Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site iham1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!iham1!rck
From: rck@iham1.UUCP (Ron Kukuk)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: The Scientific Case for Creation (Part 1)
Message-ID: <328@iham1.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 6-Apr-85 10:09:58 EST
Article-I.D.: iham1.328
Posted: Sat Apr  6 10:09:58 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 7-Apr-85 04:02:11 EST
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 98








       Several of you have asked for specific evidences that support creation
       and oppose evolution. There are many. We will list 116. Evidences 1-36
       come  from  the  life  sciences,  37-87  come   generally   from   the
       astronomical  sciences,  and  88-116  relate to the earth sciences. An
       outline format will be used. One or more of these 116 evidences, along
       with appropriate references will be given every day or so.

            THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR CREATION: 116 CATEGORIES OF EVIDENCE

       I.  (Life Sciences): THE THEORY OF ORGANIC EVOLUTION IS INVALID.

           A.  EVOLUTION* HAS NEVER BEEN OBSERVED.

               1.  Spontaneous generation (the emergence of  life  from  non-
                   living  matter)  has never been observed. All observations
                   have  shown  that  life  only  comes   from   life.   This
                   observation  is so consistent that it is called the Law of
                   Biogenesis. The theory of evolution  conflicts  with  this
                   law by claiming that life came from non-living matter.

               2.  Mendel's laws  of  genetics  explain  almost  all  of  the
                   physical variations that are observed within life, such as
                   in the dog family. A logical consequence of these laws and
                   their  modern  day refinements is that there are LIMITS to
                   such  variation  [a,b].  Breeding  experiments  have  also
                   confirmed that these boundaries exist [c-e].

                   a)  Monroe W. Strickberger,  GENETICS,  2nd  edition  (New
                       York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1976), p. 812.
                   b)  ''On the general relation of Mendelism to evolution  I
                       have  come to a very definite conclusion; that is that


       __________

         * By EVOLUTION we mean a naturally occurring, beneficial
           change that produces INCREASING COMPLEXITY. When
           referring to the evolution of life, this increasing
           complexity would be shown if the offspring of one form
           of life had a different, improved, and reproducible set
           of vital organs that its ancestors did not have. This is
           sometimes called organic evolution, the molecules-to-man
           theory, or MACROevolution. MICROevolution, on the other
           hand, involves only changes in shapes, colors, sizes, or
           minor chemical alterations--changes that both
           creationists and evolutionists agree are relatively
           trivial and easily observed. It is macroevolution, then,
           which requires increasing complexity, that is being so
           hotly contested today, and this is what we will mean by
           the term evolution.
















                       it is  really  antagonistic  to  evolution.''  [Alfred
                       Russell  Wallace,  MY  LIFE,  Vol.1 (Chapman and Hall,
                       1905).]
                   c)  Francis Hitching,  THE  NECK  OF  THE  GIRAFFE:  WHERE
                       DARWIN WENT WRONG (New Haven, Connecticut: Ticknor and
                       Fields, 1982), p. 55.
                   d)  ''All competent  biologists  acknowledge  the  limited
                       nature of the variation breeders can produce, although
                       they do not like to discuss it much when grinding  the
                       evolutionary  ax.'' [William R. Fix, THE BONE PEDDLERS
                       (New York: Macmillan, 1984), pp. 184-185.]
                   e)  ''A rule that all breeders recognize,  is  that  there
                       are  fixed  limits to the amount of change that can be
                       produced.'' [Lane P. Lester and Raymond G. Bohlin, THE
                       NATURAL  LIMITS  TO  BIOLOGICAL  CHANGE (Grand Rapids:
                       Zondervan, 1984), p. 96.]

                                             ...


          II.  (Astronomical Sciences):

                                      TO BE CONTINUED

         III.  (Earth Sciences):