Posted on 12/21/2005 6:22:46 AM PST by truthfinder9
One of biggest paradigm shifts in origins in recent years is when genetics and morphological studies began to show that Neanderthals and humans weren’t related. Sure, a lot of Darwin Fundies around here don’t know that because they get all of their science from the talking point lists of their Fundamentalist Leaders. So this is probably a big shock too, science is also showing that man is not related to any hominids including apes.
In the groundbreaking book, Who was Adam?, biochemist Fazale Rana examines the scientific research that is overturning Darwinian Fundamentalism. Here, using peer-reviewed research that the Darwin Fundies claim doesn’t exist, Rana shows man is unique and designed.
And he details the latest findings on the fossil record, junk DNA, Neanderthals, human and chimp genetics. There's more science here than most Darwin Fundies have ever read, but this will be the next great paradigm shift.
“The parallels between Genesis and the latest scientific data are profound...” - John A. Bloom, Ph.D., professor of physics, Biola University
On Rana’s previous book, Origins of Life:
“Evolution has just been dealt its deathblow. After reading Origins of Life, it is clear that evolution could not have occurred.” - Richard Smalley, Nobel Laureate, Chemistry, 1996, professor of physics and astronomy, Rice University
Real science by real scientists. According to Darwin Fundies this doesn't exist, but here it is.
FACT: Consistently answer incorrectly about Darwin Evolution Theory taught in Public Schools...You, dear FReeper will fail the test.
FACT: Atheist, agnostic students have no spiritual test on Creationism to pass in Public Schools and are not forced to memorizing something contrary to their belief system.
Hint: "<, i, >, /" can be your friend when making a post, otherwise, others may have no idea WTF your point is about.
Romans 5:12-21
12. Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned--
13. for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law.
14. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.
15. But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!
16. Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.
17. For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.
18. Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.
19. For just as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.
20. The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more,
21. so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
"By further reflecting that the clearest evidence would be requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by which Christianity is supported,—and that the more we know of the fixed laws of nature the more incredible do miracles become,—that the men at that time were ignorant and credulous to a degree almost incomprehensible by us,—that the Gospels cannot be proven to have been written simultaneously with the events,—that they differ in many important details, far too important, as it seemed to me to be admitted as the usual inaccuracies of eye witnesses;—by such reflections as these, which I give not as having the least novelty or value, but as they influenced me, I gradually came to disbelieve in Christianity as a divine revelation. The fact that many fake religions have spread over large portions of the earth like wildfire had some weight with me. But I was very unwilling to give up my belief; I feel sure of this, for I can remember often and often inventing day-dreams of old letters between distinguished Romans, and manuscripts being discovered at Pompeii or elsewhere, which confirmed in the most striking manner all that was written in the Gospels. But I found it more and more difficult, with free scope given to my imagination, to invent evidence which would suffice to convince me. Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct."
( Charles Darwin in his Autobiography of Charles Darwin, Dover Publications, 1992, p. 62. )
Charles Darwin (1809-1882)
"I think that generally (& more & more as I grow older), but not always, that an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind."
( Quoted from Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin: The Life of a Tormented Evolutionist, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1991, p. 636. )
Perhaps the capacity for intellectual growth is a trait, and not an inevitability. For example, Marxists have shown little or no capacity for intellectual growth, merely the mimicry of the outward appearances of such.
A soul has no influence on the body?
Have to get both books. Thanks for posting the article.
Just give 'em time!!!
(Actually, don't admit that you are assuming anything if you wish to be in the Evolutionary court.)
Entropy measures the spontaneous dispersal of energy: how much energy is spread out in a process, or how widely spread out it becomes — at a specific temperature. Simply put: how much energy is dispersed is a measure of entropy. The energy is "out there", but no longer a part of the system. It actually becomes part of the surroundings (or universe). From the First Law of Thermodynamics (conservation of energy) we know that this energy has to go somewhere.
So what the aych-ee-double-toothpicks does this have to do with evolution? Energetically, the second law of thermodynamics favors the formation of the majority of all known complex and ordered chemical compounds directly from their simpler elements. Thus, contrary to popular opinion, the second law does not dictate the decrease of ordered structure by its predictions. It only demands a "spreading out" of energy when such ordered compounds are formed spontaneously. The Second Law does NOT prohibit the spontaneous formation of complex structures from simpler parts. It is simply incorrect to view the Second Law as a predictor of disorder.
Well, we're crossing into the Bible that I don't believe in (And given Alter Kaker is a Yiddish term, A.K. may not believe in it either).
But even with evolution there was a first person who evolved to the human state. Even with the mixed evolution/creation that A.K. and I believe in, there was a first man, Adam, to whom God gave a soul.
Me too!
| The word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the search box to the right. Suggestions for mispelling: 1. misspelling 2. misapplying 3. misplaying 4. misspellings 5. misplacing 6. misplanning 7. misfiling 8. misplans 9. misaligning 10. misaligns |
It's too bad that Albert Einstein's brain DNA did not enhance survivability into HIS offspring!
Interesting to note that an early form of modern man wandered around, slobbering and making primitive tools for millions of years by most accounts in the scientific community.
Then, low and behold, a mere few generations ago, something happened to accelerate developement....Kinda like warp drive on the early ape-like creatures.
Must have been a random mutation, sort of a neutrino strike on the DNA, right?
The right to life can very easily be proven logically. You do not need faith to believe it. However, you might need a little faith (or at least a prayer) to convice a liberal of this.
I'll bet it was MUCH 'cooler' up in the trees!
intergenerational repository of knowledge - see Morphogenetic Resonance
True, but they'll hype the research that shows 'life goo' arising from chemical mixtures and hope that the unlearned will made the connection in his brain that somehow the goo turned into living matter.
Then we are off to the races!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
