BRAINWASHED by Duane T. Gish, Ph.D. . (Duane T. Gish, Ph.D. (Biochemistry, University of C
by Duane T. Gish, Ph.D.
. (Duane T. Gish, Ph.D. (Biochemistry, University of California, Berkeley)
is Associate Director of the Institute of Creation Research and Professor of
Natural Science and Apologetics at Christian Heritage College, San Diego,
California. He spent 18 years in biochemical and biomedical research with the
Upjohn Company and at Cornell University and Berkeley. There are over 450
scientists with a master's or doctor's degree in some field of natural science
are now voting members of the Creation Research Society.
. The following lecture was given at the University of California at Davis
and has been greatly condensed for the sake of space.
. As a scientist, I believe we must examine all the evidence and facts
before we can come to any conclusion on any given subject. I'm asking only one
thing of this audience... that you examine the facts thoroughly and without
. The refusal by science teachers to consider creation as a possible
explanation for the origin of all things, is unwarranted and undesirable. The
student is being indoctrinated without being given a complete presentation of
. This situation could be remedied by taking a closer look at both
creation and evolution.
. First, let's examine the claims of each. The EVOLUTIONIST states that
all life gradually evolved from a single cell, which had evolved from dead
. CREATIONISTS believe that life and our existence came by the acts of a
. The evidence that the EVOLUTIONIST needs to establish his claims, is
fossils showing a gradual step-by-step development of lower animal life into
more and more complex forms.
. And this should be evident by the presence in the fossil record of many
. The evidence needed to support CREATION, is fossils showing complex life
appearing suddenly...with no fossil evidence of lower animals developing into
new and complex forms of life.
. Now, lets look at the actual fossil evidence. The earliest fossils to be
found are in the Cambrian rock strata. And the billions of fossils found there
are all of highly complex forms of life with no evidence of these complex
forms gradually developing from a simple form of life.
. According to evolutionists it would have required 1.5 billion years for
these animals to have evolved. Not a single, indisputable multicellular
fossil has been found anywhere in the world in a rock supposedly older that
Cambrian rocks. Billions of highly complex animals...trilobites, brachiopods,
corals, worms, jellyfish, etc...just suddenly appear, with no signs of gradual
development from lower forms.
. Also, throughout the remainder of the fossil record there is a
remarkable absences of the many transitional forms demanded by the theory of
. There are hundreds of thousands of missing links between invertebrates
and vertebrates. The sea squirt is presumed to be the ancestry of the
. According to evolutionists it would have taken 100 million years for
fish to have evolved from an invertebrate. But there is absolutely no fossil
evidence showing that this took place.
. Again, the evolutionists claims that it took perhaps 50 million years
for a fish to evolve into an amphibian. But again, there are no transitional
forms. For example...not a single fossil with part fins...part feet has ever
. And this is true between every major plant and animal kind. All higher
categories of living things, such as complex invertebrates, fishes,
amphibians, reptiles, flying reptiles, birds, bats, primates and man, appear
. Let me quote some comments by LEADING EVOLUTIONISTS.
. Charles Darwin admitted that "As by this theory innumerable transitional
forms must have existed, who do we not find them embedded in countless numbers
in the the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate kinds, between all
living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great."
. Prof. George Gaylord Simpson of Harvard University hs said, "Gaps among
known orders, classes and phyla are systematic and almost always large."
. Prof. E.J.H. Corner of Cambridge University has stated, "I still think,
to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special
. There is no evidence of even one species changing into another. As the
late Prof. R. Goldschmidt of the University of California observed,"It is good
to keep in mind... that nobody has ever succeeded in producing even one new
species by the accumulation of micromutations".
. If evolution is true, why don't we see living stages of evolution today?
SHouldn't new organs and new structure still be appearing today? Surely if
evolutionary processes had truly existed in the past they would still be
. The fossil of the bird(Archaeopteryx) is claimed by some to be a link
between birds and reptiles. But there was a world of difference between
reptiles and Archaeopteryx. It had wings, feathers...and it flew! The fact
that it had claws on its wings does not prove that it had a reptilian
ancestry. There are two birds living today that possess claws!
. All palenontologists (those who study fossils) now acknowledge that
Archaeopteryx was a true bird.
. The alleged horse series was created more out of imagination than from
fossil evidence. The fossils for this series are not found in the proper time
sequence as indicated by the evolutionists, and the major types appear
abruptly, without transitions.
. And there is an interesting discrepancy in the skeletal development of
. Eohippus had 18 pairs of Ribs.
. Orohippus had only 15 pairs.
. Then Pliohippus jumped to 19
. Equus Scotti is back to 18.
. Darwin cited the giraffe as an outstanding example of natural selection.
Supposedly, as a result of extended droughts, the supply of green leaves could
be obtained only at the tops of the trees, and therefore the shorter necked
giraffe died off. And the giraffes which grew longer necks survived.
. However, there is no evidence whatever in the fossil record or elsewhere
that giraffes with short necks have ever existed. And what would have happened
to young giraffes with relatively short necks?
. Darwin failed to realize that body characteristics in offspring are
determined and programmed by DNA factors of the Genes or the Genetic material
of the parents, and not by the stretching of the neck or any other bodily
. The cover of the journal, Science, December 9, 1966, shows a photograph
of a bat fossil that is alleged to be over 50 million years old. This is said
to be the oldest fossil bat, but it is the same as a modern bat! Why isn't
there any evidence of change after 50 million years?
. It might be will now to look at the "evidence" which anthropologists
have assembled, in an attempt to reconstruct the evolution of man.
. Some consider Ramapithecus to have been homiid (a man-like ape), and
this judgement has been made solely on the basis of a few fragments of the
jaw. That's all the fossil fragments they have.
. Dr. Jolley has recently reported that a species of baboon in Ethiopia
has the same dental and jaw characteristics as Ramapithecus. These
characteristics are therefore not those of man! Other anthropologists have
agreed that Ramapitecus was simply an ape.
. The first find of Australopithecines was by Dart in 1924. He pointed out
many ape-like features of the skull, but he believed the teeth to be manlike.
Its brain was only about 1/3 as large as that of modern man. It was only about
4 feet tall.
. Recently, Richard Leakey, the son of Dr. Leakey. published evidence that
indicated that the Australopithecines were long-armed, short-legged
knucklewalkers, similar to living African apes. These creatures were nothing
. In China, during the 1920's, fragments of skulls, jaws, and teeth, were
found in a limestone cliff near Peking. However, during World War II all the
original bones were lost.
. All of these creatures had been killed and eaten, and the skulls
preserved as trophies. Some prominent anthropologists believe that hunter was
true Man. Peking "man" must then have been simply a giant ape.
. Java Man is put together on the evidence of a femur (large leg bone), a
skull cap, and three molar teeth. These parts were found within a 50 foot
range, in a space of one year. Dr. Dubois, its discoverer, concealed for 30
years the fact that he found human skulls near his Java Man, and at the same
level. So man was already there when this creature was alive. THe femur was
probably from a human, and the skull cap was probably that of a giant ape.
Before his death,and after he had convinced most of the early skeptics, Dubois
changed his mind and decided that Java Man wa probably a giant gibbon and not
a man-like at all.
. Neanderthal Man has a skeletal structure of modern man. His cranial
capacity exceeded that of modern man. It was claimed that he lived as long as
about 100,000 years ago, but all anthropologists now believe that he was just
as human as you and I.
. Complete skeletons of the Cro-Magnons have been found. Their cranial
capacity was greater that modern man's. If he were alive today, and if he were
to walk down the street in a business suit, he would go completely unnoticed.
. Two of the most embarrassing so-called missing links for evolutionists,
are the NEBRASKA MAN and the PILTDOWN MAN.
. At the famous Scopes evolution trail in Dayton, Tennessee, the NEBRASKA
MAN evidence was presented by the leading scientific authorities of that day
as proof of evolution. They scoffed and laughed at William Jennings Bryan,
when he protested the scanty evidence.
. The evidence was that of a tooth that was supposed to have come from a
prehistoric man who supposedly lived one million years ago. However, years
later, when more fossils were unearthed, it was discovered that Nebraska Man
was only a pig. I think this is a case where a pig made a monkey out of an
. In 1912 Charles Dawson brought forth the PILTDOWN MAN. A piece of skull
was the evidence acclaimed by experts as that of an ape-man who was about a
half million years old.
. But in 1953 the hoax was exposed. The jawbone turned out to be that of a
modern ape. The teeth had been filed down, and the bones were artificially
colored to deceive the public. The ease with which this fraud fooled the
world's greatest authorities illustrated the powerful influence of
preconceived ideas among evolutionists.
. But in the August 1973 issues of Reader's Digest there was a report
about two phenomenal discoveries which were recently made in Africa. These
discoveries have shaken the anthropological world, because they challenge the
validity of long cherished theories concerning the origin of man. One was the
finding of a human skull, dated by evolutionists to be about 2.8 million years
old. Most text books state that the first man did not evolve until around one
million years ago. Yet the bones found are said to be even more modern that
those of Pithecanthropus, our presumed man-like ancestor. Obviously these
presumed ancestors cannot be man's true ancestors, for who ever heard of
parents being younger that their children?
. The second was the finding of skeletons of sophisticated humans who are
reputed to have lived 100,00 years ago. They had developed the art of mining,
were able to keep records, count, and had also developed sophisticated tools.
But according to the evolutionists this type of sophisticated humans was not
supposed to have appeared on the scene until 65,000 years later.
. I personally heard Richard Leaky, the discoverer of the 2.8 million year
old man, speak in San Diego. In commenting on these two discoveries Mr. Leaky
stated, "What we have discovered simply wipes out everything we have taught
about human evolution, and I have nothing to offer in its place."
. Let us now consider the beginnings of life itself.
. By chance, nothingness developed into substance. That evolved into a
very highly complex organization... without a designer. Darwinists assume
that life, or the primitive cell, arose by pure chance. For example, by chance
some amino acids were formed. Then from these the necessary protein was
. The first problem is that the rate of destruction of even relatively
simple chemical compounds, such as amino acids, by ultraviolet light or
electrical discharges far exceeds their rate of formation. No significant
quantity would thus ever be produced.
. Another insuperable barrier is that these amino acids would have to be
arranged in an exact sequence to form a protein...just like the letters in a
sentence. Mere laws of chemistry and physics cannot do that.
. The probability of a protein of only 50 amino acids forming by chance
would be 1/10 to the 65th power, or in layman language-
. 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000 to ONE!
. Even the very simplest cell contains several thousand different kinds of
proteins, and many billions of each kind, plus all kinds of DNA,RNA, and other
highly complex molecules, along with many complex structures, arranged in an
incredibly complex system.
. DNA and RNA are required to produce protein enzymes, but protein enzymes
are required to produce DNA and RNA. Which, then, came first?
. Dr. N.W. Pirie of the Rothamstead Experimental Station at Harpenden,
England, rejects this whole concept of spontaneous biogenesis simply on the
well-founded fact that "complicated molecules such as proteins do not, in our
scientific experience, arise spontaneously, even by stages. And all forms of
life known today are dependent on protein."
. Dr. John Moore spoke during the annual session of the American
Association for the Advancement of Science. He described the theory that man
evolved from "amoeba and sea-slimes" as an "incredible religion," but not
. Dr. John Moore stated:
. "Chromosome variation in animals does not correspond to predictions
based on evolution theory. There is absolutely no pattern of increase of
chromosome number from less complex to more complex, but this should take
place if evolution were true. Furthermore, hereditary material in the genes of
chromosomes shows great variation, frogs having more genetic material that do
humans, which contradicts the theory of evolution. Darwinism is more illogical
. Professor Henry M. Morris has shown that the theory of evolution
contradicts the universally accepted laws of thermodynamics.
. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that all things left to
themselves always tend to go from the complex to the simple, form the
organized to the disorganized. Evolution would require just the opposite...
the continually building up from the simplest to the more complex forms.
. I would now like for us to consider the complexity of the order and
design of our planet and universe. In researching the size of the earth we
discover that the mass and size of the earth are just right. If the earth's
diameter were 7,200 miles instead of 8,000, almost the whole earth, due to a
lessening of its atmospheric mantle, would be reduced to a snow and ice waste.
. If there were a variation of only 10 percent, either in the increase or
decrease of the size of our world, no life as we know it on earth would be
. If the average temperature of the earth were raised but two or three
degrees you could bid goodbye to many of the big cities of the earth, for the
glaciers would melt, and that in turn would flood many of the big cities. this
would also inundate hundreds of thousands of square miles of our most fertile
. The earth's axis, which now points toward the North Star, is tilted just
right - at the strange angle of 23 degrees from the perpendicular, that is, in
relation to the plane of its orbit. Because of this tilt the sun appears to go
north in the summer and south in the winter, giving us four seasons in the
. For the same reason, there is twice as much of the land area of the
earth that can be cultivated and inhabited as there would be if the sun were
always over the equator, with no change of seasons. Think what would happen if
the earth were tilted any other way than it is.
. We live miraculously on this planet, protected from eight killer rays
from the sun, by a thin layer of ozone high up in our atmosphere.
. If that little belt of ozone, approximately forty miles up and only one
eighth of an inch thick (if compressed), should suddenly drift into space, all
life on earth would perish.
. The first miracle, in the light of what the rest of the universe is
like, is that there IS an ocean here! In the universe as a whole, liquid water
of any kind - sweet or salt - is an exotic rarity.
. Contrary to common belief, the liquid state is exceptional in nature;
most matter in the universe seems to consist either of flaming gases, as in
the stars, or frozen solids drifting in the abyss of space.
. The amazing accuracy and smoothness with which the Universe revolves -
as a flawless, perfect machine - can be seen in the perfection that
characterizes the journey of our earth around the sun. It takes the earth 365
days, 5 hours, 48 minutes an 48 seconds to make its journey around the sun.
And in this circuit the earth has varied in only the slightest degree. None
but an infinite GOD could achieve such flawless, continuous PERFECTION.
. I believe as GOD states in the Bible (Romans 1:20) that nature and
creation itself reveals that there is a Creator. We know that for every
design there is a designer, and for every law there is a lawgiver. "In the
beginning God created" is still the most up-to-date statement on the origin of
the universe and all that it contains.
. And now I would like to speak personally to you ... the reader of this
little book. God is revealed through His creation...but the greatest
revelation God has given to man, He gave through His only begotten Son, Jesus
Christ. The Old Testament part of the Bible informs us that God made man in
His own image and likeness, to be His sons. Man, however rebelled against
God. We have all determined to go our own way and disregard our real Father.
Jesus Christ revealed that God dearly loves us, and that He sent Him to live
among us briefly, and then to give His life as a ransom (a sacrifice) for our
. We may now be reconciled to God... to eternal life with Him, by
accepting forgiveness of our sins through Jesus. That which is also necessary
is that we repent (turn) from our sinning and live to please God. All who
refuse to accept God's love and forgiveness will receive terrible judgment.
. I urge you to make your peace with God today. Then read the Bible that
you may grow in your new life. I suggest that you begin reading in the book
of Luke in the New Testament. God bless you!
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank