I wrote this book, it is supposed to expose the evolution theory as being a very silly thing. You can purchase it on amazon.https://www.amazon.com/dp/B081CR7R3R/re ... ext&sr=1-1
here is the description:
This book is not about challenging or questioning the evolution theory. No, this book is about showing the reader that the evolution theory is a bunch of nonsense. This book is to show that evolution theory even isn’t worth anybody’s time or attention, it even shouldn’t be taken seriously.
Evolution is a fairy tale, a myth, just like all the previous myths before it. Yes, just like the Bible. Just like the biblical religion that fulfilled the needs of population during previous times, and it was protected and propagated by certain institutions and its servants, the church and the priests, same the evolution is protected and propagated by universities, media and the evolutionist pseudoscientists. This current evolution myth fulfills the mental and cultural needs of today's population.
Evolution was never a science, it never had a case. Back in time the humanity wanted to emancipate itself from the biblical god, so people clung to the next best thing that was available at the time, the evolution theory, and stuck with it till now. But this tells us that people have a mental deficiency, by being unable to live in uncertainty or admitting that they don't know something.
If people didn't like the biblical god no more, they could just drop this idea, without the need to hang to all this evolution nonsense. Now how this book is going to achieve the task of showing that evolution is just a collection of nonsense?
First this book is not going to provide a simple and short rebuttal to evolution theory, like in one short sentence. Well maybe you can use the term "irreducible complexity" that really says it all. In the "Verdict" chapter I will provide simple logical conclusion why evolution is nonsense, but this conclusion will be based on my interpretation of the data, and maybe not everybody will agree with my interpretation. The thing is that evolution just like every fairy tale, is composed in such a way that it is almost impossible to debunk it.
The tactic of this book is to show that the evolution theory is redundant, that it has no evidence, that it is nonscientific, and that the scientific community is working hard to cover this up.
The book will show that the evolution theory has no real explanation or prediction power, that it is simply a bunch of empty words.
This book will show that the evolution theory and science can't explain the most basic things in biology and living organisms. The evolution can't explain anything really.
This book will show that the living organisms have irreducibly complex internal organs and DNA, that cannot be produced by evolutionary methods.
This book will show that the scientific community consists of mostly amateurs and jokers, that have no idea what they are talking about.
This book will show that "evolution" is an empty word, and to say about something that it had "evolved", it's same as saying "god did it". It's just empty words.
Now what method will I use?
First this book will not present any new scientific data, in fact this is not a science book, this a logic book. This book is supposed to show you how to think, it's supposed to give you tools to analyze data on your own. We don't need any new scientific data, we already have all we need.
Right now you are in a situation where you think like "majority of people say that evolution is true, but some say it's not. Both parties saying a lot of smart and complicated things, so I can't figure out who is right. But the majority is for evolution, so I guess they are right".
And in this situation you are unable to analyze data, you can't understand the scientific evidence. Any additional findings only add to your confusion.
But I will give you the tools to analyze the data, and understand what people are really saying. And that it's not about the quantity of evidence, but about the quality, and the ability to correctly interpret it.
Right now it's like you are in a forest, and because of all the surrounding trees you don't know where exactly are you and which direction are you going. I'm about to lift you up to the sky, to give you a higher prospective, and you will be able to see and understand everything.
So the book is divided into three main parts.
First part starts with a little bit of human history and philosophy. But later we have more important stuff. I'm going to talk about the meaning of the words "evidence" and "proof", how to interpret it and the major distinction between those two. (the murder in Kiev story).
Then we talk about how to form a correct point of view (position) on a specific issue. How misconception can lead to misinterpretation of scientific evidence, and in this case any additional scientific findings will only reinforce the misconception instead of clarifying it. (the car and the alien scientists story).
After, we will talk about the meaning of the word "theory", and the major difference between gravity theory and evolution theory.
Then we define both evolution and the intelligent design theories. Because there are some major misconceptions about those two.
Now it's important for me to tell you at this point that I'm not an intelligent design proponent, Bible proponent or any proponent. So why do I bring up the intelligent design theory? Because I'm going to use it as a tool, a very effective tool in dismantling the evolution theory.
This the tactic they use in the court of law. If the persecution wants to get an indictment of a suspect based on certain evidence, what the defense may do is to show that this specific set of evidence can fit to more than just the current suspect. Now if the evidence can fit to more than one person, then it no longer can be considered as proof that any of the suspects committed the crime, and additional evidence is needed. For example, the criminal was tall, had a brown hair, green eyes, and a yellow car. Police arrests a person named George that fits this description, so in court one of the first things that the defense will do is try to find additional people that live near the crime scene that also fit this description. So defense finds a person named Ross that also is tall, has brown hair, green eyes and yellow car, now this evidence is not enough to convict any of them. The defense doesn't have to find who did it, only to prove that the evidence is not sufficient to convict George.
Same here in our case, in the second part of the book I will show you that all the scientific evidence out there really suits much better the intelligent design theory, and that's already enough to establish that the evidence we have is not enough to prove evolution. Furthermore, there is additional evidence of irreducible complexity that clearly refutes any possibility of evolution.
In the process of the evidence trial you will see that evolution is not an invincible giant that you were taught to think all your life, that evolution really is a naked king, a paper tiger, a mirage, a house of cards (for how long you want me to go on?).
You were also taught all your life that there is overwhelming amount of evidence out there that strongly support evolution, but no, all this evidence was only misinterpreted and misrepresented to you by the scientific community so you would think that way.
Also in the second part we expose the total uselessness and inability of the evolution theory to explain even basic things, and you will see that it is really a pathetic sight. It's one big joke.
We also talk about simple experiments that could be conducted in order to test the concept of evolution theory, but most likely those experiments were already conducted and didn't produce the desired results, so the evolutionists kept it quiet.
Then we will have a verdict, that evolution is just a bunch of nonsense.
In the third part we talk a little bit some more philosophy, make some conclusions, I will talk about my view on the subject, what I believe in.
I will not keep you waiting, I can tell you right now. Well mostly I think that our intelligence cannot come up with an explanation for this world and the origin of life, so we make up myths in order to avoid uncertainty that for some reason scares us. In my opinion the best explanation that we have today is the work by the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer that was written two hundred years ago, it’s a book "World as will and presentation". I do believe that this is the most important book in the history of mankind. But that's just my opinion, you don't have to agree.
Now if you want a simple and short explanation to replace evolution, then sorry I can't give you that. All I can give you is the acknowledgement of not knowing, but some people prefer to live in a small comfortable fairy tale rather than in uncertainty, well it's up to you to decide what is best for you.
But I'm sure when you finish reading this book you will see, that all this evolution thing is one big silliness, a joke, that doesn’t worth your time. The most evolution deserves is a laugh, or just a giggle. What convinced me the most is not the claims that are being made by the opponents against evolution, but on the contrary the claims that are being made by proponents for evolution. The claims that are being made in favor of evolution really are just empty words, the evidence that is being presented really don’t support anything, and if evolutionist can't see that then they shouldn't be taken seriously by any rational person.
Many of my claims in this book are based on my personal "maybe"s, maybe this and maybe that. No actual research was conducted by me to support many of my claims. But the thing is that it's also the way how evolutionists operate, they been doing it for almost one hundred and fifty years by now. So what's good for the goose, is good for the gander. If any of my "maybe" interpretations will be refuted in a future research, I will admit it and retract it. But for now it's all good.
Also I want to add that throughout this book I will be constantly comparing living organisms and human made products. I know that some evolutionists don't like this practice for some reason, they claim that it's not same thing or whatever. Well I don't agree, I think it's a fair game. It depends what is the point that a person trying to make by using a specific comparison, so if the analogy is used correctly, I don’t see any problem with that.
Both human made products and living organisms share common characteristics, like having multiple different parts that are set to work together, also humans work with information just like organisms do. The major difference between the two I guess is that living organisms reproduce differently, but so what? All that gives is a possibility of random alterations, we can mimic this process in human made products with a computer software. Anyway I think it's a fair game, as long as each comparison is made correctly, and that's what I'm going to do a lot in this book.