.
.
S i t e  S e a r c h

A_B_C_D_E_F_G_H_I_J_K_L_M_N_O_P_Q_R_S_T_U_V_W_XYZ

List of Topics__Ask Suby__Free Stuff__Questions Lists
Terms of Use__________________Privacy Policy

C r e a t i o n  I n d e x

C r e a t i o n  p a g e  1 6

Darwin got hold of only one part of the truth. He missed addressing the origin of complex systems, focusing instead on the supposed transitional occurrences of development. Somehow he missed understanding the simple fact of the vast gap between man and animals:.1Corinthians 2:11 "For what man knows the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? Even so the things of God knows no man, but the Spirit of God."

Perhaps Darwin never told a joke to an ape, always theorizing that it was intelligent enough to laugh if he had done so. One would think that since an ape is 'just a short hop' back from man, that it could recognize at least some kiddy jokes. Perhaps Darwin was sure that any animal could reflect, analyse and arrive at different conclusions. Animals do think, but not as man does, but they don't laugh. Perhaps he presumed that animals could appreciate pictures of art.

Ever see an intelligent dog.(Collie, German Shepherd, Doberman, etc.).look at a picture and express any differently.(unless it was a picture of a female dog, Ha ha!)? Surely in all these millions of years evolution is claimed to have occurred, at least one animal could say one word, or even something that sounds like a word, that makes some sense in some language, or react in some way to show they could somehow converse a little bit.

If we came from apes or monkeys, how come we still have them? Where's the half-man, half-monkey in history?

Not all evolutionists believe we came from monkeys or apes. Some believe it's the other way around, Ha ha! Geoffrey Bourne, former director of Yerkes Primate Research Centre of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, article in Modern People, April, 1976, page 11."Monkeys, apes and all other lower primate species are really the offspring of man.".Are these the same scientists who cloned Dolly the sheep? Ha ha! 'Let's make a better sheep. Evolution's too slow!' Ha ha!

In New Scientist Magazine.(newscientist.com), Volume 91, 1981, page 592, John Gribbin and Jeremy Cherfas say they."think that the chimp descended from man.".Maybe they think as they do because of things like this: Humans require six times more light to see than a panther and humans can't hear all a dog can. Perhaps panthers and doggies are more evolved and therefore higher up the evolutionary tree, huh! I'm being facetious. Evolutionists think that way because of the DNA similarities.

Many evolutionary biologists deal in fuzzy word pictures, lacking quantitative details. They too require six times more light to see; because adhering to the presupposition God had no role in the creation we all experience daily, is the absolver of seeking evidence for evolution. This thus being, an alternate self-satisfying faith emerges, providing for those so inclined, an elated state of mind based upon peer hearsay and maintained by placing high value on camaraderie; i.e. "we're comfortable, who cares if it's not all correct?" 

Well, I care! I was misled in school. I'm still mad others are being misled. The anomalies of the evolutionary theory are only convincing to those who utilize pseudo science.(fact free science) due to a prior commitment to the evolutionary theory. It's all a matter of deciding what information one wants to embrace.

Decision is mental direction, usually determined by either selfishness or, concern with higher things. Many find evolution fits nicely with an amoral social stance, in that it comfortably allows for low standards.

Emphasis of general similarities in observations coupled with avoiding concern with mechanistic details for their model, has fueled an onslaught of errors and provided groundwork for 'phrauds' designed to add some 'science' to evolution.

Darwinian evolution claims life evolves through random mutations in living things on which natural selection then acts to promote survival of the fittest

In his private notebook Darwin stated."It is absurd to think of one animal being higher than another.".Perhaps he was alluding to the fact that he noticed a programming within them; that they were all programmed to function as they do. Perhaps he never compared a bulldog.(the dumbest).to a collie. Here, some of their programming is the same, in that, they both have a brain, a tail, a mouth, eyes, etc., but the functioning of these things are different. What makes a bulldog a bulldog is not what makes a Collie a Collie.

Scientific explanations invoke causes. In order to ascertain whether or not that which Darwin claimed to be a result of his theoretical conclusions.(natural selection acting upon random variation as caused by mutations).are valid, it is important to peer into recent.(1950's to the present).scientific information, which we will do. 

One requires enough intellectual interest to probe beyond simple acceptance of that which is commonly upheld as the de facto alternative for the more rigorous.de jure explanation; this being revealed by examining supportive factors regarding just how it is that something works as it does, rather than just conjectural information about something existing and 'magically' altering over time.


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*