|
Sunday, January 16, 2005
Rubens show opens at the Met
|
|
 |
Slide Show
|
|
By The Associated Press
January 14, 2005, 6:01 PM EST
Perhaps the person most surprised to see an exhibition of Peter Paul Rubens' drawings would have been Rubens himself.
The 17th-century artist famed for his portraits never made his numerous drawings public, instead using them as a personal visual archive and starting points for his huge painted canvases.
But a new exhibition of Rubens' drawings, many never before seen in the United States, offers viewers a unique look at an amazing talent and his artistic process.
"Peter Paul Rubens" opened Friday at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and runs through April 3. The show consists of more than 100 drawings taken from collections and museums all over the world.
"He's very known for his large canvases filled with voluptuous nudes, but here you see a different Rubens," said Michiel Plomp, one of the show's curators. "Most of his drawings, you never see them, (so) this is a really a once-in-a-lifetime experience."
Rubens (1577-1640) was a widely traveled and highly sought-after painter, working as an artist for the courts of nobility and even serving as a diplomat for Archduke Albert and Archduchess Isabella, the rulers of what was then the Southern Netherlands.
Drawings were a part of his artistic process from the beginning, the exhibit shows.
When he started his arts education as an adolescent, Rubens copied the well-known works of other artists. In Italy, where he lived from 1600-1608, he drew images from the classical sculpture he saw around him, as well as from the works of the greats like Michaelangelo and Titian.
So important were his drawings to Rubens, Plomp said, that the artist stipulated in his will that they couldn't be sold unless none of his sons or sons-in-law became artists and would benefit from them.
The Met show is organized both chronologically and thematically.
It groups Rubens' drawings in different ways -- including the composition sketches, which show his initial visions for his paintings, with pages covered with the same figure in different poses; his portraits, which he never really enjoyed doing but still executed with a certain liveliness and grace, including a portrait of one of his sons as a toddler, and landscape and animal drawings.
Even though Rubens considered himself a painter, his drawings are excellent in their detail and meticulousness, Plomp said.
"He's among the great draftsmen of the world," Plomp said.
"For our aesthetic of the 21st century, we appreciate his drawings better than his paintings ... he would have been shocked."
Copyright © 2005, Newsday, Inc.
Posted at 02:31 pm by R7fel
Permalink
Harry: It's a Mistake Not a Catastrophe
|
 |
|
The world response to Prince Harry's Afrika Korps costume has been mad. It makes me fear for the sanity not of the Royal Family but of the British press.
Prince Harry is a 20-year-old private citizen. He is not a member of the British government nor of the diplomatic corps. He is not a head of state, nor even a head of state in waiting. He holds no public position or status, except as a very junior member of the Royal Family. The likelihood of his ever being king is, perhaps mercifully, slim. Nor did he don his costume on a public platform or at a public occasion. He was at a private party. That a member of the Royal Family should ever portray himself as a German soldier - even one assigned to a general who died opposing Hitler - may seem tasteless. But for goodness sake, so what?
Hypersensitivity to group feeling has now moved from political cult to raging obsession. It is being enshrined in a new anti-blasphemy law. I am sure that when I was at school I played Britons versus Nazis, not to mention cowboys and Indians, doctors and nurses and a variety of other politically incorrect games. That a soldier-to-be should dress up at a private function as an old enemy is hardly the end of the world. The former proprietor of The Daily Telegraph publicly idolised Napoleon. Is there a statute of limitation on dictatorship?
Prince Harry's action was tasteless and, once publicised, insensitive to those still living who suffered at the hands of the Nazis. I am sure a bevy of historical advisers would have recommended the Afrika Korps insignia but not the swastika.
No one supposes Prince Harry was "a Nazi". He was making no political statement. He was not portraying himself as anti-British, anti-Semitic or an advocate of Auschwitz or the Holocaust. He made an error of judgment both in his choice of regalia - the swastika is illegal in Germany - and in believing that any party is ever going to be private with him around.
But I repeat, so what? Such incidents become "issues" only when journalists choose to make them so. They telephone publicists and beg them for a critical quote. Once shaken, this cocktail needs nor further stirring. By today we had comments from the German embassy, the Israeli government, the European Union, the Conservative Party, survivors of Auschwitz, Uncle Tom Cobleigh and all. The story was leading every news agency worldwide. In the face of such hysteria, the prince's apology was considered not big enough. It did not pack the requisite news punch. There were demands for him to appear in person, possibly to scourge himself in public, do penance, stand in the stocks. Perhaps he should push a pea with his nose to Jerusalem.
We have lost the ability to express proportion. There is no longer such a thing as an accident. There is only a catastrophe. Whatever happens is "big news", unless something else turns up that is bigger. Someone somewhere, preferably a celebrity, must be involved, be blamed and, with luck, be sued or sacked. Public figures no longer make mistakes. They make "massive errors of judgment" for which they must resign or be roasted alive. This is almost medieval. However minor, and however sincerely regreted, a mistake may be redeemed only with trial by ordeal.
Der Spiegel's Matthias Matussek complains in today's Evening Standard that "it is the British who have a problem with Germany's past". Every day we run movies and old newsreel portraying the British as military victors and the Germans as beasts. We satirise the goosestep and treat the swastika as fancy dress. We depict Germans as a cross between our own lager louts and our own British National Party. Sixty per cent of our young people have never heard of Auschwitz.
This is wrong. But we do not help it by having hysterics when the "third in line to the throne" commits an error of judgment. Does this mean that, were he 30th in line, German battledress would be unexceptionable? We should all grow up. So in time will Prince Harry. |
|
Posted at 01:58 pm by R7fel
Permalink
Months of war that ruined centuries of history
Cherished monuments defaced and ancient inscribed fragments found in spoil heaps
Maev Kennedy
Saturday January 15, 2005
The Guardian
Iraqi authorities will today take back responsibility for the site of Babylon in a formal handover from the coalition forces. But what they will inherit, say experts, is a catalogue of disasters. According to the report of the British Museum's John Curtis, the site has been severely contaminated and parts have been irreparably damaged.
The report details:
· damage to the dragons decorating the Ishtar Gate, one of the world's most famous monuments, from attempts to prise out the relief-moulded bricks
· broken bricks inscribed with the name of Nebuchadnezzar lying in spoil heaps
· the original brick surface of the great processional route through the gate crushed by military vehicles
· fuel seeping from tanks into archaeological layers
· acres of the site levelled, covered with imported gravel - which Dr Curtis said would be impossible to remove without causing further damage - and sprayed with chemicals which are also seeping into the unexcavated buried deposits
· thousands of tonnes of archaeological material used to fill sandbags and mesh crates, and equally damaging, when that practice stopped, thousands more tonnes of material imported from outside the site, contaminating the site for archaeologists forever.
Babylon, capital of the Babylonian empire, site of the Tower of Babel and the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, was rediscovered by archaeologists in the 19th century, but has inspired legends for thousands of years. It was the capital of two of the most famous kings of all time, Hammurabi, who ruled from 1792 to 1750BC, and introduced the world's first code of law, and Nebuchadnezzar, ruler from 604 to 562BC, who rebuilt and doubled the size of the city and built the hanging gardens.
Dr Curtis, head of the Department of the Ancient Near East at the British Museum, has worked as an archaeologist in Iraq for decades, and directed many excavations.
He was back in Baghdad in 2003 as soon as the bombs stopped falling, when the British Museum led the international effort to assess the damage and losses from the looted national museum. He returned to Babylon last month at the invitation of the Iraqi authorities, and inspected it with a team of Iraqi archaeologists. However, he was still not able to inspect the entire site, as part of it is still fenced off and mined.
He therefore warns - in what one archaeologist who has read the report described as "the killer phrase" - that his report "should not be seen as exhaustive, but is indicative of the types of damage caused".
The military camp was established by the American forces in April 2003, and damage was already visible when Dr Curtis first visited part of the site that June. The same contractors, Kellogg, Brown and Root - a subsidiary of the American civil engineering corporation Halliburton, of which the US vice-president, Dick Cheney, is a former chief executive officer - were used to develop and maintain the site throughout, as it grew to a 150-hectare camp, housing 2,000 soldiers. This was officially handed over to Polish forces in September 2003.
His 14-page report, which includes maps and was compiled during a site visit in December, lists dozens of examples of visible damage. In a walk through the ancient city he observes damage to:
The Ishtar Gate
One of the most famous monuments of antiquity. It was excavated in the 19th century by German teams; the upper glazed parts of the gate are in a Berlin museum. However, the monument was so important to the Babylonians that the foundations, deep underground and never visible in antiquity, were also decorated with beautifully modelled dragons and inscriptions. He reports 10 separate areas of damage to the moulded brick reliefs. "It has been suggested that most of the damage [to figures on the gate] was caused ... by a person or persons trying to remove a decorated brick," he says.
The "Warsaw" Gate
Two 20-metre long trenches have been dug here. "In the piles of spoil alongside the trenches there are many fragments of brick, some with inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar," the report says. One brick clearly has an inscription which reads: "Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, who provides for Esagila and Ezadila, the el dest son of Nabopolassar, King of Babylon, am I."
The "Reno" gate
At one point, outside the base entrance nicknamed the "Reno Gate", he found a 200-metre stretch of road, lined with the mesh baskets "that have clearly been filled with deposits from the Babylon site, containing sherds, bones, etc."
The processional street
Two areas of 6th century BC brick pavement, part of the processional street, are exposed in this area. "In both cases the bricks are badly broken. This is thought to be the result of a heavy vehicle or vehicles driving over them. If this is so, it is likely that the bricks still covered by earth are similarly damaged."
The Ziggurat
Trenches have been dug into the ziggurat, one of the stepped pyramids which were one of the most distinctive Babylonian monuments and gave rise to the legend of the Tower of Babel. "Much pottery and many fragments of brick with cuneiform inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar were observed in the bank of spoil" next to the trench.
Other observations include: an old car park vastly expanded to make a helicopter landing zone and parking lot, all flattened and gravelled, old tracks covered in new stones, now deeply rutted from heavy vehicles, large areas scooped out to a depth of two metres to obtain material to fill the sand bags and metal baskets and earth mounded up to protect six fuel depots, which also show evidence of leakage.
The most serious damage may be invisible, the contamination and disturbance of areas which have never been excavated, which may mean that many of the secrets of Babylon, including the site of the hanging gardens, may never be resolved.
In his conclusions Dr Curtis says: "A full-scale international investigation should be launched into the damage done to the archaeological site of Babylon during its occupation by coalition forces."
All mines and ordnance must be cleared, and all disturbed areas investigated and recorded by archaeologists appointed by the Iraqis, he says.
Babylon has never been on the Unesco list of world heritage sites. "Now more than ever Babylon needs the care, attention and advice that being a world heritage site would ensure it received," he says.
Dr Curtis said it was not possible for him to determine at which time, and by which forces, damage was caused: a separate report has been compiled by Polish archaeologists. A further report is being compiled by the Iraqis on the damage to Saddam Hussein's palace, built in a corner of the site, and which had already been looted before allied forces began camping out in the shell. The site had such symbolic importance to Saddam that he rebuilt many of the walls and gates, using bricks stamped with his name, many of which have been stolen.
Dr Curtis, back in his office in the British Museum, refused to say who should pay for the damage, but said: "The Iraqis simply do not have the resources to tackle the scale of this site, an international effort will clearly be needed."
Posted at 01:43 pm by R7fel
Permalink
Friday, January 14, 2005
Little Footprints In Our Heart
Tribute to Jane
Gravestone placed at burial site of unidentified baby
By ARIANE WILTSE
Special to The Sun
 n a warm January afternoon, the sun peeked from behind clouds to set a baby's grave aglow.
Almost 18 months since Baby Jane's burial, eight people gathered around a small patch of earth Thursday to remember a baby with no name.
A private ceremony was held at Evergreen Cemetery to lay a 400-pound granite gravestone over the unmarked grave.
"We thought it was important to complete the burial process," the Rev. Lynwood Walters said after offering a prayer.
Inscribed on the marker are two angels and the date when Baby Jane's body was discovered floating in a pond in northwest Alachua County. Excerpts from poems and prayers, including those from a note written by the man who found the dead baby, also are inscribed on the marker. An area has been left blank to one day inscribe her name.
"That way it'd be proper to put her real name on there and not her victim's name that the state gave her," said Paul Anderson of Milam Funeral Home.
The grave was not marked earlier because it was hoped someone would come forward and identify the baby, Anderson said.
On Aug. 20, 2003, Baby Jane's decomposed body was found floating face down in a former catfish pond off a dirt road. Deputies believe she was about 2 weeks old when she died, but she may have been as old as five months. Autopsy results indicated she was 22 inches long and had dark hair. It is believed she was in the pond from 36 to 48 hours before she was found. The cause of death is still unknown.
On Jan. 7 the Alachua County Sheriff's Office announced that DNA results identified Baby Jane's race as African-American and Caribbean descent.
Detectives combed more than 600 birth records from Alachua and neighboring counties for the months preceding the discovery of Baby Jane's body. After months of interviews, detectives whittled that number down to about 50, but after the discovery of her race, possible identities have been reduced to eight, officials said.
The O.T. Davis Monument Co. donated the marker, and Derrick McClain carved the inscription. Davis' daughter, Lorrie Jones, drew the angels inscribed at the top.
Pam Gamley, of the Evergreen Cemetery, said, "A lot of people come out and ask, 'Where's the baby's grave?' It's a testament to how people in this community feel about this baby."
At the head of Baby Jane's grave is a small statue of an angel with a note signed simply Kathy: "Some people come and go in our life and are quickly forgotten. Some leave tiny footprints in our hearts that will stay forever. I will never forget you."
Al Tomes, the man who found Baby Jane's body on his property, held back tears as he stood silently by her grave.
"It's strange for a man who never had kids. It hits hard," he said. "Every day I (have) to go by the spot where we found her. Every day I blow her a kiss."
Posted at 09:12 pm by R7fel
Permalink
Dear Felix
The Senate may vote on the Alberto Gonzales nomination for attorney general as early as the 21st of January!
Let's tell the U.S. Senate, and the world, that torture is not an American value.
1. Help place this TV ad in targeted states around the country on the 19th and 20th
2. Join the coordinated national call-in day on the 18th
3. Forward this action alert to friends around the country.
As White House counsel, Alberto Gonzales forged legal opinions on torture and detainment that sought to permit the president of the United States to do an end-run around international law, U.S. law, good military conduct and common decency. Mr. Gonzales's involvement in the crafting of the infamous August 2002 "torture memo" that gave CIA interrogators the legal blessings to conduct torture, and his work on two presidential orders on detainee policy have provoked controversy and judicial reprimand during Bush's first term. Mr. Gonzales' role as architect of the Bush administration's policies on detention and torture makes him unfit for the job of Attorney General of the United States.
TV AD CAMPAIGN
In conjunction with MoveOn.org and Peace Action affiliates around the country, we will be running hard-hitting television ads in key states country next week encouraging public opposition and pressure on senators to vote against Gonzales. To see the ad and make a donation to help get the ads on the air, please click here.
SENATE CALL-IN CAMPAIGN
On January 19, the Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a meeting likely to include a vote on the nomination of Alberto Gonzales for Attorney General. If the committee endorses the nomination, the full Senate could vote to confirm Gonzales as early as the afternoon of January 21.
On January 18, please join Peace Action members and concerned citizens across the United States for a National Call-in Day to the U.S. Senate (as you know, the House of Representatives does not vote on Cabinet appointments). Call the Capitol Switchboard, 202.224.3121, and ask for your Senator or call your Senator's local office. Tell your Senators that torture is not an American value and to vote against Alberto Gonzales!
Go to the Peace Action web page to download a flyer on the national call-in day to share with family, friends and neighbors. www.peace-action.org
Thank you for joining in telling the truth about Alberto Gonzales' role in Bush's torture scandal and urging our senators to reject torture.
Peace,
Kevin Martin
Executive Director
Posted at 08:49 pm by R7fel
Permalink
This is war
Thursday 13 January 2005 @ 09:57
Spc. Sam Ross, 21, combat engineer, 82nd Airborne Division, was injured May 18, 2003 in Baghdad when a bomb blew up during a munitions disposal operation. He is blind and an amputee. Photographed in the woods near his trailer where he lives alone in Dunbar Township, Pennsylvania October 19, 2003.
"I lost my left leg, just below the knee. Lost my eyesight, which is still unsettled about whether it will come back or not. I have shrapnel in pretty much every part of my body. Got my finger blown off. It don't work right. I had a hole blown through my right leg. Had 3 skin grafts to try and repair it. It's not too bad right now. It hurts a lot, that's about it. You know not really anything major. Just little things. I get headaches. I have a piece of shrapnel in my neck that came up through my vest and went into my throat and it's sitting behind my trachea, and when I swallow it kind of feels like I have a pill in my throat. Some stuff like that. And my left ear, it don't work either."
Spc. Luis Calderon, 22, from Puerto Rico, a tank operator, 4th Infantry Division, was injured May 5, 2003 in Tikrit, when a concrete wall with Saddam's face on it, which he was ordered to destroy, came crashing down on his tank severing his spinal cord and leaving him a quadriplegic. Photographed at the Miami Veterans' Hospital December 17, 2003.
"I did my job. I got an Army Commendation medal. I didn't get a purple heart. I feel like I deserve one. It would make me more confident that I really did something. I'm disappointed that when they ask you to go, we go. And when we ask them where is our reward for doing something, they take their time. I don't know. I don't know how the system runs but it's pretty bad. For the moment right now, I just want to heal."
Pfc. Alan Jermaine Lewis, 23, a machine-gunner, 3rd Infantry Division was wounded July 16, 2003 on Highway 8 in Baghdad when the Humvee he was driving hit a land mine blowing off both legs, burning his face, and breaking his left arm in 6 places. He was delivering ice to other soldiers at the time. Photographed at home in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, November 23, 2003.
"I remember every detail about my legs. Every detail from the scars to the ingrown toenails to the birthmarks to the burn marks. I made it a habit even before I even joined the military, to cherish every part of my body, cause I would always look at it like, 'What if this finger was gone, would I be able to function without it?' Things like that I've always had on my mind. I don't know why, maybe it was God's way of preparing me for what was going to happen. I've been dealing with the military since I was a sophomore in high school. They came to the school like 6 times a year all military branches. They had a recruiting station like a block from our high school. It was just right there."
PFC Randall Clunen, 19, 101st Airborne, stationed in Tal Afar, was pulling guard December 8, 2003 when a suicide bomber broke through security and exploded himself and his vehicle. Chunks of shrapnel ripped into Clunen's face. Photographed at home Salem, Ohio February 14, 2004.
"I have no political feelings. I'm just a soldier out there. You know, we're trying to help them live like us so they can be free and not be scared to do anything. Trying to set them free. That's how we looked at it. Sometimes we hated being over there because they just didn't respect what we were doing. We were trying to help them and they didn't want us there at all...It was a car bomb. A suicide bomber. He came just ripping through the gate and he exploded the car and himself. I got hit. My nose was sitting over here like on the left side of my face and I couldn't breathe so they had to cut a trache in. I was bleeding extremely bad. They kept me in a room by myself because I was just like really bad looking. I had tubes running all through."
Cpl Tyson Johnson III, 22, a mechanic with 205 Military Intelligence, was injured in a mortar attack on the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad on September 20, 2003. He suffered massive internal injuries and is 100 percent disabled. Photographed at home in Prichard, Alabama May 6, 2004.
"It was crazy. The Iraqis, they wake up about 5 in the morning and they walking like zombies, just walking, walking, like walking dead type junk. I'm serious. Most of my friends they were losing it out there. They would do anything to get out of there, do anything. I had one of my guys, he used to tell me -- my wife just had my son, I can't wait to get home and see him. And, you know, he died out there. He sure did and I have to think about that every day. Shrapnel down the back, shrapnel that came in and hit my head, punctured my lungs. I broke both of my arms. I lost a kidney. My intestines was messed up. They took an artery out of my left leg and put it into this right arm. They pretty much took my life. Pretty much."
Much more at the Purple Heart's gallery by Nina Berman.
This is war.
Posted at 12:28 pm by R7fel
Permalink
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
Distortion of Human Sexuality
HOMOSEXUAL UNIONS – WHAT A MESS!
by Jimmy Seghers
Polls show that most Americans and certainly most Christians are
opposed to elevating homosexual unions to the legal status of
marriage. Yet the aggressive agenda to promote legal status to
homosexual unions exposes the ineptitude of many Christians to
effectively articulate their opposition to this disturbing
development. How is that possible? The consistent teaching of the
Catholic Church has condemned homosexual acts "as acts of grave
depravity" that are "intrinsically disordered" (Catechism # 2357).
Furthermore, the Church has declared that the
homosexual "inclination" is "objectively disordered" (Catechism #
2358). The Church roots its lucid teaching in Sacred Scripture and
Tradition.
Protestants claim to base their beliefs on the Bible. Yet, the Bible
is very clear in its repudiation of homosexual acts (See: Gen 19:1-
29; Lev 18:22; Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:9-10; 1 Tim 1:10-11). Let's
consider two passages. In Leviticus God instructs the Hebrew people
through Moses: "You shall not lie with a male as with a women; it is
an abomination" (Lev 19:22). St. Paul's instruction is equally clear
and unambiguous: "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not
inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral,
nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the
greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the
kingdom of God" (1 Cor 6:9-10).
Some Christians have attempted to obstruct the clear biblical message
regarding homosexual acts through "reinterpretations" and "nuancing."
An example is found in Thomas A. Smith's article that appeared in the
September 20, 2003 issue of The Times-Picayune. Mr. Smith, who
teaches at Loyola in New Orleans, gives the following absurd
interpretation of the evil at Sodom and Gomorrah: "the real sin
identified in the story was a breach of the ancient social rules of
hospitality. . . The story has nothing whatever to say about
homosexual relationships as such." Evidently Mr. Smith believes God
destroyed Sodom, Gomorrah and the other three cities because they
were inhospitable not because "the men of Sodom, young and old" (Gen
19:4) attempted to commit homosexual rape upon their visitors. Aside
from this kind of silliness the message of Scripture is so clear that
the Rev. Rod Thomas, a spokesman for the evangelical network Reform,
noted that even the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement accepted that
the Bible condemns all homosexuality activity.
Because the constant teaching of the Catholic Church and the clear
teaching of Sacred Scripture condemns homosexual acts, one would
expect that almost all Catholics and Protestants would stand shoulder
to shoulder in their repudiation of this disordered behavior. Sadly,
that is not the situation. Obviously there is confusion in the ranks.
In addition many Christians lack the ability to persuasively defend
their position even when they reject these acts. Let's consider two
factors that contribute to this ineptitude.
The Onslaught of Misinformation.
It is difficult to accurately gauge the considerable impact of the
long lasting and massive media blitz that promotes homosexuality in
television, in films, in novels, in textbooks - even some religious
textbooks, and in the class room. It's clear that this campaign has
been effective in fostering an increased acceptance of homosexual
behavior while spreading confusion about the causes and remedies of
these same-sex attractions. This propaganda uses humor, stereotypes,
misdirection, half truths, and falsehoods to portray the "normality"
of homosexuality and the bigotry of those who would question it.
In a letter to Catholic bishops psychiatrist and psychologist Dr.
Richard P. Fitzgibbons and Peter Rudegeair, specialists in the
origins and healing of same-sex attractions, observe: "For over
twenty years, activists, intent on changing the laws on sexual
orientation, have put forward a massive public relations campaign
specifically designed to spread misinformation that will change the
social acceptance of homosexuality." They sight the popularized myth
that scientific research has produced conclusive evidence that
homosexuality is a genetically inherited condition. They state
emphatically: "In fact, no such evidence exists."
Those who support this false claim sight the example of men who
exhibited extreme effeminacy from early childhood. This condition is
called Gender Identity Disorder (GID). Because of the considerable
observable difference between boys with GID and other boys, the
erroneous conclusion is drawn that boys with GID are born that way.
According to Fitzgibbons and Rudegeair the reality is that "effective
family therapy in which the father bonds more closely with the son
and affirms his son's masculinity can in a relatively short time
result in the elimination of these symptoms and the emergence of
normal boyish behavior." Because this information is not widely known
many boys with GID do not receive treatment with the result that
about 75% of these boys will develop a same-sex attraction in
adolescence.
In his attempt to justify homosexual relationships Rowan Williams,
the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, posed the question, "What
about those people who say "I've never known anything different'?"
Men and women with a same-sex attraction need to hear a clear answer.
There is real hope for healing! Based on their 25 years of experience
Fitzgibbons and Rudegeair affirm: "Large numbers of people, including
clergy, who had SSA [same-sex attraction] are now substantially
cured, especially if they brought the power of faith into the healing
process. These men and women no longer view themselves as being
homosexual."
There are many causes for same-sex attractions. Among them
Fitzgibbons and Rudegeair identify: 1) weak masculine identity among
males, 2) social isolation and loneliness, 3) peer rejection, 4) poor
body image, 5) the mistrust of male love in girls, 6) and a weak
feminine identity. They stress that children are born male or female,
but they must learn what it means to be a man or a woman. When
children fail to successfully pass through this vital developmental
stage, they may develop same-sex attractions in adolescence. Sadly,
there has been a huge campaign to hide this information from the
general public and from those who wish to prevent or to rid
themselves of same-sex attractions.
This is not meant to imply that the healing of a same-sex attraction
is easy for those who have already embraced the homosexual lifestyle.
Recent studies by Fergusson, Herrell, and Sandfort demonstrates that
individuals with same-sex attractions suffer from other psychological
problems at a substantially higher rate than those without this
disorder. Some of these are very difficult to treat. Anyone wishing
to learn more about this subject should read Fr. Harvey's book, The
Truth About Homosexuality, and the Catholic Medical Association's,
Homosexuality and Hope, which can be found at www.cathmed.org. Fr.
John Harvey, O.S.F.S. is the founder of Courage, a dynamic and
effective support organization for homosexuals. Unlike the dissident
group, Dignity, Courage accepts and promotes the Church's timeless
teaching on sexual morality.
The media gives the false message that homosexual unions are stable
loving relations just like the relationships of heterosexual married
couples. The overwhelming available data gives a very different and
dark picture. The study of Dutch homosexuals by Dr. Maria Xiridou of
the Amsterdam Municipal Health Services published in the May issue of
the journal AIDS found that men in homosexual relationships have an
average of eight partners a year outside their main partnership,
adding more evidence to the stereotype that homosexuals tend to be
promiscuous. Pete LaBarbara, senior policy analyst at Concerned Women
of America's Culture and Family Institute observed that these
findings are "proof positive that these relationships … will never be
as stable as a normal heterosexual relationship regardless of what
institutions and laws are changed." The study also discovered that
homosexual partnerships last, on average, only 1½ years. In contrast
the US National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) reports that 67%
of first marriages last 10 years and 50% last 20 years.
A lengthily article in the June 2003 issue of Population and
Development Review provided extensive data highlighting the
importance of traditional family and religious values. The authors,
Linda Waite and Evelyn Lehrer, state: "We argue that both marriage
and religiosity generally have far-reaching, positive effects." The
marriages that produce these desired effects are those who make a
lifetime commitment. In contrast divorce and cohabitation
significantly reduce the positive effects that were supported by five
pages of bibliographical references.
In spite of this growing body of information the Centers for Disease
Control granted over $500,000 to the radical sex promoters, Sexuality
Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS).
SIECUS is made up of a network of pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, and
feminist organizations. According to LifesiteNews.com/CWN, SIECUS
promotes sexual activities in schools and lobbies at state and
federal levels. Their "Guidelines for Comprehensive Sexuality
Education" include recommendations to teach 5 year-olds about
masturbation and homosexual practices.
The media's handling of the terrible priest scandal is a classic
example of misdirection. These reprehensible acts were incorrectly
identified as pedophilia. The sad reality is the vast majority of the
cases involved homosexual acts committed by homosexual men against
adolescent boys. Yet, when John Geoghan was recently murdered in
prison this crime was reported as a "hate crime," motivated
by "homophobia." Are we to believe that the Boston Globe and the New
York Times only discovered that Geoghan was a homosexual after he was
killed?
Admitting the true facts of the priest scandal does not imply that
most homosexuals are child molesters. However, it does highlight the
specific problem of homosexuals in the priesthood and the unique
obstacles the homosexual person experiences in integrating his
sexuality. The psychotherapist, Gregory Popchak, clarifies the
difficulty. "While the heterosexual person works out his identity in
public, eliciting the guidance of parents and others in his quest for
a whole identity, the shame the homosexual person experiences as he
confronts the disintegration of his sexual self causes him to wrestle
with many questions in secret, which grossly retards his sexual
development. Healthy identities – sexual identities in particular –
cannot be formed in secret."
Some politicians were quick curry favor with their radical supporters
by criticizing the insightful document from Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, which gave needed clarity to the Church's
position on homosexual unions. Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy, son of Sen.
Edward Kennedy condemned the document as "bigotry." His distorted
logic went so far as to claim that the Church does not understand
what it means to be a Christian: "The very foundation of the Church
is about love. This notion of discrimination is so far afield of what
Jesus' life is all about." Using Kennedy's distorted logic one could
also justify fornication, adultery and a whole series of perversions.
Discrimination is the act of treating or judging a person unfairly
because the judgment is not based on the merit of the individual's
action. An example of discrimination would be giving a promotion
purely based on the person's sex, religion or race while passing over
more qualified candidates. In the case of homosexual acts and unions
the Church condemns the behavior precisely because it is evil. There
is nothing arbitrary about it. Behavior is the fair and objective
basis upon which all sinful actions are condemned. Jesus taught truth
and died defending it. Jesus was very severe in his condemnation of
those who pervert the truth. Those who speak of a saccharine Jesus
who tolerates anything should study tough covenantal courses Jesus
utters against the Scribes and Pharisees (Mt 23:13-36). In the words
of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: "Those who would
move from tolerance to the legitimization of specific rights of
cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval
or legalization of evil is something far different from the
toleration of evil."
Kennedy is typical of those politicians who sell out their faith to
curry favor with radical groups who support evil agendas like
abortion and homosexuality. In their duplicity they attempt to hide
behind the falsehood that they can and must separate their public
behavior from ones private values. This rationalization evokes Pilate
washing his hands over his unjust sentence of Jesus. It should be
obvious to everyone that politicians have a grave moral obligation to
protect the good of society as a whole. Marriage is not given legal
recognition because it institutionalizes friendship or companionship.
Marriage has special rights because it provides a stable basis for
the survival of society, and the education and development of
children.
It should be self evident to any thinking person that two bulls are
not made for each other, neither are two cows. Even a rudimentary
grasp of human biology demonstrates that a man and a woman compliment
each other – not two men and not two women. So while persons of the
same sex may become close buddies and intimate friends that are not
capable of the conjugal dimension which is essential to the
procreation of children. Thus the Congregation for the doctrine of
the Faith draws the obvious conclusion: "Homosexual unions are
totally lacking in the biological and anthropological elements of
marriage and family which would be the basis, on the level of reason
[and one could add – common sense], for granting them legal
recognition. Such unions are not able to contribute in a proper way
to the procreation and survival of the human race."
The Holy See makes the astute observation that there is a huge
difference between homosexual acts as private behavior between two
individuals and the radical restructure of marriage and society by
recognizing these relationships as an approved institution in the
legal structure of a society. Clearly, it would lower moral values
making them subject to the fickle whims of what is currently
considered "politically correct." Clearly giving legal status to
homosexual unions would devalue marriage, which is the essential
building block of any society. Indeed, the very survival of a society
is rooted in the family and founded on marriage.
The Fast Track to Self-Destruction.
There is another dimension to the discussion that must be explored.
It is not possible to defend marriage or demonstrate the evil of
homosexual unions while sympathetic to other sexual sins. How can one
explain the immorality of homosexual unions while approving other
sinful behavior like contraception, pornography, masturbation,
adultery, fornication and abortion? How can one, for example, make a
convincing case against the homosexual excesses of Southern Decadence
while tolerating or excusing the heterosexual excesses of Mardi Gras?
One of the most insidious characteristic of sexual sins is their
ability to corrupt the mind. Ultimately, however, the guilt of
conscience forces a decision. Will I change my behavior to conform to
truth, which is called repentance; or will I twist and distort the
truth in an attempt to conform it to my behavior, which is called
rationalization? The great wound in Western societies today is the
moral hemorrhaging caused by unfaithful Christians who rationalize
their sins and reject the need of repentance. Regrettably, no
Christian church has been spared this evil.
Pope Paul VI warned about the dangers of this modern idolatry in
1966. "Today man is tempted to worship himself, to set himself up not
only as the highest choice of thought and as the goal of history but
even of all reality. He is ready to believe that he can of himself,
relying only on his own resources, make real progress and bring about
his own salvation. In other words, man is tempted to seek only his
own glory and not the glory of God… Today a falsely humanistic
mentality is becoming more and more widespread, a mentality deeply
rooted in egoism because it is closed to the knowledge and love of
God, and is basically unsettling because it is closed to His light
and to hope in Him."
What person has the right to decide which of the Ten Commandments are
no longer in effect? This cafeteria Christianity is simply another
attempt to be like God, knowing good and evil. We can choose to
abandon God's law, but we can't remove the feeling of guilt much less
its evil effect our own salvation. We can play the fool and live in a
fantasy, but the harsh reality of Christ's judgment strikes home at
the moment of death. . . if not before.
Many people board the fantasy train to hell with a ticket stamped:
the Sixth Commandment - violation. This leads to a pool of guilt
which contemporary false prophets - theologians, ministers, priests
and intellectuals - exploit to build their pathetic little empires by
handing out naughty permission slips. The price is cheap, just become
an ardent follower and you can sin to your hearts content. Sadly,
it's like counterfeit money. There is a lot of the stuff out there,
but it isn't worth anything.
The radical distortion of human sexuality, which the so-called sexual
revolution of the 1960's broke upon us with a vengeance of a
hurricane, is the root cause of the present confusion among
Christians about homosexual unions. The pervasiveness of sexual
excesses among Christians explains their ineffectiveness in combating
homosexuality.
Genuine human love desires to be a gift to another and to receive the
gift of another. This exchange of persons is beautifully expressed
with our bodies in the conjugal act in which the two become "one
flesh." This union only finds its true meaning in the lifetime
commitment of marriage. It is the path of self-donation and
surrender. Lust in contrast is distorted sexual desire that seeks to
use the other person as an object to selfishly gratify ones pleasure.
This is the path of grasping, taking and self-focus. Selfish men
commonly express lust is in the form of physical gratification while
exploiting a women. It is also common that women experience lust in
the form of emotional gratification while using a man. Each has made
an object of the other. Taking replaces the genuine gift of persons.
Selfishness is at the core of the sexual revolution, which seeks to
pull apart the inseparable love and fruitfulness elements of human
sexuality. Whenever self predominates commitment and self-sacrifice
diminishes or disappears altogether. In this context the life element
of the sexual act, the child, becomes the enemy because it demands
sacrifice. Contraception became the battleground in the Protestant
churches in the 1930's and in the Catholic Church in the 1960's,
because contraception prevents this unwanted life, this drag on ones
freedom and the imposition of ties and responsibilities. When
preventing the pregnancy fails, abortion became the method of choice
for eliminating the obligation to the child and each other. Forty
million murders later is it surprising that homosexual unions is now
a burning issue?
Christians will never win this battle by exclusively focusing on
homosexuality because, as bad as it is, it is a symptom of a deeper
malady – the distortion of human sexuality and marriage. Therefore,
the real challenge facing Christians is to rediscover the true
meaning of human sexuality and the sacrament of marriage. This is a
message our teetering society longs to hear and desperately needs.
Genuine human love is modeled after God's love. Within the divine
Trinity of Persons it is characterized by the infinite and total
donation of each of the Persons to the others. The concrete and
definitive example of this love is discovered in the Person of Jesus
Christ, the Heavenly Bridegroom. His is a love of complete giving,
total surrender, and absolute self-sacrifice. Jesus' sacrifice on the
cross for us is the model St. Paul uses to describe how husbands and
wives are to "be subject to one another" (Eph 5:21).
The biblical blessing of fertility in marriage is built on this
fundamental union between husband and wife because in the gift of
each other in procreation they reflect the inner life of the Trinity
and the relationship of Jesus and the Church. This explains the
satanic attacks aimed at this sacred union and the resulting culture
of death. Our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 3:16;
6:19). Sexual sins desecrate that temple. In this way Satan, the
adulterous intruder, tries to steal what is not his.
The primary weapon that must be employed to win this battle to defend
marriage is the example of Christian marriages in which the husband
and wife love the way Jesus loves. Theirs must be a gift of self-
sacrificing love. There is no greater legacy to give children than a
mom and dad deeply in love, not the false love so sentimentality and
hormones, but the genuine article of commitment and self-donation.
None of us are capable of loving in this manner, but in relying of
Christ's potency we can be transformed to accomplish what is
otherwise beyond our capacity.
God's love is so totally wild that He makes Himself our gift in that
supernatural marital embrace we call the Eucharist. Why are we so
hesitant, so afraid to surrender to that gift? When we do our entire
life becomes a "Thank you," eucharistia in Greek – a eucharist. When
we eat ordinary food we absorb it into ourselves because we are of a
higher order than the food. However, Jesus is of an infinitely higher
order than we. So in the reception of the Eucharist, He transforms us
into Himself. Then we are prepared to become his sent ones (Mt 28:19-
20), the willing instruments through which he can transform our
world.
Posted at 07:36 pm by R7fel
Permalink
cont'd 'The Greatest Hoax. EVER!'
Chance Renders Evolution Impossible
 "The probability of a single protein molecule being arranged by chance is, 1 in 10-161 power, using all the atoms on earth and allowing all the time since the world began...for a minimum set of required 239 protein molecules for the smallest theoretical life, the probability is, 1 in 10-119,879 power. It would take, 10-119,879 power, years on average to get a set of such proteins. That is 10-119,831 times the assumed age of the earth and is a figure with 119,831 zeros."
(Dr. James Coppege from, "The Farce of Evolution" page 71)
"The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 nought's after it...It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of Evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence."
(Sir Fred Hoyle, highly respected British astronomer and mathematician)
"I could prove God statistically; take the human body alone; the chance that all the functions of the individual would just happen, is a statistical monstrosity."
(George Gallup, the famous statistician)
"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged through evolutionary processes is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the material therein."
(Sir Fred Hoyle, Highly respected British astronomer and mathematician)
"The probability for the chance of formation of the smallest, simplest form of living organism known is 1 to 10-340,000,000. This number is 1 to 10 to the 340 millionth power! The size of this figure is truly staggering, since there is only supposed to be approximately 10-80 (10 to the 80th power) electrons in the whole universe!"
(Professor Harold Morowitz)
"The occurrence of any event where the chances are beyond one in ten followed by 50 zeros is an event which we can state with certainty will never happen, no matter how much time is allotted and no matter how many conceivable opportunities could exist for the event to take place."
(Dr. Emile Borel, who discovered the laws of probability)
"The more statistically improbable a thing is, the less we can believe that it just happened by blind chance. Superficially, the obvious alternative to chance is an intelligent Designer."
(Professor Richard Dawkins, an atheist)
"The only competing explanation for the order we all see in the biological world is the notion of special creation."
(Dr. Colin Patterson, evolutionist and senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, which houses 60 million fossils)
"To insist, even with Olympian assurance, that life appeared quite by chance and evolved in this fashion, is an unfounded supposition which I believe to be wrong and not in accordance with the facts."
(Dr. Pierre-Paul Grasse, University of Paris & past-president of French Academy of Science.)
"It is emphatically the case that life could not arise spontaneously in a primeval soup from its kind."
(Dr. A.E Wilder Smith, chemist and former evolutionist)
"The idea of spontaneous generation of life in its present form is therefore highly improbable even to the scale of the billions of years during which prebotic evolution occurred."
(Dr. Ilya Prigogine, Nobel Prize winner)
"The complexity of the simplest known type cell is so great that it is impossible to accept that such an object could have been thrown together by some kind of freakish, vastly improbable event. Such an occurrence would be indistinguishable from a miracle."
(Dr. Michael Denton, molecular biochemist)
"The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop."
(Dr. Edwin Conklin, evolutionist and professor of biology at Princeton University.)
"Hypothesis [evolution] based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts....These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without a murmur of protest."
(Sir Ernst Chan, Nobel Prize winner for developing penicillin)
"All of us who study the origin of life find that the more we look into it, the more we feel it is too complex to have evolved anywhere. We all believe as an article of faith that life evolved from dead matter on this planet. It is just that life's complexity is so great, it is hard for us to imagine that it did."
(Dr. Harold Urey, Nobel Prize winner)
"The world is too complicated in all parts and interconnections to be due to chance alone. I am convinced that the existence of life with all its order in each of its organisms is simply too well put together. Each part of a living thing depends on all its other parts to function. How does each part know? How is each part specified at conception? The more one learns of biochemistry the more unbelievable it becomes unless there is some type of organizing principle---an architect."
(Scientist Allan Sandage)
"One may well find oneself beginning to doubt whether all this could conceivably be the product of an enormous lottery presided over by natural selection, blindly picking the rare winners from among numbers drawn at utter random.....nevertheless although the miracle of life stands "explained" it does not strike us as any less miraculous. As Francois Mauriac wrote, "What this professor says is far more incredible than what we poor Christians believe."
(French Biochemist and Nobel Prize winner, Jacques Monod, "Chance and Necessity.")
"A further aspect I should like to discuss is what I call the practice of infinite escape clauses. I believe we developed this practice to avoid facing the conclusion that the probability of self-reproducing state is zero. This is what we must conclude from classical quantum mechanical principles as Wigner demonstrated"
(Sidney W. Fox, "The Origins of Pre-Biological Systems)
"In terms of their basic biochemical design....no living system can be thought of as being primitive or ancestral with respect to any other system, nor is there the slightest empirical hint of an evolutionary sequence among all the incredibly diverse cells on earth."
(Dr. Michael Denton, molecular biochemist)
"We have always underestimated the cell...The entire cell can be viewed as a factory that contains an elaborate network of interlocking assembly lines, each of which is composed of a set of large protein machines...Why do we call [them] machines? Precisely because, like machines invented by humans to deal efficiently with the macroscopic world, these protein assemblies contain highly coordinated moving parts."
(Bruce Alberts, President, National; Academy of Sciences "The Cell as a Collectrion of Protein Machines," Cell 92, February 8, 1998)
"We should reject, as a matter of principle the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
(Biochemist, Franklin M. Harold "The Way of the Cell," page 205)
"Evolutionary biologists have been able to pretend to know how complex biological systems originated only because they treated them as black boxes. Now that biochemists have opened the black boxes and seen what is inside, they know the Darwinian theory is just a story, not a scientific explanation."
(Professor Phillip E. Johnson)
"The simplicity that was once expected to be the foundation of life has proven to be a phantom; instead, systems of horrendous, irreducible complexity inhabit the cell. The resulting realization that life was designed by an intelligence is a shock to us in the twentieth century who have gotten used to thinking of life as the result of simple natural laws. But other centuries have had their shocks, and there is no reason to suppose that we should escape them. Humanity has endured as the center of the heavens moved from the earth to beyond the sun, as the history of life expanded to encompass long-dead reptiles, as the eternal universe proved mortal. We will endure the opening of Darwin's Black box"
(Michael j. Behe, Biochemist "Darwin's Black Box, pg. 252")
"An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going."
(Dr. Francis Crick, biochemist, Nobel Prize winner, Life Itself: Its Origin and Nature, pg. 88)
"Contrary to the popular notion that only creationism relies on the supernatural, evolutionism must as well, since the probabilities of random formation of life are so tiny as to require a 'miracle' for spontaneous generation tantamount to a theological argument."
(Dr. Chandra Wickramasinge, cited in, Creation vs Evolution, John Ankerberg, pg. 20.)
"Complex molecules that are essential to particular organisms often have such a vast information content as...to make the theory of evolution impossible."
(Bird, Origin of Species Revisited, Vol. 1, pg. 71)
"A close inspection discovers an empirical impossibility to be inherent in the idea of evolution."
(Dr. Nils Heribert-Nilsson, Swedish botanist and geneticist, English Summary of Synthetische Artbildung, pg. 1142-43, 1186.)
The Laws Of Thermodynamics
Second Law Of Thermodynamics:
The Second Law Of Thermodynamics basically means that everything runs inexorably from order to disorder and from complexity to decay.
The theory of biological evolution directly contradicts the Law of Entropy in that it describes a universe in which things run from chaos to complexity and order. In evolution, atoms allegedly self-produce amino acids, amino acids auto-organize amoebas, amoebas turn into apes, and apes evolve into astronauts.
"If your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation."
(Sir Arthur Edington, Mathematician and Physicist)
"Since the laws of thermodynamics remain unquestioned, we know the total amount of energy available to do work in the universe is not self-replenishing, but is running out. (We can assume that the total available energy in the universe is finite since current cosmological models suggest this state of affairs) Furthermore, we see that work is still being accomplished in the universe at this moment, which means we have not yet exhausted our finite supply of available energy, then the amount of time the universe has to exhaust its available energy is finite. But if the universe eternally existed, then an infinite amount of time has already passed. Infinite time would have consumed our universes finite time in the infinite past, there would not be enough time left in the finite time available to our universe to last through an infinite past. Since we are still here, the universe could not have had an eternal past. Therefore, the universe had a beginning and, thus, came into being."
(Dr. David Berlinski)
Earth's Population Refutes Evolution
The evolutionary scientists who believe that man existed for over a million years have almost insurmountable problem. Using the assumption of forty-three years for an average human generation, the population growth over a million years would produce 23,256 consecutive generations. We calculate the expected population by starting with one couple one million years ago and use the same assumptions of a forty-three-year generation and 2.5 children per family......The evolutionary theory of a million years of growth would produce trillions x trillions x trillions of people that should be alive today on our planet. To put this in perspective, this number is vastly greater than the total number of atoms in our vast universe. If mankind had lived on earth for a million years, we should all be standing on enormously high mountains of bones from trillions of skeletons of those who had died in past generations. However, despite the tremendous archaeological and scientific investigation in the last two centuries, the scientists have not found a fraction of the trillions of skeletons predicted by the theory of evolutionary scientists.
Evidence For Creation
1. The Fossil Record...Evolutionists have constructed the Geologic Column in order to illustrate the supposed progression of "primitive" life forms to "more complex" systems we observe today. Yet, "since only a small percentage of the earth's surface obeys even a portion of the geologic column the claim of their having taken place to form a continuum of rock/life/time over the earth is therefore a fantastic and imaginative contrivance." "The lack of transitional series cannot be explained as being due to the scarcity of material. The deficiencies are real, they will never be filled." This supposed column is actually saturated with "polystrate fossils" (fossils extending from one geologic layer to another) that tie all the layers to one time-frame. "To the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation."
2. The Global Flood... The Biblical record clearly describes a global Flood during Noah's day. Additionally, there are hundreds of Flood traditions handed down through cultures all over the world. M.E. Clark and Henry Voss have demonstrated the scientific validity of such a Flood providing the sedimentary layering we see on every continent. Secular scholars report very rapid sedimentation and periods of great carbonate deposition in earth's sedimentary layers...It is now possible to prove the historical reality of the Biblical Flood.
3. Population Statistics...World population growth rate in recent times is about 2% per year. Practicable application of growth rate throughout human history would be about half that number. Wars, disease, famine, etc. have wiped out approximately one third of the population on average every 82 years. Starting with eight people, and applying these growth rates since the Flood of Noah's day (about 4500 years ago) would give a total human population at just under six billion people. However, application on anevolutionary time scale runs into major difficulties. Starting with one "couple" just 41,000 years ago would give us a total population of 2 x 1089. 9 The universe does not have space to hold so many bodies.
4. Human Artifacts throughout the Geologic Column...Man-made artifacts - such as the hammer in Cretaceous rock, a human sandal print with trilobite in Cambrian rock, human footprints and a handprint in Cretaceous rock point to the fact that all the supposed geologic periods actually occurred at the same time in the recent past.
5. Design in Living Systems...A living cell is so awesomely complex that its interdependent components stagger the imagination and defy evolutionary explanations. A minimal cell contains over 60,000 proteins of 100 different configurations. The chance of this assemblage occurring by chance is 1 in 10 4,478,296.
6. Design in the Human Brain...The human brain is the most complicated structure in the known universe. It contains over 100 billion cells, each with over 50,000 neuron connections to other brain cells. This structure receives over 100 million separate signals from the total human body every second. If we learned something new every second of our lives, it would take three million years to exhaust the capacity of the human brain. In addition to conscious thought, people can actually reason, anticipate consequences, and devise plans - all without knowing they are doing so.
The Fraud Of Ape-Men
Piltdown Man: (Eoanthropus dawsoni)
These fossils were "doctored," the skull was stained with chemicals, the teeth were filled with material to change their appearance, and there were also file marks for the same purpose. In 1953 it was formally announced a fake.
Peking Man:
It was conveniently discovered in China, just as Canadian physician Davidson Black was about to run out of funds for his evolutionary explorations in 1927.
The Rockefeller Foundation rewarded this discovery with a generous grant, permitting Black to continue digging. This find consisted off bashed monkey skulls and some tools. Monkey brains is a delicassey in some parts of the world. It turns out that Peking man was dinner.
Professor Marcellin Boule was angry, "at having traveled halfway around the world to see a battered monkey skull."
Nebraska Man:
In 1922, a single tooth was discovered in Nebraska. These experts said, "that it belonged to an ape-man." By the time the story hit a London newspaper, not only was there a picture of "Nebraska man" but there was also a picture of "Nebraska mom." All of this from a single tooth!
Some time later an identical tooth was found by geologist Harold Cook, this time it was connected to a skull, the skull was connected to a skeleton of a wild pig. How far will "science" go to "fit" fossils into their theory?
Java Man: (Pithecanthropus erectus) (Homo erectus)
Eugene Dubios found these bones on the Dutch island of Java in 1891, it consisted of a skullcap, femur, and three teeth. The femur was found 50 feet away from the skullcap a full year later. Dubios also found two human skulls (Wadjak skulls) in close proximity to the original "finds."
The Selenka expedition which included 19 evolutionists was sent to prove the validity of Java Man. Their 342 page report says, "beyond a peradventure of a doubt Java Man played no part in human evolution"
Heidelberg Man:
Built from a jawbone that was conceded by many to be quite human.
New Guinea Man:
Dates way back to 1970. This species has been found in the region just north of Australia.
Neanderthal Man
Boxgrove Man: Fully human
Neanderthal Man: Fully human
Cro-Magnon Man: Fully human
Homo Habillis: Mixture of at least four different animals
Lucy: Ape
"Detailed comparisons of Neanderthal skeletal remains with those of modern humans have shown that there is nothing in Neanderthal anatomy that conclusively indicates locomotor, manipulative, intellectual or linguistic abilities inferior to those of modern humans"
(Erik Trinkaus, Natural history, vol. 87, pg 10. 1978)
Neanderthal Man buried his dead and had elaborate funeral customs that included arranging the body and covering it with flowers. He made a variety of stone tools and worked with skins and leather. There is evidence that he engaged in medical care. Some specimens show evidence of survival to old age despite numerous wounds, broken bones, blindness and disease, this suggests that these individuals were cared for and nurtured by others who showed human compassion.
The bent posture of piltdown man has been traced to a bone deformity resulting from a vitamin deficiency cave dwellers experienced from lack of sunlight.
Questions And Answers With Professor Philip E. Johnson
Q: Describe the premise and process of intelligent design?
A: The premise of intelligent design is that the evidence of science, understood impartially, points to the need for intelligence. This is shown in two particular ways. First, there is the irreducible complexity of living organisms, like the biological cell. This is best explained in the book "Darwin Black Box" by my friend and colleague, biochemist Michael Behe. He shows the incredible complexity of each cell and the systems that are required many complex parts to work. If you are missing one part, you don't get an almost perfect system; you get no system at all. Any creative process would have to produce everything all at once. The Darwinism says that you produce one thing that has some function, and then you add another one and another one and so on until you get the complete cell. Each step is supposedly superior to the last. But irreducible complexity makes that impossible. That is the first feature.
The second feature of the living organisms is that they contain what is known as complex specific information. To explain that, just think of a book like an encyclopedia or a computer program like Windows 98. Computer programs don't write themselves; they need computer engineers. A computer program has a very complex set on instructions. Richard Dawkins, the arch Darwinist promoter and atheist, admits forthrightly that a single cell in the body has more information in it than all the volumes of the encyclopedia Britannica put together. That information is what coordinates the activities of the cell. Now, you know how impossible it would be to provide an encyclopedia by mixing letter at random until they come together in a certain way.
Neither of these things can be explained by the Darwinism theory. They don't even try to explain them; all they do is huff and puff and bluff and say, "You're not allowed to challenge our scientific fact." This dogma is not science at all. None of it has been demonstrated by experiment, which is what would have to happen for it to be truly scientific.
(Conversation from, Decision magazine Volume 44, number 8, August 2003)
Q: If there is no evidence for evolution, why do teachers continue to propagate it in our universities and schools?
A: Most professors continue to teach evolution in the universities out of fear. This fear is that of not being tenured, of not getting research grants, of not being published, and of not being accepted by their peers. So to be accepted, to be published, to be granted research money, and to be tenured by their university, they must follow the party line, which is evolution. This is how the academic game is played.
(Dr. Phillip E. Johnson, speaking at a conference.)
Posted at 09:18 am by R7fel
Permalink
cont'd "The Greatest Hoax, EVER!
After Seeing The Impossibility Of Evolution, These Scientists Made The Following Observations:
"Evolution can be thought of as sort of a magical religion. Magic is simply an effect without a cause, or at least a competent cause. 'Chance,' 'time,' and 'nature,' are the small gods enshrined at evolutionary temples. Yet these gods cannot explain the origin of life. These gods are impotent. Thus, evolution is left without competent cause and is, therefore, only a magical explanation for the existence of life..."
(Dr. Randy L. Wysong, instructor of human anatomy and physiology, The Creation-Evolution Controversy, pg. 418.)
"After chiding the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the unenviable position of having to create mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort, could not be proved to take place today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past."
(Dr. Loren Eiseley, anthropologist, The Immense Journey, pg. 144.)
"Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups."
(Dr. Duane Gish, Biochemist.)
"Evolution is a fairy tale for adults."
(Dr. Paul LeMoine, one of the most prestigious scientists in the world)
"Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless."
(Prof. Louis Bounoure, Director of Research, National Center of Scientific Research.)
"The evolution theory is purely the product of the imagination."
(Dr. Ambrose Flemming, Pres. Philosophical Society of Great Britain)
"The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research but purely the product of the imagination."
(Albert Fleishman, professor of zoology & comparative anatomy at Erlangen University)
"We have had enough of the Darwinian fallacy. It is time we cry, "The emperor has no clothes."
(Dr. Hsu, geologist at the Geological Institute in Zurich.)
"The great cosmologic myth of the twentieth century."
(Dr. Michael Denton, molecular biochemist, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis.)
"9/10 of the talk of evolution is sheer nonsense not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by fact. This Museum is full of proof of the utter falsity of their view."
(Dr. Ethredge, British Museum of Science.)
"We have now the remarkable spectacle that just when many scientific men are agreed that there is no part of the Darwinian system that is of any great influence, and that, as a whole, the theory is not only unproved, but impossible, the ignorant, half-educated masses have acquired the idea that it is to be accepted as a fundamental fact."
(Dr. Thomas Dwight, famed professor at Harvard University)
"I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science. When this happens, many people will pose the question, "How did this ever happen?"
(Dr. Sorren Luthrip, Swedish Embryologist)
"The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based upon faith alone; exactly the same sort of faith which is necessary to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion....The only alternative is the doctrine of special creation, which may be true, but irrational."
(Dr. Louis T. More, professor of paleontology at Princeton University)
"Evolution is faith, a religion."
(Dr. Louist T. More, professor of paleontology at Princeton University)
"Darwin's theory of evolution is the last of the great nineteenth-century mystery religions. And as we speak it is now following Freudians and Marxism into the Nether regions, and I'm quite sure that Freud, Marx and Darwin are commiserating one with the other in the dark dungeon where discarded gods gather."
(Dr. David Berlinski)
"In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to "bend" their observations to fit in with it."
(H.S. Lipson, Physicist Looks at Evolution, Physics Bulletin 31 (1980), p. 138)
"A time honored scientific tenet of faith."
(Professor David Allbrook)
"Darwinism has become our culture's official creation myth, protected by a priesthood as dogmatic as any religious curia."
(Nancy Pearcey, "Creation Mythology,"pg. 23)
"When students of other sciences ask us what is now currently believed about the origin of species, we have no clear answer to give. Faith has given way to agnosticism. Meanwhile, though our faith in evolution stands unshaken we have no acceptable account of the origin of species."
(Dr. William Bateson, great geneticist of Cambridge)
"Chance renders evolution impossible."
(Dr. James Coppedge)
"It (evolution) is sustained largely by a propaganda campaign that relies on all the usual tricks of rhetorical persuasion: hidden assumptions, question-begging statements of what is at issue, terms that are vaguely defined and change their meaning in midargument, attacks of straw men, selective citation of evidence, and so on. The theory is also protected by its cultural importance. It is the officially sanctioned creation story to modern society, and publicly funded educational authorities spare no effort to persuade people to believe it."
(Professor Phillip Johnson, "Objections Sustained: Subversive Essays on Evolution, Law and Culture," pg. 9)
"Therefore, a grotesque account of a period some thousands of years ago is taken seriously though it be built by piling special assumptions on special assumptions, ad hoc hypothesis [invented for a purpose] on ad hoc hypothesis, and tearing apart the fabric of science whenever it appears convenient. The result is a fantasia which is neither history nor science."
(Dr. James Conant [chemist and former president of Harvard University], quoted in Origins Research, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1982, p. 2.)
"George Bernard Shaw wisecracked once that Darwin had the luck to please everybody who had an axe to grind. Well, I also have an axe to grind, but I am not pleased. We have suffered through two world wars and are threatened by an Armageddon. We have had enough of the Darwinian fallacy.
(Dr. Kenneth Hsu, "Reply," Geology, 15 (1987), p. 177)
"Unfortunately for Darwin's future reputation, his life was spent on the problem of evolution which is deductive by nature...It is absurd to expect that many facts will not always be irreconcilable with any theory of evolution and, today, every one of his theories is contradicted by facts."
(Dr. P.T. Mora, The Dogma of Evolution, p. 194)
"Ultimately the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century...The origin of life and of new beings on earth is still largely as enigmatic as when Darwin set sail on the [ship] Beagle."
(Dr. Michael Denton, molecular biochemist, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1986), p. 358.)
"It is inherent in any definition of science that statements that cannot be checked by observation are not really saying anything or at least they are not science."
(George G. Simpson, "The Nonprevalence of Humanoids," in Science, 143 (1964) p. 770.)
"The theory [of evolution] is a scientific mistake."
(Dr. Louis Agassiz, quoted in H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation, (1966), p. 139. [Agassiz was a Harvard University professor and the pioneer in glaciation.]
"There is no evidence, scientific or otherwise, to support the theory of evolution."
(Sir Cecil Wakely)
"It's impossible by micro-mutation to form any new species."
(Dr. Richard Goldschmt, evolutionist. Founder of the "Hopeful Monster" theory.)
"Scientists who utterly reject Evolution may be one of our fastest growing controversial minorities...Many of the scientists supporting this position hold impressive credentials in science."
(Larry Hatfield, "Educators Against Darwin," Science Digest Special, Winter, pp. 94-96.)
"The theory of life that undermined ninteenth-century religion has virtually become a religion itself and in its turn is being threatened by fresh ideas...In the past ten years has emerged a new breed of biologists who are scientifically respectable, but who have their doubts about Darwinism."
(Dr. B. Leith, scientist)
"The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 nought's after it...It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of Evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence."
(Sir Fred Hoyle, highly respected British physicist and astronomer)
"Everyone who is seriously interested in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe a spirit vastly superior to man, and one in the face of which our modest powers must feel humble."
(Albert Einstein)
"Unfortunately, in the field of evolution most explanations are not good. As a matter of fact, they hardly qualify as explanations at all; they are suggestions, hunches, pipe dreams, hardly worthy of being called hypotheses."
(Dr. Norman Macbeth, Darwin Retried (1971), p. 147)
"Evolution is baseless and quite incredible."
(Dr. John Ambrose Fleming, President, British Association for Advancement of Science, in "The Unleashing of Evolutionary Thought")
"The fact is that the evidence was so patchy one hundred years ago that even Darwin himself had increasing doubts as to the validity of his views, and the only aspect of his theory which has received any support over the past century is where it applies to microevolutionary phenomena. His general theory, that all life on earth had originated and evolved by a gradual successive accumulation of fortuitous mutations, is still, as it was in Darwin's time, a highly speculative hypothesis entirely without direct factual support and very far from that self-evident axiom some of its more aggressive advocates would have us believe."
(Dr. Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1986), p. 77)
"I have always been slightly suspicious of the theory of evolution because of its ability to account for any property of living beings (the long neck of the giraffe, for example). I have therefore tried to see whether biological discoveries over the last thirty years or so fit in with Darwin's theory. I do not think that they do. To my mind, the theory does not stand up at all."
(H. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physic Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138.)
"In conclusion, evolution is not observable, repeatable, or refutable, and thus does not qualify as either a scientific fact or theory."
(Dr. David N. Menton, PhD in Biology from Brown University)
"The success of Darwinism was accomplished by a decline in scientific integrity."
(Dr. W.R. Thompson, world renowned Entomologist)
"I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially to the extant that it's been applied, will be one of the greatest jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so flimsy and dubious a hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has."
(Malcolm Muggeridge)
"There are gaps in the fossil graveyard, places where there should be intermediate forms, but where there is nothing whatsoever instead. No paleontologist..denies that this is so. It is simply a fact, Darwin's theory and the fossil record are in conflict."
(Dr. David Berlinsky)
"Scientists concede that their most cherished theories are based on embarrassingly few fossil fragments and that huge gaps exist in the fossil record."
(Time Magazine, Nov. 7, 1977)
"Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so we are guilty of circular reasoning if we then say the fossil record supports this theory."
(Dr. Ronald R. West)
"The evolutionary establishment fears creation science, because evolution itself crumbles when challenged by evidence. In the 1970s and 1980s, hundreds of public debates were arranged between evolutionary scientists and creation scientists. The latter scored resounding victories, with the result that, today, few evolutionists will debate. Isaac Asimov, Stephen Jay Gould, and the late Carl Sagan, while highly critical of creationism, all declined to debate."
(Dr. James Perloff, Tornado in a Junkyard (1999), p. 241)
"I doubt if there is any single individual within the scientific community who could cope with the full range of [creationist] arguments without the help of an army of consultants in special fields."
(David M. Raup, "Geology and Creation," Bulletin of the Field Museum of Natural History, Vol. 54, March 1983, p. 18)
"I think in fifty years, Darwinian evolution will be gone from the science curriculum...I think people will look back on it and ask how anyone could, in their right mind, have believed this, because it's so implausible when you look at the evidence."
(Dr. Johnathan Wells, author of the book, "Icons of Evolution")
"As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency--or, rather, Agency--must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?"
(Astronomer George Greenstein, "The Symbiotic Universe," page 27)
"Astronomy leads us to a unique event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say "supernatural") plan."
(Nobel laureate Arno Penzias, "Cosmos, Bios, and Theos," page 83)
"Human DNA contains more organized information than the Encyclopedia Britannica. If the full text of the encyclopedia were to arrive in computer code from outer space, most people would regard this as proof of the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence. But when seen in nature, it is explained as the workings of random forces."
(George Sim Johnson "Did Darwin Get it Right?" The Wall Street Journal, October 15, 1999)
"The vast mysteries of the universe should only confirm our belief in the certainty of its Creator. I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science."
(Werner von Braun, father of space science, "Gone Bananas," World September 7, 2002)
"Faith does not imply a closed, but an open mind. Quite the opposite of blindness, faith appreciates the vast spiritual realities that materialists overlook by getting trapped in the purely physical."
(Sir John Templeton "the Humble Approach," page 115)
"It is hard to resist the impression that the present structure of the universe, apparently so sensitive to minor alterations in numbers, has been rather carefully thought out...The seemingly miraculous concurrence of these numerical values must remain the most compelling evidence for cosmic design."
(Physicist Paul Davies, "God and the New Physics," page 189)
"Would it not be strange if a universe without purpose accidentally created humans who are so obsessed with purpose?"
(Sir John Templeton, "The Humble Approach: Scientists Discover God," page 19)
"Set aside the many competing explanations of the Big Bang; something made an entire cosmos out of nothing. It is this realization--that something transcendent started it all--which has hard-science types...using terms like 'miracle.'"
(Gregg Easterbrook, "The New Convergence")
"Perhaps the best argument...that the Big Bang supports theism is the obvious unease with which it is greeted by some atheist physicists. At times this has led to scientific ideas...being advanced with a tenacity which so exceeds their intrinsic worth that one can only suspect the operation of psychological forces lying very much deeper than the usual academic desire of a theorist to support his or her theory."
(C. J. Isham, "Creation of the Universe as a Quatum Process" page 378)
"Science and religion...are friends, not foes, in the common quest for knowledge. Some people may find this surprising, for there's a feeling throughout our society that religious belief is outmoded, or downright impossible, in a scientific age. I don't agree. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that if people in this so-called 'scientific age' knew a bit more about science than many of them actually do, they'd find it easier to share my views."
(Physicist John Polkinghorne, "Quarks, Chaos, and Christianity")
"Science...has become identified with a philosophy known as materialism or scientific naturalism. This philosophy insists that nature is all there is, or at least the only thing about which we can have any knowledge. It follows that nature had to do its own creating, and that the means of creation must have included any role for God."
(Professor Phillip E. Johnson, "The Church Of Darwin," Wall Street Journal, August 16, 1999)
Posted at 08:56 am by R7fel
Permalink
The Theory Of Evolution: The Great Myth
The question we must ask is: Is it more logical, rational, and scientific to believe in evolution, or it it more logical, rational, and scientific to believe that , "In the beginning God created?" Lets look at the evidence.
Does life arise spontaneously by chance, as evolution teaches? No! The basic axiom of all biology is biogenesis: Life only arises from life; it does not come from nonliving matter. Does this more logically fit evolution or creation.
What about the teaching of evolution that everything is evolving ever upward to greater and greater complexity, all by chance? The evidence is the second law of thermo-dynamics. The laws of physics show that everything goes from organization to chaos. This is known as entropy. Does this more logically fit evolution or the biblical account of creation and the fall?
What about the fossil record? Darwin said that if evolution were to be true we would find the evidence in the fossil records by finding millions of transitional forms or, "missing links." What we find, in fact, is everything appearing fully formed after its own kind in the fossil record with no evidence of transitions! Does this more logically fit evolution or the biblical creation? In Genesis Chapter 1 doesn't God say He created everything, "after their own kind?"
It never ceases to amaze us that when we were in kindergarten they taught us that a frog turning into a prince was a nursery fairy tale, but when we got to college they told us that a frog turning into a prince was science! The Bible says that only a fool says in his heart, "There is no God". By following evolution we have literally become a nation of fools following false, unscientific data.
(Ron Carlson, Fast Facts on False Teachings)
These Quotes Reveal The Credulity Of Evolutionists:
"There are only two possibilities as to how life arose; one is spontaneous generation arising to evolution, the other is a supernatural creative act of God, there is no third possibility. Spontaneous generation that life arose from non-living matter was scientifically disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others. That leaves us with only one possible conclusion, that life arose as a creative act of God. I will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in God, therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generation arising to evolution."
(Dr. George Wald, evolutionist, Professor Emeritus of Biology at the University at Harvard, Nobel Prize winner in Biology.)
"Most modern biologists, having reviewed with satisfaction the downfall of the spontaneous generation hypothesis, yet unwilling to accept the alternative belief in special creation, are left with nothing."
(Dr. George Wald, evolutionist, Professor Emeritus of Biology at the University at Harvard, Nobel Prize winner in Biology.)
"Evolution [is] a theory universally accepted not because it can be proven by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible."
(Professor D.M.S. Watson, leading biologist and science writer of his day.)
"My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed.....It is not even possible to make a caricature of an evolution out of paleobiological facts...The idea of an evolution rests on pure belief."
(Dr. Nils Heribert-Nilsson, noted Swedish botanist and geneticist, of Lund University)
"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever! In explaining evolution we do not have one iota of fact."
(Dr. Newton Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission.)
"When you realize that the laws of nature must be incredibly finely tuned to produce the universe we see, that conspires to plant the idea that the universe did not just happen, but that there must be a purpose behind it."
(John Polkinghorne, Cambridge University physicist, "Science Finds God," Newsweek, 20 July, 1998)
"Many have a feeling that somehow intelligence must have been involved in the laws of the universe."
(Charles Townes, 1964 Nobel Prize winner in physics, "Science Finds God," Newsweek, 20 July, 1998)
"250,000 species of plants and animals recorded and deposited in museums throughout the world did not support the gradual unfolding hoped for by Darwin."
(Dr. David Raup, curator of geology at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, "Conflicts Between Darwinism and Paleontology")
"The pathetic thing about it is that many scientists are trying to prove the doctrine of evolution, which no science can do."
(Dr. Robert A. Milikan, physicist and Nobel Prize winner, speech before the American Chemical Society.)
"The miracles required to make evolution feasible are far greater in number and far harder to believe than the miracle of creation."
(Dr. Richard Bliss, former professor of biology and science education as Christian Heritage College, "It Takes A Miracle For Evolution.")
"Scientists at the forefront of inquiry have put the knife to classical Darwinism. They have not gone public with this news, but have kept it in their technical papers and inner counsels."
(Dr. William Fix, in his book, "The Bone Peddlers.")
"In the meantime, the educated public continues to believe that Darwin has provided all the relevant answers by the magic formula of random mutations plus natural selection---quite unaware of the fact that random mutations turned out to be irrelevant and natural selection tautology."
(Dr. Arthur Koestler)
"The only competing explanation for the order we all see in the biological world is the notion of special creation."
(Dr. Colin Patterson, evolutionist and senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, which houses 60 million fossils)
"A growing number of respectable scientists are defecting from the evolutionist camp.....moreover, for the most part these "experts" have abandoned Darwinism, not on the basis of religious faith or biblical persuasions, but on strictly scientific grounds, and in some instances, regretfully."
(Dr. Wolfgang Smith, physicist and mathematician)
"It must be significant that nearly all the evolutionary stories I learned as a student....have now been debunked."
(Dr. Derek V. Ager, Department of Geology, Imperial College, London)
"One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom, a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith has not been written."
(Dr. Hubert P. Yockey)
"Darwin's evolutionary explanation of the origins of man has been transformed into a modern myth, to the detriment of scientific and social progress.....The secular myths of evolution have had a damaging effect on scientific research, leading to distortion, to needless controversy, and to gross misuse of science....I mean the stories, the narratives about change over time. How the dinosaurs became extinct, how the mammals evolved, where man came from. These seem to me to be little more than story-telling."
(Dr. Colin Patterson, evolutionist and senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, which houses 60 million fossils)
"The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop."
(Dr. Edwin Conklin, evolutionist and professor of biology at Princeton University.)
"One has only to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible. Yet here we are-as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation."
(Dr. George Wald Evolutionist, Professor Emeritus of Biology at the University at Harvard, Nobel Prize winner in Biology.)
"The explanation value of the evolutionary hypothesis of common origin is nil! Evolution not only conveys no knowledge, it seems to convey anti-knowledge. How could I work on evolution ten years and learn nothing from it? Most of you in this room will have to admit that in the last ten years we have seen the basis of evolution go from fact to faith! It does seem that the level of knowledge about evolution is remarkably shallow. We know it ought not be taught in high school, and that's all we know about it."
(Dr. Colin Patterson, evolutionist and senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, which houses 60 million fossils)
"Hypothesis [evolution] based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts....These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without a murmur of protest."
(Sir Ernst Chan, Nobel Prize winner for developing penicillin)
"There is the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form. This theory can be called the "general theory of evolution," and the evidence which supports this is not sufficiently strong to allow us to consider it as anything more than a working hypothesis."
(Dr. G. A. Kerkut evolutionist)
"All of us who study the origin of life find that the more we look into it, the more we feel it is too complex to have evolved anywhere. We all believe as an article of faith that life evolved from dead matter on this planet. It is just that life's complexity is so great, it is hard for us to imagine that it did."
(Dr. Harold Urey, Nobel Prize winner)
"The deceit is sometimes unconscious, but not always, since some people, owing to their sectarianism, purposely overlook reality and refuse to acknowledge the inadequacies and the falsity of their beliefs."
(Dr. Pierre-Paul Grasse of the University of Paris and past-president of the French Academy of Science)
"Meanwhile, their [evolutionists] unproven theories will continue to be accepted by the learned and the illiterate alike as absolute truth, and will be defended with a frantic intolerance that has a parallel only in the bigotry of the darkest Middle Ages. If one does not accept evolution as an infallible dogma, implicitly and without question, one is regarded as an unenlightened ignoramus or is merely ignored as an obscurantist or a naive, uncritical fundamentalist."
(Dr. Alfred Rehwinkel)
"It is my conviction that if any professional biologist will take adequate time to examine carefully the assumptions upon which the macro-evolution doctrine rests, and the observational and laboratory evidence that bears on the problem of origins, he/she will conclude that there are substantial reasons for doubting the truth of this doctrine. Moreover, I believe that a scientifically sound creationist view of origins is not only possible, but it is to be preferred over the evolutionary one."
(Dean H. Kenyon, professor of biology at San Francisco State University)
"For myself, as, no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom."
(Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means)
"I suppose the reason we leaped at the origin of species was because the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores."
(Sir Julian Huxley, President of the United Nation's Educational, Scientific, Cultural Organization (UNESCO).)
"Evolution is unproved and improvable, we believe it because the only alternative is special creation, which is unthinkable."
(Sir Arthur Keith, a militant anti-Christian physical anthropologist)
"Perhaps generations of students of human evolution, including myself, have been flailing about in the dark; that our data base is too sparse, too slippery, for it to be able to mold our theories. Rather the theories are more statements about us and ideology than about the past. Paleontology reveals more about how humans view themselves than it does about how humans came about, but that is heresy."
(Dr. David Pilbeam, Professor of Anthropology at Yale University, American Scientist, vol 66, p.379, June 1978)
"If I knew of any Evolutionary transitional's, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them in my book, 'Evolution' "
(Dr. Colin Patterson, evolutionist and senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, which houses 60 million fossils)
"For over 20 years I thought I was working on evolution....But there was not one thing I knew about it... So for the last few weeks I've tried putting a simple question to various people, the question is, "Can you tell me any one thing that is true?" I tried that question on the Geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago, A very prestigious body of Evolutionists, and all I got there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said, "Yes, I do know one thing, it ought not to be taught in High School"....over the past few years....you have experienced a shift from Evolution as knowledge to evolution as faith...Evolution not only conveys no knowledge, but seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge."
(Dr. Collin Patterson evolutionist, address at the American Museum of Natural History, New York City, Nov. 1981)
"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualist accounts of evolution."
(Stephen Jay Gould, Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University.)
"I shall discuss the broad patterns of hominoid evolution, an exercise made enjoyable by the need to integrate diverse kinds of information, and use that as a vehicle to speculate about hominoid origins, an event for which there is no recognized fossil record. Hence, an opportunity to exercise some imagination."
(Dr. David Pilbeam)
"To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree possible."
(Charles Darwin, "The origin of species by means of natural selection")
"The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as a trade secret of Paleontology. Evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils."
(Dr. Stephan J Gould, Harvard Paleontologist, "Evolution, Erratic Pace")
"Within the period of human history we do not know of a single instance of the transformation of one species into another one. It may be claimed that the theory of descent is lacking, therefore, in the most essential feature that it needs to place the theory on a scientific basis, this must be admitted."
(Dr. T.H Morgan)
"The facts of paleontology seem to support creation and the flood rather than evolution. For instance, all the major groups of invertebrates appear "suddenly" in the first fossil ferrous strata (Cambrian) of the earth with their distinct specializations indicating that they were all created almost at the same time."
(Professor Enoch, University of Madras)
"It remains true, as every paleontologist knows, that most new species, genera, and families, and that nearly all categories above the level of families, appear in the record suddenly and are not led up to by known, gradual completely continuous transitional sequences." (Dr. George Gaylord Simpson of Harvard)
"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
(Charles Darwin, "The Origin of Species")
"I can envision observations and experiments that would disprove any evolutionary theory I know."
(Dr. Stephen Jay Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory," Discover 2(5):34-37 (1981)
"Darwinism is a creed not only with scientists committed to document the all-purpose role of natural selection. It is a creed with masses of people who have at best a vague notion of the mechanism of evolution as proposed by Darwin, let alone as further complicated by his successors. Clearly, the appeal cannot be that of a scientific truth but of a philosophical belief which is not difficult to identify. Darwinism is a belief in the meaninglessness of existence."
(Dr. R. Kirk, "The Rediscovery of Creation," in National Review, (May 27, 1983), p. 641.)
"It is not the duty of science to defend the theory of evolution, and stick by it to the bitter end no matter which illogical and unsupported conclusions it offers. On the contrary, it is expected that scientists recognize the patently obvious impossibility of Darwin's pronouncements and predictions . . Let's cut the umbilical cord that tied us down to Darwin for such a long time. It is choking us and holding us back."
(Dr. I.L. Cohen, "Darwin Was Wrong:" A Study in Probabilities (1985)
"The theories of evolution, with which our studious youth have been deceived, constitute actually a dogma that all the world continues to teach; but each, in his specialty, the zoologist or the botanist, ascertains that none of the explanations furnished is adequate . . It results from this summary, that the theory of evolution is impossible."
(Dr. P. Lemoine, "Introduction: De L' Evolution?" Encyclopedie Francaise, Vol. 5 (1937)
"Paleontologists [fossil experts] have paid an exorbitant price for Darwin's argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we almost never see the very process we profess to study."
(Dr. Steven Jay Gould, The Panda's Thumb (1982), pp. 181-182 [Harvard professor and the leading evolutionary spokesman of the latter half of the twentieth century].)
"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy."
(Charles Darwin, Life and Letters, 1887, Vol. 2, p. 229)
"I have often thought how little I should like to have to prove organic evolution in a court of law."
(Dr. Errol White, Proceedings of the Linnean Society, London (1966) [an ichthyologist (expert on fish) in a 1988 address before a meeting of the Linnean Society in London])
"The universe and the Laws of Physics seem to have been specifically designed for us. If any one of about 40 physical qualities had more than slightly different values, life as we know it could not exist: Either atoms would not be stable, or they wouldn't combine into molecules, or the stars wouldn't form heavier elements, or the universe would collapse before life could develop, and so on..."
(Stephen Hawking, considered the best known scientist since Albert Einstein, Austin American-Statesmen, October 19, 1997)
"Facts do not 'speak for themselves' they are read in light of theory."
(Evolutionist, Steven J Gould, Professor. Harvard University)
"Why then is not every Geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record."
(Charles Darwin)
"If nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such cases all her efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being, may thus be rendered futile"
(Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" 1924)
"The German Fuhrer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consistently sought to make the practices of Germany conform to the theory of evolution."
(Sir Arthur Keith, a militant anti-Christian physical anthropologist)
"The more civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world." (Charles Darwin, 1881, 3 July, "Life and Letters of Darwin, vol. 1, 316")
"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world."
(Charles Darwin, The descent of Man, Chap. vi)
"The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shown by mans attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than the woman. Whether deep thought, reason, or imagination or merely the use of the senses and hands.....We may also infer.....The average mental power in man must be above that of woman."
(Charles Darwin, "The descent of Man, pg. 566")
"No rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average Negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the white man.....it is simply incredible to think that.....he will be able to compete successfully with his bigger-brained and smaller-jawed rival, in a contest which is to be carried on by thoughts and not by bites."
(Thomas Huxley, 1871, Lay Sermons, addresses and reviews)
"The Negroid stock is even more ancient than the Caucasian and the Mongolian, as may be proved by an examination not only of the brain, of the hair, of the bodily characters, such as the teeth, the genitalia, the sense organs, but of the instincts, the intelligence. The standard intelligence of the average adult Negro is similar to that of the 11 year old youth of the species homo-sapiens."
(Dr. H.F. Osborn, Director of the Museum of National History)
"Recapitulation provided a convenient focus for the persuasive racism of white scientists; they looked to the activities of their own children for comparison with normal adult behavior in lower races." (Dr. Stephen J Gould, "Dr. Downs Syndrome" natural history, 1980)
After Seeing The Impossibility Of Evolution, These Scientists Made The Following Observations:
"Evolution can be thought of as sort of a magical religion. Magic is simply an effect without a cause, or at least a competent cause. 'Chance,' 'time,' and 'nature,' are the small gods enshrined at evolutionary temples. Yet these gods cannot explain the origin of life. These gods are impotent. Thus, evolution is left without competent cause and is, therefore, only a magical explanation for the existence of life..."
(Dr. Randy L. Wysong, instructor of human anatomy and physiology, The Creation-Evolution Controversy, pg. 418.)
"After chiding the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the unenviable position of having to create mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort, could not be proved to take place today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past."
(Dr. Loren Eiseley, anthropologist, The Immense Journey, pg. 144.)
|
|
|
|
