“The Scopes Trial Revisited” - An invitation to examine both sides of the origins debate

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
“After more than seven decades of monitoring sediment movement globally, scientists have long recognized that insufficient sediment is available for widespread fossilization. Sediment is being deposited in rivers, lakes, estuaries, lagoons, and marine environments worldwide. Sediment deposition also occurs during small storms and rare catastrophic events. However, insufficient sediment is produced in any of these environments to bury large numbers of animals over large areas…”

 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
From Facebook…

6A8A229F-6E4D-4810-8D0B-40D318F9F0E2.jpeg

George Wald was a Nobel Prize winning scientist. A few of his quotes clearly illustrate the cognitive dissonance required to believe in spontaneous generation - that life was created in a primordial soup of chemicals. It also shows his personal contempt for God. As I've said before, believing in evolution is more about the heart than the head.

1) "One has only to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible. Yet here we are-as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation."

2) "Therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generation leading to evolution. I do not want to believe in God. Therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generation leading to evolution."

3) "However improbable we regard (spontaneous generation), it will almost certainly happen at least once.... The time... is of the order of two billion years.... Given so much time, the "impossible" becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One only has to wait: time itself performs the miracles."

Gotta love that last quote. Given enough "time," the impossible becomes inevitable! LOL Time can do miracles, but God can't!
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
@Lucy - I can only conclude that almost everyone on this forum including @VigilantCitizen agrees that creation is the only scientifically credible account of origins! Nobody seems to want to stand up for Darwin or Dawkins!!! I’m not sorry, but I am surprised as it is the most popular cultural myth of our times….
 

Lucy

Star
Joined
Feb 8, 2021
Messages
1,097
@Lucy - I can only conclude that almost everyone on this forum including @VigilantCitizen agrees that creation is the only scientifically credible account of origins! Nobody seems to want to stand up for Darwin or Dawkins!!! I’m not sorry, but I am surprised as it is the most popular cultural myth of our times….
This world is just so beautiful Red! Just watching a hummingbird in my garden shows me there is a Creator!
It takes way more faith to think that everything in this creation just happened by chance after billions of years.

Evolution is just another lie from Satan
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
This world is just so beautiful Red! Just watching a hummingbird in my garden shows me there is a Creator!
It takes way more faith to think that everything in this creation just happened by chance after billions of years.

Evolution is just another lie from Satan
You get hummingbirds in your garden!!??? The most exotic I get is a woodpecker but both are truly miracles of creation.

https://creation.com/woodpecker-head-banging-wonder
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
Even Sherlock Holmes Can’t Explain African Dinosaurs

BY TIM CLAREY, PH.D. * |
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2020

A new species of duck-billed dinosaur, Ajnabia odysseus, was recently unearthed in North Africa.1This is the first hadrosaur-type dinosaur ever discovered on the continent of Africa, and it creates a conundrum for evolutionary scientists because its location doesn’t fit their narrative.

The new dinosaur, a member of the Lambeosaurinae subfamily, was discovered in a mine in Morocco in the uppermost Cretaceous System strata. It measured about 10 feet long, which is rather small compared to other hadrosaurs that could reach up to 49 feet.2

Other hadrosaur fossils have been discovered in North America, Europe, and Asia where they are relatively common.1 But until now, lambeosaurs similar to Ajnabia odysseus were found only in Europe.1 Secular scientists believe that the hadrosaur kind dispersed from Asia to Europe and then to Africa.

But, the big question is how? According to uniformitarian scientists, Africa was an isolated island continent at the end of the Cretaceous, with deep oceans for hundreds of miles in every direction.2

CNN quoted Nicholas Longrich, senior lecturer at the Milner Centre for Evolution at the University of Bath, who described the discovery as "about the last thing in the world you would expect.”2

"It was completely out of place, like finding a kangaroo in Scotland. Africa was completely isolated by water—so how did they get there?" Longrich said.2

Locked into uniformitarian thinking, secular scientists have to resort to the near impossible, suggesting that these dinosaurs swam across hundreds of miles of open ocean and/or floated on rafts of debris for weeks or months.2

But did they forget the oceans are filled with salt water? How could any large land animal swim or float across the open sea without a fresh water source or significant food for weeks or longer? And why would a dinosaur swim out to sea or climb on a debris raft without land in sight?

Longrich tried to justify this explanation:

Sherlock Holmes said, “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” It was impossible to walk to Africa. These dinosaurs evolved long after continental drift split the continents, and we have no evidence of land bridges. The geology tells us Africa was isolated by oceans. If so, the only way to get there is by water.2
Do we need Sherlock Holmes to explain dinosaurs like Ajnabia odysseus in Morocco? Not this time. Genesis provides a much more reasonable solution. Evolutionary scientists deliberately forget that there was a global Flood (2 Peter 3:3-6). Dinosaurs would have been buried swiftly in mud and sand as tsunami-like waves washed across the continents. Often, they were mixed with marine fossils and even buried in marine rocks.3 The continents also split and moved rapidly away from one another during the year-long catastrophe, preserving the fossils of duck-billed dinosaurs on separate continents, including Africa.4

No long-range swimming by hadrosaurs is necessary in this explanation. In fact, the fossils of these dinosaurs demonstrate that they couldn’t swim well enough to escape the rising floodwaters, let alone swim across hundreds of miles of open ocean. Even Sherlock was willing to follow the evidence where it leads. Those who are willing to do the same will see that true science confirms exactly what we read in Genesis. The Flood was the reason for these and nearly all fossils.

Stage image: Rendering of duckbill dinosaurs.
Stage image credit: Raul Martin. Copyright © 2020. Adapted for use in accordance with federal copyright (fair use doctrine) law. Usage by ICR does not imply endorsement of copyright holders.

References
1. Longrich, N.R. et al. 2020. The first duckbill dinosaur (Hadrosauridae: Lambeosaurinae) from Africa and the role of oceanic dispersal in dinosaur biogeography. Cretaceous Research. 104678: ISSN 0195-6671.
2. Woodyatt, A. 2020. New fossil discovery suggests dinosaurs traveled across oceans. CNN. Posted on CNN.com November 5, 2020, accessed November 16, 2020.
3. Clarey, T. 2017. Dinosaur Fossils Found in Marine Rocks...Again. Creation Science Update. Posted on ICR.org May 25, 2017, accessed November 16, 2020.
4. Clarey, T. 2020. Carved in Stone: Geological Evidence of the Worldwide Flood. Dallas, TX: Institute for Creation Research, 282-311.

*Dr. Clarey is Research Associate at the Institute for Creation Research and earned his doctorate in geology from Western Michigan University.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
The real difficulty of abiogenesis

“If naturalistic molecules-to-human-life evolution were true, multibillions of links are required to bridge modern humans with the chemicals that once existed in the hypothetical “primitive soup”. This putative soup, assumed by many scientists to have given birth to life over 3.5 billion years ago, was located in the ocean or mud puddles. Others argue that the origin of life could not have been in the sea but rather must have occurred in clay on dry land. Still others conclude that abiogenesis was more likely to have occurred in hot vents. It is widely recognized that major scientific problems exist with all naturalistic origin of life scenarios. This is made clear in the conclusions of many leading origin-of-life researchers. A major aspect of the abiogenesis question is “What is the minimum number of parts necessary for an autotrophic free living organism to live, and could these parts assemble by naturalistic means?” Research shows that at the lowest level this number is in the multimillions, producing an irreducible level of complexity that cannot be bridged by any known natural means.” ~ Jerry Bergman


Quoting further from the article:

“The major links in the molecules-to-man theory that must be bridged include (a) evolution of simple molecules into complex molecules, (b) evolution of complex molecules into simple organic molecules, (c) evolution of simple organic molecules into complex organic molecules, (d) eventual evolution of complex organic molecules into DNA or similar information storage molecules, and (e) eventually evolution into the first cells. This process requires multimillions of links, all which either are missing or controversial. Scientists even lack plausible just-so stories for most of evolution. Furthermore the parts required to provide life clearly have specifications that rule out most substitutions.”

“In the entire realm of science no class of molecule is currently known which can remotely compete with proteins. It seems increasingly unlikely that the abilities of proteins could be realized to the same degree in any other material form. Proteins are not only unique, but give every impression of being ideally adapted for their role as the universal constructor devices of the cell ... Again, we have an example in which the only feasible candidate for a particular biological role gives every impression of being supremely fit for that role” (Denton, 1998, p. 188, emphasis in original).
 
Last edited:

Maldarker

Star
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
1,269
Listen if you can take an ant & make it a dog then we can take about evolution as maybe more then speculation. You should be able to recreate this in a lab if its a theory. Never has been proven though has it. See the truth of the lie is that yes stuff evolves in species not across species without outside interference aka genetic manipulation.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
I saw this article and it made me laugh!


The article stated that these marine animals “had to evolve” large bodies to counteract the drag of their long necks etc.

How does one go about evolving a large body? How many hundreds of thousands of years might they have been dragging around slowly in the oceans, poorly equipped for survival while time and random mutation supposedly selected bodies far beyond their normal genetic potential?!
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
Creationists, Just A Fringe Group Debating Against A Well Established Science (i.e., Evolution), Or Do They Have A Point?

For centuries, esp in the west, people accepted the biblical story of Special Creation at face value because the Bible was their final authority on origin and laws. Then enter the age of revolutions and reasoning (1600 A.D. to present), and the minds of men slowly drifted away from needing God as an explanation for the existence of everything.

During this socalled of age reasoning, a radical theory was proposed by a English divinity student, turn ship captain talking buddy, turn bug collector "Charles Darwin" that theorized that mankind emerged from the animal kingdom over time and that the saga of "Adam & Eve" was just a myth to make simple minded people feel important.
Furthermore who needed the God of the Bible to explain the world and its living organisms, for evolutionism has freed mankind from ancient superstitions.

Creationists Make Their Objections Known...

Despite Evolutionism being promoted as a creative mechanism in the secular Scientific world there are those who not only question its validity, but have evidence to backup their claims.

Creation scientists, teachers, and speakers for years have not only debated their evolutionary counterparts, but have proven that they aren't just some fringe group teetering on the edge of science.

Creationists are very confident in their position regarding the origin of the universe and the living things that inhabited it, Creationists welcome the debate.

Reference;

The Twilight of Evolution... Dr.H. Morris
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
Just read this on Facebook


I had to know more—I read Strobel’s book ‘The case for the Creator’ and in it I read of my hero Francis Crick and his thoughts on DNA and evolution. I read of another hero, (former atheist) Professor Antony Flew, and his astonishing u-turn to become at least a theist, and his clear denunciation of naturalistic evolution (chemicals to life) as anything other than a disproved theory rather than a religion or even a Faithful Truth.

I was shaken badly. Could all I had believed have been wrong after all? I was then given more on creationism and the mathematical likelihood of the four astonishingly coalesced nucleotides of DNA subsequently coalescing a few thousand more times in some miraculous fashion to make a DNA strand—and that then somehow all the other machinery of a living cell, a machine that can make copies of itself, arose, and this first living thing then avoided all the storms, floods, earthquakes, volcanoes and everything else and from a series of genetic accidents made a population that again continued to vary from cosmic rays and evolve, develop male and female sexual reproduction, mitosis/meiosis and more. The more I thought the more I was disturbed at what I read.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
Over-engineering in nature: an evolutionary conundrum
by David Catchpoole

Published: 23 November 2021 (GMT+10)
123rf.com
crocodile-sunbathing

Recently I encountered this passage in a book about the evolution of crocodylians (crocodiles, alligators, caimans):

“… a conundrum noted in crocodylian lungs by Perry (1990). He observed that the lungs are complex and appear very well designed, reminiscent of bird lungs, and he wondered why they seemed to be ‘over-engineered’. The notion that crocodylians are over-engineered was taken up by Colleen Farmer and David Carrier in relation to other attributes. Before the discovery of unidirectional airflow, they noted that the apparently competent respiratory system in alligators, with such a complex musculo-skeletal system devoted to maintaining ventilation, seemed out of place in a sit-and-wait predator with a fairly low metabolic rate and ‘a poor capacity for sustained vigorous terrestrial locomotion’ (Farmer and Carrier 2000).”1
Over-engineering in nature is indeed a conundrum for evolution, and a serious challenge for evolutionists. They see the problem this way: How and why would natural selection select for an attribute for which there is no survival advantage, given the living conditions and lifestyle of the creature in question (in this case, crocodylians)?

 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
A powerful computer program with far-reaching consequences has been developed by a group of biologists and computer scientists.

Striking at the heart of neo-Darwinian theory, it tackles the subject of mutation/selection using a straightforward method called genetic accounting. Named Mendel’s Accountant, this software platform provides a comprehensive refutation of multiple aspects of evolutionary theory using nothing but standard evolutionary population genetics. The developers have used it to quantify the actual selection threshold for new mutations, to test alternate evolutionary ideas (e.g. unusual selection models, such as ‘synergistic epistasis’), to quantify the long-standing ‘waiting time problem’ for new beneficial mutations, to make predictions about the long-term effects of mutation accumulation in viruses (which were later confirmed), and to compare different historical population models to the modern human mutation frequency spectrum seen in the 1000 Genomes Project data. Their results represent a complete refutation of the ‘primary axiom’ of neo-Darwinian theory. Computationally, the mutation/selection model failed in multiple ways.

 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
12,040
These are the 4 DNA bases molecules:
Adenine = C5H5N5 (15 atoms)
Cytosine = C4H5N3O (13 atoms)
Guanine = C5H5N5O (16 atoms)
Thymine = C5H6N2O2 (15 atoms)

These can form in nature through a well understood process of atomic bonding. But, there is no law of nature or chemistry that is going to organise these molecules into a functional structure. I challenge anyone to provide an hypothesis on how these molecules can interact in any manner that will produce coded DNA.

C38FB280-4DBB-4921-8828-946B97753EBB.jpeg
 
Top