The Evolution of Man Scientifically Disproved in 50 ArgumentsWilliams, William A. (William Asbury)
Religion
The Evolution of Man Scientifically Disproved in 50 Arguments
Williams, William A. (William Asbury)
Evolution
Evolution is not universally true in any sense of the term. Why are not
fishes _now_ changing into amphibians, amphibians into reptiles,
reptiles into birds and mammals, and monkeys into man? If growth,
development, evolution, were the rule, there would be no lower order of
animals for all have had sufficient time to develop into the highest
orders. Many have remained the same; some have deteriorated.
And now we have a new amendment to the theory of evolution: We are told
that the huge Saurians (reptiles) overworked the development idea, and
became too large and cumbersome, and hence are now extinct. Prof. Cope
says:—“Retrogression in nature is as well established as evolution.” It
seems that man also has, contrary to all former conceptions, reached
the limit of his development, if he has not already gone too far.
Prof. R. S. Lull says, (Readings p. 95) “Man’s physical evolution has
virtually ceased, but in so far as any change is being effected, it is
largely retrogressive. Such changes are: Reduction of hair and teeth,
and of hand skill; and dulling of the senses of sight, smell and
hearing upon which active creatures depend so largely for safety. That
sort of charity which fosters the physically, mentally and morally
feeble, and is thus contrary to the law of natural selection, must
also, in the long run, have an adverse effect upon the race.” Too bad
that Christian charity takes care of the feeble, endangering evolution,
and the doctrine that the weak have no rights that the strong are bound
to respect! We are not surprised that Nietzsche, whose insane
philosophy that _might is right_, helped to bring on the world war,
died in an insane asylum.
After all, evolution is not progress and development, but retrogression
and deterioration as well.
But evolutionists, compelled by the requirements of their theory, have
added another amendment, which will seem ridiculous to some:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account