Introduction

Many times students hear that the theory of evolution is a "proven fact of science."

The reality is that the theory of evolution is NOT a proven fact of science.

For example, the theory of evolution requires that life be created from simple chemicals. 
It requires the conversion of “life from non-life.”

Such a conversion has never been demonstrated and such a conversion has never been
proven to be possible.  For example, the complex chemical binding of many amino
acids, necessary to create proteins, has never been demonstrated to be possible outside
of cells.

Even the simplest life on earth, which does not require a host, is far too complex to form
by a series of accidents.  Therefore the theory of evolution requires that the first “life”
was a form of life which does not exist on this earth any more.  Thus, according to the
theory of evolution, the “first living cell,” meaning the first living cell on this planet, is a
species which no longer exists on this earth.

The theory of evolution also requires massive amounts of new genetic information form
by totally random mutations of DNA.  For example, the “first living cell” would have had a
very simple and very short DNA strand.  However, human DNA would be much, much
longer and far, far more complex.  In other words, human DNA has millions of times
more complex genetic information than the “first living cell” would have had according to
the theory of evolution.

New genetic information, including at least one new gene, has never been observed in
nature, nor has new genetic information, created by random mutations of DNA, ever
been accomplished in a science lab.

When discussing the probability of the theory of evolution, things get really absurd for
the theory of evolution.  The Wistar symposium, mentioned in the quote at the top of this
chapter, which shredded the theory of evolution by mathematical analysis, should have
dispensed with the theory of evolution over 40 years ago (several world-famous
evolutionists were at that symposium), but of course that did not happen.

No fully functional computer program on earth has been improved upon by randomly
changing and adding “bits” of information.  Likewise, no fully functional DNA strand has
been improved upon by randomly changing and adding nucleotides.

The truth is that any honest geneticist will tell you that the DNA of almost all plants and
animals is deteriorating (this is called “genetic entropy”).  “Point mutations,” meaning a
mutation of a single nucleotide, are overwhelmingly negative.  But even when point
mutations yield a positive result, it is generally an environmental coincidence caused by
a loss of genetic information.

Even though scientists have tried billions of times to create new genetic information in
DNA by random mutations, they have never created any new genetic information by
mutating existing DNA.

Thus, why would the scientific establishment claim that the theory of evolution is a
proven fact of science; when in fact every shred of actual scientific evidence is
overwhelmingly against the theory of evolution?

"Thus, why would the scientific establishment claim that the theory of evolution is a
proven fact of science; when in fact every shred of actual scientific evidence is
overwhelmingly against the theory of evolution?"