Why I cannot believe Evolution – part 1


I love Science. And I used to love Evolution. But, over time, Evolution has tarnished Science. That led me to disbelieve in Evolution.

So, why can’t I believe in Evolution?

First, the scientists of Evolution make many more mistakes than we find in the entire Bible. And Evolutionists make their mistakes every couple of years. And the Bible’s mistakes are almost all typos. The Bible makes insignificant mistakes and is ‘found guilty.’ But, evolutionists make major mistakes and are exonerated.

That was the first thing I noticed, and it began my journey back to serious faith in the Bible, and the God of the Bible.

Secondly, tree rings are not annual. The same is true for sediment layers and carbon-dating. But, what are children taught? Are they taught what Science knows? No, they are taught a lie – I was taught a lie.

As I grew up, and I began to see serious error in what I had been taught, I went looking for the truth.

By, itself, this error would not have led me back to God. I admit that. But, I really didn’t enjoy being taught a lie in the name of Science.

Thirdly, the human race is devolving. So, are all other studied species.

Extinction is a REAL problem that Evolution ignores. And while I could separate this problem out from this third example, I will use it to support this third example.

Science knows that all life is devolving. Science knows that all life has a half-life, life span. And that span is much shorter than what we are taught in school, if it is even mentioned.

If you own a dog, you have probably noticed the need for health care over the last couple of decades. Breeding has ‘over-bred’ most breeds of dogs until they have serious genetic disorders.

Great Danes have serious heart problems. Most pure dog breeds have problems with hip-dysplasia and eye problems.

Problems are showing up in humans as well.

ALL of the lab experiments used to support evolution clearly show that devolution is brought about by evolutionary forces. BUT it is never mentioned, by 99.99% of ‘scientists’. WHY?

WHY teach a lie? Why hide a lie? Why ignore a lie?

I guarantee, Evolutionists do not ignore anything in the Bible they consider a ‘lie.’ There are none in the Bible by the way. Why is the Bible attacked by people who do not believe in it. But, the same people defend their faith by lying?

I am a Texan, when lies start to float around, I get very uneasy. I get uncomfortable. And I start looking for a door so I can leave – literally.

Maybe someday, I will teach you why honesty became a Texican cultural icon.

But, I am un-comfortable with all of the scientific lying used to support the Theory of Evolution.

Yes, there is brilliant research. That produces brilliant knowledge. But, we won’t know for decades what is true and what is fake. The Bible has produced brilliant results. And we know the biblical result endures.

When I study the two stories, I keep coming back to a simple statement:

The Bible produces truth, but is called myth; evolutionary science produces myth, but we call that truth.


What do you think?



About Wayne

First, I blogged on blogger, then Myspace - soon I was consistently ranked. Next, I quit. Then the blogging addiction came back .... Comments are appreciated. Not nice comments are edited. You can follow me at the top right.
This entry was posted in Cosmology, Evolution, God, News, People, Religion, Science. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Why I cannot believe Evolution – part 1

  1. Adam Benton says:

    I’m no professional yet, but I am currently studying evolutionary anthropology: the study of humans, in particular their evolution.

    • Wayne says:

      Oh, I know exactly what that is …. that is part of what I study …. I focus upon Cosmogony within Cosmology.

      • Adam Benton says:

        That’s a nice change, normally when I say “evolutionary anthropology” most people just go “whut?”

      • Wayne says:

        Yes. It is not very high on most reading lists.

        What is your favorite area?


      • Adam Benton says:

        I don’t really have a favourite area per say, but I do like certain “themes.”

        For one I like studying the development of things now important to us. Whether its bipedalism or religion, it’s fascinating to watch modern traits first emerge and develop.

        I also like it when we get a glimpse of a past life. Often an archaeological site is made up of years (even thousands of years) of accumulation and it can be difficult to spot what individual people were doing. But sometimes we can spot what an individual does. Sometimes we can see someone making a tool, which I find fascinating. Its a window into the past.

      • Wayne says:

        That is so cool.

  2. Adam Benton says:

    Firstly, regarding the mistakes evolution makes, one must remember that this is not a bad thing. Only by discovering a mistake can it be rectified and a more accurate vision of reality by obtained. It’s a long process of trial and error but at the end of it we are left with a theory that is a lot more correct than the one we started.

    This is why people are not chastised for making mistakes. Because it is obvious they have done so, that the reformulated model is better, researchers are happy to say “I was wrong, let us move on.” There is no need to dismiss these people, they were doing the best they could with the data available and now they have better data they will be doing even better work.

    There are a handful of people holding onto beliefs longer than they should, or ideas that are still accepted despite evidence to the contrary, but these are in the vast minority and for the most part evolution continues developing more accurate ideas unhampered.

    If evolution didn’t make mistakes, if it were as steadfast as the Bible I would be worried. It would mean that it had finished uncovering reality and could stop, which would make my career prospects very grim indeed!

    Secondly, there is the issue of errors in methodologies. That strata are not laid down as annually as one might expect etc. Of course, these are all facts known by scientists and they try to account for them as much as possible.

    Naturally these confounding factors cannot always be eliminated, which is why a margin of error is included with dates. A scientific paper might say something is 3.5 million years old, +/- 0.5 million years. This is the researcher going “we don’t know for sure, there is the potential for error. This error might alter our result by 0.5 million years!”

    These margins are not normally included in newspaper articles on finds, leaving the public with the mistaken impression that science is more certain than it actually is. This is a misconception I would like to fix, but in the meantime be assured that we know that there are confounding factors and that we take them into account.

    Finally there is this “devolution” you mention. It should be remembered that there is no perfect organism, that evolution works out a compromise. What works well in one environment might not work well in another. Thus it’s easy to point at one animal and go “it wouldn’t do so well in another situation, it has devolved!” In reality it is simply differently adapted.

    A cow with massive udders might not fare well in the natural world but it is well suited to living on a farm since the farmer will spot its milk making potential and make more calves from it. One could look at how poorly it would survive in nature and conclude it has devolved but in reality it is simply adapting to its current environment – an environment controlled by man.

    Your reasoning, whilst ostensibly accurate are actually insufficient to topple evolution. I implore you to reconsider your stance on the subject.

    • Wayne says:


      A very well written response. And quite convincing by itself. If most of what I read about Evolution was this well written, I would find it difficult to maintain what I believe.

      If only we could work towards that. Do you think we can raise the standards?


      • Adam Benton says:

        Ironically evolution is one of the simplest concepts in science but for those living on a diet of pop culture it can be one of the hardest to understand. Politicisation of the issue and bad reporting make it more difficult than it needs to be.

        If I’ve helped clarify things for you then I’m very happy. If you have further questions or concerns then there’s a feedback form on my blog or, if you don’t feel like being so formal, just ask here and I’ll do my best to answer you.

        As for raising the standards, I try to help in my own small way. Whenever I discuss something on my blog I try to include the error bars (or at the very least say something is “around” x years old rather than “is” x years old). If my future were more certain I might devote more time to campaigning for others to do that same – introducing the concept of error to science standards is very important.

        You too can do the same. When discussing the past, both on and offline, include a margin of error in what you say (or at least don’t claim the figure is precise). If there are science standards in your area, try and ensure they make reference to these uncertainties (this should not be confused with the creationist ploy to “teach both sides.” It is valid to say science is not absolute, it is not correct to suggest evolution is on par with other ideas).

        Often understanding the fine line between noting the imperfections of science and playing into creationist hands is difficult; as is simply understanding if the science standards are any good. If you don’t have the time to pour over them, simply supporting professional bodies which do do this (in America I believe you have the “national centre for science education) is a good alternative.

      • Wayne says:


        Interesting – I will have to come back and read your reply more slowly. You have several great suggestions. And I want to investigate those further.

        So, what is your professional area?



  3. You point out examples of scientific lies, like “tree rings are not annual. The same is true for sediment layers and carbon-dating.”, however, you never pointed out why The Bible is true.

    • Wayne says:


      the Bible has never been proven wrong. There are controversial statements in the Bible which some people assume to be wrong.

      Does that help?


      • I see, but the Qur’an has never been, to my knowledge, proven wrong, either. Not to mention the ancient Mesopotamian Tablets and Egyptian inscriptions. Also, by who exactly could they be proven wrong?

      • Wayne says:


        Great reply.

        The Qur’an not proven wrong? Did you mean to write, no one has ever lived after proving it wrong?

        Several Egyptian inscriptions are KNOWN to be wrong. Because they are known to be wrong, some researchers believe the Old Testament must also exaggerate.

        Which Mesopotamian Tablets? I have never heard them broken out as a group.


      • I don’t quite know, this are just questions that pop randomly in my inquisitive mind.

        What does “known to be wrong” exactly means? How can someone just say “I know” without any proof. Wouldn’t you be mixing Knowledge and Belief? If it’s not the case, pease clarify.

        The Mesopotamian Tablets are a bunch of stones with inscriptions about Sumerian and Babylonian Gods who created earth found at Uruk in the 1800’s and translated partially in 1903.

        Also, you didn’t answer one of my questions, perhaps it wasn’t posed clearly: Who would have the power and right to prove any religious or spiritual text wrong?

      • Wayne says:


        Last question, first, American Political Culture has been saying the Bible was wrong for at least 50 years. And while I admit they have the power, I do not believe they have the right, nor do I believe they are correct.

        Well, I know I do not believe the myth of Gilgamesh is correct. But, I assume others disagree with me.

        Known to be wrong. That gets into one’s epistemology. And we would need to investigate that slowly.

        How are we doing so far?


      • So I guess we won’t attain an universal impossible-to-disagree answer on this, since it relies greatly on personal belief and perception? I don’t think that such texts can be “proven wrong”. Not the Qur’an, not the Bible, not even Lovecraft’s books.

      • Wayne says:


        I have read a significant portion of the ‘Qu’ran’. I find it difficult to believe it to be true. The Bible is much less mystical or mythical, IMHO.

        But, I agree that we cannot really have a universal decision upon truth in our modern wold. To have a universal truth, we would need to universally agree upon one standard of truth.


      • Is mysticism a factor that, in your opinion, points towards the idea of a lie? If so, how much mysticism (although I doubt it can be measured) is enough to turn something unbelievable?

        Yes, however, if there is no one to oppose to the universal truth established, we would fall in stagnation.

      • Wayne says:

        Well, there is I think a difference between myth and mysticism. And I do not know about Islamic mysticism.

        But, I found what I read in the Quran to be more myth than reality. I find a story about a miracle to describe a ‘god’ or other power changing something in our Universe.

        But, I found the Quran difficult to balance with the real world.

        It is one thing to compare a unicorn with a narwhale. But, a fairy, or a leprechaun is difficult to believe.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s