Creation: Facts that Support the Biblical Account II
A Sunday guest post by my brilliant husband, Gregg.
Every Sunday, my clever husband offers me a “day of rest” by taking over the homemaker duties here. His primary topic, the Biblical Truth of Creation vs. Darwinism, is a subject that has broad reaching scientific, social, and metaphysical implications and is gaining more and more attention in our modern culture. For believers and non-believers alike, the primary purpose is to present scientific, historical, logical, and/or sociological data in an empirical and defensible fashion, as much as possible written in layman’s terms, and in a format suitable for supplementing any homeschool curriculum whether you choose to believe the Biblical account — or secular guesses — about the origins of human life on earth.
Facts that Support the Biblical Account of Creation
The following are observed facts about nature and the universe that support the Biblical account of Creation. Note that these facts are held up by operational and empirical science.
Complicated Interrelated Functions of Independent Systems—All of the various structures and organs in every living thing are marvelously interrelated. In order to maintain its existence, each part depends on many others. In a wider sense, symbiotic relationships exist when two or more separate and distinct yet interdependent life forms’ very survival depends upon their interrelated functions. For example, plants respire carbon dioxide and expel oxygen as waste while humans expel carbon dioxide as waste and require oxygen to respire.
Extremely Complex and Specific Production Sequence—The plan for every biological structure exists in the life form’s DNA and the code is mysteriously understood by all biological systems. The plan for all biological systems also exists in the same library. Yet the biological systems already exist in every living thing and those systems produce still more complexity at the cellular level each and every second. In fact, the various processes by which things are made in living organisms are complicated in the extreme. Very lengthy and highly specific production sequences are generally required with microscopically precise tolerances at every step of the way. Each step in the procedure must follow still other correctly taken extremely complicated and highly specific steps.
Coded Instructions Which are Referenced and Obeyed—Not only are highly specific and incredibly complex coded instructions provided for everything done in the cell, but proteins and enzymes automatically read and rigorously obey these instructions as though they had the mind, will, and intelligence to do this. There is no explanation for why they do since they, by every fair measure, have no “natural” tendency to do so.
Excessive Information Content and Capacity in Life Forms— Such a capacity, far beyond the bare minimum needed for survival, is repeatedly observed in living things. The brain power of mankind is remarkable. Non-human forms of life also show an abundance of capacity well beyond the amount needed for mere survival such as the number of chromosomes in a simple fern.
What is Darwinism, really? At its root, it is a truth claim about human origins. But what is that truth claim after some scrutiny? What is it really? It is a collection of unsubstantiated guesses about unobserved events in the past. What does that have to do with biology, really? Biology is the study of life in the present, is it not? It would seem logical, then, that historians and philosophers should be having this argument over origins instead of people who make their living studying life in the present.
That Biologists continue to argue this point demonstrates even further that this is a philosophical argument, not a scientific argument. This is a debate between two religious groups.
The greatest logical fact in existence that dispels the myth of Darwinism is the complete inability of Darwinists to provide even one solid scientific evidence in support of the entire silly notion. This is a very revealing fact. A “scientific theory” is not scientific at all when it lacks the underlying scientific evidence proving it worthwhile.
Darwinism includes countless unfounded and unscientific pronouncements framed as truth claims, hypotheses, guesses, and theories — all of it built on even more guesses and theories. None of this can dispel the fact that the basic notion upon which they are all piled on top of is totally and utterly lacking in empirical and operational scientific evidence.
Even discounting the thousands of outright frauds perpetrated in the name of Darwin in the last 150 years or so, the truth is that no evidence that is ever presented as “proof” of Darwinism ever stands up to simple logic, is almost never observed or observable, and never enters into the arena of empirical and operational science. Think about that for a moment.
While believers in the Biblical account of Creation are able to almost endlessly present a multitude of scientific evidences that support our divine origin, Darwinists can only respond with ridicule.
That ridicule takes many forms. Ridicule of the believer stating the facts (Ad hominem), ridicule of very minor points never offered as evidence (Straw Man), ridicule of only very minor points offered as evidence while monolithic major points are totally ignored (elephant in the room), equivocation, mockery, intimidation, or other efforts to stifle any discussion.
Darwinists cannot stand an open debate of the scientific merit of their arguments, nor can they ever seem to present valid, sound, cogent scientific data shown to be true by empirical and operational science that tends to support their notions, because they have none.
They have none because — there is none.
The vociferous and fanatical ridicule (that borders on senseless religious fanaticism) and the lack of supporting scientific evidence are abundantly seen in the so-called scientific articles written exclusively in an attempt to refute the Biblical account of Creation. There are entire web communities dedicated to the ridicule of believers that simultaneously do not presenting any actual scientific facts supporting the Darwinist claims.
I commit to you that I will publish every single comment that meets this blog’s commenting criteria. You may want to review that criteria before adding your opinion here.
God Bless you and yours.