We hear lots of people telling us that the concept of “Creation” is passe, that Science proves to us that we all ACTUALLY came from primeval sludge via evolution. The thing is, those “lots of people” are NOT Scientists. How do I know this? Well, to accept evolution you have to disregard a number of “tried and true” Scientific Axioms, and REAL Scientists wouldn’t do that!
The first Axiom is our old friend, SPONTANEOUS GENERATION, which, basically stated that life comes from non-life. You may remember that it was Louis Pasteur who finally laid the concept of Spontaneous Generation to rest.
Yet, proponents of Evolution would have you believe that the works of Francisco Redi (Meat and Maggots), Lazzaro Spallanzani (Airborne Micro-organisms) , and Pasteur are all for naught.
Axiom number two is THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS, which, in a nutshell, tells us that the Universe is “winding down.” Evolutionist, not Scientists!, would have us believe that somewhere along the line the Universe hiccupped and living organisms came from non-living matter.
My last point is NOT in the form of an Axiom, but is, nonetheless, just as relevant and factual. It can start with the age-old riddle, “which came first, the chicken or the egg?,” but a TRUE scientist would know that the REAL question is, “which came first, the protein or the DNA?” Chickens are composed of Proteins, which are carried in DNA, which needs Proteins to be manufactured. The answer to this second riddle – They had to be created AT THE SAME TIME!
So why do so many people use Science as their basis for Evolution? I think this question may be best answered by what Dr. George Wald, Nobel Prize winner of Harvard University, has to say, and the Faith it takes for him to say it. In his dissertation, HOW EVOLUTION FLUNKED THE SCIENCE TEST, Joe Crews presented some very interesting information regarding “Spontaneous Generation,” including Dr. Wald’s comments:
“How does the evolutionist explain the existence of that first one-celled animal from which all life forms supposedly evolved? For many years the medieval idea of Spontaneous Generation was the accepted explanation. According to Webster, Spontaneous Generation is ‘the generation of living from nonliving matter … [it is taken] from the belief, now abandoned, that organisms found in putrid organic matter arose spontaneously from it.’
“Simply stated, this means that under the proper conditions of temperature, time, place, etc., decaying matter simply turns into organic life. This simplistic idea dominated scientific thinking until 1846, when Louis Pasteur completely shattered the theory by his experiments. He exposed the whole concept as utter foolishness. Under controlled laboratory conditions, in a semi-vacuum, no organic life ever emerged from decaying, nonliving matter. Reluctantly it was abandoned as a valid scientific issue. Today no reputable scientist tries to defend it on a demonstrable basis. That is why Webster says it is “now abandoned.” It never has been and never can be demonstrated in the test tube. No present process is observed that could support the idea of Spontaneous Generation. Obviously, if Spontaneous Generation actually did take place in the distant past to produce the first spark of life, it must be assumed that the laws that govern life had to be completely different from what they are now. But wait a minute! This won’t work either, because the whole evolutionary theory rests upon the assumption that conditions on the earth have remained uniform throughout the ages.
“Do you begin to see the dilemma of the evolutionists in explaining that first amoeba, or monad, or whatever formed the first cell of life? If it sprang up spontaneously from no previous life, it contradicts a basic law of nature that forms the foundation of the entire theory. Yet, without believing in Spontaneous Generation, the evolutionist would have to acknowledge something other than natural forces at work—in other words, God. How do they get around this dilemma?
Dr. George Wald, Nobel Prize winner of Harvard University, states it as cryptically and honestly as an evolutionist can:
‘One has only to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the Spontaneous Generation of a living organism is impossible. Yet here we are—as a result, I believe, in Spontaneous Generation.’ Scientific American, August 1954.
“That statement by Dr. Wald demonstrates a much greater faith than a religious creationist can muster. Notice that the great evolutionary scientist says it could not have happened. It was impossible. Yet he believes it did happen. What can we say to that kind of faith? At least the creationist believes that God was able to speak life into existence. His is not a blind faith in something that he concedes to be impossible.
There you have it … A REAL Scientist, one who has won the Nobel Prize, admitting that he believes in Spontaneous Generation even though he KNOWS it is impossible. I guess that pretty much sums it up – – – Apparently Dr. Wald’s belief is little more than a wish or a hope, but it CERTAINLY isn’t fact!