--MISSING YOU ARE NOT VERY WELL LINKED---- Several of us ID BELIEVERS have been their been there , where have you been?
--We've been there and your bio-evol ideas are no different than in the religious pages, --
--The study of life , as biology is , --SHOULD not be a study of falsity of life, in the evolutionary hoax!
--HERE IS A SAMPLE of our involvement:
"What is science and how is it relevant to my existent??"
Best Answer -
--Science, contains laws & principles that can prove or disprove ideas. The maker of science and all its laws, has made available opportunities to learn of these marvelous principles.
--Note what the Historian Moses suggested some 3,500 years ago , that only in our time has action been taken seriously to learn from the creation:
(Job 12:7-9) “7 However, ask, please, the domestic animals, and they will instruct you; Also the winged creatures of the heavens, and they will tell you. 8 Or show your concern to the earth, and it will instruct you; And the fishes of the sea will declare it to you. 9 Who among all these does not well know That the hand of Jehovah itself has done this,”
--Science—What Is It?
According to The World Book Encyclopedia, “science covers the broad field of human knowledge concerned with facts held together by principles (rules).” Understandably, there are various kinds of science. The book The Scientist claims: “In theory, almost any kind of knowledge might be made scientific, since by definition a branch of knowledge becomes a science when it is pursued in the spirit of the scientific method.”
*** g93 4/8 p. 8 Science—Mankind’s Ongoing Search for Truth ***
--Why Science Should Interest Us
?Science and technology have had much to do with creating the structure of our modern world. Frederick Seitz, former president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, said: “Science, which started out primarily as an adventure of the mind, is now becoming one of the principal pillars of our way of life.” Thus, scientific research has today become synonymous with progress. Anyone questioning the latest scientific developments runs the risk of being labeled “antiprogressive.” After all, what some call scientific progress is to them what separates the civilized from the uncivilized."
--It is important to be able to distiinguish between true science and fradulent. There is a reason why evolution has remained a theory for over 100 years in its modern existence.
--Many of the sciences are focusing in on life not being a result from any type of accident , but has come from an intelligent mind, and many scientists are referring to this one as having personality and at times even evolutionists refer to the intelligence involved!
--Note a tie in with your thought on existence:
(Acts 17:26-28) “26 And he made out of one [man] every nation of men, to dwell upon the entire surface of the earth, and he decreed the appointed times and the set limits of the dwelling of [men], 27 for them to seek God, if they might grope for him and really find him, although, in fact, he is not far off from each one of us. 28 For by him we have life and move and EXIST(my caps), even as certain ones of the poets among YOU have said, ‘For we are also his progeny.’”
--Please note reference here is made to the Greek people at the Areopagus, where Paul was visiting, and his discussion was on the many gods the Greeks venerated. He then referred to a plaque in behalf of an unknown god. Thus Paul makes reference to Adam being created and that we have life, move , and exist--much different from trees and other of God's creation, that are indeed limited in intelligence and other capabilities.
--So then we indeed have purpose to our existence, and it indeed can be found in the Bible!
***OOPS 7 thumbs(updated)--Guess your little fraudulent evolutionary believers DO NOT SEEM TO LIKE the idea of The true sciences having meaning, GET YOUR LITTLE COLUSIONISTS and do your bit , BUT SCIENCE is factual --NOT science fiction!
---QUESTION ON BIOLOGY-Dec. 2006 Biology Page!
***How close is evolution to being right?
--The far-fetched possibility decreased every day since its modern conception, about 100 years ago!
*** ce chap. 2 p. 14 Disagreements About Evolution—Why? ***
---When a special centennial edition of Darwin’s Origin of Species was to be published, W. R. Thompson, then director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, in Ottawa, Canada, was invited to write its introduction. In it he said: “As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but even about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution"
***Evolution Under Assault
--4 The scientific magazine Discover put the situation this way: “Evolution . . . IS NOT ONLY(my caps)under attack by fundamentalist Christians, but is also being questioned by reputable scientists. Among paleontologists, scientists who study the fossil record, there is growing dissent from the prevailing view of Darwinism.”1 Francis Hitching, an evolutionist and author of the book The Neck of the Giraffe, stated: “For all its acceptance in the scientific world as the great unifying principle of biology, Darwinism, after a century and a quarter, is in a surprising amount of trouble.”2
........7 A London Times writer, Christopher Booker (who accepts evolution), said this about it: “It was a beautifully simple and attractive theory. The only trouble was that, as Darwin was himself at least partly aware, it was full of colossal holes.” Regarding Darwin’s Origin of Species, he observed: “We have here the supreme irony that a book which has become famous for explaining the origin of species in fact does nothing of the kind.”—Italics added......
...... Booker also stated: “A century after Darwin’s death, WE STILL HAVE NOT THE SLIGHTEST (my caps) demonstrable or even plausible idea of how evolution really took place—and in recent years this has led to an extraordinary series of battles over the whole question. . . . a state of almost open war exists among the evolutionists themselves, with every kind of [evolutionary] sect urging some new modification.” He concluded: “As to how and why it really happened, we have not the slightest idea and probably never shall.”5
....NEWER THEORIES
17 All of this has led many scientists to champion novel theories for evolution. Science Digest put it this way: “Some scientists are proposing even more rapid evolutionary changes and are now dealing quite seriously with ideas once popularized only in fiction.”15
--These well substantiated quotes are but the tip to a very, very large iceberg---This is simply because there are so many OLOGIES that indeed are deminishing all the fraudulent concepts of the evolutionary idea.
*****THE IDEA OF EVOLUTION is like the non-substance cloth in the Fairy Tale "THE EMPERORS NEW CLOTHS" in which only the intelligent could see the invisible fabric that was made from a non-substance thread.
--Thus the same arguement is used that 'atheist scientists are smarter' than those scientists that believe in Gods total creation reality, AND of course any common people cannot by any chance see the non-fabric evolution because we do not have intelligence, of the elite kind!
--Source(s):
Book "Life How Did It Get Here --By Evolution or by Creation?"
-- 0 10----------HURRY HURRY, I got 10 thumbs down, CALL all your friends quick before LINKED goes MISSING!
**WOW YOU---DID A GOOD JOB on the person who "DARED" quote a Scripture, ---you guys would have been great in the 600 yr. INQUISITION!
***CONTINUANCE:
*** g90 1/22 pp. 12-14 Fraud in Science—The Greatest Fraud of All ***
MOLECULAR BIOLOGIST Michael Denton writes in Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, page 250: “Molecular biology has shown that even the simplest of all living systems on earth today, bacterial cells, are exceedingly complex objects. Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than [one trillionth of a gram], each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machine built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world.
---“MOLECULAR BIOLOGY(my caps) has also shown that the basic design of the cell system is essentially the same in all living systems on earth from bacteria to mammals. In all organisms the roles of DNA, mRNA and protein are identical. The meaning of the genetic code is also virtually identical in all cells. The size, structure and component design of the protein synthetic machinery is practically the same in all cells. In terms of their basic biochemical design, therefore no living system can be thought of as being primitive or ancestral with respect to any other system, nor is there the slightest empirical hint of an evolutionary sequence among all the incredibly diverse cells on earth.”
--George Greenstein acknowledges all this intelligence involved in the earth’s structure. In his book The Symbiotic Universe, he speaks of the mysterious and incredible series of coincidences that are beyond explaining, coincidences without which life on earth would be impossible. The following statements, appearing throughout pages 21-8, reflect his agonizing over conditions that bespeak the need for an intelligent and purposeful God:
--“I believe that we are faced with a mystery—a great and profound mystery, and one of immense significance: the mystery of the habitability of the cosmos, of the fitness of the environment.” He sets out “to detail what can only seem to be an astonishing sequence of stupendous and unlikely accidents that paved the way for life’s emergence. There is a list of coincidences, all of them essential to our existence.” Yet “the list kept getting longer . . . So many coincidences! The more I read, the more I became convinced that such ‘coincidences’ could hardly have happened by chance.” A shattering fact for an evolutionist to face up to, as he next acknowledges:
---“But as this conviction grew, something else grew as well. Even now it is difficult to express this ‘something’ in words. It was an intense revulsion, and at times it was almost physical in nature. I would positively squirm with discomfort. The very thought that the fitness of the cosmos for life might be a mystery requiring solution struck me as ludicrous, absurd. I found it difficult to entertain the notion without grimacing in disgust . . . Nor has this reaction faded over the years: I have had to struggle against it incessantly during the writing of this book. I am sure that the same reaction is at work within every other scientist, and that it is this which accounts for the widespread indifference accorded the idea at present. And more than that: I now believe that what appears as indifference in fact masks an intense antagonism.”
--WHAT ANTAGONISM? Antagonism to the thought that the explanation might lie in a purposeful Creator. As Greenstein expresses it: “As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency—or, rather, Agency—must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially drafted the cosmos for our benefit?” But Greenstein recovers from such heretical thinking and reasserts his orthodoxy to the evolutionary religion, reciting one of their creedal dogmas: “God is not an explanation.”
---Astrophysicist Fred Hoyle in his book The Intelligent Universe, on page 9, talks about those, like Greenstein, who fear God’s entering the picture: “Orthodox scientists are more concerned with preventing a return to the religious excesses of the past than in looking forward to the truth [and this concern] has dominated scientific thought throughout the past century.”
---In his book he then discusses these same mysterious features that trouble Greenstein. “Such properties,” he says, “seem to run through the fabric of the natural world like a thread of happy accidents. But there are so many of these odd coincidences essential to life that some explanation seems required to account for them.” Both Hoyle and Greenstein say chance cannot explain these many “accidental coincidences.” Hoyle then says that to account for them, ‘the origin of the universe requires an intelligence,’ an ‘intelligence on a higher plane,’ ‘an intelligence that preceded us and that led to a deliberate act of creation of structures suitable for life.’
--NONE OF THIS (mycaps)is to be taken as saying that Hoyle is thinking of the God of the Bible, but he does see that behind the universe and the earth and life on it, there must be a tremendous supernatural intelligence. While he does say that “‘God’ is a forbidden word in science,” he allows that we might “define an intelligence superior to ourselves as a deity.” He speculates that “through our own minds’ pre-programmed condition,” there might be “a connecting chain of intelligence, extending downward . . . to humans upon the Earth.”
******MORE SCIENTIFIC CLUTTER AS REQUESTED:
*** g02 3/22 When Simple Is Not So Simple ***
--The theory of chemical evolution proposes that life on earth developed by spontaneous chemical reaction billions of years ago.
--This theory is not that an accident directly transformed lifeless matter into birds, reptiles, or other complex life-forms. Rather, the claim is that a series of spontaneous chemical reactions eventually resulted in very simple life-forms such as algae and other single-celled organisms.
--Based on what is now known about these single-celled organisms, is it reasonable to assume that they are so simple that they could have appeared spontaneously? For example, how simple are single-celled algae? Let’s examine one type in particular, the unicellular green algae of the genus Dunaliella of the order Volvocales.
****Unique Single-Celled Organisms
---The Dunaliella cells are ovoid, or egg-shaped, and very small—about ten microns long. Placed end to end, it would take about 2,500 [1,000] of them to make one inch [one centimeter]. Each cell has two whiplike flagella at one end, which allow it to swim. Similar to plants, Dunaliella cells use photosynthesis to provide energy. They produce food from carbon dioxide, minerals, and other nutrients absorbed into the cell, and they reproduce by cell division.
--Dunaliella can live even in a saturated salt solution. It is one of the very few organisms of any kind that can live and propagate in the Dead Sea, which has a salt concentration about eight times that of seawater. This so-called simple organism can also survive sudden changes in the salt concentration of its environment.
--Consider, for instance, Dunaliella bardawil, found in shallow salt marshes in the Sinai desert. The water in these marshes can be diluted quickly during a thunderstorm or can reach saturated salt concentration when the extreme desert heat evaporates the water. Thanks in part to its ability to produce and accumulate glycerol in just the right amount, this tiny alga can tolerate such extreme changes. Dunaliella bardawil is able to synthesize glycerol very rapidly, starting within minutes of a change in salt concentration, either producing or eliminating glycerol as needed in order to adapt. This is important because in some habitats the salt concentration can change considerably within a matter of hours.
---Living in shallow marshes in the desert, Dunaliella bardawil is exposed to intense sunlight. This would damage the cell were it not for the protective screening provided by a pigment in the cell. When grown under favorable nutritional conditions, as when ample nitrogen is available, a Dunaliella culture is bright green, with the green pigment chlorophyll providing the protective screen. Under conditions of nitrogen deficiency and high salt concentration, temperature, and light intensity, the culture changes from green to orange or red. Why? Under such harsh conditions, a complicated biochemical process takes place. The chlorophyll content drops to a low level, and an alternative pigment, beta-carotene, is produced instead. Were it not for its unique ability to produce this pigment, the cell would die. The appearance of large amounts of beta-carotene—up to 10 percent of the alga’s dry weight under these conditions—accounts for the change in color.
--In the United States and Australia, to produce natural beta-carotene for the human nutrition market, Dunaliella has been grown commercially in large ponds. For example, there are large production facilities in southern and western Australia. Beta-carotene can also be produced synthetically. However, only two companies have the very costly and complex biochemical plants capable of producing it at production scale. What has taken humans decades and huge investments in research, development, and production facilities, Dunaliella accomplishes very easily. This simple alga does it with a miniature factory too small to see, in immediate response to the changing requirements of its environment.
--Another unique ability of the genus Dunaliella is found in a species called Dunaliella acidophila, which was first isolated in 1963 in naturally occurring acidic sulfur springs and soils. These environments were characterized by a high concentration of sulfuric acid. In laboratory studies this species of Dunaliella can grow in a solution of sulfuric acid, which is about 100 times more acidic than lemon juice. On the other hand, Dunaliella bardawil can survive in high alkaline environments. This demonstrates the extreme range of ecological adaptability of Dunaliella.
***Some Points to Ponder
The unusual abilities of Dunaliella are remarkable. Yet, these are only a small part of the astounding array of properties used by single-celled organisms to survive and thrive in varying and sometimes hostile environments. These properties enable Dunaliella to respond to growth needs, take in food selectively, exclude harmful substances, excrete wastes, evade or overcome disease, escape predators, reproduce, and so forth. Humans use about 100 trillion cells to accomplish these tasks!
--Is it reasonable to say that this single-celled alga is merely a simple, primitive life-form that by happenstance came about from a few amino acids in an organic soup? Is it logical to ascribe these wonders of nature to pure chance? How much more reasonable it is to credit the existence of living things to a masterful Designer who created life for a purpose. Such intelligence and craftsmanship, far beyond our ability to comprehend fully, are necessary to account for the vastly complex and interactive nature of living things.
--A careful examination of the Bible, UNCLUTTERD by religious or scientific dogma, reveals satisfying answers to questions concerning the origin of life. Millions of people, including many trained in the sciences, have had their lives enriched by such an examination.
MORE "CLUTTER" COMING---if you so wish?..............