Archive for August, 2009

Evidence From Geology

August 30th, 2009


The mapping of the ocean floor–with its awesome mountain ranges and deep caverns–shows a gigantic fissure (crack) spanning the entire globe, called the Mid-Oceanic Ridge. The Bible says when the Flood began, “all the fountains of the deep were broken up” (Genesis 7:11). The Hebrew word used for broken up also means “to rip open” or “burst forth.” This implies that massive quantities of subterranean waters existed below the surface of the earth and that these waters broke forth to fill our present sea basins. Some creationists believe that these Mid-Oceanic Ridge fissures are possibly what remains of the scar from which all of this water burst forth. This theory is known as the hydroplate theory, which is one of the creationist models explaining the rapid changes that happened to the earth’s crust during the global Flood.

It is interesting to note that the very word ocean is translated from the original Hebrew word that literally means “that which burst forth from the womb.” Scientific discoveries heighten one’s appreciation for the Bible, especially when we find that every word and phrase has a specific meaning which fits perfectly with the world around us.

The above was quoted from Science and the Bible, p.21 (Grady) and In the Beginning, p.87-119 as depicted in A Closer Look At The Evidence by Richard & Tina Kleiss.

…the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broke up, and the windows of heaven were opened. And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights. (Genesis 7:11-12 KJV )


Evidence from Astronomy

August 18th, 2009


Evolutionists have no adequate explanation for why, if our solar system evolved, the planets do not all spin in the same direction. Most planets rotate in the same direction [prograde orbit] as their orbits; but Venus, Uranus, and Pluto rotate backwards. In the nebula model of solar system evolution, the 72 [170] (see note below)  known moons should orbit planets in the same direction.  Instead, at least eight moons have backward orbits [retrograde orbit]. The planets Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune have moons orbiting in both directions!

These types of undisputed observations contradict the current theories of how the solar system evolved. They are, however, exactly what an all-powerful Creator, who wanted to reveal His hand in creation, would place in the universe for our enjoyment.
What grand diversity we see exhibited by our Creator!

The above article was taken from In the Beginning, 7th Ed., p.21 as written in A Closer Look At The Evidence by Richard & Tina Kleiss

Dominion and awe belong to God; he establishes order in the heights of heaven. Can his forces be numbered?…

(Job 25:2-3)

EDITOR’S NOTE: I suspect the 72 moons were calculated from old information. My links point out that there are 170 moons as of this posting. This number is accurate as of March 2009 but I expect it to continue to change as time goes on.  Whatever the actual number is, I find the quantity to be irrelevant within the context of this article which concentrates on the rotational directions of moons around our planets within our solar system. 


Evidence From Mathematics

August 17th, 2009


The simplest conceivable form of life (e.g., bacteria) contains at least 600 protein  molecules. Each of these molecules performs specific functions by fitting into other molecules shaped in exact three-dimensional spacial arrangements. These proteins work like a key fitting into a lock – only a specifically shaped protein will fit. Yet there are multiple trillions of possible combinations of protein molecules * and shapes. How could the exactly required shape find the exactly correct corresponding protein in order to perform the required cellular function? The mathematical probability that the precisely designed molecules needed for the “simplest” bacteria could form by chance arrangement of amino acids (these are the chemicals that link up to form proteins) is far less than 1 in 10450 . Most scientists acknowledge that any probability less than 1 in 10 50 is considered an impossibility. One wonders why this “impossibility” is taught as a “fact of science” to millions of school children each year.

* Editor’s Note: When going to the link on “protein molecules” be sure to scroll down about 1/5 of the way to a box titled “A Deeper Look”.

The above document is from In The Beginning, 7th Ed., p.14 as quoted in A Closer Look At The Evidence by Richard & Tina Kleiss.

“As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways are higher than your ways and My thoughts higher than your thoughts.”   (Isaiah 55:9)


Dinosaur Soft Tissue

August 17th, 2009
T-Rex from

T-Rex from

Dinosaur Soft Tissues: They’re Real!
by Brian Thomas, M.S.*

Paleontologist Mary Schweitzer’s discoveries of soft blood vessels, proteins, various blood cells, and even DNA inside fossilized dinosaur bones have been met with extreme skepticism from the scientific community. It has been well established that such biological structures and molecules should not last beyond a few tens of thousands of years, and could not possibly survive millions of years. So why are they there?

Scientists have made multiple attempts to debunk Schweitzer’s findings. Over the last 15 years, alternate explanations for the soft dinosaur tissue include contamination in the field or in the lab, bacterial activity producing the illusion of blood vessel remains, and the possibility that protein signatures derived from the tissues are actually just statistical artifacts (i.e., distortions or data errors).

In an effort to answer these objections, Schweitzer’s team implemented sterile excavation procedures and had an independent third party analyze their results. They confirmed that the soft tissues could not have come from bacteria. Bacteria do not manufacture products in the shape of vertebrate blood vessels, nor can they produce the kind of collagen found in the dinosaur bones.

The issue has generated such fervor that John Asara of Harvard Medical School, who found clear collagen signatures in Schweitzer’s dinosaur tissues,1 placed his data on line so that anyone could access it. Researchers from Palo Alto reanalyzed the data and published their report on line in the Journal of Proteome Research.2 They verified that four of Asara’s original seven collagen sequences were clearly legitimate, using different statistical and bioinformatics techniques. So far, there is every indication that the dinosaur soft tissues—incredible as it seems—are real biological leftovers from their once-living hosts.

Three options present themselves for the presence of molecules and blood vessels in creatures that purportedly passed on eons ago. Perhaps the soft tissue is some kind of mistake—it isn’t really organic material. But the number of other possible substances it could be is dwindling. Or perhaps there is an entirely unknown natural process that could have preserved soft tissue for millions of years. But this is a special pleading argument, one with strong laboratory evidence against it. Third, perhaps the soft tissue, and therefore the sedimentary rock that encased it, are thousands—not millions—of years old.

Dinosaur soft tissue leaves the evolutionary paradigm, which must have millions of years in order to achieve even remote plausibility, between a rock and a hard place. However, these dinosaur blood cells and vessels fit perfectly into the biblical history of the world, which indicates that man and dinosaurs both were created on the same day in the relatively recent past.3

Asara, J. M. et al. 2007. Protein Sequences from Mastodon and Tyrannosaurus Rex Revealed by Mass Spectrometry. Science. 316 (5822): 280-285.
Bern, M., B. S. Phinney, and D. Goldberg. 2009. Reanalysis of Tyrannosaurus rex Mass Spectra. Journal of Proteome Research. Published online July 15, 2009, accessed July 30, 2009.
Genesis 1:24-27.

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

This post was taken from the Institute For Creation Research

And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:25)

Evidence From Anatomy

August 16th, 2009
Simple Squamous Capillary

Simple Squamous Capillary

Our blood vessels are an incredible pipeline system which networks our entire body. These vessels come in three basic types: arteries, veins, and capillaries. Capillaries are microscopic vessels that link the smallest arteries to the veins. They are the most abundant type of blood vessels. About 40 capillaries laid end to end measure only one inch. Yet they are so numerous that if all of the capillaries in our body were laid end to end they would stretch around the equator two times!

Blood is pumped into the capillaries with enough force to drive the plasma through the porous walls of these tiny vessels, thus nourishing surrounding cells. However, the pressure is not so great that the red and white blood cells are lost or the capillaries burst. There must be an absolutely perfect balance of pressure between the blood flowing within the vessel, the blood being forced through the vessel walls, and the blood in and around the body’s cells. Without question, the design of our blood vessels and the perfect balance of pressure required to maintain life is testimony to our Designer.

The above was quoted from The Human Body: Accident or Design?, p.42-44 as depicted in A Closer Look  At The Evidence by Richard & Tina Kleiss.

To Him who alone does great wonders, For His loving kindness is everlasting…    (Psalm 136:4 NASV)


Evidence From Mathematics

August 11th, 2009

simple cell drawingDrawing of a cell membrane from Wikipedia.

At one time living cells were considered no more than empty table tennis balls. As biochemists have learned more about the complexity of life, it has become increasingly apparent that thousands of specific and complex chemicals are required for any form of life to survive. Evolutionist Harold Morowitz estimated the probability for chance formation of even the simplest form of living organism at 1/10340,000,000. By contrast, only 10²º grains of sand could fit within a cubic mile, and 10 billion times more (10³º) would fit inside the entire earth. So the probability of forming a simple cell by chance processes in infinitely less likely than having a blind person select one specifically marked grain of sand out of an entire earth filled with sand.

There is nowhere near enough time nor matter in the entire universe for even the simplest cell to have formed by chance combinations. Even if all the correct chemicals somehow came together in the correct place, you still wouldn’t have life. This is exactly the situation every time a living organism dies. Immediately after death, all the right chemicals exist, in the right proportions, and in the right place – yet the creature is still dead!

Five billion years is nowhere near long enough for evolution to have taken place. In reality, all of eternity would not provide enough time for random processes to form the enormous complexity of life.

This document was taken from Energy Flow in Biology, Academic Press, NY, 1968, p.99 and quoted in A Closer Look At The Evidence, by Richard & Tina Kleiss.

I will proclaim the name of the LORD.  Oh praise the greatness of our God! He is the Rock, his works are perfect, and all His ways are just. . .  (Deuteronomy 32:3,4)

The Golden Ratio

August 2nd, 2009

In the year 1202 the Italian mathematician Leonardo Fibonacci worked out a problem about rabbits having babies and discovered a pattern of numbers: 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144,233,377, and so on. Every number in the pattern was the addition of the two that came before it: 0+1= 1, 1+1= 2, 1+2= 3, 2+3= S, 3+5= 8,5+8= 13, 8+13= 21, and so on. We see these Fibonacci numbers showing up over, and over, and over in nature.


If you ignore the zero, and divide a Fibonacci number into the one before it you get: 1, 2, 1.5, 1.67, 1.6, 1.625, 1.615, 1.619, 1.617,1.618,1.617,1.618,1.618, etc. After the first few, the answer lS always close to 1.618. Now you might ask yourself, “So what? What does 1.618 have to do with anything?” Well, as it turns out, that’s a very special number – so special, in fact, that it’s called the “golden ratio“.

The ancient Greeks based a lot of their art and buildings on the golden ratio (often shown as the Greek letter Phi Φ). The length of the Parthenon, for example, is a rectangle 1.618 times as long as it is wide (known as a golden rectangle). They also designed much of their pottery with the same ratio. Now why did they do that? They did it because they believed that this special ratio was much more pleasing to the human eye than any other ratio. Many of the great artists used the golden ratio in their art. For example, Mona Lisa‘s face is 1.618 times as long as it is wide. Beautiful symphonies also have the same golden ratio. The first movement is usually 1.618 times as long as the second one.

So why do we find that number so pleasing to the eye and to the ear? Do we find it beautiful because it copies creation, the work of the Master Artist, God? Could it be that the golden ratio is one of the blueprints God used in His creation? Let’s look at a few of the other ways that the number 1.618 shows up over, and over, and over again throughout the universe.

ΦEach segment in your finger is roughly 1.618 times as long as the next one.

Φ Your forearm is approximately 1.618 times as long as your hand.

Φ People with mouths 1.618 times as wide as their noses, are often considered the most beautiful.

Φ In addition, the distance between their pupils is about 1.618 times as wide as their mouths.

The leaves and stems of some trees are arranged at 137.5 degrees from each other. That angle lets the sun shine on the greatest number of leaves. When you draw that angle inside a circle, you get two pieces. Divide 137.5° into 222.5° and you get … 1.618!

If you make a spiral based on Fibonacci numbers, where every quarter turn is 1.618 times as far from the center as the previous one, you get what is known as a “golden spiral”. Amazingly, most of the spirals found in nature are golden spirals.

The list of golden ratios goes on and on and on. From art and music to nature and science, 1.618 keeps showing up over and over. It is almost as if “Somebody” used that number as a measuring stick for the universe. It just can’t be an accident. Many people call the golden ratio the “divine proportion” because it is clear only God could have done it!

The above document was published by Alpha Omega Institute, Kids Think and Believe, March-April 2006 and authored by Lanny & Marilyn Johnson.

Dr. Michael Ruse

August 2nd, 2009


Michael Ruse, editor of the Cambridge Series in the Philosophy of Biology and founding editor of the professional journal “Biology and Philosophy” is a hardcore Darwinist. Yet he considers both Dawkins and Dennett “dangerous.” Ruse is worried that if Dawkins and Dennett make evolution and atheism one (they do!) then Intelligent Design advocates will have a legal basis for its discussion in science classrooms. Why? Because teaching Darwinian evolution in the classroom as equal to atheism would violate the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Ruse has a valid point. Sooner or later Secular Humanism as a religion will be in the courts, and atheism will be a key element in the discussion. Already the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has declared atheism a religion. But Ruse, who teaches at Florida State University, is even more direct than Dawkins and Dennett, who equate atheism and evolution. In a telling article published in the Canadian National Post (May 13, 2000) he writes, “Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion-a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality …. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.”

Secular Humanists generally deny their world view is a religion. Their opponents, however, argue that Secular Humanism IS as much a religion as Christianity, Islam, et al, and, therefore, should not be the religion of American public schools. Ruse gives the whole Secular Humanist case away when he says, “Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitution for Christianity. It stressed laws against miracles and, by analogy, it promoted progress against providence …. One of the most popular books of the era was Religion Without Revelation, by the evolutionist Julian Huxley, grandson of Thomas Huxley.”

The above excerpt was taken from The Schwarz Report, April 2009, p.2

Paul Amos Moody

August 2nd, 2009

Paul Amos Moody, a superb scientist, wrote Introduction To Evolution published by Harper and Row. In it, he admits to his students that the more he studies science, the more impressed he is with the thought that “this world and universe have a definite design–and a design suggests a designer.” He goes on to say, “It may be possible to have design without a designer, a picture without an artist, but  my mind is unable to conceive of such a situation.”

The above exerpt was taken from The Schwarz Report, April 2009, Volumn 49 Number 4,  p.2

Dr. Colin Patterson

August 2nd, 2009


On November 5, 1981, the late  Colin Patterson (who at the time was the senior paleontologist of the British Museum of Natural History in London, the editor of the professional journal published by the museum, and one of the world’s foremost fossil experts) delivered a public address to his evolutionist colleagues at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. In his speech, Dr. Patterson astonished those colleagues when he stated that he had been “kicking around” non-evolutionary, or “anti-evolutionary,” ideas for about eighteen months. As he went on to describe it:

One morning I woke up and something had happened in the night, and it struck me that I had been working on this stuff for twenty years and there was not one thing I knew about it. That’s quite a shock to learn that one can be misled so long. Either there was something wrong with me, or there was something wrong with evolution theory (1981).

Dr. Patterson said he knew there was nothing wrong with him, so he started asking various individuals and groups a simple question: “Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing that is true? I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History, and the only answer I got was silence.” He tried it on the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar at the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of evolutionists, and all he got there “was silence for a long time and eventually one person said, ‘I do know one thing—it ought not to be taught in high school.’ ” He then remarked, “It does seem that the level of knowledge about evolution is remarkably shallow. We know it ought not to be taught in high school, and that’s all we know about it.”

Dr. Patterson went on to say: “Then I woke up and realized that all my life I had been duped into taking evolution as revealed truth in some way.” But more important, he termed evolution an “anti-theory” that produced “anti-knowledge.” He also suggested that “the explanatory value of the hypothesis is nil,” and that evolution theory is “a void that has the function of knowledge but conveys none.” To use Patterson’s wording, “I feel that the effects of hypotheses of common ancestry in systematics has not been merely boring, not just a lack of knowledge, I think it has been positively anti-knowledge” (1981; cf. Bethell, 1985, 270:49-52,56-58,60-61).

Dr. Patterson made it clear, as I wish to do here, that he had no fondness for the creationist position. Yet he did refer to his stance as “anti-evolutionary,” which was quite a change for a man who had authored several books (one of which was titled simply Evolution) in the field that he later acknowledged was capable of producing only “anti-knowledge.”

The above article was taken out of an article published in the Apologetics Press :: Sensible Science 

Is Evolution a “Fact” of Science?

by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.