Rock dating site Sex chats without sign up without video

26-Nov-2019 09:40

I also wish to thank those who have encouraged me by telling me that this presentation has made a difference. Wiebe February, 1997 This is an abstract of the presentations on the creation/evolution issue that follow: As design demonstrates the existence and capability of a designer, the inherent design in life, the earth and the universe implies the existence and capability of its Designer.

The best source of information regarding a design can be had by inquiring of the designer.

The laws of biochemistry, probability and statistics, and basic information theory are against it. But no one has ever shown them to be beneficial, so as to result in complex and sophisticated designs. Random genetic mutations) The "survival of the fittest" clause is a tautology and success does not imply complexity.

Natural selection shouldn't be expected to result in functionally different or more complex designs. Animals vary based on coded genetic information that is already there.

This document is not a scientific thesis, but an apologetic intended to be submitted and defended by me in an interactive, online electronic forum.

I claim no copyright on this document, and grant its use to the public domain.

I do not agree to defend this document in any forum that I did not submit it, due to the practical limitations of my own time.

The original source of this document is located at originality of content of this document ranges from mere paraphrases of material from a wide assortment of authors to entirely original material that I have not seen expressed by any other author. I should point out that I do not consider myself an authority on the leading edge of modern creationism, although it may seem so to the uninitiated.

Today there are an increasing number of anti-creationist authors who are producing books and periodicals that make this relatively brief presentation insufficient to deal with all the points in dispute.As a preface to this document, I want to point out that it is a shame that we have to continue to refute the same arguments that evolutionists keep bringing up over and over again in their attempts to argue against the fact of creation, which fact has been well established since the day the earth was created ex nihilo several thousand years ago.Nevertheless, the neo-Darwinian dogma of the spontaneous auto-organization of random chemicals into complex biopolymers, by chance forming complex self-replicating automatic machines that then evolve into more and more complex self-replicating automatic machines through genetic transcriptional errors and the injection of random noise, filtered into highly coded information and structures by predators, the climate, and other mindless agents working together to produce an ecosystem capable of sustaining and improving all these countless life forms for billions of years has managed to permeate, over the last 150 years, the thinking in major scientific circles, the media, and secular education, even penetrating some professing Christian institutions.The following is an organized presentation on the creation vs. This is the fourth revision of a set of essays which I had originally submitted in note 840 of the now-archived Christian_V5 conference, with first revisions submitted in note 24 of the Christian_V6 conference and note 35 of the Biology conference, and second and third revisions submitted in note 25 and 640 of the now-archived Christian_V7 conference as of this writing, respectively.(These are employee-interest forums at my place of employment.) It is my hope that this will provide a logical and coherent framework for defending the fact of special creation and the abrupt appearance of life on earth against the popular dogma of evolution.

Today there are an increasing number of anti-creationist authors who are producing books and periodicals that make this relatively brief presentation insufficient to deal with all the points in dispute.As a preface to this document, I want to point out that it is a shame that we have to continue to refute the same arguments that evolutionists keep bringing up over and over again in their attempts to argue against the fact of creation, which fact has been well established since the day the earth was created ex nihilo several thousand years ago.Nevertheless, the neo-Darwinian dogma of the spontaneous auto-organization of random chemicals into complex biopolymers, by chance forming complex self-replicating automatic machines that then evolve into more and more complex self-replicating automatic machines through genetic transcriptional errors and the injection of random noise, filtered into highly coded information and structures by predators, the climate, and other mindless agents working together to produce an ecosystem capable of sustaining and improving all these countless life forms for billions of years has managed to permeate, over the last 150 years, the thinking in major scientific circles, the media, and secular education, even penetrating some professing Christian institutions.The following is an organized presentation on the creation vs. This is the fourth revision of a set of essays which I had originally submitted in note 840 of the now-archived Christian_V5 conference, with first revisions submitted in note 24 of the Christian_V6 conference and note 35 of the Biology conference, and second and third revisions submitted in note 25 and 640 of the now-archived Christian_V7 conference as of this writing, respectively.(These are employee-interest forums at my place of employment.) It is my hope that this will provide a logical and coherent framework for defending the fact of special creation and the abrupt appearance of life on earth against the popular dogma of evolution.In fact, within the laws of probabilities and statistics we should not expect order and selection to be the result of "random" processes. ) Effects caused by random genetic mutations (that is, those that are phenotypically expressed) are almost always bad.