Search This Blog

Sunday, April 22, 2012

The biggest lie being told, Evolution, is also the greatest threat to society!

"The abject failure of Darwinism is not simply that it is a pack of lies and fairy tales nor that it has been the excuse used by a host of tyrants to brutally murder millions of people, but on top of that it removes any hope of meaning in life.   The devoted Darwinist, while nonsensically acknowledging that there cannot be free will in an evolutionary scenario, nevertheless reasons that evolution is true and therefore one can do whatever one wishes as long as you can get away with it without any responsibility to a Higher Power.  This in turn means that you were an accident, that you have no purpose in life and the fact that you have existed really makes no difference at all.   Life therefore has no purpose or meaning and it then becomes devalued, which is why abortion is legal now and euthanasia is coming if Christianity and real science do not win the day." - Radar

"He has put eternity in their hearts"

Within all aspects of American society there are lies that are accepted as truths, lies that have caused people to view science as inexact and mythical.   The odds against one organism ever arising by chance are so infinitesimal as to be statistically impossible...and yet we cannot even number the vast number of the varieties of organisms that are alive today, not to mention the myriad creatures which have gone extinct since the creation of the world.

Because Darwinist evolution has been promoted as proven science rather than the hilariously ridiculous farcical collection of lies and fairy tales that it actually is, society has begun to reject God and accept all kinds of mystical supernatural alternatives.  Why is this?  Because it is ingrained in the human soul to understand that there is a supernatural aspect to life.  We cannot look up at the stars at night or hold a newborn baby or even look another human being in the eyes and not understand that there is more to life than simply material existence.   This ingrained knowledge is expressed in the Bible in many places.

"He has made everything beautiful in its time"

Ecclesiastes 3:10-12

" I have seen the God-given task with which the sons of men are to be occupied.  He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end.

I know that nothing is better for them than to rejoice, and to do good in their lives..."

This verse had to be very familiar to the early Christian scientists who actually founded modern science.   It was the belief that a Logical God had made all things that caused men like Sir Francis Bacon and Sir Isaac Newton to seek to do their best to understand how the Universe works.   Men who saw the Truth and Beauty of a created Universe through the lenses of Christian faith were confident that years of research, testing and probing and thinking and imagining were worth investing big chunks of their time to make use of the world as best they could and give others the tools to make life better for everyone and to better comprehend the magnificence of God's creation.   Men who were also dedicated to putting the lie to the superstitions of the common man, superstitions based in ignorance and pagan belief systems.

"I have seen the God-given task with which the sons of men are to be occupied"

We are born with the desire to accomplish things.   David Coppedge has compiled a great list of Godly men who were the pioneers of modern science, each of them with a short biography and many of them names you will recognize.

                               From Y1K to Y2K

Read the content on that site and you will understand why the naturalistic materialists are anti-science religious zealots who hate real science and seek to stifle all dissent.   Who censors and seeks to hide information?  It is always the bad guys!   Darwinists do not want you to realize that upward evolution never happens, that rather devolution is eroding the genetic material available to organisms to the point that we foresee that life will die from the accumulation of mutations before we overcrowd the planet with people, an event that is quite a ways event that may never happen because the Universe in this form will end when the One Who began it all in the first place decides to say, "Stop!"

It is therefore Christians, (primarily priests at first because few people other than priests could read before the Reformation and the invention of the printing press) who developed the scientific method and formed modern science.   It was Christians who sought to teach the common man to read and to improve their lot in life.

It was the political rulers masquerading as "The Church" that forbade commoners to even own a Bible and invented all sorts of ways to get the common man to give the rulers all they wanted.   The horrors of the Inquisition are oft-related but usually misunderstood.   The ruling paradigm was seeking to keep their place in society, their power and their riches...just as Darwinists seek to keep people believing in their mythical and magical process so they can retain their lifestyles and the dominance of grant monies, teaching positions, membership in scientific organizations and of course in government agencies and public schools.

We are also born with the ingrained tendency to sin and be completely selfish.   Those born into societies where the accepted morality is twisted will live a twisted life. This was true of the cannibals of Africa, South America and the Caribbean.   This was true of the treacherous tribes of Papua New Guinea.   This was also true of the residents of Canaan when God sent the Children of Israel from bondage in Egypt to conquer and force out all of the sinful residents.   Imagine a society of serial killers, rapists, pedophiles and demon-worshipers?   This was the society that had inhabited The Promised Land that God had originally given to Abraham and his kin.   One of the common lies of Darwinists is that God is murderous, because He ordered the Jews to kill off all of the inhabitants of Canaan.   Yet, if the Jews had obeyed God in the first place, this is what was planned:

Exodus 23:20-32

The Angel and the Promises

“Behold, I send an Angel before you to keep you in the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared.  Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for He will not pardon your transgressions; for My name is in Him.  But if you indeed obey His voice and do all that I speak, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries.  For My Angel will go before you and bring you in to the Amorites and the Hittites and the Perizzites and the Canaanites and the Hivites and the Jebusites; and I will cut them off.  You shall not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do according to their works; but you shall utterly overthrow them and completely break down their sacred pillars.

“So you shall serve the Lord your God, and He will bless your bread and your water. And I will take sickness away from the midst of you.  No one shall suffer miscarriage or be barren in your land; I will fulfill the number of your days.

“I will send My fear before you, I will cause confusion among all the people to whom you come, and will make all your enemies turn their backs to you.  And I will send hornets before you, which shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite from before you.  I will not drive them out from before you in one year, lest the land become desolate and the beasts of the field become too numerous for you.  Little by little I will drive them out from before you, until you have increased, and you inherit the land.  And I will set your bounds from the Red Sea to the sea, Philistia, and from the desert to the River. For I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand, and you shall drive them out before you.  You shall make no covenant with them, nor with their gods." 

Of course, when the time came for the Children of Israel, the Jews, to invade and occupy Land of Canaan, they faltered and feared and refused to invade:

Numbers 13:30-33

"Then Caleb quieted the people before Moses, and said, “Let us go up at once and take possession, for we are well able to overcome it.”

But the men who had gone up with him said, “We are not able to go up against the people, for they are stronger than we.”  And they gave the children of Israel a bad report of the land which they had spied out, saying, “The land through which we have gone as spies is a land that devours its inhabitants, and all the people whom we saw in it are men of great stature.  There we saw the giants (the descendants of Anak came from the giants); and we were like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight.”

So instead of the steady march across The Promised Land, their enemies fleeing before them, the Jews spent 40 years wandering around waiting for the death of all but the two men, Joshua and Caleb, who were willing to go and obey God.  By the time the Jews were able to go across and take the land, it was by force and by sword and sling and arrow.   The bloodshed involved in casting out the demon-worshipers of Canaan would not likely have occurred if the former slaves of Egypt had simply obeyed God in the first place.

"I know that nothing is better for them than to rejoice, and to do good in their lives"

Modern scientists in growing numbers are coming over to the Creationist side (not even counting all the Intelligent Design people who are not religious or at least not Christian) and Coppedge gives us some more recent examples, below:


The Resurrection of Creation Science

The scientists in this chapter brought creation science back from its apparent coma.  These were brave men who fought the establishment and won a hearing.  Their books, lectures, and influence - along with their science - demonstrated to millions that the evidence supported creation all along, and that Darwinism was only a facade hiding numerous and serious evidential problems.  The chapter concludes by examining trends in creation science at the start of the Third Millennium.
  A. E. Wilder-Smith     1915 - 1995The Intelligent Design Movement is big news today, but did you know much of the scientific reasoning behind it came from a European organic chemist?  William Dembski, author of several key books in the ID movement, credits Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith for the inspiration to make the study of origins his life’s work.  Dean Kenyon, the evolutionary origin of life researcher turned creationist, called Dr. Wilder-Smith one of the two or three most important scientists in his life.  Much of the literature coming out of the modern intelligent design movement contains echoes of powerful arguments made by A. E. Wilder-Smith decades ago.

    In his books and tapes, Arthur Edward Wilder-Smith stressed the importance of information in biology, stressing that the materialist’s formula for the life, energy + matter + time, was deficient because it left out the factor information.  He convincingly argued that the information in DNA, in its translation, had to follow a language convention which presupposed an agreement between parties needing to communicate with one another.  For example, he explained how SOS is a meaningless sequence of letters unless there has been a convention (a “coming together” agreement, in advance) that it is a signal for distress.  Similarly, the DNA triplet codon for alanine, GCC, looks and smells nothing like alanine, by itself.  Unless both the translation mechanism (the ribosome) and the DNA code both have aconvention that GCC means alanine, it means nothing at all.  This, he explained, was prima facie evidence of intelligent design.

    He also argued effectively against Thomas Huxley’s old monkey-typewriter analogy, the claim that a million monkeys typing on a million typewriters would eventually produce Psalm 23 by chance, given enough time.  Wilder-Smith pointed out a fatal flaw that undermined the whole argument.  By showing that since the chemical reactions that would have led to life in a primordial soup are reversible, that fact rendered the analogy useless – in the monkeys’ case, if the letters fell off the page as soon as they were typed, no meaningful sequence would ever be produced.  Huxley, therefore, had cheated by claiming that the letters typed would remain on the page.  The laws of chemistry do not permit that sort of stability in chemical evolution scenarios.  With points like this, he argued that creation was scientific and naturalistic evolution was unscientific.

    As a highly qualified organic chemist, A. E. Wilder-Smith was uniquely positioned to critique so-called “chemical evolution.”  This kindly gentleman was merciless in his attacks on Miller, Oparin, Fox and other evolutionists who claimed to be making progress explaining life’s origin by chance and necessity.  His effectiveness stemmed not from vituperative ability or rhetoric, but rather – because of his intimate acquaintance with the facts of chemistry – from calm, rational dismantling of the philosophical and scientific assumptions underlying his opponents’ errors: i.e., from scientific arguments that could not be denied by any knowledgeable chemist.  Dr. Wilder-Smith was one of the first to emphasize the necessity for one-handed molecules to hold genetic information (see online book), and to apply the laws of thermodynamics and equilibrium to discussions of the origin of life.

    A. E. Wilder-Smith was one of few scientists in the world to have three earned doctorates.  He obtained his first Ph.D. in physical organic chemistry at Reading University, England in 1941.  A research scientist during the war, he subsequently became a fellow of the University of London, and then director of research for a Swiss pharmaceutical company.  After becoming a full professor at the University of Geneva, he earned a second doctorate in pharmacology there, and later, a third in pharmacological sciences at ETH, a senior university in Zurich, Switzerland.  In addition, he was a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry and a NATO three-star general!

    Dr. Wilder-Smith was not only an expert on chemotherapy, pharmacology, organic chemistry, and biochemistry, but a gifted teacher and popular public speaker.    He did not shy away from entering the lions’ den of the evolutionary establishment.  At a time when communism was strong and evolutionary science reigned with unchallenged bravado, he was like a Daniel with seemingly divine power to shut his opponents’ mouths.  Once, in a manner reminiscent of Paul turning the Pharisees and Sadducees against each other (see Acts 23), he got the better of a hostile audience of Finnish and Russian students by referring to a word that meant one thing in Finnish and another in Russian.  The Finns, who despised the Russians, were incensed to hear him claiming this word had the Russian meaning, but the Russians agreed with him.  As they were shouting at one another, the English jumped in and argued that the word was a meaningless syllable. 
Thus the professor made his point effectively: without a language convention, a sequence of letters carries no information.  Dr. Wilder-Smith confronted communists with scientific arguments that undermined their political philosophy.  God only knows how much his work contributed to the eventual demise of communism, but it certainly affected numerous individual communists.

    A. E. Wilder-Smith is also probably responsible for Richard Dawkins refusing to debate creationists any more.  In 1986, Wilder-Smith and Edgar Andrews debated the two leading evolutionists in Britain, Richard Dawkins and John Maynard Smith, at Oxford – a lions’ den with the two strongest Darwinian lions in Europe.  Yet even there, over a third – almost half – of the staunchly pro-evolution audience voted that the creation side had won the debate.  The vote count became a contentious issue.  There were claims of a cover-up by the Oxford Student Union.  The AAAS was accused of lying about the vote count and didn’t correct it even when confronted (see article).  The evolutionists apparently were embarrassed that the creationists made such a strong showing.  For whatever reason, Dawkins no longer will debate creationists.  Reports from those in attendance say that, contrary to the ground rules of the debate, the Dawkins and Maynard Smith repeatedly attacked religion, while the creationists used only scientific arguments.  Dawkins himself had to be reprimanded by the moderator for attacking Wilder-Smith about his religious views.  Dawkins implored the audience not to give any votes to the creationists lest it be a “blot on the escutcheon of ancient University of Oxford” (an odd remark, considering Oxford was founded by Christians).

After the debate, details of the event were lost by the University.  Normally, Oxford Union debates are big news, given prominent publicity in the press, radio and television.  This one, however, which should have rivaled the historic 1860 Huxley-Wilberforce debate in importance, and indeed was even titled the ’Huxley Memorial Debate,” was silently dropped from the radar screen.  In his memoirs, Dr. Wilder-Smith wrote, “No records of my having held the lecture as part of the Oxford Union Debate could be found in any library.  No part of the official media breathed a word about it.  So total is the current censorship on any effective criticism of New-Darwinian science and on any genuine alternative.”

    A sought-after public speaker, Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith shared his insights with tens of thousands throughout America and Europe.  His rapport with audiences made them feel at home with even difficult scientific concepts as he would occasionally glance into their faces to see whether they “got it” and, if not, would ask who needed a term or concept explained before he went on.  With charming simplicity he could be found discussing comfortably everything from black holes to one-handed molecules, or Shannon information theory, time dilation, DNA transcription, AIDS, criminal psychology, history, natural theology, natural selection or why God allows suffering.  He was no mere talking head.  A devoted husband and father of five children, a devout born-again Christian, and an unquestionably capable scientist, he left no chinks in his armor.  To the consternation of his scientific colleagues, here was a young-earth creationist they could not pigeonhole as an ignoramus.  He could not only hold his own among the best of them, he could make his opponents turn tail and run for cover.  Wilder-Smith authored over 70 scientific publications and more than 30 books, some of which have been published in 17 languages and are still in print.  Many of today’s leading creationist consider him a major influence in their own intellectual development, and call him a pioneer in anti-evolution arguments.

    Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith appeared prominently in an award-winning creation film series called Origins: How the World Came to Be.  Still available from, this series keeps his wit and wisdom alive.  It’s a good way to become acquainted with the man and his message.  In one episode, he holds up a living plant and a dead stick to the energy of the sun and asks the viewer what is the difference.  If energy is all that is necessary to produce life, why does one grow, and the other decay?  Clearly, the energy must be directed through programmed instructions and conversion mechanisms to harness the energy for growth.  Such pithy illustrations using familiar objects are a good teacher’s art.  In another taped lecture (The Seven Main Postulates of Evolution), he holds up a sardine can.  Could life evolve from this can? he asks.  After all, it has all the ingredients necessary for life, because they were once alive.  It’s an open system, too: we can heat it or cool it any way we wish.  Everyone knows that nothing will happen.  If new life could originate from the can, he points out, the food processing industry would be in turmoil, because no one would be able to predict what new life-forms would be found in our food.  He drives the point home by asking what would happen if the genetic program for E. coli bacteria were inserted into the can: an explosion of life would result.  Clearly, matter and energy are insufficient to produce life under the best of conditions; the essential ingredient is information, in the form of the genetic instructions and processing apparatus to utilize the matter and energy to carry out the program.

    The time you are taking reading this short biography of a great creation scientist might be better spent listening to Dr. Wilder-Smith himself.  Fortunately, friends have made a website in his honor:, with information about his books, tapes, videos and articles.  So after reading this, go browsing and learn more; download some audio files and listen.  To know A. E. Wilder-Smith from his legacy of literature and lectures is to love him, not only as a great scientist and thinker, but as a winsome Christian man of integrity.  He had the look of a kindly grandfather.  His disarming personal appearance belied the sharp intellect inside.  His soft-spoken and unhurried speech, seasoned with wry humor, had a way of getting right to the heart of important issues and conveying difficult concepts in terms accessible to everyone.  A masterful teacher, he won the “Golden Apple” award three years in a row at the University of Illinois Medical Center for the best course of lectures.  The last one was inscribed, “He made us not only better scientists, but better men.”

    Despite his busy schedule, A. E. Wilder-Smith loved classical music and enjoyed hiking in the Swiss alps.  The music of Haydn’sCreation reminded him of God’s creativity described in Genesis.  Of his outdoor experiences he said, “In God’s beautiful nature, with the colorfully blossoming mountain meadows in front of you and the gigantic snow-capped ten thousand footers behind them, the murmuring brooks beside you and the ringing of the cow-bells around you, hearts automatically begin to admire God’s creation and wisdom and cannot but praise the intelligence behind such manifold beauty.”

Learn More About
A. E. Wilder-Smith
Browse the Wilder-Smith website.Order the videos Origins: How the World Came to Be from
Read about the 1986 Oxford Debate scandal and cover-up by George Cooper and Paul Humber.
A recording of the Oxford Debate has surfaced after being forgotten and is now available.  A New Zealander had bought them in 1986 from an Englishman who had purchased the copyright to the tape, but then he forgot about them for 17 years.  In 2003, when he was involved in a discussion about the debate, he remembered he had the tapes and has now made it available on CD. Order here.
Read testimonials from scientists in the biography of A. E. Wilder-Smith by his wife Beate, entitled Fulfilled Journey: The Wilder-Smith Memoirs.
To find his books, enter "A E Wilder-Smith" (in quotes) in a book search  Inquire for audio tapes from Chapel Tapes, P.O. Box 8000, Costa Mesa, CA 92628, 800-272-WORD.
  Henry Morris     1918 - 2006 The man considered the “father of the modern creationist movement,” a prolific author, scientist and founder of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR), died Feb. 25, 2006 at age 87 after a series a small strokes.  His memorial service, a celebration of a consistent and profitable life, attracted leading creationists from around the world.

Dr. Henry M. Morris, Jr. (PhD, hydraulic engineering, Rice University) and Dr. John Whitcomb awakened a slumbering church in 1961 withThe Genesis Flood, a book that many have claimed marked the beginning of the modern creationist movement.  The book presented convincing scientific evidence against long ages and for a global watery cataclysm.  In 1970, Morris left Virginia Tech where he was head of the department of civil engineering, to pursue his creation activities full time.  With Dr. Duane Gish, a biochemist from UC Berkeley, Morris formed the Institute for Creation Research.  The fledgling work, begun on a shoestring, soon grew into the leading creationist research institute in the world and added a museum and graduate school.  Morris and Gish debated hundreds of scientists on college campuses across America and around the world.  His 50+ books, unabashedly Christian and literally Biblical but also very astute about science and the history of evolutionary thought, have had an enormous impact on generations of readers.

Gentle and soft-spoken in person but impregnable with a pen, Dr. Henry Morris was still writing things up to his final few days.  The breadth and depth of subjects he wrote about is remarkable.  His mind stayed sharp mind through age 87.  The work at ICR continues under the leadership of his son John Morris, a PhD in geological engineering.  The institute has begun several new research projects including one in genetics, after the recent conclusion of its 8-year RATE project, an interdisciplinary analysis of radioactive dating by 11 scientists.

In 2002, ICR hosted a large, well-attended conference at Calvary Chapel, Costa Mesa called “Passing the Torch of Creation,” where Morris received a standing ovation after being introduced to speak at one of his last public appearances.  He will be missed by all who loved him and his work; indeed, even his pro-Darwinist enemies will probably pay their respects.  While denouncing his beliefs, they never could deny his personal character, integrity and influence.  His many books, along with audio and video recordings, and not least the institution he founded, will ensure that Dr. Henry M. Morris, Jr. will remain near to the creation movement he revived.

Dr. Morris demonstrated how one man, committed to God and his word, can make a difference.  Almost every creationist leader today is indebted to his life and works.  In the 1960s there were very few books on creation.  Evolution dominated the textbooks and most churches, intimidated by science, preferred to avoid the issue.  Henry Morris’s first small paperback, The Bible and Modern Science, began to change things.  Then The Genesis Flood electrified a new generation of college-educated Christians.  Liberal churches had long since given in to Darwinism completely, and many Bible-believing churches had capitulated to long ages and uniformitarianism.  Assuming that science had proved deep time, they merely tried to accommodate it with compromises like the gap theory or progressive creation.

Morris and Whitcomb demonstrated that it was possible to look at the fossil record and the geological strata in a new way that corroborated the Bible record of a world-wide flood.  Not only that, they showed how the scientific evidence was superior to that of the evolutionists.  A new army of creation scientists launched into further investigations that continue to the present day.  New organizations, like the Bible-Science Association and the Creation Research Society, were formed and numerous spin-off clubs and societies have kept the creation movement growing in strength and extent around the world.  Almost all of them can trace some ancestry back to ICR.

Henry Morris never boasted about himself but always sought to honor Jesus Christ and remain faithful to God's word.  He was aware to the last of the crucial nature of this intellectual battle.  The battle has become more heated than ever.  Having passed the torch on to a new generation, he didn’t leave the field, but continued to challenge and encourage others to the end.  Dr. Morris has been the Moses of modern creationism.  His personal endurance, patience and integrity, and the wisdom of his books, need to inspire a new generation of Joshuas and Calebs to be strong and very courageous, and to take back the land, for good science and the glory of God.

Learn More About
Henry Morris
The best source for information on Dr. Morris is the website of the Institute for Creation Research that he founded: ICR.
Duane Gish: coming soon.
Steven Austin: coming soon.
  Raymond V. Damadian     b. 1936    On a given Sunday morning, in a small Bible Baptist church on Long Island, New York, sitting alongside his wife, you might find a quiet, unpretentious white-haired gentleman who changed the world.  Other than by his distinguished appearance, you might not know he warrants a place in our hall of fame, but in fact, millions owe their life and health to him.  His name is Dr. Raymond V. Damadian.  He invented the MRI scanner.

MRI is a household acronym these days; everybody knows somebody who has had one (if not themselves) when needing to be diagnosed for a serious disease.  But in the 1970s, it would have seemed like a device out of Star Trek.  To see inside a living body in fine detail, without the harm of X-rays, was a doctor’s impossible dream then; today it is a reality.  And it is going to get better.  His latest invention, just now coming on the market, will revolutionize the operating room.  More on that later.

Dr. Damadian, biophysicist, took a relatively new discovery of physics called nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and applied it to biology.  But it was to prove an uphill battle against doubters and patent thieves.  The three stages of reaction to a new invention are, (1) It’s impossible, (2) It’s possible but impractical, and (3) It was my idea.  Dr. Damadian experienced all three.

After years of legal hassles and near loss of his livelihood, he was vindicated, and is rightly honored today as the inventor of the first practical MRI scanner.

His story comes right out of a Hollywood David-and-Goliath script, the lone entrepreneur against the giant corporations, the optimistic man with a vision against the skeptics in the establishment.  Physicists had been using NMR, first reported in 1938, to study various materials, but it was Damadian who reasoned that hydrogen (in water) might prove responsive within the cells of living tissue.  Moreover, he speculated that cancerous tumors might respond differently than healthy tissue.  Working on borrowed time, experimenting on mice, he gained confidence that his hunch was right.  He published a seminal paper in 1971 on his preliminary findings, then applied for a patent and attempted to get a research grant to build a prototype of the invention he had in mind, a device that would flood a human torso with high-energy magnetism and then receive radio emissions from the water in the tissues.  But his academic colleagues said it couldn’t be done; why, he would have to spin the patient at 10,000 RPM to make it work!  The experts laughed his idea to scorn; the National Institutes of Health refused his request for grant funds.

Undaunted, Damadian appealed directly to President Nixon, who in 1971 had just declared war on cancer.  He received a modest grant, but then found himself in a race to produce a working scanner when he learned that others, envious of his preliminary successes, were beginning to steal his idea.  Scientific American described the contest: “Damadian pushed himself and his students relentlessly and found private backers to keep research going on a shoestring budget.”  Finally, in 1977, he was ready to step into his contraption he had named “Indomitable”  It must have looked like a scene out of Frankenstein.

Damadian proved on his own body that the intense magnetic fields produced no harm, but the machine was too small for him.  He got a smaller graduate student to play guinea pig and made history by producing the first NMR image of a human torso.  The press leaped on this story, gaining him some notoriety, but since the image was imprecise (it showed the heart, lungs and chest, but needed improvement), no venture capital could be found.  Convinced of his belief it could detect cancer, he decided to go it alone.  With a small group of friends and supporters, he started FONAR Corporation to design and build Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scanners.  But the Big Boys wanted to play, too, and he was in competition with General Electric, Toshiba, Siemens, and other corporate giants wanting to capitalize on his discovery.

The big competitors nearly robbed him of his invention.  He learned first-hand about corporate greed, and had to spend millions defending his patent.  In 1982, a jury trial vindicated him against international corporations that were manufacturing scanners overseas, but a judge single-handedly reversed their verdict (any corruption there?).  After years of legal wrangling, Fonar Corp. was eventually awarded $100 million in damages, but the really big bucks are still going overseas to those never involved in the invention at all.  From his experience, Damadian became an energetic advocate for the lonely inventors competing against corporate giants, lobbying Congress for protection of patents from infringement and warning against the consequences of weakening the patent laws.

His reputation, however, seems secure.  In 1988, Damadian was awarded the National Medal of Technology, the nation’s highest award for applied science.  The following year he was enrolled in the Inventor’s Hall of Fame in company with Thomas Edison, Samuel F. B. Morse, and the Wright Brothers, among many other famous inventors.  Today, his prototype scanner ’Indomitable” resides in the Smithsonian alongside the first electric light bulb and the first airplane.

Needless to say, Magnetic Resonance Imaging has swept the medical world.  After years of embellishments and refinements by Damadian and others, thousands of MRI scanners are in daily use around the globe, detecting not only cancer but many other diseases and ailments, better and more safely than X-rays,.  Fonar Corporation remains the leader in MRI technology.

Damadian’s newest invention takes Star Trek to The Next Generation: a whole Operating Room MRI.  Soon, it will be commonplace for the whole surgical team to surround the operating table, unaffected by the intense magnetic field that is being applied only to the patient.  A projected 3-D image will allow the doctors to pinpoint the tumor precisely in real time, giving the surgeons unprecedented accuracy in treating life-threatening conditions.  Who knows how many more thousands, if not millions of lives, will be saved by this latest application of Damadian’s vision and genius.  His secretary told this author that he feels, however, like he did at the beginning when he could not find backers for his idea.  To date, few hospitals have been willing to pay for this invention, just now coming on the market.  We can only hope it will succeed as magnificently as before.

Scientific American described Raymond Damadian as a man of intense convictions and energy; “Twenty years later he seems able to muster the same enormous drive that allowed him to prove NMR scanning of the body would, after all, work.  One wonders whether the most indomitable thing to emerge from that dingy laboratory in Brooklyn was a novel machine or Damadian himself.”  But you might not know this from watching him in church.  With nearly a tear in his eye, he told this author, whose sister (a member of the same church) was dying of cancer in early 2000, that he regretted his new operating room MRI was not ready in time to help.  During her illness, and that of her husband who had brain tumors, he donated free MRIs for which they could not pay, and his dear wife Donna would come and sit with them for hours just to show she cared.  They are the most unpretentious and gracious people you could know.

Does creation play a part in Damadian’s philosophy of science?  No; it does not play a part, it plays the lead role.  Dr. Damadian, a young-earth creationist, is convinced that the Bible is the reason for the advancement of science and the blessings of Western civilization, and that our country is in great peril if we do not return to Biblical principles, including the foundational doctrine of creation.  He considers creation a vitally important message for America today.  He told Creation magazine in 1994 that acceptance of the unqualified Word of God “has been the foundation for Western civilization since the printing of the Gutenberg Bible in the fifteenth century,” resulting in centuries of blessing.  But that blessing is now imperiled by greed for the almighty dollar.  “If America is to be rescued, she must be rescued from the pulpit,” he said, adding that any country “runs off its spiritual batteries, not off its bank accounts, and when those batteries are drained, its bank accounts will be empty.”

For himself, Dr. Raymond V. Damadian emphatically affirms that his greatest single scientific discovery was to find that “the highest purpose a man can find for his life is to serve the Will of God.”  And that he does, as a creation scientist, exploring and applying the laws of nature and of nature’s God for the benefit of all mankind.

Learn More About
Raymond Damadian
The interview in the June 1994 Creation Magazine is excellent, and includes color pictures of Dr. Damadian, his scanner, an MRI image, and more.For a lively account of Damadian’s humble beginnings and harrowing adventures on the way to fame, read this well-written short story from Scientific American, June 1997..
Visit FONAR Corporation and read all about their latest Operating Room MRI, as well as accounts of the company history and achievements.
See Dr. Damadian’s entry in the National Inventor’s Hall of Fame and look at the other famous winners through history.
Read the account about Damadian as winner of the National Medal of Technology, and look over the list of other honorees.
Read a chapter from Hope For Those Who Hurt, in which Dr. Damadian provided free MRIs to a poor man with brain tumors and then to his wife dying of cancer.
  Richard Lumsden     1938-1997    Sure, there have been Christians who did good science, but that was before Darwin.  Right?  Wrong!  Here is the story of a staunch Darwinian who converted to creationism first, then to Christianity.

You couldn’t claim Dick Lumsden’s faith come from the culture in which he lived, like you might with someone from the 1500s.  If anything, he was a product of the anti-creationist second half of the twentieth century.  Dr. Richard D. Lumsden was fully grounded in Darwinian philosophy, and had no reason or desire to consider Christianity.  Science was his faith: the facts, and only the facts.  But at the apex of his professional career, he had enough integrity to check out the facts, and made a difficult choice to go where the facts led him, against what he had been taught, and against what he himself taught.  His life took a dramatic turnaround, from Darwinist to creationist, and from atheist to Christian.

Dr. Richard Lumsden was professor of parasitology and cell biology at Tulane University.  He served as dean of the graduate school, and published hundreds of scientific papers.  He trained 30 PhDs.  Thoroughly versed in biological sciences, both in knowledge and lab technique, including electron microscopy, he won the highest world award for parasitology.  All through his career he believed Darwinian evolution was an established principle of science, and he took great glee in ridiculing Christian beliefs.  One day, he heard that Louisiana had passed a law requiring equal time for creation with evolution, and he was flabbergasted– how stupid, he thought, and how evil!  He used the opportunity to launch into a tirade against creationism in class, and to give them his best eloquence in support of Darwinism.  Little did he know he had a formidable opponent in class that day.  No, not a silver-tongued orator to engage him in a battle of wits; that would have been too easy.  This time it was a gentle, polite, young female student.

This student went up to him after class and cheerfully exclaimed, “Great lecture, Doc!  Say, I wonder if I could make an appointment with you; I have some questions about what you said, and just want to get my facts straight.”  Dr. Lumsden, flattered with this student’s positive approach, agreed on a time they could meet in his office.  On the appointed day, the student thanked him for his time, and started in.  She did not argue with anything he had said about evolution in class, but just began asking a series of questions: “How did life arise? . . . Isn’t DNA too complex to form by chance? . . . Why are there gaps in the fossil record between major kinds? . . . .What are the missing links between apes and man?”  She didn’t act judgmental or provocative; she just wanted to know.  Lumsden, unabashed, gave the standard evolutionary answers to the questions.  But something about this interchange began making him very uneasy.  He was prepared for a fight, but not for a gentle, honest set of questions.  As he listened to himself spouting the typical evolutionary responses, he thought to himself, This does not make any sense.  What I know about biology is contrary to what I’m saying.  When the time came to go, the student picked up her books and smiled, “Thanks, Doc!” and left.

On the outside, Dr. Lumsden appeared confident; but on the inside, he was devastated.  He knew that everything he had told this student was wrong.
Dr. Lumsden had the integrity to face his new doubts honestly.  He undertook a personal research project to check out the arguments for evolution, and over time, found them wanting.  Based on the scientific evidence alone, he decided he must reject Darwinism, and he became a creationist.  But as morning follows night, he had to face the next question, Who is the Creator?  Shortly thereafter, by coincidence or not, his sister invited him to church.  It was so out of character for this formerly crusty, self-confident evolutionist to go to church!  Not much earlier, he would have had nothing to do with religion.  But now, he was open to reconsider the identity of the Creator, and whether the claims of the Bible were true.  His atheistic philosophy had also left him helpless to deal with guilt and bad habits in his personal life.  This time he was open, and this time he heard the Good News that God had sent His Son to pay the penalty for our sins, and to offer men forgiveness and eternal life.

A tremendous struggle was going on in Dr. Lumsden’s heart as he listened to the sermon.  When the service ended, the pastor gave an invitation to come to the front and decide once and for all, publicly, to receive Christ.  Dr. Lumsden describes the turmoil he was in:  “With flesh protesting every inch of the way, I found myself walking forward, down to the altar.  And there, found God!  Truly, at that moment, I came to know Him, and received the Lord Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior.”  There’s room at the cross even for know-it-all science professors, if they are willing to humble themselves and bow before the Creator to whom the scientific evidence points.

Dr. Lumsden rejoiced in his new-found faith, but found out there is a price to pay also.  He was ejected from the science faculty after his dynamic conversion to Christ and creationism.  The Institute for Creation Research invited him to direct their biology department, which he did from 1990 to 1996.  Dr. Henry Morris said of him, “He had a very vibrant testimony of his conversion only a few years ago and of the role that one of his students played in confronting his evolutionism with persistent and penetrating questions.  He became fully convinced of the bankruptcy of his beliefs and realized that the only reasonable alternative was that there must be a Creator.”  Dick Lumsden was also appointed to the science faculty of The Master’s College, and used his intimate knowledge of electron microscopy to help the campus set up an operational instrument for training students.  There was a joy present in his life and manner that made his lectures sparkle, and he loved to demonstrate design in the cell that could not have arisen by Darwinian processes.  In discussions with evolutionists, he knew “just where to get them” (he would say with a smile), having been in their shoes.  His students appreciated the training his depth and breadth of knowledge and experience brought to the class and to the lab.

Richard Lumsden gave his personal testimony on Dr. D. James Kennedy’s Coral Ridge Hour.  In the feature, he re-enacted that day in his office when the student made him rethink his beliefs.  In January 1996, he also spoke to the Bible-Science Association in a response to atheist Richard Dawkins’ book The Blind Watchmaker.  In his talk, called Not So Blind a Watchmaker, he gave several detailed descriptions of organs that could not have formed by Darwinian natural selection.  In the question and answer session, he shared his testimony of how God had saved him from his former life as a bragging evolutionist.  Unfortunately, years of unhealthy habits as an unbeliever, including alcohol and tobacco abuse, took their toll on his body, and he died too soon, at age 59, in 1997.  His students miss him very much.

In September 2001, PBS aired an eight-hour series portraying evolution as fact and as the central theme of biology.  It tried to portray the only opponents to Darwinism as being motivated by religion.  Dr. Richard Lumsden, if he were still with us, might just call up the producers and ask, Say, I wonder if I could make an appointment with you; I have some questions about what you said, and just want to get my facts straight.  It would be an interesting interchange.  Doc would know just where to get them.
"except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end."

If you made it this far, you are indeed an inquisitive person or at least a thorough one.   The above section from Ecclesiastes tells us that naturalistic materialists will never find the ultimate truth they seek, as the truth is God and they hate God, or at least the concept of God.   Once we get to the level of quantum mechanics I can picture God's amusement as scientists try to nail down those pesky subatomic particles!   Herding four-dimensional cats?  Harder than that!

The abject failure of Darwinism is not simply that it is a pack of lies and fairy tales nor that it has been the excuse used by a host of tyrants to brutally murder millions of people, but on top of that it removes any hope of meaning in life.   The devoted Darwinist, while nonsensically acknowledging that there cannot be free will in an evolutionary scenario, nevertheless reasons that evolution is true and therefore one can do whatever one wishes as long as you can get away with it without any responsibility to a Higher Power.  This in turn means that you were an accident, that you have no purpose in life and the fact that you have existed really makes no difference at all.   Life therefore has no purpose or meaning and it then becomes devalued, which is why abortion is legal now and euthanasia is coming if Christianity and real science do not win the day.

But I am confident that God wins in the end.   I have read the end of the book.   You don't know what chapter of your life you are living out right might be the last page or there may be hundreds of pages left to go.  In the end, the good guys win and the bad guys get their due.  Be on the God side before the last words of your life on this Earth are written!


Anonymous whatsit said...

"Imagine a society of serial killers, rapists, pedophiles and demon-worshipers?"

Massive logic fail. Absence of a belief in God doesn't equate to this at all. If it were, then atheism would coincide with higher crime rates, right?

And how exactly does an atheist "demon-worship", seeing as they don't believe in demons?

"The devoted Darwinist, while nonsensically acknowledging that there cannot be free will in an evolutionary scenario, nevertheless reasons that evolution is true and therefore one can do whatever one wishes as long as you can get away with it without any responsibility to a Higher Power."

This misrepresentation of yours makes it clear you don't understand the point of view you're trying to argue against. Who exactly is this "devoted Darwinist" that argues that "one can do whatever one wishes as long as you can get away with it"?

Anonymous said...

"Who exactly is this "devoted Darwinist" that argues that "one can do whatever one wishes as long as you can get away with it"?"

That's Radar's giant straw man.

radar said...

First, I would like to see you establish what standards your conduct is based upon, oh anonymous ones? Darwinism is about the strong overcoming the weak, is it not?

Second, that "About" article? Did they just make up statistics? The primary crime and murder centers in the US are large cities ruled by Democratic machines with a definite non-Christian slant. Places like Gary, Detroit, Washington DC, Chicago, Los Angeles...In fact a lot of crimes taking place in such cities go unreported and murders not even publicized. People go missing in large numbers. In the inner cities, people have a tendency to not bother to tell the police.

We spent over a year discussing the idea of "Christians" in jails and what that meant. The majority of prisoners will check off a box on a form and maybe get to go to a prison church meeting instead of sit around in their cells. Some of them actually become Christians while in jail but often claiming to belong to a Christian church of some kind is just the tendency of people to fill in forms with something. That is what I did in the Army when I was absolutely NOT a Christian.

All Eastern mystery religions, chanting, wicca, psychic readings and etc are simply forms of demon worship.

radar said...

I will go on. It is increasingly popular to follow horoscopes and get psychic readings. There are far more television programs with supernatural themes involving aliens, witches, demons and fairy-tale characters. Once such programs were simply comedies that used the theme as a comedic device (Bewitched, the Addams Family, The Munsters) while now it is things like Fringe and The Vampire Slayer and Once Upon A Time with violence and telekinesis and mind-reading and so on and so forth. Society is turning back to paganism as it turns its back on God.

Belief in Evolution causes people to abandon belief in God. Yet people still tend to have an inborn yearning to know Truth and find real meaning in life. Darwinism has confused the search for meaning and greatly damaged society as a whole. Eugenics, racism-as-a-scientific-observation, abortion, mass genocides all become more common with the onset of belief in Evolution. Yet evolution is an empty bag. No evidence for it, never observed, completely illogical and totally statistically impossible.

radar said...

Julian and Aldous Huxley were among the early Darwinists who praised evolution as an excuse for them to be free of restrictive sexual mores. Dr. Will Provine has asserted that Darwinism actually precludes a free will entirely.

Richard Dawkins stated that Darwin gave him freedom to be an intellectually satisfied atheist, which is pretty funny since Dawkins has piled up gaffes left and right. He may be intellectually satisfied but he really stinks as a defender of Darwin. He is a gift that keeps on giving...

Anonymous said...

"Belief in Evolution causes people to abandon belief in God."

"It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent Theist & an evolutionist." - Charles Darwin

radar said...

Darwin was wont to put a Theistic patina on his first writings, in part to mollify his wife and of course to be acceptable to society. Keep in mind that 19th Century England was very class-conscious and that Darwin was considered a gentleman rather than a commoner. However, he did admit to having abandoned any belief in God long before his late-in-life admission.

Darwin's excuses were a hypocritical father, an atheist for a grandfather, a local church which existed more as a social club than a genuine exercise in Christianity and his grief at losing his beloved daughter to illness. Yet bad things befall most people and it is the person rather than the event which causes them to move towards God or away.

This Sunday at church several people were baptized and gave short testimonies about their faith. One man had lost an eye, two young ladies had nearly lost their father to a car crash, one woman in her 20's expressed her dismay at becoming pregnant, which did not fit in with her occupation as a stripper. She had abandoned stripping and decided to have the baby and try to put a life together with the baby's father. The young ladies had learned to pray to God for their father and found faith. The man who lost his eye found a wife and children and finally fulfillment in knowing a loving God.

Tragedies abound in life. Some people fall into a valley and curse the fall, while some look up and see God on the slopes above.

Anonymous said...

"Darwin was wont to put a Theistic patina on his first writings, in part to mollify his wife and of course to be acceptable to society."

If you had done the least bit of research you would have known that Darwin wrote this in acknowledgment of his Christian friend and ardent supporter, the botanist Asa Gray.

Anonymous whatsit said...

"First, I would like to see you establish what standards your conduct is based upon, oh anonymous ones? Darwinism is about the strong overcoming the weak, is it not?"

No. That's a caricature that self-serving propagandists like yourself try to propagate. The theory of evolution describes a process, it does not prescribe an ideology. But if you insist on making up an ideology based on evolution, then "the cooperative overcoming the non-cooperative", for example, can be just as valid as "the strong overcoming the weak".

"Second, that "About" article? Did they just make up statistics?"

No. You can easily find this out by reading the article and following the links yourself.

"We spent over a year discussing the idea of "Christians" in jails and what that meant."

Ah yes, speaking of "making up statistics", this was a perfect example of you making up statistics. And then you couldn't back them up, despite some ridiculous attempts and evasions. That was fun to follow for a while. We can gladly dig it up again if you'd like.

"The majority of prisoners will check off a box on a form and maybe get to go to a prison church meeting instead of sit around in their cells. Some of them actually become Christians while in jail but often claiming to belong to a Christian church of some kind is just the tendency of people to fill in forms with something."

And this is based on what evidence exactly? Ah, I see, it isn't.

You can squirm all you want, but you have nothing to back up this ridiculous vision of a "society of serial killers, rapists, pedophiles and demon-worshipers" that you try to conjure up here.

"All Eastern mystery religions, chanting, wicca, psychic readings and etc are simply forms of demon worship."

Exactly, nothing to do with atheism.

"Belief in Evolution causes people to abandon belief in God."

Perhaps to a small extent, but (a) there are plenty of adherents in theistic evolution, and (b) there may well be other factors that cause people to abandon belief in God. I would think that poor ambassadors for God, such as yourself, do plenty of damage to their own cause as well.

"Eugenics, racism-as-a-scientific-observation, abortion, mass genocides all become more common with the onset of belief in Evolution."

Post hoc ergo propter hoc - a pretty blatant logical fallacy, Radar.

"No evidence for it, never observed, completely illogical and totally statistically impossible."

Wrong on every count. Repeating it won't make it come true.

Anonymous whatsit said...

"Tragedies abound in life. Some people fall into a valley and curse the fall, while some look up and see God on the slopes above."

And some deal with tragedies without turning to religion. Nothing wrong with that.

Anonymous said...

"First, I would like to see you establish what standards your conduct is based upon, oh anonymous ones?"

If you really don't know, this may serve as a bit of a primer:

radar said...

Who cares what Darwin wrote to Asa Gray? He was not a believer, in fact knew his so-called theory would, if accepted, bring about a decrease in belief in God. He was in very poor health in his later years, battling depression and worried over whether what he had done was wrong or right.

But no matter, the things he wrote and the postulates he made all turned out to be misunderstandings or mistakes. Knowing what we know today, a logical person would never think up Darwinism. It is not even possible, let alone probable, from a scientific point of view and it is terrible philosophy.

It is a sign of the failure of the public school systems that Darwinism persists. The young person comes to school wanting to know WHY and HOW and leaves having been taught to quit asking so many questions and go get a job!

Anonymous said...

"It is not even possible, let alone probable, from a scientific point of view"

Evolution by natural selection has been shown to be not just possible, but also probable. Can you name a single falsification of evolution by natural selection?

"and it is terrible philosophy."

Putting them in the same sentence in that way implies that you're equating the scientific theory of evolution and something that is actually a philosophy, which the theory of evolution certainly isn't. You're probably thinking of something closer to philosophical materialism.

You're free to hold that opinion, but I'd certainly disagree with you. All the evils you describe so breathlessly have nothing to do with philosophical materialism.

Anonymous said...

"which is why abortion is legal now and euthanasia is coming if Christianity and real science do not win the day"

Incidentally, Radar, what do you imagine euthanasia to be exactly?

Anonymous said...

"It is a sign of the failure of the public school systems that Darwinism persists."

Or is it a sign of the failure of creationism which, after an almost 2000 years long monopoly and a Scopes Trial, still hasn't been able to come out on top?

But of course there's always the conspiracy theory. Nice and easy: it convinces the gullible and doesn't require any hard scientific research...

Anonymous said...

Surely it's more than 2,000 years, isn't it?

And they still can't come up with any scientific evidence for creationism, which is why they're stuck blaming the referees. Sad.

Anonymous said...

"Who cares what Darwin wrote to Asa Gray?"

Actually, who even cares what Darwin's religious beliefs were? Either you can falsify the theory of evolution or you can't. And judging from this blog and creationist rants all over the Internet, you can't.

radar said...

Evolution has been falsified already. If the average scientist was honest, then it would not be taught.

It is never observed
It is statistically impossible
It supposedly works in the reverse order of Thermodynamics
It cannot account for information
It cannot account for design
It cannot account for life itself

We have seen the evidences pile up for created organisms - the incredibly intricate DNA/RNA coding mechanism, the interdependence between multiple organisms to live, the remarkably designed micro-machines and systems that we strive to copy and use for ourselves.

radar said...

Any time I have had a chance to have a long discussion with an intelligent person face-fo-face on this subject, they either decide to check what I have told them out for themselves (and wind up in agreement) or they get angry and walk or storm away. Funny how I can use evidence that we can observe and test today while Darwinists keep pointing to the past and making up stories. That is because the world of organisms has put the lie to Darwinism.

The amazing complexity and design, the huge amounts of information and the precision of the fine-tuning of at least 154 laws/processes to allow for life on this planet, when added to the ever-increasing proof that the Solar System is young has caused many secular scientists to begin considering creation again. Now the lies told in college about star and galaxy and planet formation are still told, but the math and the examples of observable evidence are nowhere to be found.

Darwinism is founded on ignorance and survives on propaganda, censorship and boredom. Students willingly swallow the big lie without question and then go on with their lives, as Darwinism is irrelevant to real science at all (other than an occasional handicap to research). Applied scientists will tell you that the idea of evolution has nothing at all to do with their research. They usually do not know that Christians invented the methods of research they use.

As mentioned before, the life cycle of the Monarch Butterfly destroys Darwinism all by itself. Go ahead and research that...

Anonymous said...

"Darwinism is founded on ignorance and survives on propaganda, censorship and boredom."

And there you already have it: the conspiracy theory.

Like clockwork.

radar said...

As usual, the comments are retorts with no content and personal attacks.

If there really was evolution taking place and if there was an explanation for how life could begin without being created and if there was a naturalistic explanation for information sources...Darwinists would still have to explain the diversity of organisms, as the evolutionary model is one that funnels organisms into singular solutions. There would be no explanation for the multiple organisms that all fill the same niche in the life cycle of Earth...unless a Designer built redundancy not only into individual kinds but also into the broad spectrum of creatures. That is what we see.

Anonymous said...

As usual, Radar makes a lot of big claims without backing any of them up.

Radar, it speaks volumes that you have to attack the theory of evolution by means of FUD-tactics (linking Darwinism to Hitler, claiming Evolution is a threat to society,...) instead of scientifically disproving evolution, which would be MUCH more effective.

Maybe because you can't?

Anonymous whatsit said...

"Evolution has been falsified already."

Name a specific falsification and explain the validity of your falsification in your own words, if you can.

"If the average scientist was honest, then it would not be taught."

Quite an accusation. Obviously the theory of evolution is taught. So you're accusing multiple thousands of "average scientists" of dishonesty. Seems to me that you should be able to answer the challenge above before you even come close to making such an accusation.

If you can't name such a specific falsification and explain its validity, then it's far more likely that the "average scientists" (as well as the above-average ones, of course) know more about this than you do - and that they are right.

"It is never observed"

Long-term evolution is easily observed in the fossil record. There is no viable alternative explanation. Witness the lack of any credible or plausible scientific explanation from the creationist side.
Short-term evolution is observed in nature and in laboratory conditions.

“It is statistically impossible”

Evolution statistically impossible? On what grounds? Are you back to origins again? Evolution is not only statistically possible, it’s practically inevitable once reproduction with variation is in place.

“It supposedly works in the reverse order of Thermodynamics”

Evolution is a natural consequence of reproduction with variation, which does not violate the 2nd LOT. If reproduction with variation violated the 2nd LOT, then either none of us would exist or the 2nd LOT would be false. Since we do exist, it’s safe to conclude that reproduction with variation doesn’t violate the 2nd LOT.

“It cannot account for information”

A rather strange accusation. Information about what exactly?

“It cannot account for design”

You’re putting the cart before the horse in your claim here. Calling something a “design” already presumes that it was designed by a designer/creator. Just because something has a function doesn’t automatically mean that it is a design.

Can evolution account for function? Of course. So why be deceptive about this aspect?

“It cannot account for life itself”

The theory of evolution doesn’t account for the origin of life, if that is what you’re trying to say.

Scientifically, the closest that can account for life itself is the current research in abiogenesis by natural means.

Creationists have no scientific explanation for the origin of life.

"We have seen the evidences pile up for created organisms - the incredibly intricate DNA/RNA coding mechanism,"

How is this evidence for creation? It's just another fallacy, an argument from ignorance.

"the interdependence between multiple organisms to live,"

What exactly makes you think an interdependence can't evolve?

"the remarkably designed micro-machines and systems that we strive to copy and use for ourselves."

Putting a word like "designed" in here is putting the cart before the horse - again.

"Hot Lips" Houlihan said...

"As mentioned before, the life cycle of the Monarch Butterfly destroys Darwinism all by itself. Go ahead and research that..."

How do you figure it "destroys Darwinism"? This is just another argument from ignorance. Which is a logical fallacy.