skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Paleontologists have little good to say after touring the museum.
SUMMARY: Six dozen paleontologists visited the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky last week to get a glimpse at marketing tactics being used by the museum. The scientists had been in the area already for a conference.
Although they spend their careers studying evolution, they were visiting a place dedicated to a literal interpretation of the Bible and to disproving the theory. "The real purpose of the museum visit is to give some of my colleagues an opportunity to sense how they're being portrayed," said Arnold Miller, a paleontology professor at the U. of Cincinnati which was hosting the conference. "They're being demonized, I feel, in this museum as people who are responsible for all the ills of society."
The scientists objected to exhibits that portray science as doing more harm than good. They were disturbed at the depiction of the great flood as being a rebuke for questioning God. They didn't like seeing dinosaurs alongside cows, monkeys and other animals in a model of Noah's Ark or in another exhibit, two young girls pictured playing near dinosaurs.
Dr. David Menton, a biology professor with Answers in Genesis, which founded the museum, insisted the museum largely uses the same evidence that other scientists use but with a starting point millions of years later. Scientists can't prove anything beyond a few thousands years anyway, he said. He defended the idea that dinosaurs and man were contemporaries but doubts that they spent much time hobnobbing with each other.
To read the entire article click on this MSNBC link.
COMMENT: Why would so many paleontologists pay a visit to a place that publicly they look at with such deep contempt? Certainly, curiosity might be the reason. However, they might have wanted to tour the museum so that they could freely criticize the place without someone complaining that they shouldn't criticize an institution they haven't seen. We'll see what if anything these scientists have to say in the days and weeks ahead about what they learned at AiG's museum.
If we are allowed to hope, we might hope and pray that at least some of the scientists might be "closet creationists" or at least "closet evolution-doubters" who have had questions about Darwin's theories that may have deepened as a result of their visit. That some of them spoke out against the museum isn't surprising because one could lose his/her standing in the evolutionist fraternity if appearing to be too soft on creationism.
It is interesting that these scientists were paleontologists. Two people creationists most like to quote are paleontologists. In regard to the alleged evidence for evolution in the fossil record, the late Stephen Jay Gould wrote such things as "All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt." The late Colin Patterson of the British Museum of Natural History wrote in a letter regarding a book on evolution he had authored, "‘I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them." Evolutionists may falsely maintain these men were misquoted or their remarks were taken out of context, but even though Gould and Patterson remained evolutionists, their honesty regarding the fossil record can't be ignored.
As for the claim that creationists believe Darwinians are responsible for all the world's ills, that is an overstatement. There were plenty of problems in the world long before anyone ever heard of Charles Darwin. For instance, the Bible makes it clear Noah's Flood was sent because of the serious tide of sin that had overtaken the world at that time. Still, a theory that insists we are descended from animals can't be good for society. Some people may take that as permission to sometimes act like animals. Most important though, evolutionism destroys the need for a Savior and causes people to look at science as their god instead of looking to the only true God in heaven who alone can provide salvation. This He does, of course, through the death of Jesus Christ by which He offers salvation to anyone willing to accept it.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
According to author Vance Ferrell, what are the evolutionary formulae for the evolution of the first cell and the first human?
Nothing+Time+Chance="Simple" Cell
Cell+Time+Chance=Man
Source: The Evolution Handbook by Vance Ferrell
*********************************************
NOTE ON VISITOR COMMENTS: Visitor comments are encouraged including those containing alternate views. However, comments containing profanity will not be published. Please allow several hours for a comment to appear on the blog.
Half of American pet owners treat their pets like children.
SUMMARY: An Associated Press-Petside.com poll based on interviews with 1,110 pet owners has found that half of them consider their pets just as much part of the family as any person in the household, while another 36 percent consider the animals as part of the family but not a full member.
Most pet owners feed their pets human food; nearly half give their animals human names; and a third allow the pets to sleep in human beds. Nineteen percent of the owners have purchased outfits for their pets.
Single persons were more likely than married people to consider pets full members of the family by 66 percent to 46 percent. Women were more likely than men to have this feeling. For some single women pets become surrogate children. For instance, Debbie Jablonski of Wilmington, N.C. allows her cat, Milkshake, to sleep at the foot of her bed and then wake her up at 4:30 a.m. to be fed by pawing her and touching her with his cold nose. Jablonski celebrates her cats' birthdays, includes their photos on holiday cards, and watches home movies of them playing.
Forty-two percent of pet owners have taken their pets on vacation, with dogs more likely than cats to go along, and dog owners were also more likely to take their pets to work or to other places they weren't really allowed to be.
To read the entire article click on this MILWAUKEE JOURNAL SENTINEL A.P. link.
COMMENT: Granted this isn't the most important topic ever discussed on this blog, but maybe after talking recently about dinosaur fossils, depression, and people who don't go to church, it is time for some lighter fare.
As a cat owner, I would say one of a pet's most redeeming qualities, which many a person would be advised to copy, is its ability to quickly forgive and forget. When I accidentally step on my tabby's tail or paw, she may cry out and run off for a few minutes, but before long she is back showing she holds no grudge. I'm sure most other cat owners and dog owners would agree with this assessment of the forgiving nature of pets.
Of course, pets aren't perfect. Dogs may bark too much or even bite. Cats may scratch the furniture and chase birds. However, they offer lots of positives including providing needed companionship, especially to the sick and elderly. Dogs and cats have been known to wake up their owners in the middle of the night when a fire has broken out in the house.
We should avoid abusing them, of course, and really ought to be including our pets and other animals in our prayers of thanksgiving. On the other hand, we shouldn't be treating them as equals. Also, we have no biblical support for any notion that we will see them in heaven. Only humans have eternal souls, and we have been sent to preach the Gospel only to our fellow human beings. Whether or not there will be animals in heaven the Bible doesn't say, but we do know that when we are there, we will be completely happy with or without these wonderful creatures God has given us.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
Does the entire earth spin at the same rate?
The solid inner core, which has a mass comparable to the size of the moon, spins slightly faster. A study done in 1996 suggests that every 400 years the inner core will have made an extra complete rotation compared to the rest of the planet.
Source: www.livescience.com
Larger beasts may have been only half as big as usually portrayed.
SUMMARY: Dinosaurs may not have been as big as usually pictured, London's Journal of Zoology said in a paper published June 21. One of the largest dinosaurs, Apatosaurus louisae (picture), may have been only half the size of what it has been estimated to be.
The problem appears to be a statistical model which has been used by paleontologists for 25 years to estimate body weight of giant dinosaurs and other large prehistoric animals. The model appears to be flawed, scientists say. "By re-examining data in the original reference sample, we show that the statistical model is seriously flawed and that the giant dinosaurs probably were only about half as heavy as is generally believed" says Gary Packard from Colorado State University.
This discovery may cause scientists to re-evaluate their ideas about dinosaur locomotion, metabolism, and food requirements.
To read the entire article click on this SCIENCE DAILY link.
COMMENT: This story points once again at the difficulty of getting fossils to give definitive answers. Whether these giant beasts lived hundreds, thousands or millions of years ago, many questions can never be answered with certainty. Yesterday's fact becomes today's question mark.
If paleontologists have been wrong about the size of dinosaurs, what else might they be wrong about? Did dinosaurs really die out some 65 million years ago? Were there really dinosaurs covered with feathers? Did some dinosaurs actually evolve into birds?
Learning about dinosaurs is a fascinating subject, but with one exception ideas about the prehistoric past should never take on the aura of invincibility. The one exception is if the ideas come right out of Scripture. Even creationist scientists must be careful about over-selling their own theories if they are not validated by Scripture, as reasonable as such theories might seem.
Fortunately, the main message of the Bible is a fact, clearly stated numerous times. Jesus came to earth to save sinners, which includes all of us. Repentance over our sins and belief that He died for our sins so we wouldn't have to die for them is the free ticket to heaven that all people ought to be looking for.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
Where can most of the Earth's fresh water be found?
About 70% of the fresh water can be found frozen in the icecaps of Antarctica (picture) and Greenland. The remaining fresh-water supply exists in the atmosphere, streams, lakes or groundwater.
Source: www.livescience.com
The science of linking specific genes to depression is still in its infancy.
SUMMARY: Many scientists believe that depression can be inherited, even though finding the genes involved has been difficult. But a new study published June 16 in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) is raising questions about that belief.
An analysis of 14 prior studies concluded the so-called "depression gene", a variant of a gene called 5-HTTLPR, may not be associated with an increased risk for depression. "Knowing whether or not you have this gene is irrelevant," says the study's co-author, Kathleen Merikangas, a genetic epidemiologist at the National Institute of Mental Health. She adds that future studies should consider the interactions of many genes rather than the actions of just one.
Duke psychologist Avashalom Caspi in 2003 did a study that found people with one or two copies of a form of 5-HTTLPR appeared to be more vulnerable to depression than other people after a stressful event such as death of a child or sudden unemployment. Subsequent studies considered the gene's role in posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety and neuroticism, but the results were mixed.
The new JAMA study reviewed 14 other studies involving 14,250 participants and looked for a link between 5-HTTLPR and stressful life events, but it could find none. It cautions against using 5-HTTLPR as a screening tool to determine depression risk. Some genetic-companies do use genetic markers to tell customers which antidepressant drugs may be best for them. But Merikangas cautions, "My concern is that [these tests] are being marketed to the public as if there is no question about it." She worries that some people may unnecessarily put off getting married or having children because of these tests.
Caspi, however, defends his work and cites 22 studies using both animals and humans which support the idea that the 5-HTTLPR depression genes are very vulnerable to stress. However, most genetics researchers agree that uncovering the genetic roots of depression is a complex task. "We have about 30,000 genes, and it is hard to pick just one and analyze it," says Dr. Hans Joergen Grabe of Germany. Grabe's own studies have hinted at a correlation between 5-HTTLPR and depression among the unemployed, but if that effect does exist, only rarely will it cause depression, he says.
The bottom line is that the science of linking specific genes to the disorder is still in its infancy, so nobody needs to worry that they might have genes that will doom them to a life of sorrow. Some simple treatments such as physical exercise and social relationships have been shown to help many people suffering from depression.
To read the entire article click on this TIME MAGAZINE link.
COMMENT: Some Christians who don't suffer from depression have at times expressed the belief that all one needs is a stronger faith and any depression will go away. I don't think most Christian psychologists today would agree with that belief.
Still, as this article points out, improving social relationships can help. What better way is there to do this than to strengthen the link between the church and the sufferers of depression? It certainly shouldn't hurt for patients to be reminded of the love of Christ for them and the promise of an eternity free from depression and all other ailments. Christians will want to show love and compassion for the depressed just like they do for people suffering from physical diseases. We don't know if researchers will ever be able to nail down the gene-depression link and find better medical ways to treat the disorder. However, we do know what the future holds in store for Christian believers, whether they suffer from depression or not.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What physical complications can appear from the use of the abortion drug RU-486?
These physical complications include hemorrhage, infection, and missed ectopic pregnancy (which can be fatal). At least 8 women have died from RU-486 due to hemorrhage and infection.
Source: A Sacred Trust (Metro-Milwaukee chapter of WELS Lutherans for Life)
Scientists point to crucial differences in their lung systems and other problems.
SUMMARY: A recent idea that has gained popularity among many evolutionists is that birds evolved from a group of dinosaurs known as theropods. Nature magazine has been pushing this idea as has the National Geographic (which had promoted Archaeoraptor as the missing link only to have it shown to be a hoax). Many museums are also presenting this claim as fact.
Not all mainstream scientists are convinced. Storrs Olson, the curator of birds at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington said, “The idea of feathered dinosaurs and the theropod origin of birds is being actively promulgated by a cadre of zealous scientists acting in concert with certain editors at Nature and National Geographic who themselves have become outspoken and highly biased proselytizers of the faith.”
Another doubter is Dr. Alan Feduccia, a bird authority at the U. of North Carolina, who criticized the idea on two grounds: anatomical and chronological. “It’s biophysically impossible to evolve flight from such large bipeds with foreshortened forelimbs and heavy, balancing tails, exactly the wrong anatomy for flight,” he says. Also, he notes that the claimed "featured dinosaur ancestors" are "dated" as being 28 million years younger than Archaeopteryx, believed by evolutionists to be the first bird. "You can't be older than your grandfather!" says Feduccia.
Another problem with the belief in a dinosaur-bird link involves their lung systems. Reptilian lungs operate like bellows, somewhat similar to our own lungs, but birds have a complicated system of air sacs which keeps the air flowing in one direction through special tubes while blood is moving through the lung's blood vessels in the opposite direction. Archaeopteryx already had the through-flow avian lung system of modern birds while its later "ancestors" did not. Researcher John Ruben of Oregon State U. also noted that reptilian lungs could not have gradually evolved into avian lungs because the animals could not have breathed with lungs in transition.
Ruben, along with OSU colleague Dr Devon Quick have made a new discovery concerning the fixed femur (thigh bone) of birds. It appears that these fixed femurs are essential for birds to keep their air-sac lungs from collapsing inwards when the bird inhales. Theropods had moving femurs that couldn't have supported avian air sacs.
Quick, Ruben and Feduccia are not rejecting evolution. They believe it is possible birds and dinosaurs had a common ancestor, but "it just seems pretty clear now that birds were evolving all along on their own and did not descend directly from the theropod dinosaurs, which lived many millions of years later.” No such common ancestor though has been found.
To read the entire article click on this CREATION MINISTRIES INTERNATONAL link.
COMMENT: As the author of the CMI article suggests, scientists on both sides of this debate are partly right, but mostly wrong. The promoters of the supposed dinosaur-bird link are correct in rejecting the idea that birds and reptiles evolved from a common ancestor. Ruben and Quick are right that birds did not evolve directly from theropods. They all are wrong, however, in believing that there is any kind of a link between birds and reptiles other than the fact they have a common Creator.
This controversy is just another example of the difficulties in trying to reconstruct something that allegedly happened millions of years ago. I believe the world would be far better off if the day comes when true scientists stick to applying the scientific method to solving current problems. They should forget about inventing "just so" stories about the past, because there will always be controversy, not just between creationists and evolutionists, but as we've seen in so many cases, evolutionist vs. evolutionist.
For those who want to know about the past, we have a perfectly reliable account by the One who has been there from the beginning. I am talking, of course, about the Holy Bible and the Lord who inspired its writings. The Bible not only tells us everything we need to know about the past, it informs us about the future, and it has good news for those who have repented of their sins and come to faith in Jesus as their Savior. The good news is the promise of an eternal life of complete happiness in heaven.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What are two substances that are harder than diamonds?
Researchers in China and the U.S. have determined that the mineral ionsdaleite (made of carbon) is 58% harder than diamonds and wurtzite boron nitride is 18% harder. Although occurring in nature, these substances are very rare and are difficult to make in the laboratory.
Source: Discover magazine (July/August, 2009)
Organized religion is held in low regard.
SUMMARY: Most of America's "unchurched" adults (defined as those who haven't been to a worship service for six months) believe in the existence of God, according to a recent survey of 1,402 unchurched adults by Lifeway Research, the research arm of the Southern Baptist Convention. But an equal percentage (72%) of those surveyed also said the church is "full of hypocrites."
Other statistics uncovered by the survey include: 22% of Americans never go to church; just 52% believe that Jesus died and came back to life; 61% say the God of the Bible is "no different" from the gods or spiritual beings depicted by Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.; 86% think they have a good relationship with God without belonging to a church; and 79% say Christianity is too much about organized religion and not enough about loving God and people.
Non-churchgoers tend to identify with a "generic god" that fits any and all religious faiths, even when the faiths are contradictory. It can no longer be assumed that most Americans worship the God of the Bible. Scott McConnell, associate director of LifeWay Research, says it is clear churches are "not getting through on the two greatest commandments (i.e. to love God and your neighbor)" and the unchurched don't see churchgoing people living out their faith.
But there is some hope for Christianity in the survey. Some 78% of these non-churchgoers would be willing to listen to someone explain his or her faith; 89% have at least one close friend who is a Christian; and 71% agree that belief in Jesus makes a positive difference in a person's life. "What surprised me is the openness of the hard-core unchurched to the message of God and Christianity -- just not as expressed in church," said Ed Stetzer, LifeWay Research director.
According to other experts, traditional Christian belief is being affected by such things as popular culture as well as Internet Bible studies and prayer circles that can take place outside the church.
To read the entire article click on this USA TODAY link.
COMMENT: It is clear that a lot of work needs to be done to get people back in churches and to get them back in for the right reasons. The first problem, as alluded to in the article, is popular culture, or we could say "political correctness." The popular message is that all gods are equal and all religions are equal. If that is true, then I can have my own religion right in my own home--no need to waste time getting into my car to go to a church and no need to take money out of my wallet for an offering.
However, we can't blame this attitude all on popular culture. Many liberal Christian denominations are preaching the same message. The ecumenical drive to unify all denominations has become a new "gospel." These ecumenical-minded churches seem to be saying, as I see it, that "it doesn't really matter what other churches teach as long as they respect our beliefs and are willing to join with us in one large fellowship."
Yes, Jesus did pray to His Father in John 17:11 that his followers "may be one as we are one." But the same Jesus also said, "...If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." [John 8:31-32] So true unity is built around following Jesus' teachings, all of them, and not on some nebulous outward union.
A church, unified around the Word of God, can then preach the true Gospel--that we are saved from the deadly effects of our sins through faith in Jesus as our Redeemer. It is truly unfortunate if a church is full of "hypocrites." However, a church should be judged on how closely it is following the teachings of Jesus, especially the Gospel, and not on the spiritual growth or lack of it of some of its members.
I disagree with one of the statements in the article that "people don't go to institutions to fix their problems." I believe, and there are hints in the survey to back up this belief, that many of the unchurched deep down realize there is more to life than being born, existing, and then dying and are looking for answers. Many are searching for a church that knows the way (singular) to eternal life and is willing to preach it, political correctness and false unity notwithstanding. Jesus said, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." [John 14:6] Amen.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
At current rates, what percentage of American women will have at least one abortion by the age of 45?
43%. And 52% of U.S. women having abortions are younger than 25. Sadly, 64% of the women having abortions felt pressured by others.
Source: A Sacred Trust (Metro-Milwaukee chapter of WELS Lutherans for Life)
And evolutionists aren't happy about it.
SUMMARY: Two years after its opening, the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky has drawn 720,000 visitors, far more than the 250,000 a year organizers had predicted (picture from opening day, 2007). The popular museum's message is that science supports the Bible's accounts of the Earth's creation in six days. Among its teachings, the museum says the Grand Canyon was created suddenly by Noah's Flood, dinosaurs and humans once lived together, and animal poison did not exist before Adam's original sin.
Many of the visitors, 20 to 30 percent of the total attendance. come from Christian schools and home schools. But some public school groups such as religious clubs have also made the trip. A Kentucky Department of Education spokeswoman said public schools could legally pay a visit if it were part of "a lesson" on "how some perceived the world's beginnings." The commemoration of Charles Darwin's 200th birthday this year may be actually increasing interest in this museum.
Secular scientists and educators are not happy with the Creation Museum, fearing that students are being led astray by "pseudo-science" that distorts accepted scientific findings. One example of the alleged scientific findings: the fossil record which these evolutionists claim shows life becoming progressively more complex over billions of years. "The poor students who go there thinking they will learn some science are done a great disservice," said a museum critic, and the National Center for Science Education, an evolutionist group, thinks students exposed to creationist teachings will not succeed in college science courses.
A biologist from a college in nearby Cincinnati, noting that polls show almost half of Americans reject evolutionary explanations, recognizes the right to believe in any view. But he says, "The Bible is not a science book. In Job, it says that the Earth rests of pillars, but we don't teach that to children."
The Creation Museum, however, remains a popular destination for Christians. As a project of the Answers in Genesis organization, it features a digital planetarium, 150 exhibits and an effects theater. "There's just too much fact and research that goes to prove that there's an intelligent design behind the universe," said the principal of a Christian school who had paid a visit. In an effort to expand its reach to young people, a "Knee High Museum" of interactive displays and activities for young people will be added next year. And the museum is sending representatives to meet with teachers at Christian schools in order to plan more exhibits to counter Darwinism.
To read the entire article and view some videos click on this LOUISVILLE COURIER-JOURNAL link.
COMMENT: The defenders of Darwin's theory are reacting in an entirely predictable way to the success of AiG's Creation Museum. We would have been surprised if they had stood up and applauded the large attendance figures or even if they had only grudgingly given the museum some respect.
Open-minded people who have been studying the arguments on both sides of the issue realize that the evolutionists are engaging in overstatements and wishful thinking in their efforts to convince the public that there's more science behind the theory of evolution than what is actually the case.
Take the subject of the fossil record, for instance, which is mentioned in the article. What can the evolutionists do with statements such as one made some time ago by Dr. Colin Patterson of the British Museum of Natural History? When replying to a question about why he didn't include any examples of missing links in a book he had written about evolution, Patterson replied (as reported by author Vance Ferrell):
"I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them. You suggest that an artist should be used to visualize [portray] such transformations, but where would he get the information from? I could not, honestly, provide it. [Steven] Gould [of Harvard] and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils. "
To be sure, there are a handful of interesting fossils of extinct creatures such as Tiktaalik that are claimed to be missing links, but they all have fully formed features and don't appear to be in transition between one kind of creature and another.
Diagrams portraying the fossil-bearing rock strata picture levels containing the simplest organisms at the bottom with each layer above the one below it being younger in age and showing increasingly more advanced fossils. Such a portrait, while looking convincing on paper, doesn't exist in real life. According to Ferrell:
"Nowhere in geological formations can we find (1) all the strata in order, (2) all the strata—even out of order, (3) most of the strata, in order or out of it. Instead we only find little bits here and there, and frequently they are mixed up (out of their theoretical sequence)."
However, one word of caution needs to be given for anyone considering assumptions about the past, whether coming from evolutionist or creationist. When made by a creationist, these are inferences or deductions based on the Bible and science, but they are not necessarily capable of being proven. For instance, if the Creation Museum is saying that animal poison did not exist before Adam's sin, this is a quite reasonable inference. However, I can imagine another possibility-these animals had their poison all along but just saw no need to use it before death came into the world. Still, if I were a betting man, I would rather place my bet on inferences based on Scripture and science then those based on atheism and science.
The biologist's reference to the Job passage about the earth resting on pillars (Job 9:6) is not relevant because all Bible scholars recognize that the Bible, like most types of literature, does on occasion use figurative expressions. If he wanted to be perfectly consistent, he should have also mentioned another passage from Job (Job 26:7) that says God "suspends the earth over nothing." The Holy Bible is a book we can trust because it has a divine holy Author who wants us to trust Him and His message, especially the central message of all of Scripture--that we have a Savior who came to take away our sins and to offer us eternal life in His heavenly home.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What is currently being claimed about the speed of wind?
According to a recent study, the wind seems to be dying down, but the idea admittedly is a speculative one. One theory, if the speed of the wind is slowing, is that it is due to global warming, the problem which wind power seeks to address. One of our blog readers suggests that perhaps the construction of so many wind turbines may be the cause. "To every action, there is a reaction."
Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (June, 2009)
The Church never fears the truth of science, Vatican City's governor says.
SUMMARY: A delegation from the Vatican which including Vatican City's governor, Cardinal Giovanni Lajolo, toured the world's biggest nuclear physics laboratory, the
CERN proton accelerator near Geneva, Switzerland this week (picture from Wikimedia Commons). "The Church never fears the truth of science, because we are convinced that all truth comes from God," Lajolo said.
Scientists hope to use the $10 billion CERN atom smasher to smash protons from hydrogen atoms into each other at high energy, record what particles are produced, and get a "better idea of the makeup of the universe and everything in it." Researchers hope these collisions will tell them what happened in the first one-trillionth of a second after the so-called Big Bang, the theoretical explosion held by many scientists to be the beginning of the universe. Scientists also hope the CERN project might unify Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity with quantum mechanics. The accelerator was damaged during its initial use in September and may not get running again until this autumn.
Lajolo went on to say that science will help faith to "purify itself." He would welcome any breakthroughs by physicists which would provide a better understanding of the basis of the universe. However, he added that faith can broaden the horizons of men who shouldn't be enclosed within just science's horizons.
To read the entire article click on this USA TODAY link.
COMMENT: The CERN atom smasher or Large Hadron Collider is a project by evolutionists. Would creationist scientists be spending $10 billion to find out what happened in the first split second of the creation? People who have been following recent statements about evolution coming out of the Vatican, the Roman Catholic Church's headquarters, realize that the Catholic church is on record as supporting Darwinism. At the same time, as an observer who lives across an ocean from this institution, I must say there definitely seems to be some confusion and uncertainty on how they should handle the evolution question. One can't cozy up too close to the scientific establishment, which wants to keep God out of the picture, without appearing to make faith and religion irrelevant. That's not a situation the world's largest Christian denomination should want to be in.
Why is the Roman Catholic Church doing this? I believe it is because this church body got burned once, when it condemned Galileo in the 17th century and put him under house arrest. Galileo's crime: he supported Copernicanism which removed the Earth from the center of the universe. The Catholic Church undoubtedly doesn't want to get embarrassed again. Yet, just because Galileo may have been right doesn't mean that Charles Darwin also was right. In both these cases, Roman Catholicism has chosen to be on the wrong side. Yes, we don't need to fear the truth of science, as the Cardinal said, but what does evolution have to do with the "truth of science"?
Many have pointed out that today the Pope and his followers are farther from the truth, perhaps MUCH father, then the Catholic Church of Martin Luther's day, when the church's errors eventually led to a split. At least then Genesis was accepted as an accurate account of the world's beginnings. Today, with the Catholic Church no longer believing in a literal Genesis or a literal Adam and Eve, how do their theologians explain the origin of sin? How can people be blamed for falling short of the glory of God if we homo sapiens are evolving to a higher state all on our own. What need is there for a Savior?
Roman Catholic leaders (as well as many Lutherans and other Christians) need to get their act together. Study the science of origins with an open mind. Note the absence of transitional animals in the modern world and the lack of missing links in the fossil record which even many secular paleontologists have admitted. Note how mutations are almost always harmful and can never add information to an organism's genetic code that will help it evolve to a higher level. Best of all, go back to the Holy Bible, study it, and appreciate how it has stood the test of time. Only wild speculations, not scientific facts, have put Scripture in a bad light. Scripture tells us how mankind fell into sin, how God promised a Savior, how Jesus Christ came as the Savior to conquer sin and Satan, and how we can all enjoy an eternity of bliss in heaven by accepting the gifts of forgiveness and salvation which the Lord offers to all.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
MY APOLOGIES for the profanity a reader left in the Comments section of the previous post. These comments have been removed. Hopefully, I have now set up this blog to inform me of any comments before they are published.
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What is meant by the term "astrobiology"?
Astrobiology (other terms have been exobiology, exopaleontology, and bioastronomy) is the study of the origin, evolution, distribution, and future of life in the universe.
Source: Wikipedia.
Indiana group spending up to $60,000 to spread atheism.
SUMMARY: "In the beginning, man created God." So say advertisements on 25 Chicago buses, put there by the Indiana Atheist Bus Campaign. Their message is that "man created God as well as all religions." The ads were inspired by similar campaigns elsewhere, such as one in England sponsored by the British Humanist Association.
The project began in Bloomington, Indiana. A group of about a dozen people set up a Web site [inatheistbus.org] and began collecting donations. They took phrases from the book of Genesis--"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1:1) and "So God created man in his own image" (Genesis 1:27)--and revised them to come up with the message now being displayed on the buses.
The ads are scheduled to be posted for several weeks. In order to keep the campaign going, the atheist group with support from the American Humanist Association hopes to raise $50,000 in addition to the $10,000 they have already raised.
In commenting on this Indiana atheist program, The Christian Post suggested that although atheists make up only a small percentage of America's population, they are trying and succeeding in getting noticed. Gallup polls have shown only 6% of Americans do not believe in God or a higher power, and 61% of those polled rejected the idea that humans have evolved.
To read the entire article click on this ICR link.
COMMENT: This blog on Feb 23 reported on research that seemed to indicate children are born to believe and people must reprogram their brains to in order to become atheists. A later blog (March 4) reported on other research that hinted creationism and the need to see a purpose in life are also quite natural. So, do these Indiana atheists realize that their campaign puts them out of step with science?
There was already plenty of reason during Old Testament times for the psalmist to write, "The fool has said in his heart there is no God." (Psalm 14:1) With what we know today about the fine tuning of the universe, the obvious evidence of intelligent design in living things, and the complexities of almost everything, atheism today is beyond foolishness.
May the Holy Spirit in His mercy knock at least one more time on the hearts of these unbelievers, and may they not reject His free gifts of faith and forgiveness. God is a God of mercy but He is also a God of justice. On the Day of judgment, there will be no more atheists, but unhappily for many people it will be too late to come to faith in the Savior, Jesus Christ.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
How hot does it get inside the earth?
The temperature increases about 36 degrees Fahrenheit for each kilometer (0.62 miles) one might descend into the earth. At the planet's center, it is thought to be at least 7,000 degrees Fahrenheit (3,870 Celsius).
Source: www.livescience.com
Creationism might just be the tool God is using to save Christianity in America.
SUMMARY: Writer Shelley Emling reports on a meeting she had with Answer in Genesis' Ken Ham (picture), whose Creation Museum recently celebrated its second anniversary.
Emling writes Ham isn't bothered by the discovery of Ida (See the May 22 blog), which is claimed as a link between modern primates and "more distant" species, or by other "significant" fossils being hyped by the media. "No other book gives an account of origins as specifically as the Bible," Ham says.
Emling met Ham earlier this year in London after he gave a speech at Westminster Chapel, part of an effort to bring creationist theory to Britain and the rest of Europe. She found Ham to be very "confident and engaging." She wanted to hear his message after writing a biography of Mary Anning, a British paleontologist who uncovered fossils of prehistoric animals from England's southern coast in the early 1800s. According to Emling, Anning's work paved the way for Charles Darwin and his theories.
Emling feels the devout Anning was probably unsettled by the fossils she was finding, as was Darwin who at least on one occasion gave God the credit for what she was discovering. Emling says she has spent a lot of time wondering if anyone will ever be able to narrow the gap between religious beliefs and scientific evidence.
While Ham believes in the historicity of Noah's Flood and in the 24-hour days of creation, Emling mentions that some early Christian theologians such as St. Augustine saw at least some allegory in Genesis. Ham, she says, agrees in the concept of natural selection although believing this process could never lead to new species. Darwin though didn't believe that species are fixed.
Some scientists today try to meld science and religion, such as biologist Francisco Ayala who believes the importance of Genesis is the proclamation of God's sovereignty over nature and not the details found in Genesis. A well-known paleontologist in England, Simon Conway-Morris, also argues that science and religion are compatible. He apparently believes evolution is guided by God.
Emling admits science can't explain everything. "There are plenty of mysteries that have yet to be solved." She doubts though that the debate over evolution and creationism will ever be settled. "The arguments on both sides are too persuasive. Still, one can hope."
To read the entire commentary click on this ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION link.
COMMENT: Before getting to the subject of the compatibility of evolution and Christianity or the lack of it, I feel the need to point out a couple possible flaws in Emling's piece which ought to be clarified.
1. While Ken Ham may be trying to extend Answer in Genesis' reach into Great Britain and Europe, he is hardly a pioneer in bringing the message of creationism to that continent. Long before anyone ever heard of Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis, the Institute for Creation Research or even the Creation Research Society, "scriptural geologists" were spreading the word of young-earth creationism in England during the nineteen century. In addition, England's Creation Science Movement has been around since 1932 and claims to be the oldest creationist organization in the world. It was founded as the Evolution Protest Movement. There are also other active creationist groups in Great Britain and elsewhere in Europe.
2. Just because some early Christian theologians didn't accept a literal Genesis doesn't invalidate belief in a six-day, young earth creationism. Many former evolutionists now reject evolution. Does this fact invalidate Darwinism?
As for whether the debate between evolutionism and creationism will ever be settled, I agree with Emling that it probably won't, at least any time soon. Some people think science (meaning evolutionism) and religion can be made compatible if science would only accept a divine Creator. But their idea of an agreement would force Bible-based Christians to give up too much, including the heart and soul of the Christian message: the fall into sin by Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and the promise of a Savior in the person of Jesus Christ. Of course, there never has been a conflict between real science and the Bible.
Some observers of the religious scene in America today are bemoaning the apparent weakening of Christianity. They note regular church attendance is falling off and "political correctness" is taking its toll on conservative, Bible-based beliefs such as opposition to abortion, same-sex marriage and homosexuality. Perhaps, the creationist movement may be the last, best effort to save the faith in our country. Some polls indicate belief in a six-day creation and doubts about Darwinism have not been weakening.
God has guaranteed that Christianity will never disappear from our planet (Matthew 16:18), but we know He does allow it to virtually die out in individual nations. By spreading the news of the truthfulness of every word of Genesis and by showing how far from reality are the tenets of evolution, creationism might just be the tool God is using to save Christianity in America.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What do evolutionists mean when they talk about a "reducing atmosphere"?
An atmosphere without oxygen, which some scientists believe was the situation as life was first evolving. If oxygen were present on earth at the beginning it would be almost impossible for the chemical compounds such as amino acids needed for life to have formed. Yet there is no evidence the earth ever was without oxygen nor is there an adequate explanation for how oxygen could have formed when there was none to begin with.
Source: The Evolution Handbook by Vance Ferrell
Cod numbers diminish in the "struggle for survival."
SUMMARY: Cod fish once were dominant in the waters of the North Atlantic Ocean but now have dwindled to the point the World Wildlife Federation (WWF) is concerned, and the blame for this situation can be laid at the feet of a prominent evolutionist. a disciple of Charles Darwin by the name of Thomas Henry Huxley (pictured).
During the late nineteenth century fishermen were having to travel farther to catch cod because the numbers of these fish were diminishing. So they asked the British Royal Commission for advice. Huxley, a prominent member of this group, advised the fishermen to continue fishing as aggressively as they had been. In the struggle for survival, only the weak cod fish would get caught, Huxley believed, while the stronger ones would be left in the ocean to continue to evolve.
Mark Kurlansky, an evolutionist and author of a book on cod, in 2006 wrote, "The lesson gleaned from Charles Darwin, especially as interpreted by the tremendously influential British scientific philosopher, Thomas Henry Huxley, was that nature was a marvelous and determined force that held the inevitable solutions to all of life's problems." Such a belief may have made sense to Huxley, but it paid no attention to the reality of ecosystems, population, and organism dynamics. As for the fishermen's concerns, they were ignored by the commission.
The cod still haven't recovered. The WWF wants to reduce the amount of cod bycatch (cod inadvertently caught by those fishing for other species), and it believes the fishing industry isn't doing enough to give the cod fish a chance to recover. It also wants to set catch reduction numbers and protect spawning areas from overfishing. (pictures from Wikipedia)
To read the entire article click on this ICR link.
COMMENT: The creationist author of this ICR article is correct when he suggests advice based on a biblical philosophy could have prevented the cod fish situation as it exists today. Humans have been given dominion over the animal world, which gives people the right to fish (Genesis 1:28). However, we humans also have been given a responsibility--to take care of God's creation (Proverbs 12:10, Proverbs 27:23).
If the principle of good stewardship of God's creation had been put into effect as soon as the problem of dwindling numbers of codfish was noticed, there is a good chance overfishing could have been stopped and the severe threat to this species today would not exist.
Did you notice that according to author Kurlansky the early evolutionists apparently held an almost religious reverence for the power of nature and natural selection to solve problems? Relying entirely on nature did not work for the cod fish and it won't work for any other problem in our natural world either. The power and wisdom of the Creator and those who serve Him is the best hope for slowing down the wave of species going extinct.
The day will come when we won't have to worry about problems in nature any longer. That day will be the endless day when we, who have admitted our guilt and accepted the Savior's forgiveness, go to live with the Lord forevermore. Extinctions and death will be things of the past.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
What percentage of the world's water is in the oceans?
About 97 percent. Oceans make up about two-thirds of the earth's surace.
Source: www.livescience.com
A patient's own cells soaked in human proteins revert back to embryonic-like cells.
SUMMARY: U.S. researchers say they have devised the safest way yet to make embryonic-like stem cells using a patient's own skin cells. A team at Harvard U. and Massachusetts-based Advanced Cell Technology Inc. say they soak the cells in human proteins. This technique turns back the clock biologically making the cells pluripotent (iPS), meaning they have the potential to morph into any type of tissue.
Embryonic stem cells are considered the most powerful kind of stem cells as each one is pluripotent, but several countries including the U.S. limit funding for research involving this type of stem cell because it requires the destruction of living human embryos. Also, stem cells made from a patient's own tissues have the advantage of avoiding the problem of the body rejecting foreign cells.
Dr. Robert Lanza of Advanced Cell said his team used peptide, a protein fragment, to drag the human proteins into the cells. This allowed the researchers to transform these cells into iPS cells which they then regrew into a variety of mature new cell types. "This method eliminates the risks associated with genetic and chemical manipulation, and provides for the first time a potentially safe source of iPS cells for translation into the clinic," Lanza said.
Lanza sees immediate commercial applications after a few more "flight tests." Doctors hope to eventually use stem cells to transform medicine, such as in regenerating cells destroyed by type 1 diabetes or in regrowing eye cells to reverse blindness. He said his company would seek Food and Drug Administration permission to test the cells in people by next year, a process not likely to be quick considering this is brand-new technology.
To read the entire article click on this YAHOO NEWS REUTERS link.
COMMENT: The string of success stories for non-embryonic stem or adult cell research continues while we hear very little about any success stories for the embryonic version. It is one of the bewildering stories of our time that embryonic stem cell research, which destroys living human embryos, is getting most of the love from the media despite a lack of successes while adult stem cell research, which is having all the victories, is getting relatively little. (Click on this link to CHRISTIAN LIFE RESOURCES for a report on the successes of adult stem cell research.)
There is not much more I can say on this subject that I haven't said before. (To see the other posts on this topic, type "stem cells" in the search window at the top, left) May God continue to grant success to the researchers who are doing the non-lethal type of stem cell research. And may He in His wisdom wake up the people so that they demand an end to the fruitless scientific experiments that devalue human life so much.
Life is precious because only God can create it. We value the life He gave us and even more the eternal life in heaven He has promised us through faith in Jesus Christ as our Savior.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
How many seconds are there in 10 billion years? How much does the earth weigh in ounces? What is the universe's diameter in inches?
There are 10 (to the 18th power) seconds in ten billion years, 10 (to the 26th power) ounces in the earth's weight, and 10 (to the 28th power) inches in the diameter of the universe. The odds that intelligent life could arise by natural means without intelligent direction, according to Dr. William Dembski, are 1 in 10 (to the 150th power).
Source: The Evolution Handbook by Vance Ferrell
Dr. George Tiller was shot to death at his Lutheran church.
SUMMARY: Dr. George Tiller (picture from Wikipedia) was fatally shot shortly after 10 a.m. Sunday at Reformation Lutheran Church in Wichita, Kansas. A suspect who was driving a vehicle that matched a description of the getaway car has been taken into custody, but no charges as of this writing have been filed.
Tiller was one of the few U.S. physicians who still performed late-term abortions. His Kansas women's clinic has been the center of the state's battles over abortion for nearly two decades. In 1993 he was shot and wounded in both arms outside his clinic. An ardent foe of abortion was convicted of attempted murder in that incident. Tiller's clinic was once burned down, and in March he was acquitted of 19 counts of performing illegal abortions.
Tiller's family asked that he be remembered as a good husband, father and grandfather and "a dedicated servant on behalf of the rights of women everywhere." The pro-abortion group Planned Parenthood called Tiller's death "an enormous loss."
Anti-abortion groups were quick to denounce the murder. Operation Rescue which has demonstrated numerous times at Tiller's clinic called the shooting a "cowardly act." "Operation Rescue has worked for years through peaceful, legal means, and through the proper channels to see him brought to justice," the group said even as its Web site referred to Tiller as a "monster" who has "been able to get away with murder." Randall Terry, who founded Operation Rescue but who no longer is affiliated with the group, said, "We grieve for him that he did not have time to properly prepare his soul to face God."
The largest pro-life group, the National Right to Life Committee said it "unequivocally condemns any such acts of violence regardless of motivation. The pro-life movement works to protect the right to life and increase respect for human life."
If it turns out that Tiller was slain because of his work, he would be the fourth U.S. physician killed by abortion opponents since 1993.
To read the entire article click on this CNN link.
To read the latest click on this CNN link.
COMMENT: I share and I think the overwhelming majority of pro-life Christians would share the views expressed by Operation Rescue and the National Right to Life Committee regarding this incident. We live in a nation of laws and killing someone without benefit of a trial by jury is as illegal as it can get in our society.
Abortion rights people, those who refuse to admit that taking the lives of innocent unborn children is equivalent to murder, will now try to get as much advantage as they can out of this slaying. While we can understand the frustration of many people over the millions of unborn babies who have lost their lives through the gruesome practice of abortion, it is not helpful to the pro-life cause to go to these lengths. Jesus never called for individuals to pick up arms to strike down the ungodly.
Perhaps the saddest statement in the whole article to think about was Randall Terry's comment: "We grieve for him that he did not have time to properly prepare his soul to face God." While nobody could have looked into Tiller's heart to see if he had saving faith, Jesus said, "Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit." (Matthew 7:17 NIV) Using that truth, it is hard to imagine George Tiller could have lived in the true faith with a repentant heart and still continued his notorious practice. Tiller's church, by the way, is a member congregation of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the most liberal branch of American Lutheranism. We ought not forget Tiller's murderer either and pray that he may realize what he has done, repent, and receive Jesus' forgiveness.
May we work and pray and do our part to bring an end to unnecessary abortions. Not only could there then be an end to the taking of lives of innocent unborn children, but also then there will be an end to the frustrations of many people over doctors who take lives when they should be saving lives.
*********************************************
Want to be automatically notified each time there is a new post? Just e-mail your request to [admin@lutheranscience.org].
*********************************************
QUESTION OF THE DAY
How do the suicide rates of women who have an abortion compare to those who give birth?
Suicide rates of those who abort are 6-7 times higher than women who give birth.
Source: A Sacred Trust (Metro-Milwaukee chapter of WELS Lutherans for Life)
SUMMARY: Six dozen paleontologists visited the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky last week to get a glimpse at marketing tactics being used by the museum. The scientists had been in the area already for a conference.
Nothing+Time+Chance="Simple" Cell
