EVOLUTION--THE SEEN AND THE UNSEEN. X CLIFORD GOLDSTEIN; Signs of the Times Aug. 2019.

My many thanks to both the Author and the Publishers, and our Creator God.  (John B)

  Did Y O U know that most creationists believe in evolution, including scientists who believe that God created this earth and its living things a few thousand years ago?

 NOTE (JB) :   Despite that millions of dollars and as many more hours, spent trying to create life , by mankind?

   One of the most famous (? or infamous) defenders of evolution, Richard Dawkins, made the following claim: "Evolution is a fact in the same sense as it is a fact that Paris is in the Northern Hemisphere."
    Though not as well known as Richard Dawkins but just as staunch an evolutionist, Daniel Dennet  [ Note: this name in the Hebrew mans God is my judge!]  who claims that "the fundamental core of contemporary Darwinism is beyond dispute among scientists. ...The hope that it will be 'refuted' by some shattering breakthrough is about as reasonable as the hope that we will return to a geocentric vision and discard Copernicus". In other words, Dennett was saying he thinks that there's as much a chance of evolution being refuted as there's a chance of humans going back to the ancient view that planet Earth is situated at the center of the universe.
    Of course, no one challenges these two views, in contrast millions reject the evolution that Dawkins and Dennett so dogmatically defend. How can some people be so certain about evolution, while others, with the same certainty, deny it?

THE SEEN AND THE UNSEEN;

     Part of the answer can, in broad terms, be boiled down to the differences between the seen and unseen. More specifically, and in the context of evolution itself, this disparity arises from the difference between MICROEVOLUTION AND MACROEVOLUTION .
    What are these two concepts and how does the difference between them help explain much of the controversy surrounding the Theory of Evolution? 

NOTE(JB) :  Microevolution: is what we see in dogs, the breeding of a small Poodle and a Dachshund, is Microevolution. This created a new breed, but still the same genus, the same family..still dogs!
                 MACROEVOLUTION:  IS IMPOSSIBLE  for it holds that by selective breeding of the surviving species, a new species comes into the being. Sorry cows will not brith pigs, and fish becoming salamanders! As the Holy Bible says: "..Kind after his kind.."  This takes men forcing the issue with Artificial Insemination, or using a stallion to mate with a receptive female donkey, that results in a mule, nearly always male and sterile, thus end of the line for this type to reproduce naturally!

DARWIN AND THE  VARIATION OF SPECIES.

    One of the most consequential sea voyages in modern history was that one by Charles Darwin on the HMS BEAGLE, which set sail from Plymouth, England, in December 1831 and returned to port in October 1836, just two months short of five years! During those years C. Darwin saw things, especially in the Galapagos Islands off the Pacific Coast of South America, that helped him formulate his ideas.
     So what, exactly did Darwin see?
     Darwin noted that certain species of wildlife varied from one island to another. Finches, tortoises, and mocking birds living on other islands.For example, the beaks of finches on one island were larger than the beaks on another island. Even on the same island, differences among the same species existed, depending upon where each lived. Some finches lived on the ground in coastal areas; some lived inland in trees and others in bushes. Some had access to and ate one food, some another.


    NOTE(JB) : Many in Orient, use chop sticks to eat their foods, while we use forks and spoons, does that make us a different species, or are we both human? We have over 500 types of dog breeds, but are they not all STILL dogs? This is the MICRO EVOLUTION.  size, color, shape, ability, does not change into anything other than a dog! MACRO IS NOT POSSIBLE! This is a change from one species to another, and why cows do not give birth to pigs! Remember for live to be, it MUST have all the organs, all the materials a body needs to just exist, evolution of a life form with NO digestive tract, is soon dead, and evolution stops! This not even Hawkins can refute nor change!
   Thus what's the ONLY purpose of the Theory of Evolution men the first place?
Look at what it has accomplished.... most people believe life just kinda-sorta came to be, by random chance, and that there's NO GOD!  Just the way Satan planned it all along!

>>>>>> AsAS the direct results of these different environments, the species developed different traits, that allowed each to better adapt to their particular circumstances. The differences were enough for one Governor to say "Just by looking at a tortoise, he could tell which island it came from.
     While the differences were small, they got Darwin to speculate about what would happen if all these small changes kept happening over the long ages. With various ideas germinating in his head, Darwin returned to England, where he continued his studies.
    Back i n England, Darwin also noted that selective breeding could cause variations with a species. Though they had no knowledge of genetics, humans knew for millennia that they could bring about minor changes in a population of animals, dogs, horses, cows , oxen pigeons, and so forth, just selective breeding. Within each species, differing only by color, size and traits.As the hairless dogs and cats of today! All this helped shape Darwin's thinking.
    In 1859, Darwin published his most (in)famous, and consequential book, The "On The Origin Of Species,", in which he theorized that the constant accumulation of small changes within a species would eventually lead to the creation of whole new species of animals and plants. He claimed that all this process was due to what he called "Natural Selection", a process inherent in nature itself, in which organisms that are better adapted to their environment tend to ,do better and thus survive, with more offspring, while those that don't adapt die off.

NOTE(JB)  The most powerful microscopes then available, it was not possible to view, a single cell, unlike today's that have 50,000 times magnification powers.

MICROEVOLUTION:

      There's no question that these changes caused by natural selection do indeed, occur. Species, both plants and animals, and humans, can and do change either by the natural environment or through selective breeding, and it can be done quickly enough that we can see the differences between the populations of the same same species, even while the earlier versions of the same species are still alive!
A cockapoo, is a cross-breed between a poodle and a cooker spaniel, while the parents are yet living! However, these changes are always small- a change in color, size, leg length ect., or a change in a bacterium that enables it to be more resistant to antibiotics that its ancestors were.. These changes are called MICROEVOLUTION.  Yes the changes are real, but the species remains the same. Mixing Poodles with Cocker Spaniels, do not result in a liter of kittens! Dogs remain dogs and Tomato plants remain tomatoes! Size and colors do not determine a species change.

   All scientists agree on the above points, as do all Creationists believers.  So where's the argument?

MACROEVOLUTION:

    The controversy arises with Darwin's thinking about the EXTRAPOLATION [a term he never used] which is the idea that through the process of Natural Selection, a particular plant or animal, given enough time, and enough of these small Microevolutionary changes, can over time produce an entirely different species, with new and very different body parts!Meaning that with enough of these micro changes all add aup to Macro changes and viola a brand new species!  Because all these changes added up that the variation has transcended the boundaries of GENERA [which is one step up from species in the scientific classification of living things] * "Scientists classify living things from species to genera, a family, order, class, phylum, kingdom, and domain."
      In other words, Macroevolution occurs, the theory goes, when enough of these incremental Microevolutionary variations cause one family of animals or plants to change into a completely different family.Some examples SUPPOSEDLY taken place over a million years ago of time are the decent of fish from invertebrate animals of a completely different species, or when the whale descended from one species of a land mammal that had been from another species entirely.

NOTE(JB) All land mammals have their breathing apparatus, connected in mouth and nose. But all whales, and dolphins, breathe via a "BLOW-HOLE, on the tops of their head at the neck! How is it, that land-animals legs just became fins, and the ends became a flexible and powerful tail? Especially in view of a great fact, that mutations are nearly always very detrimental to life? Just because their front flippers have bones that look similar to our fingers, does not mean humans walked on their hands, nor did whales used to have legs and feet!
    Fort to be factual, then when do cows give birth to pigs? Can Elephants give birth to buffaloes?

CONTEMPORARY VIEWS:

     I can well remember, that moment I was told in the 4th grade, and the "Theory of Evolution" is no longer a theory but a proven scientific fact! This caused me to ask my teacher, "Did we find the Missing Link"? I was royally ignored!
    Today, most researchers, and scientist, adhere to dogma lies, it's their Religion, because if they don't, they lose their jobs, and can no longer find funds to pay for their research! They believe and accept the idea that all creatures, including plants, were once different species, gerera, and families. One theory states that life on earth originated almost four billion years ago through the natural processes of physics and chemistry impacting air, water, and rocks: and the great variety of life on the earth now, from magic mushrooms to bald eagles to human beings, resulted from these processes of macroevolution.

THE UNSEEN AND THE SEEN:

     The argument that microevolution morphs into macroevolution is , however riddled with many problems, including the big one: that all observable examples of evolution involve MIRCO-evolution  only, which allows for the minimal changes we can all observe. The problem is that these MICRO evolutionary changes have NEVER been shown to lead to MACRO- evolution: that is, one kind of animal or plant changing into another one of a totally different kind.>>>>>>

NOTE(JB) :  Kind produces kind only! Planting carrot seeds will get you a crop of potatoes or corn right? For the same reason cows don't give birth to pigs, and fish don't grow legs to become salamanders! One celled amoebas, stay one celled, throughout all the time they have existed!

>>>>>> This leads to a crucial distinction between MIRCO and MACRO evolution: Micro ca n be seen all the time, in human efforts of selective breeding in both plants and animals, BUT MACROevolution, even ONE case of it... HAS NOT EVER BEEN OBSERVED!NOR Photographed, because it just can not happen, no matter how much science, or scientist, wants it to be so! Darwin included! Darwin looked at what nature did in the Galapagos Islands, and looked at what he saw in the selective breeding programs in their own livestock, a nd what he saw was MICROEVOLUTION. Then from what he did see, MICROEVOLUTION Charles Darwin extrapolated, and theorized about what HE DIDN"T SEE, namely MACROEVOLUTION by natural selection.
     Jonathan Howard, a staunch evolutionist who is a professor of cell genetics at the Institute for Genetics at the University of Cologne in Germany, made the same point about macroevolution. He said, "Natural selection is the mechanism of evolutionary change. Unlike the process of geological change, it is not readily observable, but is inferred by argument from other kinds of observations".

   REALLY? Not readily observable? It isn't observable at all! Rather as Howard himself stated, it's inferred from other kinds of observations, mostly from the small changes {JB and expected changes via selective breeding} that do occur in species namely microevolution. that just because your Honda's check-engine light comes on , that given enough time, the Civic will become a Boeing 747, ain"t happening!
NOTE (JB) : Just because I've said many times "I believe the Moon is is made  of Green cheese , over and over, does not make it so!
    Even today, i n work be scientists is labs, who intentionally try to bring about macroevolution, who try to change one species into another... ALL have failed. None for instance, has ever turned a fly into a butterfly, much less a fish into an amphibian. This doesn't mean it can't be done: it means only that no one has done it, despite all the efforts.
    And just because no one has ever created a macroevolutionary change, or that no one has to date not ever done it, doesn't mean it will not ever happen either. It only means that the claims that it has happened are only pure speculation. The common assertion that fish turned into amphibians, and that amphibians turned into mammals and that mammals turned into Human being is a story about supposed events that no one has ever seen, in spite of all the firm assurances by some in the scientific community that these changes are as certain as, well the location of Paris in the northern Hemisphere!

NOTE(JB) :  Question: "If man descended from ape, why do we still have apes in trees"?
A:  Because these apes, are too smart, and refused to be be mistaken for PhD's!

Thanking Y O U for your time. Questions?  Comments?  John at bazenj@gmail.com

WANT MORE? Visit you Seventh-day Adventist Church any SATURDAY/SABBATH, 9-10 AM, and Jesus Christ, who died for our sins, has set aside a place for YOU in heave's eternity,m that no other can fill!

Other sites:  BLBN.org   AFTV.org     AMAZINGDISCOVERIES.org itiswritten.com servantsite@wordpress.com