TrishAndHalli.com

Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, observations on life in general, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them all!

RSS Feeds, Etc.

Get New Posts Via Email! Enter your e-mail address and hit the 'Subscribe' button. Your address will never be sold or spammed.

About

Profile TrishAndHalli.com
Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them!.

Archives

Categories

Pages

Blogroll

Conservative News

General Interest

Idaho Falls Links

Idaho Politics

Left-Leaning Idaho

Libertarian Links

Pro-life Organizations


Jerry Sproul, CPA
ThoughtfulConsideration.com

Please take a moment to visit our sponsors!

David Ripley: Planned Parenthood IS Legalized Abortion

April 28th, 2011 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

As the nation engages in an unprecedented discussion about fiscal disaster and spending priorities, Planned Parenthood is front and center.

How much of our national treasure should be devoted to destroying our very future?

The House of Representatives provided rational leadership by asserting that funding Planned Parenthood is not only an expense we can’t afford – it is practical insanity to do so. For the first time in many years, the Conservative Majority has asserted crucial moral values into the nation’s fiscal debate.

Planned Parenthood has responded to this dire threat by staging a powerful and expensive public relations effort. Like any evil enterprise, its immediate goal is to obscure its mission and hide its ugly truths behind bumper stickers and slogans.

We urge pro-Lifers to arm themselves with the facts by reading a powerful article now running on the National Review: Five Truths About Planned Parenthood.

Please join us in praying for those courageous members of Congress who are fighting to end our unwanted partnership with Planned Parenthood.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Taxes | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Jesus’ Teachings Irreconcilable with Socialism

April 26th, 2011 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

With the arrival of Easter, perhaps the most significant of Christianity’s holy days, comes an opportunity to reflect on our own lives and what we do to magnify the message of Jesus. It also affords an opportunity to reconcile our core beliefs with the political machinations of the world we live in.

There is obviously much need for the latter, especially in light of an article in USA Today this week which proclaimed, “A new poll released Thursday found that more Americans (44%) see the free market system at odds with Christian values than those who don’t (36%).”

To those of us who work through our faith intellectually and logically, such poll results are disturbing for the obvious logical superficiality of their viewpoint.

Let’s start with the most obvious issues. Did Jesus go to the Sanhedrin, Caiaphas, or Pilate to advance his teachings as a new system of governance? No! His message was not one of collective governance, but one of individual, personal governance. Governments have no soul to be saved, no salvific ordinances can be performed in their behalf, and have not the promise of a resurrection on some distant Easter morn. Christ’s message was to individuals, not a political system by which to govern.

Secondarily, and perhaps most theologically important, is the eternal concept of free agency or free will. To understand this in political context, it may help to take a brief look at the simplified political spectrum, which applies to individual ideological alignment as well as governments, and goes from left to right, most tyrannical and un-free to least tyrannical, or freedom.

All variations of socialism are on the far left of that spectrum right along with dictatorships. They are coercive and trample individual freedom as they reduce individuals to tools of the state. Yet the Lord’s entire plan is based on freedom of choice, or free agency. Socialism is irreconcilable and heterodox to Jesus’ message for it is based on coercion, the elimination of freedom and free agency. It is both illegal and immoral for individuals to forcibly take from one to give to another, so why is it not immoral when governments do it? It certainly has no redeeming value to the forced “giver.”

Jesus taught many divine principles by parable. One of the most relevant dealing with economics is His “Parable of the Talents.” You’ll recall that the master gave five talents (a measurement of weight and also of a silver currency in biblical times) to one servant, two to another, and one to a third, based on their respective abilities. He was not egalitarian in his distribution, but he expected results, namely that each would increase what was entrusted to them. The first two doubled their talents and were rewarded; “Well done thou good and faithful servant…” while the third buried his in the ground and returned it to the master with no increase, and was punished for his indolence.

The fundamental tenets of free agency and free enterprise were affirmed as none of the servants were told how to increase that which was entrusted to them, or by how much they were to increase the master’s wealth. But the tenet of increasing what is given to us, either as financial talents or talents as we employ the term today, is clear.

Not only are we accountable for what we do to develop character through our industry and acumen, but we are to be sensitive to the needs of others. As Jesus said, “I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me… Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” And this we do individually, exercising our free agency as evidence of our professed religious beliefs, not by force, coercion, or compulsion from a government that mandates it. For coercion is to Jesus’ teachings as negative is to positive in physics: polar opposites.

Socialism is an amoral (if not immoral) secular governmental system, while free enterprise or capitalism is the freest, most ennobling and affirming to individual worth. Free to pursue our own interests, free to buy, trade, barter, whatever we legally choose. It is not a perfect system, but it is the most true to the fundamental tenet of free agency and provides best for individual altruism.

In our reflections of the meaning of Easter, let us be cognizant of how we use our talents, monetary and otherwise, in the service of others, not counting on forced government programs to do what we as individuals are called to do.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Family Matters, Guest Posts, National Sovereignty, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Budgetary Theatrics and Posturing

April 21st, 2011 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

There are so many disturbing elements to last week’s last-minute federal budget agreement that it’s truly difficult to know where to begin. Especially when we consider that such budgetary brinkmanship would not have been necessary if Nancy Pelosi’s congress had done what they were supposed to last year: have an operating budget for 2011. But because the political backlash would have been even more devastating at the polls last November, she forsook her responsibilities for perceived political advantage.
Instead, we waited through last-minute theatrics on both sides, and we still got an illogical, break-the-bank kind of budget that we can’t afford, while apprehension continues to increase over the cost and scope of government. The compromise arrived at with two hours to spare before the government “shut down” trimmed a scant $38 billion from a $3.7 trillion budget. A mere 1% cut to the proposed budget was enough of a stumbling block to some congressmen that they nearly let the government shut down.

And yet, playing to the politics of fear in grand theatrical fashion, many in Washington were lamenting in apocalyptic Jeremiads, what a devastating effect such a small reduction would have on the nation. At the center of the budgetary battle was whether the relatively minuscule $75 million appropriated to Planned Parenthood, seen by many as the primary social advocate for abortions, should be halted. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on the floor of the Senate told about the health risks to his wife and daughters and nine granddaughters if he agreed to the proposed cuts. Makes one wonder what he thought Planned Parenthood would do for them.

Not to be outdone in the politics of fear, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton called the potential government shutdown “the equivalent of bombing innocent civilians.” The Senate Appropriations Committee chairman, Daniel Inouye, said in a news release that some of the cuts would be “especially painful.” Collectively they were saying the proposed cuts were “draconian.” If they act like this with these minor spending reductions, we know they will never have the political backbone to make the necessary major cuts to ensure fiscal soundness of the republic.

The Democrats were willing to shut down the government over a scant $75 million for their abortion purveyor of choice. Yet the Republicans let them get away with holding the nation hostage based on ideology over a minuscule part of the budget, and not pushing for some serious spending reductions which may actually make a difference in the future solvency of the country. I don’t know what to be more outraged over.

The Democrats obviously have no will or backbone to make serious cuts, and are willing to sacrifice the entire operation of the government over relative pennies in the budget. But the Republicans, proving they are little more than “Democrat-lite” seem to lack the courage to seriously reduce spending as they boasted of the “historic” 1% spending cuts. Truth be told, the actual cuts are much less than 1%. The $38 billion figure was little more than figurative, since the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) has now said that most of the $38 billion was accounting trickery, and that the actual cuts amount to a mere $352 million under 2010 spending levels.

President Obama has called for addressing the spending boondoggle like “adults.” Since much of it is a result of his and his party’s profligacy, that’s tantamount to calling for his replacement next year by a real adult. And based on all the posturing, theatrics, and budgetary trickery that resulted from such a minor figure in last week’s showdown, it appears we don’t have many adults in Washington.

There are a few exceptions, like Congressman Paul Ryan who is developing a long-term budget proposal that will actually reduce the deficit, pay down the federal debt, and increase the solvency of some of the core entitlement entities like Social Security. There is a little glimmer of hope for the nation since the House passed Ryan’s 2012 budget on Friday. If 1% cuts were “draconian” I can only guess the posturing they’ll pull on this one.

Considering the umbrage expressed by the left with George W. Bush’s $267 billion deficit, they should be outraged at Obama’s $1 trillion plus deficit. And Republicans, seemingly content with a 1% budget cut, obviously have no clue either. Our current spending trajectory is simply unsustainable, and portends serious consequences for the steadily declining value of the dollar, the viability of our debt instruments as investments, and our national security. Perhaps our only hope is if all those who voted for the budget resolution last week, and those who voted against it believing the cuts were too much, are replaced with people of common sense and a commitment to live within our means, like all of us real people have to.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, National Sovereignty, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

Bob Webster: Creation vs. Evolution, Chapter 10

April 18th, 2011 by Halli

This is the final chapter of Bob Webster’s manuscript, Creation vs. Evolution.

Chapter 9

CHAPTER 10 LDS CHRISTIAN SCIENTISTS TESTIFY

From THE CREATION, by Frank B. Salisbury, we glean the valuable information paraphrased here in Chapter 10.

P. 160 Only a small portion of the Geologic Time table exists at any one. location. All methods of age dating apply the principle of uniformitarianism.

P. 162 Sediments cannot be directly dated by the radioactive clock.

P. 175 No one in science has bothered to look for the evidence of cataclysms on a worldwide scale.

P. 180 – There is no way of demonstrating from the fossils alone that any one life form evolved into another.

P, 207 Darwin’s scheme of evolution depends completely upon some source of variety. Variety is the Achilles Heel of the entire evolutionary concept. Evolutionary theory requires mutations to provide variety: yet most mutations are either harmful or fatal.

P. 219 God hasn’t told the whole story, and science hasn’t collected all the data. The facts simply are not all in. Both sides require faith.

P. 221 The stratigraphic fossil record has always been evolution’s most attractive evidence.

P. 223 After 200 years of careful study, there is no fossil record of gradual evolution of phyla and divisions of living creatures! There are no intermediate stages! Complex forms appear suddenly in the record. The transitional forms simply are not there. No major group has obvious fossil predecessors!

P.225 – It is impossible to find rigorous p roof that any one fossil was the descendant of any other. The evolutionary sequences are merely implied!

P. 226 In many locations all over the earth, the cataclysmic origin of fossils is clearly indicated.

P. 227 There is no place on earth where all of the strata of the of the Geologic Time Table lie one on top of the other. The GTT was constructed on the pre-assumption that evolution occurred, and that organisms began simple and became increasingly more complex through time. This is merely self supporting “circular logic,” which is illogical and unscientific!

P. 228 – Numerous examples are known in which simple (supposedly older) life forms occur on top of more complex (younger) forms, with normal contacts between the sedimentary strata. This reality defies evolutionary theory. *** If even one strata or one fossil form is out sequence, then the entire evolutionary theory held by geologists is wrong! No compromise position is possible!

P. 231- Trinil Ape Man, alias Java Man (Pithicanthropuss erectus), is a proven hoax! Peking Man, once considered one of the strongest links in man’s alleged evolution, is even more tenuous than Java Man.

P. 233 THE STORY OF THE EVOLUTION OF MAN IS THE PRODUCT OF BASICALLY BAD SCIENCE!

P. 234 The scientific community has been totally convinced about an idea that has turned out wrong.

P. 235 The fossil record is the evolutionists’ strongest argument; yet it does not prove, nor even strongly support the theory of evolution.

P. 239 Scientific classification of living organisms, showing the complexity of their anatomy provides some of the strongest evidences against evolution. Evolution predicts a continuous sequence of organisms from the simplest to the most complex. But science shows that discontinuity is the over whelming rule in the geologic record.

P. 240- In natural selection, it is unlikely that a particular feature (such as the eye) would appear more than once during evolution. Yet many types of eyes exist in nature. The whole idea of evolution is completely disproven if evolution insists upon exact application of natural selection.

*** The reverence which men used to reserve for God is now bestowed upon assumed chance directed processes of nature, based on unprovable, atheistic assumptions.

P. 245 – In nature, homologous structures need not be controlled by identical or even related genes, and characters that are controlled by identical genes need not be homologous. These observations destroy the very foundation of the theory of evolution!

P. 247 – At one point, evolutionists proudly listed 180 “vestigial organs” which they claimed linked man with the “lower” forms of life. True science has shrunk that list to almost zero, as the true functions of these supposed “vestigial organs” are understood.

P. 251 – Molecular biology supports intelligent Creation.

P. 252 Minor creature adaptations are a far cry from producing new phyla, orders, families, and genera from some common ancestor. So called proof of evolution is in reality reduced to a few micro scale adaptations.

P. 253 It is enormously invalid to believe that the micro cases of adaptation prove the macro stale adaptations claimed.

P. 251 It is in the genes that evolutionary changes are alleged to originate. Yet, even the common genetic molecule called cytochrome C is too complex to be accounted for mathematically by the theory of evolution. Not even within the farthest limits of the conceivable expanses of Space is it mathematically possible!

P. 261- The evolutionist must rely on faith, much as the Creationist does. But evolutionary theory has no director. It is purely opportunistic and fortuitous.

P. 262 The evolutionary process faces impossible odds at each step, where the environment demanded the evolution of some new enzyme. Each time, the chances become vanishingly small. Consider all the coordinated body parts and intricate chemical react ions that would have to evolve separately, yet simultaneously.

P. 263 – Molecular biology has given us a deeper appreciation for the complexity and intricacy of life. Natural selection is inadequate to explain it. It is incapable of providing it. Variety would not appear often enough. Complexity is not accounted for by evolution’s purely mechanistic, chance directed, atheistic assumptions. Living cells must divide, multiply, and specialize at precisely the right times and places.

P. 265 Shakespeare was not written by letting monkeys randomly pound typewriters. Neither can
intricate enzymes be generated by chance All things testify of an intelligent and purposeful Creator.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

SCIENCE AND MORMONISM, by Melvin A. Cook and M. Garfield Cook is possibly the best LDS source of information on “LDS viewpoints.” The Cooks present, quote and compare the positions of all the “big names” among LDS scientists and theologians.

It becomes obvious that one can “prove” his own preferred position by quoting those LDS “big names” who favor that viewpoint. Just as in the rest of society, there are “big names” among LDS who favor literal Creation, others who favor evolution, and many in between. In other words, being LDS does not automatically mean you are anti evolution. Mormons appear to be just as diverse in their opinions on this subject as are members of any other religious group. But, Church Presidents have always supported Creation.

This reality makes it all the more important for the LDS individual to exercise his free agency and discover the truth for himself. As stated in the Foreword of this book, of all people on earth. members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints have the greatest advantage, and opportunity, to settle the science vs- religion controversy in their own minds. No other people have access to such a wealth of information on this subject as do the Latter day Saints.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The rough draft for this publication, CREATION-VS-EVOLUTION, was begun in 1975. In late 1999, as I was preparing it at last for printing, I saw a new book of articles by LDS authors with impressive credentials, both scientific and ecclesiastic. But I rejected it for detailed study after reading in the Introduction that the compiler felt that in the case of any conflict between science and religion, he would favor science. Soon after, I noticed another new book, EARTH IN THE BEGINNING, by Dr. Eric N. Skousen (ES). There are many, many books on this topic, each with its own interpretations and conclusions, of course, like mine. ES discredits organic evolution as the source of living organisms, yet identifies a possible way in which the ancient fossil records could be as old as claimed, yet not conflict with Creation and The Fall of Adam theology. ES’s book seriously challenged my paradigm. I am thankful to have found it before finishing my own effort. It is a valuable addition to this section.

EARTH IN THE BEGINNING, by Eric N. Skousen, PHD, 1997, Verity Publishing

ES agrees with the “true science” evidences already presented herein that mortal death began after The Fall of Adam, that radiogenic dating methods cannot give accurate dates of anything older than the Fall – about 6000 years ago, that Adam was the first man on earth and the first mortal “flesh,” and that the earth’s mortal/temporal existence is programmed to last only about 6000 years (6 God-days) until the 7th God-day, the Lord’s millennium, that catastrophism (not uniformity) is the main geologic force.

Where ES opens “eyes to see” is his detailed and systematic interpretations of the scriptural stages of Creation, supported at key points by LDS General Authority (GA) statements. His sequence, in brief is:
1. Organization of intelligence and matter by Gods.
2. Birth of living spirits (spirit creation), including the living earth, creatures and God’s own children – all near Kolob.
3. Three Creation Epochs:
1. Placing spirit lives on the spirit earth for experience (Moses 2) near Kolob.
2. Transplanting of physically-born lives onto the physically-born earth in a lengthy, preparatory period (Moses 3; Abra. 3-5) near Kolob.
3a. Sanctification of prepared earth (extinction/removal of all preparatory life) at the 6th-7th Day/Time.
3b. Transplanting modern, immortal, physical life forms onto the “prepared and sanctified” earth on the 7th Day/Time – near Kolob.
3c. Fall of Adam, and the fall of earth from Kolob into solar orbit; initiating mortality (7th Day/Time).

ES feels that earth strata containing “ancient fossils” are from the preparatory period (#3.2 above). In other words, ES says there was death and aging during the preparatory period before the Fall. Then, once earth was cleansed and sanctified of all preparatory life (by extinction or removal), the “modern” physical life forms for which God originally intended to occupy earth during mortality were transplanted here as immortal/Terrestrial beings, with no death until the Fall.
This is how ES accommodates the abundance of scientific evidences of ancient life forms found in earth’s rock record. None of these ancient, preparatory forms, however, are ancestors of the “modern” forms. In fact, all life forms are individual creations, incapable of replicating outside the orderly, genetic limits of their own kind. All were transplanted to earth from sources on other planets.

According to ES, EVOLUTION IS FALSE, because:
1. Science doesn’t support it; there is no geologic record of any ancestral origin or transition stages from ancient forms to modern forms, nor within any ancient or modern forms. No “missing link” or transition forms exist in the scientific, geologic evidence.

2. All life is created/born/organized by intelligent God-Creators. Development of life by accumulative accident is irrational, illogical and unscientific. All scientific evidence displays order, control and similarities.

3. Earth and the “inorganic” elements are all living intelligences. Earths, planets, stars, moons and all physical objects in all galaxies of space are NOT merely the result of accidental, natural forces of the universe. Intelligent and purposeful Gods control and use the natural laws to organize/create all matter, for the ultimate purpose of developing and perfecting Gods’ offspring into Gods, like their parents. It is a sophisticated, intelligent and stringent process.

4. ?”Time” is irrelevant and unmeasurable in the geologic evidence. ES’s Geologic Column (formerly called the Geologic Time Table) classifies rock strata from oldest to youngest, but does not assign any ages. Age dating anything older than the Fall (6000 years) is not scientifically possible with available technology, because of all the unknowns of the geologic process.

ES’s book expands one’s paradigm of Gods’ creation sequence, and also accommodates the known fossil evidence. Since the fossil record is obviously real, it must be explained somehow, and ES feels the answer is in the preparatory period described above. His interpretation also explains the doctrinal problem of “no death until after the Fall,” and reaffirms that modern life did not descend from those ancient forms. Those preparatory forms lived, and then either died out (extinction), or were removed before the earth was sanctified for modern forms, including Adam and Eve. Consequently, there were no “pre-Adam men,” only a rare few preparatory hominids.

1. In spite of ES’s careful discussion points, I still struggle with the seeming inconsistency in whether the physical earth of ES’s 2nd Creation Epoch was placed promptly into solar orbit after its birth, or kept near Kolob. ES says earth wasn’t put into solar orbit until after the Fall. My problem with this view is that our earth needed a day-night environment, and Kolob’s neighborhood is in the galactic center where there is constant light and no night. Our solar system, however, is an experienced “jig” designed to process probationary earths like ours, and has all of the day/night, warmth, tide-pull conditions necessary for the scheduled preparatory life period ES describes. I grant God the ability to make necessary adjustments in solar orbits to supply the slightly warmer and brighter conditions, which ES says were present during the preparatory period, and then to “fine tune” it again for the modern life period – first paradisiacal, and then mortal earth.

2. ES also discounts the concept of a rainbow-free thick vapor atmosphere prior to Noah’s Flood. It still seems plausible to me, as described elsewhere in this text, although I agree that the moisture-rich atmosphere was not the major source of the deluge waters. The lack of UV light screened out by a thick atmosphere could well explain the longevity question of Adam and his pre-diluvian posterity. Having a moisture-dense atmosphere does not imply that there was no sunlight or night/day conditions.

3. My third area of struggle is with ES’s view that the earth’s original, single land mass of “Pangaea” was “divided” by the Pacific Ocean, not the Atlantic Ocean. After such detailed documentation on other points in his text, this undocumented opinion shocks me. The subsequently “divided” Western Hemisphere obviously matches Europe and Africa on the Atlantic side. This is the least acceptable of all of ES’s points.

My major paradigm shock is accepting the preparatory period at all, with its death and decay, and “millions of years” dating. If time and decay were operational during a preparatory period, but irrelevant then, how can those ages from that period now be somehow “counted” by modern dating to be in the millions of years? Yet, ES’s quote (p.313) from LDS GA’s is stunning – that concepts of “no death before the Fall” is not an official doctrine of the Church ),J.E. Talmadge 4-7-1931.This is what opens the door of possibility for ES’s preparatory period scenario, to fill the geologic rock records as modern scientists now identify them.

In brief, ES’s position changes the doctrinal viewpoint from one of “No death before the Fall” to “No death during the Garden of Eden period, until after the Fall.” That is a significant difference. The rock record is there. It has to fit somehow, and ES’ view fills that awkward and disputed void.

If evolution’s detestable “millions of years” ages can now be tolerably explained and accepted as having occurred in a preparatory period, as ES proposes (before the Fall only), then those fossil ages don’t conflict with either the scriptural doctrine of “6000 years of earth’s mortal existence (since the Fall)” or the “No death until after the Fall” doctrine. By satisfying both of those two major conflicts, ES relieves most of the perpetual stress between science and religion, and at the same time maintains two other sacred positions –
1. That modern life (especially man) is NOT descended from any ancient forms (certainly not lower forms), and
2. That evolution theory is still verifiably as scientifically bankrupt and atheistic as religion has always claimed it is.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Bob Webster, Education, Family Matters, Guest Posts | No Comments »

Andi Elliott: How Do You Live With Yourself?

April 16th, 2011 by Halli

By Andi Elliott

I don’t understand the apathy of people. My parents taught us compassion and to help those who were unable to help themselves. Therefore it’s unfathomable that folks would watch as their neighbor’s animals suffer or starve and do absolutely nothing.

Three times in two months, I have been called out on animal cruelty cases in the Roberts area. All involved horses that had been allowed to near starve or actually did starve to death.

Imagine for a moment, the suffering that the animal has endured? Think of the constant hunger, the searching for any scrap of edible substance, and then in desperation it begins to eat its own feces or wood or anything else within their reach in a desperate attempt to live. As their body mass wastes away and never-ending hungering increases, the cold and wind takes its toll on what little life is left in the animal. No longer able to stand and with head hanging low, it falls to ground, knowing it will never rise. But the suffering continues. There it lies in the mud and its own feces while the remaining life ebbs out of their body…prolonging the agony until the bitter end.

Only lowlifes would allow a helpless creature to suffer and die such a horrible death. I question the character of the neighbors and passersby who have watched the excruciating suffering. How do you sleep at night? What example have you set for your children? How do you live with yourself? I wonder how.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Family Matters, Guest Posts, Politics in General | No Comments »

David Ripley: Governor Signs Fetal Pain Legislation

April 15th, 2011 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

This legislation would ban almost all abortions after 20 weeks’ gestation based upon a legislative finding that a preborn child is able to feel pain during an abortion. Testimony during the legislative session from several medical experts offered substantial scientific evidence that a preborn child has developed the neurological means to experience pain by at least the 20-week mark.
But, as we testified, the fact of prenatal suffering is hardly a revelation.

During the 1990s, the late Bernard Nathanson offered the world a chance to confront what “abortion” means by filming a live abortion of a late first-term child. It is, appropriately enough, entitled, “Silent Scream”.

Attacked by forceps and a scalpel, we can watch the baby writhe to get away, fighting for its life.

No human can see this video without having to confront the horrible suffering to which we are subjecting these tiny brothers and sisters. It rightly undermines our proud claim to being the most advanced civilization in history.

The primary virtue of SB1165 is its focus on the preborn child and his irrefutable status as a defenseless human being, too often the target of our cruel selfishness.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues | No Comments »

David Ripley: An Historic Legislative Session

April 14th, 2011 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

The recently concluded session of the Idaho Legislature was a learned picture of conservative principle in action.
Most importantly, the Legislature and Governor reaffirmed in several important ways their commitment to the proposition that government’s most vital mission is the protection of human life. We have, for example, a new law which makes it a felony to assist another in committing suicide. We believe that Idaho is the first state to add such a criminal provision in many years.

The Ban on Assisted Suicide is particularly important given the Death Lobby’s national movement to create a “right to die” under the misguided banner of “compassion”.

We have also taken steps to prevent the expansion of abortion coverage in Idaho through ObamaCare. If we are ever forced to accept a federally-run “insurance exchange” in Idaho, we can at least take some comfort from the fact that it will not cover elective abortions.

Speaking of ObamaCare, it is important to acknowledge the Legislature’s leadership in stopping the Idaho Department of Insurance from taking federal funds to build the infrastructure necessary to implement that federal power grab. Persistent work by folks like Vito Barbieri, Monty Pearce and Judy Boyle helped move legislation to the governor’s desk which prohibits other departments in state government from moving to implement ObamaCare.

And then there is the success we achieved this session in fixing the rules being used by the Department of Health & Welfare to pay for abortions under state Medicare rules. Hopefully those changes will help reduce teenage abortions in Idaho.

We are also encouraged by the Governor’s signature on the amendment to the state’s Conscience Protection Law. The amendment came about in part because of Governor Otter’s concern last year that the Conscience Law did not sufficiently protect patients facing the end of their lives. With his signature on the amendment, the law is now quite clear that doctors must abide by the provisions of the Living Will section of Idaho Code. That law seems to have worked pretty well since its creation in 1988. Hopefully, with this latest action, Idaho seniors will be reassured that their wishes are still protected by Idaho Law despite the rhetoric and manipulation of groups like AARP.

Conservatives will rightly applaud accomplishments like the balanced budget without tax increases and the passage of a law closing Idaho’s primary to those voters who identify with the Republican Party.

But it is the tremendous work done in rebuilding a Culture of Life which deserves the greatest applause.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Common Sense Returns with Idaho Wolf Emergency Legislation

April 14th, 2011 by Halli

by Richard Larsen

I’ve always thought it a blessing that I was raised on a farm and, from my youth, had inculcated into me fundamental principles of common sense. And not just on seemingly minor issues like not pushing a stuck pickup out from right behind the back tires, or even greater issues like not raising a sprinkler pipe near power lines. But with even larger issues that have ramifications in many facets of life, like, don’t tear down a fence until you know why it was put up.
The application of that last principle is pertinent to the discussion that has been going on in Boise this week regarding HB 343 giving the governor power to declare a state of emergency in counties adversely affected by the proliferation of Canadian Gray Wolves. The fundamental question to the whole issue should be “Why were wolves eradicated across Europe and North America in the 19th and 20th centuries?”

According to National Geographic, wolves are apex predators, which means they’re at the top of their food chain. Their primary diet consists of ungulates, or hoofed mammals, including horses, goats, pigs, sheep, moose, elk, deer and antelope. They also attack and kill other predators within their territory to diminish competition for their food source, including domesticated dogs. Since they typically travel in packs of 5-10 they can rip through a deer or elk herd with ferocious rapidity, and not even eat all that they kill. For wolves not only kill for food, they kill for sport and often take just enough of a bite out of an unsuspecting fawn to kill it and then quickly move on to the next kill.

As apex predators, the only real natural enemy of the wolf is man. And man, across several continents, collectively engaged in the eradication of the wolf because it was a menace and a threat not just to domesticated livestock and wildlife, but a threat to humans as well. Congress actually funded the process of eradication into the 20th century. This eradication, applying my farm lessons, was the fence erected for safety and security. That was common sense.

Then came the 1960s and 70s, and true to the recalcitrance, illogic, and dearth of common sense of the era, the fence started to be torn down. With the passage of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), later inclusion of the wolf as an endangered species, and subsequent decisions to introduce the Canadian Gray Wolf across select areas of the country, common sense was totally abandoned. They started tearing down the fence without knowing why it was constructed to begin with.

The ESA has had some great successes stabilizing and restoring populations of the bald eagle and the whooping crane and others. But to use it as justification for facilitating proliferation of an apex predator like the wolf is totally illogical, especially introducing them to an ecosystem where they weren’t even indigenous. The term “reintroduction” is a misnomer, since the Canadian Gray Wolf was not here before. Releasing a natural predator into our ecosystem is a little bit like introducing polio because it’s an endangered virus! After all, these are not cute little furry domesticable critters; they’re killers, a threat to us, our pets, our livestock, and our wildlife.

Wolves have decimated the hunting industry in Idaho. According to Idaho Fish and Game data released in 2002, the kill rate of wolves in Idaho ranges from 10.7 to 23.3 kills per wolf. That’s 11 to 23 elk and deer killed by each wolf per year. With a current estimated population of 94 packs and over 850 wolves, that’s 9,350 to 19,805 deer and elk killed every year by wolves. Elk population in the Lolo zone alone is down 57% since 2006 primarily due to wolf predation. And you wondered why you’re having such poor luck hunting recently!

All of this lends credence to the legislature’s passage of the Wolf Emergency bill this week. And for those who don’t think the process of nullification is valid, here’s another example to add to your list. This bill negates some federal mandates of the Endangered Species Act relative to wolf management and puts Idaho back in the driver’s seat protecting our wildlife, our livestock, and our citizens from wolf depredation and attacks. I just regret that our state legislators lacked the backbone to do the same thing with Obamacare. But Washington has much more financial leverage to exert over states when it comes to health care.

Just think of the millions of dollars and the livestock and wildlife that could’ve been saved if a little agrarian common sense would’ve been applied 40 years ago. We can’t undo the harm that’s been done, and the money that’s been wasted on an illogical “feel good” venture, but at least common sense seems to be prevailing again, and, applying the metaphor, getting back to why the “fence” was constructed to begin with.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Pocatello Issues | No Comments »

Rep. Tom Loertscher: House Highlights – A Look Back

April 11th, 2011 by Halli

By Rep. Tom Loertscher, R-Bone

I’ve been trying to come up with a way to describe the 2011 session of the legislature. I have decided to leave the discussion of how well we did to others, and I know you will be hearing plenty of negative comments and self praise from those directly involved. I’ll try to stay away from that.

It was the most difficult session of all the time I have observed there. To say that there was a lot that went on behind the scenes would be an understatement. It’s hard to describe the new process of legislating in Idaho. Part of that has come because of the culture change that has occurred because of the renovating of the capital. We used to run across each other quite frequently and now in order to talk to someone you have to search hard to find them. I don’t know whether that’s good or bad but I can tell you that it has changed the way we deal with each other and how we talk about the issues.

We passed a lot of legislation, some good and some not so good. The variety of topics is the largest I remember and those matters were more difficult to deal with than ever before. The numbers of people coming to the capital was remarkable. It seemed more like a pressure cooker at times than an honest discussion of the issues. It was a time of attempted political maneuvering coupled with parliamentary wrangling. The last two weeks of any session are tense but these last two weeks are sure to go down as a record for rancor. Most of the time we are able to overcome some of the problems in the place with a little bit of humor, in an effort to not take ourselves quite so seriously. During the final meeting in State Affairs the other day in an effort to lighten the mood a bit I made a comment that didn’t receive even a smile from anyone in attendance. Smiles were hard to come by at the end of this session.

You may ask, what took so much time? Here’s a short list of the things we talked about: Primary election law, video services act, horseracing, conscience law, fetal pain, concealed weapons, nullification of national health care, legislative legal services, wind moratorium, wind siting, just to name a few. And that’s just a partial list of the matters we dealt with in the State Affairs Committee in the House.

Then there was Health and Welfare with the most prominent topic there being Medicaid reworking and how services will be delivered in the future. Also in Health and Welfare a two-day discussion took place on medical marijuana. Then, there was education with a multitude of bills, the effect of which will not be known for quite some time. I don’t want to leave out all of the talk surrounding a potential cigarette tax increase, wind turbine sales tax rebate, or the taxing of Internet sales.

Now that it’s over my Duramax will get a little rest, with emphasis on little. Sitting on the house floor the last day of the session I composed this little ditty as a very brief synopsis of the session.

As Sessions Come, Sessions Go

We came to the capital with a flurry of snow
With hopes that debate would warm winter air.
Though the heat came about as the winds of time blow,
In spite of Spring coming the weather’s not fair.

So now the time comes for the process to end
And we get back to things of tractor, rake and a hoe.
The weather outside has not made much of a bend
And it looks like we’ll get home with a flurry of snow.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Education, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Politics in General, Rep. Tom Loertscher, Taxes | No Comments »

Bob Webster: Creation vs. Evolution, Chapter 9

April 11th, 2011 by Halli

By Bob Webster

Chapter 8

CHAPTER 9 CHRISTIAN SCIENTISTS TESTIFY

Whereas in Chapter 8, the author, Velikovsky, ascribes the cause of earth’s major cataclysms to passing planets changing earth’s axis, the authors of Chapter 9 focus on Noah’s Flood. From THE GENESIS FLOOD, by John C. Whitcomb Jr. and Henry M. Morris, scientific evidences are examined which seriously expose and challenge the foolishness of modern geologic illogic, namely the twin false theories of UNIFORMITY and ORGANIC EVOLUTION. Some of the more obvious evidences, particularly from Chapters V, VI and VII of their book are summarized in this chapter 9. Page numbers at the left margin of this chapter are approximate references to their pages in THE GENESIS FLOOD.

CHAPTER V of “THE GENESIS FLOOD”

p. 149 – The vast Columbia Plateau of America’s Northwest is covered by water-eroded canyons, hanging valleys, dry waterfalls, basins and bizarre geologic/geographic features which testify of a sudden, vast flood – the only type of force capable of creating these features.

p. 151 – The Grand Canyon is the geologist’s pride and joy, his showcase of uniformity, of supposedly gradual erosion processes. This semi-arid Colorado Plateau region covers 250,000 square miles in four states, displaying mostly horizontal sedimentary layers thousands of feet thick collectively. But its sediments are of marine (ocean) origin.

The entire region has been uplifted from far below sea level to more than a mile above sea level. This uplifting process took place in several stages, and is not unique. A similar plateau three times larger and formed in similar fashion exists in Tibet.

First, these marine sediments were deposited rapidly in a brief, continuous period of time. Then came the great regional uplift, fracturing the crust deeply. The erosion which formed the Grand Canyon spectacle we see today occurred while the sediment layers were still relatively soft, and under the influence of much greater volumes of water than present today. While the entire region was still near sea level, it developed a typically flat-land stream meander pattern, in which the rivers eroded laterally into those soft sediments. The sudden regional uplift caused rapid down cutting, but it still followed the previously established flat-land meander patterns.

p. 161 – In the famous Bone Bed of Agate Springs, Nebraska are found thousands of fossil animals, buried and solidified in a horizontal, water-deposited layer for a large distance in a limestone hill. Within this layer are fossils of rhinoceros, camel, giant bear and numerous exotic animals, all suddenly packed together in a scene of mass chaos.

P. 166-167 – Remarkably clear tracks of three-toed dinosaurs are found in the Cretaceous rock surface in Texas, only inches away from equally clear foot prints of a giant human. Tracks made in soft mud, as these obviously were, usually disintegrate rapidly. How and why did these side-by-side dinosaur and human footprints become preserved as solid rock immediately after they were made in the mud of the Paluxy River Bed near Glen Rose, Texas? Only a sudden and catastrophic drying action could do it. What answers do evolutionary geologists have? (Maybe Alley Oop was real after all) [See Figures 11 A – B]

The evolutionists’ theory that such dinosaurs became extinct some 70 billion years before man evolved is here shown to be absurd and grossly false! Both dinosaurs and men were co-habitants in Texas in recent historical times. The human footprints are 15 inches long (Genesis 6:4). Similar giant footprints of men have been found in Arizona, near Mt. Whitney California, near the White Sands in New Mexico and in other locations. Did you ever hear of this in science classes? Look at the pictures in The Genesis Flood.

In 1842, a human skull was found within a Tertiary-age coal bed in Saxony, Germany. This skull is on display in the coal collection in the Mining Academy in Freiburg. The coal bed is supposedly millions of years older than man. In other words, real fossils of man, geology’s most recent creature, are found imbedded within the supposedly ancient pre-historic geologic coal deposits. How?

p. 176-177 – Lizard-like Beakhead reptiles supposedly went extinct 135 million years ago, by the geologists’ Geologic Time Table. Their fossils are found in Cretaceous and older rocks, but none in younger rocks. Yet, the Tuatara Beakhead lizards still live in New Zealand today, and nowhere else. This sole survivor of its species exists despite purported millions of years of adversity during which it went extinct. Why would survival-of-the-fittest forces destroy all other Beakheads in the world and permit this one to perpetuate itself on one island? Despite the persistence of living Beakheads, not one Beakhead fossil has been found in any rocks younger than Cretaceous. Furthermore, the Beakhead fossils in “100 million year old” Jurassic deposits of Europe are identical to the living Beakheads in New Zealand. How can this be explained? It must be explained; it cannot be ignored. This reality exists.

p. 178 – A living specimen of the extinct coelacanth fish, whose fossils are abundant in the Paleozoic and Mesozoic (500 to 370 million years) strata, was photographed by the London Times in 1939. That same year, other primitive crustaceans were found in New Zealand beach sands. Geologists, please explain.

Mollusks, which supposedly went extinct 280 million years ago, were dug up alive in the 1950’s from ocean floor mud 11,700 feet deep off Central America’s Acapulco Trench. Why haven’t Mollusk fossils so common in Paleozoic strata been found in more recent Mesozoic or Tertiary marine strata?

In 1953, a primitive crustacean was dredged from shallow mud in Long Island Sound. Its closed relative, Lepidocaris, lived in Middle Devonian time, 300 million years ago, geologists claim.

p. 179 – Fossil remains of the tree Metasequoia are widely distributed over Northern Hemisphere rocks, and dated by geologists from 60 to 300 million years ago. They say those trees went extinct 20 million years ago, with no fossils known in rocks younger than Miocene. Yet an entire stand of Metasequoia trees lived in China in 1948, which was studied by a paleobotanist from the University of California. Were you told this in school?

p. 180-193 – Rock strata are dated by geologists according to the fossils they contain, based on the Geologic Time Table. How do they explain why and how enormous land areas covering hundreds of thousands of square miles contain older strata on top of younger strata? It must be explained, not ignored!

Near Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, a 30 mile by 60-mile block of Paleozoic rock lies horizontally and conformably on top of rock beds supposedly 250 million years younger. There is no evidence of faulting or thrusting disturbance at the contact line between the strata, and no apparent sources for this older block. The “older” layers appear to have been deposited normally upon the “younger” strata. How does evolutionary geology explain this impossible contradiction identified by honest geologists?

Larger examples of similarly reverse-aged beds are found in Glacier National Park, in Canada, France and Switzerland. Geologists simply ignore such obvious scientific observations – which show no
evidence of grinding, sliding, shearing or fracturing forces at the contact line between these reverse-aged strata! The upper layers were obviously deposited upon the lower.

p. 200 – The theory of UNIFORMITY is utterly inadequate to explain the earth’s most significant geologic features. Neither the character nor the rates of the earth’s geologic forces of erosion, glaciation, deposition and volcanism have continued uniformly and unchanged over the ages. Yet, UNIFORMITY remains as the BASIC GEOLOGIC PRINCIPLE, despite worldwide evidences of repeated catastrophism.

CHAPTER VI of THE GENESIS FLOOD

THE FIRST TWO LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS

p. 222 – The first and Second Laws of Thermodynamics operate upon two master concepts: ENERGY and ENTROPY. These two natural laws describe the behavior of matter, both when it is in a state of equilibrium and when it changes from one state of equilibrium to another. All physical, chemical, biological and geological processes operate according to these FIRST TWO LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS. Matter itself is a form of energy.

THE FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS – ENERGY.
This law of energy conservation affirms that, although energy can be converted from one form to another, the total amount of energy remains unchanged. Energy is neither created not destroyed; IT EXISTS!

THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS – ENTROPY
Although the total amount of energy remains unchanged, at each energy conversion to another form, less energy remains available for useful work, because some energy is released in the conversion. This loss of available energy is called ENTROPY. Friction and heat are two common examples of ENTROPY.

Point #1. During Creation, matter and energy were organized into higher and more complex systems. That’s what Creation is – organization into higher forms, not degenerating into lower conditions.

Point #2. During the Garden of Eden time, and before the Fall of Adam, all created things, living and non-living, existed in a suspended state of endless constancy, with neither any more creation, nor deterioration.

Point #3. But after the Fall of Adam, the earth and all other created things associated with it, living and non-living, began a steady degeneration or decay (ENTROPY) toward a less organized state. This ENTROPY, including aging, death, decay and radioactive half-life, did not begin until after the Fall of Adam.

Earth today is still degenerating under the SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS toward a less organized state o disorder, disorganization and disarrangement. This physical law verifies that the Fall of Adam brought death into existence on earth for the first time! Since then, all things wear out, lose energy (ENTROPY) and eventually die and decay to a lower state.

The contrast between Creation and Evolution should now appear more obvious than ever.
First, the theory of Uniformity assumes that all physical and biological processes on earth have always proceeded at today’s same slow rate. This is, of course, exactly the opposite of the Creation story, in which organizational events happened suddenly, by external sources of power (God’s will).
Second, the other twin theory, Evolution, claims that biological processes on earth changed from lower forms to higher forms over enormous lengths of time, resulting in forms of greater organization, complexity and selective ability to survive into positions of dominance.

BOTH THEORIES DEFY THE LAWS OF NATURE (THE FIRST TWO LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS). BOTH OF THE TWIN THEORIES (Uniformity and Evolution) ARE PROVEN FALSE BY THE FIRST TWO LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS!

p.224 – Geology may observe and classify the strata of the earth’s crust as it exists today, but it is powerless to reconstruct or identify the order of events during this earth’s origin. WHY? BECAUSE THOSE CREATION PROCESSES AND CONDITIONS NO LONGER OPERATE. The earth is now under an entirely different set of conditions – mortality. Creation dynamics are passed. Creation is no longer taking place. Today we and everything associated with this earth are all subject to the SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS. This law rules as ruthlessly as time; it cannot be changed, stopped or denied by any person or force on earth, only by the Creator. ENTROPY REIGNS today and every day since the Fall of Adam, until the Creator, Jesus Christ, intervenes once again, to move the earth and man closer toward the final eternal destiny that was originally pre-planned before the earth was ever formed. The next major divine intervention will introduce the prophesied Seventh Day of earth’s mortal existence, the MILLENNIUM.

p. 226 – It is as impossible to convert a land vertebrate into a fish as it is to turn a fish into a land vertebrate. No amount of time will make it happen! The evidences of so-called micro-evolution within given species are not only irrelevant, but are actually denials of the very theory of evolution which claims them as proof! Any true evolution would show creative changes toward higher states of organization, greater complexity and order. But the mutations which evolutionists claim to be the very vehicle of evolutionary progress are deteriorations from a higher state to a lower state! MUTATIONS ARE DESTRUCTIVE, NOT CREATIVE! THEY CAUSE LOWER, DEFECTIVE FORMS, NOT HIGHER! Mutations verify ENTROPY. They render organisms LESS able to survive and reproduce, not more able.

Evolution has been merely ASSUMED to be true, despite absence of scientific evidence to support it, and in direct contradiction to known laws of nature. Making truth out of this enormous lie is one of the greatest paradoxes in all history or science. Remember, when you ASS-U-ME, you make an ASS out of U and ME. How Satan, the father of lies, must laugh at the children of God.

When men deny God as Creator, and deny His word as truth, they automatically declare God as false (a liar) and set themselves up as His replacement, self-declared gods. That’s Satan’s mentality!

CHAPTER VII OF THE GENESIS FLOOD – CARBON DATING

p. 331 – First, there are problems in the accuracy of dating procedures:
1. Accuracy in measurement procedures is seldom duplicatable, hence, scientifically unreliable.
2. Alteration and contamination of the samples to be measured, both in nature and during human collection and handling of samples, affects scientific accuracy adversely.
Second, the whole problem of dating revolves about the BASIC ASSUMPTIONS implicit in all radioactivity methods of age measurement:
1. The assumption that the rate of radiogenic decay has always been the same as at present (Uniformity theory).
2. The assumption that all of the radiogenic isotopes being sampled and dated has been derived from a parent isotope by the process of uniform radioactive decay.

Both of these assumptions are essential to obtain meaningful scientific age calculations. Yet, they both defy scriptural; accounts of a divine Creation and the catastrophic and universal flood of Noah.

p. 334-340 LEAD AND URANIUM
From the discovery of uranium and lead Isotopes in the 1930’s, serious errors in both analysis and dating were common. THE PUBLISHED GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE WAS BASED ON DISCORDANT AGES.
Nature provided pure original lead, as well as Uranium and Thorium, which decay through various isotope stages to become lead. Natural ‘weathering (dissolving by ‘weak natural acids, leaching away, escape of gaseous by products, etc.) makes it difficult to identify or obtain samples that are uncontaminated, and which are of known composition enough to provide reliable samples for measurements. Uranium and Thorium are more common in igneous rocks, and are rare in the fossiliferous sedimentary formations which are used for age dating.

p. 341 RUBIDIUM AND POTASSIUM
Sedimentary fossiliferous rocks more commonly contain the alkali metals Rubidium and Potassium, especially Potassium.. The decay rate of Rubidium into strontium is not known precisely, making it questionable for age dating.
Potassium decays by two routes into Calcium and Argon gas. Again, uncertain decay rates and loss of the Argon gas make age dating unreliable.

CONCLUSION ON RADIOACTlVE DATING

AGE DATING BY RADIOACTIVE MEASUREMENTS ARE NOT AT ALL PRECISE, contrary to common publicity. ERRORS, BOTH IN MAN?S EXPERIMENTAL PROCESSES AS WELL AS HIS BASIC ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT THE TRUE PHYSICAL PROCESSES (e.g. uniformity theory), RESULT IN UNRELIABLE CALCULATIONS!

P. 344 Creation concepts also require some basic assumptions
1. There ‘was an intelligent, purposeful creation by a creator.
2. All elements were created simultaneously, including all stages of the
radioactive chain, from unstable parent isotope to final stable element,
such as from Uranium to Lead.
3. The entire universe was created as a functioning system.
4. ‘Decay rates did not begin until the Fall of Adam. At that point, decay
and aging began.
5. Some decay rates can be altered slightly by heat, pressure, and chemical
change.

P. 347 DlFFERENT TYPES OF DECAY

1. Alpha Decay Helium 4 nuclei emitted from Uranium and Thorium nuclei.
2. Sets Decay Beta electrons emitted from nuclei of Rubidium and Potassium.
3. X Rays Potassium 40 to Argon 40.
4. Fission Nucleus splits.

It is not known WHY these reactions occur in nature.

P. 350 Cosmic radiation can and does penetrate atoms to cause changes and decays to occur, both in the atmosphere and in the earth” crust.

P. 352 Earth’s atmosphere has not always been the same. During creation, and after the Flood, a less dense thermal vapor layer would allow a much greater amount of cosmic radiation to reach the earth, and thus increase radioactive decay rates. The external sources of cosmic radiation may also fluctuate. Cosmic rays have been detected to penetrate 400 meters below the earth’s surface in modern times.

P. 353 Van Allen radiation belts around the earth provide a significant source of external radiation, which could influence radioactive decay rates on earth.

P.355 Neither the original ?creation? amount of radiogenic material, nor the decay rates can be determined. COMPUTATIONS BASED ON UNIFORMITARIAN ASSUMPTIONS YIELD AGE ESTIMATES THAT ARE ABSURDLY TOO OLD.

FOUR DATING METHODS

I. Ratio of Lead 206 to Uranium 238.
2. Ratio of Lead 207 to Uranium 235.
S. Ratio of Lead 206 to Lead 207.
4. Ratio of Helium to Uranium.

NO AGE ESTIMATE IS SCIENTIFICALLY COMPETENT UNLESS AT LEAST TWO OF THE FIRST THREE YIELD THE SAME RESULT, AND CAN BE DUPLICATED BY INDEPENDENT EXAMINERS!

YET, DISAGREEMENT AND DISCREPANCIES ARE COMMON.

P. 356 It Is not possible for any human experimenter to study or duplicate the Creation process. Creation is scientifically unverifiable. Likewise, the theory of Uniformity is equally unverifiable scientifically.

P.357 THE TWO GREAT UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES or THERMODYNAMICS – ENERGY CONSERVATION AND DETERIORATION TESTIFY CF THE SCIENTIFIC NECESSITY OF
ORIGINAL CREATION. The true facts of Creation can only be verified by divine revelation, not science.

P. 259 ANY RADIOACTIVE AGE CALCULATION WILL BE INCORRECT, BECAUSE IT IS BASED UPON FALSE ASSUMPTIONS AND UNKNOWN FACTORS. Neither the initial amount of an element nor the rate of decay are known accurately. RADIOACTIVE AGE ESTIMATES CANNOT LEGITIMATELY BE USED AS PROOF OF THE AGE OF ANY PART OF THE EARTH!

THE GEOLOGIC TIME TABLE

p. 362 – Arthur Holmes, one of the originators of the Geologic Time Table, or Time Scale, stated in 1931 that, “… we have to steer a difficult course through a maze of data of very variable quality, guided in some places by atomic weight evidence, in others by series of accordant ratios, but in far too many by a subjective weighing of probabilities … only a few points can be fixed with precision Into the geologic column, and the total assemblage of data is too confused to permit detailed accuracy …”

But despite Holmes’ open admission of questionable scientific data to support The Geologic Time Table, he still justifies it with this amazingly unscientific conclusion, stating, “… it is remarkable how consistently the most probable ratio for each of the various suites falls into its proper place and order as judged by geologic age.”

In other words, a so called scientist chooses to accept highly questionable data, just because it can be imagined to fit into his pre-conceived idea of a Geologic Time Scale, and furthermore he will reject good data which appears to conflict with that Time Scale.

P. 363 – Adolph Knopf, editor of the 1957 National Research Council symposium on geochronology added, “?Not a single one of them eras, periods, and ages, let alone zones has yet been reliably determined.” Knopf stated that the accepted Geologic Time Table is based on only three dates:

1. 60 million years the age of pitchblende at Central City, Colorado.
2. 220 million years the age of pitchblende at St. Joachimstal, Bohemia.
3. 440 million years age of the uranium bearing shale at Gullhagen, Sweeden.

“ ALL OTHER ABSOLUTE AGES HAVE BEEN DERIVED FROM THESE THREE RADIOACTIVE TIE POINTS BY INTERPOLATION BASED ON THICKNESS OF STRATA OR BY REASONED GUESSES.”

That’s science?

P. 363 – Genetics can show only micro-mutations within species as “proof” of historical evolution. No true mutations exist as evidence. The position of geology is equally void of evidence. Geology can point only to rock layers which have been age-dated based on false assumptions and philosophies of men, despite great contradictions in data and evidence.

As stated earlier, the Geologic Time Table is based on three dates derived from “reasoned guesses” of relative thickness of strata. OF THOSE THREE BASELINE DATES, ONLY ONE WAS DERIVED FROM RADIOACTIVE DATING (in 1939), AND THAT DATING HAD A 100% VARIATION OF ERROR!!

In 1936, the sedimentation authority, Twenhofel, said that estimates of time based on thickness of strata “are hardly worth the paper they are written on.”

P. 365 – In 1958, Teichert wrote in the Bulletin of the Geological Society of America that radioactive datings were mostly derived from igneous rocks and cannot be applied to sedimentary fossiliferous strata. He concluded, “At present, no coherent picture of the earth could be built on the basis of radioactive datings.”

P. 368 ASTRONOMIC AGE DATING

Other age-dating methods are based on even flimsier evidence and assumptions than are the erroneous radioactivity methods, We know nothing about the age of the universe or its origin. All is theory. Our earth’s calculations of the speed of light may be incorrect out in Space.

CARBON DATING

P. 370 The most accepted “scientific” method of dating the age of fossils is the Carbon 14 method. This method professes to supply absolute dates for events the past 30,000 to 40,000 years. Carbon 14 dating was developed in 1946 by W. F. Libby. Earlier, Mr. Serge Korff was first to discover the natural process of the formation of Carbon 14. Carbon 14 is created when cosmic ray neutrons from outer space radiation are captured by nitrogen nuclei to form the radioactive isotope of carbon, with a mass of 14. This isotope has a half life of 5,500 years, meaning that it decays by one half in 5,500 years.

This Carbon 14 in the earth’s atmosphere becomes attached to oxygen to form carbon dioxide. It is then incorporated into water bodies and the physical bodies of plants and animals. Theoretically, the percentage of radiocarbon 14 which can be identified among the NORMAL carbon atoms within a living organism can be measured, to establish a date at which It stopped living and stopped taking in Carbon 14

P. 371 But, just as with other age dating methods, there are some basic assumptions required in order for Carbon 14 dating to be accurate. IT MUST BE ASSUMED THAT:

1. The concentration of Carbon 14 in the atmospheric carbon dioxide is always constant.
2. The amount of cosmic radiation entering the atmosphere has always been constant.
3. The Carbon 14 rate of decay is now and always has been constant.
4. Dead organic matter is not and never has been altered by chemical, biological or other activity.
5. The concentration of carbon dioxide in both the atmosphere and the oceans is now and always has been constant.
6. The size and quantity of ocean water on earth is now and always has been constant.
7. Both the rate of formation and the rate of decay of Carbon 14 have always been the same, and in constant equilibrium.

Every one of these assumptions is highly questionable! And all of these assumptions are rooted in the theory of uniformity. They defy both the divine Creation and the great deluge of Noah.

P. 372 Even Dr. Libby, the inventor of the Carbon 14 dating system stated, “The first shock Dr. Arnold and I had was that our advisors informed us that history extended back only 5,000 years. We had thought initially that we would be able to get samples all along the curve back to 30,000 years… We learned rather abruptly that these numbers, these ancient ages, are not known; in fact It is at about the time of the first dynasty in Egypt that the last historical date of any real certainty has been established (by Carbon 14)” (W. F. Libby “Radiocarbon dating,”American Scientist, Vol. 44, Jan. 1956, p. 107.)

In other words, the only events for which Carbon 14 dating is even possibly valid are those of known historical dates since Noah’s Flood. Those seven major assumption. listed above could potentially be valid only for post diluvial dates. FOR ALL EARLIER DATES, THE BASIC ASSUMPTIONS ARE INVALID, AND THE DATES DERIVED BY THE CARBON 14 METHOD ARE LIKELY WRONG!

P. 372 In 1955, the President of the American Geologic Institute cautioned that ,”In order for a technique or discipline to be useful in scientific work, its limits must be known and understood, but the limits of usefulness of the Radiocarbon age determinations are not yet known or understood. No one seriously proposes that all the determined dates are without error . . . and we do not know which dates are in error or by what amounts, or why.” (Charles B. Hunt: “Radiocarbon Dating in the light of Stratigraphy and Weathering Processes,” Scientific Monthly, Vol. 81, Nov. 1955, p. 240).

Samples can be contaminated in warm, damp locations. Was the radiocarbon in the sample original, secondary, intrusive, or altered in ways other than natural decay?

Local Variation, especially in shells, can be highly significant. The problem of biological alteration of materials in the soil becomes more serious with greater age. For example: dating a supposedly 10,000-year-old specimen can have a 50% error in age due to a 25% replacement of the carbon atoms. It only takes a 5% error in age to give a 50% error in a 40,000 year-old specimen dating. A mere 1% carbon replacement can cause a dating error of 5,000 years!

P. 373 – When comparing carbon dating with samples of known age, it has been found that the
activity of radiocarbon in the atmosphere has been fluctuating since even before the industrial revolution’s production of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels.

P. 375 Prior to the Flood, the earth’s atmosphere was more universally warm and moist a global semitropic climate which provided greater vegetational coverage, due to the thermal-vapor canopy of the atmosphere. These factors caused the amount (or ratio of radiocarbon to ordinary carbon) to be much less than today.

With a dense atmosphere, more of the cosmic neutrons reacted with Deuterium (heavy hydrogen) to form Tritium, which in turn readily decays to 3He (an Isotope .of helium). This accounts for the present heavy concentration of 3He, a concentration which could not have happened under earth’s present circumstances.

Earth’s present 3He concentration demonstrates that either the earth had a more dense thermal vapor in the past, and/or it has been bombarded with more intense radiation at some time prior to our modern times. Only creation and/or catastrophism can explain our atmospheric 3He. The theory of uniformity cannot.

P. 376 – The amount of Carbon 14 was less before the Flood. Consequently, pre diluvian fossils would have little or no radioactivity, even though only a few thousand years old. This means that ALL RADIOCARBON DATES FOR EVENTS SINCE THE ICE AGE ARE OF QUESTIONABLE ACCURACY.

The plants and animals living shortly after the flood would contain much less radiocarbon
than those living under modern rates of radiocarbon formation and equilibrium. By falsely assuming that the rate has always been the same over the ages (uniformity), the carbon dating of Flood age fossils would appear erroneously to give much older ages than they really were. Similarly, all pre diluvial fossils would appear to be dated too old, all because of the false assumptions of uniformity.

A truly scientific approach, rather than using false assumptions, confirms the Biblical account of a recent Creation and universal flood.

P. 379 METEORIC DUST
According to uniformity, if the earth was 5 billion years old, the entire earth should be 54feet thick In meteoric dust today assuming that 14.3 million tons of meteoric dust settles from the atmosphere uniformly each year, continually. Such dust heavy with nickel, iron, cobalt and other metals, does not exist on earth.
The fallacy of trying to age date meteorites is equally obvious. For example, by merely changing the method of calculation from helium to potassium-argon, the calculated ages of meteorites changes drastically from 60 million to 4,600 million years. Different methods, if valid, should yield the same age. The meteorites don’t change age while sitting on the scientists’ table waiting to be age dated.

p. 381 TEKTITES

Glassy rneteorites (tektites) have been dated younger than the. rock strata in which they were found. Tektites in Checkoslovakia are found in Miocene strata, in Texas – in Eocene strata, in Australia Recent strata. No Tektites are older than Tertiary strata, however. If Uniformity was true, Tektites would be found uniformly throughout all ages consistently.

P. 384 HELIUM

There is not enough radioactive helium in the earth’s atmosphere to account for the supposed millions of years age of the earth claimed by the uniformity evolution theory.
Neither has the earth’s upper atmosphere been heated up to between 1800 to 2300 degrees Celsius necessary to cause excess helium to escape earth’s atmosphere, to end up with the small amount of helium content found today.

If uniformity was true, either the atmosphere would be loaded with helium after all those millions of years, or earth’s air would have to have been “cooked” to expel it as a gas, down to present concentrations.

P. 385 – SEA SALT

Assuming that the ocean originally had no salt (a false assumption), all of its salt would have to have come from land erosion (also false), and that earth’s erosion rate has always been the same as today (uniformity again), then the maximum age calculation for earth is 50 million years. But this approach conflicts with actual earth evidences that salt water ocean basins existed in pre Cambrian times (supposedly 500 million to 1.8 billion years).

In 1955, salt water ocean fish sharks and sawfish were found and described living in a fresh water mountain lake 20 miles inland and 200 feet above sea level in Dutch New Guinea. Fish can evidently adapt more easily to a less-salty water than to a saltier fish habitat. But how did they get there?

P. 387 – VOLCANIC WATER

The 1943-52 Mexican Volcano, Paricutin, issued vast amounts of ?fresh volcanic water, which is water created for the first time from primary constituents. In Noah’s Flood, the Bible says the “fountains of the great deep” contributed water to the Flood.

P. 390 – VOLCANIC ROCK

Volcanic rock and soils constitute a small part of the earth’s crust of rock and soil. If the earth’s crust developed as uniformity claims, by consistent rates of volcanism and erosion, no reasonably scientific calculation could yield an age as old as 4 to 5 billion years. Such an age assumes only four active volcanoes like Paricutin (.8 cubic kilometers of ash per year). More realistic assumptions of only volcanic activity easily reduce the age estimate to to 20 million years.

THE ONLY CERTAIN BASIS OF PREHISTORIC CHRONOLOGY MUST COME BY WAY OF DIVINE REVELATION. Bible dating puts the Flood at 2350 B. C. (about 4350 years ago, 1650 after the Fall of Adam began the counting of mortal time on this earth)
9 – 12

.CHRISTIAN SCIENTISTS TESTIFY

P. 392 SEQUOIA GIGANTEA

The giant Sequoia trees and ancient Bristlecone Pines of California and Washington live in their original locations, No known plant is older than these 4600 years. Why aren’t there any older parent trees, or older snags of parents, or any younger offspring generations succeeding this one single generation of unusually ancient plants? Uniformity, please answer!

P. 393 CIVILIZATIONS

Things are dated only by men. Their real ages exist, but men must discover them. No verifiable archaeological datings are known older than about 3000 B. C. The most ancient record keeping people known lived in the agricultural centers of civilization around the Tigris-Euphrates Rivers, the Nile River, and other Near East sites. This corresponds with the Biblical records of the post diluvial spread from
Noah’s Ark. Why won’t science accept this obvious evidence? Swiss, Danish, and Chinese cultures began about 2700 to 2200 B.C. as people migrated out from the region near the Ark (The Tower of Babel was about 2200 B.C.).

P. 395-6 – POPULATION STATISTICS

Linguists likewise confirm that languages trace to a common center of origin in central Europe, from which they radiated: Semitic (from Noah’s son Shem) in Asia; Hamitic (Ham) in Africa; and Japhetic (Japeth) in Europe. Ever hear of the Tower of Babel? It happened soon after the Flood.

P. 397-8 – POPULATION STATISTICS

Some 160 years before Darwin, Malthus stated that the animals and man increased in population at geometrical rates. If this was strictly true as a scientific principle, then a man evolving onto the scene and finding a mate 30,000 years ago would have by now created a population belly to belly over every inch of the dry earth. Such unscientific speculation is the root of modern population explosion hysteria.

There were about 300 million people at Christ’s time. Some 700 years later there were still 300 million. In 1650 1200 million, and in 1950 2.4 billion. From that growth curve it is reasonable to interpolate back to Noah’s family of eight at about 3300 B. C., just as the Bible states.

The Bible reports longer life spans (900+ years) before. the Flood, and rapidly declining ages after the Flood (80 today). Earth’s heavy atmosphere prior to the Flood contributed to long life by protecting living things from direct, harmful short-wave radiation from outer space. Radiation retards growth and shortens life. The new rainbow effect testified to Noah of the first clear skies after the Flood period, exposing earth to direct solar and cosmic radiation, and shortening life.

P. 401-3 MUTATIONS

Mutations are harmful alterations of normal organisms, and mutants are less able to survive. Radiation is the chief cause of mutations. Mutations are permanent hereditary changes in the genetic structure of the reproductive cells.

Can creatures like man be altered into new life forms? And can radiation be a cause of species mutation? The pioneer in genetic mutation, Dr. H.J. Muller, stated In 1950, “Radiation is in fact the only type of agent yet known to which human beings are likely to be exposed in quantity sufficient to cause any
considerable production of mutations in them.”

But laboratory evidence shows that radiation caused mutations are always harmful! RADIATION EITHER KILLS OR IMPAIRS. A mutation is a random change of an already highly-organized and smoothly-functioning living body.

MUTATIONS MAKE THE BODY LESS FIT TO SURVIVE. SUCH MUTANTS DIE OUT, DUE TO LESS ABILITY TO SURVIVE. SEVERE MUTATIONS CAUSE EARLY DEATH OR STERILITY, CAUSING THE MUTANT GENE TO BE ELIMINATED FROM THE NORMAL POPULATION. THE NET RESULT OF ACCUMULATIVE RANDOM MUTATIONS INBRED INTO A POPULATION IS DETERIORATION OF THE SPECIES. THAT IS TRUE NATURAL SELECTION. MUTATIONS CANNOT CREATE NEW SPECIES! THEY ARE EVEN LESS ABLE TO SURVIVE.

Anybody who ever raised chickens can tell you the fate of any odd or defective members of the population. The normal, healthy ones peck and chase the defective individuals until they die. That’s natural selection!

True scientists warn of the danger of fatal and damaging nuclear radiation as a serious threat to living organisms. But the evolutionist theorizes that the same radiation is the source of all improvements in the earth’s genetic evolution, not only of man, but of all living things. Do you sense a problem of credibility
between the two? Which position is based on evidence, and which is theory?

P. 406 SEDIMENTATION

The present rate of sedimentation varies so widely that it is impossible to determine an average rate of sedimentation for modern times, and more impossible to do so for past times. Yet uniformity ass-u-mes sedimentation rates have always been constant.

P. 409 RIPPLE MARKS

Well-defined ripple marks have been found at 600 foot depths on the Pacific Ocean floor. Likewise deep sea deposits of fresh water diatoms are found far off the African equatorial roast on the Atlantic floor. Some ocean floors were once above sea level, and have been sunk several miles beneath. Does that hint of uniformity or catastrophism?

P. 412 – SALT DOMES

Uniformity cannot account for huge subterranean domes of salt found in places around the world. Catastrophic volcanic activity is more likely the cause.

P. 418 BURIED FORRESTS

Amethyst Mountain in Northwest Yellowstone Park shows 18 successive petrified forests layered in a 2000-foot vertical section of uplifted mountain rock. Each forest is buried in a lava flow. But these forests were not grown in place and then buried. The forests are primarily stumps that were violently sheared off, uprooted, and mass transported in repeat wave cycles of water. They represent cyclical oscillations of water transported tree parts, buried in intermittent volcanic ash or lava. Amethyst Mountain is solid geologic evidence of geologic catastrophism.
The trees are only stumps; there are no limbs, fossil foliage, or root systems. Uniformity, explain that!

P.432 Oil has been called ‘black gold” because of the wealth it can bring in modern times. Where can it be found? How did it get there? Do geologists know?

Oil has been found in rocks of practically all geologic ages prior to Pleistocene, and it cannot be easily located by geologic stratigraphic criteria. Oil is found in pre Flood deposits. All oil deposits are associated with water influence and are organic in origin. Crude oil originates with compaction of sediments. Vast organic remains were dissolved and changed into petroleum hydrocarbons.

P. 436 – There is no reason to think that these processes may have required long ages. Even under modern conditions, petroleum hydrocarbons can be formed rather quickly, as shown in recent sediments from the Gulf of Mexico. Likewise, geologically-formed “oil traps” have been created during post deluge Pleistocene times, as demonstrated in California’s Ketterman Hills.

Petroleum geology has developed independently of historical geology. The theories of uniformity and evolution are irrelevant to the actual practice of petroleum discovery, However, the practice of petroleum discovery harmonizes well with the Deluge history.

P. 437 ORES

Commercial ores of all kinds can be found in rocks of all geologic strata, and are usually associated with igneous intrusions. Again, uniformitarian historical geology is of no more value to locate ores than
it is to locate oil.

Ore formation occurs independent of geologic strata. It seems most closely associated with catastrophic volcanism in the upper four miles of the earth’s crust. Such catastrophic volcanism was common both in the original Creation of the earth, in the Deluge period and at Christ’s crucifixion.

P. 439 Present geologic rates and processes cannot account for the earth’s geologic history. THE CONCEPTS OF UNIFORMITY AND EVOLUTION ARE BANKRUPT THEORIES!
THE BIBLICAL OUTLINE OF EARTH’S HISTORY ACTUALLY PROVIDES THE ONLY SCIENTIFICALLY-ACCURATE FRAMEWORK FOR CORRECT AND HARMONIOUS ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT GEOLOGIC REALITY.

p. 440 EVOLUTION IS A FALSE RELIGION

Earth’s sedimentary formations art largely Deluge related. You may ask, “What difference does it make which theories are correct?” The difference is significant!

There are only two competing philosophies or RELIGIONS: GOD-WORSHIP or MAN- WORSHIP. They affect our total existence.

MAN WORSHIP focuses on man as the most important entity. The evolutionary concept of a nature caused world appeals to man’s self pride and vanity at earth’s most advanced life form. Such a self centered, egotistical concept manifests itself in many of man’s activities (philosophies, religions, economic and political systems) from primitive animism to existentialism and atheistic communism. All of these focus on man and his own works. From earliest history, the conflict has existed between these two ideologies: theism vs atheism (humanism).

P. 441-2 – Darwin’s philosophical predecessor, M. DeLamarck, and all of the prominent proponents of the theory of evolution – Darwin, Huxley, Spencer, Haekel and others were firm opponents of the Biblical view of earth and man. They ridiculed the Creation account as “the mystical approach” which hides its insufficient understanding of the facts behind such empty words as creative evolution. A true biologist is forced to ignore them, the evolutionists taunted. “There is no longer need or room for the supernatural,” Sir Julian Huxley said in 1959. “Earth was not created, it evolved. So did all the animals and plants that inhabit it, including our human selves, mind and soul, as well as brain and body. So did religion.”

The world’s intellectual community seems almost unanimously committed to this atheistic philosophy. They have completely rejected true Biblical Christianity in favor of atheistic evolution. It is the backbone of the entire scientific structure of communist philosophy. Karl Marx dedicated Das Kapital to Charles Darwin. At Marx’s funeral, Engels said, “Just as Darwin discovered the law of evolution in organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of evolution in human history.”

P. 444 This man~centered atheistic philosophy dominates political thought all over the world. Communism, the United Nations, secular humanism, and other one world government movements all promote man’s own welfare and advancement on a materialistic “scientific ethic,” for the greatest good of the greatest number in the long run (U.S. Forest Service Motto).

Evolution combines humanistic ethic. with a mechanistic philosophy. All sciences are universally dominated by and completely organized in terms of evolutionary concepts It is the very foundation of the entire educational philosophy. The acknowledged architect of education’s evolutionary foundation was John Dewey of the University of Chicago and Columbia University.

Man is considered not only the crowning offspring of evolution, but now its proponent and glorifier. This enthronement of man forces the dethroning of God, and this is the true objective of atheistic philosophies. How tragic, for the creature to deny its own Creator!

P. 447 Evolution attempts to account for all things, omitting God. Evolution’s immoral “morality” assumes that progress and good come from the self benefit of some at the expense or detriment of others. In contrast, Christianity functions on unselfish sacrifice for the benefit of others. Evolution is a failure system; it comes from Satan. True Christianity comes from God, and it works!

DESPITE THE WIDESPREAD ACCEPTANCE OF EVOLUTION, NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE SUPPORTS IT! HOW INCREDIBLY IRONIC THAT AN UNSCIENTIFIC THEORY UNPROVEN AND UNPROVABLE – IS PROMOTED BY THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY AS FACT!

p.448 Genetic mutations are proof against evolution, not for it. Mutations are harmful, not advantageous or adaptive. They KILL; they do not produce new, stronger forms. Mutation results in degeneration and extinction, not new species.

There is no evidence of biological change outside the narrow genetic limits set by God, the Creator. All true evidence supports reality, the creation by God of all things, “each after its own kind.”

Paleontology, which purports to show the actual record of evolutionary change, cannot honestly do so. Even Paleontology confesses that all species, genera, families, and all categories above families appear suddenly in the earth’s rock records, and are not preceded by any known sequences that are gradual, continuous or transitional. There is no such evidence. The real evidences conform to the real way it happened, naturally, by divine Creation.

Paleontological research cannot trace the phylogenetic history of even one single group of modern plants from its beginning to the present. The fossil records, the genetic mutation mechanisms, and the taxonomic classification systems all confirm clear cut kinds of living organisms with un-bridged gaps between them – just as the Creation account testifies.

P.451- Evolution hides deceptively and precariously behind the twin apron strings of THEORY:
1. Enormous periods of time.
2. Uniformity

Divine Creation testifies of sudden, deliberate, intelligent and purposefully-planned Creation, followed by many equally-sudden changes and interventions, finally to be climaxed by a sudden final change yet to come. (Matt. 24:37 39; Lk. 17:24 27; Heb. 11:7; I Pet. 3:20; 1 Pet. 2:5 and 3:3-10)

The divine Creation and Flood are witnessed not only by the natural evidences in the earth, but by human histories world wide, and by the two celestial laws of thermodynamics.

WHICH WILL YOU CHOOSE TO BELIEVE CREATION OR EVOLUTION?
(II Pet. 3:11, and 17-18)

Posted in Bob Webster, Education, Family Matters | 1 Comment »

« Previous Entries

Copyright © 2oo6 by TrishAndHalli.com Powered by Wordpress          
Ported by ThemePorter - template by Design4 | Sponsored by Cheap Web Hosting