- Given the stated age of earth, at 4.5 Billion years, and life began at some 3 billion years ago, what human Scientist was there present, to record these events, and with what instrumentation?
- Develop a theory, and then devise an experiment, to prove or to disprove that theory.
- To be present for both the visual and any up to-date electronic recording equipment, and write down all observations..
Seeing as that neither options could have been available to any scientist, for any scientific observations, can we agree. that much of what is given and taught as fact, MUST be placed upon the shelf of human Assumptions?
Lest we all forget, one of Science's ethos, is:Man's Search for Truth! We shall see that there is NOT any over abundance of truth with the idea of Evolution!
So, for intellectually honest study, allow your mind to think, upon the following facts, without prejudice, and the many statements from the evolutionists themselves.
3. In short what we have been told & taught since the the 1930's is that we know best, and this is a proven fact, that evolution can show how life began, and how it was evolved to its present states!
If you have bought into this idea, please explain the following:
"The Real Jurassic Park" in an "Earth" Magazine: article by M. Schweizer and T. Staedter June 1997 PP. 55-57.
Mart Schweizer and her co-workers looking at a dinosaur's bone section, complete with red blood vessel channels.
She wrote: "The Lab filled with murmurs of amazement, for I focused on something inside the vessels that none of us had noticed before: Tiny round objects translucent red, with a dark center. Then a colleague took one look and shouted, "You've got red blood cells!" -- IBID.
It was then that she confronted her boss, "Dinosaur Jack Horner:
"I can't believe it,' she said, 'The bones are after all 165 millions of years old. How could blood cells survive that long"?
"How about you trying to prove they are NOT red blood cells?"
So she tried. And the Verdict? "So far we have not been able to" (Ibid)
Well now, the evidence, that hemoglobin, the red oxygen carrying protein, obviously has survived putting in doubt, the idea of millions of years theory.
PROOF: The reddish/brown material, the hemoglobin, was extracted from this Dino bone, contains heme units. Chemical signatures within, under specific wavelengths of Laser light, reacts because heme contains iron, thus reacts to magnetic fields differently than other proteins.These re-acted the same ways modern heme compounds do.
To insure that there's no bacterial contamination, {which always lack the protein hemoglobin) extracts were injected into rats,over several weeks. No anti bodies were formed.
The process of biochemical decay starts soon after death.,These cells should have long since disintegrated...... unless they were only a few thousand years old!
This, obviously, throws out the slow gradual changes over great periods of time, led to to exclaim, Punctuated Equilibrium meaning sudden and rapid changes followed by period of no change, but this does not explain, the presence of red blood cells in a "dino" bone, now does it?
However, the deceptions don't stop there, who has heard of the PILTDOWN MAN or THE NEBRASKA MAN?
The first was proved to be false, parts of a lower jaw bone, two pieces and a 1/4 section of a right rear section is all that was found. So someone put it with a ape's skull and called it the Piltdown man, and it was proved a fake, in 1930's, but it's still in our school text books, WHY?
The Nebraska Man, came to the fore, by a farmer's plowing a field, seeing something white, he picked it up, a tooth, which he gave to the nearest University. I wound up in England, where from only one tooth, a man, a woman and a child were drawn, and put into textbooks!
As it happened, the next season this farmer found a whole jaw bone, with one tooth missing, this also went to England, where they fitted that first tooth into an open socket, for a perfect fit! There was only one catch, even though the Nebraska Man & Family are still in text books,, it was declared the to be the jaw of a pig!
WHY? Why are they so quick, to grasp at straws,.in their quest to eliminate, God from the picture? How does that square up to their motto "Science is the human search for truth? to their present truth, "Science, human search for truth as we want it to be"? How can YOU & ME accept this and still be intellectually honest with self?
REARRANGING the DATA: a Book by Dr. Jack Cuozzo, "Buried Alive"
Most have seen pictures of the so-called cave man, the Neanderthal Man right? BUT how many know that they have the lower jaw forwards, by as much as 30 millimeters/ nearly 1" to give give the ape like look!
Ramapithecus: in the 1930's they found a full lower jaw with the lower right skull part attached. Yet from that jaw they drew a fully upright super long armed ape man! Would YOU call that dishonest?
Australopithecus Africanus, as she is shown in in pictures and displays, holding a tool, a walking stick? Note the human hand, and very upright stance. Plus look at the "contemplative gaze, they have given her, in text books. Every attempt is made to "Humanize" these apes.
If you've ever seen a picture of both a human and chimp pelvis, you'll understand there's no mistaking one for the other! Even more pronounced are the Skull's attachments to the spines. Humans are attached nearly centrally to the skulls, but chips and apes, are nearly at the rear most part of their skulls, and to see forwards they must bend at the knees, and lean backwards, to see the horizon!
Lucy: her bones were found along with many other animals bones, in fact even human bones, that every one can see they are human! Yet she is called our common ancestor, for both ape and man. They claim she walked upright, but have found no knees nor foot bones to complete her so to claim bipedal ring hollow!
MORPHOLOGY: a change from one life form to another totally different than from before: IE: from egg to caterpillar, to pupae, to cocoon, to butterfly, or moth!
Ask yourself, how does the moth or the butterfly, know which tree to lay her eggs? She's not ever ate a leaf in her life? The from all previous stages, she again is a moth or butterfly, yet although having no experience in flight, they fly, and they eat/drink nectar from flowers they have not ever seen ,so how do they know which is good for food, and which may be poisonous? Could this be part of the overall Creation?
MUTATIONS
Detrimental Neutral Beneficial
Disease No Change Add Information no
yes I
No Evolution No Evolution Change Morphology I
yes no I
Evolution Poss.-No Evolution
To put this in plain words, half a fish and half a salamander, are just not possible, just as 1/2 a fin and 1/2 a foot makes only for another' s quick lunch, thus no evolution. Cows don't birth pigs, and no woman has ever birthed a litter of pups, right? Kind produces kind! If YOU sow carrot seeds, I hope you don't wait for cabbages!
If any teacher, or Ph.D ever spoke up for Creation or against Evolution, they'd be out of a job faster than you can say WHAT? Thus evolution has but one sided point of view, and will tolerate no other, given rise to the Bible being a collection of fairy tales, and an allegorical view of Jewish History!
Yet this also is changing, now that so much is known about life, in the cellular levels, along with the DNA, and genetics! We know that to begin life, is a odds ratio of 1 to the 240th power! Science accepts the fact that the probability of 1:50, in already in the realm of the impossible, yet it clings to the idea of 1;240th power is possible?
One famous evolution supporter belonged to the famous English family known by the name Huxley, they were philosophers and Ph.D's and it was Aldous who said this {paraphrased} "I don't accept God, because I want none to interfere in my sex life"
Well think we can extend this idea of self, to all others who embrace evolution? Mainly because because the Bible is as a mirror, that judges their personal actions in ways they don;t like? {Just asking!}
COMMENTS?....................QUESTIONS?
servant@frontier.com john
for a Bible following Church, find your local Seventh day Adventist Church...come ans see?
No comments:
Post a Comment