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 13) Message-ID: <350@iham1.UUCP> Date: Tue, 7-May-85 22:29:43 EDT Article-I.D.: iham1.350 Posted: Tue May 7 22:29:43 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 8-May-85 06:18:09 EDT Distribution: net Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 42 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. (See 1-13.) B. ALL ARGUMENTS FOR EVOLUTION ARE OUTDATED, ILLOGICAL, OR WISHFUL THINKING. (See 14-24.) C. NEW RESEARCH SHOWS THAT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR LIFE ARE SO COMPLEX THAT CHANCE AND EVEN BILLIONS OF YEARS CANNOT EXPLAIN IT. 25. If the earth, early in its alleged evolution, HAD OXYGEN in its atmosphere, the chemicals needed for life would have been removed by oxidation. But if there had been NO OXYGEN, then there would have been no ozone in the upper atmosphere. Without this ozone life would be quickly destroyed by the sun's ultraviolet radiation [a,b]. The only way for both ozone and life to be here is for both to come into existence simultaneously. In other words, Creation! a) Duane T. Gish, SPECULATIONS AND EXPERIMENTS RELATED TO THEORIES ON THE ORIGIN OF LIFE, ICR Technical Monograph No.1 (El Cajon, CA: Institute for Creation Research, 1972). b) Francis Hitching, THE NECK OF THE GIRAFFE: WHERE DARWIN WENT WRONG (New Haven, Connecticut: Ticknor and Fields, 1982), p. 65. ... II. (Astronomical Sciences): TO BE CONTINUED III. (Earth Sciences): Ron Kukuk Walt Brown