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
According to the evolution theory, the gain in the mechanism of the eye
causes its possessors to survive, and others to die. Is that true? Are
there not many species that survive, whose eyes are less perfect than
the eye of man? Indeed, it is claimed that many animals have eyes
superior to man. If so, why did man survive and become the dominant
species, with eyes less perfect? The compound eyes of some species are
superior in some respects, as every one knows, who has ever tried to
slip up on a fly. A scientist says that fleas have such perfect vision
that the darkness under the bed clothes is to them a glaring light.
Darwin makes a fatal admission, when he says, “To arrive, however, at a
conclusion regarding the formation of the eye with all its marvelous
yet not absolutely perfect characters, it is indispensable that the
reason should conquer the imagination; But I _have felt the difficulty
far too keenly to be surprised at others hesitating to extend the
principle of natural selection to so startling a length_.” (Italics
ours). No wonder the reason and judgment of mankind revolts against
such a theory and that so many evolutionists themselves reject it.
Three or four per cent. of the population are color blind—“red-blind”
—and are not able to distinguish the color of the green leaves from
that of the red ripe cherries. Can it be possible that the eye becomes
more perfect, because those who had less perfect eyes perished, and
only those who could recognize colors survive until color blindness is
finally eliminated? Is such a doctrine scientific? Is it more
reasonable to believe it than to believe that an infinitely wise and
powerful God created this organ of marvelous value and beauty? Of
course, the ability to recognize color is only one of the many
perfections of the eye.
Evolution is made so much more incredible, because it teaches that
every permanent improvement in the eye is made at the expense of
multitudes of individuals that perished because of the lack of the
improvement. The defect perished only because all individuals afflicted
with it perished. Is this true?
The bureau of education of the U.S. government reports that, of
_22,000,000_ school children examined, 5,000,000 have defective eyes;
1,000,000, defective hearing; 1,000,000 have active tuberculosis;
250,000, heart trouble; 3,000,000 to 5,000,000 are underfed; total,
12,250,000,—more than half. Must all these defectives perish in order
that man may reach perfection? Less than half are the “fittest” and
they only could survive.
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