Jerry Newcombe, spokesman for Truth in Action Ministries (formerly Coral Ridge Ministries, led by the late D. James Kennedy), has a column in the Worldnutdaily defending the idea that there was a literal Adam and Eve like the Bible says. He presents no evidence for this, of course, merely saying that he believes that because he believes in Jesus and Jesus quoted Genesis. Wow, what a compelling argument. But then he tries to argue against evolution and falls flat on his face.
How are we to understand claims of overwhelming “scientific facts” backing up the theory of evolution? Well, there are minor biological changes in nature. Some people call this “micro-evolution” (if you will), which simply refers to a limited range variation within a species or kind. In Genesis, God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind.” That’s why some dogs are poodles and some dogs are great Danes, while both still remain dogs.
Critics note that Darwinists have tried to make a word game by using undisputed microevolution (if you want to call it that), which can be observed everywhere, and claim it as proof of macroevolution – the theory that one species can change into another and that all life evolved ultimately from a common ancestor.
Those critics are abysmally ignorant. There is no distinction between “microevolution” and “macroevolution.” Just like one can measure time in seconds (micro) or centuries (macro), the latter is merely the accumulation of the former. And then he tries a quote mine:
The late Dr. Colin Patterson, paleontologist at the British Museum, wrote a letter in 1979 saying in effect there are no definitive transitional forms in the fossil record chronicling evolution (“gradualism”) in progress: “So, much as I should like to oblige you by jumping to the defense of gradualism, and fleshing out the transitions between the major types of animals and plants, I find myself a bit short of the intellectual justification necessary for the job.”
Patterson, author of the textbook, “Evolution,” also said in that letter: “I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them.” (This letter was written to the late Luther Sutherland, who reproduced it in his book, “Darwin’s Enigma.”)
Ah yes, the old Patterson quote mine. Debunked long ago by Patterson himself. And then this old chestnut:
In 1912, scientists discovered in England a human skull with a jaw like an ape. They named him Piltdown Man. This was, they said, evidence of true evolution in progress – a real ape man. He was in the textbooks, encyclopedias, museums and even the dictionaries. Finally, the missing link was no longer missing.
But, of course, Piltdown Man turned out to be a deliberate hoax. That aspect was discovered in 1953, after four decades of providing alleged evidence for human evolution during a critical time for the theory to gain wider acceptance.
Seriously, they’re still using this one? For crying out loud, Piltdown Man was not “the missing link,” it was just one in a whole series of hominid fossils and it never fit the pattern at all. That’s why scientists kept questioning it and eventually proved that it was a hoax, because it simply did not fit all of the other evidence of human evolution. That’s how science works. The fact that they have to go back a full century to find this “proof” of the falsehood of evolution shows two things: how ignorant they are and how desperate they are.