Debate Topic: Evolution vs Creationism, which theory best explains our existence.
abecrombi will be debating for Creationism as the superior theory while frogfish will be debating for Evolution.
This will be a 1v1 formal debate.
An Introduction, 5 bodily posts and a conclusion from each participant. No Flaming, bad manners or profantities will be tolerated.
There is a point deduction for debaters who fail to make a post within the 7 day time frame. The deductions will be 2 points for every day the participant fails to post after the 7 days.
This is to ensure that debates continue in a timely fashion. If for any reason you cannot post within the 7 days, please ensure that you let myself, Lottie or Tiddlyjen know to avoid having the points taken off your debate.
If, however the participant does not then attempt to make a post for up to 2 weeks after the 7 day rule has started an immediate disqualification will occur.
Good luck!
Full Version: Evolution vs Creationism
Introduction
The age long question has baffled minds since the dawn of time. How did we get here? This question has been the subject of a heated debate for the last 200 years. It was widely thought that the roots of humans came from a higher power. But then a man stepped onto the scene. This man combined years of research and studies into a theory. A theory that shook religion, minds, and the earth itself to its very core. This man's name was Darwin, and he discovered the Theory of Evolution.
Evolution has been the widely accepted theory of how we got here. It is taught in schools and has been backed up by science. Creationism has too many flaws to be accepted by science. Evolution is undoubtedly the most plausible way to explain the question: How did we get here?
My 5 points will be:
1. Darwin and his studies-how evolution came to be
2. The science of evolution
3. Proof of evolution throughout time
4. Genetics and its ties with evolution
5. How evolution is a much better theory than Creationism.
The age long question has baffled minds since the dawn of time. How did we get here? This question has been the subject of a heated debate for the last 200 years. It was widely thought that the roots of humans came from a higher power. But then a man stepped onto the scene. This man combined years of research and studies into a theory. A theory that shook religion, minds, and the earth itself to its very core. This man's name was Darwin, and he discovered the Theory of Evolution.
Evolution has been the widely accepted theory of how we got here. It is taught in schools and has been backed up by science. Creationism has too many flaws to be accepted by science. Evolution is undoubtedly the most plausible way to explain the question: How did we get here?
My 5 points will be:
1. Darwin and his studies-how evolution came to be
2. The science of evolution
3. Proof of evolution throughout time
4. Genetics and its ties with evolution
5. How evolution is a much better theory than Creationism.
Debate
Topic :CREATION vs EVOLUTION
Side : CREATION
Debater: Abecrombie
Date 04/08/2006
_______________________________________________________________________________ C_R_E_A_T_I_O_N__I__S__M vs EVOLUTION__________________________
FROM WHERE DOES LIFE COME ?
:
Throughout history, man has looked up at the sky , stared at the stars and was mystified in its wonder.
Like those such as Galileio, Albert Einstein, Newtan , to name a few . We as well might do the same and ask ourselves this question.
“ where does life come from? “ and why do we have such the desire for the answer ?
Life as we know it wouldn’t be the experience of what we know is human . It wouldn’t be a journey
And if we wernt able to walk we wouldn’t have to choose a path. Inasmuch , if we didn’t have a bridge to cross in our experience we would not be on a path.
Just like the scientists ,mathmaticians , chemists etc above mentioned, the desire to understand ourselves and our orgin is a step in the pursuit of knowlgedge.
In my argument of this debate topic I will attempt to approach it with a variety of angles . Biblilcal refferences will be made of course but I m going to go back to the planet lifecycle . The three world ages. Scientifical , chemicaly,and biologicly.
Evelution has missing links in fact three quarters of it.
What makes us the individuals we are from one another as well as to eachother unique and with a face. A voice and a mind to do what our heart feels. Human beings have a creator, and some call him by name . were as I will try to
To breakdown and define why my thoughts are on creation not evelution in my following bodily posts..
So the intro duction as asks is this…….from where does life come from?
International bible students and tract society
Watch tower publishers. New york
“did man get here by evolution or by creation?”
Topic :CREATION vs EVOLUTION
Side : CREATION
Debater: Abecrombie
Date 04/08/2006
_______________________________________________________________________________ C_R_E_A_T_I_O_N__I__S__M vs EVOLUTION__________________________
FROM WHERE DOES LIFE COME ?
:
Throughout history, man has looked up at the sky , stared at the stars and was mystified in its wonder.
Like those such as Galileio, Albert Einstein, Newtan , to name a few . We as well might do the same and ask ourselves this question.
“ where does life come from? “ and why do we have such the desire for the answer ?
Life as we know it wouldn’t be the experience of what we know is human . It wouldn’t be a journey
And if we wernt able to walk we wouldn’t have to choose a path. Inasmuch , if we didn’t have a bridge to cross in our experience we would not be on a path.
Just like the scientists ,mathmaticians , chemists etc above mentioned, the desire to understand ourselves and our orgin is a step in the pursuit of knowlgedge.
In my argument of this debate topic I will attempt to approach it with a variety of angles . Biblilcal refferences will be made of course but I m going to go back to the planet lifecycle . The three world ages. Scientifical , chemicaly,and biologicly.
Evelution has missing links in fact three quarters of it.
What makes us the individuals we are from one another as well as to eachother unique and with a face. A voice and a mind to do what our heart feels. Human beings have a creator, and some call him by name . were as I will try to
To breakdown and define why my thoughts are on creation not evelution in my following bodily posts..
So the intro duction as asks is this…….from where does life come from?
International bible students and tract society
Watch tower publishers. New york
“did man get here by evolution or by creation?”
Post 1
Charles Darwin was a British naturalist who founded the theory of evolution. He made a voyage on the Beagle to the Galapagos, Peru, Argentina, and Chile to conduct studies. One of his most famous is his notation of the different variety of finches on each Galapagos Island, specialized for different kinds of food.
Out of this study grew several related theories: one, evolution did occur; two, evolutionary change was gradual, requiring thousands to millions of years; three, the primary mechanism for evolution was a process called natural selection; and four, the millions of species alive today arose from a single original life form through a branching process called "specialization." Darwin's theory of evolutionary selection holds that variation within species occurs randomly and that the survival or extinction of each organism is determined by that organism's ability to adapt to its environment. He set these theories forth in his book called, "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life" (1859) or "The Origin of Species" for short.
His findings shook his faith and compelled his to write "The Orgin of Species", one of the most influencential books ever.
This prelude will lead into the theory of evolution itself in my next post.
Charles Darwin was a British naturalist who founded the theory of evolution. He made a voyage on the Beagle to the Galapagos, Peru, Argentina, and Chile to conduct studies. One of his most famous is his notation of the different variety of finches on each Galapagos Island, specialized for different kinds of food.
QUOTE
Darwin collected and described thousands of animals and plants. In South America he observed the adaptations of organisms to a variety of habitat from jungle to grassland to mountain habitats. In the temperate regions the species resembled more closely the species of the tropical regions of South America rather than the corresponding species of the temperate regions of Europe. For example, in the grasslands of Argentina there are no rabbits, however, there are rodents that resemble rabbits; these rodents are unrelated to European rabbits but are similar to other rodents in South America. Moreover, the fossils in South America are dissimilar to European fossils but have similarities with extant (i.e. currently living) plants and animals in South America
QUOTE
As well as drawing on his own observations, Darwin drew from the work of Linnaeus, Cuvier, Hutton, Lyell, Malthus and Lamarck. In the hierarchial classificatory system of Linnaeus there is a tacit acknowledgement of relatedness, for example, species belonging to one genus have more in common with each other than they do with species belonging to another genus. Linnaeus was a creationist -- as evidenced by his egotistical proclamation "God creates, Linnaeus arranges". Cuvier, also a creationist, was a comparative morphologist (he described the similarity/dissimilarity in anatomy of diverse animals). Cuvier founded the science of paleontology and described the differences between the fossil flora and fauna in different strata of rock: he observed that the more recent strata had fossils that more closely resembled extant organisms. Cuvier believed that the discontinuities between fossils in different strata were brought about by catastrophes such as floods which caused the extinction of many species living at a particular time. This interpretation of earth's history is termed catastrophism and was also held by many contemporary geologists. By contrast, Hutton and subsequently Lyell held that geological processes are slow and subtle but that over prolonged periods of time (millions of years) these can lead to major changes; implicit in this viewpoint is an age for the earth radically different from the 6,000 years of the biblical creationists.
Link 1Out of this study grew several related theories: one, evolution did occur; two, evolutionary change was gradual, requiring thousands to millions of years; three, the primary mechanism for evolution was a process called natural selection; and four, the millions of species alive today arose from a single original life form through a branching process called "specialization." Darwin's theory of evolutionary selection holds that variation within species occurs randomly and that the survival or extinction of each organism is determined by that organism's ability to adapt to its environment. He set these theories forth in his book called, "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life" (1859) or "The Origin of Species" for short.
His findings shook his faith and compelled his to write "The Orgin of Species", one of the most influencential books ever.
This prelude will lead into the theory of evolution itself in my next post.
3 Veiws +1st Point = 4 Creation
POST #1
_________________________________________________________________
Sir Iissac Newton once said,”
To explain all nature is too difficult a task for any one man or even for any one age. `Tis much better to do a little with certainty, and leave the rest for others that come after you, than to explain all things.”http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Quotations/Newton.htmlQuoted in G Simmons Calculus Gems (New York 1992).
Boy he couldn’t say it better, neither could I . Being that this is one of the most commonly old debates .Means to me that is his a heated one and expecialy whaen due to laws placed in U.S.A. schools , this is the exceptable form taught in science classrooms. I call it pure torture ,….mindboggling and for a reason. As I go throught my research here and do my homework . Im finding evidence that supports my side of debate CREATION overwhelming Where do I start ….{picture the tasmania devil whirling around in a tornado spinacross the page }?
I’ll begin with the three approaches that support creation against frogfish one .
1st big bag theory
2nd 1st earth age {world age}
3rd a scientists –biologist,molecular,mathmathical etc.
and what proves them to be accreddionaly correct in through-out the world and acheiviments made . therefore with each bodily post I will revenue another source of multiple refferences of material with a different topic to support that creation is the alpha as to evolution theory as so far supported by one man.
And of course an * or underlined word or source will direct reader to refference material . Addition refference I find in books as well as online classroom to articles in magazines ,so keep that in mind Any additional notes or scientists in the common subject or simularities will be added as well ….
BUT !! FIRST,….--------THIS JUST IN--------______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[/
frogfish stated……
abecrombies counter: Melvin calvin
The oldest known rocks on Earth occur in northwestern Canada (3.96 billion years), but well-studied rocks nearly as old are also found in other parts of the world. In Western Australia, zircon crystals encased within younger rocks have ages as old as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials so far found on Earth.
Using the carbon-14 isotope as a tracer, Calvin and his team mapped the complete route that carbon travels through a plant during photosynthesis, starting from its absorption as atmospheric carbon dioxide to its conversion into carbohydrates and other organic compounds. In doing so, the Calvin group showed that sunlight acts on the chlorophyll in a plant to fuel the manufacturing of organic compounds, rather than on carbon dioxide as was previously believed. In his final years of active research, he studied the use of oil-producing plants as renewable sources of energy. He also spent many years testing the chemical evolution of life and wrote a book on the subject that was published in 1969. Calvin also researched organic geochemistry, chemical carcinogenesis and analysis of moon rocks.
DNA and Cells
Big bang theory-Edmund Hubble prooved that to be older when thought of previously and the calculation of our galaxay betwween 9-16 billion. Hubbled studided radioactive elements in our solor system and thus the universe ,mars being the first in frozen water as to microbes here on earth comets and meteors as well. All these determined are consistant with the independently dereived estimate for the age of the univierse.
BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS
Three world ages: Eph.1:1-18 the foundation of the world what caused it and the overthrow of fallen angles
pslms 104:1-18,.
.2peter3-18- the three world ages
and acts chapter 2
genesis 6
*kabohe- hebrew meaning overthrowEph 4: and Matt 13- concerning mysteries
viod – hebrew tu’tu’ pronounciation=def. Utterly destroyed.
scientists and nobel peace prize winner “THE CHEMICAL THEORY “as above counter ….
Melvin calvin – nobel peace prize winner1965 discovered chorrophil as life on the planet earth in a chemical evolution
1962 the history of animal life was pushed back an additional 1,500,000,000 years by discovering tiny fossils in ancient sedimentray rock on the north shore of lake superior.
Dinosours ages and time periods exhisted at around the same time period as well as the earths cycles approx until the ice age and mammoths exhisted for a time after ,….then man fossils started to come up after the ice age. Approx. 6000 years scientists have known mankind has been around and took over the central theme of life. In biblical accounts in JOB 38- BOHEMETH – resembling the chief ways of god giant bronosauras type described as dinosaur
BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS
Three world ages
2ND WORLD AGE AFTER DINOSOUR PERIOD
2 PETER Chapter three explains the three world ages according to creation
3RD WORLD AGE- 2 PETER 3:13,14,15,16,17
______________CLASSIFIED ADDITION_____F.Y.I_________________________
Disproving evolution =Evolution has missing links in fact three quarters of it. "The creation account in Genesis and the theory of evolution could not be reconciled. One must be right and the other wrong. The story of the fossils agrees with the account of Genesis. In the oldest rocks we did not find a series of fossils covering the gradual changes from the most primitive creatures to developed forms but rather, in the oldest rocks, developed species suddenly appeared. Between every species there was a complete absence of intermediate fossils."—*D.B. Gower [biochemist], "Scientist Rejects Evolution," Kentish Times, England, December 11, 1975, p. 4.
POST #1
_________________________________________________________________
Sir Iissac Newton once said,”
To explain all nature is too difficult a task for any one man or even for any one age. `Tis much better to do a little with certainty, and leave the rest for others that come after you, than to explain all things.”http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Quotations/Newton.htmlQuoted in G Simmons Calculus Gems (New York 1992).
Boy he couldn’t say it better, neither could I . Being that this is one of the most commonly old debates .Means to me that is his a heated one and expecialy whaen due to laws placed in U.S.A. schools , this is the exceptable form taught in science classrooms. I call it pure torture ,….mindboggling and for a reason. As I go throught my research here and do my homework . Im finding evidence that supports my side of debate CREATION overwhelming Where do I start ….{picture the tasmania devil whirling around in a tornado spinacross the page }?
I’ll begin with the three approaches that support creation against frogfish one .
1st big bag theory
2nd 1st earth age {world age}
3rd a scientists –biologist,molecular,mathmathical etc.
and what proves them to be accreddionaly correct in through-out the world and acheiviments made . therefore with each bodily post I will revenue another source of multiple refferences of material with a different topic to support that creation is the alpha as to evolution theory as so far supported by one man.
And of course an * or underlined word or source will direct reader to refference material . Addition refference I find in books as well as online classroom to articles in magazines ,so keep that in mind Any additional notes or scientists in the common subject or simularities will be added as well ….
BUT !! FIRST,….--------THIS JUST IN--------______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[/
frogfish stated……
QUOTE
“Creationism has too many flaws to be accepted by science”
abecrombies counter: Melvin calvin
The oldest known rocks on Earth occur in northwestern Canada (3.96 billion years), but well-studied rocks nearly as old are also found in other parts of the world. In Western Australia, zircon crystals encased within younger rocks have ages as old as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials so far found on Earth.
Using the carbon-14 isotope as a tracer, Calvin and his team mapped the complete route that carbon travels through a plant during photosynthesis, starting from its absorption as atmospheric carbon dioxide to its conversion into carbohydrates and other organic compounds. In doing so, the Calvin group showed that sunlight acts on the chlorophyll in a plant to fuel the manufacturing of organic compounds, rather than on carbon dioxide as was previously believed. In his final years of active research, he studied the use of oil-producing plants as renewable sources of energy. He also spent many years testing the chemical evolution of life and wrote a book on the subject that was published in 1969. Calvin also researched organic geochemistry, chemical carcinogenesis and analysis of moon rocks.
DNA and Cells
Big bang theory-Edmund Hubble prooved that to be older when thought of previously and the calculation of our galaxay betwween 9-16 billion. Hubbled studided radioactive elements in our solor system and thus the universe ,mars being the first in frozen water as to microbes here on earth comets and meteors as well. All these determined are consistant with the independently dereived estimate for the age of the univierse.
BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS
Three world ages: Eph.1:1-18 the foundation of the world what caused it and the overthrow of fallen angles
pslms 104:1-18,.
.2peter3-18- the three world ages
and acts chapter 2
genesis 6
*kabohe- hebrew meaning overthrowEph 4: and Matt 13- concerning mysteries
viod – hebrew tu’tu’ pronounciation=def. Utterly destroyed.
scientists and nobel peace prize winner “THE CHEMICAL THEORY “as above counter ….
Melvin calvin – nobel peace prize winner1965 discovered chorrophil as life on the planet earth in a chemical evolution
1962 the history of animal life was pushed back an additional 1,500,000,000 years by discovering tiny fossils in ancient sedimentray rock on the north shore of lake superior.
Dinosours ages and time periods exhisted at around the same time period as well as the earths cycles approx until the ice age and mammoths exhisted for a time after ,….then man fossils started to come up after the ice age. Approx. 6000 years scientists have known mankind has been around and took over the central theme of life. In biblical accounts in JOB 38- BOHEMETH – resembling the chief ways of god giant bronosauras type described as dinosaur
BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS
Three world ages
2ND WORLD AGE AFTER DINOSOUR PERIOD
2 PETER Chapter three explains the three world ages according to creation
3RD WORLD AGE- 2 PETER 3:13,14,15,16,17
______________CLASSIFIED ADDITION_____F.Y.I_________________________
Disproving evolution =Evolution has missing links in fact three quarters of it. "The creation account in Genesis and the theory of evolution could not be reconciled. One must be right and the other wrong. The story of the fossils agrees with the account of Genesis. In the oldest rocks we did not find a series of fossils covering the gradual changes from the most primitive creatures to developed forms but rather, in the oldest rocks, developed species suddenly appeared. Between every species there was a complete absence of intermediate fossils."—*D.B. Gower [biochemist], "Scientist Rejects Evolution," Kentish Times, England, December 11, 1975, p. 4.
Post 2
What is your point...Calvin just studied chemicals!
Again, what is your point...How does this prove creation? The Big Bang Theory actually is a scientific theory...it does not support creationism.
Do you have a link? Because Chlorophyll is a PIGMENT.
Source please?
Job 38 does not mention dinosaurs at all:
Link 1
ambercrombie said:
Well, the oldest life on earth appeared around 3.5 billion years ago according to science, almost 1.1 billion years AFTER the formation of the earth.
Link 2
I can give more links if you please.
Now on with my second point, The Science of Evolution
Evolution is a complex theory that describes where animals came from. There are many parts to the theory of evolution, but five main theories are described by Darwin:
Link 3
or
Link 4
Basically, Evolution works by 3 principles...Natural Selection, Sexual Selection, and Genetic Drift.
NATURAL SELECTION
-One of the prime motives for all species is to reproduce and survive, passing on the genetic information of the species from generation to generation. When species do this they tend to produce more offspring than the environment can support.
-The lack of resources to nourish these individuals places pressure on the size of the species population, and the lack of resources means increased competition and as a consequence, some organisms will not survive.
-The organisms who die as a consequence of this competition were not totally random, Darwin found that those organisms more suited to their environment were more likely to survive.
-This resulted in the well known phrase survival of the fittest, where the organisms most suited to their environment had more chance of survival if the species falls upon hard times.
-Those organisms who are better suited to their environment exhibit desirable characteristics, which is a consequence of their genome being more suitable to begin with.
Natural Selection is a process in which on the fittest survive, thus passing on the "best" (most adapted) genes/traits to their offspring. It only selects among the existing variation already in a population. It does not create new genetic varieties or new combinations of varieties. One of the sources of those new combinations of genes is recombination. It is responsible for producing genetic combinations not found in earlier generations.
[see Link 4]
The genetics will be described in more detail in Post 4.
Here's a Diagram from Link 4 to help demonstrate Natural Selection.
There are different types of natural selection. In stabilizing selection, the extremities of a frequency distribution of the trait are eliminates, making it look like the generation before it. In directional selection, induvidulas at one end of the frequency distribution do well, so the F1 progency (next generation) will be closeer towards that direction. In diversifying (disruptive) selection, both extremes are favored at the expense of intermediate varieties. This can happen when a speicies is geographically divided.
To sum it up, Natural Selection is the process in which favorable traits are passed on so that the offspring will be better adapted.
SEXUAL SELECTION
Natural Selection is when animals out-reproduce each other. Sexual Selection can fall under natural selection and is when animals produce the best offspring by mating with the best partner. Secondary sex features on animals, like the mane of a lion, the plumage of birds etc. help find the best partners. Bouts of strength also shows who's best and the better partner.
There are two types of Sexual Selection:
Link
Link 5
So Sexual Selection is when the best traits are passed on by choosing the best mate.
GENETIC DRIFT
Genetic drift is an evolutionary force that can alter populations through time, and shows that the Hardy-Weinberg "equilibrium" does not hold exactly for any finite population. The amount of evolutionary change associated with random sampling error is inversely related to population size; the larger the population, the less the allele frequency will change. Hence, genetic drift is most effective as an evolutionary force when a population is small.
I will explain more in Post 4 (genetics)
QUOTE
BUT !! FIRST,….--------THIS JUST IN-------- ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________[/
frogfish stated……
abecrombies counter: Melvin calvin
The oldest known rocks on Earth occur in northwestern Canada (3.96 billion years), but well-studied rocks nearly as old are also found in other parts of the world. In Western Australia, zircon crystals encased within younger rocks have ages as old as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials so far found on Earth.
Using the carbon-14 isotope as a tracer, Calvin and his team mapped the complete route that carbon travels through a plant during photosynthesis, starting from its absorption as atmospheric carbon dioxide to its conversion into carbohydrates and other organic compounds. In doing so, the Calvin group showed that sunlight acts on the chlorophyll in a plant to fuel the manufacturing of organic compounds, rather than on carbon dioxide as was previously believed. In his final years of active research, he studied the use of oil-producing plants as renewable sources of energy. He also spent many years testing the chemical evolution of life and wrote a book on the subject that was published in 1969. Calvin also researched organic geochemistry, chemical carcinogenesis and analysis of moon rocks.
DNA and Cells
______________________________________________________________________[/
frogfish stated……
QUOTE
“Creationism has too many flaws to be accepted by science”
abecrombies counter: Melvin calvin
The oldest known rocks on Earth occur in northwestern Canada (3.96 billion years), but well-studied rocks nearly as old are also found in other parts of the world. In Western Australia, zircon crystals encased within younger rocks have ages as old as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials so far found on Earth.
Using the carbon-14 isotope as a tracer, Calvin and his team mapped the complete route that carbon travels through a plant during photosynthesis, starting from its absorption as atmospheric carbon dioxide to its conversion into carbohydrates and other organic compounds. In doing so, the Calvin group showed that sunlight acts on the chlorophyll in a plant to fuel the manufacturing of organic compounds, rather than on carbon dioxide as was previously believed. In his final years of active research, he studied the use of oil-producing plants as renewable sources of energy. He also spent many years testing the chemical evolution of life and wrote a book on the subject that was published in 1969. Calvin also researched organic geochemistry, chemical carcinogenesis and analysis of moon rocks.
DNA and Cells
What is your point...Calvin just studied chemicals!
QUOTE
Big bang theory-Edmund Hubble prooved that to be older when thought of previously and the calculation of our galaxay betwween 9-16 billion. Hubbled studided radioactive elements in our solor system and thus the universe ,mars being the first in frozen water as to microbes here on earth comets and meteors as well. All these determined are consistant with the independently dereived estimate for the age of the univierse.
BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS
Three world ages: Eph.1:1-18 the foundation of the world what caused it and the overthrow of fallen angles
pslms 104:1-18,.
.2peter3-18- the three world ages
and acts chapter 2
genesis 6
*kabohe- hebrew meaning overthrowEph 4: and Matt 13- concerning mysteries
viod – hebrew tu’tu’ pronounciation=def. Utterly destroyed.
BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS
Three world ages: Eph.1:1-18 the foundation of the world what caused it and the overthrow of fallen angles
pslms 104:1-18,.
.2peter3-18- the three world ages
and acts chapter 2
genesis 6
*kabohe- hebrew meaning overthrowEph 4: and Matt 13- concerning mysteries
viod – hebrew tu’tu’ pronounciation=def. Utterly destroyed.
Again, what is your point...How does this prove creation? The Big Bang Theory actually is a scientific theory...it does not support creationism.
QUOTE
scientists and nobel peace prize winner “THE CHEMICAL THEORY “as above counter ….
Melvin calvin – nobel peace prize winner1965 discovered chorrophil as life on the planet earth in a chemical evolution
Melvin calvin – nobel peace prize winner1965 discovered chorrophil as life on the planet earth in a chemical evolution
Do you have a link? Because Chlorophyll is a PIGMENT.
QUOTE
1962 the history of animal life was pushed back an additional 1,500,000,000 years by discovering tiny fossils in ancient sedimentray rock on the north shore of lake superior.
Source please?
QUOTE
Dinosours ages and time periods exhisted at around the same time period as well as the earths cycles approx until the ice age and mammoths exhisted for a time after ,….then man fossils started to come up after the ice age. Approx. 6000 years scientists have known mankind has been around and took over the central theme of life. In biblical accounts in JOB 38- BOHEMETH – resembling the chief ways of god giant bronosauras type described as dinosaur
Job 38 does not mention dinosaurs at all:
CODE
Job 38
The LORD Speaks
1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:
2 "Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge?
3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.
4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone-
7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels [a] shouted for joy?
8 "Who shut up the sea behind doors
when it burst forth from the womb,
9 when I made the clouds its garment
and wrapped it in thick darkness,
10 when I fixed limits for it
and set its doors and bars in place,
11 when I said, 'This far you may come and no farther;
here is where your proud waves halt'?
12 "Have you ever given orders to the morning,
or shown the dawn its place,
13 that it might take the earth by the edges
and shake the wicked out of it?
14 The earth takes shape like clay under a seal;
its features stand out like those of a garment.
15 The wicked are denied their light,
and their upraised arm is broken.
16 "Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea
or walked in the recesses of the deep?
17 Have the gates of death been shown to you?
Have you seen the gates of the shadow of death [b] ?
18 Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth?
Tell me, if you know all this.
19 "What is the way to the abode of light?
And where does darkness reside?
20 Can you take them to their places?
Do you know the paths to their dwellings?
21 Surely you know, for you were already born!
You have lived so many years!
22 "Have you entered the storehouses of the snow
or seen the storehouses of the hail,
23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?
24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?
25 Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain,
and a path for the thunderstorm,
26 to water a land where no man lives,
a desert with no one in it,
27 to satisfy a desolate wasteland
and make it sprout with grass?
28 Does the rain have a father?
Who fathers the drops of dew?
29 From whose womb comes the ice?
Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens
30 when the waters become hard as stone,
when the surface of the deep is frozen?
31 "Can you bind the beautiful [c] Pleiades?
Can you loose the cords of Orion?
32 Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons [d]
or lead out the Bear [e] with its cubs?
33 Do you know the laws of the heavens?
Can you set up God's [f] dominion over the earth?
34 "Can you raise your voice to the clouds
and cover yourself with a flood of water?
35 Do you send the lightning bolts on their way?
Do they report to you, 'Here we are'?
36 Who endowed the heart [g] with wisdom
or gave understanding to the mind [h] ?
37 Who has the wisdom to count the clouds?
Who can tip over the water jars of the heavens
38 when the dust becomes hard
and the clods of earth stick together?
39 "Do you hunt the prey for the lioness
and satisfy the hunger of the lions
40 when they crouch in their dens
or lie in wait in a thicket?
41 Who provides food for the raven
when its young cry out to God
and wander about for lack of food?
The LORD Speaks
1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:
2 "Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge?
3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.
4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone-
7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels [a] shouted for joy?
8 "Who shut up the sea behind doors
when it burst forth from the womb,
9 when I made the clouds its garment
and wrapped it in thick darkness,
10 when I fixed limits for it
and set its doors and bars in place,
11 when I said, 'This far you may come and no farther;
here is where your proud waves halt'?
12 "Have you ever given orders to the morning,
or shown the dawn its place,
13 that it might take the earth by the edges
and shake the wicked out of it?
14 The earth takes shape like clay under a seal;
its features stand out like those of a garment.
15 The wicked are denied their light,
and their upraised arm is broken.
16 "Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea
or walked in the recesses of the deep?
17 Have the gates of death been shown to you?
Have you seen the gates of the shadow of death [b] ?
18 Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth?
Tell me, if you know all this.
19 "What is the way to the abode of light?
And where does darkness reside?
20 Can you take them to their places?
Do you know the paths to their dwellings?
21 Surely you know, for you were already born!
You have lived so many years!
22 "Have you entered the storehouses of the snow
or seen the storehouses of the hail,
23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?
24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?
25 Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain,
and a path for the thunderstorm,
26 to water a land where no man lives,
a desert with no one in it,
27 to satisfy a desolate wasteland
and make it sprout with grass?
28 Does the rain have a father?
Who fathers the drops of dew?
29 From whose womb comes the ice?
Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens
30 when the waters become hard as stone,
when the surface of the deep is frozen?
31 "Can you bind the beautiful [c] Pleiades?
Can you loose the cords of Orion?
32 Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons [d]
or lead out the Bear [e] with its cubs?
33 Do you know the laws of the heavens?
Can you set up God's [f] dominion over the earth?
34 "Can you raise your voice to the clouds
and cover yourself with a flood of water?
35 Do you send the lightning bolts on their way?
Do they report to you, 'Here we are'?
36 Who endowed the heart [g] with wisdom
or gave understanding to the mind [h] ?
37 Who has the wisdom to count the clouds?
Who can tip over the water jars of the heavens
38 when the dust becomes hard
and the clods of earth stick together?
39 "Do you hunt the prey for the lioness
and satisfy the hunger of the lions
40 when they crouch in their dens
or lie in wait in a thicket?
41 Who provides food for the raven
when its young cry out to God
and wander about for lack of food?
Link 1
ambercrombie said:
QUOTE
Disproving evolution =Evolution has missing links in fact three quarters of it. "The creation account in Genesis and the theory of evolution could not be reconciled. One must be right and the other wrong. The story of the fossils agrees with the account of Genesis. In the oldest rocks we did not find a series of fossils covering the gradual changes from the most primitive creatures to developed forms but rather, in the oldest rocks, developed species suddenly appeared. Between every species there was a complete absence of intermediate fossils."—*D.B. Gower [biochemist], "Scientist Rejects Evolution," Kentish Times, England, December 11, 1975, p. 4.
Well, the oldest life on earth appeared around 3.5 billion years ago according to science, almost 1.1 billion years AFTER the formation of the earth.
CODE
Using a method never applied to rock from ancient Earth, researchers have found possible signs of biological activity dating back nearly 3.5 billion years, earlier than any other agreed-upon discovery of life on this planet.
Link 2
I can give more links if you please.
Now on with my second point, The Science of Evolution
Evolution is a complex theory that describes where animals came from. There are many parts to the theory of evolution, but five main theories are described by Darwin:
CODE
Darwin's Basic Premise
Darwin's On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, made several points that had major impact on nineteenth-century thought:
1.That biological types or species do not have a fixed, static existence but exist in permanent states of change and flux;
2.that all life, biologically considered, takes the form of a struggle to exist -- more exactly, to exist and produce the greatest number of offspring;
3.that this struggle for existence culls out those organisms less well adapted to any particular ecology and allows those better adapted to flourish -- a process called Natural Selection;
4.that natural selection, development, and evolution requires enormously long periods of time, so long, in fact, that the everyday experience of human beings provides them with no ability to interpret such histories;
5.that the genetic variations ultimately producing increased survivability are random and not caused (as religious thinkers would have it) by God or (as Lammarck would have it) by the organism's own striving for perfection.
Darwin's On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, made several points that had major impact on nineteenth-century thought:
1.That biological types or species do not have a fixed, static existence but exist in permanent states of change and flux;
2.that all life, biologically considered, takes the form of a struggle to exist -- more exactly, to exist and produce the greatest number of offspring;
3.that this struggle for existence culls out those organisms less well adapted to any particular ecology and allows those better adapted to flourish -- a process called Natural Selection;
4.that natural selection, development, and evolution requires enormously long periods of time, so long, in fact, that the everyday experience of human beings provides them with no ability to interpret such histories;
5.that the genetic variations ultimately producing increased survivability are random and not caused (as religious thinkers would have it) by God or (as Lammarck would have it) by the organism's own striving for perfection.
Link 3
or
CODE
Darwin's theory of evolution has four main parts:
1. Organisms have changed over time, and the ones living today are different from those that lived in the past. Furthermore, many organisms that once lived are now extinct. The world is not constant, but changing. The fossil record provided ample evidence for this view.
2. All organisms are derived from common ancestors by a process of branching. Over time, populations split into different species, which are related because they are descended from a common ancestor. Thus, if one goes far enough back in time, any pair of organisms has a common ancestor. This explained the similarities of organisms that were classified together -- they were similar because of shared traits inherited from their common ancestor. It also explained why similar species tended to occur in the same geographic region.
3. Change is gradual and slow, taking place over a long time. This was supported by the fossil record, and was consistent with the fact that no naturalist had observed the sudden appearance of a new species. [This is now contested by a view of episodes of rapid change and long periods of stasis, known as punctuated equilibrium].
4. The mechanism of evolutionary change was natural selection. This was the most important and revolutionary part of Darwin's theory, and it deserves to be considered in greater detail.
1. Organisms have changed over time, and the ones living today are different from those that lived in the past. Furthermore, many organisms that once lived are now extinct. The world is not constant, but changing. The fossil record provided ample evidence for this view.
2. All organisms are derived from common ancestors by a process of branching. Over time, populations split into different species, which are related because they are descended from a common ancestor. Thus, if one goes far enough back in time, any pair of organisms has a common ancestor. This explained the similarities of organisms that were classified together -- they were similar because of shared traits inherited from their common ancestor. It also explained why similar species tended to occur in the same geographic region.
3. Change is gradual and slow, taking place over a long time. This was supported by the fossil record, and was consistent with the fact that no naturalist had observed the sudden appearance of a new species. [This is now contested by a view of episodes of rapid change and long periods of stasis, known as punctuated equilibrium].
4. The mechanism of evolutionary change was natural selection. This was the most important and revolutionary part of Darwin's theory, and it deserves to be considered in greater detail.
Link 4
Basically, Evolution works by 3 principles...Natural Selection, Sexual Selection, and Genetic Drift.
NATURAL SELECTION
-One of the prime motives for all species is to reproduce and survive, passing on the genetic information of the species from generation to generation. When species do this they tend to produce more offspring than the environment can support.
-The lack of resources to nourish these individuals places pressure on the size of the species population, and the lack of resources means increased competition and as a consequence, some organisms will not survive.
-The organisms who die as a consequence of this competition were not totally random, Darwin found that those organisms more suited to their environment were more likely to survive.
-This resulted in the well known phrase survival of the fittest, where the organisms most suited to their environment had more chance of survival if the species falls upon hard times.
-Those organisms who are better suited to their environment exhibit desirable characteristics, which is a consequence of their genome being more suitable to begin with.
Natural Selection is a process in which on the fittest survive, thus passing on the "best" (most adapted) genes/traits to their offspring. It only selects among the existing variation already in a population. It does not create new genetic varieties or new combinations of varieties. One of the sources of those new combinations of genes is recombination. It is responsible for producing genetic combinations not found in earlier generations.
QUOTE
The Process of Natural Selection
Natural selection is a process that occurs over successive generations. The following is a summary of Darwin's line of reasoning for how it works (see Figure 2).
If all the offspring that organisms can produce were to survive and reproduce, they would soon overrun the earth. Darwin illustrated this point by a calculation using elephants. He wrote:
"The elephant is reckoned the slowest breeder of all known animals, and I have taken some pains to estimate its probable minimum rate of natural increase; it will be safest to assume that it begins breeding when 30 years old and goes on breeding until 90 years old; if this be so, after a period from 740 to 750 years there would be nearly 19 million elephants descended from this first pair."
Figure 2: The Process of Natural Selection
This unbounded population growth resembles a simple geometric series (2-4-8-16-32-64..) and quickly reaches infinity.
As a consequence, there is a "struggle" (metaphorically) to survive and reproduce, in which only a few individuals succeed in leaving progeny.
Organisms show variation in characters that influence their success in this struggle for existence. Individuals within a population vary from one another in many traits. (Animal behavioralists making long-term studies of chimps or elephants soon recognize every individual by its size, coloration, and distinctive markings.)
Offspring tend to resemble parents, including in characters that influence success in the struggle to survive and reproduce.
Parents possessing certain traits that enable them to survive and reproduce will contribute disproportionately to the offspring that make up the next generation.
To the extent that offspring resemble their parents, the population in the next generation will consist of a higher proportion of individuals that possess whatever adaptation enabled their parents to survive and reproduce.
The well-known example of camouflage coloration in an insect makes for a very powerful, logical argument for adaptation by natural selection. Development of such coloration, which differs according to the insect's environment, requires variation. The variation must influence survival and reproduction (fitness), and it must be inherited.
During the early and middle 20th Century, genetics became incorporated into evolution, allowing us to define natural selection this way:
Natural Selection is the differential reproduction of genotypes.
Natural Selection Requires...
For natural selection to occur, two requirements are essential:
There must be heritable variation for some trait. Examples: beak size, color pattern, thickness of skin, fleetness.
There must be differential survival and reproduction associated with the possession of that trait.
Unless both these requirements are met, adaptation by natural selection cannot occur.
Some examples:
If some plants grow taller than others and so are better able to avoid shading by others, they will produce more offspring. However, if the reason they grow tall is because of the soil in which their seeds happened to land, and not because they have the genes to grow tall, than no evolution will occur.
If some individuals are fleeter than others because of differences in their genes, but the predator is so much faster that it does not matter, then no evolution will occur (e.g. if cheetahs ate snails).
In addition, natural selection can only choose among existing varieties in a population. It might be very useful for polar bears to have white noses, and then they wouldn't have to cover their noses with their paws when they stalk their prey. The panda could have a much nicer thumb than the clumsy device that it does have.
When we incorporate genetics into our story, it becomes more obvious why the generation of new variations is a chance process. Variants do not arise because they are needed. They arise by random processes governed by the laws of genetics. For today, the central point is the chance occurrence of variation, some of which is adaptive, and the weeding out by natural selection of the best adapted varieties.
Natural selection is a process that occurs over successive generations. The following is a summary of Darwin's line of reasoning for how it works (see Figure 2).
If all the offspring that organisms can produce were to survive and reproduce, they would soon overrun the earth. Darwin illustrated this point by a calculation using elephants. He wrote:
"The elephant is reckoned the slowest breeder of all known animals, and I have taken some pains to estimate its probable minimum rate of natural increase; it will be safest to assume that it begins breeding when 30 years old and goes on breeding until 90 years old; if this be so, after a period from 740 to 750 years there would be nearly 19 million elephants descended from this first pair."
Figure 2: The Process of Natural Selection
This unbounded population growth resembles a simple geometric series (2-4-8-16-32-64..) and quickly reaches infinity.
As a consequence, there is a "struggle" (metaphorically) to survive and reproduce, in which only a few individuals succeed in leaving progeny.
Organisms show variation in characters that influence their success in this struggle for existence. Individuals within a population vary from one another in many traits. (Animal behavioralists making long-term studies of chimps or elephants soon recognize every individual by its size, coloration, and distinctive markings.)
Offspring tend to resemble parents, including in characters that influence success in the struggle to survive and reproduce.
Parents possessing certain traits that enable them to survive and reproduce will contribute disproportionately to the offspring that make up the next generation.
To the extent that offspring resemble their parents, the population in the next generation will consist of a higher proportion of individuals that possess whatever adaptation enabled their parents to survive and reproduce.
The well-known example of camouflage coloration in an insect makes for a very powerful, logical argument for adaptation by natural selection. Development of such coloration, which differs according to the insect's environment, requires variation. The variation must influence survival and reproduction (fitness), and it must be inherited.
During the early and middle 20th Century, genetics became incorporated into evolution, allowing us to define natural selection this way:
Natural Selection is the differential reproduction of genotypes.
Natural Selection Requires...
For natural selection to occur, two requirements are essential:
There must be heritable variation for some trait. Examples: beak size, color pattern, thickness of skin, fleetness.
There must be differential survival and reproduction associated with the possession of that trait.
Unless both these requirements are met, adaptation by natural selection cannot occur.
Some examples:
If some plants grow taller than others and so are better able to avoid shading by others, they will produce more offspring. However, if the reason they grow tall is because of the soil in which their seeds happened to land, and not because they have the genes to grow tall, than no evolution will occur.
If some individuals are fleeter than others because of differences in their genes, but the predator is so much faster that it does not matter, then no evolution will occur (e.g. if cheetahs ate snails).
In addition, natural selection can only choose among existing varieties in a population. It might be very useful for polar bears to have white noses, and then they wouldn't have to cover their noses with their paws when they stalk their prey. The panda could have a much nicer thumb than the clumsy device that it does have.
When we incorporate genetics into our story, it becomes more obvious why the generation of new variations is a chance process. Variants do not arise because they are needed. They arise by random processes governed by the laws of genetics. For today, the central point is the chance occurrence of variation, some of which is adaptive, and the weeding out by natural selection of the best adapted varieties.
[see Link 4]
The genetics will be described in more detail in Post 4.
Here's a Diagram from Link 4 to help demonstrate Natural Selection.
There are different types of natural selection. In stabilizing selection, the extremities of a frequency distribution of the trait are eliminates, making it look like the generation before it. In directional selection, induvidulas at one end of the frequency distribution do well, so the F1 progency (next generation) will be closeer towards that direction. In diversifying (disruptive) selection, both extremes are favored at the expense of intermediate varieties. This can happen when a speicies is geographically divided.
To sum it up, Natural Selection is the process in which favorable traits are passed on so that the offspring will be better adapted.
SEXUAL SELECTION
Natural Selection is when animals out-reproduce each other. Sexual Selection can fall under natural selection and is when animals produce the best offspring by mating with the best partner. Secondary sex features on animals, like the mane of a lion, the plumage of birds etc. help find the best partners. Bouts of strength also shows who's best and the better partner.
There are two types of Sexual Selection:
QUOTE
In one kind of sexual selection, members of one sex create a reproductive differential among themselves by competing for opportunities to mate. The winners out-reproduce the others, and natural selection occurs if the characteristics that determine winning are, at least in part, inherited. In the other kind of sexual selection, members of one sex create a reproductive differential in the other sex by preferring some individuals as mates. If the ones they prefer are genetically different from the ones they shun, then natural selection is occurring.
That second type of sexual selection, in which one sex chooses among potential mates, appears to be the most common type among birds. As evidence that such selection is widespread, consider the reversal of normal sexual differences in the ornamentation of some polyandrous birds. There, the male must choose among females, which, in turn, must be as alluring as possible. Consequently in polyandrous species the female is ordinarily more colorful -- it is her secondary sexual characteristics that are enhanced. This fooled even Audubon, who confused the sexes when labeling his paintings of phalaropes. Female phalaropes compete for the plain-colored males, and the latter incubate the eggs and tend the young.
That second type of sexual selection, in which one sex chooses among potential mates, appears to be the most common type among birds. As evidence that such selection is widespread, consider the reversal of normal sexual differences in the ornamentation of some polyandrous birds. There, the male must choose among females, which, in turn, must be as alluring as possible. Consequently in polyandrous species the female is ordinarily more colorful -- it is her secondary sexual characteristics that are enhanced. This fooled even Audubon, who confused the sexes when labeling his paintings of phalaropes. Female phalaropes compete for the plain-colored males, and the latter incubate the eggs and tend the young.
Link
CODE
A culture of Drosophila set up with equal numbers of red-eyed and white-eyed flies of both sexes will, after 25 generations or so, end up having only red-eyed (the "normal") flies in it. This, despite the fact that white-eyed flies are just as healthy and live just as long as red-eyed flies, i.e., they are equal in terms of survival. But, as it turns out, not only do red-eyed females prefer red-eyed males, but white-eyed females do also.
Link 5
So Sexual Selection is when the best traits are passed on by choosing the best mate.
GENETIC DRIFT
Genetic drift is an evolutionary force that can alter populations through time, and shows that the Hardy-Weinberg "equilibrium" does not hold exactly for any finite population. The amount of evolutionary change associated with random sampling error is inversely related to population size; the larger the population, the less the allele frequency will change. Hence, genetic drift is most effective as an evolutionary force when a population is small.
I will explain more in Post 4 (genetics)
Bodily post 2
_________________AS A MATTER ----------------------- OR FACT ? __________________
Abe’crombie
04/15/06 Consider the following
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Q: can any process be called a fact? “ An actual happening” a “ verified statement”, when the knowledge if how, when, where, what and why is missing?
Example: If someone stated that it was a fact that a skyscraper evolved by itself from a brick on an empty lot, but that how, when, where, and why it did so, and what it looked like in the process, were not known. Would you consider the transformation a fact or just an assertion?
And this isn’t the only case in which evolution contradicts the process they call is fact,
. The encyclopedia Britannica stated
Professor Dobzhansky ‘s book “ the biological basis of human freedom wrote,
On one hand, evolution is declared fact but on the other hand, it is acknowledged that the process is
“ Far from completely known” the causes “ only dimly discerned “ the difficulties “, staggering.
frogfish
QUOTE “Creationism has too many flaws to be accepted by science”
___________________________________________________________________________
abecrombies counter:
Melvin Calvin
… rocks have ages as old as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials so far found on Earth.
Using the carbon-14 isotope as a tracer, Calvin and his team mapped the complete route that carbon travels through a plant during photosynthesis, starting from its absorption as atmospheric carbon dioxide to its conversion into carbohydrates and other organic compounds. In doing so, the Calvin group showed that sunlight acts on the chlorophyll in a plant to fuel the manufacturing of organic compounds, rather than on carbon dioxide as was previously believed. In his final years of active research, he studied the use of oil-producing plants as renewable sources of energy. He also spent many years testing the chemical evolution of life and wrote a book on the subject that was published in 1969. Calvin also researched organic geochemistry, chemical carcinogenesis and analysis of moon rocks.
DNA and Cells
_____________________________________________________________________________________
frogfish=
Abecrombies =QUOTE
Big bang theory-Edmund Hubbell proved that to be older when thought of previously and the calculation of our galaxy between 9-16 billion. Hubbell studied radioactive elements in our solar system and thus the universe, mars being the first in frozen water as to microbes here on earth comets and meteors as well. All these determined are consistent with the independently derived estimate for the age of the universe.
__________________________________________________________________________________--
BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS
Three world ages: Eph.1: 1-18 the foundation of the world what caused it and the overthrow of fallen angles
psalms 104:1-18.
.2peter3-18- the three world ages
and acts chapter 2
genesis 6
*kabohe- Hebrew meaning overthrow Eph 4: and Matt 13- concerning mysteries
void – Hebrew tu’tu’ pronounciation=def. Utterly destroyed.______________________________________________________________________________
Frogfish=
Abecrombie:
One thing is certain: If scientists—and the rest of us—decide not to accept the folly of evolution, the only alternative is creation. If stars, planets, plants, animals, and men did not make themselves, —then the only alternative is that God made them!
QUOTE Scientists and Nobel peace prize winner “THE CHEMICAL THEORY “as above counter….
Melvin Calvin– Nobel peace prize winner1965 discovered chlorophyll as life on the planet earth in a chemical evolution now called the Calvin theory.
frogfish=-
http://www.chemistryexplained.com/forum/
Abecrombie=
QUOTE
1962 the history of animal life was pushed back an additional 1,500,000,000 years by discovering tiny fossils in ancient sedimentary rock on the north shore of Lake Superior.
__________________________________________________________________________
frogfish
________________-------------------------------------
Abecrombie
."—*D.B. Gower [biochemist],"Scientist Rejects Evolution," Kentish Times, England, December 11, 1975, p. 4."According to an article in Newsweek (November 3, 1980), at a conference in mid-October at Chicago's Field Museum of Natural History, the majority of 160 of the world's top paleontologists, anatomists, evolutionary geneticists, and developmental biologists agreed to abandon Darwinian evolution, in favor of punctuated equilibria, otherwise known as the hopeful monster theory.
"Apparently, Darwin's theory had become indefensible to them, citing particularly the absence of intermediate fossils as the conflicting fact. The hopeful monster theory is a retreat to what appears to be reliable geological evidence, namely, the general stringing-out of fossils from `simple' to `complex' in the rock strata."—Randall Hedtke, "Asa Gray Vindicated," in Creation Research Society Quarterly, June 1981, p. 74.
In addition, the Melvin Calvin article will lead you to this source
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THIS JUST IN........
*Newsweek for November 3, 1980 carried an article on the Chicago meeting. You may wish to read it for yourself. The large majority of evolutionists at the conference agreed that professionals could no longer regard the neo-Darwinian mechanism of mutation and natural selection as scientifically valid or tenable. Neither the origin nor the diversity of living creatures could be explained by evolutionary theory.
_______________________________________________________________________
RESULTS ARE , IN A Q: HOW MANY SCIENTISTS DOES IT TAKE TO PROVE WITHOUT CREATION WE WOULDNT HAVE SCIENCE ? ----------------------------Thus, so far we have the late Melvin Calvin,
THE CHEMICAL THEORY = CALVIN THEORY
Proves that chemicals in plant life and every other life form that has chlorophyll inside its structure exhists as life as we know. Sunlight is the cause of the reaction inside the chemicals responsible for their existence. Without out the sunlight this metamorphism could come about
Chemical reaction due to the sun in our universe, simply explains further Einstein’s theory as well
Therefore, Edward Hubbell and Galileo too are the designers after the human eye to construct their telescopes
To venture out into space for more answers of the why what how when and where to find the truth in the purpose of life.
ISSAC NEWTONS LAWS OF GRAVITY
GALILEOS SEARCH FOR THE HEAVENS
And the invention of the telescope
EDWARD HUBBLE – HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE
THE THEORY OF RELATIVITYAlbert Einstein’s “ the theory of relativity goes into this exploration and as we know him to be one of the more accurate scientists to date as well as a humanitarian. I will leave you with some quotes on insight of how perplexed the thoughts of this scientist and his quest for answers.
DARWIN IS JUST ONE – WHICH LEADS ME TO ASK?
WHAT ARE HIS CREDENTIALS?
_________________AS A MATTER ----------------------- OR FACT ? __________________
Abe’crombie
04/15/06 Consider the following
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Q: can any process be called a fact? “ An actual happening” a “ verified statement”, when the knowledge if how, when, where, what and why is missing?
Example: If someone stated that it was a fact that a skyscraper evolved by itself from a brick on an empty lot, but that how, when, where, and why it did so, and what it looked like in the process, were not known. Would you consider the transformation a fact or just an assertion?
And this isn’t the only case in which evolution contradicts the process they call is fact,
. The encyclopedia Britannica stated
QUOTE
“ We are not in the least doubt as to the fact of evolution…. The evolution by now is overwhelming.”. However, few pages later it called that evidence “very imperfect and often interrupted by gaps.” It added: “Of the vital process, which brought about these changes we are yet ignorant.”
Professor Dobzhansky ‘s book “ the biological basis of human freedom wrote,
QUOTE
“Evolution as a historical fact was proved beyond a reasonable doubt not later than in the closing decades of the nineteenth century.”
Two pages later , he states, QUOTE
“There is no doubt of the evolutionary process are far from completely known…. The causes which have brought about the development of the human species can be only dimly discerned”
On one hand, evolution is declared fact but on the other hand, it is acknowledged that the process is
“ Far from completely known” the causes “ only dimly discerned “ the difficulties “, staggering.
frogfish
QUOTE “Creationism has too many flaws to be accepted by science”
___________________________________________________________________________
abecrombies counter:
Melvin Calvin
… rocks have ages as old as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials so far found on Earth.
Using the carbon-14 isotope as a tracer, Calvin and his team mapped the complete route that carbon travels through a plant during photosynthesis, starting from its absorption as atmospheric carbon dioxide to its conversion into carbohydrates and other organic compounds. In doing so, the Calvin group showed that sunlight acts on the chlorophyll in a plant to fuel the manufacturing of organic compounds, rather than on carbon dioxide as was previously believed. In his final years of active research, he studied the use of oil-producing plants as renewable sources of energy. He also spent many years testing the chemical evolution of life and wrote a book on the subject that was published in 1969. Calvin also researched organic geochemistry, chemical carcinogenesis and analysis of moon rocks.
DNA and Cells
_____________________________________________________________________________________
frogfish=
QUOTE
What is your point...Calvin just studied chemicals!
________________--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abecrombies =QUOTE
Big bang theory-Edmund Hubbell proved that to be older when thought of previously and the calculation of our galaxy between 9-16 billion. Hubbell studied radioactive elements in our solar system and thus the universe, mars being the first in frozen water as to microbes here on earth comets and meteors as well. All these determined are consistent with the independently derived estimate for the age of the universe.
__________________________________________________________________________________--
BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS
Three world ages: Eph.1: 1-18 the foundation of the world what caused it and the overthrow of fallen angles
psalms 104:1-18.
.2peter3-18- the three world ages
and acts chapter 2
genesis 6
*kabohe- Hebrew meaning overthrow Eph 4: and Matt 13- concerning mysteries
void – Hebrew tu’tu’ pronounciation=def. Utterly destroyed.______________________________________________________________________________
Frogfish=
QUOTE
Again, what is your point...How does this prove creation? The Big Bang Theory actually is a scientific theory.... It does not support creationism.
______________________________________________________________________________--
______________________________________________________________________________--
Abecrombie:
One thing is certain: If scientists—and the rest of us—decide not to accept the folly of evolution, the only alternative is creation. If stars, planets, plants, animals, and men did not make themselves, —then the only alternative is that God made them!
QUOTE Scientists and Nobel peace prize winner “THE CHEMICAL THEORY “as above counter….
Melvin Calvin– Nobel peace prize winner1965 discovered chlorophyll as life on the planet earth in a chemical evolution now called the Calvin theory.
frogfish=-
QUOTE
Do you have a link? Because Chlorophyll is a PIGMENT.
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
http://www.chemistryexplained.com/forum/
Abecrombie=
QUOTE
1962 the history of animal life was pushed back an additional 1,500,000,000 years by discovering tiny fossils in ancient sedimentary rock on the north shore of Lake Superior.
__________________________________________________________________________
frogfish
QUOTE
Source please?
------------------same as calvin theory " the chemical theory ______________________________________________________________-________________-------------------------------------
Abecrombie
."—*D.B. Gower [biochemist],"Scientist Rejects Evolution," Kentish Times, England, December 11, 1975, p. 4."According to an article in Newsweek (November 3, 1980), at a conference in mid-October at Chicago's Field Museum of Natural History, the majority of 160 of the world's top paleontologists, anatomists, evolutionary geneticists, and developmental biologists agreed to abandon Darwinian evolution, in favor of punctuated equilibria, otherwise known as the hopeful monster theory.
"Apparently, Darwin's theory had become indefensible to them, citing particularly the absence of intermediate fossils as the conflicting fact. The hopeful monster theory is a retreat to what appears to be reliable geological evidence, namely, the general stringing-out of fossils from `simple' to `complex' in the rock strata."—Randall Hedtke, "Asa Gray Vindicated," in Creation Research Society Quarterly, June 1981, p. 74.
In addition, the Melvin Calvin article will lead you to this source
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THIS JUST IN........
*Newsweek for November 3, 1980 carried an article on the Chicago meeting. You may wish to read it for yourself. The large majority of evolutionists at the conference agreed that professionals could no longer regard the neo-Darwinian mechanism of mutation and natural selection as scientifically valid or tenable. Neither the origin nor the diversity of living creatures could be explained by evolutionary theory.
_______________________________________________________________________
RESULTS ARE , IN A Q: HOW MANY SCIENTISTS DOES IT TAKE TO PROVE WITHOUT CREATION WE WOULDNT HAVE SCIENCE ? ----------------------------Thus, so far we have the late Melvin Calvin,
THE CHEMICAL THEORY = CALVIN THEORY
Proves that chemicals in plant life and every other life form that has chlorophyll inside its structure exhists as life as we know. Sunlight is the cause of the reaction inside the chemicals responsible for their existence. Without out the sunlight this metamorphism could come about
Chemical reaction due to the sun in our universe, simply explains further Einstein’s theory as well
Therefore, Edward Hubbell and Galileo too are the designers after the human eye to construct their telescopes
To venture out into space for more answers of the why what how when and where to find the truth in the purpose of life.
ISSAC NEWTONS LAWS OF GRAVITY
GALILEOS SEARCH FOR THE HEAVENS
And the invention of the telescope
EDWARD HUBBLE – HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE
THE THEORY OF RELATIVITYAlbert Einstein’s “ the theory of relativity goes into this exploration and as we know him to be one of the more accurate scientists to date as well as a humanitarian. I will leave you with some quotes on insight of how perplexed the thoughts of this scientist and his quest for answers.
QUOTE
*“ Laws alone cannot secure freedom of expression in order that every man presents himself”
Albert Einstein
*“ Before god we are all equally wise and equally foolish “
KEEP IN MIND, THIS ALL LEADS UP TO THE CREATION THEORY. AND ALL THE SCIENTS ABOVE HAVE HAD NOBLE PEACE PRIZE AWARDS AS WELL AS MANY ACCREDENTIAL TITLES IN SCIENCE MEDICINE EDUATION AND PHYSICS JUST TO NAME A FEW OF THERE VAST GENIUS ALL OF THEM WERE.Albert Einstein
*“ Before god we are all equally wise and equally foolish “
DARWIN IS JUST ONE – WHICH LEADS ME TO ASK?
WHAT ARE HIS CREDENTIALS?
Body Post 3
You have not refuted any of my comments and rebuttals.
That is not a counter...That has nothing to do with evolution and creationism...If anything, it supports evolution to show that is was the "organic soup" that first started life, not a god.
Again, this has no relevance to the topic! All it talks about is the age of the universe. If anything, this proves EVOLUTION as humans have not lived for 9-16 billion years! The topic does not even match my quote!
Again, what does the chemical theory have to do with the Big Band AND evolution? Nothing!
What is this for?
Again, you have not proven my point. Chlorophyll is a PIGMENT and has nothing to do with evolution. Calvin has nothing to do with evolution! His most respected research came in the life processes of plants i.e. the Calvin Cycle.
Calvin had nothing to do with evolution! You have not refuted any of my points!
Link 1
What the site basically says is that only 5% of scientists reject evolution and only .15% of scientists in a field related to evolution and orgins are creationist. It also says that scientists that are creationist are not that because of fact, but because of a religious faith. Also, it states the claims that scientists reject evolution are exagurrated and fraudulent. It also provides this nifty piece of evidence:
[see Link 1]
None of the scientists you have described have said anything against Evolution...What is your point?
Now on to my 3rd point: Evidence of Evolution
Evolution has many pieces of evidence, the most convincing is the fossil record.
The simple animals (unicellular algae, microbes, bacterium, protists) came before the complex animals (fish, tigers, dinosaurs, etc).
Here's a quote the shows that:
Link 2
It also states that animals have living parents, and that some animals are different than others...
Evolution is a process in which a species get more complex and adaptive...So it makes common sense that Simpe animals would come first, then complex animals. The fossil record proves this. Invertebrates came before vertebrates...Unicellular organisms came before multicellular organisms...etc.
More proof lies in the fossil record that no evidence shows the humans existed with prehistoric creatures, like dinosaurs. For creationism to be right, humans would have existed with dinosaurs. There is just no proof to support that claim. One more score for evolution.
My next evidence that supports evolution is that humans (homo) evolved only around 2.2-1.6 MYA, not at the beginning of time. This is proof that humans evolved and descended from apes. Before humans, we were Australopithecus.
Link 3
The fact that human and ape DNA vary by as little as 2% also proves the theory of evolution.
[see Link 3]
Another piece off evidence are vestigial limbs/organs. Vestigial limbs/organs are evolutionary remenants that are of no use to the animals, but vital for its ancestor...Take for example the Rock Python. Close examination reveals that the Python has 2 vestigial hind limbs...This proves that snakes evolved from lizards.
Link 4 - includes top 10 most useless vestigial limbs
This is ample physical proof that evolution is the correct theory...not creationism...But for those skeptics out there, I will delve deeper in my next post into evolution and describe/show proof for evolution's driving force-genetics.
You have not refuted any of my comments and rebuttals.
QUOTE
frogfish
QUOTE “Creationism has too many flaws to be accepted by science”
___________________________________________________________________________
abecrombies counter:
Melvin Calvin
… rocks have ages as old as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials so far found on Earth.
Using the carbon-14 isotope as a tracer, Calvin and his team mapped the complete route that carbon travels through a plant during photosynthesis, starting from its absorption as atmospheric carbon dioxide to its conversion into carbohydrates and other organic compounds. In doing so, the Calvin group showed that sunlight acts on the chlorophyll in a plant to fuel the manufacturing of organic compounds, rather than on carbon dioxide as was previously believed. In his final years of active research, he studied the use of oil-producing plants as renewable sources of energy. He also spent many years testing the chemical evolution of life and wrote a book on the subject that was published in 1969. Calvin also researched organic geochemistry, chemical carcinogenesis and analysis of moon rocks.
DNA and Cells
QUOTE “Creationism has too many flaws to be accepted by science”
___________________________________________________________________________
abecrombies counter:
Melvin Calvin
… rocks have ages as old as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials so far found on Earth.
Using the carbon-14 isotope as a tracer, Calvin and his team mapped the complete route that carbon travels through a plant during photosynthesis, starting from its absorption as atmospheric carbon dioxide to its conversion into carbohydrates and other organic compounds. In doing so, the Calvin group showed that sunlight acts on the chlorophyll in a plant to fuel the manufacturing of organic compounds, rather than on carbon dioxide as was previously believed. In his final years of active research, he studied the use of oil-producing plants as renewable sources of energy. He also spent many years testing the chemical evolution of life and wrote a book on the subject that was published in 1969. Calvin also researched organic geochemistry, chemical carcinogenesis and analysis of moon rocks.
DNA and Cells
That is not a counter...That has nothing to do with evolution and creationism...If anything, it supports evolution to show that is was the "organic soup" that first started life, not a god.
QUOTE
frogfish=
QUOTE
What is your point...Calvin just studied chemicals!
________________--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abecrombies =QUOTE
Big bang theory-Edmund Hubbell proved that to be older when thought of previously and the calculation of our galaxy between 9-16 billion. Hubbell studied radioactive elements in our solar system and thus the universe, mars being the first in frozen water as to microbes here on earth comets and meteors as well. All these determined are consistent with the independently derived estimate for the age of the universe.
QUOTE
What is your point...Calvin just studied chemicals!
________________--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abecrombies =QUOTE
Big bang theory-Edmund Hubbell proved that to be older when thought of previously and the calculation of our galaxy between 9-16 billion. Hubbell studied radioactive elements in our solar system and thus the universe, mars being the first in frozen water as to microbes here on earth comets and meteors as well. All these determined are consistent with the independently derived estimate for the age of the universe.
Again, this has no relevance to the topic! All it talks about is the age of the universe. If anything, this proves EVOLUTION as humans have not lived for 9-16 billion years! The topic does not even match my quote!
QUOTE
Frogfish=
QUOTE
Again, what is your point...How does this prove creation? The Big Bang Theory actually is a scientific theory.... It does not support creationism.
______________________________________________________________________________--
Abecrombie:
One thing is certain: If scientists—and the rest of us—decide not to accept the folly of evolution, the only alternative is creation. If stars, planets, plants, animals, and men did not make themselves, —then the only alternative is that God made them!
QUOTE Scientists and Nobel peace prize winner “THE CHEMICAL THEORY “as above counter….
Melvin Calvin– Nobel peace prize winner1965 discovered chlorophyll as life on the planet earth in a chemical evolution now called the Calvin theory.
QUOTE
Again, what is your point...How does this prove creation? The Big Bang Theory actually is a scientific theory.... It does not support creationism.
______________________________________________________________________________--
Abecrombie:
One thing is certain: If scientists—and the rest of us—decide not to accept the folly of evolution, the only alternative is creation. If stars, planets, plants, animals, and men did not make themselves, —then the only alternative is that God made them!
QUOTE Scientists and Nobel peace prize winner “THE CHEMICAL THEORY “as above counter….
Melvin Calvin– Nobel peace prize winner1965 discovered chlorophyll as life on the planet earth in a chemical evolution now called the Calvin theory.
Again, what does the chemical theory have to do with the Big Band AND evolution? Nothing!
QUOTE
BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS
Three world ages: Eph.1: 1-18 the foundation of the world what caused it and the overthrow of fallen angles
psalms 104:1-18.
.2peter3-18- the three world ages
and acts chapter 2
genesis 6
*kabohe- Hebrew meaning overthrow Eph 4: and Matt 13- concerning mysteries
void – Hebrew tu’tu’ pronounciation=def. Utterly destroyed
Three world ages: Eph.1: 1-18 the foundation of the world what caused it and the overthrow of fallen angles
psalms 104:1-18.
.2peter3-18- the three world ages
and acts chapter 2
genesis 6
*kabohe- Hebrew meaning overthrow Eph 4: and Matt 13- concerning mysteries
void – Hebrew tu’tu’ pronounciation=def. Utterly destroyed
What is this for?
QUOTE
frogfish=-
QUOTE
Do you have a link? Because Chlorophyll is a PIGMENT.
_________________________________________________________________________
http://www.chemistryexplained.com/forum/
QUOTE
Do you have a link? Because Chlorophyll is a PIGMENT.
_________________________________________________________________________
http://www.chemistryexplained.com/forum/
Again, you have not proven my point. Chlorophyll is a PIGMENT and has nothing to do with evolution. Calvin has nothing to do with evolution! His most respected research came in the life processes of plants i.e. the Calvin Cycle.
QUOTE
QUOTE
1962 the history of animal life was pushed back an additional 1,500,000,000 years by discovering tiny fossils in ancient sedimentary rock on the north shore of Lake Superior.
__________________________________________________________________________
frogfish
QUOTE
Source please?
------------------same as calvin theory " the chemical theory ______________________________________________________________-
1962 the history of animal life was pushed back an additional 1,500,000,000 years by discovering tiny fossils in ancient sedimentary rock on the north shore of Lake Superior.
__________________________________________________________________________
frogfish
QUOTE
Source please?
------------------same as calvin theory " the chemical theory ______________________________________________________________-
Calvin had nothing to do with evolution! You have not refuted any of my points!
QUOTE
Abecrombie
."—*D.B. Gower [biochemist],"Scientist Rejects Evolution," Kentish Times, England, December 11, 1975, p. 4."According to an article in Newsweek (November 3, 1980), at a conference in mid-October at Chicago's Field Museum of Natural History, the majority of 160 of the world's top paleontologists, anatomists, evolutionary geneticists, and developmental biologists agreed to abandon Darwinian evolution, in favor of punctuated equilibria, otherwise known as the hopeful monster theory.
"Apparently, Darwin's theory had become indefensible to them, citing particularly the absence of intermediate fossils as the conflicting fact. The hopeful monster theory is a retreat to what appears to be reliable geological evidence, namely, the general stringing-out of fossils from `simple' to `complex' in the rock strata."—Randall Hedtke, "Asa Gray Vindicated," in Creation Research Society Quarterly, June 1981, p. 74.
In addition, the Melvin Calvin article will lead you to this source
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THIS JUST IN........
*Newsweek for November 3, 1980 carried an article on the Chicago meeting. You may wish to read it for yourself. The large majority of evolutionists at the conference agreed that professionals could no longer regard the neo-Darwinian mechanism of mutation and natural selection as scientifically valid or tenable. Neither the origin nor the diversity of living creatures could be explained by evolutionary theory.
."—*D.B. Gower [biochemist],"Scientist Rejects Evolution," Kentish Times, England, December 11, 1975, p. 4."According to an article in Newsweek (November 3, 1980), at a conference in mid-October at Chicago's Field Museum of Natural History, the majority of 160 of the world's top paleontologists, anatomists, evolutionary geneticists, and developmental biologists agreed to abandon Darwinian evolution, in favor of punctuated equilibria, otherwise known as the hopeful monster theory.
"Apparently, Darwin's theory had become indefensible to them, citing particularly the absence of intermediate fossils as the conflicting fact. The hopeful monster theory is a retreat to what appears to be reliable geological evidence, namely, the general stringing-out of fossils from `simple' to `complex' in the rock strata."—Randall Hedtke, "Asa Gray Vindicated," in Creation Research Society Quarterly, June 1981, p. 74.
In addition, the Melvin Calvin article will lead you to this source
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THIS JUST IN........
*Newsweek for November 3, 1980 carried an article on the Chicago meeting. You may wish to read it for yourself. The large majority of evolutionists at the conference agreed that professionals could no longer regard the neo-Darwinian mechanism of mutation and natural selection as scientifically valid or tenable. Neither the origin nor the diversity of living creatures could be explained by evolutionary theory.
Link 1
What the site basically says is that only 5% of scientists reject evolution and only .15% of scientists in a field related to evolution and orgins are creationist. It also says that scientists that are creationist are not that because of fact, but because of a religious faith. Also, it states the claims that scientists reject evolution are exagurrated and fraudulent. It also provides this nifty piece of evidence:
QUOTE
Additionally, many scientific organizations believe the evidence so strongly that they have issued public statements to that effect (NCSE n.d.). The National Academy of Sciences, one of the most prestigious science organizations, devotes a Web site to the topic (NAS 1999). A panel of seventy-two Nobel Laureates, seventeen state academies of science, and seven other scientific organizations created an amicus curiae brief which they submitted to the Supreme Court (Edwards v. Aguillard 1986). This report clarified what makes science different from religion and why creationism is not science.
[see Link 1]
QUOTE
RESULTS ARE , IN A Q: HOW MANY SCIENTISTS DOES IT TAKE TO PROVE WITHOUT CREATION WE WOULDNT HAVE SCIENCE ? ----------------------------Thus, so far we have the late Melvin Calvin,
THE CHEMICAL THEORY = CALVIN THEORY
Proves that chemicals in plant life and every other life form that has chlorophyll inside its structure exhists as life as we know. Sunlight is the cause of the reaction inside the chemicals responsible for their existence. Without out the sunlight this metamorphism could come about
Chemical reaction due to the sun in our universe, simply explains further Einstein’s theory as well
Therefore, Edward Hubbell and Galileo too are the designers after the human eye to construct their telescopes
To venture out into space for more answers of the why what how when and where to find the truth in the purpose of life.
ISSAC NEWTONS LAWS OF GRAVITY
GALILEOS SEARCH FOR THE HEAVENS
And the invention of the telescope
EDWARD HUBBLE – HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE
THE THEORY OF RELATIVITYAlbert Einstein’s “ the theory of relativity goes into this exploration and as we know him to be one of the more accurate scientists to date as well as a humanitarian. I will leave you with some quotes on insight of how perplexed the thoughts of this scientist and his quest for answers.
QUOTE
*“ Laws alone cannot secure freedom of expression in order that every man presents himself”
Albert Einstein
*“ Before god we are all equally wise and equally foolish “
KEEP IN MIND, THIS ALL LEADS UP TO THE CREATION THEORY. AND ALL THE SCIENTS ABOVE HAVE HAD NOBLE PEACE PRIZE AWARDS AS WELL AS MANY ACCREDENTIAL TITLES IN SCIENCE MEDICINE EDUATION AND PHYSICS JUST TO NAME A FEW OF THERE VAST GENIUS ALL OF THEM WERE.
DARWIN IS JUST ONE – WHICH LEADS ME TO ASK?
WHAT ARE HIS CREDENTIALS?
THE CHEMICAL THEORY = CALVIN THEORY
Proves that chemicals in plant life and every other life form that has chlorophyll inside its structure exhists as life as we know. Sunlight is the cause of the reaction inside the chemicals responsible for their existence. Without out the sunlight this metamorphism could come about
Chemical reaction due to the sun in our universe, simply explains further Einstein’s theory as well
Therefore, Edward Hubbell and Galileo too are the designers after the human eye to construct their telescopes
To venture out into space for more answers of the why what how when and where to find the truth in the purpose of life.
ISSAC NEWTONS LAWS OF GRAVITY
GALILEOS SEARCH FOR THE HEAVENS
And the invention of the telescope
EDWARD HUBBLE – HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE
THE THEORY OF RELATIVITYAlbert Einstein’s “ the theory of relativity goes into this exploration and as we know him to be one of the more accurate scientists to date as well as a humanitarian. I will leave you with some quotes on insight of how perplexed the thoughts of this scientist and his quest for answers.
QUOTE
*“ Laws alone cannot secure freedom of expression in order that every man presents himself”
Albert Einstein
*“ Before god we are all equally wise and equally foolish “
KEEP IN MIND, THIS ALL LEADS UP TO THE CREATION THEORY. AND ALL THE SCIENTS ABOVE HAVE HAD NOBLE PEACE PRIZE AWARDS AS WELL AS MANY ACCREDENTIAL TITLES IN SCIENCE MEDICINE EDUATION AND PHYSICS JUST TO NAME A FEW OF THERE VAST GENIUS ALL OF THEM WERE.
DARWIN IS JUST ONE – WHICH LEADS ME TO ASK?
WHAT ARE HIS CREDENTIALS?
None of the scientists you have described have said anything against Evolution...What is your point?
Now on to my 3rd point: Evidence of Evolution
Evolution has many pieces of evidence, the most convincing is the fossil record.
The simple animals (unicellular algae, microbes, bacterium, protists) came before the complex animals (fish, tigers, dinosaurs, etc).
Here's a quote the shows that:
QUOTE
The first step in demonstrating the truth of evolution is to make the claim that all living creatures must have a living parent. This point has been overwhelmingly established in the past century and a half, ever since the French scientist Louis Pasteur demonstrated how fermentation took place and thus laid to rest centuries of stories about beetles arising spontaneously out of dung or gut worms being miraculously produced from non-living material. There is absolutely no evidence for this ancient belief. Living creatures must come from other living creatures. It does no damage to this point to claim that life must have had some origin way back in time, perhaps in a chemical reaction of inorganic materials (in some primordial soup) or in some invasion from outer space. That may well be true. But what is clear is that any such origin for living things or living material must result in a very simple organism. There is no evidence whatsoever (except in science fiction like Frankenstein) that inorganic chemical processes can produce complex, multi-cellular living creatures (the recent experiments cloning sheep, of course, are based on living tissue from other sheep).
The second important point in the case for evolution is that some living creatures are very different from some others. This, I take it, is self-evident. Let me cite a common example: many animals have what we call an internal skeletal structure featuring a backbone and skull. We call these animals vertebrates. Most animals do not have these features (we call them invertebrates). The distinction between vertebrates and invertebrates is something no one who cares to look at samples of both can reasonably deny, and, so far as I am aware, no one hostile to evolution has ever denied a fact so apparent to anyone who observes the world for a few moments.
The final point in the case for evolution is this: simple animals and plants existed on earth long before more complex ones (invertebrate animals, for example, were around for a very long time before there were any vertebrates). Here again, the evidence from fossils is overwhelming. In the deepest rock layers, there are no signs of life. The first fossil remains are of very simple living things. As the strata get more recent, the variety and complexity of life increase (although not at a uniform rate). And no human fossils have ever been found except in the most superficial layers of the earth (e.g., battlefields, graveyards, flood deposits, and so on). In all the countless geological excavations and inspections (for example, of the Grand Canyon), no one has ever come up with a genuine fossil remnant which goes against this general principle (and it would only take one genuine find to overturn this principle).
The second important point in the case for evolution is that some living creatures are very different from some others. This, I take it, is self-evident. Let me cite a common example: many animals have what we call an internal skeletal structure featuring a backbone and skull. We call these animals vertebrates. Most animals do not have these features (we call them invertebrates). The distinction between vertebrates and invertebrates is something no one who cares to look at samples of both can reasonably deny, and, so far as I am aware, no one hostile to evolution has ever denied a fact so apparent to anyone who observes the world for a few moments.
The final point in the case for evolution is this: simple animals and plants existed on earth long before more complex ones (invertebrate animals, for example, were around for a very long time before there were any vertebrates). Here again, the evidence from fossils is overwhelming. In the deepest rock layers, there are no signs of life. The first fossil remains are of very simple living things. As the strata get more recent, the variety and complexity of life increase (although not at a uniform rate). And no human fossils have ever been found except in the most superficial layers of the earth (e.g., battlefields, graveyards, flood deposits, and so on). In all the countless geological excavations and inspections (for example, of the Grand Canyon), no one has ever come up with a genuine fossil remnant which goes against this general principle (and it would only take one genuine find to overturn this principle).
Link 2
It also states that animals have living parents, and that some animals are different than others...
Evolution is a process in which a species get more complex and adaptive...So it makes common sense that Simpe animals would come first, then complex animals. The fossil record proves this. Invertebrates came before vertebrates...Unicellular organisms came before multicellular organisms...etc.
More proof lies in the fossil record that no evidence shows the humans existed with prehistoric creatures, like dinosaurs. For creationism to be right, humans would have existed with dinosaurs. There is just no proof to support that claim. One more score for evolution.
My next evidence that supports evolution is that humans (homo) evolved only around 2.2-1.6 MYA, not at the beginning of time. This is proof that humans evolved and descended from apes. Before humans, we were Australopithecus.
QUOTE
Man has been a tribal animal since he first walked erect, more than four million years ago. With the impediment of being bipedal, he could not out-climb or outrun his predators. Only through tribal cooperation could he hold his predators at bay.
For two million years, the early hominid was a herd/tribal animal, primarily a herd herbivore. During the next two million years the human was a tribal hunter/warrior. He still is. All of the human's social drives developed long before he developed intellectually. They are, therefore, instinctive. Such instincts as mother-love, compassion, cooperation, curiosity, inventiveness and competitiveness are ancient and embedded in the human. They were all necessary for the survival of the human and pre-human. Since human social drives are instinctive (not intellectual), they can not be modified through education (presentation of knowledge for future assimilation and use). As with all other higher order animals, however, proper behavior may be obtained through training (edict and explanation followed by enforcement).
The intellect, the magnitude of which separates the human from all other animals, developed slowly over the entire four million years or more of the human development. The intellect is not unique to the human, it is quite well developed in a number of the other higher animals. The intellect developed as a control over instincts to provide adaptable behavior. The human is designed by nature (evolution) to modify any behavior that would normally be instinctive to one that would provide optimum benefit (survivability). This process is called self-control or self-discipline, and is the major difference between the human and the lower order animals, those that apply only instinct to their behavioral decisions. Self-discipline, therefore, is the measuring stick of the human. The more disciplined behavior (behavior determined by intellect) displayed by the individual, the more human he becomes. The less disciplined behavior (behavior in response to instinct) displayed by an individual, the more he becomes like the lower order animals that are lacking in intellect and are driven by their instincts.
For two million years, the early hominid was a herd/tribal animal, primarily a herd herbivore. During the next two million years the human was a tribal hunter/warrior. He still is. All of the human's social drives developed long before he developed intellectually. They are, therefore, instinctive. Such instincts as mother-love, compassion, cooperation, curiosity, inventiveness and competitiveness are ancient and embedded in the human. They were all necessary for the survival of the human and pre-human. Since human social drives are instinctive (not intellectual), they can not be modified through education (presentation of knowledge for future assimilation and use). As with all other higher order animals, however, proper behavior may be obtained through training (edict and explanation followed by enforcement).
The intellect, the magnitude of which separates the human from all other animals, developed slowly over the entire four million years or more of the human development. The intellect is not unique to the human, it is quite well developed in a number of the other higher animals. The intellect developed as a control over instincts to provide adaptable behavior. The human is designed by nature (evolution) to modify any behavior that would normally be instinctive to one that would provide optimum benefit (survivability). This process is called self-control or self-discipline, and is the major difference between the human and the lower order animals, those that apply only instinct to their behavioral decisions. Self-discipline, therefore, is the measuring stick of the human. The more disciplined behavior (behavior determined by intellect) displayed by the individual, the more human he becomes. The less disciplined behavior (behavior in response to instinct) displayed by an individual, the more he becomes like the lower order animals that are lacking in intellect and are driven by their instincts.
Link 3
The fact that human and ape DNA vary by as little as 2% also proves the theory of evolution.
QUOTE
From a genome viewpoint, the difference between modern man and the modern apes is quite small, about 2 percent. From a physical viewpoint, the greatest difference is in locomotion. The human walks upright. It is generally thought that this came about when the ancient hominid adopted the edge of the forest and plain and adapted to a life under the trees as opposed to in them. Fossil evidence shows that this bipedal adaptation was completed quite early, perhaps as early as four million years ago, long before we looked like or thought like we do today. Facial feature changes toward the modern appearance came much later. The facial characteristics of modern man are about 100,000 years old. The faces of earlier hominid were much more apelike.
[see Link 3]
Another piece off evidence are vestigial limbs/organs. Vestigial limbs/organs are evolutionary remenants that are of no use to the animals, but vital for its ancestor...Take for example the Rock Python. Close examination reveals that the Python has 2 vestigial hind limbs...This proves that snakes evolved from lizards.
QUOTE
In Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species (1859) and his next publication, The Descent of Man (1871), he referred to several “vestiges” in human anatomy that were left over from the course of evolution. These vestigial organs, Darwin argued, are evidence of evolution and represent a function that was once necessary for survival, but over time that function became either diminished or nonexistent.
The presence of an organ in one organism that resembles one found in another has lead biologists to conclude that these two might have shared a common ancestor. Vestigial organs have demonstrated remarkably how species are related to one another, and has given solid ground for the idea of common descent to stand on. From common descent, it is predicted that organisms should retain these vestigial organs as structural remnants of lost functions. It is only because of macro-evolutionary theory, or evolution that takes place over very long periods of time, that these vestiges appear.
The presence of an organ in one organism that resembles one found in another has lead biologists to conclude that these two might have shared a common ancestor. Vestigial organs have demonstrated remarkably how species are related to one another, and has given solid ground for the idea of common descent to stand on. From common descent, it is predicted that organisms should retain these vestigial organs as structural remnants of lost functions. It is only because of macro-evolutionary theory, or evolution that takes place over very long periods of time, that these vestiges appear.
Link 4 - includes top 10 most useless vestigial limbs
This is ample physical proof that evolution is the correct theory...not creationism...But for those skeptics out there, I will delve deeper in my next post into evolution and describe/show proof for evolution's driving force-genetics.
Post3 1 man vs 354 = 354 scientists for creation
Q:
Darwin darwin darwin is there anybody else besides darwin and where again are his credentials?
Q:What proof is there in his theory
Ive given you einstein galileo calvin plato and the list goes on …..
And on and on …
Note: Individuals on this list must possess a doctorate in a science-related field.
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. 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. 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
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
Colin W. Mitchell, Geography
Dr. John N. Moore, Science Educator
Dr. John W. Moreland, Mechanical engineer and Dentist
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
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/bios/default.asp
Which scientists of the past believed in a Creator?
Note: These scientists are sorted by birth year.
Early
Francis Bacon (1561–1626) Scientific method. However, see also
Culture Wars:
1. Part 1: Bacon vs Ham
2. Part 2: Ham vs Bacon
Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) (WOH) Physics, Astronomy (see also The Galileo ‘twist’ and The Galileo affair: history or heroic hagiography?
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 Ideas 68(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) Archeologist
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) Archeologist
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) Archeologist
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
Dr. Henry M. Morris (1918–2006), founder of the Institute for Creation Research.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/bios/default.asp________________________________________________________________________
Frogfish stated.....
SEXUAL SELECTION
Natural Selection is when animals out-reproduce each other. Sexual Selection can fall under natural selection and is when animals produce the best offspring by mating with the best partner. Secondary sex features on animals, like the mane of a lion, the plumage of birds etc. help find the best partners. Bouts of strength also shows who's best and the better partner.
Q:What about seahorses ?
______________________________________________________________________
I NEED AIR………….THIS JUST IN STUDIES SHOW THAT CHEMICAL AND HUMAN ARE REALAVENT
Plant life –without plantlife we wouldn’t be here.
The largest single manufacturing process in the world takes place in one of the smallest units of life – cells of the green plant
The mamafacturing process is photosynthesis. . each year this process accounts for the transformation of 100 billion tons of the inorgaanic element carbon into organic forms that support life. Atmosphere
This again backing up from my very first post that chemicals , such in the calvin cycle or the chemical theory goes back to the orgin of life .
There proving melvin calvin
Another form of chemicals are in the brain . the whole human brain is made up of a chemical collaboration of trillions of cells and neuron , energy and transmitters. Lets look at einsteins brain
He was cremated without ceremony on the same day he died at Trenton, New Jersey, in accordance with his wishes. His ashes were scattered at an undisclosed location. An autopsy was performed on Einstein by Dr. Thomas Stoltz Harvey, who removed and preserved his brain. Harvey found nothing unusual with his brain, but in 1999 further analysis by a team at McMaster University revealed that his parietal operculum region was missing and, to compensate, his inferior parietal lobe was 15% wider than normal.12 The inferior parietal region is responsible for mathematical thought, visuospatial cognition, and imagery of movement. Einstein's brain also contained 73% more glial cells than the average brain.
http://www.bioquant.com/gallery/einstein.html"Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. THAT'S relativity."
In other words, time is dependent on certain factors. And he said like an hour and like a minute.
Examination of Some Einstein Quotes and his Relation to the Jewish Religion - It is possible that Einstein may have sympathized with the ideas that time is not absolute because of the message in Psalm 90 Verse 4. Why would a verse have inspired Einstein?
Psalms90:4 for a thousande years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.
Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth. This belief, which sometimes is termed "theistic evolution," is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution. Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines.
http://newton.nap.edu/html/creationism/origin.html
http://www.geocities.com/kmhigginson/einstien.html
concerning dinosaurs- I stand corrected it is in job 40:15
job 40:15
15 "Look at the behemoth, [a]
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
16 What strength he has in his loins,
what power in the muscles of his belly!
17 His tail [b] sways like a cedar;
the sinews of his thighs are close-knit.
18 His bones are tubes of bronze,
his limbs like rods of iron.
19 He ranks first among the works of God,
yet his Maker can approach him with his sword.
20 The hills bring him their produce,
and all the wild animals play nearby.
21 Under the lotus plants he lies,
hidden among the reeds in the marsh.
22 The lotuses conceal him in their shadow;
the poplars by the stream surround him.
23 When the river rages, he is not alarmed;
he is secure, though the Jordan should surge against his mouth.
24 Can anyone capture him by the eyes, [c]
or trap him and pierce his nose?
Link 1
Q:
Darwin darwin darwin is there anybody else besides darwin and where again are his credentials?
Q:What proof is there in his theory
Ive given you einstein galileo calvin plato and the list goes on …..
And on and on …
Note: Individuals on this list must possess a doctorate in a science-related field.
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. 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. 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
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
Colin W. Mitchell, Geography
Dr. John N. Moore, Science Educator
Dr. John W. Moreland, Mechanical engineer and Dentist
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
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/bios/default.asp
Which scientists of the past believed in a Creator?
Note: These scientists are sorted by birth year.
Early
Francis Bacon (1561–1626) Scientific method. However, see also
Culture Wars:
1. Part 1: Bacon vs Ham
2. Part 2: Ham vs Bacon
Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) (WOH) Physics, Astronomy (see also The Galileo ‘twist’ and The Galileo affair: history or heroic hagiography?
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 Ideas 68(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) Archeologist
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) Archeologist
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) Archeologist
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
Dr. Henry M. Morris (1918–2006), founder of the Institute for Creation Research.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/bios/default.asp________________________________________________________________________
Frogfish stated.....
SEXUAL SELECTION
Natural Selection is when animals out-reproduce each other. Sexual Selection can fall under natural selection and is when animals produce the best offspring by mating with the best partner. Secondary sex features on animals, like the mane of a lion, the plumage of birds etc. help find the best partners. Bouts of strength also shows who's best and the better partner.
Q:What about seahorses ?
______________________________________________________________________
I NEED AIR………….THIS JUST IN STUDIES SHOW THAT CHEMICAL AND HUMAN ARE REALAVENT
Plant life –without plantlife we wouldn’t be here.
The largest single manufacturing process in the world takes place in one of the smallest units of life – cells of the green plant
The mamafacturing process is photosynthesis. . each year this process accounts for the transformation of 100 billion tons of the inorgaanic element carbon into organic forms that support life. Atmosphere
This again backing up from my very first post that chemicals , such in the calvin cycle or the chemical theory goes back to the orgin of life .
There proving melvin calvin
Another form of chemicals are in the brain . the whole human brain is made up of a chemical collaboration of trillions of cells and neuron , energy and transmitters. Lets look at einsteins brain
He was cremated without ceremony on the same day he died at Trenton, New Jersey, in accordance with his wishes. His ashes were scattered at an undisclosed location. An autopsy was performed on Einstein by Dr. Thomas Stoltz Harvey, who removed and preserved his brain. Harvey found nothing unusual with his brain, but in 1999 further analysis by a team at McMaster University revealed that his parietal operculum region was missing and, to compensate, his inferior parietal lobe was 15% wider than normal.12 The inferior parietal region is responsible for mathematical thought, visuospatial cognition, and imagery of movement. Einstein's brain also contained 73% more glial cells than the average brain.
http://www.bioquant.com/gallery/einstein.html"Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. THAT'S relativity."
In other words, time is dependent on certain factors. And he said like an hour and like a minute.
Examination of Some Einstein Quotes and his Relation to the Jewish Religion - It is possible that Einstein may have sympathized with the ideas that time is not absolute because of the message in Psalm 90 Verse 4. Why would a verse have inspired Einstein?
Psalms90:4 for a thousande years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.
Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth. This belief, which sometimes is termed "theistic evolution," is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution. Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines.
http://newton.nap.edu/html/creationism/origin.html
http://www.geocities.com/kmhigginson/einstien.html
concerning dinosaurs- I stand corrected it is in job 40:15
job 40:15
15 "Look at the behemoth, [a]
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
16 What strength he has in his loins,
what power in the muscles of his belly!
17 His tail [b] sways like a cedar;
the sinews of his thighs are close-knit.
18 His bones are tubes of bronze,
his limbs like rods of iron.
19 He ranks first among the works of God,
yet his Maker can approach him with his sword.
20 The hills bring him their produce,
and all the wild animals play nearby.
21 Under the lotus plants he lies,
hidden among the reeds in the marsh.
22 The lotuses conceal him in their shadow;
the poplars by the stream surround him.
23 When the river rages, he is not alarmed;
he is secure, though the Jordan should surge against his mouth.
24 Can anyone capture him by the eyes, [c]
or trap him and pierce his nose?
Link 1
Bodily Post 4
I think you missed a previous statement I made:
Link 1.1
The biggest males, the most colorful, etc...What does this question imply?
Do you have any proof that Calvin said Photosynthesis was in progress at the birth of the earth? Life on Earth came from an "organic soup"...the primordial atmosphere...Not photosynthesis.
Stanley Miller, a chemist, proved this point with this experiment:
Link 1.2
Abercrombie said:
This has no relevance!
Concerning the Behemoth, scholars mostly accept it as a hippopotamus. A giant dinosaur cannot hide in the lotus reeds.
The Behemoth and Leviathan are important in Hebrew MYTHOLOGY.
QUOTE
Post3 1 man vs 354 = 354 scientists for creation
Q:
Darwin darwin darwin is there anybody else besides darwin and where again are his credentials?
Q:What proof is there in his theory
Ive given you einstein galileo calvin plato and the list goes on …..
And on and on …
Note: Individuals on this list must possess a doctorate in a science-related field.
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. 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. 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
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
Colin W. Mitchell, Geography
Dr. John N. Moore, Science Educator
Dr. John W. Moreland, Mechanical engineer and Dentist
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
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/bios/default.asp
Which scientists of the past believed in a Creator?
Note: These scientists are sorted by birth year.
Early
Francis Bacon (1561–1626) Scientific method. However, see also
Culture Wars:
1. Part 1: Bacon vs Ham
2. Part 2: Ham vs Bacon
Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) (WOH) Physics, Astronomy (see also The Galileo ‘twist’ and The Galileo affair: history or heroic hagiography?
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 Ideas 68(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) Archeologist
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) Archeologist
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) Archeologist
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
Dr. Henry M. Morris (1918–2006), founder of the Institute for Creation Research.
Q:
Darwin darwin darwin is there anybody else besides darwin and where again are his credentials?
Q:What proof is there in his theory
Ive given you einstein galileo calvin plato and the list goes on …..
And on and on …
Note: Individuals on this list must possess a doctorate in a science-related field.
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. 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. 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
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
Colin W. Mitchell, Geography
Dr. John N. Moore, Science Educator
Dr. John W. Moreland, Mechanical engineer and Dentist
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
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/bios/default.asp
Which scientists of the past believed in a Creator?
Note: These scientists are sorted by birth year.
Early
Francis Bacon (1561–1626) Scientific method. However, see also
Culture Wars:
1. Part 1: Bacon vs Ham
2. Part 2: Ham vs Bacon
Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) (WOH) Physics, Astronomy (see also The Galileo ‘twist’ and The Galileo affair: history or heroic hagiography?
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 Ideas 68(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) Archeologist
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) Archeologist
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) Archeologist
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
Dr. Henry M. Morris (1918–2006), founder of the Institute for Creation Research.
I think you missed a previous statement I made:
QUOTE
What the site basically says is that only 5% of scientists reject evolution and only .15% of scientists in a field related to evolution and orgins are creationist. It also says that scientists that are creationist are not that because of fact, but because of a religious faith. Also, it states the claims that scientists reject evolution are exagurrated and fraudulent. It also provides this nifty piece of evidence:
Link 1.1
QUOTE
SEXUAL SELECTION
Natural Selection is when animals out-reproduce each other. Sexual Selection can fall under natural selection and is when animals produce the best offspring by mating with the best partner. Secondary sex features on animals, like the mane of a lion, the plumage of birds etc. help find the best partners. Bouts of strength also shows who's best and the better partner.
Q:What about seahorses ?
Natural Selection is when animals out-reproduce each other. Sexual Selection can fall under natural selection and is when animals produce the best offspring by mating with the best partner. Secondary sex features on animals, like the mane of a lion, the plumage of birds etc. help find the best partners. Bouts of strength also shows who's best and the better partner.
Q:What about seahorses ?
The biggest males, the most colorful, etc...What does this question imply?
QUOTE
I NEED AIR………….THIS JUST IN STUDIES SHOW THAT CHEMICAL AND HUMAN ARE REALAVENT
Plant life –without plantlife we wouldn’t be here.
The largest single manufacturing process in the world takes place in one of the smallest units of life – cells of the green plant
The mamafacturing process is photosynthesis. . each year this process accounts for the transformation of 100 billion tons of the inorgaanic element carbon into organic forms that support life. Atmosphere
This again backing up from my very first post that chemicals , such in the calvin cycle or the chemical theory goes back to the orgin of life .
There proving melvin calvin
Plant life –without plantlife we wouldn’t be here.
The largest single manufacturing process in the world takes place in one of the smallest units of life – cells of the green plant
The mamafacturing process is photosynthesis. . each year this process accounts for the transformation of 100 billion tons of the inorgaanic element carbon into organic forms that support life. Atmosphere
This again backing up from my very first post that chemicals , such in the calvin cycle or the chemical theory goes back to the orgin of life .
There proving melvin calvin
Do you have any proof that Calvin said Photosynthesis was in progress at the birth of the earth? Life on Earth came from an "organic soup"...the primordial atmosphere...Not photosynthesis.
Stanley Miller, a chemist, proved this point with this experiment:
QUOTE
Spontaneous generation in a primeval soup: Miller's Experiment
Stanley Miller, a graduate student in biochemistry, built the apparatus shown here. He filled it with
water (H2O
methane (CH4)
ammonia (NH3) and
hydrogen (H2)
but no oxygen
He hypothesized that this mixture resembled the atmosphere of the early earth. (Some are not so sure.) The mixture was kept circulating by continuously boiling and then condensing the water.
The gases passed through a chamber containing two electrodes with a spark passing between them.
At the end of a week, Miller used paper chromatography to show that the flask now contained several amino acids as well as some other organic molecules.
In the years since Miller's work, many variants of his procedure have been tried. Virtually all the small molecules that are associated with life have been formed:
17 of the 20 amino acids used in protein synthesis, and
all the purines and pyrimidines used in nucleic acid synthesis.
But abiotic synthesis of ribose — and thus of nucleosides — has been much more difficult.
One difficulty with the primeval soup theory is how polymers — the basis of life itself — could be assembled.
In solution, hydrolysis of a growing polymer would soon limit the size it could reach.
Abiotic synthesis produces a mixture of L and D enantiomers. Each inhibits the polymerization of the other. (So, for example, the presence of D amino acids inhibits the polymerization of L amino acids (the ones that make up proteins here on earth).
Stanley Miller, a graduate student in biochemistry, built the apparatus shown here. He filled it with
water (H2O
methane (CH4)
ammonia (NH3) and
hydrogen (H2)
but no oxygen
He hypothesized that this mixture resembled the atmosphere of the early earth. (Some are not so sure.) The mixture was kept circulating by continuously boiling and then condensing the water.
The gases passed through a chamber containing two electrodes with a spark passing between them.
At the end of a week, Miller used paper chromatography to show that the flask now contained several amino acids as well as some other organic molecules.
In the years since Miller's work, many variants of his procedure have been tried. Virtually all the small molecules that are associated with life have been formed:
17 of the 20 amino acids used in protein synthesis, and
all the purines and pyrimidines used in nucleic acid synthesis.
But abiotic synthesis of ribose — and thus of nucleosides — has been much more difficult.
One difficulty with the primeval soup theory is how polymers — the basis of life itself — could be assembled.
In solution, hydrolysis of a growing polymer would soon limit the size it could reach.
Abiotic synthesis produces a mixture of L and D enantiomers. Each inhibits the polymerization of the other. (So, for example, the presence of D amino acids inhibits the polymerization of L amino acids (the ones that make up proteins here on earth).
Link 1.2
Abercrombie said:
QUOTE
Another form of chemicals are in the brain . the whole human brain is made up of a chemical collaboration of trillions of cells and neuron , energy and transmitters. Lets look at einsteins brain
He was cremated without ceremony on the same day he died at Trenton, New Jersey, in accordance with his wishes. His ashes were scattered at an undisclosed location. An autopsy was performed on Einstein by Dr. Thomas Stoltz Harvey, who removed and preserved his brain. Harvey found nothing unusual with his brain, but in 1999 further analysis by a team at McMaster University revealed that his parietal operculum region was missing and, to compensate, his inferior parietal lobe was 15% wider than normal.12 The inferior parietal region is responsible for mathematical thought, visuospatial cognition, and imagery of movement. Einstein's brain also contained 73% more glial cells than the average brain.
http://www.bioquant.com/gallery/einstein.html"Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. THAT'S relativity."
In other words, time is dependent on certain factors. And he said like an hour and like a minute.
Examination of Some Einstein Quotes and his Relation to the Jewish Religion - It is possible that Einstein may have sympathized with the ideas that time is not absolute because of the message in Psalm 90 Verse 4. Why would a verse have inspired Einstein?
He was cremated without ceremony on the same day he died at Trenton, New Jersey, in accordance with his wishes. His ashes were scattered at an undisclosed location. An autopsy was performed on Einstein by Dr. Thomas Stoltz Harvey, who removed and preserved his brain. Harvey found nothing unusual with his brain, but in 1999 further analysis by a team at McMaster University revealed that his parietal operculum region was missing and, to compensate, his inferior parietal lobe was 15% wider than normal.12 The inferior parietal region is responsible for mathematical thought, visuospatial cognition, and imagery of movement. Einstein's brain also contained 73% more glial cells than the average brain.
http://www.bioquant.com/gallery/einstein.html"Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. THAT'S relativity."
In other words, time is dependent on certain factors. And he said like an hour and like a minute.
Examination of Some Einstein Quotes and his Relation to the Jewish Religion - It is possible that Einstein may have sympathized with the ideas that time is not absolute because of the message in Psalm 90 Verse 4. Why would a verse have inspired Einstein?
This has no relevance!
QUOTE
concerning dinosaurs- I stand corrected it is in job 40:15
job 40:15
15 "Look at the behemoth, [a]
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
16 What strength he has in his loins,
what power in the muscles of his belly!
17 His tail sways like a cedar;
the sinews of his thighs are close-knit.
18 His bones are tubes of bronze,
his limbs like rods of iron.
19 He ranks first among the works of God,
yet his Maker can approach him with his sword.
20 The hills bring him their produce,
and all the wild animals play nearby.
21 Under the lotus plants he lies,
hidden among the reeds in the marsh.
22 The lotuses conceal him in their shadow;
the poplars by the stream surround him.
23 When the river rages, he is not alarmed;
he is secure, though the Jordan should surge against his mouth.
24 Can anyone capture him by the eyes, [c]
or trap him and pierce his nose?
job 40:15
15 "Look at the behemoth, [a]
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
16 What strength he has in his loins,
what power in the muscles of his belly!
17 His tail sways like a cedar;
the sinews of his thighs are close-knit.
18 His bones are tubes of bronze,
his limbs like rods of iron.
19 He ranks first among the works of God,
yet his Maker can approach him with his sword.
20 The hills bring him their produce,
and all the wild animals play nearby.
21 Under the lotus plants he lies,
hidden among the reeds in the marsh.
22 The lotuses conceal him in their shadow;
the poplars by the stream surround him.
23 When the river rages, he is not alarmed;
he is secure, though the Jordan should surge against his mouth.
24 Can anyone capture him by the eyes, [c]
or trap him and pierce his nose?
Concerning the Behemoth, scholars mostly accept it as a hippopotamus. A giant dinosaur cannot hide in the lotus reeds.
The Behemoth and Leviathan are important in Hebrew MYTHOLOGY.
QUOTE
Names of gigantic beasts or monsters described in Job xl. The former is from a root denoting "coil," "twist"; the latter is the plural form of "behemah"="beast."
—Biblical Data:
Ever since Bochart ("Hierozoicon," iii. 705), "behemoth" has been taken to denote the hippopotamus; and Jablonski, to make it correspond exactly with that animal, compared an Egyptian form, "p-ehe-mu" (= "water-ox"), which, however, does not exist. The Biblical description contains mythical elements, and the conclusion is justified that these monsters were not real, though the hippopotamus may have furnished in the main the data for the description. Only of a unique being, and not of a common hippopotamus, could the words of Job xl. 19 have been used: "He is the first [A. V. "chief"] of the ways of God [comp. Prov. viii. 22]; he that made him maketh sport with him" (as the Septuagint reads, πεποιημένον ἐγκαταπαιζέσΘαι; A. V. "He that made him can make his sword to approach unto him"; comp. Ps. civ. 26); or "The mountains bring him forth food; where all the beasts of the field do play" (Job xl. 20). Obviously behemoth is represented as the primeval beast, the king of all the animals of the dry land, while leviathan is the king of all those of the water, both alike unconquerable by man (ib. xl. 14, xli. 17-26). Gunkel ("Schöpfung und Chaos," p. 62) suggests that behemoth and leviathan were the two primeval monsters corresponding to Tiamat (= "the abyss"; comp. Hebr. "tehom") and Kingu (= Aramaic "'akna" = serpent") of Babylonian mythology. Some commentators find also in Isa. xxx. 6 ("bahamot negeb" = "beasts of the south") a reference to the hippopotamus; others again, in Ps. lxxiii. 22 ("I am as behemoth [="beasts"; A. V. "a beast"] before thee"); but neither interpretation has a substantial foundation. It is likely that the leviathan and the behemoth were originally referred to in Hab. ii. 15: "the destruction of the behemoth [A. V. "beasts"] shall make them afraid" (comp. LXX., "thee" instead of "them").E. G. H. K.
—In Rabbinical Literature:
According to a midrash, the leviathan was created on the fifth day (Yalḳ., Gen. 12). Originally God produced a male and a female leviathan, but lest in multiplying the species should destroy the world, He slew the female, reserving her flesh for the banquet that will be given to the righteous on the advent of the Messiah (B. B. 74a). The enormous size of the leviathan is thus illustrated by R. Johanan, from whom proceeded nearly all the haggadot concerning this monster: "Once we went in a ship and saw a fish which put his head out of the water. He had horns upon which was written: 'I am one of the meanest creatures that inhabit the sea. I am three hundred miles in length, and enter this day into the jaws of the leviathan'" (B. B. l.c
—Biblical Data:
Ever since Bochart ("Hierozoicon," iii. 705), "behemoth" has been taken to denote the hippopotamus; and Jablonski, to make it correspond exactly with that animal, compared an Egyptian form, "p-ehe-mu" (= "water-ox"), which, however, does not exist. The Biblical description contains mythical elements, and the conclusion is justified that these monsters were not real, though the hippopotamus may have furnished in the main the data for the description. Only of a unique being, and not of a common hippopotamus, could the words of Job xl. 19 have been used: "He is the first [A. V. "chief"] of the ways of God [comp. Prov. viii. 22]; he that made him maketh sport with him" (as the Septuagint reads, πεποιημένον ἐγκαταπαιζέσΘαι; A. V. "He that made him can make his sword to approach unto him"; comp. Ps. civ. 26); or "The mountains bring him forth food; where all the beasts of the field do play" (Job xl. 20). Obviously behemoth is represented as the primeval beast, the king of all the animals of the dry land, while leviathan is the king of all those of the water, both alike unconquerable by man (ib. xl. 14, xli. 17-26). Gunkel ("Schöpfung und Chaos," p. 62) suggests that behemoth and leviathan were the two primeval monsters corresponding to Tiamat (= "the abyss"; comp. Hebr. "tehom") and Kingu (= Aramaic "'akna" = serpent") of Babylonian mythology. Some commentators find also in Isa. xxx. 6 ("bahamot negeb" = "beasts of the south") a reference to the hippopotamus; others again, in Ps. lxxiii. 22 ("I am as behemoth [="beasts"; A. V. "a beast"] before thee"); but neither interpretation has a substantial foundation. It is likely that the leviathan and the behemoth were originally referred to in Hab. ii. 15: "the destruction of the behemoth [A. V. "beasts"] shall make them afraid" (comp. LXX., "thee" instead of "them").E. G. H. K.
—In Rabbinical Literature:
According to a midrash, the leviathan was created on the fifth day (Yalḳ., Gen. 12). Originally God produced a male and a female leviathan, but lest in multiplying the species should destroy the world, He slew the female, reserving her flesh for the banquet that will be given to the righteous on the advent of the Messiah (B. B. 74a). The enormous size of the leviathan is thus illustrated by R. Johanan, from whom proceeded nearly all the haggadot concerning this monster: "Once we went in a ship and saw a fish which put his head out of the water. He had horns upon which was written: 'I am one of the meanest creatures that inhabit the sea. I am three hundred miles in length, and enter this day into the jaws of the leviathan'" (B. B. l.c