The Proof of Evolution blog is a Christian blog bringing you interesting and current news about evolution, as well as each new page from the Proof of Evolution web site.
I believe the most powerful testimony to Christ is in the life of Christians. We don't need scientific evidence for God, as the tremendous power of Christians united in service to God overthrows every argument against him.
As a result, we Christians should be able to be honest with science. At some point, we are going to have to face the overwhelming evidence for evolution, knowing that Jesus Christ is the Truth. He is not afraid of the truth; he is the Truth.
Latest updates follow, or return home.
As a Christian, I am embarrassed by creationist dishonesty. Here Walter Brown practices lying for Jesus in a discussion of the Grand Canyon
A review of and response to the book, The Evolution of a Creationist.
Lists of questions of evolutionists have been circulating the internet, proving only that creationists have not taken the time to understand or research evolution themselves.
Specified complexity is the argument that evolution cannot explain how complex, successful organisms arose.
One more reader suggested a video that would surely overturn my belief in evolution. One more time, the video was simply a subject list of anti-evolutionist errors.
If evolution is true, then God intended his creatures to have life cycles. Can this really be reconciled with the Bible?
This is not earth-shaking news. However, it is an interesting thought about whatever species is the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees.
Ardipithecus ramidus is the oldest known hominid for which we have a largely complete skeleton, dating from around 4 million years ago. The fossils of that species have caused scientists to rethink the development of knuckle walking and the tree-swinging that great apes do.
After reading your site through, I now really do believe that the Bible is not true. You have shown that even as a believer, you believet the Bible has
A reader sent me a message on YouTube trying to refute the arguments I present at The Pseudogene. He referred me to two articles, one claiming that the Vitamin C gene to which I refer actually has a use in humans and another claiming that there is evidence that some species share mutations without common descent.
Here is my response:
I don't even have to look up the articles to answer this.
1. One major source of mutations is a repeated or broken gene. Both provide the same source of mutation. A repeated gene means that an individual now has two of the same gene. The second is not used. Because it is not used, it mutates freely, until generations later, by chance it becomes something not useless. Then it can be positive or negative mutation. If it's positive, it has a chance to remain in that population's genome.
A broken gene is similar. Because we eat our own vitamin C (raw meat provides vitamin C, too), it didn't matter that our gene for producing vitamin C went bad. Thus, it can mutate *until it becomes useful.*
In other words, if someone found out that the pseudogene is now being used by someone or all humans, this doesn't affect the argument at all.
2. Convergent mutation without common descent is called "convergent evolution." Driver Ants in Africa and Army Ants in South America are an example. They are very alike, but unrelated (not of common descent except hundreds of millions of years ago). Everyone knows about convergent evolution.
Again, that's irrelevant to the argument.
The argument is: All mammals have a gene that allows them to produce vitamin C. We have that gene, but ours has mutated. It has mutated in exactly the same way that all the other great apes have mutated.
This indicates common descent because a *mistake* is common to all these species (chimp, bonobo, gorilla, orangutan, possibly gibbon, and human). It's not a common design because it's not a design, it's a mistake.
Even if that mistake has finally evolved in such a way that we as a species are now using it, it still is a mistake passed on by common descent.
See my published article (yes, young earth creationists DO publish their young earth findings in reputable international journals...) on soft bone in a
Great home school video with reenactments of the Dover trial on Intelligent Design.