Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘evolution’

This week: eroding continents, design in trees, grace in the gospel, and more on the twin reduction issue.

Continents Should Have Eroded Long Ago (by Brian Thomas, ICR)

A new study indicates that the earth’s overall erosion rate, although slow, would have leveled the continents at least 70 times over if they are as old as the evolutionary claim maintains!

13-Year-Old Makes Solar Breakthrough Based on the Fibonacci Sequence (by Molly Cotter)

“The tree design takes up less room than flat-panel arrays and works in spots that don’t have a full southern view. It collects more sunlight in winter. Shade and bad weather like snow don’t hurt it because the panels are not flat. It even looks nicer because it looks like a tree. A design like this may work better in urban areas where space and direct sunlight can be hard to find.”

Tim Keller Striking the Note of Grace, Grace, Grace (by David Zahl)

Non-Christians will always automatically hear gospel presentations as appeals to become moral and religious, unless in your preaching you use the good news of grace to deconstruct legalism. Only if you show them there’s a difference–that what they really rejected wasn’t real Christianity at all–will they even begin to consider Christianity.

Half-Aborted: Why do "reductions" of twin pregnancies trouble pro-choicers? (By William Saletan, Slate)

Reduction destroys this distinction. It combines, in a single pregnancy, a wanted and an unwanted fetus. In the case of identical twins, even their genomes are indistinguishable. You can’t pretend that one is precious and the other is just tissue. You’re killing the same creature to which you’re dedicating your life.

Read Full Post »

I think it’s obvious and becoming even more obvious by the day. Is there really a more ridiculous idea than evolution? Random mutation + time + chance = we’re here! Let’s roll the dice with some mud and produce some lions! How much time do we have? 4.5 million years? Oh wait, that’s too short. How about 4.5 billion years? That sounds about right.

This clip is merely a tidbit of how absurd evolution is and it’s actually one part of a DVD that includes 6 videos about the problems of evolution.

I’m not trying to say I have all the answers but what more do you need? This hit me about 2-3 years ago in some discussions over evolution and looking at various arguments as to how evolution could produce the human brain or eye. The arguments revealed the gist of humanistic evolution: natural selection is not the driver, random mutation is. Go on Panda’s Thumb. Look up the arguments, there are too many discussions and arguments to link to. But the heart of the modern theory of evolution (an evolution of a theory that still hasn’t found its own evidence) is simply random mutation producing change over a very long period of time with a miniscule aid called natural selection (which is really isn’t much of an aid when it comes to increased complexity).

In fact, just forget about natural selection when you deal with evolution. Natural selection comes in handy with change but not with forming new species. You need a whole lot of mutation for that to happen. Mutation that we have yet to really see produce new genetic code.

Maybe calling it the dumbest idea ever is a bit extreme, but it’s pretty close…

Read Full Post »