Case-Making 101: Is Darwinian evolution’s answer to the origin of life based on blind faith?

I have heard it said that many intelligent people believe in evolution as a means for the origin of life because other intelligent people believe in evolution as a means for the origin of life. Is this intelligence or blind faith? I’m glad that many of us unintelligent types are questioning the lack of evidence and incoherence in Darwinian evolution and maybe the “Emperor of evolution” will finally be told by more than one person that he is not wearing any clothes!

There has been so much evidence presented against Darwinian evolution as a means for the origin of complex life that even those in the science community who say they are not religious are taking note and jumping off the Darwinian view that all life has evolved over eons of time from non-living chemicals to the complex life forms we see today. Given the avalanche of evidence from modern day genetics and cosmology it is becoming more and more clear that something else has been going on. In my view, most who are unwilling to accept this evidence are so tied to the idea of evolution (financially or emotionally) that they cannot bring themselves to be objective, which is exactly what they say about those who are on the other side.


Who was Darwin and what is his theory of evolution?

In the mid 1800’s Charles Darwin, an English Naturalist, took the idea of evolution and wrote books called The Origin of Species and Descent of Man. In these books Darwin used his studies from a one time visit to the Galapagos Islands and made an assumption that the observable changes he saw within species, such as variations in finch beak size, was the mechanism that caused one kind of living thing to evolve into another. From this he developed a theory of the origin of all species, including humans. This theory takes an awful leap of faith from the observable microevolution (changes within species or kinds) to the unobservable and nonexistent macroevolution (a change from one species or kind into another). Sadly this is the only theory that is allowed to be taught in our public schools today.

Watch this 5 minute preview clip to Illustra Media’s Intelligent Design collection:

What evidence is there against Darwinian Evolution?

Last week we identified the mistake that is often made in terminology between microevolution and macroevolution and how most people understand evolution as an umbrella term for origin of life. However, there is absolutely no evidence of transition from the observable microevolution to the unobservable macroevolution of species. It is a theory touted as fact but in reality it is a philosophical presupposition.

Phillip Johnson, U.C. Berkley Law Professor and Author of “Darwin on Trail” has said, “Darwinism is based on an ‘a priori [prior] commitment to materialism, not on a philosophically neutral assessment of the evidence. Separate the philosophy from the science, and the proud tower collapses.” 

Evolutionary Biologist and Harvard Professor Richard Lewontin admits, “We take the side of science in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises…because we have a prior commitment to materialism…Moreover that materialism is absolute for we cannot allow a divine foot in the door.”

Michael Ruse, (Ardent evolutionist and ex Christian) Professor of Philosophy and Zoology at the University of Gwelth in Canada has said… “Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than a mere science. Evolutions is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality…Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning and it is true of evolution still today.”

When I read Molecular Biologist Dr. Jonathan Wells’ “Icons of Evolution I was astonished and I felt cheated. If Wells and other reputable scientist have shown that there is deception in the textbooks and evidence that contradicts evolution why are we as public school science teachers not allowed to present that information?

What are icons of evolution?

Icons of evolution are the visual representations that symbolize evolution, usually as a means for the origin of human life, and most people assume these icons are true. Here are just a just a few of the false icons that are embedded in our public school curriculums:

  • Haeckel’s embryos: Ernst Haeckel, in the late 1860’s, drew embryos of different animals and a human to demonstrate that all living things evolved from a common evolutionary ancestor. His drawings (not real pictures) showed almost identical embryos at their earliest stages—fish, salamander, turtle, chicken, rabbit and human. In reality Haeckel altered (faked) these drawings. The actual embryos of the earliest stages are significantly different, yet these drawings are still being used. Ardent evolutionists will defend this by saying that it is ‘an easy way to describe how evolution works’ [what they believe to be true] even though the drawings are inaccurate.

Haekel's Embryos

  • Darwin’s Finches: Charles Darwin, from his one time trip to the Galapagos Islands, theorized that the changes he observed in the size and length of finch beaks were evidence of evolution. He never returned to the island for further study and today we know, depending on the climate, that some years the birds with longer beaks thrive and other years birds with shorter beaks do fine. The beaks fluctuate in size but there is no evidence of evolutionary change over time. Most importantly, there is no evidence of change from a finch to another kind of animal. THEY ALWAYS REMAIN BIRDS
  • Antibiotic resistant bacteria: Evolutionists cite certain types of bacteria that become antibiotic resistant over time. Rapid change in these bacteria can be observed but even after the changes they are still bacteria. There is no evidence of change from bacteria to other kinds of organisms. THEY ALWAYS REMAIN BACTERIA
  • Fruit flies: Two winged fruit flies reproduce and die very quickly so when mutations occur, such as those that result in four winged flies, Evolutionists will cite this as evidence for evolutionary transition. However, the four wings become a detriment to the fly and according to evolutions’ own premise of ‘survival of the fittest’ and they do not thrive and soon die out. The four winged fly is also a human manipulation in a lab so it defeats itself in claiming a naturalistic method of evolution. Most importantly after observation of hundreds of generations there is still no transition to another kind of organism, they are still flies. THEY ALWAYS REMAIN FLIES
  • Homologous structures: Evolutionists will cite similarity in body plans (like bone structure in hands, paws, fins and wings) as evidence of common ancestry. Instead this can be seen as the best possible design for functionality and survivability. A common designer with a perfect body plan for all living things better answers the question of homology than evolutionary speculation that has no evidence in the fossil record. None of these have transitioned to another kind of organism.
  • The tree of life: This chart is found in almost every science classroom and it shows life evolving from one common ancestor, a single cell in a primordial fluid. From this cell it branches out like a tree into the different kinds of life we see today. If this is true then there should be abundant transitional forms found in the fossil record but the earliest fossils found to date show complete body plans that match what we see today. Where are the transitional forms? Instead we find groups of organisms that do not transition to other kinds.
  • The assent of man chart: This chart  shows a series of imposed pictures of primates representing human evolution from a knuckle-walking ancestor to a modern man. William Huxley’s well-known version of this icon is in fact a copy of skeletons from a modern day Gibbon, Orangutan, Chimpanzee, Gorilla and then a man. These are not transitional forms but apes still with us today. The visual representation implies transition but again there is no evidence in the fossil record. Biochemist Dr. Fazale Rana, professor of Human Origins, regularly gives his students an assignment to go out and bring back fossil evidence of human evolution. Every student comes back empty handed because the physical evidence is non-existent. The things they find are, in reality, fossils of apes or humans, or humans with bone disease such as arthritis.

The few incomplete fossils that evolutionists tout as transitional, like ‘Lucy,’ are not available because they are behind lock and key, Why? There is only a replica available to view in places like the Smithsonian.

In fact, the few bones that make up Lucy have more chimp-like characteristics than human, and the couple of lower limb bones were found in another site and then put together with the others.


“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever! In explaining evolution we do not have one iota of fact.”  -Dr. Newton Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission

Watch this 52 minute movie-documentary called “Icons of Evolution” that provides some startling evidence against evolution’s most famous icons. This video also tells a story of one High School Biology Teacher who attempted to present this evidence and the tragedy that followed.

Charles Darwin, said this about his own theory:  “Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory.”

Darwin also admitted:  “If it should be determined that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”

As we now have available to us, through the abundance of evidence from modern science and technology, Darwin’s theory does absolutely break down.

Join us next week as we continue our investigation of Darwinian Evolution by looking at 12 major problems that evolution cannot answer, but intelligent design can.


You will not find this material in the public school curriculum even though it is based on solid evidence and grounded in research. It is ironic that following the evidence to where it leads stops at the door of our public schools as they will not let a “Divine footprint” in! Join us as we examine evidence for Christianity and learn how to become a thoughtful defender and ambassador of your faith.

Click into the resource page of this website to view many of the top Christian thinkers and apologists along with some of their work; connecting to these types of resources is essential in your Christian growth.

Please let me know what you think: Give feedback, ask questions or send concerns in the comment section of the blog.

Teri Dugan

2 Responses to Case-Making 101: Is Darwinian evolution’s answer to the origin of life based on blind faith?