Only an uninformed fanatic says that evolution or creation can be proved scientifically. Christians believe in creationism because we believe in the veracity of the Bible but we also have scientific evidence to support our position.

In every debate I’ve had with evolutionary scientists, the arrogant, asinine accusation is made, “Well, evolution is science while creationism is religion.” Evolution is about as scientific as a voodoo rooster-plucking ceremony in Haiti. Almost.

Science means to know and systematized knowledge derived from observation, study, etc. It is based on observation and experimentation. Evolutionists don’t “know” anything about man’s origins. They guess, suppose, speculate, etc., but they don’t know. Honest scientists have become weary and embarrassed at the confusing, convoluted, and contradictory claptrap that often passes as science. They have watched their colleagues rush to defend Darwin rather than putting him to rigorous tests.

World famous scientist G. G. Simpson stated, “It is inherent in any definition of science that statements that cannot be checked by observation are not about anything…or at the very best, they are not science.” Neither creationism nor evolution can be observed or tested.

Need I remind my readers of the many incredible mistakes made by evolutionists because of their faith: Haeckel’s recapitulation theory that only third-rate scientists believe; also the vestigial organ error; the failure of the fossil record (that no informed evolutionist uses to prove his position), etc.

Let me dwell on the fossil record since most people assume it supports evolution. It does not.

Dr. David Kitts, professor of geology at the University of Oklahoma, said, “Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them….” And Lord Zuckerman admitted there are no “fossil traces” of transformation from an ape-like creature to man! I assume that all college professors know that Darwin admitted the same fact. I also assume they know that Darwin was not trained as a scientist but for the ministry, so evolutionists are worshipping at the feet of an apostate preacher!

Famous fossil expert, Niles Eldredge confessed, “…geologists have found rock layers of all divisions of the last 500 million years and no transitional forms were contained in them.” Dr. Eldredge further said, “…no one has yet found any evidence of such transitional creatures.”

World famous paleontologist Colin Patterson agreed saying, “there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.” Not one.

All the alleged transitional fossils, that were so dear to the hearts of evolutionists a generation ago, are now an embarrassment to them. Breaks my heart! Archaeopteryx is now considered only a bird, not an intermediate fossil. The famous horse series that is still found in some textbooks and museums has been discarded and is considered a phantom and illusion because it is not proof of evolution. In fact, the first horse in the series is no longer thought to be a horse! And when a horse can’t be counted on being a horse then of course we’ve got trouble, real trouble right here in River City.

Surely it is not necessary for me to remind college professors that Piltdown Man was a total fraud and Nebraska Man turned out to be a pig’s tooth, not an ape man! And in recent years we have discovered that Neanderthal Man was simply a man with rickets and arthritis, not the much desired “ape man.” Need I go on? The truth is that only a fool says evolution is a fact as compared to gravity, and to equate scientific creationists with flat earthers as some evolutionists do is outrageous irresponsibility.

Dr. Soren Lovtrup, Professor of Zoo-physiology at the University of Umea in Sweden, wrote, “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: for a long time now people discuss evolutionary problems in a peculiar ‘Darwinian’ vocabulary…thereby believing that they contribute to the explanation of natural events.” He went on to say, “I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science.” He also said, “Evolution is ‘anti-science.'” And so it is.

Do those who teach evolution know that scientists have characterized Darwinism as speculation, based on faith, similar to theories of little green men, dead, effectively dead, very flimsy, incoherent, and a myth. Hey, with friends like that, evolutionists don’t need scientific creationists to hold their feet to the fire. Nevertheless, our public school textbooks and teachers, even up to most colleges and some universities, are not up to date on current thought. Did you get that–current “thought”?

I have assumed that the three college professors are familiar with all the world famous scientists I quoted above. All of them! If not, they are really uninformed, and should stay out of the evolution/creation discussion until they spend some time to bring themselves up to date.

So you see evolutionists are dishonest or uninformed when they suggest that creationists are backwoods, snake handling fanatics. In fact, over a thousand scientists with advanced degrees belong to one group that takes a stand for scientific creationism and against the guess of evolution.

Those college professors were correct in stating that Darwin’s book does not deal with the origins of life even though its title was Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. So a book about origins does not deal with the beginning of life!

Later Darwin suggested that life began in a warm little pond, but he never suggested where the pond came from! Most evolutionists teach that life started there also, but scientists have proved conclusively that spontaneous generation is impossible. So where did the first spark of life come from? You think maybe God was involved?

And would it be possible to remind everyone that Darwin and his followers were racists who believed that blacks were closer to the nonexistent ape men than whites? Thomas Huxley, Henry F. Osborne, Professor Edwin Conklin, and others preached white superiority – because of their evolutionary bias. The haters for a hundred years after Darwin can be tied to Darwin starting with Nietzsche (who asserted that God was dead, called for the breeding of a master race and for the annihilation of millions of misfits), followed by Hitler, Mussolini, Marx, Engels, Stalin, etc. Evolutionary teachings have resulted in soaking the soil of Europe in innocent blood. After all, evolutionists tell us that man is only a little higher than the animals rather than a little lower than the angels as the Bible teaches, so what’s a few million lives to be concerned about?

I don’t have the space to deal with numerous problems that evolutionists have such as the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics, origin of the universe, beginning of life from non-living matter, the Cambrian explosion, etc.

Evolution is a guess, a speculation, a hypothesis, a theory, and a faith. Yes, evolution is a religion as I document in my book, Evolution: Fact, Fraud or Faith? And, since it is a faith, it should not be taught in public schools. At least, any thinking, honest person would agree that if it is, then scientific creationism should be taught along with it. After all, we do believe in balance and fairness, don’t we? Or do we?

Sorry, professors, evolution is NOT a fact. It is a fraud, a fake, a farce and a faith, and taxpayers should demand that the religion of evolution be kept out of public schools unless the truth of scientific creationism is taught as well.

Boys’ new book, Evolution: Fact, Fraud, or Faith? was published this week by Barbwire Books; to get your copy of Evolution: Fact, Fraud, or Faith? click here. An eBook edition is also available.

The article continued to relate that the appendix harbors “good” bacteria and when the intestines are emptied during a bout of diarrhea, the appendix “reseeds” the intestines with “good” bacteria and restores the body back to good digestive health.

Creationists have known the benefit of the appendix and tonsils for decades! I wrote in the 1994 edition of Evolution: Fact, Fraud, or Faith? (new, expanded edition to be published this month by Barbwire Books) the following:

“Another major error made by evolutionists is that of allegedly useless organs in man that are supposed to be withered memorials of man’s past evolution. As late as the 1960s, evolutionary textbooks listed over 200 ‘useless’ organs, but later information has proved that almost all ‘vestigial organs’ have some function during our lifetime. The tonsils, appendix, and thymus gland are known to protect us against infections, especially during our younger years, but until recent years, they were thought to be unnecessary.”

So there! That qualifies as an “I told you so” event.

Atheist David Mills asserted that the human appendix is harmful to our well-being! However, he is wrong because scientists have finally discovered that the appendix serves an important function in the human immune system. If evolutionists had declared these organs as having an “unknown purpose” rather than being unnecessary (there is a difference, you know) I would have agreed; however, now we know that those organs are necessary for proper functioning of the immune system, etc.

Because of their ignorance, for a hundred years doctors took out those “unnecessary” healthy organs to the detriment of their patients. If those scientists had not been controlled by an atheistic worldview, they could have done an enormous amount of research, but since they did not believe God designed those organs with a purpose in mind, the “experts” perpetrated crimes upon children and adults and furthered their crimes by not researching those organs for a hundred years.

Irreparable harm has resulted from this teaching as hundreds of thousands of tonsils, adenoids, appendixes, etc., were removed from children and adults in the past hundred years. How much research has not been done on various “useless” organs because scientists taught other scientists that many organs and glands were useless? We should pity the distraught evolutionists who had all their “vestigial” organs removed only to discover, post-surgery, that they were all important! Not essential but important. I have been told that some of the more desperate, dogmatic, and depressed evolutionists/atheists had their brains removed, but that hasn’t been confirmed!

One’s worldview changes everything. If a person is convinced that he evolved from the animals, then it is understandable when he acts like an animal. If he thinks life is accidental, then he will face each day without purpose to life. It surprises no one that he will live a hedonistic, selfish life. Since he assumes that he and others are not made in the image of God, he has no obligation to treat others in a kind, gracious, and friendly manner.

Evolution is supposed to be an advance from the simple to the complex; however the vestigial organ argument militates against that position! After all, if many human organs were needed and worked well in the past but are now useless and unnecessary, that is not evolution! Evolution would be the appearance of new organs not the degeneration of old ones.

Only four or five organs are now believed, by some evolutionists, to be unnecessary and those are questionable. And of course, just because an organ may not be necessary does not mean that it is useless. A thumb is not really essential, but it is surely handy when you have to grasp or pick up an object.

Zoologist S. R. Scadding asserted: “The ‘vestigial organ’ argument uses as a premise the assertion that the organ in question has no function. There is no way, however, in which this negative assertion can be arrived at scientifically….I conclude that ‘vestigial organs’ provide no special evidence for the theory of evolution.” That means none, zero, zilch, and nil evidence for evolution based on vestigial organs.

Those human organs may not be necessary for life, but non-thinking evolutionists are unnecessary and should be unemployed.

If evolutionists had followed their much touted scientific method, they would not have made fools of themselves so many times. An honest scientist will keep an open mind so that he will not “jump to conclusions” (often wrong conclusions) until he has made many observations with the same results. He must be very careful to base any conclusion on what he has actually seen, rather than what he wanted to see. And he must always be willing to change his mind. To the credit of most evolutionists, they have done that regarding the recapitulation theory and vestigial organs; however, there are some poorly trained scientists (or scientific fanatics) hanging to those silly, discredited theories like an insecure kid clutches a security blanket. It has been over 65 years since the Recapitulation theory was shown to be a fraud but still being taught; so, how long will it take for doctors to stop removing healthy “vestigial” organs?

No, there are no vestigial organs. God provided man with an incredible body that has the astounding ability to not only reproduce itself, but also to repair itself! But before the body can repair itself, it must review the injury (or illness), report on the problem, then resolve the problem before repair begins. What machine can do anything similar to that? Only fools would suggest that no design was involved!

While I don’t believe in vestigial organs, maybe, just maybe, the atheists/evolutionists have encased inside their skulls a vestigial organ that is shrunken and stunted from disuse for decades.

(Boys’ new book, The God Haters was published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy of The God Haters click here . An eBook edition is also available.)

Any “scientifically” deduced date will be discarded if the date does not conform to the pre-determined age of the strata where the fossil was discovered. The dating firm will often ask, “What date will be acceptable?” Real science, huh?

Creationists understand the limitations of dating methods whether used by evolutionists or creationists. In reality, all dating methods, including those that point to a young Earth, rely on many assumptions.

We are told (over and over) that the Earth is 4.6 billion years old yet rocks have been dated to an excess of 10 billion years! I think we can all agree that earth’s rocks can’t be older than the Earth itself! Why are these modern dating methods still being used after they have been discredited? My guess is that it impresses the gullible and those who want to believe.

We know that the moon is slowly receding from the Earth at about 1.5 inches per year, and this rate would have been greater in the past. However, if the moon had been in contact with the Earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance from the Earth. This gives a maximum age of the moon, not the actual age. The “clock” is not working.

Scientists used both uranium-thorium-lead and potassium-argon methods to date Apollo moon samples and they got results which varied from 2 million to 28 billion years! That is some difference!

Lava flows produced submerged volcanic rocks near Hualalai, Hawaii in the years 1800-1801 and potassium-argon dated them from 160 million to 2.96 billion years according to the Journal of Geophysical Research. Seems as if the “clock” is a little off! It seems the “experts” are deducing instead of dating. Deducing means to “infer” or to “assume.” I like “guessing.”

Scientists used potassium-argon dating to date a rock sample from the recently formed 1986 lava dome from Mount St. Helens and the newly formed rock gave ages for the different minerals in it of between 0.5 and 2.8 million years. Not even in the ball park but fanatics continue to play the game!

Another absurdity is obvious when wood taken from living trees was dated to be 10,000 years old by carbon-14! And mortar from an English castle about 800 years old was dated 7,370 years! But can you believe it gets worse?

Eleven samples were taken from solidified lava on Mount Ngauruhoe in New Zealand that are known to have formed from eruptions in 1949, 1954, and 1975. The samples were sent to Geochron Laboratories in Cambridge, Massachusetts to ascertain their approximate age. They got dates ranging from 0.27 to 3.5 million years old! Maybe scientists throw darts to arrive at dates?

Some Russian volcanic rocks only a few thousand years old were labeled as being from 50 million to 14.6 billion years old! This is getting to be embarrassing!

The shells of living mollusks have been dated at up to 2,300 years old according to Science magazine.

Wayne Jackson wrote, “Freshly-killed seals have been dated at up to 1,300 years, and mummified seals, dead only about thirty years, have yielded dates as high as 4,600 years. In our book, Creation, Evolution and the Age of the Earth, we documented one case where muscle tissue from a mummified musk ox was dated at 24,000 years, while hair from the same carcass dated only 7,200 years!” Hummm, that’s interesting!

Dr. Thomas Barnes, professor emeritus of physics at the University of Texas, has done extensive research in the decay of the Earth’s magnetic field. His findings indicate that the magnetic field was created only a few thousand years ago, and is decaying toward extinction!

A major problem in radiometric dating is the assumption of a closed system. A closed system demands that uranium or potassium was in the rocks for “millions” of years without any kind of contamination. However, that requires a massive leap of faith without any foundation in science. There can be no doubt that, over the years, leaching, evaporation, etc., took place that throws off the “clock.”

The thing that surprises me when an evolutionist spouts his drivel about how they can “prove” the great age of the Earth is that informed people don’t fall to the floor, gasping and holding their sides with raucous laughter! And the most reserved critics will only express a grin and a muffled giggle.

The biblical account of creation is growing brighter and brighter as the ancient-earthers’ predictions are growing dimmer and dimmer. Or is that dumber and dumber?

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

The recent news that the angry, aggressive, asinine atheist Richard Dawkins is now the “World’s Top Thinker” is further proof that the world has turned upside down. For centuries, the herd mentality has been to place far too much credibility in anyone who is known as an “expert.” Such a person is quickly given the desired accolades if he is a “doctor” or wears a white coat. All scientists are thought to be honest, honorable, even heroic; however, may I suggest that all New Atheists are hysterical, heretical, and harmful to everyone, especially children?

I challenge my readers to forget the hype and not believe Dawkins’ Press Releases and simply look at the facts. Is Dawkins a highly respected scientist or charlatan and fraud? Let the facts determine the answer. It should be remembered that a lie is still a lie if everyone believes it and the truth is still the truth is no one believes it.

I challenge my critics to read the books of Dawkins and his fellow New Atheists. They are deceptive, dangerous, dishonest, and dull. Very dull. Dick and his New Atheist buddies spend their days down at the Angry Atheist Association telling each other how clever they are and pinning metals on each other for their accomplishments in writing their banal books to bamboozle the hoi polloi.

All New Atheist authors make it very clear that their agenda is to remove children from the homes of parents who teach them Bible truth! Dawkins wrote, “We should work to free the children of the world from the religions which, with parental approval, damage minds too young to understand what is happening to them.” The New Atheists all demand that children be removed from the theistic influence since, to the atheists, it is child abuse. I think the atheists’ books are literary abuse!

The “World’s Top Thinker” showed his confused, contradictory, and contrary thinking when he wrote, “The fact that life evolved out of nearly nothing, some 10 billion years after the universe evolved literally out of nothing, is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice.” So, I ask Dick, “Do you really mean to say that everything came from nothing?” He said, “literally” out of nothing. Dawkins and the New Atheists tell us that a cosmic egg floated around space and then, but wait a minute, Lucifer’s Lackeys are assuming way too much: where did space come from? And the cosmic egg? No answer. We are supposed to give them that, but I don’t give the dummies anything.

Atheists tell us that nothing created everything, and I fight the impulse to grab my sides and roll on the floor with laughter. After all, we must show some decorum in our discussion, don’t you agree?

Aristotle told us that “nothing” is what rocks dream about but New Atheists dream (more like hallucinate) about nothing creating not just something, but creating everything seen and not seen in the universe. Where did Dawkins find the cosmic egg? Maybe it was laid by a cosmic chicken! The cosmic egg, the size of a pinhead (no, I will restrain myself), exploded and from that explosion developed the well-ordered, massive, precise, awesome universe! No one tells us what caused the explosion and how the alleged results can be reconciled with scientific laws. Explosions don’t produce order but disorder–always. New Atheist ranting is dumb, dumber, and dumbest.

I document in my eBook The God Haters that Dawkins is a lackey, loser, and liar. He lied about a debate he had with a Jewish rabbi; he lied about his interview with a creationist film crew from Australia. He lied (or showed incredibly poor scholarship) about his quote of early church leader Tertullian. So the World’s Top Thinker is a world class liar.

America is in deep trouble when you realize there is a still a fool on every corner, a clown in every public office, and every village has not one but several idiots plus numerous twits, tyrants and totalitarians lounging down at the Angry Atheist Association. We used to laugh at them; now we are in a life and death struggle with them. Our children are in their sights, so that puts atheists in my sights.

The war is on for our religious freedom to teach our children what we believe. Dawkins, who is uninformed, unreliable, and uninteresting is leading the New Atheists Brigade into battle against us and they are as intolerant and vicious as the most rabid Inquisitor of the fourteenth and fifteenth century. The battle rages between thinking theists and non thinking New Atheists and their leader is not the “World’s Top Thinker” but England’s little stinker.

Bring it on!

Copyright 2013, Don Boys, Ph.D.