Do You Believe That Evolution Is True?
If so, then provide an answer to the following questions. “Evolution” in this context is the idea that natural, undirected processes are sufficient to account for the existence of all natural things.
1. Something from nothing?
Where did the energy for the “Big Bang” come from? And what caused it to explode? We know from common experience that explosions are destructive and lead to disorder. How reasonable is it to assume that a “big bang” explosion produced the opposite effect – increasing “information”, order and the formation of useful structures, such as stars and planets, and eventually people?
2. Physical laws an accident?
We know the universe is governed by several fundamental physical laws. The activities of our universe depend upon these principles just like a computer program depends upon the existence of computer hardware with an instruction set. How reasonable is it to say that these great controlling principles developed by accident?
3. Order from disorder?
The Second Law of Thermodynamics may be the most verified law of science. It states that systems become more disordered over time, unless energy is supplied and directed to create order. Evolutionists say that the opposite has taken place – that order increased over time, without any directed energy. How can this be?
4. Information from Randomness?
Information theory states that “information” never arises out of randomness or chance events. How can the origin of the tremendous increase in information from simple organisms up to man be accounted for? Information is always introduced from the outside. It is impossible for natural processes to produce their own actual information, or meaning. The generation of information always requires intelligence, yet evolution claims that no intelligence was involved in the ultimate formation of a human being whose many systems contain vast amounts of information.
5. Life from dead chemicals?
Evolutionists claim that life formed from non-life (dead chemicals), so-called “abiogenesis”, even though it is a biological law (“biogenesis”) that life only comes from life. The probability of the simplest imaginable replicating system forming by itself from non-living chemicals has been calculated to be so very small as to be essentially zero – much less than one chance in the number of electron-sized particles that could fit in the entire visible universe! Given these odds, is it reasonable to believe that life formed itself?
6. Complex DNA and RNA by chance?
How reasonable is it to believe that DNA and RNA, both of which are tremendously complex came into existence by chance at exactly the same time?
7. Life is complex
We know and appreciate the tremendous amount of intelligent design and planning that went into landing a man on the moon. How reasonable is it to believe that purely natural processes, with no designer, no intelligence, and no plan, produced a human being.
8. Where are the transitional fossils?
If evolution has really taken place, where are the transitional forms? And why does the fossil record actually show all species first appearing fully formed, with most nearly identical to current instances of the species?
9. Could an intermediate even survive?
How could a creature intermediate between one kind and another even survive, when it would not be well-suited to either its old environment or its new environment? Can you even imagine a possible sequence of small changes which takes a creature from one kind to another, all the while keeping it not only alive, but improved?
10. Reproduction without reproduction?
A main tenet of evolution is the idea that things develop by an (unguided) series of small changes, caused by mutations, which are “selected” for keeping the “better” changes” over a very long period of time. How could the ability to reproduce evolve, without the ability to reproduce? Can you even imagine a theoretical scenario which would allow this to happen? And why would evolution produce two sexes, many times over? A sexual reproduction would seem to be more likely and efficient!
11. Plants without photosynthesis?
How could the first plant survive unless it already possessed this remarkable capability?
12. How do you explain symbiotic relationships?
There are many examples of plants and animals which have a “symbiotic” relationship (they need each other to survive). How can evolution explain this?
13.It’s no good unless it’s complete
We know from everyday experience that an item is not generally useful until it is complete. Why would natural selection start to make an eye, or an ear, or a wing (or anything else) when this item would not benefit the animal until it was completed?
14. Explain metamorphosis!
How can evolution explain the metamorphosis of the butterfly? Once the caterpillar evolves into the “mass of jelly” (out of which the butterfly comes), wouldn’t it appear to be “stuck”?
15. It should be easy to show evolution
If evolution is the grand mechanism that has produced all natural things from a simple gas, surely this mechanism must be easily seen. It should be possible to prove its existence in a matter of weeks or days, if not hours. Yet scientists have been bombarding countless generations of fruit flies with radiation for several decades in order to show evolution in action and still have only produced … more (deformed) fruit flies. How reasonable is it to believe that evolution is a fact when even the simplest of experiments has not been able to document it?
16. Complex things require intelligent design!
People are intelligent and they invented marvelous machines. But those machines could never come about by accident, or assemble themselves by chance, even if all of the parts were available laying next to each other. And we are certain beyond doubt that a canister of hydrogen gas, not matter how long we left it there or what type of raw energy we might apply to it, would never result in those machines being produced.