Creationism - National Center for Science Education

In a 1925 book The Evolution of Man Scientifically Disproved Rev. William A.
Williams gave the first full-scale presentation of one of creation-science’s most popular
and formidable arguments: the probability arguments against evolution. Williams
presents fifty arguments decisively refuting evolution, most of them by the “acid test” of
mathematical proof. These proofs are intended as an antidote to the textbooks promoting
evolution, infidelity and atheism in the schools. When evolution is subjected to rigorous
scientific examination of facts and mathematical logic, declares Williams, it fails utterly.
Williams’ first argument is based on the rate of human population increase. If the earth
were as old as evolutionists claim, its population, according to this rate, would now be
2 1040 —a number too vast even write out. “Q.E.D.” This argument, though patently
absurd in its assumption of unchanging rate, is still a favorite with modern creationscientists.
Henry Morris, for instance, praises Williams for originating it and other
probability arguments (1984:106). Williams fills his book with huge numbers. He
devises intricate calculations refuting chance origin of adaptive features. Noting that
Darwin used phrases indicating uncertainty 800 times (after Riley), Williams multiplies
these all together and solemnly announces that the probability of his argument for
evolution being true is therefore only 6 out of a quintillion.
Williams also vehemently maintains that evolution is atheistic and therefore evil
and untrue. In a forthright statement of the fundamentalist attitude, he states: “No one
has a moral right to believe what is false, much less to teach it, under the specious plea of
freedom of thought.” (Many evolutionists would retort that the plea of freedom of
religion does not give the right to teach, as science, false theories.)
The second half of Williams’ book refutes various evolutionist arguments.
Notable in this section is his presentation of the serology (blood test) evidence of
biochemical relatedness between humans and other animals.
They tell us that the blood of a dog injected into the veins of a horse, will kill the horse, whereas the blood
of a man injected into the veins of an ape results in very feeble reaction, which proves that the dog and the
horse, they say, are not related by blood, while the man and the ape are so related. But a distinguished
authority says, “The blood of the dog is poisonous to other animals, whilst, on the other hand, the blood and
the blood serum of the sheep, goat and horse, have generally little effect on other animals and on man. It is
for this reason that these animals and particularly the horse, are used in preparation of the serums employed
in medicines.” [1925:86-87]
Williams concludes that this proves, if anything, that the horse is more closely related to
humans than is the ape. Naive and ignorant as this interpretation is (Williams completely
misundertands antibody reactions), it is repeated nearly verbatim in another “scientific”
book a decade later (Paul Johnson 1938:578), and re-quoted in a recent tract based on this
later book (Laymen’s Home Missionary Movement, undated).
Rimmer’s Research Science Bureau published a booklet Evolution and the Bible
(undated; apparently 1920s) by Arthur I. Brown. Brown was a Vancouver physician who
became a full-time Baptist preacher. He wrote a series of anti-evolution pamphlets up to
the 1940s, plus several books. Miracles of Science (1945), based on radio talks for
Moody Bible Institute, consists of various examples of design in nature. Each
demonstrates the “indisputable, scientific fact of a personal, omnipotent Creator-God.”
God and You: Wonders of the Human Body (1940s) presents the same argument based on
human physiological design. “No speculative evolutionary hypothesis will suffice as an