"This post reminded me of a worksheet that I was made to do in my public high school (religion of atheism thrust upon a 'secular' system...I digress). And I was appalled to see the sheet again recently, being used by a professor for his students (masters, PhD), who are my colleagues at work. Unfortunately I can't find this worksheet online, but I'll explain it. Picture about 20-25 black and white simplistic computer drawings of "animals". The kind of hamster-size animals that you may expect to see in a cheesy space movie, crawling out of a lunar scum puddle. Exactly. Each of these drawings is a bit like the other, but no two are quite alike; there are variations. The student is to cut each out and paste them, making cladograms depicting lineage. Evolutionists are entertaining for me. It's never a dull moment when "studying" evolution, because if you have conflicting evidence, you make something up to fill the gap. Or you just ignore the way genes work... Back to the worksheet. The evolutionist(s) who made this worksheet were so desperate to 'show' evolution to students that they had to recruit make-believe critters because out of all the 7.77 million species of animals and almost 300,000 species of plants to ever exist on Earth (I googled "how many species of animals ever existed), they couldn't fine ONE to showcase macro evolution. Yes, the famed Galapagos finches had beaks that changed. That's a design in the genetic code for adaptation (aka micro evolution), put there by Someone who wanted His creation to thrive.
I've learned what evolutionists teach. I've learned what creationists teach. I know that many a time, the evidence simply is interpreted in different ways, depending on one's own bias. Attempting to set down the bias and consider all known hard facts (no theories, no assumptions, etc.), what makes sense to you? Does it make sense that vertical standing petrified trees would be buried far in the ground? Does it make sense that discoveries of dinosaur and ice age animal flesh is still found fresh (soft material not completely mineralized or fossilized) and DNA quality? Does it make sense that just as all cars have a chassis as part of the structural base, many animals share bone structures that are similar in order to have similar connectivity and function? Evolutionists used to study vertebrate embryos of many different species to show evolutionary links or similarities. But now they don't because that proved to be a dead end. Whenever I think of how life could begin (assuming all elements, some molecules, a habitable planet: gravity, habitable atmospheric pressure, a source of sustenance, etc. are provided), I then think how the first cell (wow! that was a quick jump from molecules to an organism!!) was so lucky that it could respirate, expel waste, repair damage/sustain itself, become mobile (?), feed, and reproduce (asexually, I would think) before the helpless thing could better itself (mutations! ooh la la) and populate a world. I dunno. It just seems a bit far fetched. Everyone's opinion is their own, but to me, a human comprehension can not fully comprehend God (the Yaweh, of the Bible) and His will and His understanding. So we can't fully understand the workings of the universe in its full. To think we could do so would be attempting to elevate ourselves with God; the blasphemy! Not all evidence for creationism is easy-peasy to explain; of course there are conundrums. But to me, as a whole, it makes a bit more sense than the assumptions and randomness of macro evolution theories. In the right attitude, studying His handiwork is worship."
Well I didn't mean to write an essay but it seems I have! Foods for thoughts 🍕
Penny for YOUR thoughts? 💰
The Professor saw my post and was kind enough to willingly give me my evidence XD
Resources: "Undeniable" by Douglas Axe, https://answersingenesis.org/theory-of-evolution/evolution-theory-fact-or-law/?utm_source=facebook-aig&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=facebook-aig
