In May of 2008 the British House of Commons passed a new version of its Human Fertilization and Embryology Bill. Under this new set of rules scientists working in Britain are allowed to produce embryos that are part human and part animal. Many were troubled by this possibility and expressed concern, especially about where this might lead in the future. The press of course proceeded to try to paint anyone who questioned the wisdom of such research as backward, ignorant, anti-science bigots.

Sadly these sorts of experiments are nothing new. They had been tried before, however the technology to produce human - animal hybrids had not been sufficiently developed and these experiments failed. The best known of these experiments were carried out by the Nazis. They made a number of efforts to cross apes with Jewish concentration camp victums. One of the goals of such experiments was to prove that Jews were in fact racially inferior. The theory being that, if Darwin was right and all life forms had descended through a chain of ancestors in hierarchical fashion, it would be easier to hybridize a Jew with a lower life form such as an ape because Jews were lower on the “Tree of Life” than other humans. Fortunately it is not necessary to review this disgusting, unimaginably cruel “work” here.

However the Nazis were not the only ones to attempt to cross humans and apes. When many Soviet archives were opened in the 1990’s, new light was thrown on the little known Soviet attempts to hybridize humans and animals. The most famous of these was the work of Ilia Ivanov, a biologist who specialized in hybridization. In the 1920’s Ivanov began going to Africa to collect great apes. These animals were brought back to Russia and experiments were planned to try to produce half human - half apes. At least five women actually volunteered to be inseminated with primate sperm but alas, it was not to be. After several unsuccessful experiments, the program was eventually terminated for a variety of reasons including the untimely death of “Tarzan” the orangutan who was supposed to be the prime sperm donor for the volunteers.

Here is where the spin comes in: these experiments were originally embraced by the world’s Darwinists, however Darwin’s apologists are now trying to cover up what Ivanov was really trying to prove with these experiments. The original proposal to the Soviet Academy of Sciences survives and it gives Ivanov’s reasons as to why the Soviet state should finance his experiments. The primary reason given was to prove that Darwin was correct and that humans had evolved from apes. If a human could be hybridized with an ape, it would provide powerful evidence that we were closely related biologically. It went further and stated that this would strike a blow against religion and provide the Soviets with a powerful propaganda tool. Not surprisingly The American Association for the Advancement of Atheism conducted fund raising on behalf of the project.

Arguably this leaves no doubt as to what Ivanov was out to prove. However no amount of fact dissuades Darwinists from their opinions. Despite the undisputably clear records, Ivanov’s “real motives” are considered a “mystery,” by some. This is a mystery that no doubt requires the efforts of a academic “Inspector Clouseau” to solve. So in the most recent issue of “Studies in the History of Philosophy and Science, Part C” can be found the “real reasons” for Ivanov’s experiments, and low and behold, Darwinism had almost nothing to do with it. It seems that the very absence of evidence points to the inescapable conclusion that the Politburo members were actually out to create the perfect “Socialist Man”. Ivanov’s work was in reality an experiment in “Positive Eugenics.” Given Soviet history perhaps a human - horse hybrid might have been closer to the perfect “Socialist Man” then a human - ape hybrid.

The history of Darwinism is one of ugliness and cruelty. And regrettably the ugliest and cruelest chapters probably have yet to be written.

Source:

“Beyond Eugenics: the forgotten scandal of hybridizing humans and apes”, Studies in History of Philosophy and Science, Part C: Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, vol 39, Issue 2, pp 205-210.

I would like to make a few points clear before going further. I do not oppose the idea of “evolution.” Evolution is change through time. Obviously organisms and everything else changes through time. “Darwinism” is the claim that this change is driven by the purposeless, meaningless, undirected, natural process of “Natural Selection” (Survival of the Fittest). I find the scientific evidence for this philosophical assertion unconvincing and indeed, I am far from alone in this. So the question as is not whether or not “Biological Evolution” occurs, but rather - What is the cause of this “Evolution.” Is it a purposeless, natural cause or is there an intelligence guiding this evolution?

Harry Truman was right, “History is bunk.” The more I learn the more undeniably true this statement becomes. Most “history” consists of claims crafted into a media template that fills some political or philosophical agenda. The picture that emerges is usually substantially at odds with the facts. There are few places where this has been truer than the case of Charles Darwin and the legacy of Darwinism.

Darwin’s apologists have been busy ever since the 1860’s fabricating this template. For example racism is no longer popular. Racists are today seen as evil people. Consequently, “Saint Darwin” could not possibly be a racist. Thus the title of Darwin’s most famous book has been progressively sanitized. The volume which today goes by the title “The Origin of the Species” was originally titled “On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Survival.”

First, the secondary title of the book “The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Survival” was dropped. It is widely recognized though rarely admitted by scholars that Darwin’s book was initially most warmly embraced by racists of every stripe. English colonialists, slave owners, sweat shop owners, monarchists and all types of racial supremacists agreed that Darwin had indeed proven why they were superior and it was only natural that they should be at the top of the social hierarchy. Indeed Marx used it to justify European colonialism and Hitler and the Nazi’s used it as the reason for “Aryan supremacy.”

Next “by Means of Natural Selection” was dropped or down played since it has been accepted by the Neo-Darwinists that natural selection alone indeed cannot explain the origin of species. But that is another matter too vast to discuss here.

But now the Darwinists are being confronted with what may be the biggest challenge they have ever faced, the evidence that Darwin’s greatest ideas weren’t even his but were stolen from his grandfather and Alfred Wallace. In a new book called “The Darwin Conspiracy” Roy Davies (himself a former Darwin apologist) makes a detailed and compelling case showing that Darwin actually stole his major ideas from Alfred Wallace.

While the media often traces Darwin’s “discovery of natural selection” to an “ah ah” moment while observing finches in the Galapagos Islands, Darwin scholars have long recognized that their is no evidence to support this claim. His notes of the time record no awareness of this mechanism. It was not until Alfred Wallace sent Darwin a letter in 1858 describing Natural Selection that Darwin claimed that he had discovered it twenty years before but had just never gotten around to publishing it. (Some of his apologists would later claim that his “reluctance to publish” was for fear of persecution by Christians).

Davies book meticulously reviews the documents involved and makes a compelling case that Darwin in fact plagiarized Wallace’s ideas. Given the differential in their social status and connections Wallace agreed to co-publish the theory (half a loaf is better then none), which up until the 1950’s, commonly was attributed to both of them but from which Wallace’s name has been recently dropped. As it turns out Wallace had to be dropped, as his other writings are an embarrassment to Darwinists because Wallace exhibited a strong tendency toward acceptance of the idea that the evolution and natural selection observed in nature were working within some sort of Divine plan.

A joke among Chinese paleontologists is that, “In the US you can criticize the government, but you can’t criticize Darwin, in China it is the other way around”.

If Indiana Jones discovered a 55 Chevy buried in the undisturbed tomb of an Egyptian pharaoh even he would be surprised. However Darwinists are unimpressed by an even more amazing discovery of something even further out of its place in time.

On May 29, 2008 scientists at the Victoria Museum in Melbourne, Australia reported finding the fossilized remains of the oldest vertebrate, placental animal ever discovered. The creature was a beautifully preserved placoderm (armored, jawed) fish found in a fossil bed in Northwestern Australia known as the Gogo Formation. What made this fossil so spectacular was that inside of this female fish was a tiny baby placoderm fish still attached to its mother by an umbilical chord. Until now the oldest known viviparous (animals that give birth to live young) vertebrate ever discovered was from the Jurassic period dating to about 180 million years ago. However this placoderm fish dates to at least the middle Devonian dating about 380 million years ago. Because the process appears to be in its fully developed form, it does not seem unreasonable to believe that viviparous birth in vertebrates probably dates back to at least the middle Silurian epoch to about 420 million years ago when placoderm fish first appear in the fossil record.

Viviparous insects are believed to exist from this period. However they are far more primitive than these fish, do not have umbilical cords and are clearly unrelated to them as any type of ancestral form. Scorpions for example hatch their eggs inside of the mothers and then release the live young. The placental birth process is extremely complicated. It requires many specialized organs and behavior. It also requires highly developed complex sexual organs, copulation, mating behavior and much more.

Here is what is so stunning about this find: the Cambrian period when true multi-cellular animals first appear in the fossil record only ends about 500 million years ago. These very advanced placoderms are in the fossil record only about 120 million years later and they appear suddenly, out of nowhere and fully developed. According to Darwinism they should have been developing gradually over long periods of time and should only appear much later in the fossil record. So there should have been lots of simpler intermediate forms in the fossil record not the fully developed form that was discovered at this stunningly early time.

Why This Is Important

The Darwinists while expressing surprise are just embracing this discovery as nothing truly stunning or creating a need to reexamine their assumptions about how evolution is supposed to work as an unguided, accidental process. Their conclusion will be that fully developed viviparous birth simply randomly developed earlier than expected. This is the equivalent of Indiana Jones concluding that there it was no big deal in finding a 55 Chevy in the tomb of a pharaoh. His conclusion being that the 55 Chevy was first built in 2500 BC instead of 1955 - no big deal - just revise the numbers and go on as before.

The real importance of this fossil is that it is another of a growing list of examples of highly advanced biological processes that appear far too early in the fossil record to be honestly explained as the result of an unguided random process.

Further Source: “The Oldest Pregnant Mum”, by Carina Dennis, Nature, 453, 575 (2008).

By: Lawrence Vescera, Ph.D.

On May 19th the British House of Commons passed the new Human Fertilization and Embryology Bill. It is the first nation to pass legislation of this type but almost certainly will not be the last. This bill marks the crossing of a Rubicon for humanity, the consequences of which no one can even begin to foresee. It opens a ghastly panorama of science fiction nightmares that are not likely to ever be exceeded in the future of the human race.

The bill allows the creation of four types of embryos for new organisms which are all part human and part animal. They are:

Cybrids - These will be creatures with animal cells replaced with a human nucleus. These will allow epigenetic effects to operate on the human nucleus.

Chimeras - These are organisms that are made of a mixture of human and animal cells. On September 7, 2007 in “Human Animal Hybrids Have Been Created” this Blog reported the creation of Sheep Chimera that had a human liver.

Transgenic Embryos - These will be creatures with a small amount of human or animal DNA mixed with the opposite member. This is done in genetic engineering such as taking genes from one plant and placing them in a different plant. Science fiction writers have often envisioned creations such as humans with chloroplasts, who do not need to eat because they turn sunlight into food directly.

True Hybrids - These are the most disturbing of all. In these procedures human eggs or sperm will be fertilized by their animal counter part thereby creating an organism that is 50% human and 50% animal. The Nazis tried this unsuccessfully during WWII when they tried to impregnate Jewish women with ape sperm. They hoped to create the perfect slave laborer. Where the Nazis failed perhaps the others will succeed?

Some temporary solace can be taken from the fact that these monsters from “Frankenstein science” as the Catholic Cardinal of Scotland called these embryos, will not legally be allowed to live past 14 days. However one wonders what will be the fate of a half human that is allowed to live “illegally” past 14 days? What if its creator simply forgets to kill it at 14 days?

The reason given for the creation of these partially human entities is their alleged value as research tools in medicine and basic biology. While there are serious scientific questions about their value for these purposes, all types of marvelous
cures for terrible diseases such as Alzheimer’s are postulated. It is on the basis of such claims as this research may lead to breakthroughs in treating human diseases that the pressure to allow this ghoulish exploration is generated.

Why This Is Important

Even if the serious moral questions surrounding these experiments are ignored, there is still plenty of danger here. Soon pressure will come to allow these organisms to go full term and be born. The Pandora’s Box of problems that will follow probably cannot even be dimly imagined today. It does not require much of a stretch of the imagination to see people crossing cells from their pets, that they love dearly, with cells from their recently dead spouse or lover and creating for example a half dog/half man. It might look like one and have the brain of the other. Imagine the possibilities of what its “owner” might do with that?

Source: “MP’s Back Creation of Human - Animal Embryos”, by Mark Henderson and Francis Elliott, www.timesonline.co.uk. May 19, 2008.

By: Lawrence Vescera Ph.D.

Thanks to National Geographic, it has now become common knowledge that “Judas wrote a Gospel” and that “Jesus asked Judas to betray him.” Just as the “Da Vinci Code” has made it common knowledge that “Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and that they had children together.” If you doubt that these “facts” are now common knowledge, just ask a few teenagers about the subject and you will quickly learn some of the absolute nonsense they believe and are even being taught in school.

It is shocking but true. National Geographic allowed itself to become the vehicle for this type of scholarly abuse. The Biblical Archaeological Review among others have now blown the whistle on this fraud of which the National Geographic has made itself a part. In May of 2006 the Geographic ran a large article headlined on its cover as “The Judas Gospel.” The Judas Gospel is a document that surfaced in Egypt in the 1970’s. The facts around its discovery are somewhat murky but radiocarbon dating of the manuscript puts its origin between 220 and 340 AD. It is written in Coptic but is alleged to be a copy of a currently nonexistent earlier Greek Gnostic text. In the early days of Christianity one of the more popular heretical groups were the Gnostics. This group claimed to have “secret knowledge” about God and Jesus. The Nag Hammadi Codices, which also contained the apocryphal Gospel of Thomas, represent the largest collection of surviving writings of this sect. This Gospel of Judas is also a product of the Gnostics. These writings were known to be frauds since the second century and have been recognized as such by scholars, secular and Christian alike. This information was no secret to the staff of the National Geographic.

Despite knowing exactly what these documents were the Biblical Archeology Review points out that the Geographic staff went ahead and, not only misrepresented what these documents were, but shockingly went even further and reported clear mistranslations of these the documents to further cloud the issue. So the Geographic took a fraud and made it more fraudulent. Even Dan Rather and CBS would not have gone this far; at least CBS correctly reported what the fraudulent documents they used actually said.

According to the Biblical Archeology Review (BAR) the Geographic, “In the first instance, it pitches its enormous publicity machine to imply that the newly released Gospel of Judas contains what may be a historically reliable portrait of Judas Iscariot, not as he is portrayed in the New Testament as Jesus’ betrayer, but as a hero, the thirteenth disciple who is closer to Jesus than the other twelve.” Then in the National Geographic version, “Jesus asks Judas to betray him.” So they treat this known counterfeit as though it is a reliable historical source. As the BAR points out, “In fact , no scholar would treat it this way, including the National Geographic scholars themselves.” ‘”The idea that this new gospel might be an accurate historical report of the reason for Judas’s betrayal of Jesus is arrogant nonsense.”‘

As if this was not bad enough the Geographic goes further and mistranslates the documents in key areas. For example the Judas Gospel does not actually portray Judas as a hero. This is an invention of the Geographic. In their attempt to turn Judas from a villain into a hero they make key misrepresentations. A glaring case is seen in Judas 46:25-47:1. The Geographic has Jesus saying to Judas, “You will ascend to the holy generation.” In the document it says exactly the opposite, it actually says “You will not ascend to the holy generation.” There are numerous other examples that could be cited for those who are interested. You may want to begin with the source article listed below.

Why Is This Important

A big question that comes to mind is, why would the National Geographic lend itself to this abuse? Why would they engage in such fraud? The only purpose that seems apparent is an attempt to advance the materialist agenda by undermining Christian faith. Do any readers have another suggestion?

Source: “Judas Iscariot Among the Gnostics: What the Gospel of Judas Really Says”, Biblical Archeology Review, by Birger Pearson, May/June 2008, Vol 34, No. 3, pp 52-57.

By: Lawrence Vescera Ph.D.

Imagine the headlines if some group started tearing down the Great Pyramids at Giza or the Colusseum in Rome or the Great Wall of China! The world would be outraged. It would rightly be called a crime against humanity and a desecration of the world’s heritage. Indeed his type of reaction followed the Talibans destruction in 2001 of the 1700 year old Buddhas of Bamyan in Afghanistan. These monumental statues were dynamited by Islamic fundamentalists for violating Sharia law. The Taliban was condemned around the world for this outrage against an archaeological monument that belonged to the world not just to Afghanistan.

Yet a far worse archaeological outrage against the world’s heritage has been taking place and the world media has been predictably silent on this one. Since 1999 the Islamic authorities in charge of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem under the claim of “construction” has been destroying the archaeological remains on the Temple Mount. The Temple Mount currently has the Al-Aqsa Mosque sitting at its summit. This mosque previously was a Christian Church and before that the Roman Temple of Jupiter. However it originally was the site of the First and Second Temples of Solomon, the home of the Ark of the Covenant, Boaz Thrashing Floor and the place were Abraham took Isaac to make his sacrifice. The archaeological remains here go back to at least 2500 BC. This was where King Solomon and all of the following Kings of Judea worshipped. It is the Temple where Jesus and Paul and the other Apostles stood. It was the site of more history then can be imagined.

All construction on the site is supposed to be supervised by the Israeli Antiquities Authority (IAA), however in 1999 the Islamic religious trust known as the Waqf, which oversees the Al-Aqsa Mosque, began a construction project underneath the mosque. This has turned out to be a huge excavation covering 1600 square meters to a depth of 15 meters. The Waqf had over 200 dump truck loads of earth and archaeological remains removed and summarily dumped in a landfill. This was all done with no archaeological supervision. Later examination of this priceless material in the dump turned up a number of valuable finds. This massive excavation is also being carried out quite carelessly and consequently the eastern wall of the Temple mount is now bulging and in danger of collapse.

The thought of the information that has been lost to the world is staggering and saddening. Modern archaeological research on sites like the Temple Mount is performed with dental picks, half-inch fine haired brushes and microscopes. However once the dirt is moved, the data loss is almost complete. Also stories have been floating around for several years of major finds being made during this digging which were deliberately destroyed so that they would not fall into the hands of the Israelis. Such stories may or may not be true but sadly probably cannot be known for sure now.

The Israeli authorities permitted this atrocity to go on according to the Biblical Archaeological Review and other sources because they wanted to avoid the political consequences of intervening. If the IAA had attempted to stop the destruction there likely would have been riots accompanied by claims of religious persecution from the Muslims. The world’s media of course would have repeated this mantra thereby creating an international crisis for the Israelis at a particularly sensitive time. It was easier to just turn a blind eye to this because, “…the top priority of the State of Israel is quiet, not riots, even if the antiquities pay the price.”

Why This Is Important

This is a crime against science and against the world because it destroyed a unique archaeological resource, which would have added to knowledge of world prehistory and history. Christians and Jews are especially affected by this crime because it eliminated opportunities to find materials, which may have, provide independent verification for Biblical accounts or expanded the understanding on materials referenced in the Bible and other ancient texts. It also would undoubtedly have contributed to an understanding of this historical period.

Sadly, it is also a shining example of the continued failure of the “objective” medias’ coverage of world events. If you want to be informed, do not depend on the major news sources.

Source:

“Israeli Authorities Acquiescence in Destruction of Temple Mount Antiquities”, Biblical Archaeological Review, May/June, Vol 34, No. 3, p.22.

By Lawrence Vescera, Ph. D.

In broad outline the Book of Genesis gives the following information about early human history:

1. All humans are descended from one woman and one man. (Genesis: 2)

2. Humans originated in an area close to or in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley. (Genesis 2) The early human population grew to a considerable size (Genesis: 5)

3. At some point early in human history the entire world population was almost wiped out by a catastrophic event. (Genesis: 6)

4. The world was repopulated by the survivors of this catastrophe. (Genesis: 10)

This narrative has found support in recent research published in “The American Journal of Human Genetics.” Please keep in mind that this article has nothing to say about the relevance of this research to the above scriptural passages. The conclusions of this research as stated are completely secular. However there are Biblical implications in this research.

The study examined the mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) of the Khoi and San people, they are two groups of hunter and gathers living in southern Africa. These two bands are considered “…unique relics of the hunting and gathering life style.” Their genetic material represents a pocket of reproductively isolated genes with ancient roots. The analysis of their genetic material is quite complex and convoluted so no detail is included here, if you are interested, the original article is referenced below. However the findings of the researchers were shocking to some and are fascinating to review.

First this work reminds the reader that mitochondrial DNA research supports the idea that we are all descended from one woman. For those interested, there are also Y Chromosomal studies that show that we are all descended from one man. Sound familiar? (Adam & Eve)

Second, in addition to showing lines of descent and the approximate time that these lines diverged from their ancestral line, such studies can also point to the original geographical dispersion patterns of populations of organisms. The current dominant theory among paleoanthropologists is that humans first appeared in Northeast Africa somewhere around the Rift Valley. This area is only about 1,000 miles from the Tigris-Euphrates Valley. Given the imprecision of such studies, the actual focal point of human origins could easily have been anywhere within the East African/Middle Eastern region which includes the Tigris-Euphrates Valley. Again does this ring a bell? (Garden of Eden)

Third, this and other cited studies concluded that the human race underwent a catastrophic near extinction about 70,000 years ago. A related piece of research done by a group from Stanford University concluded that the world population may have collapsed to as little as 2,000 individuals. It is argued that this catastrophic population implosion was “probably” caused by a drought. However the study does not postulate a world wide drought, so it is difficult to see how a drought would have caused a world wide population decline? However this event would fit very nicely with the expectations of what would follow a world wide hydrological catastrophe as described in Genesis 6. (Noah’s Flood)

Fourth, the study points to the fact that all existing humans are the descendants of the survivors of this catastrophe. Again, does this sound familiar? (Genesis 10)

Why This Is Important

This research while probably not intended to have Biblical implications in its broad brush strokes, paints a picture of the early history of the human race that is consistent with the Biblical narrative. Some may take exception to the details of the research but its general outline certainly has a ring of familiarity to it.

Sources:

1. “Humans Nearly Wiped Out 70,000 Years Ago”, April 24,2008,www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/24/close.call.ap/index.html

2. “The Dawn of Human Matralinial Diversity”, in The American Journal of Human Genetics, by Doron Behar, et.al., April 24, 2008.

By: Lawrence Vescera, Ph.D.

You may be a “Thought Criminal” and not know it. So, if you have not yet seen “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”, I strongly suggest that you see it. Ben Stein produced this movie to alert the public to some very disturbing trends. The movie exposes a widespread effort in academia and the media to suppress the fact that a growing number of mainline scientists are beginning to consider Intelligent Design as an explanatory factor in their work or world view.

Intelligent Design is probably most often defined as the argument that the origin of the Universe and the origin of life cannot be completely explained by purely natural, random or unguided processes alone. This leads to the argument that at some point supernatural intervention was required to either start the process or to intervene in it. This supernatural force is usually identified as God. The movie shows what happened to some scientists and teachers who dared to openly consider Intelligent Design. They very quickly found themselves purged from the field, loosing their positions, abilities to publish, reputations and more.

This movie attempts to tackle an enormously large set of subjects. Adequately addressing such a large body of information in two hours is nearly impossible. A twenty-four part series would be inadequate to cover issues that include: science definitions, science history, biology, evolution, Darwinism, Social Darwinism, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, academic freedom and much more. But Stein did a good job of providing an overview and introduction to this battle that is being waged against scientists and scholars who want to consider Intelligent Design.

The film recounts what happened to several researchers who dared to write about scientific research findings that support the Intelligent Design argument. These people have paid dearly career-wise for openly thinking about Intelligent Design.
Keep in mind that in most cases they were not advocating it, but only discussing it. Their crime can best be described as a “thought crime.” Such crimes in the 20th Century generally occurred in the Marxist countries where such crimes were covertly and occasionally openly punished. In Marxist regimes anyone who dared question the Neo-Marxian worldview usually found themselves without a job and home and in some cases imprisoned, like Alexander Soljenitzen, and occasionally as under Stalin or Mao execution was also a real possibility.

The film also discusses some of the problems with Social Darwinism and its consequences. It briefly reviews the undeniable link between Darwinism and the Eugenics Movement and their use by regimes such as the Nazi’s with their theories about survival of the fittest between competing races and how this was directly linked to the Holocaust.

Not surprisingly the film has infuriated the Darwinists. The film is being attacked on all sides. The factual accuracy of the film is usually not attacked directly because many of the facts are undeniable so they speak for themselves. Therefore the criticisms have mostly fallen into marginal areas such as claims that the film does not tell the other side of the argument completely enough or that there are copyright issues about the use of some animations (it is hard to imagine a more irrelevant criticism).

Arguably the films most important point is that the effort to squelch discussion of Intelligent Design is an infringement of freedom of speech and thought. Whether or not Intelligent Design is factually correct is not the main issue for many, the main issue is freedom of thought. The Darwinists, materialists and atheists want to straight-jacket us all, having us put on blinders to the evidence that points to God’s creative role in the Universe by saying that Intelligent Design is not science. However at the same time they contradict themselves by also claiming that the scientific evidence against Intelligent Design is “irrefutable.” If this is the case, why are they trying to suppress free discussion of the subject? The truth is only too
obvious; they know that their beliefs are based on extremely weak evidence and in all probability will collapse under future scrutiny. However Darwinism is the basis for moral relativism and moral relativism is the foundation of the political left. Therefore there is no length these people will not be willing to go to in order to enforce their ideological orthodoxy.

By: Lawrence Vescera, Ph.D.

Imagine your surprise if you suddenly discovered that the person you thought was your grandfather was actually born more recently then your father.  Well, that is exactly the position that Darwinists are in, given new genetic studies of sponges and jellyfish.

Sponges are very simple, “primitive” life forms. They lack true tissues, having no muscles, internal organs or nervous systems.  They even lack a digestive system.  They resemble something like a colony of independent cells.  They have long been regarded as representing a first step in the evolutionary transition from single-celled organisms to the first multi-celled organisms. Comb jellyfish on the other hand are more advanced, complex organisms having such innovations as internal organs including a nervous system.

According to the Darwinian model of the “Tree of Life,” all life forms are descended from a single-celled ancestor which evolved through time by exclusively random, natural, accidental process into ever more complex multi-cellular organisms.  This model is a hierarchy, which requires that simple life forms must come first and give rise gradually to more complex life forms. Consequently, primitive organisms like sponges must evolve before more complex organisms like jellyfish can be “naturally selected” into existence.

So, imagine the surprise a group of scientists using powerful new genetic research tools had when they discovered that their data showed that comb jellyfish diverged onto their own evolutionary path before sponges. “This was a complete shocker. . . So shocking that we thought something had gone very wrong,” said Casey Dunn, the team’s lead researcher from the University of Hawaii. But despite checking and rechecking the data still pointed to the same conclusion – the more complex animal predated the simpler animal.

Despite this “shocking” finding in contradiction to the predictions of the Darwinian model, the Darwinian model was not brought into question.  After all, these scientists want to keep their jobs and one does not question Darwin in academia (an alleged bastion of unfettered “free thought”).  Consequently, two highly improbable alternative explanations were offered in an attempt to bludgeon the data back into the constraints of Darwin’s 1859 insights.  The suggested solutions are that either sponges devolved from a heretofore completely unknown, more complex ancestor or the comb jellyfish evolved their complexity independently after they went off onto their own evolutionary branch of the Tree of Life.

Why this is Important

This study raises three critical problems only one of which is even addressed by the authors.  The first problem is the fact that the higher form of life is more ancient than the lower form.  The evidentially unsupported speculations mentioned above that are offered to account for this are weak at best and will likely not find support by further research.  The second finding that is even more important is the undressed time factor.  The fossil record shows that jellyfish appeared suddenly in the fossil record.  The third problem is where are their ancestors in the fossil record? If jellyfish didn’t evolve from the sponges where did these complex creatures come from? In terms of the Darwinian model the evolution of organs such as a nervous system would have taken at least ten’s of millions of years.  So where are the original and intermediary forms?

This is not the first case where genetic research has collided with Darwinism.  Genetic research has been making it harder and harder to maintain the Darwinian straight jacket that claims that life appeared and evolved without any divine or intelligent intervention.

Sources:

“Broad Phylogenomic Sampling Improves Resolution of the Tree of Life”, Casey Dunn et. al., Nature, April 10, 2008 pp 745-749.

“The First Animal on Earth Was Significantly More Complex The Previously Believed”, Science Daily, April 11, 2008.

By Lawrence Vescera Ph. D.

“Meteorites Delivered The ‘Seeds’ Of Earth’s Left-handed Life, Experts Argue”, read the headline in this Science Daily story of April 7, 2008. This claim was quickly advertised around the world by the media as a major breakthrough in the effort to explain the origin of life on Earth by purely natural, unguided processes. However, what the headline claimed and what the story actually reported are two far different things. This story is a classic example of how the media mis-informs and dis-informs the public on issues of great import. It is also an example of the widespread misuse of science and scholarly research to promote the materialist/humanist agenda.

Here is how the media operates this abuse: first they make a bold claim such as that in the above story. They then report the details in the story, realizing that few will read beyond the headline and knowing that even if they do, very few will understand what is being written at a level necessary to evaluate the claim in the headline and accurately conclude that the headline’s claim is so weakly supported by the data that the story is not really worth reporting. Also when competent scientists criticize the story, if reported at all, will be printed on page 36 under a headline such as “Scientist Question Chirality Claim.” A title, which will guarantee that almost no one will read it.

Let us examine the above story to see this pattern at work. The opening paragraphs tell an imaginative tale of the early Earth:

“Flashback three or four billion years – Earth is a hot, dry and lifeless place. All is still. Without warning, a meteorite slams into the desert plains at over 10,000 miles per hour. With it this violent collision may have planted the seeds of life on Earth.” “Scientists have presented evidence that desert heat, a little water and meteorite impacts may have been enough to cook up the first prerequisites of life: The dominance of “left-handed” amino acids, the building blocks of life on this planet.”

The story claims to answer one of the greatest mysteries in biology, known as the “chirality problem.” Chirality here refers to the molecular mirror image symmetry of proteins. This symmetry is labeled as either left or right-handedness depending on how amino acid molecules polarize light. This is a very complex problem, which cannot be discussed here in detail, but in summary is as follows: With a few exceptions almost all of the amino acids in living systems are left-handed. However, in the inorganic world, amino acids because of the physics of their formation process are always found in mixtures of equal parts of left and right-handed forms. These amino acids are the raw material from which proteins are constructed. If protein synthesis occurs in a mixture of left and right-handed amino acids, even if the right-handed molecules constitute only a tiny fraction of the whole, the molecules formed will be biologically useless because they will fold in a manner that causes them to be inactive. Consequently when life was first synthesized on Earth it was necessary to start in environment of pure left-handed only amino acids.

Getting and maintaining a solution of purely left amino acids even under laboratory conditions is extremely difficult. This means finding a natural route to the synthesis of purely left-handed amino acids in the very messy natural world, full of right-handed amino acids, contaminants and thermodynamic problems seems almost insurmountable. Consequently origin of life researchers have long despaired over finding a materialist explanation for this phenomenon.

The article in question claims to provide a solution to this problem. According to this article: researchers examining the amino acids on the surface of some meteorites from Australia and Tennessee found a 5% to 10% excess of left-handed molecules over right- handed molecules. They then postulate that if this is combined with a series of natural processes (not currently known to exist), which could purify and amplify left-handed molecules, this concentration level can be increased to higher levels and (add another mere 100,000 or so other critical steps) you “voila” get life.

The article does not mention several interesting facts. First researchers have been examing meteorites for years looking for evidence of this chiral excess. Up until now all have always found that meteorites contain equal amounts of left and right-handed molecules. Ancient rocks in the Earth’s crust also always show this same racemic mixture. Would anyone like to bet that this finding will not be replicated when preformed at different labs using different meteorites? The fact that the excess of left-handed amino acids comes from the surface and not the interior of the meteorites should raise a big red flag because the surface is where contaminants from Earth life are likely to be found. Also not mentioned is the fact that even if there is a slight abundance of left-handed amino acids in meteors and a natural process did amplify this concentration (of which there is currently absolutely no evidence) it would still not provide the purely left-handed solutions of amino acids which is necessary for life to start from. In a mind-boggling step of illogic, the process of amplification postulated in this article requires preexisting biological organisms to carry out the process of amplification. So the way life originates under this scenario is through the mediation of preexisting life.

Why This Is Important

This piece of extremely questionable research will now begin to work its way into the public forum. It will become used as evidence to support the claim that “life originated through strictly natural processes.” It will probably become common knowledge that “meteorites brought left-handed amino acids to Earth and these formed the basis of life.” The reality however is that this common knowledge will be based on a greatly overstated case standing on the shakiest of evidence. This is reminiscent of that fact that many people now believe that there is genetic evidence to support the claim that homosexuality is genetically based. Such claims are based on several pieces bogus research, which were touted with extravagant headlines in the media. This research was all later shown to be specious, yet it is not unusual today to be told, “Everybody knows that scientists have shown that homosexuality is genetic.”

Source: www.eurekalert.org “Meteorites Deliver The ‘Seeds’ Of Earth’s Left-hand Life”, AAAS, April 6, 2008.

By: Lawrence Vescera Ph.D. - Isaac Newton Institute