creatttt
... because so many people have been taught evolution only.” The scientific magazine Discover said this about the Theory: “Evolution is not only under attack by fundamentalist Christians, but also being questioned by reputable scientists. Among paleontologists, scientists who study the fossil record, there is growing descent.” A London Times science writer, Christopher Booker said this: “It is a beautiful and attractive theory. The only trouble was that, as Darwin was himself at least partly aware, it was full of colossal holes.” Regarding Darwin’s book Origin of Species, he stated: “We have here the supreme irony that a book which has become famous for explaining the origin of species in fact does nothing of the kind.” Evolutionist Francis Hitching, author of the book The Neck of the Giraffe, stated this: “It is an academic dispute of far-reaching proportions, potentially one of those times in science when, quite suddenly, a long held idea is overthrown by the weight of contrary evidence and a new one takes its place.” One of the biggest questions in this theory is that of the origin of life. Regarding this question, astronomer Robert Jastrow said: “To their chagrin [scientists] have no clear-cut answer, because chemists have never succeeded in reproducing natures experiments on the creation of life out of non-living matter. Scientists do not know how that happened.” Many people may recall the scientific work of Louis Pasteur in solving problems related to fermentation and infectious disease. But he also performed many experiments to determine whether tiny life-forms could arise by themselves. Pasteur demonstrated that even minute bacteria did not develop in sterilized water protected from contamination. In 1864 he announced: “Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover form the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment.” This still remains true. Even in our advanced scientific age, no experiment since then has ever produced life from non-living matter. Many wonder why I question this theory so much. Why don’t I just accept it as fact? I believe that you need to examine closely both sides, and then make a logical conclusion. For example, if you were a jury in a courtroom and you heard only the prosecution’s arguments, and deiced that the defendant was guilty, without hearing the defense, people would think you to be irrational, jumping to conclusions without hearing both sides. The same too with the theory of evolution. When considering the theory, you need to approach it with an open mind, considering both sides of the arguments. I strongly believe that those who do not understand the other possibilities of a particular belief, do not fully understand their own. Those who support the theory of evolution feel that it is an established fact. Here are a few quotes from those in the scientific community who believe in evolution: In a centennial edition of Darwin’s Origin of Species, W. R. Thompson, the director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control stated in the introduction: “As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but even about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution.” Science Professor John Moore of Michigan State University states: “If monopoly is inordinately wrong in industry, I ask rather pointedly, isn’t monopoly inordinately wrong in education? I feel that it is high time now that the taxpayers be assured that their young people hear a fair presentation of both sides of the issue of evolution.” Moore taught evolution in his classrooms for years. Then a friend challenged him to prove his theory. He couldn’t. “I realized I was only teaching what I had been taught,” he said. “The reason so many people believe evolution is...