Evolution/Creation
All posts tagged Evolution/Creation
Psalm 111:10 “The fear of the LORD [is] the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do [his commandments]: his praise endureth for ever.”
‘Many people have been taught that evolution is science and creation is religion. However, the origins debate is really a debate between two religions. According to the evolutionist’s own rules of science, evolution is not good science. Consider the claims of evolution in view of what science knows today.
Life has never been seen to develop from nonliving materials. Yet, evolutionists say it did. Mutations, said by evolutionists to have created all the kinds of living things, have never been seen to produce one creature that was more complex or better able to survive. The moon has moonquakes, a magnetic field and internal heat. These are all indications that it is far younger than evolutionists care to believe. Geological strata were at one time sediments in water – floodwaters. Evolutionists believe that the multiple layers of sedimentary rock were laid down one after another by local floods with millions of years between each flood. If that is true, how is it that these strata are often found showing the lower strata blending into the strata above it?
If language evolved, why are the most ancient languages the most complex? If religions evolved, why do the most ancient forms of religion worship one God – a Creator – while later forms of the same religions have many gods – gods who are much more like human beings?
Many more examples show that only the Bible’s account of history makes sense in view of what we know.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/creation-makes-better-science-3/?mc_cid=45671eabed&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
Genesis 1:21 “And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good.”
‘Do you know how to handle a sailboat? If you had to sail to a destination that was not exactly downwind, would you be able to do it?
Unlike most jellyfish, velella does not merely drift with the wind. Velella has a triangular sail. However, unlike some jellyfish with sails, velella‘s sail doesn’t simply catch the wind and move velella along with it. Velella‘s triangular sail has an S-shaped base so that it can stand up to winds from any direction. The sail is set on top of velella‘s body at an angle to its length. This makes velella a biological oddity – because its body is not symmetrical.
This asymmetry is not without purpose. The unusual body design of this jellyfish allows it to sail as much as 60° off the direction of the wind. This is what sailors call a broad reach. Some velellas have their sails tilted to the right, allowing them to sail up to 60° to the right of downwind. Others have their sails tilted to the left, allowing them to sail up to 60° left of downwind. What’s more, velellas can change their angle of sailing by extending or retracting their tentacles in the water.
When scientists noticed that velella‘s body was asymmetrical, they immediately looked for a purpose behind the design. Even though many scientists will not recognize the Creator, they understand enough to realize that nothing in the creation is without purpose or design. So while many deny the Creator, they still recognize the pattern of His handiwork!‘https://creationmoments.com/sermons/the-jellyfish-with-a-broad-reach-2/?mc_cid=423df30e6b&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
Acts 20:32 “And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified.”
‘Biologists have recently discovered a gene that suggests that God may not be above playing a practical joke on those who reject what His Word says.
Those scientists who believe that natural forces made everything, including you and me, think that we have inherited all that we are. However, the Bible says that all living things reproduce “after their kind.” Thousands of years of experience in selective breeding have shown that plants and animals always reproduce after their own kind. Not only is every known example of a mutation harmful, but living things resist attempts to change them too much.
Geneticists have discovered a genetic basis for the Bible’s statement that all creatures reproduce after their own kinds. Keep in mind that “species” and “kinds” are not necessarily the same. Fruit fly studies show that when some species of fruit fly try to mate with other species, the resulting offspring are either sterile females or die before maturity. In one instance, however, some males survive to adulthood. The so-called “rescue” gene that allows this to happen weakens the general health of the males. Carriers of the gene are sterile. This leaves a huge mystery for evolutionists. Think about it. Parents that carry this “rescue” gene don’t benefit from it. Offspring that inherit it can’t pass it on. As one evolutionist said, how could this possibly have evolved?
Living things do reproduce after their kind, just as the Bible says. In this instance, God has found a way to do this that challenges the very basis of evolution.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/the-impossible-gene-2/?mc_cid=db11b41308&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
Exodus 15:11 “Who [is] like unto thee, O LORD, among the gods? who [is] like thee, glorious in holiness, fearful [in] praises, doing wonders?”
‘One would never expect to find any insect sharing living arrangements with a spider. That’s why scientists were amazed to find a tiny fly in the rain forests of Central America who shares both room and board with a spider!
The fly spends most of his time on the back of the golden web spider, who does not seem to object. This spider does not deal with its victims in the same way most spiders do. When a large insect gets caught in the tough web of the spider, the golden web spider injects the victim with digestive juices to prepare it for eating. The fly keeps track of meal preparations from the spider’s back. Just before the meal is liquefied to the spider’s satisfaction, the fly buzzes over and drinks its fill in a few seconds. By the time the spider approaches lunch, the fly is back napping on the spider.
Both the spider and the fly are designed with special features to make this most unlikely arrangement work. If the golden web spider’s eating habits were like most spiders’, there would be no liquefied meal for the fly. The fly itself has a mouth that is specially designed to allow it to drink a full meal in seconds. This helps keep him out of the spider’s way.
How can a spider and a fly live together? God can design a solution to any problem. Why design an arrangement between a spider and a fly anyway? So that we would know there is a Creator and that He can meet any challenge! There is nothing you cannot take to Him in the name of His Son, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/the-spider-and-the-fly-2/?mc_cid=abacf37b1f&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
‘If human similarity to apes is evidence that an apelike creature evolved into man, why aren’t the vast differences between man and ape accepted as evidence that man did not descend from apes? The human nose is totally different from that of primates; man’s lips are formed differently; apes have thumbs on their feet, while men do not; man’s head is located at a different position on the spinal column, and human babies are far more dependent upon their mothers at birth than apes.
Even more physically perplexing is the fact that apes have a bone in the male’s reproductive organ, while the human male makes use of an incredibly complicated hydraulic system. How could anyone reasonably conclude that the bone in an ape’s reproductive organ slowly evolved into mankind’s complex hormonal/hydraulic mechanism by some step-at-a-time mutational process? If the bone disappeared before the human system was completely in place, the apelike creature would not be able to reproduce and survive. Since apes have no difficulty reproducing, why would the human hydraulic reproduction system have ever evolved?
Dr. John C. Whitcomb observed that “While the physical differences between man and primates are quite great, the spiritual/mental/linguistical/cultural differences are little short of infinite.” It is extremely poor and superficial science to conclude that some apelike creature evolved into mankind.’http://www.searchforthetruth.net/
Genesis 7:21-23 “And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.”
‘Previous writers and presenters of Creation Moments have often talked about fossils. But it is often useful to go over familiar ground again, especially if it is of foundational importance. Evolutionists tell us that fossils are evidence of evolutionary change. Nothing could be further from the truth. As creationists, we find that fossils make much more sense with a biblical explanation.
Fossils are dead. Since there was no death in the world until Adam’s sin, fossils cannot predate that sin. So, when humans were created, there were no fossils. Fossils are a worldwide event, and most of them appear to be of creatures that died rapidly and catastrophically under water, being covered with water-borne sediment. Such a formation is best understood as happening because of the worldwide Flood.
Some of the larger fossils – such as dinosaurs – are found buried in contortions, which looks like the last throes of death; this is consistent with sudden death caused by the Flood. Most such fossils are also found in assemblages, or bone jumbles. We tend to forget these last two facts when we see careful reconstructions of standing dinosaurs in museums. Many fossils closely resemble modern, surviving creatures, so that the fossil record illustrates not change, but stasis or – in the case of those creatures we do not find today – extinction.
Far from being a problem for creationists, fossils are our allies, and we can be confident that a biblical explanation for their formation is the most effective.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/fossils-and-the-flood/?mc_cid=2e116164ee&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
Psalm 136:4-5 “To him who alone doeth great wonders: for His mercy endureth forever. To him that by wisdom made the heavens: for his mercy endureth forever.”
‘As our knowledge about the universe grows, the big bang theory looks increasingly unlikely. Deep space X-ray observations in 1990, along with other observations, showed that the universe is “lumpy.” These “lumps” – such as huge structures like quasars and galactic clusters – already existed early in its history. This contradicts one of the primary so-called “proofs” for the big bang: the background microwave radiation. This radiation seems to be smooth and even, so there shouldn’t be any “lumps.”
To solve this problem, big bang believers invented “cold dark matter.” Cold dark matter is sort of an invisible genie. The gravity of this invisible stuff is supposed to have transformed the smooth, even big bang into the lumpy universe we see today. Now several eminent scientists have rejected the cold dark matter theory. The authors of the latest report on the subject had been some of the strongest supporters of the big bang theory. Jeremiah Ostriker, chairman of the astrophysics department at Princeton, told a reporter, “This would be like a conference of theologians saying there is no God.” Ostriker calls himself an “agnostic” on how to make the big bang theory work.
Robert Wilson, co-recipient of the 1978 Nobel Prize for his work on the big bang, said, “I don’t know how many people actually would have sworn on a stack of Bibles that cold dark matter existed, but this sort of closes off that avenue.”
If these men would take the Bible’s message for what it is, God’s message to them, they could forget the big bang theory and thank their Creator for His forgiving love in Jesus Christ.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/has-the-big-bang-gone-bust-3/?mc_cid=2af9c01f6d&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
The following is an email from Search for the Truth.
‘In order for our eyes to see, many chemical and electrical reactions must take place in the proper sequence. Even more importantly, these reactions must happen almost instantaneously for us to see what is happening, while it is still happening.
Researchers have recently discovered just how quickly light causes the first chemical change within our eye. In order for our brain to see an image, a chemical in our eye which is sensitive to light must respond as soon as a photon of light strikes it. This type of chemical change is called a photochemical reaction. Photochemical reactions are the basis of how photographic paper works, but the reactions that result in a printed picture are extremely slow compared to the photochemical reactions in our eye. The fastest photographic film requires the camera lens to remain open for about 1/10,000 of a second. Biologists have found that the eye’s photo-chemistry is so fast that the first reaction in the sequence takes place in approximately 1/5,000,000,000 (one-five billionth) of a second. This is 500,000 times faster than our best film capabilities.
Our attempts to duplicate the processes in our eyes fall short of God’s original design by such an extreme amount that Darwin himself admitted that the human eye seemed to defy his theory of evolution.‘ http://www.searchforthetruth.net/
| MEGASHARK GETS MORE MEGA, according to Science Alert and SciTechDaily 9 June 2021, and Palaeontologia Electronica DOI: 10.26879/1140. The size of the extinct giant fossil shark now named Otodus megalodon (used to be Carcharodon) has been re-estimated using the size of its teeth compared with teeth from the living Great White shark, then using the Great White’s body proportions as a guideline. Over the years a formula has been developed using the height of a fossil tooth to calculate the size of the shark it came from. Estimates based on this formula have ranged from 15 to 18 metres, but when Victor Perez of the Florida Museum of Natural History got school students to measure Megalodon teeth and use the formula they came up with wildly differing estimates. Part of the problem is that shark teeth vary in height according to where in the jaw they are located. So, it is necessary to know where in the jaw the tooth comes from. After studying a near complete set of megalodon teeth in the Florida Museum of Natural History, along with teeth and jaws of living sharks, palaeontologists have come up with a new formula based on the width of the teeth. The researchers now consider this a more accurate indicator as the width of the teeth is related to the width of the jaw, which is related to the overall size of the shark. Using the new formula the scientists have increased megalodon’s size to an estimated body length of 20 metres (65ft). There are still some limits to how accurate this new formula can be as there is no way to know whether Megalodon’s teeth had gaps between them or overlapped, as seen in some living sharks. Victor Perez of Florida Museum of Natural History, one of the researchers, commented: “Even though this potentially advances our understanding, we haven’t really settled the question of how big megalodon was. There’s still more that could be done, but that would probably require finding a complete skeleton at this point”. He still uses the shark teeth and the formula as a school lesson. He explained: “Since then, we’ve used the lesson to talk about the nature of science – the fact that we don’t know everything. There are still unanswered questions”. Links: Science Alert, SciTechDaily ED. COM. It is important for students to understand the nature of science, including its strengths and limitations. In this example the size of teeth can be accurately measured, but as the scientists admit they are not able to observe the precise arrangement of teeth in the megalodon jaw, so they must make assumptions based on living sharks. There is nothing wrong with this, but it is important to acknowledge what is actually observed vs what is assumed. Whatever the real size of Megalodon sharks, they were certainly a lot bigger than any shark observed in the present-day oceans. This should lead scientists to ask why the change? However, they will not find the answer just by studying present day sharks or fossil shark teeth. They need to know the real history of the world, i.e. that it started out very good, and therefore could support giant animals, but has since been degraded due to human sin and God’s judgement. Science will not reveal this. Only the written record of the Creator and Judge can reveal this, and scientists should be humble enough to admit it, and then use it to better understand the results of their study of the present-day world. |
| MORE ON why change shark species names, as well as estimating the size of fossil sharks in our report How Big is a Mega Shark? |
