Every Helpless Baby Born Proves Darwin Was Wrong

The Theory of Evolution in a nutshell is "Survival of the fittest." But most mammals and birds give birth to helpless babies - instead of strong and fit ones. Neither Darwinism nor Neo-Darwinism can explain infantile helplessness. Every baby that is born contradicts Evolution Theory and this is a fatal flaw.

Darwin Purposely Overlooked Helpless Babies To Save His Theory

Infantile Helplessness Busts The Theory of Evolution

While Darwin was formulating his Theory of Evolution, he purposely overlooked the babies of mammals and birds because these babies are unfit to survive and Darwin's theory could not possibly explain this. So Darwin ignored babies - he never wrote about them. But it was absurd and wrong to ignore a crucial portion of the life of most species of mammals and birds just because it does not fit with the theory.

The fact that most birds and mammals have helpless and fragile babies totally contradicts Darwinism. If Darwinian evolution actually worked, the result would have been that all higher life forms would have babies that were "fit" and self-reliant rather than fragile and helpless. The worldwide presence of infantile fragility is such a devastating blow to the Theory of Evolution that it actually renders Darwinism totally invalid because it contradicts the very essence of the theory.

Here is why:

Every Baby Born Helpless Proves Darwin Was Wrong

According to the Theory of Evolution, within each species, the babies with "better genes" that help them to be born the most fit and self-reliant would survive the best, breed the most, and pass on their better genes to their offspring. Therefore each succeeding generation would have babies that are increasingly self-reliant and fit until the species would ultimately breed babies that are completely self-reliant at birth.

Mammals are the highest form of life and Darwinism would predict that all mammals give birth to babies that are totally fit and not in need of help from the mother.

But the opposite it true.

All mammals and birds have offspring that are handicapped with infantile helplessness.

Infantile helplessness contradicts Darwinism so fundamentally that unless Darwinists can explain it, Creationists have the right to say Darwinism is disproved by the facts of life.

On the other hand, infantile helplessness supports Logical Creationism, which believes that the world is the purposeful creation of a loving God. One purpose is to teach humanity how to love selflessly and help us to be protective and gentle. Having helpless babies assists us to learn selfless love, compassion and self-sacrifice. Every parent has made sacrifices for his or her child and this is as God intended it.

God knew that there would come a Theory of Evolution and He made certain to create life on Earth in such a way that there would be major discrepancies between real life and the false theory. God is the Master of timing and this is the time He chose to bust Darwin - and this website is an agent for Him to do so.

[Scientists normally use the term "precocial" to refer to species that have offspring that are viable; and they use the term "altricial" to refer to species that have helpless offspring. These terms are unfamiliar and meaningless to the public so for the sake of clarity, we will not use them on this website.]

The Theory of Evolution is Wrong: It Predicts that the Most Advanced Species Would Produce the Most Self-reliant Offspring

How did life begin on Earth? And how come there is such a diversity of species on this planet?

As far as Darwinists are concerned, their answer is that life began by chance, with the simplest form of bacteria they call prokaryotes, and the prokaryotes "evolved" into more complex forms of life, which in turn then diversified into all the 8 million species we now have on this planet.

According to the devotees of evolution theory, this is the order of appearance of life forms on Earth:

• Prokaryotes (simple cells) emerged on earth about 4 billion years ago
• Eukaryotes (complex cells) emerged 2 billion years ago
• Multicellular life emerged 1 billion years ago
• Simple animals about 600 million years ago
• Arthropods (ancestors of insects and crustaceans) about 570 million years ago
• Complex animals first showed up about 550 million years ago
• Fish have been on earth since 500 million years
• Proto-amphibians have been here just a little less than 500 million years
• Insects showed up 400 million years ago
• Amphibians emerge about 360 million years ago followed by
• Reptiles, which have been around for 300 million years, and
• Mammals have been on Earth for 200 million years, whereas
• Birds were the last to arrive and have been here only 150 million years
• And the direct ancestors of man (hominids) probably have been here for maybe 2 million years.

You may or may not agree with the above but that is what evolution scientists tell us.

But this timeline of evolution exposes a FATAL FLAW IN DARWINISM.

If we apply a logical mind to scrutinize the hidden details of this timeline, we come upon the following insurmountable problem for evolutionists to try to explain:

Either the timeline is backwards or the Theory of Evolution is backwards and fatally flawed. Here is why:

Mammals and birds are the highest forms of life and the most "evolved". But most of them have offspring that are born helpless and unfit to survive on their own. Every life form before mammals and birds has offspring that are essentially self-reliant and truly fit to survive. It is not possible for Darwinism to explain how life could evolve in the direction of having less and less fit babies. If Darwin were correct, each new species that evolves would have babies that are more fit.

To put it all another way:

Darwin cannot explain how the world could go from bacteria that have 'babies' that are totally fit, to humans who have babies that are totally helpless.

Bacteria have "babies" that are replicas of the "parents" and 100 percent as viable as the "parents". Fish and reptiles have babies that are miniature replicas of the parents and are self-reliant but are less viable because of their smaller size and slower speed. Most mammals and birds have totally helpless babies that have zero percent viability and need to be nursed. Babies that need to be nursed are not exactly good examples of "survival of the fittest".

How does a Darwinist explain how, after 4 billion years of evolution, we end up with helpless babies'?

The fact is as we climb the evolutionary tree of complexity we find diminishing fitness on the way up because of the survivability of the babies.

Darwinists cannot explain this. It is a FLAW IN THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION. And because this flaw concerns the very essence of the theory (reproduction and survivability, which are the foundations of evolution theory) the FLAW IS FATAL TO THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION.

The Theory of Evolution is Wrong: It Would Predict that Babies of Each Species Would Become Increasingly More Fit From One Generation to the Next

Below are the basic tenets of the Theory of Evolution (for both Darwinism and Neo-Darwinism) as published in National Geographic Magazine:

The gist of the concept is that small, random, heritable differences among individuals result in different chances of survival and reproduction ' success for some, death without offspring for others ' and that this natural culling leads to significant changes in shape, size, strength, armament, color, biochemistry, and behavior among the descendants. Excess population growth drives the competitive struggle. Because less successful competitors produce fewer surviving offspring, the useless or negative variations tend to disappear, whereas the useful variations tend to be perpetuated and gradually magnified throughout a population.

National Geographic November 2004 Vol 206 No 5

From the above outline, it is easy to understand that the Theory of Evolution would lead us to predict that over time, each generation of babies of a species would become more and more "fit" because being fitter as a baby would be a "useful variation" that would "tend to be perpetuated and gradually magnified throughout the population". Also, the more "fit" the baby, the greater the "chances of survival and reproduction" and the extra fitness would be passed on to the children of the fittest babies.

Therefore, according to Darwinism, each new generation of a species would give birth to offspring that are more fit than the offspring of the previous generation. And this would be "magnified" over and over. The result would be that over time, each species would have offspring that are totally self-reliant. And there would be no species that gave birth to unfit offspring

According to Darwinism, certainly after hundreds of millions of years of evolution, there should not be any species left that gave birth to helpless offspring.

But Darwin was wrong, which is why most mammals and birds give birth to fragile babies that are totally helpless. The fact is that most baby mammals and birds are helpless and fragile. There is no way Darwinism can explain infantile fragility. Therefore THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION IS FATALLY FLAWED.

We are not the only ones who thought about this. Evolution scientists know this, but they have suppressed the truth in a worldwide Darwin Conspiracy.