Skeleton of an ancient Scolopendra found during underground excavations

A depiction of what is supposed to be
a southeast asian prehistoric man.

WHY? you might ask

There is proof that God exists, but you wonder about that. 

It is impossible to go through everything that evolutionists claim to be true. However asking them to produce a transitional species is one of those strange things where they will say there are thousands of them, but the reality is they are unable to produce one, not even one! Now that is a problem isn’t it. You can’t go to a museum to see one, or a fossil of one. You might see a drawing of what they might call one, but you have to remember that all they have found is bones, no meat on them. A great deal of the fossils have living counterpart today. Dinosaurs being the exception.

Every depiction of a fossil, whether it be man or beast, is solely a product of an artists imagination. Every depiction of a transitional specie is even worse as the artist have no bones to derive even a close idea of  what the transitional creature should look like. Colors that they assume the creatures have are again purely a guess based on what is available in the world today.

Depictions of how man looked in prehistoric times are also a product of someone’s imagination. They add skin color and hair and lumpy eyebrows etc to make it look like they were really different from what we see today. What they neglect to tell you is that there are people that exist on earth today that have the same bone structure as the guy in the picture. But we can’t have them looking the same can we, that would demolish the myth that they are pushing

In the picture in the header we see a line of what “science” so called has assumed man’s line of development, but they have no real or solid evidence of any of this. Man has always been man, and has never been a monkey.



there is proof that God exists!

Science is at a loss to explain why plant life along with bees for pollination just suddenly appear in the geologic column

Modern bees are exactly the same as the so called “fossil bees” as are the flowers and other plant life. why is this, when everything else has evolved, how did the bees miss the boat.

Unique. Unexplainable.

Evolutionists just love to paint with an extremely broad brush. Details about their explanations are sadly lacking, and the way they explain things has a tendency to convey to the reader or listener the idea that as man evolved he decided that he needed to see. Of course they conveniently leave out the fact that if the creature doing this was coping quite well without sight, what would be the need to see anyway. Would not man have already developed amazing coping mechanisms for living without sight? 

The eye is an amazingly complex organ that is connected to another, very important and even more amazing organ, the brain, which has amazingly evolved in such a way even before the eye evolved that it could translate or interpret the information from the eye to make it useful information for man to put to good use. All this would have needed to happen simultaneously. An extraordinary collection of mutations would have been needed to make this happen. Some evolutionist have postulated that evolution made a selection of the available pieces of equipment at the time, like going to the hardware store. Anyone that can involve themselves in a bit of critical thinking can see that  evolutionists are really pulling the wool over your “eyes”. They all too often talk about very specific things in isolation without telling us how other parts had to evolve along with this amazing newly evolved thing called “sight”. 

Connected to this “sight” thing there needs to be hearing, touch, and smell. Of course having all those things there needs to be a decision making process, which will involve emotions. did all these “other” things arrive before or after the eye, and how was the decision made. Did evolution anticipate the eye and all the support systems were in place first? or did they all arrive after when the eye suddenly began working? Is Evolution reactive or proactive? Evolutionists really can’t tell you because they have nothing to fall back on to give us that information. It is really all just made up.

The facts! They eye is a remarkably complex piece of equipment. Science still doesn’t really know how or why it works the way it does. the image interpretation function of the brain is just as complex, and an even bigger mystery because there is no real way to see it in action. We just know it works because we experience it on a daily basis and take it largely for granted. The eye itself is actually what science calls “irreducibly complex”. That means that they eye will not work without any one part of it missing.

That being the case, it either suddenly appeared as a complete organ with all the brain support structure to go along with it, or God created it when man was created, as a complete, perfect adult working man with all functions fully working, and loaded with the knowledge to go ahead and live life. That actually makes much more sense than the nonsense of evolution, don’t you think?