.
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.
