- 闲话养鸡(二,悲催) [2020/07]
- 漫步纽约高线空中公园 [2019/05]
- 特朗普总统,你的讲话稿在哪里? [2019/02]
- 中国人正在丢失的10样东西 [2019/02]
- 一个令人难以置信的真实事件,在美国发生!(转载) [2019/04]
- 美中顶尖高中生对比令人震撼 [2019/05]
- 长岛种植园,植物园,州立历史公园 [2019/06]
- 女儿的第一个钢琴老师 [2019/03]
- 中日英美四国小学生守则!看完五味杂陈 [2019/04]
- 江南七日游小记 [2019/02]
- 意外就医 [2020/07]
- 闲话生姜 [2019/01]
- 基督徒可以佩戴珠宝首饰吗? [2019/03]
- 温馨的回忆 [2019/02]
- “母亲今年九十八”(一) [2018/12]
- "母亲今年九十八"(二) [2018/12]
- 我的驾车罚单 [2020/01]
- 我的岳父 [2021/03]
- 我与倍可亲 [2018/12]
- 自律的重要性 [2019/03]
- 批评不是我们的任务 [2019/03]
Evolution’s
explanation for all the varied life forms on earth is an impossibility. That’s
the perspective of a growing number of scientists who are willing to take the
bold step of saying so. Following are four of the many compelling reasons to
reject evolution compiled by scientist and author John F. Ashton MSc, PhD.
Impossible Mutations
Scientists today still
cannot produce evidence demonstrating that large-scale evolution is even possible.
Now some readers may already be thinking—hold on, scientists observe evolution
taking place. True, we see small evolutionary changes in animals that have
adapted to their environment. But you will find those changes always produce
the same—or a similar—type of organism. It may have a slightly different shape
or color. It may possess some relatively minor biochemical differences. It may
even be classed as a different species—but it is still the same type of
organism. Scientists now understand these changes come about either as a result
of mutations altering the DNA of the organism or parts of the DNA code being
switched on or off.
DNA is a very large molecule that encodes the processes necessary for an
organism to live and reproduce. If parts of that code are altered, this can
cause structural changes—which, incidentally, are almost always harmful. Many
evolutionists believe that given a long enough time, such small changes can
eventually result in the evolution of vastly different organisms with new and
different body parts, thus constituting a new “order” of animals or plants. But
despite the claims of many nature documentaries and science texts, this type of
evolution on any large scale has never been observed. It is true that
relatively small beneficial single-gene mutations (i.e., affecting DNA that
encodes a single trait) can sometimes occur. An example of this is seen in
microorganisms that by random mutations developed the enzyme nylonase. (This
allows them to digest nylon as a food source.) However, nylonase is a
relatively simple protein, which does not even compare with the amount or
extent of massive DNA changes needed for a fish to evolve into an amphibian—or
any analogous major changes in organisms. It is not merely a matter of having
enough time for many small changes to accumulate. Even the smallest steps would
require such huge genetic changes that many honest scientists have concluded it
is so improbable as to be essentially impossible—and this is their assessment
when it comes to the smallest steps! Furthermore, DNA has inbuilt repair
functions designed to limit major mutations. DNA is actually designed to
prevent the evolution of a new type of organism.
When we consider the amazing diversity of species living today—we have
discovered about two million species in existence—with an estimated 100 million
to 200 million different types of species living in the past, each with its own
unique DNA code, we have to ask ourselves a question: “What is the origin of
all the complex DNA code which produces the incredibly complex creatures and
functioning ecosystems that we see around us?” There is absolutely no evidence
that random mutations can produce complex advanced information that can result
in the high performance wing systems of insects and birds, the reproductive
systems of mammals, and the sonar systems of bats and whales—let alone the
human mind.
Dating Methods
On to another question. How old are fossils? Some radiometric dating methods
give values of millions to hundreds of millions of years for the rocks
surrounding fossils. But when we examine the data, we find that dating rock
layers can give vastly different ages depending on the method used. For
example, a particular rock formation in the Grand Canyon has been dated at 516
million years, 892 million years, 1,111 million years, 1,385 million years and
1,588 million years depending on the method used.* So how old would you say
that rock was?
Volcanic rocks formed during a 1950s New Zealand eruption were subjected to
modern radiometric dating techniques. Although the rocks were known to be only
50 years old, the dating methods gave ages ranging from hundreds of millions to
thousands of millions of years.* If these methods assign old ages to recent
rocks, how can we know with confidence the age of any rock?
Carbon-14 dating, the only method that actually dates the fossils (and not
merely the rocks around them), appears to be the most accurate technique. It
can give dates only in thousands (as opposed to millions) of years. Recent
discoveries of soft tissue and DNA fragments in fossils, including dinosaur
fossils supposedly millions of years old, support the carbon-14 ages of only
thousands of years for the fossils.
The Cell
Finally, current evidence indicates it is impossible for life to start by
itself. Textbooks sometimes refer to this as abiogenesis or the chemical
evolution of life. The first living cell would require hundreds of different
types of very large molecules, including the genetic code compounds (RNA and/or
DNA) to form by themselves. These molecules are difficult if not impossible to
synthesize in the laboratory let alone form naturally—and most are relatively
unstable, readily breaking down into smaller inactive compounds. Moreover,
millions of copies of some of these molecules would be necessary to provide
concentrations sufficient to make hundreds of biochemical reactions go in just
the right direction at just the right rate—in order to have life.
Mathematical modeling indicates this is absolutely impossible to happen by
chance alone. In fact, if we take a live single-cell E. coli bacteria and make
a small hole in its outer membrane, its chemical reactions are so disrupted
that the cell will die. Furthermore, no human can make it come back to life.
All the chemical components are still there, but we cannot restart the hundreds
of chemical reactions simultaneously in just the right state of
disequilibrium—the requirement for life.
When we consider the scientific knowledge we have about life on earth, we can
say with certainty that evolution alone as an explanation for the
diversity of life on our planet is totally impossible. Instead, science reveals
evidence of an awesome intelligent designer operating at least on some level.
Why not consider what the Holy Bible claims?—a loving Creator God formed our
world, but an enemy, called Satan, has been seeking to obliterate the evidence
of His creative acts. The Bible does not stop there. Not only did God plan for
your existence, the Bible’s last book, Revelation, claims He has a plan for a
recreated earth with everlasting happiness for you.
From:http://www.glowcanada.ca/evolution-impossible.html