Were We Made Or Not?

By Bill Ashton

The following short piece was written to provide my teenage children with some defence against the relentless evolutionary propaganda they meet in school - and virtually everywhere else.  I kept short to fit it on one side of A4 paper, so I didn't 'dot every i and cross every t'.  Even so, after twenty years, I haven't seen any need to revise it.

My youngest gave it to a science teacher at his grammar school, who returned it covered in dismissive remarks, which merely confirmed that the teacher had no notion of the issues involved, and was as much a victim as anyone else.



Evolution is not observed nor recorded.

Science involves observation and experiment. As the past is not available for observation or experiment science is disqualified to tell us about evolution.

Strictly speaking, evolution is not even a theory.

Scientific theories attempt to explain observable phenomena (e.g. theory of flight, theory of music, gravitation theory). Evolution has never been seen. So evolution is not a theory, but a notion, an idea, a hypothesis, or religious dogma.

Real science versus bogus ‘science’.

There are two forms of science: real science, the benefits of which we see all around us, and bogus ‘science’, which has arrogated (claimed falsely) the authority to invent stories about the past. The charge against this bogus ‘science’ is not that it speculates about past events, but that, calling itself ‘science’, it pretends its speculations are facts.

 To replace the Creator with the ‘Big Bang’ and the evolution of everything by chance produces huge problems.


 1. The ‘Cause and Effect’ system.

Science’s foundation is ‘cause and effect’. There are no effects without causes; if there were, science would not be a subject worth studying! It is simply illogical to deny the First Cause.


What is the cause of the ‘cause and effect’ system?


 2. Necessary completeness (irreducible complexity).

How could something which works only when complete pass through useless stages in its development?

 Some examples from among thousands are flight, sight, respiration, reproduction, digestion, creatures depending on one another to survive, and the orbit of the earth-moon system about the sun.

 Note for theistic evolutionists (people who believe in God and evolution):

Not even God could make these work a bit at a time.


What good is half a wing to a bird?


 3. Universal decay (entropy).

All observable systems decay. Everything is becoming simpler. Information never increases in transmission.

 Evolution denies these facts.


4. Statistical improbability.

The chance of throwing just ten consecutive sixes with a dice is one in 60,466,176 attempts.

 Question: If the simplest single chemical necessary for life is an elaborate construction of nearly two hundred components, how likely is its chance appearance, and its connection with everything else necessary for life?

 Answer: One in infinity (i.e. no chance!)

 Note for theistic evolutionists:

If evolution is genuinely random, it is free from God’s control.


 5. Inherent absurdity.

Hear the story of the whale according to evolution:

Once upon a time, squillions of years ago, life accidentally started in the sea (don’t ask how - it was an accident!), so Mr (and Mrs) Whale were something like fish. On the same day, they both accidentally arrived on land and both accidentally evolved lungs so they could breathe the air (lucky they both got it right first time!). Plainly, legs were better than fins for getting about, so they both accidentally evolved some, and became a bit like cows. They both accidentally evolved a mammalian reproductive system, body hair, warm blood and other mammalian traits (she accidentally evolved some breasts so she could feed her babies). Then both accidentally went back into the water, accidentally lost all land-dwelling equipment except for the reproductive and respiratory systems, but accidentally evolved other faculties for an aquatic life-style, such as pressure protection and echolocation.

Heard enough? Of course, for this to stand a chance of being believed, it must be re-written in pseudo-scientific jargon.

Suggestion: Make up your own stories about the development of birds, bats, eyes, ears, etc. and see if you can make them believable.

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay