(RNS) A Kentucky museum that advocates creationism unveiled an exhibit on Sunday (March 15) that affirms Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection even as they reject his teachings on evolution.
“All we’re doing is helping people to understand that natural selection is not evolution (even though) it’s portrayed that way in public schools,” said Ken Ham, founder of the Christian ministry Answers in Genesis, which operates the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Ky.
Natural selection was Darwin’s explanation for how organisms gain new traits over time. Ham said the exhibit was added to the museum to show that creationists can believe in natural selection without having to embrace evolution.
The exhibit, entitled “Natural Selection is Not Evolution” features a cave aquarium with blind cavefish to show how organisms possess traits specific to their environment. It also features a “Creation Orchard” that shows the family tree of each original kind of created plant or animal as described in Genesis.
Ham believes creatures can gain new traits to fit their surroundings within their own families. He asserts, however, that changing from one organism to another, such as an ape evolving into a human, does not occur.
“Darwin was right about natural selection, right about different species forming and species changing, but wrong that such changes are a mechanism to change one kind of animal into a totally different kind,”
Ham said.
Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, said natural selection can be decoupled from evolution in a sense and was not surprised by the Creation Museum’s new exhibit.
“They have long recognized that natural selection works. They just don’t think that it can do anything important,” Scott said.
The $27 million museum has drawn international attention and an estimated 650,000 visitors since its opening in 2007, according to the Associated Press.
By Karin Hamilton
Copyright 2009 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of this transmission may be distributed or reproduced without written permission.
Beliefnet
Advertisement
posted March 18, 2009 at 8:23 pm
Aside from their desperate desire to let people believe their Bible is inerrant, they probably don’t understand the immense amount of time over which things like apes and humans evolving from a common ancestor (NOT people evolving from apes) happen. Lots and lots and lots of the small changes they admit they believe in over hundreds and thousands or millions of years mean a different species.
posted March 18, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Though I hate to do so, I must side with nnmns on this one. I’m more skeptical of natural selection than I am of evolution, though I haven’t written either one off completely. They (creationists)believe in a literal six-day creation period and that the earth is only six or seven thousand years old. That flies in the face of carbon-dating, geological layering, continental drift and so on. Trying to mold scientific evidence into a literal interpretation of Genesis and find a formula that fits is not indicative of sound science. So long as they present Darwin’s natural selection theory accurately, it does show some conciliation.
posted March 18, 2009 at 9:43 pm
Why would they let a little thing like scientific findings get in the way of their “beliefs?”
posted March 18, 2009 at 11:28 pm
Sort of conveniently opens the door to promoting “Social Darwinism” without the all the Darwin.
posted March 19, 2009 at 9:34 am
Hmmm…changes can occur over time, but not from one kind of organism to another.
But how much change is acceptable (or believable in this case, I guess). The taxonomic “families” were developed by us, and they are a “theory”. Why would nature limit itself to not crossing over a man-made boundary?
And where does “change” end and “evolution” begin? Can’t the “change” of certain early primates into animals with characteristics of today’s primates be considered “change over time”? It’s just a question of how much change and how much time.
The creaitonist argument is still a bunch of drivel.
posted March 19, 2009 at 10:35 am
I remember when Christians believed that a thousand years is like a blink of an eye to God. I would encourage them to do the math (that is if math isn’t another science they eschew).
One blink = .5 of a second (or less)
X how many seconds in 6,000 years?
= millions (if not trillions) of actual, real life, earth years.
How come Christians don’t seem to ‘believe’ in metaphors?
posted March 19, 2009 at 6:20 pm
There are plenty of prominent scientists ,that aren’t coming from a creationist standpoint, that don’t buy into evolution. There’s to many holes in evolutionary theory. The more we learn the less pratical evolution is becoming. If Darwin had the knowledge of cell structure that we possess today. He’d probaly rethink his theory.
posted March 19, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Sean, please feel to list 5 of these “prominent scientists” and what holes the see in the theory of evolution. I won’t hold my breath waiting for an answer though.
posted March 19, 2009 at 6:30 pm
How many ounces of genetically modified corn syrup did you not believe in today?
posted March 19, 2009 at 11:33 pm
Any true evolutionist will admit there are holes in the theory – thats what makes it a theory. However, Creationist Theology has huge gaps and wide chasms that cannot be bridged by reason or even faith. There is far too much “because I said so, and I ought to know because my friends say I am an expert”. This whole exhibit is hysterical, but it matches the tone and style of the entire “museum”. And I ought to know because MY friends tell me I am an expert.
posted March 20, 2009 at 11:36 am
Ouabache, here are 5 or so,
Dr Paul Ackerman, Psychologist
Dr E. Theo Agard, Medical Physics
Dr James Allan, Geneticist
Dr Steve Austin, Geologist
Dr S.E. Aw, Biochemist
Dr Thomas Barnes, Physicist
Dr Geoff Barnard, Immunologist
Dr Don Batten, Plant physiologist, tropical fruit expert
Dr John Baumgardner, Electrical Engineering, Space Physicist, Geophysicist, expert in supercomputer modeling of plate tectonics
Dr Jerry Bergman, Psychologist
Dr Kimberly Berrine, Microbiology & Immunology
Prof. Vladimir Betina, Microbiology, Biochemistry & Biology
Dr Raymond G. Bohlin, Biologist
Dr Andrew Bosanquet, Biology, Microbiology
Edward A. Boudreaux, Theoretical Chemistry
Dr David R. Boylan, Chemical Engineer
Prof. Linn E. Carothers, Associate Professor of Statistics
Dr Robert W. Carter, Zoology (Marine Biology and Genetics)
Dr David Catchpoole, Plant Physiologist (read his testimony)
Prof. Sung-Do Cha, Physics
Dr Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
Dr Choong-Kuk Chang, Genetic Engineering
Prof. Jeun-Sik Chang, Aeronautical Engineering
Dr Donald Chittick, Physical Chemist
Prof. Chung-Il Cho, Biology Education
Dr John M. Cimbala, Mechanical Engineering
Dr Harold Coffin, Palaeontologist
Dr Bob Compton, DVM
Dr Ken Cumming, Biologist
Dr Jack W. Cuozzo, Dentist
Dr William M. Curtis III, Th.D., Th.M., M.S., Aeronautics & Nuclear Physics
Dr Malcolm Cutchins, Aerospace Engineering
Dr Lionel Dahmer, Analytical Chemist
Dr Raymond V. Damadian, M.D., Pioneer of magnetic resonance imaging
Dr Chris Darnbrough, Biochemist
Dr Nancy M. Darrall, Botany
Dr Bryan Dawson, Mathematics
Dr Douglas Dean, Biological Chemistry
Prof. Stephen W. Deckard, Assistant Professor of Education
Dr David A. DeWitt, Biology, Biochemistry, Neuroscience
Dr Don DeYoung, Astronomy, atmospheric physics, M.Div
Dr Geoff Downes, Creationist Plant Physiologist
Dr Ted Driggers, Operations research
Robert H. Eckel, Medical Research
Dr André Eggen, Geneticist
Prof. Dennis L. Englin, Professor of Geophysics
Prof. Danny Faulkner, Astronomy
Prof. Carl B. Fliermans, Professor of Biology
Prof. Dwain L. Ford, Organic Chemistry
Prof. Robert H. Franks, Associate Professor of Biology
Dr Alan Galbraith, Watershed Science
Dr Paul Giem, Medical Research
Dr Maciej Giertych, Geneticist
Dr Duane Gish, Biochemist
Dr Werner Gitt, Information Scientist
Dr D.B. Gower, Biochemistry
Dr Dianne Grocott, Psychiatrist
Dr Stephen Grocott, Industrial Chemist
Dr Donald Hamann, Food Scientist
Dr Barry Harker, Philosopher
Dr Charles W. Harrison, Applied Physicist, Electromagnetics
Dr John Hartnett, Physicist and Cosmologist
Dr Mark Harwood, Satellite Communications
Dr Joe Havel, Botanist, Silviculturist, Ecophysiologist
Dr George Hawke, Environmental Scientist
Dr Margaret Helder, Science Editor, Botanist
Dr Harold R. Henry, Engineer
Dr Jonathan Henry, Astronomy
Dr Joseph Henson, Entomologist
Dr Robert A. Herrmann, Professor of Mathematics, US Naval Academy
Dr Andrew Hodge, Head of the Cardiothoracic Surgical Service
Dr Kelly Hollowell, Molecular and Cellular Pharmacologist
Dr Ed Holroyd, III, Atmospheric Science
Dr Bob Hosken, Biochemistry
Dr George F. Howe, Botany
Dr Neil Huber, Physical Anthropologist
Dr Russell Humphreys, Physicist
Dr James A. Huggins, Professor and Chair, Department of Biology
Evan Jamieson, Hydrometallurgy
George T. Javor, Biochemistry
Dr Pierre Jerlström, Creationist Molecular Biologist
Dr Arthur Jones, Biology
Dr Jonathan W. Jones, Plastic Surgeon
Dr Raymond Jones, Agricultural Scientist
Dr Felix Konotey-Ahulu, Physician, leading expert on sickle-cell anemia
Prof. Leonid Korochkin, Molecular Biology
Dr Valery Karpounin, Mathematical Sciences, Logics, Formal Logics
Dr Dean Kenyon, Biologist
Prof. Gi-Tai Kim, Biology
Prof. Harriet Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jong-Bai Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jung-Han Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jung-Wook Kim, Environmental Science
Prof. Kyoung-Rai Kim, Analytical Chemistry
Prof. Kyoung-Tai Kim, Genetic Engineering
Prof. Young-Gil Kim, Materials Science
Prof. Young In Kim, Engineering
Dr John W. Klotz, Biologist
Dr Vladimir F. Kondalenko, Cytology/Cell Pathology
Dr Leonid Korochkin, M.D., Genetics, Molecular Biology, Neurobiology
Dr John K.G. Kramer, Biochemistry
Prof. Jin-Hyouk Kwon, Physics
Prof. Myung-Sang Kwon, Immunology
Dr John Leslie, Biochemist
Prof. Lane P. Lester, Biologist, Genetics
Dr Jason Lisle, Astrophysicist
Dr Alan Love, Chemist
Dr Ian Macreadie, molecular biologist and microbiologist:
Dr John Marcus, Molecular Biologist
Dr George Marshall, Eye Disease Researcher
Dr Ralph Matthews, Radiation Chemist
Dr John McEwan, Chemist
Prof. Andy McIntosh, Combustion theory, aerodynamics
Dr David Menton, Anatomist
Dr Angela Meyer, Creationist Plant Physiologist
Dr John Meyer, Physiologist
Dr Albert Mills, Reproductive Physiologist, Embryologist
Colin W. Mitchell, Geography
Dr John N. Moore, Science Educator
Dr John W. Moreland, Mechanical engineer and Dentist
Dr Henry M. Morris, Hydrologist
Dr John D. Morris, Geologist
Dr Len Morris, Physiologist
Dr Graeme Mortimer, Geologist
Stanley A. Mumma, Architectural Engineering
Prof. Hee-Choon No, Nuclear Engineering
Dr Eric Norman, Biomedical researcher
Dr David Oderberg, Philosopher
Prof. John Oller, Linguistics
Prof. Chris D. Osborne, Assistant Professor of Biology
Dr John Osgood, Medical Practitioner
Dr Charles Pallaghy, Botanist
Dr Gary E. Parker, Biologist, Cognate in Geology (Paleontology)
Dr David Pennington, Plastic Surgeon
Prof. Richard Porter
Dr Georgia Purdom, Molecular Genetics
Dr John Rankin, Cosmologist
Dr A.S. Reece, M.D.
Prof. J. Rendle-Short, Pediatrics
Dr Jung-Goo Roe, Biology
Dr David Rosevear, Chemist
Dr Ariel A. Roth, Biology
Dr Jonathan D. Sarfati, Physical chemist / spectroscopist
Dr Joachim Scheven Palaeontologist:
Dr Ian Scott, Educator
Dr Saami Shaibani, Forensic physicist
Dr Young-Gi Shim, Chemistry
Prof. Hyun-Kil Shin, Food Science
Dr Mikhail Shulgin, Physics
Dr Emil Silvestru, Geologist/karstologist
Dr Roger Simpson, Engineer
Dr Harold Slusher, Geophysicist
Dr E. Norbert Smith, Zoologist
Dr Andrew Snelling, Geologist
Prof. Man-Suk Song, Computer Science
Dr Timothy G. Standish, Biology
Prof. James Stark, Assistant Professor of Science Education
Prof. Brian Stone, Engineer
Dr Esther Su, Biochemistry
Dr Charles Taylor, Linguistics
Dr Stephen Taylor, Electrical Engineering
Dr Ker C. Thomson, Geophysics
Dr Michael Todhunter, Forest Genetics
Dr Lyudmila Tonkonog, Chemistry/Biochemistry
Dr Royal Truman, Organic Chemist:
Dr Larry Vardiman, Atmospheric Science
Prof. Walter Veith, Zoologist
Dr Joachim Vetter, Biologist
Dr Tas Walker, Mechanical Engineer and Geologist
Dr Jeremy Walter, Mechanical Engineer
Dr Keith Wanser, Physicist
Dr Noel Weeks, Ancient Historian (also has B.Sc. in Zoology)
Dr A.J. Monty White, Chemistry/Gas Kinetics
Dr John Whitmore, Geologist/Paleontologist
Dr Carl Wieland, Medical doctor
Dr Lara Wieland, Medical doctor
Dr Clifford Wilson, Psycholinguist and archaeologist
Dr Kurt Wise, Palaeontologist
Dr Bryant Wood, Creationist Archaeologist
Prof. Seoung-Hoon Yang, Physics
Dr Thomas (Tong Y.) Yi, Ph.D., Creationist Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering
Dr Ick-Dong Yoo, Genetics
Dr Sung-Hee Yoon, Biology
Dr Patrick Young, Chemist and Materials Scientist
Prof. Keun Bae Yu, Geography
Dr Henry Zuill, Biology
Francis Bacon (1561–1626) Scientific method.
Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) (WOH) Physics, Astronomy Johann Kepler (1571–1630) (WOH) Scientific astronomy
Athanasius Kircher (1601–1680) Inventor
John Wilkins (1614–1672)
Walter Charleton (1619–1707) President of the Royal College of Physicians
Blaise Pascal (biography page) and article from Creation magazine (1623–1662) Hydrostatics; Barometer
Sir William Petty (1623 –1687) Statistics; Scientific economics
Robert Boyle (1627–1691) (WOH) Chemistry; Gas dynamics
John Ray (1627–1705) Natural history
Isaac Barrow (1630–1677) Professor of Mathematics
Nicolas Steno (1631–1686) Stratigraphy
Thomas Burnet (1635–1715) Geology
Increase Mather (1639–1723) Astronomy
Nehemiah Grew (1641–1712) Medical Doctor, Botany
The Age of Newton
Isaac Newton (1642–1727) (WOH) Dynamics; Calculus; Gravitation law; Reflecting telescope; Spectrum of light (wrote more about the Bible than science, and emphatically affirmed a Creator. Some have accused him of Arianism, but it’s likely he held to a heterodox form of the Trinity—See Pfizenmaier, T.C., Was Isaac Newton an Arian? Journal of the History of Ideas68(1):57–80, 1997)
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz (1646–1716) Mathematician
John Flamsteed (1646–1719) Greenwich Observatory Founder; Astronomy
William Derham (1657–1735) Ecology
Cotton Mather (1662–1727) Physician
John Harris (1666–1719) Mathematician
John Woodward (1665–1728) Paleontology
William Whiston (1667–1752) Physics, Geology
John Hutchinson (1674–1737) Paleontology
Johathan Edwards (1703–1758) Physics, Meteorology
Carolus Linneaus (1707–1778) Taxonomy; Biological classification system
Jean Deluc (1727–1817) Geology
Richard Kirwan (1733–1812) Mineralogy
William Herschel (1738–1822) Galactic astronomy; Uranus (probably believed in an old-earth)
James Parkinson (1755–1824) Physician (old-earth compromiser*)
John Dalton (1766–1844) Atomic theory; Gas law
John Kidd, M.D. (1775–1851) Chemical synthetics (old-earth compromiser*)
Just Before Darwin
The 19th Century Scriptural Geologists, by Dr Terry Mortenson
Timothy Dwight (1752–1817) Educator
William Kirby (1759–1850) Entomologist
Jedidiah Morse (1761–1826) Geographer
Benjamin Barton (1766–1815) Botanist; Zoologist
John Dalton (1766–1844) Father of the Modern Atomic Theory; Chemistry
Georges Cuvier (1769–1832) Comparative anatomy, paleontology (old-earth compromiser*)
Samuel Miller (1770–1840) Clergy
Charles Bell (1774–1842) Anatomist
John Kidd (1775–1851) Chemistry
Humphrey Davy (1778–1829) Thermokinetics; Safety lamp
Benjamin Silliman (1779–1864) Mineralogist (old-earth compromiser*)
Peter Mark Roget (1779–1869) Physician; Physiologist
Thomas Chalmers (1780–1847) Professor (old-earth compromiser*)
David Brewster (1781–1868) Optical mineralogy, Kaleidoscope (probably believed in an old-earth)
William Buckland (1784–1856) Geologist (old-earth compromiser*)
William Prout (1785–1850) Food chemistry (probably believed in an old-earth)
Adam Sedgwick (1785–1873) Geology (old-earth compromiser*)
Michael Faraday (1791–1867) (WOH) Electro magnetics; Field theory, Generator
Samuel F.B. Morse (1791–1872) Telegraph
John Herschel (1792–1871) Astronomy (old-earth compromiser*)
Edward Hitchcock (1793–1864) Geology (old-earth compromiser*)
William Whewell (1794–1866) Anemometer (old-earth compromiser*)
Joseph Henry (1797–1878) Electric motor; Galvanometer
Just After Darwin
Richard Owen (1804–1892) Zoology; Paleontology (old-earth compromiser*)
Matthew Maury (1806–1873) Oceanography, Hydrography (probably believed in an old-earth*)
Louis Agassiz (1807–1873) Glaciology, Ichthyology (old-earth compromiser, polygenist*)
Henry Rogers (1808–1866) Geology
James Glaisher (1809–1903) Meteorology
Philip H. Gosse (1810–1888) Ornithologist; Zoology
Sir Henry Rawlinson (1810–1895) Archaeologist
James Simpson (1811–1870) Gynecology, Anesthesiology
James Dana (1813–1895) Geology (old-earth compromiser*)
Sir Joseph Henry Gilbert (1817–1901) Agricultural Chemist
James Joule (1818–1889) Thermodynamics
Thomas Anderson (1819–1874) Chemist
Charles Piazzi Smyth (1819–1900) Astronomy
George Stokes (1819–1903) Fluid Mechanics
John William Dawson (1820–1899) Geology (probably believed in an old-earth*)
Rudolph Virchow (1821–1902) Pathology
Gregor Mendel (1822–1884) (WOH) Genetics
Louis Pasteur (1822–1895) (WOH) Bacteriology, Biochemistry; Sterilization; Immunization
Henri Fabre (1823–1915) Entomology of living insects
William Thompson, Lord Kelvin (1824–1907) Energetics; Absolute temperatures; Atlantic cable (believed in an older earth than the Bible indicates, but far younger than the evolutionists wanted*)
William Huggins (1824–1910) Astral spectrometry
Bernhard Riemann (1826–1866) Non-Euclidean geometries
Joseph Lister (1827–1912) Antiseptic surgery
Balfour Stewart (1828–1887) Ionospheric electricity
James Clerk Maxwell (1831–1879) (WOH) Electrodynamics; Statistical thermodynamics
P.G. Tait (1831–1901) Vector analysis
John Bell Pettigrew (1834–1908) Anatomist; Physiologist
John Strutt, Lord Rayleigh (1842–1919) Similitude; Model Analysis; Inert Gases
Sir William Abney (1843–1920) Astronomy
Alexander MacAlister (1844–1919) Anatomy
A.H. Sayce (1845–1933) Archaeologist
John Ambrose Fleming (1849–1945) Electronics; Electron tube; Thermionic valve
The Modern Period
Dr Clifford Burdick, Geologist
George Washington Carver (1864–1943) Inventor
L. Merson Davies (1890–1960) Geology; Paleontology
Douglas Dewar (1875–1957) Ornithologist
Howard A. Kelly (1858–1943) Gynecology
Paul Lemoine (1878–1940) Geology
Dr Frank Marsh, Biology
Dr John Mann, Agriculturist, biological control pioneer
Edward H. Maunder (1851–1928) Astronomy
William Mitchell Ramsay (1851–1939) Archaeologist
William Ramsay (1852–1916) Isotopic chemistry, Element transmutation
Charles Stine (1882–1954) Organic Chemist
Dr Arthur Rendle-Short (1885–1955) Surgeon
Sir Cecil P. G. Wakeley (1892–1979) Surgeon
Dr Larry Butler, Biochemist
Prof. Verna Wright, Rheumatologist (deceased 1997)
Arthur E. Wilder-Smith (1915–1995) Three science doctorates; a creation science pioneer
posted March 20, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Husband, the use of the Hebrew word ‘Yom’ (day) in Genesis along with ‘evening’, ‘morning’, ‘number’ (days 1-7), in the literature genre setting of ‘historical narrative’, makes a water tight case for the days of Genesis being 24 hour periods of time. Your use of 1 Peter 3:8 is invalid to redefine day as a period of 1000 years, we know the meaning of a word from it’s context, the context of the creation days in Genesis 1 are of ordinary days.
Ouabache
5 non-creation scientists who publicly do not believe in evolution, easy: Dr. Lee Spetner, Dr. Michael Behe, Dr. William Dembski, Dr. Michael Denton, Dr. Paul Davies et al.
Oh and Kepler, Boyle, Newton, Linnaeus, Euler, Faraday, Babbage, Joule, Pasteur, Kelvin, Maxwell believed in creation to name but a few.
jestrfyl you said ‘Creationist Theology has huge gaps and wide chasms that cannot be bridged by reason or even faith’, would you care to elaborate, rather than just elephant hurl??
posted March 21, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Who knows what holes or gaps are in creation if they cannot duplicate the action they know nothing. If you don’t know how life started then you can’t make evolution a law and if it is a theory what has the law have to do with it.
posted March 22, 2009 at 5:10 am
A few points.
A scientific theory is the highest level of understanding in science, higher than a law, higher than an hypothesis, even higher than facts.
There will always be research opportunities in evolutionary biology, but nobody calls these points for future understanding “holes”.
Creationism, also known as intelligent design, is nothing more than a belief in magic.
barny, nice cut and paste job. What’s your point? If you’re trying to imply there’s some doubt about the basic facts of evolution in the scientific community you’re wrong.
posted March 22, 2009 at 5:20 am
“All we’re doing is helping people to understand that natural selection is not evolution (even though) it’s portrayed that way in public schools,” said Ken Ham, founder of the Christian ministry Answers in Genesis, which operates the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Ky.
Natural selection is one of the most important mechanisms of evolution.
Ken Ham knows absolutely nothing about science. He’s never made any effort to study and understand how evolution works. He makes a living from lying to children about science. This is called child abuse. Ken Ham should be deported back to country he came from, Australia, but I doubt Australia would take him back.
Ken Ham’s “Answers in Genesis” should be renamed to “Answers in Stupidity”. These people, besides being evolution deniers, believe people and dinosaurs lived at the same time. They also claim the entire universe was magically created by their god fairy 6,000 years ago. There are no words that can accurately describe how hopelessly stupid and insane this is.
posted March 22, 2009 at 10:50 pm
I think we should all list our yearly income and whether we believe in Evolution or Intelligent Design as the origin of man. We’ll just settle it that way. Whichever belief has the highest yearly salary is the answer. Okay, maybe we’ll still be arguing, but at least we can have a little fun in the process.
posted March 23, 2009 at 12:17 am
C Scott,
I think it would be more telling if we listed our favorite ice cream flavors as a way to determine the validity of evolution v. creationism. Too much in our society is based on wealth making the decisions. How about if we examined Morning people from Night Owls? That might tell us more. Maybe foreign cars v. domestic cars or Rock n Roll v. Country?
My response would be as follows
Evolution
Chocolate
Night Owl
foreign (Japanese)
Rock n Roll (w/ a little Country)
Anything else?
posted March 23, 2009 at 2:16 pm
People that insist that other people are stupid not to believe the way they do have not studied the issue and only believe what they want to believe.
posted March 23, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Barny, you thought someone was actually going to read all those names? That would be NO! Not impressed.
posted March 24, 2009 at 11:05 am
“Lots and lots and lots of the small changes they admit they believe in over hundreds and thousands or millions of years mean a different species.”
You first have to assume billions of years, then you have to show a mechanism for an increase in genetic information. Natural selection is just the opposite. You have a genetically “complete” original kind that over thousands of years and under natural selection pressures loses certain genetic traits.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n3/antibiotic-resistance-of-bacteria
http://www.answersingenesis.org/assets/images/articles/ee/v2/dog-kinds-tn.jpg
posted March 24, 2009 at 11:13 am
“Can’t the “change” of certain early primates into animals with characteristics of today’s primates be considered “change over time”? It’s just a question of how much change and how much time.
The creaitonist argument is still a bunch of drivel.”
You’re going the wrong way with change. The change in natural selection is a downward change. It’s the selection of information already present in the genetic code. If I gave you 50 Legos, there are a large number of different ways you could put them together. But if you build something using only 45 Legos, I’m going to take away the other 5. Those lost Legos aren’t available to the next generation. You can create changes all day long by taking away more Legos, but until you have a source of new Legos, you’re never going to be able to build anything bigger than your original creation. Just as in genetics there can never be an “upward” change because more information is not available. The code can only “choose” how to use the information already present.
posted May 11, 2009 at 5:49 pm
Have you all considered this?
There are more than 2.4 times as many different ways to randomly arrange the composition of just 30 rungs on the DNA double helix molecule as there are seconds of time in 15 billion years.
So, when has there been enough time for chance arrangement to develop the CODE that directs the construction of all biological entities?
It looks to me that evolution of Life from base chemicals by means of random natural processes, undirected chance, natural selection and the survival of the fittest is a patently ridiculous idea. Not So?