Why I Don't Believe In Evolution

By Jeffrey L. Girling

I don’t believe in evolution because there’s no reason why I should.  Evolutionists have failed to scientifically  prove their theories, and they have given society a trail of hoaxes, fraud, deceptions, and speculations.   I also believe there’s enough scientific evidence for creation and a young earth that’s contrary to an old earth which evolution teaches.  Creation itself would demand a Creator, and there’s enough evidence for design in nature, which indicates intelligence and a Creator.  Too many things exist today that would prove it impossible to come by chance as evolution teaches.  There are too many details in living organisms themselves, which would make it impossible for life to spring forth from no life such as Spontaneous Generation which evolution teaches.  (That life started from no life.)  Biology itself would indicate that only life can produce life.


No! I'm not a scientist, so I can't speak about design science as well as Creation Scientists might. But I can give a few simple observations which anyone should be able to reason.

1. Design one: Male and Female: Question: How much faith would it take to believe that a puddle of primordial soup eventually grew into living organisms, which eventually evolved into male and female human beings?(The myth & faith of evolutionists)  To believe that a puddle of primordial soup would become living cells and organisms would require a leap of faith in the first place, but then for these simple organisms to evolve into complex cells and organisms would require another giant leap of faith, but then to believe these complex organisms divided themselves into male & female organisms, which is required to produce new life would require gigantic leaps of faith, which is what evolution really is based on by many atheistic Scientists who don’t want to be accountable to a Creator, whether  there’s a Creator or not.  Evolution has failed to explain how life is made up of male and female species, which requires both to reproduce, which makes life impossible to spring forth from primordial soup as evolutionists believe with their gigantic leap of faith in the religion of evolution.  Here’s a scienticfic link to an article about origins and male and female species.


2.Design two: One cell in the human body has enough information to create a blueprint more complicated than a blueprint of New York City, and if just one part of that information mal-functions, then life ceases to exist.(It's called complexity of life or the complexity of the living cell.) Question 2: How much faith does it take that all that information gathered together into one cell so life can exist came by chance?(The myth and faith of evolutionists.) Evolutionists believe life started out with simple cells or orgainisms, which eventually evolved  into complexity, but Creation Scientists believe life was complexed from the start just like they are now.(Creation!)


Various Articles by Scientists Regarding Complexity:











3. Design Three: If we looked at a picture of beautiful designs on a wall, then we would automatically believe a person with some intelligence created or painted that picture. So when we see design in nature, like one elm leaf resembling another or the design in flowers is another example.  We might also consider how the earth is exactly far enough distance from the sun to support life on earth, if it was just a little further away from the sun, then the earth would be too cold for life as we know it, but if the earth was a little closer then we all would burn up.  So there appears to be a Designer or Creator who designed it that way.  The fact that all the complexed information contained within living cells to allow life to exist would also be considered part of a design or intelligence of a supreme Creator designing the complexity of living cells.  Question 3: How much faith would it take to believe that all the design we see in nature was designed through chance without intelligence designing it?(Myth and faith of evolutionists)

4. Design four: Where did intelligence come from itself, or morals for that matter!  How did our brain cells form to create thought patterns? How much faith would it take to believe that all knowlege & intelligence sprung forth by chance from a puddle of primordial soup.(Myth & Faith of the evolutionists)


Article about brain cells: à   http://www.icr.org/article/559/


I could go on for pages like this, but I hope the reader will get the point. The Thing is: I don't think science has made a case for evolution at all. I think there are a lot of deceptions hoaxes going on in evolution.(Period!)


Here’s a link to a website that list the names and gives links to articles written by 50 different Scientists giving reasons why they believe in Creation:




 The claim by some that the DNA between man and monkey is 98.3 % identical amuses Biologist Dr. Gary Parker, because he states that the DNA genes inherited from our own mother’s and fathers are only 93 % similar at best. So are there some who want us to believe that monkeys are more related to us than our own mothers.and fathers?

Dr. Gary Parker also says that a jelly fish is 98 % water! A cloud is 98 % water! A watermelon is 98% water! So if we believe in per cents like (98 % similarity between monkey and man) Then we must also believe that water melons, clouds, and jelly fish are the same as us, because we are 98 % water too! (Not very good logic! Is It?) I mean believing man evolved from monkey because of a so called 98.3 % similarity, which would make us more related to monkeys than our own mothers and fathers. (Do you really believe that’s true?) I don’t.  Quotations from Dr.Gary Parker are from a video release titled: Question of Origins


Here’s a website link exposing the Ape-Man Hoax:






Dr. Gary Parker was once an atheistic evolution Scientist himself, who set out to teach evolution, but was then converted through science evidence which indicated creation rather than evolution, which caused him to abandon evolution theories.  Here’s a link to an article by Dr. Gary Parker with his testimony and details of his conversion from evolution to creation science.     http://www.icr.org/article/95/



More articles by Dr. Gary Parker:

Nature's Challenge to Evolutionary Theory (#64)

by Gary Parker, Ed.D.



Things that are Made (#62)

by Gary Parker, Ed.D.



Creation, Selection, and Variation (#88)

by Gary Parker, Ed.D.



Creation, Mutation, and Variation (#89)

by Gary Parker, Ed.D.




Professor Roberto Fondi Specialist in  Paleontology teaches at the Dept of Earth Sciences in  the University of Seita Italy, and also acts as Scientific Advisor for the reconstruction of prehistoric animals.  He says that the fundamental assumptions which evolution is based on, that living cells rose from Non Living matter by spontaneous generation as a result of a chain of chemical reactions of a hypotheical  primordial soup are not at all confirmed by Paleontology.   He said all biological groups from bacteria of blue green algae to man appear abruptly in the fossil record without any links connecting them to each other.   He further went on to say, that the fact is: That after nearly two centuries of intensed research the paleontological evidence for evolution theory is not only rare but highly questionable.  He said the point is:  If evolution really happened, then the evidence would be in great abundance and incontestable.  Museums would be over flowing with fossils clearly documenting.the transitions between the various biological groups.  Yet there are none! More over there is no indication the situation will change in the future. He concluded by saying that more progress would be made in Biology and other disciplines if they kept away from the dead end road of evolution mythology.

Quoted from video release titled: Evolution Fact Or Belief?

Here’s a link to an article about the fossil record written:



Prof. M. Giertych  Polish Academy Of Science Institute of Dentrology  said:  Quote "The Science of Molecular Biology makes it clear that never in the past could there be such a thing as a simple organism.  All organisms no matter how primitive they may appear are complex and vested with information.  We know that this information must have been there from the very beginning.  For example:  The very complexed DNA RNA protein replicating system in the cell must have been perfect from the very start!  If Not! Life systems couldn't exist.  The only logical explanation is that this vast quanity of information came from intelligence.    Every bacterium!  Every Microscopic cell is so procisely programed, that we have to assume, that the information contained within it comes from intelligence far beyond our own.  The evolutionists do not want to accept this self evident fact, as a result they are producing theories which are of no scientific value, because they don't provide any idea how new genetic information is produced."   Unquote.  Quoted from video release titled: Evolution Fact Or Belief?


Prof. Giuseppe Semonti  Molecular Biologist in Italy says: Quote: "Surely there's no evidence that man derived from some primitive animal whatsoever. From what we can say observing the human chromosomes or the human DNA and comparing it to other species is that man is original, and man has not arrived from any other species, so the statement that man is some recent creature coming from some primitive form can not be supported by genetic data at all." Unquote! Quoted from video release titled: Evolution Fact Or Belief?


Here's a link to an article titled "Over 600 Scientists Sign “A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism”  At:



Quote from the article "Prof. Giuseppe Semonti  has published his book entitled “Why is a Fly Not a Horse?” Prof. Semonti challenges the myth that all critics of Darwinism are American religious fundamentalists and argues that since genetics does not explain even the present forms of life, genetic mutations cannot alone explain their origin." Unquote



Here is a link to an online edition of In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood (7th Edition) by Dr. Walt Brown.  Pages of this book can be read at this website: 




Links ToArticles Supporting A Young Earth!  Not Millions And Billions Of Years Old:

Evidence for a Young World


Young Age for the Moon and Earth (#110)

by Thomas G. Barnes, D.Sc.



Evidence for a Young World (#384)

by D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D.

Here are fourteen natural phenomena which conflict with the evolutionary idea that the universe is billions of years old. The numbers listed below in bold print (usually in the millions of years) are often maximum possible ages set by each process, not the actual ages.)



The First Young-Earth Conference on Radioisotopes (#290)

by Larry Vardiman, Ph.D.



Some Recent Developments having to do with Time (#27)

by Harold S. Slusher, Ph.D.




Here are more articles by Scientists challenging evolution.


I do what to point out here that these following articles as well as several links to articles above are actually from the website of Institute Of Creation Research  (IRC)at:  http://www.icr.org/



Evolution Hopes You Don't Know Chemistry: The Problem of Control (#374) by Charles McCombs, Ph.D.


Biology Confronts Evolution (#368) by Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D.


The Mystery of Complexity (#157)
by Henry Morris, Ph.D.


Cosmology on Trial (#137) by Henry Morris, Ph.D.


The Scientific Case Against Evolution: A Summary* Part 1 (#330) by Henry Morris, Ph.D.


The Scientific Case against Evolution: A Summary* Part 2 (#331) by Henry Morris, Ph.D.


Summary of Scientific Evidence for Creation (Part I & II)(#95) by Duane Gish, Ph.D.




The "Baby Doctor," Benjamin Spock, On Darwin and Morality (#356)
by Jerry Bergman, Ph.D


216b - Those Amazing G Protein Receptors (#216)
by Frank Sherwin, M.A.*



Evidence for a Young World (#384)
by D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D.


215a - If Apes Evolved into Humans, Why Do We Still Have Apes?(#215)
by John Morris, Ph.D.


Dinosaurs vs. Birds: The Fossils Don't Lie (#399)
by Timothy L. Clarey, Ph.D.


The History and Impact of the Book,"The Genesis Flood"(#395)
by John C. Whitcomb, Ph.D.





Why Is Only Evolution Being Taught In Many Schools And Creation Science Not Being Taught?   Because The Schools In America Are Being Dictated By Atheistic Humanists!


The thing is: Many are accepting evolution theory as fact and science, when there are many Scientists who say there's no evidence to support the evolution theory as fact.
Another Thing: Evolution theory is allowed to be taught in schools as factual science, when it's not. While some real scientific facts, which have been discovered and would support the creation theory are not allowed to be taught in schools.

Why? Because anything that would suggest creation in school is considered to be religion.(Even if it consist of scientific facts, which some scientists would agree to.)
Some believe evolution to be a religion in itself, with many scientists saying there's no scientific facts to support it.(So why is Evolution accepted as factual science, when it's not?)



Again! I'm not a Scientist myself, so I'm not a knowledgeable authority on scientific facts. It's just that I have viewed several tapes and have read many articles by Scientists who give much scientific evidence for creation and have turned away from evolution.  (I have shared some of these articles on this page.

One thing I can do though, is talk about Bible, because I've studied the Bible sense 1969. So I'm quite familiar with what the Bible teaches. Let's see if there's evidence in the Bible.)   I once ask God a very sincere question: I asked God:"How Can I Know The Bible Is Your Inspired Word?"

This was God's answer to me. He immediately brought John 5:39 to my mind. Jesus said in John 5:39 "Search the scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life, but they are they which testify of me"   So Jesus said that scriptures testify about him, or speak about him. We know he was referring to the Old Testament when he said that, because the New Testament wasn't written yet, when he made that statement.
So Jesus actually was saying the Old Testament testified or spoke about him.

The Point Is: The Old Testament was written hundreds of years before Jesus was born. So if the Old Testament indeed speaks about Jesus, then the writers of the Old Testament had to know about Jesus hundreds of years before he was born.  Which if true: Would suggest proof that the Old Testament is inspired, and if the Old Testament is inspired.(Then who's inspiring it?)

I'm convinced beyond any shadow of doubt that the Old Testament speaks and prophesies about Jesus hundreds of years before he was born. I also believe Jesus Christ himself inspired the Old Testament writers, because I believe Jesus Christ is God.(According to John 1:1-3, Colossians 1:16, and Hebrews 1:2.)
I could quote about 100 places in the Old Testament where it prophesies or speaks about Jesus, but I'm saving it for a book I'm writing on the subject.
But I'll leave you with these scriptures to think about.
John 1:10 says:"He(Jesus) was in the world, and the world was made by him, but the world knew him not."
John 1:12 says:"But as many who received him, to them gave he power to become sons of God."(I believe that meant daughters as well.)
John 3:16, 17, 18:"16. For God so loved the world he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved. 18. He that believeth on him is not condemned, but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Please read and copy free my book on this website about Old Testament prophecies of Jesus Christ written hundreds of years before he was born, which was a result or product of the Lord's answer to me from John 5:39 above, when I asked the Lord to show me how I can believe the Bible is His inspired Word.