Evolutionism is far more than just the Darwinian theory of biological development taught in most modern science curriculums. It actually represents an entire system of thinking that has infiltrated every sphere of modern thought and brought with it disastrous consequences. Physical sciences, such as astronomy, chemistry, physics, and geology, use it to explain how the universe arose from a vast sea of nothingness and grew into a self-organized, neatly-structured, and highly-efficient environment suitable for life. Life sciences, like biology, medicine, and pathology, use it to show how life developed over millennia from simple, chemically-directed, unconscious, and amoral amino acids into complex, multi-cellular organisms conscious of themselves, indued with free will, and aware of the inherent moral value of certain choices. But it’s the behavioral sciences, with disciplines like psychology, sociology, and the humanities, as well as politics and law, that have truly demonstrated the awesomely destructive power of an evolutionary worldview. Collectively, these disciplines of study have formed the doctrinal basis for political systems that have brutalized, enslaved and murdered countless billions, economic systems which have stripped and redistributed the native wealth of prosperous territories to distant monarchies, and have been the catalyst for social systems that have seduced even the most civilized nations into total anarchy.
In order to understand evolutionism one must first understand the two basic types of evolution: micro and macro. Microevolution is the idea of random changes or adaptations within a species or small group of organisms that occurs over a relatively short period of time (geologically or astronomically speaking). Whereas macroevolution, from a modern perspective, is the idea that directed changes guided by natural selection or some other means are used to produce large developmental changes on a taxonomic level over immensely long periods of time. Simply put, the idea of macroevolution, which is evolutionary thinking applied to whole families of species in order to describe their beginnings was used as the basis rationale behind the modern scientific idea of biogenesis. Theories of biogenesis based on macroevolution were developed in order to describe the beginnings of everything: plants, animals, the earth, the universe, the laws of physics, even life itself. Therefore, the modern concept of macroevolution, is really a theory on the beginnings of things (biogenesis), and when biogenesis is applied to the entire spectrum of scientific study (the physical, behavioral, and life sciences), it becomes evolutionism. This would make evolutionism the idealogical anthesis of creationism, which means the idea of evolutionism is fundamentally antithetical to the biblically established fact of creationism.
As a discipline, science remains one of the most scared means of which we were gifted in order to understand not only our world, but our creator. This gift works best when practiced in humility. Such humility would often recognize the ever increasing yet infinitesimally limited scope of understanding we humans posses, and as such any principle given the weight of law was done so with the carefullest of considerations that any new discovery could potentially refute what we thought we knew as an irrefutable law. Take the laws of physics; they are considered by many in the scientific community to be infallible, yet they are not. However, until proven otherwise , they permitted to maintain their title of “Law” and their clout among the scientific community. A theory on the other hand no matter how sound, established or evident it may seem, is not required to to meet the strict guidelines or continuity of a law. The problem with evolutionism is that it spits in face of the very laws its attempting to explain.
Consider thermodynamics. The first law of thermodynamics states that energy cannot create or destroy itself, thus it demands that our universe, because it exists, must come from a non physical or supernatural origin. Evolution offers no first cause for our existence, and boasts that life as we know it could have only originated by a countless number of “chance” happenings. Furthermore, evolution claims to bring order from entropy (chaos), which is the exact opposite of the entropic principles found in the second law of thermodynamics. This principle states that in a closed system entropy or chaos always increases. That means that on a universal level, when a closed system (a system left alone and not influenced by outside sources) is left uninterrupted, it never moves from a state of order to increased order but rather moves from a state of order to a state of disorder. That means that when things are left alone they tend to decay or devolve, not get better or evolve. And that is exactly what we see in everyday life. Leave a house alone and comeback in a year. Provided no one enters the house or does anything to it, when you come back will you find it neatly swept and still in order, or will it be dusty, maybe a bit smelly, perhaps even have a shutter falling down or something. The answer’s obvious. When things are left alone, they decay not improve. Such is the case with the entire natural world around us; a world governed to a large degree, by the laws of nature.
It’s hard to believe that any theory could rise to such popularity when defying the laws we already know govern our physical existence. That is until we see the intentionality of the lies. There have been many attempts to secure evolutionism’s place in our culture. Doctor Henry Morris discusses many of these falsified studies, (like the Piltdown Man, as well as many other paleoanthropological hoaxes) in his book, The Long War Against God. There are many documented deceptions from mere lies and omissions of truth to outright fabricated evidences, all to validate evolutionism. Why is such deliberate dishonesty needed to prove what scientists claim is such an obvious and indisputable truth? Could it be that there’s more than we are being told and that what is being marketed as a law is at best a theory and a false one at that. We think so. Unfortunately, evolutionism, replete with its logical fallacies, factual omissions, and evidential obfuscations, has not only been adopted as the foundation of academic understanding, but it’s broken the bounds of the biological sciences and “evolved” to become the de facto religion of the United States.
Evolutionism’s primary aim is to attack the biblically founded and factually evident claim of supernatural origin – namely creationism. Evolutionism tells us we weren’t made supernaturally, but over billions of years; a mindless, faceless, heartless force changed monkey into man, culturally killing God’s divine order. Friedrich Nietzsche is recognized for his astute assessment that if “god is dead” then man must find a new way of being. That is, man has to redefine his code of ethics, purpose and position in a world now devoid of supreme order. Social Darwinism, Eugenics, Humanism, Transhumanism, Scientific Naturalism, Hedonism, Postmodernism and a plethora of, current but not new, ideologies can be found suckling from the lucifereian teat of evolutionism. We don’t need to look very far in order to see the fruit of these movements: the Third Reich, the millions killed by Stalin, Mao, Hussein and the like, the brutal slavery across the world and the hundreds of thousands of unborn children, legally murdered every year in the US alone. People like to abhor and vilify religion because of the atrocities done in its name. However these same people tend to forget that the bloodiest centuries owe their crimson tide to not just the name but the teaching of evolutionism. All this mass evil has been justified by the claim that there is no higher power, supreme order or sovereign moral law to submit to. How does the world claim to know there is no such law? Argumentum ad Ignorantiam, or an appeal to ignorance; it’s the fallacy that because there is no scientific proof of God’s existence, then He must not exist. Too often this is exactly what we see: a manipulation of science and logic in order to force it to fit a larger narrative; an agenda to secure, define, and maintain control over truth – and that’s not scientific at all.