If a giant asteroid
wiped out the dinosaurs, their
evolution would have to start all over and would have been too darn slow
to produce the myriad
species we see by the
Cambrian
period in the fossil record. And what
about the dinosaurs being contemporary
with man?
The questions answers are
sought for by both evolutionists,
creationists and all of us are: Where do we come from? Where are we going?
What is our origin? What is our purpose here? What is our ultimate end?
Where does everything that exists come from and where is it going? What
keeps it all intact?
Since evolutionary theory
has proven itself inept
at satisfactorily addressing the important questions of life, it therefore
is a sop intended
for souls easily satisfied with meandering
amongst
reams
of
suppositions.
An overriding question to
keep in mind as we read through here is, could an
irreducibly
complex system have evolved when its function depends upon many separate
components, the lack of any one causing the system to cease functioning?
Elisabeth Vrba, Yale University paleontologist
says."The idea
is that organisms are so complex that it is very hard.(for
evolution).to
change one aspect
without wrecking everything else.".Is
it then reasonable to assume, as evolutionists do, that random occurrences
can produce organized complexity within diverse organisms?
To be irreducibly complex
we must ask if all the components are required for the function. An irreducibly
complex system cannot be produced directly by slight successive modifications
to a precursor.system,
because any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing
a part, is by definition non functional. Taking an alternator out of an
automobile's engine compartment removes the function from both the alternator
and the engine. It is an irreducibly complex system. For example,
a
body's cell without its regulatory functions working in synergy,
just would not exist at all.
The synergism
involved gives forth evidence toward a sudden and fully functioning system,
otherwise they could not have had cause to perpetuate.
One cannot disprove experimental evidence by pointing to a theory. Evolutionary
theory gets rid of anything it deems non functional.
Many scientists we laud
failed to get at causes. Newton recognized but declined to explain what
caused gravity. Darwin offered no explanation for the origin or vision
of life. And, he had problems with understanding
animal
electricity too.
"To be accepted, new ideas
must survive the most rigorous standards of evidence and scrutiny. The
suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or in politics,
but it is not the path to knowledge and there is no place for it in the
endeavors of science.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."....Carl
Sagan. The extraordinary claims evolution makes sadly lack the scientific
support needed for authenticity.
Cosmologists
offer no explanation for the Big Bang.
Mr.
Ken Bingman of the Kansas State Board of Education believes."When
you start teaching the supernatural to understand science, you aren't in
science anymore.".Another
board member, John Altervogt commented on Bingman's statement and tactics."Mr.
Bingman's tactics, after seeing his methods, makes me wonder if he should
have access to students.".However,
he
seems to have recanted.
Philip
E. Johnson, book,
Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Scientism,
InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois, Berkeley law professor and
witness on the side of the evolutionists portrays naturalism.(what
we call nature is all that can be known to exist; called philosophical
naturalism, the cousin of subjectivism).as
the unofficial religion
of North America, embraced
without examination by most academics, educators and media commentators
and those who accept as truth without checking. These are surely
not the intelligent of the world, but just as surely are the majority.
Accepting without checking things out is of the common low consciousness
of humanity. Mr. Johnson sees the common erroneous
belief in evolution as the."creation
myth of the 20th century".
When the supernatural is
left out of science, fallacies
such as the evolutionary theory are developed. When the behaviorial 'science'.concept
of evolution is taught, it circumvents.true
science.
1) Darwin and
His
Theory of Evolution:
What does evolution mean
to you? To many it is a change over time, the evolution of the computer,
the evolution of transportation, like from the bicycle to the space probe.
To others it may mean descent
of all life forms to a common ancestor.
In Darwin's sense of the
word, it was a process whereby life arose from non living matter and subsequently
developed entirely by natural means, where all the order and complexity
in designs of life resulted from natural selection, where it is that biological
living things descend with modification from shared, common ancestors.
It holds this meaning today among evolutionists.
Darwinian
evolution
is claimed to have occurred by means of the extremely contradictory
natural selection process acting upon random mutations,
causing adaption
of species through
eons.
Natural selection is incompetent
to account for the incipient
stages of useful structures, as we'll see soon. Never mind how life may
vary over time; we know we are living beings that are here and we know
where we are now. The important questions would seem to be, how did we
get here in the first place, what is our purpose here and where is it that
we are headed?
From David Berlinski Ph.D.
in Philosophy from Princeton
University, postdoctoral in mathematics, molecular biologist
,
professor at Stanford University, taught at Rutgers University and Pacific
College in New York and who interestingly now lives in the oldest building
in Paris, France. He states in the movie.Expelled:
No Intelligence Allowed, that regarding the preliminary
question of Darwinian Theory being correct:."Is
it even clear enough so that it could be correct? Looking at Darwinian
theory is such a mess. It is like looking into a roomful of smoke. Nothing
in the theory is precisely defined and clearly delineated.
It lacks all the rigor
one expects from mathematical physics and mathematical physics lacks all
the rigor one expects from mathematics. We don't even know what a species
is!"
