If you have not read Stories Versus Truth, you may want to read that before reading this.

Question:

I heard a debate-Ken Miller said that a Hawaiian butterfly evolved a mouth for a banana plant that wasn't in Hawaii until recently. Do you have a rebuttal for that? Could that just be micro-evolution, not macro-evolution, since species don't change to a new species?

Answer:

To start with, according to the Evolutionistic dogma, evolution, if there were such a thing, would be a random process that leads to increasing information, order, and complexity. According to Evolutionists, it is a random process. Random processes do not think and act. Old-Earth Naturalists will tell us that it is not just random processes, but also the magic of Natural Selection that evolves things into what they need to be.  That boat does not float.  Natural Selection is not nature's intelligence.  According to their theory, butterflies can evolve anything.  They cannot evolve something in response to something else.  That would imply a mind and god-like creative power.  This is one of the flimflam methods of Evolutionists.  They turn evolution into a magic wand that is able to do impossible things. That is not science.  It is bold-faced lying.  Selection can only select from what is already available.  Mutations cannot add information.  Students are lied to in the schools.  What a shame!

(Read the latest science on the subject: Without Excuse by Werner Gitt, a description of the scientific Laws of Universal Information. See also: Information Theory Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4. Here is another interesting article.) More is constantly being learned about information and about the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Evolutionists tend to hide in the weeds of the unknown with an argument from ignorance: "If you can't prove, by empirical science, that evolution is impossible, then it happened." By empirical science alone, we can only prove probabilities. The probabilities show the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story to be a bazaar hypothesis, a story that is so improbable that it should not be considered. However, empirical science is not a tool that can prove anything to be true or false absolutely. For absolute proof, we have revelation. (See Basic and Concise Guide to Practical, Useful Logic and Reasoning). God says that He created everything. He is the One Who enforces the laws of nature. He is the One Who will judge all of us in the end. We know that because we know Him presonally through the indwelling Presence of Jesus Christ and the moment-by-moment instruction of the Holy Spirit.

The use of the term, micro-evolution also deceptively implies that small variations add up to large variations, which is a diversion from the point. The point is not the number of variations or the size of the variations. The point is that mutations do not add information. They remove information. Evolution would require that they add the right information so that the resulting changes to the creature can be "selected" for by nature.

In addition, there is a problem with the word, "species." It refers to rather random divisions between different animals. These divisions are created by humans who are known to make many mistakes. No one doubts that adaptation happens. No one doubts that when adaptation happens a human has the ability to classify that change as a new species. But what does it prove when a human calls something by a different name? It certainly doesn't change what that something is. This species-naming ability of human beings is part of the magicians patter that endlessly comes out of the ungodly. Species are not like the "kinds" that the Bible talks about. The Bible does not specifically define the kinds of animals, but it says that each kind produced after its kind. Using science, it appears that there were many trees of animals, each one representing a kind, and each kind allowing a great deal of variation within the kind. But the butterfly did not turn into another kind of animal. That would be macro-evolution rather than variation. Macro-evolution has never happened. There are no examples in the fossil record. What is a species? The surprising answer.

The Atheists will not turn from their dreams because they hate God. Arguments don't work. Once in a while, the Spirit of God may go out from you to them, either by words that you say, by actions that you do, or by the prayers that you pray. And the Spirit of God may turn the hard heart of someone whom God decides to call to Himself. You probably will never see it, so never be discouraged. You never know how much God is doing through you.

It appears that there are abilities built into the DNA for adaptation. Real science does not know all about this capability yet. What real science does show is the second law of thermodynamics. We never observe random chance adding information to anything, but when the information is already designed in, we can observe adaptation. We never observe random chance bringing anything to a higher level of energy. Clocks wind down. Fences break down. Cars rust out. DNA gets damaged and loses information. In rare instances, the loss of information can help an organism. That is what happens when bacteria become resistant to antibiotics. Some of the bacteria are missing something that the antibiotic attacks. Since these bacteria don't are missing that something, the antibiotics don't affect them and they keep living while the others die off. But those so-called super bacteria cannot survive among normal healthy bacteria when the antibiotics are not present. They have lost information--de-volved--because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. (read more about the Second Law of Thermodynamics) (and even more

The Evolutionists will tell you a half truth about the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The Evolutionists will tell the half truth: "The Second Law of Thermodynamics only applies to isolated systems, so it's not relevant to evolution, because the Earth is an open system." This is a clever lie. Here is the part of the truth that they are withholding: the Second Law of Thermodynamics was derived using theoretical isolated systems, but it applies to all systems, and can only be overcome locally and temporarily in open systems when stringent conditions are met. Not only that, but we are not talking about the Earth. The Earth is just a subsystem of a much larger system called the Universe. The Universe is an isolated system. Evolutionists claim that Evolution took place in this isolated system, but the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that their story is a myth.

More information on the Second Law of Thermodynamics can be found here & here & here & here & here

One Evolutionism website says this: "There are two species of butterflies on Hawaii, indigenous to the islands, that have mouth parts meant specifically for eating bananas. What's so special? Bananas were not introduced to Hawaii until a couple hundred years ago. So if those butterflies were there before, then they would have had no food source. They had to have evolved to eat the bananas."

This is typical babbling of the carnal mind of mankind--deceitful and desperately wicked. The logical error is easy for a child to spot. "They had to have" Really? So there is only one possibility here? That is faulty logic, and probably reflects the blindness that blind faith in unsupported assumptions will bring. And the unsupported assumptions are those of scientism, a cult that redefines science then worships science. The most obvious possibility is that the Creator knew what these butterflies would need and so He built that into them so that their mouths could adapt to eating bananas. There are many such claims among the Evolutionism religion. They use this same faulty logic repeatedly.

By the way, every age of the earth theory uses circular reasoning. Since the "science" of estimating the age of the earth is forensic science, it always involves circular reasoning. Old earth theories require old earth assumptions. There are many indicators of the age of the earth. When old earth assumptions are made for the popular age of the earth indicators, those indicators show a very old earth. However, the other indicators, the vast majority of indicators, show a very young Earth when using the same old earth assumptions. In addition, if you change the assumptions, you get a very young earth. Bottom line is that old Earth ideas are for the purpose of eliminating creation and the flood and the God who did these things.

We are not dogmatically claiming to know that the Earth is 6,000 years old. We know that God created the Heavens and the Earth in six days and we know the number of generations between Adam and Christ. That's about it. Even though a plain reading of Scripture seems to indicate a young Earth; even though there is zero observed evidence and only circular reasoning and speculations that support old Earth stories, we can't even deny the possibility that God could have done something that Scripture doesn't hint at and that has left no scientific evidence. It is possible. It just is not worth the time to think about it.

SeekFind.net is not really about Creation and Evolution. Any information that we have is owed to other sites. We have tried to simplify the concepts. Seekfind is really about the meaning of life: (Article)

If you ever want to frustrate an Evolutionist, ask him or her to explain why they believe in Evolution. Make them explain everything that you don't understand about what they are telling you. If they say that the mouths evolved, ask, what is the mechanism for the mouths evolving? If they say that it is random chance, ask how that works since the Second Law of Thermodynamics predicts that just the opposite will happen, that information will not be added. If they say that every once in a while, information is added by accident, then ask how they know. Have they observed it? If they say that they know it because they read it somewhere or it was published in a scientific article, ask if they actually read the detail of the research behind the scientific article. The likelihood is that they have not even read the article. Ask them if there have any other reason for believing the scientific article other than blind faith in the article. In fact, you will find that you never have anything to fear in asking Evolutionists these things. Behind their bold words there are just puffs of smoke. It takes real patience to talk to them, but if you keep your cool and really listen and question everything they say, they will lose their cool or run out of steam when they realize that they have spent their life following a mirage. They have been fooled and have probably fooled others as a result.

By the way, there is plenty of evidence for a young Earth and a recent creation:

• Semi-technical Article
• Several Articles on Various Aspects
• What Evidence is Used to Show that the Earth is Young?
• The Universe was Created Recently.
• Fourteen Easy-To-Understand Reasons for a Young Earth
• Questions and Answers About the Age of the Earth
• Old Galaxies Don't Line Up with Facts

Here are some audio and video resources for conversations with unbelievers:

• AIG Nuclear Strength Apologetics
• Who Is Jesus: Defending Jesus Christ as the Way (part 1 of 2)
• Who Is Jesus: Defending Jesus Christ as the Way (part 2 of 2)
• Faith Under Fire: Jesus Among Other Gods (part 1 of 2)
• Faith Under Fire: Jesus Among Other Gods (part 2 of 2)
• God or Science: Stephen Hawking's False Choice (part 1 of 2)
• God or Science: Stephen Hawking's False Choice (part 2 of 2)
• The Loss of Truth (part 1 of 2)
• The Loss of Truth (part 2 of 2)
• Is Atheism Dead? Is God Alive? (part 1 of 2)
• Is Atheism Dead? Is God Alive? (part 2 of 2)
• Effective Apologetics in the 21st Century (part 1 of 4)
• Effective Apologetics in the 21st Century (part 2 of 4)
• Effective Apologetics in the 21st Century (part 3 of 4)
• Effective Apologetics in the 21st Century (part 4 of 4)
• Confidence in the Gospel in a World of Competing Ideas (part 1 of 4)
• Confidence in the Gospel in a World of Competing Ideas (part 2 of 4)
• Confidence in the Gospel in a World of Competing Ideas (part 3 of 4)
• Confidence in the Gospel in a World of Competing Ideas (part 4 of 4)
• Secularism and the Illusion of Neutrality (part 1 of 4)
• Secularism and the Illusion of Neutrality (part 2 of 4)
• Secularism and the Illusion of Neutrality (part 3 of 4)
• Secularism and the Illusion of Neutrality (part 4 of 4)

Astronomy

• Astronomy and Astrophysics (evidence for design, big bang problems, dark matter, seeing distant starlight)
• Solar System and Extra-solar planets Q&A (evidence for design, age, the Sun, planets, moons, comets, extra-solar planets)
• Aliens/UFOs (are extra-terrestrial aliens visiting us?)
• Galileo, geocentrism, and Joshua's long day

Bible, God, theology

• Bible (is it the Word of God? How are we to understand it?)
• Genesis (real history or mythology/polemic?)
• God (does God exist? what is He like?)
• Jesus Christ (the 'Son of God'? Why did He die? Resurrection?)
• Atheism, agnosticism and humanism: godless religions

Biology (creation vs evolution)

• Origin of life (origin of life theories critiqued, including life-from-space)
• Design features (dozens! ID, biomimetics, 'bad' design, astronomy, irreducible complexity)
• Natural selection (yes, it happens but it is not the same as evolution)
• Mutations (yes, they happen, but they can't change microbes into microbiologists)
• Speciation (yes, it happens, but it is limited to variation within the created kind)
• Genetics ('mitochondrial Eve', ape vs human DNA, gene duplication, genetic engineering, cloning, longevity of patriarchs)
• Information theory (including DNA) (information defined, claimed new information)
• Probabilities (could life arise by chance? What about computer simulations of evolution?)
• Thermodynamics and order (how the laws of thermodynamics contradict Naturalism)
• Vestigial organs (including 'junk' DNA)
• Embryonic recapitulation and similarities (Haeckel's fraudulent concept, plus similarities due to common design)
• Charles Darwin (his religious views, contribution to human suffering, natural selection vs evolution)

Creation: relevance to Christianity, society and science

• Creation: Why It matters
• Death and suffering (Why? Origin of bad things such as poisons, carnivory, Satan)
• Creation compromises (theistic evolution, gap theory, progressive creation, framework, etc.)
• Apologetics defending the faith (proof & presuppositions, New Age, postmodernism, hell)
• Philosophy (logic and faith, proof of God, evolution and materialism)
• Countering the Critics (anti-creationists, 'bad' design, probability, 'proof' for an old earth)
• Bible 'contradictions' and 'errors' (answering attacks on the Bible)
• Communism and Nazism (the evolution connection)
• Science (what is it? Is creation or evolution science?)
• Arguments creationists should NOT use
• Creation Scientists (and other biographies)

Geology, the Flood, the Ice Age and the age of the earth

• Young Age Evidence (astronomy, botany, geology, fossils, caves, coal, glaciology, human history, oceanography)
• Radiometric Dating (radiometric dating problems, flaws, rapid decay? radiohalos)
• Flood (global? fish survival? Black Sea flood? flood legends).
• Noah s Ark (size, construction, stability, feasibility, care for animals, diseases, biogeography)
• Geology (Flood evidences, coal formation, limestone caves, rapid rocks, age of fossils?)
• Plate Tectonics (continental drift and catastrophic plate tectonics)
• Ice Age (post-Flood Ice Age, ice core dating, multiple Ice Ages? mammoths)

History

• Archaeology (archaeology and the Bible, from the Flood to New Testament times)
• History (including biblical chronology, genealogies, origin of deep time beliefs)
• Scopes Trial (What is the truth?)
• Linguistics (languages point to the Tower of Babel, animals talking?)

Paleontology

• Fossils (rapid formation, missing links, living fossils, dino-birds?, whale origins, tetrapods)
• Anthropology (human ancestry, alleged ape-men)
• Dinosaurs (humans coexist with? evidence against millions of years, birds from dinosaurs?
• Mammoths (how they fit with the post-Flood Ice Age)