Time to Deal with Darwinism!

I made the effort to reach out to TEs and received the standard fallacious arguments and inevitable insults. I'm convinced that this philosophy is nothing more then atheistic materialism in sheep's clothing and I intend to treat it as such. They won't stop at Biology or natural history, they mean to uproot Biblical Christianity and replace it with their own brand of pseudo-theology. The Christians who are involved with these Darwinians are deceived into a false sense of security that they are somehow intellectually superior to fundamentalists and evangelicals. It's time to deal with Darwinism the same way the Church has dealt with the many other false teaching for 2.000 years, expose the error and shun the offender.

I guess I could start a flame war but that is the sort of thing they thrive on. I'm simply going to expose the myth they have substituted for God's special creation and as of right now I will not engage them on any issue for any reason. What I am going to do is to track their responses and categorize them logically. I'm no longer interested in studying evolution, I'm going to study the evolutionists and expose them for what they are, mythographers.

The key to the whole thing is to seperate the genuine article of science from the fallacious nature of naturalistic assumptions. I know how to do this and now that it's started it won't stop. I'm well aware of the rules of the forum and know full well how to keep this in bounds.

This is just to inform interested Creationists that things are going to change. So kick back, grab a box of popcorn and enjoy the show.

Grace and peace,
Mark

__________________

Be sure to read Did God Use Evolution?, by Dr. Werner Gitt. He exposes the many fallacies of theistic evolution.

http://www.christianbook.com/Christi...WW&view=covers

There are some posting high readings on the smug-o-meter. But, there were also some pretty reasonable exchanges with a few others.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(as it is written, "I have made you a father of many nations")
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
in the presence of Him whom he believed--God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;

I noticed early on that there is a big difference between Darwinian naturalistic assumptions and actual Biology. In the secular and scientific world Darwinian logic comes before the empirical data. It is propagated as an empirical conclusion based on the evidence but it's not, it's an a priori assumption in that it comes before the actual empirical evidence and transcends all evolutionary thinking. The key to defending Creationism against the constant onslaught of Darwinian logic is genetics.

MIT Open Courseware Lecture Series

In this series these brilliant Professors will expound on a vast array topics in Genetics and Biology. Creationism is not the only issue, Bioethics for instance with regards to things like embryonic stem cells. Prolifers have opposed harvesting stem cells because as soon at the egg is fertilized it is considered human.

In the opening introduction Prof. Robert A. Weinberg starts right off the bat pushing Darwinian evolution. The next four lectures will be on Biochemistry and by the time the course gets to Genetics taught by Prof. Eric Lander the focuses has shifted to Gregor Johann Mendel. Mendel was a monk but he did not live a Monastic lifestyle that we associate with Medieval clerics. He was more like a Professor who both taught and research on how traits are inherited. While Darwinism was enjoying great popularity Mendel was working pretty much in obscurity and could not manage to attract much attention. According the the Human Genome project it was the work of Mendel and his single surviving paper that has propelled Biology and the quest to understand how inherited traits for the last 100 years. They identified four main phases corresponding roughly to the four quarters of the century.

1. Cellular basis of heredity- The Chromosomes
2. Molecular basis of heredity: The DNA Double Helix.
3. Informational basis of heredity: Biological mechanism by which cells read the information contained in genes (recombinant DNA, cloning and sequencing)
4. Genomics: Decipher genes and then entire genome sequences.
(Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome, Nature 15 Feb 2001)

According to Professor Weinberg, Genetics finally became a real science 50 years ago with the discovery of the structure of DNA by Watson and Crick. He further says that because of that we can start to talk about the basic laws and rules that govern all forms of biological life on this planet and that we did not know 80% of what we do now in 1961.

The Mythical Time line of Darwinism:

Biological attributes,developed a very long time ago early in the inception of life on this planet...It’s clear, for example, that to the extent that Darwinian Evolution governs the development of life forms on this planet that is not an artifact of the Earth. Darwinian Evolution is a logic which is applicable to all life forms and all biosystems that may exist in the universe, even the ones we have not discovered. (Weinberg)

Evolution he says, solved the biochemical and molecular problems starting with the inception of life, this is the time line as he describes it:

The Two Major Cell Divisions, protozoa (single cell) and metazoa (zoa=animals).

• The inception of life (abiogenesis?)
• Conserved almost unchanged for the intervening 2 or 3 billion years.
• 1.5 billion years ago cells evolved that contained nuclei (largest organelle in animals and occupies 10% of the total volume.
• eukaryotes then existed in single-cell form for perhaps the next 700 or 800 million years until multi-cellular aggregates of eukaryotic cells first assembled
• the first multicellular life forms began to evolve 550, 600 million years ago.
• Plants go back 300 to 400 milion years but no more.

This time line has absolutely nothing to do with the real world science of Biology and Genetics but was artificially incorporated in what is called the Modern Synthesis. The fact is that Darwinism leaches off of Mendelian Genetics and Genetics does not need Darwinism at all. After the Darwinian model based on naturalistic assumptions foundation is laid, then and only then does he begin to describe cellular architecture. At this point we are leaving the metaphysics are Darwinism and entering the empirical world of cellular molecular mechanisms:

• Mitochondrion (Cell Power Production. ATP synthase)
• Golgi apparatus (Post Office) Remodel and regenerate membranes, an integral in Modifying, sorting, and packaging Macromolecules required for life.
• Endoplasmic reticulum (Protein Synthesis)- important for the synthesis of proteins which are going to be displayed on the surface of cells

Cells synthesize a large number of different macromolecules required for life. The Golgi apparatus is integral in modifying, sorting, and packaging these substances for cell secretion (exocytosis) or for use within the cell. It primarily modifies proteins delivered from the rough endoplasmic reticulum but is also involved in the transport of lipids around the cell, and the creation of lysosomes. In this respect it can be thought of as similar to a post office; it packages and labels items and then sends them to different parts of the cell. (Golgi Apparatus from Wikipedia)

Ribosomes (Protein Factory)

Ribosomes (from ribonucleic acid and "Greek: soma meaning 'body' they are 'the factories' that build proteins from the genetic instructions held within messenger RNA. They are complexes of RNA and protein that are found in all cells. The function of ribosomes is the assembly of proteins, in a process called translation. Ribosomes do this by catalyzing the assembly of individual amino acids into polypeptide chains; this involves binding a messenger RNA and then using this as a template to join together the correct sequence of amino acids. This reaction uses adapters called transfer RNA molecules, which read the sequence of the messenger RNA and are attached to the amino acids. (Ribosomes from Wikipedia)

• Chromatin (Chromosomes) the mixture of DNA and proteins and a little bit of RNA in it., which together constitutes the chromosomes.

Here's the thing, the former has nothing to do with the later. Intelligent Design is a movement that started at Berkly and has grown to include scientists, philosophers and mathematicians who claim naturalistic forces could not have evolved these molecular mechanisms. The problem with the sudden appearance of 19-35 of the 40 phyla would have had to be developed in a 5 to 10 million year period. In addition between 32 and 48 of 56 total subphyla.

Molecular biologists have recently estimated that a minimally complex single-celled organism would require between 318 and 562 kilobase pairs of DNA to produce the proteins necessary to maintain life (Koonin 2000). More complex single cells might require upward of a million base pairs
(Intelligent Design: The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories By: Stephen C. Meyer)

Did you know that the term specificity did not originate with Intelligent Design proponents, this is where they get the term from.

...Thus, molecular biologists beginning with Crick equated information not only with complexity but also with “specificity,” where “specificity” or “specified” has meant “necessary to function” (Crick 1958:144, 153; Sarkar, 1996:191)...

Finally you will never hear a Darwinian admit that the known mutation rate causes a problem for evolution as natural history. If you have been into these issues you have seen the probablity argument for abiogenesis. The same probability argument can be applied to most of the major transitional in the pantheon of modern Darwinian mythology.

It is staggering at the enormous problems with Darwinian evolution and yet it can never be questioned. If you do question it you are immediately considered ignorant. They call it an argument from incredulity because you have the audacity to question the naturalistic assumptions of Darwinian metaphysics. My suggestion for Creationists is simply this, learn to discern Darwinism out of Biology and Genetics. The conflict is not between religion and science but between theistic reasoning and naturalistic a priori assumptions.

You can learn the Life Sciences without Darwinism and should.

To that end I'm working on an Open Courseware and public domain based resource to encourage Creationists to do exactly that.

7.012: Introduction to Biology, Fall 2004

Whether you are a dyed in the wool Darwinian or Creationist how life works and how information is inherited remains unchanged. It's not science that is in jeopardy here, Darwinism has targeted traditional Christian theism. My advice to Creationists is to pursue knowledge of the Life Sciences. Darwinism is the obstacle, Creationism represents the true history of mankind, Intelligent Design proponents are our intellectual allies and genetics is the prize.

Grace and peace,
Mark

__________________

I don't know if I will be able to get the book right now, I'm getting ready to move. I did find this, thought you might find it interesting, I know I did:

__________________

"Some day the world may be as indebted as it is to Isaac Newton for physics. They may be as indebted to the City of Braunau for its contributions to inheritance." (CF Nap, President of the Pomological and Enological Society of Braunau, 1820)


Eric Lander led the Broad Institute which is a a joint institute between MIT and Harvard. He worked on the Human Genome project and tells us that Genetics is growing so fast the curriculum had to be changed every year, unlike calculus. The diagram that he uses to outline the course is a pyramid with one point being biological function. Then Biochemistry seeks to break down the organism into individual components and study them. The focus is on physical properties of the proteins that are the physical structure of living systems. Genetics focuses on how the genes in the DNA produce traits, often by knocking one of the genes out. For a long time Genetics and Biochemistry could not be integrated until Molecular Biology blended the two, first theoretically and later technologically. This came about when the structure of the DNA was finally manifest and could be worked with directly.

Mendel and the birth of Genetics

We have a growing number of utube videos around here but this series is from the most prestigious research institutes in the world. You will notice if you follow the lecture that there is absolutely nothing about evolution. Most people will prefer either genetics or paleontology and personally I prefer the study of living systems over speculative discussions of dead ancestors. If you would know the history and practice of Biology and Genetics Mendel is the most important figure from the nineteenth century. While Darwin was enjoying great popularity Mendel's work laid undiscovered for a half a century.

This world class researcher and educator Eric Lander says that Mendel is his hero because he pursued the truth in such a scientific way. He says, 'Mendel working of genetics was no accident. He will give you a window into this vital period he calls the Age of Discovery. Mendel like Darwin was looking at inherited traits and hybrids, better breeding practices and the Austria Hungarian empire was starting research projects at their capitol. CF Nap makes a speach saying that one day be as indebted to the city of Braunau for understanding inherited traits as physics is to Isaac Newton.

The crucible of modern genetics was the gardens of the St. Thomas Monastery where Gregor Johann Mendel preformed a series of hybrid experiments. The monastery had a university that focused heavily on scientific research and teaching and it was there that Mendel would make history. Mendel started a serious of experiments and noted the, ‘ striking regularity with which the same hybrid forms always reappeared whenever fertilization took place between the same species induced further experiments to be undertaken”. Mendel using thirty-four different kinds of peas of the genus Pisum , produced 70 hybrid crosses with each of the seven traits he studied, from 10,000 meticulous experiments, crossing and cataloging some 24,034 plants, over a six year period (1857-1863).

Mendel's experiments yielded two laws of science that became the foundation of modern genetics. Without directly observing the chromosomes he built a scientific model that demonstrated how the internal mechanism of inherited traits worked. Nearly half a century later his only surviving paper on the pea plant experiments were discovered and demonstrated again and again in the early 1900s. His experiments would yield the two foundational laws of modern genetics. The Law of Segregation that states the alleles (alternative versions of the genes) account for the inherited variation. The next generation inherits two alleles, one from each of the parents and finally that the two alleles are segregated during the fusion of the egg and sperm (gamete production). And the Law of Independent Assortment that states that the inheritance pattern of one trait will not affect the inheritance pattern of another. I submit that it is these laws that represent the Mendelian boundary beyond which species cannot transform above the level of genus.

This is the most fascinating discussion of the history of Genetics I have ever seen or heard. I would suggest that no self respecting Creationists should consider themselves well read without and extensive understanding of Mendelian Genetics. Professor Lander will describe in detail how the controled cross over experiments worked.

While I fully realize that the material is not easy to understand I would encourage Creationists who are serious about learning the requisite science involved explore this topic zealously. The science of Mendel draws a dramatic boundary between Genetics and the philosophy of Darwin, Huxley and Dawkins. Nothing you will study on the subject will be as potent or vital to dealing with Darwinism and putting the issues in their proper perspective.

For instance, the scientific definition of evolution is the change of alleles in populations over time. An allele is a Greek meaning change and this lecture covers the terminology associated with how alleles change. The changes are not really evolutionary, in fact there is a strong tendency to revert back to the grandparent form. This becomes important when you start looking at the role of mutations in evolution. Not only are the mutations carefully screened by checkpoints as the DNA is being replicated, mutations can be repaired.

Talk of the Nation, March 25, 2005 · Researchers report finding that some plants may have a hidden mechanism for repairing damaged genetic material -- even when the plant received two copies of the damaged gene. Does that finding shake up the rules of inheritance?

Plant Inherits Repaired Gene

Grace and peace,
Mark

__________________

You lost me right there. I remember no such thing.

Anyhow, I'm just dropping this post to subscribe to the thread. Pass the popcorn? ^^

__________________

The Christians who are involved with these Darwinians are deceived into a false sense of security that they are somehow intellectually superior to fundamentalists and evangelicals.

True.

I want to always be careful to distinguish between darwinism, which I believe is a lie straight out of the pit of hell, and darwinists, which are people who believe in darwinism.

A person can be a fantastic loving Christian and be a darwinist. They are wrong, and they are deceived by Satan himself, but they can be great people.

I have to always remember how God continually shows me ways in which Satan has deceived me. When I value materialism or work or ..... over spending time with God -- when I allow various things to capture my heart when it really belongs to the One who IS love -- I am deceived.

I believe darwinism and its cousins scientificism and liberal theology and higher criticism, etc., appeal to people out of elitism and pride. It is so appealing to think that we know more than God Himself revealed in His Word. To put ourselves and our human understanding over what He says so clearly.

Of course true wisdom involves accepting God at His word first. By putting ourselves into the proper context and worldview, we can attain real knowledge and real wisdom. In the case of geology -- we find that oh, you CAN interpret these huge intercontinental formations as being formed in a global flood -- just like God said! Amazing... He is true. Always.

__________________
Therefore Pilate said to Him, "So You are a king?" Jesus answered, "You say {correctly} that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice."
John 18:37 (NASB)

That's definitely part of it, they do have a condescending way about themselves. I think it goes back to what Bacon said, 'knowledge is power'. More importantly then being right or wrong I think they like being in control of Universities that have big budgets.

__________________