.
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 3
The brain then ascertains
where particular
cells exist, being sure they are in the right places and responds to these
pathways so we can see, hear, touch, smell, etc. Everything is wired to
be lightning quick and provide
super efficiency. Thousands of conjunctions
are formed by each cell and pathways soon are set in place, wrapped with
a myelin sheath,
protecting them from body acids in the blood and to enhance conductivity,
so that further alterations in system organization are prevented. The system
becomes stable and we can grow and participate in another 'miracle',
that
of language. Who but this incredibly intelligent Great Infinite One
could have designed such an awesome good system? It sure didn't develop
according to the commonly explained lame natural
selection.tenet.
Evolution in over 140 years
hasn't accounted for separate existence precursory
functioning, for example, the eye existing before the brain, or vice
versa. The closest they come to it is believing that optical differences
were weeded out, but they fail in proving exactly how.
But...
For natural selection to
be effective.(and
that means to progress), it must have
at least a minimally functioning system to work on. Minimal function must
occur in order to
militate.change.
Martin Olomucki, Laboratory
Vice Director at the Colege de France,.The
Chemistry of Life, 1993, McGraw Hill, New York, N.Y., asks."How
did metabolism,
the flow of energy and matter that passes through organized beings, appear
in the course of evolution? What is the minimal organization of matter
that merits characterization as 'living'?"
Would you agree that the
only evolutionary definition of success is successful reproduction? For
natural selection to work, something right now must be useful to work on.
Evolution needs to show how any particular protein
or protein system was first produced, whether slowly or suddenly or whether
by natural selection or some other mechanism. Evolution hasn't done it
yet, so IBM is going to try.
IBM's recent Blue Gene.(gene
for genetics).super
computer.(for
example here, we use the Blue Gene; there are far more powerful
computers now
available).has
one million processors and can do a quadrillion
calculations per second. And their newer one has have over ten times this
capacity.
All this super computing
power to at first try to understand the amazing organized
complexity in the structure and functions of proteins, the workhouse
molecules
and undergirding
building blocks of the body.."The
smallest catalytically
active protein
molecules of
the living cell consist
of at least a hundred amino
acids. For even such a short molecule, there exists 20100
to 10130 alternative arrangements of the twenty basic monomers.
This shows that on the level of complexity, that of biological macromolecules,
analysis shows an almost unlimited variety of structures is possible."....Bernd-olaf
Küppers,.Information
and the Origin of Life, 1990, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
And if that weren't enough...
If, for example, a protein
appeared in an evolutionary cycle
with nothing to do, then mutation
and natural selection
would tend to eliminate
it before it had a chance to become a useful part in a much more complex
system, such as blood clotting,
etc.
Darwin's mechanism of natural
selection would actually hinder
the formation of irreducibly
complex systems upon which all life depends. For evolution to have effect,
it must explain how clotting might have originated and subsequently
evolved. When an evolutionist gives a model without numbers or quantities,
there is no science!
Quantification
ensures results are consistent.
True science.evinces.vigorous
attempts to make true statements about the physical world. However,
evolutionary.tenets
avoids the same, or it would crash down the tower of evolution with such
a thud that its
reverberation
would forever free the world from this ridiculous.concept,
this concept of idiocy.
By avoiding available detailed
explanations about processes involving the mind boggling complexity of
the foundation of life, like the purpose of the nucleoid
for example and intricate life processes including hibernation
and temperature maintenance,
modern evolutionary theorists persist in the insult of one's intelligence
by continuing to extrapolate
their severely crippled fable.
The complexity of life as
we know it here on Earth seems limited to our plane.
Our Earth is rare.,
but there are other Earth type planets..Why
Complex Life Is Uncommon In The Universe, by George Swenson, Jr., professor
emeritus
of electrical engineering and astronomy at the University of Illinois,
former member of the team for project Cyclops, the seminal
SETI.(Search
For Extra Terrestrial Intelligence {aliens}).study
conducted in 1971, which became a con job to gain public money, as they
all knew and as Dr. Steven
Greer has pointed out in his movies.
Professor George Swenson,
Jr. is a member of the National Academy of Engineering and a fellow of
both the American Association of the Advancement of Science and the Institute
of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.
When the horrendous complexity
of the nucleoid
is examined, the evident intelligence behind
the design leaves one awestruck! Ascribing
the simplistic
notion
of evolution to such astounding complexity presents amusing idiocy,
woefully.inadequate
for training school children in true
science.
How good are the science
and biology books now being used in high schools? Andrew Ahlgren, associate
director of the American Association for the Advancement of Science's Project
2061.(the
year Halley's Comet returns), in an
article in Popular Science.(popsci.com/),
October, 2000, says."They
are a total washout! Of the nine widely used middle grades science texts
and the 10 newly developed biology books, we couldn't recommend any of
them."
The science texts failed
the test of adequately conveying
scientific basic ideas in such a manner as to lead children to understand
them. And the biology texts present poorly connected illogical
ideas. Why
would educators appear to be so stupid?
Jo Ellen Roseman, the project's
head, regarding a disconnect between ideas and representation, states."One
of the worst examples in these books was children playing musical chairs
with some of them blindfolded. That was supposed to illustrate natural
selection. To all those people upset about teaching evolution in schools,
I'd say, Don't worry. The kids aren't learning it."
Microevolution
is small changes within species. Microevolution is the theory that random.genetic.mutation
combined with natural
selection to produce within a kind.(adaptive
modifications).and
cites
differences in bird beaks, etc. of various species. One bird's beak
may indeed be longer than another, but is it not still a bird's beak? It
sure ain't an elephant's
trunk!
Microevolution.(which
is really).does
not require new information, because the changes are a function of the
genetic makeup
already present
in the gene pool of the species.
How a gene controls or directs the features of organisms is answered not
by biology, but by biochemistry. Get a
book on biochemistry if you're inclined to further information.
Because one beak of a particular
kind of bird may resemble
another beak on a different kind of bird, the similarities
say nothing about how the similarity is produced. Evidence of changes within
a kind are everywhere.
Clams change
shell shapes. Humans show forth much diversity;
fingerprints, faces; one person may have long fingers and another short,
etc. Travel from a cold or temperate climate to a tropical one and your
body is well able to adapt to different atmospheres, including cosmic
ray bombardment. Temperature change, tropical food, etc., necessitate.adaption.
