About Me

Name: Patriot Pastor
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
[Click to edit me]

Evolution vs. Intelligent Design: 6 Bones of Contention

National Geographic News: “Evolution vs. Intelligent Design: 6 Bones of Contention

It’s the sort of headline that both excites us and worries us: will National Geographic News’s portrayal of “evolution vs. intelligent design” be fair and balanced?

“[T]he theory that new species can arise from old ones through natural selection is still met with some resistance,” the story begins (in understatement). The article then lists six major empirical disagreements between “evolution” and “intelligent design.” (That dichotomy is imperfect, however; many intelligent design advocates [IDers] still accept billions of years of evolution between the hypothesized instances of intelligent design.)

We were pleasantly surprised to see that National Geographic let each side (or, at least, one representative from each) speak for itself, although the evolutionary perspective was given the last word on each debate. On the whole, the six-page article gives not a bad overview of evolution versus bare-bones intelligent design—i.e., a view much more open-ended than young-earth creation.

Here is a summary of the six debates, along with intelligent design and evolutionary perspectives offered by the Discovery Institute’s Casey Luskin and Occidental College’s Don Prothero, respectively:

  • On the vertebrate eye, IDers note the multiple interacting parts and argue the parts would have to evolve simultaneously to produce a functioning eye. Evolutionists counter that eye could have begun as a simple “spot” that transformed in stepwise fashion into the modern eye.
  • For Luskin, the Cambrian explosion is about “abrupt explosions of mass biological diversity that required huge amounts of information be injected into the biosphere rapidly,” the opposite of Darwinian predictions. Prothero claims soft-bodied organisms from before the Cambrian reduce how “explosive” the event was.
  • IDers claim genes pack “complex specified information,” which can only come from an intelligence. For evolutionists, it’s natural selection to the rescue—starting with the most basic DNA fragment and ratcheting up the complexity over time.
  • Bacteria flagella, like eyes, are complex parts that IDers say reflect design, while evolutionists say they’re due to natural selection hard at work over millions of years.
  • Were whales once land mammals that adapted to an aquatic lifestyle? While Luskin points out problems for evolutionists such as whales’ long generation times, National Geographic News shows its colors and refers to “fossils of ‘archaic’ whales” (which are, of course, contested).
  • The anthropic principle, which posits that various universal constants and astronomical facts are “set” perfectly to enable human life, leaves Prothero with his least scientific response yet. “There’re lots of ways you can imagine a universe that is not finely tuned for us, but might be tuned for something else,” he says. National Geographic News fills in the idea of multiple universes, which physicists have resorted to in the face of arguments about astrophysical design. Of course, all of this is, as Prothero puts it, part of evolutionists’ imagination—taken on faith to protect the naturalistic enterprise.

For those familiar with the creation/evolution debate (including intelligent design perspectives), the back-and-forth is nothing new. We take the intelligent design side in each of the debates above, of course (minus some disagreement on the nature of the Cambrian explosion in the fossil record; we do not consider the fossil layers a continuous record of billions of years of earth history).

What is as important to us is what evolutionists cannot do (at least, not with scientific—as opposed to philosophical—arguments): they cannot show why intelligent design is inferior, as a belief, to evolution. That is, even if we agreed that natural selection was a plausible way to generate the complexity observed in life (and we don’t), such agreement does not reduce the plausibility of an intelligent creator. And evidence from the fossil record merely begs the question, since no fossil can prove either evolution or the lack thereof.

Most evolutionists (and many creationists, we’ll admit) fail to recognize that the debate isn’t ultimately about scientific evidence or interpretation. Instead, the creation/evolution controversy cuts much deeper, pitting two worldviews—one materialist, the other supernaturalist—against each other. For those of us who start with the Bible, the science isn’t where the big debate lies; it’s about God’s Word and its ultimate authority.
 
Source: Answers In Genesis
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Democrat Party: The Lawyer Party

 


    VERY INTERESTING!


Johnny Carson nailed lawyers with one of his "how cold was it?" jokes:

 "It was so cold that lawyers were running around with their hands in their
 own  pockets!!"
  
The Democratic Party has become the Lawyers' Party. 
  
Barack Obama is a lawyer.
 
Michelle Obama is a lawyer.
 
Hillary Clinton is a lawyer.

Bill Clinton is a lawyer.
John Edwards is a lawyer.

Elizabeth Edwards is a lawyer.
 
Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not
 graduate
).
 

Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd
Bentsen, went to law school.
  
Look at leaders of the Democrat Party in Congress: 
  
Harry Reid is a lawyer.  

Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer.
 
The Republican Party is different. 
   
President Bush is a businessman.
 
Vice President Cheney is a businessman.
 
The leaders of the Republican Revolution: 

Newt Gingrich was a history professor.
 
Tom Delay was an exterminator.  Armey was an economist.

House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer. 
The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.

Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer?  Gerald Ford, who
left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a
sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976.  The Republican
Party is made up of real people doing real work, who are often the targets
of lawyers.

The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers.  Democrats mock and scorn men who
create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick, like Frist, or
who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich.

The Lawyers' Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and
services that people want, as the enemies of America.  And, so we have seen
the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers' Party, grow.
 
Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail?  Pharmaceutical companies, oil
companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large
retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our
nation. 

This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of
lawyers.  Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients,
in this case the American people.  Lawyers seek to have new laws passed,
they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn
precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.
 
Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine.  But it is an awfulway to govern a great nation.  When politicians as lawyers begin to view
some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the
role of the leg al system in our life becomes all-consuming.  Some Americans
become "adverse parties" of our very government.  We are not all litigants
in some vast social class-action suit.  We are citizens of a republic that
promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from
lawyers.
Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we
are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once
private lives.  America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is
modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked.  When the most important
decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme
Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big.  When lawyers
use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means, as
happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power of
lawyers in America is too great.  When House Democrats sue America in order
to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us,
then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

We cannot expect the Lawyers' Party to provide real change, real reform or
real hope in America  Most Americans know that a republic in which every
major government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges is not what
Washington intended in 1789.  Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a
war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders.  Most Americans
intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values
or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy..

Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our
nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and
business.  Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the
mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work.  Perhaps
Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only
 make our problems worse.  
 
The United States has 5% of the world's population and 66% of the world's
 lawyers! Tort (Legal) reform legislation has been introduced in congress
 several times in the last several years to limit punitive damages in
 ridiculous lawsuits such as "spilling hot coffee on yourself and suing the
 establishment that sold it to you" and also to limit punitive damages in
 huge medical malpractice lawsuits. This legislation has continually been
blocked from even being voted on by the Democrat Party. When you see that
 97% of the political contributions from the American Trial Lawyers
 Association goes to the Democrat Party, then you realize who is responsible
 for our medical and product costs being so high!
AUTHOR UNKNOWN
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The $164.00 Question

How is it that such an auto accident can go into the round file without even an interview with the driver? Is this a case of the rich and famous getting away with anything? I guess the next time one of us ORDINARY people has an accident we can just refuse to answer any questions from the Highway Patrol. I wonder how much of a donation the Florida Highway Patrol will receive from Mr. Woods this year. Well, there you have it folks! I guess it will be up to the media to ferret out the many mistresses this squeaky clean Buick agent had. I wonder if Buick will continue to let him advertise for them, seeing that he was driving a Cadillac in the accident.

DID YOU KNOW that Mr. Woods pulled in a smooth 100 million dollars this year from his commercials etc.? Wow! I guess he can afford the $164.00 ticket, don't you?

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Any Proofs For Evolution? Let The Experts Speak

“In each of these pivotal nexuses in life's history, the principal “types" seem to appear rapidly and fully equipped with the signature features of the respective new level of biological organization. No intermediate “grades" or intermediate forms between different types are detectable.”
—Eugene V Koonin,

“The Biological Big Bang model for the major transitions in evolution,” National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, in Biology Direct 2007, 2:21.

"To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage
is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that
carries the same validity as a bedtime story - amusing, perhaps
even instructive, but not scientific."
—Henry Gee

Evolutionist, Dr. Henry Gee, Senior Editor, Biological Sciences for the journal Nature as written in his book, In Search of Deep Time: Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life, New York, The Free Press, 1999, page 126-127.

"We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some
of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant
promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific
community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism … Moreover, that materialism
is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."
—Richard Lewontin

Evolutionary geneticist, Alexander Agassiz Research Professor, Harvard University, “Billions and billions of Demons,” The New York Review, p. 31, January 9, 1997

Source: whoisyourcreator.com

The challenge to evolutionists is to PROVE that evolution is real. To try and force feed it to us as FACT is absurd. Where are the facts to back it up? It is a fraud hatched up by atheists to try and disprove God's existence. God will never be disproven but evolution is on its last legs even as a theory.

PS: Stay tuned for the next theory, that space aliens did it. Well, if they did, where did the space aliens come from? This question will never be any more answered than the question of how the first life came into existence. Let me suggest that you look at Genesis chapters one and two and you will find a rational and logical answer. Most people who hold to evolution have been unwilling to examine the scientific evidence for creation. As Mr. Koonin stated, everything came into being suddenly and in their complete form. This is referred to as the Cambrian Explosion. This has dealt a death blow to the theory since it agrees with the missing fossil record of transitional forms. Isn't it time to shed your bias against creation and look for yourself at the evidence? There are many excellent sources available.

Intelligent Design, Answers In Genesis and Institute For Creation Research are just three good sources to help you. Also, if you have questions about the Bible's reliability, I recommend that you read Josh McDowell's research book, New Answers That Demand A Verdict. Happy hunting! Prepare to be blown away!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Each American Has 4 Of These, Someone Gets One Every 2 Seconds ...

Can you guess what it is? The answer is THE BIBLE! Are you surprised by this? Take a look at what the New Yorker magazine, December 18, 2006, had to say about it.
 
The familiar observation that the Bible is the best-selling book of all time obscures a more startling fact: the Bible is the best-selling book of the year, every year. Calculating how many Bibles are sold in the United States is a virtually impossible task, but a conservative estimate is that in 2005 Americans purchased some twenty-five million Bibles—twice as many as the most recent Harry Potter book. The amount spent annually on Bibles has been put at more than half a billion dollars.  (emphasis added)

Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/12/18/061218fa_fact1#ixzz0YYR8pqQN
 
Wouldn't it make sense for each American to take some time to READ it? If you will, you will be changed by it for the better. You will especially be changed by reading the book of Romans and the Gospel of John. These two books tell us all about Jesus/Yeshua and how He died on the cross to make forgiveness for our sins possible. The greatest gift ever given to the human race was when God gave His only Son to the world, as we all know from John 3:16.
 
Merry Christmas to all of you and may you find a new beginning through God's greatest gift.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bible Prophesy Fulfilled In Our Time

The world conditions today raise a lot of questions for Christians concerning the end times prophesies. Every word of God will come to pass. There have been 333 specific prophesies fulfilled concerning Jesus Christ/Yeshua Ha Mashiach.  The probability of this happening is 1 in 83 billion. There remains only a few more to be fulfilled and you can count on it that they will be fulfilled, possibly in our lifetime. God warns us over and over that in the last days perilous times will come. (See 2 Timothy 3:1-17) He warns us that there will be a one world government and a one world religion. A world leader will arise who will be empowered by Satan himself and will deceive multiplied millions of people. Here is just one of Jesus'/Yeshua's warnings to us and we would do well to heed its warnings and pay close attention to world events. The Obama administration is setting out to bring America down and turn it into a Socialist state which will spell the end of the protection we have offered to many nations around the world. This will rapidly speed up the takeover of many nations. My belief is that Islam will be both the one world government and religion as it is really both in its essence. Note Jesus'/Yeshua's words in the following passage.
 
'As He was going out of the temple, one of His disciples said to Him, "Teacher, behold what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!" And Jesus said to him, "Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone will be left upon another which will not be torn down." As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew were questioning Him privately,  "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are going to be fulfilled?" And Jesus began to say to them, "See to it that no one misleads you.  Many will come in My name, saying, 'I am He!' and will mislead many.  When you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be frightened; those things must take place; but that is not yet the end.  For nation will rise up against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; there will be earthquakes in various places; there will also be famines. These things are merely the beginning of birth pangs. But be on your guard; for they will deliver you to the courts, and you will be flogged in the synagogues, and you will stand before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them.  The gospel must first be preached to all the nations.  When they arrest you and hand you over, do not worry beforehand about what you are to say, but say whatever is given you in that hour; for it is not you who speak, but it is the Holy Spirit.  Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and have them put to death.  You will be hated by all because of My name, but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved. But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where it should not be (let the reader understand), then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains.  The one who is on the housetop must not go down, or go in to get anything out of his house; and the one who is in the field must not turn back to get his coat.  But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days!  But pray that it may not happen in the winter.  For those days will be a time of tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never will.  Unless the Lord had shortened those days, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect, whom He chose, He shortened the days.  And then if anyone says to you, 'Behold, here is the Christ'; or, 'Behold, He is there'; do not believe him; for false Christs and false prophets will arise, and will show signs and wonders, in order to lead astray, if possible, the elect.  But take heed; behold, I have told you everything in advance. But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers that are in the heavens will be shaken.  Then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. And then He will send forth the angels, and will gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest end of the earth to the farthest end of heaven. Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near.  Even so, you too, when you see these things happening, recognize that He is near, right at the door.  Truly I say to you, this generation (race) will not pass away until all these things take place.
  Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.  But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. Take heed, keep on the alert; for you do not know when the appointed time will come.  It is like a man away on a journey, who upon leaving his house and putting his slaves in charge, assigning to each one his task, also commanded the doorkeeper to stay on the alert.  Therefore, be on the alert -- for you do not know when the master of the house is coming, whether in the evening, at midnight, or when the rooster crows in the morning -- in case he should come suddenly and find you asleep.  What I say to you I say to all, 'Be on the alert!'"  Mark 13:1-37
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

It's Great To Be Queen

Source: Family Research Council
Plenty of Hill leaders are trying to put their stamp on the U.S. health care system, but none will matter as much as the woman in charge of implementing this reform: Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. While the media is focused on the Nancy Pelosis and Bart Stupaks, the full force of the bill will rest squarely on the HHS boss, who is as liberal--if not more so--than the current Congress. When and if the legislation passes, Secretary Sebelius will have almost unilateral control over one-sixth of the American economy.

The Senate version of health care reform, H.R. 3590, grants an unprecedented amount of power to the HHS chief, who, prior to taking her place in the President's Cabinet, served as the most pro-abortion governor in U.S history. According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, there are 1,697 instances in the bill "where the Secretary of Health and Human Services [has] the authority to create, determine, or define things in the bill." Sebelius would be the sole authority on everything from setting monthly costs per person to establishing an agency that would determine cuts without congressional approval. She would even make the final decisions about including abortion in the government-run plan.

That's an awful lot of responsibility for a leader who has proven to be largely ineffective during the health care debate and maintained close ties to an abortion industry that helped finance most of her political career. If Sebelius is behind the wheel of a $2.5 trillion health care overhaul, you can bet she'll be receiving a lot more notes like this one. Earlier this month, the HHS boss got a letter from Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards, thanking her for speaking to a gathering of leaders in the abortion industry. "Planned Parenthood is honored to have you as an ally," it reads. At the bottom, Ms. Richards adds a personal P.S., gushing her gratitude "for [Sebelius's] friendship and support." I shudder to think about the kind of "support" Sebelius could offer to Richards if HHS is entrusted with reinventing the entire health care system in the image of the abortion industry.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

EVOLUTION: The Truth About Fossils

Of all fossils that we have found:

95% are marine invertebrates

4.7% are algae and plants

.2% are insects and invertebrates

.1% are vertebrates, and of this only an infinitesimal amount are vertebrate fossils of primates (humans, apes, monkeys and lemurs).

So how do scientists claim to have found missing links to man's ancestors from monkeys?

Artist renderings are evolution's number one means of making us think that man evolved from monkeys. By the way, they avoid using moders living specimens of monkeys but rely solely on fossils that 'show' a relation to man. You see, living monkeys actually show the same differences as do the fossils. They no longer want to claim that modern monkeys and apes are our ancestors. They hope to hide the evidence by using fragments of fossilized monkey bones. Note the following illustration to see this better.

In the early 1920's, the Hesperopithecus was pictured in the London Illustrated News complete with his wife, children, domesticated animals and his cave. The problem? The only thing that scientists had in their possession was A SINGLE TOOTH. That's right; this whole family was 'imagined' from a single tooth. And was the tooth from the missing link? Negative, it turned out to be a peccary (pig) tooth. In 1927 the rest of the animal was unearthed and Nebraska Man was proved to be nothing but a wild piggy. Now, have you seen this taken out of circulation or a retraction in science books or on PBS? Negative again!

PS: This was the 'evidence for evolution' offered in the Scopes trial, by the way. Did we get the straight scoop on the Scopes trial? Negative! The movie, Inherit The Wind, was a complete scam of the actual trial evidence. If you want the whole truth on it get the book 'Monkey Business' by Marvin Olasky and John Perry.

So how do we get the Apeman from such sketchy 'evidence'?

A. They have to combine the human and ape bones and try and sell them as coming from the same individual.

B. They try to emphasize the 'humanlike' qualities of the fossilized ape bones and then try to 'snow' you into believing that the apes possess these qualities.

C. They try to emphasize the 'apelike' qualities of human fossils and then downplay humankind to be more like apes.

ALL these are used in ALL attempts to convince a naive public that they have found the missing link.

PS: There have never been found a SINGLE MISSING LINK in all the fossils we have in our possession! There have been MANY attempts to fabricate these so called missing links but each one has been found out. Piltdown Man, Lucy etc. etc.

So, not only has bogus science been exposed on global warming, we must also expose the outright lies of evolution today. We must also INSIST that these hoaxes be removed from our textbooks used in government run schools.

Are you sick to death of the blatant lies of the Socialist/atheistic/evolutionistic community? We have been lied to and we have believed it to our own detriment.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Amazing! Flat Footed Liars On Global Warming

Robert Gibbs has trouble looking into the eyes of those who asked questions about the scientific evidence AGAINST global warming and this is a sure sign that one is lying outright. How can this man just stand there and call himself a journalist when they have been found out by the e-mails among the scientists who are trying to propagate this hoax on the world. The effort to gloss over this lie is amazing to behold. Obama and his cronies, both here and abroad, have been found out and need to simply admit that their attempt to scam the world has been exposed. This would be the honorable thing to do, but this gang seems to have no honor among them.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Simple Explanation of Baseball

 
This is a game played by two teams, one out the other in. The one that's in, sends players out one at a time, to see if they can get in before they get out. If they get out before they get in, they come in, but it doesn't count. If they get in before they get out it does count.

When the ones out get three outs from the ones in before they get in without being out, the team that's out comes
in and the team in goes out to get those going in out before they get in without being out.

When both teams have been in and out nine times the game is over. The team with the most in without being out before coming in wins unless the ones in are equal. In which case, the last ones in go out to get the ones in out before they get in without being out.

The game will end when each team has the same number of ins out but one team has more in without being out before coming
in.
 
Any questions?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Miller-Urey Experiment Still Taught As Good Science

The Miller-Urey experiment conducted in early 1950 claimed to have created life in a test tube. Miller tried to reproduce what he believed to be the conditions of early earth and how life evolved into existence. His choice of gasses was determined by preconceived notions of what might produce life rather than what we know existed. Our atmosphere has most likely remained the same from the beginning. Miller assumed that the gasses present DID NOT include oxygen since oxygen would have destroyed any expected outcome. He assumed that our atmosphere consisted of water, methane, ammonia and hydrogen. He then added the electrical spark to simulate lightning. (How we had lightning he did not explain.) The result produced amino acids, which science textbooks tell our naive students that this could have been how life first originated. The problem is that he did not give us all the negatives about his experiment.

Three critical questions were not answered.

1. How much of the experiment was left to chance processes or how much involved intelligent design?

2. How did Miller know what earth's early atmosphere was like?

3. Did Miller produce the right type of amino acids used in life?

Miller started with years of intelligent research in chemistry to set up his experiment. He sort of 'helped out' the experiment by his knowledge of how amino acids are formed and then set up his experiment to produce the best possible results based on his distorted ideas of early earth's atmosphere. Why would oxygen NOT be in the original atmosphere? Because oxygen would have destroyed the amino acids that were produced.

"Oxygen is a poisonous gas that oxidizes organic and inorganic materials on a planetary surface; it is quite lethal to organisms that have not evolved protection against it."  P. Ward and D. Brownlee, Rare Earth: p. 245

So, you see why he had to leave out oxygen, don't you? There is NO evidence that earth ever was absent oxygen as part of our atmosphere.

"The only trend in the recent literature is the suggestion of far more oxygen in the early atmosphere than anyone imagined."  Thaxton, Bradley and Olsen: The Mystery of Life, p. 80

He also isolated the amino acids from the other elements he used as they too would have destroyed the outcome. All you have to do is to see the apparatus he used to bleed off the amino acids to isolate them from all the other elements used in the experiment.

If we grant the evolutionists that there was no oxygen, then ozone, which is made by oxygen, would not have existed and the sun's ultraviolet rays would have also destroyed the outcome.

But what if life started in the oceans? Water has the ability to split apart the molecules and this would have destroyed them. Water also breaks apart chains of amino acids thus destroying the possibility of this process expanding into more complex forms. This is why evolution is IMPOSSIBLE!

Out of the 2000 types of amino acids, only 20 are used in life. The atoms that make up the amino acids are two basic shapes; these are left and right handed. The amino acids that make up life are ALL left handed. We do not find right handed amino acids in proteins. Miller's experiments produced both left and right handed amino acids.

"So we remain profoundly ignorant of how life originated. Yet, the Miller-Urey experiment continues to be used as an icon of evolution, because nothing better has turned up. Instead of being told the truth, we re given to the misleading impression that scientists have empirically demonstrated the first step in the origin of life."  J. Wells: Icons Of Evolution, p. 24

Well, because of limited space we see that this experiment was 'set up' in a way that modern science knew in advance would produce some amino acids but did not represent the remote possibility of being real in early earth's makeup.

Now for a quote from your student's textbook:

"By re-creating the early atmosphere (ammonia, water, hydrogen and methane) and by passing an electric spark (lightning) through the mixture, Miller and Urey PROVED that organic matter such as amino acids could have formed spontaneously."  Kenneth Miller and Joseph Levine, Biology, 5th ed.

You see how our students are manipulated by telling them only a little bit of the evidence without telling them all the side effects and man made manipulation of the conditions.

Folks, it is time to clear out all the outright lies in our student's textbooks and force them to put in the truth. This is why evolutionists try to force school boards to forbid the teaching of the evidence against evolution. Get involved in your kid's education and let them know the facts without the lies and distortions.

(Excerpts taken from The New Answers Book 2, Ken Ham editor)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive