Evolution
Evolution is a Scientific Tale
All that you require a scientific evidence that proves the validity of evolution on the terms of scientific evidence, which makes it one of the American theories, any evidence that can be refuted, observable, and observable, can be experimented and repeated, you find him saying: You do not understand the theory, which contains proteins and deep needs, and you are also taught in universities, and I are certainly not biology specialists, so only We trust the world and the scholars! This is an internal theory or as
#Stanley_Jackie says: ""What gives Darwinism the most effective is #Mystic_Faith"", the theory of evolution is the same books of the Bible that the pastors despise and when the public argued about legislation, they said: Do you understand what the Pope means? In the same absence, we must befriend scientists and scholars … What logic is this, our request is clear, give us a species-shifting object, let the theory be recorded in the American curriculum, separate it with a decisive evidence without falsification, and the story of a donkey bone turning into a complete fossil … I swear to God, the theory of evolution - and the religion of text - and no one talks about morals - these are the things that I don’t discuss in other than ridicule, because the owner is tired of being a psychologically ill person just trying to justify to entice him or to defeat what he/she has the mentality to research or confirm something, just a pot that is tired of anything and filled with any potency. ؟ I
“Evolution says that it became more diverse with each reproduction due to random genetic mutations. Some of these mutations made the creature stronger and better able to survive. These creatures diversified over time to the point that they became entirely new species. The transformation of one organism into another by random mutations and natural selection is scientifically impossible. Today we know that random mutations are actually rare events. They destroy the pairing of genetic information, not create it…which puts an end to any hope of evolutionary development .”
Stanley Jackie, Distinguished Professor of Physics at Seton Hall University, wrote: “Darwin’s own admission, that geological research has failed to yield as many infinite gradations between past and present species as is required by the theory… What gives Darwinism its greatest potency is the mystical faith expressed by its proponents in the face of the absence of evidence and even contrary evidence.”
However, research shows that the odds are virtually zero that all the necessary structures and chemicals randomly came together at the same instant, that the simplest cell could not have formed by chance. What Louis Pasteur proved over a century ago is still true: non-life cannot produce life, given that the first living cell began spontaneously.
“For a start, after 150 years, there is no evidence to support the evolution of organisms from simple to more complex forms. There was none when Darwin proposed his theory, and there remains precious little hard evidence today.”
- Pierre Gilbert
“Theory, and perhaps more accurately hypothesis. I don’t want to get too Neanderthal about all this, but I find it disturbing that, 150 years after the publication of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species, the fossil evidence supporting the idea of evolution between species is still rather embarrassing,… This explains why proponents of the theory of evolution so vehemently denounce the somewhat reluctant skeptics as irrational obscurantist fundamentalists.🥺“I must confess that I was somewhat surprised by the hostility that many people feel toward any questioning of the theory of evolution.”
- Pierre Gilbert
The Fossil Record and Darwinian Forgery ”
Falsifying evidence is clearly due to the lack of conclusive scientific evidence,
which is what drives evolutionists to forgery and manipulation. We will review a group of forged evidence presented by evolutionists, each of which they used to establish the theory in the minds of the public for years before the forgery was exposed.
The Java Man Fraud
Java Man is the name given to a set of fossils discovered in 1891 at the Trinil site, in Ngawi district, on the banks of the Solo River in Java, Indonesia.
- The person behind this hoax was the Dutch physician Eugène Dubois.
While serving with the Royal Dutch Army, he traveled to Java as part of an exploratory mission. When he grew frustrated that no fossil evidence seemed to support Darwin’s theory at the end of the 19th century, he decided to fabricate one himself — you could say he “used his creativity” 🙂 and falsified a fossil.
🔍 Here’s how it happened:
- In 1890, workers under him found a lower jawbone and a single tooth in a village along the Solo River.
- Then, in 1891, he discovered a piece of a flattened and low skull, with bony ridges above the eyes and a protrusion at the back — indicating a small brain capacity, making it look more like a monkey’s skull!
- A year later, he found a human femur (thigh bone) in the same area.
- To appear as a hero and discoverer, he claimed all these bones belonged to a single creature!
Immediately, evolutionists jumped on the discovery and hailed it as the missing link between apes and humans, giving it the scientific name:
Pithecanthropus erectus ✅
This became the first so-called example of what is now called Homo erectus — the upright walking human.
Scientific Refutation Begins
🔸 In 1895, the famous scientist Dr. Rudolf Virchow confronted this claim at an anthropology conference attended by Dubois himself.
He stated clearly that:
“The skull belongs to an ape, and the femur belongs to a human.”
He challenged Dubois to present any scientific evidence supporting his claim — but Dubois could not provide any.
🔸 In 1907, Germany sent a team of experts from Berlin to study the fossils and the excavation site in Java.
But Dubois refused to share any information or allow them to investigate anything!
He basically told them:
“You don’t believe in science and scientists?” 🥺
These experts concluded that the area where the bones were found was geologically recent.
A volcano had erupted not long before, covering the area in ash and silt — which buried the bones. This proved the site wasn’t ancient, further undermining the supposed evolutionary significance of the find.
🔸 Yet, despite all this, some still try to defend it by saying:
“Well, even if there are some bad actors, that doesn’t mean the whole field isn’t scientific.” 🥺
🔗 For more details, see:
http://creationwiki.org/Java_Man ✅
Let me know if you’d like this formatted into a clean article or infographic for educational purposes! ✅
This one is just laughable, seriously 😑
In 1982 , a group of archaeologists discovered a bone in the Orce region of Spain , and they named it “La Galleta” (“The Biscuit”) because of its round, small cake-like shape .
Then in 1983 , this bone was declared to be the oldest human fossil ever found in Europe !
The scientist behind the claim, José Gibert , claimed that it was part of the skull of a 17-year-old creature that lived between 900,000 and 1.7 million years ago .
This professor even made detailed illustrations of what this “creature” supposedly looked like — an ape-like being considered an ancestor of humans.
Look at the image of the so-called “discoverers” and notice how they invented a whole being from just a tiny skull fragment in the background!
I’m telling you — it was just a piece of bone , and they built an entire species around it! 🤦♂️
At the time, evolutionists were fully convinced this bone represented an early ape-like ancestor and called it “Orce Man” .
All based on a bone the size of a small cake ! Can you imagine?! 😑🤯
Then in 1984 , the discovery was officially announced — but soon after, independent experts outside the original research team tested the bone and found out the shocking truth:
It belonged to a donkey that was only six months old ! 🐴💩
Yes, the legendary “missing link” turned out to be nothing more than a baby donkey’s skull fragment.
🔸 Moral of the story?
When you’re desperate to find evidence for a theory, sometimes you end up proving something completely ridiculous instead ✅
After the Orus Man fossil was forged and the claim was made that the bone belonged to a great ape and was a donkey skull bone, “Orus Man” or “Orus Donkey” became a laughingstock in the press and a famous joke among newspapers in Spain in 1989.😂😂😂😂😂
The bullies are a joke. Stop bullying the world and the globalists. They made a mistake. It doesn’t mean you should bully them.
Neanderthal Man
In 1856 , the first fossils of Neanderthal Man were discovered, and evolutionary scientists immediately labeled it as a primitive human ancestor , claiming it had gone extinct thousands of years ago ✅
However, in 2010 , the scientific journal Science published a study stating that Neanderthal DNA is 99.7% similar to modern human DNA — a difference so small that it could easily exist between different races of humans today .
This shows that the genetic gap is not enough to classify them as a separate species or evolutionary link 🧬✅
- One of the key tactics used by evolutionists has always been the use of highly detailed artistic renderings and life-like statues of Neanderthals.
These images have a powerful effect on people’s imagination and beliefs — after all, seeing is believing for many.
Evolutionist artists have used their imaginations freely to create various facial features and appearances of Neanderthals, even though the actual evidence was often limited to bones and fragments.
🔸 But recent discoveries have changed everything.
Researchers found that Neanderthals used tools just like modern humans , and some studies even show they had complex social structures , used medicinal plants , and possibly even performed burial rituals .
These findings led many scientists to reject the idea that Neanderthals were our evolutionary ancestors.
📌
In fact, Science Daily described these new discoveries as “debunking the stupid Neanderthal myth.”
And according to Live Science , Neanderthals were, in reality, just humans from the Middle Ages!
🔗 Read more here:
- In short:
The image of the “primitive ape-man” Neanderthal was mostly a product of biased interpretation and imagination — not solid science ✅
{Embed}
‘Neanderthal’ Remains Actually Medieval Human
{Embed}
New Evidence Debunks ‘Stupid’ Neanderthal Myth
New research has struck another blow to the theory that Neanderthals became extinct because they were less intelligent than our ancestors. The research team has shown that early stone tool technologies developed by our species, Homo sapiens, were no more efficient than those used by Neanderthals. Their discovery debunks a textbook belief held by…
Because of their lying about the Neanderthal fossil and their attempt to patch up any evidence for the theory, Pierre Gilbert says in his book
, “The theory, and perhaps more accurately, the hypothesis. I don’t want to talk too much about Neanderthal man about all this, but I find it disturbing that, one hundred and fifty years after the publication of Darwin’s book On the Origin of Species, the fossil evidence supporting the idea of evolution between species is still rather embarrassing.”
- Pierre Gilbert
The Fraud of Haeckel’s Embryo Drawings
This is Salman Al-Malki , the one who ran away from the debate 😂 — and just two weeks ago, someone shared his post using these fake embryo drawings as “evidence for evolution”!
📌 The truth is: These drawings are entirely forged , created by the 19th-century evolutionary biologist Ernst Haeckel .
His theory claimed that:
“The human embryo in its early stages looks like a fish, then develops reptilian traits with a tail (which doesn’t fully grow), and finally takes on human features.”
He even claimed that the embryo had gills! 🤯
🔸 The scandal?
Haeckel falsified the drawings of embryos , making them look almost identical across different species — including fish, chickens, dogs, and humans — to support his theory.
These fraudulent images were then widely used in textbooks as “proof” of evolution ✅
But when the fraud was exposed, his only defense was :
“Other evolutionists do the same!” 🙄
- To this day — yes, even now — some people still share these drawings online and pair them with the myth of “junk DNA”, believing they’re presenting solid scientific proof 😑
So don’t be surprised when we laugh at such claims — because if you use reason, you’ll see how weak these arguments really are.
🔗 Learn more here:
{Embed}
Archaeopteryx No Longer First Bird ” American Scientist
Fraud in Fossil Dating
At a site in northern Spain , there are dozens of fossilized skeletons , and UNESCO has classified it as an important World Heritage site due to its supposed significance in understanding human evolution.
Millions of euros have been invested in building a museum near the location ✅
However, Dr. Chris Stringer , a scientist from the Natural History Museum in the UK , warned that the site’s officials had falsified the age of the fossils , adding an extra 200,000 years to their estimated dating .
Also, Philippe Charlier from the Musée de l’Homme in Paris raised objections regarding how the researchers assessed the ages of these fossils.
🔸 This controversy was reported by The Guardian newspaper.
🔗 Read more:
- This shows once again how evolutionary timelines can be manipulated or exaggerated to fit a narrative — and why we must always question and verify scientific claims, especially when they’re used to support major theories like evolution.
{Embed}
Scientists are accused of distorting theory of human evolution by m…
Briton says Spanish researchers are out by 200,000 years and have even got the wrong species
Nebraska Man
Imagine this — they created a full scientific illustration , and even added it to school textbooks — based on just one tooth?!
Yes, just one tooth! 🦷
The name “Nebraska Man” appeared in 1922 , based on what was claimed to be a human-like tooth found in Nebraska, USA .
- The story began in 1917 , when Harold Cook , a farmer and geologist from Nebraska, discovered a tooth.
He sent it in 1922 to Henry Osborn , a paleontologist and president of the American Museum of Natural History.
Osborn examined it and believed it belonged to an ape-like creature , so he quickly published an article announcing a new species, which he named:
Hesperopithecus haroldcookii ✅
Despite the fact that some evolutionists claimed Nebraska Man was a human ancestor and rushed to include it in school curriculums , Osborn and his colleagues were more cautious — suggesting it might have been just an advanced ape species , and they did not dare claim it was a missing link in human evolution.
🔸 But here’s the punchline:
They even made a scientific drawing — based on just one tooth!
Look at this — a single tooth, and suddenly it becomes a textbook “human ancestor.”
Evolutionary artist Amédée Forestier drew a full image of this supposed creature — complete with a wife — all based solely on a single ancient tooth !
This drawing was published in The Illustrated London News in 1922 , and widely circulated as evidence for human evolution.
- In the end, further studies revealed the tooth actually belonged to an extinct species of peccary (a type of wild pig), not any kind of early human or ape. 🐗🤦♂️
So yes — a pig’s tooth became “evidence” for human evolution in many textbooks and articles.
The Fall of Archaeopteryx
Archaeopteryx is no longer the first bird, nor is it the evolutionary link between reptiles and dinosaurs. After 150 years of teaching this myth and believing it as scientific evidence for the validity of the theory of evolution, this belief has been proven wrong! Source: Nature magazine.
American Scientist magazine published the news and then deleted it. Here is another source.
{Embed}
Archaeopteryx no longer first bird
Nature - Mounting evidence shows famous fossil more closely related to Velociraptor.
The Junk DNA Scandal
This is one of the biggest jokes we’ve had to endure from evolutionists — the concept of “Junk DNA” (الـ DNA الخردة) .
They kept saying it was the strongest proof for evolution , claiming that parts of our DNA were just leftovers from our evolutionary ancestors — once useful, but now useless in humans! 🤦♂️
For example, in a radio interview in 1998 , the Darwinist Eugenie Scott said:
“It’s the strongest evidence for evolution.”
🔸 But in 2012 , this whole argument collapsed completely when scientists discovered that most of what was called “junk DNA” actually has vital biological functions!
This shocking discovery was reported by The Washington Post , marking the fall of the “junk DNA” myth:
- I swear by Allah — even to this day , you still see some ignorant Arabs sharing posts online using “junk DNA” as evidence for evolution 😑
That’s why we laugh — because if you actually use your mind and check the facts, you’ll see how outdated and wrong these claims are.
{Embed}
‘Junk DNA’ concept debunked by new analysis of human genome
Once thought to be extra genetic material, parts of the human genome are believed to help regulate genes.
❤️
The mentality of the scholar and scientists
It is a source of laughter, knowledge and reading for the deep-rooted and seekers of truth.
Our mission is to destroy the myth of evolution, which is considered a simple and understandable phenomenon. Biologists must be encouraged to reflect on the weaknesses of the explanations and generalizations that theorists have established as established facts. Sometimes deception is unintentional, but not always. Some biased people deliberately ignore reality and refuse to acknowledge the shortcomings and falsity of their belief.
- Pierre Grasset
We must admit that at present there are no detailed Darwinian explanations for the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, but only a variety of wishful speculations.
- Franklin Harold
Darwinism is a trivial idea elevated to the level of a scientific theory that governs modern biology.
- Michael Egnor
❤️
Fossils Turned Into Scientific Myths
- One of the most annoying things evolutionists keep throwing at us is using fossils and bones as “proof” — like finding one bone or two is enough to build an entire evolutionary story!
You’ve already seen for yourself how much fraud, lies, and imagination are involved in these claims.
Their main argument is based on a confusion between hypothesis and actual scientific fact .
They link fossils together in a misleading and deceptive way — because the so-called evolutionary chain is mostly just assumption .
🔸 The so-called “scientific expert” often connects fossils in a supposed evolutionary sequence — but he doesn’t even know how , when , or how long it took between similar fossils.
He has only one thing connecting them : a pre-existing assumption that evolution happened .
As if we should just believe:
“Trust science and scientists!” 🙄
And all this is built on the unproven assumption that this fossil is the ancestor of that one …
- There’s no real meaning to claiming there’s a chronological sequence between simple and complex organisms in the fossil record.
There are complex creatures like dinosaurs that went extinct millions of years ago, while simple organisms still exist today — proving that complexity isn’t necessarily the end result of evolution.
We’re not even talking here about microevolution within species , which is observable and accepted — like:
Bacteria developing resistance to antibiotics,
Birds having different beak sizes depending on environment,
Body changes due to climate and terrain.
These are adaptations within species , known as microevolution ✅
This kind of change is scientifically proven , and no one denies it.
But this kind of adaptation doesn’t change the overall structure of the organism , nor does it add new features that weren’t already present in the gene pool .
🔸 Yet, evolutionists try to connect this idea of microevolution to macroevolution — the claim that humans evolved from apes over time — and that’s where the fraud begins 😑
A professor once described the gaps in the theory as being wide enough for trucks to drive through !
🔗 Read more:
{Embed}
Dominic Aquila
Iowa Professor: Theory of Evolution Filled With ‘Semi-Truck’ Si…
Despite this fairly middle-ground tone, the faculty at UI found plenty to take issue with, particularly with Bowden’s claim that there are “holes in the theory of evolution that are big enough to drive a semi-truck through.” In response to the column, 25 of Bowden’s colleagues wrote a rebuttal acknowledging that while professors have a r…
- In short, the theory assumes that evolution happens gradually from simple to complex life forms — with millions of transitional species in between.
But the fossil record shows huge gaps , and missing links — something even many evolutionists admit.
Only some ignorant Arab evolutionists deny it 😑
Also, where did the genetic pools come from?
Why don’t we find fossils of creatures outside those gene pools ?
I don’t know — but you and I aren’t biologists, so let’s leave it to “science and scientists” 😁
- And enough to refute the theory is simply to look at the biological systems in the body and how they work.
Take the urinary system , for example — it’s a complete system. It only works when all its parts function together .
The kidney can’t work without the bladder, for example.
So did a mutation randomly create the kidney first — and then leave it useless for millions of years until the bladder appeared?!
With no fossil evidence of any of those incomplete stages?
And remember — mutations are mostly destructive , and they harm genetic compatibility , not improve it.
So how could a random mutation somehow create the bladder later, and suddenly the whole urinary system starts working perfectly?
Or did all the parts appear at once by chance, over millions of years — and yet no trace remains in the fossil record ?
What about the circulatory system — it works with the urinary system.
Can one function without the other?
How about the respiratory system — can the circulatory system operate without it?
What about the digestive system , the nervous system , and all the other vital systems in the body?
🔸 How could all of them have emerged through mutations that are based on destruction and randomness ?
Taking a fossil lineage and claiming it represents an evolutionary line is not a testable scientific hypothesis, but rather an assertion of a story that has the same value as a bedtime story: useful perhaps, but not scientific.
- Biologist Henry G.
We are still in the dark about the origin of most species. They appeared in the fossil record suddenly, contrary to Darwin’s conception of evolution resulting from the gradual accumulation of countless infinitely subtle changes, which requires that the fossil record preserve an unbroken chain of transitional forms.
- Jeffrey H.
Schwartz
It was not backward religious people who challenged Darwin (by denying his theory).
This credit goes to famous paleontologists such as Louis Agassiz , Roderick Murchison , and Adam Sedgwick ✅
Darwin himself acknowledged that if his theory gave an accurate picture of the process that generated the vast diversity of life on Earth, then the fossil record should be full — completely filled — with fossils showing the various stages of evolution that his theory predicted.
But instead, what we find is that there should be countless examples of transitional forms for all practical purposes of evolution — yet these examples are basically missing from the fossil record 🤔
Where are the extinct transitional mammals with one eye , or three eyes , or one eye on the forehead and another under the chin**?
Every dinosaur species found has two eyes in a strategic position to provide 3D vision .
Even if we accept — as we should — that the fossil record is incomplete…
- …it’s still not incomplete in just one specific way — always missing exactly what would disprove evolution! 😑
Even if we were to accept the idea of evolution between species through small, gradual, and random changes — how do we explain the appearance of such incredible engineering marvels as the hydrogen atom, which could not have arisen by natural selection?
What do we make of the world of biochemistry , for instance — where Michael Behe , a biochemistry professor at Lehigh University, has presented example after example of biochemical systems that are “irreducibly complex,” to borrow his phrase — meaning they couldn’t possibly be the result of blind evolution or natural selection.
🔸 Take, for example, the bacterial flagellum — a hair-like appendage that protrudes from certain cells and is used for movement.
It’s a relatively simple biological motor that requires 30–40 different protein parts to function.
If even one of those components is missing, the whole system fails completely .
Yet the engineering behind this tiny structure is simply astonishing .
The flagellum doesn’t just allow the cell to move forward — it also includes a clutch mechanism that allows it to shift into neutral or reverse! 🧠⚙️
- “While my goal here is not to debate the scientific legitimacy of evolutionary theory,
I believe there is enough evidence to question its near-religious status as an infallible doctrine.
I don’t align with those who believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old — but tell me:
Who is the reasonable person?
The one who firmly believes that all the wonders before us — from the amazing development of a single atom to the nearly infinite complexity of nanotechnology present in every living being on Earth — came about purely through 12 billion years of blind cosmic accidents and random mutations ?
Or…
The one who believes that an infinitely powerful and intelligent Being designed all of this in six literal days?
With all due respect… who really makes more sense? 🤔💡
Junk DNA
is still considered evidence by Arab atheists to this day.
Darwinian Scientific Terrorism
Any attempt by any scientist to criticize evolution, even spontaneously, is suppressed, expelled, and his scientific function is destroyed.
Like Dr. Caroline, who was fired because she discussed some points of the theory and was accused of promoting the theory of direct creation, even though in her statement she said, “I did not mention any creation, I only discussed some points and the weakness of the theory.”
freedom of expression😁
As well as oppression and scientific priesthood
The theory of evolution hinders scientific progress and has provided nothing for it.
Don’t be fooled by the propaganda that says the theory of evolution has given birth to new sciences — all of this is nonsense promoted in a populist way.
- Evolution has not produced any real science , and even one of its strongest supporters, the famous evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne , admitted this failure.
He openly stated in an article published in Nature in 2006 :
“In reality, evolution has not led to many practical or commercial benefits.
Yes, bacteria develop resistance to drugs, and yes, we need to take countermeasures — but there’s not much more to say beyond that.
Evolution cannot help us predict what new vaccines we should produce, because microbes evolve unpredictably.
But didn’t evolution help guide animal and plant breeding? Not really.
Most improvements in crops and livestock occurred long before we knew anything about evolution.”
🔸 So if you hear someone claiming that evolution is the foundation of modern biology or medicine —
they’re either misinformed or trying to deceive you 😑
{Embed}
Selling Darwin
Nature - Does it matter whether evolution has any commercial applications?
Microbiologist Scott Mintsch admits that you cannot criticize evolution because you will pay a high price for it.
freedom of expression
As for the biophysicist Neil Broom, he says, “I want to liberate science from the scientific priesthood,” meaning Darwinism.
Although the majority of the scientists who were expelled do not believe in God? They were accused of being creationists, and the book “Heretics” is the best book that explains how any scientist who tries to criticize evolution scientifically is excluded and accused of being a creationist, even though he was talking about its weakness in his field of specialization without referring to the creation of Darwinism as sacred.
Additions
“Evolution is not a fact , it is a philosophy. Materialism comes first as a self-evident premise, and then the evidence is interpreted in light of this unalterable philosophical commitment.”
Evolutionary scientist Richard Lewontin
80% of proteins differ between chimpanzees and humans.
Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees.
Link:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009
{Embed}
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009
Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpan…
The chimpanzee is our closest living relative. The morphological differences between the two species are so large that there is no problem in distinguishing between them. However, the nucleotide difference between the two species is surprisingly small. The early genome comparison by DNA hybridizatio …
I cannot believe that our existence in this universe is just a strange coincidence that happened, a random accident, or an incidental anomaly. Our existence is very welcome, and the presence of reason in some beings is a fact of fundamental importance. It cannot be a trivial detail, nor a by-product of mindless and purposeless forces. Our existence is #intentional, really.
- British astrophysicist Paul Davies
The idea that scientific study, modern or otherwise, requires an atheistic—or more euphemistically (skeptical)—outlook is a 20th-century myth propagated by people who wanted science itself to be a religion (and who were usually the priests of that religion themselves).
- Lawrence M. Principe
Many physicists have noted that fine-tuning strongly suggests design by an eternal, intelligent designer, and as the renowned British physicist Paul Davies said, “The idea of design is overwhelming.”
American scientist Stephen Meyer
By the way, the majority of the scientists who were excluded and scientifically terrorized did not believe in God. They only discussed the impossibility and fragility of the evidence for evolution in their scientific fields of specialization and with a scientific approach, and they were marginalized. The book: Heretics is the best book that mentions the scientific priesthood in Darwinism today.
We have no hope but to resort to the use of our imaginations to some extent to produce the historical narratives that are the ultimate goal of our studies of animal evolution.
Evolutionary biologist | Ronald Jenner.
Source:-
{Embed}
Macroevolution of Animal Body Plans: Is There Science after the Tree?
A renewed emphasis on the gaps in organization that exist between the crown-group body plans of higher-level animal taxa is a hallmark of the emerging cons
Natural selection does nothing. It neither selects for nor against anything, it neither proliferates, it multiplies, it creates, it modifies, it shapes, it operates, it guides, it selects, it preserves, it induces, it adapts—natural selection, in fact, does nothing.
- William Provine, an evolutionary biologist, is also an atheist who strongly denies the existence of God /p. 199
Most major groups appear suddenly in rocks with no empirical evidence of transition from their ancestors. This is one of the main points of attack by anti-evolutionists in virtually all evolutionary books: the fossils say no! For these gaps and the conclusion that if paleontologists cannot demonstrate gradual evolution, then evolution must not have occurred, his case seems devastating. This is supported by quotes from prominent paleontologists ranging from George Gaylord Simpson to Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould, who, along with Stephen Stanley, are major proponents of a concept they call punctuated equivalence.
Douglas Jay Futuyma - evolutionary biologist.
Either living things appeared on the face of the earth fully developed, or they did not. If they did not appear fully developed, they must have evolved from pre-existing species by some process of mutation. If they appeared fully developed, they must have already been created by an omnipotent power.
Evolutionary biologist | Douglas Jay Futtema.
Take it easy
In China we cannot criticize the government, but we can criticize Darwin and his theory. But in America you can criticize the government, but you cannot criticize Darwin and his theory.
Chinese paleontologist Jun Yuanxin
The book says:
Did life on Earth begin suddenly and in complex forms?
Evolutionists are trying to hide large numbers of these fossils. The traces of Cambrian life remained hidden in the famous Smithsonian Institution for 70 years. Fossils of the oldest complex life forms in the history of the planet - where Charles Doolittle Walcott, a paleontologist and curator at the Smithsonian, began searching in the Burgess Shale area of the Canadian Rockies, and discovered one of the greatest discoveries in the history of paleontology, the first fossils of Cambrian creatures, 530 million years old. These ancient fossils completely destroyed the false idea of gradual evolution. However, these fossils were hidden and then brought out from where they were stored to the world only 70 years later, after Walcott decided to hide the fossils he had obtained rather than share those findings with his scientists.
- Joseph Sickbach, a biologist and plant scientist at the University of Chicago
{Forwarded Message}
The pathetic thing is that many scientists are trying to prove the doctrine of evolution, which science cannot do.
Originally sent: 2/20/2025 9:56 PM
🤣
{Forwarded Message}
The probability of life spontaneously forming from non-living matter is one followed by 40,000 zeros to the right, which is large enough to bury Darwin and the entire theory of evolution.
- Deism Fred Hoyle
Originally sent: 2/20/2025 8:59 PM
🤣 (2) 💀
This entire research criticises Theory of evolution and also proves that how Darwinism has become a religion now
More 👇
#『⚛』evolution-criticism