Is Micro or Macro Evolution a Fact?

There are two kinds of evolution. One is change within a particular type of organism; the other is change from one organism to another. One is micro-evolution or adaptation: changes in size, color, type of food, type of environment, type of shelter, length or amount of hair/fur, type of sounds they make, their particular temperament. The other is Macro-evolution or Darwinian atheistic, or Theistic Evolution.
Atheists, Agnostics, and Liberal compromising Christians who believe in man’s speculation over God’s Word believe in Macro evolution. Most Christians who believe God’s Word literally believe in Micro-evolution, but NOT macro-evolution.
Micro-evolution can be demonstrated and observed. It is called breeding, and was used by Darwin to ’prove’ his speculation was true.
Examples of Micro-Evolution



Notice something odd? What is common for all these variations when considering all the species on earth? These are all caused by man's breeding. Man meddling with nature.  None of these are natural. And breeding is not evolution, it is created by man. And intelligent design.
Macro-evolution cannot be observed, so secular scientists claim micro-evolutionary changes lead to unlimited changes over millions of years. But they neglect to explain that micro-evolution only causes changes in a specific kind and has a limit which prevents it from producing offspring. And it is a loss of genetic information (evolution requires an increase of information) that causes natural selection to cause it to go extinct, or revert back to the original kind. Darwin’s Finch produced changes based on the food supply and weather conditions, then this change reverts back to the original design with no changes.
Also the loss of genetic information due to mutations (which are always destructive) slowly causes the organism to become extinct. To say there are good mutations is like saying an accident caused you to buy a better vehicle, the point is it is based on a creative act in response to a bad event. 
Macro-evolution cannot be observed, so they claim the fossils in the geologic column illustrate these assumed changes. Once again assuming sedimentary rock forms slowly over millions of years, another thing that cannot be observed.
What we do observe is sudden changes in flat layered rock that gives no evidence of being a surface with valleys, hills and mountains. Then there are the paraconformaties where supposed millions of years of strata are missing leaving no evidence that there was a gap here.
Paraconfomities at the Grand Canyon

List of sedimentary problems that falsifies long ages with proof:
  N.D. Newell, in the 1984 issue of the Princeton University Press, made a very interesting and revealing comment concerning this paraconformity phenomenon: 
 "A puzzling characteristic of the erathem boundaries and of many other major biostratigraphic boundaries [boundaries between differing fossil assemblages] is the general lack of physical evidence of subaerial exposure. Traces of deep leaching, scour, channeling, and residual gravels tend to be lacking, even where the underlying rocks are cherty limestones (Newell, 1967b). These boundaries are paraconformities that are usually identifiable only by paleontological [fossil] evidence." (Jeremy: These can be explained by changes in the direction of tidal impacts from the ocean during the worldwide Flood)
Newell noted in an earlier paper that, "A remarkable aspect of paraconformities in limestone sequences is general lack of evidence of leaching of the undersurface. Residual sods and karst (Jeremy: These limestone layers form caves today, proving these strata were always under water during their deposition, which were eroded into caves after the Flood. When the water table dropped below these layers.) surfaces that might be expected to result from long subaerial exposure are lacking or unrecognized. . . The origin of paraconformities is uncertain, and I certainly do not have a simple solution to this problem."
 Also, in a 1981 publication of the Journal Nature, T. H. Van Andel commented:
 "I was much influenced early in my career by the recognition that two thin coal seams in Venezuela, separated by a foot of grey clay and deposited in a coastal swamp, were respectively of Lower Palaeocene and Upper Eocene age. The outcrops were excellent but even the closest inspection failed to turn up the precise position of that 15 Myr gap.”
Examples of Unconformaties

Some strata have rough unconformities between them, shows the sediment was laid down flat, then tilted and eroded and covered by flat sediment. 
The worldwide Flood produced the Great Unconformity between the PreFlood tilted granite bedrock, and the flat sedimentary rock above it. 
Some flat strata are curved up and down by being compressed while they were still soft mud, lime, or sand. Some surfaces even have pristine fossil trackways in them which would be destroyed within hours or days.
Flat strata folded while it was soft sediment which turned to rock within days. And fossil Trackways on surfaces which had to be covered by volcanic ash or mud within hours which hardened into rock within months.
 Many fossils are often out of evolutionary order, and there are no complete lineages illustrating change from one organism to another (missing links) we must assume it is a fact, because science can only accept natural causes (natural history, taking God out of HisStory), everything else is blind faith or superstition according to them. If you cannot see it, smell it, and touch it – it cannot exist! This is atheistic materialistic dogma!
The facts of sedimentation and fossils falsify this speculation. Paleontology and geology show that the evolutionary lineages like the horse evolution series are found out of order, and some extinct ‘horses’ are found together with modern horses and other supposed ancestors. And the speculation of horse evolution goes from the four toed ‘horse’ to three, to two, to one. This cannot be, evolution does not go from many to one. Also some of these ‘horses’ are not horses. They were chosen because they resembled a horse. Also, some ancestors had more ribs than their descendants - this is devolution. Like the dawn horse, Hyrcotherium which is a hyrax, a rodent not a horse. The San Diego zoo says they are relatives of the elephant! The hyrax or Rock Cooney not only did not evolve it is still alive.
Horse Evolution due to selective placing of fossils. Notice they used a fossil Rock Cooney and reconstructed it to look horselike.

Rock Cooney, Hyrax or Hyracotherium. It has feet to climb on rocks. And even its teeth are not like a horse.
 Dr. Niles Eldredge, a curator at the American Museum in New York, where "evolution of the horse" diagrams were on public display at that time on the ground floor of the museum, said the following about the exhibition:
“There have been an awful lot of stories, some more imaginative than others, about what the nature of that history [of life] really is. (Jeremy: Assuming it happened at all) The most famous example, still on exhibit downstairs, is the exhibit on horse evolution prepared perhaps fifty years ago. That has been presented as the literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now I think that is lamentable, particularly when the people who propose those kinds of stories may themselves be aware of the speculative nature of some of that stuff.”
Here is the imaginative reconstruction of horse evolution based on evolutionary assumptions..


Most creation scientists support Micro-evolution, but not macro-evolution. Those who support Macro-evolution believe in both, and they use evidence for micro-evolution as proof of macro-evolution.
Marco-evolution shows a lack of evidence for a common ancestor for any organism. And missing links are not the only problem, there should be whole chains of links for everything. But there are none. Fossils are either almost identical to living things, or they are extinct. In fact many are larger than today’s organisms, when they should be smaller. There are no series of organisms outside of artistic drawings based on evolutionary imagination picked at random from similar appearing organisms and faith in the goddess Mother Nature and Cronos the Pagan god of time.
The speculation of natural scientists has been proven false. And my research supports the conclusion that creation scientists’ belief in Micro-evolution is also false. There is no common ancestor for any organism for Macro-evolution or Micro-evolution in nature. The only Micro-evolution that has occurred was by man’s breeding, by mixing different organisms that have similar genetics. Some of these produce offspring that cannot reproduce because they are an un-natural hybrid!
I became aware of this Micro-evolution fallacy when I recalled that I had found a Miocene fossil fan palm leaf and that it was identical to the living palm right down to the structure of the leaf. Then I thought about all the different kinds of palms there are. Did all these come from a common ancestor? Then how come the fossil has not shown any changes? Evolutionists claim many millions of years since the Miocene. Even creationists know that the Pleistocene was about 4 thousand years ago. That should be enough time to cause some changes. But no the fan palm is still a fan palm.
Fan Palm as compared to other palms. Do you think all these came from one kind of palm and spiceated?







Now look at birds. Do all birds come from one common ancestor? And all the birds today are descendants of one kind of bird? This would be ridiculous. Birds tend to flock together with their own kind. Some build nests on the ground, some in trees, some in holes in rocks, some are carnivorous/scavengers, some are herbivores.

Consider ants. Did they all come from one common ant and all the different kinds today were created by speciation? Some ants live in the ground, others live in mounds, others in wood, some sting, some do not, some invade houses, others do not, they are different sizes, some are red, some black, some black and red, some are ringed black and brown. Ants don't mix with other ants. The small black ants attack and kill large red fire ants, they don't mate with them.
. Do they have a common ancestor?











Now let's compare fossil ants in amber (tree sap) found in dinosaur strata. Where is the Macro or Micro evolution?
These ants in amber start during the middle Cretaceous when dinosaurs roamed and are assumed to be 90 million to 50 million years old.  Most are found in the last part of the Cretaceous strata. Creationists date this to the Flood in 2348 BC





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

101 Pieces of Evidence Earth is Young

Secular Scientists Prove Evolution False

Knights Templars and the Grail Treasure