I do not agree to defend this document in any forum that I did not submit it, due to the practical limitations of my own time.The original source of this document is located at originality of content of this document ranges from mere paraphrases of material from a wide assortment of authors to entirely original material that I have not seen expressed by any other author. I should point out that I do not consider myself an authority on the leading edge of modern creationism, although it may seem so to the uninitiated.As a preface to this document, I want to point out that it is a shame that we have to continue to refute the same arguments that evolutionists keep bringing up over and over again in their attempts to argue against the fact of creation, which fact has been well established since the day the earth was created ex nihilo several thousand years ago.Nevertheless, the neo-Darwinian dogma of the spontaneous auto-organization of random chemicals into complex biopolymers, by chance forming complex self-replicating automatic machines that then evolve into more and more complex self-replicating automatic machines through genetic transcriptional errors and the injection of random noise, filtered into highly coded information and structures by predators, the climate, and other mindless agents working together to produce an ecosystem capable of sustaining and improving all these countless life forms for billions of years has managed to permeate, over the last 150 years, the thinking in major scientific circles, the media, and secular education, even penetrating some professing Christian institutions.
They must also keep a level head in the face of some vicious attacks and diatribes that will be directed against them, as is advised in the scriptures (1 Peter -16).This document is not a scientific thesis, but an apologetic intended to be submitted and defended by me in an interactive, online electronic forum.I claim no copyright on this document, and grant its use to the public domain.The laws of biochemistry, probability and statistics, and basic information theory are against it. But no one has ever shown them to be beneficial, so as to result in complex and sophisticated designs. Random genetic mutations) The "survival of the fittest" clause is a tautology and success does not imply complexity.Natural selection shouldn't be expected to result in functionally different or more complex designs. Animals vary based on coded genetic information that is already there.