Price: $ .99
Excerpt from the Tract:
Many evolutionists claim that evolution has been proven, and therefore must be spoken of not as a theory, but rather as afact. Most people today, for example, have at least heard the names of Francis Crick and James Watson, the two scientists who shared the Nobel Prize for their discovery of the structure of DNA (the molecule within each living cell that carries the genetic information). Several years after their discovery, Dr. Watson wrote a book titled The Molecular Biology of the Gene in which he stated: “Today the theory of evolution is an accepted fact.” A few years later in the August 23, 1999 issue of Time magazine, famous Harvard evolutionist Stephen J. Gould said that “evolution is as well documented as any phenomenon in science, as strongly as the earth’s revolution around the sun rather than vice versa. In this sense, we can call evolution a ‘fact.’”
Is evolution a “fact” of science? No, it is not. A fact is defined as “an actual occurrence” or “something that has actual existence.” With that standard-usage definition in mind, consider the following.
Evolution cannot be considered a fact because it is based on a number of non-provable assumptions. Several years ago, a well-known evolutionist from Great Britain by the name of George Kerkut boldly listed no less than seven such assumptions in his widely distributed book, The Implications of Evolution. The first two assumptions he listed were these: (1) spontaneous generation must have occurred; and (2) spontaneous generation must have occurred only once.