View Full Version : Your thoughts on evolution?

10-13-2005, 02:18 AM
I was listening to AJ today and he made an offhand remark that took me aback somewhat. He said that our genes were the product of millions of years of nature, and that creationism, or atleast the idea that human kind is less than ten thousand years old is somewhat of a strawman. I wish he would do a bit more research before going on his usually interesting rants. Anyway, what's the general sentiment here?

EVOLUTION: yay, or nay?

10-13-2005, 07:34 AM
Alex is a sincere Christian but an immature one, it seems. He says a lot of silly things here and there.

10-13-2005, 08:43 AM
It's not as simple as one or the other - everything (including humans) on this planet is a result of creationism or "Intelligent Design" - (An interesting term Bush has taken to using lately) While our genetic code, Or some version of it may have been around for millions of years, The human race is very new and our "Creator" is not who we have been led to believe it is. We have been given a humanly acceptable version of how we came to be. Look at how many have accepted the roman catholic version. Just like good little sheep.

10-13-2005, 09:09 AM
I come from the position that God exists, and so do we. How He chose to put us here is not as important to me as what we do with the lives He gave us.
I would caution anyone, however, about the Tavistock agenda regarding our alleged evolution from pond scum.

10-13-2005, 09:22 AM
But WHO is God ?? Or WHAT is God ??
Do you honestly believe you have been given the truth ? We are told by our government not to believe in extra-terrestrials because we've never
seen them. Have you seen God ? Have you seen the Anti-Christ ? We are also told to have "Blind Faith" in our elected official's.....
We need to decide which we believe came first - God or Government or ?????

10-13-2005, 09:51 AM
wolff wrote:
But WHO is God ?? Or WHAT is God ??
Do you honestly believe you have been given the truth ? We are told by our government not to believe in extra-terrestrials because we've never
seen them. Have you seen God ? Have you seen the Anti-Christ ? We are also told to have "Blind Faith" in our elected official's.....
We need to decide which we believe came first - God or Government or ?????

Couldn't have said it better myself! :lol:

Which came first the chicken or the egg?

Which came first GOD or government?

The answer is that WE DO NOT KNOW!!!

10-13-2005, 11:24 AM

I think its a better chance that we were seeded here.
It explains racial differences, missing link and the whole UFO thing.

I think the parents are whizzing around in the stars
dropping in from time to time to see if us silly teenagers have blowen ourselves up yet.

10-13-2005, 12:15 PM
"It explains racial differences, missing link and the whole UFO thing."

Ok Khopesh, I understand how it explains UFO's but how does our being "seeded" here explain the racial differences or the missing link ??
Please explain your thoughts.

10-13-2005, 02:33 PM
Genes are the product of millions of years of evolution.. that's basically the way evolution (and the world) works. Sorry if you don't want to accept the Truth..

Moreover, I thought Christianity was about following the Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. I never got the memo that said Christians are required to believe (as a *literal* truth) all the fables in the OT about Adam and Eve, a 6,000 year-old universe, Moses parting the Red Sea, Joshua commanding the Sun to stop moving and a talking donkey belonging to Balaam..

10-13-2005, 02:37 PM
psholtz wrote:
Genes are the product of millions of years of evolution.. that's basically the way evolution (and the world) works. Sorry if you don't want to accept the Truth..

Moreover, I thought Christianity was about following the Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. I never got the memo that said Christians are required to believe (as a *literal* truth) all the fables in the OT about Adam and Eve, a 6,000 year-old universe, Moses parting the Red Sea, Joshua commanding the Sun to stop moving and a talking donkey belonging to Balaam..

I always have a hard time believing in reported "miracles" I didn't witness.

:lol: 8-) :lol:

10-13-2005, 02:40 PM
To be born again, as Jesus himself describes it, is to be born of the Spirit. That means that those who are not are in fact spiritually "dead".
Every religion has a cultural tradition of how much to accept as literal truth and how much to accept as allegory. The Spirit leads those into knowledge who are ready and able to accept it.
Jonathan Gray and other archeologists like him are proving every day that the OT historical accounts are extremely accurate.
So, don't believe anything without proof, or at least confirmation.

10-13-2005, 02:43 PM
Bouncer wrote:
To be born again, as Jesus himself describes it, is to be born of the Spirit. That means that those who are not are in fact spiritually "dead".
Every religion has a cultural tradition of how much to accept as literal truth and how much to accept as allegory. The Spirit leads those into knowledge who are ready and able to accept it.
Jonathan Gray and other archeologists like him are proving every day that the OT historical accounts are extremely accurate.
So, don't believe anything without proof, or at least confirmation.

It can be proven that the Red Sea was parted?

10-13-2005, 02:45 PM
Well, my Egyptian is a little rusty, but there's got to be a story about Pharao's army getting a nasty surprise? No?
Otherwise, I guess ya just had to be there.

10-13-2005, 02:56 PM
Bouncer wrote:
Well, my Egyptian is a little rusty, but there's got to be a story about Pharao's army getting a nasty surprise? No?
Otherwise, I guess ya just had to be there.
The Egyptians have no record of ever having kept 2,000,000 Hebrew slaves, nor do they have any record of a prince named Moses ever having been born, nor do they have any record of 2,000,000 Hebrew slaves making a sudden exodus from Egypt.

This is significant, since if you're talking about the ancient Egyptians, you're talking about a people who built the Pyramids (<- which are still standing today, more than you can say for the "Temple" in Jerusalem), who did brain surgery and who knew that Sirius had a small white dwarf orbiting it (<- something we didn't "discover" until the 1920s or so).. and yes, the Egyptians kept rather precise records.

Kinda makes you wonder who to believe, doesn't it??..

10-13-2005, 03:53 PM
Sure, based on extant and KNOWN records, it seems awfully flimsy.
But then, I have to wonder who is in control of which records reach the public and which ones are tucked away in a wooden crate in Washington somewhere.
Also, the temple's destruction was by divine will and was prophesied by many, including Jesus himself, with the approximate era included. I don't think God really cares much whether the pyramids stick around or not. Besides, the great pyramid is a big mechanical PA system. This is one of the "silent voice" techniques used today, and is based on this mystery of the pyramid (which is, incidentally, also known by the Masons). I.e., the voice is modulated with the resonant frequency of the ground on which we live, and the voice literally vibrates everywhere, as though the earth itself were speaking to us. It is a low, masculine voice that seems to feel like the bass is turned up too high on the stereo.
Perhaps you've heard it?

10-13-2005, 08:09 PM
Psholtz, you should come and work for me, but then again you already do. Good work.

10-13-2005, 11:37 PM
we've gone a little off topic. What do people think about humanity being millions of years old, versus just a few thousand?

10-14-2005, 07:18 AM
Here's an exerpt from Jonathan Gray. If this is typical of many different sites, then the Tavistock time-table being shoved down our throats is obviously wrong.
In the United States in 1990, the bones of a beautifully preserved Tyrannosaurus Rex skeleton were unearthed. When these were brought to the Montana State University's laboratory, it was noticed that “some parts deep inside the long bone of the leg had not completely fossilized.” ( M.Schweitzer and T. Staedter, 'The Real Jurassic Park', Earth ,June 1997 pp. 55-57)
Mary Schweitzer and her co-workers took turns looking through a microscope at a thin section of this dinosaur bone, complete with blood vessel channels. She says: “The lab filled with murmurs of amazement, for I had focused on something inside the vessels that none of us had ever noticed before: tiny round objects, translucent red with a dark center. Then a colleague took one look at them and shouted, 'You've got red blood cells. You've got red blood cells!'”
Schweitzer says, “I got goose bumps. It was exactly like looking at a slice of modern bone.”
She confronted her boss, famous paleontologist
'Dinosaur' Jack Horner. “I can’t believe it,” she said. “The bones, after all, are 65 million years old. How could blood cells survive that long?”
The evidence that hemoglobin (the protein which makes blood red and carries oxygen) has indeed survived in this dinosaur bone casts immense doubt upon the 'millions of years' idea.
It hasn’t been so long!

If you would like to know more about this and related matters, please go to http://www.archaeologyanswers.com/first.php

10-15-2005, 09:44 PM
There is no doubt in my mind that this world is four or five billion years old.. and that evolution.. thru the survival of the fittest is God's plan (If there is a terrestrial God)..

There is no doubt in my mind that there are millions of earths like ours that support life like ours in this universe that we live in... In fact, I don't doubt that there are an infinite number of worlds exactly similar to "our" own world.. I suspect that we are making choices and navigating the entire universe in each response that we make at each second.. Each of us traversing our own multi-universe in our own path of enlightenment.

I think quantum theory will prove this.

In the short span of time our world will be destroyed by a comet every 65 million years.. and wiped down to primitive life forms.. In the longer term "our" planet will be fried when the sun turns into a red giant in five billion years..

Unless the human race can figure out how to get the energy sources that enable interstellar, and intergalactic travel , "our" species and "our" religions are doomed... to stardust.
The idea that Buddha, or that Krishna, or that Jesus, or that there is any "God" at all.. is unlikely..

More than likely the truth is that we don't understand the true nature of the universe that we were thrust into by our birth.. and seek to use three or four dimensional models to describe an 11 dimensional experience.

10-16-2005, 07:46 AM

Very few people are aware of the events that led to the presentation of Charles Darwin’s theories on origins to Great Britain’s 19th Century scientific community. Darwin was aided in his research by his very close friend, Charles Lyell. Lyell stood by the reluctant Darwin for more than twenty years of painstaking research in the development of his theories. Additionally, Darwin was not a seeker of fame and notoriety. As a matter of fact, he was very hesitant to bring his work into the public forum of the intellectual community. (5)

However, the day arrived that Darwin was forced to publicly present his theories or else not only be upstaged by another, but witness the loss of all of his efforts. In 1855, Darwin received a copy of a paper written by Alfred Russell Wallace that detailed the same theories that he himself painstakingly developed over the course of 20 years. Darwin then immediately, at Lyell’s urging, began writing his infamous work, The Origin of Species. Both Darwin and Russell, however, were seeking the missing key component—the mechanism by which one species could effectively change into another. (The problem with the absence of such a mechanism is obvious, for there is absolutely no evidence [scientific or otherwise] that provides any proof that one species has or ever will evolve into another species.)

Three years after sending his paper on origins to Darwin, Wallace became very ill while living on the island of Ternate. In the violent throes of a debilitating fever, a vision of the missing mechanism came to him in a “moment’s revelation.” Wallace then sent that mechanism, The Survival of the Fittest, to Darwin. The Ternate Paper contained “in complete form, what is today known as the Darwinian Theory of Evolution…” (6) In reality, the circumstantial evidence strongly suggests that Darwin plagiarized many of the key concepts of the infamous Origin if Species from Wallace’s work. However, since Wallace was closer to New Guinea than to London when the presentation time arrived, the concepts presented to the Linnean Society in July of 1858 became known as the Darwin/Wallace Theory.

That, of course, is not the entire story. Alfred Russell Wallace not only received the “vision” of The Survival of the Fittest to complete the evolutionary lie of Lucifer while delirious with fever, but Wallace harbored a much darker side. During his early life, Wallace traveled to the Amazon and befriended Indians who shared with him their “black arts.” Wallace then began to dabble in Spiritism, and he was openly ridiculed for his membership in the Society for Psychical Research. The extreme level that he became involved in the occult resulted in his virtual expulsion from Britain’s intellectual community, not to mention the removal of his name from the Darwinian theories

In the case of his Ternate Paper, the method of scientific discovery utilized by Wallace went beyond the unorthodox into the realm of the metaphysical. As a matter of fact, revelations such as his are not uncommon in the realm of the “occult sciences” and, from a biblical perspective; this experience can be accurately placed into the category of demonic communication methodology. (The Koran was communicated to the illiterate Mohammed in the midst of similar convulsions.)

The point here, however, is a specific demonic connection to the public presentation and proliferation of evolutionary theories into mainstream society. Additionally, few realize that the men of the 19th Century who shaped the evolutionary and socialistic philosophies destined to permeate the future of mainstream society had little in common, and most were not formerly educated as scientists. Charles Darwin had a degree in theology, Charles Lyell was a lawyer, Thomas Huxley had a dubious degree in medicine, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and Herbert Spencer had no formal education, and Hegel and Marx had degrees in philosophy. There was, however, one thing that each of these men shared—a hatred of God and biblical Christianity.

Based on all of the above, there should be no surprise in learning that occult philosophies and pagan religions operate from a baseline of evolutionary thought. These evolutionary principles within the occult world are actually based on another lie that Lucifer told Eve in the Garden of Eden: “Ye shalt be as gods…” New Agers, witches, and adherents to other earth-based religions believe that man is divine and simply needs to discover or develop the god or goddess within. In addition, New Age practitioners such as Jean Houston teach that man is still evolving to a new evolutionary level---from homo sapiens to homo noeticus; and the concept of homo noeticus, the god-man, is actively promoted by organizations such as the Institute of Noetic Sciences, led by former NASA astronaut, Ed Mitchell.

Therefore, the Theory of Evolution did not only originate within an occult framework, but is absolutely the key in understanding occult philosophies. For if one fails to realize that occultists believe the universe evolved from a primary energy source which it deems as “god,” “the force,” or “the mother goddess”---no understanding of occult philosophy will ever be reached. In addition, the occult world holds to the notion that this “energy” or “force” indwells everyone and everything. This all-indwelling force is termed immanence. Immanence is one of the foundational principles of the occult world, and this indwelling force is seen by occultists as the evolutionary impetus that has implemented the cosmic changes that will eventually lead to the emergence of homo noeticus—the god-man.

10-16-2005, 07:47 AM
DNA: The Tiny Code That's Toppling Evolution
As scientists explore a new universe—the universe inside the cell—they are making startling discoveries of information systems more complex than anything ever devised by humanity's best minds. How did they get there, and what does it mean for the theory of evolution?

by Mario Seiglie

Two great achievements occurred in 1953, more than half a century ago.

The first was the successful ascent of Mt. Everest, the highest mountain in the world. Sir Edmund Hillary and his guide, Tenzing Norgay, reached the summit that year, an accomplishment that's still considered the ultimate feat for mountain climbers. Since then, more than a thousand mountaineers have made it to the top, and each year hundreds more attempt it.

Yet the second great achievement of 1953 has had a greater impact on the world. Each year, many thousands join the ranks of those participating in this accomplishment, hoping to ascend to fame and fortune.

It was in 1953 that James Watson and Francis Crick achieved what appeared impossible—discovering the genetic structure deep inside the nucleus of our cells. We call this genetic material DNA, an abbreviation for deoxyribonucleic acid.

The discovery of the double-helix structure of the DNA molecule opened the floodgates for scientists to examine the code embedded within it. Now, more than half a century after the initial discovery, the DNA code has been deciphered—although many of its elements are still not well understood.

What has been found has profound implications regarding Darwinian evolution, the theory taught in schools all over the world that all living beings have evolved by natural processes through mutation and natural selection.

Amazing revelations about DNA

As scientists began to decode the human DNA molecule, they found something quite unexpected—an exquisite 'language' composed of some 3 billion genetic letters. "One of the most extraordinary discoveries of the twentieth century," says Dr. Stephen Meyer, director of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle, Wash., "was that DNA actually stores information—the detailed instructions for assembling proteins—in the form of a four-character digital code" (quoted by Lee Strobel, The Case for a Creator, 2004, p. 224).

It is hard to fathom, but the amount of information in human DNA is roughly equivalent to 12 sets of The Encyclopaedia Britannica—an incredible 384 volumes" worth of detailed information that would fill 48 feet of library shelves!

Yet in their actual size—which is only two millionths of a millimeter thick—a teaspoon of DNA, according to molecular biologist Michael Denton, could contain all the information needed to build the proteins for all the species of organisms that have ever lived on the earth, and "there would still be enough room left for all the information in every book ever written" (Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, 1996, p. 334).

Who or what could miniaturize such information and place this enormous number of 'letters' in their proper sequence as a genetic instruction manual? Could evolution have gradually come up with a system like this?

DNA contains a genetic language

Let's first consider some of the characteristics of this genetic 'language.' For it to be rightly called a language, it must contain the following elements: an alphabet or coding system, correct spelling, grammar (a proper arrangement of the words), meaning (semantics) and an intended purpose.

Scientists have found the genetic code has all of these key elements. "The coding regions of DNA," explains Dr. Stephen Meyer, "have exactly the same relevant properties as a computer code or language" (quoted by Strobel, p. 237, emphasis in original).

The only other codes found to be true languages are all of human origin. Although we do find that dogs bark when they perceive danger, bees dance to point other bees to a source and whales emit sounds, to name a few examples of other species" communication, none of these have the composition of a language. They are only considered low-level communication signals.

The only types of communication considered high-level are human languages, artificial languages such as computer and Morse codes and the genetic code. No other communication system has been found to contain the basic characteristics of a language.

Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft, commented that "DNA is like a software program, only much more complex than anything we've ever devised."

Can you imagine something more intricate than the most complex program running on a supercomputer being devised by accident through evolution—no matter how much time, how many mutations and how much natural selection are taken into account?

DNA language not the same as DNA molecule

Recent studies in information theory have come up with some astounding conclusions—namely, that information cannot be considered in the same category as matter and energy. It's true that matter or energy can carry information, but they are not the same as information itself.

For instance, a book such as Homer's Iliad contains information, but is the physical book itself information? No, the materials of the book—the paper, ink and glue contain the contents, but they are only a means of transporting it.

If the information in the book was spoken aloud, written in chalk or electronically reproduced in a computer, the information does not suffer qualitatively from the means of transporting it. "In fact the content of the message," says professor Phillip Johnson, "is independent of the physical makeup of the medium" (Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds, 1997, p. 71).

The same principle is found in the genetic code. The DNA molecule carries the genetic language, but the language itself is independent of its carrier. The same genetic information can be written in a book, stored in a compact disk or sent over the Internet, and yet the quality or content of the message has not changed by changing the means of conveying it.

As George Williams puts it: "The gene is a package of information, not an object. The pattern of base pairs in a DNA molecule specifies the gene. But the DNA molecule is the medium, it's not the message" (quoted by Johnson, p. 70).

Information from an intelligent source

In addition, this type of high-level information has been found to originate only from an intelligent source.

As Lee Strobel explains: "The data at the core of life is not disorganized, it's not simply orderly like salt crystals, but it's complex and specific information that can accomplish a bewildering task—the building of biological machines that far outstrip human technological capabilities" (p. 244).

For instance, the precision of this genetic language is such that the average mistake that is not caught turns out to be one error per 10 billion letters. If a mistake occurs in one of the most significant parts of the code, which is in the genes, it can cause a disease such as sickle-cell anemia. Yet even the best and most intelligent typist in the world couldn't come close to making only one mistake per 10 billion letters—far from it.

So to believe that the genetic code gradually evolved in Darwinian style would break all the known rules of how matter, energy and the laws of nature work. In fact, there has not been found in nature any example of one information system inside the cell gradually evolving into another functional information program.

Michael Behe, a biochemist and professor at Pennsylvania's Lehigh University, explains that genetic information is primarily an instruction manual and gives some examples.

He writes: "Consider a step-by-step list of [genetic] instructions. A mutation is a change in one of the lines of instructions. So instead of saying, "Take a 1/4-inch nut," a mutation might say, "Take a 3/8-inch nut." Or instead of "Place the round peg in the round hole," we might get "Place the round peg in the square hole" . . . What a mutation cannot do is change all the instructions in one step—say, [providing instructions] to build a fax machine instead of a radio" (Darwin's Black Box, 1996, p. 41).

We therefore have in the genetic code an immensely complex instruction manual that has been majestically designed by a more intelligent source than human beings.

Even one of the discoverers of the genetic code, the agnostic and recently deceased Francis Crick, after decades of work on deciphering it, admitted that "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" (Life Itself, 1981, p. 88, emphasis added).

Evolution fails to provide answers

It is good to remember that, in spite of all the efforts of all the scientific laboratories around the world working over many decades, they have not been able to produce so much as a single human hair. How much more difficult is it to produce an entire body consisting of some 100 trillion cells!

Up to now, Darwinian evolutionists could try to counter their detractors with some possible explanations for the complexity of life. But now they have to face the information dilemma: How can meaningful, precise information be created by accident—by mutation and natural selection? None of these contain the mechanism of intelligence, a requirement for creating complex information such as that found in the genetic code.

Darwinian evolution is still taught in most schools as though it were fact. But it is increasingly being found wanting by a growing number of scientists. "As recently as twenty-five years ago," says former atheist Patrick Glynn, "a reasonable person weighing the purely scientific evidence on the issue would likely have come down on the side of skepticism [regarding a Creator]. That is no longer the case." He adds: "Today the concrete data point strongly in the direction of the God hypothesis. It is the simplest and most obvious solution . . ." (God: The Evidence, 1997, pp. 54-55, 53).

Quality of genetic information the same

Evolution tells us that through chance mutations and natural selection, living things evolve. Yet to evolve means to gradually change certain aspects of some living thing until it becomes another type of creature, and this can only be done by changing the genetic information.

So what do we find about the genetic code? The same basic quality of information exists in a humble bacteria or a plant as in a person. A bacterium has a shorter genetic code, but qualitatively it gives instructions as precisely and exquisitely as that of a human being. We find the same prerequisites of a language—alphabet, grammar and semantics—in simple bacteria and algae as in man.

Each cell with genetic information, from bacteria to man, according to molecular biologist Michael Denton, consists of "artificial languages and their decoding systems, memory banks for information storage and retrieval, elegant control systems regulating the automated assembly of parts and components, error fail-safe and proof-reading devices utilized for quality control, assembly processes involving the principle of prefabrication and modular construction . . . [and a] capacity not equalled in any of our most advanced machines, for it would be capable of replicating its entire structure within a matter of a few hours" (Denton, p. 329).

So how could the genetic information of bacteria gradually evolve into information for another type of being, when only one or a few minor mistakes in the millions of letters in that bacterium's DNA can kill it?

Again, evolutionists are uncharacteristically silent on the subject. They don't even have a working hypothesis about it. Lee Strobel writes: "The six feet of DNA coiled inside every one of our body's one hundred trillion cells contains a four-letter chemical alphabet that spells out precise assembly instructions for all the proteins from which our bodies are made . . . No hypothesis has come close to explaining how information got into biological matter by naturalistic means" (Strobel, p. 282).

Werner Gitt, professor of information systems, puts it succinctly: "The basic flaw of all evolutionary views is the origin of the information in living beings. It has never been shown that a coding system and semantic information could originate by itself [through matter] . . . The information theorems predict that this will never be possible. A purely material origin of life is thus [ruled out]" (Gitt, p. 124).

The clincher

Besides all the evidence we have covered for the intelligent design of DNA information, there is still one amazing fact remaining—the ideal number of genetic letters in the DNA code for storage and translation.

Moreover, the copying mechanism of DNA, to meet maximum effectiveness, requires the number of letters in each word to be an even number. Of all possible mathematical combinations, the ideal number for storage and transcription has been calculated to be four letters.

This is exactly what has been found in the genes of every living thing on earth—a four-letter digital code. As Werner Gitt states: "The coding system used for living beings is optimal from an engineering standpoint. This fact strengthens the argument that it was a case of purposeful design rather that a [lucky] chance" (Gitt, p. 95).

More witnesses

Back in Darwin's day, when his book On the Origin of Species was published in 1859, life appeared much simpler. Viewed through the primitive microscopes of the day, the cell appeared to be but a simple blob of jelly or uncomplicated protoplasm. Now, almost 150 years later, that view has changed dramatically as science has discovered a virtual universe inside the cell.

"It was once expected," writes Professor Behe, "that the basis of life would be exceedingly simple. That expectation has been smashed. Vision, motion, and other biological functions have proven to be no less sophisticated than television cameras and automobiles. Science has made enormous progress in understanding how the chemistry of life works, but the elegance and complexity of biological systems at the molecular level have paralyzed science's attempt to explain their origins" (Behe, p. x).

Dr. Meyer considers the recent discoveries about DNA as the Achilles" heel of evolutionary theory. He observes: "Evolutionists are still trying to apply Darwin's nineteenth-century thinking to a twenty-first century reality, and it's not working ... I think the information revolution taking place in biology is sounding the death knell for Darwinism and chemical evolutionary theories" (quoted by Strobel, p. 243).

Dr. Meyer's conclusion? "I believe that the testimony of science supports theism. While there will always be points of tension or unresolved conflict, the major developments in science in the past five decades have been running in a strongly theistic direction" (ibid., p. 77).

Dean Kenyon, a biology professor who repudiated his earlier book on Darwinian evolution—mostly due to the discoveries of the information found in DNA—states: "This new realm of molecular genetics (is) where we see the most compelling evidence of design on the Earth" (ibid., p. 221).

Just recently, one of the world's most famous atheists, Professor Antony Flew, admitted he couldn't explain how DNA was created and developed through evolution. He now accepts the need for an intelligent source to have been involved in the making of the DNA code.

"What I think the DNA material has done is show that intelligence must have been involved in getting these extraordinary diverse elements together," he said (quoted by Richard Ostling, "Leading Atheist Now Believes in God," Associated Press report, Dec. 9, 2004).

"Fearfully and wonderfully made"

Although written thousands of years ago, King David's words about our marvelous human bodies still ring true. He wrote: "For You formed my inward parts, You covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made . . . My frame was not hidden from You, when I was made in secret, and skillfully wrought. . ." (, Psalm 139:13-15 emphasis added).

Where does all this leave evolution? Michael Denton, an agnostic scientist, concludes: "Ultimately the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century" (Denton, p. 358).

All of this has enormous implications for our society and culture. Professor Johnson makes this clear when he states: "Every history of the twentieth century lists three thinkers as preeminent in influence: Darwin, Marx and Freud. All three were regarded as 'scientific' (and hence far more reliable than anything 'religious') in their heyday.

"Yet Marx and Freud have fallen, and even their dwindling bands of followers no longer claim that their insights were based on any methodology remotely comparable to that of experimental science. I am convinced that Darwin is next on the block. His fall will be by far the mightiest of the three" (Johnson, p. 113).

Evolution has had its run for almost 150 years in the schools and universities and in the press. But now, with the discovery of what the DNA code is all about, the complexity of the cell, and the fact that information is something vastly different from matter and energy, evolution can no longer dodge the ultimate outcome. The evidence certainly points to a resounding checkmate for evolution! GN

10-17-2005, 12:27 PM
55132: I also believe that the nihilistic existentialism which you mention is indeed one of the seminal foundations of many occult philosophies, and is favored by the pop-occult circuit (Seth Society, et al).
In fact, the Temple of Set uses the classical egyptian beetle (xeperet) which means, "becoming; evolution; transforming."
It is a subtle way of subverting and denying any foundation of truth or right and wrong. It is as if we were all sharks swimming in a bottomless ocean; if we are idle, we die.

10-17-2005, 07:58 PM
test.. to see why I can't see to post.

10-17-2005, 07:59 PM
Why don't you guys cut and paste for once (sarc).. to defend the indefensible.. that the earth is only 6,000 years old?..

What religious zealots have done for the last couple of thousand years is impede the truth of how our universe really works.

Religion and dogma stinks. And so do those that proclaim that they have the only "truth"..

We are currently in a state of de-evolution.. Where the best and brightest of all of our societies are being fed into a war machine.. Essentially destroying the very brightest and able people who should survive, and contribute to get us to the stars and beyond.

But that is not the plan of the NWO.. No, their plan is to destroy the ability of us to become a part of the galactic federation.. Their goal is to stop us from evolving to the stellar realms..

The NWO has decided to thwart our progress towards intergalactic co-operation and instead make themselves very rich and powerful on this one planet.. Earth.

They have done this using the treacherous lies of religion, and dogma, written thousands of years ago with no substance in history that is verifiable..

It is as if an alien race of beings is supporting the NWO, totally devoid of humanity and trying to stop our integration into the cosmic proliferation of new beings, co-operating with each other.

The people in back of the NeoComs (Neo-Communists).. Are the spawn of Satan.. one of the 23 separate members of extra terrestrial beings that play into our sphere..

The number 23 comes up because that is the number of angels that "The BlackkBook" claims.

Within each of us there are 23 chromosomes..

There are 23 different angels, and Satan is just one of them??.. Coincidence anyone?

I believe there is an Angel of faith that can turn a mountain into dust just by believing. That angel, is in us, and has just as much power as Satan..

All Angels are equal in their powers, and also, Like I have said before.. We live in a four dimensional universe, as far as we are concerned.. And yet the other dimensions have no meaning to us because we are blind to them..

I am suggesting that The NWO is a plot by one of the Angels (Satan) to subvert the plan for our emergence with the inter galactics..

Who the religionists proclaim as their God.

10-17-2005, 08:23 PM
The "Tiny Code" article is fascinating, 55132. I had to read it several times over before it sunk in, but it raises some excellent issues.