Transcript PowerPoint - Living Stones

The mainstream media tell us, and much of the scientific community
believe, that human beings are the product of a long unguided
development process called Darwinian Evolution.
The Bible teaches that human beings are a special creation by God.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Does this really matter?
Can a Christian believe in evolution and also the God of the bible?
Is there any evidence for gradual evolution?
Is there any evidence that life has been created?
What are the consequences of an evolutionary worldview?
Why are the most ardent evolutionists also atheists?
Could God have used evolution to create life?
Does belief in evolution matter for a Christian or for non-Christian?
YES!
For a Christian, the theory of evolution contradicts Genesis Chapter 1.
God says that he directly created the universe and all life. No random processes or
gradual development was needed to produce mankind.
For a non–Christian, believing in evolution means that God is not involved in
mankind’s existence. Therefore we are not accountable to him even if he is thought
to exist. There is no need to believe in God as a creator, judge and saviour of
mankind if we are here only because of lucky accidents over millions of years.
How did this evolution idea start?
The history of evolutionary ideas long predates Darwin and his theory.
The Greek philosopher Heraclitus [500 B.C.E.] believed that change was a
fundamental property of the universe. His successor, Empedocles (c.. 392–432 B.C.E.),
suggested a theory that the origin of life had taken place in a manner similar to
evolution.
Belief in species change, or transmutationism, slowly began to emerge during
the Enlightenment [18th century].
The French naturalist Comte de Buffon
(1707–1788) was one of the first to question
the fixity of species and to suggest a
transmutationist theory with a startling
resemblance to Darwinian evolution.
Jean-Baptiste Lamarck
[1744 – 1829] proposed the
inheritance of acquired
traits.
Darwin's grandfather Erasmus Darwin,
published a book “Zoonomia”, a
medical text which also outlined a
theory that life originated from “one
living filament”.
Charles Lyell
Lyell promoted the theory of uniformitarianism. This proposes that the Earth is millions of
years old, and that rock layers were deposited gradually rather than rapidly due to a flood.
The theory assumes that conditions on Earth have been the same for millions of years.
Lyell was a great friend of Darwin. The long geological timescales implied by his theory
enabled Darwin to propose that natural selection could change species very gradually.
Lyell wrote three volumes called the “Principles of Geology”. Darwin had volume one on
his voyage aboard the Beagle.
Alfred Russel Wallace
Wallace was a naturalist and biogeographer who went to the Amazon in 1848 to try
and find evidence for his own ideas of organic evolution. In 1858, whilst suffering
from malarial fever in Borneo, he formulated the idea of “the survival of the fittest”.
He immediately wrote to Charles Darwin explaining his ideas. They published a joint
paper on this topic. The next year, Darwin published “On The Origin of Species”.
Charles Darwin
Darwin observed many examples of artificial selection [breeding] and natural
selection in action. These produced fairly minor changes to existing characteristics
in organisms. He thought that natural selection could, over long timespans,
produce entirely new creatures and organ systems by acting on small variations in
populations. He never observed “true evolution” in action. Inspired by his research,
reading and contemporaries, Darwin finally published his Book in 1859.
Charles Darwin
Born at Shrewsbury February 12th 1809, his father was a doctor
An inquisitive
young man at
school
Darwin married his 1st cousin
Emma Wedgewood in 1839.
They had ten children, two of
whom died in infancy, but their
eldest daughter Anne died of a
fever at age 10 in 1851
Emma was a quite
devout Unitarian, but
after Annie’s death
Charles Darwin lost any
remnants of his faith.
At age 16, Darwin went to
Edinburgh University for
two years and then on to
Cambridge where he
studied natural history.
After graduation in 1831, his
tutor secured him a position
as a naturalist aboard HMS
Beagle for a five year voyage
around the world.
The Galapagos Islands
What was Darwin’s BIG IDEA?
Darwin was in contact with Edward
Blyth, an English zoologist, and was
familiar with his ideas. Blyth wrote
articles describing how natural
selection could maintain the purity
of a species by weeding out any
inferior specimens through the
struggle for survival.
Blyth’s idea was simply that
any species would stay
as it was due to the process
of natural selection [he did
not coin that phrase]. The
few inferior specimens then
could not pass on any
genetic defects.
Darwin turned this idea on its head!
He proposed that in any
population there will be “fitter”
individuals who will therefore
have a better chance of survival.
These individuals will produce
more offspring thus improving
the whole population. New
species could be produced by
this means.
So in Darwin’s theory,
natural selection does
not select against
inferior specimens but
selects for superior
specimens.
Darwin’s idea has an immediate and severe problem……………..
You cannot breed a dog into a horse – which is artificial selection.
So this will never happen in the natural world due to natural selection.
So a new “theory” was proposed to overcome this problem.
This incorporated discoveries in genetics as well as eventually DNA.
All living things are made from cells
Research since WW2 has uncovered
many secrets of cell function.
Crick and Watson famously discovered
DNA in 1953.
This is located in the nucleus of a cell
and is the information storage centre.
1.Nucleolus
2.Nucleus
3.Ribosome (little dots)
4.Vesicle
5.Rough endoplasmic reticulum
6.Golgi apparatus (or "Golgi body")
7.Cytoskeleton
8.Smooth endoplasmic reticulum
9.Mitochondrion
10.Vacuole
11.Cytosol (fluid that contains
organelles)
12.Lysosome
13.Centrosome
DNA contains the information needed
to synthesise proteins plus all the
instructions for the growth,
development and control of a
complete organism.
It is a multi-layer code.
Each cell contains sophisticated
mechanisms to maintain the integrity
of the DNA code e.g. repair enzymes.
Modern Neo-Darwinism
According to this theory, evolution is driven by chance. Chance mutations affect one or a
few base pairs of DNA per occurrence. Bigger changes come from recombination, a
genetic process in which longer strands of DNA are swapped, transferred, or doubled.
These two processes, mutation and recombination, create new meaning in DNA by lucky
accidents.
a base pair
The mutations and recombinations are thought to be
the source of the new genetic information needed to
transform one species into another. Normally, highly
specific coded information is the product of an
intelligent mind and is non-random.
Once mutations exist, it is assumed that natural
selection can ensure that the “improved”
members of a population will preferentially
survive. Hence the phrase:
SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST
This is the basic idea behind modern evolution.
This means that a bacterium
could over millions of years
change into a ……………….
biologist
1013 specialised
cells [roughly]
3 x 109 DNA
base pairs
bacterium
single cell
one million
[106] DNA
base pairs
This process has to rely on chance
mutations and natural selection to
produce the quite precisely coded
extra DNA – no intelligence needed.
Scientifically the theory of evolution has very serious problems.
•
The vast, vast majority of all mutations are fairly neutral [unselectable] or harmful.
•
If a beneficial mutation could be produced, its effects would be masked by the
previous accumulation of near neutral and harmful mutations.
•
The high “cost” of harmful mutations could ensure extinction of a species before
any possible beneficial mutations had any significant effect.
•
All significant developmental changes to an organism would require a set of very
precise DNA changes which would have no benefit until they were all present.
Mutation/selection could only produce these changes one or two at a time.
•
DNA is not a “linear” code. It can be read in many ways so a mutation just might
possibly develop one function of the organism but would wreck several others.
•
Natural selection is a crude mechanism and trying to produce better DNA by this
means is like trying to improve the performance of a computer with a hammer.
•
Even if the mutation/selection model worked, there is not enough time – even
over millions of years for necessary changes to fix in a population.
Haldane's Dilemma
Evolution requires the substitution of new beneficial
mutations into the population, to create new biological
adaptation. Haldane calculated that organisms with low
reproduction rates, such as cows, could substitute a new
beneficial mutation no more frequently than one per 300
generations.
In ten million years, an ape-human-like lineage could substitute no more than 1667
beneficial mutations. In evolutionary genetic literature, it is undisputed that Haldane’s
calculations, if correct, would indicate such a limit.
All the necessary data, theory, and claims, come from evolutionists. The calculation is:
Allow 10 million years for an ape-man lineage. (This figure allows far more time than is available.)
Divide by 20 years effective generation time. (This figure is from evolutionary geneticists
Divide by 300 generations per beneficial substitution. (This figure is from Haldane’s calculations.)
Equals a maximum of 1667 beneficial mutations substituted into that ape-man lineage. (Plus some
limited number of neutral mutations, which do nothing to improve adaptation.)
If human/chimp DNA is 2% different, this is 60000000 base pairs - a bit more than 1667?
IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY
Virtually all biological systems are IRREDUCIBLY COMPLEX: many component parts must be
in place for proper functionality.
Just like a bicycle….. every part must be in place and
working for the machine to be rideable.
You could not develop a bicycle gradually. No-one
would buy a machine without a saddle or wheels.
The human ear is just the same. All parts are
needed for hearing to take place. You could not
develop the ear system gradually, since without all
the parts we would be deaf.
The biochemical pathway responsible for blood clotting is
an irreducibly complex mechanism. All the cells/proteins
must be present for activation. A subset of these would
not be a viable clotting mechanism, so gradual
development is not possible.
Stepwise mutation/selection cannot produce complex organs or biochemical
pathways. NATURAL SELECTION HAS NO INTELLIGENCE OR FORESIGHT.
The other problem is that natural selection works at the level of the whole organism.
Survival and reproductive success are normally
based on a number of different factors, so
selection FOR a particular advantageous genetic
change is really impossible.
Natural selection can only work on the
PHENOTYPE [whole characteristic].
What is really need for evolution to
work is selection of the
GENOTYPE [precise and specific DNA
changes].
“the survival of the fittest”
"Genetics has no proofs for evolution. It has trouble explaining it. The closer one looks at the evidence for evolution
the less one finds of substance. In fact the theory keeps on postulating evidence, and failing to find it, moves on to
other postulates (fossil missing links, natural selection of improved forms, positive mutations, molecular phylogenetic
sequences, etc.). This is not science."
Written by Professor Maciej Giertych, Head of Genetics Department, Polish Academy of Science, Institute of Dendrology, Poland. Quoted in
Creation Ex Nihilo, Vol. 13 No. 3, 1991 p:17
There is an even bigger problem that evolutionists WILL NOT admit to!
Darwin’s theory cannot deal with the origin of the first cell. A cell is incredibly complex,
and needs to use very large and complicated molecules. The jump from simple
chemicals to proteins and DNA/RNA is immense; the probability of finding a functional
protein by chance is so remote that it would never happen within the lifetime of the
“Big Bang” universe, even if one possible protein was tried every second.
The jump from bio-molecules to a functioning cell structure is just as
immense – with no plausible chance mechanism even proposed.
NO scientist in the world, if given basic chemicals and a laboratory,
could make proteins or DNA or indeed create a living cell.
SO HOW COULD THESE HAPPEN BY CHANCE IN A HOSTILE WORLD?
Doesn’t the fossil record prove evolution though?
In fact the nature of the fossil record is peculiar:
Pliocene
Miocene
Oligocene
There are massive fossil deposits in the so called Cambrian layer with
most animal groups appearing – but very little before this.
So no gradual development is evidenced.
Eocene
Paleocine
Cretacious
If Noah’s flood is true then we would expect to see all creatures
buried together and then covered with further sedimentary layers.
Jurassic
Triassic
Permian
Carboniferous
If evolution is true then there should be
a multitude of intermediate fossils e.g.
dino-birds and walking whales!!
Devonian
Silurian
Ordovician
Cambrian
Precambrian
Almost all major animal
groups [phyla] found here
Evolutionists have dreamed up
a “tree of life” based on known
creatures. This claims to show
how all living things evolved
from the earliest living things.
This evolution would require
many thousands of transitional
forms as evolution proceeded.
When the fossil record is
studied……….
THERE ARE NO
TRANSITIONAL
FOSSILS
All so called ape/men fossils
are fiction made from
incomplete skeletons and
bone fragments.
TWO KINDS OF “EVOLUTION”
Charles Darwin was interested in pigeon breeding and
noticed that by selecting desired characteristics for
mating pairs, different varieties could be produced. This
process happens in nature also, as in the beak size/shape
of Galapagos finches. The process happens due to the
expression of pre-existing genes. This is often called
MICROEVOLUTION
Microevolution is an observed process.
However, to transform a dinosaur into a bird
significant DNA changes are required to
produce brand new genes. Simple changes in
pre-existing gene expression will simply not
do it. This is often called
MACROEVOLUTION
Macroevolution is an unobserved process.
Evolutionists often use examples of microevolution to “prove” macroevolution.
Many evolutionist scientists will claim that they have seen real evolution
in action when in fact they have only observed genetic drift or badly
mutated insects. This is not the same as species/species transition.
NATURAL SELECTION – by a committed evolutionist
“To understand the origin of whales, it's necessary to have a basic understanding of how natural
selection works. Natural selection can change a species in small ways, causing a population to
change colour or size over the course of several generations. This is called "microevolution."
But natural selection is also capable of much more. Given enough time and enough accumulated
changes, natural selection can create entirely new species, known as "macroevolution." It can
turn dinosaurs into birds, amphibious mammals into whales and the ancestors of apes into
humans.”
By Ker Than, Live Science Contributor | May 13, 2015 10:58pm ET
This is typical of how modern pseudo-scientists present evolutionary ideas.
Natural selection is portrayed as a creative force, almost having intelligence, so that it
can carefully select any improved individuals in a species and ensure that they
preferentially reproduce and survive. This relies on “enough time” and the availability
of definite positive changes in complexity.
The truth is somewhat different……………………….
The philosophical problems with the theory of evolution
Most committed evolutionists are also atheists and philosophical naturalists.
This means that from their viewpoint the material Universe is all there is.
This presents huge logical problems:
If someone believes in evolution then they evolved to do that and
so their opinion is not the result of a free thinking person.
If matter is all there is then a human being is just a very complex
chemical reaction - a sort of programmed robot. All opinions and
beliefs result from chemistry or random events in the brain.
Within a material framework there is no means to explain our
self awareness, our consciousness and our innate moral sense.
We can have no soul or spirit.
Biological systems give the appearance of being
carefully designed so an evolutionist must ascribe
this to the “power of natural selection” which has no
intelligence or foresight.
Darwin Quote:
"But then with me the horrid doubt always arises
whether the convictions of man's mind, [if developed by
evolution], are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would
any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if
there are any convictions in such a mind?"
[Letter to W. Graham, July 3rd, 1881]
An unkind but revealing cartoon of Darwin
SETI
searches for
ET
SO WHY DO EVOLUTIONSTS CLING TO SUCH A FLAWED THEORY??
Simply because there is no alternative - we are here so we must have evolved
They think that apes and men are so
similar that apes gradually evolved
into men and women. The basic
biochemistry and physiology is very
similar – you have to believe the
evidence of your own eyes!
This is the same as
realising that in fact
the sun goes round
the Earth…..
You have to believe the
evidence of your own
eyes!
Is there any evidence that life has been created?
There can be no direct scientific proof as this is a one off historical event.
[Evolution is just the same – unrepeatable events in the past]
HOWEVER
The theories of historical science don’t work.
The Big Bang theory has serious flaws.
Evolution is a non-starter.
The Universe and the Earth seem to be “fine tuned” for life to exist.
The whole of the biosphere is an integrated system and is irreducibly complex, and
therefore screams “ I was designed”!
E coli bacteria have a remarkable organ called a FLAGELLUM which propels
them. It has a proper biochemical rotary motor with many parts, all of which
are needed for it to work. This rotor system is irreducibly complex, take away
any part and it won’t work. It is very difficult to see how it could possibly have
evolved in small steps, since until the last step, it can’t work.
A venus fly trap also catches insects It traps them on its leaves which
then close and digest the insect. Evolutionists believe that this plant
developed gradually, but if its insect catching system was only half
developed, how did it feed and survive?
From a creationist viewpoint, the biosphere on Earth has been designed as a complete system:
• Atmospheric composition and control which regulates temperature and gas composition
and provides a cosmic ray shield [together with the Earth’s magnetosphere].
• A plant kingdom which stores solar energy to act as a fuel source for animals and man.
• A complete recycling system using bacteria, fungi and insects etc.
• All life conforms to a similar, successful biochemical blueprint.
Why do the media love evolution?
This because religion [e.g. biblical Christianity] is
seen as old fashioned and unenlightened and as
inspiring as an old Victorian church on a rainy day.
Science on the other hand is seen as modern,
exciting and relevant.
Science is perceived as the origin of truth today
The huge success of modern science in its application to medicine and technology has given
some scientists the opportunity to state opinions as facts. We read or hear the phrase
“scientists think that” followed by pure speculation.
Science can only ever discover the rules and principles that govern the material world.
It relies on assuming an orderly and predictable Universe [i.e. created by God].
Science can only discover mechanisms not reasons. It does not explain things but provides
detailed descriptions [often mathematical] of natural phenomena.
The Church of Scientism
The pursuit of science will lead us into all truth
Great High Priests
DARWIN
We are all advanced apes, descended from microbes.
We were not created by God.
SAGAN
The Cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be.
There is nothing supernatural.
DAWKINS
Religion and belief in God are delusions.
Teaching children religion is child abuse.
William B. Provine (1942–2015) was the ‘Andrew H. and James S. Tisch
Distinguished University Professor’ at Cornell University and was a professor
in the Departments of History, Science and Technology Studies, and Ecology
and Evolutionary Biology.
Dr William B. Provine, Professor of Biological Sciences, Cornell University
“Belief in modern evolution makes atheists of
people. One can have a religious view that is
compatible with evolution only if the religious
view is indistinguishable from atheism.”
“Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and
clear … There are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no
life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the
end for me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning to life, and
no free will for humans, either.”
Reference:
Provine, W.B., Origins Research 16(1), p.9, 1994.
If you are an atheist evolutionist
If you are a creationist Christian
Life has no ultimate meaning or purpose.
Life was created by God for a purpose.
You are just an advanced animal.
Mankind is much more than an animal.
There is no way to determine right from
wrong – apart from arbitrary choice.
God has told us what is right and wrong
via the ten commandments.
Human beings do “bad” things because
they are still really animals.
Human beings do wrong because of our
sin and separation from God.
Suffering happens due to random events.
Suffering happens because we live in a
fallen world, we have rejected God.
Freewill and love are just illusions caused
by chemicals in the brain.
When you die there is only oblivion.
Eventually the whole Universe will
extinguish in a heat death.
Our emotions and feelings are real.
After death our spirit lives on and we
will give account to God for our lives.
God will create a new Heaven & Earth.
Could God have used evolution to create human life?
NO
Otherwise there would have been life and death struggles for
survival over millions of years. No perfect creation or fall.
At what stage would God have “ breathed life” into man?
Studies of mitochondrial DNA, which is good science, appear to indicate that
ALL human beings currently alive are descended from one female.
Estimations from current mitochondrial DNA mutation rates indicate that this
woman lived only thousands of years ago.
So modern science has in part verified the truth of Adam and Eve.
What does God himself tell us through the bible writers?
Genesis chapters 1 & 2
John 1 v 1-3
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in
the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
Job 38 v 4
“Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand.
Psalm 104 v 24
How many are your works, Lord! In wisdom you made them; all the earth is full of your creatures.
Psalm 33 v 6
By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, their starry host by the breath of his mouth.
Isaiah 45 v 12
It is I who made the Earth and created mankind on it. My own hands stretched out the heavens;
Romans 1 v 20
Isaiah 42 v 5
Isaiah 40 ALL
For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have
been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
This is what God the Lord says—the Creator of the heavens, who stretches them out, who spreads out the earth
with all that springs from it, who gives breath to its people, and life to those who walk on it:
Evolution is:
• Pitiless
• Purposeless
• Pointless
• Wrong
Only the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob has the
power and intelligence to create life, and the
power to destroy life, and the power to redeem
man through the death of his son Jesus Christ
EXTRAS
DNA structure
Crick and Watson
Who discovered the
structure of DNA in
1953
“The theoretical size of the sequence space, i.e. the total number of possible protein
sequences is, for all practical purposes, infinite. Assuming that an average protein length
is 300 amino acids, there can be 20300 different protein sequences, a number that is
much greater than, for example, the number of protons in our Universe. Our current
theoretical understanding of protein folding is insufficient to estimate the total possible
number of protein structures, but one suspects it is also vast”.
A simple 150 amino acid protein
has, if subject to random sequence
selection, about a 1 in 1077 chance
of finding a useful functional form.
In context, there are about 1080
particles in the Universe, and the
Universe has existed for about
1018 seconds [Big Bang model].
73 specific proteins are
needed just for the ribosomes
in our cells to function.