Quote of the Month from Jonathan Rosenblum

"The fossil record is largely one of species and groups of species coming into existence fully formed, remaining unchanged throughout their history, and becoming extinct by virtue of some great catastrophe, not because they were replaced by better-adapted descendants."

Question Darwin and Face the Consequences

What happens when a professor decides to present students with evidence that challenges Darwin's theory? Find out on this episode of ID the Future, where we've highlighted comments from biochemist Nancy Bryson Ph.D., a professor who knows firsthand the importance of academic freedom on college campuses.
Dr. Bryson was removed from her position as head of the division of natural sciences at Mississippi University for Women when she presented criticisms of evolution to a group of honor students. Listen as she recounts the chilling effect the university's censors' actions had on academic freedom and students' ability to question and engage in their material.

Dr. Dawkins Information Challenge

If you want to listen to the podcast then click here and it will take you to the page where you can access the podcast.

"On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin addresses Richard Dawkins’ Information Challenge. When Dawkins was recently asked to explain the origin of genetic information according to Darwinism, he was embarrassingly silent. He later claimed to rebut this question using Shannon information, but Luskin reveals just how inadequate Dawkins’ explanation is when it comes to explaining the specified complexity of information."

You can click on the title bar and read Luskin's article.

More Evolution Frauds: Archaeopteryx Revisited

On one of my blogs I addressed the issue of transitional (intermediate) species for which there is no fossil evidence at all. Some gentleman evolutionist wrote back with his short response, "Archaeopteryx" as if that one word confirms Darwins theory. That provoked me to write the article, "Archaeopteryx or Giving Creationists the Bird." I've also dealt with the many frauds perpetrated on society by the "scientific community" to support the theory of evolution. Almost all creationists are familiar with the Nebraska Man and Piltdown Man frauds. Ironically, National Geographic was quick to publish this hoax (depicted above) as well as another fraud I covered, "The Lost Tribe of the Tasaday's." It strikes me odd that the same secular voices that cry out long and loud about wrong doing in the broader Christian society take extreme offense when confronted with the truth that "scientists" perpatrate even more frauds often in an attempt to actively promote their own agenda, especially evolution, and especially when it will net them new money's.
Today I was reminded of those frauds once again when I came across the following article which is reprinted here from nwcreation.net.



"Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis: Fake Dinosaur-bird ancestor

The most recent and perhaps the most infamous evolution frauds was committed in China and published in 1999 in the journal National Geographic 196:98-107, November 1999. Dinosaur bones were put together with the bones of a newer species of bird and they tried to pass it off as a very important new evolutionary intermediate.
'Feathers For T-Rex?', Christopher P. Sloan, National Geographic Magazine, Vol. 196, No. 5, November, 1999, pp.99,100,105



Interesting Quote - "National Geographic has reached an all-time low for engaging in sensationalistic, unsubstantiated, tabloid journalism" Storrs L. Olson, Smithsonian Institution."

(This article is reprinted here from nwcreation.net)



For more information on this fraud see the following:


Another Missing Link Takes Flight


Another Hoax?


Archaeopteryx, Archaeoraptor, and the “Dinosaurs-To-Birds” Theory


Crying Fowl: Tale of 'Missing Link' Embarrasses Scientists


Evolution Coverup

Simple Cell?

The evidence of Intelligent Design (God) abounds in nature as the evidence for evolution is conspicuous by its absence. The complexity of even the simplest cell is astounding. So how do you get around the simple logic that if all life evolved from a single cell, that first cell (progenitor of all cells to follow) would have at the very least possessed complete reproduction capabilities within itself in order to pass its traits on.

Just a few decades ago a simple cell was believed to be just that; simple. Since then scientific knowledge has progressed to a much better understanding of the tremendous complexity of even the 'simplest' cell here-to-fore unimagined. Even the bacterial structure diagrammed here is merely a simple depiction of a much more complicated life form. In this "simple," single celled creature there are numerous different mechanisms that must work together (interdependency) to enable the cell to function. For example, there are cilia and flagella. They are designed to move the cell or move fluids around the cell. They themselves are made up of microtubules whose structure is made up of linear polymers of tubulin which is a globular protein. They function as conveyor belts. Then there are centrioles, which are also made of microtubules but they are organized in pairs at right angles to each other. The centrioles control the movement of the flagella and cilia. This is simply the most elementary description of a much more complicated function of only one small part of a cell. And then there's the cell membrane which is very complex in itself with it's proteins, lipids and protein channels, it's uniport and cotransport systems and all of that is only a minute fraction of the outside of a cell.

As Charles Darwin himself noted:

"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not
possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my
theory would absolutely break down."

So to Charles Darwin, I must say, "Sorry - your theory is broken down. The Bible says this:

"For that which is known about God is evident to them and made plain in their
inner consciousness, because God [Himself] has shown it to them.
For ever since the creation of the world His invisible nature and attributes, that
is, His eternal power and divinity, have been made intelligible and clearly
discernible in and through the things that have been made (His handiworks). So
[men] are without excuse [altogether without any defense or
justification], because when they knew and recognized Him as God, they
did not honor and glorify Him as God or give Him thanks. But instead they became
futile and godless in their thinking [with vain imaginings, foolish reasoning,
and stupid speculations] and their senseless minds were darkened."

- Romans 1:19-21 AMP

Archaeopteryx or giving Creationists the Bird!

Whenever the lack of fossil evidence showing a transitional specie comes up, one word commonly drops from the lips of the evolutionary protagonist: Archaeopteryx!

Archaeopteryx
Archaeopteryx is a bird with many unique similarities to certain dinosaurs called Theropods. The fossils of Archaeopteryx date back to the [1]Jurassic period.
Paleo-ornithologists classify Archaeopteryx as a bird because the most unique thing that defines a creature as a bird are its feathers.

Archaeopteryx is said to be a transitional form bridging the gap between dinosaur and bird. In all seven known Archaeopteryx fossils, Archaeopteryx had feathers; feathers which were well developed, and had the ability of flight.

Feathers are very complicated structures of which there are several types. Scientists have promulgated several different theories about why feathers evolved but there has been (until recently) a consensus among them that feathers evolved from reptilian scales. One theory is that thermoregulation is responsible for the original morphing of dino-scales into feathers. Others think that feathers evolved for flight and the most recent theory is that feathers evolved to attract a mate.

The Evidence
The so-called "proof" is a theropod dinosaur (that had a scale that sort of looked feathered). This [2]theropod is called Caudipteryx, (which dates to about 127 million years ago). This goose sized dinosaur is depicted with feathers in every drawing I've seen.

First Problem: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Do you see a problem yet? Feather’s are very complex structures of which there are several distinct categories. Certainly something as complex as a feather would have taken a long time to evolve if Archaeopteryx were to be that “transitional” evolutionary link. Yet not only did Archaeopteryx have one kind of feather, he had different kinds of fully developed feathers and was capable of flight. Archaeopteryx always appears fully developed in the fossil record with nothing showing a protoarchaeopteryx type.
Now here’s the problem. Archaeopteryx pre-dates Caudipteryx by a geologic period (or at least 20 million years). Archaeopteryx goes back to the Jurassic Period and Caudipteryx dates to the later [3]Cretaceous period. That’s kind of putting the cart before the horse, don’t you think?

The Second Problem: The Feathered Look
Reptilian scales are vastly different from bird feathers. They originate in different places, they are made of different proteins and they serve totally different functions. Why would reptiles need feathers? They are not warm blooded and they don't fly (some glide). They don't have a problem mating.

The Third Problem: That’s not a gap-that’s an abyss!
The teeth of Archaeopteryx are not serrated as they are in theropods. Other birds had teeth but Archaeopteryx had several other unique features that don't relate to any other known bird--an indication of special creation. As I explained to one commentator, Archaeopteryx is more evidence for Intelligent Design than evolution.

[4]David B. Kitts, Ph.D an evolutionist and paleontologist, said:

"Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides a means of 'seeing'
evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists the most
notorious of which is the presence of 'gaps' in the fossil record. Evolution
requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide
them."

And as [5]David Raup, a paleontologist at the Field Museum of Natural History said:

"We are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record
has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species
but the situation hasn't changed much -- ironically, we have even fewer
examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time. By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record
such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information."

Now, lest I'm accused of quote mining, I admit it. I'm not ashamed of it-the words speak for themselves. Not just a sentence-you can see whole paragraphs--they speak for themselves in that context. These quotations are referenced in the footnotes below.
__________

[1] Jurassic Period extends from about 145 million years to 200 million years ago.
[2] Any of various large carnivorous dinosaurs of the suborder Theropoda of the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods, characterized by bipedal locomotion, large jaws, and short forelimbs.
[3] Cretaceous Period follows the Jurassic Period; from about 65 million years to 145 million years ago.

[4] David B. Kitts, PhD (Zoology) Head Curator, Dept of Geology, Stoval Museum. Evolution, vol 28, Sep 1974, p 467
[5] David Raup, Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, 50:22-29

More So-Called Scientific "Truth"

Haeckel's Embryos The Real Deal?

"Evolutionist should stand proud and salute Haeckel a true apostle. From his embryos to Piltdown, from Nebraska Man to Lucy the tradition Ernest Haeckel begun, the creation of evidence continues to this day. "

They're doing it again. Oh my!

Listen to the pod-cast for more details. (click on Haeckel's Embryos or the title bar above)

Amber Alert or Tell Me Have You Seen Him?

Have you seen this guy? In the early weeks of 1990, three news reports appeared which differed as to the disappearance of the fossils of the controversial Peking Man following WW II. In reality this report merely describes different theories related to the disappearance. One theory is that they are buried under a car warehouse in Beijing (Peking). Another theory is that the government has them hidden and a third theory is that two of the teeth were found in Southwest China and were dated at three million years old. That would make the teeth a much older than the Peking Man himself. I've personally been down in China Town in both San Francisco, CA and Honolulu, HI but haven't seen a sign of him so far. I don’t look for him to make an appearance any time soon but keep an eye out for him.

He seems to be as elusive as Bigfoot up around my neck of the woods.

Intelligent Design vs Evolution -- again

Professors at Southern Methodist University (SMU) were out in protest against the visit of Intelligent Design (ID) Scientists from Discovery who were invited to speak. As usual, with people who feel threatened, they began hurling insults at ID theorists. The conference will take place on the SMU campus' McFarlin Auditorium April 13 and 14th. [Ticket information] Isn't it ironic that at a former Christian university an open discussion about ID would be met with such blatant hostility? Evolution is taught as fact and even used in commercials--

What are they so afraid of?

Click on the Geico 'caveman to check out his crib. You can 'click' your way around .

Darwinism Delusion Exposed

Read this interesting article by Professor Emeritus of Biology
Kazmer Ujvarosy
Kazmer Ujvarosy is the founder of Frontline Science, an independent think tank, based in San Francisco.
He is dedicated to the analysis of complex problems, and the development of realistic, concrete proposals on issues of global concern. His stance is independent, interdisciplinary, with an analytical rigor, and a view to the future.
He is uniquely qualified to help you understand what makes scientific sense, and what does not, based on cause-and-effect and systems principles.

author's web site
view author's other articles
Join this author's mailing list Your Name:E-mail Address:
Kazmer Ujvarosy

Is Darwinian Evolution Being Over-hyped?

Listen here for a podcast that critically analizes this claim that evolutionists make about Darwinism.

The Scopes Monkey Trial -- and Hollywood

Was the "Monkey Trial" an example of small town, small mind persecution of a High School teacher? Hollywood made a movie about it in 1960 called "Inherit the Wind" starring Spencer Tracy, Fredrich March, Dick York and Claude Akins. The movie was good but hardly reflects the 1925 trial and has instilled in minds of movie goers stereotypes of creationists that aren’t true. Unfortunately, many say the movie captured the essence of the time. A teacher (Dick York) persecuted by a "flat earth" preacher (Claude Akins) and a mob of religious fanatics is what sticks in the mind and continues to feed the Hollywood stereotypes of church people who are pre-disposed against science. There was a 1999 re-make of the movie reinforcing for a new generation the stereotypes of religious closed mindedness and persecution of those who wanted to shine the light of education in the class room. This inspite of the fact that one of the prime examples exhibited as "proof" for the evolution of man used at the trial (Piltdown Man) was found to be a total fraud three decades later.
In reality the atmosphere during the Scopes Monkey Trial was carnival like in Dayton where substitute teacher-coach John Scopes answered a newspaper ad placed by the ACLU designed to test the Tennessee law. And so it goes. John Scopes, Clarence Darrow and politician/lawyer William Jennings Bryan enjoyed celebrity status and the trial put the town on the map. After all, Dayton Tennessee was getting national coverage as the whose who of journalism from the nations largest papers covered the trial in the packed court room. Town's people were enjoying the infusion of money that was coming in! The trial was a circus and though Darrow lost, John Scopes didn’t even have to pay his $100.00 fine.

Today the ACLU credits the trial as opening the door for the teaching of evolution as part of public school science curriculum.

footnote: A star piece of evidence referred to at the 1925 trial was the "Eoanthropus dawsoni" more commonly called the “Piltdown Man,” who was unearthed from a gravel pit in England forever placing the town of Piltdown on the map. In 1955 Piltdown man was found to be a total hoax! It was a skull of a man and a jaw of an orangutan, painted, filed and acid dipped and fused to create the fraud. But by then virtually all US public schools were teaching Darwin’s theory as scientific fact. It is for that reason that creationists use this example above most other's to illustrate how fraud was used to support the theory of evolution.

top photo: by R. Hoeppner
bottom photo: Answers in Genesis

The Real Story: Evolutions Billions of Missing Links

On this episode of ID The Future CSC's Casey Luskin interviews Dr. Geoffrey Simmons author of the new book Billions of Missing Links. In the book Simmons shows that as modern science has progressed from the visible to the invisible (microscopic, submicroscopic, genetic, biochemical and genetic) the numbers of missing links have skyrocketed. Every "link" discovered brings many more questions (missing links) than answers.

Natural Law and Miracles

Quote:
"The criterion of scientificness requires that the theory be: (1) testable and (2) compatible with natural law."

Certainly evolution is not testable. Even under the most carefully controlled conditions, not even the slightest hint of macro-evolution can be observed in a laboratory.

Natural law dictates changes within a specie but prevents transitions between species. Hybrids are sterile, most mutations are deleterious (says atheist Richard Dawkins) to the specie--leaving natural selection and adaptation as the only door by which evolution can take place. In addition, Dawkins says ‘its only natural selection that produces living things which have the illusion of design.” Finally Dawkins admits that this requires faith. The recent discoveries about the simplest cellular structures reveal a complexity far greater than realized even a few decades ago. Logic suggests that this first, single, original, organic "simple" cell (with all of its new found complexity) would have to be fully capable of processing inorganic food and reproduction in order to pass it's traits on to the second generation cell By definition that would be “miraculous.” Quote:"But miracles, by definition, are not compatible with natural law." Miracles may very well be explained by natural law. God knows, (oh excuse me) that the miracle of the Exodus and the preceding Egyptian plagues have scientists formulating (since they are historic facts), they must have been caused by the eruption of a Mediterranean volcano. This is happening with regard to many of the miraculous accounts of the Bible.
How valid is it to suspect natural causes to explain the miraculous? Do miracles happen in the natural world? That begs the question: Does God employ natural law to accomplish a goal? Throughout the Bible, God used natural phenomina as well as 'miracles' to accomplish His will. For instance when Israel turned away from God their 'judgement' would often be attack by other nations, or the loss of a battle etc.

The case is made by skeptics that these were natural events, have simple and natural explanations and can be fully explained without God. Plagues, accidents, natural disasters happen all the time. Today's prophets of doom are not the religious. It's the scientists who appear on the Discover channels telling us that it's only a matter of time before an extinction event will occur. Be it an Asteroid strike, gamma ray burst, hardening of the earths liquid core, Solar eruptions (coronal mass ejections), depletion of the Ozone layer, Global Warming etc. It goes beyond that.
Suppose I were a two dimensional creature, aware only of laws regarding length and width, having no conception of height, and a three dimensional being punched a hole in the ground with a vertical shaft in front of me. I would not be at all aware of the vertical shaft. To me, as a two dimensional creature knowing only length and width, it would appear that a hole miraculously opened before me; but to the three dimensional being it would simply be an act totally within the realm of natural law.

It's no stretch to conceive of a being that moves in dimensions that I can't imagine, especially when the universe has recently been discovered to be made up of up to 90% dark matter, or dimensions beyond my natural world. When something I consider a miracle happens, it may very well be a result of natural law in another dimension. As you read this you may be totally unaware that you are surrounded by a million frequencies from radios, TV’s, cell phones gamma rays etc. Conversations you cannot hear are passing by your ears. Pictures flowing before your eyes cannot be seen You can't see, smell, touch, taste or hear them but now you’re reminded they do exist. If you could see them it would dazzle your vision! Or go outside in the daylight, look up at a blue sky not even considering that all of those stars you saw last night are still shining as brilliantly in the daylight as they were at night. So when you talk about miracles existing outside of natural laws, perhaps it's simply because we are unaware of some of these "laws." For example, we've just crossed the threshold of the discovery of dark matter. Dark matter may compose 90% of the universe. What will we learn? Man is just taking his first baby steps into the vast cosmos. Just a short drive north of my location there is a field of Radio Telescopes that scan the heavens for signs of intelligent life. It’s part of the SETI project. Radio telescopes have been looking into space for over forty years and haven’t heard a cosmic “peep” from alien life, yet two generations of scientists have served and retired from such projects. How do I get a job like that? Their mission, according to the SETI Institute is “to explore, understand and explain the origin, nature and prevalence of life in the universe.”And so their desperation to find the elusive proof of evolution goes on. It’s rumored that they keep a cold bottle of champagne on hand just in case. I think they’ve pulled a major coup in creating such an unproductive lucrative comfortable job for themselves that they actually do deserve a glass of champagne! Yep, I’m a bit jealous. I had to work for my retirement.

Evidence is the Tip of the Iceberg

Have you ever seen an ice berg? If you have you've only seen the tip of the iceberg. About 1/8th of it sits above the water and 7/8ths remains under water yet every mariner knows this and hopefully steers well clear of it. That 12% which is visible is positive evidence of the 88% that is invisible. Below I look at the proverbial "tip of the iceberg" for the evidence of the existence of God. When I see a post written on a blog, that is proof to me that a 'blogger' exists. When I see the wonders and intricacies in creation, that is sufficient proof to me that a creator exists. Or perhaps it was better stated by Sir Isaac Newton: 'Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system. I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance.'
Have you ever thought about God? After considering the sun, moon, stars, as Sir Isaac Newton mentioned, here are some facts: The earth revolves once every twenty four hours. The speed at the equator of this rotation is about 1,040 mph or roughly half a kilometer per second and goes to practically zero at the poles. As the earth rotates, its moon also rotates with such absolute perfect timing that man has only observed one side of its surface from any point on earth. We see the same side of the moon as Moses and the ancient Pharaohs of Egypt. Our earth orbits the star in our solar system, our sun, once a year at an average speed of 18.5 miles per second (or 30km/ second). Our solar system, which is about 26,000 light years from the center of our Galaxy, the Milky Way, makes one revolution of the Galaxy about every 200-250 million years at an average speed of 155 miles per second (250 km/sec.) The Milky Way Galaxy is just one galaxy in a group of galaxies called the Local Group. Within the Local Group, the Milky Way Galaxy is moving about 185 miles/sec (300 km/sec). It couldn't happen without universal laws. An atheist will look at that and say, 'it's all coincidence!' As a believer I look at it and say with King David of old, 'When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?'
What about Universal Law?
When I see universal law, I see evidence of a universal law giver. In my world view, God exists and I see His love and plan working continually. An unbeliever sees in their world view, dumb luck and blind chance without a first cause to account for everything. It has become popular to explain historic events by natural cause rather than divine intervention. This is permeating the educational channels of late.For example, there is no question that a series of plagues hit Egypt preceding the Exodus. Scientists are now putting forward a theory for these plagues. The theory is that a Mediterranean Volcanic Island exploded and caused the plagues.With a detectable sense of pride atheists tend to brag they believe in nothing. "Theirs," they claim, "is simply a non-belief." I find this intellectually dishonest since many atheists express extreme ‘faith’ in evolution, claiming it as proven fact (which it is not). From faith in the 'cosmic egg' from which everything hatched to the rise of modern man billions of years later, they rely on some really questionable evidence. There is far more evidence, both historic and scientific as to the accuracy of the Bible than there is for Darwin’s, The Origin of Species. As far as Biblical criticism is concerned it has been my experience that many non-believers parrot things written by critics of the Bible and they often refer to compilations written by other non-believers who are themselves devoid of any theological education whatever. I did this myself when I claimed to be an atheist. I assumed that I knew the contents of the Bible from the few stories I was familiar with; Adam and Eve, Noah and the Ark, the plagues of Egypt, the parting of the Red Sea, Jonah and the Whale etc. I concluded that there was no scientific accuracy in the Bible whatever!In the book of Job (probably the oldest book of the Bible) it states that God "hangs the earth on nothing;" - Job 26:7. A truly insightful statement for the time in which it was written. Hmmm, how did Job know? Atheists and Christians are alike in that we all face challenges, joys and mortality. The difference is that a believer contemplates a merciful God who paved the way to salvation and follow their savior, helping others. Atheists go through life without such a high purpose. Mutation and natural selection determine their coming and passing beyond which there is simply non-existence. After all is said and done I’d rather be a Christian than an atheist.

picture from Wikipedia

Why Abiogenesis (Life from Non-Life) Cannot Occur

Read this fascinating article by Jerry Bergman Ph.D

What Darwinism Has Done for the Aboriginals

Organized hunts to find and kill Aboriginal people for the furtherance of science began a grizzly business of murder and mayhem as aboriginal burial sites were desecrated, bodies dismembered and skeletons exhumed. This followed on the heels of the publication of Origin of Species, The Preservation of Favoured Races by Charles Darwin. It was theorized by many at the time that Aboriginal people were a living example of a sub-human specie. The hint of racial superiority in the sub-title of Darwin’s book was not overlooked in Nazi Germany even if it is (completely omitted) on the infidel website.

Epilogue:
After an outcry from Aboriginal peoples the Natural History Museum in London this November 17th (2006) issued a statememt in response to a claim lodged by the Australian Government in November 2005 and to a request under that claim from the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre (TAC) to return the remains of 17 aboriginals.