Science says that the world came into existence through evolution.
\nIt is necessary to describe what science is in order to be able to judge whether this is true.<\/p>\n
What a university says about science:<\/strong><\/p>\n The goal of science is: To search for general truth. Science tries to advance further than general knowledge.<\/strong><\/p>\n There is an evolution of the truth in science. For example Aristotle: He claimed that women have fewer teeth than men. By means of a simple contra experiment it can be demonstrated that women and men both have the same number of teeth.<\/p>\n Science<\/strong> will not simply accept all the dogmas, therefore, but will take a critical stance<\/strong>. Then arises the question of absolute truth<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Science wants to get closer to the \u2018truth\u2019 using methods. To this point: how a university describes how science proceeds.<\/p>\n A few examples from history<\/span> <\/a>that confirm the above are to be found here.<\/p>\n It can be concluded from these examples that scientific truth can come about in two ways:<\/p>\n The question is:\u00a0 Does the theory of evolution satisfy these criteria?<\/strong><\/p>\n The book Darwin wrote about the origin of the species was published in 1859. But does Darwin also give evidence of these developments in his book??<\/p>\n Anyone reading his book for the first time will notice that Darwin often speaks about what he \u2018believes\u2019, what he \u2018assumes\u2019, or what he \u2018takes as read\u2019, without really presenting any evidence however. Darwin himself already saw difficulties with regard to his theory. For example, he writes in this chapter: \u201cBut assuredly, if this theory be true<\/strong>, such have lived upon this earth\u201d. A little further on: \u201cTo the question why we do not find records of these vast primordial periods, I can give no satisfactory answer<\/strong>\u201d. Therefore: \u201cThe case at present must remain inexplicable<\/strong>; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained. To show that it may hereafter receive some explanation, I will give the following hypothesis<\/strong>\u201d.<\/p>\n Darwin presented no evidence for his claims therefore, and he himself was not 100% convinced of the truth thereof.<\/p>\n Question: Has his theory been confirmed nevertheless, in the course of the past 150 years?<\/strong><\/p>\n Scientists do their utmost to find proofs, and keep coming back with theories which are then later refuted. It is general knowledge that there are still scientists today\u00a0– and have been, in the course of history,\u00a0– who adapt the results of their research to the theory of evolution, to score somehow in the world of science. Science has been unable to prove the theory of evolution until now.<\/strong> The fact alone, that Pasteur has demonstrated that life does not come into existence spontaneously from dead matter should be sufficient for science to reject the theory of evolution. Darwin gave science a model of the origin of the world in which there is no place for God. Scientists like doing science without having to give account to the Creator of life.<\/p>\n Did the world come into existence through creation? Nevertheless, in recent years, more and more scientists are admitting that their scientific findings cannot be brought into agreement with the world\u2019s having come into existence through evolution. They do not know how creation did take place, but the theory of evolution does not offer them a satisfactory explanation for the results of their scientific research. Scientists who believe that God is the Intelligent Creator of the world are seeing repeated confirmation of this in their scientific research. More about the creation of the world is to be found in the study \u2018The origin of the world\u2019<\/span><\/a>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>Expressed differently: To search for what is true.
\nThe means of doing this are:<\/p>\n\n
\nIn the past it was the godhead or another authority that determined what was true and what was not true.<\/p>\n
\nScience begins from that moment.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nThis leads to a law, i.e. to knowledge that has a basis<\/span>.<\/strong><\/p>\nExamples from history.<\/span><\/h3>\n
\n
\nThese are only accepted, however, after they have been proved scientifically.
\n(Einstein had thus to wait 14 years for recognition of his theory of relativity!)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nDarwin and the theory of evolution.<\/span><\/h3>\n
\nSince then science generally accepts that the world came into existence through evolution, over a period of billions of years.
\nIn his theory Darwin claims that all life on earth began with the spontaneous coming into existence of the first simple organisms. From these more complex forms of life evolved, step by step, by coincidental mutations.
\nThis was accompanied by his idea that new forms of life would be better adapted to the environment in which they lived, as a result of which they have a better chance of survival, and the previous forms of life die out.
\nIn this way, in the course of the centuries, the diversity in the world as we know it came about.<\/p>\n
\nHe demonstrates in his book that many different races of dogs, cats, horses and all kinds of animals can be bred.
\nHe did not prove in his book how a higher form of life could evolve from a lower form of life however.
\nFurthermore, if the previous forms of life are to die out, why are they still in existence today??<\/p>\n
\nHe refers to a number of these in the chapter \u2018On the incompleteness of the geological archive\u2019.
\nHe points out i.a. the fact that no fossils with intermediate forms of life are to be found. Nonetheless, thousands of intermediate forms must be found.<\/p>\n
\nSo Darwin himself does not appear to be convinced that his theory is true.<\/p>\n
\nThen Darwin indicates how eminent geologists dispute one another\u2019s conclusions, \u2026 but: \u201cWe should not forget that only a small portion of the world is known with accuracy\u201d.<\/p>\n
\nThe missing fossil links have not been found, in spite of the fact that millions of fossils have been found, throughout the whole world, during the course of the past 150 years.<\/p>\n
\nIt is also general knowledge that scientists lose their subsidies and, often, their job as well, if they dare to declare their doubt about the accuracy of the theory of evolution in their writings.<\/p>\nConclusion:<\/span><\/h3>\n
\nThe theory of evolution does not satisfy the conditions necessary to be \u201cscientific\u201d, as sketched above by a university.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nThen why does the scientific world hold on to the theory of evolution, even though it has not been proved?<\/p>\nCreation.<\/span><\/h3>\n
\nThe fact that the theory of evolution has not been proved does not automatically mean that the world came into existence through creation.<\/p>\n
\nMany of them are convinced that an extraordinary intelligence must lie at the basis of the origin of the world, even though they are unable to clarify what they mean.<\/p>\n
\nThey cannot prove that the world was created by God, but the results of their research appear repeatedly to confirm that to be the case.<\/p>\n