Tag Archives: evolution

The Continual Failure of Evolution…

Posted on by
1

The Grand Theory of Evolution continues to fail as a predictive model when scientists are actually allowed to use data rather than assumptions and extrapolations.

Dennis Venema is professor of biology at Trinity Western University, and he has written some articles that claim evolution to be verified by the data.

Interesting, because when the research is analyzed, what it shows is the exact opposite.

So that you don’t have to read the entire article, here are a few snippets from the researchers:

If the evidence can confirm evolution, then it also can disconfirm evolution.

What does it say? …for it seems that what the science shows is that Venema’s claim, that the genetic evidence confirms evolutionary predictions, is inaccurate.

For starters, phylogenetic incongruence is rampant in evolutionary studies. Genetic sequence data do not fall into the expected evolutionary pattern. Conflicts exist at all levels of the evolutionary tree and throughout both morphological and molecular traits. This paper reports on incongruent gene trees in bats. That is one example of many.

In fact one evolutionist, who has studied thousands of microRNA genes, explained that he has not found “a single example that would support the traditional [evolutionary] tree.” It is, another evolutionist admitted, “a very serious incongruence.”

It is not unusual for similar species to have significant differences in their genome. These results have surprised evolutionists and there does not seem to be any let up as new genomes are deciphered.

The prediction that the mouse and rat genomes would be highly similar made sense according to evolution. But it was dramatically wrong.

In other words, out of the 1,071 trees, there were zero matches. It was “a bit shocking” for evolutionists, as one explained: “We are trying to figure out the phylogenetic relationships of 1.8 million species and can’t even sort out 20 yeast.”

And although evolutionists thought that more data would solve their problems, the opposite has occurred. With the ever increasing volumes of data (particularly molecular data), incongruence between trees “has become pervasive.”

If the pattern fits the evolutionary tree, then it is explained as common evolutionary history. If not, then it is explained as common evolutionary forces.

With all of this contradictory evidence, even evolutionists have realized in recent years that the traditional evolutionary tree model is failing. As one evolutionist explained, “The tree of life is being politely buried.”

 

So, with all of this contradictory evidence, will people be persuaded to believe in a Creator instead? Probably not. Just more epicycles and sub-hypothesis are created to extend the evolutionary story.

Romans 1 tells us that there is sufficient evidence to believe that the Creator God is evident from what he has created, and there’s enough evidence to pass judgement on the unbeliever.

We can trust God’s Word in what it has revealed about our past, and we can therefore trust Him about our future.

Question Evolution Day

Posted on by
Reply

I missed the official Question Evolution Day on February 12th, but I’m re-blogging a pretty good post that I think deserves some reading.

To have coherent logic, certain things must be true about the world. Presups start with God, unbelievers start with humanism. Science needs consistency and logic, neither of which can be accounted for in a naturalistic worldview. When an atheist performs science or uses logic, he is tacitly admitting that God is real (Heb. 1:3, Col. 2:3, John 1:3, Col 1:9), because they are abandoning their worldviews and standing on ours (for example, Bill Nye). A professing atheist can reason and do science stuff because of the truth of God’s Word, and because he is created in the image of God — but they cannot account for logic, morality, and so on.

The most beneficial thing that I found in the post was a link Jason Lisle’s The Ultimate Proof of Creation. I’ve read the book, and it’s fantastic, but in this link, he gets a one hour presentation, so you can hear it too.

Don’t be afraid to question evolution. It is presented in our culture as a fact, but is it? What is meant by evolution? What is the proof for evolution? Can this proof be interpreted in any other way which would necessitate a different conclusion?

 

 

Evidence for Evolution

Posted on by
1

I recently found this blog and was reading a few of the previous articles about creation/evolution. It struck me as odd that this Christian blog would remark on the reasonableness of evolution and then essentially says, “Well, even though this evidence confirms atheism, I’m still gonna’ be a Christian.”

For one, the evidence (as will be shown below) was impotent in proving evolution, but most importantly, the writer did not understand the importance of our starting point being revelation from God . If God and his revelation are not the starting point from which we interpret all evidence, then there is no precondition for intelligibility. We can only know things if the Creator revealed himself as a self-authenticating authority.

We must first start with the presupposition that God exists, and to know anything for certain, he must have revealed himself. Since he revealed himself as the Creator in his Word, we can know some things (not everything as he has not revealed everything). And since his revealed word also has definite things to say about the history of the universe and mankind, we can trust those things.

The evolutionary worldview differs sharply from what has been revealed in God’s Word, so we know that they are not true, and all evidence will show this. For a more complete rebuttal of the Grand Theory of Evolution, you can check out my Creation Manifesto. But below answers, what the writer of the Isaiah53 blog says is the emperor’s clothes best evidence for evolution:

  1. DNA – The universal common genetic code is strong evidence for a single designer. Information does not coalesce by natural processes. Specified complexity requires a designer. As a database administrator, I understand the critical nature of coded information being correct, and I reject the idea that the hard work I put in to formulate thousands of lines of code could be thrown together by natural forces like gravity, erosion, or combustion. As DNA is far more complex than the most sophisticated computer code, it is beyond logic to expect genetic code to have been formulated or improved by natural processes absent a designer. As far as all genetic code being similar, it only makes sense that the code be very similar but not exactly the same since all organisms were intended to be nourished by the same food source: plants. Plants, while classified as “alive” today are really just self-replicating food sources. Genesis 1:29-30. Since all genetic code is similar, it can be nourished by the same food source. If genetic code were wildly different, the only thing that humans would be able to eat for nourishment would be ourselves.
  2. Fossils – The fossil record shows variation within the same families of animals, but any theoretical transition between kinds of animals is missing. The fossil record however, is a strong indication that the Bible is true. In Genesis 7, God brings a catastrophic worldwide flood upon the surface of the earth that killed every living thing that was not on the ark. So Christians would expect to find billions of dead things buried in water-sorted rock layers. That is exactly what is found! So, why have human remains not been found with dinosaur remains? Would you live in the vicinity of dinosaurs? Probably not. Neither did pre-flood humans. They are buried in different layers, not because they lived at different times, but because they lived in different places. As far as the existence of fossils goes, it is an insurmountable problem for evolutionists to explain. Why are the rock layers perfectly flat with no erosion markers between the layers? Surely after each layer is exposed for thousands/millions of years there would be erosion between the layers. Why is there no bioturbation (root/worm-path fossils) in the layers? Why are the layers sorted by soil type? After thousands/millions of years soil types would be mixed and jumbled. Why are there fossils across multiple layers of rock? Did these dead animals/plants/trees lay exposed for millions of years while it was waiting to be buried by multiple layers of rock? To get fossilized material at all, an organism has to be buried quickly to avoid scavenging and decomposition, so the existence of fossils is actually unexpected from an evolutionary worldview that relies on slow, destructive processes. Fossils and the geologic layers are actually strong evidence for a catastrophic worldwide flood.
  3. Genetic Commonalities – This is pretty-well covered in item 1. But to further show that this is a false indication of evolution, the most recent research of DNA is showing that the genetic code is orders of magnitude more complex than originally thought. Junk DNA has been shown to be a false prediction of evolution as the entire DNA strand is now proving to be useful for the organism…exactly as one would expect if an omnipotent Creator designed everything from the beginning. For anyone interested in doing more research on this issue, check part one of this six part issue. A great quote from the article says, “If ENCODE is right, then Evolution is wrong.” Hint: ENCODE is right.
  4. Common Traits in Embryos – This line of reasoning was disproven over 100 years ago. Let me say that again, so it sinks in: Common traits of embryos was disproven over ONE HUNDRED years ago!!!! This was based on the fraudulent drawings made by Haeckel in the 1800s and recognized for the lie that they were within years of his submission. It’s absolutely irresponsible for this line of reasoning to be used as evidence for evolution. Gill slits??? Please!
  5. Bacterial Resistance to Antibiotics – This has nothing to do with microbes to microbiologists evolution. As stated, there are a few individuals present in bacterial colonies that are already resistant to antibiotics. So, in the presence of antibiotics, these mutants will thrive and be able to produce more offspring. As is required by evolution, no new information is added…only the gene pool is thinned by antibiotics, which is natural selection in action. Natural selection thins the gene pool; it does not create anything new. People have misunderstood what natural selection means, but it is an expectation that is perfectly in line with a biblical worldview. For more information on antibiotic resistant bacteria, you can check out this article.

So, as you can clearly see, these “evidences” for evolution are completely misunderstood or misrepresented. They are actually strong evidence that the Creator can be trusted in his revealed word. Since God can be trusted about the past, we can put our faith in Him completely for our future!

It Only Takes One Generation

Posted on by
Reply

I Kings 12-14 records the steep decline of morality among God’s chosen people once King Solomon died. It was a sad time for Israel and led to their eventual destruction for breaking God’s covenant. In a single generation the chosen people of Almighty God rejected his covenant, blessing, and protection for worldliness, wickedness, and unfaithfulness.

America is NOT God’s chosen people, and it could be debated that the government of the United States has ever been Christian in nature, but the culture of the American people has been strongly influenced by the Bible and Christian morality. For generations the vast majority of Americans would have declared themselves to be Christian. Even today, polls show that about 70% of Americans identify as Christians.

The numbers continue to fall, and over this next generation, the numbers will fall precipitously. I would propose that the single biggest factor in this decline is the prominence that has been granted to evolution. The grand theory of evolution is a naturalistic origins story that purportedly replaces the Creator, and as evolution has been taught as the only viable origins story in all public schools for the past 60 years, it’s no small wonder that today’s youth find no need for the Bible or a Redeemer. Sadly, many people who claim to be Christians endorse this naturalistic tool without realizing the way it dismantles people’s faith.

Today’s article from the Slate identifies evolution as a primary reason for the decline and fall of Christianity in America:

The increase in younger people embracing evolution is “quite striking,” says Kenneth R. Miller, a biologist at Brown University and an expert witness the landmark court case Kitzmiller v. Dover, which kicked “intelligent design” out of public school classrooms in 2005. “We’re moving in the right direction.”

Evolution has been used as a bludgeon to beat down belief in the Creator. Youth and adults alike fear the stigma of being identified with creationists if they are not worshiping at the altar of St. Darwin.

Sadly, as Darwinism extends its iron grip on the American culture, certain side effects are inevitable. From the same article:

To turn that cultural tide in such a short period of time, the supporters of gay marriage had to do something far more difficult: change deeply rooted attitudes and beliefs. Similarly, for the movement behind evolution to triumph, younger Americans who have been raised to believe in creationism need to be open to changing their minds. Fortunately, today’s generation is growing up in a time of greater open-mindedness and willingness to listen to evidence-based thinking, Wolfson says. Rather than being blinded by ideology, today’s young adults are open to evidence, facts, and reason.

The author hypocritically or ignorantly attributes ideology to Christianity without showing how evolutionary ideology is tyrannical in its extreme prejudice.

Romans 1 (I’ve included the text at the end) speaks clearly of this cascade of steps in which wicked people engage:

  • They suppress the Truth of God as Creator
  • Instead of thanking and glorifying God, they claim to be wise
  • This causes futile thinking and darkened hearts
  • They attribute God’s creative works instead to created things (evolution did it)
  • Therefore, sexual impurity becomes rampant and accepted

If anyone ever wondered before about the strength and prophetic power of scripture, reading Romans 1 erases doubt that the Spirit revealed to Paul how quickly a culture could be sabotaged from the inside. The Roman culture quickly crumbled once immorality became acceptable. We’re seeing the same thing in our American culture today.

Where’s the hope? Hope is in Christ alone. Our culture like every other culture that has thought it would last forever will end up in the landfill. But as Deuteronomy 6 stresses, “Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. Impress them on your children.”

It only takes one generation that unlike their parents, rejects God’s commands, and the culture will be irrevocably changed.

The only hope for cultures, ourselves, and our children is in the redemption that only Christ can bring. Avoid the cascade of Romans 1 by first of all giving thanks to God as Creator. Don’t let evolution corrode your faith in his creative and redemptive works.

 

 

Romans 1

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.20 Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; 21 for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen.

26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

ENCODE Eviscerates Evolution

Posted on by
5

The Grand Theory of Evolution essentially tells us that with no divine intervention, all biological creatures came from a rock while developing through small, successive modifications to mature into the tree of life that is seen today.

While popular and convenient, the grand theory of evolution has been facing very serious scientific challenges. One of the most recent of these challenges comes from the ENCODE project, which analyzed the human genome. Their findings undermined the predictions and expectations of evolution. Although the project itself is very technical, some clever people at EvolutionNews.org, have written four of a six part analysis of the project.

Here are some highlights from each of the blog entries:

  • Post One – “If the human genome is indeed devoid of junk DNA as implied by the ENCODE project, then a long, undirected evolutionary process cannot explain the human genome. If, on the other hand, organisms are designed, then all DNA, or as much as possible, is expected to exhibit function. If ENCODE is right, then Evolution is wrong.”
  • Post Two – “Despite their bluster, critics have been unable to disprove what a leading ENCODE researcher stated in 2014: “There is not a single place in the genome that doesn’t have something that you might think could be controlling something else.”If we’re willing to follow ENCODE’s experimental evidence where it leads, unhindered by evolutionary assumptions, evidence of important genomic function is everywhere.”
  • Post Three – “Critics like Dan Graur charge that ENCODE is guilty of “divorcing genomic analysis from its evolutionary context” -and that’s exactly right. ENCODE’s empirically based finding that the vast majority of our genome is functional has withstood theoretical, evolution-based objections from critics. Maybe a divorce from evolutionary thinking is exactly what we need to liberate biology from bad evolutionary assumptions and explain what’s happening inside our cells.”
  • Post Four – “However, what I’ve shown above only scratches the surface of a huge body of literature. Again and again, evolutionary biologists have predicted that our genome is primarily useless junk. Occasional caveats from evolutionary scientists, allowing that some small amount of the “junk” might be functional, do not mitigate the widespread, longstanding view that our cells are full of junk DNA. We now know that, on this point, evolutionists were wrong. The “junk DNA” paradigm has conclusively faltered.”

Evolution has been masquerading as science for decades. It has become common to expel people from the discussion if they fail to worship at the altar of Saint Darwin, but with the latest findings, the charade is proving to be empty bluster.

Evolution is diametrically opposed to the Christian worldview, and is now being challenged on scientific grounds.

If we stand on the unmovable foundation of God’s Word, then there is a basis for Absolute Truth by which we can do science. Trusting what God has told us about our past gives us faith to trust Him with our future as well.

Jurassic Nightmare

Posted on by
1

Who has seen Jurassic World? I’m anxious to see it as I was a huge fan of the original Jurassic Park from 1993. The idea is that scientists were able to clone dinosaurs from dino DNA that was retrieved from amber-trapped blood parasites. Great story, but it is built upon a foundation of irrationality.

The dominant paradigm of billions of years of evolution acting on genetic code to form all terrestrial life from a single cell ancestor is completely at odds with the historical account of the Bible. It is said in this dominant paradigm of scientism that the dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago.

The problem for this epic fairy tale is that the dates are wrong. The bards of this epic fantasy tell us that radioactive dating has proven that the fossil material recovered in archaeological digs is absolutely dated as older than 65 million years. The problem is that they have disregarded one of the Creationist’s best friend, Carbon-14 testing.

This article shows how the story of evolution is coming apart.

The CRSQ study authors tested seven dinosaur bones, including a Triceratops from Montana, hadrosaurids, a cartilaginous paddlefish, a bony fish, and fresh-looking wood and lizard bones from Permian layers in Canada and Oklahoma. Five different commercial and academic laboratories detected carbon-14 in all the samples, whether from Cenozoic, Mesozoic, or Paleozoic source rocks.

carbon14_Dinosaur

Evolutionists are left with the choice that either radiometric dating is untrustworthy because ALL fossils have carbon-14 (and therefore, they cannot prove that fossils existed millions of years ago) or carbon-14 is a reliable dating method (and therefore since all fossils have carbon-14, then not enough time has passed to validate their fantastic tale.)

It’s a nightmare for old earthers like Hugh Ross and evolutionists.

But all of these dates verify the historicity of the Bible. At every point, we find that God’s Word can be trusted. We find that since we can trust God about his revelation of history, we can trust Him in his prophecy about our future.

Evolution is a Religion

Posted on by
8

DarwinStatueDon’t believe me? Listen to the words of the UCONN Biology teacher when he decides to stop berating the preachers and begins indoctrinating the students. (WARNING!!! Profanity from evolutionist)

Not only do the atheist elite want to indoctrinate the masses with their message of naturalism, they cannot believe that anyone would disagree with them. To them, you can have any opinion on origins as long as it’s the same as them. Unfortunately (for them), their own worldview cannot account for good/evil, science, reason/logic, beauty, or truth.

If anyone tries to speak out that naturalism/evolution has some shortcomings in explaining everything, they are excommunicated. Those who do not worship at the alter of naturalism lose their job (David Coppedge) or career (Guillermo Gonzalez.)

What Could Persuade You?

Posted on by
4
What Could Persuade You that evolution were not true?
If archaeologists found a rabbit in the Cambrian layers of soil then evolution would be disproven…right?
Well, as it turns out, proverbial rabbits are found all of the time in layers much “too old” for them. The problem is that people do not change their view based on conflicting evidence…they evolve their interpretation of the evidence to fit their view.
In an article entitled Radiometric Backflip, Volume 37, Issue 1, Creation Magazine describes just such an example. Here’s an example where the “science” (based on absolute radio metric dating) proved suggested that the rock layers of the Santo Domingo rock formation were 200 million years old (Nature 417 (6892):936-938, 27 June 2002).  But when footprints of sandpipers were found in layers of soil underneath the 200 million year old layers, scientists were able to scrub away 175 million years to make the data fit with the idea that sandpipers evolved about 37 million years ago. It must have taken quite a bit of soap to scrub away 175 million years that fast.
And this is not an isolated case. A hominid fossil, KNM-ER 1470 was found beneath soil that had originally been absolutely dated at over 200 million years old. Once the fossil was found, Richard Leakey requested a re-test. Not surprisingly, the NEW absolute dates of between 2-5 million years fit perfectly in the range that was needed to perpetuate the evolutionary myth. What happened to the original 200 million years? They were donated to a local charity for all we know.
So no amount of evidence will change someone’s mind regarding origins. This is why it is so important for Christians to be familiar with presuppositional apologetics. Everyone has presuppositions that define how we interpret evidence. So, the argument is not over evidence; the argument is over which presuppositions can correctly account for the preconditions of intelligibility. Only Christianity can account for intelligibility
Christians presuppose that there is a Creator God and that he revealed himself through the Bible, through creation, and in Jesus. Those who presuppose that there is no God are reliant on billions of years and a creative mechanism (evolution by natural selection and random mutation) to explain the origin and development of life.
So to convince someone that there is a God and that his word is infinitely reliable, you have to show how their atheistic presupposition contains contradictions.
We can trust God’s Word about history, and since it is a reliable history book (and the revealed Word of God), we know that we can trust God at his word regarding salvation and our future hope (Romans 8.)

Book Review: Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds

Posted on by
Reply

Phillip E. Johnson lays out a crystal-clear presentation for understanding the case against Darwinism. Not quite as comprehensive as Darwin on Trial or Reason in the Balance, this book was written as somewhat of a primer for those interested in learning about the scientific case against naturalism without being overwhelmed with scientific jargon.

The book was easy to get through and thoroughly compelling. Knowing that atheists would be resistant to arguments involving the Bible, he does not use it as an one of his arguments. The book’s main focus is on showing that naturalism as a foundation for Darwinism is the main problem. He quotes a letter that he received to show some very common mistakes from those that try to engage in this debate.

  1. Wrong definition of evolution – In the letter, the student tried to say that it was possible that God could have used evolution to do his creating. As I have shown here, here and here, this is not possible. But Johnson continues to explain why evolution as understood in the classroom is not a part of God’s creative plan when he shares the definition of evolution from the American National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT), “The diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and changing environments.” <in 1997 the NABT removed the words unsupervised and impersonal>
  2. God started everything and then retired – The student tries to redefine the God of the Bible for a first cause (remote god) of deism.
  3. Faith vs. Reason – This is a very common intellectual error. Many people mistakenly think that naturalism is a result of reason, and anything that is not naturalism is faith. Firstly, naturalism cannot account for reason, and secondly, assuming naturalism is a faith position.

Johnson does a great job at correctly framing the debate. It is not a debate of science vs. faith, but it is one in which those in power of the “microphone” have overstated their case and suppressed any dissent. He has clear insight into the irony of the Darwinian position with regards to the media. Johnson correctly shows the hypocritical position of the Darwinists by describing the 1960 movie release, Inherit the Wind. The movie is based on the historical 1925 Scopes Trial in which a Kentucky high school PE teacher is convicted of teaching evolution in the classroom, which at the time was against the law in Tennessee. The movie stereotypes the Christians as evil monsters bent on suppressing knowledge, and it stereotypes the evolutionists as heroes of reason and humanity. What Johnson is able to do is show that this movie is actually a representation of what is happening in today’s science classrooms…just the reverse of the heroes and villains. In the movie, Mr. Cates is the persecuted hero, who “righteously” stood for reason by teaching evolution. During the scene described below, the prosecuting attorney takes the stand as a witness for creation while the defense attorney grills him:

“Suppose Mr. Cates had enough influence and lung power to railroad through the State Legislature a law that only Darwin should be taught in the schools!”

That possibility may have seemed remote in Hillsboro, but of course it is exactly what happened later. The real story of the Scopes trial is that the stereotype it promoted helped the Darwinists capture the power of the law, and they have since used the law to prevent other people from thinking independently. By labeling any fundamental dissent from Darwinism as “religion,” they are able to ban criticism of the official evolution story from public education far more than the teaching of evolution was banned from Tennessee schools in the 1920s.

But how was this reversal accomplished in a voting democracy? Given that a majority of Americans still believe that God is our Creator, how have the Darwinists been able to obtain so much influence and lung power?

The play answers that question too. In the final scene of Inherit the Wind, when the jury returns to the courtroom to deliver its verdict, a character identified as “Radio Man” appears in the courtroom carrying a large microphone…

The microphone (that is, the news media) can nullify <Darwin Dissenters> power by (in effect) outshouting him..There is only one microphone in the courtroom, and whoever decides when to turn it on or off controls what the world will learn about the trial…When the creation-evolution conflict is replayed in our own media-dominated times, the microphone-owners of the media get tot decide who plays the heroes and who plays the villains. What this has meant for decades is that Darwinists – who are now the legal and political power holders-nonetheless appear before the microphone as <heroes>.

The rest of the book builds the real scientific case for intelligent design and the wedge strategy. Johnson refers to the wedge strategy as the idea of not accepting the presupposition of naturalism. People should be allowed to question this unprovable axiom without having to face Darwinist persecution.

I highly recommend the book for those who would like a start in understanding the creation-evolution conflict at an introductory level. It is a quick read at only 119 pages.

The Best Evidence

Posted on by
Reply

The best evidence for evolution has been shown to be incorrect…or at best outdated.

Citing the lack of support among students for embracing the Grand Theory of Evolution, two political science professors from Penn State, Michael Berkman and Eric Plutzer, have decided to help remedy the situation. They gathered science teachers from across the country into focus groups in an effort to find possible solutions. In the article that reported on their progress, the title photograph was Kenneth R. Miller and Joseph Levine’s textbook, Biology.

Evolution News reports that this Biology textbook is filled with information that could best be described as misleading.

I have a copy of the 2000 “elephant cover” textbook, which features (1) a drawing of the 1953 apparatus used by Stanley Miller and Harold Urey, accompanied by a caption stating that their experiment “first demonstrated how organic matter may have formed in Earth’s primitive atmosphere” (p. 344); (2) drawings of vertebrate embryos that look most similar in their early stages, showing that they evolved from common ancestors (p. 283); and (3) photographs of light- and dark-colored peppered moths resting on light- and dark-colored tree trunks, illustrating a story about natural selection in action (p. 297).

But these icons of evolution misrepresent the evidence. Among other things, the “atmosphere” used in the 1953 Miller-Urey experiment was almost certainly unlike that of the early Earth; vertebrate embryos actually look very different from each other in their early stages; and peppered moths rarely rest on tree trunks in the wild. The moth photographs were staged.

If the best evidence for evolution has to be fabricated, perpetuated, or assumed, then it’s time to try a different foundation for one’s worldview.