WAKE UP YOU PROPAGANDIZED PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I will publish a series of articles on the 15 Questions, beginning with these articles. Any leftover questions that do not address the rationalwiki (ironic name) so-called answers will be taken on after this mini-series. Note that I am staying on project and wondering if Darwinist commenters can do the same? I know my man Piltdown Superman and Creation.com are working on this project and have inspired me to do the same. After all, Darwinists really cannot deal with the 15 questions honestly (Please go look and see for yourself)! So today an article from each source:
Piltdown Superman today!
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2013
Perhaps the food in the UK influences their thinking? Naw, Brits have a stable diet. Anyway, you can read the rest of "Scientocracy Is Coming", here. And then you might like to see this video:
Abiogenesis was begun and that in and of itself is unscientific, as Biogenesis was a Law and remained unbroken. There was no scientific reason to abandon it, only religious ones.
The same is true concerning the origin of the Universe. Scientists generally believed that God created it OR that it was eternal before the Darwinist propaganda took hold. Some thought that God had created a Universe that would never end, giving it a beginning but no end. Now we have evidence that the Universe has an end and had a beginning. Darwinists like to make the ridiculous claim that God is "magic" but a "singularity with no causation or power that made everything by exploding" is science? You call that logic? You might want to check out the equations for the Big Bang that now feature 96% unobserved matter and energy...now that sounds like a fairy tale to me!
Creation by God is logical and best fits the evidence we have available to us. One of the biggest lies ever told is that evolution is "proven fact" when it is rather an unproven and poorly supported hypothesis.
General objections and attempted answers to questions 1–3
Published: 7 September 2011(GMT+10)
“In objects of known origin, there are certain features—specified complex information—that occur only in those made by an intelligent designer (or an intelligently designed program). So by the normal analogical reasoning we use in science, when we see these features in an object where the origin is unknown, we canlikewise conclude that this object had an intelligent designer.
“These features are those that an archaeologist would use to determine whether an object was designed by an intelligent designer, or that a SETI devotee would use to argue that a signal from space came from an intelligent alien, or whether a ballot or card game was fixed, or whether a sequence of letters was the result of intelligence or monkeys on a keyboard.
“In the first two cases above, it would be perverse to complain that the archaeologist didn’t discuss whether the object’s designer itself had a designer, or that the SETI researcher didn’t tell us who designed the alien. It would be even sillier to argue from this that we should simply drop the idea of design, and conclude that the object or hypothetical space signal had no designer.”
1. How did life originate?
2. How did the DNA code originate?
“It seems to me that Richard Dawkins constantly overlooks the fact that Darwin himself, in the fourteenth chapter of The Origin of Species, pointed out that his whole argument began with a being which already possessed reproductive powers. This is the creature the evolution of which a truly comprehensive theory of evolution must give some account.
“Darwin himself was well aware that he had not produced such an account. It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.”2
3. How could mutations—accidental copying mistakes—create the huge volumes of information in the DNA of living things?
Darwinists!!! So prone to logical fallacies and yet constantly accusing Creationists of using them? But the evidence will win out! Would you believe that they are STILL using Dawkin's WEASEL and GA programs and citrase-eating bacteria as evidence for evolution? Oh, yes they are! Have I asked you to go to rationalwiki enough times that you will do it? If you know the subject, it will either make you laugh or sadly shake your head!