Essays

Origins

Download a PDF File of This Document

by Braswell D. Deen, Jr., Copyright © 2011

Here is a 3 page guideline, for suggested use as study sheets, to stimulate serious student science scanning, research and evaluation, of macro evolution, devolution, and punctuated equilibrium, all as compared to, an original, sudden simultaneous, abrupt appearance of man and monkey, both fully grown, and of all life at the beginning of time.

School and college biology curriculums include the alleged strengths of evolution, while mostly excluding the many alleged flaws and weaknesses. This brief guideline encourages study and focus on the latter flaws, so that there will be a more fair and balanced, level field of investigation of: “where did we really come from?”

Darwin’s Bulldog, Sir. Julian Huxley, has said evolution is a fact, while Dr. Louis Bounoure, a former President of Biological Society of Strasbourg, has noted evolution is only a fairytale for grown-ups. All are encouraged to read, Shute, Evan, Flaws in the Theory of Evolution (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Co., 1966), 286 pp. Students may then, with knowledge of strengths and weaknesses, question with boldness.

Seven assumptions must be made and considered, as to the general theory of evolution.

  1. Non-living things give rise to living material, ie, spontaneous generation occurred;
  2. Spontaneous generation occurred only once;
  3. Viruses, bacteria, plants and animals are all interrelated;
  4. Protozoa gave rise to metazoan;
  5. Various inveterate phyla are interrelated;
  6. Invertebrates gave rise to vertebrates;
  7. Fish gave rise to amphibian, amphibian to reptiles, reptiles to birds and mammals.

Read G.A. Kerkut, Implications of Evolution (London Pergamon Press, 1960, where he stated “The first point I would like to make, is that these seven assumptions by their nature, are not capable of experimental verification.” Darwin wrote two principle works, “On the Origin of Species by Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle of Life,” and, “Descent of Man.” Darwin said he only wanted to say there were two sides to the question of immutability, and he confessed, to many evolutionary weaknesses; that the very idea, of the evolution of the “eye,” seemed “to be absurd.”

Many regard the title to his former book, as a Survival of the Fittest type Natural Selection and whichever Race is Preserved is the Favored and Fittest Race. The title to his latter book, Descent of Man, could suggest that humans may have descended downward toward and into the ape, rather that the monkey ascending upward toward and into a man. Some say that his “On the Origin of Species” writing, is well stocked with the words, such as “apparently” and “probably,” and the phrase, “we may well suppose,” is included, more than 800 times.

Former Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan has noted, as to the Descent of Man, devolutionary title of his second book, that he knows of no argument that could be used to prove that man was an improved monkey that could not be also used to substantiate the far more plausible theory that the monkey was a degenerate man. Punctuated Equilibrium is a close kin to the evolutionary model, but suggests that maybe a reptile laid an egg and out flew a bird. There is no scientific evidence supporting this type variable alternative theory of punctuated equilibrium, which is an off shoot notion, of macro evolution.

Darwin contended that all life was interrelated and connected, so he placed all life on one tree. The more simple life like jelly fish, was shown on the bottom limbs and the more complex life, like monkeys and humans, he located, on the upper branches. Apes and humans might copulate, but cannot produce offspring. The same is true of rats, bats and cats, ergo, each, that cannot procreate belong on different trees, as they have distinctive roots, than other life, that cannot produce offspring together. Many cannot see all the different trees, for the forest. Should it then be a single tree, or, a many multiple of trees?

Protozoa to Phyla to Python pathway, upward to Pithecanthropus to people, is a puzzling philosophy to many, and if it did, or could actually occur, would take billions and trillions of years. Evolutionists teach many old earth time clocks, like the Potassium Argon decay, which is allegedly reputed to indicate an old earth, and as supporting of macro evolution. Compare these claims with several young earth time clocks like Efflux of Gases into the Atmosphere, and the Decay of the Earth’s Magnetic Field. Do your own research and make your own judgment, as to the Earth’s age, and then question with boldness.

An always aimless, accidental, animal ape adaptation, alternative ancestry, ascending action and achievement, of monkeys into men, and, the bizarre bad biology, big bang baboon barnyard begets and beginnings, both of which two notions, appear not to be supported, by any scientific evidence. How then stands: The sudden simultaneous abrupt appearance action of accomplishments and achievements of monkey and man separately appearing fully grown, at the very beginning, similar to, and about what we all see today?

The author of this paper is a retired Georgia Judge, who has studied Origins for over 50 years. He has written two books, Trial by Combat and Roots and Origins, that both focus on Macro Evolution. He sets forth 10 points, all of these, should be researched and reviewed. Students should be well informed, as to which theory or model of origins, is sustained and supported by the greater weight of sound scientific evidence. These books are included on this website for free review or purchase a printed copy by selecting "Buy Books" from the "Books" menu above.

The first 5 will require study and interpretations, of whether one sees more similarities or differences, in the various areas, of each issue. The next 4 points, then focuses on change; and, do any changes noted, indicate micro evolution, macro evolution changes, or, only a genetic variation of small non-evolution minor changes? The 10th and major point, relates to fossil evidence, and is said to be direct evidence, which favors, either macro evolution model, or, of the abrupt appearance, non-evolution model. Fossil study is most important!

  1. COMPARATIVE ANATOMY: Plants and animals may be thusly arranged in a classification table, for examination, as to similarities, or, of differences and gaps.
  2. EMBROLOGY: Embryo’s of humans, apes, chickens, lizards and rabbits and other life, raises the same question, of the similarities or differences and gaps?
  3. BIOCHEMISTRY: The DNA molecule and its function is claimed by both sides as supporting of Evolution, or Not! It’s a question of similarities vs differences?
  4. BEHAVIOR: Some animals and humans have a pattern of sometimes similar and sometimes dissimilar behavior. It becomes a question, of what do you conclude?
  5. CONVERGENCE AND MIMICRY: Evolutionists seek to use these two ideas to explain superficial similarities as proof: but, is this due, to any common ancestry?
  6. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION: Where living things are isolated from similar populations in different regions and some variation or change occurs, does this imply macro, micro, evolution, or just genetic variation, of a non-evolution?
  7. VESTIGIAL ORGANS: Is the coccyx bone of humans, a remnant of a long monkey tail, used in previous evolutionary stages, allowing the swinging in the trees, of the monkey? Isn’t this bone really necessary, and not a vestigial organ?
  8. BREEDING EXPERIMENTS: Read G. de Beer, Nature, vol. 206, (1965), p 331, as to the changes of the peppered moth, and, does this or not, support evolution?
  9. MUTATIONS: If, there are sudden appearances of new organisms, with a minor mutation, is that visual proof of micro or macro evolution or of a non evolution?
  10. FOSSILS: Fossils are remains of organisms found geographically worldwide. Are rocks dated by appearance, structural features, fossil content, or by vertical superposition? Many scientists state the rocks are dated by index fossils, based on the notion that macro evolution has already occurred. Read, J.E.Ransom, Fossils in America (New York: Harper and Row, 1964), p.43. The fossil record is alleged by evolutionists to be a historical fact of direct evidence and proof of macro evolution. Read C.O. Dunbar, Historical Geology (2nd ed. New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1960), p. 47. Query: Do the fossils speak more clearly of quick and rapid formation, or more of a slow gradualism of uniformitarianism? Jay Gould commented on the use of the latter word “as a smokescreen to hide confusion both as to student and teacher.” See, “Is Uniformitarianism Useful?” Journal of Geological Education, vol.15 (October 1967), p.150. A lawyer, Charles Lyell, a theologian, Buckland, a surveyor, Smith, and a journalist, Chambers, put together a concept, based on evolution having already occurred, of structuring and arranging a man made, geological column. They brought forth a method for dividing pre historic time based on evolution of organisms whose fossil record had been left in the sedimentary rocks of the earth’s crust. See, W.B.N. Berry, “Growth of a Pre Historic Time Scale.” (San Francisco, W. H. Freeman Co., 1968), p.5. Index Fossils located anywhere, is claimed to date rocks in other parts of the world where similar fossils were found. This would distinguish one geologic age from another. Examples would be Carboniferous age, cock-roach’s Silurian age; bats, Cretaceous age; cats, Eocene age, rats. The geologic column is based on the notion, macro evolution has actually already occurred. If any macro evolution has not really occurred, the geological column is useless, and is a hoax!