TODAY whoever promotes it claims the theory of evolution is a fact. However, to what extent do the statements you make so often make sense? Consider the following.
The silk produced by spiders is one of the toughest materials known. According to the New Scientist, "any fiber can stretch 40% of its length and absorb 100 times more energy than steel without breaking". How is this extraordinary silk made? A viscous liquid, a protein, passes through tiny tubes in the spider's body, and the liquid turns into a solid wire that reorganizes its protein molecules, says Encyclopædia Britannica.
New Scientist sums up: "The spider has developed techniques that go far beyond those of the most experienced chemists." Is it conceivable that the spider developed such a complex manufacturing technique that humans have not yet understood it?
An article in the Wall Street Journal by Phillip E. Johnson, a law professor at the University of California, notes that evidence of evolution is lacking, but those who support it often ridicule those who question it. The article comments, "The theory of evolution has serious problems with the evidence, but its proponents do not want an honest debate that can undermine their view of the world."
Another example showing the lack of logic in evolutionary thinking concerns plants. Scientists doing research in Morocco have discovered 150 fossils of archaeopters, "the closest relatives to date of the first seed plants, ancestors of most modern trees," explains the London Daily Telegraph. The magazine's science editor says the plant "helped shape the modern world by inventing leaves and twigs". "Inventing" is "designing thinking". Does it make sense to give a plant the ability to think and invent?
Solomon, one of the wisest men, advises us to "watch our thinking ability", to think for ourselves. The need to do this has never been greater.
I love the information in this article