Pasting and posting yet another article that makes Darwinism look foolish.
Do you like censorship? Does it bother you when you see it happening in China?
Yet censorship is happening in the United States of America. It is spelled NCSE. It stinks to high heaven and it is to me one of the evils of the 20th Century that has continued with us to this day. Censorship.
If you have not yet seen this movie, I double-dog dare you to think for yourself and see it before you let someone talk you into avoiding it because it is "pseudoscience." Try to think for yourself, go watch the movie and think for yourself. You cannot let Richard Dawkins or Eugenie Scott do your thinking for you!
Here I go again! I am going to be so obnoxious as to post an article written by yet another Creationist scientist. Creationists and ID'ers! Doggone it, there are so many of them now that one cannot even keep track of them all. Whatever shall we do? Worse yet, they ask questions that Darwinists cannot answer and then those questions filter down to the public. What will happen to Darwinism when the public begins to realize how completely foolish and absurd it is that a religion has taken charge of science?
There was a time when Marie Antoinette was evil and proud and clueless enough to say, "let them eat cake." You don't want to know what that meant in the slang of the day, trust me on this. Eugenie Scott and those of her ilk are ruling over science like the French royals ruled over the serfs, improperly and illegitimately. Darwinists, guess what? Science does not belong to you, it belongs to everyone! You have no right to censor information and inquiry.
There was a time when ownership of a Bible or even a portion of scripture was illegal unless you were a member of the ruling elite. If you would be caught with scripture in hand you could be forced to pay in many ways and perhaps be tortured and even killed. But the invention of the printing press helped set mankind free from the Dark Ages and the rule of elitists by disseminating information to the masses. The Bible was the primary product of early printing presses but soon all sorts of information was being printed and passed along to others. The Reformation that led to people of all classes being able to read and write and share information was the secret sauce that ended the Dark Ages in Europe and led eventually to the formation of the United States.
We live in a new Dark Age, a time when Naturalistic Materialistic Humanism is the official religion of science and academia. They are not even hiding the fact that they work hard to censor Intelligent Design and Creationism from schools and academic societies and scientific organizations. Consider the NCSE, an entire organization devoted to censorship. Here is their motto/mission statement: "National organization devoted to defending the teaching of evolution in public schools, and keeping creationism out." An entire organization devoted to ignorance!!! Kind of like the alliance of royalty and state church leaders who determined to stamp out the idea of a heliocentric solar system back in the middle ages, we are seeing our tax dollars go to an organization that seeks to eliminate questions about science and blatantly lies about both creation science and intelligent design. What pathetic foolishness, seeking to keep people from even hearing about any evidence that is not Darwinist in nature!
The result has been fertile soil for the growth of socialism and communism and fascism and eugenics and abortion on demand. Once God is thrown away and life loses the intrinsic value assigned to it by God then we are more likely to produce Hitlers and Pol Pots and Maos and Castros and Stalins and Farrakhans and Gueveras. No absolutes, no responsibility to a Creator, then no responsibility to anyone beyond one's self. Now we have a government in Washington that has changed the definition of "confiscation and usurpation" to "reform" but that is another topic and I will leave that for another time. But does it bother anyone in the least that there are hundreds of so-called scientists and researchers and educators and wonks whose full-time job is censorship? It should!
I rarely argue with Darwinists over their religion versus mine. I do enjoy using their arguments against them. This following post is an example. Darwinists have admitted that the onset of life is inexplicable by natural causes. They have no idea how it could have happened (hint, ask me, I know) and admit that the odds against life resulting from chance are infintesimal to the point of impossibility. Never has a Darwinist come up with a viable solution to this problem. But it is not a one time problem. There are barriers built in to life that would have required life to poof into existence not just once but several times...Life has had to jump so many domains and barriers to have all come from one ancestral simple organism that we would have to enter it into the high hurdles at the Olympics! Here is yet another reason that Darwinism is preposterous - built in barriers within the realm of living creatures:
The Discontinuity of Life
by Kurt P. Wise
November 12, 2008
is the professor of science and theology at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He earned his PhD in geology from Harvard University and has published numerous articles on biblical geology. He has also written the book Faith, Form, and Time.
Our Creator placed enough discontinuity in just the right places, showing us that no natural process could have generated such a diverse creation.
Each of these myths looks at only a limited amount of God’s creation. Evolution, for example, sees similarities and proposes that all organisms are related by common descent. Ancient cultures, in contrast, developed pantheons of diverse gods to explain the diversity they saw in the universe.
The God of the Bible, on the other hand, filled His creation with clear examples of both similarities and differences. He created the universe in such a way that no human would be confused about the Creator. The similarities, or continuity, are evidence of One common Creator. The differences, or discontinuity, are evidence of the diversity within the One Creator—three unique persons with one divine nature. God made the similarities and differences in creation so obvious that every human, even children, can see them (see Matthew 11:25; Romans 1:18–19; and related verses).
When God planned His creation, He was strategic in His placement of continuity and discontinuity. Foreknowing every creation myth that humans would ever devise, He created in such a way as to falsify every one of them. He placed enough continuity to demonstrate that multiple gods could not have constructed such a unified creation. He also placed enough discontinuity in just the right places to show that no natural process could have generated such a diverse creation.
A few examples of this discontinuity follow. Most are covered in standard biology classes, but rarely is their significance recognized. All this discontinuity points toward the triune Creator, who made every distinct kind of living thing in six days, according to Genesis 1.
Bacterial Discontinuity
If evolution had occurred, it would have followed the simplest course—developing first a single organism of the simplest form possible, and then in time, developing more organisms and more complexity. Because the simplest known organism which can exist without other organisms is a bacterium,2 it is assumed that evolution would have begun with a bacterium and, in time, modified it into other bacteria and finally into other organisms.Yet differences (discontinuities) found among the bacteria seem to indicate that this evolutionary story cannot be true. First, there is an enormous discontinuity between even the simplest known bacterium and the earth chemistry from which it is purported to have evolved.
Second, discontinuities separate all organisms into three major, distinct groups (called domains)—the bacteria themselves are divided into two different domains (Bacteria and Archaea) and all non-bacteria grouped into a third (Eukarya). These realms are so very different that even many evolutionists believe they evolved separately. The fact that bacteria make up two realms shows just how fundamentally separate the various bacteria really are (more different, at this scale, than any two plants or animals!).
Third, within one of these realms, Archaea, are discontinuous creatures known as extremophiles. (Phileo is a Greek word for “love,” so an “extremophile” is something that loves extremes—extremes that would kill any other organism.) Every extremophile is vastly different from every other organism on earth, with no viable common ancestor. Barophiles, for example, love the immense pressures found under thousands of feet of rock; thermophiles love the temperature near that of boiling water; and acidophiles love the acidity of fuming sulfuric acid. Any one of these extreme conditions destroys the organic molecules in all other organisms. Virtually every molecule of these extremophiles has to be specially designed for the extreme conditions for which they were created.
Cellular Discontinuity
Further discontinuities divide the realms according to how they get the energy they need to survive (what is called metabolism). Some organisms get energy from organic compounds made by other organisms. Animals, for example, get energy by ingesting, while fungi get it by absorbing. Other organisms get energy from the sun—plants using certain wavelengths of radiation (light) and other organisms using other wavelengths. Still others, such as many different bacterial groups, get their energy in ways radically different from any plant, animal, or fungus.Unusual energy sources range from gases, such as hydrogen or carbon monoxide (which are poisonous to other organisms), to metals (such as iron or magnesium) and rock-forming compounds (such as nitrite or phosphite). The differences are so very foundational to how these organisms live, that it seems quite impossible to evolve one into another.
Further discontinuities separate organisms according to how they move around—amoebas, for example, move by changing cell shape; paramecia move by tiny cilia; and still others move by a long flagellum. Other discontinuities separate organisms according to how they build “armor” to protect themselves—for example, mollusks use carbonate; radiolarians use silica (glass); and arthropods use stable organic molecules.
Animal Discontinuity
Discontinuity also abounds within each of these groups. Discontinuities, for example, divide the animal kingdom into about three dozen distinct groups, called phyla.Consider just a few of the profound differences between phyla. Chordates have skeletons inside their bodies, whereas arthropods have skeletons outside their bodies. Even among animals that protect themselves with very specific armor plates, such as two carbonate shells, different phyla often put them together in radically different ways: clams place the shells on the sides of their bodies, while brachiopods place them on the front and back of their bodies. Sponges are identical, or symmetric, in every direction around a line, while echinoderms, such as starfish, are symmetric in five directions around a line, and worms are symmetric along a plane.
Looking deeper, discontinuity can also be found within phyla. There is such discontinuity between turtles and all other reptiles (for instance, turtles have shoulder blades inside their body cavity) and between bats and all other mammals that evolutionary transitions are not only unknown, but sometimes even difficult to imagine.
These are but a few examples of the discontinuity that abounds among life-forms. This pervasive discontinuity is both a challenge to the creation myth of evolution and a manifestation of the Creator’s true nature.
Footnotes
- According to Romans 1:18–20, everyone knows God through His creation but suppresses the truth. See Jud Davis, “The Creator Clearly Seen,” Answers (July–September 2008), p. 32.
- “Bacteria” is used here informally to refer to all single-celled organisms that lack a cell nucleus. With this informal use of the word I am including the group of single-celled organisms known as archaea, not technically a part of the monera (the true bacteria). This larger group (archaea + monera) is officially called prokaryota, but I am avoiding this term because of its evolutionary etymology (it assumes that these organisms lived before single-celled organisms with nuclei). Plus, the differences between monera and archaea are rather subtle (only at the biochemical level).