Biblical Creation vs Evolution- the age of the Earth

[total relism]

Merely that something can be refuted does not mean that the person who refutes it is correct. That the Catholic church stated that the Earth was the centre of the Universe did not make it true, and merely Catholics agreed did not some how add weight to the "proof". It is merely evidence of an echo chamber of like minded individuals who conflate opinion with fact.

Selecting survivors based on the environment is exactly what natural selection is. This was never supposed to demonstrate how bacteria started, no more than a the absence of God from a Church is not taken that God does not exist.
Evolution is not always increasing complexity.
Resistance has several different mechanisms. Some are gain of information from gene transfer. Others are mutation of existing genes. Which is evolution.
The function genes play depends on where they are - and even have evolved new functions.

What relevance do the beliefs of Alexander Fleming have? If he was Hundu would this "prove" there are in fact several gods?

And to repeat... even if these cherry-picked examples of rather dubious work did "prove" evolution didn't work, that doesn't suddenly mean the answer is God.

I do not disagree. I already addressed the false claim of the catholic church and flat earth their is so much scholarly work out their to refute it if you wish to know the truth.



Once more I suggest you read up on my material or creation before you object to something you dont know what they believe as everything said, is addressed in my posts.


Biblical Creation- Natural Selection and Speciation


“What Darwin really accounted for was not the origin, but the extermination of species.”
-C.S Lewis

I am a biblical creationist I believe everything was created to reproduce after its own kind, dogs produce dogs, cats produce cats etc There is alot of variety in these animals so that a dog, coyote, and wolf have a common ancestor, but it was from the original dog kind, they have know varied and produce the many kinds today. But all the information was already present the variation we see in animals today was already present in the original producing kind.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...tion-evolution
http://creation.com/refuting-evoluti...rsus-evolution
https://creation.com/variation-infor...e-created-kind



So in the above picture on the left we see how variation can lead to genetic change in a population. The original created pair of dogs had the genes for both Long [L] and short fur [S]. They produced a variety in their offspring where some received only Long fur genes and some only short fur genes. This is a very basic example of how variation within the kind that eventually leads to speaciation [dog, wolf, coyote] happens. The picture on the right is an example of this. The original dog kid's descendants spreads out over various terrain and those with short fur survive better than those with longer fur in the hotter climate and natural selection favors those with short fur and the long fur die out. In the north the long fur have the advantage and the short fur die out. But all the original information to produce the genes for long fur and short fur are already present in the original biblical kind.

“natural selection is therefore likely to be important in evolution. However, natural selection does not explain the origin of new variants, only the process of changes in their frequency....But evolution is more than merely a change in trait distributions or allele frequencies; it also includes the origin of the variation.... Natural selection only affects changes in the frequency of the variants once they appear; it cannot directly address the reasons for the existence of the variants.”
--Endler, John A., Natural Selection in the Wild, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, USA, 1986

Biblical Kind

21 So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. ...24 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
-Genesis 1

The bible says God created life to reproduce after its own kind. God created various separate distinct kinds [not species] of animals. So a wolf coyote and dog shared a common ancestor. Today we often use the term species for multiple animals within the same biblical kind. For example a camel and a llama can breed. A Lynx and a bobcat, yak and cow, lion and tiger, leopard and jaguar, dingo and dog, coyote and dog, gray wolf and coyote, killer whale and bottle nose dolphin, a zebra and donkey, a zebra and horse and on and on. Because these species all originated from the original biblical kind God created they can still interbreed. They have since diversified but all the potential for change was within the original kind God created.




Defining Evolution

Evolutionist will often point to adaptation, natural selection , survival of the fittest, change in gene frequency and other similar biological changes in organisms as evidence for evolution. Not one of these is rejected by creationist or the bible. Creationist accept and agree with all of the above. If evolutionist maintain evolution is nothing but “change” or natural selection, than me and all other creationist are evolutionist.

“The point is, however, that an organism can be modified and refined by natural selection, but that is not the way new species and new classes and new phyla originated”
-The Altenberg 16: An Exposé of the Evolution Industry by Suzan Mazur North Atlantic Books, Berkeley, CA, 2010

But we argue those changes dont have anything to do with evolution properly defined. Evolutionist are able to pull a bait and switch by defining evolution two separate ways. Because they control public education and almost all media, they can then give the kids evidence for natural selection, or adaptation, and sell that as “evolution.” they can than on a separate page, define evolution in a completely different way, yet use natural section as evidence for the second definition of witch there is no evidence.

"If evolution is to occur . .living things must be capable of acquiring new information, or alteration of their stored information." —George Gaylord Simpson, "The Non-prevalence of Humanoids," in Science, 143, (1964), p. 772.

Evolutionist claim that evolution is the cause of the origin of all life and the genetic information of organisms through history. They say the original organisms were simple life forms that evolved into greater complexity over time. Originally there was no genetic information for complex systems such as wings, brains, ears etc the genetic code for these evolved over time. Evolution must than expsalin the origin of all the biological systems, all the proteins, and the genetic information to produce these. It does not have to be able to show the formation of an entire organ, but it does need a mechanism that can increase information and complexity. Yet there is not one example of increasing information or the origin of a single novel functional gene, enzyme, or any sort of biological system despite their best efforts. Evolutionist claim to exspalin origins, so origins is what they must be able to show through an evolutionary mechanism.

“From the first cell that coalesced in the primordial soup to the magnificent intricacies of Homo sapiens, the evolution of life—as everyone knows—has been one long drive toward greater complexity. The only trouble with what everyone knows…is that there is no evidence it’s true.”
-Onward and Upward? By Lori Oliwenstein|Tuesday, June 01, 1993 Discover Magazine

"Do we, therefore, ever see mutations going about the business of producing new structures for selection to work on? No nascent organ has ever been observed emerging, though their origin in pre-functional form is basic to evolutionary theory. Some should be visible today, occurring in organisms at various stages up to integration of a functional new system, but we don’t see them. There is no sign at all of this kind of radical novelty. Neither observation nor controlled experiment has shown natural selection manipulating mutations so as to produce a new gene, hormone, enzyme, system, or organ."
—Michael Pitman, Adam and Evolution (1984), pp. 67-68



Biblical Creation and Mutations





Mutations happen but all observation and experimentation shows they work against evolution. Mutations reduce information in an organism they do not build up. See http://creation.com/the-evolution-trains-a-comin It really is in my opinion the best argument for creation and the best refuter of evolution. Evolution needs to increase complexity over time through mutations, yet all observation shows the opposite. Take the example above of antibiotic resistance. Antibiotic-resistant H. pylori have a mutation that results in the loss of information to produce an enzyme. This enzyme normally converts an antibiotic to a poison, which causes death. But when the antibiotics are applied to the mutant H. pylori, these bacteria can live while the normal bacteria are killed. So by natural selection the ones that lost information survive and pass this trait along to their offspring. This process cannot exspalin the origin of the enzyme.

“Not even one mutation has been observed that adds a little information to the genome . This surly shows that there are not the millions upon millions of potential mutations the theory evolution demands.”
-L.spetner not by chance 1997

Some mutations are beneficial such as the above, or a insect on a island that has a mutation so it does not produce wings, know lives while the others that did not have the mutation die off, so know this insect with the new mutation lives and passes on its genes till the whole island is know mutated wingless insects. Yet this is the wrong kind of change for evolution [reduced destroying] yer constant with biblical creation.



Mutations/Information

Evolutionist claim that evolution is the cause of the origin of all life and the genetic information of organisms through history. They say the original organisms were simple life forms that evolved into greater complexity over time. Originally there was no genetic information for complex systems such as wings, brains, ears etc the genetic code for these evolved over time. Evolution must than expsalin the origin of all the biological systems, all the proteins, and the genetic information to produce these. It does not have to be able to show the formation of an entire organ, but it does need a mechanism that can increase information and complexity. Yet there is not one example of increasing information or the origin of a single novel functional gene, enzyme, or any sort of biological system despite their best efforts.




Mutations work against evolution by destroying information. We have done millions of years worth of experiments with fruit fly's and bacteria and noone has ever observed new information being created. We also have all of our observation with living things that show evolution is impossible by mutations. If evolution cannot explain the origin of genetic information than evolution is refuted by observation.


“Not even one mutation has been observed that adds a little information to the genome. That surely shows that there are not the millions upon millions of potential mutations the theory demands. There may well not be any. The failure to observe even one mutation that adds information is more than just a failure to find support for the theory. It is evidence against the theory. We have here a serious challenge to neo-Darwinian theory.”
-Spetner, L. 1997. Not by chance: Shattering the modern theory of evolution. Brooklyn, New York: The Judaica Press.

‘biological information is not encoded in the laws of physics and chemistry … (and it) cannot come into existence spontaneously. … There is no known law of physics able to create information from nothing.’
-Davies, P., The Fifth Miracle, Penguin, Melbourne, Australia, 1998.

“There is no known natural law through which matter can give rise to information, neither is any physical process or material phenomenon known that can do this.”
-DR Werner Gitt head of the Department of Information Technology at the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology

“The origin of the [genetic] code is perhaps the most perplexing problem in evolutionary biology. The existing translational machinery is at the same time so complex, so universal, and so essential that it is hard to see how it could have come into existences or how life could have existed without it.” remains a formidable problem.”
- Maynard Smith J. & Szathmary E., "The Major Transitions in Evolution," W.H. Freeman: Oxford UK, 1995, p81

"Information cannot be built up by mutations that lose it. A business cannot make money by losing it a little at a time."
Spetner, L. 1997. Not By Chance! Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution. Brooklyn, NY: Judaica Press, 143.


“the complete lack of a genetic mechanism that allows organisms to gain genetic information to go from simple to complex over time.”
Dr. Georgia Purdom PhD, molecular genetics 2012

“The main mechanism for producing gentic variety required for evolution, random mutation, has been falsified”
-Jerry Bergman Evolution's Blunders, Frauds and forgeries 2017