Monday, December 15, 2014

CHRISTMAS TREE, CHRISTMAS TRADITIONS, EVERGREEN, EVERGREEN TREE, CONIFER, CHRISTMAS CELEBRATION, MARTIN LUTHER, DECORATING CHRISTMAS TREE

THE CHRISTMAS TREE


Good afternoon everyone!

I hope and pray this day finds you healthy and centering your lives around Jesus. This time of year people do think more or our Lord and Savior as He became flesh and blood for our sakes. What a beautiful gift!

Speaking of Christmas gifts, lights, the virgin birth and the Bethlehem star, all things to do with Christmas, what of the Christmas tree? Is it alright for Christians to have a Christmas tree? Where did the tradition come from anyways?

Let’s start with the tradition. Many pagan religions utilized greenery at some time during the cold winter season. The earliest tradition of bringing greenery indoors goes back as far as the Egyptians. As the winter solstice approached they brought in fresh cut palm leaves to worship and as a symbol of life’s triumph over death.

The Romans celebrated the winter solstice by decorating their homes with cut branches of different trees and shrubs in a festival
called the Saturnalia. This was done to honor the god of agriculture. 

In Great Britain many centuries ago, Druids used evergreens in their winter solstice rituals as well. These wood priests placed greenery over their doors to keep away the evil spirits and hung mistletoe and holly too as a symbol to promote eternal life.

By the late “Middle Ages, Germans and Scandinavians placed evergreen trees inside their homes or just outside their doors to show their hope in the forthcoming spring.

“And legend has it that Martin Luther began the tradition of
decorating trees to celebrate Christmas. One crisp Christmas Eve, about the year 1500, he was walking through snow-covered woods and was struck by the beauty of a group of small evergreens. Their branches, dusted with snow, shimmered in the moonlight. When he got home, he set up a little fir tree indoors so he could share this story with his children. He decorated it with candles, which he lighted in honor of Christ's birth.”1

But it seems it was in America that the tradition caught on and spread. The idea of the tree would have been brought over from German immigrants and even the Hessian troops during the American Revolution. But the tradition spread slowly at first, partially due to the Puritans that banned Christmas celebrations in the 1700’s and early 1800’s. 

But “the Christmas tree market was born in 1851 when Catskill farmer Mark Carr hauled two ox sleds of evergreens into New York City and sold them all. By 1900, one in five American families had a Christmas tree, and 20 years later, the custom was nearly universal.”2

Because of the early usage of evergreens in pagan religions, some Christians have raised the question about the use of conifer trees in our Christmas celebrations. They site Jeremiah 10:1-5 as evidence;
“Hear the word which the Lord speaks to you, O house of Israel. Thus says the Lord: Do not learn the way of the Gentiles; do not be dismayed at the signs of heaven, for the Gentiles are dismayed at them. For the customs of the peoples are futile; for one cuts a tree from the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the ax. They decorate it with silver and gold; they fasten it with nails and hammers so that it will not topple. They are upright, like a palm tree, and they cannot speak; they must be carried, because they cannot go by themselves. Do not be afraid of them, for they cannot do evil, nor can they do any good.” If you study this scripture (and also the previous 16 verses) you will understand that though there are similarities to this description and our Christmas trees, the entire passage is speaking of idolatry. There were cultures that have (and some still do) worshipped trees, forests, wood carvings and so forth. God is warning us not to worship the creation, but rather the Creator. 

So unless you actually worship your Christmas tree, I would say no worries about having one! And then you have to remember Joseph’s words when he confronted his brothers, “You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done...” (Genesis 50:20). It is just like our intelligent Savior to turn what was once used against Him into something beautiful!

Until next time, God bless and take care,
Willow Dressel

This week in the night skies; for the northern lats; “Monday, December 15th a Double shadow transit on Jupiter! Both Io and Europa are casting their tiny black shadows onto the face of Jupiter from 1:12 to 2:02 a.m. Tuesday morning Eastern Standard Time (10:12 to 11:02 p.m. Monday evening Pacific Standard Time). Europa itself starts crossing Jupiter at 1:18 a.m. EST, and Europa starts crossing the disk at 2:15 a.m. EST. (for observers in Europe add 5 hours to the times above to get UT.”3 

For the southern lats; “Terry Lovejoy has done it again! After C/2011 W3 Lovejoy, which was also a Christmas comet, he has found us another great comet. C/2014 Q2 Lovejoy is brightening rapidly. Currently the comet is around a full magnitude brighter than predicted, and there are multiple reliable reports that is is now (faintly) visible to the unaided eye. There is every possibility the comet may reach magnitude 4. While it will not have the magnificent tail developed by C/2011 W3, and will only be a fuzzy dot to the unaided eye, it will be the brightest comet we will have seen in southern skies since Terry's previous Christmas comet, and you won't have to get up at 4 am to see it. At the moment, the comet is above the distinctive star cluster around the bright star pi Puppis in the eastern sky after 10 pm.”4


References;
2https://answersingenesis.org/holidays/christmas/miscellaneous-misconceptions-about-christmas/

Monday, December 8, 2014

CHRISTMAS LIGHTS, MENORA, STAR OF DAVID, HANUKKAH, JESUS, LIGHT OF THE WORLD

Hello hello!

Can you believe it is already the Christmas season? I started gathering gifts a while ago and just yesterday my husband and I strung up twinkle lights. Did you ever wonder where this tradition came from?  I’d like to share this little article written my the great creationist Henry Morris…

“The Festival Of Lights
by Henry Morris, Ph.D.
breadcrumbs

“ ‘That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world’ (Philippians 2:15).
The Jewish season of Hanukkah, which begins on this date and continues for eight days, is also known as ‘the Festival of Lights,’ because of the many lights that are used to light their homes and communities during that period. The so-called "Christmas season," going on at the same time, is also marked by many lights everywhere.

“The Hanukkah holidays were established long ago to commemorate the expulsion from the temple and from Jerusalem of Antiochus Epiphanes and his Syrian hosts by the Maccabees. ‘Hanukkah’ means ‘Dedication’ and ‘the feast of the dedication’ is actually mentioned in John 10:22.


“Exactly how and when the use of many lights to mark Hanukkah (and, for that matter, the Christmas season) originated seems uncertain. In any case, as far as Christians are concerned, we are exhorted to ‘shine as lights in the world.’ The Lord Jesus Christ is, of course, the one real ‘light of the world’ (John 8:12), but we are expected by Him to so reflect that light to a dark world that we also can be, in effect, ‘the light of the world’ (Matthew 5:14).

“Therefore, Jesus said: ‘Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven’ (Matthew 5:16). We are thus expected to ‘shine as lights in the world,’ but never with the purpose of honoring ourselves, but only in order to lighten the way to Christ, and thereby to glorify our heavenly Father. We are children of the Father by faith in Christ, and He expects us to act as those who are, indeed, ‘the children of light’ (John 12:36). HMM”1


I think it’s wonderful that we want to reflect Jesus’s light outwardly this time of year. I pray that we all Reflect His light inwardly all year long!

God bless and take care,
Willow Dressel

This week in the night skies; “Saturday, December 13. The Geminid meteor shower should be at its strongest late tonight and tomorrow night. Bundle up even more warmly than you think you'll need, find a dark, shadowed site with an open view overhead, lie back in a reclining lawn chair, and watch the stars. Be patient. Under a fairly dark sky you may see a meteor every minute or two. Also, Mid-December is when the dim Little Dipper hangs straight down from Polaris around 9 p.m.”2 

For the southern lats; “...from Southern Australia (northern Australia is similar but Gemini and the radiant is higher in the sky) on Monday December 15, the Geminid radiant is marked with a starburst. The Geminids are a fairly reliable meteor shower and this year moonlight will partly interfere. Unlike the Leonids, where there is a very narrow peak of high activity, the Geminids have a broad peak and will show good activity well before and after the peak, and on the day before and after. The radiant doesn't rise until just before midnight (daylight saving time) in most of Australia, so you will still have to disturb your sleep for this one. Australians should see a meteor every three to four minutes under dark skies in the early morning of the 15th, between 1:00 am and 4:00 am local time. You can find predictions for your local site at the meteor flux estimator (choose 4 Geminids and date 14-15 December, don't forget to change the date to 2014).”3

References:


Monday, December 1, 2014

GENETIC ENTROPY, COMPUTER SIMULATION, GENE POOL, HUMAN GENOME, HUMAN GENETICS, GENETIC DIVERSITY, GENETIC VARIATION

WHAT IS GENETIC ENTROPY?

Hi everyone!

This is the last week my youngest daughter and grandson will be with us before they make their big move to Alaska where her husband eagerly waits for them. I will miss them dearly but I am happy for their adventure. All my kids are spreading out! Now I only have my oldest daughter fairly close by (about an hour away). 

With all this spreading out of the Dressel clan I thought I would write about human genetic entropy. So what exactly is genetic entropy. It is genetic information differences over time.  We are going to specifically  look at the accumulation of genetic code errors in the human genome (in computer simulations). Really, this is all anyone can look at since there is no accumulation of new genetic codes anywhere and as creation scientists we understand and accept that no new codes will be created for there is only One Creator, and it is not us! 


Even secular scientists seem to be studying real science, that is the facts. “Two recent research studies performed by secular scientists support genetic entropy. Their data were based on rare single-nucleotide variation observed in the protein-coding regions of the human genome. Over 80% of this variation was associated with genetic entropy exhibited by heritable diseases. Because protein-coding regions are less tolerant of mutation than other parts of the genome, these regions give more reliable historical genetic
information...These new studies use demographic models of human populations over known historical time and geographical space. The resulting data showed a very recent, massive burst of human
genetic diversification—mostly associated with genetic entropy. One author stated, ‘The maximum likelihood time for accelerated
growth was 5,115 years ago.’ This places the beginning of the period of genetic decline close to the Genesis Flood, when the earth began its repopulation through Noah’s family and humans rapidly diversified.”1


In addition, the decline in human lifespans after the dispersal at the tower of Babel backs up and fits this model of  a recent explosion of human genome variation. “One more key piece of genetic data demonstrating a recent creation comes from ICR scientist Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson, who examined the mutation rates of DNA in the cell’s mitochondria. The mitochondria is a small organelle that resides outside the cell’s nucleus. Mitochondria contains its own DNA molecule separate from a creature’s main genome. Mitochondrial DNA is typically inherited from the creature’s mother, and its mutation rates can accurately be measured to produce a molecular-genetic clock. By comparing rates in a few very different animals, Dr. Jeanson demonstrated that a creation of not more than 10,000 years ago is confirmed by these genetic clocks. The results of these genetic studies fit perfectly with the
predictions of a young-earth creation timeframe but make no sense when millions of years are added to the mix—the clocks simply cannot have been ticking that long.”2

As creation scientists, we understand that only a few thousand years ago two perfect humans were created. Within their bodies was contained error-free, mutation-free genomes. We also understand that when sin entered the world, every thing changed. The whole world now was cursed and all genomes, no matter what species, plant or animal have gradually been de-evolving ever since. These new studies that recently have measured the degradation patterns and rates of genomes are new evidence supporting the true timeline that is recorded in the Bible.

We can never go wrong with God! He has provided everything we need not only to survive and to live but also to understand His created world.

Until next time, God bless and take care!
Willow Dressel

This week in the night skies; for the northern lats; “Thursday, December 4 brings the year's earliest end of evening twilight (if you're near 40° north latitude): at 6:11 p.m. if you live right on your time zone's standard meridian at that latitude. But the difference from day to day right now is very slight. Friday, December 5; The Moon is essentially full both this evening and Saturday evening (exactly full at 7:27 a.m. Saturday morning EST.) On Friday evening in the Americas, the Moon shines less than about 2° from Aldebaran.”3
For viewers in the southern hemisphere, “December 3-4, Mars and globular cluster M75 are close in viewing.”4

References:

Monday, November 24, 2014

DINOFUZZ, DINO FUZZ, DINO-FUZZ, DINOSAUR HAIR, DINOSAUR FUZZ, DINOSAUR PROTOFEATHERS, PROTO FEATHERS, TIANYULONG, AMBER

DINOSAUR FUZZ

Hi guys!

How was your week? We had an awesome birthday party/farewell party to my grandson and youngest daughter who are moving to Alaska. The cooler weather and winds let up for the day and it was pleasant and sun shinny. But what made it so special was everyone who came to show their love and support.

Speaking of support...can science support dinosaur “protofeathers”? Let’s take a look.

Sordes pilosus
First it is important to understand what a “protofeather” is thought to be. We have already addressed in an earlier blog (What Came First The Chicken or The Egg?) the anatomical difference between scales (whom many secular scientists claim changed into feathers)  and feathers. Here is a quick review; feathers grow out of skin follicles just like mammalian hairs. “They are completely different from reptilian scales in their organization, development, function, and mode of replacement. Indeed, they are unique systems involving stem cells and specialized regulatory proteins. Built-in timers know when to shed a worn feather and grow a fresh replacement. Such complexity defies ideas of gradual change since all these parts have to be in place and working together at the same time to make even one feather. In contrast, scales are simply thickened folds of skin.”1 However there are evolutionary scientists who insist that the earliest stages of feather evolution consist of filaments (dinofuzz) that can be found on dinosaurs’ skin in the fossil record. They believe this the the transition form between scales and feathers.


So what exactly is this dinofuzz? As early as 1830, George Goldfuss, professor of natural history at Bonn University, Germany, claimed evidence of hair in the fossil Sccaphognathus (a pterosaur). By 1960 another pterosaur fossil (Sordes pilosus) was discovered which showed thin, fine filaments very clearly. Thus the word dinofuzz was coined. “During the last decade, a series of superbly preserved small dinosaurs, many of them with fossil evidence of the body covering (dinofuzz), have been found in the Jehol Group of northeast China, the same rocks that have also produced such pterosaurs as Jeholopterus...In some respects, this fuzz looks remarkably similar to the body covering borne by pterosaurs. Indeed, some scientists have even suggested that they are one and the same thing, implying that something similar was already
Jeholopterus
present in ortnithodirans and subsequently evolved into the hair of pterosaurs and dino fuzz, the latter eventually evolving into true feathers.
“It’s an exciting idea, but there are several difficulties. The way feathers (and by implication, feather forerunners such as dino fuzz) develop from deep in the skin appears to be quite different from the origin of pterosaur hair, which seems to have grown directly from the surface of the skin. More significantly, there is no evidence of dino fuzz in most dinosaurs or any ornithodiran (the dinosaur that is proposed evolved into birds), and, in any case, this idea only works if pterosaurs are ornithodirans, which, as already recounted in Chapter 4, is not at all certain. It would seem that, for the present, the case for a common origin of pterosaur hair and dinosaur fuzz is still far from being proven.”2

Further difficulties concerning protofeathers. “Certain theropod dinosaurs, such as Sinosauropteryx, have fossilized fibers. This
Sinosauropteryx
‘dino-fuzz’ has been interpreted as protofeathers, but this interpretation has been disputed by other evolutionary paleontologists. One study pointed out: ‘The major, and most worrying, problem of the feathered dinosaur hypothesis is that the integumental structures have been homologized with avian feathers on the basis of anatomically and paleontologically unsound and misleading information.’ ”3 Also, “now, fibers have been found on Tianyulong, which is not even a theropod. This fact has been difficult to explain by those who are convinced that theropods evolved into birds. Why did these non-theropods have ‘protofeathers’ if they were not destined to morph into birds? It
Tianyulong
appears that these fibrous processes were present with the very earliest dinosaurs, whether they were theropods or not. In the journal Nature, Lawrence Witmer of Ohio University stated, "Perhaps the only clear conclusion that can be drawn ... is that little Tianyulong has made an already confusing picture of feather origins even fuzzier.” ”4 k

Recently there has been a great deal made out of supposed dino fuzz found in amber. Secular scientists assigned these samples to Late Cretaceous deposits dating to at least 65 million years ago. “However, the amber was still transparent, indicating that it is thousands and not millions of years old.4 Translucent amber cannot contain anything from some evolutionary dinosaur age, because oxidation would have long since darkened it.
“If dinosaurs evolved into birds, then protofeathers should be found on dinosaur fossils located below (and therefore dated before) fossils of birds, not above and after them. McKellar's fibers came from Cretaceous deposits, but true bird feathers have been found in fossil layers far below the Cretaceous. Why would feathers still be evolving long after they supposedly already
existed?
“Yale University's Richard Prum told ScienceNOW: The lack of any other remains in the amber—a distinctive bit of bone, say, or a shred of skin—leaves open the possibility that the structures aren't associated with dinosaurs at all. Indeed…they could be something completely new that hasn't been preserved elsewhere in the fossil record.”5 

It’s good to see that there are at least some scientists out there that are still interested in true science. Perhaps one day they will see God’s fingerprints in all of His creations. Please keep these people in your prayers.

Until next time, God bless and take care,
Willow Dressel 

This week in the night skies: Friday, November 28 First-quarter Moon!

References:
2Unwin, David M., The Pterosaurs From Deep Time, PI Press, New York, New York, 2006. Pp 132-135.

Monday, November 17, 2014

DO LUNG FISHES PROVE EVOLUTION?

Hello all you fine folks out there! I pray it has been a wonderful week for you all. I have been very busy once again with my youngest daughter getting ready to head up to Alaska, and my grandson’s 2nd birthday, working a new job and continuing to work all the old jobs. Phew! Needless to say, I fall into bed each night exhausted but happy!

Then I read an article on lungfish and I want to share the jest of it with you all. The obvious question is first what is a lung fish, and second, how do we refute the evolutionary implications?

There are two kinds of fish that have real lungs like mammals and reptiles and one very unique fish that have gills and one lung. 

Let’s talk about the two fish that have real lungs first. They are
Gar
the gar and lungfish species. These two fish actually breathe air with alveolar lungs the same as those of mammals and reptiles. There is an exchange of gases in tiny sacs called alveoli found within the lung. 

There are several different varieties of lungfish. For example the Australian lungfish looks very much like fossil lungfish found in Devonian rocks. What’s so interesting about this is, that the Australian lungfish shows no signs of “evolution”. In other words, if lungfish are the supposed ancestors of all life that crawled out of the sea, then why are lungfish still extant (living today)? Wouldn’t the better equipped generations have killed off all of the lungfish? You know survival of the fittest? 
Australian Lungfish

Let’s take a look at  some other lungfishes, the African and South American lungfish. These varieties “need their small gills to release carbon dioxide, but they also need their lungs to acquire enough oxygen. With this unique design, how could lungfish have evolved? If their ancestor
African Lungfish
had no gills, it might have asphyxiated. But if it had not yet evolved lungs, how would it get oxygen?”1 Sounds to me like once again, evolution could not work. On the other hand, this creature could have easily been designed by Someone who made and is beyond the laws of nature.

“Bichirs are African fish with non-alveolar lungs. Researches recently raised 111 bichirs ranging from two-month-olds to adults in a terrarium. They kept others of the same age in an aquarium. The land-dwelling bichirs’ pectoral girdles-the bones just behind their head-grew in proportions that enabled the fish to swing their heads farther from side to side when they awkwardly waggled on their front fins and flopped their long bellies behind. Their front fins also grew more directly below the chest, so as they propelled themselves along they slipped less often than their water-raised counterparts did when they tried to ‘walk’”.2 The secular scientists like to assume this is evolution in action.

But is it? Could there be another explanation? Well since there
Birchir
were no DNA mutations in either of the experimental populations, the only other reasonable conclusion would be a wide variety of original DNA coding that included these (and probably more) changes from the beginning. If you think of a machine, they don’t alter their own components without being designed to do so. It couldn’t just happen.

However that is not what the Nature study authors did.  When they described their bichirs , they had to “essentially ignore the extraordinary design behind these fish features when they hypothesized that the bichir changes they saw ‘may also facilitate macroevolutionary change’. What does a protocol that refines an existing structure have to do with the origin of such structures and protocols? Macroevolution requires nature to invent brand new body parts-something not yet demonstrated in nature or the laboratory. Optimizing a complicated support structure while it’s still in use clearly points to high-tech design-just the kind of features one would expect from a Creator who ‘created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind (Genesis 1:21a)’.”3

May you enjoy our Lords beautiful creations this week!
God bless,
Willow

This week in the night skies; “Monday, November 17th, the Leonid meteor shower should peak late tonight, but don't expect much. Even under ideal dark-sky conditions, you might see roughly a dozen per hour during the best viewing period: from about 1 a.m. Tuesday morning (your local time) until the beginning of dawn. The shower's radiant is in the Sickle of Leo near Jupiter. Also, keep an eye out for the very occasional Taurid fireball. For more: See November's Speedy Leonids.”4 They can be seen in both hemispheres.

Also the Philae lander separated cleanly form Rosetta and made a slow seven hour journey to comet 67P. There it landed, though near a precipitous, safe and sound. This is an historical moment! It is the first scientific lander that has landed on the surface of a comet. Really Star Trek stuff!

References:

Thomas, Brian, M.S., “Lungfish Design Is Walking Tall”, Acts & Facts, November 2014. Institute For Creation Research, Dallas, TX., pg. 14.

Monday, November 10, 2014

THE CHICKEN AND THE EGG...WHAT CAME FIRST?

Hello everybody!

How was your week? Mine was busy as usual, I was a part of a worship team that did an outreach for a group of people. What a blessing that turned out to be not just for them but also for us!

I wanted to continue with the chicken and egg debate. There are just two more things I want to point out:
First is the three-fingered hand. “One of the main lines of evidence cited by evolutionists for the evolution of birds from theropod dinosaurs is the three-fingered 'hand' found in both birds and theropods. The problem is that recent studies have shown that there is a digital mismatch between birds and theropods.
Most terrestrial vertebrates have an embryological development based on the five-fingered hand. In the case of birds and theropod dinosaurs, two of the five fingers are lost (or greatly reduced) and three are retained during development of the embryo. If birds evolved from theropods, one would expect the same three fingers to be retained in both birds and theropod dinosaurs, but such is not the case. Evidence shows that the fingers retained in theropod dinosaurs are fingers 1, 2, and 3 (the “thumb” is finger 1) while the fingers ret
ained in birds are 2, 3, and 4.”1
The second thing I would like to point out is the huge, and I mean HUGE, problem for evolutionists is the origin of flight. “The theropod type of dinosaur that is believed to have evolved into flying birds is, to say the least, poorly designed for flight. These dinosaurs have small forelimbs that typically can’t even reach their mouths. It is not clear what theropods, such as the well-known T. rex, did with their tiny front limbs. It is obvious that they didn’t walk, feed, or grasp prey with them, and they surely didn’t fly with them!
Another problem is that this bipedal type of dinosaur had a long heavy tail to balance the weight of a long neck and large head. Decorating such a creature with feathers would hardly suffice to get it off the ground or be of much benefit in any other way.”2
Changes over millions of years would just leave the half theropod, half bird inefficient, ineffective and vulnerable to attach. Survival of the fittest would have seen such an animal extinct long ago. And then we would have its fossils as evidence. Which we don’t. There are no half dino, half birds in the fossil record. Anywhere. 
Another problem the evolutionists have with the origin of flight is that they believe all birds first evolved into flying birds, then through more millions of years some lost the ability to fly such as penguins and ostriches. What? Would evolution see fit (through survival) that the flightless birds would just have diverged from the main “line or branch” of evolution? 
These two facts and all the other presented last week argue for a creation based origins of  birds. Yet even when presented with such evidence, some people still chose to be like the ostrich and stick their heads in the sand while they flap their flightless wings to try to boost their beliefs in millions of years. Such behavior is not science, and its not logical.
God bless and take care!
Willow Dressel

This week in the night skies; “Friday, November 14 Last-quarter Moon (exact at 10:16 a.m. EST). The Moon rises around midnight tonight with Jupiter to its left (for North America.) By dawn Saturday morning the 15th, the Moon is below Regulus with Jupiter now high to their upper right.”3 For the southern lats: Evening sky looking south from Adelaide at 21:00 (9:00 pm) ACDST in South Australia, Comet C/2012 K1 PanSTARRS is above Canopus.4


References:
1,2https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/feathers/did-dinosaurs-turn-into-birds/
3http://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/weeks-sky-glance-november-7-15/#sthash.TinhUxkr.dpuf

4http://astroblogger.blogspot.com

Monday, November 3, 2014

THE CHICKEN AND THE EGG...WHAT CAME FIRST?

Hello all my fine friends!

How did last week go for you? I have the privilege to teach at my church and one of  my students had a debate last week with some of the kids in her class on what came first…the chicken or the egg.

So do any of you know or want to take a guess? Let me give you a hint, it has to do with Creation week. Day five to be exact. “And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.” (Genesis 1:20-23). 
Now if you stop to think of it, it takes more than one day for an egg to develop into a bird, reptile, or dinosaur. And then it takes even longer for it to learn to fly. God said He made every flying
creature on day five, not the egg or young of every flying creature. God created adult birds that had the ability to fly, eat and reproduce. So very clearly, the chicken came first! 
But to an evolutionist, this is an intriguing subject for they really don’t know which came first. Here are some suggestions on how to handle a debate of this subject. Follow the way Jesus answered difficult statements or questions, answer them with your own question. For example:
  1. What came first the chicken or
    the egg? A better question to ask is where did life come from to begin with, then you will have your answer to whether the chicken or the egg came first. Can life come from non-life? It goes against the law of biogenesis, the first and second laws of thermodynamics and mathematical probability. God, on the other hand, is outside of and not subject to these laws. It would be easy for Him to create anything He wanted. And by looking around at our natural world, we can see that it was created by an intelligent designer and that He loves wondrous variety.
  2. If evolutionary changes occurred within the egg, then the egg came first. How can evolution happen in the first place if it goes against the law of biogenesis (life spontaneously occurring from non-life)? BTW, our food industry depends on the law of biogenesis every day. If this wasn’t in place, who knows what would be there when we open a jar of peanut butter or can of soup?
  3. We all know evolution is true, and birds evolved from reptiles
    How can this half dino half bird survive?
    or dinosaurs over millions of years, so the reptiles or dinosaurs eventually laid the egg that hatched as a chicken. 
    1. If this really were true how did the birds become warm blooded from a cold-blooded reptile or dinosaur (cold-blooded and warm-blooded are both entirely different systems and survival of the fittest for one system could not change into the other system--the DNA would not be there, nor could it mutate into it [remember mutations lead to disabilities or death]).
    2. Also if this really were true, how did the chicken develop its unique lungs? “One of the most distinctive features of birds is their lungs. Bird lungs are small in size and nearly rigid, but they are, nevertheless, highly efficient to meet the high metabolic needs of flight. Bird respiration involves a
      unique ‘flow-through ventilation’ into a set of nine interconnecting flexible air sacs sandwiched between muscles and under the skin. The air sacs contain few blood vessels and do not take part in oxygen exchange, but rather function like bellows to move air through the lungs. The air sacs permit a unidirectional flow of air through the lungs resulting in higher oxygen content than is possible with the bidirectional air flow through the lungs of reptiles and mammals. The air flow moves through the same tubes at different times both into and out of the lungs of reptiles and mammals, and this results in a mixture of oxygen-rich air with oxygen-depleted air (air that has been in the lungs for awhile). The unidirectional flow through bird lungs not only permits more oxygen to diffuse into the blood but also keeps the volume of air in the lungs nearly constant, a requirement for maintaining a level flight path.”
      1
  1. Doesn’t feathers that developed from scales prove evolution? Then why are bird fossils found in the same or lower layers
    than their presumed dinosaur ancestors? How is that evolution? “In actual fact, feathers are profoundly different from scales in both their structure and growth. Feathers grow individually from tube-like follicles similar to hair follicles. Reptilian scales, on the other hand, are not individual follicular structures but rather comprise a continuous sheet on the surface of the body. Thus, while feathers grow and are shed individually (actually in symmetrically matched pairs!), scales grow and are shed as an entire sheet of skin. The feather vane is made up of hundreds of barbs, each bearing hundreds of barbules interlocked with tiny hinged hooklets. This incredibly complex structure bears not the slightest resemblance to the relatively simple reptilian scale. Still, evolutionists continue to publish imaginative scenarios of how long-fringed reptile scales evolved by chance into feathers, but evidence of ‘sheather’ eludes them.”
    2
  2. Fossils prove that birds came from dinosaurs with transition forms like Archaeopteryx. Then why are all the dinosaurs that supposedly evolved into birds found thus far dated to be about 20 million years more recent than Archaeopteryx? Just because Archaeopteryx had teeth, fingers on its wings, and a long tail—all supposedly proving its reptilian ancestry? While there are no living birds with teeth, other fossilized birds such as Hesperornis also had teeth. Some modern birds, such as the ostrich, have fingers on their wings, and the juvenile hoatzin (a South American bird) has well-developed fingers and toes with
    Hoatzin
    which it can climb trees.”
    3
  3. It’s easy to see that theropod type dinosaurs evolved into flying birds. Then why are the presumed dino ancestors of birds, lizard-hipped bipedals? Dinosaurs are classified into two groups according to their hip (pelvic bone) structure; bird-hipped and lizard-hipped. “The main difference between the two hip structures is that the pubic bone of the bird-hipped dinosaurs is directed toward the rear (as it is in birds) rather than entirely to the front (as it is in mammals and reptiles). But in most other respects, the bird-hipped dinosaurs, including such bizarre creatures as the armor-plated ankylosaurs and the horned ceratopsian dinosaurs, are even less bird-like than the lizard-hipped, bipedal dinosaurs such as the theropods. This point is rarely emphasized in popular accounts of dinosaur/bird evolution.”4

I hope this gives you a better understanding on how the chicken had to have come first. It is impossible for all these (and more) changes to have occurred from one to the other animal kind. And why are there no fossil record of these supposed transitional forms?

I have an answer...because there aren’t any creations or evolved species like that!

Until next time God bless and take care!
Willow Dressel

This week in the night skies; for both latitudes, the 31st of October was the first quarter moon. “The First Quarter Moon is Friday October 31. This is the second First Quarter Moon this month and thus a "blue" First Quarter Moon. The Moon is at Perigee, where it is closest to the Earth, on the 3rd of November.”5

References;
1-4https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/feathers/did-dinosaurs-turn-into-birds/

5http://astroblogger.blogspot.com

Monday, October 27, 2014

THE TRUTH ABOUT DNA

Hi everyone!

How has this last week been for you? I don’t hear very much back from my readers so I hope that means all is well. I am enjoying my daughter and grandson as they stay with us until they leave for Alaska in December. We just had an interesting conversation about the health of our teeth and enamel reproduction. “It’s all in the genes”, my daughter exclaimed and how right she is!
I just attended a wonderful Creation seminar last Saturday and learned a thing or two I would like to share with you.
Do you remember the blog I wrote on the science skeptic and
one of the red flag words was information? The long and short of this red flag word is; information is non-physical and does not arise out of material. Materials such as ink, paper, pens, pencils, discs, computer chips and DNA molecules are only carriers of information. “For example, the information in the Gettysburg Address exists outside of the paper and ink Lincoln used to write it. It could exist just as well on an audio CD, on the internet, or engraved in stone….but it did not begin in these materials; it began in Abraham Lincoln’s mind.
 I wanted to share two points on this. First, one of Webster's Dictionary’s definition for information is “One or two or more alternative sequences or arrangements such as the nucleus provides to the cell and the programer provides to the computer.” Very interesting...very insightful. Do you see what this definition is stating? That information does not come from chemicals (this is where secular scientists claim that information comes from)! Second, when you stop to think about it, there are no, zero, examples of information coming from natural process (engery or matter). Yet there are trillions of examples of information coming from intelligent designers. That tells us that information is embedded within our DNA. It had to have been placed there originally by an intelligent designer and passed down from generation to generation.
So what about mutations? As I have stated before, mutations
Mutated fruit fly with legs growing out of its eye
are always a loss of information not a gain. Fruit flies have been the victims of genetic manipulations for  a long time due to their fast reproduction rate. Over 800 different changes have been discovered through intentional mutations. Yet all 800 lead to death or disability. 
Well then how is it explained that chimpanzees and humans only have a 2% or less difference in their DNA. When presented with statistics like this a Christian should always look into the facts…
For example the study that claimed this small percentage used both chimp and human DNA that was based on the 3% of “perfect” DNA. That is there are no indwells, repetitions, or rearrangements. In addition the study picked a certain DNA sequence such as chromosome 21 (the shortest in humans) and used those specific parameters for C21 to find any DNA sequence within the chimps genome that would match it, not the chimp’s  C21 but any DNA that would match! How scientific is that?
Other studies which have looked a the average DNA sequences, not just the “perfect” DNA (which make up only 3% of the total DNA) sequences the have come up with 17.4% and 30.0 % differences.
Then if you take into consideration indels (the insertion or
From Answers In Genesis
deletion of a specific DNA code), it adds another 20% difference. Why so large a difference? Because if you delete one single code or insert one single code (letter), then the entire rest of the strand after that point is changed. And if you include repetations, there is yet another 6% difference.
So let’s be conservative (we’ll use the 17.4 % difference rather than the 30.0%) and add the numbers. 17.4 for use of average DNA, 20 for indels, and 6 for repetitions. That’s a 43.4% difference. Oh...and there’s something else. Another thing that is not mentioned, is the difference in size between a chimpanzee and a human. Chimp DNA is as least 12% larger in size than human DNA! Add that and you get a total of a 55.4% difference between human and chimpanzee DNA. 
And that, my friends, is the rest of the facts.
Here is some food for thought…
  1. The ape to human chart is supposed to show how man has evolved from a common ancestor of ape. How come that common ancestor is not included on the chart? Oh and how come you never see a chart of the common ancestor leading up to “modern” ape? I’ll give you a hint. It has to do with money; (there’s no funding to find an “common” ape ancestor.
  2. Every kind of bacteria DNA is unique...there is no common ancestor for all the different bacterias out there. Hmmm how can we have evolved from a “simple” single cell organism if not even the bacterias have a common ancestor!

Enjoy God’s creations! God bless and take care,
Willow Dressel

This week in the night skies; for the northern lats...“Wednesday, October 29 The Ghost of Summer Suns. Halloween is approaching, and this means that Arcturus, the star sparkling low in the west-northwest in twilight, is taking on its role as ‘the Ghost of Summer Suns.’ What does this mean? For several days centered on October 29th every year, Arcturus occupies a special place above your local landscape. It closely marks the spot there where the Sun stood at the same time, by the clock, during warm June and July — in broad daylight, of course. So, in the last days of October each year, you can think of Arcturus as the chilly Halloween ghost of the departed summer Sun.
Thursday, October 30 First-quarter Moon (exactly so at 3:33 p.m. EDT). As twilight fades out, use binoculars to look a bit right of the Moon for Alpha Capricorni, a wide, lovely yellow double star. Look to Alpha's lower left for Beta Capricorni, a less wide, more difficult double for binoculars; the secondary star in this case is fainter.

For the southern lats; Evening sky on Saturday October 26 looking up towards the zenith  as seen from Adelaide at 5:00 (5:00 am) ACDST in South Australia. Comet C/2012 K1 PanSTARRS is between the tail of Canis Major and Canopus….Comet C/2012 K1 Panstarrs is rising higher in the morning sky. It  should be easily visible in 10x50 binoculars as a fuzzy dot with a stubby tail. At magnitude 7 you will need to let your eyes adapt to darkness to see the comet clearly. It doesn't have any spectacular encounters, but will look nice amongst the stars. More detailed charts and a printable binocular map  are here


References:
AZosa meeting; speaker Guy Forsythe ; October 25. Arizona