Home page of Was Darwin right?

Video 1 title

This is an example of a Vimeo video, just edit the change the video link, edit the title and this description and if you like, you can also link the continue button to a web page....

Video 2 title

This is an example of a Vimeo video, just edit the change the video link, edit the title and this description and if you like, you can also link the continue button to a web page....

Video 3 title

This is an example of a Vimeo video, just edit the change the video link, edit the title and this description and if you like, you can also link the continue button to a web page....

Video 4 title

This is an example of a Vimeo video, just edit the change the video link, edit the title and this description and if you like, you can also link the continue button to a web page....

image1 image2 image3 image4

At the start of time................

Evolution puts bacteria as the first self replicating organisms, but scientists have no irrefutable evidence of how such complex organisms arose by chance?

Bacteria to amoeba...............

A small step size wise, but a change from the Kingdom of Prokaryotic organisms to the Kingdom of Eukaryotic organisms with many new cell parts.

Fossils showing stability over time...............

Many fossils, like this jellyfish fossil, actually show stability of some species over time rather than change and there is a lack of intermediates. Species that are the same as their fossil ancestors are called "Living fossils".

Evolution or diversification...............

Dogs are a wonderful example of diversification within a species that can be applied to many other species, not to be confused with evolution.

image1 image2 image3 image4
themed object

Brief videos

  • Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed - No criticism of evolution allowed - 7 minute trailer
  • Simple cells and fossils - 9.5 minutes
  • Fossil intermediates and living fossils - 10 minutes
  • Genetics, selection and mutations - 10 minutes
  • Embryonic recapitulation fraud and origin of information - 9.5 minutes
  • Mutations and evolution - 9.5 minutes


Chance or design?
Bookmark and Share
get in touch
About Us Contact Photos Services Sitemap

Header Content Region

Insert text, image or banner ads here, or just delete this text and leave this area blank!


Half of British adults do not believe in evolution, with at least 22% preferring the theories of creationism or intelligent design to explain how the world came about, according to a survey....... Half of the 2,060 people questioned were either strongly opposed to the theory or confused about it...... Guardian newspaper, Febuary 2009.

The survey was conducted by the respected polling firm ComRes.

Introduction. Charles Darwin published his book "The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection" in 1859. Although the theory has been modified since Darwin's original theory (for example neo-Darwinism), he is still considered a major originator of the theory of evolution as it stands today. Although still a theory, nowadays the theory of evolution tends to be accepted largely as fact in most schools and universities across the  world and by most of the media. 

However, since the theory of evolution was first put forward, scientific knowledge has progressed enormously. One major area of scientific progress since Darwin's day concerns DNA. The structure of DNA, the way in which DNA replicates and codes for proteins and the genes involved in coding for specific proteins were unknown in Darwin's day. Also, in Darwin's day there was little known about the intricate and highly complex inner workings of cells, they were thought to be relatively simple.

Indeed, there are many well qualified scientists and academics who are writing books that question the science behind the theory of evolution or have publicly declared dissatisfaction with the theory of evolution.,

These include:-

  • Professor Michael Behe (Biochemist and author of Darwin's Black Box).

  • Professor Norman Nevin (OBE, Professor of Medical Genetics, editor and one of the authors of Should Christians Embrace Evolution).

  • Dr Michael Denton (molecular biologist, medical Doctor and author of Evolution: A Theory In Crisis).

  • Professor Paul Back (Former Rhodes scholar and author of Darwinism and The Rise of Degenerate Science).

  • Phillip Johnson (Professor of Law and author of Darwin on Trial).

  • Professor William Dembski (author of Intelligent Design: The Bridge between Science and Theology).

  • David Swift (author of Evolution Under the Microscope: A Scientific Critique of the Theory of Evolution)

  • Dr Gary Paker (Biologist, author of The Fossil book).

    + Many other books and authors. Over 800 Scientists with at least a PhD have signed a dissent from Darwinism statement.

"Darwinian evolutionary theory was my field of specialization in biology. Among other things, I wrote a textbook on the subject thirty years ago. Meanwhile, however I have become an apostate from Darwinian theory and have described it as part of modernism’s origination myth. Consequently, I certainly agree that biology students at least should have the opportunity to learn about the flaws and limits of Darwin’s theory while they are learning about the theory’s strongest claims." Dr. Stanley Salthe, Professor Emeritus, Brooklyn College of the City University of New York.

Professor Michael Behe  comments that there have always been since the time of Darwin, well informed and respected scientists who have found Darwinism to be inadequate (Darwin's Black Box, page 30) and Michael Denton also makes a similar comment in his book Evolution: A Theory In Crisis.

What are the main contentious points (see Conclusions page for this summary + more or see videos):-

  • There is no explanation for the appearance of the first living cells (Abiogenesis).

  • Living systems are irreducibly complex, mitigating against chance.

  • There is a rapid appearance of life in the Cambrian rocks (Cambrian explosion).

  • There are gaps in the fossil records.

  • Living fossils show the stability of species over time.

  • Anatomical homology (e.g. similar limb bone structure between species) does not always relate to similar genes, suggesting no common descent.

  • Mutations tend to lead to slight changes in function or loss of original function, but not novel function.

  • Mutations do not lead to larger and more complex genomes.

  • The evidence for early man can be considered inconclusive.

So, does current scientific knowledge try to fit to an old theory that is no longer viable? Is there any scientific justification to believing in Creation or is belief in Creation an outdated belief like the old belief held by Eighteenth century scientists that phlogiston was released into air by combustion? 

Is it not possible that God designed creatures to adapt to a limited extent to their environment and created diversity within species as part of a beautiful and imaginative Creation?

It is accepted that even amongst Christians who believe that God "Created" there are different ideas of "how" God created and some different ideas are briefly explored on the viewpoints page.

Top of page

Quottable quotes (Science quotes)

"The percentage of people in the country who accept the idea of evolution has declined from 45 in 1985 to 40 in 2005. Meanwhile the fraction of Americans unsure about evolution has soared from 7 per cent in 1985 to 21 per cent last year." Science 2006, vol. 313 p765.

BBC news, January 26th 2006. "Just under half of Britons accept the theory of evolution as the best description for the development of life," According to a recent MORI opinion poll. "Furthermore, more than 40% of those questioned believe that creationism or intelligent design (ID) should be taught in school science lessons" - see Britons unconvinced on evolution

800 Scientists who have at least a doctorate and don't believe in Darwinism

"Once only religious nuts questioned Darwinism. All that has changed" The Spectator 24th October 2003.

"Seventy-one percent of adult Americans think that the evidence against Darwin should be taught in schools." The Spectator 24th October 2003.

"A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question." Darwin, Origin of the species.

"Darwinists this month are celebrating the 80th anniversary of the Scopes trial. But critics of evolution note an irony lost on the Darwinists in the midst of their celebrations, namely, that they now behave exactly like the silencers of science they once reviled. Desperate to shut down debate that exposes their evolutionary theory as unsustainable conjecture, the Darwinists are using the incantations of an ideology they call science and the power of law to prevent the teaching of any concepts besides random variation and natural selection. While Darwinists still pose as champions of free inquiry, they actively suppress it in the name of their scientific dogmatism." American Spectator 29th July 2005

Top of page

Spectator article.

Below is an abstract taken from the Spectator of October 24th 2003 (from on-line publication, permission requested).

"Afew weeks ago I was talking to a friend, a man who has more postgraduate degrees than I have GCSEs. The subject of Darwinism came up. ‘Actually,’ he said, raising his eyebrows, ‘I don’t believe in evolution.’

I reacted with incredulity: ‘Don’t be so bloody daft.’

‘I’m not,’ he said. 'Many Scientists admit that the theory of evolution is in trouble these days. There are too many things it can’t explain'.

‘Like what?’

‘The gap in the fossil record'.

‘Oh, that old chestnut!’ My desire to scorn was impeded only by a gap in my knowledge more glaring than that in the fossil record itself.

Last Saturday at breakfast with my flatmates, there was a pause in conversation. ‘Hands up anyone who has doubts about Darwinism,’ I said. To my surprise all three — a teacher, a music agent and a playwright — slowly raised their arms. One had read a book about the inadequacies of Darwin — Michael Denton’s Evolution: A Theory in Crisis; another, a Christian, thought that Genesis was still the best explanation for the universe. The playwright blamed the doctrine of survival of the fittest for ‘capitalist misery and the oppression of the people’. Nearly 150 years after the publication of Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species, a taboo seems to be lifting.

Until recently, to question Darwinism was to admit to being either a religious nut or just plain thick. ‘Darwin’s theory is no longer a theory but a fact,’ said Julian Huxley in 1959. For most of the late 20th century Darwinism has seemed indubitable, even to those who have as little real understanding of the theory as they do of setting the video-timer. I remember a recent conversation with my mother: ‘Do you believe in evolution, Mum?’ ‘Of course I do, darling. If you use your thumbs a lot, you will have children with big thumbs. If they use their thumbs a lot, and so do their children, then eventually there will be a new sort of person with big thumbs.’

The whole point of natural selection is that it denies that acquired characteristics can be inherited. According to modern Darwinism, new species are created by a purposeless, random process of genetic mutation. If keen Darwinians such as my mother can get it wrong, it is perhaps not surprising that the theory is under attack.

 The current confusion is the result of a decade of campaigning by a group of Christian academics who work for a think-tank called the Discovery Institute in Seattle. Their guiding principle — which they call Intelligent Design theory or ID — is a sophisticated version of St Thomas Aquinas’ Argument from Design.

 Over the last few years they have had a staggering impact. Just a few weeks ago, they persuaded an American publisher of biology textbooks to add a paragraph encouraging students to analyse theories other than Darwinism. Over the past two years they have convinced the boards of education in Ohio, Michigan, West Virginia and Georgia to teach children about Intelligent Design. Indiana and Texas are keen to follow suit. They sponsor debates, set up research fellowships, publish books, distribute flyers and badges, and conduct polls, the latest of which shows that 71 per cent of adult Americans think that the evidence against Darwin should be taught in school".

Top of page


Suggested books

Each page has suggested books, either as images or as text at the bottom of the page and both of these should hyper-link to the relevant book in the shop. Please see below a list of a few of the books recommended by this site. Many more books can be bought from the shop.

An Ice Age Caused By The Genesis Flood, by Michael Oard.

Creation Facts Of Life, by Dr Gary Parker.

Darwinism And The Rise Of Degenerate Science, by Dr Paul Back - A chapter is devoted to the age of the Earth.

Darwin's Black Box, by Professor Michael Behe.

Darwinism And The Rise Of Degenerate Science, by Dr Paul Back.

Darwin's Enigma, by Luther Sunderland

Evolution, A Theory In Crisis, by Dr Michael Denton.

Evolution, The Fossils Still Say No, Dr Duane Gish.

Genesis Flood, by J. C. Whitcomb and H. M. Morris.

Grand Canyon: Monument To Catastrophe, by Dr. Steven Austin.

In six days, by fifty different scientists.

Sea Floor Sediments And The Age Of The Earth, by Dr. Larry Vardiman

The Naked Emperor: Darwinism Exposed, by Antony Latham.

Thousands not millions, by Don De Young.

Top of page

Welcome, unique visitor

back to top