Search This Blog

Sunday, September 24, 2017

Biology and Information

When we see the design in living things and want to know how they have their characteristics, we have to think small. Very small, but with big concepts, all the way down to the molecular level. It's a matter of information. DNA, RNA, chromosomes, and so on are communicating information to not only in the building of an organism, but to keep it going. The information must have a source.


Credit: Freeimages / Krzysztof (Kriss) Szkurlatowski
Those believing in muck-to-man evolution are constantly dealing with the source and uses of information in living things. They try and fail to conjure up plausible origin of life scenarios, including the desperate "RNA world" for self-replicating systems concept, and then try to explain how living things are encoded with the ability to self-adapt to changing situations. They don't give us anything real to hang our hats on in their efforts to deny the reality of our Creator who gave us life.
The greatest challenge for evolutionary biology is to account for the information found in codes in DNA, RNA, proteins, and more recently in the epigenome. The mutation/selection mechanism of neo-Darwinism, although still taught in biology textbooks, has been shown inadequate by creation and intelligent design scientists. Indeed, even some leading evolutionists are seeking alternative mechanisms such as self-organization. Much evidence has been found against neo-Darwinism (and all related stochastic processes) and for intelligent design (ID) in recent years. Intelligent design advocates have found ways to detect design. Much evidence has been found against the macroevolution of Homo sapiens and for the biblical origin of mankind.
Evolutionists must account for the origin of life, the Cambrian Explosion in the fossil record, living fossils, the lack of transitional forms, the origin of sexuality, the origin of consciousness, the origin of information in macroevolution, the origin of irreducibly complex molecular machines, convergent evolution, and the information found in the epigenome.
To read the rest, click on "The Origin of Information in Biology".

Information is vital to the origin, design, and function of living things. Believers in muck-to-man evolution are unable to present plausible ideas and models for these things, yet they persist in denying the obvious evidence of our Creator's work.
  

Sunday, September 17, 2017

Disingenuous Search for Truth in Evolutionary Science

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

There are many double standards seen in evolutionary science, not the least of which is anti-creationist censorship. I'll allow that many of the articles seen by the public are written on the lay level (as are many secular science articles), so anti-creationists point to those and mischaracterize creationary scientists as simplistic. Not hardly!

In reality, there are also many that appeal to those with a strong science background. Want three? "A Review of Mitoribosome Structure and Function Does not Support the Serial Endosymbiotic Theory",  "A 5D spherically symmetric expanding universe is young", and a PDF, "Could Magnetic Monopoles Cause Accelerated Decay?" (I seldom share articles of this nature on weblogs and social media because most of my readers are reg'lar folk like me.) Yes, creationists do get published in scientific journals. The point is that creationary scientists are just as qualified as their secular counterparts. Unfortunately, creationists and Intelligent Design advocates are blackballed from publishing material that challenges evolution. 


Credit: Pixabay / Charnchai
In a tremendous stroke of irony, when Darwin's Flying Monkeys© swarm social media, they are generally obstreperous, chock full o' logical fallacies — and get their curly tails banned. Then they shriek about "censorship", and commence to using fake accounts for trolling, deception, and criminal impersonation to ferret out personal information from other people. This is done to silence those of us who present the truth.


Used under Fair Use provisions for educational purposes
Click for larger
Yet, creationists are censored in the public arena, so we need to set up our own areas so our side of the story can be told — which often includes information that secularists do not want known because it threatens evolutionism. Interesting that those decrying "censorship" ignore real censorship against creationary scientists. Essentially, they want their pie, and they want a big chunk of ours, too! Quite a bit of effort to silence the opposition to promote "science" and deny the reality of the Creator, isn't it?

The well-heeled evolutionary science industry promotes and protects their worldview, and they don't cotton to actually seeking and spreading truth. Let's look at an example of hypocrisy and non-science from the evolution industry.
When your view has been falsified by evidence but you prohibit other views, you are not engaged in truth-based inquiry.
In a book review in Science, Marcos Huerta enjoys a fact-free suggestion about the Cambrian Explosion he found in Wallace Arthur’s new book of sweeping generalities about evolution, Life through Time and Space. Shutting his eyes to fossil data, he switches on his imagination:
To read the rest, click on "Evolution Is Not Truth-Based Inquiry".

Advocates of evolutionism disingenuously say that they want to search for the truth, then shut out creationary scientists and ID advocates. Then they hypocritically complain about "censorship" while approving of scientific censorship in their favor: they want their pie, and they want ours as well.

Sunday, September 10, 2017

Archaeology, Same-Sex Relationships, and the Apostle Paul

In AD 79. an eruption of Mt. Vesuvius suddenly wiped out the inhabitants of the Roman town of Pompeii, among others. That bad boy has not remained silent, and could be devastating to the 3,000,000 people in the area, who ignored the idea of not living near an active volcano. Didn't work for people in 79. (Useless trivia: Pompeii is pronounced pom-PAY, but a small community in Gratiot County, Michigan has the same spelling, and locals pronounce it POM-pay-eye. I was laughed at for using that pronunciation because as a kid, I lived near there, and did not know the real way.) So anyway, the tons of ash that fell on Pompeii was an effective preservative, and archaeologists have made many interesting discoveries.

Pompeii destroyed by Mt. Vesuvius, archaeology used to justify same-sex relationships
The Last Day of Pompeii / Karl Bryullov, 1833
Apostate clergyman Steve Chalke, who denies original sin in Genesis 3 and affirms the Pelagian heresy, believes that "erotic art" excavated by archaeologists at Pompeii refutes established Christian understandings of Paul's teachings about homosexuality. How Chalke diagrams his logic on the blackboard is unknown. He is joining in with other owlhoots who say that in Romans 1, Paul was only speaking of sexual abuse, but thought that same-sex "marriage" was acceptable. Such a claim impugns the integrity of God, the establishment of marriage in Genesis, its affirmation by Jesus, and implies that God is willing to let people misunderstand his word for 2,000 years.
In a recent lecture, a professing evangelical pastor in the UK, Steve Chalke argued1 that ancient erotic art from Pompeii, an ancient Roman town buried by a volcanic eruption in AD 79, shows that “New Testament verses that are used routinely to label same-sex activity as sinful were, in fact” not doing so.
Christians “Throw Bible Verses Around Without . . . Context”
Chalke reportedly asserted that “because of widespread ignorance of the ancient world and Graeco-Roman culture in churches across the West, we throw Bible verses around without understanding their context.” These pieces of explicit artwork supposedly provide the context to show that the New Testament is “condemning the abusive and exploitative sexual activity common in the world that Paul’s recipients lived in” rather than forbidding “faithful gay relationships” among Christians.
To finish reading, click on "Does Ancient Art from Pompeii Prove the Bible Supports Gay 'Marriage'?"
  
Excavated items from Pompeii are being used to justify same-sex relationships. Not only is the logic poor, but the theology in play is outrageous.

Sunday, September 03, 2017

Teaching Evolutionary Falsehoods to Children

It's natural for parents to try to shield their children from harmful things, but that can to too far and turn into "smother love". Some Christian parents have the incorrect notion that their kids should never learn about evolution. That's unrealistic, since the owlhoots at the Darwin Ranch control government-run indoctrination centers (schools), the media, secular science, public opinion, and much more. They're going to learn about it, so what can Bible-believing parents do?


Bible-believing parents can educate children correctly about evolution.
Credit: Pixabay / 7854
Out there in the real world (with a passel of help from the internet), there are sidewinders who actively attack God, the Bible, the Resurrection, creation, and other Christian beliefs. They will selectively cite data, misquote the Bible, use fake science (such as the "Canaanites disprove the Bible" fiasco or the "family tomb of Jesus" nonsense), and especially evolution. Evolution is foundational to atheism and many (if not most) secularist views.

Other attacks on our faith can be investigated and dealt with (often by simply waiting for more information), so let's focus on evolution. Christians need to be proactive. We know kids are going to learn about evolution, and some parents teach it to their own children. The difference is that the wise parent will teach it properly. In schools and such, the sanitized version of evolution is given, where flaws in the theory are ignored, and fanciful tales are presented as if they were science.


Take the kids to the natural history museums, and show them just how unnatural they are. As before, stories are presented as facts, our putative evolutionary apelike ancestors have suspiciously human-looking eyes when no scientist has any idea what the eyes actually looked like, so people are seeing opinions presented as scientific fact. I've read about parents and Christian teachers that took children to museums, and they troubled the guides' propaganda by raising points and asking questions.

Schools are dreadful at teaching critical thinking skills nowadays, and creation science ministries emphasize those skills. When presented with claims, the properly educated student or adult can ask probing questions, consider the theory of knowledge behind the claims, realize that most evolutionists have a materialist atheistic worldview that rejects facts that they dislike, and so on. We can prepare children for the lies they are going to be told, and how to deal with them.
Some parents are afraid that teaching their children unbiblical ideas like evolution or atheistic arguments would cause them to stumble in their faith, but the opposite is true. Our children are going to be exposed to evolution whether we like it or not. It’s not a matter of ‘if’; it’s a matter of ‘when’. Knowing this, one of the best things we can do for our children is to teach them unbiblical ideas, or in short, how the world thinks. Because if we do not, others will provide seeming explanations that might seem more plausible.
I'd be much obliged if you'd read the entire article. Just click on "'What?… Teach my children unbiblical ideas?' — Inoculate your children against compromise by teaching them the answers". IN ADDITION, I hope you'll read this informative article as well, "Seven ways to build a lighthouse — How Christian parents can help their kids navigate evolutionary education".
  
Bible-believing parents cannot, and should not, shield their children from evolution and other attacks on their faith. Proper education can help them deal with such matters.

Sunday, August 27, 2017

Is Belief in Creation Fading?

A 2017 Gallup poll shows a decline in the number of Americans who profess belief in special creation without Darwin. A significant number believe that God had a hand in particles-to-propagandist evolution, and then there are those who believe in atheistic evolutionism. Does this reflect reality?


Credit: Pixabay / Barbara Rosner
While any poll can be suspect since we're not given many details, let's just assume that Gallup is being it's reputable self and the results are on the level. Biblical creationists would rightly ask why this is happening. There are several reasons, including the liberalization of Christianity, laziness in Christians regarding learning the truth of creation and teaching their children, peer pressure, and more.

Additional reasons for the fading belief in creation include, bluntly, persecution in academia and the secular establishment. Creationary students have been advised to keep their beliefs quiet until they get the degrees, and possibly the jobs, that they want. Professors tend to be not only leftists, but vehement misotheist bullies who seek to destroy the faith of students. Even teachers who believe in creation have to get out of Dodge; the author of the main article linked below, Dr. Jerry Bergman, was fired for his creationary beliefs and has written books about the struggles of other creationists.

The scientific and logical evidence supports biblical creation, but ideologues in educational power (coupled with lazy, compromising Christians) exert pressure on students who can leave home as believers and come back as atheists! Creation science is streng verboten, as is Intelligent Design, and fundamentalist Darwinists control the propaganda. Evolutionism is presented, but not any of the flaws. Only the sanitized propaganda is given.

Darwinism is the prevailing viewpoint in many nations, and the United States is following the trail ridden by highly secularized (as well as socialist and communist) countries elsewhere. Evolution is not to be criticized, or  Darwin's Flying Monkeys© will get you fired and probably burn a dumpster in front of your house just for the fun of it. My exaggeration on the dumpster part is only slight, but reflects the anger and fear of losing control in the secular science industry and academia — as well as trolling the internet. The truth is on our side, but they have control and an efficient propaganda machine and aren't afraid to use it to indoctrinate people.
A new Gallup poll shows, for the first time since the poll on this subject began, “a notable decline in the percentage of Americans — including Christians — who hold to the ‘Young Earth’ creationist view that humankind was created in its present form in the past 10,000 years, evolution playing no part.” According to the poll, taken in May, the portion of the American public taking the creation position now stands at 38%. Furthermore, fifty-seven percent accept the “scientific consensus that human beings evolved from less advanced forms of life over millions of years.” The poll reveals the largest factor in the shift is the jump in the number of Christians who see evolution as God’s way of creating life on Earth and continuing to shape it today.
To finish reading, click on "Is Creationism on the Decline? If So, Why?" You may also like to read "Belief in Creation Declines".
  
A poll shows that Americans are becoming more like other secularized nations, accepting Darwinism and rejecting special creation in increasing numbers. Although truth, logic, and science are on our side, why is this happening?

Sunday, August 20, 2017

Whale Study Supports Creation Model

A study on how whales became the largest mammals on Earth had some interesting speculations, with homage to Darwin and just-so stories added. Short answer: they got big because they ate a lot. The long answer involves conditions that gave them the proper food with the right quantity and quality. 

The study was evolutionary in nature, but variations in critters isn't evolution, it's simply variations. Nothing is changing into something else, like the fish-to-land-animals-back-to-the-sea whale evolution foolishness, you savvy? In fact, none of the long-age evolutionary claims can be substantiated. The blue whale evolution concept has failed as well. That's because they were created, and not the product of evolution.

Humpback whale "breeching" image credit: Sally Mizroch,
Alaska Fisheries Science Center, NOAA Fisheries Service
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Several possible conditions that led to baleen whales' increase in size, such as ocean upwelling bringing nutrients, the Ice Age, windblown iron-rich dust assisting phytoplankton and helping with that food chain, and other possibilities fit right in with Genesis Flood models. Conditions during and after the Flood may have matched the evolutionary speculations, but without the millions of Darwin years obtained by circular reasoning and a whole whack of assumptions.
A study published in May in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B hypothesized how and when baleen whales (those which filter feed plankton, krill, and other small creatures) grew so large. Previous hypotheses on the subject had come up with several potential methodologies: change in diet to a particular niche, response to macropredator size, loss of competition for resources, larger intake of food, localized prey density, and so on. They were surprised to discover a correlation between intense wind-driven ocean upwelling and baleen whale body size. They also found that, by comparing baleen whales from the fossil record, today’s giant whales (like the blue whale) grew in size rapidly, starting at about the time of the late Pliocene (supposedly 3 million years ago) through to the late Pleistocene (conventionally dated to 100,000 years ago); the entire time period in Flood geology terms would be during the Ice Age (c. 2300–1900 BC).
To read the rest, click on "How and When Did Baleen Whales Get So Large?

A study on the evolution and size of baleen whales raised some interesting speculations. Some of the more reasonable material supports creation science Genesis Flood models.

Sunday, August 13, 2017

Chowing Down on Propane

Some people say that the little things in life are what matter. We can adjust that to say that little living things matter. This goes all the way down to bacteria. Many people know that even though there are harmful bacteria, there are many that are necessary for life. Some even help protect the environment.

Mostly made at Atom Smasher
Way down in the deep blue sea are organisms that live on asphalt volcanoes and essentially chow down on propane. Seems weird, but it's true. It's also frustrating for evolutionists to explain the symbiotic relationship among the critters living there, and waving it off as EvolutionDidIt is beyond credibility.

So, why is it different when biblical creationists say that God created bacteria to adapt and to eat propane, and have a quid pro quo happening with other creatures? I think the principle of the impossibility of the contrary may apply. That is, although they don't want to admit that the Creator's design is the logical conclusion, evolution is clearly impossible. But fundamentalist evolutionists cling to their stories despite the lack of models, science, or logic.
Asphalt volcanos really do exist on the ocean floor. They leak natural gas, oil, and the same type of black glop we use for road pavement. They have been oozing for who knows how long, although scientists discovered them only 15 or so years ago. Unique sea creatures team up to eat their petroleum products. How could any living thing live off natural gas?
We know of special bacteria that eat oil. For example, they cleaned up the Gulf of Mexico after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill more quickly than some thought possible. But the mussels, sea worms, crabs, sponges, and other animals that thrive on the slopes of asphalt volcanoes cannot eat oil.
To eat up the rest of this article, click on "Propane Eaters Spur Creation Questions".
   
So, deep sea bacteria help clean up the environment by eating asphalt and propane. This frustrates evolutionists, since they have no plausible evidence or models. They also reject creation out of hand, even though it's the logical conclusion to what's happening way down in the oceans.