Category: Evolution/Creation


I have to apologize for my title – a greater brain could have conceived a better one…

Scientists aren’t allowed to consider even the possibility of design or creation, under threat of ostracism, ridicule, and loss of livelihood. Consequently such bafflingly complex design features as the human brain are just blindly accepted as being another product of chemicals plus a convincingly long period of time. It’s that baffling complexity which got my own brain thinking about itself recently.Neuron_Cell_Body(This post is another in my “blast from the past” series posted while I concentrate on writing a book. It was originally called “Brains, Sense and Nonsense”)

An average healthy human brain contains some 200 billion nerve cells connected to one another through hundreds of trillions of synapses, so that a single human brain has more information processing units than all the computers, routers and internet connections on the earth. One brain’s memory capacity, even by a conservative estimate, is at least a petabyte, equal to the entire world-wide web. Weighing only three pounds, it is super-energy efficient. The brains internal communications occur at light-speed.*

So if we’re part of the onward and upward evolution of life, why is it that even the most talented and intellectual among us only use a fraction of their brains’ potential? Does that make sense to you? Shouldn’t it be the other way around-that the most intelligent are pushing the boundaries of their brain so that their offspring will have greater brain power, given the additional requirement of an incredibly fortuitous mutation?

Someone may protest that the history of man demonstrates evolution clearly: just look how we’ve developed technology and travel in the last few decades alone. That’s not evolution, that’s development. It’s the result of a snowballing God-given thirst for knowledge, in conjunction with times of relative freedom from war, factions, disease and starvation. You could take a man from what is a very backward tribe, still a reality in some remote parts of the world, assuming that he could stand the shock of the change in lifestyle, and put him through school and university. He has brain power too, and it’s not that of an ape-man.Great_Andamanese_-_two_men_-_1875Historians-secular historians-find remarkable the rapidity with which the first civilization in Mesopotamia developed writing, literature, mathematics, geometry, astronomy, business and technology. People weren’t morons crawling out of the trees or muddy fields and making a few marks on a piece of rock or banging two sticks together, one for yes and two for no, in order to communicate. As far back as real history goes, man was intelligent-he just hadn’t got around to building a computer or an airliner yet. He did manage to build such structures as Stonehenge, the Mayan temple and the Pyramids-structures so big and so cleverly put together that we still haven’t figured them out. Some imaginative people have put such structures down to aliens-because, they’re convinced-early man was brainless and clueless. They aren’t allowed or willing to consider the possibility that humans have always had that brain-power potential, right from their creation.

However, some people even in past millennia were able to recognize what professors and educators of today are missing by intent, which is that we humans have been created physically complete and ready to function, and designed by a mind far above our own:

I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.

(Psalm 139:14 NIV).

* http://www.icr.org/article/human-brain-beyond-belief

TOP DIAGRAM: NEURON CELL BODY, BY BRUCE BLAUS

 

 

Advertisements

Evolutionists cite similarities between various animals, and between various plants, as evidence of our ancestry from single-celled creatures. The “evolutionary tree of life” depicts us all descending from the same one-celled creatures as jellyfish, elephants, butterflies and Venus fly-traps. FISH

Apologies to anyone reading this repeat of my post from last year-I’m quite proud of it so it’s getting a second airing. Apologies also for the re-appearance of my five-legged fish for the same reason. I’m working on a book which is taking up all my writing time, so expect a few blasts from the past in lieu of some fresher material.

According to the tree of life, which is, of necessity, nothing more than a diagram: an “artist’s interpretation” or “artist’s impression”, the more structural and genetic similarities organisms share, the more closely related they are and the closer they are on the Tree of Life (NOTE 1). Four-legged creatures are very closely related, as are two-legged varieties such as the “Great Apes” which classification includes humans.

But we all come from the same Designer: the same Creator. Some design features are common in similarly-shaped animals because they work well and because they have the same designer. What do evolutionists expect to see: five legs? Three eyes? Square hips made of wood? Two heads?

Experts have assured us that we humans have very similar DNA to chimpanzees, and that we and chimps are therefore closely related. This claim has been chipped away and exposed by creationist scientists who found bias in the use of data (see note 2 below).

Somewhat more distantly, two-legged, four-legged and no-legged animals are all related. Yes, your distant cousin is a jellyfish. So don’t be surprised if he has no back-bone.

Anyway, as the saying goes, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Is the conviction as great as the claim? I haven’t yet heard of any evolutionists marrying chimps, have you?

The “FIVE-LEGGED FISH” picture above is my own creation, © Nick Fisher.

NOTES

1 http://naturalhistory.si.edu/exhibits/darwin/treeoflife.html

2 http://www.icr.org/article/human-chimp-dna-comparison-research

http://www.icr.org/article/new-research-evaluating-similarities

 

Truth marches on for those who love it, no matter what its opponents do…

File:Calliphora sp Portrait.jpg (Image by JJ Harrison)

I was listening to an interview with Dr. Stephen Meyer, who was talking about the fact that many secular scientists are now quietly-and some not so quietly-questioning Darwin’s theory of evolution, and looking for an alternative one which actually fits the evidence. Meanwhile hundreds of millions of people are still taught and assured that Neo-Darwinism, in an age when nothing is absolutely true, is gospel.

Meyer, illustrating the growth of the Intelligent Design movement, or ID, told the story of a former adherent to Darwinism, who had been rather famous in his own right as an evolutionist. Gunter Bechly was the curator of the natural history museum in Stuttgart-equivalent to London’s natural history museum. He was a world- renowned insect paleontologist.

In 2009 Gunter was curating a special exhibition in celebration of Darwin’s 200th birthday and the 150th anniversary of Darwin’s “Origin of the Species”. He had one exhibit in which many books of ID proponents were on one side of a scale, opposite Darwin’s work. “Origin” was outweighing all the design proponents’ works put together, as a mockery of their views and research.

However, one of Gunter’s colleagues suggested that he perhaps ought to know more about the books and authors he was mocking, so he proceeded to read some of them in conscientious preparation for anyone who may question him about them. Gunter’s mockery turned to amazement as he read and realized that the authors had been totally misrepresented by scientists and reviewers wishing to do away with them, and to bury their unwanted notions. Gunter, over time, made contact with ID proponents, and finally announced that he had adopted their understanding of origins and rejected Darwinian evolution. Later he became a Christian, although not all ID proponents are Christians.

As a result of Gunter’s rebellion against the establishment, he lost his position as curator at the museum, and more recently, Wikipedia deleted his page. He received abuse and ridicule for his decision. Gunter is now pursuing his own research within the ID movement. There are others of his standing who are having second thoughts about their views of origins and life, says Meyer, though quietly, for fear of losing grants, tenure, degrees, jobs, and acceptance by the establishment.

 

Just once in a while, if you’re looking for it, you’ll find a glaring example of double-speak in evolution. You may, if you’re lucky, even catch an earth-shattering admission…

12308130-close-up-of-sparrow-face

Ben Stein’s movie “Expelled” is several years old now, and I’ve reviewed it before, but I would still highly recommend it to anyone who’s really seeking some truth. In Expelled Stein exposes some of the strong arm tactics being employed to shut out of science, education and the media anyone who may believe in a Creator or Intelligent Design.

As a brief but amusing review, I want to draw your attention to the most striking part of the movie. Towards the end Stein interviewed the great Richard Dawkins, and gave us all a fabulous glimpse into the mind of one of the world’s leading evolutionists. Dawkins began by reading from his book “The God Delusion”, and proceeded to call the Judeo-Christian God (not Allah, of course) all the names you wouldn’t dare call Adolph Hitler, Ghengis Khan, Jo Stalin, Pol Pott or any other tyrant you can think of.

Then Stein asks Prof. Dawkins (for all of us to see and hear) how the process of the origin of life started. Dawkins replied:

“Nobody knows how it started…we know the sort of event that must have happened for the origin of life”.

Stein: “What was that?”

Prof. Dawkins: “It was the… origin of the first self-replicating molecule.”

Dawkins had just made a gigantic leap from nothing to the first self-replicating molecule, an interesting omission on its own. The conversation continued…

Stein: “Right. And how did that happen?”

Prof. Dawkins: “I’ve told you, we don’t know”

Stein: “So you have no idea how it started?”

Dawkins: “No, no, nor has anybody.”

I’m sure that since the movie Prof Dawkins has determined to be more prepared for pesky God-believers with tricky questions. Anyway, he went on to suggest that some remote and highly evolved civilization out there in space may have “designed a form of life which they then seeded onto perhaps this planet”.

My point is that a man who doggedly fights Creationism and Intelligent Design, and who says that the evidence for evolution on earth is “totally overwhelming”, and who has helped millions of people become convinced that evolution is conclusively proven, was offering his speculation (and not evidence) that life on earth may have been “designed” and “seeded” from somewhere else in the universe. He was also admitting that apart from this neither he, nor anyone else, knows how life began.

If it had indeed been “proven” that life evolved from soup, as hundreds of millions of people have been led to believe, then Prof. Dawkins and all his militant atheist colleagues would be trumpeting the results and demonstrating how it’s done.

A very relevant read on my blog would be the post “Photosynthesis: Fact and Fiction” (see the link below).

https://nickyfisher.com/2018/01/05/photosynthesis-fact-and-fiction/

One of the countless reasons people give for not having faith in the God of the Bible is that He’s cruel, angry and sadistic. Are they right?

Image result for darth maul

Perhaps the most important answer to this question is that the universe is not a democracy. The God of the Bible created it and sustains it. He has no equal, and He therefore has every right to do with it what he wants to do. God is God, and we are not. Not only that, be we can’t stop him doing what he wants to do. So perhaps the question should be worded differently: Can I believe that there is a God such as this, one who appears to be so cruel?

Surely, even if God were terribly cruel and sadistic, the fact would not rule out the reality of his existence, except perhaps from the point of view that no all-powerful being who is also mean and sadistic could or would create and maintain such an amazing and  beautiful cosmos. So then the question must be more correctly worded this way:

Is God so cruel that I don’t want to know him?

Here we’re getting down to the nub of the problem, because such questions are usually-but not always-thrown out as an argument from people who have no desire to know God in the first place. It’s a cop-out; an excuse.

Image result for space

But what about it: is the God of the Bible cruel? He doesn’t claim to be cruel. In fact, scripture says that, “God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16 NIV).

The gospel is all about the love of God for the pinnacle of his creation-mankind. He didn’t send his son to condemn the world, but to save it.

What about suffering? Why, if there is a God of love, do humans suffer so much, and then die? This is a subject for another post, and I’ve answered this question to the best of my ability in several posts. Please see the links below *

The skeptic will raise the subjects of God’s treatment of the Canaanites and the ancient Israelites, and the whole concept of hell.

Image result for canaanites

God told the Israelites to wipe out the Canaanites under the leadership of Joshua, including women and children. This is seen as extreme cruelty. The charge is made by people who are either ignorant of all the facts, or who are determined to deny God the right to decide how mankind will behave on his earth. The Canaanites had descended to the lowest pits of human depravity, so that they were sacrificing their own children to their idols. They had abandoned their creator and were worshiping wood and stone. They were engaging in every depraved activity they could imagine. And God did not suddenly decide to swat the Canaanites without giving them a chance to change. In fact, he gave them more than four hundred years to repent (Genesis chapter 15).

We humans don’t have a “right” to do what we want without consequence, because we are owned by our maker. Our maker has standards. I’m personally very thankful for that. How could The master mathematician, biologist, scientist and philosopher, not have standards? Why should he not want to enforce and maintain those standards? Does he not have a right to run his universe his way?

Image result for hell

And what about hell? Is the concept really so awful? Well, it certainly is awful for anyone who may go there. But suppose for  now, if you don’t believe, that God is indeed our creator and the creator of our universe, as the Bible claims he is. Where then can those people go who do not want to know their creator and refuse to adhere to his standards? Where can they go, if once having failed his standards, they then refuse his mercy also? Can they create their own universe? Can they go and settle another part of his universe? Unfortunately, God cannot, according to his nature, tolerate willing rebellion, anywhere in his creation.

He therefore has a special place reserved which we call “hell”, away from Him and the universe which those who love him will inhabit. Without God Hell can have no light, no love, no comforts, no hope, no fun, no beauty. It can only be a terrible place without God. Choose Him or lose Him and all his benefits.

Image result for heaven

There is, therefore, no part of His universe people can move to to escape his will. And if he sent everyone, against their will, to his heaven, it would be mean to those people who hate him, his ways, and his people, to make them endure all three for all eternity. Not only that, but it would be cruel also to those who do love him and his ways, to then have to endure the godless for all eternity. Heaven would be just like the earth is now, with war, aggression, immorality, hatred, abuse, decadence, and all the evils men and women perpetrate upon each other.

The  Bible says that “God is love”. God created love, and God is love. But that doesn’t preclude the need for right, wrong, and the necessary judgment of wrongdoing. God is as just as he is loving, and the two go hand in hand perfectly. True justice is as beautiful as is true love, for all eternity. Glory to God!

*Below is a link to the first part of my series on the subject of suffering. You can search for subsequent parts in the search box above, using the words “Why do we suffer? Part 2”, Part 3, etc. You can pay a lot for some “expert’s” book on the topic, or you can read these for nothing:

https://nickyfisher.com/2017/05/31/why-do-we-suffer-part-1/

%d bloggers like this: