Archive

Monthly Archives: March 2013

Theories Supported by Artistic Licence.

Theories Supported by Artistic Licence.

How did new biochemical pathways, which involve multiple enzymes working together in sequence, originate? Every pathway and nano-machine requires multiple protein/enzyme components to work.  How did lucky accidents create even one of the components, let alone 10 or 20 or 30+ at the same time, often in a necessary programmed sequence? Evolutionary biochemist Franklin Harold wrote, “we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations.”

I have learned that Jim Pappa is the author of the quote above so I want to give him the thanks and credit.

Something for those evolutionists who have been taught genetic mutations are helpful to a species and lead to one species evolving into a different species.

Adalia Rose testifies to the consequences of genetic mutations. You want evidence? You can’t handle the evidence:

 

By definition natural selection is a selective process (selecting from already existing information), so is not a creative process. It might explain the survival of the fittest (why certain genes benefit creatures more in certain environments), but not the arrival of the fittest (where the genes and creatures came from in the first place). The death of individuals not adapted to an environment and the survival of those that are suited  does not explain the origin of the traits that make an organism adapted to an environment.  How do minor back and forth variations in finch beaks explain the origin of beaks or finches? Sir I demand to know how natural selection explains goo to you evolution?

There are no indications that the world is getting any safer and history would show that mankind’s proclivity is to resolving differences through violence. It is a matter of record that western nations, and particularly those aligned with the USA, are perceived as culpable for many of the world’s ills. The western democracies are targets of many ideological narratives, most prominently an Islamic one, that proposes the west is corrupt, decadent and exploitative. These narratives have ideological roots that provide the presuppositions with which people use information they receive.

 

How can we be confident that there will be due warning of a significant event which requires an urgent mobilisation of power to defend against a threat to our liberty? Why are we so confident about the assumptions our Ministry of Defence makes about the time available to prepare for conflict? Will our military and civilian agencies have time to equip, train and response? Major General Tim Cross tells of taking command of his logistic unit in 1993ish and being called the following day to report to the aircraft for deployment to the Gulf.

 

After the Second World War the British Army spent forty years facing the imminent threat across the German border while conducting several operations around the globe. Did our posture prevent conflict, increase the risk of war, or provoke our potential adversary to reinforce? What about the wars in other parts of the war caricatured as, ‘proxy wars’? Were they despite the Cold War or, as some claim, a consequence of our unwillingness to engage the Soviets with battlefield nuclear weapons? In modern times only one year, 1968, has a British soldier not been killed in active service.

 

The answers to these questions are formed through the prism of our presuppositions or worldview. If you think the British Government’s current policy of shrinking the Army is good and there is coming a time when we will hardly need an Army (or police for that matter) then you probably think you, and mankind are essentially good and want to get along (we just need the right system (your system probably)).  I would propose that you do not have a shred of evidence to support mankind’s willingness to reconcile differences peacefully. I see history displaying, in bloody technocolour, mankind’s greed, pride and distrust for his neighbour.

 

My worldview informs me that we did well to remain on our guard before the Soviet Third Shock Army. We will do well to remain on our guard before the doctrinal ideology of mankind’s religions, grand political philosophies (Marxism, communism, and all the other isms). The question is how much suffering, how many Tamil Tiger suicide bombs, how many 9/11s and 7/7s, or killing fields of Cambodia have there to be before we realise the threat? The world is not getting any safer.

What come first the immune system or the need for it?

Was there an elephant maker or did this model elephant seen in Cardiff come about by accident?

How could such errors (mutations) create 3 billion letters of DNA information to change a microbe into a microbiologist or, for that matter, an elephant? `There is information for how to make proteins and also for controlling their use – much like a cookbook contains the ingredients as well as the instructions for how and when to use them. One without the other is useless. Mutations are known for their destructive effects, including over 1000 human diseases such as haemophilia. Rarely are they even helpful. But how can scrambling existing DNA information create a new biological pathway or nano-machines with many components, to make ‘goo-to-you’ evolution possible? I am desperate to find out the line of reasoning that my evolutionist friends follow to get where they do.