| Home - Latest News | Introduction | Bayside Messages | Directives from Heaven | Testimonies | Veronica Lueken | Miraculous Photos | Videos |

Have you been brainwashed on evolution?

"Man cannot rationalize sin; man cannot rationalize his being which eliminates the Creator and His creation from history. My children, it is a delusion set upon the world by satan." - Our Lady of the Roses, July 25, 1977


     Duane T. Gish, Ph.D. (Biochemistry, University of California, Berkeley) was Associate Director of the Institute of Creation Research and Professor of Natural Science and Apologetics at Christian Heritage College, San Diego, California.  He spent 18 years in biochemical and biomedical research with the Upjohn Company and at Cornell University and Berkeley. There are over 450 scientists with a master's or doctor's degree in some field of natural science who are now voting members of the Creation Research Society.
     The following lecture was given at the University of California at Davis and has been greatly condensed for the sake of space.


     As a scientist, I believe we must examine all the evidence and facts before we can come to any conclusion on any given subject. I'm asking only one thing of this audience... that you examine the facts thoroughly and without prejudice.

     The refusal by science teachers to consider creation as a possible explanation for the origin of all things, is unwarranted and undesirable. The student is being indoctrinated without being given a complete presentation of the evidence.

     This situation could be remedied by taking a closer look at both creation and evolution.

     First, let's examine the claims of each.  The EVOLUTIONIST states that all life gradually evolved from a single cell, which had evolved from dead matter.

     CREATIONISTS believe that life and our existence came by the acts of a Creator.

     The evidence that the EVOLUTIONIST needs to establish his claims, is fossils showing a gradual step-by-step development of lower animal life into more and more complex forms.

     And this should be evident by the presence in the fossil record of many transitional forms.

     The evidence needed to support CREATION, is fossils showing complex life appearing suddenly... with no fossil evidence of lower animals developing into new and complex forms of life.

     Now, lets look at the actual fossil evidence. The earliest fossils to be found are in the Cambrian rock strata. And the billions of fossils found there are all of highly complex forms of life with no evidence of these complex forms gradually developing from a simple form of life.

     According to evolutionists it would have required 1.5 billion years for these animals to have evolved.  Not a single, indisputable multicellular fossil has been found anywhere in the world in a rock supposedly older that Cambrian rocks.  Billions of highly complex animals... trilobites, brachiopods, corals, worms, jellyfish, etc... just suddenly appear, with no signs of gradual development from lower forms.

     Also, throughout the remainder of the fossil record there is a remarkable absence of the many transitional forms demanded by the theory of evolution.

     There are hundreds of thousands of missing links between invertebrates and vertebrates. The sea squirt is presumed to be the ancestry of the vertebrate.

     According to evolutionists it would have taken 100 million years for fish to have evolved from an invertebrate. But there is absolutely no fossil evidence showing that this took place.

     Again, the evolutionists claims that it took perhaps 50 million years for a fish to evolve into an amphibian.  But again, there are no transitional forms. For example... not a single fossil with part fins... part feet has ever been found.

     And this is true between every major plant and animal kind.  All higher categories of living things, such as complex invertebrates, fishes, amphibians, reptiles, flying reptiles, birds, bats, primates and man, appear abruptly.

     Let me quote some comments by LEADING EVOLUTIONISTS.

     Charles Darwin admitted that "As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, who do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate kinds, between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great."

     Prof. George Gaylord Simpson of Harvard University has said, "Gaps among known orders, classes and phyla are systematic and almost always large."

     Prof. E.J.H. Corner of Cambridge University has stated, "I still think, to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation."

     There is no evidence of even one species changing into another. As the late Prof. R. Goldschmidt of the University of California observed, "It is good to keep in mind... that nobody has ever succeeded in producing even one new species by the accumulation of micromutations".

     If evolution is true, why don't we see living stages of evolution today? Shouldn't new organs and new structure still be appearing today? Surely if evolutionary processes had truly existed in the past they would still be operating today. 

     The fossil of the bird (Archaeopteryx) is claimed by some to be a link between birds and reptiles. But there was a world of difference between reptiles and Archaeopteryx. It had wings, feathers...and it flew! The fact that it had claws on its wings does not prove that it had a reptilian ancestry. There are two birds living today that possess claws!

     All paleontologists (those who study fossils) now acknowledge that Archaeopteryx was a true bird.

     The alleged horse series was created more out of imagination than from fossil evidence. The fossils for this series are not found in the proper time sequence as indicated by the evolutionists, and the major types appear abruptly, without transitions.

     And there is an interesting discrepancy in the skeletal development of this series.

     Eohippus had 18 pairs of Ribs.

     Orohippus had only 15 pairs.

     Then Pliohippus jumped to 19

     Equus Scotti is back to 18.

     Darwin cited the giraffe as an outstanding example of natural selection. Supposedly, as a result of extended droughts, the supply of green leaves could be obtained only at the tops of the trees, and therefore the shorter necked giraffe died off. And the giraffes which grew longer necks survived.

     However, there is no evidence whatever in the fossil record or elsewhere that giraffes with short necks have ever existed. And what would have happened to young giraffes with relatively short necks?

     Darwin failed to realize that body characteristics in offspring are determined and programmed by DNA factors of the genes or the genetic material of the parents, and not by the stretching of the neck or any other bodily exercise.

     The cover of the journal, Science, December 9, 1966, shows a photograph of a bat fossil that is alleged to be over 50 million years old. This is said to be the oldest fossil bat, but it is the same as a modern bat! Why isn't there any evidence of change after 50 million years?

     It might be will now to look at the "evidence" which anthropologists have assembled, in an attempt to reconstruct the evolution of man.

     Some consider Ramapithecus to have been hominid (a man-like ape), and this judgment has been made solely on the basis of a few fragments of the jaw. That's all the fossil fragments they have.

     Dr. Jolley has recently reported that a species of baboon in Ethiopia has the same dental and jaw characteristics as Ramapithecus. These characteristics are therefore not those of man! Other anthropologists have agreed that Ramapitecus was simply an ape.

     The first find of Australopithecines was by Dart in 1924. He pointed out many ape-like features of the skull, but he believed the teeth to be manlike. Its brain was only about 1/3 as large as that of modern man. It was only about 4 feet tall.

     Recently, Richard Leakey, the son of Dr. Leakey. published evidence that indicated that the Australopithecines were long-armed, short-legged knucklewalkers, similar to living African apes. These creatures were nothing but apes!

     In China, during the 1920's, fragments of skulls, jaws, and teeth, were found in a limestone cliff near Peking. However, during World War II all the original bones were lost.

     All of these creatures had been killed and eaten, and the skulls preserved as trophies. Some prominent anthropologists believe that hunter was true Man. Peking "man" must then have been simply a giant ape.

     Java Man is put together on the evidence of a femur (large leg bone), a skull cap, and three molar teeth.  These parts were found within a 50 foot range, in a space of one year. Dr. Dubois, its discoverer, concealed for 30 years the fact that he found human skulls near his Java Man, and at the same level. So man was already there when this creature was alive. The femur was probably from a human, and the skull cap was probably that of a giant ape. Before his death, and after he had convinced most of the early skeptics, Dubois changed his mind and decided that Java Man was probably a giant gibbon and not man-like at all.

     Neanderthal Man has a skeletal structure of modern man. His cranial capacity exceeded that of modern man. It was claimed that he lived as long as about 100,000 years ago, but all anthropologists now believe that he was just as human as you and I.

     Complete skeletons of the Cro-Magnons have been found. Their cranial capacity was greater that modern man's. If he were alive today, and if he were to walk down the street in a business suit, he would go completely unnoticed.

     Two of the most embarrassing so-called missing links for evolutionists, are the NEBRASKA MAN and the PILTDOWN MAN.

     At the famous Scopes evolution trail in Dayton, Tennessee, the NEBRASKA MAN evidence was presented by the leading scientific authorities of that day as proof of evolution. They scoffed and laughed at William Jennings Bryan, when he protested the scanty evidence.

     The evidence was that of a tooth that was supposed to have come from a prehistoric man who supposedly lived one million years ago. However, years later, when more fossils were unearthed, it was discovered that Nebraska Man was only a pig. I think this is a case where a pig made a monkey out of an evolutionist!

     In 1912 Charles Dawson brought forth the PILTDOWN MAN. A piece of skull was the evidence acclaimed by experts as that of an ape-man who was about a half million years old.

     But in 1953 the hoax was exposed. The jawbone turned out to be that of a modern ape. The teeth had been filed down, and the bones were artificially colored to deceive the public. The ease with which this fraud fooled the world's greatest authorities illustrated the powerful influence of preconceived ideas among evolutionists.

     But in the August 1973 issues of Reader's Digest there was a report about two phenomenal discoveries which were recently made in Africa. These discoveries have shaken the anthropological world, because they challenge the validity of long cherished theories concerning the origin of man. One was the finding of a human skull, dated by evolutionists to be about 2.8 million years old. Most text books state that the first man did not evolve until around one million years ago. Yet the bones found are said to be even more modern that those of Pithecanthropus, our presumed man-like ancestor. Obviously these presumed ancestors cannot be man's true ancestors, for who ever heard of parents being younger that their children?

     The second was the finding of skeletons of sophisticated humans who are reputed to have lived 100,00 years ago. They had developed the art of mining, were able to keep records, count, and had also developed sophisticated tools. But according to the evolutionists this type of sophisticated humans was not supposed to have appeared on the scene until 65,000 years later.

     I personally heard Richard Leakey, the discoverer of the 2.8 million year old man, speak in San Diego. In commenting on these two discoveries Mr. Leakey stated, "What we have discovered simply wipes out everything we have taught about human evolution, and I have nothing to offer in its place."

     Let us now consider the beginnings of life itself.

     By chance, nothingness developed into substance. That evolved into a very highly complex organization... without a designer.  Darwinists assume that life, or the primitive cell, arose by pure chance. For example, by chance some amino acids were formed. Then from these the necessary protein was formed.

     The first problem is that the rate of destruction of even relatively simple chemical compounds, such as amino acids, by ultraviolet light or electrical discharges far exceeds their rate of formation. No significant quantity would thus ever be produced.

     Another insuperable barrier is that these amino acids would have to be arranged in an exact sequence to form a protein...just like the letters in a sentence. Mere laws of chemistry and physics cannot do that.

     The probability of a protein of only 50 amino acids forming by chance would be 1/10 to the 65th power, or in layman language -

     100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to ONE!

     Even the very simplest cell contains several thousand different kinds of proteins, and many billions of each kind, plus all kinds of DNA, RNA, and other highly complex molecules, along with many complex structures, arranged in an incredibly complex system.

     DNA and RNA are required to produce protein enzymes, but protein enzymes are required to produce DNA and RNA. Which, then, came first?

     Dr. N.W. Pirie of the Rothamstead Experimental Station at Harpenden, England, rejects this whole concept of spontaneous biogenesis simply on the well-founded fact that "complicated molecules such as proteins do not, in our scientific experience, arise spontaneously, even by stages. And all forms of life known today are dependent on protein."

     Dr. John Moore spoke during the annual session of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He described the theory that man evolved from "amoeba and sea-slimes" as an "incredible religion," but not "science."

     Dr. John Moore stated:

     "Chromosome variation in animals does not correspond to predictions based on evolution theory. There is absolutely no pattern of increase of chromosome number from less complex to more complex, but this should take place if evolution were true. Furthermore, hereditary material in the genes of chromosomes shows great variation, frogs having more genetic material that do humans, which contradicts the theory of evolution. Darwinism is more illogical than biological."

     Professor Henry M. Morris has shown that the theory of evolution contradicts the universally accepted laws of thermodynamics.

     The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that all things left to themselves always tend to go from the complex to the simple, form the organized to the disorganized. Evolution would require just the opposite... the continually building up from the simplest to the more complex forms.

     I would now like for us to consider the complexity of the order and design of our planet and universe. In researching the size of the earth we discover that the mass and size of the earth are just right. If the earth's diameter were 7,200 miles instead of 8,000, almost the whole earth, due to a lessening of its atmospheric mantle, would be reduced to a snow and ice waste.

     If there were a variation of only 10 percent, either in the increase or decrease of the size of our world, no life as we know it on earth would be possible!

     If the average temperature of the earth were raised but two or three degrees you could bid goodbye to many of the big cities of the earth, for the glaciers would melt, and that in turn would flood many of the big cities. This would also inundate hundreds of thousands of square miles of our most fertile lands.

     The earth's axis, which now points toward the North Star, is tilted just right - at the strange angle of 23 degrees from the perpendicular, that is, in relation to the plane of its orbit. Because of this tilt the sun appears to go north in the summer and south in the winter, giving us four seasons in the temperate zone.

     For the same reason, there is twice as much of the land area of the earth that can be cultivated and inhabited as there would be if the sun were always over the equator, with no change of seasons. Think what would happen if the earth were tilted any other way than it is.

     We live miraculously on this planet, protected from eight killer rays from the sun, by a thin layer of ozone high up in our atmosphere. If that little belt of ozone, approximately forty miles up and only one eighth of an inch thick (if compressed), should suddenly drift into space, all life on earth would perish.

     The first miracle, in the light of what the rest of the universe is like, is that there IS an ocean here! In the universe as a whole, liquid water of any kind - sweet or salt - is an exotic rarity. 

     Contrary to common belief, the liquid state is exceptional in nature; most matter in the universe seems to consist either of flaming gases, as in the stars, or frozen solids drifting in the abyss of space.

     The amazing accuracy and smoothness with which the universe revolves - as a flawless, perfect machine - can be seen in the perfection that characterizes the journey of our earth around the sun.  It takes the earth 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes an 48 seconds to make its journey around the sun.  And in this circuit the earth has varied in only the slightest degree. None but an infinite GOD could achieve such flawless, continuous PERFECTION.

     I believe as GOD states in the Bible (Romans 1:20) that nature and creation itself reveals that there is a Creator.  We know that for every design there is a designer, and for every law there is a lawgiver.  "In the beginning God created" is still the most up-to-date statement on the origin of the universe and all that it contains.

     And now I would like to speak personally to you ... the reader of this little book.  God is revealed through His creation... but the greatest revelation God has given to man, He gave through His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ.  The Old Testament part of the Bible informs us that God made man in His own image and likeness, to be His sons.  Man, however rebelled against God.  We have all determined to go our own way and disregard our real Father.  Jesus Christ revealed that God dearly loves us, and that He sent Him to live among us briefly, and then to give His life as a ransom (a sacrifice) for our sins.

     We may now be reconciled to God... to eternal life with Him, by accepting forgiveness of our sins through Jesus.  That which is also necessary is that we repent (turn) from our sinning and live to please God.  All who refuse to accept God's love and forgiveness will receive terrible judgment.

     I urge you to make your peace with God today. Then read the Bible that you may grow in your new life.  I suggest that you begin reading in the book of Luke in the New Testament. God bless you!

"Man shall not create a new world as he seeks. For there cannot be a lasting world without His God. And I speak not of the false idols and gods that man creates in his human nature! There is only one Creator....
     "Little by little you go forward--I say, little by little, but I should stress that many is running fast and faster to the edge of the abyss. In his seeking for power and knowledge, man seeks to dethrone his God and create his own god. But who shall set himself above his Creator, even attempting to control birth and death? I say unto you, you shall never learn the secrets, the sacred secrets of death and life, for these are controlled by the Eternal Father." - Jesus, February 10, 1978

"A war far greater than any war fought in the history of creation shall come upon mankind soon. Flames shall engulf many nations, burning the skin from the bones, and the skin shall dry up and blow away as if it had never been! Eyes will see and still not believe that these are the fruits of their evil corruptive ways and loss of a belief in the Creator." - Our Lady of the Roses, May 28, 1978 

Directives from Heaven

D56 - Science  PDF LogoPDF
D161 - The Great Apostasy  PDF LogoPDF
D164 - Heresy


VIDEO: Origin of Man - Dr. Duane Gish

VIDEO: Polystrate Trees: Upright Trees Are Evidence of Catastrophe (David Rives)

Evolution: The modern anti-science

The mathematical impossibility of evolution (Dr. Henry Morris)

Should We Expect to Find Transitional Forms in the Fossil Record?

Darwinian evolution incompatible with Catholic Faith says Cardinal and author of Catholic Catechism

Adam and Eve: fact or fable?

Teilhard de Chardin is in hell

"You shall be as gods": secular humanism and the kingdom of man (Part 1)

"You shall be as gods":  Secular humanism and self-idolatry (Part 2)



Email us:

| Home | Introduction | Bayside Messages | Directives from Heaven | Miracles & Cures | Veronica Lueken | Miraculous Photos | Videos |


August 07, 2022