Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
Evolution is the supposed process by which the first cell evolved into the diversity of life we see today. Natural selection and mutations are considered its driving force. However, evolution has never been observed and natural selection and mutations cannot add the information necessary to change one kind into another.
From Check This Out
Operational, experimental science has never demonstrated life randomly evolving from non-living elements. In fact, such an occurrence would violate the most fundamental observable law of biology: life comes from life, not from non-life. But another show-stopper for abiogenesis would be a lack of power.
When discussing natural selection as a possible mechanism for evolution, it is important to define both terms. Evolutionists and biblical creationists view these terms differently, but it comes down to how we interpret the evidence in light of our foundation. Do we view natural selection using God’s Word as our foundation, or do we use man’s truth as our foundation?
Some evolutionists have argued that science isn’t possible without evolution. They teach that science and technology actually require the principles of molecules-to-man evolution in order to work. But without uniformity in nature, predictions would be impossible, and science could not exist. The problem for evolutionism is that such regularity only makes sense in a biblical creation worldview.
The Scopes “monkey trial” of Dayton, Tennessee, in 1925, plays a unique role in the modern creation–evolution controversy. Hollywood’s Inherit the Wind was a dramatic retelling of the event that distorted many of the basic facts, with those distortions uniformly weakening the creationist position. But taught properly, the Bible-believing student can face science class confidently prepared to learn about and critically analyze evolutionary theories.
Does observational science support the big bang, the idea that 13 billion years ago all matter came from nothing and eventually formed everything we see today?
Charles Darwin, famed author of Origin of Species, is remembered as the man who popularized evolution. Have the last 200 years of research proved his ideas?
Contrary to the popular cry that “science has proven evolution as fact,” the scientific facts themselves argue against evolution.
Are humans simply the by-product of evolution from an ape-like ancestor or were they lovingly fashioned by God in His own image?
Do transitional forms really exist between microbe and microbiologist, or are they missing links? In the biblical worldview, they never existed at all!
Is natural selection, which uses existing information leading to varations in organisms, proof of information-adding, molecules-to-man evolution?
Big bangs and stardust, primordial soup, meteorites with amino acids, or maybe aliens seeded life on earth? A Creator God is a much more logical choice.
Trial of the century! Bryan cannot defend Scripture due to old-earth compromises. Evolution in schools loses the court battle but wins the classrooms.
Theistic evolution, the idea that God used evolution to create life, poses great danger to the gospel, the Bible’s authority, and the character of the Creator.
Biological evolution: is it a scientific fact, a theory, or just a hypothesis? How does this model of origins hold up under careful scientific scrutiny?
If you think evolution is unrelated to church work, some very rich people disagree. They’re spending millions to make the church an evolution-friendly place.
Did your cat evolve to like you?
A physicist and an astrobiologist team up to explain to medical doctors how knowledge of evolution holds the key to curing cancer.
Uner Tan syndrome does not harbor the evolutionary “how” of human bipedality.
Lenski's long-term evolution experiment does not distinguish between observable limited change and unobservable molecules-to-man evolution.