Okay, Let's Tackle It: Looking at the Evidence in the Evolution/Creation Debate

“Was the eye contrived without skill in opticks, and the ear without knowledge of sounds?”

            - Isaac Newton

     It was time to pull back my sleeves and dig in!  From all the evidence I've been able to find, and I've really been looking for some irrefutable, hard evidence, evolution has not been found to exist in the fossil record, or in any living creatures on earth.  I'm not talking about evolution in the general sense.  Of course species change over time!  I'm talking about Darwinian evolution.  When people, especially scientists, talk about believing in the theory of evolution, this is the type of evolution they're referring to.  It's not general changes in a species or a culture over time, which any idiot believes, of course.  They're talking about the Darwinian origin of life, species turning into other species, and man evolving from lower forms of life, traced all the way back to a single cell forming by chance in some primordial pool, and by the way, since they're usually atheists, all of this occurred without God or any kind of designer.  It's just an accident; you know, happenstance and all that!  Here's just a small smattering of some of the evidence I've found.  You can find it too, if you look hard enough.  The funny thing is, evolutionary scientists will use this same failed science as (somehow, and incredibly) proof of evolution!  Check it out for yourselves and see if they don't!
     An experiment (one of hundreds) with fruit flies to produce a new species never produced anything but mutated fruit flies (that couldn’t survive, I might add).  Even with scientists actually trying to produce a new species by any manner of means, they never produced anything but fruit flies.  A fruit fly is a fruit fly is a fruit fly, and it is neither a butterfly nor a bird, nor will it ever be.  A lizard is not a bird, and will never be a bird, and will never give birth to a bird, no matter how many years we may give it to evolve into a bird.  
     Have you ever asked yourself this question?  If all of these species are supposedly changing into other species, as the Darwiniacs say, then where is the abundant evidence (let alone any at all) of all the intermediate species that would have needed to exist in order for one species to become another?  Why are there no intermediate species currently living (say a creature that is part lizard, part bird)?  In fact, why are there species?  If everything and everyone, every creature and every plant, is in the process of evolving, there shouldn’t be distinct species, only intermediates in one long, evolving line.  The scientists then say "Puncuated mutation."  Oh, of course.  How convenient!  
     Or how about this question:  If we all evolved from a single cell, then how did the eye evolve?  Not only that, but how did it possibly evolve time and time again with all the various species, including the compound eyes of a fly, the front seeing human eye, the side seeing bird’s eye, or the fossils of the Trilobite arthropod from the early Cambrian period that some scientists say is more complex than the human eye, or the hookup to the brain to allow the collected images to be processed?  How about the ear, or the brain?  If lizards evolved into birds, then how did legs become wings?  It's a legitimate question to ask of a scientific community that expounds such things.  Over the millions of years (or at the very, very least, hundreds of thousands of years if we’re talking about the scientific concept of “punctuated mutations”) it would take for lizards to evolve into birds, their complex, scaled legs turning into differently structured yet even more complex feathered wings would first have to become useless appendages, and lizards with useless appendages would be much less likely to survive, let alone thrive and dominate among their kin who all have good, strong legs!  Darwin's theory was of "survival of the fittest" after all, and that crazy looking lizard with that ridiculous, useless leg wouldn't be as likely to survive, especially if all the other lizards didn't want to mate with the poor, unfortunate creature with the leg/wing appendage - unless... unless all the other lizards started developing these leg/wing appendages at the same time (!)... which throws even another wrench into the evolutionists' theory!  In order to work with the concept of "survival of the fittest", which IS how nature operates, it would then have to mean that this rather miraculous punctuated mutation would have to affect an entire species all at the same time, over and over again from one lizard to the next!  In order for this ugly little lizard to survive and evolve into a bird, it would have to fly in the face of all the reasoning behind Darwin's "survival of the fittest" that Darwin had so boldly proclaimed, and that scientists embraced whole-heartedly!  Scientists have still never been able to explain this.  But even if, by some miracle, all the other lizards had the same useless appendages at the same time, the odds on these useless appendages becoming wings by chance, or even with environmental influences, are still so great as to be impossible!  Multiply this one little change by all the changes needed to create all these different species, and the odds become so overwhelmingly against it occurring as to enter into the realm of the utterly ridiculous and unbelievable – requiring the need for faith - and yet this is the theory that scientists and teachers believe in without any reservations whatsoever?  
       If all these changes supposedly occurred to create all these species, where is the evidence in life today OR in the fossil record?  There is no lizard/bird creature that I know of, and don’t even bring up Archaeopteryx!  (1) There is evidence that Archaeopteryx may have been an elaborate hoax, (2) there is no living or fossil evidence to support the supposition that a lizard became Archaeopteryx and then Archaeopteryx became a bird, and (3) using the carbon dating system, some fossils of ancient birds have been found that predate Archaeopteryx.  And that's just one example.  (Yes, I have more).
     In all, science has been unable to prove that one species has ever become another species, though it was fun to suppose that we evolved from lizards and marmosets for that crazy Star Trek: The Next Generation episode “Genesis,” which also showed Data’s cat Spot de-evolving into a lizard.  Evolutionary theory itself can be just as fun sometimes, but is as fictional as this Star Trek episode.
     Here’s just a few more example (and sorry for such a long post, but the usual retort from the scientific community would be "Is that all you got?" and then to refute the evidence with just a smirk, and so the creationists then have to be rather long winded with their response, "No, I'm just getting started!"):

     Scientists claim that we evolved from a single cell created by chance in a “primordial soup” here on Earth.  This sounds simple and believable enough until you realize exactly what it would take to create a “simple” single cell.  The design of a cell is so intricate and complex as to rival a modern man-made city, all shrunk to microscopic size.  In the field of evolution, it is generally thought that because these things are small, they are not complex, and have the ability to “spring up by chance.”  Yet these building blocks are just as complex as the organisms made up of them.  In the “simple” cell, for instance, different parts of the cell serve different functions, and each part is not able to survive outside the cell membrane wall separated from the other working parts of the cell.  These amino acids, which combine to create proteins, tend to break down naturally rather than combine, so for them to create a stable protein to begin with, in any kind of solution or atmosphere, is already difficult to fathom.  When these miraculous amino acids combined in these “plasma pools” (doing the opposite of what normal amino acids tend to do), any oxygen in the air would have caused oxidization, which is deadly to amino acids.  Yet equally deadly would have been an atmosphere with no oxygen; without oxygen, there would have been no o-zone layer, meaning the earth would have been bombarded with deadly ultraviolet radiation, which also kills amino acids.  The amino acids in existence within our own bodies are protected by the very cell membrane walls they are a part of, but back when they were just forming, there were no cell membranes to protect them.  This whole argument casts a tremendous shadow of doubt on belief in the theory of evolution, for there are not one, not two, but thousands of near impossible events that would have to occur in order to create a cell that the forming of one without the aid of a designer to make it all happen could only be described as a “miracle.”

     From there, scientists say that all life evolved from this single cell (or even more miraculous, they claim that the impossible happened many times over, with many cells springing into existence by chance).  They then claim that these single cells later split into other cells, eventually becoming organisms with two cells, then three, then four, and so on.  Yet the scientific community has not discovered the existence of any two celled organisms, either alive or in the fossil records, nor any three, four, five, or six celled organisms.  Additionally, all organisms in existence today that have less than 20 cells, except for a single celled organism, are parasites that exist merely to live off of other organisms with more cells.  So if these single celled organisms that sprang into existence somehow developed into organisms with more than twenty cells, then how did they manage to get past these hurdles?  How did they develop into organisms with more than twenty cells if there were no other organisms to live off of at the time as a parasite, or no creator to lend them a hand?  Science cannot explain this.

     Somewhere along the evolutionary line, sexual reproduction had to enter into the picture, with the equivalent of male and female reproductive organs developing independently of each other, yet absolutely dependent on the counterpart organism in order to function properly and be able to perpetuate the continued existence of the species.  One change, even a microscopic one, in the makeup of either organism would mean the end of the sexual reproduction of the species (they would be unable to perpetuate themselves).  Exactly how did sexual reproductive organs evolve?

     As with the first cell, those first multi-celled organisms were also highly complex, and not “simple” in the least.  The bacterias Salmonella, E. Coli, and Streptococci all propel themselves with the use of a tiny, highly efficient, built-in motor, complete with bushings, rods, rings, rotors, s-rings, sophisticated sensors, switches, and control mechanisms.  Man himself has been unable to duplicate it to build as efficient a motor, yet according to scientists, these tiny bacterial motors evolved by chance on a microscopic scale.  Eight million of these motors could fit on the cross-sectional area of a normal human hair!
     I believe in an intelligent designer.  Boy, do I ever!  I guess I wanted to believe all along.  Some of these proofs, and more, helped to open my eyes and give me the answers I’d been looking for all along concerning the arguments for or against both evolution and creation.

- From my journal, 1995