Debunking Evolution (Full Video)

Creation and Evolution as Competing Worldviews

I am evolution. I am random chance accidents that bring us purposeless nothing, which somehow leads to everything.

I am creation.

I show order and completion.

I had to break a few scientific laws to get here. The law of conservation of mass energy, which says no matter of energy can never be created nor destroyed. The law of causality, which says that every effect must have an equal or greater cause.

Yet I ask you to believe that everything came from nothing. Not to mention the law of biogenesis, which says that life always comes from life. Yet I teach that life came from non-living matter.

I never go against these scientific laws, because I'm created by the one who made the energy. The great cause that made all the effects, the living God who created life, matter, the laws of nature, and all things.

I am marked by an invisible past.

Fossils show none of my expected in-between forms.

I am witnessed in the book that tells how I came about, the Bible.

I am talked about in almost every science textbook. Their information often changes and disagrees, but it's all the truth, at least for today.

My book has stood the test of time. Like the God that revealed it, my truth never changes.

I am clever storytelling. If what you see doesn't fit with what I'm saying, we'll make it fit. I only need a small amount of evidence to be considered true, because everyone wants to believe me.

I am the search for truth, the narrow path. Even when you're given amazing evidence, I was made by the creator of all, most will not acknowledge me.

You'll be popular if you believe in me, even if I'm wrong, which of course, I'll cleverly cover.

You will be ridiculed if you believe in Jesus the creator, but in him, there is hope and purpose. I'm a fingerprint of the eternal God, and you are a reflection of his image.

I am freedom. I free you from having to be responsible to anyone but yourself.

Freedom to die? I point to the one who gives freedom to live, freedom to be loved by the one who knows you inside and out forever.

I reflect a society that declares we don't need God. We are our own gods, if you must use that word.

I reflect the designer of everything.

From this vast universe to the smallest particle.

His ways are far beyond our ways. He doesn't need us, but yet he calls.

Will you hear?

I am heard from the loudest voices, rock stars, movie stars, even many of your teachers, even powerful religious leaders.

I am the still small voice calling you to follow the creator and submit to him as a savior.

I call a fetus a glob of tissue, a choice.

I call it a masterpiece of the creator from the very first cell, with a lifetime of choices to make.

I am millions of years of death.

Death?

Yes, all the death through natural selection brought about life. Millions of years of death to get here. Death is my champion, and time and chance are his allies.

Yes, I, the creation, grown in pain because of sin and death, but death was the payment for the wrongs we commit, not a way to advance the world. Yet within me is also evidence of new life. The way I am sustained, the miracle of a tree growing from a tiny seed, all point to my creator, Jesus Christ, the one who stretched out the universe and allowed his human hands to be stretched out and nailed to a cross to pay off that death sentence for me and for you.

It's free for anyone willing to admit their wrongs and believe that he died and rose again. Amazing life, eternal life.

Believe in me and you can have your own way today and die tomorrow, and I will be served. For when you die, there will be no reason for your random existence.

Believe in God and you will find ultimate purpose. The plan he had for you sends the very foundation of the earth because he loves you.

Stop!

Choose me, just accept it, nod your head, agree, then move on. Oh man, I have claimed the lives of so many. Today, you believe in me a little. Tomorrow, you believe in your myth a little less.

No, think.

Don't just believe because everybody else does.

Because if you look, really look,.

At me and the words he revealed, you'll see him. Find him and you will find life, eternal life.

It's your choice.

I call heaven and earth to record this day against you.

That I have set before you.

Life.

And death.

Blessing.

And cursing.

Therefore, choose life that both you and your descendants may live.

I hope, I really hope it makes you think. Is it just me or is Dating Rocks not all it's cracked up to be?

Radiometric Dating and the Age of the Earth

He's late.

Again.

Sorry I am late, Jane.

No problem. Oh, you've been jogging?

Yeah, I'm trying to get down to weight for the wrestling match this weekend.

Okay, well we'd better get studying.

I got one more thing to do. I gotta weigh in.

Right now?

Yes, right now. I gotta get down below 230 before this weekend. Otherwise, I'll get kicked up to the next weight division and have to face Jimmy the Python Peretti.

Jimmy the Python?

Yeah, he got his nickname after he squeezed a kid so hard that he was crawling to class for three days.

Oh yeah, I think I remember that. Poor kid. Don't drink the water.

You'll add water weight.

Oh no, I'll be fine.

Oh no.

What's wrong?

245. 245.

Do you know what that means?

You know what?

You'll be able to get down. Do not worry about it.

By Saturday?

Jimmy the Python, here I come.

I'm sorry, John.

Hey, you know, maybe if you just grease yourself down, you'll just slip right out of his hands.

That's okay.

Let's just get back to studying so I can go work out.

You sure?

Yeah. Okay.

You know, I've been doing a little healthy eating myself.

Well, if you want to get on the scale, be my guest.

In front of you? I don't think so.

All right, all right.

Just offering.

Phone call.

I got to take this one.

Hello, this is John.

Sorry about that. We're working on radiometric dating, right?

Yep, yep.

Yeah.

Radiometric dating.

Jane?

Oh, yeah.

Sure.

I've noticed this is one of the most heated battles, this whole dating issue.

Well, that's because time is at the foundation for everything evolutionary theory teaches. Look, just read this section right here.

Evolution takes a long time. If life is evolved, then Earth must be very fat.

I mean, old.

Yeah, yeah, it says old.

Okay, and down here.

Huh, oh, yeah, yeah.

Geologists now use radioactivity to establish the age of certain rocks and fossils. This kind of data could have shown that the Earth is young.

If that had happened, Darwin's ideas would have been refuted and abandoned. Instead, radioactive dating indicates the Earth is about 4 .5 billion years old. Plenty of time for evolution and natural selection to take place.

Wow, it seems that the foundation of evolutionary theory sure depends on radiometric dating. Radiometric dating is used to support the belief that millions of years exist for evolution to happen.

Yep, and like they said, the entire age of the Earth rests upon radiometric dating. It sure seems that they're putting a lot of faith in something that they can't actually test through direct observation.

After all, plenty of assumptions go into these calculations.

If it were to be disproved, their whole worldview would seem to collapse. Without billions of years, you can't have biological evolution or geological evolution on Earth.

Pretty epic, eh? So, based on their dating methods, they've come up with an age for each section of the geologic column that we find on the very next page.

And based on that, they determine the age of the Earth to be about 4 .5 billion years old.

Actually, the age of the Earth is based on the dating of certain meteorites. They assume these meteorites formed at the same time as the Earth and that dating the meteorites will give us the age of the Earth.

With that as a start, they then construct the ages of the layers in the column based primarily on the layers of volcanic ash and igneous rock.

Cookie, I'm not gonna be

Thanks. Well, so they don't even use rock from Earth. I guess that is another assumption you don't hear about in class. So, for the test, could you remind me about how radiometric dating works?

Sure.

Can you hand me my water bottle?

Wow, this thing's still half-frozen.

Mm-hmm.

Now, pretend the water bottle is a rock.

Jane, what are you doing?

Pretending. It's a rock.

Okay, well, rocks contain radioactive material called the parent element, or isotope, which decays into a non-radioactive stable product known as the daughter element, or isotope.

Okay, I remember now.

So, it's like the ice that slowly melts into the water.

Yeah.

And in the biology book, there's a chart here that shows potassium -40 decaying into argon -40.

Okay, I see. So, based on how we can measure it today, we assume that every 1 .3 billion years, the amount of potassium -40 decreases by half.

Right, a radioactive half-life. So, when they discover a rock, they can measure the amount of parent material and the amount of daughter product, and using a chart like this, determine how old it is.

So, what's wrong with this method?

Well, the methods measure only the amounts of isotopes in the rock. This is good science because it is observable and repeatable. It just gives the ratio of one element to another. But the age is an interpretation of those measurements, not an observation.

And that interpretation assumes answers to all kinds of untested questions. What if the rock already had a daughter isotope in it from the very beginning? Or what if the rock gets contaminated? Or what if the rate of decay was rattled at some point in the past?

What was the original ratio of parent to daughter isotope? One must assume no parent or daughter material was added or removed from the rock, and that the rate of decay has always been constant over millions and millions of years.

Are those assumptions wrong? I mean, if you start with false assumptions, you could get really bad dates.

Well, many scientists think they are, and our textbooks don't even tell us about all the assumptions required to date the rock. But the most convincing evidence is all the crazy dates they get with radioisotope methods.

I wonder if our teacher even knows all the assumptions behind radiometric dating. To be fair, there are lots of dates that agree with one another, but there are many examples of different mineral components of a rock giving very different radiometric dates.

And very often, different isotope systems give different ages for the same rock. So how can you know which one is the right age, if any? And then there are rocks we know the age of, where we watched it cool from lava, that give radically older dates.

Really?

Yeah.

A lava flow in a volcano of the North Island of New Zealand that happened in 1954 was dated to be 3 .5 million years old.

Wow, that's really off.

A volcanic bomb that blew out of Mount Stromboli in Italy in 1963 was dated to 2 .4 million years old.

And that dated much older than it really was.

A 10-year-old rock from Mount St. Helens Lava Dome dated to 350 ,000 years and older.

If we can't trust radiometric dating on rocks that we can see formed, then how can we trust radiometric dating on rocks that we can see formed? Rocks that supposedly formed a million years ago.

I know, right? And there are so many other examples.

Check this out. Okay.

What's this? You carry rocks in your backpack while you're jogging?

Hey, hardcore.

Okay, this rock was taken from the Ono Formation near Redding, California, where millions of sea fossils have been found. This Lower Cretaceous rock is supposed to be about 112 million years old. But the marine fossil stuck inside the mud rock, an ammonite, showed 36 ,000 radiocarbon years.

How can a rock be 112 million years old if it holds a fossil of only 36 ,000 years using a different method?

I wonder if either date is meaningful.

Seems kind of suspicious to me. The evidence isn't seeming too rock solid.

Hmm, funny. Let me see your diamond ring.

You mean my purity ring?

It's got a diamond on it, doesn't it?

Sure, I mean, check it out.

Aren't they brilliant? Hey, at the jewelry store, the science said diamonds take billions of years to form deep beneath the earth.

I doubt that.

Researchers find carbon -14 in diamonds.

Why is that important?

Radiocarbon decays quickly. It has a half-life of only about 5 ,730 years. So its maximum shelf life is only about 100 ,000 years before it becomes undetectable. And it might be impossible to contaminate an old diamond with young carbon.

Wow, so those diamonds must be younger than they think.

So here's the real question. Why aren't any of these examples in our textbook? Well, I should get back to working out and...

What?

This scale is reading an extra 15 pounds on it.

What?

This scale is evil!

Calm down.

It just wasn't calibrated, okay?

See? Okay.

All right, 229.

Safe.

That's kind of like radiometric dating. Maybe everyone's been trusting that it's accurate, but it's been giving them false numbers.

With all the overwhelming evidence that it doesn't work consistently, I'm surprised that they present it with such confidence in our textbooks.

Jane, it goes back to the original quote we read.

In the book.

If they're wrong about dating rocks, then the entire evolutionary theory crumbles to pieces.

That's true. None of us were there to verify the assumptions.

But God has provided a written account of history. And if you tally up all the chronologies and time cues in the Bible, the Earth is about 6 ,000 years old.

So we trust God's word instead of man's fallible dating methods.

It's like it says in Job 38 .4. Where were you when I laid the foundations of the Earth? Tell me if you have understanding.

It's like God saying, you weren't there.

Kind of makes you think, doesn't it? Is it just me, or can things that evolutionists claim take long amounts of time actually happen very quickly?

Continental Drift, Mount St. Helens, and the Flood Model

Jane, Jane.

I got the new case.

I got the heavy duty one. The heaviest duty one on the market. You could roll a truck over this, baby.

I've always wanted to do this.

Hadn't put it on yet.

Had not put it on yet. Oh no.

Oh no.

Oh, you didn't. Oops.

Oh man. What normal person throws a phone?

Well, I never said I was normal. Okay, I'm so sorry.

Puppy dog eyes.

Well, you know, I'm not like upset, upset. I was expecting a call from the scholarship board today. The process takes months, and if they can't contact me, it's just gonna be that much longer.

We can do this. We can fix this. We just have to put the pieces back on the screen and then use the shipping tape to put it all back together.

Not gonna work.

Yes, it will. Yes, it will. Who knew a phone could shatter so completely?

This is a nightmare.

No, it isn't. No, look, we can do this. We can do this. We almost got it done.

Here's Australia.

Okay, look, that can go there. And then look, we already have Africa. North America. Yes, see? Now look, soon enough we'll have Pangea, and then your phone will be able to work.

Pangea? What?

You mean the supercontinent?

Yeah, I was just reading about it for this week's homework.

Let's see.

It was page 162. Now, right here, they believe all the continents were together to form Pangea 225 million years ago.

But not everyone agrees, right?

True.

Thousands of scientists believe in fast continental sprint rather than slow continental drift. One famous scientist by the name of Dr. John Baumgardner created a computer model for plate tectonics that thousands of geophysicists used to investigate Earth processes.

His model has given us an understanding of how the continents split apart thousands, not millions of years ago.

Oh, yeah.

Isn't he the creator of Terra?

Yep.

In 1997, the US News and World Report reported Terra was created by a Los Alamos lab scientist, the world's preeminent expert in the design of computer models for geophysical convection, the process by which the Earth creates volcanoes, earthquakes, and the movement of the continental plates.

Didn't he show that they can also move very quickly?

Right, but because the theory of evolution takes a long period of time to supposedly happen, many only accept uniformitarian ideas.

Uniforma. Who?

Oh, it defines it right here. Geologists make inferences based on the principle of uniformitarianism. This principle states that the same processes that operate today operated in the past.

So they can determine the rate at which a river is currently cutting through a canyon and then use that to determine how old it is?

Correct, but what this principle refuses to take into account is the major catastrophic events of the past. Even many evolutionary geologists are starting to recognize the importance of regional catastrophe.

In understanding the geologic features on Earth.

Oh, I think this might be the scholarship board.

Quick, hand me South America.

Here.

All right, here we go.

Ready?

Done, go.

Please work, please work.

Hello?

Yes, I was calling to let you know your hearing aids are in. What? I said your hearing aids are in.

You've got the wrong number.

So I'm guessing that wasn't the scholarship board?

Nope, I probably missed their call. Now I'm not gonna hear back from them for weeks or months.

Well, at least your phone works.

Okay.

So our textbooks say that rock layers take a long time to form.

Have you heard about Mount St. Helens?

Yeah.

Okay, well, during the 1980s eruptions at Mount St. Helens, 200 layers of rock were deposited in three hours. Entire river systems were carved in a matter of months. Right through 700 feet of hard rock.

Examples like this caused geologists to rethink some of their previous ideas and give biblical creationists great models for the flood of Noah's day.

So imagine what a worldwide flood would do.

Exactly.

So,.

Here it says, these rock layers in the Grand Canyon were laid down over millions of years and were then slowly washed away by the river, forming a channel.

That's uniformitarian thinking again, isn't it?

Yup. If these rock layers took millions of years to form, then the bottom rock layers would be hard and brittle by the time the ones at the top would be deposited. But near Grand Canyon, all the layers are bent together.

If they were bent together while they were hard, snap. The rocks didn't shatter like they should have. They must have been bent together while they were soft and pliable. The whole stack.

That means they were all deposited about the same time, not over millions of years. So what about the canyon itself?

Well, if the river slowly carved the canyon, then we should see all the material piled up in a river delta. But it's completely missing. In fact, about 1 ,000 cubic miles has been eroded to form the Grand Canyon.

Where did it all go?

If the canyon was slowly eroded by the Colorado River, an enormous delta should be found at the mouth of the river where it empties into the Gulf of California. But the delta only contains about 1 of the eroded material.

We would expect if the evolutionary explanation were true.

Unless it was carved by a massive catastrophe, which carried all the material away.

That's what I think. Check out what it says about fossils in our biology book. Even if an organism lives in an environment where fossils can form, the chances are slim that its dead body will be buried in sediment before it decays.

So animals have to be quickly buried in sediment so its cells can be preserved and then replaced by the surrounding minerals. Okay, so check out this fossilized clam.

You have fossilized clams in your purse.

Yeah, they hurt my pocket. Anyway, so what happens to a clam when it dies?

No more homework?

No, they open up and their two shells separate. But this clam was fossilized before it had a chance to fall open or be pulled open by a scavenger. They've also found fossils of a fish coming out of another's mouth.

How quickly did that get fossilized?

Not fast enough.

Or what about a marine reptile caught giving birth?

Awkward.

Yeah, and they found many dinosaur bones with red blood cells, soft tissue, proteins, and even DNA. How quickly would that have to be buried before it deteriorated?

And have it last for 70 million years? There's no way.

But all of these could have been fossilized during the worldwide flood.

Right.

Noah's flood would create many of the rock layers that stretch over entire continents and bury millions of creatures for us to find as fossils today. It doesn't take millions of years to form fossils.

It can happen rapidly under the right conditions.

I guess it all comes down to what it says in 2 Peter chapter three, that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, where is the promise of his coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.

For this, they will willfully forget that by the word of God, the heavens were of old and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water.

They denied the worldwide flood.

Yes, this is John. Really?

Really?

Really?

All right, well, thank you very much. Yeah, I'll talk to you then.

Guess who that was?

That was the scholarship board. Did that go well?

Yes.

Yes!

I got the scholarship. I thought I was gonna have months of paperwork. And I just got it, just like that.

Oh, congratulations, John.

Yeah.

I guess things you think are gonna take a really long time can sometimes happen very rapidly.

Yep. Kind of makes you think, doesn't it? Is it just me, or does the evolutionary story keep changing?

Human Evolution, Ape Men, and the Image of God

John. Hey.

Hey, where'd this truck come from?

Up in the attic.

I was cleaning it out earlier and I found it, and it's got a whole bunch of junk in here, but some of it is actually helping me with our science homework.

Hey, hey, check this out. Oh, man. Oh, was this your grandpa's old yearbook?

Yeah, it must have been.

Look how out of date everyone looks.

Was this really in style back then?

Do you think our kids are gonna look at our yearbooks and say the same things?

Nah.

So, how'd you say this truck helped you?

Well, I'm starting to get the picture on human evolution. This book was published in 1925 by Sir Arthur Keith, and now he was the president of the Royal Anthropological Society of Great Britain.

And the skull?

It was found in 1912. Now, it called Piltdown Man the find of the 20th century. I think it was the New York Times said that it proves the theory of evolution. There were like 500 articles published when they first found this.

Then in 1953, they discovered that the skull was a fake.

Are you serious?

Oh, yeah.

They took chemicals and they aged the skull. They made it look like it was really, really old. And then the jaw is actually from an orangutan, and the guy who discovered it, he actually filed the teeth down and made it look real.

What the heck were scientists thinking?

Have you ever heard of Nebraska Man? Nebraska Man was the first American ape man fossil to be discovered, and Harold Cook found just a tooth.

Huh, bet that made for some news or museum display.

Yeah, well, it was big enough for the New York Times, okay? And then it went viral for back then, and the London News did a whole drawing on it from a single tooth. There's still a picture of him on Wikipedia.

They drew all that based on a tooth?

Yeah, but 10 years later, they discovered out that that tooth was actually from an extinct pig.

No way.

Yeah, so Piltdown Man was the popular proof for evolution for 40 years, and Nebraska Man was the popular proof for 10.

Makes you wonder about what they're teaching us today.

I'm way ahead of you.

Take a look at my little brother's sixth grade history book.

Really, your brother's book?

You have way too much time on your hands. Well, some of these ape men look familiar.

Long-lost relatives of yours?

No, I'm just kidding, but no,.

Because they're in our book as well.

Oh, well, in our book, they say Australopithecus afarensis evolved 3 .8 to 3 million years ago. But in the sixth grade book, Australopithecus evolving four to five million years ago.

Uh-huh.

Now, look at this.

This is an old 1951 Life magazine publication.

According to this, Australopithecus lived a million to 500 ,000 years ago. Wow, that's different by a few million years. These dates are all over the place.

Yeah, well, it gets worse. So this is our biology, the whole biology book.

Okay.

And it shows Homo habilis.

As living 1 .6 to 1 .9 million years ago. But in the sixth grade one, it's 2 .4 million years ago.

So which one's true?

It just depends on which class you're in.

So what I'm wondering is if any of these dates are correct.

It looks like today's truth is just tomorrow's fiction. If you look back at all the textbooks, they're all published at about the same time. Take a look at my little brother's sixth grade book. Now, this book shows all of the popular fossils today.