One in Messiah Congregation

As science changes, some of the information below will have to change.

Intelligent Design

The Designer - God


The reference information from Kent Hovind is from many books, textbooks, magazines, websites...

We at One in Messiah Congregation are not Baptists. We have a different theology then Kent Hovind.

We pray he will keep the 4th commandment, Sabbath and feasts of the Lord one day.

 When it comes to standing up for Creation and Intelligent Design, we agree Evolution is a bad, destructive and a evil religion.

Kent Hovind says his work is not copy written, to use it for free anywhere. So we did...

Our website is:



We believe Satan wants us to lie and to believe lies!

No liar will enter the kingdom of heaven!

Here are a few verses below:

Prov. 6 [16] These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
[17] A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
[18] An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
[19] A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.


Prov.19 [5] A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall not escape.

[9] A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall perish.


John. 8 [44] Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.


Rev. 21 [8] But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.



There are Laws and Codes to protect against inaccurate material in textbooks. The problem is that these laws are not enforced, and there are many textbooks that have out-dated information in them. Some evolution “proofs” that were proven false, or hoaxes, are still in the textbooks. Other “facts” are just plain lies.

Here are a few Laws that should protect the school system from getting books that have inaccuracies and lies in them:

Wisconsin Administrative Code 361 Role: The criteria for selection of textbooks shall be: Factual accuracy.

Alabama Code 1975, Section 16-36-70 “Adequate textbooks” – provides: “(b) All students in the public schools shall be provided with adequate and current textbooks…” One might argue that textbooks that contain statements and examples that are proven to be false and fraudulent are neither adequate nor current.

Texas Administrative Code Title 19-Education 66.66 (I) “Instructional materials shall present the most factual information accurately and objectively without editorial opinion or bias by the authors. Theories shall be clearly distinguished from facts and presented in an objective manner.

Florida Statute 223.09 (e) “All instructional materials recommended by each counsel for use in the schools shall be to the satisfaction of each counsel, accurate, objective and current.”

California Education Code 60200 (c3) “California Textbooks shall be factually accurate and incorporate principles of instruction reflective of current and confirmed research.”

8700.7500 Code of Ethics for Minnesota Teachers, Subpart 2, Standards of Professional Conduct. G. “A teacher shall not deliberately suppress or distort subject matter.”

The website Text Book Reviews has reviews and rankings of school textbooks based on how much inaccurate information they have.


Here are some inaccuracies and lies that are in many of the science books that children at all grade levels are being taught:

The Earth is 4.5 billion years old. There is no factual evidence of this, and a lot against it. See The Age of the Universe below.

The Universe began about 16.5 billion years ago. Again, no proof. See link on #1.

Life evolved over a long period of time. There is absolutely no evidence that life has evolved, which is to say that one kind of animal became another kind (like a dog becoming a non-dog). See The Facts About Evolution below.

“Over millions of years, the Colorado River has carved out the Grand Canyon from solid rock.” – The Grand Canyon is a breech in a giant dam, called the Kaibab uplift. The top of the canyon is about 6,900 feet above sea level. The river that supposedly made it over millions of years, enters the canyon at 2800 feet. This is 4,000 feet lower than the top of the canyon. So the Colorado River could not possibly have created the Grand Canyon.

There is such a thing as the “geologic column”. All evolution thinking is based on the geologic column. This is where the problem started in 1830. If the layers of the earth are really different ages, then why are there no erosion marks between the layers? (Merrill Earth Science 1993 p. 149). It should have rained many times in 10 million years, and caused erosion. A better explanation of the layers would be that they formed rapidly during and after the world wire flood of Noah. An example of this would be to take a pile of dirt and put it in a glass. Shake it up and set it down. After a while you will find that the dirt has settled in layers. This is known as “hydrologic sorting”. 80 to 85 percent of Earth’s land surface does not have even 3 geologic periods appearing in “correct” consecutive order. It becomes an overall exercise of gargantuan special pleading and imagination for the evolutionary-uniformitarian paradigm to maintain that there ever were geologic periods.”

(Dr. John Woodmorappe, geologist, “The Essential Non-Existence of the Evolutionary Uniformitarian Geologic Column” CRSQ Vol. 18, No. 1, June 1981, pp. 46-71).

Dating fossils by rock layers and rock layers by the fossils found in them is circular reasoning, and is not true. They don’t know how old the fossils or the rocks are. They are making up the ages.

There is such a thing as “index fossils”. This is part of the circular reasoning that is used along with the geologic column to date rocks and fossils. The index fossils date the rocks, and the rocks date the index fossils. Circular reasoning, which is false. Many “index” fossils have been found still alive today, like the Coelacanth (supposedly 325-410 million years old), and Graptolites, which are 410 million years old. Instead of realizing that maybe there is something wrong with index fossils and the geologic column, scientists will instead be amazed that these “index fossils” have survived for 400 million years.


Animals and plants are related. There is no proof of this. There are variations within a “kind”, like different dogs (Great Danes, Cocker Spaniels, Pugs, etc.), but this is variation within the species, not evolution.

In order to get kids to believe in evolution, they present microevolution where you have variations within a kind (like Great Danes, Pugs, Retrievers, Blood hounds, etc.). Then they tell you that macroevolution happens because microevolution happens: Prentice Hall Earth Science 1999, p. 627 says: “Earth and its inhabitants have changed over long periods of time”. Then they make it more specific: “In other words, there is no doubt that living things have changed over time”. They have now skipped the first four stages of “evolution”. Lastly, they tell you: “Evolution can be defined as a change in species over time.” So they take the provable microevolution, and lead you to “assume” that it applies to the other 5 types of evolution in one package. And this without any probable evidence. This is also known as “bait and switch”. Sometimes other names are used to try to trick you into believing that microevolution is equivalent to macroevolution: “The method of evolution in which a variety of species evolve from a common ancestor is called adaptive radiation (or divergent evolution). This is the way in which all modern domestic dogs have evolved form ancestral wolves. (Irish Textbook, p. 256). Notice, that the common ancestor was still a “dog”.

Mutations cause Evolution. This is not true. “No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.” (Pierre-Paul Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms 1977, p. 88).

Mutations rearrange existing information but do not increase genetic complexity. Examples would be a bull with 5 legs, which adds no new genetic information, since the genes already knew how to make a leg; they just made it in the wrong place. Another example is a short-legged sheep, which may have been useful to sheepherders, but would have been the first one the wolf caught in the wild. Textbooks have to use bait and switch to convince children that mutations are beneficial and cause evolution: In Biology, 1996, p. 324 it says: “Normal fruit flies have two wings. Some mutations have had four wings. This rare mutation, like most mutations, is harmful (the fly could not fly). Beneficial mutations are the raw material for natural selection.” So basically, the bait is that they show an example of a harmful mutation, and then switch it and say “beneficial mutations are the raw material for natural selection, a.k.a. evolution.” They don’t give examples of beneficial mutations, because there aren’t any. It doesn’t happen. A test was performed on fruit flies in an attempt to cause mutations from radiation. This produced flies with curved wings, no wings, more wings, red eyes, white eyes, etc. The conclusion from the experiment was that all of the mutations produced flies that were inferior to the original fly. As a result of this, they said that the fly had evolved as far as it could. There is no evidence of this. They have come to the wrong conclusion.

Natural Selection causes Evolution. This is not true, natural selection has a stabilizing affect on a species; it doesn’t create another “kind” of animal. It is like quality control.

Peppered Moth is evidence for Evolution. Moths were counted on trees in England. The trees were white, and they found that 95% of the moths on the trees were also white. During the Industrial Revolution, with all the soot going into the air, the trees all turned black. They also found that the moths were now 95% black. This was given as evidence for natural selection causing evolution. The rational was that the white moths on white trees were camouflaged. When the trees turned black, the white moths got eaten, and only the black moths survived. Proof of evolution. Here is the real story: Only 2 moths were actually seen on trees in 40 years of research. This story was faked, with dead moths glued on the trees and pictures taken. It was a hoax. This was not evidence of evolution. Even if it was true, it doesn’t prove macroevolution. If a white moth turned into a black moth, it is still a moth. This story was proven false in 1990, yet in textbooks as recent as 2001, the “evidence” is still in there.

Similar bone structures between animals and man prove a common ancestor (comparative anatomy). This is not true. Each bone develops from different genes in different organisms. Evolutionists don’t tell you this, because they cannot explain it. The “similar” bone structures are better proof that there was a common designer, than a common ancestor.

The Appendix is vestigial (meaning that it does not have a purpose anymore). This is a lie. The appendix is part of the immune system: “Long regarded as a vestigial organ with no function in the human body, the appendix is now thought to be one of the sites where immune responses are initiated.” (Roy Hartenstein, Grolier Encyclopedia, 1998). “Its removal also increases a person’s susceptibility to leukemia, Hodgkin’s disease, cancer of the colon, and cancer of the ovaries.” (In The Beginning, Walt Brown, p. 18). There are no vestigial organs, and even if there were, it wouldn’t prove evolution. It is the opposite of evolution; loosing, not gaining.

“The Whale retains pelvic and leg bones as useless vestiges.” (Biology, Curtis and Barnes, 1989, p. 969). They say that this structure has no apparent structure. They say that they were once legs. This is not true. These bones are actually anchors for muscle tissue that is used in reproduction. If the whale did not have these bones, it couldn’t reproduce. Large snakes also have bones similar to whales. These are also for reproduction

“Humans have a tailbone that is of no apparent use (vestigial).” (Holt Biology, 1989). “The coccyx is a small bone at the end of the human vertebral column. It has no present function and is thought to be the remainder of bones that once occupied the long tail of a tree-living ancestor.” (Health Biology 1991, p. 264). In fact, there are 9 muscles that attach to the “tailbone”, that have very important functions (different but like whales and snakes).

“The complex structure of the human eye may be the product of millions of years of evolution.” (Merrill Biology, 1983, p. 202). The eye very complex with 6 different structures some of which are in the brain that would have had to “evolve” simultaneously. This is called “irreducible complexity”, and cannot happen according to the theory of evolution. “The retina of your eye is less than 1 square inch yet contains over 137,000,000 light sensitive cells.” (Photo-Creation Magazine March-May, 1996, p. 39). Science books trying to tell you how the eye “evolved”, tell you to “imagine” how it happened. This is not proof for evolution; it is pure fantasy.

“Bacteria are simple organisms that we evolved from.” This is simply not true. Even the “simplest” bacteria are more complex than anything man has ever created. With motors called flagellum so small that 8 million could fit in the cross section of a human hair, they are just as complex and amazing as the cells in the human body.

“In the 1950’s Stanley Miller and Harold Urey wanted to know how the earth and solar system had come to be. They studied the chemical reactions of gases that existed in Earth’s primitive atmosphere, and were the first to show that amino acids could have formed in the atmosphere. Although he never proved how life originated, he did add evidence to the theory that life could have started by itself on the primitive earth.” Here is what really happened: Miller took gases in a system of tubes and circulated them around while producing electric sparks. The gases used were Nitrogen, Methane, Hydrogen and Ammonia (No oxygen). Textbooks say that he got a solution that was “rich in amino acids”. This was not really true, or even representative of the “way it was” long ago. First of all, he excluded oxygen, knowing that it would oxidize everything and kill it. Life cannot evolve with oxygen present. Yet 20% of our atmosphere is oxygen. Amino acids would be destroyed in oxygen. Miller said that the early atmosphere did not have oxygen. The problem here is without oxygen, you have no ozone, which means that ultra violet radiation would come in and destroy the ammonia, not to mention the amino acids. We also know that the earth has always had oxygen. Oxygen is found in the lowest rocks, and in higher concentrations. “What is the evidence for a primitive methane-ammonia atmosphere on earth? The answer is that there is no evidence for it, but much against it. (Philip H. Abelson, “Chemical Events on the Primitive Earth”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 55 June 1966, p. 1365).

“In general, we find no evidence in the sedimentary distribution of carbon, sulfur, uranium, or iron, that an oxygen-free atmosphere has existed at any time during the span of geological history recorded in well preserved sedimentary rocks.” (Erich Dimroth and Michael M. Kimberly, “Precambrian Atmospheric Oxygen: Evidence in the sedimentary Distributions of Carbon, Sulfur, Uranium, and Iron”, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, Vol. 13, No. 9, September 1976, p. 1161).

Also, 85% of the “soup” that Miller made was tar, and 13% was carboxylic acid, both of which was poisonous to any kind of life. Also, only 2 out of the 20 needed for life were produced. They also bond very quickly with water and tar. Also, half of the amino acids he produced were left handed and half right handed. This is a problem because even the smallest proteins have 70-100 amino acids in precise order and they are all left-handed. Since amino acids bond readily with water, they will do this faster than they will bond with each other. So they couldn’t have made proteins while they were in water.

“Smaller is less complex, such as unicellular organisms”. Smaller is not less complex, smaller is more complex. Even the brain of a honeybee is hundreds of times more complex than a Cray Supercomputer (ymp-90). And the human brain is millions of times more complex than a honeybee’s. The human brain has more electrical connections than all connections made by man in the history since man has been making electric/electronic devices.

“DNA proves evolution in the percentage of sequences that different species have in common. Darwin speculated that all forms of life are related through descent with modification from earliest organisms. This speculation has been verified as we have learned more about molecular biology.” This is not true.

No evidence for evolution has ever been verified by DNA. DNA is the most complex molecule in the universe. Humans have 50-100 trillion cells. Each has DNA. This total DNA would only fill 2 tablespoons, yet it would stretch end-to-end from earth to the moon and back 5 million times.

The code in the chromosomes is more complex and holds more information than all the computer programs ever written by man combined. If DNA were printed in books, they would fill the Grand Canyon 40 times. “Even with DNA sequence data, we have no direct access to the process of evolution, so objective reconstruction of the vanished past can be achieved only by creative imagination.” (N. Takahata, “A Genetic Perspective on the Origin and History of Humans,” Annual Review of Ecology and Systems Atics, 1995).

“Man must have evolved from Chimpanzees because their DNA is 98.2% similar to humans.” Scientists have only determined the function of 1% of human DNA. Having DNA that is 98% similar proves nothing. Similar DNA codes prove the same designer wrote the codes, not evolution. Dr. Barney Maddox, the leading genetic genome researcher, said, concerning these genetic differences, “Now the genetic difference between human and his nearest relative, the chimpanzee, is at least 1.6%. That doesn’t sound like much, but calculated out, that is a gap of at least 48,000,000 nucleotides, and a change of only 3 nucleotides is fatal to an animal; there is no possibility of change.” (Human Genome Project, Quantitative A Disproof of Evolution).

Fossils prove Evolution.” This is not true. Scientists cannot prove that a given fossil had ever reproduced. Or that the offspring lived, or that they were different, which means they would have evolved into a different “kind”. Darwin said, “If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties (missing links) must assuredly have existed.” Yet we haven’t found even one. So fossils don’t prove anything about evolution.

Horse Evolution”. This is fabricated based on now someone believed the different types of horses could have evolved. What they do not tell you is that the different horses have different pairs of ribs, which for from 18, to 15, to 19, then back to 18. They are not related; they are different types. “Other examples, including the much repeated ‘gradual’ evolution of the modern horse, have not held up under close examination.” (Biology The Unity and Diversity of Life, Wadsworth 1992, p. 304).

“Many examples commonly cited, such as the evolution of the horse family or of sabertooth ‘tigers’ can be readily shown to have been unintentionally falsified (they lied) and not to be really orthogenetic.” (George G. Sympson, “Evolutionary Determinism and the Fossil Record”. Scientific Monthly, Vol. 71 October 1950, p. 264).

Problems with horse evolution: 1. Made up by Othniel C. Marsh in 1874 from fossils scattered across the world, not from the same location. 2. Modern horses are found in layers with and lower than “ancient horses”. (Yu Kruzhilin and V. Ovcharov, “A Horse from the Dinosaur Epoch?”).

 The ancient horse called a hyrax was actually found in Turkey and East Africa alive. And in South America, they have found the horse fossils in reverse order, which they don’t bother to mention. The fossils have never been found in the order presented in the textbooks.

Dinosaurs evolved into birds.” This was based on a “fossil” of a reptile with feathers from China. This was later proved to be a hoax; it was assembled from different fossils to make some money. Archaeopteryx was another reptile-bird purported to be proof of evolution from reptile to bird. Alan Feduccia says, “Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered dinosaur. But it’s not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of ‘paleobable’ is going to change that.” (Alan Feduccia – a world authority on birds from UNC Chapel Hill, quoted in “Archaeopteryx: Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms”, Science, February 5, 1994, pp. 764-765).

Other so-called proofs are that they had claws on their wings. Although so do Ostrich’s and at least 11 other birds. That they had teeth, but so do some birds and fish for that matter. It was finally determined that Archaeopteryx is also a fraud: “Honest disagreement as to whether Archaeopteryx was or was not a forgery was possible until 1986, when a definitive test was performed. An X-ray resonance spectrograph of the British Museum fossil showed that the material containing the feather impressions differed significantly from the rest of the fossil slab. The chemistry of this “amorphous paste” also differed from the crystalline rock in the famous fossil quarry in Germany where Archaeopteryx supposedly was found. Few responses have been made to this attest, and probably conclusive, evidence.”



How old is the earth?

 Here is what scientists have told us through the years:

In 1770 George Buffon said the earth was 70,000 years old. (Integrated Principles of Zoology 1996, p. 151).

In 1905 the age of the earth was officially 2 billion years old (Newsweek July 20, 1998 p. 50).

In 1969, the year we went to the moon, the official age of the earth and moon was 3.5 billion years. (The Minneapolis Tribune Monday, August 25, 1969).

Today, students are taught that the earth is 4.6 billion years old.

They say that the universe is older; about 16 billion years, give or take.

But how do we know that is true?

Since we would all agree that no one was present at the beginning of the universe, nobody really knows how old it is. Many of the attempts at giving the universe an age are rife with assumptions that have not been proven. So we really have no way of knowing exactly how old the universe really is. With that in mind, and only counting on observations that can actually be proven (which would be the scientific way), what are some age ranges that we can narrow it down to? We will look at observations that can scientifically establish an upper limit. It is the overall analysis of all these events that will give us a better idea for the age of the earth and the universe:

July 24, 1999 (star tribune, Minneapolis, Minn.) newspaper reported that the world’s population topped 6 billion. In 1985 there were 5 billion. 1977, 4 billion, 1962 3 billion, 1930 2 billion, and 1800 1 billion.

At about 0 BC (Christ’s birth), there were about 250 million. This makes the start of the population from 8 people at around 2400 BC very possible. The world is not overcrowded. The entire worlds population would fit in Jacksonville Florida twice. There is 25 billion square feet in Jacksonville. Evolution believes that man started 3 million years ago. Doing the math for population growth would put 150,000 people per square inch on the earth. So according to population growth statistics, the earth is not millions of years old.

If we were to say that there was a very high mortality rate to explain why there aren’t 150,000 people per square inch, where are all the skeletons and bones? We have not found any where near that many bones.

Spiral Galaxies: They are still spinning, and the inside is spinning faster than the outside. If they were billions of years old, they would have lost their spiral shape.

Super Nova: They happen every 25 or 30 years. If the universe is billions of years old, then why can we find only about 300 dead stars? Doing the math, this would make the universe from 7500 to 9000 years old. If it were even millions of years old, there should have been more dead stars. Where are they?

Red Giants: Science says that red giants evolve into white dwarfs over billions of years. This is not true. Egyptian hieroglyphs from 2000 BC described Sirius as red. Cicero, in 50 BCc stated that Sirius was red. Seneca described Sirius as being redder than mars. Ptolemy listed Sirius as one of the six red stars in 150 AD. Today, it is a white binary star. This timeline for this observation was about 4000 years.

Jupiter is cooling off, loosing heat twice as fast as it receives it from the sun. If it were billions of years old, it would be cold; it would have cooled off long ago.

Jupiter’s moon Ganymede has a strong magnetic field. “Magnetic fields are generated by the liquid motion of molten metal inside a body.” Yet Ganymede should have cooled solid billions of years ago. (Denver Post, Dec. 13, 1996 Jupiter Probe Detects Mysterious Moon Dust. By K.C. Cole).

The rings of Saturn are moving away from Saturn. If they were billions of years old, it would not have rings, as they are unstable.

The moon is gradually getting further away from the earth. It used to be closer. 1.2 billion years ago the moon would be touching the earth. Long before, the tides would have swamped the land and washed everything into the sea.

Comets are losing material, which is why they appear to have a tail. They don’t last longer than 10,000 years. Why are there still comets? They should have all disintegrated. Scientists think there is a cloud of comets called the Oort cloud that is 50,000 au (astronomical units – 1 unit is 93 million miles, the distance from the earth to the sun). It can’t be seen. Pluto is 39 AU away, and it can hardly be seen with the most powerful telescopes. “Oort proposed a cloud of comets surrounding the solar system based on mathematical errors.” (Raymond Littleton, The Non-existence of the Oort Cometary Shell. Astrophysics and Space Science, Vol. 31, December 1974, pp. 385-401).

Earth is a big magnet, and magnets lose their strength over time. The earth has lost 6% of its magnetic strength in the last 150 years (Astronomy and the Bible, Donald DeYoung, p. 18).

30,000 years ago the field would have been so strong that life couldn’t have existed. This also messes up carbon 14 dating because it assumes a constant rate of C14 is entering the atmosphere. With a stronger magnetic field, less C14 would be able to get through. So carbon dating doesn’t work. Some would say that the magnetic field reverses, and that is why it is diminishing. This is not true. It is based on incorrect observations of cracks in the ocean floor where basalt has come up. This causes variations in the strength of the magnetism, not reversals.

Earth spins at about 1041 mph. But it is slowing down. Every once and a while there is a leap second to adjust for the earth slowing down. If the earth were billions of years old, it would be spinning real fast. Winds would be moving at 5000 mph, and centrifugal force would be flinging things off.

Sahara Desert: Prevailing winds mostly blow in one direction. It is growing about 4 miles a year because of winds drying out areas and increasing it. This is known as desertification. Scientists believe that the desert is about 4000 years old. (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, July 15, 1999 Geophysical Research Letters). If the earth is billions of years old, why is the oldest desert on earth only 4000 years old? That is also about the time of the flood, which would have wiped out any desert that was there before it.

When drilling for oil, sometimes they hit some that is under tremendous pressure, as much as 20,000 PSI. Scientists say that because the pressure is greater than the force exerted by the rock that the pressure should have equalized in about 10,000 years. Yet it hasn’t equalized. So the earth can’t be billions of years old.

Ice cores supposedly prove that the earth is at least hundreds of thousands of years old due to the hundreds of thousands of “annual rings” found in the cores. (The longest core was 10,000 feet long and had 135,000 rings). The “lost squadron”, which had run out of gas and landed in Greenland during WW2 in 1942, disproves this.

They were left there until 1990. They had to use ground-penetrating radar to find them, because after being there for 48 years, they were under 263 feet of ice. That would be 5.5 feet of ice falling on them per year to bury them 263 feet deep. They did not sink, because they were found horizontal. If they sank, they would go nose down because with the engines, the nose would be heavier than the tail. Taking the same 5.5 feet and dividing 10,000 feet by it gives 1824 years. Deeper ice is pressed into finer layers so 4400 years to accumulate the ice at the poles is not a problem. The guys digging the planes out of the ice also saw the “annual rings”, but in the 163 feet there were many hundreds. Since it was only 48 years old, the rings could not be annual. It turns out that the rings are not deposited in summer and winter; they are deposited in warm and cold weather. And there could be more than 10 rings a week.

The Mississippi river deposits sediments at a rate of 80,000 tons an hour, day after day, year after year, at the point where the river flows into the Gulf of Mexico. This is by New Orleans on a big delta that is getting larger and larger. Scientists studying the delta say it took about 30,000 years to deposit the amount of mud that is there. If the earth is millions of years old, why isn’t the whole Gulf of Mexico full of mud? Why is there just 30,000 years of mud?

The oldest tree in the world is a bristle cone pine tree in the white mountains of California, also known as the Methuselah tree. It is 4300 years old. If the earth is millions of years old, why is the oldest tree in the world only 4300 years old?

During WW2, part of the Great Barrier Reef was destroyed. This is a large coral shelf out by Australia and New Zealand. Environmentalists went out there to see how fast it grows back. They did this for 20 years. After that, they said that the reef was 4200 years old. This is the oldest reef in the world. If the earth is millions of years old, why is the oldest reef in the world only 4200 years old?

The rocky ledge above Niagara Falls has been eroding for nearly 9,900 years (Holt Earth Science, 1989, p. 279). All waterfalls do this. You can observe the rocks falling off. Crest lines showing recession of Horseshoe Falls since 1764. It has receded 865 feet in 185 years, which is about 4.7 feet per year (Niagara Falls Museum Guide). If the earth is millions of years old, why isn’t there more erosion?

It has been calculated that Carbon 14 would reach equilibrium in about 30,000 years. Readings taken 10 years ago are less than readings taken today. This means that the C14 is still increasing. We haven’t reached equilibrium yet, so the earth must be less than 30,000 years old.

Oceans are 3.6% salt. This is caused by the constant runoff of minerals from rain on land. It could have taken as little as 5000 years for this to happen. If the earth is millions of years old, why aren’t the oceans saltier?

Along with minerals deposited into the oceans when it rains, soil also erodes. At the current rate of erosion, the continents would erode flat in 14 million years. If this is true, how can we have fossils that are 300 times older than that above sea level? They should have washed out to sea 300 times by now.

The oldest languages in the world are only 5000 years old. “The first fully developed systems of word writing appeared only about 5000 years ago.” (World Book Encyclopedia). “The oldest language that can be reasonably reconstructed is already modern, sophisticated and complete from an evolutionary point of view.” (The Biological Nature of Man, G.G. Simpson. Science Vol. 152, April 22, 1966, p. 477).

Chinese calendar says that the year 2000 is 4700.

The Hebrew calendar says the year 2000 is year 5761.

A petrified metal hammer with a wooden handle was found in a rock that also had seashells that had been dated as 400 million years old. (Dr. Carl Baugh).

Textbooks say that coal formed 250 million years ago in the Carboniferous Period. But Newton Anderson found a bell inside a lump of coal in 1944. (Ammunition by Norm Scharbough, Communiqué Conservative Publishers).

On June 11, 1891, the Morrisonville Times reported: “A curious find was brought to light by Mrs. S.W. Culp last Tuesday morning. As she was breaking a lump of coal apart, embedded in a circular shape a small gold chain about 10 inches in length of antique and quaint workmanship.” (The Hidden History of the Human Race, Michael A. Cremo, p. 113).

A Cast iron pot was found in coal in 1912 at the Municipal Electric Plant in Thomas, OK. Now in Creation Evidence Museum. See

A 4 ½ inch high zinc and silver vessel found in solid rock that was dated to “over 600 million years old” in Dorchester, Mass. In 1851. (Readers Digest Mysteries of the Unexplained, p. 46, also Scientific American June 1851, p. 289-299).

A clay doll was found by a well driller at a depth of 430 feet near Nampa, Idaho in 1889. The rock layer was supposedly 12 million years old. The doll is at the Idaho State Historical Society in Boise. (Ammunition by Norm Sharbough, p. 177).

Workers found human bones and a well-tempered copper arrowhead in a vein of silver at the Rocky Point Mine in Gilman, Colo. in 1865.

In 1880, J.D. Whitney, the state geologist of California, published a lengthy review of advanced stone tools found in California gold mines. The implements, including spear points, mortars and pestles, were found deep in mine shafts, underneath thick, undisturbed layers of lava, ranging from 9 to 55 million years old. (The Hidden History of the Human Race, Michael A. Cremo p. xvii, 95).

W.H. Holmes, of the Smithsonian Institution, one of the most vocal critics of the California finds wrote: “Perhaps if Professor Whitney had fully appreciated the story of human evolution as it is understood today, he would have hesitated to announce the conclusions, not withstanding the imposing array of testimony with which he was confronted”. This basically means that he shouldn’t have told anyone about this, since it contradicts evolutionary theory.

In the 1950’s, Thomas E. Lee of the National Museum of Canada found advanced stone tools in glacial deposits at Sheguiandah, on Manitoulin Island in Lake Huron. The deposits were 65,000 to 125,000 years old. The director of the museum was fired for refusing to fire the discoverer. Tons of artifacts disappeared into storage bins at the NMC. The discovery had to be killed. “It would have forced the rewriting of almost every book in the business.” (The Hidden History of the Human Race. Michael A. Cremo, p. xviii).

A coin like object, from a well boring near Lawn Ridge, Illinois, was reportedly found at a depth of about 114 feet below the surface. According to information supplied by the Illinois State Geological Survey, the deposits containing the coin are between 200,000 and 400,000 years old.

As elements decay they produce helium. This helium slowly escapes through the rocks into the atmosphere. Very little is able to escape into space. After all factors are considered the helium in the atmosphere indicates the earth is less than two million years old. (Blowing Old Earth Belief Away, J. Sarfati, Creation 20(3) pp. 19-21, 1998).

The overall trend for the sun is that it is shrinking. It is loosing 5 million tons per second. It used to be larger. If the universe (and the sun) were billions of years old, the gravitational pull of the sun would have drug the earth in.

Stalactites and stalagmites take millions of years to form. An example would be Carlsbad Caverns. When you go there you will be told that it took 250 million years to form. They say that they grow at a rate of one inch in a thousand years. This is not true. Many formations have been found that have formed in only decades:

There are 50 inch stalactites growing under the Lincoln Memorial which was built in 1922. They were found in 1960, only 38 years later.

Dead bats have been found covered with flowstone making a type of stalagmite, before it even had a change to rot.

A refrigeration shed inside Fort Pickens in Pensacola Florida had 2 inch stalactites growing off of it. It was built in 1926-1927.

A building in Indiana had a giant flowstone formation (stalactite growing to the floor), which was only 40 years old.

A mine in Australia, which had been shut down for 55 years, was reopened. They found the mine loaded with stalactites, stalagmites, flowstone, ribbons, and many other types of formations. Looked just like a natural cave would have looked.

The basement of a building at an Air Force Base (Hurlburt Field, FL) had a 13-inch stalactite next to a water pipe. The building was only 7 years old. It also had a 3-inch stalagmite on the floor below the stalactite.

The teepee fountain in Thermopolis, Wyoming is an incredible flowstone formation that is about 100 years old. It started as a small pipe sticking out of the ground which water was running out of. As the years passed, minerals were deposited on the pipe. After 100 years, it is a 20-foot high mountain that is probably 75 feet in diameter. After only 100 years.

Where did oil come from? “Oil and gas are from organisms that once lived in the sea and were changed by heat and pressure”. (Holt General Science, 1988, p. 294) It was said that it took a long time for the transformation. “In 1996 a $22.4 million proposal was approved in Western Australia that will build a plant to create oil from sewage sludge in 30 minutes.

They tell you that things petrify over millions of years. This is not true. Here are some examples of petrification where we actually know that age of the artifact. Again, science says that things petrify over millions of years, but they weren’t there to observe this:

A piece of wood was found in Arizona’s Petrified Forest that had been chopped by an axe. (World Explorer, p. 65).

A petrified piece of a pallet was found at a company in Canada.

In the early 1900’s a flour mill in Eureka Springs, AR. Was flooded. The have recently found petrified sacks of flower that happened as a result of the flooding.

A petrified dog was found in the middle of a hollow tree. It is currently at the Southern Forest World Museum in Wayoross.

A petrified cowboy leg found in a dry creek bed near the West Texas town of Iraan, about 1980 by Mr. Jerry Stone, an employee of Corvette Oil Company. The bones of the partial leg and foot within the boot were revealed by an elaborate set of C.T. Scans performed at Harris Methodist Hospital in Americus, AART. A complete set of these scans remains with the boot at the Creation Evidence Museum in Glen Rose, Texas.

An incredible fossil of an ichthyosaur, buried and fossilized while giving birth, is clear evidence of its having been buried quickly by water-borne sediments. The fossil record is consistent with creatures having been buried suddenly, otherwise most creatures would either rot of be devoured by scavengers.

This proves that petrification does not take millions of years, and actually can happen very quickly.


The above evidence proves that the earth and the universe cannot be “billions of years old”, let along millions. This is what evolutionists want you to think, because they need this time to magically make evolution work. Evolution supposedly happened over billions of years, and has either stopped, or is happening so slowly that we cannot observe it today. But there is nothing that can be scientifically proven to be billions of years old, this means that evolution could not have had the time to do the things it is said to have done.



We’ve probably all learned about evolution at one time or another. From kindergarten, when the first dinosaur book the teacher read said “millions of years ago…”, to high school science when you dissected something, to comparative anatomy in college; we have been immersed in “theory” of evolution. Note the use of the word “theory”, because evolution is not a fact, it is closer to the realm of fantasy.

In the scientific method, there are 4 different steps you must take to prove your theory.

They are listed below:

Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena

Formulation of a hypothesis to explain the phenomena

In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.

Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations

Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments

Evolution has only reached step #2. This means that from observations that were made (step #1), the formulation of a hypotheses was made to explain how we got here. It is at this step that we stall; the hypothesis for the observations does not pass scrutiny. As more is learned by observation, the hypothesis can be refined. We therefore have a continual process of going from step #1 to #2 and back again. In science, this will usually get you to step #3 eventually, but for evolution, it hasn’t; and they aren’t even close. Under normal circumstances, the hypothesis would be thrown out as a dead end, but because evolution is actually a religion, it seems to have a life of its own, and a never-ending list of seemingly intelligent people who blindly follow it to wherever it leads.

We will go step by step through evolution and try to rationally look at the evidence that is out there, because there is plenty… It needs to be analyzed with an open mind, which is sometimes hard to come by if you realize what is at stake. There are basically two ways to look at the world; it was either designed, which means there was a designer, or it just happened by chance, and was designed by nobody. It is precisely these two choices that can blind people. In the rare case that you can get an evolutionist to give you a real answer on what evidence they have, some have admitted: “We have not yet found any credible evidence for evolution, yet we continue to believe in it, because the alternative is unthinkable, that it was designed”.

Although you can already see where this is going, you should try to read it all, there is some really interesting information here. There are also some biblical references included to give an overall description of where some of the thinking came from. One thing to keep in mind is that before the theory of evolution, most people believed in the biblical view of creation. Everything presented here has been checked out as well as we can. The scientific method needs to apply to all theories, not just evolution in order to be deemed factual. Our beliefs and proofs, if they are true, need to be able to stand up to scientific scrutiny.

Again, let’s look at what evolution believes in a nutshell:

18-20 billion years ago nothing exploded (Big Bang) and created the universe.

4.6 billion years ago the earth cooled down and formed a rocky crust.

It rained on the rocks of the earth for millions of years and created the oceans.

Swirling in the waters of the oceans is a bubbling broth or soup of complex chemicals. Some of them are carbohydrates, proteins, and nucleic acids – the chemicals of life.

The first self-replicating systems must have emerged in this organic “soup”.


Before we start looking into the specifics of what evolution actually says, you need to know that there are actually 6 “kinds” of evolution. It is important to know what kind of evolution you are talking about, to make sure that you are always on a secure scientific footing:

Cosmic Evolution: The Big Bang. This part of evolution has gone through quite an evolution by itself. From an area of several light years in size, to smaller than the diameter of a proton, to nothing at all, and yet it exploded, and this is where all matter came from. Since none of this has been proven, it is just a theory.

Chemical Evolution: All primary elements evolved from Hydrogen. This type of evolution tries to explain where all of the 115 or so primary elements came from. It is thought (theory again) that all the elements “evolved” from hydrogen, which was created in the Big Bang. Again, there is no scientific proof of this.

Stellar and Planetary Evolution: This theory tries to explain how the planets and stars formed from the primary elements created in chemical evolution. We have never seen stars and planets form; only die. It has been speculated that if twenty stars exploded, the matter ejected might create one star. This is still not evolution, because you had to loose twenty stars to gain one.

Organic Evolution: The origin of life. Organic evolution tries to explain the circumstances that may have produced an environment where “simple” life forms may have developed. An interesting thing to mention here is that science has yet to find a “simple” life form. Some of the “simplest” forms that science says they found are incredibly complex engineering wonders that man cannot even begin to understand, let alone replicate.

Macro Evolution: One animal changes to a different kind of animal, like a dog evolving into a non-dog. This has never been seen, and there is no evidence in the fossil record as well.

Micro Evolution: A better name would be variations, this happens all the time, like a Chihuahua and a Great Dane. There are different breeds of dog, but they are still dogs. Although making it a kind of “evolution” is not really a correct designation, we seem to be stuck with it. It does happen and is observable; this is the only type of evolution that works.

Now that we have defined the various types of evolution, lets take a step back and look at how the theory came about. Lets look at where and how step #1 of the scientific method lead to step #2, the theory of evolution. This involved many people, but the three most notable are James Hutton, Charles Lyell and Charles Darwin. The three of them put together the observations and hypothesis that led to the classic definition of evolution:

James Hutton (1726-1796): In his day, a person believed in the biblical view of creation and that the age of the earth was about 5800 years old. In his book Theory of the Earth (note “theory” in the title), Hutton said the earth is “much older than most people thought”. He was the first person to say that the earth was “millions of years old”. At this time in history there were many revolutions being fought (American - 1776, French - 1789, German - 1848, Spanish - 1823, Italian - 1848 and Polish - 1831 revolutions).

Everyone was rebelling against the Kings of these countries. It was the age of revolutions and Anti-Monarchy. Everyone wanted a democracy. The bible said, “Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.” 1 Peter 2:17. Some people believed that the Bible was an obstacle to their political agenda’s and they wanted to discredit it. Contradicting the Bible by saying that the earth was millions of years old was just the thing that was needed. Hutton used the principle of uniformitarianism to date the earth. This principle states that Earth processes occurring today are similar to those that occurred in the past. He observed that the processes that changed the rocks and land around him were very slow, and he inferred that they had been just as slow throughout Earth’s history. He hypothesized that it took much longer than a few thousand years to form the layers of rock around him and to erode mountains that once towered thousands of feet high. This book greatly influenced an English geologist named Sir Charles Lyell. Hutton’s book took away peoples belief that the earth was only about 6000 years old.

Charles Lyell: He was a Scottish lawyer in the 1800’s, and he really hated the Bible. Lyell wrote a book in the 1830’s called the Principles of Geology. In this book, every page contains evidence if his hatred. Page 302 says “Men of superior talent (perhaps like himself), who thought for themselves, and were not blinded by authority (perhaps like the Bible)…” He really mocked the scriptures. He said that one of his goals was to “Free the science from Moses”. (Life Letters and Journals, published by John Murray 1881). Lyell was primarily responsible for giving the world the concept of the “geologic column”. This is where the different layers of dirt have different names, index fossils, and ages. Since geologists use the age of the layer of dirt to give the age of the index fossil, and the index fossil to give the age of the dirt (circular reasoning, which is not science), the only place the geologic column exists is in the textbooks. It doesn’t exist anywhere in the world, which we will touch on later. Lyell took away peoples belief that there was a biblical flood.

Charles Darwin: Graduated from Bible College in 1831 and set sail on the H.M.S. Beagle to collect bugs for an Englishman. He took his Bible and Charles Lyell’s book The Principles of Geology with him. He said that Lyell’s book changed is life, and Darwin started to disbelieve the Bible. He said “Disbelief crept over me on a very slow rate, but at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress.” (Letter to Russell Wallace in 1868, published in World’s Greatest Letters). He sailed to the Galapagos Islands, where he found what he determined were 14 different varieties of Finches based on the shape of their beaks. As a result of his observations of the Finches, he theorized that all animals and plants are related. Here is an excerpt from his book: “It is a truly wonderful fact… that all animals and all plants throughout all time and space should be related to each other…” (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life. Charles Darwin 1859, p. 170). Darwin took away peoples believe that there was a Creator.

Now that we have a good understanding of where evolution came from, we are ready to look at some of the components. Before we do that, you may want to see what scientists and others have said about the theory of evolution. Quotes on Evolution below


The first basic conjecture is that there was an explosion billions of years ago that created the universe. This is known as the Big Bang. There is no evidence that this actually happened, but there are some questions that evolutionary scientists cannot explain.

Here are some of them:

Where did the space in the universe come from?

Where did matter come from?

Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)?

How did matter get so perfectly organized?

Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing?

The Big Bang “theory” tries to explain that there was an explosion that began expanding the universe. Through the years the exact size of whatever exploded has been shrinking. Here is a brief history of the evolution of the Big Bang theory’s initial mass that exploded:

The idea for the Big Bang began with a Belgian astronomer Georges Edward Lemaitre. He said that the mass of matter was about a few light years in diameter, or about 12 trillion miles. Later in 1965 it was shrunk to 275 million miles. In 1972, it shrunk again to 71 million miles, in 1974, 54,000 miles and in 1983, a trillionth the diameter of a proton. Now, they are saying that nothing exploded at all; a singularity. (Bolton Davidheiser).

Here are a couple more theories:

“The observable universe could have evolved from an infinitesimal region, its then tempting to go one step further and speculate that the entire universe evolved from literally nothing” (Alan Guth and P Steinhardt, Scientific American May 1984 p. 128).

Dust particles came together and got compressed and started spinning and finally exploded and created the universe.

Here are a couple of comments about the Big Bang:

If the big bang theory were true, matter would be evenly distributed throughout the universe. Instead, it is lumpy. There are clusters of stars, then great voids. (New Creation p. 8, 1999).

“I have little hesitation in saying that a sickly pall now hangs over the big bang theory” (Sir Fredrick Hoyle, Astronomer, Cosmologist and Mathematician, Cambridge University, The Big Bang Theory Under Attack, Science Digest Vol. 92, May 1984, p. 84).

So we went from some kind of matter a few light years in diameter, to literally nothing exploding. There is no evidence for this, and actually plenty to the contrary. When whatever exploded is described, it is said to be spinning very fast, as in theory #2 above. This would indicate that there was angular momentum when the explosion happened. There is a law called “Conservation of Angular Momentum” that we will look at next:

When a spinning thing explodes and pieces of it go flying out, they continue to spin the same way that the original thing that exploded, was spinning. In the “Big Bang” theory, the matter that exploded was supposedly spinning very rapidly. Here are observations of spinning objects in the universe:

Planets, solar systems and galaxies are spinning in different directions, so how can this be if the material in the Big Bang was spinning very fast and then blew up? This goes against the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum.

“This angular momentum would have caused the sun to spin very rapidly. Actually, our sun spins very slowly, while the planets move very rapidly around the sun. In fact, although the sun has over 99% of the mass of the solar system, it has only 2% of the angular momentum. This pattern is directly opposite to the pattern predicted for the nebular hypothesis” (Dr H Reeves, The origin of the Solar System, p. 9, 1978).

“The ultimate origin of the solar systems angular momentum remains obscure” (Solar system evolutionist scientist Dr Stuart Ross Taylor, Solar System Evolution, A New Perspective, p53. 1992.).

Venus, Uranus and possibly Pluto spin backwards from the rest of the planets in our solar system. At least 6 moons are spinning backwards, and some orbits go backwards. Again, the Conservation of Angular Momentum does not explain how these planets came from the Big Bang.

So scientific observation goes against the theory that there was a Big Bang. This leaves the questions above of where space, matter, and time came from. What about the age of the universe? It is said to be 18-20 billion years old. Can this be proven scientifically? It hasn’t as of yet. Only theories from observations based on uniformitarianism have been put forth. Uniformitarianism means that things that are observed today have always been that way. If we think that the universe is billions of light years wide, and we see stars that are billions of light years away, then the universe must be billions of years old. This is the uniformitarianistic way of thinking. There are a couple of things that are wrong with these observations:

We cannot really ascertain how big the universe actually is. The methods we use can at best estimate out not more than 100 million light years. To project this to “billions” of light years is pure fantasy. The method used is called parallax. It involves creating an imaginary triangle to a distant star. The earth creates one side of the triangle when it is on each side of the sun. Measurements are taken at different times of the year to do this. This leg of the triangle would be roughly 2 astronomical units long (approx. 186,000,000 miles). On each side of the sun, the angle needed to draw a straight line to the star is measured. With the two angle measurements adjacent to the leg of the triangle that the earth makes up, scientists can estimate the distance, using trigonometry. There are a couple of problems with these measurements:

The leg of the triangle that is created by the earth on both sides of the sun is an approximation. Nobody is sure when we are exactly on either side, or are they sure it is exactly 2 AU’s in length.

Even though the leg of the triangle the earth makes on either side of the sun is large, the distances to the stars are so vast, that the measured angles are very small, just fractions of a degree. The potential for error is huge.

An assumption is made that light travels at the same speed now as it did “billions” of years ago. Scientists are actually starting to realize that the speed of light is not a “constant”; that it is slowing down. Since this really shakes up the cosmologists (and many other disciplines) world, it has been rejected by mainstream science. But the evidence is mounting, and will soon become impossible to ignore, especially since the speed of light figures so prominently in many calculations and ratios.

If we can’t tell how old the universe is by measuring the distances to stars, then what about Carbon 14 or Potassium-Argon dating? Can’t we determine how old the earth is with these types of tests?

Do we have any idea at all as to how old the universe is? Here is a link that will try to explain scientifically what we do know about the age of the universe:  Although this evidence only infers how old the universe is, it does tend to illustrate why it is probably not “billions of years” old.

We have examined the Big Bang and the age of the universe, next we will look at the “evolutionary soup” that is supposed to have created life and the alleged process of evolution. A model for the “soup” that might have existed was tested in the 1950’s. Here is a description for this famous (or infamous) experiment:  As you can see, there are many problems with not only this experiment, but also the theory that a pre-biotic soup that was sloshing around for billions of years could have created life in it.

If we assumed for a moment that something did indeed grow in the soup over billions of years and then one day climb out of the sea, we have a number of problems:

If the organism was living in the sea, and suddenly climbed out to land, how did it breathe? If it was living in the sea, it must have breathed through gills. To live on land, it needs lungs. Did it grow lungs while it was still breathing underwater? If it did, how did lungs help the creature survive better in the sea? This is what natural selection says, that a mutation occurs that allows the organism to survive better than its species, and lives to spread its new genetic information.

When it crawled out of the sea, where did it find a mate of its species with which to reproduce? This is a big problem in evolution. You not only need to randomly create one organism that crawls out of the soup, you need to randomly create two, and they need to be male and female, and compatible sexually. Since different “kinds” are not compatible sexually, this raises the odds of life being created accidentally by an exponential factor.

Where is the evidence that this happened? Where are the so-called transitional forms? The half fish, half land dwelling creatures? Given the diversity of life on this planet, you would expect to find millions of these transitional forms, but you don’t find a single one.

In order for something simple to get more complex (as evolution theory says), information needs to be added to the DNA sequences. This has never been observed. The only thing that does happen is that DNA get mixed up, which when it produces a mutation, usually kills of the organism.

There are many reasons why evolution could not have happened. Some things are just too complex, or have irreducible complexity; too many parts would have to have simultaneously evolved to be of any use. Here are some examples:

Bacteria have hair on them that is used to move around. The hair is like a complex motor that rotates backwards and forwards up to 100,000 rpm. This motor is so tiny that 8 million of them would fit in the cross section of an average human hair. (Very Fast Flagellar Rotation, Nature, Vol. 371, October 27, 1994, p. 752).

From conception until birth, the baby adds 15,000 cells per minute to its body. Each cell is more complex than a space shuttle.

The probability of just one DNA molecule arranging itself by change has been calculated to be 1 change in 10 to the 119,000 power. For comparison, the visible universe is only 10 to the 28 power inches in diameter.

What about Macro Evolution? This is the main force for evolution; that more complex organisms evolved from less complex ones; that dogs emerged from non-dogs. Evolution basically says that all living things came from the soup, and that all are related. This means that animals and humans are also related to plants. If the basics of where life came from are extremely unlikely, how much more unlikely are the development of eyes, speech, and self-awareness.

Where are the “transitional” fossils that should be around had evolution happened as Darwin said it did? We should be able to find many examples of transitions all over the world. Yet none have been found that have stood the test of scientific scrutiny. The ones that have been “found” have been frauds. Most of the frauds have been in transition between monkeys and humans. The most important thing for evolutionists is to find evidence for transition between ape and human; because that is how they believe that we got here. There have been many discoveries that were touted as the “missing link”, but they have all been proven to be either just human or ape, or were fabrications. Here are some examples:

Nebraska man, originally constructed from a tooth, found by Harold Cook in 1922, actually turned out to be from a pig. It was found in Sioux county Nebraska. He built an entire man (and woman) from one tooth.

Piltdown man was a hoax. Found in Piltdown England by a catholic priest (Pierre duchardan) and others. They took a human skull and ape jawbone. They filed them down to make them fit together, treated them with acid to make them look old, buried them in a gravel pit, and then “discovered” them. It was in the textbooks for 40 years, and over 500 masters and doctorate papers were written on it. All that work and expense over a hoax.

Heidelberg Man was built up from a jawbone, a large chin section, and some teeth. Most scientists of the day have rejected it because it’s similar to the jawbone found in modern man. Still, many evolutionists believe he’s 250,000 years old.

All evidence of Peking man has completely disappeared.

New Guinea Man dates back to 1970.

Cro-Magnon Man is described as being “one of the earliest and best established fossils…at least equal in physique and brain capacity to that of modern man”. Which basically makes him the same as modern man.

Neanderthal man, named after the Neander Valley, which was named after Joacchem Neander, who was a Christian and wrote the hymn “Praise to the Lord, the Almighty, the King of Creation”. In 1856 they found the skeleton of a man. (proven later to be an old man with arthritis). The guy’s back was bent over, but they classified him as human at first, probably drowned in the flood of Noah. After Darwin’s book came out, they reclassified it (because they couldn’t find any evidence for evolution) as a transitional form of human from ape.

It had a thick forehead, which was probably because of extreme age. If he did come from the flood, he could have been several hundred years old. They have found about 300 such humans, but they are not transitions from apes.

Rhodesia man: Dr. Cuozzo said, “You must understand that this skull really cries out disease. The teeth are badly decayed, and the bones of the vault of the skull are extremely thick. There are many features that testify of Acromegaly or excess secretion of growth hormone in adulthood” (Buried Alive, Jack Cuozzo, p. 72). Jack was a dentist from New Jersey, and went to Europe to study the various skeletons that were in the museums. He found that they were assembled very poorly, and even made to look apelike, by leaving the jaw disconnected from the skull (not in the socket).

Lucy: found in 1974 in Ethiopia. There was only 40% of the skeleton. The head was crushed. Was 3 ft tall. Some kind of monkey. Said it was transitional because of the knee joint, and thighbone, which was angled to the side, which resembled a human. But the knee was not even from “Lucy”, it was found a year earlier, 70 meters lower in the rock, and over a mile away.

The knee was actually called the “Hadar” knee. Monkeys that climb trees, have angled femurs, it’s the ones that stay on the ground that have the straight ones. The St. Louis Zoo has Lucy on display with human hands and feet. No feet or hand bones were found. The purpose of the display is not for education, but for indoctrination in evolutionary theory. “The various australopithecines (Lucy) are, indeed, more different from both African Apes and humans in most features than these latter are from each other”.

(Dr. Charles E. Oxnard in fossils, teeth and sex – new perspectives on Human Evolution, University of Washington press, Seattle and London, 1987, p. 227).

Oldest Footprints: Found two adults and a child’s footprints in volcanic ash at Laetoli in Tanzania. It proves that hominids were walking upright some 3.75 million years ago. The footprints are described as “remarkably similar to those of modern man.” “The form of his foot was exactly the same as ours.” “Weight bearing pressure patterns in the prints resemble human ones.” “Footprints, so very much like our own.” (Footprints in the ashes of time, mary leakey, national geographic april 1979, p, 446-457. Russell H. Tuttle (University of Chicago) did the most extensive study of the Laetoli footprints as well as studying the footprints of more than 70 habitually barefoot people and found, “The 3.5 million year old footprint trails at Laetoli site G resemble those of habitually unshod modern humans. None of their features suggest that the Laetoli hominids were less capable bipeds than we are.” (Russell H. Tuttle, “The pitted pattern of Laetoli Feet.” Natural History, Mar 1990, p 64.). “If the G footprints were not known to be so old, we would readily conclude that they were made by a member of our own genus, homo.” (Russell h. tuttle, “The pitted pattern of Laetoli Feet.” Natural history, mar 1990 p. 64.). Evolution has blinded them into seeing that these were ordinary humans, and that they were not 3.5 million years old. Because of this problem, national geographic put dark skinned ape like creatures on top of the footprints, to make it look like pre-human transitional creatures. (Mary leaky, national geographic, April 1979, p 446-457). They even added a toe separation, which was not found in the original footprints. This is an ape type foot. A total lie.

Peking Man: Made from pieces of skull found in the 1920’s in Peking, China. All evidence was lost in WW2. People found a bunch of monkey bones in a cave, along with a bunch of human tools. They said that monkeys were making the tools (or maybe the tools were being used on the monkeys). Most people were never told that the remains of at least 10 humans were also found with these “monkey” bones, so they could not possibly be a missing link.

Java Man: Originally called Pithecanthropus erectus – meaning erect ape man, and now called Homo erectus and dated by evolutionists at 500,000 years old was made from a few scraps of bone found in 1891 in Java, Indonesia. Dutch anatomist Dr. Dubois (1858-1940) believed in evolution and had gone to look for missing links between man and apes. Dubois took an ape’s skull cap, and three human teeth plus a thigh bone (found a year later and 50 feet away) from a human and informed the world he had found the “missing link.” He hid the fact that he had also found 2 normal human skulls in the same area. His deceit was revealed 30 years later.

What about the theory that we are all like fish with gills in our embryonic state?

“The similarity between early stages in the development of many different animals helped convince Darwin that all forms of life shared common ancestors.” (BSCS Biological Science 1978, p. 628). This is in the comparison of different animal and human embryo’s, which they say are similar. “Darwin considered this ‘by far the strongest single class of facts in favor of’ his theory.” (Icons of Evolution, p. 82). “The baby, growing inside its mother has gills like a fish.” (Merrill Earth Science 1993, p. 451). The four branchial arches (which is what they are actually called) are not gills. They will actually become the ear bones and glands in the throat. They have nothing at all to do with breathing.

Earnst Haeckell who taught Embryology at the University of Jena in Germany started this idea. He read Darwin’s book, which he said was the “turning point in his thinking” in 1860. After the book was published, nobody had found any evidence for evolution for 9 years. Earnst though he would look for some (especially since he didn’t like the Bible and wanted to get rid of God). He took pictures of a dog and human embryo; and changed them to look alike. He basically “lied” and manufactured “proof” that Darwin’s theory was correct. He went on to draw a set if 8 different embryos in 3 stages of development, showing that they were similar. He published them in Anthropogenie, in Germany in 1874. It was a fake, a fabrication to provide evidence for evolution. Haeckel was finally caught and put on trial at his own university, where he was convicted. He said: “A small percent of my embryonic drawings are forgeries; those mainly, for which the observed material is so incomplete or insufficient as to fill in and reconstruct the missing links by hypothesis and comparative synthesis. I should feel utterly condemned…were it not that hundreds of the best observers, and biologists lie under the same charge.” Haeckel also claimed that spontaneous generation must be true, not because it had been proven in the laboratory, but because otherwise “it would be necessary to believe in a creator.” (Records from the University of Jena trial in 1875). So it appears to be common practice to lie about biological discoveries. “Moreover, the biogenetic law has become so deeply rooted in biological thought that it cannot be weeded out in spite of its having been demonstrated to be wrong by numerous subsequent scholars.” (Walter J. Bock, Dept. of Biological Sciences, Columbia Univ. “Evolution by Orderly Lay”, Science, Vol. 164 May 9, 1969, pp. 684-685. Although Haeckel’s drawings were proved to be a fake in 1875, they are still in textbooks today as evidence for evolution. An example is the book Evolutionary Analysis, 1998, p. 28. Also, Glenco, Holt, Irish, Prentiss Hill and Ken Miller biology textbooks.

How about dinosaurs? Evolution says that they went extinct about 65 million years ago, and that man evolved millions of years after the last one died. What evidence can we find? There is a lot of evidence that man actually lived with dinosaurs, and that they may even be alive today.

What about the “geologic column”? Scientists theorize that sediments were deposited on the earth over millions and billions of years. As animals died, their fossil remains were encased in this column at different levels, and as a result, they believe that the different “ages” can be determined by which fossil remains they find. Each age is defined by a specific fossil know as an “index fossil”. There are many problems with this theory, some of which are described here:

“If there were a column of sediments deposited continuously since the formation of the earth, the entire history of the planet could be reconstructed. Unfortunately no such column exists. Where sediments are missing, a break in the sedimentary record occurs. Breaks result in gaps in the record the may range from a few years to hundreds of millions of years. Breaks in the sedimentary record are called unconformities.” (Earth Science).

There are no signs of erosion between the layers of rock. If it were deposited slowly over millions of years, we would have expected to see some. Layers without erosion are more likely to have been deposited quickly probably by the action of water.

“If the geologic column existed in one location it could be 100 miles thick.” (Biology p. 385, A Beka Books).

The geologic column, as it exists in the textbooks, is not found in nature. Most of the earth’s layers vary and do not match the classical descriptions depicted in science books.

Circular reasoning is used in dating fossils and the geologic column. A fossil cannot be dated by itself; it can only be dated by knowing where, in the geologic column, it was found. A layer of rock cannot be dated without knowing what fossils are found in it. This is why we cannot accurately date anything using the geologic column.

“The layers of rock can be dated by which fossils are found in them (page 306).” “Scientists have determined the relative timing of appearance and disappearance of many kinds of organisms from the location of their fossils in sedimentary rock layers (page 307).” (Glenco Biology 1994, p. 306-307).

“The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply, feeling the explanations are not worth the trouble as long as the work brings results.” (J.E. O’Rourke, American Journal of Science 1976, 276:51).

“Apart from very ‘modern’ examples, which are really archaeology, I can think of no cases of radioactive decay being used to date fossils.” (Derek V. Ager, “Fossil Frustrations”, New Scientist, Vol. 100, November, 10, 1983, p. 425).

Radiometric dating would not have been feasible if the geologic column had not been erected first.” (J.E. O’Rourke, “Pragmatism versus Materialism in Stratigraphy”, American Journal of Science, Vol. 276, January 1976, p. 54).

“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists on using only temporal concepts, because circularity is inherent in the derivation of time scales.” (J.E. O’Rourke, “Pragmatism versus Materialism in Stratigraphy”, American Journal of Science, Vol. 276, January 1976, p. 53).

“How to you tell the difference between 100 million year old Jurassic limestone and 600 million year old Cambrian limestone? (Foresman Scott, Earth Science 1990, p. 138). The answer is by the index fossils.

“Trilobite fossils make good index fossils. If a trilobite is found in a rock layer, the rock layer was probably formed 500 to 600 million years ago.” (Holt Modern Earth Science 1989, p. 290). Yet they have found things like a human shoe print with a trilobite inside that was squished. (Found by William Meister of Kearns, Utah June 1, 1968. Dr. H.H.Doelling of Utah’s Geological Survey verified it was not a fake). This creates such a problem for evolutionists that they have gone to the extent to explain it as saying that the shoe print was actually made by another trilobite that evolved into the shape of a shoe and squished the smaller trilobite.

Graptolites are the index fossils for 410 million year old rocks. (Earth Magazine September 1993). The problem with this is that Graptolites were found alive in the South Pacific in 1993. So they can’t be index fossils for anything.

The Lobe-finned fish are the index fossils for 325-410 million year old rocks. The Coelacanth, which is found in the Indian Ocean, is a lobe-finned fish, and is alive today. There are no index fossils.

Another problem with different layers of rock telling of different geologic ages (geologic column) is that there are many places on the earth where trees are standing upright through many layers of the rock. This would mean that the tree is millions of years old as well, which we know is not true. We also know that a tree that dies above ground will disintegrate and disappear. Only under soil will trees be preserved and become petrified. This also has to happen quickly, which proves that the different layers of rock were deposited quickly. Here are examples of petrified trees around the world in different layers of rock:

The Kettles coal mines near Cookville, TN. Has hundreds of petrified trees. The top and bottom of the trees are in different coal seams dated thousands of years different in age. The trees range in height from 30 to hundreds of feet.

Many polystrate fossil trees may still be seen in Joggins, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Vertical trees are found in Coal Measures sandstone, St. Etienne, France.

Some polystrate trees are upside down extending through many layers including layers of coal.

Some of the petrified trees that have grown through millions of years of the geologic column are found upside down. There are very few reasons to explain this:

The trees stood upright for millions of years while the sediment layers formed around them (not possible since the tree would have died, and the part above the ground would have rotted).

The trees grew through hundreds of feet of solid sedimentary rock looking for sunlight (even more preposterous).

The third possibility, that evolutionists would not suggest, is that a great flood buried the trees suddenly and they petrified. The layers of rock that are thought of as the geologic column actually settled on the bottom as the waters receded.

Scientists estimate that there are 20,000 trees at the bottom of Spirit Lake. They were blown there by the eruption of Mount St. Helens. Many of the trees are buried upright and some are already 15 feet deep in sediments. They seem to settle out by species giving the appearance of a complete forest. These trees are beginning to petrify standing up, so we have an excellent idea of how it may have happened during the flood.

So the geologic column does not tell us how old the earth is, or any of the fossils that appear in its sedimentary layers.



There are many documented statements from scientists and evolutionists as well. Science, in its investigation of the theory of evolution must turn a blind eye to what they want the result to be. If the outcome is swayed by bias in any way, then this is not science; this is a religion. Some interesting comments come out when science truthfully admits what they have found:

Evolution: Sir Arthur Keith (evolution and ethics) wrote “The conclusion I have come to is this: the law of Christ is incompatible with the law of evolution, nay, the two laws are at war with each other. He also wrote; “Evolution is unproved and improvable. We believe it because the only alternative is special creation, and that is unthinkable.”

Professor Louis Bounoure, Director of Research, National Center of Scientific Research stated: “Evolution is a fairy tail for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.”

Malcolm Muggeridge, the famous British journalist and philosopher said, “I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in history books of the future.”

Dr. T.N. Tahmisian of the Atomic Energy Commission said, “Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great conmen and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact.”

“Scientists concede that their most cherished theories are based on embarrassingly few fossil fragments and that huge gaps exist in the fossil record.” (Time, November 7, 1977).

“There are not enough fossil records to answer when, where, and how Homo sapiens emerged.” (Takahata, molecular anthropology, annual review of ecology & systamatics 1995, p 355).

“All those trees of life with their branches of our ancestors, that’s a lot of nonsense.” (Mary Leakey, Associated Press, December 10, 1996).

“The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.” (Stephen Jay Gould, Harvard University. “Evolution’s Erratic Pace”, Natural History Vol. 5, May 1977).

“The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages has been a persistent and nagging problem for evolution.” (Dr. Stephen J. Gould, Evolution Now, p. 140, Professor at Harvard University in Boston).

“In the years after Darwin, his advocates hoped to find predictable progressions. In general, these have not been found – yet the optimism has died hard, and some pure fantasy has crept into the textbooks.” (David M. Raup, “Evolution and the Fossil Record”, Science, Vol. 213, July 17, 1981, p. 289).

Luther Sunderland asked evolutionists what evidence they had for their theory. The British Museum of Natural History has the largest fossil collection in the world. When the senior paleontologist (Colin Paterson) was asked why he did not show the missing links in his book he said: “I fully agree with your comments on the lack of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them. I will lay it on the line – there is not one such fossil.” (Dr. Colin Paterson, Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History in correspondence to Luther Sunderland quoted in Darwin’s Enigma 1988, p. 89).

“The evolutionists seem to know everything about the missing link except the fact that it is still missing.” (G.K.Chesterton).

“Slight variations in physical laws such as gravity or electromagnetism would make life impossible…the necessity to produce life lies at the center of the universe’s whole machinery and design.” (John Wheeler, Princeton University processor of physics, Reader’s Digest, September 1986).

“The universe and the laws of physics seem to have been specifically designed for us. If any one of about 40 physical qualities had more than slightly different values, life as we know it could not exist: Either atoms would not be stable, or the wouldn’t combine into molecules, or the stars wouldn’t form the heavier elements, or the universe would collapse before life could develop, and so on…” (Stephen Hawking, Austin American Statesman, October 19, 1997).

“Researchers suggest that virtually all modern men – 99% of them, says one scientist – are closely related genetically and share genes with one male ancestor, subbed ‘Y-chromosome Adam’. We are finding that humans have very, very shallow genetic roots which go back very recently to one ancestor…That indicates that there was an origin in a specific location on the globe, and then it spread out from there.” (US News and World Report, December 4, 1995).

“The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one out of 10 to the power of 40,000…It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.” (Sir Fredrick Hoyle, professor of astronomy, Cambridge University).

“Darwin admitted that millions of ‘missing links’, transitional life forms, would have to be discovered in the fossil record to prove the accuracy of his theory that all species had gradually evolved by change mutation into new species. Unfortunately for his theory, despite hundreds of millions spent on searching for fossils worldwide for more than a century, the scientists have failed to locate a single missing link out of the millions that must exists if their theory of evolution is to be vindicated.” (Grant R. Jeffery, The Signature of God).

Evolutionists think that we have evolved from apes. It is interesting to note that pig heart valves have been used as replacements for human heart valves. Pigskin has even been grafted in humans to deal with severe burns. In fact, pig tissues are the nearest in chemical composition to those of humans. Perhaps evolutionists should spend more time studying pigs than apes.

“I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time over everything; and to my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion out of them!” (Charles Darwin on this Theory of Evolution).

“To suppose that the eye…could have been formed by natural selection seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.” (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life. 1859, p. 217).

“In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to “bend” their observations to fit in with it.” (H.S. Lipson, Professor of Physics, University of Manchester, UK).

“Natural section can act only on those biologic properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptational needs.” (Parasitology, 6th ed. Lea & Febiger, p. 516).



Carbon 14 dating, what is it, and what are the problems with it?

The earth’s atmosphere is about 100 miles thick. It contains 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, .06% carbon dioxide, and .0000765% radioactive carbon (c14), which mix equally with the other normal CO2 by the wind currents. This radioactive carbon 14 is inhaled and absorbed by animals and plants. The sun produces carbon 14 by striking the atmosphere and converting the nitrogen (atomic weight of 14) to carbon (atomic weight of 12) by knocking a few particles off of it. Because the carbon came from nitrogen, it is unstable and radioactive. From testing, scientists believe that carbon 14 breaks back down to nitrogen at the rate of ½ every 5,730 years (half life).

During photosynthesis plants breath in CO2 and make it part of their tissue (some of it is C and some C14). Animals eat plants and make it part of their bodies. We eat plants and animals, so we have it too. When something dies, it stops taking in C14. It is assumed that the ratio of radioactive C14 to normal C12 in the atmosphere would be the same ratio found in the living plants and animals. Scientists assume that you should have .0000765% of C14 in your body.

By measuring the amount and given that it decays by ½ every 5,730 years, you should be able to get an estimation for how old something is. It should be noted that after about 5 half lives, it becomes almost impossible to detect the level of C14. This means that assuming that there is nothing else wrong with C14, it may only be accurate for about 40,000 years. So you can’t date things as being millions of years old, let along billions of years with C14.

An assumption is made that the amount of C14 in the atmosphere has always been the same. The amount of C14 in the atmosphere has actually been increasing. It has not reached equilibrium yet. It has been estimated that it would take 30,000 years for the earth to reach equilibrium. Because scientists believed that the earth was billions of years old, they assumed that C14 had reached equilibrium. The problem is that it hasn’t. There is more C14 in the atmosphere today than there was a decade ago. The calibration curve for C14 dating measures the number of Geiger counter clicks in a minute. If you tested a living thing, you would expect to get 16 clicks per minute, which would mean the C14 in the organism has gone through 0 years of decay. If you got 8 clicks a minute it would be 1 half-life and be 5,730 years old. 4 clicks would be 11,460, etc. As you get down to 1 or 2 clicks, you are pretty much at the limit. The problem is that science can only measure the amount of C14 in the fossil and know the rate of decay today. They don’t know if the rate of decay has been constant, nor how much C14 was in the atmosphere thousands of years ago.

If there was a covering of water around the earth as is alluded to in the Bible, this would have blocked X-Ray and UV Radiation. This would have caused there to not be much C14 in the original atmosphere. This may have meant that a living organism only gave off 4 clicks a minute when it was 0 years old. If we used our scale on the fossil after it died, and it was measuring 2 clicks, we would say it was 17,190 years old, when it was really under 6000 years old.

Some examples of why C14 is not a good system for measuring age:

Living mollusk shells were carbon dated as being 2300 years old. (Science vol. 141, 1963 pp. 634-637).

A freshly killed seal was carbon dated as having died 1300 years ago. (Antarctic Journal, vol. 6 Sept-Oct. 1971, p. 211).

Shells from living snails were carbon dated as being 27,000 years old. (Science vol. 224, 1984, pp. 58-61).

One part of the Vollosovitch mammoth carbon dated at 29,500 years old and another part at 44,000. (Troy L. Pewe, Quarternary Stratigraphic Nomenclature in Unglaciated Central Alaska, Geological Survey Professional Paper 862, p. 30).

One part of Dima, a baby frozen mammoth, was 40,000, another part was 26,000 and the wood immediately around the carcass was 9-10,000 years old” (Troy L. Pewe, Quarternary Stratigraphic Nomenclature in Unglaciated Central Alaska, Geological Survey Professional Paper 862, p. 30).

The lower leg of the Fairbanks Creek mammoth had a radiocarbon age of 15,380 RCY (Radio Carbon Years), while its skin and flesh were 21,300 RCY. (Harold E. Anthony, Natures Deep Freeze. Natural History, Sept. 1949, p. 300).

The two Colorado Creek, AK Mammoths had radiocarbon ages of 22,850 and 16,150 respectively. (Robert M. Thorson and R. Dale Guthrie, Stratigraphy of the Colorado Creek Mammoth Locality, Alaska. Quaternary Research, vol. 37, no. 2, March 1992, pp. 214-228).

Living Penguins have been dated as being 8,000 years old.

Material from layers where dinosaurs are found carbon dated at 34,000 years old. (R. Daly, Earth’s Most Challenging Mysteries, 1972, p. 280).

Russian scientists Kusnetsov and Ivanov carbon dated dinosaur bones at less than 30,000 years. (Strange Stores, Amazing Facts, Readers Digest, 1978, p. 335).

Hugh Miller, Columbus, OH had 4 dinosaur one samples carbon dated at 20,000 years old. The samples were not identified as dinosaur in advance. (Noah to Abram the Turbulent Years by Erich von Fange, p. 36).

A geologist at the Berkeley Geochronology Center, Carl Swisher uses the most advanced techniques to date human fossils. Last spring he was re-evaluating Homo erectus skulls found in Java in the 1930s by testing the sediment found with them. A hominid species assumed to be an ancestor of Homo sapiens; erectus was thought to have vanished some 250,000 years ago. But even though he used two different dating methods, Swisher kept making the same startling find: the bones were 53,000 years old at most and possibly no more than 27,000 years (the difference between these two years is a 96% error rate) – a stretch of time contemporaneous with modern humans. (Leslie Kaufman, Did a Third Human Species Live Among Us? Newsweek, December 23, 1996, p. 52).

Things to consider about carbon 14 dating:

Wild dates are obtained.

Dates that don’t fit evolution theory are rejected and not published. “Correct dates match the geologic column.

It is based on the assumptions that: A. The original content of the sample is known. B. The decay rate never changes. C. The sample has not been contaminated.

In carbon dating, when samples of a known age are test, Radioisotope Dating doesn’t work. When samples are of an unknown age, Radioisotope Dating is assumed to work. This doesn’t make sense.

“Ever since William Smith at the beginning of the 19th century, fossils have been and still are the best and most accurate method of dating and correlating the rocks in which they occur. Apart from very ‘modern’ examples, which are really archaeology, I can think of no cases of radioactive decay being used to date fossils.” (Derek V. Ager, Fossil Frustrations, New Scientist, vol. 100, November 10, 1983, p. 425).


Radiometric dating would not have been feasible if the geologic column had not been erected first.” (J.E. O’Rourke, Pragmatism versus Materialism in Stratigraphy, American Journal of Science, vol. 276, January 1976, p. 54).

“In the last two years an absolute date has been obtained for the Ngandong beds, above the Trinil beds, and it has the very interesting value of 300,000 years plus or minus 300,000 years (so they don’t really know). (J.B. Birdsell, Human Evolution, Rand McNally, 1975, p. 295).

Moon rocks brought back in 1969, were given to many different laboratories to be dated. One rock (specimen 10017) was divided into 6 pieces and dated many times. The ages ranged from 2.5 billion to 4.6 billion years. This is a 90% error rate, from the same rock.

James P. Dawson, Chief of Engineering and Operations for the Lunar and Earth Science Division at the Manned Spacecraft Center NASA in Houston. He worked on lunar samples including the Genesis rock. He said they found ages from 10,000 years to several billion years in the same rock.


Potassium-Argon dating:

Potassium-Argon dating can supposedly date older rocks and fossils than carbon 14 because it has a longer half-life of 1.3 billion years. The potassium decays to argon and the half-life was determined by measuring the number of particles that decayed in a 3 or 4 day period, then extrapolating for the time it would take for half the sample to decay. This doesn’t seem to be a very accurate way to measure half-life, especially if you are talking about a billion years.

Scientists believe that lava, also known as basalt, has no argon in it when it is ejected from a volcano. After coming out, the potassium starts to decay to argon. Because it starts without argon, the basalt is assumed to be the perfect stuff to date.

Potassium-Argon is not accurate at all. Here are some examples of the dating of volcanic lava:

Basalt from Mt. Etna, Sicily from an eruption in 122 BC gave an age of 250,000 years old, when we know it is less than 2,000 years old (G.B. Dalyrmple, 1969 40Ar/36Ar analysis of historic lava flows. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 6-47 55).

Lava from the 1801 Hawaiian volcano eruption gave a date of 1.6 million years old. (G.B. Dalyrmple, 1969 40Ar/36Ar analysis of historic lava flows. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 6-47 55). It was only 200 years old.

Basalt from Mt. Kilauea Iki, Hawaii (erupted in 1959) gave an age of 8,500,000. (Impact #307 Jan. 1999).

Basalt from Mt. Etna, Sicily (erupted in 1964) gave a date of 700,000 years old. (Impact #307 Jan. 1999).

Basalt from Mt. Etna, Sicily (erupted in 1972) gave an age of 350,000 years old. (Impact #307 Jan. 1999).

New Lava dome growing inside the crater of Mt. St. Helens since the 1980 eruption was dated at 350,000 to 2.8 million years old (S.A. Austia, 1996. Excess Argon Within Mineral Concentrates from the New Dacite Lava Dome at Mount St. Helens Volcano, CIN Tech Journal 10(3), pp. 335-343).

As we can see, carbon 14 and potassium-argon dating are not accurate, and cannot determine the age of anything, because they are based on false assumptions.



The test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to basic questions. Some well-meaning but misguided people think evolution is a reasonable theory to explain man’s questions about the universe. Evolution is not a good theory – it is just a pagan religion masquerading as science. Here are some questions for those that believe in evolution; they need to explain how they fit into their evolutionary theory:

Where did the space for the universe come from?

Where did matter come from?

Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)?

How did matter get so perfectly organized?

Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing?

When, where, why, and how did life come from dead matter?

When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?

With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?

Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the changes of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?)

How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce Chinese books.)

Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor?

Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true?

When, where, why, and how did:

a) Single-celled plants become multi-celled? (Where are the two- and three-celled intermediates?)

b) Single-celled animals evolve?

c) Fish change to amphibians?

d) Amphibians change to reptiles?

e) Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are all very different!) How did the intermediate forms live?

When, where, why, how, and from what did:

a) Whales evolve?

b) Sea horses evolve?

c) Bats evolve?

d) Eyes evolve?

e) Ears evolve?

f) Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve?

Which evolved first (how, and how long, did it work without the others)?

a) The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body’s resistance to its own digestive juice (stomach, intestines, etc.)?

b) The drive to reproduce or the ability to reproduce?

c) The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them, the throat, or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs?

d) DNA or RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts?

e) The termite or the flagella in its intestines that actually digest the cellulose from the wood?

f) The plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants?

g) The bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or muscles to move the bones?

h) The nervous system, repair system, or hormone system?

i) The immune system or the need for it?

[Click Here to Print]