top of page

Creation Science


Our Moon has craters 

by Lewis Brackett Sept 15 2005 on WEDG discussion group

posted here sept 25, 05


when GOD created our moon 6000 years ago it must have been perfect without craters....... but it sure has been walloped since then...... there is little record of impact explosions being seen on the moon anywhere in recorded history after Noah's flood.
this indicates to me that GOD sent a swarm of large chunks of rock through the earth moon system which smashed the ice canopy around the earth with many of these rocks smashed through the earths crust breaking open the underground water chambers where the seas are now, throwing the water high in the atmosphere creating rain.....
this would create mountain forming earthquakes............many of these rocks missed the earth hitting the moon.


I got all this yesterday from thinking about why/how the moon has lots of craters but is only 6000 years old


 meteorite activity impacting the moon planets before the flood would have been impossible as it would have destroyed the ice canopy..... major strikes afterward would have lit up the whole night earth, maybe as bright as daylight for a few moments!!!  certainly terrifying everyone !!!  Had any of these large objects hit the earth in recorded history it would have ended history !!!



          New "Drake Equation"

My new version of the "Drake equation" showing the possibilities of another earth in our galaxy!!!
Lets say we start out with 1 billion stars in our galaxy ................
MAYBE 10% are far enough away from each other not to affect each others planets AND to reduce radiation to a tolerable level.....more likely One percent would be 10 million stars

Half are single star systems that leaves 5 million stars

1% are in exactly the right circular orbit to be the right temperature that leaves 50,000 stars

10% are the stars with long term stable energy output that leaves 5000 stars

10% are the proper size leaving 500 stars

10% are the proper type, rocky, atmosphere etc leaving 50 stars with type worlds

Now the chance of one dna strand  happening by chance is more that 1 in 10\10th
or 1 in 100 billion....... that leaves you with one "earth" in one billion galaxies
These figures are Very optimistic!!! so you can see that as far as ""evolution "is concerned, we really aren't here  :eek:    :)


          Evidences of Noah's Flood edited shortened , from Creation Research Society Quarterly  

The River systems of our world have not existed more than 5000 years. By dividing the size (volume) of a river delta by the volume of the annual soil deposits at the river mouths, none of the worlds rivers can be more than 5000 years old The Mississippi Missouri river system is the longest in the world, about 4221 miles. It was first surveyed between 1850-1861 by General Andrew A Humphrey's of the Army corps of Engineers.His finding was that the accumulated soil deposits of the river delta was about 40 feet deep , giving the river an age of about 4620 years, about the time of Noah's flood. The compare able size of the deltas of all other rivers in the world show that they also began at this time. T


Oil (formed by fossilized animal matter) and coal (vegetable matter) are said to be millions of years old. But are they? Quite frequently, abnormally high pressures of up to 8,000 psi are encountered in deep

oil wells. Often when a new well is tapped, a gusher goes spouting into the air due to the tremendous pressure trapped below. According to measured values of the permeability of surrounding rock, such pressures would dissipate in thousands, not millions of years. If those oil deposits had been there for more than 5,000 years in some cases there would be no pressure left! Since the pressure is still there (often seeping at the surface), the rock formations containing the oil must be “young”.

Antarctic Ice In 1930, Admiral Richard Byrd established a base in Antarctica. Since that time, the ice has piled higher, so that of his 110 foot radio towers, just a few feet now protrude above the icy surface. At that rate, the ice cover is only 7,000 years old, not a million. But since the build-up must have been more rapid during the 1200ad to 1850ad little Ice Age, it is probably very much younger even than 7,000 years. Ancient maps exist showing Antarctica before the ice came revealing details only recently verified .

Once tropical north pole area  before  Noahs Flood!
Some more evidence:


June 1st 2006 Network News story tells about core samples from the Artic ocean seabed showing the area was once a tropical swamp!!!

The Eva Creek forest
The Axel Heiberg Island frozen forest
The Ellesmere Island forest

and how about the fresh Dinosaur bones found in Canada also?


                 Out of place objects...

A gold necklace was found embedded in a lump of coal. A metal spike was discovered in a silver mine in Peru. An iron implement was found in a Scottish coalbed. Estimated to be millions of years older than man is believed to have existed. A metal, bell-shaped vessel, inlaid with a silver floral design was blasted out of solid rock near Dorchester,Massachusetts                .

The Epic of  Gilgamesh        This story found in the ancient librarys of the Assyrian Kings in the ruins of Ninevah tells the story of Noah and much pre-flood history. It is the oldest book we know of. A summery of the book is at    

Worldwide oral history of Noahs flood

The legends of the Samo-Kubo tribe of New Guinea, the Athapascan Indians of America, the Papago Indians of Arizona, Brazilian tribes, Peruvian Indians, African Hottentots, natives of Greenland, native Hawaiian islanders, Hindus, Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks, Persians, Australian natives, the Welsh, Celts, Druids, Siberians, and Lithuanians

Evolution and Species Extinction




           Species are meeting changing environments by being genetically selected for them. However, genetic viability is being lost. This leads to the loss of many sub species, endangering the long term survivability of each species in its ability to adapt to future changes. This is a simplification of complexity, the opposite of evolution


           The Genetic Code

Is an information storage system. To create this system, you must first have an immense intelligence to create a language before the bio-chemical storage mechanism can exist. A randomly formed system (if possible) would only have random data Without an intelligence to create a language andthen encode it

Yellowstone National Park

Has layers of sediment with dead trees said to be millions of years old. However, when trees grow, they acquire a unique fingerprint of decades of good and bad growing seasons in their rings. All of the trees in all of the layers can be shown to have lived and died at the same time due to their unique ring patterns.


                Formation of coal

In a few years, not millions of years, has been demonstrated as a result of the mount St Helens eruption. Peat, the precursor to soft coal has already been formed in spirit lake, and is identical to soft coal formations through out America


             The Grand Canyon

Can have been created quickly. The mount St. Helens eruption created a canyon much like the Grand Canyon in only a few months . The water drainage through the Grand Canyon is insufficient to create it. Only Noahs flood could have caused enough water to flow to cause the canyon.


This site gives many sources from  science to explain WHY we believe in GOD and the Bible

This is a  Great site showing the foolishness  of evolutionism and the existence of our Creator G-D   ....

This site tells you almost everything you would like to know about Bible Prophecy


  Evidences  With  Links

Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him 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:


             Wernher von Braun, 

German/American rocket scientist on GOD

"It seems to me that your question is irrelevant," von Braun would say. "It is so obvious that we live in a world in which a fantastic amount of logic, of rational lawfulness, is at work. We are aware of a large number of laws of physics and chemistry and biology which, by their mutual interdependence, make nature work as if it were following a grandiose plan from its earliest beginnings to the farthest reaches of its future destiny. To me, it would be incomprehensible that there should be such a gigantic master plan without a master planner behind it. This master planner is He whom we call the Creator of the Universe . . . One cannot be exposed to the law and order of the universe without concluding that there must be a Divine intent behind it all."

"For me," he would continue, "there is no real contradiction between the world of science and the world of religion. The two are dealing with two different things, but they are not in conflict with each other. Theologians are trying to describe the Creator; scientists are trying to describe His creation. Science and religion are not antagonists; on the contrary, they are sisters . . . While, through science, man tries to harness the forces of nature around him, through religion he tries to harness the forces of nature within him . . ."


           GoDs creation so shows evidences of the exhistance of G-D that even those people who have never heard of Jesus wont have an excuse when they stand before HIS Judgement

The experts will say that chaos theory postulating increasing randomness of all systems actually proves Darwinism by aiding in natural selection and evolution word a more complex creature. That is like the analogy that if you plant tons of explosives in a automobile junkyard the result will be hundreds of new cars ready to drive off the lot. The same scientists will also tell you that that their new theory of Punctured Equilibrium causes spontaneous rapid change without leaving any traces of intermediate forms of life. It just comes out of nowhere.

All this evolution theory presupposes that Nature has billions of years in which to evolve life; however there is evidence that states that this is NOT SO.

In our own solar system, for example, the moon is gradually escapeing from the earth. Not too many tens of thousands of years ago it would have been far to close… The magnetic field is decreasing rapidly. Not long ago it would have been to strong for life to exist here. The sun is rapidly shrinking. Not too long ago the Earth would NOT have been in the life habitable zone. Jupiters rings are rapidly looseing cohesion. They MUST have been a recent creation.

According to Boyles law and other laws, None of the theories of stellar, planetary formation make rational or physical sense. There are NO stellar nursereys for example condensing new stars, merely dust clowds occasionally parting showing some stars more clearly. Stars age far more rapidly than is generally believed. The nearby


         Sirius system (8 light years) was in ancient times a red star, it is now blueish white. It may in fact be in its final stage before its final expansion and nova with dreadful consequences for life here on earth.

There is sufficient evidence that the very nature of the physical constants of the universe are exactly determined to make life thrive. Even the least deviation of even one of these would make life here impossible. Thus the very exact requirements for life here call out for a designer. Would any of you have the audacity to enter the Louve and insist that the paintings by Renoir, Michelangelo are really painters drop cloths? I think not. The world around us displays the same obvious earmarks of a masterful artist.


Exact requirements for life…

    flux of cosmic ray protons

if too small: inadequate cloud formation in planet’s troposphere

if too large: too much cloud formation in planet’s troposphere

        solar wind

if too weak: too many cosmic ray protons reach planet’s troposphere causing too much cloud formation

if too strong: too few cosmic ray protons reach planet’s troposphere causing too little cloud formation

      parent star luminosity relative to speciation

if increases too soon: runaway green house effect would develop

if increases too late: runaway glaciation would develop

      surface gravity (escape velocity)

if stronger: planet’s atmosphere would retain too much ammonia and methane

if weaker: planet’s atmosphere would lose too much water

    distance from parent star

if farther: planet would be too cool for a stable water cycle

if closer: planet would be too warm for a stable water cycle

    inclination of orbit

if too great: temperature differences on the planet would be too extreme

    orbital eccentricity

if too great: seasonal temperature differences would be too extreme

    axial tilt

if greater: surface temperature differences would be too great

if less: surface temperature differences would be too great

    rate of change of axial tilt

if greater: climatic changes would be too extreme; surface temperature differences would become too extreme

    rotation period

if longer: diurnal temperature differences would be too great

if shorter: atmospheric wind velocities would be too great

    rate of change in rotation period

if longer:surface temperature range necessary for life would not be sustained

if shorter:surface temperature range necessary for life would not be sustained

    planet age

if too young: planet would rotate too rapidly

if too old: planet would rotate too slowly

    magnetic field

if stronger: electromagnetic storms would be too severe; too few cosmic ray protons would reach planet’s troposphere which would inhibit adequate cloud formation

if weaker: ozone shield would be inadequately protected from hard stellar and solar radiation

    thickness of crust

if thicker: too much oxygen would be transferred from the atmosphere to the crust

if thinner: volcanic and tectonic activity would be too great

albedo (ratio of reflected light to total amount falling on surface)

if greater: runaway glaciation would develop

if less: runaway greenhouse effect would develop

    asteroidal and cometary collision rate

if greater: too many species would become extinct

if less: crust would be too depleted of materials essential for life

    oxygen to nitrogen ratio in atmosphere


if larger: advanced life functions would proceed too quickly

if smaller: advanced life functions would proceed too slowly

    carbon dioxide level in atmosphere

if greater: runaway greenhouse effect would develop

if less: plants would be unable to maintain efficient photosynthesis

    water vapor level in atmosphere

if greater: runaway greenhouse effect would develop

if less: rainfall would be too meager for advanced life on the land

    atmospheric electric discharge rate

if greater: too much fire destruction would occur

if less: too little nitrogen would be fixed in the atmosphere

    ozone level in atmosphere

if greater: surface temperatures would be too low

if less: surface temperatures would be too high; there would be too much uv radiation at the surface

    oxygen quantity in atmosphere

if greater: plants and hydrocarbons would burn up too easily

if less: advanced animals would have too little to breathe

    nitrogen quantity in atmosphere

if greater: too much buffering of oxygen for advanced animal respiration; too much nitrogen fixation for support of diverse plant species

if less: too little buffering of oxygen for advanced animal respiration; too little nitrogen fixation for support of diverse plant species

The Great Question !!!

By Lewis Brackett.....

The great question in physics today is to find a universal theory

of everything. Science would like to combine "string theory" of the infinitely small(Micro universe) where matter is unstable; decaying and present in different

dimensions with Einstein's theory  of the galaxies (Macro universe) which shows the universe in a stable condition.

  At the time of the beginning everything started out like a  wind up alarm clock which is slowly winding/slowing down.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics amply demonstrates this as it shows the decay word total chaos of everything.

This is easily observable in String theory but is so gradual in the

large universe that it is harder to measure. 

now science is using the atomic clock to measure light.  the atomic clock is affected by the same space time forces that effect lightspeed, so both light and the clock would be increasing or decreasing at the same rate !


        Since string theory says the micro-universe is unstable and slowing so the macro-universe must be slowing as well. the problem is how do you measure the length of a table that is shrinking if your ruler is shrinking also?                                                                                                              In the large einsteinium universe what science is missing is that at the beginning/creation the speed of light was instantaneous.Stellar Observations have shown that over the last 400 years the universe itself has been slowing down on a bell curve and so has light speed.

All around us decay is first observable on the cellular level .

it takes awhile for it to be easily observable in the whole organism. The universe is no different.

This problem for science will be impossible for them to resolve as long as they hold to their twin delusions of "Big Bangs" and "evolutionism"


         Light is slowing down  !!!   So are Atomic Clocks !!!

I saw a great presentation  from a Chuck Missler CD showing that the speed of light is not a constant....
over the last 300 years light speed has been measured several times,,, and light has slowed down about 10%  in 300 years,,(abt 186000 mps now) showing that at creation 6000 years ago, before the fall and the "curse" ;;in the perfect creation/universe, light speed was instantaneous.... this solves how we can see galaxies at immense distances with a young earth !!!!


The speed of light has been measured 163 times by 16 different methods over the past 300 years. However, Australian physicist Barry Setterfield and mathematician Trevor Norman, reexamining the known experimental measurements to date, have suggested a highly controversial discovery: the speed of light appears to have been slowing down!

1657: Roemer     307,600.     +/- 5400 km/sec 1875: Harvard     299,921.     +/- 13 km/sec 1983: NBS (laser method):     299,792.4358      +/- 0.0003 km/sec

      The speed of light is now measured as 299,792.4358 kilometers per second.6 (This is approximately 186,000 miles/second; or one foot per nanosecond.)

       The Canadian mathematician, Alan Montgomery, has reported a computer analysis supporting the Setterfield/Norman results. His model indicates that the decay of velocity of light closely follows a cosecant-squared curve, and has been asymptotic since 1958. If he is correct, the speed of light was 10-30% faster in the time of Christ; twice as fast in the days of Solomon; four times as fast in the days of Abraham, and perhaps more than 10 million times faster prior to 3000 B.C.


                 Helen d setterfield

The following question was: "Is the speed of light constant?"  Interestingly enough, every time it was measured over the next few hundred years, it seemed to be a little slower than before. This could be explained away, as the first measurements were unbelievably rough compared to the technical accuracy later.  It was not that simple, though.  When the same person did the same test using the same equipment at a later period in time, the speed was slower.  Not much, but slower. 

  Barry Setterfield has done years of research in this area. His website is:

We have a study overviewing his discoveries, along with an interview with him, of which you can listen to large portions online:

Here's a news article on a group that independently came to the same conclusion - that light has been slowing down (God bless The Age for keeping archives):

Further links:


T           ruth is not a personal decision. Whether its true to YOU is irrelevant.........Truth, like the law of Gravity, just IS

There are two world views prevalent today. The first world views says “I believe “it” because its True” This has absolute laws of truth, math and physics.

The second world view is “Its true because I believe it”. This second world view has no objective truth in philosophy or science .

The presupposition of evolution violates the most basic laws of Mathematical numbers theory; the law of of probabilities; as well as the second law of Thermodynamics which is the law of ever increasing chaos in all systems.This is most evident in the rapid decay of data in ALL information storage systems.

Genetic Drift, or Natural Selection


           Evolution insists that natural selection creates what is called "genetic drift". This process involves the selection of genetic traits in a species favorable to an environment with the loss of the genes not useful for existence in its environment....

If you have a heard of pigs let loose on an island, inbreeding and environment will over time simplify the genetic structure of those pigs

to fit that environment........ it has been shown that the genetic separation with other pigs not on the island will eventually be sufficient that the two groups of pigs cant be bread together.......

however, each descendant of both groups will always be a pig....

not one descendant will ever be a dog or a cat!  This shows that evolution always selects from Within a species. It does NOT create a whole new species.......... Pigs beget Pigs, Dogs beget dogs, Cats beget Cats


               Peppered Moths.

Every student of biological evolution learns about peppered moths. Here we have the same issue and cause. The dramatic increase in dark forms of this species during the industrial revolution, and experiments pointing to differential bird predation as the cause, have become the classical story of evolution by natural selection. The same careful scientific approach which established the classical story in the first place, however, has now revealed major flaws in it. It is time to take another look.

      The peppered moth, Biston betularia, comes in various shades of gray. One hundred and fifty years ago, the species consisted almost entirely of "typical" forms, with predominantly light gray scales interspersed with black (hence the name, "peppered"). In 1848, a coal-black "melanic" form was collected near Manchester, England, and by 1950 melanic forms made up more than 90% of the peppered moths in that area. A similar change was reported in many other species of moths, as well as in ladybird beetles, spiders, and even some birds. Since the phenomenon was observed not only around Manchester but also near other industrial centers such as Birmingham and Liverpool, it became known as "industrial melanism."


In Every case "natural selection" by "genetic drift" results in a genetically simpler animal selected for a specific environment.

This result  is the opposite of evolution tword a more genetically complex "higher" form of life.


This is Entropy in action. Entropy is ever increasing randomness

eventually resulting in total chaos. This is the 2nd law of thermodynamics.This entropy eventually causes extinction of species. It also causes old age, cancer, etc and death

Irreducible Complexity: The Challenge to the Darwinian Evolutionary Explanations of many Biochemical Structures

From the  Y-Origins Connection

Intelligent design for everyone

"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
--Charles Darwin, Origin of Species

With this statement, Charles Darwin provided a criterion by which his theory of evolution could be falsified. The logic was simple: since evolution is a gradual process in which slight modifications produce advantages for survival, it cannot produce complex structures in a short amount of time. It's a step-by-step process which may gradually build up and modify complex structures, but it cannot produce them suddenly.

    Darwin, meet Michael Behe, biochemical researcher and professor at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. Michale Behe claims to have shown exactly what Darwin claimed would destroy the theory of evolution, through a concept he calls "irreducible complexity." In simple terms, this idea applies to any system of interacting parts in which the removal of any one part destroys the function of the entire system. An irreducibly complex system, then, requires each and every component to be in place before it will function.

    As a simple example of irreducible complexity, Behe presents the humble mousetrap.

It contains five interdependent parts which allow it to catch mice: the wooden platform, the spring, the hammer (the bar which crushes the mouse against the wooden base), the holding bar, and a catch. Each of these components is absolutely essential for the function of the mousetrap. For instance, if you remove the catch, you cannot set the trap and it will never catch mice, no matter how long they may dance over the contraption. Remove the spring, and the hammer will flop uselessly back and forth-certainly not much of a threat to the little rodents. Of course, removal of the holding bar will ensure that the trap never catches anything because there will again be no way to arm the system.

     Now, note what this implies: an irreducibly complex system cannot come about in a gradual manner. One cannot begin with a wooden platform and catch a few mice, then add a spring, catching a few more mice than before, etc. No, all the components must be in place before it functions at all. A step-by-step approach to constructing such a system will result in a useless system until all the components have been added. The system requires all the components to be added at the same time, in the right configuration, before it works at all.

    How does irreducible complexity apply to biology? Behe notes that early this century, before biologists really understood the cell, they had a very simplistic model of its inner workings. Without the electron microscopes and other advanced techniques that now allow scientists to peer into the inner workings of the cell, it was assumed that the cells was a fairly simple blob of protoplasm. The living cell was a "black box"-something that could be observed to perform various functions while its inner workings were unknown and mysterious. Therefore, it was easy, and justifiable, to assume that the cell was a simple collection of molecules. But not anymore. Technological advances have provided detailed information about the inner workings of the cell. Michael Denton, in his book Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, states "Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10^-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable microminiaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machine built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world." In a word, the cell is complicated. Very complicated.

    In fact, Michael Behe asserts that the complicated biological structures in a cell exhibit the exact same irreducible complexity that we saw in the mousetrap example. In other words, they are all-or-nothing: either everything is there and it works, or something is missing and it doesn't work. As we saw before, such a system cannot be constructed in a gradual manner-it simply won't work until all the components are present, and Darwinism has no mechanism for adding all the components at once. Remember, Darwin's mechanism is one of gradual mutations leading to improved fitness and survival. A less-than-complete system of this nature simply will not function, and it certainly won't help the organism to survive. Indeed, having a half-formed and hence non-functional system would actually hinder survival and would be selected against. But Behe is not the only scientist to recognize irreducible complexity in nature. In 1986, Michael J. Katz, in his Templets and the explanation of complex patterns (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986) writes:

"In the natural world, there are many pattern-assembly systems for which there is no simple explanation. There are useful scientific explanations for these complex systems, but the final patterns that they produce are so heterogeneous that they cannot effectively be reduced to smaller or less intricate predecessor components. As I will argue ... these patterns are, in a fundamental sense, irreducibly complex..."

Katz continues that this sort of complexity is found in biology:

"Cells and organisms are quite complex by all pattern criteria. They are built of heterogeneous elements arranged in heterogeneous configurations, and they do not self-assemble. One cannot stir together the parts of a cell or of an organism and spontaneously assemble a neuron or a walrus: to create a cell or an organisms one needs a preexisting cell or a preexisting organism, with its attendant complex templets. A fundamental characteristic of the biological realm is that organisms are complex patterns, and, for its creation, life requires extensive, and essentially maximal, templets."


This reference site address has been changed to

  " Genetic Rainbow  "   By Guy Cramer

Noah's Ark long thought to just be a myth finds credibility with recent Genetic Studies.Jack Armstrong emailed me a few days ago with a news story on Genetics. I will outline a brief overview of the information (a link is provided at the end of this paper).


     In the ABC news article: "We Dodged Extinction" by Lee Dye, A worldwide genetic study of Humans vs. our closest living genetic cousins, the great apes of Africa, indicates that a 55 chimpanzees in a group located in West Africa have twice the genetic variability of all 6 Billion humans. These 55 chimps are more genetically different from each other then you are to any other person in the world. This finding was highly unexpected and indicates that humans came very close to extinction in the recent past.Pascal Gagneux, an evolutionary biologist at the University of California at San Diego, speaking on the findings says that our genetic variability should be at least as great as that of apes. It is nowhere near those levels.

Researchers compared 1,070 DNA sequences from apes, chimps, humans and added DNA from a Neanderthal bone. The results are very convincing, humans have the least variability. However, this low genetic variability leaves humans more susceptible to disease. "Our ancestors lost much of their original variability." "That makes perfectly good sense," says Bernard Wood, the Henry R. Luce Professor of Human Origins at George Washington University and an expert on human evolution. "The amount of genetic variation that has accumulated in humans is just nowhere near compatible with the age" of the species, Wood says. "That means youve got to come up with a hypothesis for an event that wiped out the vast majority of that variation."
That sums up the article but the researchers only conclude that some unknown event occurred in the past that eliminated almost all humans.

Of course for many people the Flood account in the Bible provides a good candidate, it tells of a large scale event that wipes out most of the population in which only 8 humans survive but this genetic research data alone does not allow for a credible flood theory.

This reference site address has been changed to


"The Origin of Information"  or how the dna molecule cannot occur by chance.

By Mark Eastman, M.D. and Chuck Missler 

    "The origin of the genetic code presents formidable unsolved problems. The coded information in he nucleotide sequence is meaningless without the translation machinery, but the specification for his machinery is itself coded in the DNA. Thus without the machinery the information is meaningless, but without the coded information, the machinery cannot be produced. This presents a paradox of the 'chicken and egg' variety, and attempts to solve it have so far been sterile."4


The Sunday TimesJune 11, 2006


I’ve found God, says man who cracked the genome

Steven Swinford


THE scientist who led the team that cracked the human genome is to publish a book explaining why he now believes in the existence of God and is convinced that miracles are real.

Francis Collins, the director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute, claims there is a rational basis for a creator and that scientific discoveries bring man “closer to God”.

In 1981 Sir Fred Hoyle commented on this appeal to metaphysics:

     "I don't know how long it is going to be before astronomers generally recognize that the combinatorial arrangement of not even one among the many thousands of biopolymers [DNA, RNA, proteins] on which life depends could have been arrived at by natural processes here on the Earth. Astronomers will have a little difficulty at understanding this because they will be assured by biologists that this is not so, the biologists having been assured in their turn by others that it is not so. The 'others' are a group of persons who believe, quite openly, in mathematical miracles. They advocate the belief that tucked away in nature, outside of normal physics, there is a law which performs miracles (provided the miracles are in the aid of biology). This curious situation sits oddly on a profession that for long has been dedicated to coming up with logical explanations of biblical miracles."18 (Emphasis added)

     If we are to assume that the laws of physics and chemistry are essentially uniform throughout the physical universe, then we must logically conclude that life could not have arisen by chance anywhere in the universe.

     Even if the laws of physics were found to be more favorable in a distant corner of the universe, there would still be no explanation for the coded information (which does not arise by chance) that is carried by the DNA molecule.

     Consequently, the source of the cellular "hardware" as well as the information carried by the DNA molecule must have been an intelligent, extra-dimensional one - beyond the bounds of space and time.

Sirius to Nova soon ??!!

  Sirius is a double star with a dwarf companion.All the ancients insist that Sirius was a red Giant star. If this was really true,and they certainly were brilliant people, this leaves us with an interesting question.
This would mean that Sirius had already exhausted its Hydrogen and was now; according to its multicolored (blue- white)spectra, be devouring its final Helium and
heavier metals.This would mean that Sirius MAY nova in the near future!

A Nova might cause Sirius to be brighter than the sun for several months especially if it goes SUPERNOVA . Supernovas occur (science thinks) when a massive star expels great quantities of its mass which are drawn into a smaller companion and ignited.

Greatly increased solar radiation IMMEDIATELY assaulting our solar system  from a nearby Supernova would cause our own sun to increase its output also, and would "burn men with fire" to quote the book of Revelation.  The nova's shockwave could reach earth in 1000 years, causing our own sun to nova, devouring the earth with fire fulfilling Bible prophecy.

Because of this, I think amateurs should keep a log of its spectral changes because if Sirius goes into its final  red stage that would mean a possible nova was imminent!!!



     Solomon and Herods Temples    Did you know that the first century Jewish historian Josephus and all the ancient writers say that their temples were NOT on the "Temple mount" platform where the Dome of the rock is but on another square tower platform over the Gihon spring 600 ft SOUTH of what is now thought to be the temple mount ?

    Davidic Family Quarrels

Think of the Davidic family quarrels that took place in this little town! Absalom claimed possession of the kingdom, so he climbed up on the roof of David’s palace and had intercourse with four of David’s concubines, ‘in the sight of all Israel’ (2 Sam. 16:22) where everyone in the city could look down from Mount Zion or Mount Ophel and observe the theatrical performance. That could not have happened if the palace had been up on the Dome of the Rock.

When Adonijah was celebrating his succession to the throne at Ain Rogel — just 300 metres south of Ain Gihon — Solomon, Nathan and the priest Zadok were gathered at Ain Gihon. While there, ‘Zadok, the priest, took the horn of oil from the tent’ — that is the tent of the Lord (1 Kings 2:2 8) that David estab­lished for the chest containing the contract, which he brought up to Jerusalem. There he placed it adjacent to the altar near Ain Gihon. The text continues:

‘Then he [Zadok] anointed Solomon. Then they sounded the shofar and shouted, “Long live King Solomon!”’

1 Kings 1:39

Adonijah and his friends heard the shout, just a few city blocks away. Adonijah had to run at once to David’s altar and take hold of the horns for security, but he did not have to run up to the Dome of the Rock. He had only a few city blocks to run. By the time he got there, Solomon had already ridden his father’s mule to the palace, just a short distance from the spring where he had been anointed, and he was sitting on the throne when people told him Adonijah was asking for security. Solomon promised that so long as Adonijah remained virtuous he would be secure, but if he did anything evil he would die. He soon displeased Solomon, and Solomon had him killed. All of these events took place within easy walking distance of one another (1 Kings 1:5–2:25).

AND scripture shows the spring was just south of the Altar in the Temple...Ezekiel 47:1  Afterward he brought me again unto the door of the house; and, behold, waters issued out from under the threshold of the house eastward: for the forefront of the house stood toward the east, and the waters came down from under from the right side of the house, at the south side of the altar.   



Enter supporting content here

bottom of page