C) RIGHT AND WRONG

“We love the truth when it enlightens us.  We hate the truth when it convicts us.”  Saint Augustine.

It must be observed that science can NEVER tell you the difference between right and wrong.  Therefore, a higher source must be sought, unless you are one of those who believes there is no right and wrong.  Try telling that to your child the next time they get into trouble.  Consider one of my common-sense conclusions:  “Whenever the truth is a threat to your lies, then it must be true.”

D) LET’S EXPLAIN A FEW OF THE ABOVE, STARTING WITH DNA.

A favorite argument of creationists has always been the lack of transitional organisms preserved in the fossil record.  In Romer’s book, “Vertebrate Paleontology,” he found that 97.7% of living orders of terrestrial vertebrates are found as fossils.  (Orders are larger groupings of families, which are larger than genera, which are larger than species).  Of living families of terrestrial vertebrates, 79.1% are represented, a member which jumps to 87.7% if birds (hardly ever preserved) are excluded.  Thus, the fossil record of even terrestrial vertebrates is seen to be remarkably complete.  Nevertheless, far less than 1% of all fossils are terrestrial vertebrates.  Approximately 95% are marine invertebrates, with the rest being mostly plants, fish, and insects.  Land fossils are notoriously scarce and when found are usually fragmentary.  When we look at the invertebrates, we see separate and distinct categories (i.e. clams, corals, trilobites, etcetera) existing in the earliest strata with no hint of ancestors or of intermediates.  Where there is good data, we see no evolution.  The fossil record is voluminous and apparently substantially complete.  Yet, no evolution is seen.  AND, all forms of life found are and can be found in the same strata as dinosaurs and others.

Behe, not a Biblical creationist, showed various aspects of the human body -- the cilia, the eye, and blood clotting -- that could not have arisen according to the basic evolutionary schema.  According to Behe, they couldn’t have arisen over time because, in order for the organ to function at all, all the pieces already had to be in place at once.  (This is actually true for everything; he is just focusing upon one aspect; his specialty).  If one part, or even one step, wasn’t there from the beginning, the organ or process could not exist at all.  His evidence presents a strong challenge to the evolutionary model of creation.

Did you know that all human beings have a chemical serial number, if you please, called “mitochondrion DNA?”  Scientists discovered that you could trace this “DNA” to your mother, grandmother, great-grandmother, including going all the way back to “the mother of all living,” Genesis 3:20 -- Eve?  “Newsweek Magazine,” January 11, 1988, published the result of this experiment under the title: “The Search for Adam and Eve.”  In the article it was stated:  “All human beings go back to one original woman.”  All-be-it, that would be Noah’s wife, since the conditions in which all experiments are done are under post-Flood conditions.

Now “Mitochondrion DNA” has a biological clock -- keep this in mind.  In 1995 it was discovered that the “Y” chromosome is only passed on from father to son.  Thus, it was discovered that we all go back to one original man.  In 1998, scientists were finally able to calibrate the mitochondrion clock.  Published in “Science Magazine,” 1998:  “The first woman lived on earth 6,000 years ago.”

There have been several attempts to synthesize RNA by mixing the four bases attached to ribose and polymerizing them by chemical agents or heat.  All of these experiments so far have produced 2-5’ linkages instead of the natural 3-5’ linkages.  In other words, even given the raw materials, RNA cannot be produced by random methods.  This is not simply a very low probability.  This is zero probability.

Then consider DNA.  DNA can only make 3-5’ linkages, because there is no hydroxyl group on carbon 2 of 2-deoxyribose.  But DNA has to have 2-deoxyribose as well as the bases and phosphates needed for RNA, and 2-deoxyribose has not been made by random methods.  So, according to all the evidence available, DNA cannot be produced by random methods.  But supposing you could create DNA of exactly the right length from deoxyribonucleotides.  That is supposing that only 2 of every 3 residues are needed to be in order.  The smallest free-living bacterium has a DNA molecule that contains 1.1 million bases.  The chances of the right DNA forming are one in 10 to the 441,510th, this is 1 divided by 100,000,000. . . (441,493 more zeroes).  With this type, it would take about 197 pages to write all the zeroes needed.

Now pick a page and pick a zero, and pick the right one in order to produce your beginning DNA (assuming we are not worried about where all these zeroes came from in the first place).  Comparing this likelihood of happening, is comparable to the chances of dumping a 5-ton truckload of pennies (1,466,666 of them) on the street and having them all turn up heads.

Consequently, supposing that there were a billion different kinds of bacteria that could be formed.  That would improve the chances to 1 in 10 to the 441,501th.  If DNA were formed every second for over 3 billion years, the chances would be 1 in 10 to the 441,493th.  And if it were being made in every square inch of the earth’s surface at that rate, the chances would be raised to 1 in 10 to the 441,475th.  By these assumptions we have raised the chances by 10 to the 35th.  But we still have so far to go before it becomes remotely possible that it is not worth considering seriously.  The estimates in the foregoing calculations were extremely liberal, and from the evidence we have, the conditions we assumed about the abundance of nucleotides did not exist in the first place.

Therefore, we cannot form all the amino acids and any of the membrane-forming fatty acids.  Nor can we form more than one pure base, because the sugar needed for DNA, usable proteins, or RNA in its normal form, would not have enough of a presence.  Thus, the chances of producing DNA are worse than astronomically small.  To put it in perspective, the chances of producing life are less than those of producing the “Oxford English Dictionary” by an explosion in a print factory.  And it gets even worse.  To get life once, we have not even considered the macromolecules where the figures for zeroes (remember) would not even fit into the “National Public Library.”

But Wait!  Chicken soup has all the DNA, RNA, and protein we could wish for, including properly formed enzymes, with plenty of lipids to make membranes and sugars for energy and structural needs.  It is even in almost the right order.  And yet, Campbell’s makes lots of money because bacteria doesn’t reconstitute once they are disorganized beyond a certain point.  Primordial soup has to have been much thinner than chicken soup and not nearly as nutritious.  It would take a miracle to get life out of primordial soup.  And that is precisely what we (I say we, because this section on Statistical Evidence was mostly taken from the book “Scientific Theology,” by Paul A. L. Giem, pages 59-61) are talking about.  The origin of life was and is a miracle.  It would have had to have a Master Designer - and IT DID!!!

A popular question of Evolutionists to Evangelicals (and vise-versa) is, “Which came first, the chicken or the egg.” However, a better question to Evolutionists would be, “Which came first, protein or DNA?”  The reason is, that protein cannot exist without DNA, nor can DNA exist without protein.  Therefore, this gives evidence of an immediate creation period of all component parts working together as a whole; as opposed to one in which these properties evolved at the same exact time.

E) THE BIG BANG THEORY AND SCIENTIFIC FACTS

According to the “Laws of Motion,” under “Conservation of Angular Momentum,” when the “Big Bang” occurred, all objects that came swirling out after the explosion would be spinning in a clockwise motion.  Or it would at least be agreed that they would all be spinning in the same direction since all objects originated from one object.  Yet “Big Bang” promoters are stymied as to how the planets Uranus and Venus, plus 6 of the 63 moons in our universe alone, are spinning counter clockwise.  This should be impossible according to them.

Also, according to the “Second Law of Thermodynamics,” everything tends toward disorder not improvement.  Evolutionists teach however, that if you add energy (but they don’t know where that energy came from after the false “Bang”), you increase order.  We added tons of energy to Iraq a few years ago and nothing was better organized after being bombed.  Nearly everyone is employed due to the “Second Law of Thermodynamics.”  Something always needs repair or replacement.  If you don’t believe me, try not servicing your car for five years.

F) DATING SYSTEMS

The best dating system available at the present time is called “potassium/argon.”  I will dispense from discussing others (except another well-accepted one), since to refute the best one would be in essence, to cancel, or make questionable, the rest.  The best way to test the age of something is to have everyone agree that the item formed is known to be within at least 5 to 10 thousand years old.  Dalrymple did this when he dated several lava flows, which are known to have erupted in modern times.

Most of the lava flows had essentially zero “potassium/argon” ages.  However, about 1/5 of the flows had excess ages in the billions of years; even though the lava flow was weeks old.  The flows that dated the oldest all had ultramafic xenoliths and xenocrysts (small rocks and crystals of foreign material) mixed into the lava.  The excess argon, and the extra apparent age, was attributed to these foreign materials.  Dalrymple then conducted tests on basalt, which flowed into the ocean.  The basalt which hardened above the water dated to essentially zero age, while basalt from this same age flow, which cooled under the water were found to be dating as high as 43 million years old.  See:  “Dalrymple GB, Moore JG:” under, “Argon 40.”  See also a study which shows excess in submarine pillow basalts from the Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii.”  “Science,” 1968; 161:1132-5.  This is of course very relevant for a creationist who believes that the world was covered with water, ocean water to be specific, during much of the Genesis Flood.

Carbon Dating cannot be used to date rocks or fossils.  It is only useful for items that were once alive, which still contain some carbon, like bone, flesh, or wood.  Therefore, rocks and fossils, consisting only of inorganic minerals, cannot be measured by this method and this should be the end of this discussion.  However, carbon normally occurs as Carbon-12.

Radioactive Carbon-14 may some-times be formed in the outer atmosphere as Nitrogen-14 undergoes cosmic ray bombardment.  The resulting Carbon-14 is unstable and decays back to Nitrogen-14 with a measured half-life of approximately 5,730 years.  Thus, the ratio of stable Carbon-12 to unstable Carbon-14, which is known in today’s open environment, changes over time in an isolated specimen.  Note the word, “isolated.”  No test can be accurate on something sitting in the dirt where properties may have changed (less rain one year; earthquake; etcetera).

Consider the dating of a piece of wood.  As long as the tree lives, it absorbs carbon from the atmosphere in the form of carbon dioxide, both C-12 and C-14.  Once the tree dies, it ceases to take in new carbon, and any C-14 present begins to decay.  The changing ratio of C-12 to C-13 indicates the length of time since the tree stopped absorbing carbon, i.e., at the time of its death.  Obviously, if half the C-14 decays in 5,730 years, and a half more decays in another 5,730 years, by the time you get to ten half-lives (57,300 years) there would be essentially no C-14 left.  Nor is 57,300 years enough time, according to Evolutionists who always cry for more time, for evolution to have taken place.

Therefore, no one even considers using carbon dating for dates in a range more than 6,000 years.   In theory, it might be useful to archaeology, but not to geology or paleontology.  Furthermore, the assumptions on which Carbon Dating is based and the conditions that must be satisfied are questionable at best.  In practice, no true scientist trusts Carbon Dating beyond about 3,000 or 4,000 years, and then only if it can be checked by some historical means.

In what will surely come as a surprise to many, of the various dating methods, such as “radiometric, potassium/argon, rubidium/strontium, uranium/lead, and uranium disequilibrium dating,” these actually were more compatible with a young earth chronology than with the millions, let alone the billions of years anticipated.  And this was done without altering the radioactive time constants, with a straightforward flood model aging between 4,000 to 8,000 years.  In reality, there are no experiments that can be done to prove that the earth is billions of years old.  This is none other than a “belief system,” no different than a Christian “belief system,” if put into the scientific framework.

G) THE GEOLOGICAL COLUMN

This supposed “Geological Column” is nothing but a made-up theory and not good science.  For example, some of the animals that are supposedly only found in a particular layer, are (if they admit it) also found in other million or supposed billion-year-old layers.  However, the one that clears this dumb made-up strata theory, is the FACT that fossilized trees, standing straight up and straight down, are found going through the entire “Geological Column.”  So when did that tree live and die Mr. Evolutionist?  In fact, the only true place we find the “Geological Column” is in the university, college, and high school text books.

H) NATURAL SELECTION

“Natural Selection” is a coined phrase of Evolutionists to describe the “Survival of the fittest.”  Simply stated, it is the natural process that enables the strongest of each successive generation to survive, and the weaker, more poorly adapted ones to die out.  Thus, the Evolutionist assumes (“assumes”) that the species gradually improves.

Actually, it’s not an all-bad theory and works in nature today.  However, until you prove (“prove”) that there are transitions between (example dog to a pine tree) species, kinds, whatever word you want to use, this theory will not stand.  There is still the FACT that there is not one shred of fossil evidence or living evidence that any species has ever changed into another kind.

Plus, the Evolutionist theory of “Natural Selection” requires the creation of a new type of genetic material which has never existed before (no explanation as to how that happens).  Also, in reality, “Natural Selection” actually decreases, or better, eliminates genetic material.  Thus, in essence, weakening the gene pool (loss of genetic information; granted, but strengthening what is left of the gene pool).  This is one reason for the loss of many “species” on our planet today.

I) STELLAR EVOLUTION

A big argument for Evolutionists is the distance to the stars, and therefore, that light took millions of years to get to earth in order for us to observe the light coming from the stars.  Interesting point and a great argument.  Thus, concluding that the earth is millions of years old.

First of all, the speed of light is now known to NOT have been, nor to be, consistent.  In fact, many scientists now claim that it is slowing down.  If (“If”) this is true, then light traveled much faster before our time and could have easily made it into our viewing field.  What do I mean by that?  Consider that you and a friend are out in a field at night and he is the only one with a flashlight.  He is walking about fifty yards ahead of you pointing the light away from you.  You can see the light but it has not reached your location yet.  In other words, just because we can see that little dot of light in our night sky, does not mean it has reached our planet yet.  Therefore, we cannot measure the distance to the stars based upon light.

Secondly, since light travels at different speeds and the brightness of a star is not a way to determine its distance (since all stars do not put out the same amount of light), and since “honest scientists” know that we do not actually know the distance to the stars (except in our own galaxy), then we cannot determine how old this earth is based upon light travel.

Also consider, that since a distant star’s light finally reached us in one billion years, that would mean that when we observe that star, it should be one billion years old.  But that is not what scientists have concluded.  They observe the star and say it looks newly created.  How does that make sense?  It doesn’t.  But the Bibles claim that God “stretched out the heavens,” Isaiah 40:22; 42:5 & 12; 44:24; 45:12; Psalm 136:6; Jeremiah 10:12, does make sense.  Plus, most scientists admit that the universe is still moving away from us.

The Bible explains this scientific problem by stating that as God said, “let there be” whatever He wanted to be created, and so it was.  So also, when God said, “Let there be light,” Genesis 1:3, the distances of light from the stars was immediate (possibley), just as everything else was immediate.

Back to God stretching “out the heavens.”  According to Isaiah 40:22; 42:5 & 12; 44:24; 45:12; Psalm 136:6; Jeremiah 10:12; Zechariah 12:1, this would mean that the stars were closer to the earth at one time but moved further away and the light of the stars would still be visible while being stretched out.

It is a known scientific FACT that Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune, give off twice as much energy than they receive from the sun.  Since that is the case, there is NO WAY that they are millions, let alone, billions of years old.

No Evolutionist Has Ever Proven Or Attempted to Prove Chemical Evolution Except With Their Silly Arguments Such As:  In The Big Bang (Theory), It Supposedly Produced Hydrogen And Some Helium.  Therefore, You Are Supposed To Believe That All Of These Other Elements Evolved From Only These Two Elements Which Is Impossible.  However, They Then Give You The Fusion And Stars Argument.  You Can Then Reason With The Unreasonable, That You Cannot Get Past The Properties Of Iron With Fusion.  In Other Words, You Cannot Fuse Past Iron Which Would Leave Out Many Of The Other Existing Elements With No Other Explanation Except A Designer.

J) UNIFORMITARIANISM

Over two thousand years ago the Bible prophesied that this doctrine would be taught (see Second Peter 3:4).

This theory assumes (“assumes”) that all the natural processes at work today were the same that operated in the very distant past.  In reality, it is naïve and conceited to compel ages in the past to conform to our observations and experiences of the present.  In fact, why would you?  For conditions of today do not support any portion of the Evolution Theory.  You have to be gullible in order to believe this one.  No such form of fossilization is taking place today.  Nor is there any oil or coal forming by present natural forces today.

Also, the layers of the earth did not, nor do they today, form in the same manner as in the past.  For example:  In Lompoc, California, in 1976, a large 80-foot fossilized whale was found standing on its tail.  How could this whale fossil have maintained its position and integrity over hundreds of thousands of years as it was buried millimeter by millimeter?  Wouldn't the bones have been quickly scattered?  Creationists have pointed to this whale as proof that the Lompoc diatomaceous-earth deposit was formed catastrophically, interning the whale almost instantaneously, and burying the doctrinaire uniformitarianism at the same time.

Keep in mind that Uniformitarians teach that each layer equals a season of time (one year).  Now please explain this fossilized whale and other fish that are found in the head down, or tail down position.  Plus the fossilized trees going through all the layers, as I mentioned above.

K) SCIENTIFIC REASONS FOR A GLOBAL FLOOD

1) All the mountains of the world have been under water at some time or times in the past, as indicated by sedimentary rocks and marine fossils near their summits.  Most volcanic mountains with their pillow lavas were largely formed when under water.

2) Most of the crust of the earth consists of sedimentary rocks (sandstone’s, shale’s, limestone’s, etcetera).  These were originally formed in almost all cases under water, usually by deposition after transportation by water from various sources.

3) Fossils require very rapid burial and compaction to be preserved at all.  Thus, since every sedimentary formation appears to have been formed rapidly, even catastrophically, no other explanation seems to fit as well.

4) Since there is known to be a global continuity of sedimentary formations in the geologic column (that is, there is no worldwide “unconformity,” or time gap, between successive “ages”), and since each unit was formed rapidly, the entire geologic column seems to be the product of continuous rapid deposition of sediments, comprising in effect the geological record of a global flood.

5) The types of rocks, the vast extent of specific sedimentary rock formations, the minerals and metals, coal and oil found in rocks, the various types of structures (i.e., faults, folds, thrusts, etcetera), sedimentary rocks grossly deformed while still soft from recent deposition, and numerous other features seem to occur indiscriminately.  Therefore, they were all formed in essentially the same brief time period.

6) Instead of representing the evolution of life over many ages, the fossils really speak of the destruction of life (remember that fossils are dead things, catastrophically buried for preservation) in one age, with their actual local “sequences” having been determined by the ecological communities in which they were living at the time of burial.

7) The fact that there are traditions of the great Flood accounts (See my Bible Study:  “Flood, Other Accounts Of”) found in hundreds of tribes in all parts of the world (all similar in one way or another to that in the Genesis record) is firm evidence that those tribes all originated from the one family preserved through the cataclysm.

8) The fact that there are NO worm holes, mouse railways, or plant deposits or other things that should be present between the layers if they are even 10 years old is proof of rapid formation.

L) A LITTLE COMMON SENSE

Some of my ancestors may have swung from a noose around their neck, but none of them swung by their tail.

The only evolution taking place today is an evolutionist evolving into a creationist, and the even less observed, vice-versa.  Today’s Christians biggest problem is not reconciling the Bible with science, but their biggest problem is bad science.  God, in order to be the Creator God, must be independent of the three things in order to be a true God, those being:  Time, Space and Matter.  Which He is (see Isa. 46:9-10; 57:15; Tit. 1:1).

From MH:463: “He who has a knowledge of God and His Word through personal experience has a settled faith in the Divinity of the Holy Scriptures.  He has proved that God’s Word is truth, and he knows that truth can never contradict itself.  He does not test the Bible by men’s ideas of science; he brings these ideas to the test of the unerring Standard.  He knows that in true science there can be nothing contrary to the teaching of the Word; since both have the same Author, a correct understanding of both will prove them to be in harmony.  Whatever in so-called scientific teaching contradicts the Testimony of God’s Word is mere human guesswork.”

“The greatest minds, if not guided by the Word of God, become bewildered in their attempts to investigate the relations of science and revelation.  The Creator and His works are beyond their comprehension; and because these cannot be explained by natural laws, {they then resort to attacking] Bible history is pronounced unreliable.”  8T:258.​