|
WHEN we received the following interesting quotations we decided to check them out with Dr John Sarfati of the Creation Science Foundation of Queensland and here publish his comments (in brackets and italics) alongside the originals (see JS). We think it's important that Christians be as accurate as possible.
An exert from an article written by Prof Norman Nevion MD, BSc, FRCP, Professor of Medical Genetics, The Queens University of Belfast.
A human cell is incredibly complex. To argue that what I see under the microscope has come about by mutation or chromosomal change is incredible. (JS—That's reasonable.) To quote Darwin himself when he was considering the complexity of the human eye—"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."
(JS—No, this is misleading. Darwin said `seems', but later on he made it clear that he believed that the eye did form this way. Obviously I disagree, but that quote must be understood in context.)
FROM ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS NUMBER 2 published by the Metropolitan Tabernacle.
Evolution is Bunk
THE growing number of people dumping the evolution theory reads like a scientists' who's Who. Prominent is British astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle, who has said: "Believing that the first cell originated by chance is like believing a tornado could sweep through a junkyard filled with airplane parts and form a Boeing 747."
His co-author, Professor N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, of Origin of Life, has also dropped out of the evolution cult. (JS—This is fine.) Senior palaeontologist at the British Museum, Colin Patterson, after believing in evolution for more than 20 years, claimed he was "duped".
(JS—This is hard to document, because it is based on a tape-recording of his lecture. It's most likely genuine, however much he later tried to down-play it, claiming that he would have said something different if he had known there were creationists present.)
More bad news for those becoming members of the evolutionist cult was the publishing of The Mystery of Life's Origin by Thaxton, Bradley and Olsen, in which they conclude that a "creator beyond the cosmos" is the most plausible explanation of life's origins.
(JS—This is fine. Should point out they are all highly qualified scientists in relevant fields.)
Charles Darwin, in My Life and Letters (Volume 1), says: "Not one change of species into another is on record. We cannot prove that a single species has been changed."
(JS—Outdated. Some new species (ie. reproductively isolated populations) have been formed, eg. by polyploidy. And irrelevant, because speciation is part of the biblical creation model, especially in deriving all the different varieties of land vertebrates from the kinds on the Ark. In no known case of speciation is the information content increased, a requirement of particles-to-people evolution. Rather, loss of information through mutations, natural selection, and genetic drift can sometimes result in different small populations losing such different information that they will no longer interbreed. For example, changes in song or colour might result in birds no longer recognising a mate, so they no longer interbreed. Thus a new `species' is formed.)
In 1984, Professor Louis Bounovre, former President of the French Biological Society, stated: "Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown ups." (JS—I agree.)
Appeared in Volume 4.3 November /December 1998
|
