Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Tell me, before people theorised about gravity, or understood what gravity was - did gravity not exist? Were people floating of into space on account of not understanding yet?I am unsure why the uncertainty about what happened prior to the big bang, or the little holes that exist in the evolutionary theory cause such problems. I really don't. When everything else discovered seems to fit in pretty much perfectly with what has been theorised so far. It is very possible, I feel, that eventually we will know. At the momant we don't. The fact that at the moment we don't does not render the rest of the theories unworkable when they quite clearly do work. As with gravity - not knowing about it yet doesn't not make it untrue.
"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"
Gal. 4:16
Scientists Admit:
Evolution Not Supported By Facts!
Issue Date: January/February 1987
"Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless," says Professor Louis Bouroune, former President of the Biological Society of Strasbourg and Director of the Strasbourg Zoological Museum, later Director of Research at the French National Centre of Scientific Research, as quoted in The Advocate, March 8, 1984.
On many campuses, any professor who admits having doubts about the "factual" nature of evolution would be laughed off the campus (and out of his job). But today, more and more courageous scientists are publicly admitting what they have known privately for years: believing in evolution requires an act of blind faith.
Does evolution square with the facts? Here are the statements of several scientific leaders as found in The Quote Book, published by Creation Science Foundation Ltd.
Evolutionists Great Con Men
"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution we do not have one iota of fact." (Dr. T.N. Tahmisian. Atomic Energy Commission, The Fresno Bee, August 20, 1959.
"...most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument made in favor of Darwinian interpretation of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true." (Dr. David Raup, Curator, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago. Quoted from "Conflicts between Darwin and paleontology," Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, Vol. 50 (1), 1979.)
Do Fossils Prove It?
"...I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transition in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them...Yet Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils...I will lay it on the line--there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument." (Personal letter from Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in London, to L. Sunderland.)
"Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides a means of ‘seeing' evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists, the most notorious of which is the presence of ‘gaps' in the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them..." (David B. Kitts, Ph.D. -- Zoology, Head Curator, Department of Geology, Stoval Museum, and well-known evolutionary paleontologist. Evolution, Vol. 28, Sept. 1974.
But What About Those Bones?
"...not being a paleontologist, I don't want to pour too much scorn on paleontologists, but if you were to spend your life picking up bones and finding little fragments of head and little fragments of jaw, there's a very strong desire to exaggerate the importance of those fragments..." (Dr. Greg Kirby in an address given at a meeting of the Biology Teachers Association of South Australia in 1976. Dr. Kirby was the Senior Lecturer in Population Biology at Flinders University and was giving the case for evolution.)
"A five million year old piece of bone that was thought to be the collarbone of a humanlike creature is actually part of a dolphin rib...The problem with a lot of anthropologists is that they want so much to find a hominid that any scrap of bone becomes a hominid bone." (Dr. Tim White, anthropologist, University of California, Berkeley, quoted in New Scientist, April 28, 1983.
But the World Is So Old...Isn't It?
"All the above (radiometric) methods for dating the age of the earth, its various strata, and its fossils are questionable, because the rates are likely to have fluctuated widely over earth history...It is obvious that radiometric techniques may not be the absolute dating methods that they are claimed to be. Age estimates on a given geological stratum by different radiometric methods are often quite different (sometimes by hundreds of millions of years). There is no absolutely reliable long-term radiological ‘clock.' The uncertainties inherent in radiometric dating are disturbing to geologist and evolutionists..." (W.D. Stansfield, Ph.D., Instructor of Biology, California Polytech State University, The Science of Evolution, Macmillan, 1987.
Carbon-14 Will Tell Us...Won't It?
"When the blood of a seal, freshly killed at McMurdo Sound in the Antarctic was tested by carbon-14, it showed the seal had died 1,300 years ago." (From W. Dort Jr., Ph.D. -- Geology, Professor, University of Kansas, quoted in Antarctic Journal of the United States, 1971.
"The hair on the Chekurovka mammoth was found to have a carbon-14 age of 26,000 years but the peaty soil in which is was preserved was found to have a carbon-14 dating of only 5,600 years." (Radiocarbon Journal, Vol. 8, 1966.)
When Did Dinosaurs Really Live?
The existence of dinosaurs long before man came along has been almost a basic tenet of faith for the evolutionist. But what if the footprints of both man and dinosaur were found together?
In the Journal of Geological Education, Vol. 31, 1983, David H Milne and Steven D Schafersman tell us "Such an occurrence, if verified, would seriously disrupt conventional interpretations of biological and geological history and would support the doctrine of creationism and catastrophism."
Well gentlemen, not only have both man and dinosaur prints been found together in Mexico, New Mexico, Arizona, Missouri, Kentucky and Illinois, but other U.S. locations as well.
Why Do They Do It?
"One is forced to conclude that many scientists and technologists pay lip-service to Darwinian theory only because it supposedly excludes a Creator." (Dr. Michael Walker, Senior Lecturer in Anthropology, Sydney University, quoted in Quadrant, October, 1982.)
Since the facts do not prove evolution, since the fossil record does not show any transition from one species to another, since "scientific" dating methods have been proven unreliable, let us remember that for those who desperately desire to reject God, evolution is a religion of last resort. If there is no Creator, there can be no sin, and no need of a Saviour.
A. Lunn summed up the curious faith of the evolutionist as follows: "Faith is the substance of fossils hoped for, the evidence of links unseen." (The Collapse of Evolution, by Dr. Scott Huse.) Those supposedly omniscient scientists who still teach evolution as though it were fact are finally seen for what they are...frail men willing to believe a lie because it helps them avoid the truth.
"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"
Gal. 4:16
Is this cave millions of years old?
Issue Date: November/December 1999
If you have ever visited a large cave, you may have heard the guide warn you, "Don't touch the formations! They took millions of years to form!" Hanging from the ceiling of the cave were probably many beautiful pointed rock hangings, called stalactites. They are formed by mineral deposits left by dripping water over time.
The guide may even have told you that it takes a thousand years to grow a stalactite an inch. Carlsbad Caverns is supposed to have taken 250 million years to grow. But is it true? If so, the world must be millions of years old, and the Genesis account of creation completely wrong.
Dr. Kent Hovind, in his video "The Age of the Earth," offers many surprising facts demonstrating that the world cannot possibly be this old.
Among them is a photo of stalactities, some 50 inches in length, that have been formed by dripping water under the Lincoln Memorial, built in 1922. These stalactites have grown nearly 2/3 inch per year! So much for the "thousand years per inch" idea.
Hovind also shows a photo of a bat covered by flowstone in a cave before he could rot. Imagine how long this bat would have had to lie here dead, without rotting, for this flowstone to cover him as it has! Obviously, these mineral deposits occur much more rapidly than we are led to believe.
If in fact God created the world 6,000 years ago, and then destroyed it by a flood 4,400 years ago, we should expect to find many of the oldest things in the world to be somewhat less than 4,400 years old.
Hovind, in his seminar, offers many examples, including:
The Great Barrier Reef, the oldest and largest reef in the world, has been determined to be 4,200 years old.
The world's oldest tree is 4,300 years old.
Minerals being washed into the ocean by erosion would bring the salt content of the ocean to its present level in less than 5,000 years!
For more fascinating information about how Creation is the only way to explain the scientific facts, see Dr. Kent Hovind's fascinating Creation Seminar series, on videotape. His presentation of the facts is both entertaining and compelling.
"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"
Gal. 4:16
The Evolution Handbook
Author:
ISBN: N/A
Price: $5.00 US
Pages: 992 - Paperback
Prominent scientists explain why evolution is a hoax
Science teachers present evolution as if it were a proven fact. This book, with its thorough index, makes it easy to find answers to those outrageous claims.
Thousands of scientific facts, disproving evolutionary theory.
Hundreds of statements by prominent scientists disproving evolution.
1,350 scientific quotations or references.
Remarkably broad coverage. Learn about many different aspects of evolution.
A handy full-size subject index to make it easy to find what you are looking for.
Study questions.
An extensive research guide.
43 pages of illustrations.
Easy to understand!
Table of Contents
Preface
A Treasure House of Information The origin of this book and how to use it
Introductory
Scientists Speak about Evolution:
Statements by Non-creationist Scientists — Even they do not believe evolutionary foolishness
Chapter 1 - History of Evolutionary Theory
How modern science got into this problem.
Chapter 2 - The Big Bang and Stellar Evolution
Why the Big Bang is a fizzle and stars cannot evolve out of gas.
Chapter 3 - The Origin of the Earth
Why the Earth did not evolve out of a molten state.
Chapter 4 - The Age of the Earth
Why the Earth is not millions of years old.
Chapter 5 - The Problem of Time
Why long ages cannot produce evolutionary change.
Chapter 6 - Inaccurate Dating Methods
Why the non-historical dating techniques are unreliable.
Chapter 7 - The Primitive Environment
Why raw materials on earth cannot produce life.
Chapter 8 - DNA and Protein
Why DNA and protein could not be produced by random chance.
Chapter 9 - Natural Selection
Why natural selection only makes changes within species.
Chapter 10 - Mutations
Why mutations cannot produce cross-species change.
Chapter 11 - Animal and Plant Species
Why the species barrier cannot be broken.
Chapter 12 - Fossils and Strata
Why the fossil/strata theory is a hoax.
Chapter 13 - Ancient Man
Why there is no evidence humans have evolved from anything.
Chapter 14 - Effects of the Flood
What actually happened after the Flood.
Chapter 15 - Similarities and Divergence
Why similar structures are not an evidence of evolution.
Chapter 16 - Vestiges and Recapitulation
You have no useless or unnecessary structures inherited from earlier life-forms.
Chapter 17 - Evolutionary Showcase
The best examples of evolution have proven worthless.
Chapter 18 - The Laws of Nature
The laws of nature oppose the evolutionary theory.
Chapter 19 - Evolution, Morality, and Violence
Evolutionary theory is ruining modern civilization.
Chapter 20 - Tectonics and Paleomagnetism
The truth about plate tectonics and paleomagnetism.
Chapter 21 - Archaeological Dating
Egyptian, and other, dates correlate archaeological finds with the Bible.
Chapter 22 - Evolutionary Science Fiction
Fabulous fairy tales which only tiny children can believe.
Chapter 23 - Scientists Speak
Evolutionary scientists say the theory is unscientific and worthless.
Chapter 24 - Utterly Impossible
Things evolution could never invent.
Chapter 25 - Latest Evolution Crisis
Events from 1959 to 2006
Chapter 26 - Summary of the Anthropic Principle
Discovering a flood fo coincidences
Chapter 27 - Big Bang Creationism
When opposites are combined
Appendix - Research Guide
Special Appendix - Something To Think About
"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"
Gal. 4:16
'Evolutionists Are In A Panic Mode'
Issue Date: July/August 2005
Kansas State Board of Education member, Connie Morris, concluded that "evolutionists are in a panic mode" after scientists supporting the teaching of evolution in schools boycotted a four-day hearing called by the school board. The purpose of the hearings was to present the board with both sides of the evolution-intelligent design question.
The board was reviewing Kansas science curriculum standards and set up the hearings to develop a dialog between the two views of the origin of life. They then would decide how the students would be taught and tested on the subject.
Martin Luther had a comment about his culture in 1520 that still rings true today: "Though our children live in the midst of a Christian world, they faint and perish in misery because they lack the Gospel in which we should be training and exercising them all the time. I advise no one to place his child where the Scriptures do not reign paramount. Schools will become wide-open gates of hell if they do not diligently engrave the Holy Scriptures on young hearts. Every institution where men are not increasingly occupied with the word of God must become corrupt."
- Martin Luther in Appeal to the Ruling Classes; 1520.
Twenty three prominent scientists appeared to present the case for intelligent design. Not all of them were believers in creation as described in the Bible. Some were scientists who have simply concluded that the mounting scientific evidence points more to an intelligent design rather than the random processes of evolution.
The school board was simply trying to determine if this new scientific view should be included in the state curriculum. Including the biblical view of creation was not even being considered.
Evolutionists called the hearings "a sham and publicity stunt" and refused to attend the hearings. Instead, they mounted a smear campaign in the local media portraying members of the board as ignorant religious fanatics.
One Topeka lawyer, Pedro Irigonegaray, did appear to represent the cause of evolution. However, he spent most of his time berating the board members for their "narrow sectarian theological view" and called the hearings "a gigantic waste of time and tax dollars."
Irigonegaray refused to answer any questions concerning evidence for evolution. Instead, he cross examined the witnesses for intelligent design in ways to make them look foolish.
"I can only conclude that they [evolutionists] don't have any evidence," observed board member Morris.
Kansas is not the only state where serious questions are being raised by public school officials about teaching evolution as the only explanation for the origin of life. Similar battles involved school boards and teachers in Texas, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
A federal judge recently ruled against a school district in Georgia that had been placing stickers in their science textbooks. The stickers contained a simple statement that evolution was a theory, not a fact.
The judge ruled that the stickers were an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. This is the only response that evolutionists can present: that any challenge must be considered as religion. They dare not get into a position requiring them to present evidence.
Honest research is quickly debunking one evolution myth after another. (See The Vanishing Proofs of Evolution by Thomas Heinze.) Their only recourse is to ignore the evidence and attempt to assassinate the character of anyone who dares suggest another view. Otherwise, they have to admit that evidence is mounting that a Designer was involved and they are not ready to surrender to Him.
Kent Hovind not a good role model.
http://www.pensacolanewsjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060714/NEWS01/607140333/1006
I don't trust a criminal.
"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"
Gal. 4:16
Beetle Warfare
Little Bugs That Evolutionists
Would Like to Forget!
Issue Date: January/February 1994
Here, excerpted from The Collapse of Evolution by Dr. Scott M. Huse, is one of the many humorous examples in nature that make evolutionists look silly.
Beetle Warfare
Did you ever notice how sometimes big surprises can come in little packages? Well, such is the case of the surprising little bombardier beetle. The bombardier beetle is a small insect that is armed with an impressive defense system. Whenever threatened by an enemy attack, this spirited little beetle blasts irritating and odious gases, which are at 212ºF, out from two tailpipes right into the unfortunate face of the would-be aggressor.
Hermann Schildnecht, a German chemist, studied the bombardier beetle to find out how he accomplishes this impressive chemical feat. He learned that the beetle makes his explosive by mixing together two very dangerous chemicals (hydroquinone and hydrogen peroxide). In addition to these two chemicals, this clever little beetle adds another type of chemical known as an "inhibitor." The inhibitor prevents the chemicals from blowing up and enables the beetle to store the chemicals indefinitely.
Whenever the beetle is approached by a predator, such as a frog, he squirts the stored chemicals into the two combustion tubes, and at precisely the right moment he adds another chemical (an anti-inhibitor). This knocks out the inhibitor, and a violent explosion occurs right in the face of the poor attacker.
Could such a marvelous and complex mechanism have evolved piecemeal over millions of years? The evolutionist is forced to respond with a somewhat sheepish “yes,” but a brief consideration of this viewpoint will reveal its preposterous nature.
According to evolutionary “thinking” there must have been thousands of generations of beetles improperly mixing these hazardous chemicals in fatal evolutionary experiments, blowing themselves to pieces. Eventually, we are assured, they arrived at the magic formula, but what about the development of the inhibitor? There is no need to evolve an inhibitor unless you already have the two chemicals you are trying to inhibit. On the other hand, if you already have the two chemicals without the inhibitor, it is already too late, for you have just blown yourself up. Obviously, such an arrangement would never arise apart from intelligent foresight and planning.
Nevertheless, let us assume that the little beetle somehow managed to simultaneously develop the two chemicals along with the all-important inhibitor. The resultant solution would offer no benefit at all to the beetle, for it would just sit there as a harmless concoction. To be of any value to the beetle, the anti-inhibitor must be added to the solution.
So, once again, for thousands of generations we are supposed to believe that these poor beetles mixed and stored these chemicals for no particular reason or advantage, until finally, the anti-inhibitor was perfected. Now he is really getting somewhere! With the anti-inhibitor developed he can now blow himself to pieces, frustrating the efforts of the hungry predator who wants to eat him. Ah, yes, he still needs to evolve the two combustion tubes, and a precision communications and timing network to control and adjust the critical direction and timing of the explosion. So, here we go again; for thousands of generations these carefree little beetles went around celebrating the 4th of July by blowing themselves to pieces until finally they mastered their newfound powers.
But what would be the motivation for such disastrous, trial and error, piecemeal evolution? Everything in evolution is supposed to be beneficial and have a logical purpose, or else it would never develop. But such a process does not make any sense, and to propose that the entire defense system evolved all at once is simply impossible. Yet, nature abounds with countless such examples of perfect coordination. Thus, we can only conclude that the surprising little bombardier beetle is a strong witness for special creation, for there is no other rational explanation for such a wonder.
The water beetle is also equipped with an impressive—although different—defense mechanism. He manages to escape his enemies by secreting a detergent substance from a gland. Ejecting the detergent accomplishes two things. Firstly, it serves to propel the beetle forward quickly so that he is out of the immediate danger. Secondly, the detergent causes the surface tension of the water to break down, and the pursuing insect sinks into the water. How true are the words of the psalmist who wrote: "O Lord, how manifold are thy works! In wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches" (Ps. 104:24).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This delightful book by Huse, full of illustrations, builds the readers understanding step by step, until it is obvious that creation (not evolution) agrees with the scientific facts.
Read it!
^ You forgot to cut and paste this
©1984-2006 Chick Publications, Inc. All rights reserved. Some portions of www.chick.com are copyrighted by others and reproduced by permission,. as indicated by copyright notices on
You forgot about this rule:
Copyright
Information copyrighted or owned by any individual or entity other than the member should not be posted on the discussion forums without the consent of the owner. If such an event occurs, the individual posting the information shall be held solely responsible. KMC Forums shall not be held responsible for member-posted information that may violate copyright law.
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonWait, this guy is a supporter of Hovind? 😆
Kent Hovind not a good role model.http://www.pensacolanewsjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060714/NEWS01/607140333/1006
I don't trust a criminal.