Delusions of Evolution

Norcalblogs.com ^ | April 04, 2009 | by OneVike

[Nathan Zachary]

It is with out a doubt that a majority of Americans believe “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” Genesis 1:1. Unfortunately, most who believe these words cannot answer the questions raised by the thousands of fossils that archeologist's have dug up and claim are millions of years old. ...

[Nathan Zachary]

It is with out a doubt that a majority of Americans believe “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” Genesis 1:1. Unfortunately, most who believe these words cannot answer the questions raised by the thousands of fossils that archeologist's have dug up and claim are millions of years old. We are told that such methods as Radiocarbon tests to find the levels of Carbon-14 remaining in fossils, U-Pb dating of volcanic materials to determine how long ago lava cooled, helioseismic dating to get a helium diffusion age in the field of astrophysics, and many more scientific fields and the methods they use can baffle the minds of even the most educated believers of God.

Depending on what poll you read, this vast amount of technology has convinced 30% to 40% of believers that God must have used evolution in His creative process.

However, what if I told you that many scientists, archaeologists, biochemists, physicists, micro biologists, and astronomers disagree with most of the findings and conclusions by today's evolutionist experts? Some of these men even go so far as to challenge the very idea that the universe is billions of years old. It is important to remember that the age of the universe is directly related to the science used to convince people of the age of planet earth.

Other then a few probes and the space station we cannot physically investigate anything but earth and maybe some small samples from the moon and what asteroids have hit the earth. All the evidence we have for the age of the universe is tied directly to their theory of the earth's age. So if the earth is proven to be young, then the evidence for an old universe crumbles. Then along with the age of the universe crumbling, so does the possibility of evolution. Now that is where these many learned men come in to the picture. These scientists have presented so much evidence that points to intelligent design, that they have put into question the very methods used by evolutionists.

Astronomer Guillermo Gonzalezand his collaborators have created the concept of the Galactic Habitable Zone (GHZ). The GHZ defines the region of the Milky Way Galaxy that is most habitable to complex life. His concept involves a number of situations that must exist for life to occur. When taken into account we see that we are not only unique but special in our planets ability to sustain life and to discover what is in the universe. Gonzalez's investigation has proven that Carl Sagan was wrong when he said there are millions of other earths full of life like ours.

What Physicist Dr. Russell Humphreys, has done is taken those who base their theories of age on helioseismic testing to task. After repeatedly ran experiments that measure how rapidly nuclear-decay-generated helium escapes from tiny radioactive crystals in granite-like rock. The data shows that most of the helium generated by nuclear decay would have escaped during the alleged 1.5 billion year uniformitarian2 age of the rock, and there would be very little helium in the crystals today. But the crystals still retain large amounts of helium, amounts these experiments show are entirely consistent with an age of only thousands of years.

Then we have biochemist Michael Behe, author of “Darwin's Black Box” who points out that molecular machines, such as the bacterial flagellum are irreducibly complex. Like a mouse trap that can not function without all the parts available to work at the same time, so to do the machines at the molecular level of cells. This irreducible complexity discounts minute changes that needs to be done for evolution to work.

Add to them such scientists as nuclear physicist Robert Gentry, geophysicist John R. Baumgardner, and many other highly educated scientists and professors from a vast array of fields that have evidence the earth is either not millions of years old or that evolution is a bad theory at best? All these men have another thing in common besides their work that proves a God created us and everything we see. They have all at one time or another been persecuted and attacked for there stance by secular academia and the media.

Now it is very understandable that they would get heated debates about there findings, but to be targeted and threatened with the loss of their very livelihood, reminds one of what the church did to Galileo for daring to say the earth revolves around the sun. Like the many scientists and experts who come out against the idea that global warming is caused by man, these men should be hailed as heroes. If, for no other reason then they dare to question the modern day evolutionists I call, “The Flat Earthers”.

[Ev Reeman]

God created all things - even evolution and science.

[freedumb2003]

>>However, what if I told you that many scientists, archaeologists, biochemists, physicists, micro biologists, and astronomers disagree with most of the findings and conclusions by today’s evolutionist experts?

What if I told you this is total and complete BS? Even a couple of hundred (which there is not of these typesof scientists) is not “many” compared to the millions of scientists who understand TToE. Get us a list of, say 25,000 Life Scientists who agree with your thesis and we’ll talk.

Move on folks. When you get a falsehood this early in a post there is no point in wasting your time with the rest of it.

[freedumb2003]

>>God created all things - even evolution and science.

Bite your tongue you Evil Humanist Satanist!!!

[SnakeDoctor]

>> Depending on what poll you read, this vast amount of technology has convinced 30% to 40% of believers that God must have used evolution in His creative process.

I think that 30-40% would say that God “may” have used evolution in His creative process. Honestly, we don’t know exactly how He did it ... and, it really doesn’t make any difference.

SnakeDoc

[Nathan Zachary]

That certainly seems to be what the evidence points towards.

[Nathan Zachary]

"What if I told you this is total and complete BS?"

I'd tell you that THAT is complete and total BS.

[GodGunsGuts]

Excellent summary!

Here are some examples of what happens to scientists and teachers who dare question Darwood’s godless creation myth:

http://www.slaughterofthedissidents.com/index.php?p=20case_studies

[freedumb2003]

>>I’d tell you that THAT is complete and total BS.

I would ask for proof for any of your assertions, but we can start with that one.

[freedumb2003]

A tiny number of people teach astrology in astronomy class and somehow they are prosecuted.

[what's up]

Astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez and his collaborators have created the concept of the Galactic Habitable Zone

Just watched Gonzalez' video, "The Privileged Planet" for the 2nd time. Excellent, excellent video.

There is a book of the same title which I am also looking forward to reading.

[freedumb2003]

>>I think that 30-40% would say that God “may” have used evolution in His creative process. Honestly, we don’t know exactly how He did it ... and, it really doesn’t make any difference.

Are you kidding? Some people DEFINE THEMSELVES on there being a difference. They won’t stop until all of scientific progress ceases and bows its collective head to Biblical teachings. You know, like islam.

[chuck_the_tv_out]

“>>However, what if I told you that many scientists, archaeologists, biochemists, physicists, micro biologists, and astronomers disagree with most of the findings and conclusions by today’s evolutionist experts?

What if I told you this is total and complete BS? Even a couple of hundred (which there is not of these typesof scientists)
“

You don’t know that. You’re just getting profane based on your own beliefs of how many scientists believe evolution is false. What a lie. Big ol’ parantheses around your assertion “which there is not...”, when it is just pulled from your proverbial derriere.

Either way, truth is not up to a vote.

[chuck_the_tv_out]

“like islam”

Oh yeah, someone trying to explain something to you is the same as someone blowing stuff up. You suck.

[freedumb2003]

>>You don’t know that. You’re just getting profane based on your own beliefs of how many scientists believe evolution is false. What a lie. Big ol’ parantheses around your assertion “which there is not...”, when it is just pulled from your proverbial derriere.<<

What? That doesn’t make any sense at all. TToE is taught as the foundation for all life sciences all over the world. To suggest there are “many” life scientists is an assertion that must be proven. There is no onus on me at all. You do know forensics, right?

>>Either way, truth is not up to a vote.

Correct. It is available to those who have the tools to find it. Science provides those tools.

[OneVike]

If the so called methods used to date different materials points to dinosaurs living millions of years before man existed, then tell me why these ancient Cambodian ruins have carvings of dinosaurs at a time when men could obviously design something as complex as these monuments?







Or how about this footprint in a dinosaurs footprint?"

Br>If you want truth then read about and look at the sequential pictures of the footprint here.

The Taylor Trail:

As usual those who disagree do not bring their evidence, they attack the scholars and others who have proof of their findings. Just like they do to those who disagree with the global warming hysteria.

[freedumb2003]

Nor can the scientists produce all those cross over bones that should be in evidence of evolution. They should be ubiquitous yet they can't produce any save hoaxes

Not even close to true -- and there are billions of fossils, not just thousands. Look at the following chart and tell me which fail to meet your very layperson definition of "crossover":

[Nathan Zachary]

Here's a partial list:

Contemporary Scientists who accept the Biblical account of creation

* Dr. Paul Ackerman, Psychologist
* Dr. E. Theo Agard, Medical Physics
* Dr. James Allan, Geneticist
* Dr. Steve Austin, Geologist
* Dr. S.E. Aw, Biochemist
* Dr. Thomas Barnes, Physicist
* Dr. Geoff Barnard, Immunologist
* Dr. Don, Batten, B.Sc.Agr. (Hons 1), Ph.D.,--Plant Physiology, Expert in environmental adaptation of tropical fruit
* Dr. Donald Baumann, Solid State Physics, Professor of Biology and Chemistry, Cedarville University
* Dr. John Baumgardner, Electrical Engineering, Space Physicist, Geophysicist, expert in supercomputer modeling of plate tectonics
* Dr. Jerry Bergman, Psychologist
* Dr. Kimberly Berrine, Microbiology & Immunology
* Prof. Vladimir Betina, Microbiology, Biochemistry & Biology
* Dr. Raymond G. Bohlin, Biologist
* Dr. Andrew Bosanquet, Biology, Microbiology
* Edward A. Boudreaux, Theoretical Chemistry
* Dr. David Boylan, Chemical Engineer
* Prof. Stuart Burgess, Engineering and Biomimetics, Professor of Design & Nature, Head of Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bristol (UK)
* Prof. Linn E. Carothers, Associate Professor of Statistics
* Dr. Robert W. Carter, PhD Marine Biology
* Dr. David Catchpoole, Plant Physiologist (read his testimony)
* Prof. Sung-Do Cha, Physics
* Dr. Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
* Dr. Choong-Kuk Chang, Genetic Engineering
* Prof. Jeun-Sik Chang, Aeronautical Engineering * Dr. Donald Chittick, Physical Chemist
* Prof. Chung-Il Cho, Biology Education
* Dr. John M. Cimbala, Mechanical Engineering
* Dr. Harold Coffin, Palaeontologist
* Dr. Bob Compton, DVM
* Dr. Ken Cumming, Biologist
* Dr. Jack W. Cuozzo, Dentist
* Dr. William M. Curtis, III, Th.D., Th.M., M.S. Aeronautics & Nuclear Physics
* Dr. Malcolm Cutchins, Aerospace Engineering
* Dr. Lionel Dahmer, Analytical Chemist
* Dr. Raymond V., M.D. Damadian, Pioneer of magnetic resonance imaging
* Dr. Chris Darnbrough, Biochemist
* Dr. Nancy M. Darrall, Botany
* Dr. Bryan Dawson, Mathematics
* Dr. Douglas Dean, Biological Chemistry
* Prof. Stephen W. Deckard, Assistant Professor of Education
* Dr. David A. DeWitt, Biology, Biochemistry, Neuroscience
* Dr. Don DeYoung, Astronomy, atmospheric physics, M.Div
* Dr. David Down, Field Archaeologist
* Dr. Geoff Downes, Plant Physiologist
* Dr. Ted Driggers, Operations research
* Robert H. Eckel, Medical Research
* Dr. André Eggen, Geneticist
* Dr. Leroy Eimers, Atmospheric Science, Professor of Physics and Mathematics, Cedarville University
* Dudley Eirich, Ph.D. molecular biologist, industrial genetic research
* Prof. Dennis L. Englin, Professor of Geophysics
* Prof. Danny Faulkner, Astronomy
* Dr. Dennis Flentge, Ph.D. Physical Chemistry, Professor of Chemistry and Chair of the Department of Science and Mathematics, Cedarville University
* Prof. Carl B. Fliermans, Biology
* Prof. Dwain L. Ford, Organic Chemistry
* Prof. Robert H. Franks, Associate Professor of Biology
* Dr. Alan Galbraith, Watershed Science
* Dr. Paul Giem, Medical Research
* Dr. Maciej Giertych, Geneticist
* Dr. Duane Gish, Biochemist
* Dr. Werner Gitt, Information Scientist
* Dr. Steven Gollmer, Atmospheric Science, Professor of Physics
* Dr. D.B. Gower, Biochemistry
* Dr. Robin Greer, Chemist, History
* Dr. Dianne Grocott, Psychiatrist
* Dr. Stephen Grocott, Industrial Chemist
* Dr. Donald Hamann, Food Scientist
* Dr. Barry Harker, Philosopher
* Dr. Charles W. Harrison, Applied Physicist, Electromagnetics
* Dr. John Hartnett, Physicist and Cosmologist
* Dr. Mark Harwood, Satellite Communications
* Dr. Joe Havel, Botanist, Silviculturist, Ecophysiologist
* Dr. George Hawke, Environmental Scientist
* Dr. Margaret Helder, Science Editor, Botanist
* Dr. Larry Helmick, Organic Chemistry, Professor of Chemistry
* Dr. Harold R. Henry, Engineer
* Dr. Jonathan Henry, Astronomy
* Dr. Joseph Henson, Entomologist
* Dr. Robert A. Herrmann, Professor of Mathematics, US Naval Academy
* Dr. Andrew Hodge, Head of the Cardiothoracic Surgical Service
* Dr. Kelly Hollowell, Molecular and Cellular Pharmacologist
* Dr. Ed Holroyd, III, Atmospheric Science
* Dr. Bob Hosken, Biochemistry
* Dr. George F. Howe, Botany
* Dr. Neil Huber, Physical Anthropologist
* Dr. Russell Humphreys, Physicist
* Dr. James A. Huggins, Professor and Chair, Department of Biology
* Evan Jamieson, Hydrometallurgy
* George T. Javor, Biochemistry
* Dr. Pierre Jerlström, Creationist Molecular Biologist * Dr. Arthur Jones, Biology
* Dr. Jonathan W. Jones, Plastic Surgeon
* Dr. Raymond Jones, Agricultural Scientist
* Dr. Valery Karpounin, Mathematical Sciences, Logics, Formal Logics
* Dr. Dean Kenyon, Biologist
* Prof. Gi-Tai Kim, Biology
* Prof. Harriet Kim, Biochemistry
* Prof. Jong-Bai Kim, Biochemistry
* Prof. Jung-Han Kim, Biochemistry
* Prof. Jung-Wook Kim, Environmental Science
* Prof. Kyoung-Rai Kim, Analytical Chemistry
* Prof. Kyoung-Tai Kim, Genetic Engineering
* Prof. Young-Gil Kim, Materials Science
* Prof. Young In Kim, Engineering
* Dr. John W. Klotz, Biologist
* Dr. Vladimir F. Kondalenko, Cytology/Cell Pathology
* Dr. Felix Konotey-Ahulu, Physician, leading expert on sickle-cell anemia
* Dr. Leonid Korochkin, M.D., Genetics, Molecular Biology, Neurobiology
* Dr. John K.G. Kramer, Biochemistry

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_any_qualified_scientists_support_the_creation_theory

[chuck_the_tv_out]

your assertion that there are NOT many scientists who believe in creation must be proven. I personally know 5, so I know hundreds is easy, and almost certainly thousands. your lie is easily disprovable.