Monday, November 17, 2014


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
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
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,

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!


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


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



Monday, November 3, 2014


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. 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. 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
    which it can climb trees.”
  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



Monday, October 27, 2014


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

AZosa meeting; speaker Guy Forsythe ; October 25. Arizona

Monday, October 20, 2014



Good day everyone! How are you all this week? I am well and enjoying God’s beautiful world as it changes once again into the spectacular colors of autumn and wonderful bounties of the fall harvests. I had such a good time with my two daughters and two grandsons taking them to a pumpkin patch last Saturday. There were many different pumpkins of all sizes and even some white ones along with a variety of cool looking winter squashes. Such a treasured memory!

Speaking of  varieties of winter squash...I am sure all you astute readers out there have noticed that many of Gods creations have similarities. For example, all mammals have mammary glands, and animals as well as humans have eyes, ears (or hearing apparatuses), mouths and nostrils of some type or another. Animals either walk, swim, or fly. As a matter of fact all terrestrial (land dwelling) vertebrates share universally homologous (similar) body parts.

We are familiar with this in the theory of evolution. Evolutionists use this similarity as evidence of a common ancestor that all animals grew out of and diverged from. Even a single celled organism (which evolutionists call simple) has similarities in that they have a means of reproduction, locomotion and digestion, etc. This concept sounds intriguing and possible, thus so many have come to accept it as truth.

However, even more logical is the theory that an Intelligent
Designer or Creator used a common theme to meet similar biological requirements. We see this all the time in the objects that man has created. For example motorized vehicles except for hover crafts have some sort of wheel mechanism. They also have an engine or motor, seat(s), in most cases a window shield of some sort, a fan and fan belts, starter, battery, fuel injector and storage tank, etc., etc. Artists in general use an array of colors including black and white and shades of grey. They use a background of some sort such as a canvas, side of a building, paper, metal, wood, etc. How about a road? Even back in the Roman Empire times people did what we do today, that is clear a straight line and put down a hard substance such as cobblestone, pavement bricks, asphalt, cement, gravel etc.  Need I go on? If something works, use that theme and fine tune it to whatever you want. Like a Volkswagen, motorcycle, porch, pickup truck, tractor, boat or airplane. You can follow the common theme in all of these man made items.

The same is true with our Creator God. “For example, all vertebrates with true limbs (amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals) have the same basic limb structure at least during their embryological development. This standard vertebrate limb consists of an upper limb comprising one bone, a lower limb comprising two bones, and a hand or foot bearing five digits (fingers and toes). Thus, the appendages of all limbed vertebrates share fundamental similarities, with each being specialized to meet the needs of each species.
“Horses have five digits while developing as an embryo, but generally all but one (the third digit) is absorbed before birth. Vestiges of the second and third metacarpal (and metatarsal) bones are visible in the modern horse as the splint bones. Some fossil horses, however, had three toes, but both three-toed and one-toed
horses have been found together in the fossil record. In National Geographic magazine, for example, there is a picture of the feet of both a three-toed horse (Pliohippus) and a one-toed horse (Equus) that were found at the same volcanic site in Nebraska.”1

But our amazing Creator goes one step beyond that. Once again He has left His fingerprints for us to see. You see, the fact is that it has been proved in many cases that homologous structures are not produced by homologous genes! For example the front limbs of reptiles, mammals, birds and humans are, as we discussed above, homologous. But surprisingly enough, the limbs of these various animals are not produced from similar (homologous) genes. 

“In the vertebrates the embryo is constructed of a large number of segments which can be numbered, starting at the head end. Surely particular segments develop under the control of particular genes. We would reasonably assume the same for any particular structure, such as the front leg. Yet we see in the diagram that in six different vertebrates which allegedly inherited their front legs from a common ancestor, the front legs as well as the rear legs develop from entirely different groups of segments from species to species.
From Answers in Genesis
“Thus if the front legs (or rear legs) of these different creatures have been inherited from a common ancestor through evolution, we have the incredible idea that the job of producing the legs is, by evolution, passed slowly back and forth from group to group of different genes, which are themselves gradually changing to accomplish this fantastic juggling act.
“In his 1971 monograph, Homology, An Unsolved Problem (reference Oxford Biology Reader), Sir Gavin de Beer, one of the truly great embryologist of this century, posed the question for evolutionary theory which still is unanswered:
“‘But if it is true that through the genetic code, genes code for enzymes that synthesize proteins which are responsible (in a manner still unknown in embryology) for the differentiation of the various parts in their normal manner, what mechanism can it be that results in the production of homologous organs, the same "patterns", in spite of their not being controlled by the same genes? I asked this question in 1938, and it has not been answered.’”2

The question, however, is easily answered by understanding that animals and humans were created and formed by a loving Creator and not randomly arising from non-life by chance.

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

This week’s night skies, for the northern lats; Monday, October 20
The annual Orionid meteor shower should be active before dawn's first light this morning and for the next few mornings. The shower's radiant (apparent perspective point of origin) is in the top of Orion's Club, and this is highest before morning twilight begins. Also, Thursday, October 23 A partial eclipse of the Sun happens this afternoon for most of North America. Seen from the eastern half of the continent, the Sun sets while the partial eclipse is still in progress. Westerners get to see the whole thing. Eastern New England just misses out. See our article online: Partial Solar Eclipse, October 23, 2014. Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles plans a live webcast from 5:00 to 7:45 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time. Also: webcast from Columbus State University in Georgia, 5 p.m. EDT. Bonus: The huge sunspot AR2192 should be near the middle of the Sun's disk by today.”3
For the souther hemisphere; “The Orionids are a worthwhile shower that somewhat favours the Southern Hemisphere,best seen between 2-5 am, the radiant, the point where meteors appear to originate from, being just under Betelgueuse, the bright red star in Orion. The Orionids are the debris from Halley's comet, and this year the sky is nicely dark for the shower. The best viewing is the morning of the 22nd, when between 3-5 am under dark skies you should see about a meteor every 4-6 minutes. You can find out the predicted rates for your location using the  NASA meteor flux estimator (use 8 Orionids and make sure you set the dates to 21-22 October 2014).”4

1Ham, Ken. The Answers Book 3 Over 35 Questions On Creation/Evolution and the Bible. Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2013. Pp 233-234.

Monday, October 13, 2014



Hello to all my readers out there! Are all of you well this week? Lord please heal and comfort any who read this if they are sick or in sorrow, and please bless everyone. I have been well myself and am enjoying the company of my youngest daughter and grandson. They have moved in with us while my son-in-law is in Alaska looking for a job. Once he has a few paychecks in the bank he’ll be sending for them. But I will get to enjoy them for a month or so. Yeah!

And that brings us to our topic this week. Vestigial organs. What exactly are these thing? Basically they can be explained as “rudimentary organs”. But are they? Let’s take a closer look.

The dictionary defines vestigial organs as a part of the body which is small, degenerate or imperfectly developed as compared to fully developed organs.” Charles Darwin even had a chapter on them in his book, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection: The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life, in which he said they bore “the stamp of inutility (uselessness) and described them as common throughout nature. He believed (as many still do today) the vestigial organs once served a purpose in
survival but when they were no longer needed began to shrink until only tiny bits remained. In his book The Descent of Man he wrote that humans had a dozen or so of these organs including the appendix, body hair, the coccyx or tailbone, the muscles of the ear, and wisdom teeth just to name a few. Several years later, Robert Wiedersheim, a German anatomist added another seventy five organs to this list including adenoids, valves in the veins, the pituitary and thymus glands, tonsils, the pineal glands, and even male breast tissue and nipples. 

Unfortunately vestigial organs are still used as evidence for evolution in science magazines, evolution websites and blogs, and most regrettably textbooks. It is interesting that vestigial organs are to today being presented as evidence of evolution when doctors are finding out more and more uses for these “rudimentary” organs. We now know that organs such as the pituitary gland regulates the bodies natural insulin, tonsils help to prevent disease from spreading to the rest of the body, the valves in veins regulate blood flow, adenoids are part of the immune system, and very importantly the pineal glands produces melatonin which is essential sexual
development, sleep and metabolism. My favorite however, is the male breast tissue and nipples. When people claim that these parts of the male body are vestigial, vestigial from what? Are they saying that our male ancestors once nursed babies? This is ridicules and once pointed out, even evolutionists back up on this one. It seems the function of male and young female mammary glands takes place while still in the womb. The fetus secretes hormones through these glands that move through the fetal circulatory system then are passed through the placenta to induce milk production in the mother. So much for vestigial mammary glands!

Another example is body hair and its associated erector pili (the small muscles attached to the hair follicles). Evolutionists argue that human body hares are the useless remains of fur from our animal ancestors. “Hair serves a thermal insulation in most mammals, which is important because most animals are incapable of regulating their body temperature by sweating. Man, on the other hand, is a profuse sweater and can maintain body temperatures over a much wider range of ambient temperatures than nearly all other mammals.1 So we don’t need hair for endothermic temperature
control, but we do use our body hairs as sensory organs. “All hair follicles, regardless of size, are supplied with sensory nerves so that stye may be considered to be mechanoreceptors. Our hairs are like small levers that, when moved by any physical stimulus including air, send sensory signals to our brain.2 Hardly vestigial! Also the erector pili muscle moves our hairs from a flattened or inclined position to a standing or erect position. We have all experienced this in the form of goose bumps when we are frightened or get cold. When these small muscles contract, it produces heat. Again, hardly vestigial!

What about in animals? There has been a lot of emphasis on the pelvic bones found in whales and manatees being the vestigial remnants for the attachment of their “lost” hind limbs. “Although the manatee pelvic bones are not attached to the skeletal frame, they are near reproductive organs and the bladder. In whales, the pelvis is used to support internal organs and serves as an attachment point for muscles—very similarly to the function of the coccyx (tailbone) in humans (also claimed to be vestigial). It is highly probable that a similar function is served by the pelvis in manatees. Further research may determine whether the 10%
asymmetry is inconsequential or whether it has a function. God may have designed the manatee to produce the level of PitX1 protein necessary to produce a pelvis that would be just the right size to perform the functions of support and attachment. The manatee pelvis is not reduced in size, implying it was once bigger; it’s just the size the Creator intended it to be.”3 

In reality is, it is dangerous to declare organs to be useless (vestigial) when in fact they do have a purpose. “The problem with declaring any organ to be without function is discriminating between truly functionless organs and those that have functions that are simply unknown. Indeed, over the years nearly all of the organs once thought to be useless have been found to be functional. When we have no evidence for the function of an organ, it is well to bear in mind that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence...The most conspicuous logical flaw in the use of vestigial organs as evidence for evolution is circular reasoning. Evolutionists first declare vestigial organs to be a result of evolution, and then they turn around and argue that their existence is evidence for evolution. This kind of argument would hardly stand up in a court of law4 It is the same circular reasoning used by secular scientists in regards to the geologic column and fossils and the cosmos. 
Our great Creator knows what He is doing and it would be wise of mankind to not underestimate Him. If God put it there, it must be there for a reason.

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

This week in the night skies; How many of you had a chance to view the blood moon? It was gorgeous! “On Sunday the 19th, the faint Comet Siding Spring (C/2013 A1) makes its much-awaited
blood moon of oct 8th 2014
close pass by Mars, as told in the September Sky & Telescope, page 53, with chart. This will be an extremely challenging observation, with Mars low in the southwest right at the end of twilight and the comet only 10th or 11th magnitude, fainter than originally predicted. But you can follow a webcast of the encounter courtesy of the Virtual Telescope project; watch in real time starting at 16:45 UT (12:45 p.m. EDT) October 19th, or the recording later. Also: NASA Prepares Its Science Fleet for Oct 19 Mars-Comet Encounter.”

For the southern lats; C/2013 A1 and Mars can be seen the nights of 13 October to 22 October at 9 pm ACDST from Adelaide. “Similar views can be seen at equivalent times elsewhere in the Southern Hemisphere...Another problem is that for any eyepiece/CCD camera frame that gets both Mars and the comet in the  same frame  Mars will be tiny (at least from Australia, from South Africa, larger magnifications will allow both the comet and Mars in the same field)….Despite the difficulties, this will be an historic encounter, and well worth the effort if you have medium to high end astronomical gear. If you are clouded out, there may be live coverage from iTelescope and the Virtual telescope (watch this space). Labels: C/2013 A1 Siding Spring, Conjunction.”6

1-4Ham, Ken. The Answers Book 3 Over 35 Questions On Creation/Evolution and the Bible. Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2013. Pp 229-240.

Monday, October 6, 2014



     Hello all you fine people out there! How did this last week go for you all? Mine was a bit trying because everything seemed to happen at once and I was slammed. But even so I love being involved in so many things.

     Speaking of being involved, how many of you remember all the controversy over global warming. And its still going on! In 2006 former vice president Al Gore even was the narrator in an Oscar-winning documentary called An Inconvenient Truth. The documentary puts out an intimidating theory of if left unchecked, man will ultimately not only destroy themselves but the entire earth. But is that the truth? How do we know?

      It is necessary to dissect the issue to expose the answer. So lets’s look a little deeper. It is evident that this subject is complex but there are really two issues involved with global warming; science and politics. 

     First with the science. As with evolution, there are the physical evidences and then interpretations of that evidence. Also as with evolution there are differing views of interpretation.  So what are the scientific facts? 

      Because this subject is so complex I will just touch it fairly lightly. Our globe and its atmosphere with its magnetic field contains a geophysical system that is affected by the sun,moon and other extraterrestrial objects (i.e. asteroids, comets etc.). There are four principal systems that effect earth’s climate; the cryosphere which encompasses the frozen grounds especially in high elevations and the poles, the hydrosphere which are the oceans, lakes, rivers, aquifers, etc., the biosphere which are the plants and animals, and the atmosphere (most importantly the troposphere where the weather happens). 

      The cryosphere effects our climate because when the solar radiation hits the snow and ice approximately 90 percent of it is reflected back into space. In years where the temperatures have risen a bit, more ice melts and exposes more water and land. Since the land and water that becomes exposed is darker, it absorbs more incoming solar radiation which in turn releases more heat into the atmosphere.

     The hydrosphere covers 70 percent of the earth’s surface and acts as a sponge for carbon dioxide where this compound is stored for a long time. When there is an increase in carbon dioxide it basically overloads the “system” and the oceans can become acidic in places. When this happens it can negatively effect some of the hydro ecosystems like coral reefs.

     The biosphere in this Post Flood world is much less than it was
in the Pre Flood world. How do we know? Well the biggest clue is in the fossil fuels. In order to have as much fossil fuels as we do, there had to be a tremendous about of biomass, much, much more than what exists today. If we compressed all of the existing biomass, it would only produce a fraction of the current fossil fuels. What does this have to do with global warming? Scientists believe CO2, which can be naturally released into the atmosphere by forest fires and exhaled air and also through man by the burning of fossil fuels, is the biggest proponent for increasing worldwide temperatures. But is this true? 

      Even though all four of systems effect the climate, by far it is the atmosphere that is the most controversial. This is where the greenhouse effect (the trapping of heat on the earth) takes place.
And it is the man-released CO2 that comes into question.  

     “In the global warming debate, it is important to separate fact from interpretation. We hear a great deal about the dangers of CO2 emissions and greenhouse gases, but rarely do we hear the facts behind the hype.”1

     Next week we will take a better look “behind the scenes.” Until then, take care and God bless,
Willow Dressel 

     This week in the night skies, “Tuesday, October 7 Total eclipse of the full Moon happens before dawn Wednesday morning for North and Central America; Wednesday evening for Australia and eastern Asia. We’re approaching the second of four total lunar eclipses that come at half-year intervals in 2014 and 2015: a lunar-eclipse tetrad. All four can be seen from at least parts of North America. The one before dawn on Wednesday, October 8th, will be visible from nearly all of the Americas. Moreover, the Moon, two days after perigee, will be 5% larger in diameter than it was during the first eclipse of the tetrad on April 14-15 earlier this year. See our article, Wake Up to a Total Lunar Eclipse on October 8.” This is the second of four “blood moons.”