Chris Welch uses Designer Pro 365 to illustrate all 3rd level concepts

Sunday, 26 July 2015

Science Versus Evolution p.3 - Some Telling Symptoms

What are my options?
The astonishing thing then, is that despite all the propaganda, the theory of evolution can be shown to be false and easily disproved by the average person in the street who has even the slightest interest in biology, physics, chemistry or the information sciences.
Yet we are so often told that evolution is proven science, but belief in a Creator is merely religion.

This was highlighted in a recent debate with the Rt. Honourable Mr Michael Gove, Secretary of State for Education about the proposed teaching of evolution to primary school children. The Government ignored the scientific questions raised to them and tried to reduce the argument to 'evolution vs. faith', saying: 'The [Education] department accepts that faith may give rise to personal misgivings about including this topic in the primary curriculum for the first time'. In other words, anything that challenges the dogma of evolution is a matter of personal faith! Why was it the government didn't address a single scientific objection raised to them? Because quite simply, on the ground of science, they would lose.

The Education Secretary was asked to give just one piece of scientific evidence, something that doesn't have to be taken by faith. Just one thing that is observable, testable, repeatable; just one piece of evidence that would warrant teaching this to primary school children as part of a science lesson. The Rt. Honourable Mr Michael Gove, Secretary of State for Education could not provide a single piece of evidence, but simply replied saying "The government is very frm in its position. I am sorry but there is nothing more the department can say on the matter"5 (Correspondence reference 2013/0049695). Or to put it another way, 'Our mind is made up, don't confuse us with the facts!'

Why then, is evolution so popular and so promoted? Because evolutionists and the government recognise that the only other option is that 'in the beginning God... ' (Genesis 1:1), and that is something 'educated' scientists, governments and the media are unwilling to face. Francis Crick, one of the two men who discovered DNA, made this telling statement: "Biologists must constantly keep in mind what they see was not designed, but evolved" 11. If everything looks like it was designed, if all the evidence points clearly in that direction, why is scientific enquiry not allowed to consider the possibility? The reality is, that if God can be done away with, then governments are the highest power, scientists are the highest intelligence and the media are accountable to no-one.

The Bible speaks of those who would one day scoff at its teaching; of these people the Bible says they are 'wilfully ignorant'. In other words, they can see the truth for themselves, but they refuse to accept it. The apostle Paul, in writing to the Christians in Rome said: "For the invisible things of [God] from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" (Romans 1:20). Further, Paul
launches a damming indictment on `man's wisdom' saying; "Where is the wise? where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?" (i Corinthians 1:20). "Because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man — and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things" (Romans 1:21-23).
Ancient cultures worshipped idols made of wood and stone; however, whist this must have been insulting to the one true God, today's academia has invented an even more insulting idol, and has attributed all the beauty, symmetry, order, design, scientific laws and the wonder of creation to... nothing!

No longer is it 'In the beginning God created...'. The mantra of today's schools, colleges and universities is 'in the beginning Nothing...' Then they call the Biblical explanation, with a beginning (verified by science), a universe that has been stretched out (verified by science), an Earth that is a globe (verified by science) hanging on nothing in space (verified by science), a Sun and Moon that exist to enable life on Earth and mark seasons (observable), life that suddenly appears on Earth (observable in the fossil record), creatures that reproduce only after their kind (verified by science and observation), a human race that is degenerating (verified by science), a world-wide flood (observable), a world that once had a uniform climate (verified by science), an ocean with 'pathways' (verified by science), the hydro cycle (verified by science) etc. etc... they call all of this, ' myth' or`religious belief', but nothing exploding and defying countless laws of nature and violating unnumbered Scientific facts, this they call "scientific knowledge, supported by extensive, robust evidence"
Again we ask the Rt. Honourable Mr Michael Gove, or any evolutionist, for just one piece of your 'extensive, robust evidence'. Please? Pretty please? Why has it gone quiet? Why have you 'nothing more to say'?

It may come as a surprise to many, that the theory of evolution is not so quickly embraced as assume.
For example, Serbia's government ordered schools to stop teaching the theory of evolution, sa evolution left many questions unanswered and was at best "dogmatic". Serbia's Education MiniStE Colic, decided that the teaching of evolution should be suspended. The Cabinet of Serbian PrimE Vojislav Kostunica backed the decision saying it was clear that the evolutionary explanation for " and development of man is full of voids". Colic added that science cannot be true science unless it i all possibilities, whereas most academic authorities, which are controlled by evolutionists, dc students to consider anything other than their theory.'?
"a way of getting a glimpse of God's mind." 11
As a believer himself, Collins finds exploring nature to be
said: "40 pe- Cent o working scientists claim to be believers".
Dr. Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Project

The Evolutionists seem to know everything about the missing link  except the fact that  it is missing - G.K. Chesterton

Jerry Bergman, PhD, has compiled a list of almost 3,000 scientists and professors who reject evolution of whom hold PhDs in science. He believes that he could easily complete a list of l0,000 names.
Even a casual follower of current news stories will have heard of the controversy raging in the USA regarding the proposed teaching of 'intelligent design' alongside Evolution theory in American schools. The cry from the evolutionists is that this is mixing religion with science. Those who say such things should quietly resign as they obviously have no grasp of what science is. Science is knowledge gained by observation using one or more of our five senses.
This is irrespective of our beliefs. However, the way we interpret our observations will depend on our belief systems — either 'Nothing exploded and then it evolved', or 'In the beginning God...' They are the only two options. We should remember that even biologists, chemists and archaeologists have a bias that will shape the way they interpret their observations.Science versus Evolution p5-6

Ch. 27 - Stifling the opposition by Michael Bowden The Rise of the Evolution Fraud

A number of people, among them several scientists who oppose the theory of evolution, whether it be on Biblical or scientific grounds or both, have formed groups, written books, given lectures and done all that they could to publicize the very considerable amount of scientific evidence against evolution. How many do oppose evolution would be difficult to say, but it is certainly far larger than most people would imagine, and the number is rising.
In America, the efforts of the creationist groups and their many supporters are at last beginning to have an effect. In some States, there have been several attempts to have a law passed that where evolution is taught, then 'scientific creationism' [effectively the scientific evidence for creation without reference to the Bible] should be given an equal amount of time. This was hotly contested in the courts by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and teachers organisations who claim it is importing religion into the classroom 'by the back door'. In America and the UK today, the emphasis has shifted to the teaching of "Intelli­gent Design" (ID).
In Britain the creationist's case has rarely received any recognition.

Quite recently, however. various articles have appeared seemingly in response to the growing numbers of those who support creation and the public presentation of the evidence. What is noticeable in such articles (or programmes) is that, although they may admit that there are a few "difficulties" with the theory, they will then proceed at some length to "explain" how certain objections can be overcome. What is certain is that at no time will a creationist be given a fair chance to present serious scientific objections to the theory. Any contributions made by a creationist will be carefully edited so that the only comments published will be those dealing with the general aspects of evolution such as the theological problems of origins. Serious scientific evidence receives no publicity whatsoever for to do so may provoke awkward questions on whether the theory is factually true when for years it has been paraded before the general public as "no longer a theory but proven fact".
Numerous lectures have been given on the scientific evidence which contradicts evolution and supports Genesis. Often the question is asked why such facts are never shown on any television programme. The answer is simply that no matter how frequently or by what means the BBC are approached, the end result is always a refusal to grant creationists a fair chance to present their case. The response is the same from any of the radio authorities, larger publishers, national newspa­pers, etc. etc.
What is certain is that at no time will a creationist be given a fair chance to present serious scientific objections to the theory.


It may appear that such a jaundiced comment is only to be expected from a minority group who fail to get a hearing for their peculiar views. However, all who lecture and write against evolution can testify to the very considerable interest which the subject generates when people are presented with facts which they have never heard before, whether Christians or not.
Such is the freedom - some would call it licence - in this country to discuss openly such subjects as explicit sex, adultery, abortion, eutha­nasia and other contentious matters, but the one subject which is sacrosanct is the theory of evolution. Such a statement may appear exaggerated, but there are numerous incidents which justify such a claim.
I therefore set out just a few of the many instances which have come to my notice, or have happened to me personally. In what follows, I have refrained from deliberately searching out sensational stories, but I am sure there are many such worthy of further investigation. Gerry' Bergman is an excellent researcher and has written an extensive article on this bias against creationists in Journal of Creation 9(2):267-275 August 1995 which appears at;
http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1784/


1. THE B.B.C.
(A) Dr. Gish
As a one time Director of the Institute of Creation Research, Califor‑
nia now retired, he has travelled extensively, speaking on the creation
versus evolution debate. Whilst touring in this country, he once said; "When a creationist is available they'll put him on TV. I have been interviewed many times on television in the States. I have been interviewed on nationwide TV in New Zealand and Aus­tralia. But your BBC... I think they are the worst when it comes to excluding an alternative point of view"[41 ].
128 Ch. 27 - Stifling the opposition
they could put on TV.
Thus, was our great, highly regarded and much loved institution ruthlessly taken over and used for the destruction of our national ethos. It is interesting that all BBC recruitment is now only advertised in the Left Wing Guardian newspaper, so the bias continues.
2. Local Radio
In 1978, Professor Edgar Andrews and I were interviewed by Rev. M. Hall for his weekly programme, "Christian Forum" on Radio Trent When this was duly broadcast, it generated considerable interest. A few months later it was also used by the London Broadcasting Com­pany, and again it provoked interest. In January 1980 the London Broadcasting Company re-transmitted the programme and used it to measure their "audience rating'.
The response this time was "the largest they had ever received" [consisting of twelve letters incidentally!] and I was invited by the interested producer to have an interview one Sunday afternoon for transmission later that evening. After we had met, he mentioned. "some people actually believe the world was created in six days". When I replied that I also believed this and gave lectures on the scientific evidence in its support, his lower jaw almost dented the floor. The interview, in which I challenged evolutionists to a debate, was eventually completed, and, a little to my surprise, actually transmitted.
Despite writing, telephoning and leaving messages, I did not receive any response whatsoever, neither did they forwarded any letters they may have received requesting information, or details of my books.
I subsequently met the Chairman of the Religious Advisory Board of LBC. He said he would try to arrange a debate on the subject and I suggested the name of Prof. Berry, a prominent Christian theistic evolutionist. No response was received.

This sudden silence is quite typical of an initial great interest shown by producers and editors, only to be followed by a sharp "cooling off . It seems to me that either they become aware of how 'hot' the subject is and fear ridicule from their professional colleagues, or alternatively (or additionally) they receive a direct order from senior executives that no further time or space is to be given to the topic. As a commercial firm, here was an opportunity to greatly increase their audience ratings, yet they avoided doing so. This proves to me that not publicising creation is even more important than commercial gain.
Later, in reply to two articles in The Church of England Newspaper by Prof. Berry in 1998 and 2002 1 pointed out that a number of his claims were simply untrue. In each of my replies (they were both published) I invited him to a debate [See ref. 101] but the usual silence followed. Thus the Gospel according to Theistic Evolution continues to be founded on the many lies of Evolution.
3. The Press
The same response is received when approaches are made to the National Press, periodicals, liberal Church newspapers, etc. Invariably, no matter how many letters may be received by a publication in response to a statement perhaps by the "Science Correspondent", whilst a few may be printed which criticize evolution in a general way, none will appear which give factual refutation. The usual excuse is "lack of space".

4. Universities
(A) Mr. Andrew Loose MSc
Mr. Loose took a B.Sc. in astronomy. The subject he chose for his dissertation was "The Age of the Universe". In researching for this, he examined all the various methods which had been used to give a date to the earth, the solar system and the universe. In every single case he found that considerable speculation was involved, and effectively the results were made to comply with evolutionary presuppositions regard­ing time scales.
When in due course he presented his paper, his was the only one that the Professor of the Department personally attended. Shortly after­wards, an instruction was issued that in future students would not be allowed to choose their own subjects, but must first confer with and receive the approval of the lecturers.
He subsequently went to another university to take his MSc. Further discussions on the subject of the age of the universe with a number of eminent astronomers — including the Astronomer Royal of the day — failed to show that his conclusions were in error.
(B) Dr. Arthur Jones
Whilst he was an undergraduate, Dr. Jones was awarded a prize for an inter-faculty essay on Communism, in which he was openly crea­tionist. When his Zoology Professor awarded him the prize, he told Dr. Jones that "No one who does not accept evolution will ever do research in my department". Undeterred, he nevertheless applied and, somewhat to his surprise, was accepted. Later, when he was being interviewed for his Ph.D., the assistant interviewer bluntly asked. "If we award you your Doctorate, how do we know you won't then use it to spread your views on creation?" The senior inter-viewer, however, interrupted and said the question was unfair and should not be answered.
Difficulties facing students
Perhaps at this point we should consider the difficult position of children and students who are creationists, when they are taught evolu­tion at schools or colleges.
Instruction in schools about evolution is invariably given as if it were a proven fact, but when teachers are challenged on this, the reply is that it is only taught as 'a theory'. But this aspect is so little referred to, if at all, that a class of young children will certainly absorb it as proven fact. How often children tell their parents that because "teacher said so" then it must be an incontrovertible fact! The absorption of evolution would of course be greatly strengthened if not a single fact or argu­ment against evolution is presented. The reason for this may be that the teacher is completely unaware of any such evidence existing. Alterna­tively they may realise that to teach anything different to the standard set of notes on evolution would be to enter fields of contention which are not conducive to a quiet life! Those who take this 'easy way out' may like to reflect what a disservice they are doing to the generation they seek to serve so conscientiously.
At universities, the situation is even more difficult. A young student may disagree with the evidence for the theory being given by a lecturer, but may be unwilling to criticize him before the whole class and thereby incur his displeasure.
Similarly, when answering questions in examinations (not necessarily on evolution), to refer to evidence which contradicts the theory could make just that difference between pass and failure, should his paper be marked by an ardent evolutionist. I am sure that such could happen and at times does. Lecturers cannot claim to be totally free of personal views when dealing with such a fundamental subject as evolution. Indeed, it is not unknown for some people to become highly emotional when doubt is expressed about the theory.
THE ONGOING OPPOSITION
Since the first edition of this book, the mass media display exactly the same bias as they have at all times. In one TV programme, the creationist, in a local studio, was placed in a small room and instructed not to look at a monitor, so he was unable to see the opposing speakers in the main studio. In another case, the creationist could only hear the studio with a two second delay due to "technical reasons". This caused him great confusion and he appeared hesitant and uncertain in trying to comment on the discussion. There are many "tricks of the trade" that technicians and editors can use to put people at a disadvantage and give them an appearance of incoherence and confusion.
POLL SURVEY RESULTS
The United Kingdom
A Mori Poll of 2,000 people gave the results ‑
Creation 22%, Intelligent Design 17%, Evolution 48%, Don't know 13%. Thus, 52% did not believe in evolution! One biology teacher reported "Many of my pupils training to be biologists are creationists, and they are often the brightest pupils."
An article in the Independent, Sunday 1 June 2008, said;
"Professor Steve Jones said religious students – even those studying medicine – were becoming increasingly vocal in their opposition to evolution, saying he was 'telling lies and insulting people's religion' by teaching the subject."
"They want permission not to come to those lectures and sit those exam questions," he said. "I have been teaching genetics and evolutionary biology for 30 years and for the first 20 I think the issue arose once. That's changed." [94].
Initially, I assumed that it was Christian believers complaining about the course, but to bluntly claim that the lecturer was "telling lies" and "insulting" their religion did not quite accord with the usual British understatement and reluctance to be so condemnatory. When it was mentioned that some Muslims had complained about lectures on evolu­tion, all became clear that it was from this faith that the main com­plaints came. British reserve and fear of upsetting the tutors - and thereby failing their exams - probably prevents Christians from making such outspoken comments. Muslims seem to have no such reserva­tions!
This quotation was used at the beginning of an interview with this author on LBC Radio on 2 June 2008. The interviewer referred to the 40% who rejected evolution and said I would be pleased with this result. I agreed, but I wondered about the remaining 60%. 1 said "How many of them actually agreed with creation, but dare not mention this for fear of losing their job?" - to which he replied "You may well be right! "

In Chapter 17 I reported the 1986 Oxford Union debate in which no less than 42% of the undergraduates voted for creation! The shock to the governing body resulted in the whole debate being expunged from their records.
Thus, despite the overwhelming propaganda for evolution by all the mass media, education authorities, etc., a surprisingly high percentage of the population still accept creation as more credible of the two theories, but this is ignored and the propaganda continues unabated.
America
There have been a number of attempts to allow the teaching of creation in schools, but this has been fiercely resisted by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Despite the powerful forces in opposition, the growing evidence contradicting evolution is gradually reaching the public. Gallup has carried out surveys of the American public every few years and the results have been reasonably consistent. Taking their first and latest surveys for 1991 and 1997 and a CBS survey of 2006, the average of these results gave -
Creation - 49%, Theistic Evolution 35%, Evolution - 11% [93].
These are figures are surprising in view of the propaganda pressure US citizens receive from official sources - the ACLU, scientific organi­sations, school authorities, etc.
The results from scientists, however are completely different - Crea­tion 5%, Theistic Evolution 40%, Evolution 55%. This shows that many scientists bow the knee at the altar of Evolution, but the question still remains; how many agree with creation but only privately for the sake of their jobs!
The Rest of the World
One survey [93] said that broadly, Europe mainly accepted evolu­tion, whilst in the mainly Muslim Middle East, creation predominated. In Africa, most people are surprised that anyone should think that life on this earth could possibly have arisen by pure chance. They are too close to the land and see the miracle of growth every day to think that it is all an accident!
The threats against all critics
I am convinced that there are many Christian and non-Christian scientists who have studied the evidence against evolution and find it at least reasonably convincing. However, depending on the work they do and their position in their company or government organisation, they will never admit that they have reservations about evolution, for they are well aware that they will be ridiculed, and possibly ostracised - and few are prepared to accept that. They know that their promotion prospects would be damaged as this would enable them to promote their contentious views further. They could also face possible dis­missal, with all the disastrous repercussions this would have on their lives, income, career and family.

I reported the 1986 Oxford Union debate in which no less than 42% of the undergraduates voted for creation! The shock to the governing body resulted in the whole debate being expunged from their records.


It might be thought that the possibility of dismissal is a ridiculous charge to make against evolutionists who are in positions of authority, but this not so. Let me relate a few of the cases that have received some publicity. There are no doubt others that are not as well recorded as these.

Richard Sternberg
Richard Sternberg was the editor of the Proceedings of the Biologi­cal Society of Washington which was under the auspices of the Smith­sonian Institute. In 2004 he received an article that supported the case for Intelligent Design. As he was a specialist in evolutionary theory he decided to review it himself as he had often done before, but he discussed it three times with a qualified colleague and then sent it out for three peer reviews. All involved were thoroughgoing evolutionists but, nevertheless, all agreed that the paper should be published. Fol­lowing publication, complaints began to arise, mainly from federal government employees acting in concert with an outside advocacy group, the National Center for Science Education.
When the controversy blew up and attempts were made to fire him, the whole subject was investigated by two official government com­mittees who fully exonerated him. He did resign from his position but this had been arranged long before the controversy arose [91 ].
Although not successful in removing him because he allowed an article supportive of Intelligent Design to be published, it does demon­strate the forces that can be marshalled by evolutionists when they feel threatened. If nothing else, even though they were not fully successful, they know that these events will be taken as a warning to others in less prestigious levels of their professions to be sure that they do not cross the authorities to whom they are beholden for their salaries.
Michael Behe
Michael Behe is Professor of Biochemistry in the Department of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University. He is also a member of the Intelligent Design group and has written several books critical of evolution. His most well known illustration of "irreducible complex­ity" is a mouse trap; take any one of its components away and it will not work. In the same way, the complexity of life is such that any removal of an important component with either kill the organism or seriously impair its function. Life could not possibly have arisen by a series of small changes; it had to be right first time.
He originally accepted evolution, but gradually came to see that there were serious flaws in it. He eventually wrote against it, and was duly turned on by his professional colleagues.
He records some of the comments he has received-,
(a) One professor called him a "screwball". Behe commented "In a way it actually makes me feel good when Darwinists call me names. First, it shows that they are having a tough time coming up with actual arguments against design. It also shows that they aren't the coolly logical persons they would have everyone think they are".
(b) Asked why ID writers never appear in peer reviewed publica­tions, he replied "I've tried to publish on this topic in journals, but the editors were not receptive. So I and my colleagues have written books to explain design." His books, in fact, were more carefully reviewed and vetted than most articles in journals.
The Kansas Board decision
In 1995, The National Academy of Sciences laid down regulations for the teaching of science in the schools. A few years later, the Kansas Board of Education appointed a committee to advise on implementing these regulations. It was then discovered that the regulations insisted

that only evolution theory alone should be taught in the science classes, and that it should be used as a "unifying concept" for all science education. The board decided not to implement the more extreme evolutionary requirements of the regulations. Predictably, the reaction from evolutionists was ferocious.
The editor of Scientific American contended that the educational standards in Kansas were obviously poor. He said:
"Make it clear that in light of the newly lowered education standards in Kansas, the qualifications of any students applying from that state in the future will have to be considered very carefully. Send a clear message to the parents in Kansas that this bad decision carries consequences for their children. If kids in Kansas aren't being taught properly about science, they won't be able to keep up with children taught competently elsewhere. It's called survival of the fittest. Maybe the Board of Education needs to learn about natural selection firsthand."
Thus was the board threatened with academic isolation should it pursue its intended course. The reaction of other official organisations was equally strong.
After a campaign, the board was changed and the NAS regulations were accepted, but later a further vote placed conservatives back in power. Eventually, in 2005, by 6 votes to 4, the teaching of Intelligent Design was approved for teaching as well as evolution.
You can see the fierce reactions of evolutionists that any limitation to their propaganda provokes. Behe commented "Bureaucracies with power do not relinquish it easily."

Summary
The few examples which I have given above do indicate the variety of ways in which the dogma of evolution is carefully protected from public exposure of its scientific weaknesses. Enquiries amongst one's scientific friends would, I am sure, reveal many more instances.
In this chapter we have only briefly considered how some of our major institutions effectively block any serious criticisms of evolution from reaching the the general public. There is however one establish­ment organisation which so far exceeds these in its popular promotion of the theory that it requires a complete chapter to do justice to the investigation of its activities.
(Chapter 28 was on the natural history Museum reported in the first part)

Saturday, 25 July 2015

Praying mysteries in tongues

When we come to Christ we have absolutely no idea what we are doing. Our only conception of what we are doing comes out of our pagan world view.
Pagan Chris? You were a Methodist.
A Pagan is somebody who hasn't got Christ in his or her being. Everything you do is pagan. Based entirely on the senses.Zilch revelation. Couldn't really care that much about sin. Any concept of God is still pagan, even if you are in a church. Your world view is pagan. Separate from God. God's in the Universe next door and you somehow have to appease Him, With a harvest festival. or helping a granny across a street. We have no idea at all about the Kingdom of God, what it is, where it is, how it works....and we can't see it at all. Like Jesus brothers, you could all be playing snooker together and you wouldn't know the Kingdom was in the same room.
So right there is a huge reason why on the first day you become a Chrstian God baptises you in His Spirit and you speak in tongues. Your mind cannot say anything. Can't filter the info....intercept....foul things up....nothing!!!
This is the sort of thing you could be saying that your mind cannot foul up.
"God I thank you you have brought me into your family. I came to you for forgiveness of sins because I have done so many things wrong, and yet you only want to explain to Me what your purpose is regarding your Sons. It's all too much Lord, but My spirit understands. Sin seems to be irrelevant to you because of the Power of the Son's life living out of My body. You seem to be raising up a Kingdom of people that not only know no death, but are daily weakening its hold on the planet. Wow, you say this current generation, as opposed to the generation raised in Adam, will stomp on Death and kick it off the planet. I am glad I am speaking in tongues...my mind would definitely kill that one. And what is this? My life is hidden bound up with , wrapped inside your Life in the Father....you don't know where your life and my spirit start and end? You are as me in the Earth, except in my particular version of your self!!!! This is all too much Lord....wait til I tell my mind. Oh , you won't allow that just yet...it would freak it out. How should I treat my mind? Oh ...be patient with it...it is as thick as two short planks yet thinks it knows everything. Yup Lord that's about the sum of it. What do i do then as a new Christian.? Just trust Your Life within me? Wow that seems a bit too simple. Shouldn't i be doing lots of things? Oh I see, feed on You in whatever form i can. Well....it's all too much for one session!!!! Jesus you are amazing. Can't i tell my mind anything? Oh...."Jesus loves you"....oh OK then....speak with You tomorrow. End of tongues .

Friday, 24 July 2015

Science versus Evolution P2 : Evolution has no single unified theory

Malcolm Bowden Weaknesses evolutionists admit to - The rise of  the Evolution Fraud p194 2nd ed.
Despite such confident statements, many evolutionists have admitted that the case is far from adequately proven. Who better to start with than Darwin himself!
"Not one change of species into another is on record... we cannot prove that a single species has been changed." [Charles Darwin My Life and Letters vol 1 p210]


"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." [Charles Darwin Origin of Species Chapter "Difficulties"]

"It is therefore a matter of faith on the part of the biologist that biogenesis did occur and he can choose whatever method of biogenesis happens to suit him personally the evidence for what did happen is not available." [Prof. G.A. Kerkut Implications of Evolution Pergamon N.Y. 1960 p 150]

"The scientists religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amaze­ment at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection." [Prof. Einstein The World as I see it p29]

"There is not the slightest evidence that any of the major groups arose from any other" [Dr. Austin Clark FRGS., Quarterly Review of Biology Dec. 28 p539].
One notable comment is:
"I think however that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is Creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it" [Prof. H.J. Lipson F.R. S. "A physicist looks at evolution", Physics Bulletin 311980 p 138].




The books ‘Origins of Life’ and ‘Who Was Adam?’ are authored by Dr. Hugh Ross (astrophysicist) and Dr. Fazale Rana (biochemist). Richard Smalley had this to say about these books: “Evolution has just been dealt its death blow. After reading ‘Origins of Life’, with my background in chemistry and physics, it is clear evolution could not have occurred. The new book, ‘Who Was Adam?’, is the silver bullet that puts the evolutionary model to death.” (Smalley 2005a)  from 
http://nobelists.weebly.com/uploads/4/0/2/0/4020654/50-nobelists-english.pdf

What are we talking about?   science versus evolution pamphlet page3-4
What most people are blissfully unaware of is that there is no single unified theory of evolution. Suggestions go from 'gradual change over millions of years' to 'punctuated equilibrium' (the belief that due to no observable evidence of transitions between kinds, evolution must have happened in big jumps), to `panspermia' (the belief that life is too complex to have started on earth, so must have been seeded from somewhere else in the universe).
if any one of these theories had the answers, there would be no need for the others!
The other point that should be mentioned is that there are a number of component parts that would have to work together if evolution were to be possible. When most people consider evolution, they have in their mind monkeys evolving into man, or dinosaurs into birds, or possibly even life from non-life. Yet there are at least six distinct categories.
 See chart below:
Evolutionists are quick to appeal to adaptation within a kind (micro-evolution), which does occur and can be observed, but from this, the incredible leap of faith is made that assumes all the other links in the chain are therefore proven also! When evolutionists talk of proof, adaptation is all they can point to. We do see different types of dogs, yet they are all still
dogs! We see insects 'becoming' resistant to C)
pesticides (but this is actually a loss of genetic information and not the addition of new information), yet the insect does not change into a different creature. Even Darwin's finches on the Galapagos never changed from being finches, nor ever could. It is scientifically observable to see adaptation within the kind, everything else, however tightly clung to, is simply a belief.
Nothing exploding and becoming everything, the origin of chemicals (from nothing), formation of the stars and planets (as yet still unobserved and unexplained), the spontaneous generation of life from non-living material, and then (even if we could get that far- which we can't) the transition from one kind of creature to another: all these are taken by faith in the evolutionary process, which we will demonstrate in the following pages, is scientifically impossible!
However, in an attempt to validate the belief that life arose from non-living material millions of years ago (viz. organic evolution), numerous experiments have been conducted to try and'prove'that the component parts (i.e. the nucleotides of DNA and RNA found inside all living systems, essential to life) could have come into existence by random chance.
Commenting on these experiments Robert Shapiro said the following: "they [the component parts] have never been reported in any amount in such 'spark & soup' type experiments. Yet a mythology has emerged that maintains the opposite. I have seen several statements in scientific sources, which claim that proteins and nucleic acids themselves have been prepared (i.e. formed by random chance). These errors reflect the operation of an entire belief system. The facts do not support this belief. Such thoughts may be comforting but they run far ahead of any experimental validation."  In other words, so desperate have evolutionists been to provide evidence for their theory, that they have blatantly lied and fabricated evidence for which there is no scientific support.
At least Leslie E. Orgel was honest enough to admit: "And so, at first glance, one might have to conclude that life could never, in fact, have originated by chemical means" "Another example of the deliberate deceit employed by evolutionists can be seen in the proposed evolution of man from primates. Many have been conned into believing evolution has been proven because of the deceitful way school text books, museums, and TV documentaries will present a picture, a stuffed dummy in an exhibit, or a clever animation suggesting that the transitional forms leading to man have been
discovered and scientifically verified, yet even one of the world's most
prominent evolutionists, Dr Richard Leakey said:
"if pressed about man's ancestry, I would have to unequivocally say that have is a huge question mark. To date, there has been nothing found to  truthfully purport as a transitional species to man, including Lucy... If I pressed, I would have to state that there is more evidence to suggest an abrupt arrival of man rather than a gradual process of evolving" Scientific American vol271 Oct 1994



All of the alleged (yet still taught) transitional forms from monkey to man  have long been shown to be figments of the imagination, wishful thinking or deliberate hoaxes
The fossil record knows nothing of the evolution of modern man from a primitive ape-like ancestor.






"Monkey Man Frauds"
Heidelberg Man, 1907 — was built from just a jaw bone.
Nebraska Man, 1922 — discovered by Henry Osborn, was built from just one tooth, later discovered to be from an extinct pig. (Schools should probably stop teaching that one now!)
Piltdown Man, 1912, discovered by Charles Dawson; now known to be from the jawbone of a modern ape. In 1953 this was proved to be a deliberate fraud that had been filed and treated with dichromate to make it look old!
Peking Man, 1921, all evidence has disappeared! Although we do have the lovely picture in our children's text books — that happens to include the whole family. How nice.
Neanderthal Man, 1829, discovered by Phiippe-Charles Schmerling in the N eander Va I ley (Germany). At the International Congress of Zoology in 1958, they concluded that Schmerling's discovery was just an old man suffering from arthritis.
Java Man, 1922, a skull cap was discovered Soft from the thigh bone, some evidence was concealed until it was revealed the teeth came from an orang-utan.
Dr Vij Sodera, Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, in his book, One small Speck to Man The Evolution Myth, comments: "The fossil record contains only human and non-human bones, with no convincing evidence for any intermediaries. Apes have always been apes and Man has always been Man" I Commenting on the lack of human like fossils Dr Sodera continues: "... Even the impressively-titled 30 `Encyclopaedia of Human Evolution' by Jones, Martin and Pilbeam shows only a small sprinkling of hum fossils, amounting to around just twelve in all. For a work purporting to be an encyclopaedia on the subje constitutes lamentably little information. And surprisingly, the Natural History Museum of London's own on human evolution includes less than ten reproductions of individual human-like fossil skull specimens".
Nebraska Man  
Artists impression created from a single tooth of an extinct pig!
For those who deny a Creator, Evolutionists are certainly very creative!

Note: all the family gathered around and dwelling in a cave, constructed from....er...well nothing actually!!!




In the 150 years since Darwin, NO intermediate stages have been found


Creationist Comments
The following are some criticisms of evolution made by some well known creationists.
"It is Darwin's habit of confusing the provable with the unprovable which constituted to my mind, his unforgivable offence against sci­ence" [Dr. L M. Davies The Bible and Modern Science Constable 1953 p8].
"The theory of the transmutation of species is a scientific mistake,
untrue in its facts, unscientific in its method, and mischievous in its tendency" [Prof. J. L K Agassiz, 1807-1873, (a famous Harvard Pro­fessor who strongly opposed evolution) in Methods ofSludv, in Natural History]
.,Was the eye contrived without skill in optics, and did the ear form without knowledge of sounds?" [Sir Isaac Newton Optics New York 1952 pp369-70].
"If complex organisms ever did evolve from simpler ones, the process took place contrary to the laws of nature, and must have involved what may rightly be termed the miraculous" [Dr. RE.D. Clark, Victoria Institute 1943 p631.
And finally, some strong words by a most eminent scientist
"Overwhelming strong proofs of intelligent and benevolent design lie around us... The atheistic idea is so nonsensical that I cannot put it into words" [Lord Kelvin Viet Inst. No. 124 p267].

Thursday, 23 July 2015

Science vs Evolution P1: The Power of the Myth

The sources for this series come from the website of the same name owned and run very close to me.
www.sciencevsevolution.co.uk
Some material from Juri Lina's Architects of Deception
Some material from The Rise of the Evolution Fraud by Malcolm Bowden
http://nobelists.weebly.com/uploads/4/0/2/0/4020654/50-nobelists-english.pdf


The Swedish Association Save the Individual (FRI), which combats sects and "saves" people from authoritarian organizations, has listed the criteria that define a destructive movement:

• False declaration of intention and misleading description when recruiting members.
 • Manipulation by psychological methods (mind control) is used during recruitment and indoctrination.
 • An all-powerful leader who demands total subjection and claims to have special knowledge and powers.
 • The ideology must not be questioned, doubt is something evil, which must be fought. 
• The image of reality is black and white: the members are the chosen (good), everything outside of the movement is evil and must be opposed. 
• There is a lot of money involved, which sometimes emanates from crime.
 International freemasonry complies with all these criteria of a destructive sect, but FRI refuses to criticise freemasonry and instead slanders those who expose political freemasonry. On 15 April 2000, the association in Stockholm invited Hakan Blomqvist from Norr- koping to give a public lecture. Blomqvist, who is a professional liar, "humanist" and "Nazi-hunter", refused several times during his lecture to answer the question whether freemasonry was a destructive sect or not. The reader might be able to guess whose interests this man serves. The most dangerous sect of them all - freemasonry - has not detached itself from society, but intervenes in its development in a very negative way. Presumably the freemasons have succeeded in their indoctrination of society, since they are no longer regarded as a serious threat. The masons are in control of the mass media. "If one controls radio, press, school, church, art, science, film - one can transform each truth into a lie, each unreason into reason." (Alf Ahlberg, "Idealen and deras skuggbilder" / 'The Ideals and Their Shadows", Stockholm, 1936, p. 135) The masses have always believed in those gods that propagate themselves most dramatically. "The power to control the news flow is the same thing as the power to control how people think. We boast about free press in the United States. But how free is it really when we receive the same news from all the big media conglomerates and when alternative opinions never reach the majority of Americans? The power to report and describe reality is now in the hands of a few. And the interest of these few powerful people is in opposition to the interest of the people, the general interest. It makes no difference that these media conglomerates have different names and appearances, since they all share the same values, which is a guarantee that we receive cloned information." (The American newspaper The Nation, reported by Aftonbladet, 31 October 1997) The few who control the flow of information belong to inter- national freemasonry. These forces do not care about the interests of the people. Noam Chomsky wrote: "Propaganda works more effectively if one manages to maintain the illusion that the mass media are non-partial observers. Tough debates within invisible boundaries will actually have the effect of strengthening the system." It is not possible to control masonic lodges or other elite struc- tures. We know that a group, which cannot be controlled, im- mediately begins to manipulate the press and believes that it stands above the law. The freemasons use myths as the base of their power in their war against mankind.
(I want to be honest here, Juri Lina's next paragraphs have not been included.
He reports a Rothschild publication that is one of the many purporting that archaeology has disproved the history of the Jews. No....he is a victim of the very same scams of the so called scholars. If you know where to go and manage to get through to the "politically sensitive sites" you will find plenty of evidence, but the Elite don't want you anywhere near....for two reasons:

1. that you get to realise how true the Bible is, and
2. so they can nick any artefacts which they regard as being invested with great power.

 Which is the second point Juri Lina is ignorant of. He says there are no witches. They only rule the planet Juri...but you don't recognise them. As you come into thirdlevel Christianity you learn there is essentially little difference between the top Vatican, Jesuit, Buddhist,Freemasonic, Hermetic order Golden Dawn world. Many dislike using the term Satan, and prefer,Solar Cult, Apollo, Lucifer...bringer of Light. Rothschild just built  a Temple to Apollo in his Oxfordshire "back garden".

 The socalled GREAT WORK is nothing less than the Antichrist system, which comes as a huge shock to New Agers.
You can perfectly well understand Lina's confusion. He may not realise there are two types of Jews.There are people who call themselves Christian but are not born again, are not "regenerate" John 3. And witches are just as likely to be smartly dressed bankers , royalty and bishops....so you can be forgiven for thinking there aren't any.)


Lina continues:
The British astrophysicist Sir Fred Hoyle reached the conclusion that the universe is governed by a greater intelligence. In 1978, Hoyle described the conspirator Charles Darwin's theory of evolution as wrong and claimed that the belief that the first living cell was created in the "sea of life" was just as erroneous. In his book "Evo- lution from Space" (1982), he distanced himself completely from Dar- winism. He stated that "natural selection" could not explain evo- lution. Hoyle asked in his book "The Intelligent Universe" (1983): "Life as we know it is, among other things, dependent on at least 2000 different enzymes. How could the blind forces of the primal sea manage to put together the correct chemical elements to build enzymes?" According to his calculations, the likelihood of this happening is only one in 10 to the 40 000 power (1 followed by 40 000 zeros). That is about the same chance as throwing 50 000 sixes in a row with a die. Or as Hoyle describes it: "The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein... I am at a loss to understand biologists' widespread compulsion to deny what seems to me to be obvious." ("Hoyle on Evolution", Nature, Vol. 294, 12 November 1981, p. 105) The odds are only for enzymes if all other relevant molecules for life are also taken account of in our calculation, the situation for
conventional biology becomes intrinsically insuperable. The unique qualities of man (conscience, morals and religion) do not correspond at all to the evolutionary thesis of "the survival of the fittest". A martyr chooses death rather than forsaking his beliefs. Hoyle stressed that science must once again accept that there is a greater intelligence in the universe. Sir Fred Hoyle believes that Darwin's evolutionary theory is a damaging myth. He stated: "We must adjust ourselves to this in our scientific research programs." The theory of evolution was worked out by the Lunar Society, founded on the initiative of the high-ranking freemason Benjamin Franklin in Birmingham, England in 1765. He later emigrated to America. The members gathered once a month at the full moon. The society was a revolutionary masonic organization that supported the overthrow of monarchies and undermining the belief in God (Ian T. Taylor, "In the Minds of Men: Darwin and the New World Order", Minneapolis, 1984, p. 55). An important member of the Lunar Society was Erasmus Darwin (1731-1802). He became the grandfather of Charles Robert Darwin and between 1794-96 wrote the book "Zoo-nomia, or the Laws of Organic Life", the conclusion of which was the same as that of "On the Origin of Species", which his grandson wrote in 1859. In this way, the freemasons managed to spread misinformation about how we only live one life on Earth and that we are alone in the universe, which created itself out of nothing. According to huma- nists, all human development ends with physical death. Darwin's "The Origin of the Species" is a fraud. The word "evolution" first appeared in the sixth edition, printed in 1872, the same year the author died. In his book "In the Minds of Men: Darwin and the New World Order", the scientist Ian T. Taylor revealed how the Lunar Society and other masonic organizations have led many intellectuals astray with their manipulations and with the aid of "modern" science. Both Erasmus Darwin and his friend James Watt in the Lunar Society were freemasons. The older Darwin was initiated into St David's Lodge No. 36 in Edinburgh in 1754. He later also became a member of Canongate Kilwinning Lodge No. 2 (Freemasonry Today, autumn 1999). Scientists now admit that the Neanderthals were not our forebears, since the DNA analysis of the mitochondria shows that they belonged to another species altogether. Svante Paabo, professor of biology at Munich University, proved that they were not our ancestors (Natur & Vetenskap, No. 9, 1997, p. 11). Charles Darwin later developed an ideology, called humanism, which international freemasonry began to utilise as a weapon against people with spiritual beliefs. Charles Darwin was just an errand boy for the masonic elite. With the help of "humanistic" organizations, the freemasons have spread atheism and other false doctrines. The British quantum physicist Paul Davies, however, postulates in his interesting book "God and the New Physics" (1983) that "a ruling universal consciousness utilises the laws of nature for a determined purpose". In his opinion, quantum physics is the surest way to find God today. Paul Davies writes in an article:  "The very fact that the universe is in the process of creation and that its laws have allowed complex structures to come into existence and develop into conscious life, is for me a strong testimony that something is happening behind the scenes. I find it impossible to deny the impression that everything is planned..." (Svenska Dagbladet, 3 March 1989, p. 14) Sigmund Freud's theory of psychoanalysis was just a huge bluff. This was revealed by, among others, Daniel Stern, an American pro- fessor of psychiatry in Geneva. Freud's so-called regressive model is not true, Stern claims. If it were true, it would be possible to use it to predict people's problems or to show a connection between early disturbances and problems later in life. But this has not been successful (Svenska Dagbladet, 1 June 1990). Freud belonged to the Jewish masonic organization B'nai B'rith (Peter Gay, "Freud", Stockholm, 1990, p. 158). During the period when Freud was working on his theory of psychoanalysis (1880- 1890), he used cocaine daily. Cocaine is a powerful sexual stimulant.

He praised the drug and handed it out to friends and acquaintances. He even wrote "songs of praise" in its honour. Freud introduced cocaine to the Western world.

Juri Lina

THE NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM'S
EXHIBITIONS - June 2008
The Museum has undergone some dramatic changes over the years. There is now a huge area devoted to dinosaurs and another to Human Biology. Most of the displays are purely descriptive, but a good number are all presented in a way that shows just how close we are to animals.
It would be tedious to look at all the many thousands of exhibits and point out their errors of fact or the way in which evolution is promoted, sometimes openly, but often more subtly. It does not require much knowledge of the evidence against evolution to go round the museum's exhibits and note how the theory is being promoted in so very many ways. The reader might like to do this for his own edification and enlightenment to see in what way and to what degree each exhibit promotes evolution.
I will just give few examples, and then look a little more closely at the link the museum has always tried to forge with great effort - the vital link between man and apes.
1. Darwin's statue. For many years statues of Darwin and Huxley were at the end of the main hall, but were then moved to a small area behind. Darwin has now been restored to his former position at the end of the main hall, seated in white splendour overseeing the whole of the hall area below him. What has happened to Huxley's statue I do not know.
2. The Darwin Canopy (left of the Main Hall). At the time of my visit, it was intended that the ceiling would be painted by different artists using themes about Darwin's life.
(i) Finches. The claim that Darwin noticed the different beaks of the finches on the Galapagos islands had now been corrected. It was an ornithologist who pointed this out to him after his return to England.
(ii) Peppered Moth. Another panel was to be about the increase of the dark form of the moth as industrial smoke made the trees darker thus exposing the lighter form to predation. Judith Hooper in her book Of Moths and Men denounced Kettlewell's experiments with these moths which she called "shoddy". The Italian Professor Sermonti published his criticisms of the experiments in 1984 and, following correspondence with him, I also criticised them in 1991 [See Ref.74 second edition p166-178 (First edition p195-211)].
(iii) Human and dog embryos. Darwin did not discover this "similarity". Ernst Haeckel in Germany proposed that embryos went through the phases of evolution of their ancestors - the (so-called) "gill slits" were due to the "fish" ancestry of humans etc. It is now well known that he deliberately faked his drawings to make several em­bryos look alike.

3. Human Biology. Here, there are many models of naked men and women, and there is, as before, a section through two bodies in the act of copulation. Full and graphic details, particularly on the subject of sexual reproduction, are provided in explicit detail. Little is left to the imagination

4. Primates. In the Primates section (1st. floor left gallery) they show how animals engage in bonding, useful play, hierarchies, infant care etc., and humans are shown to have the same characteristics - with the implication that we are not all that much different to them. This continual emphasis on our close relationship with monkeys is predomi­nant here and in the section on "Our Living Relatives" which we examine a little more fully now.
"OUR LIVING RELATIVES" (Upper right Gallery)
The previous title to this display was "Man's place in evolution", both titles looking upon man as only a normal part of the animal kingdom. The first panel is entitled "We belong to the ape family". No distinction here for human beings.
A. Cladograms or "Relationship Charts". It is noticeable that these charts that give the relationships between species are very promi­nent. That man has special and very distinct abilities well beyond those of animals is never mentioned.
B. Homo erectus and fire. A panel says "There is evidence that Homo erectus people living near Beijing [Pekin] in China were able to use fire" and there is a section of ashes about 25cm (10 inches) thick below the panel. In actual fact, a visiting professor to this site revealed that it was a huge pile of ash 7m (24f) high and had been kept burning fora long time! This was a capability well beyond that of apes, and it was probably a lime burning furnace for thebuilding of Pekin.
This panel also mentions "Ash layers, charcoal and burnt bones have been found with Homo erectus remains in a cave site at Zhoudoukian [The excavation site]". This is an interesting twist on what was actually found on this site. In parts of the furnace, they found ape skulls, always broken into pieces. These were immediately publicised as the "ape­men" responsible for the fire. Later still, they found five complete skeletons of human beings in a cave connected to the main furnace area. Usually, it is the monkey skulls only that are mentioned, but here we have the admission that some H. erectus were found in a cave site. That human skeletons were found nearby was unwelcome and they were only reported on in an obscure journal five years later.

"Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless."

What actually happened is that early human hunters caught monkeys in the forests, but as their meat is too tough to eat, they lopped off their heads, brought them back to the site and cooked them, breaking open the skulls to get at the brains, and then tossed the skull pieces onto the fire. These pieces were then "discovered" by our experts who then claimed that the v were the fossils of the makers of the fire! The humans who tended this huge furnace were found much later in the adjacent cave. The scientist reporting on the human fossil finds of the nearby cave site died whilst examining. For full details see Ref. 46 p90-137.
C. The Habilines. These fossils are called Homo habilis (handy­man) because stone tools were found in the vicinity. The most famous of these was 1470 man found by Richard Leakey in 1977. He claimed that it rewrote all human history because it had a large brain capacity for its early dating. Rejecting the first dating, he eventually obtained a much earlier date - which is the one he gave all the publicity to. After much deliberation, he classed it as a habiline. However, recognition of the skull was opposed by other experts because such a comparatively
large brain  and a human shape was too early for the neat line of human evolution. Gradually the fossil was downgraded and in the previous exhibition on this gallery of man's link with apes "Man's place in Evolution", 1470 man was virtually ignored!

All this controversy within their own seems to have been forgotten, and the habilines, with or without 1470 Man, have been called into service to act as yet another "close relation to man "
This gallery about "Our Living Relatives" will be visited by many thousands of children, and my comments about the previous display on this same gallery "Man's Place in Evolution" in the first edition of this book is still relevant today;
-The effectiveness of this indoctrination was brought home to me whilst I was on one of my visits to the museum. The display cases were surrounded by a number of young schoolchildren. The master, in order to emphasise the information they had been looking at, was asking them in a parrot-like fashion "What are you? -- yes, you are a mammal. And are you a primate? Yes you area primate" and "Yes, you are an ape." I am sure that this master was convinced that he was conscientiously teaching his boys simple biological facts. Yet that same master, when faced by those boys later in their teenage rebellious years will no doubt admonish them by telling them to stop behaving like animals, completely forgetting that he had already instructed them with this "fact" only a few years previously!
If people (and particularly the young) are told sufficiently fre­quently that they are only an animal, then we have no cause to complain if eventually they act like one!"

Science  Versus Evolution, magazine pamphlet
We live at a time in history, and in a country, where the theory of Evolution, as popularised by Charles Darwin, is accepted by the masses as an established fact. From school textbooks to the media, young and old alike are
continually taught that we are the product of spontaneous generation, chance evolution; and that mankind is the pinnacle of the evolutionary process.
Those who dare to challenge the status quo and question the validity of the theory of Evolution are soon silenced and labelled as unscientific and/or religious fundamentalists.
The word 'theory' can mean a number of things; it can be 'a speculative ' or conjectural view or idea", or in scientific terms the word 'theory' is used to denote a working hypothesis, such as with the 'general theory of relativity', or 'atomic theory': Wikipedia states: "A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. Scientists create scientific
theories from hypotheses that have been corroborated through the

scientific method, then gather evidence to test their accuracy." I
What will come as a surprise to many, is that, by this definition,the theory of Evolution is not a 'scientific theory' at all. It is not well-substantiated; and it cannot be repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. It is merely a speculative or conjectural view or idea. There is no observable
evidence, nothing that can be tested by the scientific method and proposition. Any so-called scientist who promotes it as a fact, is either blissfully unaware of the overwhelming weight of scientific
evidence to the contrary, or is living in a state of denial.

Michael Ruse, a preeminent evolutionist, wrote in New Scientist:"An increasing number of scientists, most particularly a growing number of evolutionists... argue that Darwinian evolutionary theory is no genuine scientific theory at all... Many of the critics
have the highest intellectual credentials."

 The Scientific Method Professor Louis Bounoure, Director of Research, American National Centre of Scientific Research has gone as far as saying: "Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. it is useless."

Evolution is by definition a religion – 'a belief held to with ardour and faith'; it is a belief system about our past, attempting to explain our origins. Sadly, its converts are often so aggressive in the promotion of their faith that it has put a strangle-hold on science from the classroom to the lab, a fact admitted by honest evolutionists themselves.

Sir Fred Hoyle, a well-respected British astronomer, who demonstrated that evolution is a mathematical impossibility, said: "The situation is well known to geneticists and yet nobody seems to blow the whistle decisively on the theory... Most scientists still cling to Darwinism because of its grip on the education system.  You either have to believe the concepts, or you will be branded a heretic." 
Astronomer, Robert Jastrow, who was the founder of the Goddard Space Insti that sent Pioneer and Voyager into space, commented: "Astronomers are curiously upset by... proof that the universe had a beginning. Their reactions provide an interesting demonstration of the response of the scientific mind — supposedly an objective mind — when evidence uncovered by science itself leads to a conflict with the articles of faith in their profession... There is a kind of religion in science."

One of evolution's most virulent proponents, Richard Dawkins, stated of religion: "Religion demands belief in the supernatural" , but nothing exploding and becoming everything, spontaneous generation of life from non-life, one kind changing into a totally different kind is not a natural occurrence. 
 Evolution therefore demands belief in that which cannot be naturally observed; so belief
in evolution requires belief in the supernatural. Dawkins continues: "Religion requires belief in things cannot be verified by science" . As this article will demonstrate, evolution cannot be verified by science .

Dawkins concludes: "The time has come for people of reason to say: enough is enough. Religious discourages independent thought, it's divisive, and it's dangerous."  Hear, hear Mr Dawkins! By his definitions, evolution "requires belief in things that cannot be verified by science", so is therefore a religion and he is absolutely right, evolution has discouraged independent thought — see the film `Expelled' with Stein for a shocking expose of evolution's strangle-hold on academia — and Dawkins is right, it is divisive and dangerous: Hitler used evolution as justification for his actions in extermination of the 'weaker' and less able to survive. Those who preach the religion of evolution are relentless in their 'great commission'; and there can be no doubt, evolution has been marketed so effectively that the average person in the street would not readily question it.

If the question were asked 'do you believe in evolution?' many would happily answer in the affirmative. were then asked 'do you believe evolution is a proven fact?'the same response would be given. However if you then asked for a single piece of scientific evidence, something that is observable, that doesn't have to be taken by faith, you may get a few who will cry 'fossils' (we will address that later), but the majority will be compelled to point you to the text books, the TV documentaries, or the 'scientists' — for they must have the evidence, right? The vast majority of those accepting evolution are seemingly happy just to put their faith in the 'experts', never stopping to ask questions.
Yet the experts are not nearly as confident as the evolutionary marketing machine would suggest...
One evolutionist, reviewing the work of another, conceded: "We cannot identify ancestors or "missing links" and we cannot devise testable theories to explain how particular episodes of evolution came about... all popular stories about how the first amphibians conquered the dry land, how the birds developed wings and feathers for flying, how the dinosaurs went extinct, and how humans evolved from apes are just products of our imagination, driven by prejudices and preconceptions."
Henry Gee/Peter Bowler American Scientist vol88 April
Dr. Colin Patterson, the senior palaeontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, whist giving keynote address at the American Museum of Natural History, startled his audience with the following evolutionary remarks: "One morning I woke up and... it struck me that I had been working on this stuf twenty years and there was not one thing I knew about it. That's quite a shock to learn that one can be misled for so long... I've tried putting a simple question to various people: 'Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing, any one thing that is true?' I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of evolutionists, and all I got there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said, 'I do know one thing, it ought not to be taught in high school."' the Evidence Bible p1430
TO BE CONTINUED

Tuesday, 21 July 2015

Siren's Call

I've realised since I posted the Golden Dawn blogpost that there is a huge siren's call pulling and dragging Christians as they leave their BOX 1 roots, testing and challenging everything. Listen ....BOX 2 LAND is not wrong.....God cannot have a passionnate relationship with BOX 1 automatons. BOX 2 is better. people have to make Truth their own. But reading the Golden Dawn literature shows absolutely that it is a mirror path to our own one in Christ. Because so few saints are thirdlevellers yet, there are so few real present forerunner pioneers, so in their search for reality and perhaps not a little cynicism and bitterness, people are being sucked towards "Hermetic teachings".....but I have spent the best part of 3 to 4 years studying the historical disasters caused by Hermetical people with Golden Dawn type teachings.
YOU DON'T NEED THIS TEACHING.
IT IS A CLUNKY RIPOFF of Holy place and Holiest place Christianity.
Hermetic teaching claims it comes out of BEING.....
Well if it flaming comes out of being
How come you have to read all the accompanying RITUAL TOMES, and PATHS...and "Enochian magic".....
I'll tell you what comes out of BEING.....
St Peter truly isn't joking when he says we have in us all that pertains to life and godliness.....We do not need to add to Christ....the Holy Spirit will truly lead us into all truth.....
How the MIND works....how step by step thinking works....how seeing in the Spirit works....how doing what the Father is doing works.....and NOT doing what we see the father of lies doing!!!! and cause literally generations of pain and woe....
How LOVE really works and not just the New Age version....
How Christ Himself, the Son of Man, the only begotten Son of God now lives in us as us.....
Just because churches are first and secondlevel only....doesn't mean we follow Golden Dawn and High Freemasonic orders into "The GREAT WORK"
This leads ultimately to possession, but by a wrong deity spirit....LUCIFER. It is the solar cult, following the Egyptian orders and cults....
NO....instead we lay the foundation of the THIRDLEVEL CHURCH. Let the kids play their Christian games....but don't get frustrated and go into the devil's fake spiritual teachings....fake not because they don't work.....but fake because he is seeking bodies through which to manifest himself....
We don't need that....as I said we don't get bitter at the puerile Christianity we see around, we press on toward the mark, believing our new UNION with God Himself.
The devil showers trinkets and fake mirror knowledge and human adulation....
God takes us the path of "coming up from underneath". We don't go to the top table....we live where we are by faith, and let God bring the promotion.
"Like a root out of parched ground". What's such a root look like.....incredibly tough, thick....over the top capable of supply!!!!!
I could take you through the Golden Dawn article line by line explaining what the true Holy Spirit version is in the HOLY PLACE of God's Spirit Church. There is no comparison. Our walk is in UNION with the One that loves us and that we love. He doesn't need esoteric steps and clunky rituals....but every single genuine gather ing of believers will be to purpose, will achieve new things. Look.....Jesus brought 12 normal people through into apostleship in only 3 years.....don't you think that once Jesus is actually allowed to build His thirdlevel Church we shall be zapping people through in at least equal time and perhaps faster.....why? because there was only one human guru while He was in His physical body. Now the Holy Spirit resides and empowers every single member.

Monday, 20 July 2015

A WARNING TO EVERYONE! Jacob Israel

Original Post here

THE TRUMPET SOUNDS! Seriously… please do read this and share this far and wide.

Bare with me everyone because for many I am going to SHARE may sound a bit crazy… But I promise you, I am of sound mind. (I know all crazy people say that… right? … Well, I am not one of them.

I do know this will sound odd. I have never been one to share gloom and doom. So I am fully aware that what I am about to share a bit out of the ordinary, but today I am very much in agreement with inspiration that what I am going to share MUST be shared.

And this is only the first post on this. Tomorrow, a video most likely will follow, and if what I feel in my heart is true, then I expect many more dreams and visions and ideas on the subject to give me plenty of material over the next couple of weeks. As the time may be short to do so.

You have to understand, I am not a conspiracy guy. I had no idea of what was going on in conspiracy chats or blogs or whatever, about military exercises and a comet that might hit the earth. But I DO know, that I was woke up last night inspired once again, with something new to say.
That being said, I have learned from experience to listen and to simply act upon what I am inspired to do, when I know without a shadow of a doubt that I MUST SHARE IT.

So here it goes,

For months now I have been telling others by September 15 there is going to be a huge change in my life, possibly the world. My wife, my colleagues, friends close to me, and other spiritual men and women I know on here will attest to this.
So try and follow me here…

Last couple of nights I have had dreams and ideas/visions that I should start telling people that now is the time to truly LOVE and to CHANGE the way they live their life.I have been feeling lately like I needed to warn them.
Why? You ask.

Because things in this world are going to change very drastically, very soon… Things are going to get much, much worse. That’s right I am talking like end of days worse… THE GOOD NEWS being this leads to something truly beautiful.

Now for years, I have written that the things we read about in Revelation as well as the entire body of scripture is meant to be taken allegorically. And while that was true for me, and for many like me, who have woken up to the reality of “God” and Love, for the rest of the world I have now come to believe these events are quite literal. Which is why, I have been haunted by Inspiration telling me to WARN THEM…

Sounds a bit odd, I know. But, you have to trust me, I do believe in a little while as the scriptures state, “God will once again shake the heavens and the earth, and shake all nations, and the desired of all Nations will come, so the HOUSE of God (us) may be filled with glory”…

In others words, things in the world are going to get much worse if we don’t return to LOVE … But if we do, as Ninevah was spared so may the wicked in this world as well… So may this world be spared from, what my dream would seem to imply, could be the beginning of sorrows, also known as Jacob’s trouble ironically.

I know that sounds nutty… But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true. I have a history of saying things will happen before they happen, not bragging just stating a fact. If you know me, you will know this to be true.

And again, I don’t just say attention grabbing things to get attention either… I for years didn’t believe any of it could be true…
That has changed!

So, I want you to know that to say, I have ruled out the possibility that this is simply an over active imagination on my part. I am rational very successful man both in life and business… So I don’t consider this a flippant post but one that I believe must be shared immediately.

My faith and passion to serve God (inspiration, love, peace, truth) will always trump public opinion of me.

So last night, after a dream of my wife preparing a fatted calf, and hearing the words, warn them of what is to come in my heart, … I woke up Danielle and we spoke for about an hour. I told her of my fear, and explained of the many coincidences that have led me to this BELIEF that the world was going to go through a terrible time…

I wrote about this in my novel, in fact the whole “fiction” led up to the main character stating… SHAKING WAS COMING UNLIKE ANYTHING THE WORLD HAS EVER KNOWN.

As I said, for awhile now SEPT 15 I thought was about me, about everything changing for me… BUT NOW I KNOW IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT ME… it is about the world as a whole.

Throughout the day, I had unnerving coincidences that continued to point me into this direction, where I am sharing with you all tonight.
I will share some…

Today, I found out, as it turns out this SEPTEMBER 15 I have been talking about, also happens to be THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES (literally)

But it gets better, on Sept 13, 14 it is time for the the FEAST OF TRUMPETS … This is ironic considering I have been writing about this very moment recently, my 144,000 essay, my videos about it, my Trumpet shall sound Video and more leading up to this moment.

But it gets more surreal.

Before this day according to scripture the MOON will not give it’s light …

Matthew 24:29
“Immediately after the distress of those days “‘the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light…

And coincidently on Sept 13,14 there is a NEW MOON! (GOOGLE IT)

Which means, the Moon before this day sept 15 literally will not give off its light.

Not to mention also on September 13 there is going to be a partial Solar Eclipse. That is a whole heck of a lot of coincidence. But read on, there is more.

This is how Jonah must have felt … I on the other hand, prefer not to be swallowed by the great fish and brought to the depths of hell before realizing I should of said something to begin with.

And as I prayed SHOULD I REALLY COME ON HERE AND SAY SOMETHING… I get an email from my good friend Bob, who is asking me to do a voice over for the trailer of his novel, whose lead character is loosely based on me “Noah Israel the voice in the dead woods” — Take a look at the voice over copy I receive.

Bob Souliske 8:26pm
We tried to warn them, so many times in so many ways.
They would not listen. Now the price has been paid.
The darkness has fallen and the long night has descended.
There is still hope, it flickers softly.
Even in the darkness there is always a shimmer of light.
Hope has sparked our conviction and our conviction has strengthened our resolve. We will be the light that shines in the darkness. We will be that voice that echoes through out creation.
“We will be free.”

My prayer… should I warn them… answered quite literally within seconds of me praying it.

Everything is about to change, unless everyone changes … So please LOVE LOVE LOVE

We shouldn’t need a major natural disaster to turn us back to the Lord of Love and Peace, we shouldn’t need earthquakes and a star falling from the sky to remind us that it is better to love than hate.

So for lack of a better word, and at the risk of sounding like that guy … Repent (turn back to love)
I am not saying the world is coming to an end, just an fyi, but I DO know an END OF SOMETHING IS COMING… and I believe that to be MAN’S WICKED WAYS.

I have been saying September 15 for a long while (i thought that had to do with my career, as I said before) however, I am dedicated to following what many consider to be Inspiration, I will call it GOD…

I think the coincidence is too coincidental … Call me what you will… But before doing so, take these words to heart.
AFTER THE DISTRESS… the scriptures also speak of a STAR FALLING from the sky… In scripture it is known as wormwood…
AND GUESS WHAT… On September 15, 2015 — A COMET (star) may just fall from the sky… right after the literal moon is literally darkened (new Moon)

http://www.conspiracyclub.co/…/nasa-confirms-2-5-mile-wide…/

COME ON! REALLY? I and my friend Charlie thought… How is this all possible? Why was I woke up from this dream and vision and inspired to warn the world?

I KNEW NOTHING, NOTHING ABOUT ALL OF THIS… I never heard of star or comet approaching the earth… I didn’t know about the military exercises going on around September 15 — google it…

http://www.nytimes.com/…/in-texas-a-military-exercise-is-me…

SO I AM HERE TO WARN YOU… after all of that, and more that I can’t even begin to explain in this one post… I KNOW THIS IS MORE THEN A SYMBOLIC EVENT… so please let us get together and LOVE, LOVE, LOVE

Think about it… What if God is real? What if THIS is the time of his “coming/revealing”? I know those who claim to believe, don’t really believe, which is why even your religious leader commit unspeakable acts in the name of God on a regular basis.

Well the time of God winking at such behavior is over….

Think what you want about me… But I know what I know and what you do with it is up to you… I know there will be more to come…

24 hours after sharing this I have received a huge outpouring of support and of course my fair share of attacks.

Readers of mine also opened my eyes to the the Blood Moon Tetrad — which of course is also an unlikely celestial event, also taking place in September…

“The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord,” – Joel 2:31

“The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord.” – Acts 2:20

There seems to be a feeling out there that something big is about to happen. Another reader informed me of Shemittah … In fact, three witnesses brought this to my attention.

The Shemittah year ends coincidently on September 13 as well… Which is outlined below…

At the end of seven years you will make a release. And this is the manner of the release: to release the hand of every creditor from what he lent his friend; he shall not exact from his friend or his brother, because the time of the release for the L‑rd has arrived. (Deuteronomy 15:1–2)

Many people are making their rounds saying that there will be a financial collapse … The culmination of the Shemittah Year “the release of debt” happens at the end of seven years …

Side note: I recently did a video about the Gypsy Moths that appeared everywhere in my back yard recently, after seven years of hibernation Mind you.

In any event, many are saying (just found this out) that they believe there will be a global financial collapse…

http://www.infowars.com/the-shemitah-the-biblical-pattern-which-indicates-that-a-financial-collapse-may-be-coming-in-2015/

Now if there be an event, that possibly wipes out of grid… Well, everyone’s debt would be wiped clean indeed…

My friends, that is a WHOLE LOT of coincidence … None of which I was aware of until the night before last when I woke up understanding that I needed to warn the world that EVERYTHING IS ABOUT TO CHANGE… And I do believe it.

As I have been saying on social media, credibility be damned, public opinion be damned, Let God be true and I am committed to doing what inspiration tells me to do.

I have nothing to gain by sharing this. Up until this point the majority of what I shared was to reveal the symbolism and the allegory of scripture to understand the spiritual …

But now, I am here to say I believe we LITERALLY will see a Global shift, crisis, event, etc that we have never before seen… So we need to LOVE now more than ever before. We need to repent. We need to return to the Lord.

So keep watch, because very shortly, things are going to get very interesting. I love you, PLEASE DO SHARE THIS MESSAGE and the ONES TO FOLLOW, Below you will find a Video I did to further explain my heart, which I hope helps you understand why I am doing what I am doing.

“Immediately after the distress of those days “ ‘the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’ “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. (Matthew 24:29-34 NIV)
I Love You All, Jacob