ONE HEARTBEAT AWAY
PART 13
Mark Cahill's Book
According to Dr Kent Hovind, the test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to basic questions. How would you answer these?
1. When, where, why and how did life
Come from non-living matter?
2. When, where, why and how did life
learn to reproduce itself?
3. With what did the first cell capable
of sexual reproduction reproduce?
4. Why would any plant or animal want
to reproduce any more of its kind
since this would only make more
mouths to feed, and decrease the
chances of survival? ( Does the
individual have a desire to survive,
or the species? How do you explain
this?)
5. How can mutations ( recombining of
the genetic code) create any new,
improved varieties? (Recombining
English letters will never produce
Chinese books.)
6. Natural selection works only with the
genetic material available, and
tends only to keep a species stable.
How would you explain the
increasing complexity in the genetic
code that must have occurred
if evolution were true?
7. When, where, why
and how did
a) single-celled
plants
become multi-
celled?
(Where are the
two- and three-celled
intermediates.
b) Fish change to amphibians?
c) Amphibians change to reptiles?
d) Reptiles change into birds? (Their
lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive
organs, heart, method of
locomotion, body covering etc.,
are all very different!) How did the
Intermediate forms live?
8. Where, when, why, how, and from
what did
a) Whales evolve?
b) Sea horses evolve?
c) Bats evolve?
d) Hair, skin, feathers, scales,
nails, claws, etc. evolve?
9. Which of the following evolved
first (how and how long did it
work without the others?)?
a) The digestive system, the food
to be digested, the appetite, the
ability to find and eat the food,
the digestive juices, or the body's
resistance to its own digestive
juice (stomach, intestines
etc.) ?
b) The drive to reproduce or the
ability to reproduce?
c) The lungs, the mucus lining
to protect them, the throat or
the perfect mixture of gases to
be breathed into the lungs?
d) The plants, or the insects that
pollinate the plants?
e) The bones, ligaments, tendons,
blood supply, or muscles to
move the bones?
f) The immune system or the
need for it?
Now take a minute to
thoughtfully consider
your answers. Are you sure they're reasonable and scientifically
proveable, or do you just hope and believe that it may have happened that way? Do you really think evolution makes sense?
Scientists want to convince us that new body parts and complex organs - with all their interrelated functions - simply appeared in order to meet a creature's new need.
But when you stop to consider it logically, it just isn't possible. Natural selection is fine for explaining certain small -scale changes in organisms, like the beaks of birds adapting to small environmental changes. It can take existing structures and refine them. But it can't explain how you get complex structures in the first place.
We also need to follow the idea of transitional forms to its logical conclusion. Can a fish survive with a partial gill? No, it would die. Can a bird survive with half a wing? No, it would be lunch for some other animal! Could we digest food with an incomplete digestive system? Or see with an undevelooed eyeball? Could a cheetah run without fully formed legs? Common sense tells us the answer.
next post tomorrow 1st August
No comments:
Post a Comment