Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 339

Human eyes design Origin of life? Trees of life?Smaller is simpler?DNA proves evolution?Mitocohdrial DNA Fossils prove evolution?

Punctuated Equilibria Horse Evolution?Evolution of fork Dinos became birds?People who lost faith Who is right quotesWhat should we do?Invitation

CREATION CREATION SCIENCE SCIENCE EVANGELISM in EVANGELISM Seminar Part 4B: More Lies in Seminar Part 4B: More Lies
Session 8 of 14 Session 8 of 14 A Creation A Creation Seminar Seminar by Dr. Kent by Dr. Kent Hovind Hovind
c/o 29 Cummings c/o 29 Cummings Road Road Pensacola, Florida Pensacola, Florida

the textbooks. the textbooks.

How the biased folks at Scientific American view the situation. http://www.sciam.com/2002/0302issue/0302numbers.html

It results from this It results from this explanation that the theory of explanation that the theory of evolution is not exact ... evolution is not exact ... Evolution is a kind of dogma Evolution is a kind of dogma which its own priests no which its own priests no longer believe, but which they longer believe, but which they uphold for the people. It is uphold for the people. It is necessary to have the necessary to have the courage to state this if only courage to state this if only so that men of a future so that men of a future generation may orient their generation may orient their research into a different research into a different direction. Paul Lemoine director direction. Paul Lemoine director

Scientists who go about Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great a fact of life are great con-men, and the story con-men, and the story they are telling maybe they are telling maybe the greatest hoax ever. the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution In explaining evolution we do not have one iota we do not have one iota of fact. of fact.

Every weekday from 4:30-6 Every weekday from 4:30-6 pm CST the Creation pm CST the Creation Science Hour (and a half) Science Hour (and a half) starts with, We believe starts with, We believe the Bible is literally true the Bible is literally true and scientifically accurate and scientifically accurate and the evolution theory is and the evolution theory is the dumbest and most the dumbest and most dangerous religion in the dangerous religion in the history of planet earth. history of planet earth.

the lies used as Evidence for the lies used as Evidence for evolution. evolution.

1. Grand Canyon was formed 1. Grand Canyon was formed slowly by Colorado River. slowly by Colorado River. 2. Geologic column shows 2. Geologic column shows earths history. earths history. 3. Rocks date fossils and the 3. Rocks date fossils and the fossils date rocks. fossils date rocks. 4. Index fossils. 4. Index fossils. 5. Plants and animals are 5. Plants and animals are related. related. 6. Change in species is the 6. Change in species is the real meaning of evolution. real meaning of evolution.

evolution. 8. The peppered moth shows 8. The peppered moth shows evolution. evolution. 9. Comparative anatomy proves 9. Comparative anatomy proves common ancestry. common ancestry. 10. Human embryos have gill 10. Human embryos have gill slits. slits. 11. The fetus is not human. 11. The fetus is not human. 12. The appendix is vestigial. 12. The appendix is vestigial. 13. The snake has vestigial legs. 13. The snake has vestigial legs. 14. The whale has a pelvis. 14. The whale has a pelvis. 15. The human tail bone is 15. The human tail bone is vestigial. vestigial.

Lets cover a few more lies in the textbooks, what you can do about it and why this theory is dangerous.

In the beginning, God created the Heaven and the Earth.


Genesis Genesis

The Bible says: The Bible says:

The Bible says: The Bible says:

For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is...
Exodus 20:11 Exodus 20:11

Prentice Hall 18 to 20 billion

The textbook says The textbook says

Prentice Hall General Science, 1992, page 61

The textbook says:

Prentice Hall 1997

the planet (Earth) cooled and a rocky surface was created.

Cease, my son, to Cease, my son, to hear the instruction hear the instruction that causeth to err that causeth to err from the words of from the words of knowledge. knowledge.
Proverbs 19:27 Proverbs 19:27

The four and twenty elders The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and him that liveth for ever and ever, ...saying, Thou art ever, ...saying, Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. they are and were created.

Rev. 4:10-11 Rev. 4:10-11

Heaven is my throne, Heaven is my throne, and earth is my and earth is my footstool: what house footstool: what house will ye build me? saith will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the the Lord: or what is the place of my rest? Hath place of my rest? Hath not my hand made all not my hand made all these things? these things?
Acts 7:49 Acts 7:49

He that planted the ear, He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he shall he not hear?

that formed the eye, shall he not see?


Psalms 94:8-9 Psalms 94:8-9

To suppose that the eyecould have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. Charles Darwin
The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored

The retina of your eye is less than 1 square inch yet contains over 137,000,0 00 light sensitive cells!
Photo-Creation Magazine March-

In a radio debate In a radio debate with atheist Ed with atheist Ed Buckner of Buffalo, Buckner of Buffalo, NY, he told me the NY, he told me the human eye is poorly human eye is poorly designed. He said designed. He said it is wired it is wired backwards with backwards with blood vessels in blood vessels in front of the retina. front of the retina. He said the octopus He said the octopus had a much better had a much better eye because the eye because the

Atheist Ed Buckner said the human eye is poorly designed. He said it is wired backwards. He said the octopus had a much better eye. Radio debate 12-6-2001

This argument is saying, God wouldnt do it this way so it must have evolved. This, of course, is a silly way to

it would take a it would take a minimum of 100 minimum of 100 years of Cray years of Cray [computer] time to [computer] time to simulate what takes simulate what takes place in your eye place in your eye many times every many times every second. second.
John K. Stevens, Reverse John K. Stevens, Reverse

Merrill Biology 1983 p. 202

Glenco Biology 1994 p. 337

You must picture or x g imagine ple in m gin evolution since co a e o im c to ie we nevern reand sc a it tin the observe e no s ye olv s E v i It only present. e o

e i L
t

6 1 #

among the people: and ye fools, when will ye be ye fools, when will ye be wise? wise? He that planted the ear, He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he shall he not hear?

that formed the eye, shall he not see?


Psalms 94:8-9 Psalms 94:8-9

Sci-ence n. [<scire, Sci-ence n. [<scire, to know] 1. to know] 1. Systematized Systematized knowledge derived knowledge derived from observation, from observation, study, etc. study, etc. Websters Dictionary Websters Dictionary

Design demands a designer

fingers, the moon and the fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of that thou art mindful of him? him?
Psalm 8:3-4 Psalm 8:3-4

Satan knows that real study Satan knows that real study ofWhencreation (Science) Gods creation (Science) ofWhen I consider thy Gods I consider thy will draw men to God. will draw men to of thy heavens, the work God. heavens, the work of thy

We can prove the existence of a designer by the impossibility

Could a tornado going Could a tornado going through a junk yard assemble through a junk yard assemble a 747? a 747?

Just as a painting testifies there was a and a building is painter, the builder, and proof of a watch is proof there is a watchmaker; creation is evidence of a Creator. Design demands a designer!

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Romans 1:20-22 Romans 1:20-22

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Romans 1:20-22 Romans 1:20-22

The worlds largest Rock The worlds largest Rock Group! Rushmore (find) Group! Mount

Any text Adaptation

Any text Adaptation


Why not a design feature? Textbook s avoid the word designe d.

Gills are an adaptation for living in water.

Holt Biology 2004, p. 719

Have tires adapted to fit

Casio DATA BANK Holds 300 ph. #s Calculator Stop watch Alarm clock Countdown timer Does not tell time. I have to look at it. Made in Japan,

Evolutionists argue against design using arguments they designed!


Walt Brown

A great book showing how complex living systems cannot evolve piece by piece.
Dr. Behe is associate professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University in Allentown, PA 610-758-3100, ext. 3474

Available from CSE $12.50

hair from a bacteria is like a complex motor!

Y. Marariyama etal., Very Fast Flagellar Rotation, Nature, Y. Marariyama etal., Very Fast Flagellar Rotation, Nature,

This This motor is motor is so tiny so tiny that 8 that 8 million of million of them them would fit would fit in the in the cross cross section of section of an an A hair from a bacteria is like a A hair from a bacteria average is like a average complex motor! It rotates up to human complex motor! It rotates up to human 100,000 rpm! hair! 100,000 rpm! hair!

A hair from a bacteria is like a A hair from a bacteria is like a complex motor! It rotates up to complex motor! It rotates up to 100,000 rpm! 100,000 rpm! Y. Marariyama etal., Very Fast Flagellar Rotation,
Y. Marariyama etal., Very Fast Flagellar Rotation, Nature, Vol. 371, 27 Oct. 1994, p. 752 Nature, Vol. 371, 27 Oct. 1994, p. 752

As things As things get smaller get smaller the fluid the fluid they move they move in feels in feels thicker to thicker to them. them. A bacteria A bacteria swimming swimming though though water is water is like a like a person person swimming swimming though though

Model at Dinosaur Adventure Land

life evolved from several textbooks

ce ! ceg ! n g nn e iin e d v iid llv v o v o e v e v o e n og e through n g The bacteria can iswim s n is iin its world the equivalent of a man re yth re yth e n e n swimming 60 mph! h a h a T up for the Olympics! T f Sign them o f o
If we evolved from them we are

e i L

7 1 #

A great book showing that even simple things cannot evolve. CSE- $5.50

Is claiming there was a designer a Stealth Attack on Evolution? No! There is an attack on lies that are used to support

Origin of

Nobody knows how a Nobody knows how a mixture of lifeless mixture of lifeless chemicals chemicals spontaneously spontaneously organized themselves organized themselves into the first living into the first living cell. cell. Australian Centre for Astrobiology, Paul Davies,
Davies was once described by the Davies was once described by the Washington Times as the best Washington Times as the best
Paul Davies, Australian Centre for Astrobiology, Macquarie University, Sydney. New Scientist Macquarie University, Sydney. New Scientist 179(2403);32 12 July, 2003 179(2403);32 12 July, 2003

whales, and every living whales, and every living creature that moveth, creature that moveth, which the waters brought which the waters brought forth abundantly, after forth abundantly, after their kind, and every their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was and God saw that it was good. good.

God claims that He created life. God claims that He created life.
Genesis 1:21 Genesis 1:21

The history of The history of life on earth life on earth began began approximately approximately 3.5 billion years 3.5 billion years ago. How this ago. How this occurred has occurred has been and will been and will continue to be a continue to be a Hovind translation: Hovind topic for translation: topic for It is OK to inquire about how It is OK inquiry. to inquire about how inquiry.

life evolved. It is not OK to life evolved. It is not OK to inquire about whether it inquire about whether it evolved. evolved.

Holt Biology, 2001 p. 250

life in lab HJB 1989 p. 357

H.B.J. 1989 p. 357

Earth evolving (Atlas)

Holt Earth Science 1994 p. 282

Scientists Crack 40-year-old DNA Scientists Crack 40-year-old DNA Puzzle And Point To 'Hot Soup' Puzzle And Point To 'Hot Soup' At The Origin Of Life At The Origin Of Life A new theory that explains why A new theory that explains why the language of our genes is the language of our genes is more complex than it needs to more complex than it needs to be also suggests that the be also suggests that the primordial soup where life began primordial soup where life began on earth was hot and not cold, on earth was hot and not cold, as many scientists believe. as many scientists believe.
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/08/050814170410.ht www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/08/050814170410.ht

Source:University of Bath Source:University of Bath Date: 2005-08-16 Date: 2005-08-16

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/08/0508141 www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/08/0508141 70410.htm 70410.htm

Where Theres Soup, Theres Where Theres Soup, Theres Life (July 2, 2001) -- Where Life (July 2, 2001) -- Where theres soup, theres life. But theres soup, theres life. But were talking gourmet soup. were talking gourmet soup. That is, gourmet geochemical That is, gourmet geochemical primordial soups in hot primordial soups in hot springs and hydrothermal springs and hydrothermal springs in the oceans springs in the oceans

Life In The Universe Takes Life In The Universe Takes Orders From Space (February Orders From Space (February 20, 2004) Arizona State 20, 2004) Arizona State University University A century ago, when biologists A century ago, when biologists used to talk about the primordial used to talk about the primordial soup from which all life on Earth soup from which all life on Earth came, they probably never came, they probably never imagined from how far away the imagined from how far away the ingredients may have come. ingredients may have come.

Origin of Species Not Origin of Species Not addressed in 1859, addressed in 1859, and is still a mystery and is still a mystery in 1998 in 1998 Both the origin of life Both the origin of life and the origin of the and the origin of the major groups of major groups of animals remains animals remains

Earth Science HBJ 1989 p. 344

Students are taught that life evolved from nonliving materials.

Many important events Many important events occurred during the occurred during the Archean era. The most Archean era. The most important of which was important of which was the evolution of life. the evolution Progress from of life. Progress from complex complex molecules to molecules to even the even the simplest living simplest living organism was organism was a very long a very long process. process.

The first living cells The first living cells emerged between 4 emerged between 4 billion and 3.8 billion billion and 3.8 billion years ago. years ago. There is no record There is no record of the event. of the event.
Biology The Unity and diversity of Life Biology The Unity and diversity of Life Wadsworth 1992 p. 300 Wadsworth 1992 p. 300

Biology The Unity and diversity of Life Biology The Unity and diversity of Life Wadsworth 1992, p. 301 Wadsworth 1992, p. 301

The first selfreplicating systems must e we have emerged int lif a th at this organic encer thving d p o li vi u on soup. e o n l! o s a

e i 8 L 1 #

n m m ri a is ro fro te a re f

HAECKELS CONFESSION HAECKELS CONFESSION Haeckel claimed also that Haeckel claimed also that spontaneous generation must be spontaneous generation must be true, not because it had been true, not because it had been proven in the laboratory, but proven in the laboratory, but because otherwise because otherwise

It would be It would be necessary to necessary to believe in a believe in a creator Records from the University of Jena creator Records from the University of Jena
trial in 1875. Dr. Edward Blick, trial in 1875. Dr. Edward Blick, Blick Engineering, Norman, OK Blick Engineering, Norman, OK

Have scientists produced life in the lab?

Glenco Biology 1994 p. 325

Rich in amino acids?

No, not even No, not even close! close! Miller excluded Miller excluded oxygen in a oxygen in a reducing reducing atmosphere atmosphere because life because life could not evolve could not evolve with oxygen with oxygen present. present. Any amino acids Any amino acids

Have scientists produced life in the lab?

Problems: Problems: 1. Ozone is made 1. Ozone is made from oxygen and from oxygen and blocks UV light. blocks UV light. Ammonia is destroyed Ammonia is destroyed by UV. (Origins of Life Vol. by UV. (Origins of Life Vol. Life cannot evolve Life cannot evolve without oxygen. without oxygen.
12, 1982). 12, 1982).

The earth has always had oxygen- even more than today. Oxygen is found in the lowest rocks. See Evolution a Theory in Crisis,
See Evolution a Theory in Crisis, Dr. Michael Denton p. 262. And Dr. Michael Denton p. 262. And

What is the evidence for What is the evidence for a primitive methanea primitive methaneammonia atmosphere on ammonia atmosphere on earth? The answer is that earth? The answer is that there is no evidence for it, there is no evidence for it, but much against it. but much against it. (emphasis in original) (emphasis in original)
Philip H. Abelson, Chemical Events on the Philip H. Abelson, Chemical Events on the Primitive Earth, Proceedings of the National Primitive Earth, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 55 June 1966, p. 1365 Academy of Sciences, Vol. 55 June 1966, p. 1365

In general, we find no evidence In general, we find no evidence in the sedimentary distribution in the sedimentary distribution of carbon, sulfur, uranium, or of carbon, sulfur, uranium, or iron, that an oxygen-free iron, that an oxygen-free atmosphere has existed at any atmosphere has existed at any time during the span of time during the span of geological history recorded in geological history recorded in well preserved sedimentary well preserved sedimentary Erich Dimroth and Michael M. Kimberley, Erich Dimroth and Michael M. Kimberley, rocks. Precambrian Atmospheric Oxygen: Evidence in rocks. Precambrian Atmospheric Oxygen: Evidence in
the Sedimentary Distributions of Carbon, Sulfur, the Sedimentary Distributions of Carbon, Sulfur, Uranium, and Iron, Canadian Journal of Earth Uranium, and Iron, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, Vol. 13, No. 9, September 1976 p. Sciences, Vol. 13, No. 9, September 1976 p. 1161 1161

It is suggested that It is suggested that from the time of the from the time of the earliest dated rocks earliest dated rocks at 3.7 (billion years) at 3.7 (billion years) ago, Earth had an ago, Earth had an oxygenic oxygenic atmosphere. atmosphere.
Harry Clemmey, Nick Badham, Harry Clemmey, Nick Badham, Oxygen in the Precambrian Oxygen in the Precambrian Atmosphere: An Evaluation of

The only trend in the recent literature is the suggestion of far more oxygen in the early atmosphere than anyone imagined.
Thaxton (Ph.D. Chemistry), Bradley (Ph.D. Materials Science), Olsen (Ph.D. Geochemistry), The Mystery

Primordial Air may have been breathable The Earth may have had an oxygen-rich atmosphere as long ago as three billion years and possibly even earlier, three leading geologists claimed. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization 1-9-2002 Research Organization 1-9-2002

Life from rocks!

2000 p.342

There was no oxygen but the rocks absorbed it!

2. Filtered out 2. Filtered out product. Problem: Not product. Problem: Not realistic for nature. 13% realistic for nature. 3. Made 85% tar, 13% 3. Made 85% tar, carboxylic acid, (both carboxylic acid, (both toxic to life) 2% amino toxic to life) 2% amino acids. acids.
Problems: 1. mostly two Problems: 1. mostly two amino acids were amino acids were produced, 20 different produced, 20 different ones are needed for life. ones are needed for life. 2. They bond with tar and 2. They bond with tar and

4. Amino acids are like 4. Amino acids are like letters which are letters which are building block to building block to make words, to make make words, to make paragraphs to make paragraphs to make He made the He made the books. books. equivalent of a few equivalent of a few letters when he letters when he needed to make a needed to make a

5. Half the amino 5. Half the amino acids he produced acids he produced were left handed were left handed and half right and half right handed. handed. Problem: Smallest
Problem: Smallest proteins have 70-100 proteins have 70-100 amino acids in precise amino acids in precise order all left handed. order all left handed. DNA and RNA DNA and RNA

This is a very puzzling fact All the proteins that have been investigated, obtained from animals and from plants from higher organisms and from simple

bacteria, molds, even viruses are found to have been made of (left-handed) amino acids.
Linus Pauling (Nobel Laureate in chemistry), General Chemistry, (Third

6. Hundreds of amino 6. Hundreds of amino acids must combine to acids must combine to make proteins yet they make proteins yet they un-bond in water faster un-bond in water faster The oceans bond. of than they bond. of The oceans are full than they are full to
water.* water.*

e . s b lo la 7. Brownian motione c e s 7. Brownian motion m th a drives them away from o n w drives them away from c i e ! s fe r s each other to ha li tu u each other to e g ix no equilibrium not equilibrium not

e i 9 L 1 #

Scientists have not been Scientists have not been able to cause amino acids able to cause amino acids dissolved in water to join dissolved in water to join together to form proteins. together to form proteins. The energy-requiring The energy-requiring chemical reactions that join chemical reactions that join amino acids are reversible amino acids are reversible and do not occur and do not occur spontaneously in water. spontaneously in water.
George B. Johnson, Peter H. Raven, George B. Johnson, Peter H. Raven, Biology, Principles & Explorations, Holt, Rinehart and Biology, Principles & Explorations, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1996, p. 235. Winston, 1996, p. 235.

An excellent An excellent book book showing the showing the fatal flaws in fatal flaws in the Miller the Miller experiment. experiment. P. 9 P. 9
www.iconsofevolution.com www.iconsofevolution.com See also p. 60 of In the See also p. 60 of In the Beginning by Dr. Walt Beginning by Dr. Walt Brown Brown

Available from CSE Available from CSE $23.95 $23.95

If all that is needed If all that is needed for life to evolve is for life to evolve is having all the proper having all the proper molecules in the molecules in the same place and same place and adding energy... adding energy...

Put a frog in a blender and turn it on.

Tree of

Typical birds and crocodiles Humans, have a common ancestor textboo (Heath k tree Biol 1991 p. 607) of life
Humans Bacteria

All flesh is not the same All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of fishes, and another of birds. another of birds.
1 Corinthians 15:39 1 Corinthians 15:39

Holt Biology, 2004 p.

All those trees of life with their branches of our ancestors, thats a lot of nonsense.

that adorn our textbooks that adorn our textbooks have data only at the have data only at the tips and nodes of their tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is branches; the rest is inference, however inference, however reasonable, not the reasonable, not the evidence of fossils. evidence of fossils.
Stephen Jay Gould Harvard Stephen Jay Gould Harvard University. Evolutions Erratic Pace Natural University. Evolutions Erratic Pace Natural
History Vol. 5 May, 1977 History Vol. 5 May, 1977

All forms of life have a common ancestor (Glenco Biol 324

Glenco Biol. 1994, p. 324

Humans, birds and crocodiles have a common ancestor (Heath Biol 1991 p. 607) Religious

speculation inside this area!

Heath Biology 1991 p. 607

Humans, birds and crocodiles have a common ancestor (Heath Biol 1991 p. n n o ! o d ce 607) e d ce e

e i L

s n s e a iie a b c b c re t s re t s a o a o s n e nn e n re tiio re t o t t e na se iina es g e g h a h a T m T m ii

0 2 #

Whoso shall offend one Whoso shall offend one of these little ones which of these little ones which believe in me, it were believe in me, it were better for him that a better for him that a millstone were hanged millstone were hanged about his neck, and that about his neck, and that he were drowned in the he were drowned in the depth of the sea. depth of the sea. Jesus
Jesus

Matthew 18:6 Matthew 18:6

Smaller is simpler?

Holt 1991 index

is Paramecium, singleer celled but not l

e i 1 L 2 #

l p im s t o n

The Cell: The smallest living system. What makes it tick?

A single celled organism like a Paramecium, is more complex than a space shuttle!

microchip inside paperclip

Microchip inside a paper

An ant holding a computer chip that can process all the letters in the Bible 200 times per second!
Creation Magazine Dec. 1998-Feb. 1999 p. 10

A Honeybees Brain A Honeybees Brain Compared to a Super Compared to a Super Computer Computer
Tiny Huge 1 Trillion/sec 6 Billion/sec (NASAs Cray Y-MP) Energy Consumption Microwatts Many Kilowatts (10 or more) 10 Cost Cheap Lots ($48 million) Maintenance Personnel None (self healing) Many Weight Not Much 2300 lbs with cooling system Conclusions: Evolved? Designed
7

Size Speed

The Human brain is millions of times more complex than a honeybees!

Super Computer *

Tiny Huge 1 Trillion/sec 6 Billion/sec (NASAs Cray Y-MP) Energy Consumption Microwatts Many Kilowatts (10 or more) 10 Cost Cheap Lots ($48 million) Maintenance Personnel None (self healing) Many Weight Not Much 2300 lbs with cooling system Conclusions: Evolved? Designed
7

Size Speed

Size

A Honeybees Brain Compared to a Super Computer

Tiny

Huge

The Human brain is millions of times more complex than a honeybees!

Speed

Tiny Huge 1 Trillion/sec 6 Billion/sec (NASAs Cray Y-MP) 6 billion/sec 1000 billion/sec (NASAs Cray Y-MP90) Energy Consumption Microwatts Many Kilowatts (10 or more) 10 Cost Cheap Lots ($48 million) Maintenance Personnel None (self healing) Many Weight Not Much 2300 lbs with cooling system Conclusions: Evolved? Designed
7

Size Speed

A Honeybees Brain Compared to a Super Computer

The Human brain is millions of times more complex than a honeybees!

Speed

Tiny Huge 1 Trillion/sec 6 Billion/sec (NASAs Cray Y-MP) 6 billion/sec 1000 billion/sec (NASAs Cray Y-MP90) Energy Consumption Microwatts Many Kilowatts (10 or more) 10 Cost Cheap Lots ($48 million) Maintenance Personnel None (self healing) Many Weight Not Much 2300 lbs with cooling system Conclusions: Evolved? Designed
7

Size Speed

A Honeybees Brain Compared to a Super Computer

The Human brain is millions of times more complex than a honeybees!

Tiny Huge 1 Trillion/sec 6 Billion/sec (NASAs Cray Y-MP) onsumption 10 Micro-watts Many Megawatt Energy Consumption Microwatts Many Kilowatts (10 or more) 10 Cost Cheap Lots ($48 million) Maintenance Personnel None (self healing) Many Weight Not Much 2300 lbs with cooling system Conclusions: Evolved? Designed
7

Size Energy Speed

A Honeybees Brain Compared to a Super Computer

The Human brain is millions of times more complex than a honeybees!

A honeybee can fly one million miles on one gallon

Cost

Tiny Huge 1 Trillion/sec 6 Billion/sec (NASAs Cray Y-MP) Energy Consumption Microwatts Many Kilowatts (10 or more) 10 ($48 million Cost Cheap Lots ($48 million) Maintenance Personnel None (self healing) Many Weight Not Much 2300 lbs with cooling system Conclusions: Evolved? Designed

Size Speed

A Honeybees Brain Compared to a Super Computer

Cheap

Lots

The Human brain is millions of times more complex than a honeybees!

Tiny Huge 1 Trillion/sec 6 Billion/sec (NASAs Cray Y-MP) Energy Consumption Microwatts Many Kilowatts (10 or more) 10 Maintenance Cost Cheap Lots ($48 million) Personnel None (self healing) Maintenance Personnel Many Weight Not Much 2300 lbs with cooling system Conclusions: Evolved? Designed
7

Size Speed

A Honeybees Brain Compared to a Super Computer

None

Many

The Human brain is millions of times more complex than a honeybees!

Weight Not Much

Tiny Huge 1 Trillion/sec 6 Billion/sec (NASAs Cray Y-MP) Energy Consumption Microwatts Many Kilowatts (10 or more) 10 Cost Cheap Lots ($48 million) Maintenance Personnel None (self healing) Many Weight Not Much 2300 lbs with cooling system Conclusions: Evolved? Designed
7

Size Speed

A Honeybees Brain Compared to a Super Computer

2300 lbs

The Human brain is millions of times more complex than a honeybees!

Super Computer is huge, slow, inefficient, costs lot of money, must be maintained. It had to be designed.

Tiny Huge 1 Trillion/sec 6 Billion/sec (NASAs Cray Y-MP) Energy Consumption Microwatts Many Kilowatts (10 or more) 10 Cost Cheap Lots ($48 million) Maintenance Personnel None (self healing) Many Weight Not Much 2300 lbs with cooling system Conclusions: Evolved? Designed

Size Speed

A Honeybees Brain Compared to a Super Computer

The Human brain is millions of times more complex than a


7

Computational power (bits/sec.)

Impossibility: The Limits of Science and the Science of Limits, J.D. Barrow 1998

Memory capacity (bits)

There are all sorts of different reasons for believing in God, and here I will mention only one. It is this. Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen for physical or chemical reasons to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But if so,

It is like upsetting a milk-jug and hoping that the way the splash arranges itself will give you a map of London. But if I cannot trust my own thinking, of course I cannot trust the arguments leading to atheism and therefore the reason to be an atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought or anything else: so I can never use thought

If the human brain is nothing but 3# of chemicals that arranged themselves by chance over billions of years, How can you trust

your thoughts and conclusions you come to?

DNA proves evolution

*** Evidence from fossils (Heath Biol 1991 index )

Heath Biology 1991 Table of Contents

Man and Orangatan 96% similar Glenco Biol p. 314 n A io N t D lu h o it v e w t d u e o fi b i a r g ve The World of Biology, in n th ee 1990 p. 294 by Davis, o b N s

e i L

2 2 #

*NA molecule

The DNA are the most complex molecules in the universe! *


(chromosomes)

The average *** chromosome drawing to human has and back moon over 50 trillion cells. The total DNA from all these cells would only fill about 2 tablespoons.

*** chromosome close up

If all the chromosome drawing chromosomes to moon and back from one person were stretched out and laid end to end; it would stretch from the earth to the moon and

chromosome drawing to moon and back


The code in the chromosomes is more complex and holds more information than all the computer programs ever written by man combined.
DNA is like a software program, but its much more complex than anything weve been able to design.

chromosome drawing to moon and back


IBM models its newestcomputersafter DNA. The quantity of information is so vast, we have to invent new numbers to measure it: not just terabytes (a trillion bits of genetic data) but petabytes (equivalent to half the contents of all the academic libraries in America), exabytes, yottabytes and zetabytes. All the words ever uttered by everyone who ever lived would amount to five exabytes. Time

The information contained in all the chromosomes of one human being, if typed out, would fill enough books to fill Grand Canyon 78 times! In the Beginning

Grand Canyon full of books (art Walt Brown p. 62 and Carl Sagan Dragons of Eden p. 25 * work)

I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.


Psalm 139:14 Psalm 139:14

From conceptionAbortion until birth the baby adds 15,000 cells per minute to its body. Each cell is more complex than a space shuttle!

For a great description of how the development of the baby follows the 7 feasts of Israel in Lev. 23 see: The Seven Feasts of Israel by Zola Levit p.19-24.

The probability of just one DNA arranging itself by chance has been calculated to be 1 119,000 chance in 10

The entire visible universe is 1028 inches

Even with DNA Even with DNA sequence data, we have sequence data, we have no direct access to the no direct access to the process of evolution, so process of evolution, so objective reconstruction objective reconstruction of the vanished past of the vanished past can be achieved only by can be achieved only by creative imagination. creative imagination.
N. Takahata A Genetic Perspective on N. Takahata A Genetic Perspective on the Origin & History of Humans. Annual the Origin & History of Humans. Annual Review of Ecology & Systems Atics, 1995 Review of Ecology & Systems Atics, 1995

Mitochondrial DNA Mitochondrial DNA mutation rates show we mutation rates show we have a common ancestor have a common ancestor about 300 generations about 300 generations ago. At 20 yrs/ gen thats ago. At 20 yrs/ gen thats 6,000 years. 6,000 years.
See Evolution: Fact or Fable Richard See Evolution: Fact or Fable Richard Johnston, p. 47 Johnston, p. 47 www.auroraproduction.com See also: www.auroraproduction.com See also:

If evolution is true, it seems chromosome chart in more logical that the seminar chromosomes an organism notebook (redo) first 8-10? has the further it has evolved. Since penicillin has only two chromosomes it must have evolved the increasing # of first. The evolution of life according to
chromosomes.

# Chromosomes

The evolution of life according to the increasing # of chromosomes.

The evolution of life according to the increasing # of chromosomes.

chromosome chart next few

Possum, redwood tree, and Redwood kidney bean

Possum Kidney Bean

evolutionis

The evolution of life according to the increasing # of chromosomes.

chromosome chart top 20

The evolution of life according to the increasing # of chromosomes.

chromosome chart

Twins!

2002

The evolution of various life forms based upon their gestation period.
Opossum Hamster Rat Rabbit Kangaroo Fox Dog Cat 13 days 16 days 21 days 32 days 40 days 52 days 62 days 62 days Lion Hyena Monkey Chimpanzee Human Seal Giraffe Elephant 108 days 110 days 164 days 237 days 266 days 350 days 425 days 640 days

The evolution of various life forms based upon their adult weight
Shrew Mouse Squirrel Mink Rabbit Opossum Raccoon Wolf 4 grams 40 g 600 g 1 kg 3 kg 3.5 kg 12 kg 80 kg Harbour Seal Mule Deer Dolphin Manatee Polar Bear N. Sea Lion Walrus Blue Whale 85 kg 90 kg 175 kg 400 kg 425 kg 650 kg 1400 kg 105,000 kg

Scientific American, October 2004, p. Scientific American, October 2004, p. 62 62

If amphibians evolved If amphibians evolved before mammals, why before mammals, why do some amphibians do some amphibians have 5 times more DNA have 5 times more DNA than mammals and than mammals and some amoebae have some amoebae have 1000 times more DNA? 1000 times more DNA?

the really significant finding the really significant finding that comes to light from that comes to light from comparing the proteins amino comparing the proteins amino acid sequences is that it is acid sequences is that it is impossible to arrange them in impossible to arrange them in any sort of evolutionary any sort of evolutionary seriesthere is little doubt that seriesthere is little doubt that if this molecular evidence had if this molecular evidence had been available a century ago been available a century ago the idea of organic evolution the idea of organic evolution might never have been might never have been accepted. accepted.
Michael Denton, Evolution in Crisis 1985 (pp Michael Denton, Evolution in Crisis 1985 (pp

August 15, 2005

we o r h C sn Holt is o hm Biolog T m y 1994 o c

e i L

3 r! 2aato s #

Similar DNA codes prove the same Similar DNA codes prove the same design engineer wrote the codes, design engineer wrote the codes, not evolution! not evolution! Dr. Barney Maddox, a leading Dr. Barney Maddox, a leading genetic genome researcher, said, genetic genome researcher, said, concerning these genetic concerning these genetic differences, Now the genetic differences, Now the genetic difference between human and his difference between human and his nearest relative, the chimpanzee, is nearest relative, the chimpanzee, is at least 1.6%. That doesnt sound at least 1.6%. That doesnt sound like much, but calculated out, that is like much, but calculated out, that is a gap of at least 48,000,000 a gap of at least 48,000,000 nucleotides, and a change of only 3 nucleotides, and a change of only 3 nucleotides is fatal to an animal; nucleotides is fatal to an animal; there is no possibility of change. there Genome Project, Quantitative A Disproof of is no possibility of change. Human
Human Genome Project, Quantitative A Disproof of Evolution, CEM facts sheet. Cited in Doubts about Evolution, CEM facts sheet. Cited in Doubts about

Humans and chimpanzees may be slightly Humans and chimpanzees may be slightly less closely related than had been less closely related than had been thought, according to new research. thought, according to new research. It has long been believed that the DNA of It has long been believed that the DNA of chimps and humans is about 98.5 percent chimps and humans is about 98.5 percent identical, making chimps our closest identical, making chimps our closest relative. relative. But Roy J. Britten of the California But Roy J. Britten of the California Institute of Technology conducted a new Institute of Technology conducted a new analysis comparing about 779,000 analysis comparing about 779,000 individual components of DNA from individual components of DNA from humans and chimps and found more humans and chimps and found more differences than previously noted. differences than previously noted. Britten concludes that humans and Britten concludes that humans and chimps share only about 95 percent of the chimps share only about 95 percent of the same DNA, according to a report released same DNA, according to a report released last week by the Proceedings of the last week by the Proceedings of the

Human-chimp DNA difference trebled Human-chimp DNA difference trebled 22:00 23 September 02 NewScientist.com 22:00 23 September 02 NewScientist.com
news service news service

We are more unique than previously We are more unique than previously thought, according to new comparisons thought, according to new comparisons of human and chimpanzee DNA. of human and chimpanzee DNA. It has long been held that we share 98.5 It has long been held that we share 98.5 per cent of our genetic material with our per cent of our genetic material with our closest relatives. That now appears to closest relatives. That now appears to be wrong. In fact, we share less than 95 be wrong. In fact, we share less than 95 per cent of our genetic material, a per cent of our genetic material, a three-fold increase in the variation three-fold increase in the variation between us and chimps. between us and chimps. (Newest research says 7.7% difference(Newest research says 7.7% difference-

Human-chimp DNA difference trebled Human-chimp DNA difference trebled 22:00 23 September 02 NewScientist.com news 22:00 23 September 02 NewScientist.com news service service

The new value came to light when Roy The new value came to light when Roy Britten of the California Institute of Britten of the California Institute of Technology became suspicious about the Technology became suspicious about the 98.5 per cent figure. Ironically, that 98.5 per cent figure. Ironically, that number was originally derived from a number was originally derived from a technique that Britten himself developed technique that Britten himself developed decades ago at Caltech with colleague decades ago at Caltech with colleague Dave Kohne. By measuring the Dave Kohne. By measuring the temperature at which matching DNA of temperature at which matching DNA of two species comes apart, you can work two species comes apart, you can work out how different they are. out how different they are. But the technique only picks up a But the technique only picks up a particular type of variation, called a particular type of variation, called a single base substitution. These occur single base substitution. These occur

But there are two other major types of variation But there are two other major types of variation that the previous analyses ignored. Insertions that the previous analyses ignored. Insertions occur whenever a whole section of DNA appears in occur whenever a whole section of DNA appears in one species but not in the corresponding strand of one species but not in the corresponding strand of the other. Likewise, deletions mean that a piece the other. Likewise, deletions mean that a piece of DNA is missing from one species. * of DNA is missing from one species. * Littered with indels Littered with indels Together, they are termed indels, and Britten Together, they are termed indels, and Britten seized his chance to evaluate the true variation seized his chance to evaluate the true variation between the two species when stretches of chimp between the two species when stretches of chimp DNA were recently published on the internet by DNA were recently published on the internet by teams from the Baylor College of Medicine in teams from the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, and from the University of Houston, Texas, and from the University of Oklahoma. Oklahoma. When Britten compared five stretches of chimp When Britten compared five stretches of chimp DNA with the corresponding pieces of human DNA, DNA with the corresponding pieces of human DNA, he found that single base substitutions accounted he found that single base substitutions accounted for a difference of 1.4 per cent, very close to the for a difference of 1.4 per cent, very close to the expected figure. expected figure.

Junk and genes Junk and genes Were not any more different than we were, Were not any more different than we were, says Britten. But we see a bit more divergence says Britten. But we see a bit more divergence than before because insertions and deletions are than before because insertions and deletions are taken into account. It almost triples the taken into account. It almost triples the difference. difference. The result is only based on about one million DNA The result is only based on about one million DNA bases out of the three billion (1/3,000) which bases out of the three billion (1/3,000) which make up the human and chimp genomes, says make up the human and chimp genomes, says Britten. Its just a glance, he says. Britten. Its just a glance, he says. But the differences were equally split between But the differences were equally split between junk regions that do not have any genes, and junk regions that do not have any genes, and gene-rich parts of the genome, suggesting they gene-rich parts of the genome, suggesting they may be evenly distributed. may be evenly distributed. Britten thinks it will be some time before we know Britten thinks it will be some time before we know what it is about our genes that makes us so what it is about our genes that makes us so different from chimps. He thinks the real secrets different from chimps. He thinks the real secrets could lie in regulatory regions of DNA that could lie in regulatory regions of DNA that control whole networks of genes. Itll be a while control whole networks of genes. Itll be a while before we understand them, he says. before we understand them, he says.

The function of only 1% (some say 3%) of human The function of only 1% (some say 3%) of human DNA has been determined. DNA has been determined. If 95% or 98.6% of this small amount is similar to If 95% or 98.6% of this small amount is similar to chimps it still does not prove common ancestry. chimps it still does not prove common ancestry.

French and American scientists have mapped chromosome 14, the longest sequenced to date and the site of more than 60 disease genes, including one linked to early onset Alzheimers. The feat enlisting nearly 100 researchers marks the fourth of the 24 human chromosomes

Modern Creation Trilogy vol. 2 chapter 9 Henry Morris Modern Creation Trilogy vol. 2 chapter 9 Henry Morris

Scientists at Genoscope, the French national sequencing center, said the chromosome is comprised of more than 87 million pairs of DNA, all of which have been sequenced so that the chromosomes map includes no gaps. At the present time, this is the longest piece of contiguous DNA that has been sequenced. We made an effort to close all the gaps, said Genoscopes director, Jean Weissenbach. The researchers describe chromosome 14 and its 87,410,661 pairs of DNA a fraction of the

Discover Discover Sept. 2003 p. Sept. 2003 p. 16 16

Junk Junk DNA? DNA? I dont I dont think think so! so!

Junk Junk DNA? II DNA? dont dont think think so! so!
See See Trash to Trash to Treasure Treasure Oct Oct 16, 2004 16, 2004
om om Sciencenews.c Sciencenews.c Discover Sept. Discover Sept. 2003 p. 16 2003 p. 16

Jeannie Lee, a geneticist Jeannie Lee, a geneticist at the Howard Hughes at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Medical Institute in Boston, suspects the Boston, suspects the pseudogene may function pseudogene may function as a decoy to lure away as a decoy to lure away destructive enzymes or destructive enzymes or regulatory proteins that regulatory proteins that would otherwise suppress would otherwise suppress the activity of the the activity of the makorin1 gene. makorin1 gene.

Study: Junk DNA is critically important SAN DIEGO, Oct. 19 (UPI) -- A University of California-San Diego scientist says genetic material derisively called "junk" DNA is important to an organism's evolutionary survival. Related Headlines Blending bacterial genomes for megacloning (October 18, 2005) -- Scientists in Tokyo report developing a megacloning method of transferring entire genomes from one bacterial species into another. DNA bacterial ... > full story Study compares human and chimpanzee DNA (August 31, 2005) -- A study comparing humans and chimpanzee genomes has determined the cause of differences between the two species. Researchers found much of the ... > full story Scientists sequence chimp genome (August 31, 2005) -- An international team of scientists said Wednesday they had sequenced the chimpanzee genome, an advance that could shed light on the biological basis ... > full story Genes found that control worm's life span (July 25, 2005) -- Researchers at the University of California have discovered 23 genes that influence the length of life of a small worm. A team headed by Cynthia ... > full story Canine genome is studied in Britain (July 12, 2005) -- Some dog breeds are more susceptible to particular diseases than others and British scientists want to identify their genetic ... > full story Junk DNA is so-called because it doesn't contain instructions for protein-coding genes and appears to have little or no function. But Peter Andolfatto, an assistant professor of biology, says such DNA plays an important role in maintaining an organism's genetic integrity. In studying the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, Andolfatto discovered such regions are strongly affected by natural selection -- the evolutionary process that preferentially leads to the survival of organisms and genes best adapted to the environment. Andolfatto says his findings are important because the similarity of genome sequences in fruit flies, worms and humans suggests similar processes are probably responsible for differences between humans and their close evolutionary relatives. "Sequencing of the complete genome in humans, fruit flies, nematodes and plants has revealed the number of protein-coding genes is much more similar among these species than expected," he said. "Curiously, the largest differences between major species groups appear to be the amount of 'junk' DNA, rather than the number of genes." He details his research in the Oct. 20 issue of Nature.

We are all related to man who lived in Asia in We are all related to man who lived in Asia in 1,415BC 1,415BC

By David Derbyshire, Science Correspondent, Jan. 6, 2005 news By David Derbyshire, Science Correspondent, Jan. 6, 2005 news Telegraph Telegraph

Everyone in the world is descended from Everyone in the world is descended from a single person who lived around 3,500 a single person who lived around 3,500 years ago, according to a new study. years ago, according to a new study.

Scientists have worked out the most Scientists have worked out the most recent common ancestor of all six billion recent common ancestor of all six billion people alive today probably dwelt in people alive today probably dwelt in eastern Asia around 1,415BC. eastern Asia around 1,415BC. Although the date may seem relatively Although the date may seem relatively recent, researchers say the findings recent, researchers say the findings should not come as a surprise. should not come as a surprise. Anyone trying to trace their family tree Anyone trying to trace their family tree soon discovers that the number of direct soon discovers that the number of direct ancestors doubles every 20 to 30 years. ancestors doubles every 20 to 30 years. It takes only a few centuries to clock up It takes only a few centuries to clock up thousands of direct ancestors. thousands of direct ancestors.

By David Derbyshire, Science Correspondent, Jan. 6, 2005 news Telegraph By David Derbyshire, Science Correspondent, Jan. 6, 2005 news Telegraph

Using a computer model, researchers from the Massachusetts Using a computer model, researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology attempted to trace back the most recent Institute of Technology attempted to trace back the most recent common ancestor using estimated patterns of migration common ancestor using estimated patterns of migration throughout history. throughout history. They calculated that the ancestor's location in eastern Asia They calculated that the ancestor's location in eastern Asia allowed his or her descendants to spread to Europe, Asia, allowed his or her descendants to spread to Europe, Asia, remote Pacific Islands and the Americas. Going back a few remote Pacific Islands and the Americas. Going back a few thousand years more, the researchers found a time when a large thousand years more, the researchers found a time when a large fraction of people in the world were the common ancestors of fraction of people in the world were the common ancestors of everybody alive today --while the rest were ancestors of no one everybody alive today while the rest were ancestors of no one alive. That date was 5,353 BC, the team reports in Nature. alive. That date was 5,353 BC, the team reports in Nature. The researchers, led by Dr Steve Olson, stressed that the date The researchers, led by Dr Steve Olson, stressed that the date was an estimate. was an estimate. "Nevertheless, our results suggest that the most recent common "Nevertheless, our results suggest that the most recent common ancestor for the world's current population lived in the relatively ancestor for the world's current population lived in the relatively recent past --perhaps within the last few thousand years," he recent past perhaps within the last few thousand years," he said. said. He added: "No matter the languages we speak or the colour of He added: "No matter the languages we speak or the colour of our skin, we share ancestors who planted rice on the banks of our skin, we share ancestors who planted rice on the banks of the Yangtze, who domesticated horses on the steppes of the the Yangtze, who domesticated horses on the steppes of the Ukraine, who hunted giant sloths in the forest of north and Ukraine, who hunted giant sloths in the forest of north and south America and who laboured to build the Great Pyramid of south America and who laboured to build the Great Pyramid of Khufu." Khufu." Although some groups of people may have lived in isolation from Although some groups of people may have lived in isolation from the rest of the world for hundreds of years, the researchers say the rest of the world for hundreds of years, the researchers say no one alive today has been untouched by migration. no one alive today has been untouched by migration.

Antediluvian life span chart

Yes we had a common ancestor. His name was

similar structures similar structures nearly always have nearly always have similar plans (DNA in this similar plans (DNA in this case). Similar bridges case). Similar bridges have similar blueprints. have similar blueprints. This hardly constitutes This hardly constitutes evidence that one sired evidence that one sired the other or that they the other or that they were erected by were erected by tornadoes. tornadoes.

Man has a very good Man has a very good understanding of understanding of how how

Understanding the operation of a machine does not prove how it originated or that it had no designer!

Also, there are thousand of differences between humans and chimps! Hands, feet, hair, brain, neck, back, hips, etc.

However
If % of similarity proves relationships ...

Clou d

Watermelon

Clou d

Watermelon

Jellyfish are 98% water!

Fossils prove evolutio

2001

f s f s o ill o ro ss ro ss p o p o o f o f n e n e e th e th b b d n lld iin u n u n co tiio c to re ollu re o u e v e v h e h e T T r r Holt Biology 2004, p. 283 fo fo

e i L

4 2 #

This is silly! This is silly! There is no There is no fossil record! fossil record! There are There are bones in the bones in the dirt. dirt. You cannot You cannot look back in look back in the fossil the fossil record, as record, as many many textbooks textbooks say. Fossils say. Fossils only exist in only exist in the present! the present! We can put We can put our our interpretatio interpretatio

Keep in mind that dead animals do not reproduce or evolve!


Holt Biology, 2001 p. 9

If my theory If my theory (about slow (about slow gradual gradual changes) be changes) be true, true, numberless numberless intermediate intermediate varieties varieties must must assuredly assuredly have existed; have existed;

Since Since Darwin, Darwin, many links many links have been have been found. found.

Holt Biology, 2001 p.

In the years after In the years after Darwin, his advocates Darwin, his advocates hoped to find hoped to find predictable predictable progressions. In general, progressions. In general, these have not been these have not been foundyet the optimism foundyet the optimism has died hard, and some has died hard, and some pure fantasy has crept pure fantasy has crept into textbooks. into textbooks.

What creation scientists are asking for is a What creation scientists are asking for is a simple evidential criterion that would simple evidential criterion that would support macroevolution in the fossil support macroevolution in the fossil record. This would be at least 40-50 record. This would be at least 40-50 successive fossil species showing major successive fossil species showing major generic change (macroevolution). generic change (macroevolution). Talkorigins doesnt list a fraction of this Talkorigins doesnt list a fraction of this number. But this isnt an unrealistic number. But this isnt an unrealistic number of fossils if the earth is as old as number of fossils if the earth is as old as macroevolutionists maintain. macroevolutionists maintain. . .. .. there are gaps in the fossil . there are gaps in the fossil graveyard, places where there should be graveyard, places where there should be intermediate forms but where there is intermediate forms but where there is nothing whatsoever instead. No nothing whatsoever instead. No paleontologist writing in English (Carroll, paleontologist writing in English (Carroll, 1988), French (J. Chaline, 1983) or German 1988), French (J. Chaline, 1983) or German

According to S.J. Gould of According to S.J. Gould of Harvard, arthropods are the Harvard, arthropods are the largest animal group. Where did largest animal group. Where did they come from (i.e. their they come from (i.e. their origin)? As Darwin noted in the origin)? As Darwin noted in the Origin of the Species, the abrupt Origin of the Species, the abrupt emergence of arthropods in the emergence of arthropods in the fossil record during the fossil record during the Cambrian presents a problem for Cambrian presents a problem for evolutionary biology. There are evolutionary biology. There are no obvious simpler or no obvious simpler or intermediate forms - either living intermediate forms - either living or in the fossil record . . . or in the fossil record . . .

Where did all the fish Where did all the fish come from? come from? Yet the transition from Yet the transition from spineless invertebrates spineless invertebrates to the first backboned to the first backboned fishes is still shrouded in fishes is still shrouded in mystery, & many mystery, & many theories abound . . . theories abound . . .
J.A. Long, evolutionist, 1995. J.A. Long, evolutionist, 1995.

Alan Feduccia, atheist & ornithologist, December Alan Feduccia, atheist & ornithologist, December 8, 2000. 8, 2000.

Where did all the birds come Where did all the birds come from? from? The true origin of birds is The true origin of birds is still up in the air. still up in the air. whales? whales? . . . the evolutionary origin . . . the evolutionary origin of whales remains of whales remains controversial among controversial among zoologists. zoologists.

flowering plants? flowering plants? The origin of the The origin of the angiosperms, an abominable angiosperms, an abominable mystery to Darwin, remained mystery to Darwin, remained so 100 years later & is little so 100 years later & is little better today. better today. & S. 1993, p. Patterson & Williams, Annual Review of Ecol.
Patterson & Williams, Annual Review of Ecol. & S. 1993, p. 170. 170.

In summary In summary Both the origin of life and Both the origin of life and the origin of the major the origin of the major groups of animals remain groups of animals remain unknown unknown
Dr. A.G. Fisher, Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia, Dr. A.G. Fisher, Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia, 1998 (fossil section). 1998 (fossil section).

All you know is, it died! All you know is, it died!

If you find a fossil in the If you find a fossil in the dirt: dirt:

You dont know if it had You dont know if it had any kids let alone any kids let alone different kids. different kids.
Why do evolutionists Why do evolutionists claim the bones in the claim the bones in the dirt can do something the dirt can do something the living animals cannot do? living animals cannot do?
(produce different kinds than

If you find a fossil in the If you find a fossil in the dirt: dirt:

Luther Sunderland asked evolutionists what evidence they had for their theory. The British Museum of Natural History has the largest fossil collection in the world. When the senior paleontologist was asked why he did not show the missing links in his book he said:

I fully agree with your comments on the lack of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them. I will lay it on the linethere is not one such fossil
Dr. Colin Paterson, Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History in correspondence to

There are no missing There are no missing Links! The whole Links! The whole chain is missing! chain is missing! The absence of fossil The absence of fossil evidence for evidence for intermediary stages intermediary stages has been a persistent has been a persistent and nagging problem and nagging problem for evolution. Dr. for Gould, Evolution Now p. 140 evolution. Dr. Stephen J.
Stephen J. Gould, Evolution Now p. 140

Punctuated Equilibrium

The first bird hatched from a reptilian egg.

Two choices

In the mind of the evolutionist there are only two choices: 1. Evolution happened slowly like Darwin

1. Evolution happened slowly like Darwin said. said. 2. Evolution happened quickly like Gould 2. Evolution happened quickly like Gould They dont seem capable of or willing They said. dont seem capable of or willing said.

to think outside the box. The option to think outside the box. The option that evolution did not happen at all that evolution did not happen at all never seems to dawn on them! never seems to dawn on them!

When II debated (#12) Dr. Pigliuccii When debated (#12) Dr. Pigliuccii from the University of Tennessee from the University of Tennessee Knoxville II said, Dr. Pigliuccii, you Knoxville said, Dr. Pigliuccii, you have studied and taught courses on have studied and taught courses on the evolution of plants for 10 years. the evolution of plants for 10 years. You have received and spent over You have received and spent over $650,000 in grant money to study the $650,000 in grant money to study the evolution of plants. What is the best evolution of plants. What is the best evidence you know of for evolution? evidence you know of for evolution? He replied, The evolution of He replied, The evolution of whales. whales. He claims the hippo is evidence for He claims the hippo is evidence for evolution because it is in the process evolution because it is in the process of adapting to an aquatic way of life. of adapting to an aquatic way of life. He also claims the flying squirrel is He also claims the flying squirrel is

Evolution is a shell game, with one difference. There is no pea under any of them.

Horse evolution?

Horse has 4 toes Glenco Biol p. 370 also SFES 1990 p. 153 or Holt p.181 in suitcase- put in 5 s s g a ag a a or 6 different books h s h s

e i L

ar n e ar o ny e iio y t ut 0 llu 5 0 o 5 vo g ev ng e n e ro e ro rs w rs w o n o n h e h e v v Silver Burdet e ro e ro h p h p Earth Science T T 1987 p. 361 n n e e

5 2 #

Hyrax- still alive today in Horse has 4 toes Glenco and no Biol p. Turkey and Africa relation to a horse! 370 also SFES 1990 p. 153 or Holt p.181 in suitcase- put in 5 or 6 different books

Silver Burdet Earth Science 1987 p. 361

18 pairs of ribs

Horse has 4 toes Glenco Biol p. 370 also SFES 1990 p. 153 or Holt p.181 in suitcase- put in 5 or 6 different books

15 pairs of ribs

19 pairs of ribs

18 pairs of ribs
Arabians have 19

Prentice Hall Life Science 1991 p. 50

rish Textbook p. 259

There is quite a variety in the horse family today.

Many examples Many examples commonly cited, such as commonly cited, such as the evolution of the the evolution of the horse family or of horse family or of sabertooth tigers can sabertooth tigers can be readily shown to have be readily shown to have been unintentionally been unintentionally falsified and not to be falsified and not to be really orthogenetic. really orthogenetic.
Simpson, George Gaylord, Evolutionary Simpson, George Gaylord, Evolutionary

Science Newsletter Aug. Science Newsletter Aug. 25, 1951, p.118 25, 1951, p.118

the early the early classical classical evolutionary tree evolutionary tree of the horse, of the horse, was all wrong. was all

The uniform continuous The uniform continuous transformation of transformation of Hyracotherium into Hyracotherium into Equus, so dear to the Equus, so dear to the hearts of generations of hearts of generations of textbook writers, never textbook writers, never happened in nature. happened in nature.
Simpson, George Gaylord, of Harvard Simpson, George Gaylord, of Harvard Life of the Past 1953 p. 119 Life of the Past 1953 p. 119

Biology The Unity and Diversity of Biology The Unity and Diversity of Life Wadsworth 1992 P. 304 Life Wadsworth 1992 P. 304

Other examples, Other examples, including the muchincluding the muchrepeated gradual repeated gradual evolution of the evolution of the modern horse, have modern horse, have not held up under not held up under close examination. close examination.

1. Made up by Othniel C. 1. Made up by Othniel C. Marsh in 1874 from fossils Marsh in 1874 from fossils scattered across the world, scattered across the world, not from same location. not from same location. 2. Modern horses are found 2. Modern horses are found in layers with and lower than in layers with and lower than ancient horses. Kruzhilin, Yu, and V. ancient horses. Kruzhilin, Yu, and V. Ovcharov, A Horse from the Dinosaur Epoch?
Ovcharov, A Horse from the Dinosaur Epoch? Moskovskaya Pravda (Moscow Truth), trans. A. James Moskovskaya Pravda (Moscow Truth), trans. A. James Melnick (February 5, 1984). Melnick (February 5, 1984).

Problems with Horse Problems with Horse Evolution Evolution

3. The ancient horse (hyracotherium) is not a horse but is just like the hyrax still alive in Turkey and East Africa today! toes and teeth are 4. Ribs, toes and teeth are 4. Ribs, different. different. 5. South American fossils go 5. South American fossils go from 1 toed to 3 toed (reverse from 1 toed to 3 toed (reverse order). order). 6. Never found in order 6. Never found in order presented. presented. 7. 3 toed and 1 toed horses 7. 3 toed and 1 toed horses

Impact article 1995 Tulsa Zoo horse evolution The


Institute for Creation Research
WWW.ICR.OR G
(619) 448-0900

Yale

Horse evolution still on display Made by O. C. Marsh Peabody Museum at Yale horse evolution New Haven, Conn. Proven wrong years ago.

An An excellent excellent book book showing showing the fatal the fatal flaws in the flaws in the horse horse evolution evolution story. story. P. 195
P. 195 www.iconsofevolution.co www.iconsofevolution.co m m

Available from

Arranging *** rhino evolution animals in ts . ts . c p c p order on e jje hii b sh b s o n o n paper g iio ngt iin a g lla g does not n re n re ra e ra e r v prove any ar ov a o lly pr ll y pr relationshia t iia o t c iic n o f p rtiif s n t

e i L
r e A oe A o d

6 2 #

Piecing Piecing together together fragmentary fragmentary evidence I evidence I have been have been able to able to reconstruct reconstruct

Conclusive evidence that this specimen is slightly bigger showing mass 274 MYO extinctions and millions of years of natural selection causing evolution to

352 MYO

knifeMissing link to spoon to fork (make new) 4 shots in new series include mutations

Missing links

Discovered by Dr. Kent Hovind while on board US Air in 1994

Discovered by Dr. Kent Hovind at Popeyes Fried Chicken in Southington, CT 1994.

knife to spoon to fork (make new) 4 shots in new series include mutations

Many Many mutants mutants did not did not survive survive over the over the years. years.

As people found out II As people found out was doing research on was doing research on fork evolution, many fork evolution, many sent me their finds. sent me their finds. Some were only Some were only hoping for fame and hoping for fame and fortune. fortune. Many frauds, such as Many frauds, such as this obvious fork head this obvious fork head on a spoon handle, on a spoon handle, have also been have also been submitted as evidence submitted as evidence in this cut throat in this cut throat business. business. My highly trained My highly trained

The environment caused diverse species to evolve into superior and

Evolution of words in (seminar notebook)

Dinosaur s turned to birds?

And God said, Let the waters And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of earth in the open firmament of heaven. and every winged heaven. and every winged fowl after his kind: let fowl fowl after his kind: let fowl multiply in the earth. 23And the multiply in the earth. 23And the evening and the morning were evening and the morning were the fifth day. the fifth day.
20

Genesis 1 Genesis 1

Birds made on day Birds made on day 5 5

earth bring forth the living earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth and beast of the earth and every thing that and every thing that creepeth upon the earth creepeth upon the earth after his kind: the sixth after his kind: the sixth day. day.

Genesis 1 Genesis 1

Reptiles made on Reptiles made on day 6 day 6

e is i is Lh

7d! 2ur #s
b a

Archaeoraptor liaoningensis USA Today, Oct. 15, 1999

National Geographic Oct. 1999

National Geographic 11-99

USA Today 1-25-2000

The Missing Link That Wasnt By Tim Friend, USA TODAY, 2-3-00 From the remote Liaoning Province of China, an unusual dinosaur fossil has made a mysterious journey from the hands of Chinese smugglers to the polished halls of the National Geographic Society in Washington. And like some curse from a mummys tomb, the archaeoraptor, supposedly a birdlike creature with the tail of a meat-eating dinosaur, has brought to those who would possess it what may be remembered as modern paleontologys greatest embarrassment. It appears now, after several months of suspicion and consternation, that this true missing link in the complex chain between dinosaurs and birds somehow sprouted its

The Missing Link That Wasnt By Tim Friend, USA TODAY, 2-3-00

Whether a deliberate fake or an honest mistake, it is the tale of a tail that has children believing in feathered dinosaurs that never existed, prominent scientists calling each other names and two respected science publications under assault. And, just as the plot thickens, scientists in China have told USA TODAY that they have discovered yet another faked tail -- this one added by an entrepreneurial Chinese farmer to a flying pterosaur. That one appears to have fooled another group of scientists as well as the editors of the British

Storrs Olson, curator of birds at the Smithsonian Institutions National Museum of Natural History, turned the spotlight on the whole mess. Those involved with the scientific gaffe agree that Olson tried to warn officials at National Geographic, in a letter sent Nov. 1, that the organization was headed for embarrassment if it endorsed the fossil. Both of the faked fossils were intended to support the theory that birds evolved from dinosaurs.

Now Olson, who is an outspoken opponent of the theory, is taking advantage of this moment to renew an old debate on the origin of birds. The popular view, thanks most recently to the fictional Jurassic Park, is that birds evolved from dinosaurs. National Geographic and Nature have co-published magazine articles and scientific papers supporting the view. Museums including the American Museum of Natural History in New York also promote exhibits of the dinosaur

But Olson and a group of academic ornithologists have been arguing, often bitterly, for years that birds evolved independently of dinosaurs. They believe that dinosaurs and birds had a common ancestor that lived in trees and that dinosaurs were, after all, cold-blooded.

www.icr.org, 619-448-

Scientific American, one of the passionate Scientific American, one of the passionate proponents of the Darwinist theory, proponents of the Darwinist theory, considered one of the theorys popular considered one of the theorys popular claims in its March 2003 issue: the claims in its March 2003 issue: the evolution of birds. evolution of birds. An article by the ornithologists An article by the ornithologists Richard O. Prum and Alan Brush Richard O. Prum and Alan Brush titled The Feather or the Bird, titled The Feather or the Bird, Which Came First? reiterated Which Came First? reiterated the classical evolutionist thesis the classical evolutionist thesis that birds evolved from dinosaurs that birds evolved from dinosaurs with a new series of findings and with a new series of findings and hypotheses and dino-bird hypotheses and dino-bird illustrations designed to visually illustrations designed to visually influence the reader. influence the reader.

So determined were Prum and Brush So determined were Prum and Brush that they imagined they had put an that they imagined they had put an end to the continuing debate among end to the continuing debate among evolutionists regarding the origin of evolutionists regarding the origin of birds, and suggested that their birds, and suggested that their findings had revealed a remarkable findings had revealed a remarkable conclusion that the feather conclusion that the feather evolved in dinosaurs before the evolved in dinosaurs before the appearance of birds. Prum and appearance of birds. Prum and Brush Brush maintained that maintained that bird feathers evolvbird feathers evolved for the purposes ed for the purposes of insulation, of insulation, water repellency, water repellency, courtship, camoucourtship, camouflage and defense, flage and defense, Scientific American March, 2003 Scientific and only lastly being American March, 2003 and only lastly being

However, this assertive thesis However, this assertive thesis actually consists of nothing more actually consists of nothing more than speculation devoid of any than speculation devoid of any scientific evidence. This new thesis scientific evidence. This new thesis developed by Prum developed by Prum and Brush and adopted by and Brush and adopted by Scientific American is nothScientific American is nothing but a new, but hollow ing but a new, but hollow version of the birds were version of the birds were dinosaurs theory, which dinosaurs theory, which has been defended with a has been defended with a furious, blind fanaticism furious, blind fanaticism over the last few decades. over the last few decades. We shall be demonstrating We shall be demonstrating this in this paper. this in this paper.
Scientific American March, 2003 p. 85 Scientific American March, 2003 p. 85

Looking at Prum and Brushs article, their Looking at Prum and Brushs article, their bird evolution thesis appears to rest on bird evolution thesis appears to rest on two bases: two bases: 1) Fossils found in China in recent years 1) Fossils found in China in recent years and claimed to be those of feathered and claimed to be those of feathered dinosaurs. dinosaurs. 2) Prum and Brushs efforts to come up 2) Prum and Brushs efforts to come up with an evolutionary pathway by with an evolutionary pathway by examining the development of modern examining the development of modern bird feathers (in line with the concept bird feathers (in line with the concept called evolutionary developmental called evolutionary developmental biology or shortly evo-devo, which biology or shortly evo-devo, which assumes that the developmental pathways assumes that the developmental pathways of living things can shed light on their of living things can shed light on their alleged evolutionary histories). alleged evolutionary histories). Let us now set out exactly why both these Let us now set out exactly why both these foundations are invalid. foundations are invalid.

Feathered dinosaurs, or dino-birds, Feathered dinosaurs, or dino-birds, have been one of the Darwinist medias have been one of the Darwinist medias propaganda tools in the last decade. A propaganda tools in the last decade. A string of headline-hitting dino-bird string of headline-hitting dino-bird reports, artists reconstructions and reports, artists reconstructions and announcements by self-confident announcements by self-confident experts have convinced a great many experts have convinced a great many people that half-bird half-dinosaur people that half-bird half-dinosaur creatures once walked the earth. creatures once walked the earth.

Prum and Brush maintain this selfPrum and Brush maintain this selfconfident approach and portray dinoconfident approach and portray dinobirds as a concrete fact in their birds as a concrete fact in their Scientific American article. The truth, Scientific American article. The truth, however, is very different. We shall be however, is very different. We shall be relying on the views of a very relying on the views of a very

North Carolina Universitys Department North Carolina Universitys Department of Biology. Dr. Feduccia is one of the of Biology. Dr. Feduccia is one of the worlds most prominent authorities on worlds most prominent authorities on the subject of the origin of birds. Dr. the subject of the origin of birds. Dr. Feduccia actually supports the theory Feduccia actually supports the theory of evolution, and believes that birds of evolution, and believes that birds emerged through evolution. However, emerged through evolution. However, what distinguishes him from dinowhat distinguishes him from dinobird supporters such as Prum and bird supporters such as Prum and Brush, is that he admits the uncertainty Brush, is that he admits the uncertainty in which the theory of evolution finds in which the theory of evolution finds itself on this matter, and attaches no itself on this matter, and attaches no credence whatsoever to the dino-bird credence whatsoever to the dino-bird hype passionately put forward but hype passionately put forward but lacking any foundation at all. lacking any foundation at all.

An article titled Birds Are Dinosaurs: Simple Answer to a Complex Problem, by Dr. Answer to a Complex Problem, by Dr. Feduccia in the latest edition of The Auk Feduccia in the latest edition of The Auk magazine, published by the American magazine, published by the American Ornithologists Union and serving as a Ornithologists Union and serving as a platform for the most technical debates in the platform for the most technical debates in the field, contains some highly important field, contains some highly important information. In considerable detail, Dr. information. In considerable detail, Dr. Feduccia describes how the theory that birds Feduccia describes how the theory that birds evolved from dinosaurs, evolved from dinosaurs, first proposed first proposed by John Ostrom by John Ostrom in the 1970s and in the 1970s and fiercely defended fiercely defended ever since, lacks ever since, lacks any scientific any scientific proof, and how proof, and how Scientific American March, 2003 p. 93 such an evolutionScientific American March, 2003 p. 93 such an evolution

fact about the alleged dino-birds found in China: It is not at all clear that the feathers found in fossils purportedly belonging to feathered dinosaurs are bird feathers at all, albeit primitive ones. On the contrary, there is a considerable body of evidence that these fossil traces, known as dino-fuzz, have nothing to do with

Having studied most Having studied most of the specimens said of the specimens said to sport protofeathers, to sport protofeathers, I, and many others, do I, and many others, do not find any credible not find any credible evidence that those evidence that those structures represent structures represent protofeathers. Many protofeathers. Many Chinese fossils have Chinese fossils have that strange halo of that strange halo of what has become what has become known as dino-fuzz, known as dino-fuzz, but although that but although that material has been material has been homologized with homologized with avian feathers, the avian feathers, the arguments are far less arguments are far less than convincing. than convincing.

has behaved in a prejudiced manner: Prums (2002) view is shared by many paleontologists: birds are dinosaurs; therefore, any filamentous material preserved in dromaeosaurs must represent protofeathers. According to Dr. Feduccia, one of the reasons why this prejudice fails to stand up to scrutiny is that this dino-fuzz also appears in fossils that can absolutely nothing to do with birds: Most important, dino-fuzz is now being discovered in a number of taxa, some unpublished, but particularly in a Chinese pterosaur [flying reptile] (Wang et al. 2002) and a therizinosaur [a carnivorous dinosaur class]... Most surprisingly, skin fibers very closely resembling dino-fuzz have been discovered in a Jurassic ichthyosaur [marine reptile] and described in detail (Lingham-Soliar 1999, 2001). Some of those branched fibers are exceptionally close in morphology to the so called branched protofeathers (Prum Protofeathers) described by Xu et al. (2001). That these so-called protofeathers have a widespread distribution in archosaurs [a Mesozoic reptile class] is

Dr. Feduccia recalls that similar structures had been found in the area of fossils in the past, but that these structures, believed to belong to the fossils, were later identified as inorganic matter: One is reminded of the famous fernlike markings on the Solnhofen fossils known as dendrites. Despite their plantlike outlines, these features are now known to be inorganic structures caused by a solution of manganese from within the beds that reprecipitated as oxides along cracks or along bones of fossils. Another striking point on this matter is the fact that all the fossils brought up as feathered dinosaurs have been found in China. Why is it that these fossils should have emerged in China and not anywhere else in the world? And how is it that the fossil beds in China are of such a nature as to be able to preserve not just such a vague substance as dino-fuzz but also feathers? Dr. Feduccia also notes this odd phenomenon:

other dinosaurs discovered in other deposits where integument is preserved exhibit no dinofuzz, but true reptilian skin, devoid of any featherlike material (Feduccia 1999), and why typically Chinese dromaeosaurs preserving dino-fuzz do not normally preserve feathers, when a hardened rachis, if present, would be more easily preserved.

So what are all these so-called feathered dinosaurs found in China? What is the true nature of these creatures portrayed as intermediate forms between reptiles and birds?

Dr. Feduccia explains that some of these creatures put forward as feathered dinosaurs are extinct reptiles with dino-fuzz, and others are real birds: There are clearly two different taphonomic phenomena in the early Cretaceous lacustrine deposits of the Yixian and Jiufotang

dinosaur Sinosauropteryx (a commpsognathid), and one preserving actual avian feathers, as in the feathered dinosaurs that were featured on the cover of Nature, but which turned out to be secondarily flightless birds. In other words, these fossils, portrayed to the world as feathered dinosaurs or dino-birds, either belong to flightless birds, or else to reptiles which possessed the organic structure known as dino-fuzz, which had nothing at all to do with birds and their feathers. Not one single fossil exists that might represent a transitional form between birds and reptiles. (As well as these two basic groups cited above by Dr. Feduccia, he also mentions the abundant beaked bird Confusiusornis, a number of enantiornithineses, and the newly described seed-eating bird Jeholornis prima, none of which are dino-birds.) For these reasons, arguing that the existence of feathered dinosaurs has been proven, a claim put forward by Richard O. Prum and Alan Brush in

birds from dinosaurs (Holt Biol 1994 p. 214)

Holt Biology 1994 p. 214

dinosaur with feathers (art)

dinosaur trying to fly (Gish Dinosaurs by design)

Glenco Earth Science 1999, p. 376

Holt Biology 2004, p. 725

Paleontologists have Paleontologists have tried to turn tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered earth bound feathered dinosaur. But its not. It dinosaur. But its not. It is a bird, a perching bird. is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of And no amount of paleobabble is going to paleobabble is going to change that. change that.
Alan Feduccia- a world authority on Alan Feduccia- a world authority on

Archaeoptery x had all the brain features of a bird equipped for flight.
www.sciencenow.sciencemag.or g/cgi/ content/full/2004/804/1

Archaeoptery x means
Ancient Wing Claws on the wings

Strahl adds that Strahl adds that some ornithologists some ornithologists call the hoatzin call the hoatzin primitive because primitive because of its of its archaeopteryx-like archaeopteryx-like claws; but he claws; but he prefers to think of prefers to think of it as highly it as highly specialized. specialized. Swans, ibis and Swans, ibis and many other birds, many other birds, he notes, have he notes, have wing claws; they wing claws; they just never make just never make use of them. use of them.
Whats a Hoatzin? Scientific Whats a Hoatzin? Scientific American, vol. 261 (December 1989), p.

*** Archeopteryx (textbook)

Teeth

Weighing about a Weighing about a quarter of an ounce, quarter of an ounce, this tiny bird lives in this tiny bird lives in lowland rain forests lowland rain forests from eastern from eastern Panama, south along Panama, south along the Pacific slope of the Pacific slope of the Andes to the Andes to Ecuador. It Ecuador. It possesses 48 teeth possesses 48 teeth in its mouth! in its mouth!
National Geographic, National Geographic, 1991 1991

Som Som e of e of you you have have teeth teeth and and some some dont dont

Like the Chinese Dino-Bird, the Archaeopteryx is fake, too!!! Honest disagreement as to whether Archaeopteryx was or was not a forgery was possible until 1986, when a definitive test was performed. An X-ray resonance spectrograph of the British Museum fossil showed that the material containing the feather impressions differed significantly from the rest of the fossil slab. The chemistry of this amorphous paste also differed from the crystalline rock in the famous fossil quarry in Germany where Archaeopteryx supposedly was found. Few responses have been made to this

birds from dinosaurs (Holt Biol 1994 p. 214)

Holt Biology 1994 p. 214

feather close up

Holt Biology 2004, p. 785

Do you really believe this evolved by chance?

Feathers and scales are both made of the protein Keratin but that proves a common design engineer not a common Holt Biology ancestor.
1977 p. 477

At the morphological level At the morphological level feathers are traditionally feathers are traditionally considered homologous with considered homologous with reptilian scales. However, in reptilian scales. However, in development, morphogenesis, development, morphogenesis, gene structure, protein shape gene structure, protein shape and sequence, and filament and sequence, and filament formation and structure, feathers formation and structure, feathers are different. Clearly, feathers are different. Clearly, feathers provide a unique and provide a unique and outstanding example of an outstanding example of an evolutionary novelty.

Holt Biology 1994 p. 490-1

old crow sized bird. Dubbed Confuciusornis New Mexico Museum of Natural History in Albuquerque.
New Times Herald June 17, 1999

How can Archaeoptery x be a missing link since fully formed birds were already present? 130 million year

In western Colorados Dry Mesa In western Colorados Dry Mesa Quarry, Brigham Young Quarry, Brigham Young University archaeologists have University archaeologists have come upon the 140-million-yearcome upon the 140-million-yearold remains of what they are old remains of what they are calling the oldest bird ever calling the oldest bird ever found. It is obvious that we found. It is obvious that we must now look for the ancestors must now look for the ancestors of flying birds in a period of time of flying birds in a period of time much older than that in which much older than that in which the Archaeopteryx lived, says the Archaeopteryx lived, says Yale Universitys John H. Ostrom Yale Universitys John H. Ostrom who positively, identified the who positively, identified the

Fossil remains of a bird which lived Fossil remains of a bird which lived between 142 and 137 million years between 142 and 137 million years ago were recently found in the ago were recently found in the Liaoning province of northeastern Liaoning province of northeastern China. The discovery, made by a China. The discovery, made by a fossil-hunting farmer and announced fossil-hunting farmer and announced by a Chinese/American team of by a Chinese/American team of scientists, including Alan Feduccia scientists, including Alan Feduccia (University of North Carolina, Chapel (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill) and Larry D. Martin (University of Hill) and Larry D. Martin (University of Kansas), provide the oldest evidence Kansas), provide the oldest evidence of a beaked bird on Earth yet of a beaked bird on Earth yet found. ... The Chinese bird, claim its found. ... The Chinese bird, claim its discoverers, probably lived at the discoverers, probably lived at the Jurassic-Cretaceous boundaryprior Jurassic-Cretaceous boundaryprior to the arrival of Deinonychus and to the arrival of Deinonychus and Mononykusand could not possibly Mononykusand could not possibly

But there are plenty of But there are plenty of other reasons to refute the other reasons to refute the dinosaur-bird connection, dinosaur-bird connection, says Feduccia. How do you says Feduccia. How do you derive birds from a heavy, derive birds from a heavy, earthbound, bipedal reptile earthbound, bipedal reptile that has a deep body, a that has a deep body, a heavy balancing tail, and heavy balancing tail, and fore-shortened forelimbs? fore-shortened forelimbs? he asks. Biophysically, its he asks. Biophysically, its impossible. * impossible. *

1. Lungs are totally 1. Lungs are totally different. different. 2. Modern birds are 2. Modern birds are found in layers with and found in layers with and lower than dinosaurs. (In lower than dinosaurs. (In
the Minds of Men Ian Taylor p. the Minds of Men Ian Taylor p. 155 and Nature June 18, 1999) 155 and Nature June 18, 1999)

Problems with Reptile to Problems with Reptile to Bird Evolution Theory Bird Evolution Theory

3. Scales and feathers 3. Scales and feathers attach to body attach to body differently and develop differently and develop

4. Birds have a four 4. Birds have a four chambered heart, chambered heart, most reptiles have most reptiles have only three. only three. 5. Reptiles lay 5. Reptiles lay leathery eggs leathery eggs unlike birds. unlike birds.
(Tail, hips, (Tail, hips, reproduction, etc.) reproduction, etc.)

Bird Hip

Lizard Hip

Problems with Reptile to Bird Problems with Reptile to Bird Evolution 6. The Evolution 6. The

[evolutionary] origin of [evolutionary] origin of bird is largely a matter bird is largely a matter of deduction. There is no of deduction. There is no fossil evidence of the fossil evidence of the stages through which stages through which the remarkable change the remarkable change from reptile to bird was from reptile to bird was

Problems with Reptile to Bird Problems with Reptile to Bird Evolution 7. The experts Evolution 7. The experts

strongly disagree about the strongly disagree about the evidence. evidence. 8. We dont observe it today. 8. We dont observe it today. 9. All they have for 9. All they have for evidence are stories of how evidence are stories of how it might have happened. it might have happened. 11. It violates observable 11. It violates observable science, Gods Word, popular science, Gods Word, popular

An An excellent excellent book book showing showing the fatal the fatal flaws in flaws in the bird the bird evolution evolution story story
P. 111

It is absolutely safe It is absolutely safe to say that if you to say that if you meet someone who meet someone who claims not to believe claims not to believe in evolution, that in evolution, that person is ignorant, person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or stupid or insane (or wicked,) wicked,)

Dr. Karl Popper-leading philosopher

Evolution is not a Evolution is not a fact. Evolution fact. Evolution doesnt even qualify doesnt even qualify as a theory or as a as a theory or as a hypothesis. It is a hypothesis. It is a metaphysical metaphysical research program, research program, and it is not really and it is not really testable science. testable science.

Jesus said unto him, Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. all thy mind. It is logical and It is logical and
intelligent to believe intelligent to believe in a Creator! in a Creator!
Matthew 22:37 also Mk. Matthew 22:37 also Mk. 12:30, Lk 10:27
12:30, Lk 10:27

When [the devil] speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
John 8:44 John 8:44

Evolution is promoted by its Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion -- a an ideology, a secular religion -- a full-fledged alternative to full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and Christianity, with meaning and morality. II am an ardent evolutionist morality. am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but II must admit and an ex-Christian, but must admit that in this one complaint -- and Mr. that in this one complaint -- and Mr. Gish is but one of many to make it -Gish is but one of many to make it -the literalists are absolutely right. the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today. is true of evolution still today.
Dr. Michael Ruse, professor of philosophy and Dr. Michael Ruse, professor of philosophy and

Evolution is Evolution is unproved and unproved and unprovable. We unprovable. We believe it only believe it only because the only because the only alternative is special alternative is special creation, and that is creation, and that is unthinkable. unthinkable.

Age Nouveau, [a French Age Nouveau, [a French periodical] February 1959, p. 12. periodical] February 1959, p. 12. Jean Rostand, a famous French Jean Rostand, a famous French biologist and member of the biologist and member of the Academy of Sciences of the Academy of Sciences of the French Academy French Academy

Transformism Transformism (evolution) is a fairy tale (evolution) is a fairy tale for adults. for adults.

The theory has helped The theory has helped nothing in the progress nothing in the progress of science. It is useless. of science. It is useless.
Louis Bounoure professor of biology at the

It results from this It results from this explanation that the theory of explanation that the theory of evolution is not exact ... evolution is not exact ... Evolution is a kind of dogma Evolution is a kind of dogma which its own priests no which its own priests no longer believe, but which they longer believe, but which they uphold for the people. It is uphold for the people. It is necessary to have the necessary to have the courage to state this if only courage to state this if only so that men of a future so that men of a future generation may orient their generation may orient their research into a different research into a different direction. Paul Lemoine director direction. Paul Lemoine director

I myself am convinced I myself am convinced that the theory of that the theory of evolution, especially the evolution, especially the extent to which it has been extent to which it has been applied, will be one of the applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history great jokes in the history books of the future. books of the future. Posterity will marvel that Posterity will marvel that so flimsy and dubious an so flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be hypothesis could be accepted with the accepted with the incredible credulity that it incredible credulity that it

The only way life The only way life could have come into could have come into existence is because existence is because of some Superof some SuperIntelligence having Intelligence having created it.. like UFOs created it.. like UFOs Sir Fred Hoyle Sir Fred Hoyle

(Evolution) is a general (Evolution) is a general postulate to which all postulate to which all theories, all hypotheses, theories, all hypotheses, must henceforth bow in must henceforth bow in order to be thinkable and order to be thinkable and true. Evolution is a light true. Evolution is a light which illuminates all facts, which illuminates all facts, which all lines of thought which all lines of thought must follow-- this is what must follow-- this is what evolution is. evolution is.
Pierre T. de Chardin, as quoted by F.J. Pierre T. de Chardin, as quoted by F.J.

Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.


Psalm 119:105 Psalm 119:105

How will he view the world after 12 or 16 years in your school system ?

1. They think that if 1. They think that if everyone believes evolution everyone believes evolution it will become true. it will become true. 2. They must teach the lie 2. They must teach the lie to keep the paycheck to keep the paycheck coming in. coming in. 3. They understand the 3. They understand the bigger picture of how bigger picture of how evolution is the foundation evolution is the foundation for the New World Order.

Why would they lie? Why would they lie?

Why do people believe in Why do people believe in evolution? evolution?

1. That is 1. That is all they all they have been have been taught. taught. An excellent An excellent
book for the book for the busy truth busy truth seeker. CSE seeker. CSE

Why do people believe in evolution? 1. That is all they have 1. That is all they have

been taught. been taught. 2. Their job depends on 2. Their job depends on it. it. 3. They hope there is no 3. They hope there is no God to answer to. God to answer to.

And even as they did And even as they did not like to retain God not like to retain God in their knowledge, in their knowledge, God gave them over to God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to a reprobate mind, to do those things which do those things which are not convenient; are not convenient;
Romans 1:28 Romans 1:28

And for this And for this cause God shall cause God shall send them strong send them strong delusion, that delusion, that they should they should believe a lie: believe a lie:
II Thes. 2:11 II Thes. 2:11

Him from the creation of Him from the creation of the world are clearly the world are clearly seen, being understood seen, being understood by the things that are by the things that are made, even His eternal made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so power and Godhead, so that they are without that they are without excuse: excuse:

Romans 1:20 Romans 1:20

Why do people believe in evolution? 1. That is all they have been 1. That is all they have been

taught. taught. 2. Their Job depends on it. 2. Their Job depends on it. 3. They hope there is no God to 3. They hope there is no God to answer to. answer to. 4. They have social-political 4. They have social-political reasons. reasons. 5. They have too much pride to 5. They have too much pride to

If you want to know what to do about If you want to know what to do about the lies by getting involved in the lies by getting involved in selecting or influencing textbooks in selecting or influencing textbooks in your state see our video, Public your state see our video, Public School Presentation. School Presentation.
It is one of the videos in It is one of the videos in our Topical Series for our Topical Series for $99 or $9.99/ea. $99 or $9.99/ea.

The evolutionist doesnt seem to see the problem with going from abstract to the real world.

If Creation is True: Evolution is True If

1. There is a Creator

1. There is no Creator

2. There are 2. There are rules no rules 3. There is a purpose to life 3. There is no purpose to life

If Creation is True: If Evolution is True:

4. Man is a fallen creature in need of 5. Man brought a Savior death into the world 6. There is an after-life 7. There is comfort in knowing the

4. Man is evolving with no need of a Savior 5. Death brought man into the world 6. There is no after-life 7. There is no hope of knowing the future

When [the devil] speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the John 8:44it. John 8:44 father of

God is not a man, that he should lie;


Numbers Numbers

eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;
Titus 1:2 Titus 1:2

whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Romans Romans

If you died today, where would you go?

What on earth are you doing for heavens sake?


God

Call or write for Call or write for a free catalog. a free catalog. www.drdino.co www.drdino.co m m 850-479-3466 850-479-3466 Creation Creation Science Science Evangelism Evangelism 29 Cummings 29 Cummings Rd Rd

12 Topical videos on other subjects like: School Ideas, Magic Tricks, and Health. All 12 for $99

17 hour seminar on DVD or VHS plus notebook for $99

*All 39 tapes for

20 Debate tapes. Dr. Hovind vs. evolutionists in various fields of science all 20 for $169

1. Majority Opinion- In the 1. Majority Opinion- In the scientific community there is scientific community there is no debate. There are tens of no debate. There are tens of thousands of scientists digging thousands of scientists digging fossils and they support fossils and they support evolution. This is important evolution. This is important to me. This implies: to me. This implies: 2. Those who dont believe in 2. Those who dont believe in evolution are dumb. evolution are dumb. 3. Walked into their trap! 3. Walked into their trap! They want to put creation and They want to put creation and

4. Facts are my true god! 4. Facts are my true god! Please show me any facts that Please show me any facts that have stood the test of time. have stood the test of time. 5. Creationists ignore current 5. Creationists ignore current research. research. 6. All false theories die hard. 6. All false theories die hard. Geocentric theory, doctrine of Geocentric theory, doctrine of humors, etc. Evolution is a dying humors, etc. Evolution is a dying religion and its adherents are religion and its adherents are running scared. #220 (342) running scared. #220 (342) Creationists dont do science. I Creationists dont do science. I cant test it. cant test it.

Because that, when they knew God, Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. beasts, and creeping things.

Romans 1:21Romans 1:21-

them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Romans 1:24-

1. Majority Opinion- we 1. Majority Opinion- we should not be here because it should not be here because it gives credibility to a silly gives credibility to a silly theory of creation.theory of creation.embarrassed to be here. embarrassed to be here. 2. Those who dont believe in 2. Those who dont believe in evolution are dumb. evolution are dumb. 3. Scientific theories are 3. Scientific theories are testable testable 4. Historical sciences4. Historical sciences-

5. Present bio-diversity is the result 5. Present bio-diversity is the result of changes over time. Living of changes over time. Living organisms have evolved from an organisms have evolved from an ancestor that was different. ancestor that was different. 6. Mechanism of evolution is 6. Mechanism of evolution is heatedly debated among heatedly debated among evolutionists. But it is a historical evolutionists. But it is a historical reality. reality. 7. Encourage students to challenge 7. Encourage students to challenge it it why only present one side in the why only present one side in the books? books? 8. Vested interest- believe what we 8. Vested interest- believe what we

9. Go to a doctor- I have a pain9. Go to a doctor- I have a painfaulty heart- only experts are faulty heart- only experts are capable of knowing that capable of knowing that evolution is true. evolution is true. 10. Scientists arrive at facts on 10. Scientists arrive at facts on a world wide scale. They have a world wide scale. They have decided evolution is true. decided evolution is true. 11. What evidence? Fossil 11. What evidence? Fossil record- internally consistentrecord- internally consistentgeographic distributiongeographic distributioncomparative anatomy- vestigial comparative anatomy- vestigial structures- embryology, gill structures- embryology, gill

12. Biologists do not argue 12. Biologists do not argue about natural selection. about natural selection. Stand up comic not science Stand up comic not science Im smart- youre dumb. Im smart- youre dumb. 13. Scientists are realists- make 13. Scientists are realists- make sense of the world- make a sense of the world- make a model that makes is consistent model that makes is consistent with the model with the model after their kind. after their kind. 14. Biology for 30 years- are 14. Biology for 30 years- are there limits? there limits? 15. Bone in the dirt- we know 15. Bone in the dirt- we know

16. What part of the Origins is 16. What part of the Origins is wrong? wrong? 17. Types of evolution are 17. Types of evolution are religions. What is a religion? religions. What is a religion? 18. My thoughts on where 18. My thoughts on where micro ends and macro begins. micro ends and macro begins. 19. If only 6000 years old- hard 19. If only 6000 years old- hard pressed to explain- macro pressed to explain- macro becomes probable in the minds becomes probable in the minds of most scientists. of most scientists.

1. DNA is too complex 1. DNA is too complex to have arisen by to have arisen by chance chance 2. Similarities in code 2. Similarities in code prove a common prove a common designer designer 3. The chromosome # 3. The chromosome # does not follow the does not follow the expected pattern expected pattern

Why I cant believe in Why I cant believe in 1. Lack of scientific evidenceevolution. 1. Lack of scientific evidenceevolution.

over 50 lies are used to over 50 lies are used to support the theory but no support the theory but no real science. There is no real science. There is no fossil record, geologic fossil record, geologic column or billions of column or billions of years. years. 2. Lack of logic- If we can 2. Lack of logic- If we can arrange it on paper, that arrange it on paper, that proves it! proves it! 3. Lack of purpose- life means 3. Lack of purpose- life means

Centres d'intérêt liés