The Great Fairy Tale for Grownups
Why Not Believe in Santa Clause, too? Written By JOHN VENNARI
What is the Truth about evolution?
First of all, today we can say that we are living in the triumph of evolutionism. Evolution sits in the temple of God and is worshipped AS God. It is given the attributes we have always given to God: Omnipotence and Omnipresence
OMNIPOTENCE: Because it is believed to be the creating and driving force of everything in the universe without exception.
OMNIPRESENCE: Because it pervades everything and is found everywhere ... it's in the media, in education, in politics and in the Church.
What most people don't seem to realize is that evolution is not a science. It is only an unproven theory... a theory that is finally being emphatically rejected by a rising tide of honest scientists. In Truth, the evidence against evolution is so overwhelming that it actually makes more sense to believe in unicorns or the existence of the Loch Ness monster (or Santa Clause, the Tooth Fairy... and don't forget the Easter Bunny! Ed.) that it does to believe in evolution.
Firstly, it is important to make the simple but crucial distinction between Micro-evolution and Macro-evolution.
MICRO-evolution is a fact of science. It concerns relatively minor changes that take place within a plant or animal form, but do not change the plant or animal into anything else. The peppered moth of England is an example of micro-evolution. This little English moth was observed becoming increasingly darker as trees were darkened by soot during the Industrial Revolution. But throughout this change, the moth was still a moth. It was not on its way to becoming an iguana.
MACRO-evolution is something quite different. It is the teaching that one kind evolves into another. This has never been proven by science. But one of the key tactics used by evolutionists to supposedly "prove" their case is to point to an example of MICRO-evolution (the changes in the peppered moth) and claim this as proof of MACRO-evolution. This sort of cheap trickery shows how desperate evolutionists are to prove their false theory.
From Whence Comes the Ape?
Most people think that evolution is simply the teaching that man came from apes, but it actually goes much deeper. Because man came from apes, the next question is:
Where did the ape come from? "From the lower mammals"
Where did the lower mammals come from? "From the lizards and the reptiles"
Where did the Lizards and the Reptiles come from? "From the fish"
Where did the fish come from? "From clusters of living cells that had grouped themselves into colonies"
Where did they come from? "Well, they came from one single cell."
And where did that come from?
And here's the real crunch! The evolutionists teach that this one cell just came by accident ___ by chance ___ from a lucky mixture of gases and molecules and energy in a kind of primordial soup, in other words ___ from non-living matter.
The key teaching of evolution, therefore, is that life comes from non-living matter.
The Fossils say "No"
If this evolutionary process were true, and one species evolves into another over billions of years, there should be an abundance of evidence for it in the fossil record. We should be able to follow the fossil record of evolution like footprints or train-tracks straight back to our origins. Our Museums should be filled with thousands of these intermediate life forms, yet there are none.
To the contrary, all life forms appear in the fossil record suddenly, that is, with no connection to each other. It is also worth noting that man looks essentially the same as the first time we see him. This is despite artist's conceptions of the mythical ape-man, which never existed. Detailed drawings of the missing link or "ape-man" are pure fantasy. It is no different than a drawing of Fred Flintstone or the Cat-in-the-Hat (and Santa, too! ___ Ed.). Every so-called missing link (Java-man, Piltdown-man, Peking-man, the so-called homo-erectus) have been proven to be either all ape or in the case of the "Neanderthal", all man! There never has been found and there never will be found anything that is more than ape and less than man.
Science Rejects Gradualism
A piece of news that didn't get much press is that in 1980, Darwin's "Gradualism", which had species evolving one into another over "billions" of years, was actually rejected by a conference of top evolutionists meeting in Chicago because of the obvious (and embarrassing) lack of evidence in the fossil record.
Yet despite this, evolution has not been rejected. These scientists have replaced Darwinism with an more groundless, bizarre theory called "punctuated equilibrium." But the only thing impressive about punctuated equilibrium is its name. This new theory says that evolutionary changes happened so fast they didn't leave any fossils. In other words, this theory teaches that a reptile laid and egg and a bird popped out. This ridiculous fairy tale hypothesis is the present state of evolution science. Darwinism is dead, and this "chickens from lizards" theory is the best they can come up with.
Why, then, are our noble professors choosing to sound more like Dr. Seuss than doctors of science? Why do they refuse to reject evolution outright? Dr. D. N. S. Watson, who echoes the sentiments of many evolutionists gave the real answer. He bluntly admitted "The theory of evolution is universally accepted not because it can be proven true, but because the only alternative is special creation (by God) which is clearly incredible."
No Scientific Evidence
In 1985, a book was written called "Evolution, A Theory in Crisis", by the Australian scientist Michael Denton. This book proves that Darwin's theory of evolution has not been validated by one single empirical discovery of science since the first publication of Origin of Species in 1859. What makes this book of immeasurable importance is that the author is not a believer. He never tells us where we came from, he only knows it was not through evolution.
The Big Bang
The unproven "Big Bang" theory, is propagated in our day primarily in order to provide the billions of years that evolution would need in order to take place.
What, then, do we know about the age of the earth? Not as much as we have been led to believe. One of the best kept secrets of our day is that many of our dating methods such as Carbon 14 and Radioactive Dating, have been proven to be unreliable, because of the many variables that will have an effect on the final outcome.
To take a few examples:
Science Magazine revealed that some shells of snails, though still alive when tested by Carbon 14 methods were dated to be 26,000 years old.
The geographic periodical Antarctic recently reported that a newly-killed seal when tested by Carbon 14 methods were dated to be dead for 1,300 years!
In the same sea near Hawaii, rocks were formed by a volcano only 200 years ago. They were dated by Potassium-Argon method to up to 22 million years old. Other rocks near Hualalei (Hawaii) are known to be formed by volcanic action in 1801. Potassium-Argon dated these young rocks at 160 million to 3 million years of age.
Also, there are some methods of dating that show the world to be not billions of years old, but surprisingly young. In his book "In the Beginning" Dr. Walter T. Brown, Jr. from M.I.T. cites 28 dating methods that point to a young earth and universe
Genetics and Fruit Flies
We've been told the science of genetics proves evolution. This is another fallacy. Genetics disprove evolution on every count. If evolution were true, then species must produce new genes for the new creatures. But geneticists tell us that this never happens. No new genes are ever created. In breeding, (that is micro-evolution) the opposite occurs. Genes are lost in micro-evolution, not created. Also, genes and DNA act like a kind of computer program each performing the right task at the right time. If there is some type of mutation, it is usually harmful, often fatal. It has also been found that what science used to regard as a "simple cell" is anything but simple. It is reported that the genetic data contained in each one of our cells has enough information to fill a library of 4,000 volumes. Each cell! Yet, we are expected to believe that this magnificent and intricate design had no intelligent designer.
Once, in a series of experiments on fruit flies, scientists tried to induce evolution. They did everything imaginable to those poor fruit flies. They irradiated them. They tried to speed up mutation rate! But the only thing proven was the rock hard stability of the individual species. Though they produced many a "freak" fruit fly, even on with a foot growing out of its mouth, the fruit fly nevertheless remained a fruit fly and did not "evolve" into anything else.
The only explanation for the endless propagation of this unscientific theory, is that evolution is actually a pre-scientific prejudice serving not as a scientific end, but rather, a religious end ___ the uprooting of the Christian belief in Creation and the moral order based on it. Evolution is not an affirmation of scientific fact, it is a declaration of war against Christ, His Church and Christian civilization.
Evolution Must be Combatted
The utter incompatibility of Darwinian evolution and Sacred Scripture must be recognized. If belief in Adam and Eve is destroyed, then our entire Catholic Faith falls to pieces.
Because, if evolution is true then Adam and Eve did not even exist.
If Adam and Eve did not exist, then there is no such thing as original sin.
If there's no such thing as original sin, there is no need to be redeemed from original sin.
If there is no need for a redeemer, then there is no need for the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity to become Man and die on the Cross for our sins.
If there is no such thing as the Sacrifice of the Cross then there is no such thing as the sacrifice of the Mass, etc., etc., etc.
Evolution: Critical for the Atheist Agenda
Why is evolution kept alive? Why are we not told that Darwinism is dead? That there is devastating evidence against the theory of evolution? Because ___ if evolution is taken away, practically every major world view of our modern day will have nothing to support it and will come crashing to the ground. Modernism. Communism. Secular Humanism. Eugenics. The New Age Movement and even the atheistic United Nations ___ are all based upon the theory of evolution and could not survive without it. Take evolution away, and it would destroy the entire godless superstructure of our modern world in which all these erroneous ideas and institutions reign supreme.
LATERAN IV (1215)
God…creator of all visible and invisible things, of the spiritual and of the corporal; who by His own omnipotent power at once from the beginning of time created each creature from nothing, spiritual and corporal, namely, angelic and mundane, and finally the human, constituted as it were, alike of the spirit and the body.
VATICAN I (1869 - 1870)
If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, as regards their whole substance, have been produced by God from nothing- let him be anathema (canon 5).