Evolution is not a Scientific view, and is a fairytale for adults.

I will take the BOP even though there really isn't one. My goal: To show how farfetched evolution is, and that there is countless proof against it. 1. Receding Moon: The gravitational pull between the Earth and Moon causes the Earth"s oceans to have tides. The tidal friction between the Earth"s terrestrial surface and the water moving over it causes energy to be added to the Moon. This results in a constant yearly increase in the distance between the Earth and Moon." 1 This tidal friction also causes the Earth"s rotation to slow down, but more importantly, the energy added to the Moon causes it to recede from the Earth.1, 2 The rate of recession was measured at four centimeters per year in 1981; 3 however, according to Physicist Donald DeYoung: "One cannot extrapolate the present 4 cm/year separation rate back into history. It has that value today, but was more rapid in the past because of tidal effects. In fact, the separation rate depends on the distance to the 6th power, a very strong dependence ... the rate ... was perhaps 20 m/year "long" ago, and the average is 1.2 m/year. 1 Because of this, the Moon must be less than 750 million years old -- or 20% of the supposed 4.5 billion-year age of the Earth-Moon system.4 Note: Even though the maximum age obtained from this method is more than 10,000 years, it is nevertheless much younger than the alleged 4.5 billion year age for the Earth-Moon system proposed by evolutionists. Note also that nobody knows how the Moon got to be in its present orbit. All of the proposed theories as to where it came from have serious problems. It is a complete mystery " unless it was designed that way from the beginning. 2. Oil Pressure: When oil wells are drilled, the oil is almost always found to be under great pressure. This presents a problem for those who claim "millions of years" for the age of oil, simply because rocks are porous. For as time goes by, the oil should seep into tiny pores in the surrounding rock, and, over time, reduce the pressure. However, for some reason it doesn't. Perhaps because our oil deposits were created as a result of Noah's Flood only about 4600 years ago? Some scientists say that after about 10,000 years little pressure should be left. 3. The Sun: Measurements of the sun's diameter over the past several hundred years indicate that it is shrinking at the rate of five feet per hour. Assuming that this rate has been constant in the past we can conclude that the earth would have been so hot only one million years ago that no life could have survived. And only 11,200,000 years ago the sun would have physically touched the earth. If the sun were indeed billions of years old, then it seems a bit odd for its magnetic field to have doubled in the past 100 years, but this is seems to be what the evidence points to. See also: The Young Faint Sun Paradox, Global Warming - Is the Sun to Blame?, and Speedy Star changes Baffle Long-Agers 4. The Oldest Living Thing: The oldest living thing on earth is either an Irish Oak or a Bristlecone pine. If we assume a growth rate of one tree ring per year, then the oldest trees are between 4,500 and 4,767 years old. The fact that these trees are still alive and growing older means that we don't yet know how old they will get before they die. It also strongly suggests that something happened around 4,500 to 4,767 years ago which caused the immediate ancestors of these trees to die off. 13,14,15 Note also that it is possible for trees to produce more than one growth ring per year, which would shorten the above estimated ages of these trees. Also, with regard to fossil tree rings, the author has been unable to find any documented instances of fossil trees having more than about 1500 rings. Janelle says 1700. This is significant since we are told that God (literally) made the Earth, and all that is in it, only about 1800 years before the Noachian Flood described in the Book of Genesis. See also Evidence from Living Things 5. Helium in the Atmosphere: Helium is a byproduct of the radioactive decay of uranium-238. As uranium decays, the helium produced escapes from the earth's surface and accumulates in the atmosphere. As time passes, the amount of helium in the atmosphere increases. Scientists have estimated the amount of uranium in the earth's crustal rocks. From this they estimate the amount of helium that should be produced, and from these they can calculate how much helium is being added to the atmosphere over a given amount of time. They also know how much helium is currently in the atmosphere. If we use the same assumptions that radiometric dating experts make: i.e. no initial helium in the earth's early atmosphere, a constant decay rate, and that nothing has occurred to add to or take away the helium -- then the earth's atmosphere is at most 1.76 million years old. 16,17 Other estimates say it is much less: or only 175,000 years. 18 See also: Helium Evidence for a Young World Remains Crystal Clear, and Helium Evidence for A Young World Overcomes Pressure, by D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D. 6. Short Period Comets: Short period comets revolve round the sun once every hundred years or less.19 With each revolution they lose 1/2 of 1 percent of their mass. Thus, after several hundred revolutions they disintegrate. At present there are over 100 short period comets in our solar system, many of which have periods of less than 20 years.20 Since comets are believed to have originated at the same time as the solar system. 21 This, plus the fact that they have not all disintegrated, suggests that either the solar system is young, or that new comets are continuously being added. Evolutionists have come up with theories to explain the existence of comets, and how new ones are being added. One is called the Oort Cloud theory, named after J. Oort. This suggests that a hypothetical cloud surrounds the solar system that is said to extend past the orbit of Pluto.21 The other theory is called the Kuiper belt theory, and it is directed at short period comets, as opposed to to Oort Cloud theory, which is directed at both long and short period ones. Although some people claim that the Kuiper belt has been discovered, to this author's knowledge that is not the case. Nor has even one hypothetical object (i.e. asteroid of comet material) been observed to transform into a would-be comet. The existence of short period comets suggests that our solar system is less than 10,000 years old: otherwise they would have burned out long ago. 22 More evidence of a young Universe is given in reference 21 below. See also the Astronomy section of the Young Age of Earth and Universe Q&A page on the www.answersingenesis.org web site. 7. The Earth's Magnetic Field: The Earth's magnetic field is decaying at the rate of about 5% every 100 years. This means that about 1450 years ago it was twice as strong as it is today, and 2900 years ago it was four times as strong. Therefore, assuming that the rate of decay has been constant for the recent past, then only 10,000 years ago the earth's magnetic field would have been 128 times as strong as it is today: so strong that the amount of heat produced would have prevented life as we know it from existing on earth. 23,24,25,26 In other words, it seems likely that the Earth's magnetic field is quite young, and suggests that the earth itself is also young." - http://www.earthage.org... The fact that the earth's magnetic field is decaying is well documented. This was brought out by a recent NOVA Special. In fact, at present rates of decay, the earth may not even have a magnetic field 1000 years from now. And although, the NOVA special strongly suggested that this may simply mean the earth is getting ready for another reversal, such may not be the case, as Dr. Humphreys work suggests. A brief portion of Dr. Humphreys findings are quoted below. http://www.earthage.org... "Lastly, looking not to any one time, but to all time, if my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking closely together all the species of the same group, must assuredly have existed. But, as by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?" - Charles Darwin "I fully agree with your comments about the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them ". I will lay it on the line " there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument." - Evolutionist Dr. Colin "It is as though they [fossils] were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists. Both schools of thought (Punctuationists and Gradualists) despise so-called scientific creationists equally, and both agree that the major gaps are real, that they are true imperfections in the fossil record. The only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation and both reject this alternative." - Richard Dawkins "A major problem in proving the theory has been the fossil record; the imprints of vanished species preserved in the Earth"s geological formations. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin"s hypothetical intermediate variants " instead species appear and disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fueled the creationist argument that each species was created by God." - Mark Czarnecki, an evolutionist http://thetruthwins.com...