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!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!iham1!rck
From: rck@iham1.UUCP (Ron Kukuk)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: The Scientific Case for Creation: (Part 17)
Message-ID: <359@iham1.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 18-May-85 20:39:24 EDT
Article-I.D.: iham1.359
Posted: Sat May 18 20:39:24 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 19-May-85 06:19:23 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 65


     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    B.  ALL  ARGUMENTS  FOR  EVOLUTION  ARE  OUTDATED,  ILLOGICAL,  OR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.

       29.  Computer-generated  comparisons  have  been  made  of  the
            sequences  of  amino acids that comprise a protein that is
            common to almost all forms of animal and plant  life.  The
            results of this study seriously contradict the predictions
            of the theory of evolution [a-d].

            a)  Personal communication from Robert Bayne Brown.
            b)  Ginny Gray, ''Student Project 'Rattles'  Science  Fair
                Judges,'' ISSUES AND ANSWERS, December 1980, p. 3.
            c)  Robert  Bayne  Brown,  ABSTRACTS:  31ST  INTERNATIONAL
                SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING FAIR (Washington D.C.: Science
                Service, 1980), p. 113.
            d)  Dr. Colin Patterson is the Senior Principal Scientific
                Officer in the Palaeontology Department at the British
                Museum of Natural History.   In  a  talk  he  gave  on
                November  5,  1981  to  leading  evolutionists  at the
                American Museum of Natural History, he presented  some
                new  data  on amino acid sequences in several proteins
                of a number of animals.  The  relationships  of  these
                animals,  according  to  evolutionary theory, has been
                taught in classrooms for many decades.  Dr.  Patterson
                pointed  out  to a stunned audience that this new data
                contradicts the theory of  evolution.  In  his  words,
                ''The  theory makes a prediction; we've tested it, and
                the prediction is falsified precisely.''  Although  he
                acknowledged  that  scientific  falsification is never
                absolute, the thrust of his entire talk  was  that  he
                now  realized  that ''evolution was a faith,'' that he
                had ''been duped into  taking  evolution  as  revealed
                truth  in  some  way,''  and ''that evolution not only
                conveys  no  knowledge  but  seems  to  convey   anti-
                knowledge,  apparent  knowledge  which  is  harmful to
                systematics  [the  science  of  classifying  different
                forms   of  life].''  [''Prominent  British  Scientist
                Challenges    Evolution    Theory,''    Audio     Tape
                Transcription  and  Summary by Luther D. Sunderland, 5
                Griffin Drive, Apalachin, New  York  13732.  Also  see
                Luther  D. Sunderland and Gary E. Parker, ''Evolution?
                Prominent Scientist Reconsiders,'' ICR IMPACT, No.108,
                June 1982.]

                                      ...


   II.  (Astronomical Sciences):

                               TO BE CONTINUED

  III.  (Earth Sciences):
				Ron Kukuk
				Walt Brown