Articles About Evolution

Every day men and women go to work in their professions. Some of us dig ditches for a living while others work as engineers that work out the mechanics of sending spacecraft into the cosmos. For our effort, we receive something called a wage. Our employer pays each of us a certain amount of money for the work that we turn out for them. If we are productive we are allowed to remain in their employ and if we are not productive we are fired and replaced by someone who can meet our employer’s expectations. Unless we’re involved in organized crime, we expected to operate under a specific code of ethics where we do the best job that we can possibly do, represent our employer by treating clients with honor and respect, and we are expected to produce results using honesty and integrity. If we work in such a manner we are often promoted to a higher status within our company and we are rewarded with a better wage and sometimes public or company recognition. Tak into account that I am writing from America and I speak from a Capitalist point of view. If you live outside North America then perhaps you might notice some similarities but also some differences. In Capitalism, people work mostly in a production-based economic model.

Science works in a different mode than most of the world is familiar with. Science works in an outcome based economic model. Many people do not realize that most of science is funded by grants and/or private funding. One good example can be found in a comedy titled “Back to School.” In the movie the main character wants to go back to college, figuring that if he is there he can help his son to stay in school and in addition so that he too can get a college degree. In the movie, there is another character that is a tenured professor in the colleges’ school of business. The main character is a businessman who became quite successful because he saw a niche and took advantage of that need thus becoming very rich. The professor of economics contends that the main character is not able to attend the school because of poor high school grades and missing transcripts. The main character counters that if he’s allowed to attend the school he’ll build a new wing on the college if he’s allowed to attend. The college, in want of a new wing, allows the main character to attend the school. This is a good example of an outcome-based system, a sort of “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch your back.”

Now I’m not saying that all scientists operate on this basis, but science as a whole is built upon this principle. As I mentioned above, almost all of science is funded by both public and private grants. People and organizations that provide grants do so on the premise that the scientists that they are funding will produce scientific evidence for something that they (those giving the grants) are interested in proving. Another thing that spurs science on is when a scientist or a group of scientists have a personal conviction, idea or theory that they want to advance. They will often pitch their ideas to several sources until they find one source that deems their study fund-worthy. Albert Einstein, in an attempt to prove that gravity bends light sought out several benefactors until he finally found a man who wanted to advance his (Einstein’s) theory. The expedition was funded and a small group of men set off for Crimea but were instead captured and labeled as spies because of political turmoil at the time. His theory would be proved a few years later in another part of the world. If scientists would crack open the Bible they would realize one very important aspect of funding by grants:

The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender. Proverbs 22:7

During the past two hundred or so years it has become quite evident that science isn’t solely in existence for science, but it is also a lucrative way of making a living. Yes, there are still some scientists who are compelled by truthful conviction, but much of science is ruled by those giving the grant rather than the truthful results that come from truthful verification from repeatable laboratory results. There are six steps to the scientific method:

  1. Purpose/Question. Ask a question.
  2. Research. Conduct background research.
  3. Hypothesis. Propose a hypothesis.
  4. Experiment. Design and perform an experiment to test your hypothesis.
  5. Data/Analysis. Record observations and analyze what the data means.
  6. Conclusion. Conclude whether to accept or reject your hypothesis.

If the six steps above are followed then there is a good chance that the results will be accepted by the scientific community and the result will be an accepted theory. When a theory is accepted by the scientific community and it has been proven time and time again then it becomes a scientific Law.True science is demonstrated by a thirst for knowledge, not by political pressure or monetary gain. In addition, true science strives to find the truth for the sake of knowing the truth. False science exists to destroy people, places or things. False science is often motivated by political or military purposes.

A good example of junk or false science is found in what is commonly called “the Theory of Evolution.” To promote this theory, evolutionary scientists often use circular reasoning to promote what it perceives to be a truth. For example, if you were to ask a scientist how he can date a layer of strata he or she would say that they date strata by the fossils that they find in that strata. If you ask them how they date fossils they will tell you that they date fossils by the strata in which they are found. Another dating method is called “carbon dating.” Since the universe is being affected by atrophy, everything decays. Elements and decay to become other elements. For instance, uranium decays to become the element lead. For you gardeners out there, the leaves that fall Autumn decay to become mulch and later good planting soil. Everything alive consists of carbon. The rays of the sun affect carbon creating something called “carbon 14.” Carbon 14 decays over time. The result is that something that died two thousand years ago should have much less carbon 14 than something that died five hundred years ago. The problem is that science relies on what it supposes that the sun has always shined upon the Earth in a constant manner. They do not take into account diminished sunshine because of volcanic ash in the atmosphere, the cycling of the sun between more and less active times. Places on Earth that experience less sunshine because of seasonal effects. Here are just a few examples of errors that were noted when using Carbon 14 as a dating method:

  • Living penguins have been carbon dated and the results said that they had died 8,000 years ago! This is just one of many inaccurate dates given by Carbon dating.
  • The shells of living mollusks have been dated using the carbon 14 method, only to find that the method gave it a date as having been dead for 23,000 years!(Science vol. 141 1963 pg. 634-637)
  • The body of a seal that had been dead for 30 years was carbon dated, and the results stated that the seal had died 4,600 years ago! (“The Illustrated Origins Answer Book” by Paul Taylor)
  • What about a freshly killed seal? Well, they dated one of those too, the results stated that the seal had died 1,300 years ago. (Antarctic Journal vol. 6 Sept-Oct 1971 pg. 211)
  • Antarctic seawater has a low level of C14. Consequently, organisms living there dated by C14 give ages much older than their true age.
  • A Lake Bonney seal known to have died only a few weeks before was carbon dated. The results stated that the seal had died between 515 and 715 years ago. (Antarctic Journal, Washington)
  • Shells from living snails were dated using the Carbon 14 method. The results stated that the snails had died 27,000 years ago. (Science vol. 224 1984 pg. 58-61)

The examples above and below are sourced from the following website. It is a very informative website with much more information. Please visit them at

Methods for dating older objects and nonorganic things like rock are flawed too and cannot be relied on by someone who is honestly seeking the truth. Scientists involved in evolution use the Potassium-Argon Ion dating test to determine the age of rocks and such. There are problems with Potassium-Argon dating, as exampled below:

  • “Scientists got dates of 164 million and 3 billion years for two Hawaiian lava flows. But these lava flows happened only about 200 years ago in 1800 and 1801.
    (“Dry bones and other fossils” by Dr. Gary Parker)
  • Volcanic ash has also been known to give dates much older than they actually were.
  • Lava flows at Mt Ngauruhoe, New Zealand gave erroneous dates (from K-Ar analyses) ranging from <0.27 to 3.5 (± 0.2) million years old. These rocks were “observed to have cooled from lavas 25-50 years ago”.(“Radioactive ‘dating’ failure: Recent New Zealand lava flows yield ‘ages’ of millions of years” by Andrew Snelling published in: Creation Ex Nihilo 22(1):18-21 December 1999 – February 2000)
  • The equipment was checked and the samples were run again to exclude the possibility of lab error but similar results were obtained.(“Radioactive ‘dating’ failure: Recent New Zealand lava flows yield ‘ages’ of millions of years” by Andrew Snelling published in: Creation Ex Nihilo 22(1):18-21 December 1999 – February 2000)
  • Because the actual age of these rocks is known to be less than 50 years old, it is clear that these K-Ar ‘ages’ are due to ‘excess’ argon which was inherited from the magma source area deep in the earth.(“Radioactive ‘dating’ failure: Recent New Zealand lava flows yield ‘ages’ of millions of years” by Andrew Snelling published in: Creation Ex Nihilo 22(1):18-21 December 1999 – February 2000)
  • See also the video: Mount St. Helens: Explosive Evidence for Catastrophe Dr. Steve Austin

So we see in just the dating methods of science there are problems. In real science, these methods would have caused the scientific community to castigate evolutionists and dismiss the Theory of Evolution. However, in a scientific community that has an agenda and a bias, these things are allowed to remain. There is good news about evolution, however, in that there are so many scientists that see the myriad of problems with Darwinism, that same Darwinism is starting to come under scrutiny.

The scrutiny that comes upon Darwinism would be a good and fair thing if those who had suspicions were to consider all viable replacements for Darwinism. If one can look at the history of Darwinism one could see that the Scopes Trial did a lot to establish Darwinism into our modern culture. Basically, it all has to do with religion vs. religion. There might be some that would argue that Evolution is a science, not a religion. But let’s look at some things in regard to evolution. In the current evolution model, the universe came into existence from just a tiny dot spinning very fast that one day exploded and became the endless universe that we see today. According to Evolution Theory, about 4.6 billion years ago lightning struck a puddle of goo that somehow contained all of the amino acids needed to create life, resulting in a single-celled plant/animal that colonized and through what would have to be countless mutations throughout the 4.6 billion years that single-celled entity evolved into all life forms that we see today. Through some sort of evolution miracle process, the fact that 99.999% of mutations are fatal or create sterility were suspended, allowing not only adaptation to the environment, but also allowed species to evolve into other species. So, according to current Evolution Theory, one day a cold-blooded reptile with a two chamber heart evolved without mutations into a warm-blooded bird with a four chamber heart. That is just one of the cosmic miracles, but there had to be billions, maybe trillions of such miracles that had to occur without any being performing these perfect gene manipulations. Are you starting to see that evolutionists have to possess a very strong faith to believe these things? Having faith denotes a religious aspect to their belief, a faith that far exceeds that of any religion that has faith in a creator deity. In essence, to believe that something came from nothing all by itself, that order was created out of chaos, that somehow strong genetic mutations ceased for no reason and that you can believe in something even though you never saw it or still can’t observe it today makes evolutionists the people with the most faith, more than anyone that ever existed. And, it elevates mankind to a god status because mankind is the final result of evolution.

This brings us to an interesting quandary. If a person is, in essence, a god, they do not want to be subject to a higher deity simply because it would cause them to surrender their sovereignty to the higher power and it would cause them to be subject to the rules and regulations set forth by The Almighty. Such a person would go through great strides to prove that the Almighty does not exist, using all means possible, especially promoting things that expressly deceive people of other religions and/or create doctrines that water down the doctrines expressly of Judeo/Christian belief. This would be especially easy if the government and private party’s that also consider themselves to be gods wanted a fellow god to disprove or attempt to disprove the existence of Yahweh or to diminish how Yahweh cares for His own creation.

So now that we’ve explored the beast of modern science, let’s look at some of the foo pah’s that scientists have thrown at an unsuspecting public so that they can profit from their vain imaginations:

One theory that scientists used to make a lot of money back in the 1960’s and into the 1970’s came in the way of saying that there was a climate change coming upon the earth that would result in a New Ice Age. It was all over the news. Here are three “Time Magazine” covers from back in that time:

Yes, back in the 1970’s science wanted us to think that the Earth was going through a phase of global cooling. Just like today, they tried to get us to believe that we were introducing vast amounts of CO-2 into the atmosphere and that as a result, we were blocking the sun’s rays from reaching the surface of Earth. Today they want us to believe that the heat reaches the Earth’s surface, but the CO-2 acts like a blanket that won’t allow the heat to escape. Interestingly, back in the 1970’s is when the environmentalists started to pressure the public into utilizing mass transit. It was much better for Earth if we rode in buses and trains. I was always amused when the hippies would show up as protests and especially on Earth Day, simply because it seemed that the majority of them drove Volkswagon Beetles and vans which were some of the worse polluters and which got the worse gas mileage of the majority of the cars out there. It is also interesting that those in power took advantage of what was perpetrated to be a gasoline shortage, causing long lines at gas stations and gas rationing. All of this was done to indoctrinate people to become “better stewards of Earth’s resources.” It seems that the purpose has always been to guilt those with resources to back off of the resources with the threat that we’re running out of fossil fuels and that we’re destroying the earth. The propaganda that CO-2 was a bad thing but they left out one thing, that is that plants take in CO-2 and in return, they supply us with oxygen. More CO-2 makes Earth greener and encourages the production of oxygen. Yahweh caused equilibrium in His creation, but science always tries to dispute that fact and supplant that fact with their own little lies.

The Business of Science and Pharmaceuticals:

Another place where science seems to be dragging its feet is in the study of cholesterol so as to procure a cure, but also in its blatant lie in treating the condition. First, it must be understood that Cholesterol is important, so much so that your body makes it on its own. The body uses cholesterol

Cholesterol is a waxy, fat-like substance that’s found in all cells of the body. Your body needs some cholesterol to make hormones, vitamin D, and substances that help you digest foods. Your body makes all the cholesterol it needs. However, cholesterol also is found in some of the foods you eat. [Source:]

So you see, cholesterol in itself isn’t a bad thing. It used to be thought that cholesterol was responsible for clogging the arteries of humans, and it still may play a minor role, but research is finding that artery blockages might more be the result of inflammation of the arteries and certain ruptures in the arteries where the reaction to the inflammation suddenly blocks artery channels. Wouldn’t it make sense that your doctor telling you to take an aspirin a day might be for inflammation rather than platelet aggregation (clumping)? I mean, after all, aspirin is falls into the drug classification of NSAID, which stands for Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug.

What science does in regard to cholesterol is they just assume that since they suppose that cholesterol is responsible for clogging the arteries of their test subjects, some of which might have been affected and some which were not, they should just recommend that everyone should be placed on some sort of anti-cholesterol medication. Using this sort of reasoning, we might just assume that since just a few people have allergies in Spring, we should just place everyone on an antihistamine, a rescue inhaler, and a steroid inhaler. Also, this is akin to saying that just because a few bad apples are found in any race or heritage group then all of that race or group must be a problem. No, there are more and more studies coming out proving that cholesterol is normal in people and that everyone reacts differently to high levels of cholesterol. For instance, my own dad had “high cholesterol” in his blood chemistry. When he died because of meningitis the doctors wanted to do an autopsy on him to see why meningitis killed him so quickly and why treatments didn’t help. One of the results of his autopsy is that they looked at the arteries in his whole body and found that he had very little if any arterial sclerosis. In other words, his high cholesterol was normal for him and didn’t affect him in a negative manner.

If you’ve been to the doctor and your cholesterol level has been high, especially the LDL and triglycerides, the first thing that the doctor will do is tell you to adjust your diet. If your new diet doesn’t reduce your cholesterol levels, the next step will be to put you on an antilipidemic drug. Many of these drugs, especially the “statins” have terrible side effects, one being they are toxic to your liver. You only get one liver, and if you destroy it you’re in danger of dying. Folks, you have to realize that most of the studies that are conducted regarding drugs and medication are done by drug companies (which have vested interests) and/or companies that are funded by drug company grants. These studies are used by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) to determine if a drug is safe for human use. They usually conduct so many studies that any study that might prove that their product is harmful is quashed by those making the decision about the safety of the drug.

Now we have to look at another aspect of this whole biological drug safety research. Now let’s say that the studies show that cholesterol is bad for humans what is the first thing that those in power do. First, they tell you what you can and cannot eat. Then they convince you to take drugs that reduce cholesterol. Remember earlier in this article where I cited National Institute of Health, which said that Cholesterol is important for the human body because it aids in the production of hormones, vitamin D, and substances that help you to digest your food. Don’t you think that if you are taking medicine to inhibit cholesterol you are inhibiting a natural process that Yahweh gave you to live in a healthy manner? Oh, and where is your cholesterol made in the body? It is made in the, are you ready for this, the Liver. Yes, drugs like “statins” might inhibit extra cholesterol, but they also affect your liver in a dangerous way that could destroy the only source of your body’s natural cholesterol. This is just something to consider before your doctor throws medications at you. Change your diet first and if things improve then maybe the pills aren’t the answer. Oh, and in addition, there have been studies of populations around the world where the people naturally have high cholesterol levels, and the people live much longer than those that are diagnosed with high cholesterol and have medications forced upon them.

Now, here is another way that science works in regard to cholesterol. Back three decades or so some “scientific” studies came out which tried to prove that the chicken eggs that many of us consume, have large volumes of cholesterol within them. The reports stated that we should be limited to maybe one egg a week, just to be safe. As the years went on the scientists started to tell us that we could eat maybe two or three eggs a week and the number kept going up. This went on for 15 years or so, maybe more. Then one day we heard that scientists came to the conclusion that it wasn’t the eggs that were causing the high cholesterol problem in people, it was the fats that people were using to cook the eggs. I’m waiting for a new scientific research study that proves that it’s not the oil anymore because that study is bound to come out. So let’s look at the progression. Some scientist gets a grant to study cholesterol. Another scientist gets a grant to find out what causes high cholesterol. The first guy finds that some people in his studies have high cholesterol and some of these people have developed heart disease. So right away, cholesterol is bad for everyone. The second guy finds that eggs have a lot of cholesterol so his study results in the news that the general public should avoid eggs because since cholesterol is a problem eggs are silent killers. The grant for scientist one will be extended because he’s discovered a supposed major problem. He’ll be funded by the government and drug companies. Scientist number two has supposedly proven that eggs are bad and that everyone needs to stop eating them and if they don’t they will probably die of heart attacks. The second guy has made a foregone conclusion so he doesn’t need any more grant money. He’ll have to find work in another field that has an active grant, or he can make another announcement. He can contact the media and say that he’s found that two or three eggs a week might be okay to eat. He has now created doubt that his first study was accurate but he wants to find the truth. He gets another grant to continue his study. A year or two later he comes out with yet another study that says that eggs really aren’t the problem, it is the highly saturated fat that people are using to cook the eggs that are causing all of the problems. Now he gets a grant to study exactly what sort of oil causes the problem. In the meantime, the first scientist is having money thrown at him left and right. He’s getting grants from the government and pharmaceutical companies. The drug companies want him to identify what mechanism can be found that could curb high cholesterol. He finds that the problem is the way that the liver handles all of the extra cholesterol that is produced. He goes to work for the pharmaceutical industry which comes out with a variety of different drug classes that fight cholesterol through different mechanisms of action. As time goes on more and more scientists come into the process, some chemists, some biologists and a variety of others. A whole mega-scientific industry is now in full swing. Oh, and let’s not forget your family doctor. Doc

Oh, and let’s not forget your family doctor. Doctors are for the most part ignorant participants in this whole cycle of scientific fraud. Doctors read research papers that tell them the result of studies. Being scientists themselves, they trust that their colleagues are giving them good information. They want the best for their patients. I do believe that a very high percentile of doctors do genuinely care for their patients and their care. So in this scenario, you have a doctor or an HMO that is approached by drug company representatives. The doctors are shown all of the false data, and being trusting souls that believe in science and that science always tells the truth, they buy into the whole cholesterol debacle.

Last year sometime my wife went to visit a doctor and I went with her. I won’t list the doctor’s name or field of study. He talked to my wife about her situation after which time I brought up antilipidemic drugs, and that I didn’t believe in them. The doctor gets red in the face and I thought that I was going to get a tongue lashing. What I heard next really made me respect this doctor. The doctor looked at me and said, “That’s so much bullshit. All of the cholesterol crap is stuff that is made up by the pharmaceutical companies and they are running the whole show on that one. Cholesterol is natural in people and the drugs that they are being forced to take are hurting more than they are helping them.”

If you’ve read any of my recent articles or have listened to our Opposing The Matrix radio show you probably know that back in April I was diagnosed with colon cancer. The good news is that they removed all of the cancer (and a good section of the colon) as well as some affected lymph nodes. As my wife drove me up to the oncologist I imagined all sorts of scenarios as to how this doctor was going to try to get me to take chemo. I was very surprised to find a doctor that was not opposed to alternative medicine, telling me that the chemo would probably have more negative side effects than I would want. I love doctors that think for themselves and allow their patients to think for themselves. You see, I have worked in pharmacy for many years and I have read about the effects. I love to work and if I was on Chemo I would be exposed to a patient population that really don’t know or they don’t care about spreading infections like the common cold or flu. That is not good for immune compromised people like I would be if I was taking Chemo. Chemo also kills good cells. It is not selective in what it goes after.

Why Haven’t Major Diseases Been Cured?

When I was a younger man, even a child I can remember there being telethons on television to raise money for the research to cure disease. Over the years, billions of dollars, if not trillions have been donated to the cure of diseases like Muscular Dystrophy, Cancer, and many other diseases too numerous to name here. I was sitting around the other day thinking that in the decades that supposed scientists have been researching these diseases hardly any advance has been made. Yes, some very good drugs have been invented to treat the symptoms of a disease, or even to bring them into remission, but nothing has ever been invented to actually kill virus’ and cure autoimmune diseases.

Now I’m going to present something to you that maybe you haven’t considered. Did you ever stop to realize that diseases that have been cured or should I say diseases that have been given high importance to in research are the ones that are brought on by sexual activity? This suggests to me that more money is funneled into these ailments because those who donate the money and those who donate the grants are involved in sexual immorality. For instance, when AIDS came onto the scene it became imperative that cures for this virus were of the utmost importance to cure. While AIDS, as far as we know, has no cure, it can be maintained and/or brought into remission by using some very exotic antiviral drugs that would not have existed had it not been for AIDS research.

Let’s look at another killer, that being Hepatitis C. Hepatitis C is often associated with sharing dirty needles in the administration of illicit drug use, but, Hepatitis C is a blood-borne illness that is spread through sexual intercourse.  Just last year we started to see commercials on Television stating that there is now a drug that cures Hepatitis C. In addition, we now have commercials on television that are trying to convince that general public to get their kids vaccinated against a disease called HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) which is spread through sexual contact.

It seems almost sure that the reason why there has not been a cure for diseases like cancer, heart disease, and other killers is that the pharmaceutical companies make a lot of money on maintenance care and palliative care of the victims of such diseases. If it would only cost a couple of thousand dollars to cure cancer or heart disease, the drug companies would not be able to cash cow that they now have. If they could cure a disease in a six month time period it would not be as lucrative as selling a patient a regimen of drugs that would last for a decade or more. It is simply evil mathematics, drag out the misery instead of cure it.

What I find alarming however is the news that has been coming out of Washington lately. If this news can be believed, there has been a very large child sex traffic ring that many politicians and many rich people have been taking advantage of for many years. Some of the news reports list high profile people like both Bill and Hillary Clinton, senators, congressmen and many others who have partaken in this evil carnage. But then the light bulb comes on even brighter. This sort of activity could be why So much attention has been paid to curing diseases that are sexually transmitted. The purveyors of sexual perversion can feel free to pursue their escapades if there is a cure for Hepatitis C, AIDS, various types of venereal diseases and whatever else is down the pike.

For all that we know, there has been a cure for cancer and all of the other diseases that plague mankind. It just isn’t available to the common man but is available to the elites. Think about it, in the past twenty years you rarely hear of the Rich Elite or any of the important politicians dying of any sort of incurable disease. As a matter of fact, a phrase that a good friend’s mother once echoed seems to be prevalent in our conversation, that being, “evil never dies.”

Mercury In Tuna Scare:

Okay, so I don’t remember exactly when this became a big deal, but if my memory serves me correctly the big Mercury Scare in Tuna made the rounds in the 1980’s. I’m not going to try to glaze over the fact that there are chemicals and metals in fish that could harm people, especially nowadays. When the first mercury scare came out about mercury in tuna the seas weren’t as polluted as they are nowadays, we’re talking 30 years ago. There has always been a degree of minerals and metals within fish. Remember one thing, metals are heavy and they sink to the bottom of our seas and rivers. Mercury is a very heavy metal and, like gold seeks to fall in a flow quite quickly. Heavy metals and minerals have been flowing in streams, rivers and into the ocean since the beginning of time. Many times these minerals enter waterways and seas as a result of landslides and such, but mankind does play in important role. Mercury is used in the processing of other ores such as gold. Since heavy metals like mercury tend to fall to the bottom right away we would expect bottom feeding fish to have the highest mercury levels, right? Below is what science tells us:

Taking in the assumption that bottom feeding fish would probably have the highest content of mercury, one has to doubt and question the chart above. For example, look at the chart’s right side. Supposedly these fish are lowest in mercury content. However, having been a fisherman I know that catfish, crabs, crawfish, flounder, scallop, shrimp, sole are all bottom feeders. Scallops are not bottom feeders in that they eat other fish, but they are filter eaters, meaning that they filter the water at the bottom of the sea which places them closer to the heavy metals that fall to the bottom. In the second column, they have lobster, cod, and halibut listed, all bottom feeders. According to science, all of the bottom feeders that feed on other bottom feeders or dead top feeders are okay to eat, but the top feeders are high in mercury content. This makes absolutely no sense. Notice also that the top feeders have asterisk’s next to their names denoting that they are being overfished. Maybe it’s not truly a mercury content concern, but an environmental concern. Maybe it’s the environmental lobby that is causing science to make false comments.

Truth Be Told About Eating Fish:

In our new millennium, we have witnessed a variety of disasters that have affected the sea. The biggest of these disasters was the breakdown and destruction of Japan’s Fukushima Nuclear Reactor. To this day it is still spewing mass amounts of radiation into the Pacific ocean. Why isn’t science talking about this? Personally, I wonder if it is safe at all to eat tuna, especially if it was caught in the Pacific Ocean. Frankly, I wonder if it is safe to eat anything that comes out of the Pacific Ocean anymore. A couple of years ago the coast of Oregon played host to a few arrivals that washed up on shore, debris fields that were from the tidal wave that swept through Fukushima and its surrounding areas. This debris was not radioactive because it was swept out to sea by the tidal wave before the nuclear reactors in Fukushima became a problem. The image below is a more realistic illustration of how the radiation has spread in the Pacific Ocean. Based on this map I refuse to eat fish unless I can be guaranteed that it comes from the Atlantic Ocean.

[Map Source:]

Back in the 1990’s, I was working in a little pharmacy down in Carmichael, California. My boss hired a woman that immigrated from Armenia. I got to know her and her family well and often discussed politics, America vs. The Former Soviet Union. One day we started to talk about the American News Media. I expressed that I was angry that some story was not being reported upon accurately and said something to effect that they were lying about the true story. She told me that in Armenia she learned “they report to you what they want you to know.” Now I sort of knew that, but saw that as a confirmation that the press all over the world was jaded and we very rarely got the truth concerning just about everything. To the best of my information, radioactivity in the sea does not distill into the atmosphere, but airborne particles do, so any particles that became airborne from Fukushima traveled the Jetstream to fall as rain or just particles on North America and probably around the world. This means that anything eaten that grows from the soil or anything that eats something grown in the soil is probably contaminated by radiation. We are witnessing a man-made destruction of the Earth, but we know that this is a sign of the times mentioned in the prophetic books of Biblical scripture.

So what they’re not telling us is:

As of June 2015, the radiation in the Pacific Ocean reached the US West Coast; the seafood you’ve been eating from the Pacific ocean is loaded with Cesium-137 and Strontium-90. Both radioactive. Strontium-90 mimics calcium. Both radioactive strontium and cesium may end up getting deposited in human bones, where the radiation wreaks havoc on bone marrow, causing bone cancers and blood cancers like Leukemia.

And, proof of this contamination can be clearly seen:

Tumors found on Pacific Salmon. [Source of quote and photo: []

I am a firm believer that Yahweh is more than able to preserve his people. Many of us pray over our meals before we eat. I think that we should be more attentive to doing that seeing that most of the food that is available to us is tainted in one way or another, even the food that is labeled “organic.” I think that it’s important to remember that Yahweh has allotted a certain amount of days for each person and he has also ordained the method that he has chosen for us to go home. Earlier I mentioned that I was diagnosed with colon cancer back in April. I had the surgery and it appears to be gone. I’m going natural with adjunct therapy. When you hear the word “cancer” in your own diagnosis you start to think about things. You start to wonder if you have a limit of time to get things done. You start to wonder if the cancer will come back, or if it has hidden somewhere else in the body where it will grow more aggressively. You start to worry about your spouse and how they will get along without you. You think about all of the things that you want to do with your grandkids and with other loved ones. You worry about your parents because it is terrible for a parent to lose their son or daughter. But then you start to come around to realize that Yahweh has everything under control. You start to realize that nothing happens unless He allows it to happen. You start to realize how much he truly loves us, then you know that if he has destined us to go home he will take care of those we leave behind and all the affairs that we leave on Earth. Yahweh is love and love conquers all, and this knowledge makes “worry” flee from us.

Climate Change – Global Warming:

There is no doubt that things are changing or perhaps “cycling” where the climate is concerned. The question that should be asked (and is being ignored) is whether global warming is natural or if it is man-made. The theory that a minority of scientists, the media, and the New World Order is trying to sell us is that man-made hydrocarbons are being released into the atmosphere and that it is creating a barrier that is not allowing heat to return into space, sort of like a blanket keeps us warm in the cold weather. What the proponents of global warming fail to mention is that there have been serious periods of global warming that occurred well in advance of mankind’s industrial endeavors, and, there have been some serious periods of global cooling between those times. This suggests a cycle that does not involve mankind but is a natural occurrence. See the graph below:

Yet another factor that false science forgets to share with us is that the sun goes through cycles. There are periods where the sun is more active and periods when it is less active. In the winter we use wood for heat. We have a nice wood burning stove mounted into our fireplace. When the stove is stoked and burning well it sometimes gets unbearable in our home so we have to the fan off. When the wood burns down the stove is less hot and it starts to get cooler in the house and if we forget to stoke the fire (like at 3 AM) the fire dies down and the house gets cold. So in essence, when the sun is hot earth warms, when the sun is not so hot earth cools. Really, it’s not rocket science.

Like I mentioned earlier, CO-2 isn’t a bad thing. The atmosphere is made up of oxygen, nitrogen and yes, CO-2. Plant life on earth is wonderful in that it uses nitrogen and CO-2 for food. Plants absorb CO-2 and through chemical process plants release oxygen. They use nitrogen which comes to them through the rain that collects the nitrogen and brings it to the ground where the nitrogen is absorbed by the roots. What science doesn’t tell you is that CO-2 is also taken up in water vapor that sooner or later condenses and comes back to the ground where it can be absorbed by the plants to start that cycle all over again. Whatever you send up into the sky, whether it is a baseball, a spacecraft or CO-2, it is all going to come back to the ground sooner or later.

Modern science liars, orchestrated by their NWO keepers fail to tell us the truth in many things. They are also skilled at using the good nature of people to further their cause. In recent years there have been many lies perpetrated to gain the sympathy from well-meaning people. They show us polar bears adrift on ice flows and say that the bears are in danger because the ice is disappearing. They ignore the reports of the ice in the polar regions actually expanding and getting thicker. Just this week there was a report that scientists on their way to study in the North Pole region had to turn back because the summer ice was too thick to navigate through. The weather here in Oregon has been unseasonably cool all winter and all spring. Right now in the middle of June, we’ve only had five days above seventy degrees. My wife and I, expecting it to get warmer moved all of the wood outside along with the stove tools. Three days ago, in an effort to save on the electric bill we decided not to turn on the baseboard heat. We sat in our living room with jackets on as we watched television. It’s June for goodness sake and it feels like it’s early April. There is no doubt in my mind that there is climate change occurring, but it is global cooling, not global warming. Or, maybe it is as I have mentioned in other articles, that the earth’s poles have moved. There is evidence that this has happened, but we will not explore that in this article.

So What Are You Trying To Save David?

We’ve seen that science has turned into a political machine. Science was once based on empirical evidence that could be reproduced in laboratory conditions and that could be observed by peers to verify as being true. There are literally thousands of scientists that oppose the idea of global warming. Many of them have suffered censure and humiliation because of their disagreement and some have lost their jobs or funding. That is not science, it is politics. Real science considers all possibilities and fosters discussion, not humiliation.Today, science is ruled by a minority of scientists that get paid good money for promoting political agendas. We are moving into a time when the Elites of this world are trying to form the world into a world government. They want to eliminate sovereign states, especially the powerful nations. They operate on the idea of “fairness” in the classic communist thought that all people should be in the same state, that no one country or people should be better off than another. The only way to do this is to tear apart the nations that are prospering and redistributing their wealth to other nations that are poor and destitute. In order to do this, they must completely gut the economic structure of rich nations. I mean, how would anyone explain the election of a Marxist-Islamist to the presidency of the United States just 7 years after Islamist declared war on the United States by destroying the Twin Towers. No sane nation would elect an enemy of the state, but a nation that has been deluded by Marxist/Leninist ideas for the past fifty years would be an easy mark.

The globalists have a few wrenches that have been thrown into their machinery. The Russians have rightfully asserted that the NWO Elitists exist and they have fought to slow down the advance of a global government. The British have realized the same thing and are exiting the European Union. Finally, the United States elected Donald Trump who is very anti-Globalist. A recent report came out showing that it was the United States that was paying the majority of costs for The Paris Agreement, a horrible agreement that would have destroyed the US economically and would have been a great device to turn our nation into a Third World nation. Trump pulled us out of the agreement, causing those who weren’t supporting the agreement economically to become irate with the United States.

Global warming is going to be a hard beast to overcome. Money is pouring in from governments all over the globe and it is sanctioned by the United Nations. It would not surprise me to someday see that the false scientists who are promoting the global warming lie, becoming part of the wealthy elite, the new millionaires, and power players. False Science has become a religious entity and it will meld with lukewarm Christianity and every false religion of this world. They have become the false prophets of our time and will probably be a powerful force in the Beast System mentioned in Revelation.

This world is going to hell in a handbasket. The thing is are you ready for what is coming down the pike? Do you know Yeshua, because if you don’t you won’t survive because you’ll either die in your sin, or you will join the Beast System and perish with it. The choice is yours. Yeshua is calling you, will you answer?

Strange Relics from the Depths of the Earth

by J.R. Jochmans, Litt.D., 1979


Short Summary

Dr. Jochmans cites numerous accounts of human artifacts being found in earth strata, which according to the standard evolutionary timescale, predate human evolution. These accounts show human existence far back into earth history, and prove evolution theory false.

Important Notes

Although Dr. Jochmans writes “as though” human remains and artifacts are hundreds of thousands or millions of years old, is it is clear from his conclusion that he considers this world to be young, in accordance with a normal, straight, reading of the Bible and its genealogies. 

I do not have any background on, nor contact with Dr. Jockman. I cannot contact the “Forgotten Ages Research Society” of Lincoln, Nebraska, USA, which, I understand, originally published the booklet. This booklet was available through the Bible-Science Association some time back. 

Accepted theories and unaccepted facts

In most of the academic and scientific world today, the interpretation of the history of the earth, of life, of man, and of human culture, is defined within the narrow boundaries of specific, prevailing theories. The geology of the earth, for example, is viewed almost exclusively in terms of uniformitarianism. This means that the present-existing processes of erosion and volcanism are thought to have been the only forces at work in the past. Because of the slowness of these processes of change, and the tremendous transformations observed in the earth’s depths, the age of the earth is thus counted in billions of years – today, it is put between 4 1/2 and 5 billion years.

Likewise, the history of life on this planet is seen as a lengthy development by evolution, or, the progression from simple to increasingly more complex forms. Since the simplest – and supposedly earliest – life forms appear in Cambrian rock, and Cambrian rock is dated geologically at 600 million years, this is deemed the age of life on earth. Only in the final stage of evolution did man appear on the scene, the ultimate end-product: According to the most recent anthropological finds, the earliest man-like creatures roamed the earth just 4 million years ago. Finally, the very nature of evolutionary theory dictates that man’s cultural development must have been linear – a slow, gradual, but constant, upward climb from primitive beginnings, spanning the last 10,000 years, with the advent of modern technological civilization and its products the recent culmination of that climb.

These theories, which together form the uniformitarian-evolution-linear model, have predominated modern science for the past century, to the extent that all finds made – every rock sample, every fossil, every human remains and every artifact – have been carefully interpreted and categorized so as to fit this model’s framework, at the exclusion of all other. But it is becoming increasingly apparent that not all facts from the past find their “proper” place. Other discoveries have been made that contradict the accepted model. Yet these discoveries are largely ignored since it is far easier for the majority of scientists and historians to uphold what is “established,” than to try to build a new model based on the “exceptions.”

One of the greatest pitfalls of the uniformitarian-evolution-linear model is that it must accept the premise that man, as an intelligent being, was a very recent arrival in the history of the earth. With the geologic record counted in billions of years, the fossil record in hundreds of millions of years, the record of human fossils in the millions of years, and human civilization only in the thousands of years, there would be no way to explain the presence of human bones, or sophisticated artifacts derived from the hand of man, in deep rock strata. In fact, the finding of even a single such item would be totally devastating to the model, for it would negate the entire concept of uniformity and the evolution of man and human culture in the past.

The point that will be brought out in this book is that there is evidence for man, and the products of human civilization, in the deep recesses of the earth. Herein are presented the case histories.

The bones of forgotten men

Walk into any natural museum today, or read any textbook on anthropology, and one invariably finds a large chart exhibited, tracing the ancestry of man back through more primitive forebears, until the line is lost somewhere amid the apes. Recently, paleoanthropologist Richard Leakey, excavating in Ethiopia, announced the discovery of what are supposed to be the oldest accepted fossil remains of man – about 4 million years old. What has been disturbing about the new finds is that they are, in part, too human: Their great age, yet partly “modern” appearance, has forced evolutionists to push back the departure of man from the ape stock farther into the past, so that now it is beginning to infringe upon the time period necessary for the development of the apes themselves.

But while the African finds are revolutionary, there have been other discoveries of human fossils greatly more important, but these have been deliberately neglected or denounced because they are far older than man is “supposed” to be.

Over a hundred years ago, in the 1850’s, gold miners began digging tunnels into the sides and top of Table Mountain, northwest of Needles, California. Gold was discovered, but along with it were bones of extinct mastodons, mammoths, bison, tapirs, horses, rhinos, hippos and camels – all dating from the Pliocene. In 1863, a physician from nearby Sonora, Dr. R. Snell, began to collect specimens from the excavations. In that year, with his bare hands, he loosened from among the fossils a stone disc that appeared to have been used for grinding. But Dr. Snell was not the first, or last, to unearth mysterious objects from the mountain gravel: In 1853, Oliver W. Stevens made affidavit that he removed a large stone bowl from the lowest level tunnel; in 1857, the Honorable Paul Hubbs, of Vallejo, dug up part of a human crania from inside the Valentine shaft; and in 1862, Mr. Llewellyn Pierce also signed affidavit that he had found a stone mortar 200 feet in from the mouth of the same shaft. The most dramatic find, however, was reserved for a Mr. Mattison, one of the owners of the mines. In February of 1866, Mattison unearthed from beneath a layer of basalt an object which – because of the encrustation’s – he first thought was the petrified root of a tree, but on closer examination discovered was a complete human skull. The miner sent the skull to the office of the State Survey in June of the same year. Eventually, the skull came into the possession of Dr. L. Wyman, of Harvard College, who removed the encasing material around the cranium. Dr. Wyman, and an associate named Professor Whitney, identified the skull as very modern in type, but also noted that, “the fragments of bones and gravel and shells were so wedged into the cavities of the skull that there could be no mistake as to the character of the situation in which it is found.” The stickler was, however, that this meant the skull, along with all the artifacts found, were 12 million years old.

In 1958, Dr. Johannes Huerzeler, of the Museum of Natural History in Basel, Switzerland, unearthed a human jawbone at a depth of 600 feet, in a coal mine in Tuscany, Italy. The bone had belonged to a child, between the ages of five and seven. Though flattened like a sheet of iron, the jaw was declared by several experts to be not only human but modern-looking at that. But what mystified them was that it had been encased in a Miocene stratum – geologically dated at 20 million years. Dr. Huerzeler declared it to be the world’s oldest man” – but his fellow anthropologists did not dare give it the same distinction. Here were human remains more modern in appearance than all the “ape-men” forms ever found – yet they were five times as old as any of them. In fact, the jaw bone is as old, if not older, than many ancestors of the apes. The bone raised more problems than answers – so the find was quickly “shelved,” and no further work was ever done to give it due recognition.

Early in November of 1926, archaeologist J.C.F. Siegfriedt made a discovery in another mine, this one the Number Three shaft of the Mutual Coal Mine of Bear Creek, 55 miles southwest of Billings, Montana. What Siegfriedt found was a human tooth, in which the enamel had been replaced by carbon and the roots by iron, by seepage petrification. In an account published in the Carbon County News and dated November 11, 1926, Siegfriedt reported that he had meticulously preserved the mineral matrix that had been deposited around the tooth, and several dentists identified the mold created as being a human second lower molar. The tooth, however, came from the lower level of the mine – from an Eocene deposit dated at 30 million years old. Siegfriedt could generate no interest in his find among other specialists, and as far as is known, no one has done any further study of the mystery.

One of the more controversial of the “out-of-place” bones from extreme antiquity is today part of the collection of the Freiberg Mining Academy in West Germany. It is a poorly preserved human skull, found in brown coal in 1842, from an undisclosed locality. Early European authorities dismissed the skull as a fake, but more recent research and analysis has questioned this hasty pronouncement, putting it back into the realm of the authentic. The reason for its initial denunciation is understandable: The coal it was embedded in, a portion of which still clings to the skull, is estimated to be as much as 50 million years old.

It seems that even when authentication is overwhelming, the response by the scientific community is, inversely, underwhelming. In 1973, a rock collector named Lin Ottinger was searching over a rock plateau that had just been bulldozed over, in preparation for the beginning of mining operations by the nearby Big Indian Copper Mine. The mine is situated 35 miles southwest of Moab, Utah. During his pickings in the exposed rock, Ottinger suddenly found pieces of bone and teeth and traced these to a patch of sand with a brown stain – the tell-tale sign of decayed organic matter. Carefully removing the sand, Ottinger discovered the top portion of a large intact bone. The rockhound, realizing the importance of his find, decided to have a credited expert look at it, and let him do the digging so that everything would be “scientifically acceptable.”

A week later, Ottinger returned to the plateau with Dr. J.P. Marwitt, professor of anthropology at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, several photographers, a news reporter, and a number of observers. With cameras recording the event, Dr. Marwitt carefully removed the lower halves of two human skeletons. The bones were articulated – that is, laid out naturally – showing the bodies had not fallen or been washed into the stratum in which they were situated. These and other factors revealed the bones to be as old as the layer in which they were found. The one problem was, the layer is Lower Dakota and Upper Morrison formations -over 100 million years of age, according to uniformitarian geologists. Yet, as Marwitt noted, the bones were not simian or even half-ape: They were fully human and modern-looking.

The skeletons were taken by Marwitt back with him to the University of Utah, to run laboratory datings on them. But whether the tests were ever run, there was no official confirmation. One gets the impression they were, and that the findings were too disturbing for conservative thinking. Marwitt suddenly became “disinterested” in the project, and left Utah to take up a teaching position elsewhere. After a year waiting for results, Ottinger recovered the bones – and that ended the scientific inquiry.

More finds, made in the last century, were similarly reported and promptly forgotten. The Saturday Herald of Iowa City carried an article that on April 10, 1867, human remains and artifacts were brought to light at the Rocky Point Mine, in Gilman, Colorado. At a depth of 400 feet below the surface, excavators found human bones embedded in a silver vein. Along with the bones was found a well-tempered copper arrowhead. As best as can be calculated, the vein in which the items were situated was 135 million years old, by present geological standards. ((SR. #2))

At times, the discoveries made revealed “mysteries upon mysteries.” In July 1877, four prospectors were looking for gold and silver outcroppings in a desolate, hilly area near the head of Spring Valley, not far from Eureka, Nevada. Scanning the rocks, one of the men spotted something peculiar projecting from a high ledge. Climbing up to get a better look, the prospector was surprised to find a human leg bone and knee cap sticking out of solid rock. He called to his companions, and together they dislodged the oddity with picks. Realizing they had a most unusual find, the men brought it into Eureka, where it was placed on display.

The stone in which the bones were embedded was a hard, dark red quartzite, and the bones themselves were almost black with carbonization – indicative of great age. When the surrounding stone was carefully chipped away, the specimen was found to be composed of a leg bone broken off four inches above the knee, the knee cap and joint, the lower leg bones, and the complete bones of the foot. Several medical doctors examined the remains and were convinced that anatomically they had indeed once belonged to a human being, and a very modern-looking one. But an intriguing aspect of the bones was their size: from knee to heel they measured 39 inches. Their owner in life had thus stood over 12 feet tall. Compounding the mystery further was the fact that the rock in which the bones were found was dated geologically to the era of the dinosaurs, the Jurassic – over 185 million years old. The local papers ran several stories on the marvelous find, and two museums sent investigators to see if any more of the skeleton could be located. Unfortunately, nothing else but the leg and foot existed in the rock.

The next and last skeletal find takes us another quantum leap in geologic time and plunges us even deeper into the earth’s strata. A Scientific American article published in 1880 reprinted the particulars of a discovery made in the spring of that year, reported in the St. Louis Republican.  Dr. R.W. Booth, who operated an iron mine about 3 miles from Dry Branch, in Franklin County, Missouri, unearthed from a depth of 18 feet a human skull, portions of ribs, vertebrae and a collarbone. With them were two barbed arrowheads of flint, and pieces of charcoal. Dr. Booth realized the significance of all this but was frustrated when at just a touch the skull crumbled to dust, and the other bones likewise broke into pieces. But these pieces nevertheless told their story: Later analysis showed they were definitely human. Two and a half weeks later, Dr. Booth reached a level of 24 feet and found more of the same skeleton – a thigh bone, vertebrae, and more charred wood. What is more, the remains were found resting on a layer of iron ore, which bore the impressions of coarse matting. One could still see the marks of crisscrossing fibers. What astounded Booth was that the layer in which both portions were dug up was the second or saccharoidal sandstone of the Lower Silurian – dated an incredible 425 million years old.

Let me repeat that: 425 million years. We have gone far beyond the purported age of human culture, of man himself, the apes, all mammals, even the age of the dinosaurs. According to evolutionary theory, the Silurian age saw the advent of life on land and was, in fact, more than two-thirds of the way back to the supposed advent of life itself. But what are the remains of man and his products doing at this level? Something, certainly, is very wrong.

Muddy footprints across the face of time

Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington once wrote: “We have found a strange footprint on the shores of the unknown. We have devised profound theories, one after another, to account for its origin. At last, we have succeeded in reconstructing the creature that made the footprint. And lo! it is our own.” There is more truth in this statement than first meets the eye, for there are many instances where not only did man leave his remains in the rock strata, but also his imprint.

In 1884, Earl Flint, a geologist representing the Peabody Museum and Harvard University, discovered in a rock quarry near Managua, Nicaragua, on the shores of Lake Gilva, a layer containing fossilized human tracks, 16 to 24 feet below the surface. Flint described the tracks in these words, written in 1884:

“The footprints are from one-half to three inches in depth and none exceeded eighteen inches. Some of the impressions are nearly closed, the soft surface falling back into the impression, and a crevice about two inches in width is all one sees, and my first glance at some parallel to one less deep, gave me an idea that the owner of the latter was using a stave to assist him in walking. In some the substance flowed outward, leaving a ridge around it – seen in one secured for the museum; the stride is variable, owing to the size of the person, and the changing nature of the surface passed over. The longest one uncovered was seventeen inches, length of foot ten inches, and width four inches, feet arched, steps in a right line, measured from center of heel to center of great toe over three steps. The people making them were going both ways in a direction consonant to that of the present lake shore east and west, more or less.”

Among these, and others in nearby sites, Flint found examples of both barefoot and well-defined sandaled-foot impressions. All were geologically dated as being over 200,000 years of age. Now supposedly at this remote time, man was nothing more than a naked, hairy creature, capable of chipping a few flints and just beginning to overcome his fear of fire. In sharp contrast, the Nicaragua finds reveal the intelligent use of a walking stick and the wearing of sandals that appear to have been best designed for both comfort and protection. We are confronted here with not just the footprint of a half-beast, but rather the footprint of a civilized being.

Two years earlier, in the summer of 1882, inmates working in the quarry at the State Prison near Carson City, Nevada, brought to light a layer of sandstone covered with fossilized animal tracks, among them a number having belonged to the extinct mammoth. What caused considerable scientific consternation, however, was the fact that several human tracks were also found. The tracks were in six series, each with alternate right and left tracks. The stride was from two and a half to over three feet, and the individual prints were from 18 to 20 inches in length – that of a giant. The straddle – the distance between the lines of left and right prints – was 18 to 19 inches. Geologist Joseph Le Conte read a paper on the investigation done on the Carson City tracks to the California Academy of Science on August 27, 1882, and attempted to explain them as the marks left by an extinct giant sloth that lived during the late Pliocene – over 2 million years ago. But sloths, in order to walk upright on only two feet, as the fossil tracks indicate, would have had to have used their tails as a balance, and there were no tail grooves in the sandstone. Not only this, but a comparison between the Carson City tracks and known sloth impressions showed several dissimilarities. The sloth’s prints have marked toe protuberances as well as definite claw marks; the Carson City tracks have neither. The Carson City tracks, in fact, showed signs that their maker had worn some type of sandal or foot protection – very definitely not the habit of an animal.

The May 25, 1969 issue of the Tulsa Sunday World carried the story of a curious fossil find made on a hilltop overlooking the eastern part of Tulsa, Oklahoma. The find was made by Troy Johnson, a field geologist of thirteen years’ experience, and though he showed plaster-casts of his discovery to several experts, each and everyone refused to accept it or its implications. Johnson had unearthed a sandstone strata filled with fossil tracks – many five-toed and distinctly human. The fact that a number of examples of these were overlaid by the tracks of now-extinct creatures demonstrated that the mantracks could not have been of recent origin, but dated back between 3 and 5 million years.

One remarkable mantrack find was reported in the Soviet journal (no. 8, 1961). In 1959, a joint Russian-Chinese paleontological expedition under the direction of Dr. Chou Ming Chen, discovered in the Gobi Desert of central Asia the fossilized print of a shoe with a ribbed sole. The find appears in sandstone dated at 15 million years. Members of the expedition who carefully examined the shoe-print were quick to recognize that it was not the footmark of any animal, for the ribbing was too straight and regular to be of natural origin.

Even more recent examples of foot and shoe prints were brought to light in the 1970’s, in the Carrizo Valley in northwest Oklahoma. The prints occur in both the Morrison formation and Dakota sandstone – over 100 million years old. The barefoot marks are somewhat eroded but show evidence of definite pressure ridges. Several are in very close proximity to dinosaur tracks. The shoe prints are more clearly defined and reveal their wearers to have been above normal size, with the imprints averaging 20 inches long and 8 inches across the ball of the foot.

Probably the most publicized mantracks are those found along the Paluxy River, near Glen Rose, Texas. They were first observed in 1908, after a flood washed away a portion of shore ledging, exposing geologic levels of the Glen Rose Formation, the Paluxy Formation, and the Twin Mountain Formation of the Trinity Group – all dated to the early Cretaceous, between 120 and 130 million years. Interestingly, these same rock types occur at Bandera, not far from San Antonio, and there, too, human prints have been uncovered and documented. On the Paluxy, serious research into the mystery of the fossil prints did not begin until 1938, when Roland T. Bird, of the Department of Vertebrate Paleontology of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, removed a trail of brontosaurus tracks that were alongside a series of what his eyes beheld with the “official” position, but admitted in the May, 1939 issue of Natural History: “No man ever existed in the age of reptiles although the tracks are perfect in every detail.” Bird could only conclude that the prints he saw were those of some “extinct ape” – but this explanation was most unsatisfactory since according to evolutionary theory, apes were not to appear for another 100 million years after the epoch of the brontosaurus.

The Paluxy site became a tourist attraction, and during the Depression, locals began excavating both dinosaur and man prints, and selling them for souvenirs. Some of the specimens sold were really hand-carved by the more unscrupulous opportunists, and unfortunately, in later years, conservative scholars were quick to point to these few examples of fakery as the answer to all the tracks discovered. But on-the-spot diggings by geologists and paleontologists have uncovered many new prints found in situ that could not have been hoaxes, for they were discovered deep within the rock layers, and at times several feet back into the Paluxy banks, where no fabrication could possibly be made.

The sum total of finds along the Paluxy reveal quite a mixture of man and animal types having lived all at the same time. There are heavy brontosaur tracks, the talon marks of the feared Tyrannosaurus Rex, three-toed spoors of other dinosaurs – and the imprint of a saber-tooth tiger, which was supposed to have lived only a few million years ago, not in the era of the giant lizards. As for the human prints, many are found in series, popping out of the Paluxy banks in a very natural stride, then wading into the river bed. A good number of the prints are bare, with the large toe in particular clearly distinguishable; others show signs of the maker’s feet having worn some form of foot covering, like a moccasin or thin sandal. in one instance, in fact, the fossil print is so well preserved that the impression of the lacing on the moccasin is still visible. Some human tracks are of men of modern stature, with shoe sizes from 7 to 13; others are of children, whose prints are both proportionally smaller and shallower. Several more, however, are 1 6-inches, with not a few of men with 21 and 1/2-inch feet and a 7-foot stride – giants in the true sense of the word.

The most remarkable fact of all, however, is that these prints are in the same layer as dinosaur tracks, and in a few instances, the human and dinosaur prints cross each other, showing that the two had been contemporary when the rock had been mud. The significance of these examples was noted by Dr. A.E. Wilder Smith of the University of Illinois: “One authentic man-track found in the same stratum as one authentic brontosaurus track throws out one hundred years of evolutionary teachings. It is sufficient to bring the whole Darwinistic theory down and revolutionize all biology today.”

But the out-of-place footprints go back even further in geologic time. The American Anthropologist, volume IX (1896), page 66, describes the finding of a perfect human imprint in stone about 4 miles north of Parkersburg, on the West Virginia side of the Ohio River. The track was 14 1/2 inches long and was found embedded in a large stone. Though few specifics were given, one expert has calculated from the type of rock depicted, and its position on the river’s edge, that the track must be at least 150 million years old, according to modern geologic dating.

In the late 1970’s, Dr. Rex Gilroy, director of the Mount York Natural History Museum of Australia, discovered a giant impress on Mount Victoria. One tentative estimate puts the track at 200 million years of age.

One of the most remarkable tracks was found in Fisher Canyon, Pershing County, Nevada. On January 25, 1927, an amateur geologist named Albert E. Knapp was descending a small hill in the canyon, when he spotted the fossil laying topside up among a pile of loose rocks. He picked up the find and took it home with him. Upon closer examination, Knapp was astounded to discover, “it is a layer from the heel of a shoe which had been pulled up from the balance of the heel by suction, the rock being in a plastic state at the time.” The shoe print was in a marvelous state of preservation – the edges of the heel were smooth and rounded off as if cut and its right side appeared more worn than the left – suggesting it had been worn on the right foot. But what Knapp found really amazing was that the rock in which the heel mark was made, was Triassic limestone – 225 million years old – which runs in a belt through the canyon hills he had been exploring. The rock was later examined by an expert geologist at the Rockefeller Foundation, who confirmed Knapp’s analysis. The presence of minute crystals of sulfide of mercury throughout spaces in the fossil also testified to it being of great antiquity.

The real surprise about the age-old heel imprint, however, did not come until micro-photographs revealed that the leather had been stitched by a double row of stitches, the twists of the threads is very discernable. One line followed along the heel’s outer edge, and the second line paralleled the first precisely, inwards by one-third of an inch. What baffled investigators was the fact that this double-stitching had been done with thread much smaller, and more refined in workmanship than that used by shoe-makers in 1927, when the fossil print was discovered. As Mr. Samuel Hubbard, Honorary Curator of Archaeology of the Oakland Museum in California, commented: “There are whole races of primitive men on earth today, utterly incapable of sewing that moccasin. What becomes of the Darwinian theory in the face of this evidence that there were intelligent men on earth millions of years before apes were supposed to have evolved?”

In 1885, Professor J.F. Brown of Berea College, Kentucky was called upon to examine a puzzling find, made 16 miles east of the town of Berea, on Big Hill in Rock Castle County, one of the spurs of the Cumberland Plateau. Near the summit, an old wagon trail cut through a stratum of carboniferous limestone, and removal of earth to widen the trail into a road had exposed a new section of this stratum. As E.A. Allen reported in the American Antiquarian, volume 7, page 39, preserved in the layer were the fossilized impressions of several creatures. What mystified those who witnessed the remains was that among these tracks were two well-preserved prints of a human being. They were described as “good-sized, toes well spread, and very distinctly marked.”

It was not until 1930 that further and more detailed investigations were performed, this time by Dr. Wilbur Greely Burroughs, head of the geology department at Berea College. Dr. Burroughs discovered a total of twelve 9 1/2-inch mantracks and portions of others and confirmed that they had indeed been impressed upon gray Pottsville sandstone dating from the Upper Pennsylvanian period -well over 300 million years old.

Several geologists and paleontologists of the conservative school, in search of a face-saving explanation, declared the tracks not to be of human origin, but the marks of some as yet unknown species of amphibian. Dr. Burroughs’ research, however, proved otherwise. He described the configuration of the tracks this way, as quoted in the Louisville Courier-Journal, May 24, 1953:

“Of these, two pairs show the left foot advanced relative to the right. The position of the feet is the same as that of a person. The distance from heel to heel is 18 inches. One pair shows the feet parallel to each other, the distance between the feet being the same as that of a normal human being.

Dr. Burroughs concluded that the prints were made by a creature that was exclusively bipedal. Most amphibians and reptiles are quadruped – there were no foreleg prints. And those that have been known to walk upright on their hind legs, always do so with the tail acting as a tripod or “third leg,” to give balance. As Dr. Burroughs carefully noted, nowhere were there signs of belly or tail marks in the examined stratum. Furthermore, Dr. Burroughs and several of his colleagues performed a microscopic analysis of the mantracks, and based upon the grain count, established that, “the sand grains within each track are closer together than the grains immediately outside the tracks and elsewhere on the rock for the same kind and same combination of grains, due to the pressure of the creature’s foot.” The “creature,” they found, had exerted a weight pressure a little above that of a modern man. As the Science Newsletter of October 29, 1938, commented, no amphibian or reptile that size has been discovered in the fossil record that walked upright in the Pennsylvanian era.

Finally, the clear impressions showing five toes, ball and heel are totally unrelated to an amphibian’s or reptile’s physical makeup – only man has a foot like that. Albert G. Ingalls, writing in Scientific American, January 1940, declared, “If man existed as far back as in the Carboniferous Period in any shape, then the whole science of geology is so completely wrong that all geologists should resign their jobs and take up truck driving.”

On an outcrop of greyish-blue crinoidal limestone about 200 feet wide and extending along the west bank of the Mississippi for 3 miles just south of St. Louis, are a number of mantrack impressions which a century ago could be observed during low-water stages. The early French explorers along the river were the first to note their existence, and ever since they have created a heated controversy. The first scientific observation of the prints was reported by Henry Schooleraft in The American Journal of Science (volume V), for 1822, and he described them as, “strikingly natural, exhibiting every muscular impression, and the swell of the heel and toes, with a precision and faithfulness to nature I have not been able to copy.” His colleagues dismissed the tracks as Indian petroglyphs, but Schooleraft was convinced of their natural origin: They had been impressed, he carefully noted, not carved into the limestone. Whoever had made them, Schooleraft also commented, had been of average size: The foot lengths were 10 1/2 inches; width across the outspread toes were 4 inches, and the heels were 2 1/2 inches wide.

The American Antiquarian, volume 7, pages 364-367 (1885) gave the account of another find associated with the St. Louis footprints that are perhaps even more disturbing. Quoting from Priest’s “American Antiquities,” a particular set of tracks was described in detail. Then, “directly before the prints of these feet, within a few inches, is a well-impressed and deep mark, having some resemblance to a scroll, or roll of parchment, two feet long by a foot in width.” The squared impression was not a natural shape; neither were there scratch marks that would have indicated the patch had been carved. Rather, the evidence points to the parchment impression having been made when the rock was still in a plastic state – made at the same time as the footprints. What such a find suggests is that the prints’ owners were not only men but were men with the intelligence to produce some form of paper sheet – and perhaps write upon it. But as if this were not enough of a mystery, the limestone in which prints and paper appear, is dated to the Mississippian age – 345 million years ago.

Still more finds of prints plunge mankind “feet first” even farther down into the geologic column. In 1948, a shoe impress was discovered near Lake Windermere, England. As reported in the natural history journal The Field for that year, the impress had been made in Ordovician limestone – an unbelievable 500 million years old. Remarkable too is the finding that the print bears signs of craft and artistry: Around the edge of both the heel and the foreshoe are circular impressions which resemble tacking; while in the center of the sole and heel are faint decorations of linear and flower-like designs. Though the impression is somewhat distorted in shape due to fractures and crevices in the rock surface, a measurement reveals an extended length of the shoe of about 8 inches and a width of 31/2 inches.

On June 1, 1968, an amateur rock hunter, William J. Meister, of Kearns, Utah was visiting nearby Antelope Springs with his family. The area, which includes the Swasey Mountains and the Cambrian Wheeler shale formation, is famous for its many fossils, and on this particular day, Meister was on the lookout for fossilized trilobites and brachiopods – according to evolutionary theory, once among the oldest known living creatures. Meister broke off a rock slab, and, tapping its edge with a hammer, it fell open in two pieces, like the leaves of a book. To his great surprise, inside was a human sandal print, pointed in the toes, rounded in the heel, and with a squashed trilobite in the center of the sole. The sandal print measured 10 1/4 inches long, 31/2 inches wide at the ball and 3 inches at the heel. The sandal appears to have been well-worn on the right side – indicating it had been worn on the right foot – and the heel impression is deeper by one-eighth of an inch, characteristic of the weight distribution of humans on the foot. This particular find was later examined by Dr. Hellmut H. Doelling, of the Utah Geological Survey, and he found no irregularities or evidence of fakery – the print was genuine.

On July 20th, Meister returned to Antelope Springs with professional geologist Dr. Clifford Burdick. Digging in the same locality, Burdick discovered another imprint in the Cambrian shale, this time of a child The print was 6 inches long, and the five toes were barely distinguishable as if the child was wearing moccasins. Yet Burdick detected that the toes were spread out, indicating the child had only begun to wear shoes, which tend to compress the toes with age. The heel and arch were again well depressed, showing weight distribution, and a segment of a fossil was crushed in its middle. Burdick managed to find a larger fossil imprint, like Meister’s original, though the impression was shallower, and also unearthed a second child’s track, smaller than the first, with the toes broken off, but perfect in its other aspects. Later, a detailed examination revealed that the rock in which the prints were found was made of tiny layers, and where the foot-marks occur, the layers were bowed downward from the horizontal – demonstrating that weight had indeed, been pressed into the once prehistoric mud.

But that “prehistoric mud” with its tell-tale prints, is now Cambrian shale – an astounding 600 million years old. And the fossils in the prints are trilobites – supposed to be among the earliest forms of life on earth. This time, we have literally hit “rock bottom” in the fossil record – and yet here we find the presence of man and an intelligent, shoe-wearing man at that. How could he have “evolved” from simple life, when the Cambrian prints testify that he is as old as life itself?

Out-of-place metal objects

It is one thing to find evidence of human skeletal remains and footprints in the incredible past, but it is something else again to discover artifacts that prove the existence of advanced cultures in the strata as well. One of the characteristics of any high civilization is its ability to work metals. Conservative historians and archaeologists, who hold to the concept of linear cultural development, point to the ancient Middle East as the home of the very first metal production. Here, they claim, man began to melt and shape copper, iron, gold, and silver only 8,000 years ago. But unusual relics brought up from the depths of the rocky earth tell a different story.

In 1826, a well dug near the Ohio River in north Cincinnati failed to produce water but did produce the unexpected. From a level 94 feet down, a buried tree stump was brought to the surface which showed the marks of an ax. The marks were deep and well-cut, indicating the use of a sharp and durable blade. The suspicion that the ax had been made of metal was confirmed when embedded in the top of the stump, an advanced oxidized wedge of iron was found. The layer from which the stump came was estimated to be between 50,000 and 75,000 years old – nearly 10 times the accepted age of the supposed first metal usage.

A letter kept in the Archives of Madrid and dated 1572, records the account of the Spanish Viceroy in Peru and a strange artifact which came into his possession. In the year the letter was written, Indian miners removed from a subsurface layer of gravel a large conglomerate boulder, and broke it into pieces for easier disposal. As the mass shattered to the hammer blow, out of the center of it fell a perfect six-inch nail. The nail was later given to the Viceroy as a souvenir, who had it thoroughly examined, and verified its finding. The first mystery is that iron was unknown to the Peruvian Indians, so the nail did not originate with them. And the second mystery is that the rock from which the nail was freed was in the neighborhood of 75,000 to 100,000 years in age.

In the June 1851 issue of Scientific American (volume 7, pages 298-299), a report was reprinted from the Boston Transcript about two parts of a metallic vase dynamited out of solid rock on Meeting House Hill, Dorchester, Massachusetts. When the two parts were put together, they formed a bell-shaped vase, 4 1/2 inches high, 6 1/2 inches at the base, 2 1/2 inches at the top and an eighth of an inch thick. The metal of the vase was composed of an alloy of zinc and a considerable portion of silver. On the sides were six figures of a flower in bouquet arrangements, inlaid with pure silver, and around the lower part a vine, or wreath, also inlaid with silver. The chasing, carving, and inlaying are exquisitely done by the art of some unknown craftsman – yet this curiosity was blown out of solid pudding stone from 15 feet below the surface. Estimated age – 100,000 years. Unfortunately, the vase was circulated from museum to museum and then disappeared. It is probably gathering dust in some curator’s basement, its identity or source long forgotten.

At Lawn Ridge, 20 miles north of Peoria, Illinois, in August of 1870, three men were drilling an artesian well, when – from a depth of over a hundred feet – the pump brought up a small metal medallion to the surface. One of the workmen, Jacob W. Moffit, from Chillicothe, was the first to discover it in the drill residue. A noted scholar of the time, Professor Alexander Winchell, reported in his book Sparks From a Geologist’s Hammer, that he received from another eye-witness, W.H. Wilmot, a detailed statement, dated December 4, 1871, of the deposits and depths of materials made during the boring, and the position where the metal “coin” was uncovered. The stratification took this form: Soil – 3 feet; yellow clay – 17 feet; blue clay – 44 feet; dark vegetable matter – 4 feet; hard purplish clay – 18 feet; bright green clay – 8 feet; mottled clay – 18 feet; paleosol (ancient soils) – 2 feet; coin location; yellowish clay – 1 foot; sand, clay and water – 11 feet. The strange “coin-medallion” was composed of an unidentified copper alloy, about the size and thickness of a U.S. quarter of that period. It was remarkably uniform in thickness, round, and the edges appeared to have been cut. Researcher William E. Dubois, who presented his investigation of the medallion to the American Philosophical Society, was convinced that the object had in fact passed through a rolling mill, the edges showed “further evidence of the machine shop.” Despite its “modern characteristics”, however, Dubois plainly saw that, upon the object, “the tooth of time is plainly visible.”

Both sides of the medallion were marked with artwork and hieroglyphs, but these had not been metal-engraved or stamped. Rather, the figures had somehow been etched in acid, to a remarkable degree of intricacy. One side showed the figure of a woman wearing a crown or headdress; her left arm is raised as if in benediction, and her right arm holds a small child, also crowned. The woman appears to be speaking. On the opposite side is another central figure, that looks like a crouching animal: it has long, pointed ears, large eyes and mouth, claw-like arms, and a long tail frayed at the very end. Below and to the left of it is another animal, which bears a strong resemblance to a horse. Around the outer edges of both sides of the coin are undecipherable glyphs – they are of very definite character, and show all the signs of a form of alphabetic writing.

In 1876, the medallion was presented by Professor Winchell to a meeting of the Geological Section of the American Association in Buffalo. There was much speculation, but few answers. One participant, a conservative historian, Professor J.R. Lesley, tried to explain the object as a “practical joke” dropped into a hole by a passing French or Spanish explorer. The professor even claimed to see the coin’s figures as the astrological signs of Pisces and Leo and read into the glyphs the date 1572. However, Winchell countered with these arguments against such an interpretation: 1. By no stretch of the imagination were the figures and glyphs decipherable in terms of any known symbology or script. 2. Who, as a practical joke, would have dropped a metal object into a hole and known that someone several hundred years later would happen to drill at that precise spot (within a 4-inch tolerance) and find it? The odds would be phenomenal. And 3. There is the very real problem of explaining the accumulation of 114 feet of deposit over the buried coin. Having examined all the evidence, Winchell was convinced the coin had indeed come from this depth. It had not fallen into a hole in the past – the sediments drilled through were uniform and undisturbed. And the amount of sedimentation was not what would have settled in only a few centuries. In fact, recent calculations based on uniform rates of alluvium deposition and radioisotope dates for this region estimate an age for materials from just below a depth of 100 feet to be between 100,000 and 150,000 years.

What conclusions can we draw about the mystery coin? A lost civilization once existed on the North American continent which worked in copper and other metals; possessed art and writing; attired themselves with crowns and other clothing; knew of and perhaps domesticated several animals including the horse; utilized acids for etching in a manner that is still not understood today; and perhaps the most disturbing, possessed forms of machinery for the cutting, rolling and processing of metal pieces.

As a sidelight, the enigmatic coin was not the only item that came from deep levels in Illinois. In 1851, in Whiteside County, another well-drilling bit brought up from a sand stratum 120 feet deep two copper artifacts: What appears to be a hook, and a ring. Their age is thought to be the same as that of the coin – about 150,000 years old.

On February 13, 1961, three rock hunters – Mike Mikesell, Wallace Lane, and Virginia Maxey – were collecting geodes about 12 miles east-southeast of Olancha, California. Geodes are spherical stones with hollow interiors lined with crystals. On this particular day, while searching in the Coso Mountains, they found one stone located near the top of a peak approximately 4,300 feet in elevation and about 340 feet above the dry bed of Owens Lake.

The rockhounds took it to be a geode, but later found it was not, because it bore traces of fossil shells. The next day when Mikesell cut the stone in half, he nearly ruined a ten-inch diamond saw in the process, for it did not contain crystals, but rather something totally unexpected. Inside were the remains of some form of a mechanical device: Beneath the outer layer of hardened clay, pebbles and fossil inclusions is a hexagonally shaped layer of a substance resembling wood, softer than agate or Jasper. This layer forms a casing around a three-quarter inch wide cylinder made of solid white porcelain or ceramic, and in the center of the cylinder is a two-millimeter shaft of bright, brassy metal. This shaft, the rock hunters discovered, is magnetic, and after several years of exposure never showed traces of oxidation. Also, surrounding the ceramic cylinder are rings of copper, much of them now corroded. Embedded too in the rock, though separate from the cylinder, are two more man-made items – what look like a nail and a washer.

EDITOR’S COMMENT:   Several readers have stated that this artifact is indeed a spark plug from the 1920’s.

The puzzled rock hunters sent their find to the Charles Fort Society, who specializes in investigating things out of the ordinary. The Society made an X-ray examination of the cylinder object enclosed in the fossil-encrusted rock and found further evidence that it was indeed some form of mechanical apparatus. The X-rays revealed that the metallic shaft was corroded at one end, but on the other end terminated in what appeared to be a spring or helix of metal. As a whole, the “Coso artifact” is now believed to be something more than a piece of machinery: The carefully shaped ceramic, metallic shaft, and copper components hint at some form of electrical instrument. The closest modern apparatus that researchers have been able to equate it with is a spark plug. However, there are certain features – particularly the spring or helix terminal – that does not correspond to any known spark plug today. The rock in which the electrical instrument was found was dated by a competent geologist at 500,000 years old.

The rock strata appear to be full of metal “surprises.” The Illinois Springfield Republican reported in 1851 that a businessman named Hiram de Witt had brought back with him from a trip to California a piece of auriferous quartz rock about the size of a man’s fist, and that while showing the rock to a friend, it slipped from his hand and split open upon hitting the floor. There, in the center of the quartz, they discovered a cut-iron nail, six-penny size, slightly corroded but entirely straight, with a perfect head. the quartz was given an age of over one million years.

In 1865, a two-inch metal screw was discovered in a piece of feldspar unearthed from the Abbey Mine in Treasure City, Nevada. The screw had long ago oxidized, but its form – particularly the shape of its threads – could be clearly seen in the feldspar. The stone was calculated to be 21 million years in age.

Twenty years earlier, in 1844, Sir David Brewster made a report to the British Association for the Advancement of Science which created quite a stir. A nail of obvious human manufacture had been found half-embedded in a sandstone block excavated from the Kindgoodie Quarry near Inchyra, in northern Britain. It was badly corroded, but identifiable nonetheless. The sandstone was determined to be at least 40 million years old.

In the fall of 1885, at an iron foundry owned by the sons of Herr Isidor Braun located in Schondorf near Bocklabruck, Upper Austria, a workman named Riedl was breaking up a block of Tertiary brown coal that had been mined from the pits at Wolfsegg, near Schwannstadt, and was about to be used to heat the foundry’s giant smelters. As the block disintegrated into several pieces, out dropped a strange cube-like object. In 1886, mining engineer Dr. Adolf Gurlt made a report to the Natural History Society at Bonn, Germany and noted that the object, coated with a thin layer of rust, is made of iron, measures 2.64 by 2.64 by 1.85 inches, weighs 1.73 Ibs., and has a specific gravity measurement of 7.75. Four of the iron “cube’s” sides are roughly flat, while the two remaining sides – opposite each other – are convex. A fairly deep groove was incised all the way around the object, about mid-way up its height. Other early studies on the iron artifact were in scientific journals of the day as Nature (London; November 11, 1886, page 36) and L’Astronomie (Paris; 1886, page 463). A plaster cast was also made before the turn of the century -important because the original object subsequently suffered from handling, and from being disfigured by samples having been cut from it by investigators for research. The cast is kept in the Oberosterreichisehes Landesmuseum in Linz, Austria, where the original object was also exhibited from 1950 to 1958. The iron cube is presently in the custody of Herrn O.R. Bernhardt of the Heimathaus Museum in Vocklabruck.

In 1966-67, the iron “cube” was carefully analyzed by experts at the Vienna Naturhistorisehes Museum, using electron-beam microanalysis. They found no traces of nickel, chromium or cobalt in the iron – which means the object was not of meteoric origin. No sulfur was detected either, ruling out the chance of it being a pyrite, a natural mineral that sometimes forms geometric shapes. Because of a low magnesium content, Dr. Kurat of the Museum, and Dr. R. Gill of the Geologisehe Bundesanstalt of Vienna are of the opinion that the object was made of cast-iron. In 1973, Hubert Mattlianer concluded from yet another detailed investigation that the object had been made from a hand-sculptured lump of wax or clay pressed into a sand base, this forming the mold into which the iron had been poured.

The final conclusion, then, is that the strange object is definitely man-made. What is not explained is what it was doing encased in coal dating to the Tertiary – 60 million years old.

In 1968, French speleologists Y. Druet and H. Salfati reported finding unusual metal nodules entombed in an Aptian chalk bed in a quarry at Saint-Jean de Livet. The nodules are reddish brown, wafer-shaped and hollowed at the ends, measuring from 3 to 9 centimeters long and 1 to four centimeters wide. The two investigators at first thought the nodules were fossils until they discovered their metallic nature. Next, they theorized they were residue from a meteor – but careful study showed the nodules were too uniformly shaped to be of natural origin. Chemical analysis showed a carbon content consistent with modern forging and casting techniques. But what had these man-made objects been doing in chalk beds dating toward the end of the Cretaceous – over 120 million years? As Druet and Salfati concluded, “These objects, then, prove the presence of intelligent life on earth long before the limits given today by prehistoric archaeology.”

On June 9, 1891, Mrs. S.W. Culp of Morrisonville, Illinois was shoveling coal into her kitchen stove when a large lump broke in two and out from the center of it fell a gold chain. The chain was about 10 inches long, made of eight-carat gold, weighed 8 pennyweights, and was described as being “of antique and quaint workmanship.” The Morrisonville Times of June 11 reported that investigators were convinced the chain had not simply been accidentally dropped in with the coal: One portion of the coal lump still clung to the chain, while the part that had separated from it still bore the impression of where the chain had been encased. The Times could only comment, “Here is one for the student of archaeology who loves to puzzle his brain over the geological construction of the Earth from whose ancient depth the curious are always dropping out.” In this case, the “curious” “dropped out” of a piece of coal from the Pennsylvanian era – over 300 million years old.

Similar events produced another metal object of even greater age. In 1912, two employees of the Municipal Electric Plant of Thomas, Oklahoma, were shoveling coal into the plant furnaces, using fuel which had been mined near neighboring Wilberton. One chunk of coal was too large to handle, so the workmen took a sledgehammer to it. Once it broke open, however, the workmen found that the chunk contained an iron pot, and upon its removal, the two coal halves bore the “mold” of the pot in its interiors. Both employees signed affidavits testifying to the authenticity of the discovery, and the iron pot was subsequently examined by several experts – every one of which was most reluctant to comment on the pot, and the circumstances surrounding its discovery. This was most understandable since the object came from coal dated from 300 to 325 million years.

One more find that must be mentioned in the out-of-place metal category takes us – once again – to the deepest level of fossil life. On June 13, 1880, a reporter for the Inverness Courier named Walter Carruthers was vacationing near Loch Maree and Victoria Falls, in Scotland, and – being an amateur rock hunter – decided to explore the geology of the area. Between 300 and 400 yards above Victoria Falls, and immediately beside the last of the three lesser falls on the west side of the stream, Carruthers noticed peculiar impressions in the rock. The rock was a l6 x 16-foot exposed surface of Torridon Red Sandstone, placed in the Cambrian age. The impressions consisted of two continuous flat bands side by side, between 1 1/4 and 1 1/2 inches wide and about 1/4 inch deep, running unnaturally straight through the flat layers of sandstone in situ, and perfectly distinct for 16 feet, disappearing on the west side under the superimposed rock, and broken only where portions of the sandstone had been weathered out. A few weeks later the curious “bands” were also observed by a colleague of Carruthers, Mr. William Jolly, Her Majesty’s Inspector of Schools for the region. Carruthers had thought the impressions to have been the creation of some highly unusual living creature, but Jolly recorded that “the continuous even breadth and square section of the bands would seem to render this impossible.” Jolly further noted, “The double band resembles nothing more nearly than the hollow impression that would be left by double bars of iron placed closely together.” Jolly’s observation was corroborated years later when micro-specks of iron oxide were taken from the impression cavities. The superintendent thought, however, that perhaps the iron bands had at one time been inserted into the rock, “to clasp some structure to it” – but other findings discount this. First, the bands occur high above the Falls in an almost totally inaccessible place, where a “structure” would serve little purpose. Second, the bands are only one-quarter of an inch deep, so that anything “clasped” to them would not hold for long. Third, parallel on either side of each band are tin)? ripple marks in the sandstone, indicating the presence of the original iron bands had caused turbulence patterns in the sand during the time the sand had been laid down by water, and before it had turned to stone. Fourth, the sandstone in the impressions show tiny striations which are really the preserved grain marks of the iron – again, indicating the metal had been impressed in the primordial sand, before solidification took place. And finally, fifth, one portion of one of the bands bends back into the subsurface, and careful excavation revealed the presence of iron oxide totally encased by the surrounding sandstone.

Jolly also found other band impressions in the same locality: There is a third band that runs alongside the other two, but is much less distinct and is not continuous. Two more lines, about 2 feet lower down on the rock surface, are only 7 feet long, and two more are higher up, running 3 feet long. Jolly also saw still more bands on an outcropping of the same sandstone on the other side of the stream, again parallel to one another – one 3 feet, another 6 feet, and smaller portions of several others.

What purpose these iron bands served, we can only guess. What we do know, however, is that all the bands were very uniform in width and thickness, with squared edges, and the grain marks they left indicate they were rolled and cut – all of which points to precision manufacturing by machine production.

But this is totally impossible, if we are to believe the geologists, for the sandstone in which the bands occur, is Cambrian – 600 million years old, by their own measurements. Who, pray tell, was running an iron mill at a time when there was supposedly only tiny invertebrate creatures ruling the world?

Images and messages from the incredible past

Metal-working is by no means the only sign of advanced culture: Other characteristics include such developments as art, architecture and writing. Since we have already observed several examples of metal production encased in geologic rock, it should be no surprise to find examples of other cultural elements also entombed deep within the earth.

In 1921, an Arkansan named Rowlands was digging in one of the many gravel pits on a line of small hillocks known as Crowley’s Ridge, located two miles north of Finch. At a depth of 10 feet, Rowlands’ shovel suddenly struck something large and solid. The object appeared at first to be a boulder, but excavating around it, Rowlands soon discovered that it was a large rock-sculptured head of a man. It stood about 4 feet high, and the figure had a squared, protruding chin, small, tight-lipped mouth, a short nose, and a furrowed brow and stare accented by two flat “buttons” of inlaid gold for eyes. Two more gold discs ornamented the figure’s ears, and a heart-shaped plug of copper was embedded in the chest. The top of the head was covered by a carved hood that draped down the nape, and attached to a piece around the neck. Near the head, and in the same layer, Rowlands dug up a number of smaller objects: a gold ring, a small coffer made of volcanic pumice (which does not exist in this region), and tiny carvings of men, animals, moons and stars.

The head and artifacts soon became a local attraction, and the newspapers dubbed the glowering figure “King Crowley.” Several investigators authenticated the find, though they could not explain its presence in the ten-foot layer of gravel – geologically dated at 175,000 years. The head and objects were sent to the Arkansas Natural History Museum in Little Rock. The museum curators, who also examined the artifacts and had double-checked and documented their discovery, were confident in the findings’ authenticity to place them on public display. At the same time, however, some of the small carving samples were mailed to the Smithsonian in Washington. The Smithsonian – being a far more conservative institution -described the carvings as truly “unexplained items,” but could not reconcile the antiquity of the strata in which they had been brought to light. Finally, after fifteen years of vacillating on the subject, orthodoxy triumphed: The Smithsonian concluded that the Crowley Ridge artifacts could not be 175,000 years old as this contradicted established theory on the age of human civilization, and therefore declared the artifacts fakes. Conforming to this prestigious conservative pronouncement, the Little Rock museum promptly took the stone head and other objects off display, and eventually sold them to unnamed private collectors. The “King Crowley” had was shipped off to California, and the rest of the collection was similarly scattered to the four winds. Today, the location of even a single object is unknown.

One wonders how many other valuable out-of-place items, because they do not conform to “acceptable” schemes of history and geology, have been likewise thrown out or lost by Establishment institutions.

On June 27,1969, workmen cutting into a rock shelf situated on the Broadway Extension of 122nd Street, between Edmond and Oklahoma City, came upon a find that was to create much controversy among the experts. The find was an inlaid tile floor, found 3 feet below the surface, and covering several thousand square feet. Durwood Pate, an Oklahoma City geologist, commented on the floor in the Edmond Booster of July 3, 1969:

“I am sure this was man-made because the stones are placed in perfect sets of parallel lines which intersect to form a diamond shape, all pointing to the east. We found post holes which measure a perfect two rods from the other two. The top of the stone is very smooth, and if you lift one of them, you will find it is very jagged, which indicates wear on the surface. Everything is too well placed to be a natural formation.”

Pate also discovered a form of mortar between the tiles. He believes now that the tile surface served as a common floor for several human shelters over a wide area. Delbert Smith, a geologist and president of the Oklahoma Seismograph Company, summed up the mystery concerning the tile floor in the Tulsa World of June 29, 1969: “There is no question about it. It had been laid there, but I have no idea by whom.” Yet another facet of the mystery involved the question of age. There are some differing opinions as to the geology involved, but the best estimate places the tiles at 200,000 years old.

On August 1, 1889, a professional well-driller, M.A. Kurtz, was working near his home in Nampa, Idaho, along with two other crewmen, when their steam pump suddenly spat out a piece of brownish clay 11/2 inches long that was clearly humanoid in appearance. The discovery was also eye-witnessed by several prominent citizens of Nampa. What amazed these men was that the little clay “doll” had come from below a 15-foot layer of lava rock, 100 feet of sand, 6 inches of clay, 40 feet of more sand, then 165 feet composed of clay, sand, clay nodules mixed with sand, and coarse sand layers – a total of 320 feet.

The small “doll” is composed of half clay and half quartz, and according to at least one expert, Professor Albert A. Wright of Oberlin College, it was not the product of a small child or amateur, but was made by a true artist. Though badly battered by time, the doll’s appearance is still distinct: it has a bulbous head, with barely discernible mouth and eyes; broad shoulders; short, thick arms; and long legs, the right leg broken off. There are also faint geometric markings on the figure, which represent either clothing patterns or jewelry -they are found mostly on the chest around the neck, and on the arms and writs. The doll is the image of a person of a high civilization, artistically attired.

The Nampa doll came to the attention of Dr. G.F. Wright of the Boston Society of Natural History, who sought to verify the depth at which it was found – and thus also establish its great antiquity. In an on-location examination of Kurtz’s equipment, the hole drilled, and interviews with the witnesses, Dr. Wright became convinced the find was genuine. Kurtz demonstrated that the well had been tubed with heavy iron tubing 6 inches in diameter, so that there was no mistake about the occurrence of the artifact at the stated depth. Furthermore, the pump worked in only one direction – had the object fallen into the hole from above, it would have been destroyed by the pump. Wright concluded in a report to the Boston Society that, “There is no ground to question the fact that this image came up in the sand pump from the depth reported.” In another study, fellow Bostonian Professor F.W. Putnam found through microscopic analysis that quartz grains under the doll’s right arm had been cemented by iron molecules. This too – independent of the fact of the depth of the discovery – is indicative of a great age.

How old is the Nampa object? The lava rock layer through which Kurtz’s drill penetrated is part of the prehistoric lava flows of the Columbia Plateau which occurred before the advance of the last Ice Age. And below this layer, the image was discovered another 300 feet down. The best modern geologic estimate puts the date for the layer in which the doll was found at over 300,000 years. Today, the Nampa doll is on exhibit at the Idaho State Historical Society in Boise.

Curiously enough, a second doll-like figure was discovered sometime before 1880 near Marlboro in Stark County, Ohio, by workmen drilling a well. The image – made of black variegated marble and standing 6 inches tall – was unearthed from a depth of only 120 feet, but was embedded in sand and gravel of a similar type and age as that of the Nampa doll. There were two things remarkable about the Ohio figure: First, the marble it is made of is not indigenous to Ohio; and second, it bears an astonishing resemblance to the image found at Nampa. One can see in it the same bulbous head, simple facial features, stocky frame and long arms and legs. Did the two, the Ohio and Idaho “dolls,” come from the same enigmatic lost civilization? The evidence answers yes.

One of the most convincing signs of a high civilization is the written word. In the early spring of 1891, a farmer named J.H. Hooper was examining a wooded ridge on his property, located in Bradley County, 13 miles from Cleveland, Tennessee. A peculiar stone caught his attention, which he first took to be a grave marker. But digging around it, he soon discovered that the stone was only a surface projection of a subterranean structure that extended into the depths below. Hopper spent the next several weeks in an attempt to uncover his unusual find: A length of wall, traced for a thousand feet, on the average 2 feet thick and 8 feet high, with numerous projections – like the first one – spaced along the top every 25 to 30 feet. The wall ran roughly at an angle of 15 to 20 degrees east. The structure continues on beyond the section exposed, in both directions, following the crest of a ridge that extends from the Hiawassee river north of Chattanooga southward, where it dips beneath the Tennessee river. Its position dates it geologically to near the beginning of the Quaternary – well over a million years old.

The wall is composed of red sandstone blocks constructed in three courses, cemented together with a dark red clay mixed with salt, and in numerous places is plastered over with red, slate and yellow clays. Along one stretch of wall, near the northern end a distance of 16 feet, Hooper made without a doubt the most important discovery: Hidden beneath the outer clay plasterings, a number of the sandstone block surfaces were covered with the hieroglyphs of a lost language. The letters were arranged in wavy, parallel and diagonal lines, interspersed with small pictures of strange animals, many unidentifiable. there were other symbols too, of the sun and crescent moon, which appear to have some astronomical significance. All together, 872 individual characters were made out, many repeated – suggesting the script is a form of pictographic writing, like Chinese.

Despite the implications of the wall, and the challenge of the discovery of an unknown writing, the find was met by the scientific community with overwhelming apathy. A short notice on the Tennessee mystery wall appeared in the Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences (11:26-29), written by A.L. Rawson, who examined the structure and script first-hand, as well as published copies he had made of some of the glyphs and pictures. But that was all; no further study was ever made.

In 1936, Tom Kenny, a resident of Plateau Valley, a town located on the western slope of the Rockies in Colorado, was excavating for a winter cellar to store vegetables, when at a depth of 10 feet his spade hit a barrier. Clearing the covering material away, he unearthed a pavement made of tiles, each man-made and five inches square. The tiles were laid in mortar, the chemical composition of which later analysis showed was different from all materials found in the valley. The perplexing problem is that the strange pavement was found in the same layer containing the three-toed Miocene horse – upwards of 30 million years old.

In November, 1829, a block of marble measuring over 30 cubic feet was excavated from a depth of between 60 to 70 feet, from the Henderson quarry, located 12 miles northwest of Philadelphia. The block was sent to the Savage marble saw mill in nearby Norristown for cutting into slabs for construction. After taking off one slab about 3 feet wide and 6 feet long, workmen noticed something strange: They had exposed an unnaturally straight-edged, rectangular indentation. Several respectable townsmen were called to the scene, and in their presence, the rest of the block surface was carefully removed. Revealed were two sharply defined engraved letters, resembling an “I,” and a “U” with a squared base. The indentations were 11/2 inches long and five-eighths of an inch in width. There was no way the letters could have been of recent origin – they were deeply embedded in the marble. More mysterious, the marble had come from a very old lime rock. Estimated age: About 65 million years.

The Los Angeles News of December 17, 1869, printed an account supplied to the paper by a correspondent of the Cleveland Herald, writing from Wellsville, Ohio. The account described how in the autumn of the year, at a coal mine operated by a Captain Lacey of Hammondville, a miner named James Parsons was loosening a large mass at a depth of 100 feet, when he suddenly exposed a smooth slate wall covered with strange alphabetic writing. The letters were raised and well defined. The coal that had covered the wall bore their distinct impression – which means the letters date to a time when the coal was in a vegetable state, and had molded itself against the wall. Each sign was three-quarters of an inch in size, and arranged in rows precisely spaced 3 inches apart. The first line of letters contained 25. Local teachers and ministers examined the find, but could offer no explanations. Unfortunately, just before a number of university professors arrived to verify the discovery, the slate surface disintegrated from exposure to air, and the script was lost. Nevertheless, the find was well-documented, and attested to by several reliable witnesses. But the most disturbing fact about the mysterious slate wall and its glyphs was their undeniable presence in coal – coal from the Carboniferous era, well over 200 million years old.

A naturalist named Isaac Lea reported in the American Journal of Science (volume I, number 1, page 155), in 1822, a find he had made in a stretch of sandstone located a quarter mile north of Pittsburgh, on the same side of the Monongahela river. Lea described it as the most singular specimen he had ever seen: An unusually flat rectangular surface, 3 feet long and varying from 5 to 6 inches wide. One end was cut off by a break in the rock – so there is no way of knowing the real length of the original impression. The other end terminated in the middle of the rock face in a straight, square line -as if a roll of paper had been torn off clean. On this flat surface were row after row of evenly spaced, perfect diamond shapes, each with an oblique, raised band across its center. Lea was mystified as to how to classify the impression, as belonging to the animal or vegetable kingdom. The answer is neither: The pattern is too precise to be natural, the diamond shapes too square to be designed by anything but an intelligent hand. Luckily, Lea had forethought enough to make accurate measurements and draw sketches of the impression, for when he returned to remove it for further study, he found that a quarryman had beaten him to it, and had done his work. The naturalist also took meticulous note of the position of the rock surface in relation to the geology of the surrounding area. The hill in which it existed is not high enough to take in the bed of carboniferous coal found in a horizontal stratum about 250 feet above the locality. In fragments of the impressed rock, Lea found fossils of primitive jointed plants – the type which made its appearance in the Devonian era, 400 million years ago.

What exactly was the mysterious pattern in rock? We do not know, but the fact remains that it bore the artistic and measuring hand of man. That hand was contemporary with purportedly the earliest plant life on earth.

Analysis and conclusions

How can this evidence of the presence of man from the very beginning of the fossil record be explained? Certainly, the prevailing Uniformitarian-evolution-linear model of the past is in no position to do so, because the mere existence of deeply buried human objects completely destroys the whole premise of slow, gradual, progressive development of the earth, of life, of man, and of human culture -the very cornerstone of the model. If man and his products can be found all the way down to the lowest level of geologic life, where is the evidence for his continual evolution, or for his long cultural climb from primitive beginnings? It is clear we must look elsewhere for the answers.

Today, besides the Uniformitarian-evolution-linear model, there have been three new and alternative models proposed, and each of these offer their own interpretations of the past. These are: Extraterrestrialism, Catastrophic evolution, and Creationism. Let us look at each one separately.

Most people have become aware of the Extraterrestrialist model through the writings of Erich von Daniken, author of Chariots of the Gods, and other similar works. What is not often realized, however, is that von Daniken’s ideas not only have had popular appeal to the man on the street, but they are having a definite impact on the academic and scientific world as well. Von Daniken offers what appears to be a plausible answer to the riddle of out-of-place artifacts of an advanced nature which have been unearthed from the archaeological record -and, as we have seen from the fossil and geological records as well. According to him, aliens from other worlds have supposedly been visiting the earth throughout history and prehistory, and the out-of-place remains we find were the product of contact between the spacemen and early man. In the case of those objects discovered in those layers believed to pre-date man’s appearance, then the items were left by the extraterrestrials themselves. By giving the out-of-place artifacts an “other world” source, Von Daniken has thus neatly explained their presence, while at the same time preserving accepted” theories of evolution. In effect, he has placed the artifacts in a realm outside the earthly scheme of things, where they do not conflict with slow, progressive evolutionary development – only intervening now and then.

But there are several flaws in the Extraterrestrialist model. In not one instance has Von Daniken been able to demonstrate the existence of a single “ancient astronaut.” His “evidence,” on close inspection, is largely based on his own personal interpretations of primitive drawings and ancient records which look and sound (to him) like men wearing spacesuits, or riding around inside spaceships. In every case, there is another simpler and literally more “down to earth” interpretation for every “space” drawing and record he offers as proof.

When we examine closely the out-of-place artifacts themselves, especially those we have studied embedded in the geologic layers, we find that they do not appear alien to us, and they certainly do not exhibit a technology exclusively different from that of, say, our own civilization today – that is, what man himself has and could have once before produced. What is more, where we have found the presence of artifacts, we have also found clear evidence of the presence of man: You will remember that among those discoveries made in the fossil record, not only did we observe objects of worked metals, stone, etc., but there were also human skulls, bones and footprints. Man was there; the artifacts logically were of his making. There is no need to invoke spacemen, or look to the stars, for an answer – the answer lies here on earth, or as in the case of our study here, in the earth.

A second modern model of the past is Catastrophic evolution -and as its name implies, it is a modification of the old Uniformitarian-evolution model. Catastrophic evolutionists propose to fully accept the existence of human remains in the geologic column, while leaving the column and the dating of the various rock layers intact. What this means is a scenario of human history in which civilizations have been born, risen to intellectual and technological heights, and then were destroyed by earth upheavals, again and again over 600 million years. At first glance, this model might seem plausible enough to explain the facts. But there are problems to consider. As noted earlier, historians measure the antiquity of our own civilization as being no more than 10,000 years. If we take this as the average “lifespan” for the development of a technological society, and attempt to apply this to the multiple civilization scenario, we find that we must presuppose the existence of an incredible 60,000 civilizations to each down to the Cambrian age. What is more, there is the major difficulty of how all these societies would have disappeared -unless one is also to imagine 60,000 separate cataclysms. Unfortunately, the geologic record does not support that many world changes. The geologic record also reveals that, if only simple forms of life supposedly existed in the earliest levels, there was no way such environments could have supported a human population, let alone active civilizations. Finally, there still remains the unanswered question of where man originated – and for that, we have already seen, evolution cannot even attempt a solution.

Our third alternative model to examine is by no means new – in fact, it was the accepted model of the past long before uniformitarianism of geology came to the forefront. It is called Creationism, or Creation-Flood science, because it is based on the Biblical account in Genesis of the Divine creation of the world, life and man, and the world-destroying Deluge. What makes Creationism distinctive from the other proposed models is it teaches that mankind existed on the earth before most geologic strata were formed. What is more, he was created and lived as an intelligent, civilized being from the outset. The Genesis record describes how after Creation and before the Flood, the descendants of Adam – the Antediluvians – possessed an advanced culture that included agriculture, urbanization, the arts, metal-working and sophisticated engineering abilities. The Flood completely destroyed the Antediluvian civilization and the entire world, depositing the remains (according to Creationist-Flood geology) in a short time in the form of all the strata from Cambrian to early Tertiary. After the Flood, the first descendants of Noah built another civilization culminating in the technology that constructed the Tower of Babel. The remains of this post-Flood civilization, after the destruction of Babel, were swept away by the Ice Age disaster, and were preserved in the strata of the Tertiary-Pleistocene.

The Creation-Flood model can thus accept the appearance of human remains and advanced artifacts in the geologic past, as evidence for pre-Flood and immediate post-Flood civilizations. Because of the cataclysmic nature of the Flood, and the abruptness with which the Babel-Ice Age disaster occurred, the Creation-Flood model predicts further that buried artifacts are probably few and far between, appearing as rare surviving remnants in the rock – which is the case exactly.

Another upset in Creationism’s favor is that, by its rejection of uniformitarian long-age dating of the earth’s strata, it is able to explain remarkable similarities among the out-of-place artifacts, in diverse levels. For instance, we found several examples of giant human bones and footprints – in Tertiary, Cretaceous, Jurassic, Triassic, and Pennsylvanian rock. This would mean, in “accepted” geologic time measurements, the persistence of a very specialized life form – Homo gargantuan – over a span of 300 million years. There is no precedent for that kind of survival anywhere in the fossil record. But by viewing all these layers as having been laid down in a short time period, and by regarding the remains within as the remnants of one destroyed world, the various giant finds and their similarities are explained. In addition, the large bones and prints confirm what was recorded in Genesis about conditions before the Flood: “There were giants in those days, mighty men, men of renown.”

There is, however, one problem that Creationism must contend with. But that problem at least may have a satisfactory answer. It involves the presence of foot and sandal prints – and, for that matter, the prints of extinct animals – found in the fossil record. Dr. John D. Morris of the Institute for Creation Research, in San Diego, noted that in the case of the mantracks and dinosaur tracks found on the Paluxy river, there is a layer of sedimentary rock 8,500 feet in thickness underlying these Cretaceous formations. Now according to the Creationist model, this must all have been deposited during the Flood. The problem is, as Morris put it, “How could man and dinosaur witness such massive deposition at the beginning stages of the Flood and survive long enough to leave their prints so high up in the geologic column?”

The answer may lie in an uplift of pre-Cambrian rock located just to the southwest of Glen Rose. The uplift shows only small traces of the deposits which covered the Paluxy area, which means it could have served as a refuge for men and animals during the first part of the Flood. The waters appear to have retreated momentarily, and the men and dinosaurs climbed down from their summit, to cautiously walk across the mud-filled Paluxy region, probably in search of food. It is significant that all the Paluxy man prints are clear impressions of the whole foot, indicating that the stride of their makers had been slow and deliberate, and not running, as the impressions then would have been deep prints of the forefoot only. The tracks also go off in different directions, as if the survivors had split their company to search over more ground. But just moments after the impressions were made, the Flood waters must have returned, sweeping men and creatures away, and quickly burying their tracks by new deposits – deposits which aided in the perfect preservation of the prints to this day.

This particular scenario of waters retreating and returning may not only have applied to Paluxy, but to the making of the other fossil foot and shoe prints as well. Flood geologists note many examples in various sedimentary rocks of evidence for tidal water action. Some coal seams, for example, contain numerous layers of limestone alternating with carbonized vegetable matter (coal). These, the geologists say, were created by the “rocking” motion of a large body of water, that carried the remains of marine organisms at one end and land life on the other, and dropped portions of its two different loads with each surge, as it moved back and forth. Sometimes in these layers, coal appears directly on coal, or limestone on limestone, without the alternate material between – indicating a complete retreat of the waters temporarily, and then their dramatic return and deposition. Noteworthy is the fact that in the book of Genesis, Noah described the Flood waters as “prevailing upon the earth.” In the Hebrew, the word used for “prevail” has the connotation, “a movement to and fro.”

Summarizing now the various models we have discussed, we find that:

  1. The Uniformitarian-evolution-linear model is totally inadequate to explain the presence of human remains in the geologic record, as these remains are in direct contradiction to the model’s premise of slow, progressive development from simple, primitive beginnings. 2. The Extraterrestrialist model is dependent upon the unproven existence of aliens from outer space, and rests on the false assumption that man himself could not have produced the out-of-place artifacts – even though they are in fact accompanied by human skeletal remains and imprints. 3. The Catastrophic evolution model presupposes the existence of a highly improbable number of destroyed civilizations to explain the buried objects, and cannot answer the basic question of the origins of man by evolution, since his remains are found as far back as the earliest fossil layer.

    4. The Creation-Flood model offers a workable solution to the mystery of out-of-place fossil relics, which is also consistent with observable geologic phenomena based on a catastrophic premise. The model also explains similarities and parallels between out-of-place finds in diverse layers, which no other model can do.

    Based on these findings, then, we must conclude that the Creationist model is superior to all other models in supplying answers to the riddle of human remains and artifacts in the geologic record. These “strange relics from the depths of the earth,” in fact, testify to the validity of the Creation-Flood model, and tend to prove wrong the major concepts of all other models so far proposed.


Allen, E.A. “Footmarks in Kentucky” American Antiquarian (1885) vol. 7.
American Antiquarian (1885) vol. 7, 364-365.
Bergier, Jacques Extraterrestrial Visitations From Prehistoric Times to the Present New York: New American Library, 1974.
Berlitz, Charles Mysteries From Forgotten Worlds New York: Dell Publishing, 1972.
Bible Science Newsletter July, 1970, p. 2.
Binder,Otto O. Unsolved Mysteries of the Past New York: Tower Publications, 1970.
Braidwood, Robert J. Prehistoric Man New York: William Morrow and Co., 1967.
Brandon, Jim Weird America: A Guide to Places of Mystery in the United States New York: E.P. Dutton, 1978.
Browne, J.B. “Singular Impression in Marble” American Journal of Science vol. 1, no. 19, p. 361, 1831.
Chapman, Glen W. “Archaeological Findings of Pre-Flood Cultures in America” Bible Science Newsletter August-September, 1969.
Chardin, Pierre Teilhard de The Appearance of Man New York: Harper and Row, 1965.
Charroux, Robert Forgotten Worlds New York: Walker and Co., 1973.
Charroux, Robert One Hundred Thousand Years of Man’s Unknown History New York: Berkeley Publishing, 1971.
Corliss, William R. Ancient Man: A Handbook of Puzzling Artifacts Glen Arm, Md.: The Sourcebook Project, 1978.
Corliss, William R. Strange Artifacts, 2 vols. Glen Arm, Md.: The Sourcebook Project, 1976.
Donelly, Ignatius Ragnarok: The Age of Fire and Gravel, rev. ed. New York: Steiner Books, 1976.
Edwards, Frank Strange World Secauscus, N.J.: Lyle Sturat, 1974.
Fange, Erich A. Von “Time Upside Down” Creation Research Quarterly June, 1974.
Flint, Earl “Nicaragua Footprints” American Antiquarian (1889) vol. 11, 306-311.
Fort, Charles The Book of the Damned New York: Ace, 1941.
Itao, Jude Studies of the Stratigraphy and Dating of Geologic Anomalies in North America and Europe Unpublished, 1975.
Keel, John A. Our Haunted Planet New York: Fawcett Publications, 1971.
Kolosimo, Peter Not of This World New York: Bantam Books, 1973.
Landsburg, Alan and Sally In Search of Ancient Mysteries New York: Bantam Books, 1974.
Le Conte, Joseph “Carson Footprints” Nature May 31, 1883, 101-102.
Marsh, O.E. “On the Supposed Human Foot Prints Recently Found in Nevada” American Journal of Science (1883) vol. 3, no. 26, 139-140.
Mooney, Richard E. Colony Earth Greenwich, Conn.: Fawcett Publications, 1974.
Nelson, Byron C. The Deluge Story in Stone Minneapolis: Augsburg Press, 1962.
Noorbergen, Rene (researched for by J.B. Jochmans) Secrets of the Lost Races New York: Bobbs: Merrill, 1977.
Norman, Eric Gods, Demons and UFO’s New York: Lancer Books, 1970.
Pauwels, Louis The Eternal Man New York: Avon Books, 1972.
Pauwels, Louis Impossible Possibilities New York: Stein and Day, 1971.
Pierce, Josiah American Antiquities and Discoveries in the West: 1835.
Rehwinkel, A.M. The Flood St. Louis: Concordia Publishing, 1957.
Sanderson, Ivan T. Investigating the Unexplained Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentise-Hall, 1972.
Silverberg, Robert Man Before Adam Philadelphia: Macrae Smith Co., 1964.
Steiger, Brad Mysteries of Time and Space Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentise-Hall, 1974.
Tomas, Andrew On the Stones of Endless Worlds New York: G.P. Putman’s Sons, 1976.
Tomas, Andrew We Are Not the First New York: Bantam Books, 1973.

Is The Universe Expanding?

By David Ben Ya’akov

© 2002 David Ben Ya’akov / Delusion Resistance




For the past twenty years or more, we have been reading articles, listening to news blurbs and have been taught in the schools that the universe is expanding. Most of those in my generation can understand what expanding means because our waistlines have been doing the same thing as we get older. But what about this “expanding universe” scenario that is being taught to us. Are there fallacies to this theory? Does the Bible mention anything about an expanding universe? Let’s take a look.

Explained in simple terms, the scientific theory for the creation of the universe goes something like this. They say that before the big bang all of the matter in the universe was compressed into something no bigger than any period on this page. The dot started to spin and build up energy until at one moment it exploded in a superheated mass that contained all of the pieces that would make up all of the atoms in the universe. This explosion then expanded over billions of years to become what the universe is today.

You know, the problem with society today is that no one sits down and ponders things anymore. We’re so busy in a run around the world that we won’t examine what our minds are being fed. We see examples of physics and other natural laws every day that we assume that we know everything. We know for instance, that if our car runs head-on into another car coming from the opposite direction there will be a wreck that will ruin both cars. We know that if we take a corner too fast centrifugal force will pull us one way or the other. Finally, we know that if we don’t clean our homes they become worse off which proves the second law of thermodynamics, but we suddenly become ignorant and accepting when someone tells us that there was a big bang that created everything from nothing, and did it as a happenstance. We didn’t see it, no one was there to experience it, but it is presented as fact.

Big Bang Has Big Holes:

The Big Bang, as it is currently being inculcated, presents more problems then questions. This is usually the case when lies are presented as fact; more lies have to be added to cover for the prior lies. Anyway, let’s look at some of the simple problems that anyone with common sense can see with a little bit of thought.

Matter versus no matter: We are constantly told that all of the matter (or potential matter) in the universe was crowded into a period sized dot before the big bang. On the other hand, we are told that Matter didn’t exist before the big bang. Hence, we have a problem because we are being told that something that didn’t exist actually did exist, but it wasn’t Matter like we have today.

Atoms didn’t exist: We are told that before the big bang, atoms didn’t exist, only the elements of atoms. We are told that only after the big bang did those subatomic elements get together to make atoms. It is interesting to note that the “evolution of Matter,” is suggested here. Then, like something from a children’s story, the subatomic particles knew how to get together to form atoms, and from there molecules. Now, what the scientists are reluctant to state is that they are great at splitting atoms and making subatomic particles, but that is all they have done. They have never made an atom out of those particles. Now if people who are supposed intellectuals can’t perform such a fete than how can things that have no thought or will to do so accomplish it???

We have been taught that Matter and time are intertwined, so much so that one cannot exist without the other. This is a true statement and can be best exhibited by the reality of the “atomic clock,” which science touts as the most exact measurement of time ever invented. The reason that this can be done is due to the fact that time is measured by the cesium 133 atom. It is fairly complicated to explain so I have included the following link for you to go to and learn more about using the atom to measure time.  Go to to learn more. Seeing that time and matter both hold each other up, it would be impossible for there to be time before any supposed big bang. Yet, we still have evolutionists telling us that there was time before the big bang. 

Remember as mentioned above, that science says that that little dot that would someday become the big bang was spinning. Now that we have determined that there was no time before any supposed big bang, then how could there have been “spinning?” Spinning denotes time and there was no time. Everything that spins can be measured, whether it be revolutions per minute, per second or even per nanosecond, so how could spinning occur? Simple, it can’t. Spinning requires a mass to spin, yet there were no atoms so there could not have been any mass. It becomes more ridiculous the more you look at it.

Let’s remember that this thing was supposed to be an explosion. All explosions require an ignition source. Some might argue that friction inside the whirling dervish might have been an ignition source, but there were no atoms, so there could have been no friction. Some might suggest some sort of nuclear explosion, but there were no atoms yet. Fusion and fission can only happen where atoms exist.

There are specific laws that govern the universe, just as there are rules that govern everyday life. Every law has a lawgiver. Humanity has laws because mankind was given a free will by its creator. After the fall of Adam which introduced lawlessness into the world, laws became a requirement. The Universe, on the other hand, does not have a will of its own no matter how much some religions try to say it does.

The first two laws of thermodynamics are an established fact, heralded by science to be true until the evolution of the universe and life on Earth are concerned. In laymen’s terms the two laws state:

The first law of thermodynamics says that the total quantity of energy in the universe remains constant. This is the principle of the conservation of energy. The second law of thermodynamics states that the quality of this energy is degraded irreversibly. This is the principle of the degradation of energy.

Hence to explain it in even more simple terms, “the total energy of the universe is constant, but it can decay unless more energy is added to keep it going.” My best way of imagining this is an automobile. Let’s say that I just bought a new truck and had it delivered to my driveway. Now, here is a machine that has the ability to do a lot of work. Work will not be performed unless I turn the key and introduce an electric current to the coil, which goes to the spark plugs. In the meantime, the fuel pump sends gasoline to the explosion chamber. When the spark meets the fuel/air mixture it pushes the piston down, causing the crank to turn, which in turn causes the transmission to transmit power to the wheels that cause the car to move.

Now let’s suppose that I decide that I don’t want to maintain the truck. About the fourth or fifth-year things are going to start to go wrong with the machine. Because I didn’t wash it or wax it the paint finish starts to corrode. First, it will oxidize then finally the metal will start to rust. I never changed the coolant hoses so they are leaking. The oil has never been changed and that has caused the piston rings wear and some of the seals to decay. Because I neglected the truck and didn’t perform work in order to maintain it, I have allowed entropy to happen more rapidly than if I would have applied work and effort during the five years I have owned the vehicle.

We see this process everywhere we look. As a matter of fact, almost everyone employed all over the Earth is employed because of the effects of entropy. Nothing ever gets better and everything, if left to itself, will decay and die. Do we at least agree on that? Well then, how is it then that so many believe the lie of evolution, both here on Earth and out in the universe? If evolution was true, then it would fly in the face of the laws of thermodynamics. Life could never have evolved on Earth because the odds would be stacked against it. The universe would have crumbled because energy would have decreased enough in these supposed billions of years because there is no one to maintain it. And finally, science seems to be saying, “yes, we believe in thermodynamics, but not where evolution is concerned.” There is no way that evolution can skip specific scientific laws that every other process in science and life are bound to.

Conservation of Angular Momentum:

One of the most interesting things to look at when considering the expanding universe is something called “The Conservation of Angular Momentum.” The best way to illustrate this can be found at This website is run by Kent Hovind and he poses some interesting challenges to those in the evolution realm. Kent was on an airplane one day and he was sitting right next to a professor from The University of California at Berkeley. This is a very secular school with a very extreme leftist agenda. Kent wasted no time in starting a debate with the professor.

Kent proposed a very interesting problem to the professor. Kent started to talk about a merry-go-round and how at certain speeds you would receive different reactions from the children. Kent worked up the story to a point where at around 100 miles per hour the children would fly off the device. He said that the children would all spin off in the same direction and that they too would spin in the same direction as the merry-go-round. The professor interjected that he was aware of the conservation of angular momentum and confirmed that Kent was right. Kent then proposed that since this is true, then if the big bang was true then the same principle should apply, to which the professor agreed. He then asked the professor why two planets in the solar system spin backward. The professor said that this was new to him and suggested that perhaps an object struck the planets to turn them around. Kent laughed and asked if the professor was aware of what it would take reverse the spin of an entire planet? Kent asked, “wouldn’t it leave a big scar on the body?” Then Kent said six of the moons in the solar system also spin backward. Kent then said that he knew why those bodies spin backward. He told the professor that God did it that way to make the big bang look stupid. Boy, you can’t argue with logic, can you?

What Do They Mean By “Created,”:

Did you ever notice that science seems to be confused about the words that they use? They use a lot of speculative words and if you read any of their works very carefully you will notice that those works are just a bunch of guesses and ponderings. But the most interesting word that they use is the word “creation.” Almost all textbooks and press releases will use a term similar to, “the universe was created by the Big Bang.” Some even are as bold as to say, “at the creation of the universe.” Frankly, for them, it is a bad choice of words.  The Big Bang would have made a lousy creator because we are told that it was a chaotic event like most explosions are. You can never obtain order from disorder. It would be easier to believe that the faces on Mount Rushmore came to be by way of wind and rain erosion.

Again I had to look up the word “create,” in order to get the correct sense of the word. It appears directly below:

Main Entry: 1cre·ate
Pronunciation: krE-'At, 'krE-"

Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): cre·at·ed; cre·at·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin creatus, past participle of creare; akin to Latin crescere to grow
Date: 14th century
transitive senses
1 : to bring into existence <God created the heaven and the earth — Gen 1:1 (Authorized Version)>
2 a : to invest with a new form, office, or rank <was created a lieutenant> b : to produce or bring about by a course of action or behavior
3 : CAUSE, OCCASION <famine creates high food prices>

4 a : to produce through imaginative skill <create a painting> b : DESIGN <creates dresses>
intransitive senses :
to make or bring into existence something new

One thing that all of the definitions above have is that they all require a CREATOR and one who is able to create in an intelligent way. Perhaps the scientific community is really tipping its hand when they use the word Create. Perhaps they really know deep down inside that there is an intelligent creator. I certainly hope they realize the truth because one day we will all meet that creator.

So What is The Universe Expanding Into:

I think that it is very important to examine the word “expand,” before we continue this study. The Merriam-Webster Internet Dictionary gives us the following definition:

Main Entry: ex·pand
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English expaunden, from Latin expandere, from ex- + pandere to spread 
Date: 15th century
transitive senses
1 : to open up : UNFOLD
2 : to increase the extent, number, volume, or scope of : ENLARGE

I believe that all will agree with me that the second definition pretty well sums up what science means when it says that the universe is expanding. Hence, they are saying that it is increasing in volume. They’re saying that is has expanded and continues to do so.

But one has to ask the question; what is the universe expanding into? We run into a problem here because everything we know of that expands does so into something else. Take for example a balloon. Until a great volume of liquid or gas is introduced into the balloon it is just a piece of rubber. When gas or liquid is introduced into the balloon the balloon expands to accommodate the pressure. The pressure on the inside causes the skin to expand into the medium that surrounds the balloon. And that only happens because there is enough room for the balloon to expand and there is a viable medium outside. There is only one explanation for what the universe is expanding into if it is indeed expanding. It could only be expanding into eternity; a timeless dimension. I suspect that some scientists have come to the correct conclusion on this but they will never voluntarily express their thoughts because it would cause them to admit that there is someone greater than the universe and everything that was created. But even though the universe does sit in and is surrounded by eternity, it is not expanding, but is a fixed size and has some peculiar properties as we will now see.

The Biblical Perspective:

The Biblical perspective of the creation of the universe is quite simple and concrete to those who are earnestly searching for the truth. But before we get into any Biblical jargon, let’s look at some of the words that science itself chooses in its syntax. First, we have the word “universe,” itself. First, we have the word (prefix) UNI, which denotes a singular effect; (example; unicycle = one wheel). Second is the word VERSE, which is a spoken word. Put together they spell UNIVERSE, or “a single spoken sentence.” Gee, where do we see that in the Bible?

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1

So we can see that the very word that sciences use to describe all that we can sense is actually a condemnation of their belief system. It befuddles me how so many self-ascribed intellectuals can miss such an obvious fact.

As mentioned above, science uses the word “created,” as in “when the universe was created by the Big Bang,” thus ascribing an intelligent act to an impersonal action of fantasy. But, those who trust God know that everything created has to have a creator and nothing can exist without one. Again, we see the “single spoken sentence.”

What The Bible Says:

The Bible says many things about how God created the Universe. Let’s look at what He says through the Prophets and others about what He did:

He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea. Job 9:8

He wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent Psalm 104:2

By wisdom the LORD laid the earth’s foundations, by understanding he set the heavens in place. Proverbs 3:19

All the stars of the heavens will be dissolved and the sky rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves from the vine, like shriveled figs from the fig tree. Isaiah 34:4

He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in. Isaiah 40:22

This is what God the LORD says, he who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and all that comes out of it, who gives breath to its people, and life to those who walk on it… Isaiah 42:5

“This is what the LORD says–your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself… Isaiah 42:44

It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts. Isaiah 45:12

that you forget the LORD your Maker, who stretched out the heavens and laid the foundations of the earth… Isaiah 51:13

But God made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom and stretched out the heavens by his understanding. Jeremiah 10:12

“He made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom and stretched out the heavens by his understanding. Jeremiah 51:15

This is the word of the LORD concerning Israel. The LORD, who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of the earth, and who forms the spirit of man within him. Zechariah 12:1

It’s interesting to note that God describes the universe as a fabric that has been stretched out. As seen in the scripture above; Isaiah 40:22, God says that he stretched out the heavens like a canopy or a tent to live in. Again we have the universe described as a fabric. Furthermore, it is interesting that when scientists talk about space, they describe it as a fabric; as in the term, “the very fabric of space and time.” Perhaps they know something they’re not telling us. The Hebrew word stretched out is “natah {naw-taw’},” and it is used in a variety of places in the Bible.

If we do a word comparison with other scriptures where the Bible uses the same word stretch we see some interesting things. The same word is used to describe when Moses stretched out his arm with the staff and the Red Sea separated and became as dry land in order to allow the Israelites to escape from Pharaoh. Every time that Moses stretched out his arm in Exodus the word, “natah,” is used. It’s a word connoted with authority and power, as well as faith. The same word is used for instance, in Genesis 33:19 when Jacob “spread out,” his tents. So in essence, when we see the word used in Isaiah, and since it is the same word, we can rightly judge that it means that God spread forth his arm in an authoritative manner and stretched the fabric of the universe into what we see it as today. He created one tent, one place of habitation in the vast sea of eternity for His creation to abide. 

Taking the above into account, we have to believe that the universe isn’t expanding. There is nothing to expand into because it is a tent, or a garment if you will, that has been completed. Like the Bible says in Genesis, He saw what He did, and He said it was good, or as we would say it, it was complete.

Now by looking at the scriptures above, we can again ascertain that the heavens are a fabric. In Isaiah 34:4 we are told by Isaiah that he saw something that was truly mind-boggling. He saw the sky roll up like a scroll! Now in Isaiah’s time, there were two things that scrolls were made from; animal skins and papyrus. They didn’t have bound books like we have today. A scroll was one sheet of material that varied in width and could be from inches long to many feet long. There were two rollers on each end and the material was rolled on the rolls from the ends toward the center.


When a person in that day wanted to read a long scroll they would lay it on a table, open it a bit then roll the rollers until they came to the place where they wanted to read. There were also scrolls of proclamation that were much shorter. You’ve probably seen them in movies that relate to Biblical times, or perhaps movies relating to any time up until the 1800’s. These scrolls also had a rod affixed to each end. When a proclamation was made, or perhaps a very short scroll was to be read, the reader would hold one end in his left hand and would stretch forth his right hand to open the scroll. So, we can assume that the heavens were stretched forth like a scroll because the action of stretching is the same in the Hebrew vernacular. This would well back up what Isaiah says when he says that the heavens (sky) would be rolled up like a scroll. 

Aren’t the galaxies billions of light years away and doesn’t that prove an ancient expanding universe?

Well, that is what science would have you and I believe. Science measures such distances in what is called light years. That is the speed at which light travels in one year. Light travels at 186,000 miles per second. It takes the light from the sun, which is 93 million miles away, about 8 minutes to reach our Earth. These vast distances can only be measured accurately up to a certain point, and everything past that point is pure conjecture. This is better explained on another page on this website that can be reached by clicking here

There are many in the Christian community who are confused about the size and age of the Universe. We live in a world where so many are coming at us from so many sides with lies and deceit that many in our number have listened and believed the lies. It saddens me when I hear a Christian say that the Earth has to be billions of years old and that the universe is tens of billions of years old. Had these people read their scripture clearly and believed the Bible as the word of God they would not be so deceived.

When I think of Christians or anyone else for that matter, who try to meld Biblical truth with worldly thought it reminds me of building a radio. There is a lot involved in building a radio. All of the resistors, diodes, and other electrical components have to be soldered in their correct positions. Then the radio has to be tuned to certain frequencies in order for the whole radio to work. The people mentioned above have built the radio, but they didn’t follow the instructions correctly. They put diodes where resistors should be and have left transistors out, thinking that they don’t need them. So what you have in the end is a wonderful looking radio that is worthless. The Bible is a manual that has to be followed to the letter and it can’t be melded with worldly things. The results are ideas and thoughts that might look good but are useless.

I have to admit that I pondered an old Earth and theistic evolution theories for a short time but then I was shown a scripture that cemented my belief in a recent creation and young Earth and Universe. That scripture is found in 2 Peter and reads:

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 2 Peter 3:5

The first part of that scripture is plain and simple. It states that when God created the universe, he created it with the appearance of being old. During the period of one twenty four hour day, he made the universe look billions of years old. And as Peter says at the beginning of the sentence, those who perpetuate evolution as a fact really know the truth, but they deliberately don’t tell you and I the truth. 

Now, I’ve included the second part of that scripture for a reason also. Basically, it says that the earth was created with oceans and continents. The evolutionists say that first there was a molten land mass and that over millions of years water accumulated to form oceans, lakes, and rivers. So you see, God in His infinite wisdom and knowledge knew that someday men would come along who would distort the truth, and He let us know the truth through the writings of His prophets and apostles. 

Where Is The Universe Expanding From?

Over the years I have really learned to listen carefully to people when they talk. You can tell a lot about people by listening to them talk. If you listen really carefully, you can even tell if what they are saying is true or not, depending on the words that they say and the verbal punctuation that they put in their sentences. For instance, you can ask a person, “how are you doing” and it can be a legitimate question asked out of concern for another human being. However, if you were to ask the same question, “how are you doing,” putting the emphasis on the word “you” and adding a demeaning flair to the word and you can turn the nice question into a very hostile question. Ah, the complicated human language system.

In the same manner, if you don’t listen carefully to a speech or a news broadcast, there are many things that can be missed. I say that in order to open into something that I heard on a documentary on a local access channel here in Sacramento recently. The woman who was giving the lesson was talking about the universe, and how it is supposedly expanding. The women said something that really made my ears perk up. She said that a man named Hubble (for whom the space telescope is named after) had made some equations several years ago where he proved Hubble’s Law. In this law, (the woman stated) Hubble proved that all of the Galaxies in the universe are moving away from the Earth. By this, I surmise that she meant that the galaxies are moving away from the Earth’s position in the cosmos.

Now, if this is true, we have to look at one very important implication to this statement. We will look at a couple of illustrations to examine this statement. We will look at an exploding paint bag and a light bulb.

Let us hang a large baggie of paint in the center of a room. In that bag, we will insert a small explosive called an M-80, which is a pretty big fire-cracker. We will light a long fuse and leave the room. After a very large explosion we enter the room and notice that the firecracker has caused a mess, but the mess is just about everywhere in the room. Humor me for a second, and let us pretend that the firecracker was the big bang and that the paint was all the matter in the universe. So, we see that the big bang threw out all the matter and it is dispersed everywhere (although chaotically) throughout the universe. There was, however, one center of focus in the center of the universe from where this all began.

For a less messy example, let us look at a light bulb. When electricity is introduced to the bulb it produces light. Now, the rays of light that come from the bulb light up the room in various degrees. The room that is lit is lit from one focal point though, the bulb. It is the center of all the light that is being introduced into the room.

If you are wondering where I am going with all of this I will tell you. If you believe in a “big bang,” which I personally do not, you have to believe that there had to be someplace where it occurred. There had to be a point where it all is expanding from. The lady in the documentary said that Hubble discovered (and science calls it a law) that all the galaxies seem to be moving away from the area that Earth inhabits in space. If all of that is true, and Hubble was right, then Earth is the center of the Universe.

Now, if Earth is the center of the Universe, what are the spiritual implications of that. The Christian Church has held the belief that Earth is the center of the universe ever since its birth two thousand years ago. Since the universe was created by God that way in the Big Creation, then it must be a very special place. Since man is the highest form of intelligence on Earth, then he must be a very special form of creation.

It is my opinion that those scientists who are in a high position really know the truth. Hubble’s’ discovery and law really prove that Earth is the center of the universe, but many in science don’t want us to know that. They don’t want us to know that because it would like I mentioned in the prior paragraph, prove that man and Earth are special and unique. The Earth being center of the universe would prove that the Lord is God, and many in power and in science don’t want that to come out.

I realize that there are those who read this article who will attack my lack of credentials. They will say that since I don’t have a diploma hanging on my wall from some liberal institution of learning that I don’t know what I am talking about. My answer to that is this. While having a diploma hanging on a wall might enable a person to calculate the value of Pi to the hundredth degree, or to accelerate an atom until it splits into a thousand tiny fragments it still doesn’t tell me that such a person has common sense or any sort of morality. Certainly when those in the scientific community go around telling us that we descended from apes and that everything that we see happened in one cosmic accident followed by millions of smaller accidents, they certainly lack any sort of common sense. When they perpetuate it as a religion to deceive the youth of America and the world, it certainly lacks morality. And finally, to delude oneself into believing one’s one lie just so that you don’t have to believe the truth and be accountable to a higher authority, well, that lacks description.

In closing, remember that those who teach such things are, as the scripture says, “deliberately ignorant,” meaning that they deliberately deny the truth, knowing full well the consequences of such actions. And in closing we read the words of the Apostle Paul in his second letter to Timothy, where he describes such people:

But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them. 2 Timothy 3:1-5

The Measurement Of
Stellar Distances

David Ben Ya’akov

© 2000 David Ben Ya’akov


A Galaxy Less Far, Far Away

Found In The Sacramento Bee

December 01, 2000


LIVERMORE – Astrophysicists stripped a galaxy near the Big Dipper of “most distant object known” status when it was discovered it was 9.8 billion light years away instead of 12.5 billion light years

With the estimate of distance of 12.5 billion light years for STIS 123627+621755 no longer correct, the scientists said the new title holder for the most distant object known belongs to a quasar, an active black hold 12.4 billion light years from Earth.

“At Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, we have been at the forefront of distant galaxy searches for many years, and we realize that sometimes a difficult measurement may turn out to be in error,” said astrophysicist Wil Van Breugel. “We hope that our own record of a galaxy, which emits powerful radio waves at a distance of 12.3 billion light years, will stand the test of time.”

Van Breugel and fellow astrophysicist Wim De Vries, with colleagues from several universities and observatories, said they were able to determine that the initial distance estimate made by a team of State University of New York at Stony Brook astronomers was incorrect. Their findings were published in Thursday’s issue of Nature.


I would like to address the article above in my own words and then in the words of a person that I greatly admire, named Dr. Kent Hovind.

I have proven in other articles that contemporary science, especially where evolution is concerned, and in some instances, astronomy, is a religion, plainly put, a faith. The priests of the evolution faith constantly have new revelations about their religion and the foundation that it is built on. When one fossil is disproved, another discovery is pulled from the bag of magic tricks to fool an unsuspecting public. Stated plainly, evolution is constantly evolving to suit the need of its creator and its priests.

Hence, we have the article above. Put simply, the article states that party one has found out that party two’s measurement to a foreign celestial body is not adequate. Party one has remeasured and found it to be different. So we can see that there is discontent in the ranks of the evolution and astrophysics faith. Since astrophysics is giving the astronomical time figures, they are giving those vast figures as a time foundation for evolution. Remember, without vast periods of time, evolution is dead.

Now let’s look at the difference that the scientists found in the distance to the celestial body mentioned in the article. Party two said that by their measurements, the celestial body was 12.5 billion light years distant. The revised measurement by party one is 9.8 billion years. That is a difference of 2.7 billion years. Now, this is not just a trivial difference, if the speed of light is constant, it an enormous distance. They try to make it look like a trivial matter, but a mistake in measurement that large is embarrassing, to say the least. You definitely don’t want these guys figuring your taxes or building a house for you with their kind of reasoning.

Now, before I put Dr. Hovind’s material on this page, I would like to ask one question of you. Do you want to adhere to modern science, which changes from day to day? Do you want to listen to dribble from men who reinvent their religion to suit their needs or agendas? Or, do you want to believe a loving creator, whose own word describes him thusly: “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever.” Now, to Dr. Hovind:

General Science Questions and Answers

If the earth is only 6,000 years old, how do we see stars billions of light years away?triangulation

See This in Seminar Slideshow Online:
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
Hear this on Seminar on Audio Online:
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4

A:    This is one of the most commonly asked questions and deserves an honest answer. Below is first a short answer than a more thorough answer. There are three things we need to consider when answering the starlight question.

1.  Scientists cannot measure distances beyond 100 light years accurately.

2.  No one knows what light is or that it always travels the same speed throughout all time, space and matter.

3.  The creation was finished or mature when God made it. Adam was full-grown, the trees had fruit on them, the starlight was visible, etc.

Let me elaborate on these 3 points.

First, no one can measure star distance accurately. The farthest accurate distance man can measure is 20 light years (some textbooks say up to 100), not several billion light years. Man measures star distances using parallax trigonometry. By choosing two measurable observation points and making an imaginary triangle to a third point, and using simple trigonometry, man calculates the distance to the third point. The most distant observation points available are the positions of the earth in solar orbit six months apart, say June and December. This would be a base for our imaginary triangle of 186,000,000 miles or 16 light minutes. There are 525,948 minutes in a year. Even if the nearest star were only one light year away (and it isn’t), the angle at the third point measures .017 degrees. In simpler terms, a triangle like this would be the same angle two surveyors would see if they were standing sixteen inches apart and focusing on a third point 8.24 miles away. If they stayed 16 inches apart and focused on a dot 824 miles away, they would have the same angle as an astronomer measuring a point 100 light years away. A point 5 million years away is impossible to figure with trigonometry. The stars may be that far away but modern man has no way of measuring those great distances. No one can state definitively the distance to the stars. The stars may indeed be billions of light years away, but man cannot measure those distances.

Several other methods such as luminosity and redshift are employed to try to guess at greater distances but all such methods have serious problems and assumptions involved. For a more complex and slightly different answer to the starlight question from a Christian perspective, see the book Starlight and Time by Russell Humphrey available from

Second, the speed of light may not be a constant. It does vary in different media (hence the rainbow effect of light going through a prism) and may vary in different places in space. The entire idea behind the black hole theory is that light can be attracted by gravity and be unable to escape the great pull of these imaginary black holes. No one knows what light is, let alone that its velocity has been the same all through time and space. Since atomic clocks use the wavelength of the Cesium 133 atom as a standard of time, if the speed of light is decaying, the clock would be changing at the same rate and therefore not be noticed.

Third, the creation account states that God made the light before He made the sun, moon, or stars. The rest of creation was mature, so starlight was probably mature at creation as well. I would ask the question, How old was Adam when God made him? Obviously, he was zero years old. But how old did he look? He was a full-grown man. The trees were full-grown with fruit on them the first day they were made. The creation had to be that way; it would not work otherwise. Stars and their light were made at the same time. The God that I worship is not limited to anything involving time, space or matter.

Finally, I would also like to point out that the evolutionists have no answer to the basic questions like; Where did the original matter space and energy come from for the stars? I suspect God built the universe so we would say “Wow!” When we see the stars we should be reminded of the glory of God, not evolution. See Psalms 8.



In Summary, we see that there are a lot more questions than there are answers. Since measurements over 100 light years is virtually impossible, there is no way that we can measure the distance to most stars and far galaxies. Since the measurements can’t be reliably made, the distances that science gives us is pure conjecture, yet it is promoted to be the gospel truth. Again we have another lie propagated to promote the religion of evolution.

It is my hope that those reading this will realize that science doesn’t always have our best intentions in mind. Evolutionists won’t admit it, but they have been involved in a religious war for at least two hundred years. They have been trying to promote humanism through their lies and deceit for that period of time.

Let me emphasize that there are basically two types of evolutionists. Just like in a typical religion, there is a priestly hierarchy, and there a body of parishioners. The priests of the Evolution religion are the scientists and researchers who deliberately fabricate lies and supposed evidence. They will do whatever they have to do to get new adherents and to keep the ones that they already have. The parishioners are those outside the scientific realm. These are the laymen and students who hear the preaching by the Evolution priests. They have a false trust that the priests are learned men and that they preach the truth. Thus they believe every word that comes from the mouth of the priest.

Now what I have written in the paragraph above might make it sound like the parishioners are victims of the priests. I admit that there are probably some who have never heard alternatives to evolution and because of that, they don’t know the truth. They have been fed the garbage in school and through the media for so long that there is no other truth for them. That sort of person is a minority. The majority know that there is an alternative religion to evolution. That majority refuses to acknowledge the truth because as the Bible puts it:

For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 2 Timothy 4: 3-4

Then the question arises, why would people do such a thing? Well, the Bible explains that too:

But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God — having a form of godliness but denying its power. 2 Timothy 3: 1-5

The first scripture tells us simply that people don’t want to hear the truth anymore. When combined with the second scripture, the following can be ascertained:

People are tired of hearing about God. They don’t want to be accountable to Him and they don’t want to live by rules of morality and decency. They are conceited lovers of themselves and they don’t want to be concerned with loving others. So, to drown out the noise of religion that convicts what little morality they have left, they blast the trumpet of evolution. They’ll listen to any teacher that preaches that they have no accountability. They want to be known as descendants of animals so that they can act like them, devoid of morality. Isn’t it called anarchy when people run wild without laws? Then why is it deemed okay when the souls of people run wild without morality or religious conviction?

Two quotes come to mind. The first is by an avid evolutionist named Adolph Hitler. He said: “if you repeat a lie long enough, you can get people to believe it.” The second quote comes from an anonymous source: “the longer people believe that they are descended from apes, the more they start to act like them.” We can see where Hitler and his lack of Christian ethics got Germany and the world of that time. We too can personally see that by the actions of people today, that they act like animals and saying that they act like apes is perhaps an insult to the simian order.

Well, I have come to the end of my little discourse. I sincerely hope that if you are considering the belief in evolution you change your mind. Ask a lot of questions and seek the truth. Those are two things that the priests of evolution fear because they know that their religion falters where truth is concerned. IF you are an evolutionist lay person I sincerely hope that this page has caused you to question what you believe. You know, you probably think that I am a person who never asked questions about Christianity or the Bible. I asked a lot of questions, and 99 percent of them have been answered in God’s word or by His Holy Spirit, and I know that it is the truth. If you are an evolutionist priest and think that you have all of the answers, then let me assure you that you don’t. I sincerely hope and pray that God will reveal the truth to you and that you will be honest enough with yourself to examine the truth. Remember that God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble. Jesus still loves you and wishes you to come to repentance. God bless everyone, wherever they stand.

David Ben Ya’akov


Intelligent Design is Not Very Intelligent


David Ruffino

Copyright 2014 David Ben Ya’akov / The Delusion Resistance.


Back in the early 1980’s the whole of Christendom heralded the introduction of Intelligent Design Theory. Back in that day, Intelligent Design was the Biblical answer to the Theory of Evolution. Evolution taught, and still teaches, that life on Earth came about by accident when a lightning bolt struck a puddle of primordial goo which allowed amino acids to come together to make proteins which in turn (miraculously) became single-celled animals. Anyone with any sort of unbiased thought process realized that this was a far-fetched theory that bordered on some sort of Science Fiction Religion that people actually believed. I’ve written articles about Evolution actually being a religion because the process possesses all of the articles of a faith. In essence, Evolution is a secular faith that has been established to rival the Judeo/Christian Ethic, not unlike Monopoly Money that its adherents try to pass off as valid currency.

So when Intelligent Design came on the scene it was seen as a common sense response to Evolution. It was postulated that life and creation itself is just too complicated to have happened by chance, no matter how much time was ascribed to the process. Since such wondrous complexity existed there had to be a designer. The proponents of Intelligent Design used the complexity of DNA Code to justify that since there was a code, there has to be a code writer and complexity demands a creator. Christianity saw this creator to be Yahweh, the God of the Bible, and they were correct in this assertion. 

There was one problem that arose that came upon Intelligent Design’s proponents that they probably never saw coming. A few of us saw the problem with Intelligent Design, but like so many fads that Christians tend to take on unswerving, people were not convinced that a potential problem existed. The problem that they never saw coming is that the mounting evidence against Evolution was not only noticed by people of faith, but it was also noticed by those who were strong in the Evolution faith. Now, when a problem comes up with a theory there are two things that a scientist can do. Ethically, they can throw out the problem theory and start over again. If they take the unethical road, they will tend to come up with other explanations to try to justify their faulty theory. 

One has to understand that for many years the subject of UFOs, aliens, and other unexplained things were scoffed at by serious scientists. Most men of learning thought such things to be the fantasy of imagination or what they considered the lunacy of the supernatural. To believe in such things was akin to believing in a Creator God who made all things. It can be understood why they would ascribe such things to the impossible. Let’s face it, if you believe in the unseen you have to entertain the thought that an unseen God exists. If you come to that notion you have to come to the conclusion that there is good and evil and that sin might exist; and, that a penalty for sin might exist. In essence, there has to be accountability, and secular men cannot accept accountability to the Judge of The Universe.

As mentioned above, over the years men who honestly seek the truth know that there isn’t enough time for Darwinian Evolution to occur, and there is a big problem with genetic mutations being harmful and/or deadly to the creature that experiences the mutation. They know that there is a 99 percent chance that such mutations will not work, leaving 1 out of 99 mutations to actually work and that a scant 4 billion years could not account for Evolution, even if one mutation occurred each day from the beginning of time. Another thing that stymied scientists is that if mutations occurred throughout history to make the variety of species that we see today to be here, the process of evolutionary macro-evolution has ceased and has never been observed through the history of mankind. 

Toward the end of the last century, there were great advances in DNA manipulation. Around the turn of the century, we were introduced to Dolly the cloned sheep, human ears that were grown on the backs of mice and reports that the DNA of animals and plants had been mixed. Scientists started to realize that if mankind could make such strides in DNA science, perhaps a civilization that is much older would have made the same strides in antiquity and could have advanced enough to spread DNA and creatures throughout the universe. Of course, this meant that scientists had to start believing that life could exist outside of the sphere of Earth and they had to start wondering if the UFO reports that they had scoffed at for years might actually be true sightings of craft from other planets, star systems and/or galaxies. 

I’m sure that in a closed room somewhere one or more scientists came to the conclusion that the failure of Darwinian Evolution had their backs up against the wall. The could either admit that they were wrong and that perhaps Religion was the answer, or they could come up with another way for life to have come to earth; Panspermia was born. Sure, there wasn’t enough time for Darwin’s Evolution to occur on earth, but the process could be accelerated if more advanced beings brought life to earth and gave it a kick-start. It would also be beneficial to Evolution if those same beings would come back from time to time to bring more advances and complexity to the evolutionary process. Whereas before Christians had ascribed Intelligent Design to Creation by Yahweh, it was now viable for scientists to hijack Intelligent Design and agree that yes, there were creators, but the creators were only aliens that were far more advanced with a history that reached perhaps millions of years farther back into antiquity. The aliens were now the gods and science say that we are their children. Now science could start to scrap much of Darwinian Evolution and use alien evolution as their modus operandi. No one had ever observed Darwinian Evolution, but millions of people had seen UFOs and millions claimed to be abducted by these aliens. Oh, and guess what, these aliens adopted the notion that they were the creators and that they did just what the scientists had postulated. 

As I wrote in another article, there was a problem in the Christian Community already where Intelligent Design was concerned. Some mistakingly believed that it was okay to use Intelligent Design to verify the Gap Theory and the Day-Age Theory. In this, they believed that Yahweh used epochs of perhaps billions of years to make the world and all that is in it. They ignored that Yahweh stated that He did everything in six literal days. They also made another mistake in that Scripture is clear that sin and death entered the world because of Adam and Chava. If Yahweh used billions of years and the dying out of species then there was death on the earth before sin and death actually existed. Also, the days of Creation don’t mesh with the evolutionary model. For example, the plants were made a day or two before the sun, moon, and stars. Photosynthesis could not have occurred without the sun, nor could pollination occur without the pollinating animals which were created a day or two after the plants. Evolution says that first there was earth than there was water. Genesis says that there was water and then land came forth from the water. There were too many problems. 

I see Intelligent Design as a deliberate tool of the enemy to do two things. First, it is a solution for the evolutionists to explain their warped theories of existence. Second, it is being used as a tool to attempt to meld Creationism and Evolution. It is a melding that will never work for believers as it waters down scripture to accommodate a dualistic belief to appease both camps. Of course, this only works to pervert believers because scientists would never believe in anything that might resemble having to do with Yahweh. 

It is imperative for believers who seek Yahweh’s truth about the matter of Creation, not to adhere to or entertain Intelligent Design. It was an idea that was never very good and it has been perverted in order to cheapen Creation. We are told repeatedly in Scripture not to entertain the doctrines of this world. We are to think on Scripture only. We are told not to change Scripture, every, and that people who do such things are in store for some bad things in eternity. Believing in Intelligent Design is serving two masters, which we are strictly told not to do. We aren’t supposed to try to convince the world of Yahweh’s existence using their devices, but by using Scripture and living Holy lives. It is my hope that all true believers will heed His warnings, obey His Will and prosper through His blessings.

Intelligent Design Theory
And Its Implications

By David Ben Ya’akov

© 2000 David Ben Yakov / Delusion Resistance


On April 08, 2001 an article was run in the Sacramento Bee. It was originally published in the New York Times and authored by James Glanz. In the article, the discussion was made about a victory over Creationism because evolution was again allowed to be taught in the Kansas school system. It had been abolished for a few months prior to that. The article went on to explain that a new enemy was arising against evolution; called Intelligent Design. What is this “Intelligent Design,” and what are it’s implications to the Creation Science community and to Gods Holy Word? Let’s look below to see.

Evolutionists have never recognized Creation Science adherents because they claim that most of us don’t have the education to be credible. In other words, if you don’t have a paper hanging on the wall giving you accreditation from an evolution teaching college then you aren’t smart. Well, if you’re born in a bagel shop, does that make you a bagel? No, sure it doesn’t and it is absurd to think so. In the same way, saying that just because you attended all of the classes that the evolutionary “status quo” demands do not make you a scientist. But the scientific “double standard club” doesn’t see it that way. 

What is nice to hear is that the evolutionists are actually saying that something concerns them and that they might be in for a fight. Actually, they have been fighting, and in many cases, they have been losing the fight, but like every war, there are many battles to wage and the enemy is entrenched in heavy fortifications. Actually, Christians have let them advance to where they are today. It seems like after the Scopes Monkey Trial, Christians just threw in the towel and gave up. We should have been fighting evolution all of the way, but because of inaction on our part, we have been outflanked. 

The article read on the positive side, but it really has some warnings that can be seen if you look hard enough. The thing that most concerns me is that it is said that those who are proponents of “intelligent design,” according to the article, don’t take the Bible literally. If that is the case, and those people don’t take the Bible literally, then we run into a whole bunch of problems. Either you believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, or you don’t. Anything in the middle is a lukewarm attitude that the Bible strictly warns about.

These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm neither hot nor cold, I am about to spit you out of my mouth. Revelation 3: 15-16

I like to equate a lukewarm attitude to a car that is started and is just kept idling for hours on end. It does nothing but waste gas and it is not very good for the engine either. Just like the car, a person who is lukewarm doesn’t do very much for himself or society. It’s like waking up and sitting at your kitchen table all day and doing nothing else. It’s not very healthy and you accomplish nothing.

In the same way, those who want to pick and choose bits and pieces from the Bible get nothing accomplished. The “intelligent design” people, especially the ones who don’t take the Bible literally are only wasting everyone’s time. How do they do this? Let’s see:

  1. They don’t believe that God created everything in a literal 6 days. The six-day creation is the foundation that the whole Bible stands on. God is a mighty God and the fact that he made all that we see in 6 days proves His majesty and might. If it took Him billions of years to build then it immensely lessens that majesty. To say that He took billions of years only makes Him look like the impotent god of evolution who took that long through many mistakes, dead ends and botched mutations to cause the rise of man from a single-celled ancestor or so they say. 
  2. If you can’t take the first few chapters of Genesis literally, then what about the rest of the book. If you question the creation, then what’s to stop you from questioning the fall of mankind and Noah’s great flood. If mankind never fell, why is there a need for salvation through Jesus? If you don’t believe in the Bible literally, then just shelve it because, without the foundation, the building falls.
  3. If Genesis is not taken literally, then what about the other 4 books that Moses wrote? Then perhaps the Law of Moses shouldn’t be taken literally and you can throw out the Ten Commandments. Those commandments are the foundation that all of our laws stand on. Then you will have to disregard the law and utter chaos will prevail.
  4. Finally (and for sake of time I omit much) what about words of Jesus himself spoke several times of the book of Genesis, and even verified that God created everything in 6 literal days. Now, let me say that Jesus didn’t mention it in those words, but he talked about the Sabbath (taken as a day of rest) that is to be taken every week. The Sabbath was commanded by God for the Jews to observe because as God said, “

“Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. Exodus 20:8-11. 

Again, just shelve your Bibles if you believe that Jesus’ words are not correct. And you know what else, if we were to observe the Sabbath in the time frame that some of the “Intelligent Design” people figure it, then I declare tomorrow the Sabbath and I will take a billion years off from work. Sorry boss, but some guys with “scientific credentials” said that’s the way it is, and we all know that science is always right, isn’t it?

Many “intelligent design” people tend to lean toward the hypothesis that life on Earth has evolved with the help of God, let’s look at how evolution and the Creation Story differ. The table below illustrates those differences.


Contradictions in Order Between the Biblical View and Secular (Intelligent Design) View of Creation 
Biblical View Secular or Intelligent Design View
Matter created by God in The Beginning Matter existed in the beginning
Earth before sun and stars Sun and stars before the earth
Oceans before the land Land before the oceans
Light before the sun Sun, earth’s first light
The atmosphere between two layers of water Atmosphere above a water layer
Land plants were first life forms created. Marine organisms, first forms of life
Fruit trees before fish Fish before fruit trees
Fish before insects Insects before fish
Land vegetation before the sun Sun before land plants
Marine mammals before land animals Land mammals before marine mammals
Birds before land reptiles Reptiles before birds
Man, the cause of death Death, necessary antecedent of man


It is very clear to see from the table above that there is absolutely no similarity between the two series of events. I firmly believe that God, in His infinite wisdom deliberately created His creation the way He did to confound anyone who tries to turn His word around to suit their own needs. The Intelligent Design crowd has not one leg to stand on when they claim that God worked through evolution.

What is proposed in the article isn’t a prophecy of a battle against evolution. Having read between the lines one can see that it’s an attempt to water down further, the authority of the Bible as the infallible word of God. The article tells the common man that there are some scientists “with credentials” who believe that the Earth was created, but that God was impotent and couldn’t do it in 6 literal days. Once the newspaper tells you that there are “credible” men out there finding fault in the Bible you have trouble. Another thing is that the article seems to suggest that those who believe in a literal 6-day creation are not credible. Yes, folks, they’re saying that if you take the Bible literally, you are a moron. Oh, and they also say that since “Intelligent Design” is “sophisticated,” we are lacking sophistication too.

In addition, I don’t want the readers to be ignorant as to the real intent of the evolutionists where Intelligent Design is concerned. The article makes them out to be frightened of the new theory. In all actuality, they are very pleased to see it emerge. Intelligent design will only accomplish good things for evolution. By the changing of the meaning of scripture (strictly warned against in the Word) they will attempt to bring more believers into the evolution camp. 

This is not a new tactic and has been tried (many times with success) in the attempt to water down the gospel and the intentions of a loving and caring Heavenly Father. Examples can be found in many places of our society. Easter is really a disguised name for the goddess Ishtar, a Sumero-Babylonian goddess of fertility. Her festival was held around the same time that the Christians celebrated the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. The people of that time could have called it Resurrection Day or something of the like, but to make the holiday more attractive to the unbelievers (probably in an earnest attempt at conversion) the church called the holiday Easter. Did you ever wonder what rabbits and eggs have to do with Jesus’ rising from the dead? The answer is nothing. They are symbols of fertility, associated with Ishtar. Ask any kid around Easter about it’s meaning and they will tell you about Easter eggs and rabbits. See what happens when the Christianity melds with the world, the true religious meaning always loses out. The same thing can be said for Christmas and trees, Yule logs, mistletoe and Santa Claus. Intelligent design does the same thing to the Creation event, watering it down and making it less glorious. And what about the latest trend of calling Halloween a holiday. There is nothing HOLY about Halloween, it’s purely satanic, just like Intelligent Design.

One of the favorite analogies that I like to use about the watering down of Christianity or our core beliefs, is one that deals with rat poison. But before we move on to that, let’s look at strategies. While it’s fine to see something for what it is, it is even more advantageous to know why something is the way it is. For the most part, Bible-believing Spirit Filled Christians have their acts together when it comes to knowing what they believe. We study our Bibles and with the help of the Holy Spirit, we can discern Biblical truth from harmful heresy. Satan knows that we know our scripture too, so he knows that it’s foolish to make a frontal attack because we will fight him and run to Jesus every time. So what does he do? He mixes in a little lie with a lot of truth. The same thing is done with rat poison. Rats are pretty intelligent rodents and cannot be easily fooled. That’s why we get the phrase, “looking for a better mouse (rat) trap.” They seem to have a sixth sense about danger. So, the makers of rat poison formulate their bait to be 99 percent good food, and 1 percent poison. The rat fills up on the bait and he is full before he notices that something is wrong. But the rat doesn’t equate the problem with the food and makes return trips back to the bait. The rat doesn’t die right away either. His death is slow and agonizing as the poison thins his blood so much that he starts to bleed internally and dies of massive hemorrhages.

Now I’ve been writing articles on the internet for quite some time now, and I know that someone is going to read this text and think that I’m comparing my fellow Christians to rats. That’s not the case at all. I’m merely trying to point out; what better analogy could be used for the way that some are trying to water down a literal creation in the Bible, with one where God supposedly used eons of time and countless mutations (mistakes) to get His creation to a perfect condition. Genesis is the foundation of the Bible, where the first couple sinned, and where God promised a redeemer for mankind. If the foundation is brought into doubt, then the whole house is in peril of falling to the ground. Since evolution hasn’t worked to dissuade the informed believer from doubting the Creation event, the next thing to do is to mix in the poison of Intelligent Design. This is especially effectual when you get some people who purport to be Scientists who believe the Bible to press the issue. When this happens, those scientists (possibly believers) fall into the same camp as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons and others who interpret the Bible to fit their own needs.

Now, what they fail to understand, because they are perishing, is that the Bible really can’t be understood unless God gives a person the ability to understand it. That ability comes when a person is filled with the Holy Spirit, who teaches us the ways of God. For people who are unregenerate, the Bible is like a code that is sent but is not decoded. There are words there for them to see, and sentences for them to read, but the real meaning cannot be deduced by them because they are spiritually blind. That is why so many people say that the Bible contradicts itself because they can’t decode it.

And even if our gospel (read that, Bible) is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. II Corinthians 4:3

So there we have it, folks, according to the press and the scientific community, we who believe in God, and in the literal meaning of His Word are unsophisticated morons. But I’ll tell you what. I would rather be a fool for Jesus and know the truth about many things that matter, then to have to convince myself (were I a scientist) through lies and deceit that I (a person with scientific credentials) might be right. Also, when those people finally come to their end of days here on earth, they should know that “earthly credentials” aren’t accepted and that the only lambskin that you need is to have your name inscribed in the Lamb’s Book Of Life.

David Ben Ya’akov

Questions For Evolutionists


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.  The following questions were distributed to the 750-plus people who attended my debate at Winona State University in Winona, Minnesota, on January 9, 1993.  (The videotaped debate is #6, $9.95.)  Questions added since the debate remarked with an asterisk (*).


    • 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 chances 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 of the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true?  
    • When, where, why, and how did:

      • Single-celled plants become multicelled? (Where are  the two and three-celled intermediates?)
      • Single-celled animals evolve?
      • Fish change to amphibians?
      • Amphibians change to reptiles?
      • Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive organs, heart, the method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are
        all very different)
      • How did the intermediate forms live?


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

      • Whales evolve?
      • Seahorses evolve?
      • Bats evolve?
      • Eyes evolve?
      • Ears evolve?
      • Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve?


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

      • 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.)?
      • The drive to reproduce or the ability to reproduce?
      • The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them, the throat, or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs?
      • DNA or RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts?
      • The termite or the flagella in its intestines that actually digest the cellulose?
      • The plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants?
      • The bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or muscles to move the bones?
      • The nervous system, repair system, or hormone system?
      • The immune system or the need for it?


  • There are many thousands of examples of symbiosis that defy an evolutionary explanation. Why must we teach students that evolution is the only explanation for these relationships?  
  • How would evolution explain mimicry? Did the plants and animals develop mimicry by chance, by their intelligent choice, or by design?  
  • When, where, why, and how did man evolve feelings? Love, mercy, guilt, etc. would never evolve in the theory of evolution.  
  • *How did photosynthesis evolve?  
  • *How did thought evolve?  
  • *How did flowering plants evolve, and from that?  
  • *What kind of evolutionist are you? Why are you not one of the other eight or ten kinds?  
  • What would you have said fifty years ago if I told you I had a living coelacanth in my aquarium?  
  • *Is there one clear prediction of macroevolution that has proved true?  
  • *What is so scientific about the idea of hydrogen as becoming human?  
  • *Do you honestly believe that everything came from nothing?


After you have answered the preceding questions, please look carefully at your answers and thoughtfully consider the following questions.

    • Are you sure your answers are reasonable, right, and scientifically provable, or do you just believe that it may have happened the way you have answered? (Do these answers reflect your religion or your science?)  
    • Do your answers show more or less faith than the person who says, “God must have designed it”?  
    • Is it possible that an unseen Creator designed this universe? If God is excluded at the beginning of the discussion by your definition of science, how could it be shown that He did create the universe if He did?  
    • Is it wise and fair to present the theory of evolution to students as fact?  
    • What is the end result of a belief in evolution (lifestyle, society, attitude about others, eternal destiny, etc.)?  
    • Do people accept evolution because of the following factors?

      • It is all they have been taught.
      • They like the freedom from God (no moral absolutes, etc.).
      • They are bound to support the theory for fear of losing their job or status or grade point average.
      • They are too proud to admit they are wrong.
      • Evolution is the only philosophy that can be used to justify their political agenda.


  • Should we continue to use outdated, disproved, questionable, or inconclusive evidence to support the theory of evolution because we don’t have a suitable substitute (Piltdown man, recapitulation, archaeopteryx, Lucy, Java man, Neanderthal man, horse evolution, vestigial organs, etc.)?  
  • Should parents be allowed to require that evolution not be taught as fact in their school system unless equal time is given to other theories of origins (like divine creation)?  
  • What are you risking if you are wrong? As one of my debate opponents said, “Either there is a God or there is not.  Both possibilities are frightening.”  
  • Why are many evolutionists afraid of the idea of creationism being presented in public schools?  If we are not supposed to teach religion in schools, then why not get evolution out of the textbooks?  It is just a religious worldview.  
  • Aren’t you tired of faith in a system that cannot be true?  Wouldn’t it be great to know the God who made you, and to accept His love and forgiveness?  
  • Would you be interested, if I showed you from the Bible, how to have your sins forgiven and how to know for sure that you are going to Heaven?  If so, call me.


Since this document was prepared by Dr. Kent Hovind at Creation Science Evangelism we feel that all questions and comments should be directed to him or his staff. His contact information is as follows:

Web Address


Mailing and Telephone
Creation Science Evangelism
29 Cummings Road
Pensacola, Florida USA
850-479-3466 (8-5 Mon-Fri CST)
toll-free (in US only):


If you prefer to send an e-mail please click here to go to his contact page. Please know that you have a much better chance of contacting him if you call one of the numbers above between the hours of 8 AM to 5 PM United States Central Time.




“Not one change of species into another is on record … we cannot prove that a single species has been changed.” (Charles Darwin, My Life & Letters)

“To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.” (Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, chapter “Difficulties”)

“There are only two possibilities as to how life arose. One is spontaneous generation arising to evolution; the other is a supernatural creative act of God. There is no third possibility. Spontaneous generation, that life arose from non-living matter was scientifically disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasture and others. That leaves us with the only possible conclusion that life arose as a supernatural creative act of God.” He then went on to say that “I will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in God therefore, I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible; spontaneous generation arising to evolution.” (Dr. George Wall professor emeritus of biology at Harvard University. Nobel Prize winner in biology. From an article in Scientific America)

“I have little hesitation in saying that a sickly pall now hangs over the big bang theory.” (Sir Fred Hoyle, astronomer, cosmologist, and mathematician, Cambridge University)

“The pathetic thing is that we have scientists who are trying to prove evolution, which no scientist can ever prove.” (Dr. Robert Millikan, Nobel Prize winner and eminent evolutionist)

“The theory of evolution suffers from grave defects, which are more and more apparent as time advances. It can no longer square with practical scientific knowledge.” (Dr A Fleishmann, Zoologist, Erlangen University)

“It is good to keep in mind … that nobody has ever succeeded in producing even one new species by the accumulation of micromutations. Darwin’s theory of natural selection has never had any proof, yet it has been universally accepted.” (Prof. R Goldschmidt PhD, DSc Prof. Zoology, University of Calif. in Material Basis of Evolution Yale Univ. Press)

“The theory of the transmutation of species is a scientific mistake, untrue in its facts, unscientific in its method, and mischievous in its tendency.” (Prof. J Agassiz, of Harvard in Methods of Study in Natural History)

“Evolution is baseless and quite incredible.” (Dr Ambrose Fleming, President, British Assoc. Advancement of Science, in The Unleashing of Evolutionary Thought)

“Overwhelming strong proofs of intelligent and benevolent design lie around us … The atheistic idea is so nonsensical that I cannot put it into words.” (Lord Kelvin, Vict. Inst., 124, p267)

It is possible (and, given the Flood, probable) that materials which give radiocarbon dates of tens of thousands of radiocarbon years could have true ages of many fewer calendar years.” (Gerald Aardsman, Ph.D., physicist and C-14 dating specialist)

“We have to admit that there is nothing in the geological records that runs contrary to the views of conservative creationists.” (Evolutionist Edmund Ambrose)

“The best physical evidence that the earth is young is the dwindling resource that evolutionists refuse to admit is dwindling … the magnetic energy in the field of the earth’s dipole magnet … To deny that it is a dwindling resource is phony science.” (Thomas Barnes Ph.D., physicist)

“No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.” (Pierre-Paul Grasse, Evolutionist)

“The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 noughts after it … It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution … if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.” (Sir Fred Hoyle, astronomer, cosmologist and mathematician, Cambridge University)

“It is easy enough to make up stories, of how one form gave rise to another, and to find reasons why the stages should be favored by natural selection. But such stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to the test.” (Luther D Sutherland, Darwin’s Enigma, Master Books 1988, p89)

“Is it really credible that random processes could have constructed a reality, the smallest element of which – a functional protein or gene – is complex beyond … anything produced by the intelligence of man?” (Molecular biologist Michael Denton, Evolutionist: A Theory in Crisis (London: Burnett Books, 1985) p 342.)

“When I make an incision with my scalpel, I see organs of such intricacy that there simply hasn’t been enough time for natural evolutionary processes to have developed them.” (C Everett Koop, former US Surgeon General)

“Modern apes … seem to have sprung out of nowhere. They have no yesterday, no fossil record. And the true origin of modern humans … is, if we are to be honest with ourselves, an equally mysterious matter.” (Lyall Watson, Ph.D., Evolutionist)

“Although bacteria are tiny, they display biochemical, structural and behavioral complexities that outstrip scientific description. In keeping with the current microelectronics revolution, it may make more sense to equate their size with sophistication rather than with simplicity … Without bacteria life on earth could not exist in its present form.” (James A Shipiro, Bacteria as Multicellular Organisms, “Scientific America, Vol.258, No.6 (June 1988))

“Eighty to eighty-five percent of earth’s land surface does not have even 3 geological 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.” (John Woodmorappe, geologist)

“That a mindless, purposeless, chance process such as natural selection, acting on the sequels of recombinant DNA or random mutation, most of which are injurious or fatal, could fabricate such complexity and organisation as the vertebrate eye, where each component part must carry out its own distinctive task in a harmoniously functioning optical unit, is inconceivable. The absence of transitional forms between the invertebrates retina and that of the vertebrates poses another difficulty. Here there is a great gulf fixed which remains inviolate with no seeming likelihood of ever being bridged. The total picture speaks of intelligent creative design of an infinitely high order.” (H.S.Hamilton (MD) The Retina of the Eye – An Evolutionary Road Block.)

“My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed.” (N.H.Nilson, famous botanist and evolutionist)

“None of five museum officials could offer a single example of a transitional series of fossilized organisms that would document the transformation of one basically different type to another.” (Luther Sunderland, science researcher)

“The entire hominid collection known today would barely cover a billiard table, but it has spawned a science because it is distinguished by two factors which inflate its apparent relevance far beyond its merits. First, the fossils hint at the ancestry of a supremely self- important animal – ourselves. Secondly, the collection is so tantalizingly incomplete, and the specimens themselves often so fragmented and inconclusive, that more can be said about what is missing than about what is present. Hence the amazing quantity of literature on the subject ever since Darwin’s work inspired the notion that fossils linking modern man and extinct ancestor would provide the most convincing proof of human evolution, preconceptions have led evidence by the nose in the study of fossil man.” (John Reader, Whatever Happened to Zinjanthropus? New Scientist Vol. 89, No.12446 (March 26,1981) pp 802-805))

“The evolutionist thesis has become more stringently unthinkable than ever before.” (Wolfgang Smith Ph.D.)

“The only competing explanation for the order we all see in the biological world is the notion of Special Creation.” (Niles Eldridge, PhD., paleontologist and evolutionist, American Museum of Natural History).

“A growing number of respectable scientists are defecting from the evolutionist camp … moreover, for the most part these ‘experts’ have abandoned Darwinism, not on the basis of religious faith or biblical persuasions, but on scientific grounds, and in some instances, regretfully.” (Wolfgang Smith, Ph.D., physicist and mathematician)

“As yet we have not been able to track the phylogenetic history of a single group of modern plants from its beginning to the present.” (Chester A Arnold, Professor of Botany and Curator of Fossil Plants, University of Michigan, An Introduction to Paleobotany (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1947, p.7)

“The more scientists have searched for the transitional forms that lie between species, the more they have been frustrated.” (John Adler with John Carey: Is Man a Subtle Accident, Newsweek, Vol.96, No.18 (November 3, 1980, p.95)

“…most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument in favour of Darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Un – fortunately, this is not strictly true.” (Dr David Raup, Curator of geology, Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago)

“Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides means of ‘seeing’ Evolution, it has provided some nasty difficulties for evolutionists, the most notorious of which is the presence of ‘gaps’ in the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them.” (David Kitts, Ph.D. Paleontology and Evolutionary Theory, Evolution, Vol.28 (Sep.1974) p.467)

“Hundreds of scientists who once taught their university students that the bottom line on origins had been figured out and settled are today confessing that they were completely wrong. They’ve discovered that their previous conclusions, once held so fervently, were based on very fragile evidences and suppositions which have since been refuted by new discoveries. This has necessitated a change in their basic philosophical position on origins. Others are admitting great weaknesses in evolution theory.” (Luther D Sutherland, Darwin’s Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, 4th edition (Santee, California: Master Books,1988) pp.7-8)

“The fact that a theory so vague, so insufficiently verifiable, and so far from the criteria otherwise applied in ‘hard’ science has become a dogma can only be explained on sociological grounds.” (Ludwig von Bertalanffy, biologist)

“Micromutations do occur, but the theory that these alone can account for evolutionary change is either falsified, or else it is an unfalsifiable, hence metaphysical theory. I suppose that nobody will deny that it is a great misfortune if an entire branch of science becomes addicted to a false theory. But this is what has happened in biology: … I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science. When this happens many people will pose the question: How did this ever happen?” (S Lovtrup, Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth (London:Croom Helm, p.422))

“If one allows the unquestionably largest experimenter to speak, namely nature, one gets a clear and incontrovertible answer to the question about the significance of mutations for the formation of species and evolution. They disappear under the competitive conditions of natural selection, as soap bubbles burst in a breeze.” (Evolutionist Herbert Nilson, Synthetische Artbildung (Lund, Sweden:Verlag CWK Gleerup Press, 1953, p 174)

“In all the thousands of fly-breeding experiments carried out all over the world for more than fifty years, a distinct new species has never been seen to emerge … or even a new enzyme.” (Gordon Taylor, The Great Evolution Mystery (New York: Harper and Row, 1983, pp 34, 38)

“The uniform, continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so dear to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in nature.” (George Simpson, paleontologist and Evolutionist)

“As is well known, most fossil species appear instantaneously in the fossil record.” (Tom Kemp, Oxford University)

“The fossil record pertaining to man is still so sparsely known that those who insist on positive declarations can do nothing more than jump from one hazardous surmise to another and hope that the next dramatic discovery does not make them utter fools … Clearly some refuse to learn from this. As we have seen, there are numerous scientists and popularizers today who have the temerity to tell us that there is ‘no doubt’ how man originated: if only they had the evidence…” (William R Fix, The Bone Peddlers, New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1984, p.150)

“The curious thing is that there is a consistency about the fossil gaps; the fossils are missing in all the important places.” (Francis Hitching, archaeologist).

“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.” (J.O’Rourke in the American Journal of Science)

“In most people’s minds, fossils and Evolution go hand in hand. In reality, fossils are a great embarrassment to Evolutionary theory and offer strong support for the concept of Creation. If Evolution were true, we should find literally millions of fossils that show how one kind of life slowly and gradually changed to another kind of life. But missing links are the trade secret, in a sense, of paleontology. The point is, the links are still missing. What we really find are gaps that sharpen up the boundaries between kinds. It’s those gaps which provide us with the evidence of Creation of separate kinds. As a matter of fact, there are gaps between each of the major kinds of plants and animals. Transition forms are missing by the millions. What we do find are separate and complex kinds, pointing to Creation.” (Dr Gary Parker Biologist/paleontologist and former ardent Evolutionist.)

“Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them.” (David Kitts, palaeontologist and Evolutionist)

“… I still think that, to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favour of special creation. Can you imagine how an orchid, a duckweed and a palm tree have come from the same ancestry, and have we any evidence for this assumption? The evolutionist must be prepared with an answer, but I think that most would break down before an inquisition.” (Dr Eldred Corner, Professor of Botany at Cambridge University, England: Evolution in Contemporary Botanical Thought (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961, p.97))

“Fossils are a great embarrassment to Evolutionary theory and offer strong support for the concept of Creation.” (Gary Parker, Ph.D., biologist / paleontologist and former evolutionist)

“So firmly does the modern geologist believe in evolution up from simple organisms to complex ones over huge time spans, that he is perfectly willing to use the theory of evolution to prove the theory of evolution [p.128] … one is applying the theory of evolution to prove the correctness of evolution. For we are assuming that the oldest formations contain only the most primitive and least complex organisms, which is the base assumption of Darwinism … [p.127] If we now assume that only simple organisms will occur in old formations, we are assuming the basic premise of Darwinism to be correct. To use, therefore, for dating purposes, the assumption that only simple organisms will be present in old formations is to thoroughly beg the whole question. It is arguing in a circle. [p.128]” (Arthur E Wilder-Smith, Man’s Origin, Man’s destiny: Harold Shaw Publishers, 1968, pp127-8)

“It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint, geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by the study of their remains imbedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of the organisms they contain.” (R H Rastall, Lecturer in Economic Geology, Cambridge University: Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol.10 (Chicago: William Benton, Publisher, 1956, p.168)

“I admit that an awful lot of that [fantasy] has gotten into the textbooks as though it were true. For instance, the most famous example still on exhibit downstairs [in the American Museum of Natural History] is the exhibit on horse evolution prepared fifty years ago. That has been presented as literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now, I think that that is lamentable, particularly because the people who propose these kinds of stories themselves may be aware of the speculative nature of some of the stuff. But by the time it filters down to the textbooks, we’ve got science as truth and we have a problem.” (Dr Niles Eldredge, Paleontologist and Evolutionist)

“The set of genetic instructions for humans is roughly three billion letters long.” (Miroslav Radman & Robert Wagner, The High Fidelity of DNA Duplication, Scientific America, Vol. 259, No.2 August 1988, pp40-46)

“DNA and the molecules that surround it form a truly superb mechanism – a miniaturized marvel. The information is so compactly stored that the amount of DNA necessary to code all the people living on our planet might fit into a space no larger than an aspirin tablet.” (Paul S Taylor in The Illustrated Origins Answer Book page 23)

“… Life cannot have had a random beginning … The trouble is that there are about two thousand enzymes, and the chance of obtaining them all in a random trial is only one part in 10 to the power of 40,000, an outrageously small probability that could not be faced even if the whole universe consisted of organic soup. If one is not prejudiced either by social beliefs or by a scientific training into the conviction that life originated on the Earth, this simple calculation wipes the idea entirely out of court …” (Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space)

“The chance that useful DNA molecules would develop without a Designer are apparently zero. Then let me conclude by asking which came first – the DNA (which is essential for the synthesis of proteins) or the protein enzyme (DNA-polymerase) without which DNA synthesis is nil? … there is virtually no chance that chemical ‘letters’ would spontaneously produce coherent DNA and protein ‘words.'” (George Howe, expert in biology sciences)

“…An intelligible communication via radio signal from some distant galaxy would be widely hailed as evidence of an intelligent source. Why then doesn’t the message sequence on the DNA molecule also constitute prima facie evidence for an intelligent source? After all, DNA information is not just analogous to a message sequence such as Morse code, it is such a message sequence.” (Charles B Thaxton, Walter L Bradley and Robert L Olsen: The Mystery of Life’s Origin, Reassessing Current Theories (New York Philosophical Library 1984) pp 211-212)

“Generation after generation, through countless cell divisions, the genetic heritage of living things is scrupulously preserved in DNA … All of life depends on the accurate transmission of information. As genetic messages are passed through generations of dividing cells, even small mistakes can be life-threatening … if mistakes were as rare as one in a million, 3000 mistakes would be made during each duplication of the human genome. Since the genome replicates about a million billion times in the course of building a human being from a single fertilized egg, it is unlikely that the human organism could tolerate such a high rate of error. In fact, the actual rate of mistakes is more like one in 10 billion.” (Miroslav Radman and Robert Wagner, The High Fidelity of DNA Duplication… Scientific America. Vol. 299, No 2 (August 1988, pp 40-44. Quote is from page 24))

“In the meantime, the educated public continues to believe that Darwin has provided all the relevant answers by the magic formula of random mutations plus natural selection – quite unaware of the fact that random mutations turned out to be irrelevant and natural selection a tautology.” (Arthur Koestler, author)

“Evolution lacks a scientifically acceptable explanation of the source of the precisely planned codes within cells without which there can be no specific proteins and hence, no life.” (David A Kaufman, Ph.D., University of Florida, Gainsesville)

“Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favourable properties of physics on which life depends are in every respect deliberate….It is therefore almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect …higher intelligences…even to the limit of God…such a theory is so obvious that one wonders why it is not widely accepted as being self-evident. The reasons are psychological rather than scientific.” (Sir Fred Hoyle, well-known British mathematician, astronomer and cosmologist)

“Ultimately, the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century.” (Michael Denton, ‘Evolution, A Theory in Crisis’ page 358)

“Any suppression which undermines and destroys that very foundation on which scientific methodology and research was erected, evolutionist or otherwise, cannot and must not be allowed to flourish … It is a confrontation between scientific objectivity and ingrained prejudice – between logic and emotion – between fact and fiction … In the final analysis, objective scientific logic has to prevail – no matter what the final result is – no matter how many time-honoured idols have to be discarded in the process … After all, it is not the duty of science to defend the theory of evolution and stick by it to the bitter end -no matter what illogical and unsupported conclusions it offers … If in the process of impartial scientific logic, they find that creation by outside intelligence is the solution to our quandary, then let’s cut the umbilical chord that tied us down to Darwin for such a long time. It is choking us and holding us back … Every single concept advanced by the theory of evolution (and amended thereafter) is imaginary as it is not supported by the scientifically established probability concepts. Darwin was wrong… The theory of evolution may be the worst mistake made in science.” (I L Cohen, Darwin Was Wrong – A Study in Probabilities PO Box 231, Greenvale, New York 11548: New Research Publications, Inc. pp 6-8, 209-210, 214-215. I.L.Cohen, Member of the New York Academy of Sciences and Officer of the Archaeological Institute of America).

“The notion that … the operating programme of a living cell could be arrived at by chance in a primordial soup here on earth is evidently nonsense of a high order.” (Evolutionist Sir Fred Hoyle)

“The theory of Evolution … will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity it has.” (Malcolm Muggeridge, well-known philosopher)

“We have had enough of the Darwinian fallacy. It is time that we cry: ‘The emperor has no clothes.'” (K.Hsu, geologist at the Geological Institute at Zurich)

“Far from being an established fact of science that it is so typically portrayed to be, evolution is, in reality, an unreasonable and unfounded hypothesis that is riddled with countless scientific fallacies.” (Scott M Huse, The Collapse of Evolution (Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, pp 127)

“Unfortunately many scientists and non-scientists have made Evolution into a religion, something to be defended against infidels. In my experience, many students of biology – professors and textbook writers included – have been so carried away with the arguments for Evolution that they neglect to question it. They preach it … College students, having gone through such a closed system of education, themselves become teachers, entering high schools to continue the process, using textbooks written by former classmates or professors. High standards of scholarship and teaching break down. Propaganda and the pursuit of power replace the pursuit knowledge. Education becomes a fraud.” (George Kocan, Evolution isn’t Faith But Theory, Chicago Tribune 9 Monday April 21 1980)

“Scientists who go about teaching that Evolution is a fact of life are great con men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining Evolution we do not have one iota of fact.”
(Dr T N Tahmisian, a former U.S. Atomic Energy Commission physiologist)

“Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.” (Dr Louise Bounoure, Director of Research at the French National Centre for Scientific Research, Director of the Zoological Museum and former president of the Biological Society of Strasbourg)

“I, as a scientist, must postulate a source of information to supply the teleonomy or know-how, I don’t find it in the universe, and, therefore, I assume that it is transcendent to this universe. I believe, myself, in a living God who did it. I believe that this God, who supplied the information, revealed Himself in the form of a man – so that man could understand Him. We are made to understand. I want to understand God. But I can only do it if He comes down to my wavelength, the wavelength of man. I believe that God revealed Himself in the form of Christ, and that we can serve Him and know Him in our hearts as the source of the Logos – all information is necessary to make the universe and to make life itself … Look at the beauty of nature around us. When you consider that it all grew out of matter injected with information of the type I have been describing, you can only be filled with wonder of the wisdom of a Creator, who, first of all, had the sense of beauty to do it, and then the technical ability. I am filled with wonder as I look at nature, to see how god technically did it and realized the beauty of His own soul in doing it. The Scripture teaches perfectly plainly, and it fits in with my science perfectly well, that the one who did called Himself THE LOGOS. That Logos was Jesus. Jesus called Himself the Creator who made everything – ‘for Him and by Him’. Now, if that is the case, then I am very happy and filled with joy that He made the Creation so beautiful and that He also valued me enough to die for me, to become my Redeemer as well.” (Arthur E Wilder-Smith, Ph.D.,D.Sc.,, The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution (Santee, California: Master Books, p.154).


Foundation and Fruits

By David Ben Ya’akov

© 2003 David Ben Ya’akov / Delusion Resistance


The Delusion Resistance has been and always will be dedicated to fighting the lies of Evolution. I don’t think that anyone reading this would disagree that the battle between Evolution and Biblical Creationism is a battle for the mind and souls of mankind. What a person believes affects the way that they conduct their daily lives, their social conduct and ultimately their eternal security, or insecurity as the case may be.

There have been two strategies in this battle. The Church (the corporate body of true believers) has attempted to battle the foe by attacking the fruits (the byproducts) of evolution while the evolutionists have attacked the foundation of Creation, which is the Bible. It’s sad to note that the evolutionists have been much more successful than the Church. A good illustration will be to look at an apple tree. Let’s say that we don’t want an apple tree growing in the yard, but one sprouts and grows very quickly. The apple tree will represent evolution. On the other side of the yard, we have an old fig tree that we want to keep. The fig tree represents Creation. There are two brothers who own the yard, one a Christian, and the other an atheist. The Christian doesn’t want the apple tree to grow, so he picks the apples, thinking that it will keep the tree from propagating. He never has the chance to pick all the apples because they are so many, and every year there is a new crop. The atheist, on the other hand, knows that the fig tree will keep producing no matter how many figs he pulls off. He goes about his attack in another way. He digs around the tree and systematically starts to take an ax to the roots. He knows that if he destroys the tree, he will destroy the fruit too.

So the Church goes around attacking the fruit of evolution; abortion, homosexuality, promiscuity, lawlessness, and Marxism. We pull off a little fruit at the time but it always grows back. Up until a few years ago, this was the common practice. Now, you would think that the Church would know better, especially after all of the illustrations in the Bible concerning foundations and fruit, but we have failed so far. 

This failure and lack of understanding have been changing over the past twenty or thirty years. God has raised up several scientists who have done a very good job of exposing the lies of evolution and they are using true science to prove the Creation and other events in Genesis. They are taking an ax to the roots of the evolution tree and it is slowly dying. Genesis is the foundation of the Bible. There we are introduced to sin; it’s beginning and we are even given a hint that God would someday do something to put an end to it. The Bible is like a troubleshooting manual. Genesis is the part that describes the problem and the rest of the book is God’s fix-it part of the manual. The books of the Old Testament that come after Genesis are like the rundown list in a fix-it manual. The sum total of the Old Testament is that mankind cannot be fixed by any human remedies and that only complete overhaul will do. Jesus gives us a complete overhaul when we ask Him to fix us. Then, and only then do we start to run right.

Foundations and Fruit:

Today when we think of foundations, we think of houses and the stable base that they are hopefully built upon. If a house is anchored to a good foundation, it can withstand any number of disasters. Jesus was a carpenter, and he knew of foundations. He even illustrated this in one of his parables:

“Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.” Matthew 7:24-27

I live in California, and as everyone knows, we are prone to earthquake activity. Several years ago the state recognized that the major cause of property damage during a quake was that houses were knocked off of their foundations. For this reason, new home builders are required to bolt the frame structure to the foundation. Had they read their Bibles they would have realized this long ago and might have averted a lot of damage and heartache. Ignorance has never been a good excuse where the forces of nature are concerned and it isn’t accepted by God either.

Foundations are also important where people and philosophies are concerned. Each one of us had a childhood that affected us in either a positive or negative way. Our parents or guardians set a foundation for us and depending on what they built that foundation determined how we grew up into adults. The Bible is explicit about this when it says:

Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it. Proverbs 22:6

And it also says:

Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far from him. Proverbs 22:15

So we can see that whether it involves a house or a person, the beginnings are very important and have a lot to do with the ultimate result of each. In the lives of the people who have committed some of the most heinous crimes in history, there were foundational things that affected them. Most sexual predators were themselves abused. Most spousal abusers grew up with a history of that activity in their homes and the list goes on and on. Please understand that I used the word “most,” and not the word “all” above. There are some who have those foundations and who come into adulthood with correct morals and values.

On the flip side of the coin, there are those who are brought up with a solid foundation of morality. A vast majority of these people grow into honest and moral adults, but like above, there are exceptions. But everyone who is honest with themselves will have to admit that since prayer and God were taken out of the schools, many statistics of immorality and lawlessness have risen. The rights of parents have been stripped away and there is a threat of legal action even if the slightest bit of physical correction is administered. Add to this that kids are being force-fed the notion that they are just animals (evolution) and it is no wonder why they are running wild through the streets.

Biblical Foundation and Fruit:

So let’s look at a Biblical foundation and the fruit that it produces. Let’s look at the following illustration and then focus on some of its points.



A Biblical Foundation – Creation and its Fruits



The illustration shows the results which occur with the belief in the creation of the Earth by the God of Creation. Creation rests on the foundation of God’s Word. Belief in God causes a person to realize that they will have to answer to Him someday. Because of that, the believer treads carefully and a pursuit of truth and justice prevails. The opposite of that is evolution and we will come to that later.

When a person or a society place their trust in God, His Holy Word and in the fact that He created all we see, hear, feel, touch and taste, many good things happen. First, that person or society cares for the creation. It was specially created by a loving God and it’s defacing or pollution is strongly deplored. A Biblical foundation causes “good science” to occur. A scientist with a Biblical grounding knows full well that integrity and fidelity are just as high on his list of priorities as finding scientific truth is. The scientist who believes in a creator also knows that he or she will someday be accountable to God and will have to give account for all that they have taught the public and their peers. 

Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. James 3:1

When a society is built on its foundation being God and His Word, it’s government usually follows suit. A good example of this would be the United States. For many years its society had a foundation built on God and for the most part, a government that followed suit. It was known as a Christian Nation, its people worshipped God and it’s leaders were held accountable for its laws and its constituents. With the advent of the 20th century, many things changed. The people became rebellious, evolution was accepted as a “truth,” and society went down the pipes. We’ve declined so much that we murder the unborn upon demand and everyone does what is right in their own eyes. The Biblical foundation that once supported the United States was torn down and replaced by humanism. America is the modern day example of a fall from glory.

A person or society whose foundation is the Word of God has a strong sense of right and wrong. They have a moral code to live by and are governed by laws and precepts. Those people know that they are going to someday answer to a divine power to which there will be no excuses and ignorance will not be accepted.

A person or society whose foundation is the Word of God also values human life. To them, life is a gift that is imparted by God himself. A person with such a foundation knows that nothing evolved and that all life is a special creation of God. That is why, in such a society, murder is the most heinous of crimes because it is snuffing out a special creation, a gift of God to the world. 

People and societies who have a firm foundation on the Word of God place great emphasis on family values. They know that a spouse isn’t just an object of lust and sexual desire, but an integral part of a family unit. They know that a family consisting of a husband (male), wife (female), and children is healthy. There are various examples of correct family relationships in the Bible and the fruits of those healthy relationships are duly noted. There are also examples of incorrect family relationships there too, and they almost always result in the strife that passes on through many generations.

The Bible is full of blessings and consequences of our lifestyles. It is a guidebook that has been around for centuries and for the most part, has been ignored by many for that period of time. Those who blame God for the ills of the world, or wonder why He doesn’t step in to fix things must remember that He gave us the book and admonished us to read it. Nearly everything that you buy in the store has an instruction book. If you put something together without using the instructions and it looks funny or doesn’t work, whose fault is it? The fault is yours because you ignored the instructions. Life is the same way! If you try to live it and don’t look at the instruction book, or ignore it, thinking that you can do it on your own, it’s your fault, not God’s.

Humanist Foundations And Fruit:

So what is Evolution and what is it built on. Simply put, it is built on the mind of Man. Mankind is unique from the rest of creation in many ways, but the one we will look at today is the fact that mankind can sense that he is a higher being and that it has a sense of purpose. You see, every person has a God-shaped void in them. To some, that void is filled by God Himself when a person is regenerated through Christ Jesus. Those who choose other paths try many things to fill that void. Many try the use of drugs, others try sexual excitement, others try financial gain and most turn to evolution theory. Remember that game we all had when we were kids with the pegs or blocks. Some of the blocks were square, some triangular and others round; and there were holes that we had to put those pegs into. At first, I think we all tried many different combinations until the day that we realized that the round pegs went into the round holes, the square ones in the square holes and so on. Well, life is the same way in that respect. Our lives are the canister where the peg will eventually go. The trouble is that there is only one entrance and the hole is shaped like Jesus. None of the other pegs can be put into the canister and many people spend their whole lives trying to put round pegs into square holes or triangular pegs into round holes.

Evolution is much akin to the illustration above. It can never fit into the Jesus shaped void that every human has in their life. The finds that we hear about all of the time and the supposed new ideas about evolution are really attempts by those pseudo-scientists to try to bang that square peg through that round hole and it never works. Then they will find some sort of discovery in the cosmos and try to fit it into evolution, but that square peg just won’t fit through that round hole. Of course, some have tried to cheat and cut the corners off of the square peg to make it fit, but those cases have always been rejected upon further examination.

When I was younger there was a phrase that was popular. When a person made a mistake and they were called to task for that mistake they would use the phrase, “I’m only human.” What they were saying in effect was, “hey I’m human, so I’m not perfect.” Aside from the fact that the phrase was basically used as a copout, it did state one truth; humans are far from perfect! So, since humans are far from perfect and at times mostly faulty, what should we assume about the evolution theory? We have to assume that it is faulty also. Remember too that foundations are important and a faulty foundation can result in ruin for the rest of the house and more importantly, those who live in that house.




Now let’s look at the results of evolutionary theory when they are adhered to by people and society. We’ll use The Webster’s Online Dictionary to expound on these several fruits.

1. Worship of The Earth: 

Earth itself is treated as a living entity. We get phrases like “Mother Earth,” and “mother nature.” There are many people who worship Earth. They call her the Goddess Gaia and fight for her like one fights for a human relation. Those in the environmental movement are involved in such things. They put the creation above the creator and value it over human life. 

2. Naturalism

Main Entry: nat·u·ral·ism
Pronunciation: 'na-ch&-r&-"li-z&m, 'nach-r&-

Function: noun
Date: circa 1641
1 : action, inclination, or thought based only on natural desires and instincts
2 : a theory denying that an event or object has a supernatural significance; specifically : the doctrine that scientific laws are adequate to account for all phenomena

I don’t think that anyone can doubt that description of naturalism above describes our society to a tee. The whole psyche of our society is based on sex and doing whatever else feels good. The pursuit of longing for righteousness and doing what is right both in our consciences and in God’s eyes has gone by the wayside. Want to know why drug abuse and alcoholism keep increasing? It’s because people have to soothe their consciences through substances instead of doing what is right, to begin with.

The definition also says that naturalism denies any supernatural intervention and says that science and it’s laws are able to explain life and the universe, and of course origins. The writers at Webster’s could just as easily have written the word “Evolution,” as an explanation for choice number two. The newspapers and television media never mention Christian things but only focus on scientific discoveries and evolution. A free and unbiased press, yeah right?

3. The New Age Movement

Main Entry: New Age
Function: adjective
Date: 1956
1 : of, relating to, or being a late 20th century social movement drawing on ancient concepts especially from Eastern and American Indian traditions and incorporating such themes as holism, concern for nature, spirituality, and metaphysics

The New Age is really just the same old lie that mankind has been fed since Adam and Eve fell in the garden of Eden. New Age teaches that we can become our own Gods, which was Satan’s lie to Eve:

“You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” Genesis 3:4

The total sum of New Age thought is to battle Christianity for the souls of men. It embraces a little from each religion or philosophy so that it can satisfy everyone who is searching for the truth. The New Age was prevalent back in ancient times. There were mystics, mediums and such back in Biblical days. The Bible warned the people of that time about such practices: 

When you enter the land the LORD your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there. Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD, and because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you. You must be blameless before the LORD your God. Deuteronomy 18:9-13

We have always had this sort of people among us. In the last century though they came out of the shadows and practiced in indiscrete shops. But during the last twenty years or so they have been gaining influence. We hear of movie stars going to psychics. We hear stories about former First Lady Nancy Reagan visiting a medium and even heard that former First Lady Hillary Clinton was in contact with Eleanor Roosevelt, who has been deceased for many years. An then there’s Miss Cleo, who is there to annoy the crap out of us during commercial breaks. Yes, a society that spurns God almighty for the god evolution quickly degenerates.

4. Socialism

Main Entry: so·cial·ism
Pronunciation: 'sO-sh&-"li-z&m

Function: noun
Date: 1837
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

A society who turns to socialism to answer it’s problems is turning itself over to the mind of man. You see, a society that is built and run on Godly principles is a society of freedom and liberty. The United States up until recent years has been a good example of this concept. In recent years though God has been eliminated from government and all but banned in public, so people are now turning to socialism, hoping that mankind can solve their problems. Socialism is the path to communism, and we all know what that does to people, freedom and society. And let us not forget that back in the 1930’s and 1940’s there was a movement in Germany called  the “Nationalsozialist” or National Socialist party which started a war that took the lives of over 50 million people. And furthermore, let’s not forget that Hitler and his henchmen were avid evolutionists, who elevated a selected few higher than all others. Man’s wisdom always turns to tyranny. 

5. Marxism

Main Entry: Marx·ism
Pronunciation: 'märk-"si-z&m

Function: noun
Date: 1897
: the political, economic, and social principles and policies advocated by Marx; especially : a theory and practice of socialism including the labor theory of value, dialectical materialism, the class struggle, and dictatorship of the proletariat until the establishment of a classless society

Communism is the ultimate result of a society that is founded on the mind of man. Communism is something that might sound good in theory, but there is one factor that those who advocate communism always forget; that being the hearts of men. If there is no peace in a man’s heart then he can’t offer peace to others. Because the hearts of natural men are corrupt communism, as it is theorized, can never work. It is always a choice of a few and a demand on the many. 

The first ideal that communism attacks is religion. The mind of the natural man cannot accept a God or godly principles because those things go against human nature. So when communism takes over a nation, the churches are taken over, puppet ministers are placed in them and true believers are persecuted, imprisoned and killed. 

Dictators always rise out of communistic situations. These leaders are usually surrounded by others of the same thought, who lust for power, economic riches, and fame. Power struggles are common in these situations. Those who remember history will remember how Lenin in his waning years favored Trotsky, but Stalin had other plans and Trotsky had to flee the country, only to be brutally murdered (assassinated) in Latin America by Stalin’s henchmen. Stalin is then credited with murdering millions of his own countrymen. Communism embraces evolution theory and survival of the fittest is the main theme in its realm, except their example of survival and fittest, is to only deem fit those who will kowtow to those who are in power.

Evolution theory thrived in Russia when it was called, “The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.” Humanism replaced religion and evolution was humanism’s so-called “proof” that Christianity was bogus. God had other ideas though because the Soviet Union no longer exists and it’s ideals imploded into one big heap of rubble. And the thing that every regime or dictator forgets is that Christianity grows under persecution.

6. Anarchy

Main Entry: an·ar·chy
'a-n&r-kE, -"när-
Function: noun
Etymology: Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek, from anarchos having no ruler, from an- + archos ruler
Date: 1539
1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
2 a : absence or denial of any authority or established order b : absence of order : DISORDER <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature — Israel Shenker>

When a person or society has the mind of man as a foundation and evolution as it’s religion, there can be two types of anarchy. First, there is the anarchy that there is no Godly government in their hearts. When a person rejects God and places themselves in command, they deny any accountability to a higher authority. When this happens, they do what is right in their own eyes, as we will see in the definition of relativism. At the beginning of this document, we used an illustration of trying to put square pegs in round holes. When a person disallows the formation of a Godly government in their hearts they have in effect tried to drive that square peg into that round hole, which is really impossible. Because of this, there is no guidance, no purpose in that life other than to satisfy the wants and needs of that person. Others are merely stepping stones or instruments to use in order to try to achieve peace and stability which can never come through these means. Only God can fill that God-shaped void in every person’s life.

The second type of anarchy is social anarchy. Social anarchy is a direct result of spiritual anarchy. We see many types of social anarchy in our society today. We have kids running the streets in gangs, all killing each other in order to gain control of their turf. We have neo-Nazi’s, Muslim terrorists, Black Panthers and many others all running around, trying to get an upper hand on society because they think that they have the only answer to the injustices of this world. Neighborhoods where doors were never locked thirty years ago are now bolted shut and the love of many people has grown cold. Jesus predicted this when he said:

At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. Matthew 24:10-14

So how could all of this come into being? Well, first you start telling people that there is an alternative to God, namely, evolution. Then you get the press to push more of evolution and less of God. Then you make it illegal to pray in school or have any religious discussion there. Then you start degrading the value of human life by telling kids in every generation since the 1960’s that they are really animals, not special in any way except that they are more evolved than their cousins the apes. In addition, you strip away godly values of right and wrong and replace them with secular, man-made rules. You combine all of these and you have a society in anarchy. It’s clear and simple, but so few see it; or perhaps few want to see it.

7. Relativism

Main Entry: rel·a·tiv·ism
Pronunciation: 're-l&-ti-"vi-z&m

Function: noun
Date: 1865
1 a : a theory that knowledge is relative to the limited nature of the mind and the conditions of knowing b : a view that ethical truths depend on the individuals and groups holding them.

Relativism and anarchy are virtually intertwined together. Both derive from a lack of belief in a divine set of laws and ethics. Take for instance the case of Timothy McVeigh who was found guilty of bombing the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Although he killed many men, women and children, he never repented of his crimes. His callousness was based on his belief that he was correct in what he did based on his relativism and possibly the relativism of those who might have conspired with him. If he would have had any sort of morals or ethics, he would not have done what he did, or at the very least he would have carried out his act early in the morning when there was nobody in the building. He chose relativism, based on the anarchy in his heart. He allowed that Jesus shaped void in his life to be filled with hatred and maliciousness and it resulted in needless death, yes, even his own.

8. Abortion

Main Entry: a-bor-tion
Pronunciation: ‘a-bor-shun
Function: noun
1a: Murder of an unborn human child for convenience of parents b: extermination of unborn child on pretense that child may have a birth defect c: genocide of unborn child on pretense that child is result of rape or incest. Note: example 3 only occurs in 1/10th of one percent of abortion cases.

There is no doubt that abortion has been a hot issue in our society. Abortionists say that it is a matter of freedom of choice for women. Pro-life people say that it is infanticide, plain and simple. The theory of evolution has caused the cheapening of the value of life to such a degree that secular society thinks that a child in it’s mother’s womb is not yet human. They use the argument saying that if it isn’t able to survive outside the womb then it is not yet viable. Again, we “survival of the fittest” being used as a crutch. The womb is an envelope that protects the embryo and where it is nourished. We who have been born also need similar things. We need clothing to survive in Autumn, Winter and into Spring. We need food to exist, don’t we. If an abortionist were to be stripped of clothing, forced out into the cold of winter and denied food, would they then be termed as unviable? Wouldn’t the person who forced that person out into the cold be guilty of murder? Yet, it is fashionable to do the same to unborn children. Where is the sense?

The excuse is used by abortionists that abortion should be allowed in case of rape and incest. What they don’t tell the public is that those instances account for only 1/10 of 1 percent of all abortion cases. Yet, they hold up this banner to rally for all abortion cases. The excuse is used for the unborn who are “supposedly” going to be born with birth defects. Well, the question has to be asked, “what if the tests are wrong?” What if the doctor is wrong? Beethoven’s mother had V.D. when she carried him and he was severely impaired, yet he composed some of the most beautiful music that has ever been written. Steven Hawking developed a disabling disease sometime after he was born, but is one of the brightest minds in the scientific community. Where would society be if his parents would have been able to abort him, with the knowledge that he would someday develop such a disease? I know one man who is developmentally disabled, yet he can give you any baseball stat that you would need to know, and I mean any statistic about any team, player or game. Perhaps the abortionists are the disabled ones.

For the most part, abortion is a convenience for a careless and demented generation who want to have their thrills but don’t want to pay the price for their “good times.” Someone once said that since God holds children in such high esteem, and since He is their covering before their age of accountability, that there will be more children in heaven then adults. So, if you have aborted a child or children, and you happen to get your life turned around to God, you will see those kids again and I know that they will love you and forgive you for what you have done.

And one more thing, before I get off this subject. There is a lot of talk going on about our economy; who will fund social security when the baby boomers come of retirement age and such. Well, I suggest to those of you who have selfishly aborted children, that when you come of retirement age, and there is no social security for you to draw from, remember that as of the year 2001, over 40 million potential taxpayers have been aborted since 1973 when abortion was made legal. 

9. Euthanasia:

Main Entry: eu·tha·na·sia
Pronunciation: "yü-th&-'nA-zh(E-)&

Function: noun
Etymology: Greek, easy death, from euthanatos, from eu- + thanatos death
Date: 1869
: the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy.

Euthanasia is actually divided into two different categories, one noble and the other is murder. The first, or noble, type of euthanasia is to let the person die of what is wasting them away. To those not in the western world who might be reading this and explanation is in order. Medical science in the western world is dedicated to trying to keep a person alive no matter what the condition. People lie in hospitals for months and years, kept alive by machines. This is unfair to that person and only prolongs the inevitable death of the person. A small part of this is an ego trip of a physician who thinks that they can cure the person, but a larger part is because the doctor and hospital make a lot of money each day that person lies in a hospital room. So, noble euthanasia is allowing fate take it’s course and allowing the person to pass on without any artificial aids. 

The murderous side of euthanasia is where another person steps in and actually kills the patient to supposedly relieve them of pain and suffering. You see, God has appointed a time for everything:

There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under heaven: a time to be born and a time to die, a time to plant and a time to uproot, a time to kill and a time to heal, a time to tear down and a time to build, a time to weep and a time to laugh, a time to mourn and a time to dance, a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them, a time to embrace and a time to refrain, a time to search and a time to give up, a time to keep and a time to throw away, a time to tear and a time to mend, a time to be silent and a time to speak, a time to love and a time to hate, a time for war and a time for peace. Eccl.  3:1-8

So with abortion as well as euthanasia mankind tries to change the times that have been appointed by God. I found it quite interesting that in the definition above, human suffering is compared to animal suffering. Again we have the inference that mankind is just another animal and should be treated as one. So once again, another fruit of evolution and the mind of man taints the fruit basket.

10. Promiscuity

Main Entry: pro·mis·cu·ous
Pronunciation: pr&-'mis-ky&-w&s
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin promiscuus, from pro- forth + miscEre to mix
Date: 1603
1 : composed of all sorts of persons or things
2 : not restricted to one class, sort, or person : INDISCRIMINATE <education… cheapened through the promiscuous distribution of diplomas — Norman Cousins>

3 : not restricted to one sexual partner

When we think of promiscuity we immediately think of a sexual looseness. We think of men and women who have relations of either a heterosexual or homosexual nature. We can’t deny that our society is a “if it feels right, do it,” society. Once mistakenly thought to be a conduct only of the lower classes or less informed it has come to light in all elements of society. It is because of promiscuity that abortion on demand has become so popular. Again, we have to look at the origins of these actions. When people are told that they are only animals they are going to act like animals. Now I know that there are some who read this who are going to say that promiscuity has always been with us and that one of it’s oldest elements (prostitution) is the worlds oldest profession. But one only has to look back just 30 years or so to see how things have changed. Back then if a woman slept around she was a tramp and was spurned by most people. These days she is credited with her deeds, almost like a hunter who has hash marks in his rifle stock to count the amount of animals he has bagged. Back then when a man was caught with a prostitute he was shamed, got a bad reputation in the neighborhood and might have even lost his job and family. People of high stature used to be ostracized for infidelity and now they are made into icons for all sorts of people. The list goes on and on.

Religion has become quite promiscuous too. The church has mixed all sorts of pagan rituals into its realm. Christmas used to be a day for celebrating the birth of Christ Jesus, but now is a day of Christmas trees, Yule logs, mistletoe, all which have pagan origins. It has become synonymous with going into debt and is more of a shopping holiday than a religious one. Easter (the very name being pagan) used to be a day of celebrating the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the grave, but now it is a day of coloring and hiding eggs and eating chocolate rabbits. Evil will always take over when a people become lax and complacent. The church is trading in its solid foundation for one built on sand. 

One teacher whom I really like to listen to is named Chuck Missler, whose page can be found by clicking here. Chuck relates a funny pun that a friend told him. He said that every morning the monkeys in the zoo get together and tell their youngsters (referring to Humans), “you are not related to those people.” 





Biblical Thought:

The Bible is the inspired Word of God. In it can be found answers to everyday life, codes for moral and satisfying life and societal bliss. But in addition to those things, the Bible is a wealth of prophecy. Basically, prophecy is the writing of history before that history happens. It is not a hard book to understand if one has the Mind of Christ, but to the natural man, it is just a book of stories and to many, a book of contradictions. But, so is a textbook on physics to people not trained in physics. 

The Old Covenant (Testament) of the Bible is, among other things, a story of how mankind cannot (using his own effort) live a happy and fruitful life. By fruitful, I mean a life of producing good fruit. As illustrated in the New Covenant, good fruit can only be produced by regenerated man, with the help of Jesus and the guidance of His Holy Spirit. Now, that regeneration doesn’t make people perfect but sets them on the road toward perfection. It does, however, make a person perfect in God’s eyes because He sees us through Jesus, His son. 

So what does the Bible have to say about mankind in these last days? How did God describe people who have left the firm foundation of Jesus Christ and his Holy Word and replaced it with faulty worldly wisdom? Let’s look below at some key scriptures:


But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God; having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them. They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth; men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone. 2 Timothy 3:1-9

Anyone who has any dealings with the world cannot deny that the scripture above pretty well describes the society that we live in today. I’ll even bet that some Christians have one or more of the lesser attributes in the list. These are the fruits of ungodliness, of a society that would rather rely on mankind for salvation rather than relying on the King of Righteousness. These fruits are all rotten fruits, filled with maggots and disease rendering it inedible and unhealthy.

For the sake of those who don’t know the identity of Jannes and Jambres, I’ll elaborate on the story. Moses was sent several times to persuade Pharaoh to free Israel from their captivity. Each time he went there, Moses would perform a miracle. Jannes and Jambres were the sorcerers in Pharaoh’s court that for the first few times were able to imitate the wonders that God performed through Moses. There came a time though when God’s miracles could not be duplicated and Jannes and Jambres realized that they had come up against the one True God. After that, they tried also to persuade Pharaoh to let Israel go.

In the same way, God has raised up Creation Scientists to prove to a disbelieving world that evolution is bogus and a great lie. For some time now these men have been challenging evolution and its adherents (modern-day Jannes and Jambres) about their claims. For a while, the claims of the Creationists were met with claims of evolutionists, but in recent years the evolutionists haven’t been able to come against the evidence of the truth and have realized that they are failing, and so is their theory. Those who practice real science have been leaving evolution by the droves because the evidence against it is mounting quickly and is undeniable. 


First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this `coming’ he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. 2 Peter 3:3-7

The scripture directly above is a description of evolution theory, written almost two thousand years ago and talking about the time we now live in. There are many scoffers, most of all who believe in evolution, who mock Christianity as a fairy tale. They say Jesus isn’t going to come back because He doesn’t exist. They attack the Genesis account of Creation which is the crux of everything where Christianity and Judaism are concerned. They say that since God didn’t create the Earth (and there is no God) then mankind could not have fallen into sin. You take sin away and you take away the need for a redeemer. That nullifies the need for Jesus and His atoning blood. As we saw at the beginning of this document, they attack the roots of the tree, trying to kill the tree so that it won’t produce good fruit anymore. 

If evolutionist would read the scripture above it would answer a lot of the questions that they have had for years because it describes the age of the creation and also describes the great flood in Genesis, which incidentally altered the geography and geology of this planet a great deal. The universe looks old because He created it that way and you can either take that by faith or waste your life trying to prove Him wrong. It’s like spitting into the wind, the spit comes right back into your face. But I guess that some people have to learn the hard way.

Yes, the Bible is certainly inspired by God and does tell us what is to come. It’s too bad that people refuse to ignore its warnings. Ignorance has never been an excuse recognized by God. It’s sort of like trying to build our own computer. You are given the parts and the instructions. You ignore the instructions and hook your IDE cables wrong. That action burns out the controller on the board. Do you take the board back and expect a free replacement? No, it was you that messed up and you have to fork out the money for a new board.

Now, God is much more gracious. He tells people time and time again that we have the instructions. We have our whole lives to read the instructions and to take the appropriate actions to live a happy and satisfying life, but we put the instruction book on the shelf and say that we’re going to run our lives our own way. Then the person who does that dies let’s say perhaps of a drug overdose, and you will always hear people say that it was so unfair for God to take someone so young whereas, in reality, they didn’t read or heed the instructions. Or in another scenario, a person becomes old and decrepit. They are wracked by a multitude of illnesses that are brought on by stress, hatred or abuse to their bodies and they blame God for their condition. All the time God will say, “if you’d only read the instructions.”

What Is Your Foundation?

There are three types of people who have read this document. First, there is the person who has built their house on the sand (on the mind of man) without a firm foundation. You trust in science for the answers for all of your ills and problems. While science can sometimes provide temporary solutions, it can never satisfy your insatiable hunger for the truth and the true answers to your problems. There will always be some problem that you or the mind of man cannot solve and that will leave you disappointed every time. I’m here to tell you that you are not an animal, but a special creation of the Living God. He formed you in your mother’s womb:

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.  Psalm 139:13-14

You are not an animal:

All flesh is not the same: Men have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. 1 Corinthians 15:39

You are very special to God; so much so that He sent His own Son to tell you:

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. John 3:16-17

He goes out of His way just to find you:

“Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it? And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbors together and says, `Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep.’ I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent. Luke 15:4-7

God is so gracious that once you accept His invitation for salvation through His Son Jesus, he rebuilds you upon a solid foundation:

So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. 2 Corinthians 5:16-21


For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

So God has made provisions, you just have to accept them and live by them, it’s that easy. To find out how to make the transition to a new and glorious life click here.

The second type of person who might read this document is Creationists who mix evolutionary theory in with the creation event. These people ascribe periods of billions of years to the days of creation in order to justify it with evolution theory. I do believe that this is done in order to bring evolution and creation together. I do believe that there are some honest people who do this, but they do it because they can’t take the Bible literally, which is the way that God intends us to take it. There are two insurmountable hurdles that have to be conquered in order for this idea to work. First, there are the problems with plants and sunlight. Let’s read what scripture says:

Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning; the third day.

And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. God made two great lights–the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning; the fourth day.

And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky.” So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” And there was evening, and there was morning–the fifth day. 

And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. Genesis 1:11-24

Now we have some very interesting problems to look at, assuming that the days of creation are really epoch’s like the Day-Age people would have us believe. First, you will notice that all plants were created on the third day, but the sun, moon, and stars were created on the fourth day. So, if the Day-Age people are right, plants thrived for perhaps millions of years without the benefit of the sun. That is ridiculous since plants need sunlight to make food through photosynthesis. I sincerely think that God created things in this manner to throw that theory into chaos.

The next problem is that the land animals (that would include insects) weren’t created until the fifth day. Anyone who knows any biology knows that insects are needed to pollinate plants. It would be a sheer miracle for plants to survive with no sunlight to help them to produce food and no insects to pollinate the plants.

The third and final problem is the word that is used to describe the word “day” in the text. The word in Hebrew is YOM. This is the same word that is used in “Day of Atonement,” and also when God instructed Moses and the Israelites to remember the Sabbath Day and keep it holy.

“Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. Exodus 20:8-11

The third type of person to read this is the person who knows that the Bible is the inspired and infallible word of God. They take it’s meaning quite literally and know that if God says it, He means it, and that settles it. We know that there have been many schemes throughout the millennia to cheapen its words and precepts, but they have all failed and any current and future ones will continue to fail.

But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:14-17

The people of the world prove every day that the Bible is the infallible word of God. Look at any nation that has ever existed when it becomes socialistic or communistic. The first people attacked are the people of the Book, the Jews, and Christians. The first book that is usually banned is the Bible and all its references. That’s because those regimes know that the Bible is full of truth and that it feeds men’s souls. You can’t have dominion over a people if you can’t possess their souls. So, it appears to me that the only people who don’t know the value and power of God’s word are those really don’t want to understand it. Those who hate it know it’s true and those who love it know it’s true. One hates it and another reveres it.

It is my hope that if you are searching for the truth, that you consider reading the Bible. You won’t find truth in evolution because their supposed truths change all the time. The Bible says about Jesus:

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. Hebrews 13:8

But my word to you is this. You will not understand His word unless He shows the true meanings to you. Unless you ask Him to help you understand it, you will become lost in the book. And the only way that He will help you to understand it is if you are searching genuinely for Him:

But if from there you seek the LORD your God, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul. Deuteronomy 4:29

I love those who love me, and those who seek me find me. Proverbs 8:17

“Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. Matthew 7:7-8


So in essence, and not with a lot more words, we have learned some things. First, that everything that we do produces fruits, what we in the common world call results. Some actions cause good fruit to develop and some produce bad fruit. We have seen that living a life in Jesus produces, for the most part, good fruit. Those who are in Jesus Christ only produce bad fruit when they follow worldly ways or self-appeasement.

We have seen the foundations of evolution, that it is of worldly wisdom and that worldly wisdom never gets a man to a point of contentment or productiveness. We have seen that the fruits of evolution and the mind of man are really all the evils that plague a society and I won’t name them again because they are all above.

In recent weeks here in America we have seen what the fruits of men who worship anarchy can accomplish. All of the lives that were lost in New York and Washington, D.C. were the results of men who thought that their ideal was higher than all others and many people have perished as a result of their lack of concern for others who didn’t hold their convictions. They were no more religious than the chimpanzees at the zoo.

As the end of days approaches the bad fruit of such deeds will continue to get worse. It is imperative that if you don’t have a relationship with Jesus Christ, you get one, and quick. There is an eternity and there is Heaven and hell and trust me you don’t want to go to the lower place. If you are a Christian who believes in evolution, you better get your priorities straight because if you are deceived over one part of His word, what is to stop you from being deceived about the rest of God’s words and promises. And if you are a literal Bible believing Christian then you better get into that word, read it, dissect it and study it like you would if you knew that they were going to come to your house and take it away tomorrow.

I pray that the Lord Jesus Christ will touch everyone who reads this document. I pray for peace and contentment through Him in your lives and that we will all meet in Heaven when this is all over and rejoice in Him and His saving grace.


David Ben Ya’akov



Foundation pictures and multiheaded dragon picture found in the book “The Young Earth,” By John D Morris, Ph.D. Permission to use the images on the page as noted on page 141 of this publication.

Some definitions above from search on Merriam Webster Online, except for the abortion definition which I defined because the Webster definition was too politically correct and bias.

Evolution Is A Religion

By David Ben Yakov

© 2003 David Ben Yakov / Delusion Resistance


Sometimes I like to ponder things in my mind. I will look at an idea or someone, examine their good points as well as their bad points. By looking at the actions of a person, or someone who believes in an idea you can pretty well figure out what is right and wrong or what a person’s intentions were. While this works most of the time, there are still times when I am wrong and I feel that I am man enough to admit it.

I have been looking at and reading about evolution for quite some time. In high school, I took an anthropology class and was very interested in the supposed ancestors of humankind. I knew all of the names; such as Australopithecus africanus and such and really embellished what I thought was intelligence.

As I approached the end of my teenage years I found out that Jesus Christ is really the answer, which changed my thoughts about evolution. My thoughts about evolution didn’t change overnight. Many a night I would wonder how evolution played into God’s creation, but I really never could make the two adhere to each other. After a couple of years of basking in the love of God, I came to the conclusion that evolution was dead wrong.

There are Christians I learned, who still believed in evolution. These people, called theistic evolutionists, try to unite the theory of Evolution with God’s creation, and many of them think that they are successful. Such people, I think, really lack a lot of faith in God, thinking that it was too hard for the Master of The Universe to create all that we see in just a literal 7 days. They look at passages in the Bible that might have dual meanings or words that have that same way, and they twist them to meld their love for evolution into Biblical Christianity. It’s too bad that they just can’t believe the Bible literally.

There is a strange thing in this whole evolution versus Christianity thing though. I have not heard of any evolutionary scientist who is trying to bring the Bible into an evolutionary light. Scientists are either hot or cold where the Bible is concerned. When a scientist learns and accepts the truth of Creation, they change totally and become strong Bible-believing Christians.

The important thing here is to define what science is. According to the dictionary, the definition of science is:

Science: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method ….. the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding.

So we see by the above definition, that true science should be defined as facts, backed up by tests using the scientific method. So, what is the scientific method? It is defined below.

Scientific Method: principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.

From the definitions above, we know without a shadow of a doubt that something can only become a scientific fact if it passes all of the rigors of scientific method. When a theory is established as fact, it becomes a law of science. Laws do not have to be proven anymore, they are established and concrete.

Take for instance the Law of Gravity. It is readily observed, you can experiment to your heart’s delight and it still stays the same, because it is a law. On the other hand, theories are mere conjecture, as is stated in the definition below. They should not be presented as fact and certainly not taught as fact. But we must remember that to become a theory, there has to be a reason to believe that the speculation could be true.

Theory: Pronunciation: ‘thE-&-rE, ‘thi(-&)r-E
Function: noun
Etymology: Late Latin theoria, from Greek theOria, from theOrein
Date: 1592
The analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another : abstract thought :
SPECULATION : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <wave theory of light> : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : CONJECTURE.

Take for example seeing a house out in the country from very far off. When you first see it, you might make a few assumptions. You think, well, since this is out west, it is probably a stucco or adobe house with an old tile roof. Your theory is that you saw in a great distance a white adobe house with a tile roof. That is what you will tell your friends about your journey. You believe you are right but it is only through conjecture or speculation (theory).

Had you taken the time to hike to the house, as you would have gotten closer you would have had to change your opinion, because you notice now that you can see slats going across the house, denoting that the house has a wooden exterior with a dark tile roof. So you continue to walk onward toward the house and you notice that the roof is not tile at all, but is made up of shingles. Just by observing the house over a period of time, you have had to realize that the first conjecture was wrong. The fact (or law) is that the house is a wooden exterior with a shingled roof. If so required, you could even perform more tests on the house. For instance, it is possible that the siding is plastic siding, which is made to look like wood siding. A simple knock on the material would confirm or deny your suspicions. You could even take a core sample to examine if it is wood or particle board. You will notice that this was only done with direct observation. The only way you knew for sure was by time and tests.

For the next step, we jump 2000 years into the future. The observer is walking where that old house once stood. The elements have destroyed almost all vestiges of the old structure. The only thing that remains is a foundation. He looks real carefully because he wants to know how the old house was built. He wants to know what it looked like. He speculates that old houses in this part of the country were built of stucco or adobe, and that that they had tile roofs. If he is lucky, he might have found some old rusty nails or perhaps some copper pipe, but that is all he can find. Both of those materials were used in many types of homes. So, without knowing much, he makes his assumption and writes his theory. He knows that he can’t be wrong about his theory because he has been taught that all houses had that type of foundation 2000 years ago and because of where it was, it had to be adobe or stucco with a dark tile roof. He is dead wrong, but because of the status quo of current thought, he is right on the mark. If he were proved wrong, he would cover it up and continue the lie. Some institutions do not like to be challenged that they might be wrong.

Now let us look at evolution. First of all, what they say is evidence is really only taken from dead things. The foundation of evolution is what is called the Geologic Time Table. You see, without time, evolution is dead. The interesting thing about the geologic timetable is that it was formulated back in the nineteenth century, close to 100 years before radio-metric or isotope dating ever came on the scene. With this timetable, it was assumed that the deeper you go, the older the fossil or layer of rock should be dated. So someone got the bright idea and said, “this clamshell is on the bottom layer. It must be the oldest, so I say it is 750 million years old.” So the assumption that all layers of that particular shell had to be around 750 million years old was formulated. Today in evolution something called “circular reasoning” is used to explain dates. If you were to find a fossil and send it to a archeologist and ask them how old it was, he would look at index fossils and tell you the age of the fossil, judging by the index fossil. How did he know the age of the fossil? He knew by what layer it was found in. If you took him a mineral sample from the same layer, he would ask you what sort of fossils are in the same layer and would make his assumption on that basis. Thus you have circular reasoning. It is faulty whether you are talking about 2000 year old house foundations or fossils, or anything else for that matter.

Scientists might argue that they have reliable dating methods that they use to date fossils and rock layers. The first method that they argue for is called Carbon-14, a radioactive carbon that is found in all living things. What science will not tell you is that it is not very reliable. Carbon 14 tests done on living animals have shown them in some instances to be hundreds if not thousands of years old. Where is the reliability here? Some try to say that they have used Carbon 14 to date fossils back hundreds of thousands of years. Carbon 14 has a relatively short half-life and dates past ten thousand years are impossible and absurd.

Scientists claim with great pride the second test, called potassium-argon dating. It too has shown to be unreliable. To prove my point, tests recently done on a fresh lava flow has shown it to be hundreds of millions of years old. The lies and falsehoods go on and on…

Let me ask you something. Let us suppose that you were not feeling well and you went to the doctor. Let us say that you have pain in the right upper quadrant of your abdomen. To add to this, you have yellowing of the skin and the white part of your eyes is a shade of yellow too. The doctor takes a blood sample from you and sends it to the laboratory. The laboratory performs the tests of your blood, but the tests are faulty. The laboratory sends back the result of the test telling the doctor that you are low in iron. The doctor (albeit a very stupid physician) prescribes iron pills and sends you home. The weeks go by and you get progressively worse. You have faith though that the doctor and lab knew what they were doing, so you do not question them. A year goes by and you find out that you are dying because you have had hepatitis the whole time and the laboratory and doctor didn’t tell the truth. This all happened because of faulty tests and a doctor that you thought you could blindly trust.

I think we all agree that the little story above is pretty horrible. I also think we all know doctors who would fit into that category. But I pose another question to you. Why do people blindly believe that science is right about evolution? It is because modern society has mistakenly put supposed highly educated people in a god-like class. We assume that because they have a diploma from an institution of higher learning hanging on their wall, they are correct about almost everything. What most people do not realize is that although much intelligence is taught in those institutions, very little morality or common sense is taught to the students. You can master all of the knowledge of the universe, but if it is not coupled together with morality and common sense then it is useless.

Evolution Is The Religion:

There are some of you who are probably thinking that I have gone crazy for making the statement that evolution is actually a religion. Before you judge any further, let us look at what a religion is and what one has to do to participate in a religion. Below is a definition of religion found on the Internet at the Webster’s site:

I suppose we should look at ways in which those who believe in evolution are faithful in their religious beliefs.

1. Belief in a “Big Bang,” that they have no proof of.

2. Belief in life which resulted from chemical processes, of which they have no proof.

3. Belief in an old Earth, for which no convincing proof has ever been found.

4. Belief in macro-evolution without producing any transitionary forms.

5. Belief in uniformitarianism, that all environmental processes have always been the same on Earth, with no proof of that hypothesis.

I like to read articles in the newspapers that promote evolution theory. It is the only reason that I take the paper at all.  If you examine the articles you will notice that the scientists are not very sure of themselves. There are in many instances phrases like: “scientist’s hope,” “scientist’s supposed,” and “scientist’s surmise,” all phrases that should be big red flags for the reader. The articles are filled with other words, such as: “could,” “if,” “may,” and “might.” Think about what is being said. There is not a great deal of confidence in those words.

I think that a person who believes in such a doubtful religion is really grasping for straws. I know that as a practicing, Bible-believing Christian, I have a great deal of faith. For instance, I know that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, lived here on Earth, died for my sin, and was resurrected. I also know, like I know the map of my own hand, that He will return again. Now, my hope is that it will be during my lifetime, but I know it will happen. But where evolution is built on suppositions without any evidence at all, I have a book, called the Bible, which has been proven to be ancient. That book has prophecies, many of which have been proven by their fulfillment with many more to be fulfilled in the future, and that, might I add, is more scientific than evolution.

Why Do Evolutionists Believe So Ardently?

That is one of the simpler questions to answer in the whole big mess. The basis for their disbelief is a blatant disregard for the Living God and a rebellious attitude that has hardened their hearts. Actually, their actions are a sign of the times, and a sign of things to come. Below you can read about what was prophesied in the Bible about these times, and these people:

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 2 Timothy 4: 3-4

It is not hard to see how big a fable that evolution is. Men do not want to be accountable to God, so they listen to the things that they want to hear. In the end, this will only lead to destruction. Incidentally, the definition for the word “fable,” is: “a fictitious narrative or statement: as a: a legendary story of supernatural happenings.” That is what evolution is, fiction!

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, truce breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 2 Timothy 3: 1-7

The scripture above says just about all about the heart of the evolutionist. If a man loves himself, he cannot love God. It is even hard for such a person to love other human beings. The words that follow in that scripture give an illustration of the attributes of those who value themselves above others. And isn’t that what the theory of evolution is all about, survival of one’s self, survival of the fittest. Nothing else matters but self and the perpetuation of one’s self. Finally, the end sentence illustrates what I said about some people who are educated at institutions of higher learning. A person can attain all the information that there is to learn but still not know the truth.

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished. 2 Peter 3: 3-6

The above scripture reads as a prophecy of evolutionary theory. It is quite evident that evolution mocks Christianity. They are scoffers who say that they have a better way. They say that creation is not possible. Because they deny creation, they deny God and our Lord Jesus Christ, and cannot possibly believe in his return.

Where the scripture says, “for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation,” talks about the belief that many evolutionist’s hold which is called “uniformitarianism.” That belief suggests that all of the processes of nature have been uniform since the formation of the Earth. This denies the creation and the Genesis flood.

The scripture goes on to say, “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished,” which has some very interesting implications. First, it says that the evolutionist is willingly ignorant, meaning that they know the truth but willfully refuse to believe it. Next, the article says that God created the Earth and universe with the appearance of being old. The evolutionist teaches that the Earth was formed billions of years ago, denying the Word of God. The evolutionist teaches that the Earth was formed as a molten globe and that water later formed as a result of steam from volcanoes and such. The Bible teaches that God had water on the Earth first and then formed the land. And finally, the evolutionist denies a worldwide flood and that God preserved mankind and animals through escape in the ark. This is where the evolutionist is very much willfully ignorant because of all of the pieces of evidence of Noah’s flood all over the face of the globe.

What is Religion?

I got to the Websters Online Dictionary and looked up the word, “religion,” for this little study. The definition of religion is:

Main Entry: religion
Pronunciation: ri-‘li-j&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back
Date: 13th century
1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

Another dictionary explains “religion” in these terms:

Religion: a belief in, recognition of or an awakened sense of, a higher, unseen controlling power or powers with the emotion or morality connected therewith: rites or worship: any system of such belief or worship: devoted fidelity: monastic life.

So we see that a definition of a religion, as defined above in choice number two and especially in choice number four, does not necessarily have to do with a belief in God, but can be defined as a principle or cause held to with ardor and faith. Now let us look now at what defines faith:

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Hebrews 11:1

Below I have put the definition of faith from the Websters electronic dictionary, for those of you who may not accept a Biblical interpretation:

Main Entry: faith
Pronunciation: ‘fAth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural faiths /’fAths, sometimes ‘fA[th]z/
Etymology: Middle English feith, from Old French feid, foi, from Latin fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust — more at BIDE
Date: 13th century
1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one’s promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs

You will notice that the Webster’s definition of “faith” is the same as the Biblical definition. I think that we can, in simple terms, explain the faithful of a religion as those who have become an institution by their faith, which is a belief in something in which there is no scientific proof. If you can’t see it, and no one has ever seen it, and there is no proof that it happened then to believe it is certainly faith and when it is instituted with a group of others, it is a religion.

The first part of the definition of a religion has to do with faith. It is a belief in something, a faith in an unseen but controlling being or force. Where do evolutionists fall into this category? Evolution is permeated with faith. First, the belief in the Big Bang. Evolutionists believe that the whole universe started from just a small area of matter that exploded in some way to cause the universe. They, however, don’t have an answer as to what caused the initial spark for the bang. They don’t know where it started from or anything else about it for that matter. Yet, they believe in the bang and the force (whatever it was) that started the whole ball of wax in progress. Isn’t it faith to believe in something that you never saw, in whatever started it. Yet, when a Christian professes a loving God that created the whole deal, they are called narrow-minded and arrogant.

Secondly, evolutionists believe that life started from a single cell. For a long time, scientists thought that a cell was a simple thing, sort of trivial. Recent studies in biology have shed light on a whole new world. A cell is like a little factory, taking in food, producing energy and sustaining itself if need be. The DNA in each cell could fill many volumes with your personal information, yet it is all kept in one little package, the cell. It is virtually impossible to even think that such complexity could be manufactured by some amino-acids getting together billions of years ago. Again, there is a lot of faith involved here.

Let’s look at the third aspect of evolution faith. Any biologist should be able to tell you that 99 percent of mutations that occur are detrimental or fatal to an organism. Yet, the faith of evolutionists would have you believe that hundreds of thousands, if not millions of mutations have occurred to produce all of the varied species that live now or have lived in the past on the Earth. Since the miraculous only is believed by those with faith, then we have to assume that evolutionists live by faith in miraculous mutations.

A fourth aspect of faith could be summed up by what Charles Darwin said about evolution. He said that if evolution is true, then we should stumble over transitional fossil forms when we step out of our houses. In essence, what he was saying is that there should be a lot of fossils of animals that were transitional forms. For instance, there should be many fossils of animals that are between reptiles and birds, or between reptiles and mammals, in the evolutionary scale. To this day, not one viable transition fossil has been found. So, since nothing of this sort has been found, to believe them (or that they will be found) is faith. There are other examples of the faith of evolutionists, but time and bandwidth cause me to move on.

Emotions and Morality:


While some debaters on the evolution side do conduct themselves in a dignified manner, the majority do not. When you challenge an evolutionist by debating him or her about their beliefs and theories, you are attacking their foundational theology. Similar responses can be seen with any religions debate.

Recently, I saw a debate on the Larry King Show, where there was a quite a debate. The debate centered on whether it was wrong for Christians to tell Jews about Jesus. You could tell that the air at the station was filled with fuel and it took all the expertise of Larry King to keep an explosion from happening. There was a militant Rabbi there who came out of the gates in anti-Christian rhetoric. For an hour he more or less made an ass of himself and constantly threw contentious remarks at everyone.

Now, why was the Rabbi acting in such a matter? I believe that he thought that attacking from the start would give him the edge. He felt intimidated and wanted to establish that he was right before anyone else could talk. The same thing happens in many Creationism versus evolution debates. Now, I am not saying that all creationists are above this form of attack, but many are because they have a solid foundation to stand on.

Laurence Tisdall, founder, and president of the Christian Science Association of Quebec tells an interesting story of a debate that he had with one female evolutionist. Mr. Tisdall tells of a teacher at one university who was a very calm person. She was known in her school as having a very even personality and it seemed that she didn’t get mad about anything. Mr. Tisdall says that he presented the creationist side of the debate. He turned to look at the teacher, who was now red in the face. She yelled at Laurence and stomped out of the room. Why was such an even-tempered person provoked to such anger? It is because Mr. Tisdall challenged the very foundation of the woman’s beliefs. He stomped on her religious toes. You can visit Laurence Tisdall’s site by following the link below:


So, we know from the definition of a religion, that morality has a lot to do with being religious. The definition of a moral person is thus:

Moral: of or relating to character or conduct considered as good or evil: ethical: conformed to or directed toward right, virtuous: esp, vortuous in matters of sex: capable of knowing right and wrong: subject to moral law: supported by evidence of reason or probability.

So, in essence, a moral person, should, through a moral code of laws, be able to tell the difference between right and wrong and they should also be directed toward right, rather than wrong.

It seems that evolution is lacking in this aspect of a religion. There have been finds that have been falsified, such as Nebraska man and Piltdown man that been proved as fakes. The moral person would have been quite embarrassed by such forgeries, humbled themselves and done a self-examination. Yet, evolutionists just sweep such frauds under the rug and move on.

Then there are the dating methods that are constantly thrown at an unsuspecting and unknowing public. Evolutionists know that most methods are unreliable, giving different readings all of the time. They take the time reading that most closely fits their model and accept it no matter how many other “dates” are contrary to their find.

So, how can such people be so immoral, yet still be classified as being in a religion? The answer is very simple. You see, there are many religions in the world today. Most of the larger religions, such as Christianity and Judaism live under strict guidelines, basically the Ten Commandments. We know right from wrong and have a conscience. Even the Eastern Religions, including but not limited to Hinduism and Buddhism live by moral codes. While they differ greatly with the Western Religions, they still ponder cause and effect before (hopefully before) they act. And even if they don’t consider cause and effect before they act, they are aware of the effect of their actions, and perform some sort of act, asking their deity for forgiveness.

There are however other religions who act with a different intent than the main religions of the Earth. Take for instance the headhunters of Borneo. They thought nothing of cutting off the head of enemies or visitors. There was no ill effect to their moral codes for doing such things that made men of other religions recoil in terror. So you see, a religion doesn’t have to conform to the basic religious model.

To the evolutionist, there really is no moral code to speak of. To them, if you make a mistake, just go out and find another skull that looks a little less ape-like. If you make a mistake in dating a find, just use another dating method until you find the one that shows you correct. If you find rock layers that don’t jive with your thinking, just think up some sort of geological event that changed the rock layers. To quote an infamous American leader, “it’s all according to what your definition of the word ‘is,’ is”

Rites and worship:

I believe that before we go to this next subject of rites and worship; we should first define such terms:

Rite: n. a ceremonial form or observance, especially religious: a liturgy.

Worship: n. adoration paid, as to a god: religious service: profound admiration and affection: the act of revering or adoring.

The best analogy to the evolutionist’s rites and worship of their finds and religion can be compared to the various apparitions of Catholicism’s Virgin Mary that I have heard of throughout my life. Firstly, a fame that is given to the person who first sees the image of the virgin. Next, there always a picture either on television or in the newspaper of the supposed image, even though it never looks remotely like the Virgin Mary. Next, there is the faithful who flock to see the image and finally, the image disappears or is refuted as being imaginary or just a coincidence. After it is all over, the faithful people still believe that they saw an image of the Virgin Mary even though they never really had any tangible evidence that it was there.

In the evolutionist example, the discoverer is praised for the discovery. If that person is famous, like Louis Leakey, it is all the better. Sort of like a priest finding the Virgin Mary, there is no question that it is real. Next, the few pieces of skull, and perhaps a tooth are miraculously fashioned into a full skull that looks something like a cross between ape and human. It is photographed by the press, or the all faithful National Geographic Society and the image is shown to millions of faithful worldwide. Those even more faithful, Leakey’s fellow archeologists see the find and worship it with full adoration because although it was just a tooth and a few pieces of skull, it proves in their eyes that their religion is valid. Finally, the truth comes out and we hear from unbelievers, that the tooth was really found half a mile from the skull fragments, and that those fragments are really inconclusive, and could have originated from a true ape or a true man. The faithful still believe that the skull is from the missing link, knowing that the tooth was moved to its place half a mile away by some geologic force and that that the skull just has to be what they were looking for. All without tangible evidence.

Now we have to look at what happens when certain relics are found, and the care that they are given. In many religions, certain relics are kept to prove to the faithful that their faith is not in vain.

Take for instance the Shroud of Turin. There are many of the faithful who believe that the shroud actually covered the body of Jesus Christ when he was placed in the tomb. While science has neither proved or disproved this to be a fact, the shroud is held as sacred to many Catholics. It is placed in a church in Turin and is taken out from time to time to exhibit to the faithful.

Evolutionists do the same thing for the faithful in their religion. The pieces of skull that I mentioned are meticulously fashioned into the image that the discoverer wants. Even though no one ever saw the creature that the bones belonged too, a mental image is made into reality using clay and implements. The finished product is displayed in a museum or in magazines for the faithful, to bolster their faith.

So you see, both modes of belief took a great deal of faith. Both modes could not be substantiated by scientific method but both religions had faith that what they believe is true. You make the call.

Devoted fidelity:

Another word for fidelity is faithfulness. When a spouse has cheated on another spouse, it is called infidelity, or unfaithfulness. So, to have devoted fidelity to one’s religion is to have unswerving faith in your God. The argument could be made that evolutionists have no god, but in all reality, their god is mankind, whom they have elevated to the highest form of evolution, therefore god over evolution.

To persons of many religious faiths, fidelity comes in some basic forms. First and foremost is the adherence to a set of moral codes, set upon them by their deity. Secondly, there is an unswerving faith that their faith is the one and only true faith. Thirdly, but not necessarily last in the order, is the devoted commitment to the deity itself.

So how does the evolutionist fit into this mold? The moral code that evolutionists believe in is that whatever they have written is the gospel. Evolution is true and all other modes of belief are moot, even to the point of publicly denouncing other forms of faith in the press or in great debates. Since man is their deity and the highest form of evolution, then the smartest men (in their eyes, scientists) are the writers of their moral codes. Those codes are gospel. And since man is the deity to evolutionists, then they are dedicated to committing themselves to man, and only man. That is one of the reasons why they become so impassioned about their cause in debates. When they are defeated in debates, they are dethroned from their divinity title. So, we see that in this aspect, evolution is a religion. They just have different gods.

Monastic lifestyle:

Many religions around the world incorporate those who live a monastic lifestyle. Catholicism, Hinduism and many of the eastern religions have those who remove themselves from worldly concerns in order to find a path closer to their god. Many of these sects are so far removed that they rarely see normal people in the outside world.

So, how are evolutionists like this? The higher-ups in evolution have basically removed themselves from normal society. They rarely leave the college campus and really refuse to fellowship with those who are less enlightened than themselves. Those who are out in the field usually stay in the field, only to come into public light when they want to show something that they have discovered, after which they sneak back to their form of a monastery.


I think that I have proved that evolution is a religion. Let’s face it; there are more similarities than differences where modes of belief are concerned. As a religion, there are some social implications that has not been addressed.

First, since evolution is a religion, it should not be subsidized by the government. To me, this seems like what the ACLU terms a violation of the separation of Church and State, as accorded in the Constitution. Billions of dollars of government grants are given each year for the furtherment of evolutional study.

Secondly, evolution should not be taught as a theory or fact in public schools. This is another clear violation of the constitution. I have proved that evolution is a faith, and if one looks at it clearly, it takes more faith to believe in it than other faiths do. So, let’s get it out of our schools.

Thirdly, evolution is a danger to our society. It is the foundation for racism, abortion, and hatred in this society. We would all do better without it.