DINOGOOSE
Genesis 1:25
“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.”
An article in the Los Angeles Times about a recent fossil find began:
If it walks like a duck and swims like a duck, it might be a dinosaur.
The writer was referring to a fossil called Halszkaraptor escuilliei, which the paleontologists think shows traits of both therapod and aquatic bird – a sort of dinogoose. These scientists did not discover the fossil. They purchased it from Mongolia in an area where certain other fossil purchases have proved controversial.
Scientists claim that the bird has a beak-like structure, which, they say, cannot be a beak because it contains teeth. It should be noted that there are other dinosaurs that have beak-like structures, and, indeed, other animals such as the platypus. The LA Times article states that the creature “probably sported plumage”. Their reason for this statement can only be question-begging because the article admits that “no feathers survived on this specimen”. Even the phrase “no feathers survived” is a biased statement. The specimen featured no feathers, but this can only mean that feathers had not “survived”, if it was known for sure that feathers originally existed. There is no such evidence, so once again we see that statements are made from an evolutionary starting point with no justification for that starting point being given.
God made such a wide variety of creatures in the world that, as Bible-believing Christians, we have no trouble accepting that here, perhaps, is a new type of dinosaur that we have not previously known. We are not obliged to attribute qualities to the creature just because of any a priori commitment.
We are amazed, Lord, at the incredible variety of creatures that You created to be on this world with us. It is to You that we give all the honor and glory. Amen.
Genesis 1:25
“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.”
An article in the Los Angeles Times about a recent fossil find began:
If it walks like a duck and swims like a duck, it might be a dinosaur.
The writer was referring to a fossil called Halszkaraptor escuilliei, which the paleontologists think shows traits of both therapod and aquatic bird – a sort of dinogoose. These scientists did not discover the fossil. They purchased it from Mongolia in an area where certain other fossil purchases have proved controversial.
Scientists claim that the bird has a beak-like structure, which, they say, cannot be a beak because it contains teeth. It should be noted that there are other dinosaurs that have beak-like structures, and, indeed, other animals such as the platypus. The LA Times article states that the creature “probably sported plumage”. Their reason for this statement can only be question-begging because the article admits that “no feathers survived on this specimen”. Even the phrase “no feathers survived” is a biased statement. The specimen featured no feathers, but this can only mean that feathers had not “survived”, if it was known for sure that feathers originally existed. There is no such evidence, so once again we see that statements are made from an evolutionary starting point with no justification for that starting point being given.
God made such a wide variety of creatures in the world that, as Bible-believing Christians, we have no trouble accepting that here, perhaps, is a new type of dinosaur that we have not previously known. We are not obliged to attribute qualities to the creature just because of any a priori commitment.
We are amazed, Lord, at the incredible variety of creatures that You created to be on this world with us. It is to You that we give all the honor and glory. Amen.
SCIENTIFIC PROOF
1 Timothy 6:20
“O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called.”.
During a radio interview on the BBC, Richard Dawkins once said, “The view that all living organisms have a common ancestor, from which they have evolved, is the correct one.” Statements like these often intimidate the layman into thinking that certain ideas in science, such as evolution, must have been proven beyond all reasonable doubt.
Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Even serious articles and books written from an evolutionary standpoint have to acknowledge the nature of their theories. Evolutionists like to criticize less experienced creationists if the latter say something like, “But evolution is only a theory.” They will wax lyrical on how a scientific theory is something designed to fit all the available facts and evidences. Yet evolutionary theory fails to do that. It is indeed true that a theory cannot be proved. It can, of course, be disproved, and large amounts of evidence can be accumulated to support a theory. But the theory fails if just one piece of evidence is found which contradicts the theory.
There are innumerable pieces of evidence which do not fit into an evolutionary framework. Therefore, the theory ought to fall, but it doesn’t. The reason why it is difficult to overturn people’s belief in the theory of evolution is that so many people have invested heavily in it.
Those of us who believe the Bible note that scientific principles are consistent with our belief because this is a firm foundation on which to build.
Thank You, Lord, for the truth of Your word. Help us to submit to Your word in every circumstance. Amen.
1 Timothy 6:20
“O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called.”.
During a radio interview on the BBC, Richard Dawkins once said, “The view that all living organisms have a common ancestor, from which they have evolved, is the correct one.” Statements like these often intimidate the layman into thinking that certain ideas in science, such as evolution, must have been proven beyond all reasonable doubt.
Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Even serious articles and books written from an evolutionary standpoint have to acknowledge the nature of their theories. Evolutionists like to criticize less experienced creationists if the latter say something like, “But evolution is only a theory.” They will wax lyrical on how a scientific theory is something designed to fit all the available facts and evidences. Yet evolutionary theory fails to do that. It is indeed true that a theory cannot be proved. It can, of course, be disproved, and large amounts of evidence can be accumulated to support a theory. But the theory fails if just one piece of evidence is found which contradicts the theory.
There are innumerable pieces of evidence which do not fit into an evolutionary framework. Therefore, the theory ought to fall, but it doesn’t. The reason why it is difficult to overturn people’s belief in the theory of evolution is that so many people have invested heavily in it.
Those of us who believe the Bible note that scientific principles are consistent with our belief because this is a firm foundation on which to build.
Thank You, Lord, for the truth of Your word. Help us to submit to Your word in every circumstance. Amen.
THE OLDEST LIFE?
Joshua 4:6
“That this may be a sign among you, that when your children ask their fathers in time to come, saying, What mean ye by these stones?”
How old is the world’s oldest fossil? The problem is that the term “oldest” implies a timescale, and we may not agree on the nature of that timescale. For example, deep-time evolutionists assume that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, whereas creationists show that the age of the Earth given in the Bible is about 6,000 years.
Research presented to the National Academy of Sciences shows little compromise on these varying timescales, however, declaring, “Scientists finally confirm there was life on Earth 3.5 billion years ago.” This headline, describing the dating of microfossils in a rock found in 1993, uses language suggesting that definitive proof has been found. Is this the case?
In order to “finally confirm” something, that something would have to be proven beyond doubt. Yet, when we read the article, we note a considerable amount of doubt, even among the researchers. The article keeps mixing its thoughts on dating. The original version of the article suggested that the rock, containing the microfossils, had been carbon-dated at 3.45 billion years old. Of course, even if there were such time, carbon-dating cannot account for more than 100,000 years. The current edition of the article contains an erratum stating that the rock was dated by radiometric means. Yet the article still suggests that carbon isotopes were isolated in the microfossils, as if from the material of the original organism. But a fossil is an imprint of an original, not the organism itself.
The confusion of evolutionary science journalists is understandable, as they have not had the opportunity to see that the biblical timescale is more real.
Lord God, You hold all times and seasons in Your hand. You have made everything for our benefit, but most especially for Your Glory. Amen.
Joshua 4:6
“That this may be a sign among you, that when your children ask their fathers in time to come, saying, What mean ye by these stones?”
How old is the world’s oldest fossil? The problem is that the term “oldest” implies a timescale, and we may not agree on the nature of that timescale. For example, deep-time evolutionists assume that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, whereas creationists show that the age of the Earth given in the Bible is about 6,000 years.
Research presented to the National Academy of Sciences shows little compromise on these varying timescales, however, declaring, “Scientists finally confirm there was life on Earth 3.5 billion years ago.” This headline, describing the dating of microfossils in a rock found in 1993, uses language suggesting that definitive proof has been found. Is this the case?
In order to “finally confirm” something, that something would have to be proven beyond doubt. Yet, when we read the article, we note a considerable amount of doubt, even among the researchers. The article keeps mixing its thoughts on dating. The original version of the article suggested that the rock, containing the microfossils, had been carbon-dated at 3.45 billion years old. Of course, even if there were such time, carbon-dating cannot account for more than 100,000 years. The current edition of the article contains an erratum stating that the rock was dated by radiometric means. Yet the article still suggests that carbon isotopes were isolated in the microfossils, as if from the material of the original organism. But a fossil is an imprint of an original, not the organism itself.
The confusion of evolutionary science journalists is understandable, as they have not had the opportunity to see that the biblical timescale is more real.
Lord God, You hold all times and seasons in Your hand. You have made everything for our benefit, but most especially for Your Glory. Amen.
COLLIDING IN THE SKY
Psalm 8:3-4
“When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?”
Astronomers have apparently witnessed a collision between two neutron stars. This collision apparently produced gold, worth about $10 octillion (109). But before you jump in your car to go and collect some of this bounty, you need to know that this collision occurred 130 million light years away. The discovery, such as it is, was reported by a number of news agencies in October 2017.
What are we to make of such reports? As with all evolutionary or deep-time articles, we have to read between the lines.
Behind the reports are the astronomers’ presuppositions. According to Big Bang philosophies, the original matter in the universe would have to have been hydrogen. This hydrogen would have to aggregate, by gravity waves, until it could start undergoing nuclear fusion. This would gradually produce slightly heavier elements. Later gravitational collapse would cause supernovae, and the clouds of dust which these caused would aggregate again into second- and third-generation stars, providing ever heavier elements. Finally, super-dense stars, called neutron stars, would be produced. The very heavy elements, such as gold and platinum, would require the collision of two of these neutron stars in order to create them. So you see that the presuppositions of how heavy elements could form by themselves were in place before the discovery was reported. What the astronomers actually saw was a complex object whose light included the absorption spectrum for gold. It is therefore somewhat disingenuous to claim, as they do, that “we see the gold being formed”.
Instead of using Big Bang theory to interpret the observations, creationist astronomers – who presuppose the Bible – will soon suggest better explanations of these observations.
When we look at the heavens, Lord God, we consider that we do not know why You are mindful of us, but we are thankful that You are. Amen.
Psalm 8:3-4
“When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?”
Astronomers have apparently witnessed a collision between two neutron stars. This collision apparently produced gold, worth about $10 octillion (109). But before you jump in your car to go and collect some of this bounty, you need to know that this collision occurred 130 million light years away. The discovery, such as it is, was reported by a number of news agencies in October 2017.
What are we to make of such reports? As with all evolutionary or deep-time articles, we have to read between the lines.
Behind the reports are the astronomers’ presuppositions. According to Big Bang philosophies, the original matter in the universe would have to have been hydrogen. This hydrogen would have to aggregate, by gravity waves, until it could start undergoing nuclear fusion. This would gradually produce slightly heavier elements. Later gravitational collapse would cause supernovae, and the clouds of dust which these caused would aggregate again into second- and third-generation stars, providing ever heavier elements. Finally, super-dense stars, called neutron stars, would be produced. The very heavy elements, such as gold and platinum, would require the collision of two of these neutron stars in order to create them. So you see that the presuppositions of how heavy elements could form by themselves were in place before the discovery was reported. What the astronomers actually saw was a complex object whose light included the absorption spectrum for gold. It is therefore somewhat disingenuous to claim, as they do, that “we see the gold being formed”.
Instead of using Big Bang theory to interpret the observations, creationist astronomers – who presuppose the Bible – will soon suggest better explanations of these observations.
When we look at the heavens, Lord God, we consider that we do not know why You are mindful of us, but we are thankful that You are. Amen.
EXPERTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
Genesis 8:22
“While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.”
Every year, more and more articles appear in print and on the web concerning the effects of climate change.
These experts are an elusive group. Hovering in the background, commenting on every disaster, these nameless experts are like a 21st Century gnostic priesthood in possession of secret knowledge which only those expert enough to be experts can comprehend.
One recent article gloried in the following lengthy headline: Climate change will displace millions in coming decades. Nations should prepare now to help them.
The article began with comments on the terrible fires in California which have destroyed so many homes. The tactic is to associate sad disasters with climate change so that those who oppose this so-called “settled science” will appear heartless. To be clear, we should support effective methods of helping those affected by such disasters.
The problem lies in what the experts say about such events. Quote: “Experts estimate that climate change is likely to displace between 150 and 300 million people.” What these experts do not establish is the link between the possible changes in climate and human industrial activity. Nor do they prove the extent of such changes, the likes of which have occurred throughout human history.
Here is another. Quote: “Experts agree that a prolonged drought may have catalyzed Syria’s civil war.” Does that awful war have nothing to do with the quality of leadership in the regime?
Thankfully, we do indeed have an expert who has reminded us of the truth that “while the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease.”
Father, there are many trials which cause us concern and seem to make us anxious. But You have told us not to be anxious about anything. We pray that we might cast all these anxieties on You, knowing that You care for us.
Genesis 8:22
“While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.”
Every year, more and more articles appear in print and on the web concerning the effects of climate change.
These experts are an elusive group. Hovering in the background, commenting on every disaster, these nameless experts are like a 21st Century gnostic priesthood in possession of secret knowledge which only those expert enough to be experts can comprehend.
One recent article gloried in the following lengthy headline: Climate change will displace millions in coming decades. Nations should prepare now to help them.
The article began with comments on the terrible fires in California which have destroyed so many homes. The tactic is to associate sad disasters with climate change so that those who oppose this so-called “settled science” will appear heartless. To be clear, we should support effective methods of helping those affected by such disasters.
The problem lies in what the experts say about such events. Quote: “Experts estimate that climate change is likely to displace between 150 and 300 million people.” What these experts do not establish is the link between the possible changes in climate and human industrial activity. Nor do they prove the extent of such changes, the likes of which have occurred throughout human history.
Here is another. Quote: “Experts agree that a prolonged drought may have catalyzed Syria’s civil war.” Does that awful war have nothing to do with the quality of leadership in the regime?
Thankfully, we do indeed have an expert who has reminded us of the truth that “while the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease.”
Father, there are many trials which cause us concern and seem to make us anxious. But You have told us not to be anxious about anything. We pray that we might cast all these anxieties on You, knowing that You care for us.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.