Apologia

Part #1 is the literal asking of “Why So Much Time?” Evolutionists WANT the age of the earth to be really, really, old. Why is that? I reveal the answer in this video. Along the way we also recognize that slowness does not assist impossibility and that evolution would not be slow anyway but super, lightning, FAST!

In physics textbooks one can find the second law of thermodynamics stated in different ways and some can be helpful to a reader toward grasping what the law means. I created this phrasing to help someone understand how this law of physics pertains to the false claims of the theory of evolution, in particular the conflating of improbable and impossible as being the same thing and of large amounts of time having the opposite effect it actually does: of creating things rather than in fact breaking down created things.

“Random Genetic Mutations”. Does anyone ever stop to consider what that is plainly saying? Random Trial & Error explains the mind-blowing complexity in living organism that our intelligent brains have only scratched the surface of understanding, yet we would never consider our bosses appreciating that our performing random actions until he tells us, “that’s it”, will result in the best work achievement?

If you truly believed you owed your creation to mutations you wouldn’t dread them like the plague. You wouldn’t go out of your way to prevent them from happening. If you believed random mutations were just that, happen any time or place to anyone, then need “shared” with the world population, you would understand and teach that this is in-progress everywhere and continually. Random means each addition of information could end up at countless locations along the code (currently between any of 6,400,000,000 characters). If you believed mankind was produced through a process of adapting to the environment you would have no reason whatsoever to fear the environment changing. What is the actual motive for people who don’t really have evolutionary beliefs espouse them?

The strata below the earth’s surface is taught to have common concentric layers throughout the planet, like a gob stopper. This has been named the “geologic column”, having a supposed progression with depth of millions of years. So is the earth then getting bigger and bigger? Is there some reason people would think the deeper you dig the older stuff you will find (anywhere)? This global jaw breaker construction is supposedly the result of the local processes we see scrambling the earth’s cross-section today. This video looks at how what is taught doesn’t make any sense, and ends with how the layers really got there.

How can we conceptualize the enormity of the instruction code for the creation and operation of a human being? The DNA molecule is so tiny that it is invisible to the eye, indeed it is contained inside the small nucleus at the center of diploid cells which themselves are too small to be visible with the naked eye. This video walks through a repeatable, graphic illustration of the enormous amount of information contained within this “program”.

I was musing one day about monkey-to-man “Evolutionary Family Trees” in textbooks. They purportedly show how organisms gradually and spontaneously changed into different organisms over time. Creationists recognize, rather, an order imparted by an intelligent organizer. This is comparable to arranging plastic utensils: spoon then spork then fork, and claiming it proves forks arose incrementally from spoons. Because a pattern can be imposed does not mean it is innate. Giving opportunity to these textbook authors is the generous selection available to sort from. This is provided by the diversity of ages, tribes, statures, health conditions and gender of people, and of gorillas, apes, baboons, monkeys, chimpanzee, orangutans, etc. It occurred to me that if these trees are just the artificial combination of fossils from the aforementioned, then (if not too many have become extinct) the same tree could be made from creatures living today. This possibility was so intriguing I had to find out if it was so. I discovered an online catalog for a company which sells skulls for educational purposes. Patterning off uniformitarian textbooks I matched each of the few links of the chain that are present with a modern skull photo from the site. I averaged the substantial disagreement between textbooks in how these few links are related to each other. By this process I was able to produce a family tree “akin” in appearance to those found in textbooks. Shown here are two versions of my tree, the main product labeled with the textbook names, followed by a key labeled with what each creature actually is. Please give it a look. Do you doubt students would equally accept this as a family tree “proving” evolution? How ironic that photos of no change in present day could “prove” supposed change occurred supposed millions of years ago! Consider that the deception can be even stronger using greater resources. Just as Demetrius and his colleagues did in the Book of Acts, evolutionary textbook writers make a living off fabricating their God-substitute idols. Their Hollywood counterparts with enormous budgets can make Transformers clawing up pavement and Tom Hanks speaking to President Kennedy look impressively real. If it was not difficult for me to deceive by amateur artistry in a little spare time, how much more can bankrolled collaborators make something untrue appear convincing. https://drive.google.com/open?id=17ulUlkkAEI-tlUoTPF-Vlfj7cgiJTBj1

Exact details of Christ's crucifixion were clearly illustrated before the event happened. Only a Being who transcends time could do that. Some painted depictions with heels to the sides of the crucifix upright are Giovanni Tiepolo's "The Lamentation at the Foot of the Cross", Rembrandt van Rijn's "The Raising of the Cross" and inside Answers in Genesis's Ark Encounter exhibit. https://answersingenesis.org/ministry-news/creation-museum/depicting-crucifixion-jesus-christ/

"Survival of the fittest" is an emotional, distraction tactic and not logical science. The deception of "survival of the fittest" and "survival advantage" is the notion of out-surviving another organism as a means to explain the 3,800,000,000 character genome writing itself. "Survival of the fittest" is intrinsically a comparison between two organisms. Both of the organisms in the comparison are subject to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. The relative comparison to another "sinking" organism is not pertinent to the absolute comparison between no genome existing in the past and an enormous genome existing today. Its like running toward the back of a 767 that's lifting off while yelling at the seated passengers "you my be leaving O'Hare, but see, I'm not". The only thing survival of the fittest can tell us is who is breaking down fastest. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YhrZ6Q2mtwFTCz4Q32bgrY8kxSA2DhAg https://drive.google.com/open?id=1WiRtCHOoNkcaY8JIztaaQVz31a5ZT6uu