.
.
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  2 7

Electromagnetism gives atoms their powerful chemical properties at close ranges, especially their positively charged protons and the negatively charged electron. If the balance of the electromagnetic force altered in.any.way, their chemistry would disintegrate. There would be no stars, no planets and no life!

The electromagnetic force fixes the chemical structure of matter and makes positive and negative electric changes attract. Without that we would miss a lot more than our cellular phones, radios and TV. Aren't you glad Creator-God designed it to work so well? Man, in his wildest dreams couldn't even begin to approach this kind of astonishing integrated complexity and end up with it all working!

Exactly equal to the magnetizing force is the magnetization of a substance in the opposite direction.(diamagnetism). Diamagnetism is the property that certain substances have of being repelled by both poles of a magnet and hence taking a position at right angles to the magnet's line of influence. 

Established physical theories cannot predict a value for the cosmological constant which measures the gravitational repulsion of empty space.."Many theoretical physicists find themselves forced to seek a timeless description of the Universe, as they recognize that the usual notions of space break down near the Big Bang."....New Scientist, October 16, 1999, page 31.

The Universe looks so much the same over vast distances, except for our solar system.

The background radiation is remarkably constant in space and the Earth is bombarded by it with astonishing uniformity of intensity, indicating the entire Universe started at the same temperature. Temperature and density are uniform across the Universe, yet there simply was no way for distant parts of the Universe to communicate with one another and reach an identical temperature unless all is connected.

The Universe appears flat, that is, the overall structure of space/time has little if any curvature. We exist in the eternity of that which was determined to be our present physical existence; our recent physical past being but a memory and the future, a dream. Where is the past and the future if it's all a hologram?

Fossils:.In Darwin's time there were few fossil finds. Today, about 160 years later, we have over a quarter of a million of them.(*).

What about the fossil discovery of our 'human ancestors', the Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus africanus, Homo habilis.and.others, then Homo erectus.(Java man).and Lucy? The search for our 'human ancestors' has been one filled with dishonest science and wishful thinking. 

New finds shed more doubtful lights on evolution's messy history. Meave Leakey, Palentologist, discovered fossils in Africa that show that Homo habilis, which according to prior thinking of evolutionists, evolved into Homo erectus, which in turn evolved into Homo sapiens.(humans). He found that no evolution occurred. Instead he says that they were contemporary, living side by side together. His and his collegues' findings were published in the journal.Nature.(nature.com)

Lord Solly Zuckerman, M.A., M.D., D. Science.(anatomy).in.Beyond the Ivory Tower, Taplinger Pub. Co., New York, 1970, p. 64, is one of Britain's most influential scientists, yet he also regards much of the fossil evidence for human evolution as nonsense.

Zuckerman has subjected key fossils to years of biometrics testing and declares that the idea that they walked and ran upright is flimsy wishful thinking. He remarked on the record of reckless speculation in the field of human origins."For example, no scientist could logically.dispute the proposition that man, without having been involved in any act of divine creation, evolved from some ape like creature in a very short space of time—speaking in geological terms—without leaving any fossil traces of the steps of the transformation. ...As I have already implied, students of fossil primates have not been distinguished for caution when working within the logical constrains of their subject. The record is so astonishing that it is legitimate to ask whether much science is yet to be found in this field at all."

Remember the Piltdown man; look it up in a dictionary. It was a hoax, like the adaptive moths and now apparently, the theropods. Although not right regarding some things, at least I haven't noticed Creationists using delusive methods as some evolutionists have used, whose tactics have done discredit to science.

Some anthropologists are so involved in figuring out how evolution works, they have no time to pursue answers to the question of whether evolution was even true in the first place.

Did you know that you could call any anthropological museum on the face of this planet and ask them if they have one.......just one transitional fossil.(a fossil between plant and animal, or animal to man, or even from one species of animal to another species).and they will all tell you no? There has never, since the beginning of time been one transitional fossil found anywhere. Now don't you think that if we'd been around for billions or even millions of years, taking into account that there are literally millions of other fossils in museums all over the world, that we'd have at least one transitional fossil to show as evidence for this evolution theory? One would think so. But there are none. And what the Lebanese desert shows is most inteesting.

Gary Parker, university professor:."Like most Americans, I was mistaught in grade school that it takes millions of years and tremendous heat and pressure to turn sediments.(like sand, lime, or clay).into rock.(like sandstone, limestone or shale).."Surprisingly enough, just about everybody, creationist, evolutionist and everyone in between, agrees that individual fossil specimens themselves begin to form very, very rapidly! Most fossils are formed when a plant or animal is quickly and deeply buried, out of reach of scavengers and currents, usually in mud, lime or sand sediment rich in cementing minerals that harden and preserve at least parts of the dead creatures...The ideal conditions for forming most fossils and fossil bearing rock layers are flood conditions. The debate is just whether it was many 'little floods' over a long time, or mostly the one big Flood of Noah's time.(*)..In fact, until Darwin's theory came along, most educated laymen and scientists, including the founding fathers of geology, assumed that fossils were the remains of plants and animals buried in Noah's Flood. If a plant or animal just dies and falls to the ground or into the water, it's quickly broken up and decomposed by scavengers, wind and water currents, even Sunlight.(*).

"Fallen logs, road kills and dead aquarium fish do not just become fossils, nor did the millions of bison slaughtered in America's move West. Although professionals understand how fast fossils begin to form under flood conditions, the general public often does not. I was on a radio talk show one time when a caller said he believed the Earth had to be fantastically old because he'd seen west, as I have, huge logs turned to stone in Arizona's Petrified Forest. Surely, he said, it would take millions of years to turn a log six feet.(2m).across into solid stone! So I asked him to think about it. If a tree fell over in a forest or into a lake or stream and just lay there for millions of years, wouldn't it just rot away? Bugs, termites, fungus, chemical action would soon turn it back into dust. But if that tree got suddenly and deeply buried in mineral rich sediment, then minerals could crystallize throughout the log and turn it to stone before it had time to decay. To my encouragement, he replied "You know, I believe you're right about that!

"A museum in central Tasmania has a 'fossil hat' on display. A miner had dropped his felt hat and the limey water had turned it into a 'hard hat', which the curator was kind enough to let me feel and photograph. That same process, mineral infill, can turn wood, bones and shells into fossils in a short period of time. Indeed, fossils can be made in the laboratory! 

"Remember the Precambrian Australian jellyfish? Jellyfish often wash ashore, but in a matter of hours they have turned into nondescript 'blobs', although watch out as the stinging cells continue to work for quite a while!

"To preserve the markings and detail of the Ediacara jellyfish, the organisms seem to have landed on a wet sand that acted as a natural cement. The sand turned to sandstone before the jellyfish had time to rot, preserving the jellyfishes' markings, somewhat as you can preserve your hand print if you push it into cement during that brief time when it's neither too wet nor too dry. Indeed, the evolutionist who discovered the Ediacara jellyfish said the fossils must have formed in less than 24 hours. He didn't mean one jellyfish in 24 hours; he meant millions of jellyfish and other forms had fossilized throughout the entire Ediacara formation, which stretches about 300 miles or 500 km from South Australia into the Northern Territory, in less than 24 hours! In short, floods form fossils fast!"....from his book.Creation Facts of Life, 1994, Master Books.

Stephen J. Gould, Harvard University and Niles Eldredge, American Museum of Natural History, Paleobiology 3-1977, page 147."At the higher level of evolutionary transition.(macroevolution), morphological designs, gradualism has always been in trouble. ...Smooth intermediates between bauplane.(basically different types of creatures).are almost impossible to construct, even in thought experiments; there is certainly no evidence in the fossil record; curious mosaics like archaeopteryx do not count. Darwin did wrestle brilliantly and triumphantly with the product of adaption, but he had limited success with the issue of diversity, even though he titled his book with reference to his relative failure, The Origin Of Species."....The Confusion Over Evolution, Stephen J. Gould, New York Review of Books, November 19, 1992, page 54.


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