Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Note:

Holy hell I have been busy. Between school stuff and writing papers I've also been learning Trace Bundy's arrangment of Pachelbel's Canon. It is easily one of the most difficult guitar pieces I've learned but I can, bar by bar, play it entirely. Now I just have to string it together. Also I'm getting my Tremarctos tattoo soon! 

Sunday, October 5, 2008

Evolutionism alert!

I recently stumbled upon Project Creation while plodding through the vast sea of pro-creation websites. The site makes many broad generalizations about evolution, and is starved for an understanding of the basic principles! Here are the "Three Questions to Ask those that think evolutionism is based on science." That's right, evolutionism.

Question 1) Where did the information in DNA come from originally?
Well, I'll be frank. The jury's out on this one. There are many people who could tackle this better than me. I'm not going to pretend to know shit about molecular biology.

Question 2) How can mutations that are only capable of rearranging or losing information, cause brand new information to appear?
Okay, this one I can do. It's a pretty fucked up question to begin with because the rearranging of bases produces what would be called new "information". Also, I'm a little bothered by his use of information because in this instance(and most instances probably) he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. New genetic material can in fact be added to the gene through the processes of duplication and mutation. The case that jumps to mind is MRSA(methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus). Staphylococcous aureus was discovered in 1880 by Alexander Ogston. Since it's discovery several strains have shown resistance to the antibiotic methicillin. The first instance of MRSA was reported in 1961 only two years after methicillin was introduced. If you looked at the genome of S. Aureus and MRSA you would find that MRSA has extra genetic information that S. Aureus does not.

Question 3) Why is there no evidence of 2, 4, 8 celled animals etc., ever having lived?
There is abundant evidence for one-celled animals in both the living world and the fossil record, but there is not one shred of evidence of any animal above the one-celled level until it reaches many thousands of cells in multi-cellular creatures. Yet if evolution were true there should be innumerable examples of 2, 4, 8 celled animals in both the living world and fossil record. In fact if evolution were true it should be impossible to classify animals by families at all. We shouldn’t find a world full of cats and dogs and cows and horses. What we should see around us is a world filled with dats and cogs and hows and corses, a blending of all of the different kinds of animals. The existence of distinct kinds of creatures as well as the lack of intermediate animals is clear evidence of a created world. This problem for evolutionists became so clear that several of the best known evolutionists of the 20th century had to invent what they called punctuated equilibrium. Their speculation was that for long periods in the past animals remained essentially unchanged, maintaining equilibrium, and then suddenly something happened to cause a major change very rapidly, a punctuation of that equilibrium. Those who support this idea maintain that change happened so fast that there was no fossil evidence of the change from one kind to another. So for people who promote punctuated equilibrium, the lack of fossil evidence is their proof for punctuated equilibrium.

That is his assertion. I don't even know how to begin to approach that level of idiocy. I did contact the guy so hopefully I'll have an interview with him up soon.