of biogeography—25 years after ‘ontogeny, phylogeny, palaeontology and the biogenetic law’ (Nelson, 1978),” Journal of Biogeography 31 (2004): 685-712.)
No species in the series could possibly be the ancestor of any other, because all of them possess characteristics they would first have to lose before evolving into a subsequent form. Scientist try to postulate why this is, or come up with ideas why there is no connection that should be there if the species evolved, but they all fall apart. They even admit there is none, "To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.”(Henry Gee, In Search of Deep Time. New York: Free Press, 1999, pp. 5, 32, 113-117. Jonathan Wells, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design (Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, 2006). )
Evolution along with the 'Big Bang' idea are losing the people as more evidence comes to light. How could the universe just appear out of nothing, and be spinning in all different tangents rather than one way as they should, be larger than we can even chart in such a short time. Many ideas of man which no longer seem to have any validity with people today.
Yet there are no not one piece of evidence found of a gradual change from a "self-replicating molecule" to all the different species. There are no evidence of gradualism or that later species should have traits that make them look like the descendants of earlier ones. We don't find a fish changing to land crawler or a lizard changing to bird, in fact there is no evidence whatsoever of the ancestors or fossils that would show the lineage of any species. You cant put them in a way to support this as one scientist says, “The idea that one can go to the fossil record and expect to empirically recover an ancestor-descendant sequence, be it of species, genera, families, or whatever, has been, and continues to be, a pernicious illusion.”(Gareth Nelson, “Presentation to the American Museum of Natural History (1969),” in David M. Williams & Malte C. Ebach, “The reform of palaeontology and the rise of biogeography—25 years after ‘ontogeny, phylogeny, palaeontology and the biogenetic law’ (Nelson, 1978),” Journal of Biogeography 31 (2004): 685-712.)
No species in the series could possibly be the ancestor of any other, because all of them possess characteristics they would first have to lose before evolving into a subsequent form. Scientist try to postulate why this is, or come up with ideas why there is no connection that should be there if the species evolved, but they all fall apart. They even admit there is none, "To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.”(Henry Gee, In Search of Deep Time. New York: Free Press, 1999, pp. 5, 32, 113-117. Jonathan Wells, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design (Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, 2006). )
Evolution along with the 'Big Bang' idea are losing the people as more evidence comes to light. How could the universe just appear out of nothing, and be spinning in all different tangents rather than one way as they should, be larger than we can even chart in such a short time. Many ideas of man which no longer seem to have any validity with people today.
