DIOSPYROS LEAF

According to Darwinists’ unscientific claims, date trees, pine trees, cacti, orchids, carnations, roses, cherry trees, grasses, ferns—in short, all plants share the same imaginary forebear. But when asked about the nature of this common forebear, or by what stages different plants diverged from one another and finally assumed their present forms, evolutionists have no scientic response to give. E. J. H. Corner, an evolutionist botanist from Cambridge University, admits that evolutionists have no answers on the subject of the origin of plants: The words of widely recognized evolutionist botanist E.J.H. Corner of Cambridge University still ring true 40 years after he wrote them: “But I still think that, to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favour of special creation . . . Can you imagine how an orchid, a duckweed, and a palm have come from the same ancestry, and have we any evidence for this assumption? The evolutionist must be prepared with an answer, but I think that most would break down before an inquisition.” ( E.J.H. Corner, Prof of Botany, Cambridge University, England, Evolution in Contemporary Botanical Thought, Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961, p. 97) The level of science and technology of the 21st century has made Corner’s concerns more valid. Countless scientific findings, and the fossil record in particular, have placed Darwinism in an insoluble dilemma—not in the field of botany alone, but in all branches of science. In their intellectual death throes, Darwinists are trying to keep their theory alive and to prepare for questions they may be faced with. Yet they still have not a single scientific answer to give.