Free news

FREE blog







Gun poll








14th Amdt

19th Amdt













Eliminating fatherlessness

"Evolutionists" versus Scientists

Copyright © 2001 by The Fathers' Manifesto

Please distribute freely, all portions intact.

Post your comments on the "Creation versus Evolution" Forum

horizontal rule


9-12% of Americans are "evolutionists"


16% oppose teaching creation in high school


5% don't believe in God or a higher spirit


17% believe that religion is old-fashioned


9% of Americans are neither religious nor spiritual


Kansas makes teaching "evolution" optional


evolutionists.gif (31224 bytes)

horizontal rule

"On an average every species must have same number killed year with year by hawks, by cold, & c.--even one species of hawk decreasing in number must affect instantaneously all the rest.  The final cause of all this wedging must be to sort out proper structure.... One may say there is a force like a hundred thousand wedges trying to force every kind of adapted structure in the gaps in the oeconomy of nature, or rather forming gaps by thrusting out weaker ones." Charles Darwin

horizontal rule


The case against Darwin


The improbability of evolution as a theory.


The mass hysteria techniques used by evolutionists.


Lying with science.


Question for "evolutionists".


Cro-Magnon Man: a case study in devolution.


"Proof" of evolution.


Science requires many attributes which "evolutionists" simply don't possess:

  1. Scientists must accept and analyze every distinct possibility of their supposition until they have enough observable evidence to produce a theory.  "Evolutionists" completely reject any notion that creation is a possibility which makes them advocates rather than scientists.

  2. Scientists must remain open minded about external data, opinions, empirical evidence, and other competing suppositions.   "Evolutionists" believe that 81% of the American population supports creation only because they are "ignorant".

  3. Scientists cannot claim that a supposition is a theory until they have "observed phenomen which has been verified to some degree".  The "theory of evolution" is not a theory at all because no "evolutionist" has ever observed speciation, which is a fundamental requirement of evolution.

  4. Scientists must analyze, clarify, and explain the compounding statistical errors which are created when multiple suppositions are combined.  "Evolutionists" not only ignore the improbability of their speculation when they combine speciation, evolution, carbon dating, contradictory palentological evidence, the dearth of respectable fossils, and contradictory DNA evidence, but they dismiss it by claiming that even events which have an almost zero probability of occurring can still occur, given enough time.

  5. Respectable scientists have raised serious doubts about the reliability of carbon dating, and suggested that the Earth is much younger than carbon dating suggests.  "Evolutionists" reveal their advocacy when they question the credentials of the scientists and engage in character assassination rather than a legitimate defense of their position.

  6. Scientists must consider the ramifications of the Earth's magnetic field strength decreasing 50% in every 1,400 years.  "Evolutionists" claim [falsely] that this is not an exponential decrease and that there isn't enough observable evidence.

  7. Scientists should welcome organizations like the Institute for Creation Research which are filling the gap in the scientific analysis of creation.  "Evolutionists" instantly presume that any research done by such organizations is suspect, even though they admit that they themselves haven't examined and don't want to examine any facts, opinions, speculation or theories based on creation.

  8. Scientists must recognize that an extremely small variation in DNA produces radically different species.   "Evolutionists" speculate that the DNA of chimpanzees and humans being "98.5% similar" is proof of speciation, which is  analogous to claiming that the blueprints of Volkswagens and Boeing 747s being "98.5% similar" is proof that there is little difference between a Volkswagen and a Boeing 747.


Consider how many similarities there are between the design plans of a Volkswagen and a Boeing 747.  They both use the same paper, ink, and mathematics.  They both use English and metric measuring systems.  They are both drawn on computers using identical software programs.   They both required simulation and prototypes and testing and redesign.  They both use parts which can be manufactured en masse and assembled on an assembly line.   They both have engines, brakes, hydraulic systems, electrical systems, water cooling systems, electronics, transceivers, headlights, doors, windows, ceilings, floors, carpeting, seats, and seat  belts.

They are almost identical?

If Volkswagen used a smaller font size in the plans than Boeing, then a complete collection of the printed design plans of the Volkswagen could be larger than for the Boeing 747.  Does this make them "98.5% similar"?


horizontal rule


bulletThe Usenet newsgroup   is the most referenced web site used by "evolutionists".   This is a great site for discovering how they prefer to engage in character assassination and slander rather than debate.  This site has an entire page dedicated to questioning the credentials of "creationists" with whom they disagree. Yet they themselves have elevated college dropout, uneducated, medical school flunky Charles Darwin to a "virtual god".  If they were to apply the same level of scrutiny to Darwin, his "theory", or "speciation", this site wouldn't exist.  Such hypocrisy is exceeded only by their "religious conviction" to their cause
bulletA particularly specious article on this web site falsely accuses respected scientist Thomas G. Barnes of mischaracterizing his data as being exponential,  of "resting on false premises","simply playing a trick on us", "already played his trick", and being "simply false".  Even if any valid points were made, this is advocacy at its worst, not science, and it discredits the entire web site.
bulletThe Usenet newsgroup is a great illustration of the pack mentality which led to the mass hysteria surrounding the "theory of evolution".  In just a few days of debate, most "evolutionists" had rejected any new scientific evidence which challenged their position, derided any reference which was  associated with "creationists", manufacured false premises and outright LIES about this author, "appealed" to the "Christian nature of Christians" in order to curtail the debate, and dedicated more effort to character assassination than to real debate.   In only two posts, one poster had managed to pack together 26 false statements, 10 LIES, 14 adhominems, 4 "I hate its", and only 9 facts.  Being accurate 14.3% of the time isn't good, but it appears to be better than the accuracy involved in the overall "evolution debate".





jewn McCain

ASSASSIN of JFK, Patton, many other Whites

killed 264 MILLION Christians in WWII

killed 64 million Christians in Russia

holocaust denier extraordinaire--denying the Armenian holocaust

millions dead in the Middle East

tens of millions of dead Christians

LOST $1.2 TRILLION in Pentagon
spearheaded torture & sodomy of all non-jews
millions dead in Iraq

42 dead, mass murderer Goldman LOVED by jews

serial killer of 13 Christians

the REAL terrorists--not a single one is an Arab

serial killers are all jews

framed Christians for anti-semitism, got caught
left 350 firemen behind to die in WTC

legally insane debarred lawyer CENSORED free speech

mother of all fnazis, certified mentally ill

10,000 Whites DEAD from one jew LIE

moser HATED by jews: he followed the law Jesus--from a "news" person!!

1000 fold the child of perdition


Hit Counter


Modified Saturday, March 11, 2017

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party