A big problem for evolutionists

Advertisement

The evolutionists have a big problem with emphasis on the big, but it is not likely they will admit it.

In discussing the transition from the “simple cell” to what we have now Charles Darwin wrote, “If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking closely together all the species of the same group, must assuredly have existed.”

His son, Francis, writing in “Life and Letters of Charles Darwin” put it this way, “The number of intermediate and transitional links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great.”

So here is another question you can ask the evolutionists? It has been more than 150 years since Darwin’s book was published, millions of fossils have been found, where are the inconceivably great numbers of intermediate and transitional links?

For the benefit of those who don’t have much knowledge of geology the rock layers that form the basic foundation of the Earth have been given names. According to my dictionary the Precambrian layer is the oldest. It is followed by the Cambrian layer, which is followed by a number of other layers up to our time.

The item of interest in all this is that in the Precambrian layer there are virtually no fossils nor evidence of transitional organisms. But when one gets to the Cambrian layer fully formed plants and animals appear.

So we again have the question, where are the huge number of transitional forms Darwin and his son predicted? It is clear there is a scarcity of the transitional forms for animals, but it is even more difficult to explain the origin of plants and to find the transitional forms for plants.

In fact that problem is of such a magnitude that in the book “Contemporay Botanical Thought” by E. J. H. Corner, professor of botany at England’s Cambridge University and an evolutionist, was quoted as follows, “To the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in accord with special creation.” As a matter of fact there is no good fossil evidence existent that shows a gradual divergence over long ages to produce organisms with new body plans.

Was there another miraculous event as Nobel Prize winner George Wald described to produce plants or did they evolve from the first “simple cell?” If so can you imagine what they would have looked like and where is the fossil evidence?

Don Casebolt

Walla Walla

Comments

chicoli 1 year, 2 months ago

Hi Doctor Casebolt. My question is to make us ponder about how light the creationist theory stands based on facts. Why is it that both Adam and Eve had navels? If they were created from "nada" what was the purpose of the presumed umbilical cord? Was the world "created" about 5 or 6 thousand years ago, according to biblical assumptions?

0

Sign in to comment

Click here to sign in