Critique of the Theory of Evolution. Walter Friedman

every 1010 years or so. This group of evolutionists stooped to the lowest level scientists could imagine: astrology.

      Yet another group of evolutionists came to the conclusion that some sort of “nature magic” that acts only once was involved in all this; that group was also known for riding naked on a broomstick.

      Without a doubt, the evolutionist will, upon finishing this chapter, cry—the straw man is down! But it was their predecessors who created the straw man to begin with.

      11 : Second-Generation Evolutionists

      The second generation of evolutionists did not like one bit what the first generation did to their beloved theory, so they came up with ideas of their own. As a result, they were able to discard the ideas of vital force, “nature magic,” astrology, and all other unscientific garbage. But in the process they created an equally large mess.

      Initially, the second generation stated that the creation of the original cell was a random event and, because of this randomness, cannot be reproduced.

      In order to proceed with the discussion, we will need to define the word random. This is how Webster’s New World Dictionary defines it: “without careful choice, aim, plan, etc.; lacking aim and method.” Nothing in this definition suggests that a random event is necessarily a one-time event.

      Science indeed deals with random events; for example, the landing of an electron on a laboratory screen is a random event in the sense that determination of the exact landing spot is impossible. However, it is possible to calculate the probability of the electron hitting any given spot based on the position of the screen and the electron gun.

      Does any branch of science deal with one-time events that cannot be reproduced? The answer is a categorical NO—all scientific theories deal with events that can be reproduced numerous times, otherwise there would be no difference between science and unscientific speculation.

      Evolutionists tried to bypass this methodological difficulty by saying that the big bang was also a one-time event that, nevertheless, forms the basis of all cosmological theories.

      Let’s take a look at an alternative to the big bang theory. If the big bang never occurred, then it follows that the universe always existed. But the notion of a universe that has no beginning runs contrary to all known cosmological data, such as the expansion of the universe, background radiation, etc. On the other hand, the data that would prove that any alternative to the evolutionary theory is incorrect does not exist.

      Some evolutionists tried to remedy the situation by asserting the following proposition: at the present time we do not know what kind of biochemical reaction led to the creation of the original cell; however, in the future, scientists will be able to reproduce it and understand why the reaction is extremely rare. But in this case the evolutionary theory is not really a theory but a hypothesis and should be classified as such. This is how Webster’s New World Dictionary defines hypothesis: “an unproven theory, proposition, supposition, etc., tentatively accepted to explain certain facts or provide a basis for further investigation.” But evolutionists demand complete and immediate acceptance of their ridiculous theory.

      Recently an evolutionist proposed that there was more than one original cell; perhaps they came to be in different geological epochs. Although a vast majority of evolutionists disagree with it, this proposition deserves a close look.

      If the proposition is correct, then there are two distinct possibilities: 1) All original cells lead to identical evolutionary lines. This is clearly absurd: if this proposition is correct, then dinosaurs, for example, would still be roaming around. 2) The original cells lead to different evolutionary lines. In this case, the number of original cells is impossible to determine and it is also impossible in principle to make classifications of species based on the evolutionary lines. But true science does not deal with objects that defy classification.

      Now it’s the right time for the evolutionists to yell—the straw man is on fire!!

      But the straw man is a creature of their own making.

      12 : Third-Generation Evolutionists

      Recently, NASA probes landed on one of Saturn’s moons, Titan. That was the day when the third generation of evolutionists decided to boldly go where no one has gone before by transporting the evolutionary theory to Titan. They hypothesized that Titan’s rivers, which are filled with frozen methane (it’s awfully cold out there!), are somehow filled with the “building blocks of life” as the earth’s rivers were millions of years ago. Of course, the earth was never that cold, but it didn’t matter because the earth’s landscape looked exactly like its current-day Titan counterpart (This is not a creationist joke; all Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) scientists interviewed by the journalists used this argument!). Now we all know where the straw man came from!

      The third generation in effect sided with the first one by using the outdated Hegelian philosophical system mixed with astrology and black-and-white magic sprinkled with vital force. Will naked flights to the moon follow? Luckily, O’Keafe flew out of NASA pronto.

      If anyone is to be credited with causing the most damage to NASA, and to science in general, that would be O’Keafe. On his watch NASA embarked on a journey to nowhere by developing extremely complex and costly equipment intended for the search of signs of bacteria on Mars. But not a single type of bacteria can exist outside the ecosystem, and there is none on Mars. O’Keafe wasted tons of money on useless equipment and on the small army of biologists he hired to participate in designing the equipment. As a result, the other, much more important projects were either put on hold or were underfunded. The most disturbing news was O’Keafe’s decision not to repair the Hubble telescope, thus effectively shutting it down. The astronomers and science buffs protested ever so loudly, but O’Keafe ignored their protests and went on a hunt for non-existant bacteria.

      It’s over now, at least for O’Keafe; and the Hubble telescope will be repaired if the reports are correct. This is extremely good news for the spectators interested in true science. As for the third generation of evolutionists, they acted out of desperation because their pseudo-scientific theory is in the process of being destroyed.

      Every time NASA makes a technological achievement its biologists claim that they are one tiny step away from proving that life in the Universe came to be as a result of an unknown biochemical reaction. The latest assertion is that this reaction occurred at the time of the big bang explosion, then some of the materials with a DNA-like structure were stored on comets that later hit the earth.

      This theory is so pathetic that only a minimal amount of criticism is needed to bring it to its knees.

      Let’s assume for the sake of discussion that the theory is correct—a number of comets contain materials with DNA-like structures. Then there is the question, when were these materials created? There are two possible answers:

      1) They were created after the creation of the elements of the periodic table.

      But this leads to a previous discussion (see Appendix B), which shows that it is impossible to assemble DNA-like materials from the elements of the periodic table.

      2) They were created at the same time as were the elements of the periodic table.

      That was the time of intense X-ray radiation. Not a single DNA-like material can survive such extreme conditions without decomposing into its elemental ingredients—all radiation experiments prove it!

      There is only one possible conclusion: DNA-like materials that brought life to the earth can survive under any condition. But if this were true, there would have been thriving civilizations on Mars, Saturn, Jupiter, etc.—all these planets were hit by the comets. But this is only half of the story—all earthling men and women, being descendants of the original super-cell, would have been able to walk through atomic explosions, jump out of airplanes without a parachute, drink volcanic lava as if it were a soft drink, etc., because they all are carriers of the imprint of the original super-cell. Who wants to be a Superman?

      Often scientists working for NASA cite the famous Occam’s Razor principle as a “proof”