Is There Evidence Against Evolution?

The biggest problem for evolutionists is the origin of life from non-life. Even the simplest single-celled organism is unthinkably complex, with scores of highly-sophisticated parts, all performing important functions and all mutually interdependent. The laws of statistics have convinced all who have bothered to calculate that even a protein molecule, consisting as it does of a chain of hundreds of precisely arranged amino acids, could never arise by chance. And such a protein molecule is trivial compared to any of the working parts of a cell. When it is recognized that all of these parts must be present and functioning at the start, it must be admitted that life from non-life is impossible without intelligent design. Actually, any living thing gives such strong evidence for design by an intelligent designer that only a willful ignoring of the data (II Peter 3:5) could lead one to assign such intricacy to chance. Every living thing, from simple bacteria to people, possesses the marvelous DNA code, which contains a library full of precise information, and without which life is impossible.

Another huge problem for evolutionists lies in the nature of the fossil record, i.e., the only physical record we have of life in the past. As is now being admitted by my evolutionary colleagues, the fossil record gives no clue that any basic type of animal has ever changed into another basic type of animal, for no in-between forms have ever been discovered. Each basic type is distinct in the modern world and in the fossil record, although there is much variation within these basic types. While gradual, "Darwinian" evolution has always predicted that in-between forms would one day be found, the current rage in evolutionary circles is the concept of rapid evolution, or "punctuated equilibrium"—proposing that small isolated portions of a larger population evolved rapidly and left no fossils. But where is the evidence that they evolved at all?

Even though the gaps in the fossil record are found between each basic animal type, there are two huge gaps, which should be emphasized. The evolutionary distance between single celled organisms and the vast array of multicellular, highly complex marine invertebrates precludes even rapid evolution. In the supposedly 600-million-year-old layers of rock designated as Cambrian (the first appearance of multicelled life), sponges, clams, trilobites, sea urchins, starfish, etc., etc., are found with no evolutionary ancestors. Evolutionists don't even have any possible ancestors to propose. And then the gap from marine invertebrates to the vertebrate fish is likewise immense. To make matters worse for the evolutionists, fish fossils are also found in Cambrian strata. If evolution is true, fish must have evolved from something, and invertebrates must also have evolved from something. Evolution has no ancestor to propose, but the evidence exactly fits the creation model, for creation insists that each animal type was created fully formed, with no evolutionary transition.

The evidence for creation is so strong; it is illogical to believe anything else. Only a religious commitment to atheism, or a desire for the approval of those atheists, who call themselves scholars, could lead one down this path. The Bible says that those who deny creation are "without excuse" (Romans 1:20).

*Dr. John Morris is the President of ICR.

Cite this article: John D. Morris, Ph.D. 1989. Is There Evidence Against Evolution?. Acts & Facts. 18 (6).


© 2014 Institute for Creation Research. All Rights Reserved.

Proclaiming Scientific Truth in Creation | www.icr.org