What Are Scientists And Others Really Saying About Evolution?
- "Not one change of species into another is on record ... we cannot prove
that a single species has been changed."
(Charles Darwin, My Life & Letters)
- "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting
the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light
and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have
been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the
(Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, chapter "Difficulties")
- "I have little hesitation in saying that a sickly pall now hangs over
the big bang theory."
(Sir Fred Hoyle, astronomer, cosmologist, and mathematician, Cambridge University)
- "The pathetic thing is that we have scientists who are trying to prove
evolution, which no scientist can ever prove."
(Dr. Robert Millikan, Nobel Prize winner and eminent evolutionist)
- "The theory of evolution suffers from grave defects, which are more and
more apparent as time advances. It can no longer square with practical
(Dr A Fleishmann, Zoologist, Erlangen University)
- "It is good to keep in mind ... that nobody has ever succeeded in
producing even one new species by the accumulation of micromutations.
Darwin's theory of natural selection has never had any proof, yet it has
been universally accepted."
(Prof. R Goldschmidt PhD, DSc Prof. Zoology, University of Calif. in Material Basis of Evolution Yale Univ.
- "The theory of the transmutation of species is a scientific mistake, untrue
in its facts, unscientific in its method, and mischievous in its tendency."
(Prof. J Agassiz, of Harvard in Methods of Study in Natural History)
- "Evolution is baseless and quite incredible."
(Dr Ambrose Fleming, President, British Assoc. Advancement of Science, in The Unleashing of Evolutionary Thought)
- "Overwhelming strong proofs of intelligent and benevolent design lie
around us ... The atheistic idea is so nonsensical that I cannot put it into
(Lord Kelvin, Vict. Inst., 124, p267)
- It is possible (and, given the Flood, probable) that materials which give
radiocarbon dates of tens of thousands of radiocarbon years could
have true ages of many fewer calendar years."
(Gerald Aardsman, Ph.D., physicist and C-14 dating specialist)
- "We have to admit that there is nothing in the geological records that
runs contrary to the views of conservative creationists."
(Evolutionist Edmund Ambrose)
- "The best physical evidence that the earth is young is the dwindling
resource that evolutionists refuse to admit is dwindling ... the magnetic
energy in the field of the earth's dipole magnet ... To deny that it is a
dwindling resource is phoney science."
(Thomas Barnes Ph.D., physicist)
- "No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any
kind of evolution."
(Pierre-Paul Grasse, Evolutionist)
- "The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one
to a number with 40,000 noughts after it ... It is big enough to bury Darwin
and the whole theory of evolution ... if the beginnings of life were not
random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful
(Sir Fred Hoyle, astronomer, cosmologist and mathematician, Cambridge University)
- "It is easy enough to make up stories, of how one form gave rise to
another, and to find reasons why the stages should be favoured by
natural selection. But such stories are not part of science, for there is
no way of putting them to the test."
(Luther D Sutherland, Darwin's Enigma, Master Books 1988, p89)
- "Is it really credible that random processes could have constructed a
reality, the smallest element of which - a functional protein or gene - is
complex beyond ... anything produced by the intelligence of man?"
(Molecular biologist Michael Denton, Evolutionist: A Theory in Crisis (London: Burnett Books, 1985) p 342.)
- "When I make an incision with my scalpel, I see organs of such
intricacy that there simply hasn't been enough time for natural
evolutionary processes to have developed them."
(C Everett Koop, former US Surgeon General)
- "Modern apes ... seem to have sprung out of nowhere. They have no
yesterday, no fossil record. And the true origin of modern humans ... is,
if we are to be honest with ourselves, an equally mysterious matter."
(Lyall Watson, Ph.D., Evolutionist)
- "Although bacteria are tiny, they display biochemical, structural and
behavioural complexities that outstrip scientific description. In keeping
with the current microelectronics revolution, it may make more sense to
equate their size with sophistication rather than with simplicity ...
Without bacteria life on earth could not exist in its present form."
(James A Shipiro, Bacteria as Multicellular Organisms, "Scientific
America, Vol.258, No.6 (June 1988))
- "Eighty to eighty-five percent of earth's land surface does not have
even 3 geological periods appearing in 'correct' consecutive order ... it
becomes an overall exercise of gargantuan special pleading and
imagination for the evolutionary-uniformitarian paradigm to maintain
that there ever were geologic periods."
(John Woodmorappe, geologist)
- "That a mindless, purposeless, chance process such as natural
selection, acting on the sequels of recombinant DNA or random
mutation, most of which are injurious or fatal, could fabricate such
complexity and organisation as the vertebrate eye, where each
component part must carry out its own distinctive task in a
harmoniously functioning optical unit, is inconceivable. The absence of
transitional forms between the invertebrates retina and that of the
vertebrates poses another difficulty. Here there is a great gulf fixed
which remains inviolate with no seeming likelihood of ever being
bridged. The total picture speaks of intelligent creative design of an
infinitely high order."
(H.S.Hamilton (MD) The Retina of the Eye - An Evolutionary Road Block.)
- "My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for
more than 40 years have completely failed."
(N.H.Nilson, famous botanist and evolutionist)
- "None of five museum officials could offer a single example of a
transitional series of fossilised organisms that would document the
transformation of one basically different type to another."
(Luther Sunderland, science researcher)
- "The entire hominid collection known today would barely cover a
billiard table, but it has spawned a science because it is distinguished
by two factors which inflate its apparent relevance far beyond its
merits. First, the fossils hint at the ancestry of a supremely self-
important animal - ourselves. Secondly, the collection is so
tantalisingly incomplete, and the specimens themselves often so
fragmented and inconclusive, that more can be said about what is
missing than about what is present. Hence the amazing quantity of
literature on the subject ever since Darwin's work inspired the notion
that fossils linking modern man and extinct ancestor would provide the
most convincing proof of human evolution, preconceptions have led
evidence by the nose in the study of fossil man."
(John Reader, Whatever Happened to Zinjanthropus? New Scientist Vol. 89,
No.12446 (March 26,1981) pp 802-805))
- "The evolutionist thesis has become more stringently unthinkable than
(Wolfgang Smith Ph.D.)
- "The only competing explanation for the order we all see in the
biological world is the notion of Special Creation."
(Niles Eldridge, PhD., palaeontologist and evolutionist, American Museum of Natural History).
- "A growing number of respectable scientists are defecting from the
evolutionist camp ... moreover, for the most part these 'experts' have
abandoned Darwinism, not on the basis of religious faith or biblical
persuasions, but on scientific grounds, and in some instances,
(Wolfgang Smith, Ph.D., physicist and mathematician)
- "As yet we have not been able to track the phylogenetic history of a
single group of modern plants from its beginning to the present."
(Chester A Arnold, Professor of Botany and Curator of Fossil Plants,
University of Michigan, An Introduction to Paleobotany (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1947, p.7)
- "The more scientists have searched for the transitional forms that lie
between species, the more they have been frustrated."
(John Adler with John Carey: Is Man a Subtle Accident, Newsweek, Vol.96, No.18 (November 3, 1980, p.95)
- "...most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the
general argument in favour of Darwinian interpretations of the history
of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true."
(Dr David Raup, Curator of geology, Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago)
- "Despite the bright promise that palaeontology provides means of
'seeing' Evolution, it has provided some nasty difficulties for
evolutionists, the most notorious of which is the presence of 'gaps' in
the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between
species and palaeontology does not provide them."
(David Kitts, Ph.D. Palaeontology and Evolutionary Theory, Evolution, Vol.28 (Sep.1974)
- "Hundreds of scientists who once taught their university students that
the bottom line on origins had been figured out and settled are today
confessing that they were completely wrong. They've discovered that
their previous conclusions, once held so fervently, were based on very
fragile evidences and suppositions which have since been refuted by
new discoveries. This has necessitated a change in their basic
philisophical position on origins. Others are admitting great
weaknesses in evolution theory."
(Luther D Sutherland, Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, 4th edition (Santee, California: Master Books,1988) pp.7-8)
- "The fact that a theory so vague, so insufficiently verifiable, and so far
from the criteria otherwise applied in 'hard' science has become a
dogma can only be explained on sociological grounds."
(Ludwig von Bertalanffy, biologist)
- "Micromutations do occur, but the theory that these alone can account
for evolutionary change is either falsified, or else it is an unfalsifiable,
hence metaphysical theory. I suppose that nobody will deny that it is a
great misfortune if an entire branch of science becomes addicted to a
false theory. But this is what has happened in biology: ... I believe that
one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the
history of science. When this happens many people will pose the
question: How did this ever happen?"
(S Lovtrup, Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth (London:Croom Helm, p.422))
- "If one allows the unquestionably largest experimenter to speak,
namely nature, one gets a clear and incontrovertible answer to the
question about the significance of mutations for the formation of
species and evolution. They disappear under the competitive conditions
of natural selection, as soap bubbles burst in a breeze."
(Evolutionist Herbert Nilson, Synthetische Artbildung (Lund, Sweden:Verlag CWK Gleerup Press, 1953, p 174)
- "In all the thousands of fly-breeding experiments carried out all over
the world for more than fifty years, a distinct new species has never
been seen to emerge ... or even a new enzyme."
(Gordon Taylor, The Great Evolution Mystery (New York: Harper and Row, 1983, pp 34, 38)
- "The uniform, continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus,
so dear to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened
(George Simpson, palaeontologist and Evolutionist)
- "As is well known, most fossil species appear instantaneously in the
(Tom Kemp, Oxford University)
- "The fossil record pertaining to man is still so sparsely known that
those who insist on positive declarations can do nothing more than
jump from one hazardous surmise to another and hope that the next
dramatic discovery does not make them utter fools ... Clearly some
refuse to learn from this. As we have seen, there are numerous
scientists and popularizers today who have the temerity to tell us that
there is 'no doubt' how man originated: if only they had the
(William R Fix, The Bone Pedlars, New York: Macmillan
Publishing Company, 1984, p.150)
- "The curious thing is that there is a consistency about the fossil gaps;
the fossils are missing in all the important places."
(Francis Hitching, archaeologist).
- "The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has
never bothered to think of a good reply."
(J.O'Rourke in the American Journal of Science)
- "In most people's minds, fossils and Evolution go hand in hand. In
reality, fossils are a great embarrassment to Evolutionary theory and
offer strong support for the concept of Creation. If Evolution were true,
we should find literally millions of fossils that show how one kind of life
slowly and gradually changed to another kind of life. But missing links
are the trade secret, in a sense, of palaeontology. The point is, the links
are still missing. What we really find are gaps that sharpen up the
boundaries between kinds. It's those gaps which provide us with the
evidence of Creation of separate kinds. As a matter of fact, there are
gaps between each of the major kinds of plants and animals. Transition
forms are missing by the millions. What we do find are separate and
complex kinds, pointing to Creation."
(Dr Gary Parker Biologist/palaeontologist and former ardent Evolutionist.)
- "Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and
palaeontology does not provide them."
(David Kitts, palaeontologist and Evolutionist)
- "... I still think that, to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in
favour of special creation. Can you imagine how an orchid, a duckweed
and a palm tree have come from the same ancestry, and have we any
evidence for this assumption? The evolutionist must be prepared with
an answer, but I think that most would break down before an
(Dr Eldred Corner, Professor of Botany at Cambridge
University, England: Evolution in Contemporary Botanical Thought
(Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961, p.97))
- "Fossils are a great embarrassment to Evolutionary theory and offer
strong support for the concept of Creation."
(Gary Parker, Ph.D., biologist/palaeontologist and former evolutionist)
- "So firmly does the modern geologist believe in evolution up from
simple organisms to complex ones over huge time spans, that he is
perfectly willing to use the theory of evolution to prove the theory of
evolution [p.128] ... one is applying the theory of evolution to prove the
correctness of evolution. For we are assuming that the oldest
formations contain only the most primitive and least complex
organisms, which is the base assumption of Darwinism ... [p.127] If we
now assume that only simple organisms will occur in old formations,
we are assuming the basic premise of Darwinism to be correct. To use,
therefore, for dating purposes, the assumption that only simple
organisms will be present in old formations is to thoroughly beg the
whole question. It is arguing in a circle. [p.128]"
(Arthur E Wilder-Smith, Man's Origin, Man's destiny: Harold Shaw Publishers, 1968, pp127-8)
- "It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint,
geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms
has been determined by the study of their remains imbedded in the
rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains
of the organisms they contain."
(R H Rastall, Lecturer in Economic Geology, Cambridge University: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol.10 (Chicago: William Benton, Publisher, 1956, p.168)
- "I admit that an awful lot of that [fantasy] has gotten into the textbooks
as though it were true. For instance, the most famous example still on
exhibit downstairs [in the American Museum of Natural History] is the
exhibit on horse evolution prepared fifty years ago. That has been
presented as literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now, I think that
that is lamentable, particularly because the people who propose these
kinds of stories themselves may be aware of the speculative nature of
some of the stuff. But by the time it filters down to the textbooks, we've
got science as truth and we have a problem."
(Dr Niles Eldredge, Palaeontologist and Evolutionist)
- "The set of genetic instructions for humans is roughly three billion
(Miroslav Radman & Robert Wagner, The High
Fidelity of DNA Duplication, Scientific America, Vol. 259, No.2
August 1988, pp40-46)
- "DNA and the molecules that surround it form a truly superb
mechanism - a miniaturised marvel. The information is so compactly
stored that the amount of DNA necessary to code all the people living
on our planet might fit into a space no larger than an aspirin tablet."
(Paul S Taylor in The Illustrated Origins Answer Book page 23)
- "... Life cannot have had a random beginning ... The trouble is that
there are about two thousand enzymes, and the chance of obtaining them all
in a random trial is only one part in 10 to the power of 40,000, an
outrageously small probability that could not be faced even if the whole
universe consisted of organic soup. If one is not prejudiced either by
social beliefs or by a scientific training into the conviction that life
originated on the Earth, this simple calculation wipes the idea entirely
out of court ..."
(Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space)
- "The chance that useful DNA molecules would develop without a
Designer are apparently zero. Then let me conclude by asking which
came first - the DNA (which is essential for the synthesis of proteins) or
the protein enzyme (DNA-polymerase) without which DNA synthesis is
nil? ... there is virtually no chance that chemical 'letters' would
spontaneously produce coherent DNA and protein 'words.'"
(George Howe, expert in biology sciences)
- "...An intelligible communication via radio signal from some distant
galaxy would be widely hailed as evidence of an intelligent source. Why
then doesn't the message sequence on the DNA molecule also
constitute prima facie evidence for an intelligent source? After all,
DNA information is not just analogous to a message sequence such as
Morse code, it is such a message sequence."
(Charles B Thaxton, Walter L Bradley and Robert L Olsen: The Mystery of Life's Origin, Reassessing Current Theories (New York Philosophical Library 1984) pp 211-212)
- "Generation after generation, through countless cell divisions, the
genetic heritage of living things is scrupulously preserved in DNA ...
All of life depends on the accurate transmission of information. As
genetic messages are passed through generations of dividing cells, even
small mistakes can be life-threatening ... if mistakes were as rare as one
in a million, 3000 mistakes would be made during each duplication of
the human genome. Since the genome replicates about a million billion
times in the course of building a human being from a single fertilised
egg, it is unlikely that the human organism could tolerate such a high
rate of error. In fact, the actual rate of mistakes is more like one in 10
(Miroslav Radman and Robert Wagner, The High Fidelity
of DNA Duplication... Scientific America. Vol. 299, No 2 (August 1988,
pp 40-44. Quote is from page 24))
- "In the meantime, the educated public continues to believe that Darwin
has provided all the relevant answers by the magic formula of random
mutations plus natural selection - quite unaware of the fact that random
mutations turned out to be irrelevant and natural selection a
(Arthur Koestler, author)
- "Evolution lacks a scientifically acceptable explanation of the source of
the precisely planned codes within cells without which there can be no
specific proteins and hence, no life."
(David A Kaufman, Ph.D., University of Florida, Gainsesville)
- "Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating at
random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes
sensible to think that the favourable properties of physics on which life
depends are in every respect deliberate....It is therefore almost
inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect ...higher
intelligences...even to the limit of God...such a theory is so obvious that
one wonders why it is not widely accepted as being self-evident. The
reasons are psychological rather than scientific."
(Sir Fred Hoyle, well-known British mathematician, astronomer and cosmologist)
- "Ultimately, the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than
the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century."
(Michael Denton, 'Evolution, A Theory in Crisis' page 358)
- "Any suppression which undermines and destroys that very foundation
on which scientific methodology and research was erected, evolutionist
or otherwise, cannot and must not be allowed to flourish ... It is a
confrontation between scientific objectivity and ingrained prejudice -
between logic and emotion - between fact and fiction ... In the final
analysis, objective scientific logic has to prevail - no matter what the
final result is - no matter how many time-honoured idols have to be
discarded in the process ... After all, it is not the duty of science to
defend the theory of evolution and stick by it to the bitter end -no matter
what illogical and unsupported conclusions it offers ... If in the process
of impartial scientific logic, they find that creation by outside
intelligence is the solution to our quandary, then let's cut the umbilical
chord that tied us down to Darwin for such a long time. It is choking us
and holding us back ... Every single concept advanced by the theory of
evolution (and amended thereafter) is imaginary as it is not supported
by the scientifically established probability concepts. Darwin was
wrong... The theory of evolution may be the worst mistake made in
(I L Cohen, Darwin Was Wrong - A Study in Probabilities
PO Box 231, Greenvale, New York 11548: New Research Publications,
Inc. pp 6-8, 209-210, 214-215. I.L.Cohen, Member of the New York
Academy of Sciences and Officer of the Archaeological Institute of
- "The notion that ... the operating programme of a living cell could be
arrived at by chance in a primordial soup here on earth is evidently
nonsense of a high order."
(Evolutionist Sir Fred Hoyle)
- "The theory of Evolution ... will be one of the great jokes in the history
books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so flimsy and dubious an
hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity it has."
(Malcolm Muggeridge, well-known philosopher)
- "We have had enough of the Darwinian fallacy. It is time that we cry:
'The emperor has no clothes.'"
(K.Hsu, geologist at the Geological Institute at Zurich)
- "Far from being an established fact of science that it is so typically
portrayed to be, evolution is, in reality, an unreasonable and unfounded
hypothesis that is riddled with countless scientific fallacies."
(Scott M Huse, The Collapse of Evolution (Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, pp 127)
- "Unfortunately many scientists and non-scientists have made Evolution
into a religion, something to be defended against infidels. In my
experience, many students of biology - professors and textbook writers
included - have been so carried away with the arguments for Evolution
that they neglect to question it. They preach it ... College students,
having gone through such a closed system of education, themselves
become teachers, entering high schools to continue the process, using
textbooks written by former classmates or professors. High standards of
scholarship and teaching break down. Propaganda and the pursuit of
power replace the pursuit knowledge. Education becomes a fraud."
(George Kocan, Evolution isn't Faith But Theory, Chicago Tribune 9
Monday April 21 1980)
- "Scientists who go about teaching that Evolution is a fact of life are
great con men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax
ever. In explaining Evolution we do not have one iota of fact."
(Dr T N Tahmisian, a former U.S. Atomic Energy Commission physiologist)
- "Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped
nothing in the progress of science. It is useless."
(Dr Louise Bounoure, Director of Research at the French National Centre for
Scientific Research, Director of the Zoological Museum and former
president of the Biological Society of Strasbourg)
- "I, as a scientist, must postulate a source of information to supply
the teleonomy or know-how, I don't find it in the universe, and, therefore, I
assume that it is transcendent to this universe. I believe, myself, in a
living God who did it. I believe that this God, who supplied the information,
revealed Himself in the form of a man - so that man could understand Him. We
are made to understand. I want to understand God. But I can only do it
if He comes down to my wavelength, the wavelength of man. I believe
that God revealed Himself in the form of Christ, and that we can serve
Him and know Him in our hearts as the source of the Logos - all
information is necessary to make the universe and to make life itself
... Look at the beauty of nature around us. When you consider that it all
grew out of matter injected with information of the type I have been
describing, you can only be filled with wonder of the wisdom of a
Creator, who, first of all, had the sense of beauty to do it, and then the
technical ability. I am filled with wonder as I look at nature, to see how
god technically did it and realized the beauty of His own soul in doing
it. The Scripture teaches perfectly plainly, and it fits in with my science
perfectly well, that the one who did called Himself THE LOGOS. That
Logos was Jesus. Jesus called Himself the Creator who made
everything - 'for Him and by Him'. Now, if that is the case, then I am
very happy and filled with joy that He made the Creation so beautiful
and that He also valued me enough to die for me, to become my
Redeemer as well."
(Arthur E Wilder-Smith, Ph.D.,D.Sc.,Dr.es.Sc., The Natural
Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution (Santee, California: Master
Our Purpose -
Is The Bible True?
The Ressurection -
The Trinity -
Bible Prophecy -
Bible Verses -
Great Links -
Support Us -