Why do people deny evolution?

Paraphrasing Sagan, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Both god and everlasting life falls into that category; magic.

Kansas mom killed 10-year-old son so he could go to heaven, not have to 'face the world's problems': cops
Lindsey Blansett was charged with first-degree murder after she beat and stabbed her son in his bedroom while his 9-year-old sister was home, police said. The Wellington mom 'decided the boy would be better off in heaven' and killed him to free him of future suffering, a Sumner County attorney said.

"In order to effect the destruction of all collective forces except ours we shall emasculate the first stage of collectivism, the universities, by re-educating them in a new direction." Protocols of Zion, 16

"Do not suppose for a moment that these statements are empty words: think carefully of the successes we arranged for Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzsche-ism.... it should be plain to see what a disintegrating importance these directives have had upon the minds of the goyim. " (Protocol 2)

"We shall erase from the memory of men all facts of previous centuries which are undesirable to us..."

We shall turn them into "unthinking submissive brutes waiting for things to be presented before their eyes in order to form an idea of them.

Squinting into the sunlight of a world separated from their own by millennia, a fragile family has emerged to shape the way we view ourselves. Everyone knows the name of this family...Neanderthal.
Since the first cave discoveries in Germany's Neander Valley, we have been fascinated by these thick-browed, powerful creatures. Who were they and where did they go? A centerpiece in study of human evolution, Neanderthal Man has, by his own mysterious demise, created more questions than he has answered. But what if Neanderthals could answer for themselves and tell us about their origins?

Now, for the first time, that is possible through the original research of Jack Cuozzo. Fascinated by Neanderthal Man for over two decades, Cuozzo, an orthodontist, has fashioned a research book that will clutch the attention of scientists and laypersons alike, for the Neanderthal family has finally emerged to tell a shocking story.

http://www.amazon.com/Buried-Alive-Jack-Cuozzo/dp/0890512388/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1418934839&sr=1-1&keywords=Buried+Alive++Cuozzo

In an easy-to-read text, this book examines growing scientific evidence that is challenging Darwin's theory of evolution: lack of transitional forms in the fossil record, the impossibility of mutations (almost universally destructive) serving as evolutionary building blocks, the bad logic of natural selection theory, the stunning lack of evidence for "ape-men," the mathematic impossibility of life beginning by itself, more. Also explores how Darwinism helped foster Hitler's racial policies and examines how Inherit the Wind grossly misled Americans about the Scopes trial. Addresses the ever-vital question: Are we here by chance or are we created by God? Indexed, over 80 illustrations, hundreds of quotes from scientists.

The Case Against Darwin is James Perloff's newest title on the creation-evolution debate. Written from a creationist perspective, this 83-page book is a primer for those unfamiliar with the subject, and too busy for a full-length book such as the author's earlier Tornado in a Junkyard.
Perloff first explores the social impact of Darwinism to establish the relevance of the topic. Then, in layman's language, he discusses the growing body of evidence that is invalidating Darwin's theory of evolution: evidence from genetics, origins science, biochemistry, paleontology, taxonomy and molecular biology. Finally, he examines fallacies of certain evidences commonly said to support Darwin's theory: Ernst Haeckel's embryo drawings, vestigial organs, salt percentages in blood and seawater, babies born with "monkey tails," peppered moths, microevolution, and similarity as a proof of common descent.

Despite the scientific nature of the material, Perloff keeps it light and short, and most readers should find The Case Against Darwin an easy read.

http://www.amazon.com/Case-Against-Darwin-Evidence-Examined/dp/0966816013/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1375303278&sr=1-2

Darwin’s theory of evolution: good science or faulty philosophy?
May 9, 2014 55 comments
charles darwin
Charles Darwin (1809-1882) is considered the father of evolutionary theory but apparently it was really his grandfather Erasmus who formulated the theory of evolution. (image source) Modern science, I was surprised to learn, seems to show that evolution cannot possibly be true.

When I was little I learned about evolution – the idea that as humans we evolved from lizards and microbes through a process of competition and violence, with the strong surviving while the weaker members of the species die off in the struggle for life.

As a child I initially found this theory depressing but then I accepted it and made it my own – I identified with it on a very deep level.

In high school I won the award for best science student in my graduating class, and later on, I found myself doing research in a genetics laboratory at a major university as an undergrad. I was hopeful that the answers to life’s most important questions would be discovered by science someday.

After graduation, when I met people who didn’t believe in evolution, I felt uncomfortable, like I was meeting someone from another planet. Did they use a fork and spoon to eat their food? Did they sleep upside down?

To reduce my anxietyy, I developed the attitude that ridicule, contempt and avoidance were probably the best ways to relate to non-evolution believers.

http://botstudent.net/2014/darwin-evolution-wrong

It’s interesting to notice that the more we know about life and the more we know about biology, the more problems Darwinism has…2

Dr. Michael Behe, Professor of Biochemistry

Dr. Colin Patterson (1933-1998), senior paleontologist at the British Museum, was a strong public supporter of evolutionary theory – he even wrote a book on the topic.

However in 1981 he gave a talk at the American Museum of Natural History – which was tape-recorded without his knowledge – in which he said:

Most of us think that we are working in evolutionary research. But is its explanatory power any more than verbal?…

“Evolution” not only conveys no knowledge, but seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge…3

In the article 'Toward a New Science of Life,' EIR journalist Jonathan Tennenbaum makes the following the statement concerning Darwinism:

Now, it is easy to show that Darwinism, one of the pillars of modern biology, is nothing but a kind of cult, a cult religion. I am not exaggerating. It has no scientific validity whatsoever. Darwin's so-called theory of evolution is based on absurdly irrational propositions, which did not come from scientific observations, but were artificially introduced from the outside, for political-ideological reasons (Tennenbaum).

Thousands not Billions: Challenging the Icon of Evolution, Questioning the Age of the Earth



http://www.amazon.com/Thousands-not-Billions-Challenging-Questioning/dp/0890514410/ref=pd_sim_b_6?ie=UTF8&refRID=1DPM11N4TY4XQ042W6BX

No such thing as you describe is predicted by evolution. This is the straw man you are presenting. It is not the actual theory of evolution.

If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties… must assuredly have existed.
- Charles Darwin

If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.15
- Charles Darwin