Find articles by John R. Goodwin Find articles by Mark B.
First Learn the meaning of what you said and then speak. Apart from a few very primitive experiments, it became possible to make self-propelled flying vehicles only in the 20th century. This feat, which mankind managed to achieve with the accumulated technology of centuries, is something that birds-known to have existed on Earth for the last million years-have always performed to perfection.
Even a new-born chick will soon acquire this special ability in a matter of weeks, which humans can manage only through advanced technology. How, then, did these astonishing creatures come into being?
Everyone who examines birds realizes that like other living things, they possess perfect anatomical systems. This leads to the inevitable conclusion that they are the products of flawless creation.
Yet proponents of the theory of evolution are reluctant to admit this. According to Darwin's theory of evolution, every living species evolved from a single common ancestor.
This scenario means that the million or so known species must all be descended from earlier versions of one another. No rational, logical person can believe that an airplane assembled itself of its own accord.
These components did not combine by chance to produce a vehicle capable of flight. On the contrary, the design of a plane reveals very detailed calculations at every stage of its manufacture. Many scientists and engineers have used their knowledge and experience and expended a great deal of time and effort.
Birds, however, have been equipped with far superior aerodynamic characteristics. To examine birds, created with the ability to fly, and then claim that they came into being by chance, defies all reason and logic.
The position of those who make such claims is revealed in the verse: Yet neither mechanism has the ability to give rise to any new living thing. Mutations are random, typically harmful effects caused by anomalies in the DNA and are directed towards no particular purpose.
Naturally, aimless and randomly occurring coincidences cannot give rise to living things that possess planned, orderly structures designed for specific objectives. Blind chance cannot endow living things with complex organs and systems. The more those with common sense examine life forms, the more they will realize the nonsensical nature of the theory of evolution, which bases the origins of life on chance.
Perceiving design but calling it purposeless, seeing order but calling it accidental, is nothing more than a deliberate denial of the facts. At the root of this denial lie evolutionists' devotion to materialist philosophy and their bigoted reactions against the fact of creation.
Rather than admit their Creator's existence, evolutionists prefer to believe that blind chance is a mighty creative force and that this concept-an expression of purposeless, unconscious happenstance-can perform miracles.
But the distorted nature of this belief is easy to see: If you strew the components of an airplane on the ground, random forces such as wind, lightning, rain and earthquakes can never make them combine into a complete, functional aircraft.
In addition, all the components in this example have already been created to be mutually compatible. Nonetheless, no matter how long one waits it is impossible for the parts to assemble themselves into a complete model.
This finished product can come into being only if a conscious entity assembles all the components. Yet according to evolutionists, chance is able to produce systems incomparably more perfect than this example, as well as the most delicate balances.
The logical contradiction here is obvious for anyone to see. Every living thing is a unique marvel of creation. The proposed evolutionary mechanisms, on the other hand, lend no support to evolutionist claims.
The first of these mechanisms-natural selection-assumes that those living things will survive that are best adapted to the challenges of the environment in which they live; while those unable to adapt will die out and disappear.
According to evolutionists, this unconscious, automatic mode of elimination endows surviving individuals with ever-more complex organs and systems, but this claim has no valid proof or scientific basis. Observation has shown that natural selection serves only to weed out unfit individuals, but that there is no question of it endowing survivors with new organs and systems.
The well-known biologist D'Arcy Wentworth Thompson summarizes this point: We see in natural selection is not to create but to destroy—to weed, to prune, to cut down and to cast into the fire.
Therefore, natural selection is not a mechanism that can be used to account for the lavish diversity of living things, with their complex systems and perfected structures.Feb 9, - Rare Ontogenetic Stages in the Upper Cretaceous Hell. Creek Formation . clades that focused on body size, habitat partitioning and living.
de: (from, ), (del, ), (de, ), (van, ), (dj, ), (alle, ), (maw, ), (timber, ), (n, software All Software latest This Just In Old School Emulation MS-DOS Games Historical Software Classic PC Games Software Library.
Internet Arcade. Top Kodi Archive and Support File APK MS-DOS Community Software IPA Software Vintage Software CD-ROM Software. Full text of "Guide to Mysterious and Legendary Creatures".
Dinosaurs show some of the most extreme variations in size of any land animal group, ranging from the tiny hummingbirds, which can weigh as little as three grams, to .
In these books, unlike some other books, you will not find the author's personal views, explanations based on dubious sources, styles that are unobservant of the respect and reverence due to sacred subjects, nor hopeless, pessimistic arguments that create doubts in the mind and deviations in the heart.
A dinosaur census recorded during the Hell Creek Project (–) incorporates multiple lines of evidence from geography, taphohistory, stratigraphy, phylogeny and ontogeny to investigate the relative abundance of large dinosaurs preserved in the Upper Cretaceous Hell Creek Formation of.