ADULLAM FILMS

“O Timothy, keep that which is committed

to thy trust, avoiding … oppositions of science

falsely so called …” (1Timothy 6:20)

Through the 20^th century, certain men have gone to every extreme, no matter how unbelievable, to prove that Darwin’s “theory” is scientific fact.  Nevertheless, the missing link, while often counterfeited, has never been found.  Yet because there have been so many phony links, people have actually begun to believe that the necessary proof exists. 

Modern media often refers to the creation/evolution debate as a conflict between “science and religion.”  In fact, there is no science to support evolution.  The word science refers to knowledge gained through observation.  A scientist (through experimentation) observes events as they happen, and then chronicles the details of those events.  In a nutshell, that is science.  With this in mind, it is worth noting that no one has ever observed a tiny dot explode and produce solar systems (i.e. the big bang theory).  In addition, no one has ever seen birds give birth to alligators or monkeys give birth to men.  The evolutionist has faith that these things happened, but he has not seen them and neither does he have any way of proving them.  Therefore, the Evolution vs. Creation debate is not a matter of science vs. religion – but rather, religion vs. religion. 

A DEADLY BELIEF

It is important to realize that the theory of evolution is not simply that man evolved from apes, but that man evolved from everything.  According to Darwin, all living creatures have a common origin.  Men, monkeys and bananas share the same ancestry.  As such, when a man eats a banana he is engaging in a kind of cannibalism, consuming an ancestral version of his former self.  Yet he consumes the banana so that he might survive.  He feels no guilt about using the banana for his own benefit.  He will not phone the authorities and report that a crime has been committed, in that he killed the banana and ate it.  Neither will he feel guilt over killing a cockroach he finds in his kitchen cupboard.  The cockroach by its very presence imposes upon the atmosphere he desires to create for himself.  Yet the cockroach, like the banana, is his ancient ancestor.  So, why does he feel no guilt in destroying the cockroach?  Or the rat?  Or the termite – all of which threaten the “perfect” environment he seeks to establish?  The full title of Darwin’s theory provides us with a clue: Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life.

Man, as the highest link in the Darwinian food chain, claims the right to make use of, kill, or destroy lower life forms for the benefit of his own existence.  Man determines which life forms are beneath him, and then uses them for his benefit.  Horses and donkeys may be subject to labor on man’s behalf; cattle and fish may be killed and eaten for his appetite; while rats and cockroaches can be destroyed for his convenience.  Once these principles are understood, a person can begin to understand how the evolutionist, Adolf Hitler could say:

“I have the right to exterminate millions of

people that multiply like so many vermin upon

 the earth.” – Adolf Hitler

Hitler’s concept of the Aryan (exalted or noble) race represented the highest point of the evolutionary pyramid, and all races that fell beneath the Aryan standard were fair game for removal (i.e., extermination).  This is why Hitler equated Jews with rats and termites.  In fact, the Zyklon-B gas used to murder Jews in the showers of Auschwitz was originally a pesticide developed to kill insects.  This is also why the Nazis used Jewish skin, bones and teeth to make lamp shades and brush handles – because killing a Jew was deemed no different than killing a cow, cutting down a tree, or picking cotton from a field – according to Darwinian philosophy.  Darwin’s “struggle” for life seems to have been the theme of Hitler’s famous work – Mein Kampf (i.e. My Struggle).  His struggle was the preservation of the Aryan race, the favored race according to Hitler. 

Some people coming out of Communist countries tell of how the Communists used evolution in schools to remove the consciousness of God from the minds of the people.  Evolution removes the authority of God, and makes man his own god – accountable to no one but himself.  In Communist countries, Marxist Atheism is the rule and the state is the supreme authority.  Yet according to The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression (first published in 1997), some 94 million people were mass murdered in the 20^th century by this atheist form of government.  That’s more than all the people killed through the Crusades and the Inquisitions combined.  Keep that in mind the next time your atheist friend tells you about the “evils” of religion in government.  Also remember that evolution is the cornerstone of both atheism and the occult. 

Our articles under “Darwin Debunked” will attempt to provide information for those trying to understand why the evolution debate is so important to defending the gospel – and for the preservation of human life.

MODERN SCIENCE BETRAYED

Sir Francis Bacon is known as the father of the modern scientific method.  It was Bacon who introduced the fundamental precepts of gathering evidence and then drawing a conclusion about that evidence based upon observation – rather than preconceived superstitions or theories.  But one must wonder why Bacon is such a little taught figure in today’s school system.  Creation-science author Ian Taylor comments:

“There was a time when every schoolboy

used to know who Francis Bacon was and

what he contributed – and it was the

method of science.”

Why is it that students today are not taught much, if anything, about Sir Francis Bacon?  Possibly because his scientific method, if rightly employed, would completely debunk the theory of evolution as a false and unscientific belief.  Through the last two centuries, the subject has been driven by Darwinian philosophy and anti-Biblical bias rather than sober, scientific examination.  Charles Darwin published his controversial, Origin of the Species in 1859.  Then, afterward, the scientific community went about trying to find evidence to support his assertions.  While Bacon’s method certainly allowed for a “working hypothesis,” that hypothesis was to be subject to experiments designed to “test” the idea.  Ian Taylor explains:

“For example, by observation the human senses

may tell us that heavier objects fall more rapidly

than lighter objects.  To test this hypothesis, the

simplest experiment would be to let two dissimilar

objects fall at the same time from a tall tower

and see which one reaches the ground first.  In

fact, both objects would reach the ground at the

same time unless one happens to be, for

example, a feather, in which case another more

elaborate experiment would be required to

remove the effect of the air.  From such an

experiment the theory of gravitation was derived,

and, after no exceptions could be found, the

theory was declared to be a universal law.”

(Ian Taylor, In the Minds of Men, pg. 27)

Today, more and more scientists admit that every reasonable test or investigation to prove Darwin’s theory has failed.  Nevertheless, the world charges forward teaching our children that the evolution of mankind over millions (and billions) of years is as proven as gravity itself.  This notion is taken for granted by every major information resource (i.e. schools, universities, National Geographic, History Channel, Discovery, etc.,) that teaches the history of mankind from a “scientific” perspective.  Sir Fred Hoyle was the man responsible for coining the phrase “the big bang.”  Few people today know that was actually mocking the idea that life began with an explosion billions of years ago.  Hoyle declared that:

“… the general scientific world has been

bamboozled into believing that evolution has

been proved. Nothing could be further from

the truth …” (Theory of Evolution, Fact or

Fairy Tale, by Dr. Samuel L. Blumenfeld)

Hoyle went on to say that the truth is recognized by some, who, fearful of persecution still refuse to expose the Darwinian lie:

“This situation is well known to geneticists and yet

nobody seems to blow the whistle decisively on the

theory … Most scientists still cling to Darwinism

because of its grip on the educational system …

You either have to believe the concepts, or … be

branded a heretic.” (Dave Hunt, Occult Invasion,

pg. 30)

Serious scientists, like biochemistry professor, Michael J. Behe (author of Darwin’s Black Box) presents staggering evidence of the mathematical impossibilities that destroy the evolutionary model.  Behe writes that, “… highly sophisticated molecular machines control every cellular process.  Thus the details of life are finely calibrated, and the machinery of life enormously complex.” (Darwin’s Black Box, pg. 5)

Darwin himself admitted that: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”  In Darwin’s day, man’s abilities did not yet allow him to examine life at the level of single cells and cell structures.  But if modern science has proved anything, it is that Darwin’s philosophy of the origin of life is refuted by the standard of its author.  If Darwin were alive today, he would have to admit that the building blocks of life are far too complex for his theory to be true.

Yet not all scientists are completely duped and fearful.  There are (and have been) many scientists who have openly rejected Darwinism, as Michael Behe explains:

“Over the past 130 years Darwinism, although

securely entrenched, has met a steady stream

of dissent both from within the scientific community

and from without it.” (Behe, pg. 26)

Meanwhile, author Dave Hunt writes:

“Australian biologist Michael Denton, an agnostic and

former evolutionist, and author of Evolution: A Theory

in Crisis, says science has so thoroughly discredited

Darwinian evolution that it should be discarded.

Mathematics professor Wolfgang Smith says evolution

is a ‘metaphysical myth … totally bereft of scientific

sanction.” (Hunt, Occult Invasion, pgs. 26-27)

Perhaps the most telling expose is given by evolutionist Colin Patterson, the Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History.  The following is an abbreviated version of his now-famous speech at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, November 5, 1981:

“One of the reasons I started taking this anti-evolutionary
view, or let's call it a non- evolutionary view, was last
year I had a sudden realization for over twenty years
I had thought I was working on evolution in some way.
One morning I woke up and something had happened in
the night and it struck me that I had been working on
this stuff for twenty years and there was not one thing
I knew about it. That's quite a shock to learn that one
can be so misled so long. Either there was something
wrong with me or there was something wrong with
evolutionary theory. Naturally, I know there is nothing
wrong with me, so for the last few weeks I've tried
putting a simple question to various people and groups
of people.”

Patterson continued with his revealing question that met with an equally revealing response in New York:

“Question is: Can you tell me anything you know
about evolution, any one thing, that is true? I tried
that questionon the geology staff at the Field Museum
of Natural Historyand the only answer I got was silence.
I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology
Seminar in the University of Chicago, a very prestigious
body of evolutionists,and all I got there was silence for
a long time and eventually one person said, "I do know
one thing - it ought not to be taught in high school."
(Source: Stephen E. Jones/Creation Evolution Articles)

Next, Patterson goes on to admit what may be the clearest evidence against teaching evolution in our schools, and forcing the American taxpayer to finance it.  He actually admits that for him and probably many of his fellow scientists (in America) evolution is not science at all.  It is in reality a matter of faith:

“Now I think many people in this room would
acknowledgethat during the last few years,
if you had thought about it at all, you've
experienced a shift from evolution as
knowledge to evolution as faith. I know that's
true of me, and I think it's true of a good many
of you in here." (Source: Can You Tell Me Anything
About Evolution? audio CD transcript from ARN)

Patterson’s quote proves perhaps more than any other, that Darwinian philosophy is a matter of faith, not science.  In his lifetime, Darwin himself once admitted to preaching “the Devil’s gospel.”  Is it possible he knew more about what he was doing than is often supposed?

SEEDS OF DECEPTION

“Seldom has an assertion like that of Haeckel’s

‘theory of recapitulation’ … done so much harm

to science …”  (Sir Gavin de Beer, British Natural

History Museum, 1958)

In 1866, shortly after the publication of Origin of the Species, a German scientist named Erst Haeckel developed his Biogenetic Law (or theory of recapitulation), which suggested that certain embryos begin in a common state where they are identical.  The theory declared that human embryos begin with “organs which are leftovers from evolutionary ancestors” including “a yolk sack like a chicken, a tail like a lizard, and gill slits like a fish!”¹ Then as their growth proceeds they develop individual characteristics.  Haeckel developed his theory into a series of woodcuts that showed the progression, with a human embryo presented alongside those of a pig, a bull, and a rabbit.  This now nefarious diagram was widely accepted as proof of evolution, and supported the notion that all living things share a common origin.  This embryonic association had been presented by Darwin in the thirteenth chapter of Origin:

“The community in the embryonic structure

reveals community of descent …”

(Source: Taylor, In the Minds of Men, p. 275

quoting Darwin, p. 449)

In fact, Darwin and his “chief apostle” T.H. Huxley had capitalized on the idea of illustrating this concept some time before:

“Well aware that a good picture is worth a
thousand words, Huxley included a pair of
reasonably accurate drawings of the embryos
of dog and man to show their similarities in his
essay On the Relations of Man to the Lower Animals,
in 1863.  Darwin used these same compelling
drawings in his Descent of Man, in 1871. Haeckel,
in Germany, seized upon Darwin’s notion

of recapitulation together with the idea of Huxley’s

illustration, and announced Biogenetic Law …”

(Taylor, In the Minds of Men, p. 275)

Haeckel’s diagram was, as you would expect, embraced by Darwin and his supporters:

“It was an enormously influential idea, utilized
by both Darwin and Huxley, who were impressed
with Haeckel's detailed illustrations comparing
embryonic development in various animals and man.
In their earlier stages, according to Haeckel's drawings,
pigeons, dogs, and humans looked identical."²

Haeckel published his charts in a number of books including Natural History of Creation which appeared in 1868.  That same year, a German professor of zoology and comparative anatomy named L. Rutimeyer published an article (titled Referate) which was first presented in the German publication Archiv fur Anthropologie (Archives of Anthropology), and exposed the obvious flaws in Haeckel’s work. Rutimeyer not only exposed the errors, but clearly suggests they are not by mere accident:

“There is considerable manufacturing of
scientific evidence perpetrated. Yet the
author has been very careful not to let
the reader become aware of this state of
affairs.” ³

Wilhelm His, Sr. was a highly respected German embryologist who also exposed the Haeckel deception.  In a series of letters that would later be published, His, Sr. detailed his arguments against Haeckel’s diagrams, also maintaining that such errors were intentional and without excuse:

“Mr. His explained, in detail, the extent of the
fake woodcuts and the false claims in the
accompanying text ....He also pointed out that
Haeckel was a professor at the University of Jena,
which was noted for having excellent optical facilities.
Thus, according to His, there was no excuse for
these fraudulent productions. His concluded by
denouncing Haeckel as a fraud, and henceforth
as eliminated from the ranks of scientific research
as a worker.”⁴

Despite the clear refutation of Hackle’s diagrams, they continue to appear in school science books today – as proof of evolution!

Notes on “Seeds of Deception”

1. Creation Science Facts, online article titled, “Recapitulation”
2. Creation Science Facts, onlilne article titled, “Haeckel’s Fraudulent Charts” citing R. Milner, Encyclopedia of Evolution (1990), p. 205
3. Creation Science Facts, quoting"—*L. Rutimeyer, "Referate," in Archiv fur Anthropologie (1868).
4. The Evolution Handbook, by Vance Farrell, pg. 101

THE OCCULT CONNECTION

The most disturbing fact about evolution is that its origins, while not scientific, are very spiritual in nature.  Evolution is the very backbone of all the occult sciences, which even the most basic examination of esoteric philosophy will reveal.  In his book, Occult Invasion, author Dave Hunt gives considerable attention to the implications of evolution’s real origins:

“Evolution plays a key role in the occult. 
Theodore Roszak pointed out that mysticism
is ‘the parent stock from which the theory of
biological evolution springs.’  Anthropologist
Michael Harner reminds us that ‘millennia before
Charles Darwin, people in shamanic cultures were
convinced that humans and animals were related.’ 
Evolution, as the core belief of Hinduism and witchcraft,
is at least as old as the theories of reincarnation and
karma, in which it is a key element.”
(Dave Hunt, Occult Invasion, p. 20.)

Hunt further reveals why evolution is not compatible with the Genesis account. The blending of these ideas is called “Theistic Evolution” (the idea that God used evolution as His creation process).  But, in reality, evolution threatens the entire Gospel message.  Hunt writes:

“Christ refers to the Genesis account of man’s
creation and quotes directly from it, placing His
stamp of approval on its authenticity.  Paul, too,
attested to the accuracy of the Genesis account
when he declared that ‘Adam was first formed, then
Eve’ (1 Timothy 2:13,14; see also 1 Corinthians 15:22,45
; Jude 14).  Furthermore, Paul says that it was through
Adam that sin entered into the world, and death by sin
(Romans 5:12).  If Adam and Eve descended from
ancestors who had lived and died during thousands
(or millions) of years of prehuman evolution until God
finally humanized them, death would have been in
effect before Adam sinned.  Clearly, such a contradiction
would be devastating to Christianity.”
(Dave Hunt, Occult Invasion, p. 35)

Hunt goes on, quoting The American Atheist, which seems to know more of what’s at stake than many Christians:

“But if death preceded man and was not a result of
Adam’s sin, then sin is fiction.  If sin is fiction, then
we have no need for a Savior …. Evolution destroys
utterly and finally the very reason [for] Jesus’ earthly
life …. If Jesus was not the Redeemer who died for our
sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity
is nothing.”     
(The American Atheist, as quoted by Dave Hunt,
Occult Invasion pg 35)

To be continued ….

-- CJP