Speedy species surprise (R)
Readers’ comments
Nathan R., Australia, 28 November 2012
Thanks guys. This article corrected heaps of misconceptions I had about the evolution and creation stances.
Mark E., Australia, 29 November 2012
Indeed, this is a 'killer' article. However me thinks the evolutionary camp will still not allow 'a Divine foot in the door', regardless of how convincing the evidence for the Divine is or will be.
Thank you for elucidating the process of creation and variation. We can always trust the word of Jesus to understand how the world came to be, why it is here and what we are supposed to be doing in it...turning people towards the Saviour. May eyes be opened to see His work in the world, and ears unplugged to hear His call on their lives. Bless you CMI.
Rev. Rich V., United States, 29 November 2012
Oh, this was an excellent article! However, may I point out something that your article addresses indirectly by inference, but not directly? Namely, the "catch 22" in which the evolutionary camps find themselves with regard to the evidence you have highlighted herein, versus their desperate "requirement" for "millions" and "billions" of years for their absurd claims to seem plausible.
(1) Evolutionists face facts that cannot possibly be explained by evolutionary theories -- ever. One is the existence of matter and energy. The law of causality demands that there was an "in the beginning," but without resorting to the concept of a Creator, evolutionary concepts are bereft of any explanation of from where these came; or from where the laws of physics, chemistry, etc., had their origin; or from where the laws of logic originated, by which we observe and comment on all these things.
(2) Thus, to compensate for these "inexplicable things" (i.e. within their worldview), they have to push them back billions of years past, in order to sound plausible when they say, "We cannot explain those things yet. They were too long ago."
(3) Thus, they need millions of years (at least) in order to provide a plausible explanation for "molecules to man" evolutionary claims within that larger billions of years framework.
So here these "scientists" face a situation which, if they are sincere in their pursuit of knowledge, would require them to admit that adaptations of species can happen in short periods of time. Yet, that clearly reduces the time-frame needed for "natural selection" SIGNIFICANTLY from their "millions" of years for changes to occur; and this, therefore, removes their facade of plausibility.
In other words, they would have to admit that "the emperor has no clothes."
![[img]](/images/sml_cmi_logo.png)











Graham P., New Zealand, 28 November 2012
You've done a marvellous job with this article.