Should Darwinists Be Straitjacketed ?
In a debate with an atheist on alt.religion.mormon, he said in regards to Mormonism:
"In sanity we are taught that fairy tales aren't reality, and that people who believe that they are aren't sane."
Kenneth Poppe in his book "Reclaiming Science from Darwinism" called evolution a fairy tale for grownups. I doubt YOU are sane at all.
(excerpt from Reclaiming Science from Darwinism; Kenneth Poppe):
These blind alleys dismissed, the book (textbook) usually gives the correct view for the origin of cellular life, using Pasteur's famous "soup in a flask" experiment. Pictures show how boiled broth left in an open container developed the contamination of bacterial life, while boiled broth in a flask sealed from microbes in the air did not--thereby proving that only life gives rise to life. And to be sure that the impressionable young reader understands that superstitious theories cannot account for life, the author is likely to close with the cell theory. This theory has three tenets:
1. The cell is the basic unit of life.
2. All organisms are made of cells.
3. All cells come from other cells.
The heart of the cell theory is the third statement, which says a new cell can only come from a preexisting cell.
"Where was there ever a son without a father? And where was there ever a father without first being a son? Whenever did a tree or anything spring into existence without a progenitor? And everything comes in this way." (Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected and arranged by Joseph Fielding Smith, p.373)
To add on top of Louis Pasteur proven law that only life comes from life meaning that spontaneous generation is false something the Prophet Joseph Smith knew of even before Pasteur, we know that the first law of thermodynamics says that matter and energy has always been in existence and more cannot be created. The second law of thermodynamics also known as entropy says that all matter and energy has a natural inclination to disorganize itself. That's why people get old and die. That's why things like cars and houses deteriorate unless you take constant care of it but they are always in a ceaseless process of degeneration. So to claim as Darwinists like yourself believe that lifeless atoms by a random process over billions of years formed the first cell which scientists are increasingly becoming appreciative of its amazingly complex molecular structure is an absolute lie because it directly contradicts the 2nd law. That's like saying water flows uphill not downhill. It would be easier for a person to throw up a deck of cards into the air and land as a house of cards. Or a tornado to blow through a junkyard and put together a Cadillac. It's completely absurd.
36 The fundamental premise of evolution is that organisms sprang into being from a random chance collision of molecules in a "primordial sea" or "soup" and that these admittedly simple organisms "evolved"-a term coined by some fat victorian naturalist-into more complex organisms by an equally random, chance process.
37 First of all this process in its description breaks one of the fundamental laws of physics, the second law of thermodynamics, which states that everything in nature naturally proceeds from a high energy level which is usually less stable, to a low energy state (in other words, water runs downhill, not up).
38 A specific case of this law states that through a process called entropy, systems prefer to be in a disorganized state, rather than one that has a high degree of organization, such as a human body, in other words, things in nature proceed from a state of order through entropy to a state of disorder (I speak of random collisions of molecules).
39 A system which is organized has inherently more energy, not less than one than one which is disorganized.
40 Hence the need for an energy input of some source to effect this organization.
41 Random chance cannot explain the existence of such a monumentally complex organization as that of the human body!
42 It takes a great deal of faith of the blind kind to believe in such an absurd proposition.
43 It takes more than I am capable of mustering.
44 A specific example of this absurdity, according to the laws of mathematics which we stated that the theory of evolution must conform to, or else be labeled as false, which it is is this: suppose we take the random arisal of not an organism, but just one protein molecule (of which there must be a specific combination of billions upon billions of these different proteins in a specific way to form a single organism, a puzzle which in its complexity staggers the capacity of all the computers in all the world to put together).
45 Now according to a good sourceb, the average length of this one protein molecule of about 100 amino acids in length (there being in the body some proteins much longer than this in length).
46 According to the laws of mathematical probability, what are the chances of this one specific protein which is necessary in the formation of an enzyme which is absolutely necessary for, say, the digestion of starch [just for the sake of argument]?
47 According to mathematical probability which you can read in any elementary textbook on College Algebra, (Darwin obviously did not have access to one), the chances of this one protein needed for the digestion of starch randomly arising in this primordial soup is one in 20^100!
48 This is one in 20 to the 100th power!
49 This is approximately equal to 10^130.
50 To give you an idea of the immensity of this number, suppose we say that we give evolutionists 10 billion (10^10) years to make good their claims not for just this earth but for the entire universe which is estimated by to contain 10^22 stars.c Now for each of these stars, let's be generous and give not only one earth, but ten "earths" upon which this one random chance protein molecule is to arise.
51 Therefor, according to the law of the addition of exponents, the total number of earths would be 10^(22+1)= 10^23.
52 Now let us give each "earth" oceans the same size as the ones here which are calculated by volume to contain roughly 10^46 molecules of water.d So the total number of molecules contained in all the oceans on all the "earths" in the universe (estimated) is 10^23 X 10^46, or 10^69 (10 to the 69th power) molecules.
53 Now suppose for the sake of these poor evolutionists, we say that each ocean is filled not with water, but amino acids, the building blocks of protein.
54 This means that there are a total according to our mathematical calculations which do not lie, of 1069 amino acids from which this one protein needed for the digestion of starch to "evolve".
55 Now to really give these poor evolutionists a sporting chance (I say 'poor' because they are less than that along with everyone else who is duped into believing their lies, for their eternities are effected), lets say that all of these amino acids, combine, not once a year or every ten years (both of which are absolutely impossible) but every second of every year in the 10^10 years which is estimated by our brave brethren, the scientists, to be the age of the universe, to form proteins all of them exactly 100 amino acids in length.
56 Now this would mean that every second, 10^67 proteins exactly 100 amino acids long would be formed.
57 Now how many seconds are there in 10 billions of years There are 10^8 seconds approximately, in a year (actually there are a little less than that number).
58 This would mean that over all the space and time imaginable, there would be 10^10 X 10^8 X 10^67 = 10^85 chances for this one protein to come into being!
59 But we said that the total number of combinations of amino acids 100 in length which are possible is 20^100 which is approximately equal to
10^130.
60 This would mean that the chances of this one protein (not an entire being) necessary for the digestion of starch to randomly form, as the evolutionists claim, is one in 10^130/10^85 which is equal to one in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 which is for all intents and purposes, zero.
Revelations of Jesus Christ section 14
(I thought this would be interesting to note that Joseph Smith and the early Mormons knew of the first law of thermodynamics even before scientists formulated it:)
You ask the learned doctors; why they say the world was made out of nothing; and they will answer, "Doesn't the Bible say He created the world?" And they infer, from the word create, that it must have been made out of nothing. Now, the word create came from the word baurau which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship. Hence, we infer that God had materials to organize the world out of chaos--chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time he had. The pure principles of element are principles which can never be destroyed; they may be organized and re-organized, but not destroyed. They had no beginning, and can have no end. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 350-352; DHC 6:309)
"There is not a hint in all the Bible that God created this or any other world out of nothing. The work of creation was to take the materials that existed from all eternity, that never were [28] created or made out of nothing, to take these self-existent materials and organize them into a world. This is called creation." (Apostle and scientist Orson Pratt, JD 16:315)
President Brigham Young:
If I were a sectarian, I would say, according to their philosophy, as I have heard many of them say hundreds of times, "God created all things out of nothing; in six days he created the world out of nothing." You may be assured the Latter-day Saints do not believe any such thing. They believe God brought forth material out of which he formed this little terra firma upon which we roam. How long had this material been in existence? Forever and forever, in some shape, in some conditions. We need not refer at all to those who were with God, and who assisted him in this work. (JD 18:232)
"In sanity we are taught that fairy tales aren't reality, and that people who believe that they are aren't sane."
Kenneth Poppe in his book "Reclaiming Science from Darwinism" called evolution a fairy tale for grownups. I doubt YOU are sane at all.
(excerpt from Reclaiming Science from Darwinism; Kenneth Poppe):
These blind alleys dismissed, the book (textbook) usually gives the correct view for the origin of cellular life, using Pasteur's famous "soup in a flask" experiment. Pictures show how boiled broth left in an open container developed the contamination of bacterial life, while boiled broth in a flask sealed from microbes in the air did not--thereby proving that only life gives rise to life. And to be sure that the impressionable young reader understands that superstitious theories cannot account for life, the author is likely to close with the cell theory. This theory has three tenets:
1. The cell is the basic unit of life.
2. All organisms are made of cells.
3. All cells come from other cells.
The heart of the cell theory is the third statement, which says a new cell can only come from a preexisting cell.
"Where was there ever a son without a father? And where was there ever a father without first being a son? Whenever did a tree or anything spring into existence without a progenitor? And everything comes in this way." (Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected and arranged by Joseph Fielding Smith, p.373)
To add on top of Louis Pasteur proven law that only life comes from life meaning that spontaneous generation is false something the Prophet Joseph Smith knew of even before Pasteur, we know that the first law of thermodynamics says that matter and energy has always been in existence and more cannot be created. The second law of thermodynamics also known as entropy says that all matter and energy has a natural inclination to disorganize itself. That's why people get old and die. That's why things like cars and houses deteriorate unless you take constant care of it but they are always in a ceaseless process of degeneration. So to claim as Darwinists like yourself believe that lifeless atoms by a random process over billions of years formed the first cell which scientists are increasingly becoming appreciative of its amazingly complex molecular structure is an absolute lie because it directly contradicts the 2nd law. That's like saying water flows uphill not downhill. It would be easier for a person to throw up a deck of cards into the air and land as a house of cards. Or a tornado to blow through a junkyard and put together a Cadillac. It's completely absurd.
36 The fundamental premise of evolution is that organisms sprang into being from a random chance collision of molecules in a "primordial sea" or "soup" and that these admittedly simple organisms "evolved"-a term coined by some fat victorian naturalist-into more complex organisms by an equally random, chance process.
37 First of all this process in its description breaks one of the fundamental laws of physics, the second law of thermodynamics, which states that everything in nature naturally proceeds from a high energy level which is usually less stable, to a low energy state (in other words, water runs downhill, not up).
38 A specific case of this law states that through a process called entropy, systems prefer to be in a disorganized state, rather than one that has a high degree of organization, such as a human body, in other words, things in nature proceed from a state of order through entropy to a state of disorder (I speak of random collisions of molecules).
39 A system which is organized has inherently more energy, not less than one than one which is disorganized.
40 Hence the need for an energy input of some source to effect this organization.
41 Random chance cannot explain the existence of such a monumentally complex organization as that of the human body!
42 It takes a great deal of faith of the blind kind to believe in such an absurd proposition.
43 It takes more than I am capable of mustering.
44 A specific example of this absurdity, according to the laws of mathematics which we stated that the theory of evolution must conform to, or else be labeled as false, which it is is this: suppose we take the random arisal of not an organism, but just one protein molecule (of which there must be a specific combination of billions upon billions of these different proteins in a specific way to form a single organism, a puzzle which in its complexity staggers the capacity of all the computers in all the world to put together).
45 Now according to a good sourceb, the average length of this one protein molecule of about 100 amino acids in length (there being in the body some proteins much longer than this in length).
46 According to the laws of mathematical probability, what are the chances of this one specific protein which is necessary in the formation of an enzyme which is absolutely necessary for, say, the digestion of starch [just for the sake of argument]?
47 According to mathematical probability which you can read in any elementary textbook on College Algebra, (Darwin obviously did not have access to one), the chances of this one protein needed for the digestion of starch randomly arising in this primordial soup is one in 20^100!
48 This is one in 20 to the 100th power!
49 This is approximately equal to 10^130.
50 To give you an idea of the immensity of this number, suppose we say that we give evolutionists 10 billion (10^10) years to make good their claims not for just this earth but for the entire universe which is estimated by to contain 10^22 stars.c Now for each of these stars, let's be generous and give not only one earth, but ten "earths" upon which this one random chance protein molecule is to arise.
51 Therefor, according to the law of the addition of exponents, the total number of earths would be 10^(22+1)= 10^23.
52 Now let us give each "earth" oceans the same size as the ones here which are calculated by volume to contain roughly 10^46 molecules of water.d So the total number of molecules contained in all the oceans on all the "earths" in the universe (estimated) is 10^23 X 10^46, or 10^69 (10 to the 69th power) molecules.
53 Now suppose for the sake of these poor evolutionists, we say that each ocean is filled not with water, but amino acids, the building blocks of protein.
54 This means that there are a total according to our mathematical calculations which do not lie, of 1069 amino acids from which this one protein needed for the digestion of starch to "evolve".
55 Now to really give these poor evolutionists a sporting chance (I say 'poor' because they are less than that along with everyone else who is duped into believing their lies, for their eternities are effected), lets say that all of these amino acids, combine, not once a year or every ten years (both of which are absolutely impossible) but every second of every year in the 10^10 years which is estimated by our brave brethren, the scientists, to be the age of the universe, to form proteins all of them exactly 100 amino acids in length.
56 Now this would mean that every second, 10^67 proteins exactly 100 amino acids long would be formed.
57 Now how many seconds are there in 10 billions of years There are 10^8 seconds approximately, in a year (actually there are a little less than that number).
58 This would mean that over all the space and time imaginable, there would be 10^10 X 10^8 X 10^67 = 10^85 chances for this one protein to come into being!
59 But we said that the total number of combinations of amino acids 100 in length which are possible is 20^100 which is approximately equal to
10^130.
60 This would mean that the chances of this one protein (not an entire being) necessary for the digestion of starch to randomly form, as the evolutionists claim, is one in 10^130/10^85 which is equal to one in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 which is for all intents and purposes, zero.
Revelations of Jesus Christ section 14
(I thought this would be interesting to note that Joseph Smith and the early Mormons knew of the first law of thermodynamics even before scientists formulated it:)
You ask the learned doctors; why they say the world was made out of nothing; and they will answer, "Doesn't the Bible say He created the world?" And they infer, from the word create, that it must have been made out of nothing. Now, the word create came from the word baurau which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship. Hence, we infer that God had materials to organize the world out of chaos--chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time he had. The pure principles of element are principles which can never be destroyed; they may be organized and re-organized, but not destroyed. They had no beginning, and can have no end. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 350-352; DHC 6:309)
"There is not a hint in all the Bible that God created this or any other world out of nothing. The work of creation was to take the materials that existed from all eternity, that never were [28] created or made out of nothing, to take these self-existent materials and organize them into a world. This is called creation." (Apostle and scientist Orson Pratt, JD 16:315)
President Brigham Young:
If I were a sectarian, I would say, according to their philosophy, as I have heard many of them say hundreds of times, "God created all things out of nothing; in six days he created the world out of nothing." You may be assured the Latter-day Saints do not believe any such thing. They believe God brought forth material out of which he formed this little terra firma upon which we roam. How long had this material been in existence? Forever and forever, in some shape, in some conditions. We need not refer at all to those who were with God, and who assisted him in this work. (JD 18:232)
Labels: Bible, darwinism, evolution, joseph smith, mormon, religion
posted by Anonymous at
4:54 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home