ICR article image
ICR article image
Why would any benevolent creator create Cancer?
One need only read this paragraph to know the author is a hack with no scientific knowledge or a shill using a modicum to purposefully misinterpret data once again:
“Findings of rapid trait expression by organisms tend to confirm creationist theory that emphasizes active, problem-solving organisms. As one evolutionist notes, rapid change is hard to reconcile with any theory that emphasizes an active environment fractioning out the genetic material of passive organisms by a mechanism which “requires radical amounts of natural selection (the Darwinian mechanism), mutations and genetic drift to accomplish such changes.”8 The rapid changes documented in the Royal Society paper do not fit with the stagnant notion of the slow accumulation of random genetic mutations struggling to survive.
These rapid changes fit much better with contemporary research that reveals how organisms possess elaborate built-in systems composed of sensors, cellular algorithms, and output responses that enable them to continuously track environmental changes—man-made or otherwise—so they can quickly fit and fill new niches. Up-to-date research shows that they may employ dozens of mechanisms including epigenetic, hybridization, cryptic variation, behavioral changes, unreduced gametes, directed crossover, regulated micro-RNAs or RNA splicing, horizontal gene transfer, and even modulation of an organism’s microbiota. None of these mechanisms require a struggle for life and death! Creationists have been reporting on these mechanisms which enable organisms to self-adjust to external conditions in a single generation—and often across multiple ones—for many years.”
In the VERY BEGINING 200 years ago that may been the overall basis of TToE. For many years TToE has placed stochastic processes in the forefront of it mechanism. This is exactly what is being described.
icr is the WND of science. Its logo should be Bat Boy.
Really a waste of electrons to produce it. much less use it as a reference.
The evolutionists shot themselves in the foot when they divided species distinctly. Evolution requires a smooth transition and there is zero evidence of that, so far anyway.
You can take a human being and turn his descendants into a Democrat in one generation, and a Morlock in three. If that isn’t rapid speciation, I don’t know what is.
Dr., let me give you some advice, you ought to be the head of some medical device start-up rather than publishing at ICR.
ON, NTSA
Fast evolution proves evolution theory. There is no scientific proof for creation theory.
The excerpt looks like the establishment of a strawman to me.
bump
Interesting article.
I think every thinking person realizes that there’s really zero evidence of goo to you through the zoo. Even the most “simple” single-celled organism is ridiculously complex, so complex that the very idea that it could’ve formed spontaneously is laughable. In fact, the formation of a single usable protein by natural processes has been likened to a solar system full of blind men all simultaneously solving the Rubik’s Cube. That “simple” cell requires dozens of them. Such faith! And there’s also the issue of all the billions of missing transitional forms. Even more faith!
And taking it back even further, matter/energy can neither be created nor destroyed according to the First Law of Thermodynamics. Yet the universe is full of matter/energy. It can’t be there, but there it is.
Anything that happened only once, and supernaturally at that, has to by definition be faith-based. It’s not repeatable. Belief in creation falls in the supernatural category. But so does belief in evolution, with its belief that cytoplasm, a selectively permeable cell membrane, organelles, a nucleus and the most complex code in the universe (DNA), all formed spontaneously in a puddle. Laughable.
When people thought cells were just blobs of cytoplasm, it’s sort of understandable that they could believe those blobs could’ve formed via natural processes. We know better now.
Changes within species? Sure. They’ve irradiated thousands of generations of fruit flies. They’ve seen some freakish looking critters, but they were all still fruit flies. Just like an ambitious Chihuahua can breed with a Great Dane. But they’ll still be dogs.
Biologist & Geneticist John Sanford has a unique viewpoint worth the 19 minute investment.