31- The Human Eyeball Is More Complex and Efficient Than the Most Advanced Camera

With its 40 basic components, the human eye provides a better image and clarity than even the most advanced digital camera. In order for the eye to be able to see at all, every one of these 40 components need to be fully functional at the same time, able to work together in harmony. If even one of these components is absent, the eye is effectively blind. In the same way that a workable camera cannot emerge in stages as its component parts are assembled haphazardly, neither can the eye have formed in stages and as the result of chance mutations.

32- The Human Brain Is Organized in a Highly Complex and Superior Way

The analytical power of our brains is many times superior to that in computers. The brain has a total capacity equivalent to that of an average of 1,000 computers. Since it is impossible for even a single computer to have come into being by chance, it is utterly nonsensical to suggest that such a magnificent structure as the human brain originally did so..

The brain consists of some 100 billion nerve cells, which communicate with one another by way of connection points known as synapses. There are 10,000 synapses in every neuron, so that any one neuron can communicate with 10,000 other neurons at the same time. The number of synapses in the human brain is estimated to be around 1 quadrillion-enabling 1,000,000,000,000,000 acts of communication. The transistors in computers, analogous to the brain's nerve cells, have only six connection points.

The fastest computer in the world can perform an average of 109 processes per second. The brain can manage 1015 (that is, 10,000,000,000,000,000 actions per second.) In addition, the computer has a memory capacity of 1011 bytes (a byte being the smallest unit of information capable of being recorded on a computer). Compare that to the brain's capacity of 1014. In other words, the human brain has a capacity equivalent to that of 1,000 computers.

It is absolutely impossible for chance to organize the brain cells in such a way as to give rise to such a dazzling communications network. This system is far more complex and wondrous than Internet technology, one of the greatest developments of the 20th century. Internet technology-indeed, even the simplest telephone switchboard system cannot form by chance. People are well aware that engineering, design, information, and intelligence are all essential for such technology. How, then, can they still manage to claim that the brain's far more extraordinary system came into being by "evolution"-by slow, incremental chance?

There is no doubt that this is the result of blind devotion to the theory of evolution. But approaching matters in an unprejudiced manner can clearly reveal the full glory inherent in humanity's creation.

33- The Bacterial "Whip" that Baffles Evolutionists

The Bacterial Flagellum

Certain bacteria use a microscopic whip or flagellum to propel themselves through their liquid environment. This organic engine does not run on the energy kept in a ready state in the ATP molecules inside the cell. Instead, it has its own particular source of energy: The bacterium uses the energy it receives from a flow of acid from the membrane. Some 240 separate proteins make up the bacterial whip. Scientists say that these proteins emit signals to turn the microscopic engine on and off and form joints that permit movement at the atomic level.

This complex structure in the bacterial flagellum alone is sufficient to demolish the theory of evolution. The whip itself has a structure, which can by no means be reduced to a simple form. If only a single molecular piece that constitutes the whip were absent or defective, the flagellum would not function and would therefore be of no use to the bacterium. This yet again clearly reveals the invalidity of the theory of evolution's claim of "gradual development."

34- A Defense System with a Memory and a Laboratory

Some antigens-foreign bodies and microbes-endanger human beings by entering the bloodstream. When this happens, the defense cells try to eliminate these antigens by producing substances known as antibodies or else prevent them from multiplying.

The most surprising, and important, characteristic of antibodies is their ability to recognize hundreds of thousands of microbes that are completely different in nature and to prepare themselves to destroy them. What's really interesting is that there are antibodies that can recognize even artificial antigens produced in the laboratory and introduced inside the human body.

How is this cell able to recognize hundreds of thousands of different cells? In addition, how does it acquire information about an artificially produced substance? Moreover, antibodies are able to immediately produce effective weapons to be used against the invader-a process that presents an insoluble dilemma for evolutionists.

35- Bone Cells That Sculpt Cannot Be the Products of Chance

The cells found in bone known as osteoclasts enable changes in the shape and size of bones and let them in time increase to adult dimensions by carving away in certain areas of bone. They also decrease the size of protrusions on the bone surface. During the demolition process performed by osteoclasts, other cells known as osteoblasts begin to form new bone tissue to reconstitute the skeleton.

The cells perform the same task within the bones of every human being. They all know how to reduce and shape the bone surface. Aware of the differences between the skull and the thigh bone, they know how to shape any given bone, when to stop its growth, and how thick or thin the eventual bone is to be. These cells prepare the body's skeleton with the greatest care, just like a sculptor. It is Almighty God Who inspires every step taken by these cells that creates the hardness, length, shape, protrusions and cavities of every part of the skeleton.

26-How Did Different Species Come to Have Different DNA?

Evolutionists ascribe the origin of different species' different genetic characteristics to mutations-changes that, as you know, take place in DNA as a result of radiation or chemical effects. Yet these outside influences either damage DNA or else have no effects on it.

To clarify this with an example, let us record a very thorough history of the world on a computer. In the process, let us rewrite the book completely several times, and also ask the person typing it over to press the keyboard at random without actually looking at it. Could he improve this history book, or even complete it in the first place? Could a chapter titled "The History of Ancient Egypt" that did not already exist in ever come into being? The inevitable spelling mistakes can of course never improve or develop the book. On the contrary, they will impair it and damage its meaning. Yet evolutionists claim that, in effect, spelling mistakes can improve a book, making it more precise and sophisticated.

27- Who Established the Hierarchical Order in the Genes?

Certain genes have the ability to control others. For example, some "control" genes halt the gene that manufactures haemoglobin during childhood.

This fact requires careful reflection. Since genes are made up of molecules, how did these molecules set up such an organization among themselves? How can a molecule decide to halt a human being's growth and to transmit that decision to others, and how do those other molecules understand that signal and act upon it? From whom did those disciplined orders originate?

Moreover, trillions of genes have been flawlessly performing these functions with the same discipline, obedience, reason and apparent intent for millions of years. To claim that such an immaculate system came into being by chance is utterly nonsensical.

28- One Example of the Predicament in Which Evolutionists Find Themselves

Let evolutionists place large quantities of elements found in the structure of living things-such as phosphorus, nitrogen, carbon, oxygen, iron and magnesium-into a large container. Let them also add whatever other materials not actually present under normal conditions, but which they may deem necessary. Let them also mix in as much amino acids (which cannot form spontaneously in the Earth's atmosphere) and as many proteins (even though not a single protein can form by chance) as they wish.

To this mixture, let them apply as much heat and moisture as they desire. Then let them agitate it with whatever advanced equipment they choose. Let them have teams of eminent scientists stand watch over the container for billions or even trillions of years. Let them be free to apply whatever conditions they may believe to be necessary in order for life to form. No matter what they do they will definitely never be able to produce a living organism from it, much less a human being. They will definitely be unable to produce any of the countless living species on Earth, such as giraffes, lions, bees, canaries, nightingales, parrots, horses, dolphins, roses, orchids, irises, carnations, bananas, oranges, apples, dates, tomatoes, melons, water melons, figs, olives, grapes, peaches, peacocks, leeches or brightly-colored butterflies. They will be unable to produce even a single cell, let alone any one of these many life forms.

In short, unconscious, insentient atoms cannot combine together to form a cell. Neither can they subsequently decide to divide that cell into two, and then take further decisions and create creative humans who invent the electron microscope and then examine the structure of their own cells under it. Matter is an inanimate, unconscious substance, and finds life only through God's sublime inspiration.

The theory of evolution, on the other hand, which maintains the exact opposite, is merely nonsense. Just a little consideration of about the irrational claims made by evolutionists will make this crystal clear.

29- The Theory of Evolution Cannot Explain the Creation in Living Things

If you see an ink stain on a piece of paper, you naturally assume that an ink has been spilled on the paper, forming a random shape. But should you see handwriting on that same paper that reads, "Call your father," you can safely assume that this has not appeared haphazardly. Even if the writer of the note is not in the room, you know that this is a meaningful, purposeful message written by a conscious individual.

Alternatively, when you see a beautiful picture, you know that this is the product of a skilled and knowledgeable intelligent artist, even if you cannot actually see the artist who painted it.

You never imagine that this picture has come into being through paints being flung at it at random. The same applies to the flawless features in living things. Their immaculate and extraordinary engineering clearly show that they cannot be the work of chance, but are rather the product of a Superior Creator. In the face of this truth, the theory of evolution is now in a state of collapse. The superior creation in living things is the work of God, the Lord of all the worlds.

30- The Irreducible Complexity in Living Things Invalidates the Theory of Evolution

The intricate complexity of anatomical systems makes the stage-by-stage development espoused by evolutionists completely impossible. For example, it is impossible for organs such as the tear gland, retina or iris, some of the components of the eye, to have formed separately, in gradual stages. Eyesight can take place only after all the components of the eyeball are present and fully functioning. If even one is missing or deficient, eye will be useless. And, according to the theory of evolution, any functionless organ should be eliminated by way of "natural selection."

21- The Claim that Life Arrived from Outer Space is Wholly Fictitious

Faced with the fact that amino acids could never have formed by chance under the conditions of the primeval Earth, evolutionists embarked on a search for some new way to account for the emergence of life. According to one of their new claims, a meteor fell to Earth. Soon after, organic substances and amino acids inside this meteor reacted together, and thus life sprang into being.

Yet it is now known that the primeval atmosphere was of such a kind that would have quickly broken down any amino acids. In addition, under the conditions of the primeval Earth, even if large quantities of amino acids had arrived from outer space, and even if the world had actually been awash in amino acids, this still would not account for the origin of living things. It would still have been impossible for amino acids to combine by chance and haphazardly give rise to exceedingly complex and three-dimensional proteins, the organelles of the cell, and then for these organelles to give rise to a cell with its own miraculous structure.

According to yet another view, the first life formed not on Earth, but on some other planet. These organisms were subsequently carried to Earth in the form of spores or seeds by meteors, and life thus began here. However, current knowledge shows that it is impossible for spores or seeds in the irradiated vacuum of space to have been withstood the heat, pressure, dangerous rays, etc. through their journey to Earth. Therefore, the claim that the first life formed on another planet does not resolve evolutionists' problems at all, but merely places them one step back. The obstacles to life emerging by chance on Earth will also apply on any other planet.

22- The False Proof that Life Could Have Formed Spontaneously on the Primeval Earth

For their only evidence of this claim, evolutionists point to the Miller Experiment, carried out in 1953. Yet that experiment produced no living cell. All that happened was that a few simple amino acids were synthesized. But it is mathematically impossible for amino acids to assume the correct sequence and constitute proteins, and for these then to give rise to the cell, by chance. In addition, the amino acids that Miller synthesized were irrelevant and meaningless, because in his experiment Miller employed gasses that did not exist in the primeval Earth's atmosphere.

23- The Theory of Evolution Can Never Explain How Proteins' Capabilities Came to Be

Albumin, one of the proteins in the body, binds to itself fats such as cholesterol, hormones, toxic bile and drugs such as penicillin. It then travels throughout the body in the bloodstream, deposits the substances it has collected in the liver where they can be converted into usable form, and carries other nutrients and hormones to the sites where they are needed.

How can a molecule such as albumin, composed of unconscious, unknowing atoms, distinguish between fats, toxins, drugs and various nutrients?

Furthermore, how is it able to recognize the liver and gall bladder, and deposit the substances it transports at just the right place and in just the right amounts, never confusing them or making a mistake? Since it is impossible for human beings to tell toxins, nutrients and drugs carried in the bloodstream apart from one another, how is a molecule made up of atoms able to do so?

24- Did Unconscious Atoms Think of Setting up and Designing a Power Plant in Our Bodies?

In our cells, the energy plants known as "mitochondria," only 1/100 millimeters in size, are more complex than any oil refinery or hydroelectric station. Our cells, which possess no consciousness or knowledge and are made up of combinations of specific numbers of molecules, produce energy in a manner that is far more economical and practical than that devised by a combination of engineers, technical experts, workers and designers employing the most advanced technology.

Every detail in the energy plants in our cells has been flawlessly created, from energy conservation to the recycling of waste products. The theory of evolution is unable to account for the formation of even one of these features in the cell.

25- The Equivalent of 25 Encyclopedic Volumes of Information Contained in DNA Cannot Have Emerged by Chance

In a single human DNA molecule, there is sufficient information to fill one million printed pages. All this information has a very important sequence. Just think; if we typed millions of letters at random on sheets of paper, and if all these letters then turned into words and then formed an article like those in the pages of a newspaper, could we claim that this was all the result of blind chance? Of course not! Yet according to the Darwinist mindset, it is indeed possible for such an extraordinary event to take place by chance-not just once, but many times!

16- The Claim that Some Organs Are Vestigial Is Untrue

Evolutionist sources have long suggested that certain organs in the human body no longer have any function and that they are not used but represent a legacy from long-dead ancestoral forms. The human appendix and the coccyx were for many years regarded as "vestigial" organs. However, the latest scientific research has revealed that these organs do, in fact, serve a purpose. The list of "vestigial organs" that evolutionists drew up at the beginning of the 20th century is now completely discredited. In the same way, the concept of "junk DNA" proposed by evolutionists-the claim that a large part of the DNA chain serves no purpose-has also been discredited by new discoveries.

17- It Is Utterly Impossible for Proteins to Form by Chance

It is mathematically impossible for proteins, the building blocks of life, to have formed by chance. For example, the odds of an average-sized protein molecule, which consists of 288 amino acids, emerging by chance is 1 in 10300. (This is an astronomical figure of 1 followed by 300 zeros.) In practical terms, it is impossible for this to happen. (In mathematics, chances smaller than 1 in 1050 are regarded as having zero probability.) The theory of evolution, which is unable to account for the formation of even a single protein in terms of chance, can never explain how the cell and even more complex structures came into being.

18- Chance Combinations of Inanimate Molecules Cannot Account for Life

Even if we assume that protein molecules did come into existence by chance, still it is impossible for life to emerge spontaneously. Thousands of further stages are needed in order to progress from a protein to a cell. Above all, any protein that happens to form by chance will have to wait patiently for other proteins to form alongside, while not itself suffering any impairment due to ultraviolet rays or mechanical effects in its immediate environment. Then these other proteins must form in sufficient numbers and at the same point and combine in a meaningful manner in such a way as to constitute the organelles of the cell. No foreign substance, harmful molecule or useless protein must enter the sequence. Then, these organelles have to combine in an exceptionally planned and organized manner, attract the requisite enzymes and be covered with a membrane. And then finally, the interior of that membrane must be filled with a special fluid that provides an ideal environment for these organelles. Yet by itself, every one of these stages is impossible.

19- Any Single Cell Is More Complex Than Even A Great City

Around 4 billion years ago, according to the evolutionist scenario, various inanimate chemical substances entered into a reaction, combining under the effects of lightning or earthquakes, and thus gave rise to the first cell. In fact, however, scientists describe the cell as having as complex a structure as that of a city like Paris or London. A great number of structures inside the cell, from energy-producing plants to protein factories, from transport systems carrying raw materials to decoders that interpret DNA, and communications systems, are all in a constant state of activity in a flawless organization. Believing the evolutionist claim that the cell came into being by chance is as illogical as claiming that all the buildings, roads, transport systems, water and electricity grids in New York City emerged spontaneously thanks to the effects of random natural phenomena such as storms and earthquakes.

20- The Creation in the Structure of the Cell is One Proof that Invalidates the Theory of Evolution

Thanks to their perfect structures, some 200 different kinds of cells perform different functions in the body.. For example, nerve cells have extensions approximately 1 meter long, reaching from the spinal cord down to the feet. This enables stimuli to reach their destination very quickly along a single route. Blood corpuscles, on the other hand, are only 7 micrometers in size, which allows them to pass easily through microscopically small capillary vessels.

Inside the eye's light-sensitive retinal cells, a large number of membranes carry light-sensitive pigments and nerve connections. In this way, the cells become sensitive to light. The intestines contain food-digesting cells with a shape ideally suited to their task. All these cells come into being through the division of one single cell in the human embryo. But did unconscious atoms and coincides assume the responsibility for these cells' flawless shapes so ideally suited to their functions? This extraordinary organization and planning, which the theory of evolution can never account for, is a proof of God's creation.

11- Archaeopteryx Is Not the Missing Link between Reptiles and Birds

Archaeoptery

Ever since the 19th century, evolutionists have portrayed the 150-million-year old fossil known as Archaeopteryx as the greatest fossil evidence for the theory of evolution. They claimed that the fossil has a number of reptilian features that make it a "missing link" between reptiles and birds. Recent findings have invalidated this claim, however, by revealing that Archaeopteryx was a fully-fledged flying bird. In addition, the therapod dinosaurs formerly regarded as the supposed reptilian ancestors of birds are in fact much younger than Archaeopteryx-an inconvenient fact that evolutionists attempt to conceal.

12- The Fossil Record Refutes the Famous "Equine Evolution" Scenario

For decades now, the "evolution" of the horse has been presented as one of the best- documented proofs of the theory of evolution. Four-footed mammals that lived in different periods have been arranged in an arbitrary order from small to large, and this "horse series" displayed in the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. The fact is, however, that recent research in years has revealed that the extinct species in the horse series were not one another's ancestors. The sequence is highly inaccurate, and that the smaller quadrupeds depicted as the ancestor of the horse actually appeared on Earth long afterwards.

13- Evolutionists' Ape-Man Stories Are not Based on Any Evidence

The pre-eminent deception of Darwinism is that human beings evolved from ape-like creatures-a claim that's been imposed on the popular imagination by way of countless of imaginary drawings and models. In fact, there is no evidence that such "ape-men" ever lived. Australopithecus, commonly depicted as today's man's earliest ancestor, of, was in fact an extinct species of ape not so very different from chimpanzees. Classifications such as Homo erectus, Homo sapiens neandertalensis and Homo sapiens archaic, which follow Australopithecus in the so-called family tree of humans, are actually different human races. The small anatomical differences between these classifications and today's man can also be observed among different races alive today, such as native Australians, pygmies and Inuit, or Eskimos.

14- The 99% Genetic Similarity between Man and Chimps Is A Deception

For a very long time, the evolutionist choir has been propagating the unsubstantiated thesis that there is very little genetic difference between humans and chimps. In every piece of evolutionist literature, you could read sentences like "we are 99 percent equal to chimps" or "there is only 1 percent of DNA that makes us human". Although no conclusive comparison between human and chimp genomes has been done, the Darwinist ideology led them to assume that there is very little difference between the two species.

A recent study shows that the evolutionist propaganda on this issue-like many others-is completely false. Humans and chimps are not "99% similar" as the evolutionist fairy tale went on. Genetic similarity turns out to be less than 95 %.

A biologist at the California Institute of Technology based this on a computer program that compared 780,000 of the 3 billion base pairs in the human DNA helix with those of the chimp. He found more mismatches than earlier researchers had, and concluded that at least 3.9 percent of the DNA bases were different.

This led him to conclude that there is a fundamental genetic difference between the species of about 5 percent.(http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/09/24/humans.chimps.ap/index.html)

New Scientist, a leading science magazine and a strong supporter of Darwinism, reported the following on the same subject in an article titled "Human-chimp DNA difference trebled":

We are more unique than previously thought, according to new comparisons of human and chimpanzee DNA. It has long been held that we share 98.5 per cent of our genetic material with our closest relatives. That now appears to be wrong. In fact, we share less than 95 per cent of our genetic material, a three-fold increase in the variation between us and chimps. (http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992833)

15- Creation, Not Evolution, Is the Origin of Human Consciousness

The theory of evolution cannot explain how human consciousness emerged. Unconscious atoms and chance cannot account for human beings who found civilizations, produce works of art, establish scientific fields from medicine to archaeology, philosophize, rejoice and feel amazement, compose music, take pleasure from the arts they have created, enjoy the taste of yogurt, have friends, understand such concepts as loyalty, self-sacrifice and love, feel longing, build space vehicles, invent the microscope and the light bulb-and study the atoms that comprise their own bodies. It is impossible to account for consciousness in terms of any materialist philosophy that regards a human being as an assemblage of matter. By themselves, the atoms and molecules in the brain can neither feel, nor know anything, nor speak. Consciousness is an attribute of the human soul; and it is God Who bestows that soul on human beings.

6- No Transitional Forms Have Ever Been Found in the Fossil Record

The theory of evolution claims that the transition from one species to another takes place from the primitive (simple) to the more complex-progressively, and in stages. According to this claim, bizarre, monstrous creatures known as "transitional forms" must have existed during this progress from one species to another. For example, there must have existed half-fish and half-amphibian creatures that, despite still having fish characteristics, had also acquired some amphibious ones, as well as half-human, half-ape creatures, and half-reptile, half-bird life forms.

If any such transitional species had really existed, then their remains should be encountered in the fossil record. But in over a century, there is still not the slightest trace of such intermediate forms that paleontologists have searched for with such great eagerness.

7- Living Groups Emerged Abruptly on Earth and at the Same Time

Almost all the basic living categories known today emerged suddenly and at the same time, during the Cambrian Period, 530 to 520 million years ago. Living organisms with totally different bodily structures-sponges, mollusks, worms, Echinodermata, arthropods and vertebrates-all appeared suddenly, simultaneously, with no life forms remotely resembling them in any earlier geological period. This fact alone completely undermines evolutionists' claims that living things evolved from a single common ancestor gradually, and over a very long period of time.

The fact that the Earth was suddenly filled with a great many species, all possessing radically different physical structures and exceedingly complex organs demonstrates that these were, of course, created. Since evolutionists deny creation and the existence of God, they cannot definitely explain this miraculous phenomenon.

8- Species Living Today Have Undergone No Changes over Hundreds of Millions of Years

Had evolution actually taken place, then living things must have emerged on Earth as a result of small, gradual changes-and to have continued changing over the course of time. Yet the fossil records demonstrate the exact opposite! Different classes of living creatures emerged suddenly, with no ancestors even remotely resembling them, and remained in a stable state, undergoing no changes at all, often for hundreds of millions of years.

9- Fish that Ruined Evolutionists' Dreams:Colecanth

Colecanth

Evolutionists used to depict the Colecanth, a fish known only from fossils dating back 400 million years, as very powerful evidence of a transitional form between fish and amphibians. Since it was assumed that this species had become extinct 70 million years ago, evolutionists engaged in all kinds of speculation regarding the fossils. On 22 December 1938, however, a living Colecanth was caught in the deep waters of the Indian Ocean. More than 200 other living specimens have been caught in the years that followed.

All the speculation regarding these fish had been unfounded. Contrary to what evolutionists claimed, the Colecanth was not a vertebrate with half-fish, half-amphibian characteristics preparing to emerge onto dry land. It was in fact a bottom-dwelling fish that almost never rose above a depth of 180 meters (590 feet). Moreover, there were no anatomical differences between the living Colecanth and the 400-million-year-old fossil specimens. This creature had never "evolved" at all.

10- Birds' Wings Cannot Be the Work of Chance

Evolutionists maintain that birds evolved from reptiles-though this is impossible, and a bird's wing alone is sufficient to prove this. In order for evolution of the kind claimed to have taken place, a reptile's forearms would have to have changed into functional wings as the result of mutations taking place in its genes-and quickly! And this is not feasible. First of all, this transitional life form would be unable to fly with only half-developed wings. It would also be deprived of its forearms. That would mean it was essentially deformed and therefore-according to the theory of evolution-would be eliminated.

In order for any bird to fly, its wings had to be fully formed in every detail. The wings should be soundly attached to the chest cavity. The bird would need to have a light skeletal structure allowing it to take off, maintain its balance in the air and move in all directions. Its wing and tail feathers would have to be light, flexible and in aerodynamic proportion to one another. In short, everything would have to operate with a flawless coordination in order to make flight possible. How could this inerrant structure in birds' bodies have resulted from a succession of random mutations? That question has no answer.

1- The Theory of Evolution Regards Chance as a Creative Deity

The theory of evolution claims that unconscious, unreasoning, inanimate atoms such as phosphorus and carbon assembled themselves together by chance. As a result of such natural phenomena as lightning, volcanic eruptions, ultraviolet rays and radiation, these atoms organized themselves in such a flawless way as to give rise to proteins, cells-and thereafter, fish, rabbits, lions, birds, human beings and all manner of life forms.

That is the basic claim made by the theory of evolution, which regards chance as a creative deity. However, belief in any such claim is a violation of reason, logic and science.

2- Natural Selection Cannot Account for the Complex Structures in Living Things

The theory of evolution maintains that those living organisms that best adapt to their environment have more opportunities to survive and multiply, and therefore, they can pass on their advantageous characteristics to subsequent generations, and species evolve by way of this "mechanism."

But the fact is that the mechanism in question-known as natural selection-cannot cause living things to evolve, nor endow them with any new features. It can only reinforce existing characteristics belonging to a particular species.

In any given region, for example, those rabbits able to run fastest will survive, while others die. After a few generations, all the rabbits in this region will consist of fast-running individuals. However, these rabbits can never evolve into another species-greyhounds or foxes, for instance.

3- Peppered Moths Are No Evidence for Evolution through Natural Selection

Of all the supposed "proofs" of the theory of evolution, the most frequently repeated concerns changes in a species of moth in 19th century Britain. It is claimed that due to air pollution during the Industrial Revolution, tree bark was darkened-for which reason dark- colored moths were better camouflaged from predatory birds, and thus their numbers increased.

But this is not evolution, because no new species of moth emerged. All that happened was that the ratio ratio of the two already existing types in an already existing species changed. In addition, it has since emerged that the account on which this claim was based was untrue. The well-known photos showing moths clinging to the bark of trees were found to be fabrications. Contrary to what has been claimed, no instance of so-called "industrial melanism"-the darkening of color due to industrial pollution-has ever taken place.

4- Just as an Earthquake Cannot Improve a City, Neither Are Mutations Advantageous to Develop Living Things

Mutations are caused by random changes in the DNA in which all the information concerning the human body's characteristics is encoded. Mutations occur due to outside agents such as radiation or chemicals. Evolutionists maintain that such random genetic changes can cause living things to evolve. The fact is, though, that mutations are always harmful to living things, do not develop them, and can never endow them with any new functional features (such as wings or lungs, for instance). Mutations either kill or deform the afflicted organism. To claim that mutations improve a species and endow it with new advantages is like claiming that an earthquake can make a city more advanced and modern, or that striking a computer with a hammer will result in a more advanced model. Indeed, no mutation has ever been observed to increase-much less improve-genetic information.

5- Life Comes From Life

The erroneous theory known as "spontaneous generation," which had been around since at least the Middle Ages, maintained that inanimate substances could by chance assamble to produce a living being. The idea that insects formed from food wastes or mice from wheat was widespread up, until the 18th century. Even in the 19th century, when Darwin wrote his book The Origin of Species, the scientific world still widely believed that bacteria could arise from inanimate matter.

In fact, however, only five years after Darwin published his book, Louis Pasteur announced his results after long studies and experiments, that disproved spontaneous generation, a cornerstone of Darwin's theory. In his triumphal lecture at the Sorbonne in 1864, Pasteur said: "Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment." (Sidney Fox, Klaus Dose, Molecular Evolution and The Origin of Life, New York: Marcel Dekker, 1977. p. 2)

His findings revealed, once again, that life did not emerge spontaneously on Earth, but that it began with a miraculous creation.