C r e a t i o n ,  P a g e  1 3
-
 
The brain then ascertains where particular cells exist, being sure they are in the right places, and responds to these pathways so we can see, hear, touch, smell, etc. Everything is wired to be lightening quick and provide super efficiency. Thousands of conjunctions are formed by each cell, and pathways soon are set in place, wrapped with a myelin sheath, protecting them from body acids in the blood and to enhance conductivity, so that further alterations in system organization are prevented. The system becomes stable, and we can grow, and participate in another 'miracle', that of language. Who but God could have designed such an awesome system? It sure as hell didn't all develop by evolution's natural selection
    Evolution in over 140 years hasn't accounted for separate existence precursorial functioning; for example, the eye existing before the brain, or vice versa. The closest they come to it is believing that optical differences were weeded out, but they fail in proving exactly how. But...
    For natural selection to be effective (and that means to progress), it must have at least a minimally functioning system to work on. Minimal function must occur in order to militate- change.
    Martin Olomucki, Laboratory Vice Director at the Colege de France, The Chemistry of Life (1993), McGraw Hill, New York, N.Y., asks "How did metabolism, the flow of energy and matter that passes through organized beings, appear in the course of evolution? What is the minimal organization of matter that merits characterization as 'living'?"
    Would you agree that the only evolutionary definition of success is successful reproduction? For natural selection to work, something right now must be useful to work on. Evolution needs to show how any particular protein or protein system was first produced, whether slowly or suddenly, or whether by natural selection or some other mechanism. Evolution hasn't done it yet, so IBM is going to try. 
    IBM's new Blue Gene (gene for genetics) super computer will have one million processors and do a quadrillion calculations per second. All this super computing power to at first try to understand the amazing organized complexity in the structure and functions of proteins, the workhouse molecules and undergirding building blocks of the body. "The smallest catalytically active protein molecules of the living cell consist of at least a hundred amino acids. For even such a short molecule, there exists 20100 to 10130 alternative arrangements of the twenty basic monomers. This shows that on the level of complexity, that of biological macromolecules, analysis shows an almost unlimited variety of structures is possible." … Bernd-olaf Küppers, Information and the Origin of Life, (1990), MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. And if that weren't enough...
    If, for example, a protein appeared in an evolutionary cycle with nothing to do, then mutation and natural selection would tend to eliminate it before it had a chance to become a useful part in a much more complex system, such as blood clotting, etc. Darwin's mechanism of natural selection would actually hinder the formation of irreducibly complex systems upon which all life depends. For evolution to have effect, it must explain how clotting might have originated and subsequently evolved. When an evolutionist gives a model without numbers or quantities, there is no science! Quantification ensures results are consistent. True science-evinces-vigorous attempts to make true statements about the physical world. 
    By avoiding available detailed explanations about processes involving the mind boggling complexity of the foundation of life, like the purpose of the nucleoid for example, and intricate life processes including hibernation and temperature maintenance, modern evolutionary theorists persist in the insult of one's intelligence by continuing to extrapolate their severely crippled fable.
    The complexity of life as we know it here on earth seems limited to our plane. Our earth is rare.-Why Complex Life Is Uncommon In The Universe, by George Swenson, Jr., professor emeritus of electrical engineering and astronomy at the University of Illionois, former member of the team for project Cyclops, the seminal SETI (Search For Extra Terrestrial Intelligence {aliens}) study conducted in 1971. He is a member of the National Academy of Engineering and a fellow of both the American Association of the Advancement of Science and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.
    When the horrendous complexity of the nucleoid is examined, the evident intelligence behind the design leaves one awe struck! Ascribing the simplistic notion of evolution to such astounding complexity presents amusing idiocy, woefully inadequate for training school children in scientific lieracy.
    How good are the science and biology books now being used in high schools? Andrew Ahlgren, associate director of the American Association for the Advancement of Science's Project 2061 (the year Halley's Comet returns), in an article in Popular Science, October, 2000, says "They are a total washout! Of the nine widely used middle grades science texts and the 10 newly developed biology books, we couldn't recommend any of them." 
    The science texts failed the test of adequately conveying scientific basic ideas in such a manner as to lead children to understand them. And the biology texts present poorly connected illogical ideas. 
    Jo Ellen Roseman, the project's head, regarding a disconnect between ideas and representation, states "One of the worst examples in these books was children playing musical chairs with some of them blindfolded. That was supposed to illustrate natural selection. To all those people upset about teaching evolution in the schools, I'd say, 'Don't worry. The kids aren't learning it."

Micro evolution is small changes within species. Micro evolution is the theory that random-genetic-mutation combined with natural selection to produce within a kind (adaptive modifications), and cites differences in bird beaks, etc. of various species. One bird's beak may indeed be longer than another, but is it not still a bird's beak? It sure ain't an elephant's trunk!
    Micro evolution (which is really) does not require new information, because the changes are a function of the genetic makeup already present in the gene pool of the species. How a gene controls or directs the features of organisms is answered not by biology, but by biochemistry. Get a book on biochemistry if you're inclined to further information.
    Because one beak of a particular kind of bird may resemble another beak on a different kind of bird, the similarities say nothing about how the similarity is produced. Evidence of changes within a kind are everywhere. Clams change shell shapes. Humans show forth much diversity; fingerprints, faces; one person may have long fingers, and another short, etc. Travel from a cold or temperate climate to a tropical one, and your body is well able to adapt to different atmospheres, including cosmic ray bombardment. Temperature change, tropical food, etc., provide necessitate adaption.-...continues


Subject Sampler_List of Topics_Search
A_B_C_D_E_F_G_H_I_J_K_L_M_N_O_P_Q_R_S_T_U_V_W_XYZ
Questions Lists_Free Stuff_Entrance
-
There are three kinds of people; those who can count and,
those who can't!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-