.
.
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  7 0

If they all came from a common ancestor, why would they not be in harmony? Why did the need for food in some animals turn into the prey/predator contest and yet, others are herbivores? Like the computer message says when it won't compute "too many javascript errors". Evolution has too many errors for it to be called a theory, for how can one construct anything but erroneous reasonings from it?

Evolutionists carry on speculating about their story's implications in the real world, just as kids use imagination when they become aware of.The Little Engine That Could.and/or.Peter Pan. 

Observation of species disputes Darwin's conclusions. Species exist alongside each other in relative.harmony. The Serengeti Plains of Africa elicit a diverse agglomeration of animals. They peacefully coexist, doing as they do. 

Animals like the bull.(male).elephant compete for the female by butting heads, rubbing their tusks or horns, seek their source of food as hunger necessitates, etc., but not a struggle for survival; rather a harmonious 'Gaian' interdependent system providing in many different ways for the sustenance of all things within it. We see diversity even in the temperament of individual animals with a species. Some are docile, others aggressive and some in between to varying degrees. Among animals there is also such diversity of eyes. 

Among the variety of animals, many share similar structures such as the birds, reptiles, mammals and so forth. This argues at least as persuasively for a common designer as they do for a common life source. There appears to be deliberately structured variation within a kind, but one 'kind' does not become another. 

What does this show? Animals have several behavior patterns, even within a species; as do dragonflies. We have the kangaroo with its silly pouch; the Koala sleeping 23 hours a day, the stotting of animals, etc., etc. Throughout the animal world we see every range of behavior imaginable. This shows that Creator has done these many things to show us His ability, that truly, with Him, nothing is impossible:.Luke 1:37 "For with God nothing is impossible.".God can do it! Evolution can't even account for it.

Creator-God shows forth to us His infinite creative ability, the more of it we become aware of, the more astounding it all is and there is so much of it. He does things many different ways and in seemingly contradictory manner at times, but it all works! 

For example, among the dogs, the teacup poodle is very different from the Great Dane, but they are both dogs. However, they won't become horses, as the mtDNA ensures this. 

Evolution often provides seemingly convincing examples of microevolution, such as variation of a type within its kind and adapting to the environment common to its kind. For example, evolution books talk of the ratio of black to white Peppered Moths.(another hoax).which may increase when pollution makes it easier for dark moths to escape detection. 

Trees and finches, even different types in the same habitat, adapt to the particular environment they may be in. Finches develop different beaks in response to their distinctive environmental needs.(called, coevolution). But finches are still finches and moths are still moths. There has been no change outside of the kind. In fact Jonathan Wells in his book.Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution Is Wrong, Regenery Publishing, 2000, reveals that biologists Peter and Rosemary Grant, went to the Galapágos to observe the process of the lengthening beaks of finches.(by about a tenth of an inch).in a severe drought. However, once the rains returned, beaks size returned to normal. As Wells goes on to show, there is no evidence that slight adaptions.(a slight adaption could be, more hair in the nose for those who live in windy dusty areas, etc.).produce new features.(distinct parts).or new species.

Genes can be changed. Bruce Lipton has excellent videos on this. Genes actually 'change' according to prevailing requirements, that is, newly formed ones predominate current ones. Genes exist in a number of different forms and the function of unneeded genes are gradually replaced with better suited ones for what may be currently required according to what an animal experiences in its environment. This is adaption and natural selection. It is not one species changing into another. When you go from your home at sea level to visit some place high in the mountains, it too, takes a while for your body to adapt. For more see.The Beak of the Finch: Evolution in Real Time, Journal of Creation 9.by J. Weiner. 

Frank Sullaway of Harvard University has shown that the story of Darwin's finches, are just that, a story..American Scientist.(americanscientist.org), Vol. 88, page 332, July/August, 2000.."In actuality Darwin failed gathering few examples of these supposedly crucial birds. He failed to recognize the importance of the specimens that he did collect and neglected to so much as tag each one of the 13 species with the name of which of the 17 Galapagos islands from which it came.

"Indeed, Darwin did not even realize that some of these birds were finches until six years later, when John Gould, an eminent British ornithologist, set him straight."

Darwin postulated that the same pressures that produced light and dark colored birds would also account for the larger deviation between species, families and orders and that all must have bloomed from a common ancestor sometime in the distant past. Most modern evolutionary thinking carried on somewhat from these early observations and thoughts. Darwin of course didn't know about the effect that genes and chromosomes have upon heredity. If so, he might have come to terms with his natural selection idea of hatching light or dark groups of finches with potential for both colors being present in the original organisms and no real change or mutation occuring.

The Voyage Of The Beagle.revised the text of his 1845 journal to reflect what he had pieced together in the intervening years. His original account says very little about the account, reflecting the minimal attention he paid to these birds when he first saw them. According to Daniel Simberloff at Florida State University, it's very doubtful whether the patterns commonly seen in island communities truly reflect such things as competition between species or are simply the result of happenstance. 

Simberloff and his student Edward Connor, who moved to the University of Virginia concluded by mathematical analysis that this distribution of finches according to Darwin's observation is just another myth.

Their analysis tested whether the pattern shown by such an occurrence.(the distribution).matrix reflects competition between species. Ecologists must compare the distribution figures with random or 'null' matrices, for which the sums of each of the rows and each of the columns matches the actual distribution matrix. To do this they had to mathematically solve the problem of the large null range.

What is called microevolution does not prove macroevolution. It simply shows what is readily evident. It has been found that remote adaption of species is actually built in design capabilities. For example, three types of finch, each with a unique bill and genome, dominate an ecotone in Cameroon.(a west central African country).and each type neatly corresponds to the seeds available in its sliver of the forest.."In some cases, you have all three forms occurring together".says Thomas Smith, San Francisco State University. Also Greenbulls, a bird in Cameroon, that exists deep in the forest resemble each other, even when they are more than 600 kilometers apart with natural barriers in between. And differences in these birds residing in the ecotone are striking. And more noticeable are birds living on the forest edges, as they have a wide variety of wing lengths and bill sizes, also exhibiting a variance in dietary preferences and risk factors due to predators. 

Dolph Schluter of the University of British Columbia, Canada in Vancouver and Jeffrey McKinnon at the University of Wisconsin in Whitewater and their colleagues have shown that freshwater and marine stickleback fish prefer to mate with peersfrom the same environment, even if those peers live on the opposite side of the Pacific Ocean and so are more genetically distant than fish in alternative habitats at home. This suggests that fish living a world apart, yet in the same ecological niche, do not diverge much.

Vague.phraseology.pervades explanations by evolutionists. Fraught with errors are attempts by evolutionary scientists building phylogenies or evolutionary family trees in trying to track evolutionary history through mitochondrial DNA or nuclear DNA analysis.

Ian Tattersall of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City,."believes the evolution of a successful animal species.almost always.involves trial and error.(so, when does it and when doesn't it?), false starts and failed experiments.(you mean that 'ol swamp goo and the ancient primates were intelligent enough to experiment? No, of course not. So then there was some great overriding intelligence then?).".He says."the human species is no exception to this."....Time Magazine, August 23, 1999, article, 'Up From the Apes'..(there appear so many worn out hackneyed.behavioral approaches to research in the realm of evolutionary doctrine)


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