Make $$$ Selling Ads

Category Archives: universe

Evolution Pollution

appreciation Breathing-Fragile-Life conscientious-ness earth education faith God horses humility insights Joan Winifred knowledge logic love mind food science & spirituality spiritual food things i learned trees trust Truth universe wisdom

Pollution is the introduction of contaminants into the natural environment that cause adverse change.[1]

pollution STINKS!!…:) lol p.u. (puteo/piu) 😉

“The World Health Organization says that between 5 and 6 percent of deaths worldwide each year are a result of air pollution.” (2001/03)

How dangerous is pollution??

“Toxic levels of pollution leads annually to the early death of an estimated 7 million people, according to a new World Health Organization report.”

“It’s not just the air outdoors in polluted cities that poses a danger to public health. About 3 billion people are breathing deadly fumes from domestic cooking stoves and fires, according to the Geneva-based agency. Household air pollution caused an estimated 3.8 million deaths in 2016.” [excerpted www.bloomberg.com/news/air-pollution-kills-7-million-people-a-year-who-reports]

What/how about wearing masks i.e. surgical??

“Taiwan’s leading expert on the effects of pollution, Dr. Chan Chang-chuan, says diesel fumes are a cause of cancer.”

Dr. Chan says: “These masks are ineffective. Much of the pollution in the form of gases and particulates is so tiny that a simple mask has a low filtration rate. Besides, . . . they are not airtight. So they give a false sense of security.” [old quote excerpted Asiaweek Magazine]

FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY!!!…beware.

For me and my research…“Truth” aka True “LOVE” is no where to be found in the “theory”…(not even a theory) of evolution.  The FALSE teaching of Evolution…is a contaminant to clear, pure THINKING ABILITY!  Don’t let someone else think for You!! Investigate for Yourself. That’s what lazy/idle thinkers do…let/allow others do the thinking/mind labor/work for them…they turn over their minds/brains to the likes of Darwin and Others. Personally, i don’t care much for Mind Squatters!

Sometimes, we cannot help being adversely affected by air pollution…we may be unaware…of air quality, etc. where we happen to live. Where do our minds live??  Same with many of us regarding the bullying of evolution on our brains…since childhood, etc.  Many of us have been indoctrinated/(brain washed?) with this teaching at a young age…by chance vs. by choice.  (Public) education?? or aka (Public) Pollution?!

Spiritual Air Pollution…propaganda, demonic ideas, controlling concepts…cause changes…an unhealthy spiritual state.

Who’s squatting in Your Mind? taking up residence?  Time to kick ’em out of your house!!

Keep Your Head in the Game—and LIVE!:) Learn what True Love is and what True Love does and what True Love produces! Do your own thorough investigation!! Do your own mind work! It’s well worth the time and effort. 🙂

Check out this: my highlights

If evolution were a fact, the fossil evidence would surely reveal a gradual changing from one kind of life into another. And that would have to be the case regardless of which variation of evolutionary theory is accepted. Even scientists who believe in the more rapid changes associated with the “punctuated equilibrium” theory acknowledge that there would still have been many thousands of years during which these changes supposedly took place. So it is not reasonable to believe that there would be no need at all for linking fossils.

Also, if evolution were founded in fact, the fossil record would be expected to reveal beginnings of new structures in living things. There should be at least some fossils with developing arms, legs, wings, eyes, and other bones and organs. For instance, there should be fish fins changing into amphibian legs with feet and toes, and gills changing into lungs. There should be reptiles with front limbs changing into bird wings, back limbs changing into legs with claws, scales changing into feathers, and mouths changing into horny beaks.

In this regard the British journal New Scientist says of the theory: “It predicts that a complete fossil record would consist of lineages of organisms showing gradual change continuously over long periods of time.”⁠As Darwin himself asserted: “The number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed, [must] be truly enormous.”5

7. What should the fossil record show if the Genesis creation account is factual?

On the other hand, if the Genesis creation account is factual, then the fossil record would not show one type of life turning into another. It would reflect the Genesis statement that each different type of living thing would reproduce only “according to its kind.” (Genesis 1:11, 12,21, 24, 25) Also, if living things came into being by an act of creation, there would be no partial, unfinished bones or organs in the fossil record. All fossils would be complete and highly complex, as living things are today.

8. If living things were created, what else should the fossil record show?

In addition, if living things were created, they would be expected to appear suddenly in the fossil record, unconnected to anything before them. And if this was found to be true, what then? Darwin frankly admitted: “If numerous species . . . have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution.”⁠6

How Complete Is the Record?

9. What did Darwin say about the evidence in his day?

However, is the fossil record complete enough for a fair test of whether it is creation or evolution that finds support? Over a century ago, Darwin did not think so. What was “wrong” with the fossil record in his time? It did not contain the transitional links required to support his theory. This situation caused him to say: “Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.”7

10. What other disappointment did Darwin mention?

10 The fossil record in Darwin’s day proved disappointing to him in another way. He explained: “The abrupt manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear in certain formations has been urged by several paleontologists . . . as a fatal objection to the belief in the transmutation of species.” He added: “There is another and allied difficulty, which is much more serious. I allude to the manner in which species belonging to several of the main divisions of the animal kingdom suddenly appear in the lowest known fossiliferous rocks. . . . The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the [evolutionary] views here entertained.”⁠8

11. How did Darwin attempt to explain the difficulties?

11 Darwin attempted to explain these huge problems by attacking the fossil record. He said: “I look at the geological record as a history of the world imperfectly kept, . . . imperfect to an extreme degree.”⁠It was assumed by him and others that as time passed the missing fossil links surely would be found.

12. How extensive is the fossil record now?

12 Now, after well over a century of extensive digging, vast numbers of fossils have been unearthed. Is the record still so “imperfect”? The book Processes of Organic Evolution comments: “The record of past forms of life is now extensive and is constantly increasing in richness as paleontologists find, describe, and compare new fossils.”10 And Smithsonian Institution scientist Porter Kier adds: “There are a hundred million fossils, all catalogued and identified, in museums around the world.”⁠11 Hence, A Guide to Earth History declares: “By the aid of fossils palaeontologists can now give us an excellent picture of the life of past ages.”12

13, 14. Why have evolutionists been disappointed by the enlarged fossil evidence?

13 After all this time, and the assembling of millions of fossils, what does the record now say? Evolutionist Steven Stanley states that these fossils “reveal new and surprising things about our biological origins.”⁠13 The book A View of Life, written by three evolutionists, adds: “The fossil record is full of trends that paleontologists have been unable to explain.”⁠14 What is it that these evolutionary scientists have found to be so “surprising” and are “unable to explain”?

14 What has confounded such scientists is the fact that the massive fossil evidence now available reveals the very same thing that it did in Darwin’s day: Basic kinds of living things appeared suddenly and did not change appreciably for long periods of time. No transitional links between one major kind of living thing and another have ever been found. So what the fossil record says is just the opposite of what was expected.

15. What conclusion did a botanist draw from his study of the fossil record?

15 Swedish botanist Heribert Nilsson described the situation this way, after 40 years of his own research: “It is not even possible to make a caricature of an evolution out of palaeobiological facts. The fossil material is now so complete that . . . the lack of transitional series cannot be explained as due to the scarcity of material. The deficiencies are real, they will never be filled.”15

lol…laughable! the irony of evolution lacking any fossil…fuel…no true substance/energy/tractionyet, it’s a very dangerous/toxic gas…false ideology! It has contaminated, shaped and molded/moved the minds of millions…and for some…alienating them from the TRUTH about true source of love & life…the True God/Creator of Life–Yahweh!

Some of us don’t like having any authority in life…or having to answer to a Higher Power…God.  Some don’t like accountability.  They only want to answer to themselves.

And…Some bow/submit to false ideas/false gods, etc….aka let these dictate/control their thinking/lives. Personally, i don’t bow/worship imposter gods…female or male. Or so-called teachings of “higher” education…that don’t elevate my thinking or living…but rather inflate head/ego instead.

No transitional features found. (period)

28. Have transitional forms of bones and organs ever been found?

28 Another difficulty for evolution is the fact that nowhere in the fossil record are found partially formed bones or organs that could be taken for the beginning of a new feature. For instance, there are fossils of various types of flying creatures​—birds, bats, extinct pterodactyls. According to evolutionary theory, they must have evolved from transitional ancestors. But none of those transitional forms have been found. There is not a hint of them. Are there any fossils of giraffes with necks two thirds or three quarters as long as at present? Are there any fossils of birds evolving a beak from a reptile jaw? Is there any fossil evidence of fish developing an amphibian pelvis, or of fish fins turning into amphibian legs, feet and toes? The fact is, looking for such developing features in the fossil record has proved to be a fruitless quest.

A whiff? a hint? Fruitless!…yet—rotten fruitage—produced, eh? Lots of “stinky” “dirty” money made off of lies! (including lie of evolution!)  Lies are big business…(so is keeping people sick).  Sorry, but i don’t eat rotten nor rotting fruit…nor buy it for food. Do You?!

The New Evolutionary Timetable acknowledges, “the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to another. Furthermore, species lasted for astoundingly long periods of time.”33​—Italics added. (my highlight)

30. What does an extensive study confirm?

30 This agrees with the extensive study made by the Geological Society of London and the Palaeontological Association of England. Professor of natural science John N. Moore reported on the results: “Some 120 scientists, all specialists, prepared 30 chapters in a monumental work of over 800 pages to present the fossil record for plants and animals divided into about 2,500 groups. . . . Each major form or kind of plant and animal is shown to have a separate and distinct history from all the other forms or kinds! Groups of both plants and animals appear suddenly in the fossil record. . . . Whales, bats, horses, primates, elephants, hares, squirrels, etc., all are as distinct at their first appearance as they are now. There is not a trace of a common ancestor, much less a link with any reptile, the supposed progenitor.” Moore added: “No transitional forms have been found in the fossil record very probably because no transitional forms exist in fossil stage at all. Very likely, transitions between animal kinds and/​or transitions between plant kinds have never occurred.”⁠34

31. Does the fossil record say something different now from what it said in Darwin’s day?

31 Thus, what was true in Darwin’s day is just as true today. The evidence of the fossil record is still as zoologist D’Arcy Thompson said some years ago in his book On Growth and Form: “Darwinian evolution has not taught us how birds descend from reptiles, mammals from earlier quadrupeds, quadrupeds from fishes, nor vertebrates from the invertebrate stock. . . . to seek for stepping-stones across the gaps between is to seek in vain, for ever.”⁠35

But what about horses, i LOVE horses…..

As The World Book Encyclopedia states: “Horses are among the best-documented examples of evolutionary development.”⁠36Illustrations of this begin with a very small animal and end with the large horse of today. But does the fossil evidence really support this?

33. Does the fossil evidence really support evolution of the horse?

33 The Encyclopædia Britannica comments: “The evolution of the horse was never in a straight line.”⁠37 In other words, nowhere does the fossil evidence show a gradual development from the small animal to the large horse. Evolutionist Hitching says of this foremost evolutionary model: “Once portrayed as simple and direct, it is now so complicated that accepting one version rather than another is more a matter of faith than rational choice. Eohippus, supposedly the earliest horse, and said by experts to be long extinct and known to us only through fossils, may in fact be alive and well and not a horse at all​—a shy, fox-sized animal called a daman that darts about in the African bush.”⁠38

34, 35. (a) Why do some now question the place of Eohippus? (b) Have any evolutionary ancestors been found for the varieties of fossil horses?

34 Placing little Eohippus as the ancestor of the horse strains the imagination, especially in view of what The New Evolutionary Timetable says: “It was widely assumed that [Eohippus] had slowly but persistently turned into a more fully equine animal.” But do the facts support this assumption? “The fossil species of [Eohippus] show little evidence of evolutionary modification,” answers the book. It thus concedes, regarding the fossil record: “It fails to document the full history of the horse family.”39

35 So, some scientists now say that little Eohippus never was a type of horse or an ancestor of one. And each type of fossil put into the horse line showed remarkable stability, with no transitional forms between it and others that were thought to be evolutionary ancestors. Nor should it be surprising that there are fossils of horses of different sizes and shapes. Even today, horses vary from very small ponies to large plow horses. All are varieties within the horse family.

Time for joanie to shut up…YAY! (You may say;))

When we let the fossil record speak, its testimony is not evolution-oriented. Instead, the testimony of the fossil record is creation-oriented. It shows that many different kinds of living things suddenly appeared. While there was great variety within each kind, these had no links to evolutionary ancestors before them. Nor did they have any evolutionary links to different kinds of living things that came after them. Various kinds of living things persisted with little change for long periods of time before some of them became extinct, while others survive down to this day.

37. How does an evolutionist acknowledge this?

37 “The concept of evolution cannot be considered a strong scientific explanation for the presence of the diverse forms of life,” concludes evolutionist Edmund Samuel in his book Order: In Life. Why not? He adds: “No fine analysis of biogeographic distribution or of the fossil record can directly support evolution.”⁠40

NO! FOSSIL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT CONCEPT OF EVOLUTION!

The above-excerpted reading…promotes “impartial” inquiry! am i an impartial investigator??

As zoologist Coffin stated: “To secular scientists, the fossils, evidences of the life of the past, constitute the ultimate and final court of appeal, because the fossil record is the only authentic history of life available to science. If this fossil history does not agree with evolutionary theory​—and we have seen that it does not—​what does it teach? It tells us that plants and animals were created in their basic forms. The basic facts of the fossil record support creation, not evolution.”⁠41

Wow! even Sagan sees…”evidence” of design/designer:)

Astronomer Carl Sagan candidly acknowledged in his book Cosmos: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”⁠42

{(Regarding concept of Evolution…i see evidence of a designer of a dastardly-deceptive-design…of imagination/fiction.)}

Is it time to take out the trash?? Some things are worth recycling; other things are not!

An impartial inquiry (including touchy topics) is like…Breathing Fresh, Clean, Pure Air…it’s good for Brains. 🙂

Reference Reading: Life–how Did It Get Here? By Evolution or By Creation? Chapter 5, “Letting the Fossil Record Speak” pp. 54-70

Footnotes:

4. New Scientist, book review by Tom Kemp of The New Evolutionary Timetable by Steven M. Stanley, February 4, 1982, p. 320.

5. The Origin of Species, Part Two, p. 55.

6. Ibid., p. 83.

7. Ibid., p. 55.

8. Ibid., pp. 83, 88, 91, 92.

9. Ibid., pp. 94, 296.

10. Processes of Organic Evolution, p. 136.

11. New Scientist, January 15, 1981, p. 129.

12. A Guide to Earth History, by Richard Carrington, 1956, p. 48.

13. The New Evolutionary Timetable, by Steven M. Stanley, 1981, p. 6.

14. A View of Life, by Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, 1981, p. 642.

15. Synthetische Artbildung (The Synthetic Origin of Species), by Heribert Nilsson, 1953, p. 1212.

June 2018 @ the “Mind Gym”

–fav local FL place

& fav flowering tree–

Crape Myrtle

7/21/18 @ 8:01 p.m.

p.s. oops…the missing…link?:)…nope, the missing footnotes…🙂

33. The New Evolutionary Timetable, p. 95.

34. Should Evolution Be Taught? by John N. Moore, 1970, pp. 9, 14, 24; New Scientist, “Letters,” September 15, 1983, p. 798.

35. On Growth and Form, by D’Arcy Thompson, 1959, Vol. II, pp. 1093, 1094.

36. The World Book Encyclopedia, 1982, Vol. 6, p. 333.

37. Encyclopædia Britannica, 1976, Macropædia, Vol. 7, p. 13.

38. The Neck of the Giraffe, by Francis Hitching, 1982, p. 31.

39. The New Evolutionary Timetable, pp. 4, 96.

40. Order: In Life, by Edmund Samuel, 1972, p. 120.

41. Liberty, September/​October 1975, p. 14.

42. Cosmos, by Carl Sagan, 1980, p. 29.

7/21/18 @ 11:10 p.m.

Published by:

Super-Moon Blue-Blood Beaming

appreciation conscientious-ness God Joan Winifred lamentations of the heart never giving up! pain science & spirituality universe

“How do You catch a moon beam in your hand?”…or “solve a problem like”…is it a “weighty” endeavor UP holding “light” ??


Super-Blue-Blood-Moon
January 31, 2018
Astronomical Phenomenon

Super-Moon

Stabilizing Moon (a gift)

g

 

4/5/18 @ 10:56 a.m.

Published by:

High COMPASSION (standards)

caregiving compassion conscientious-ness Joan Winifred justice motivation respect universe

BTW: Just because

i may

“choose”

to

use

my

free will

in

a manner…exhibiting HIGH respect for life and compassion..

doesn’t make me a perfectionist or over-achiever

may be

it

just

shows

i

CARE

A LOT!!! (Hold in Esteem/Value)

for

fellow-fragile-life

and

the planet

and

the

intelligent mind (God of Compassion)

designer

behind

all that is…(created in the Universe and beyond)

 

4/16/17 @ 5:44 a.m.

Published by:

Living AT the Library (literally)!

Joan Winifred knowledge language literacy science & spirituality universe

“Man’s search for meaning is the primary motivation in his life,” said Viktor Frankl

School lets out soon…so begins our Summer (schooling) at the Library 5 days a week…(give or take a few). We are at the library (learning regularly throughout the year (literally & otherwise)). However, when so-called “regular” aka “public” school finishes for the year…we’re there (at our local library) supporting various programs, etc.

Speaking of libraries…our “cells are living libraries.” Did You realize? “The information in a bacterial cell would fill a 1,000-page book.” (Have You read a 1,000 page book lately?!)…(Uh-huh!)

How do cells use information? Think of DNA as a collection of recipes, each one involving step-by-step processes, with each step carefully scripted in precise terms. But instead of the end result being a cake or a cookie, it might be a cabbage or a cow. In living cells, of course, the processes are fully automated, adding yet another layer of complexity and sophistication.

Genetic information is stored until it is needed, perhaps to replace worn out or diseased cells with healthy new ones or to pass on traits to offspring. […]Consider one of the smallest organisms, bacteria. German scientist Bernd-Olaf Küppers stated: “Carried over to the realm of human language, the molecular text describing the construction of a bacterial cell would be about the size of a thousand-page book.” For good reason, chemistry professor David Deamer wrote: “One is struck by the complexity of even the simplest form of life.” How does the genome of a human compare? “[It] would fill a library of several thousand volumes,” says Küppers. (excerpted: Your Cells Living Libraries Awake! August 2015–my highlights)

Speaking MGL…

To describe the writing in DNA as “molecular-genetic language” is more than “mere metaphor,” says Küppers. “Like human language,” he points out, “the molecular-genetic language also possesses a syntactic dimension.” Put simply, DNA has a “grammar,” or set of rules, that strictly regulates how its instructions are composed and carried out. (excerpted: Your Cells Living Libraries Awake! August 2015–my highlights)

Intelligence is out there, eh?..(and grammar, too?)..of course, joanie.

People attribute information to intelligence, whether that information is in the form of symbols on clay or signals from space. They do not need to see the information being created to draw that conclusion. Yet, when the most sophisticated code known to man—the chemical code of life—was discovered, many shoved that logic aside, attributing DNA to mindless processes. Is that reasonable? Is it consistent? Is it scientific? A number of respected scientists say no.

Professor Yan-Der Hsuuw is the director of embryo research at Taiwan’s National Pingtung University of Science and Technology. He too once believed in evolution—until his research led him to conclude otherwise. Regarding cell division and specialization, he said: “The right cells must be produced in the right order and at the right places. First they assemble into tissues that will in turn assemble themselves into organs and limbs. What engineer can even dream of writing instructions for such a process? Yet the instructions for embryo development are superbly written in DNA. When I consider the beauty of it all, I’m convinced that life was designed by God.” (excerpted: Your Cells Living Libraries Awake! August 2015–my highlights)

There are theories…then there are NOT theories:

What qualifies a theory as a scientific theory? According to the Encyclopedia of Scientific Principles, Laws, and Theories, a scientific theory, such as Albert Einstein’s theory of gravity, must

  1. Be observable
  2. Be reproducible by controlled experiments
  3. Make accurate predictions

In that light, where does evolution stand?  Its operation cannot be observed. It cannot be reproduced. And it cannot make accurate predictions. Can evolution even be considered a scientific hypothesis? The same encyclopedia defines a hypothesis as “a more tentative observation of facts [than a theory],” yet lends itself “to deductions that can be experimentally tested.” (excerpted: Your Cells Living Libraries Awake! August 2015–my highlights)

As a person preferring poetry (and alliteration;)…(Is happy living, happy loving reading?)

“Your eyes even saw me as an embryo; all its parts were written in your book.” (Psalm (song) 139:16)

Of course, David  was using poetic language (i.e. DNA). Nevertheless, in principle, he was right on the mark, which is typical of the Bible writers. None were even slightly influenced by the fanciful folklore or mythology of other ancient peoples. (excerpted: Your Cells Living Libraries Awake! August 2015)

Makes me ask: Evolutionists…are they slightly influenced by the fanciful?!

(DNA–a space oddity?/God’s (superlatively intelligent) “poetic” living language!)

Looks like we all live at the library, huh? 🙂

(published 5/30/15 @ 10:34 a.m.)

Published by:
Make $$$ Selling Ads