From fossisl to irreducibility to genetics to planetary magnetic fields: Creation

Brief replies, this thread is too long..

MJ: “With genome mapping, I think, but do not know, that evolutionary science is getting very close to being a predictive theory”

A: (Darwinian) Evolution by definition cannot predict anything. Changes can happen the same way creationists always have said they happen, within kinds. The only physical mechanism available in Darwinian theory to unguided spontaneous creation of new kinds is point mutation, chromosomal shifting, and accidents in genetic replications. Oh yeah, epigenetics is a force for stabilization as well.

Common descent has been knocked around by the evidence since before Darwin wrote his book. He admitted it when he said the fossils were already evidence against this theory. Atheist Thomas Huxley must have been livid that anybody could admit the possibility of having an act of Creation being the only rational explanation for Creation.

So the implication of the fossils was dismissed and verboten until Stephen Gould blew the lid off this “trade secret of paleontology” and admitted that the fossil evidence says “it’s as if it never happened”. I’m sure he wished later he had said it different. I don’t know how Richard Dawkins “explains” the fossils.

The Darwin strategy was to just ignore the real-world fossil evidence, and pretend the fossils “showed” Darwinian change, and write it in textbooks, repeat lies like the Hoeckel frauds and Piltdown mans and recycle the other disproved and discredited “evidence”, till Gould came along.

Another gift that Darwin made for the future detractors of his theory, and for the author of this writing, he predicted irreducible complexity as another thing that would disprove it. Single-function supermolecular machines, bacterial outboard motors, chicken-and-egg problem with DNA-RNA-cellular environments, an alphabetical-type symbolic coding language for programming the blueprints for a biote, these are all phenomena that fit Darwin’s proposal that structures that defied stepwise evolutionary explanations for their creation would be counterexamples that refute his theory.

That doesn’t stop true dogmatic believers today, though. Pretending that “science” happens without “scientists”, they use explain away the infinitesimal improbabilities for the unguided spontaneous formation of new information in a genome with the design for such super-structures in a roundabout way that should invoke images in your brain of Rube Goldberg contraptions.

The Darwinian talking points on irreducible complexity is to cry “religion” and Rube Goldberg routes from ancestor to descendant.


Darwinians said the environment shaped new generations and the changes, but Mendel showed that like begets like.

Darwinians ignored him until the darwinian theme had captured the new generation of indoctrinated doctorates and graduates. The hoi polloi attack would wait.


Hoeckel drew diagrams of fantasy germs spontaneously arising from the sea. This was the meme among darwinians until Louis Pasteur proved it doesn’t happen, and that life begets life, life comes from life.

As long as Darwinians had a de facto monopoly over the schooling in the States, they just ignored this contrary fact from the scientific method and simply wrote to the little boys and girls that it just happened, no matter we don’t have a clue how it could. Rube Goldberg is no help here, it’s so ridiculous. DNA needs a cell and RNA to transmit instructions to the cell and cell proteins to communicate back what proteins to make. RNA needs DNA to create it and store instructions, especially mRNA, and it needs proteins to do it with. DNA and RNA both need a cellular environment. The cell needs DNA to organize it, the RNA to tell it what to do. WIthout the DNA the cell disintegrates. The DNA doesn’t know what to do without an epigenetic infrastructure.

After some few Creation Scientists got radio spots on Christian radio, and the Internet gave a voice to facts that now the Darwinian political class could not ignore, they began simply saying that abiogenesis was not part of the Darwinian theory. They always had to before, but now they have to clam up until “science” gives them an answer. They don’t have it.

The Darwinian professors that indoctrinate their student victims, having one forth arrogant and come back bruised and beaten from debates with Creation scientists, now tell their colleagues to pretend they are above debating them. So they leave their poor students to argue with creationists, but they arm them with one magic ad hominem: Just say “religion”.


When Crick and Watson discovered DNA, and its all-left-handed amino acids, another evidence of a Creation event, instead of thinking, they simply pronounced it the mechanism for common descent. Very funny.

Crick had a problem with DNA. Faced with the obvious conclusion it was designed by an intentional “hand”, he proncounced it must have been come from some other world. He doesn’t dare say “intelligent design”. He could lose his Nobel Prize if he did, after all.


Russ Humphreys calculated the magnetic field strength of the outer gas giants before the earth probe got there. So did a big bunch of NASA scientists.

Humphrey’s got a bull’s eye that would make a crack sniper blush. NASA reported the results, but they did not report that a Creation scientist got it right.

And they certainly did not mention that the creation scientist got it right with calculations based on the six-day creation of Genesis Chapter One.


%d bloggers like this: