There had to be some idiot article about how evolution is slammed too.
Evolution's shell game
Posted: April 5, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
It used to be that science followed facts.
Today, at least as far as evolution goes, facts follow theories.
When inconvenient facts are discovered, they are simply adapted to fit the theories.
The theories are constant. They are unquestionable, unassailable, unimpeachable. It's just not considered good science to question them for any reason.
Take, for example, the latest findings in Australia. Last month, fossils of what were described as "the earliest species of sea turtle, believed to be 110 million years old," were discovered in Queensland's far west.
The scientists were startled by just how little sea turtles had changed in 100 million years. They had not evolved. But that did not alarm them. That did not get them to question their premises. That did not cause them to think their dating techniques could be wrong.
No, instead, they quickly came to the conclusion that sea turtles represent a highly evolved species - one that perfected its evolution 100 million years ago and never bothered to change because change was unnecessary.
How similar are these supposedly 110-million-year-old sea turtles to today's sea turtles? Virtually indistinguishable - which is to say no different.
"For all intents and purposes, if you were to see one (of these fossils) they would look basically the same as sea turtles do today," said South Australian Museum paleontologist Ben Kear.
And why is that?
"Sea turtles have hit on the winning design and they've stuck to it," he said. "They've cracked the winning code, as it were, and it's enabled them to survive when other creatures haven't."
It's amazing they haven't taken over the world, isn't it?
"They're one of the success stories of marine evolution - if you think about the marine animals that became extinct, well why did sea turtles survive?" Kear asked without wanting to hear the answer. "That's the sort of question we can look at now."
But you know these evolutionists don't want to have dialogue about such matters. They don't tolerate any dissent from their theories. They don't allow facts to lead them in any other direction than an evolutionary explanation for the diversity of life.
What makes the scientists convinced the fossils of dead sea turtles that look remarkably like today's sea turtles are really 100 million years old? It's because of where they were found. They were found in an area of sediment that is believed to be 110 million years old. Therefore, that's how old the bones are.
Could they be wrong about the age of the sediment? No, these scientists don't make mistakes like that. If they did, it would shatter the very foundation of their work. In fact, if they were to find a human skeleton in that sediment, they would convince themselves that man is actually 100 million years old as well.
Keep in mind, these "fossils" are so well preserved that the scientists claim to be able to determine the 110-milliom-year-old sea turtles' diet by examining the remains in their stomachs.
This is one example of hundreds, thousands, like it in so-called "evolutionary science." It is a science without any foundation. It is a theory not supported by facts, but countered by them.
It takes great faith to stick to the theory. I give the evolutionists credit for that - they are true to their religion, true to their creed.
It doesn't matter what they find. They will make the facts fit the theory.
How about you? Do you still believe? Or do you think evolution, like the sea turtle illustration, is one