S.T.

22,336 views  Oct 28, 2020

Biologist Michael Denton’s new book, The Miracle of the Cell, considers the scientific evidence for intelligent design from a new perspective and at a new level. As with his previous books, it’s a more fundamental view than that of all other ID literature. 

Here, Denton discusses his new book "The Miracle of the Cell" with Eric Anderson in this Zoom event from Discovery Institute in which people from around the world submitted questions to Dr. Denton.

Denton makes the case that the directionality to the evolution of the universe was foreseen — intended — from the Big Bang. Or rather, from before it, because the design was actualized right away. Since there was no nature and no time before the universe came into being, it follows that the design must be of that a transcendent mind, the “finger of God,” as Denton puts it.

Check out these other videos:

islandonlinenews 56.4K subscribers 123,254 views  Oct 2, 2013
Epistemology is the study of knowledge, its scope and limits. And yet this most basic of studies is rarely dealt with today. How do we really ''know''? How do we determine what is really true, rather than that which is just traditionally accepted? What are our tools for validation?

As we began in the very limited universe of our playpen, our primary reliance on learning techniques was empirical: trial and error. As our universe gradually expanded to include our room, our home, our school, and our community, our primary epistemological tools increasingly relied on external guidance, qualified and validated by means of our internal processing. As our universe of interest expands from our community to the world, and ultimately to the cosmos itself, our tools increasingly rely on external guidance rather than trial and error! Qualifying our sources of information becomes increasingly critical. Yet, what tools can we use to qualify our sources of information?

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6

The extraordinary multi-sensory powers of 🦉 owls provide proof that said powers are essential to their ability to survive and thrive in so many habitats on this planet.


It is absolutely laughable to claim that they "evolved" this simply because, without it, combined with some other special abilities only owls have among birds of prey, they would NOT be able to pinpoint prey not visible beneath snow or foliage, something they MUST be able to consistently do in order to survive (owls hunt in conditions, mostly nocturnal, that other birds of prey cannot hunt in).


Owl eyes are huge in relation to their skull for a very specific reason (to capture more light in the first place). But that large eye size works together with another light capturing ability unique to owl eyes among birds of prey. That is, they have a lot more rods (needed for night vision) than cones (needed for daylight color vision), so they lose color vision, but have extremely powerful night vision.

There is much more to the OBVIOUSLY INTELLIGENT DESIGN of owl anatomy and physiology, from the larger wings for vertical takeoffs (for nest defence) and slow, almost hovering, flight for hunting, to sound absorbing wing and body (owl feathers are NOT wax covered - not waterproof like noisy duck wing feathers -, which is the reason owl wings are, with the aid of a couple of other specialized feather features, nearly soundless in flight - no other bird can fly as quietly) quiet design to sound capturing and concentrating facial feathers to 270 degree pivoting head (including special vertebra that prevent blood flow from being cut off during extreme head pivots).
The vertebral arteries enter their necks higher up than in other birds, introduced at the 12th vertebrae (when counted from the top) instead of the 14th, which gives the vessels more slack and room to breathe.

It is laughably illogical AND unscientific to claim that owls "evolved" this set of sensory tools, one by one, at random, while the "small eyed", "low rod count", "symmetrical ear placement", "waterproof winged" and so on owls all "died off" as the "survival of the fittest happy mutations" all came together in some owls by good Darwinian luck to produce modern day owls.

WHY? Because, as a careful study of owl anatomy and physiology irrefutably evidences, these abilities work successfully ONLY if they work in concert. In order for all these sensory abilities to work IN CONCERT, they had to have been SPECIFICALLY designed to work as a team. The owl is a night hunter that uses ALL of its specialized sensory equipment to survive and thrive. Take away any one of these sensory tools and its survival is in jeopardy.

It is a sad commentary on the willful denial of too many modern day scientists of God's incredibly complex and beautiful intelligent design of everything that lives in our biosphere in general, and owls in particular, that they cling to Darwinian nonsense. 

Too many modern scientists just do not want to hear the truth that NATURE was created by God.   


To a an objective person, the study of owl anatomy and physiology provides irrefutable proof that God created owls to do what owls can do now, from the start, period. 

As an earring of gold, and an ornament of fine gold, so is a wise reprover upon an obedient ear. -- Proverbs 25:12

March 5, 2023, 3:30 PM By Granville Sewell


Carl Sagan famously said on his TV series Cosmos, “I believe that the extraordinary should be pursued. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” I agree. You shouldn’t change the entire direction of science based on a few isolated pieces of evidence.

Intelligent design (ID) proponents make an extraordinary claim, that the origin and evolution of life cannot be explained without postulating a guiding intelligence. If this idea becomes generally accepted it will be a huge change in the direction of science, so the scientific establishment is justified in dragging its feet. But the evidence for intelligent design does not consist of a few missing fossils or a few examples of irreducible complexity, which could eventually be shown to be reducible. ID advocates believe we have long ago passed the threshold of evidence required to accept this extraordinary claim and that every new discovery in biology and biochemistry pushes us farther beyond the threshold. Evolution News readers are exposed to this evidence daily.

Another Extraordinary Claim

But less noticed is that ID opponents also make an extraordinary claim. They believe that they have found, or at least will eventually find, natural, unintelligent, causes capable of creating things which in our uniform experience are known to be created only by intelligence.

I have often argued (most recently here ) that to attribute to natural selection the ability to create spectacular order out of disorder is to attribute to it, alone among all unintelligent forces in the universe, the ability to defy the more general statements of the second law of thermodynamics, or at least the general principle behind this law. But it is not really necessary to appeal to the second law because everyone can see that Darwin’s claim to have discovered an unintelligent force capable of creating all the magnificent species in the living world, and even human brains, was quite an extraordinary claim. It credits natural selection with creative powers far beyond those claimed for any other natural causes. (Origin-of-life researchers’ claim that chance chemical processes could have created the first self-replicators, when human engineered self-replicating machines are still far beyond current technology, could also be considered to be an extraordinary claim.)

And where do we stand with regard to evidence for the Darwinists’ extraordinary claim? Have we passed the threshold of evidence required to accept their claim? Hardly. The ongoing debate between Michael Behe and his critics is over whether or not there is evidence that natural selection of random mutations can be credited with any evolutionary changes that would not be considered “devolution” and do not simply “promote the loss of genetic information.” And evolutionists now openly wonder if they need an entirely new theory. While the evidence for the extraordinary claim made by design theorists continually increases, the evidence for the Darwinists’ claim seems to be shrinking.

“Why Evolution Is Different”

In my 2020 video “Why Evolution Is Different” I imagine watching a tornado running backward and trying to come up with a scientific explanation for what we are seeing. It concludes:

Anyone who claims to have a scientific explanation for how unintelligent agents might be able to turn rubble into houses and cars would be expected to produce some very powerful evidence if they want their theory to be taken seriously. The burden of proof should be equally heavy on those who claim to have a scientific explanation for how a few unintelligent forces of physics alone could rearrange the basic particles of physics into computers and encyclopedias and Apple iPhones — and there is no evidence that natural selection of random mutations can explain anything other than very minor adaptations.

Some observers of the ID-Darwinism debate feel that the Darwinian point of view is the default so that the burden of proof is on us. But it is extraordinary that we are here at all, so any ideas about how we got here should require extraordinary evidence. 

https://evolutionnews.org/2023/03/yes-extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-evidence-lets-hear-some-for-darwinian-evolution/

GRANVILLE SEWELL
Granville Sewell is professor of mathematics at the University of Texas El Paso. He has written four books on numerical analysis, most recently Solving Partial Differential Equation Applications with PDE2D, John Wiley, 2018. In addition to his years at UTEP, has been employed by Universidad Simon Bolivar (Caracas), Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Purdue University, IMSL Inc., The University of Texas Center for High Performance Computing and Texas A&M University, and spent a semester (1999) at Universidad Nacional de Tucuman on a Fulbright scholarship, and another semester (2019) at the UNAM Centro de Geociencas in Queretaro, Mexico.

Exploration Films 30.9K subscribers 14,234 views  Oct 15, 2021

The Incredible Creatures That Defy Evolution Series enters the fascinating world of animals to reveal sophisticated and complex designs that shake the traditional foundations of evolutionary theory.

This series features Dr. Jobe Martin, who for the past 20 years, has been exploring evolution vs. creation. His findings have been fascinating students around the world as he lectures on these remarkable animal designs that cannot be explained by traditional evolution.

Dr. Martin himself was a traditional evolutionist, but his medical and scientific training would go through an evolution, rather a ☝🏻 revolution when he began to 👨‍🔬🔬 study animals that challenged the scientific assumptions of his education. This was the beginning of the evolution of a creationist.

- Are there really creatures that produce fire to defend themselves?
- How does a giraffe get a drink without causing lethal blood pressure to his brain?
- How can Geckos walk upside down, even on glass and not fall?

This program features:

Bombardier Beetle, The Giraffe, Woodpecker, Australian Incubator Bird, The Chicken Egg, The Platypus, Black & Yellow Garden Spider, Gecko & Chuckwalla Lizards, Human Eye & Ear Drum

Clear evidence that animal designs can only be attributed to a Creator.

Director: Steve Greisen
Writer: Steve Greisen
Stars: ⭐ David Hames, 🌟 Jobe Martin 🕊️

Mar 2, 2023  DALLAS
22 February 2023

Dr. Jobe Martin brings a 4 part series on Creation Science to Believers Chapel Wednesday Night services. Dr. Jobe Martin has spent the last twenty years studying the topic of Biblical Creation vs. Evolution, and lectures frequently on the subject.  As president of Biblical Discipleship Ministries, Jobe is a frequent speaker on topics such as "Creation vs. Evolution", marriage, family, discipleship and other topics.

Find out all about our ministry at our website:
http://www.believerschapeldallas.org

BCDallasVideo 1.56K subscribers  Mar 2, 2023  DALLAS
22 February 2023

Dr. Jobe Martin brings a 4 part series on "Creation Science" to Believers Chapel Wednesday Night services.   Dr. Jobe Martin has spent the last twenty years studying the topic of Biblical Creation vs. Evolution, and lectures frequently on the subject.  As president of Biblical Discipleship Ministries, Jobe is a frequent speaker on topics such as "Creation vs. Evolution", marriage, family, discipleship and other topics.

Find out all about our ministry at our website:
http://www.believerschapeldallas.org

AGelbert response:

Hmmmm, I see some excellent examples of the Backfire effect, but that is par for the course for those who have accepted the Theory of Evolution as reality based. Rather than address the issue brought up by a real scientist about whether or not the cell membrane could have evolved from random undirected processes (NOTE: the graphic above from Organic Chemist Dr. James Tour also evidences how wrong evolutionists are about cell membrane origins.), appeals to Evolution Theory Academic consensus and authority, plus questioning the credentials of said scientist with the temerity to question Evolution Theory ensued. 😕
 
If you Darwinists are so sure that 🦍 Evolution Theory can hold its own in any argument about any part of a cell or any biological mechanism that has the appearance of ☝🏻 Design, why do you refuse to argue the merits, if not because you are very uncomfortable with the very idea that we do not live in a random universe?

Let us forget our disparate worldviews and let us REASON together, shall we? Yeah, I'm a Christian and I do not want any of you to miss out on God's offer of Salvation through Jesus Christ, but that is irrelevant to the nuts and bolts subject of biological mechanisms. Either something COULD evolve or something, that is alive and thrives right now, COULD NOT have evolved. Now you all think everything that is alive evolved from some simpler life form through survival if the fittest natural selection. If that is true, then you need to seriously challenge, with facts, not opinions, ANY science based claim that argues against that assumption.

I'm not here to give you a hard time. If you want to believe this or that, you have free will to do that. I'm just 🤠 gonna post about lots of fascinating animals that we share this planet with. If you can explain, with facts, not opinons, how these animals evolved all the amazing processes in their anatomy and physiology, 'step by step' when they do not work unless the whole mechanism is present from the getgo, then please do.

Or, you can be honest, like this fellow that I respect for his honesty:   
       
Darwin was honest too. Why do you suppose most Darwinists only read what they want to read about what he wrote?
   
I suggest, for the sake of NON-argument, to all of you who believe Evolution is scientifically valid, that you please elect a volunteer, who does not sneer (e.g. K-Dog), to explain to me, without breaking the rules you established here about reasoned and civilized (i.e. no Ad hom or other forms of verbal abuse like disdain, sarcasm, ridicule etc. allowed, you know what I mean) debate, how the Lampsylis Mussel "evolved" its method of reproduction. Please remember, though too many evolutionist forget, that it had to work the FIRST TIME, or there wouldn't be any happy Lampsylis Mussels around today using a very specific species of fish to ensure the survival of a new generation of Lampsylis Mussels. Please spare me terms like "co-evolution" and "common ancestors". Fish and mussels, even by evolutionary biology standards are not even remotely similar genetically. Mussels cannot see. Mussels have no eyes. Mussels never had any eyes. Without EYES an organism CANNOT 'select' through 'random undirected processes' from different types of muscle pattern and color to use as a lure. YET, a small portion of their 'foot' muscle perfectly mimics, IN COLOR AND PATTERN, the APPEARANCE of a species of fish that a very specific type of bass loves to eat. Evolutionists claim this took place over "millions of years". That is obviously false because mussels of this species would have been 'selected OUT' (i.e. DIED OFF due to NO VIABLE OFFSPRING, EXTINCT, you get the idea) if they could not do this from the FIRST generation. To understand why that is so, watch the video. 🧐
 
AGelbert NOTE: Go to 4:42 for Lampsylis Mussel discussion.

Exploration Films 30.9K subscribers 31,273 views  Sep 26, 2021

Enter the fascinating world of animals to reveal sophisticated and complex designs that shake the traditional foundations of evolutionary theory. Featured in this program are Lampsylis Mussel, Horses, Ostrichs, Hummingbirds, Dogs, Manatees, Elephants, Butterflies, Cuttlefish, Penguins and Milopina Bees. Their designs cannot possibly be explained by evolution but only by a Creator.

This series features Dr. Jobe Martin, who for the past 20 years, has been exploring evolution vs. creation. His findings have been fascinating students around the world as he lectures on these remarkable animal designs that cannot be explained by traditional evolution.

Clear evidence that animal designs can only be attributed to a Creator.

Director: Steve Greisen
Writer: Steve Greisen
Stars: ⭐ David Hames, 🌟 Jobe Martin