Creation and Biological Production Clocks

When an engineer is contracted for a project, many things must be established from the beginning. Production clocks are essential because a project would be chaotic if things were not done properly and in order. Embryonic clocks support a creation science model for biological engineering.

Credit: Freeimages / Frederic Carmel

In a study of chicken embryos, researchers saw that development progresses in a distinct order. There are several biological development clocks in organisms, some work faster, slower, adjust speeds, and more. They also sense conditions in their environments and adjust accordingly. This specified complexity cannot be explained by molecules-to-mother evolution, but makes complete sense when we realize that we have a Creator. This Creator has explained himself in the Bible.

Two recent findings in biology add confirmation that biological functions are best characterized by engineering principles. This research describes a number of sophisticated internal clocks that control the timing of key events during embryological development. These clocks are part of systems that function just like a construction schedule used to guide decisions by human project managers.

. . .

Both embryological development and human-engineered building projects assemble materials into a final pre-determined product. It would seem, therefore, that a design-based framework to model embryological development could be readily created. It is true that intra-cellular information and DNA do, in many ways, correspond to the plans and specifications produced by human engineers.

You can read the entire article in context by clicking on "Embryonic 'Clocks' Mimic Human Construction Schedules".





Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Ancient Seeds and the Master Engineer

During some archaeology work in Israel, some seeds were discovered dated at about 2,000 years old. Date is the operative word with two meanings because they were date palm tree seeds. Using controlled conditions, some of those seeds were coaxed into growing.

Phoenix dactylifera image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Wilfredo R Rodriguez (CC0 1.0 PD)

An engineer will develop something for a purpose, and more advanced techniques are included to deal with adverse contingencies. The Master Engineer loads a tremendous amount of genetic information into seeds, and they can die and then come back. More than that, the organisms that come from seeds are also designed to reproduce. Dates are popular for their taste and health benefits, and even medicinal qualities; clearly they are one of God's provisions for humanity.

The extinct Judean variety of Phoenix dactylifera seeds grew, their genome was sequenced and agricultural processes from way back when were discerned. The clever folks used what is now called artificial selection. Researchers now have both male and female trees, and hope to have some pollination happening and bring back the original date palm trees. Of course, homage to Papa Darwin was used. It was nothing but a distraction and was completely irrelevant to the actual science involved.

Trees of a now-extinct date palm celebrated for its fruit have sprouted from 2,000-year-old seeds recovered from Israel.
. . .

Date seeds, growing in clusters from certain varieties of palm trees, have long been relished for their taste and medicinal properties. Date palms are familiar sights to travelers in deserts of Israel and southern California. One particular variety of date palm named Phoenix dactylifera, “described in antiquity for the quality, size, and medicinal properties of its fruit,” had been lost for centuries, say Sallon et al., publishing in Science Advances.

You can read the entire article (bring a date along if you like) by clicking on "Seeds from Time of Christ Sprout, Grow Trees in Israel". The short video below from 2016 has some interesting information from before further developments occurred.






Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

The Genesis Flood and Roman Concrete?

We have seen many examples of how evolutionary anthropology and chronological snobbery leads people to think that since we are living in a technologically advanced society, we is far more smarter than ancient folks. Neanderthals proved that wrong, but we can see that the ancient Romans were also intelligent.

Ancient Roman concrete wall image credit: Flickr / Xerones (CC by-NC 2.0)

Think about it. There are remnants of Roman construction that are a couple thousand years old or more, yet we have concrete buildings constructed by the cheapest bidder that may not last more than a few decades — even with above water. Those old boys way back then knew what they were doing, and this shows in their seaside construction. Similar scientific principles were used by the Romans can also be seen in sedimentation from the Genesis Flood!

The ancient Romans used a type of concrete that is far more durable in seaside applications than our modern concrete. Modern cement in constant contact with the sea eventually weakens, and the steel reinforcing inside then rusts as salty water travels into cracks in the structure. It takes only a few decades for the concrete to begin crumbling away.

However, Roman marine concrete actually cured into a very tough material identical to hard rock. Two millennia old Roman piers and breakwaters are still standing rock-solid today.

To read the rest, click on "Ancient Roman concrete … just like natural rock".





Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Dark Energy May Fade to Black

First, a word of caution. We keep seeing how materialists get all excited and shoot holes in the saloon ceiling in their exuberance about something they think proves something, then it turns out to be nothing. Research shows big problems in the belief in dark energy.

Type 1a supernova 2005ke image credit: NASA /Swift /S. Immler
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)

The Big Bang took center stage as the main cosmogony by secularists and compromising churchians. However, observations and additional calculations found flaws, so rescuing devices like dark matter and dark energy were cobbled together. They may look good in models, but since they presuppose naturalism instead of the Creator, it is no surprise that further adjustments are frequently necessary for cosmic evolution.

You know how fundamentalists evolutionists will say foolish things like, "Write a paper and get it peer reviewed, then get a Nobel Prize!" The prize is not all it's cracked up to be, and the paper giving evidence for dark energy won it, but like so many other secular research, it used incomplete methods. 

New research shows that dark energy is not as helpful as was once thought. There was no actual evidence anyway, it was taken by faith because it was required by the Big Bang and cosmic inflation. There are many details involved in the story, but let's be a mite cautious before we go hollering, "Yippie ky yay, secularists!" You savvy? We need to see how it plays out and keep watching for further developments.

The cosmological world was upset in the late 1990s when two teams of astronomers independently found evidence for dark energy. To put this into context, we must briefly survey modern cosmology.
. . .

Dark energy quickly became widely accepted and adapted to the big bang model. But now a new study has called into question the reality of dark energy. These researchers found evidence that other factors could cause type Ia supernovae to appear fainter than expected. They argue that the peak brightness of type Ia supernovae depended upon properties of the galaxies that the supernovae are in. Factors included the morphology (shape), mass, and inferred star formation rate of the host galaxies. The paper suggests that this implies a link between type Ia supernovae brightness and stellar population.

You can read the entire article in context by following the link to "Rethinking Dark Energy: A Fly in the Cosmic Ointment".

The video below is from a secular source and discusses some of why the new dark energy paper is such a big problem:






Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Secularist Religious Hypocrisy in Brazil

Since politicians are known to light a shuck out of there when confronted by loud special interest groups, it should be interesting to see how long this lasts. In January of 2020, the administration of Brazil's president appointed a creation advocate for their graduate study programs. Secularists are angry.

Angry, I tell you! The advocate is Benedito Guimarães Aguiar Neto, and Katie, bar the door, he has a religious background! Worse, he wants to introduce Intelligent Design! First of all, if he's talking about using material from the Intelligent Design movement, they are most certainly not creationists. Don't be riding on ahead of me now and rein in a moment: the ID movement is not creationist, but creationists frequently use intelligent design arguments and examples. You savvy that, pilgrim?

As far as Benedito's qualifications, those are not under consideration. Secularists have a nasty habit of using someone's religion as leverage against them as if that was the primary focus. Here in the United States, religious people in political offices have been attacked, such as questioning John F. Kennedy's Roman Catholicism and his loyalty to the Pope or the Constitution, Mittens Romney's Mormonism, Sarah Palin's religion was in question, and many more.

This is yet another example of the secular science industry inserting itself into leftist political activism.

The hypocrisy comes in because atheism is a religion, whether hiding behind titles like secularist, the gelastic "freethinker" or humanist. (Ironically, Secular Humanism is a religion as well.) We just came off Question Evolution Day, and the atheists and secularists were practically having worship services in the street for "Darwin Day". These owlhoots have their godless religions, but cannot abide by the possiblity that someone who may be "religious" could threaten their dominance of secular indoctrination. Evolution is a foundation for atheistic indoctrination, as we have seen here many times. Like the global warming cultists, secularists get on the prod when their suppression of unpleasant truths is threatened by contrary facts.

The Science article begins by addressing “the encroachment of religion on science and education policy.” Non-evolutionists maintain there is already plenty of religion masquerading as science in public schools—including Brazil. For example, because a Creator is ignored, then it is taught (or inferred) that everything somehow came from nothing in a big explosive event. That is an overtly religious position, because one must have a substantial measure of faith to believe that something can come from nothing.

To read this short article in its entirety, click on "Brazil Appoints 'Creation Advocate'".



Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Let Me Be Polystrate With You

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

As we have seen, there are numerous problems with particles-to-paleontologist evolution as well as deep-time dogma. Rusty Swingset and his crew at the Darwin Ranch get mighty ornery about all the discoveries of soft tissues and other remnants, but many people overlook polystrate fossils.

Polystrate tree in Nova Scotia image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Michael C. Rygel (CC by-SA 3.0)

You may want to save this article for reference. Creationists have used polystrate fossils for many years as evidence for the Genesis Flood. Most commonly used are vertical trees in rock layers, often coal seams.

"B-b-b-but Cowboy Bob! We have Wikipedia, Propaganda Talk Origins, strong opinions, and other excuses!"

Like geological theories, rescuing devices and "explanations" for polystrate fossils are contrived. Cognate on it for a spell. The layers are alleged to be millions of years in the making but the tree was considerate enough to stay put and let layers form around it, never mind shifting and other geologic activity. The tree should have broken apart and essentially become unrecognizable. Uniformitarian conjectures (gradual processes over long periods of time) fail.

Did y'all know that it's not just a few trees that appear like this? Maybe if there were just a couple of trees, it would be reasonable to say that further research needs to be done and then move on. Nope. There are many polystrate fossils, and they're not just a few trees. Genesis Flood models from biblical creationists make sense of observed evidence.

Now I'm going to turn you over to Real Science Radio. (As usual, I caution you to avoid Bob Enyart's open theism stuff, but the Real Science Radio section has strong creation science evidence.) There are three recorded broadcasts of about half an hour each The first broadcast linked also has a huge article that has material that would challenge secularists to wave off. As usual, the audio to which I link is free to download or listen online.

The first one with the article is "RSR's List of the Kinds of Polystrate Fossils".
Second, we have a recording plus another article, but this one is shorter, at "RSR's Polys Pt. 2". We conclude with "RSR's Polys Pt. 3". The article with this recording is a duplicate of the previous one. Also, the video below has some interesting points for your edification.






Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

The RubisCO Enzyme and Evolution

Believers in universal common ancestry evolution are known to appeal to dysteleology, which is essentially saying that the Creator fouled things up. Such feckless arguments are primarily based on personal preference and often include a fundamental lack of knowledge of the object in question. Fore example, the RubisCO enzyme.

Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Ericlin1337 (CC by-SA 4.0)

This is evosplained as "inefficient" by people who lack sufficient knowledge of the subject. The enzyme is slow compared to other internal mechanisms, and is one of the earliest to have evolved (evidence not required, just assume). In reality, it is more effective than those who deny the work of the Master Engineer want to admit.

One of our readers, J.D. from the U.S., asked us a question about the efficiency of the RubisCO enzyme, which takes part in plant respiration:

Hello! So, a certain person I interact with claims that RubisCO, an enzyme in the body, is ‘proof’ that evolution is true, because of its rather poor efficiency and its tendency to accidentally use oxygen instead of carbon dioxide. He says this shows that evolution has selected what works, instead of a well-designed system. Of course, this is patent nonsense; all the other irrefutable evidences show that this argument is fallacious somewhere. I was only able to find one paragraph on the subject in your website, and it did not satisfactorily answer the question: how is he incorrect, and why did God make the enzyme so seemingly poorly?

CMI-US’s Dr Matthew Cserhati responds:

To read the rest of this rather technical response, click on "Is the RubisCO enzyme an ineffective leftover of evolution?"






Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!