Is Evolution An Outdated Theory?

The question used to be, "Can evolution befuture generations better biceps, for example, as
proven?" Today, a more appropriate question is,a result of radiotherapy. Not one of the thousands
"Is evolution science?"(The following is aof surviving bomb victims of Hiroshima and
condensed version of the chapter entitledNagasaki has developed a more evolved brain, for
"Genetics" of the book "Evolution: A Scienceexample, as a result of exposure to radioactivity.
Breakdown," available free at )To most people,Not one person involved in a nuclear reactor
science is seen as "today," modern, up-to- date,accident has developed a more sophisticated skin,
and perhaps even the promise of futuristicfor instance, which is tougher and more durable
wonders. A generation which possessesthan average. In virtually every case, random
supersonic jets, Intercontinental Ballistic Missilesmutations have resulted in havoc and
(ICBM's), space shuttles and sophisticateddestruction.Is it possible that modern technology
computers can hardly be called primitive. Or canhas actually disproven evolution rather than helped
it?In the midst of all of this state-of-the-artit?Evolutionists in the past have hidden behind the
technology, there seems to be a rather primitive"it took billions of years" routine. Before the
theory which, although steadily losing credibilitynuclear age it may have been necessary to get
even among those who have adhered to it for ainto a time machine to verify whether, given
long time, still has many convinced that it is basedenough time, random mutations would cause life
on science. This theory has proven one thingto evolve. However, with the advent of modern
beyond a shadow of a doubt: although moderntechnology's ability to affect massive random
technology is nearing Star Wars sophistication,mutations relatively quickly, there is no longer a
modern man is still capable of someneed to dig into the past to see the contrived
embarrassingly primitive thinking. I'm talking aboutfallacies supporting the evolutionary powers of
the "scientific" theory of evolution. If this theory israndom mutation. The answer is right in front of
not honest misinterpretation, it may very well beus. Random mutations result in quite the opposite
the most sophisticated hoax ever perpetrated onof what we've been led to believe. They result in
the human race.The scientific concept of the originnothing but illness and fatalities--not improvements.
of life on earth begins with the premise that lifeWhat's more, the more massive and prolonged
first appeared billions of years ago with thethe occurrences of these mutations, the greater
formation of microscopic organisms out ofthe havoc and destruction. So what do you
inanimate matter. In the billions of years whichsuppose would happen to a planet subjected to
followed, small organisms evolved into higher andrandom mutations for billions of years? Total
more complex forms of life, and one speciesannihilation!When you take what we know as fact
evolved into another.The question here is nottoday about random mutation and try to
whether this actually happened. To any humanreconstruct a scenario of those alleged billions of
being living in the 1990's, the question should be, isyears of earth's history, instead of the fairy-tale
such a scenario even possible? Well, according tostory of evolution, you come up with a picture
what we know today about genetics, the answerwhich more and more resembles a horrible scene
is an unequivocal no.Probably the strongest thingout of a "post-nuke" movie:Even if earth had
going for evolution at the time of its inception,already been as populated in that alleged period of
over a hundred years ago, was that virtuallythree and a half billion years ago as it is today,
nothing was known about genetics in that era. Iand had since been affected by billions and billions
am convinced that if the public had had a decentof random mutations, according to what we
understanding of genetics, and random mutation inknow today about random mutation, by now life
particular, before being presented with the theorywould probably have been virtually wiped out.
of evolution, the theory could never have beenWith random mutation being the highly destructive
taken seriously and certainly could never haveforce that it apparently is, the process which was
been accepted as legitimate science.According tosupposed to have caused life to evolve is
evolutionists, random mutation is purportedly whatprecisely what would have caused, in all probability,
brought life from the one celled stage to itssuch genetic havoc that few organisms would
present complexity. That is, through a series ofhave survived the ordeal. Furthermore, under
beneficial accidents of random mutations, theysuch circumstances, "survival of the fittest" is a
claim, simple organisms evolved over billions oftotally ludicrous concept. The word "fit" would
years into new and more complex species.Keep inhave described largely those organisms which
mind that for one species to have evolved intowere less disease ridden than the rest, a far cry
another, massive random genetic changes wouldfrom the "better species" of evolution. And of
have to have occurred throughout earth's history.those "fit" survivors, many would have passed on
But here's how genetics--the most crucial aspectgenetic diseases to their offspring. Even if the "fit"
of evolution--does not only not support thehad not been wiped out by the random
theory but actually contradicts it:Modern man hasmutations, their offspring still would have stood a
been acquainted with and acutely affected bychance of being wiped out by hereditary genetic
random mutations more than any prehistoricdiseases. Then, any disease-free offspring would
creature. Sources of random mutations haveagain be threatened with annihilation when this
been around us for years. What are they?entire mutation cycle started over again.Thus,
Carcinogenic chemicals. Cosmic rays. Sources ofafter billions and billions of years of random
radioactivity such as nuclear weapons, nuclearmutations, even in the unlikely event that some
reactors, nuclear waste, and medical X-rays. Andgenes mutated in a way that might have
some of these sources of random mutationsultimately produced some beneficial changes to an
have been affecting modern man way before heorganism, an already populated planet would have
even knew how they wreaked their havoc.Let'sbeen reduced to a few diseased life forms, at
take radiation, for example. Here's an idea ofbest. Those few beneficial genes, if they could
what it does:even have existed, would have been so
Exposure of high doses of radiation to limitedoverwhelmed by the staggeringly high number of
parts of the body can cause severe tissuediseased genes necessary to produce just a few
damage and eventual necrosis.Exposure of thebeneficial accidents, that they could never have
entire body to a few hundred "rem" (rem is a unitborne any fruit. An organism would have been
used for measuring radiation effectiveness) canwiped out long before it had an iota of a chance
initially cause nausea. Then, in about a month, theto change or improve. In a sense, earth would
person might begin suffering hemorrhages,have resembled a planet after a nuclear
anemia, tiredness, weakness, and an increasedholocaust.Now, if a planet began with relatively
risk of infection. Although some may survive,few life forms, as earth allegedly did, how far
others will die as a result of these maladies.Atwould life have gotten? I don't mean how far
about 1,000 rem, nausea, vomiting, and diarrheawould evolution have gotten. I mean, how far
may develop within hours of exposure. As thesewould those few organisms have gotten before
symptoms become worse, they are followed bybeing wiped out by the destructive powers of
fever, loss of fluids, severe infections, and finallyrandom mutation? According to what we've
death.At about 10,000 rem, the dose to which aactually seen random mutations do in modern
worker might be exposed during a nuclear reactortimes, life never would have gotten off the
accident, vomiting and diarrhea would occur withinground, let alone proliferated into highly complex
an hour, followed by reduced blood pressure,and healthy species. In all likelihood, earth would
convulsions, and unconsciousness. Death wouldhave turned into a desolate planet long ago.The
come within one to three days.Radiation can alsoinsanity of evolution is also apparent in the more
have long-term genetic effects. Studies show thataesthetic aspects of man. How could qualities such
radiation can cause not just one, but a variety ofas artistry, abstract thinking, and appreciation of
different types of mutations. One of the effectsmusic have become traits common to an entire
of thesespecies? According to the mechanics (or imagery)
aberrations is cancer. The cancer can show upof evolution, it would have been a great wonder if
years or even decades after the organism'ssuch qualities, so meaningless to the survival of
exposure to radiation. If the organism does notpurely physical and biological systems, would have
show any signs of cancer, there is still theevolved in only a minute fraction of a species.
possibility that cancer may show up in futureYet, to be present--to one degree or another--in
generations.Some other disorders or geneticvirtually every human being? How? This should
diseases which may show up in later generationsnever have happened.The existence of such
as a result of random mutations are: hemophilia,aesthetic human qualities as emotion, humor, and
congenital cataract, spontaneous abortions, cysticintellect cannot be explained biologically, no matter
fibrosis, color-blindness, and muscularhow ridiculous you want to get. Why, for
dystrophy.Still other diseases such as diabetes,example, did nature give us a sense of humor?
heart disorders, asthma, and schizophrenia couldHow did nature even know what a sense of
manifest themselves in later generations as ahumor was? And how did a sense of humor
result of random mutations combined withrender humans more "fit to survive?" There are
environmental factors.This was just a quickmillions of plants and animals without a sense of
glimpse of the severe effects of random changeshumor which have obviously survived. There are
on biological life. And it seems that the results areeven humans without a sense of humor who
almost always the same: deterioration,seem to survive. How did such a quality ever
destruction, and, in many cases, death.Does thisevolve?With a little serious thought, it should be at
coincide with what evolutionists have beenleast somewhat obvious that the scenario
chewing our ears off with for years?For yearsproposed by the theory of evolution does not
we've been hearing stories about how biologicalwork and certainly could never have occurred.
life underwent billions of years of random geneticOne may even find it puzzling how a concoction
changes. We've been hearing how by accidentsuch as evolution could ever have been accepted
some of these changes resulted in beneficialas science in the first place. I think that if
mutations. We've been hearing how theseevolution can be called science, there should be
beneficial mutations eventually resulted in new andseveral other equally qualified scientific topics
more complex species. Yet when we look atincluded in science text books--the physics behind
what random genetic changes--or any otherSuperman's X-ray vision, the story of how the
random changes, for that matter--actually do topower of speech evolved in Mickey Mouse, and
biological life, we find nothing but disease andthe chemical composition of Batman's Shark
death. Where are all those beneficial mutationsRepellent Spray. If we're going to have fun
evolutionists have been talking about? Not onetheories, let's really make them fun.
patient has ever developed or passed on to