1 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 1

2 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1The Answers In Genesis website published an article written by  Dr. Kevin Anderson, Brian Catalucci, and Dr. Nathaniel T. Jeanson on July 1, 2015; last featured October 9, I now quote their article below: “For more than a century Christians have looked for the scientific silver bullet that would destroy Darwinian evolution and prove biblical creation to be true. We already know from God’s revealed, infallible Word how the universe, the earth, and all life came into being: He spoke them into existence (Genesis 1; Exodus 20:11; Hebrews 11:3). This fact alone refutes Darwinian evolution. Yet in a world where secular researchers reject the supernatural and divine revelation, many Christians still feel compelled to provide empirical (observable and repeatable) evidence to confirm the Bible’s claim. 11/30/2017 2

3 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“The problem is that neither creation nor evolution is observable or repeatable. Empirical science alone can’t prove a miraculous, onetime historical event any more than it can prove evolution. Instead, we must make assumptions, and our conclusions are only as good as our starting assumptions. “The issue is not the evidence, but how we interpret the evidence through our worldview. Does our worldview make sense of the world we observe today? “Evolution is based on a faulty initial assumption, while belief in creation is based on facts revealed by the only eyewitness, the Creator Himself. 11/30/2017 3

4 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“God’s Word says we should always be ready “to give a defense to everyone who asks” (1 Peter 3:15). When witnessing to unbelievers, we should challenge their worldview and show how the biblical worldview makes better sense of our world. “Three biological puzzles continue to stump evolution but make sense within the biblical worldview: “Life from Nonlife “Information of Life “Irreducible Complexity “Life comes from life” is a fundamental law of biology, and yet formation of the first living thing must violate this law. How this could happen still stumps scientists---by Kevin Anderson 11/30/2017 4

5 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-111/30/2017 5

6 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“At the beginning of my first college biology course, we studied the evidence refuting spontaneous generation—the idea that an atmospheric “vital force” can spontaneously organize inanimate organic material into living creatures. Maggots could form from rotting meat. Mice could fabricate from a pile of clothing. “Aristotle proposed an early version of spontaneous generation, and it remained popular until the nineteenth century. At that time, experiments by Louis Pasteur and others proved the fundamental law of modern biology, biogenesis (life only comes from life). Support for spontaneous generation gradually lost popularity. Well, sort of lost popularity. 11/30/2017 6

7 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“Interestingly, toward the end of that same biology course we were taught that life may have originally arisen by spontaneous generation. Confused? Supposedly, life could have arisen in the distant past under unique conditions, unlike those found on earth today. In other words, life will not spontaneously form today, but it must have under unknown conditions earlier in earth’s history. “The only real evidence given for this claim is the simple fact that life exists. It must have come from somewhere, and the possibility of a creator is completely unacceptable to the secular mind. So, life must have originated by a natural, spontaneous event. And this is a scientific solution? 11/30/2017 7

8 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“Researchers around the world have been pursuing virtually every conceivable possibility. They have spent billions of dollars searching for water on Mars, apparently assuming that water also means there will be life. Creative experiments have produced a few organic molecules and some strangely structured strings of amino acids. A recent paper in the journal Nature Chemistry proposes that a wide variety of organic molecules could form from a single basic reaction. The popular science website Phys.org even heralds this assumed achievement as having “solved the riddle of how life began.” “WHILE MUCH SPECULATION IS STILL OFFERED, A NATURAL MECHANISM FOR LIFE’S ORIGINS IS AS ELUSIVE AS EVER. 11/30/2017 8

9 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“Yet, a simple fact remains—the scientific community is clinging to trivial results. Sticking together a few amino acids, finding water on Mars or “organic” material in meteorites, or even making numerous molecules from one reaction is still not creating life. It is not even getting close. Life is an extraordinarily complex and sophisticated functioning system, not just an assemblage of miscellaneous organic molecules.1Despite decades of speculation, creative imagination, and untold millions of dollars spent on research, the spontaneous origin of life from natural processes seems just as impossible as ever. 11/30/2017 9

10 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“To make a point, I offer this challenge. I will let researchers use all the necessary molecules they want; all the molecules found in living systems (such as sugars, amino acids, and lipids). I will even grant them all the biologically correct structures of these molecules and the absence of any chemicals that might inhibit key reactions.2 None of these conditions is actually realistic in a natural setting, but that further demonstrates my point. Even granting the unrealistic, life will still not spontaneously form. “Perhaps early investigators (even Darwin) might be forgiven for imagining a simple origin of living organisms. When the universe was seen as a fertile matrix that enables flies to spontaneously emerge from spoiled meat, it was natural to assume that forming life was not a big deal. In fact, the spontaneous origin of life was considered virtually inevitable. 11/30/2017 10

11 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“While Darwinian evolution does not claim to answer questions of life’s origin, its goal is to offer a natural explanation for the diversity of all life on earth (after it began). As Darwinism gained popularity during the nineteenth and early twentieth century, people simply assumed that the same natural forces that produced diversity could also have fabricated the first living organisms. “Early investigators considered cells as simple “bags of enzymes,” and they understood only a few basic reactions within a cell. Life was little more than the correct mix of ingredients. Get the mixture right and life was inevitable. Within their vacuum of understanding, many things seemed plausible. The gap between the living and nonliving worlds did not seem too large. 11/30/2017 11

12 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“Yet, bridging this gap not only has remained elusive but has slipped completely from view. Findings in the past few decades have moved the expanse of the “bridge” far beyond the horizon. Rather than offering greater insight into life’s origin, recent discoveries have further detailed the daunting size of the gap. The “bags of enzymes” have proven to be an extraordinarily sophisticated system with no counterpart in mankind’s most advanced technology. “The findings of contemporary genetics, cell biology, epigenetics, molecular biology, and biochemistry render life beyond the reach of mere natural processes. While much speculation is still offered and millions of dollars continue to be spent in this fruitless quest, a natural mechanism for life’s origins is as elusive as ever. The mechanism exists only in the imagination of the “true believer”—hardly a scientific solution. 11/30/2017 12

13 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“A spontaneous origin of life has failed to meet the most basic of scientific tests. It has never been observed. On the other hand, we consistently observe that life comes only from life. After repeated verification, there has never been an exception. This is why biogenesis is a scientific law. So, how is it unscientific to say that life originally arose from other life (which happens all the time)? God, who is life, produced the first life. “If researchers ever do construct life in the laboratory from more elemental components, it will still not achieve their goal. Their accomplishment will use already preexisting components, and will be based upon decades of research and scientific understanding. It will not be a spontaneous event, but rather a carefully controlled and designed process. The achievement will be less a synthesis of life and more a semi-synthetic reassembly of life. 11/30/2017 13

14 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“Nonetheless, in the wake of such an accomplishment, subsequent media headlines will likely proclaim the achievement as proof that no creator was needed to form life originally. Actually, such an event would demonstrate the opposite—the formation of life requires intelligence and an extensive amount of knowledge. By studying and understanding life, secular scientists are merely attempting to copy it. 11/30/2017 14

15 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-1 三个谜题进化论无法解决-1“These researchers would simply have plagiarized the life systems that already exist. But as is often the case with plagiarists, they will attempt to deny the original author. Inadvertently, though, any such success will give honor to the original Creator, whose handiwork is worthy of copying. “Kevin Anderson earned his PhD in microbiology, and subsequently was an N.I.H. Postdoctoral Fellow and university professor. Since 2003 he has served as the director of the Van Andel Creation Research Center. He is also a past editor in chief of the Creation Research Society Quarterly and has written more than 25 papers in peer-reviewed technical journals.” Thank God for his work….. 11/30/2017 15

16 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 16

17 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 17

18 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-2“Information of Life “Life consists of more than all the physical parts working in unison—it requires the information to run the parts. Scientists still don’t understand where this information could have come from---by Brian A. Catalucci “Explaining life requires much more than the spontaneous generation of complex new physical features, such as the first DNA, cells, organs, and brains. Life also requires something intangible—vast amounts of instructions stored in DNA. This is separate and independent from the physical world, yet just as essential for any form of life. 11/30/2017 18

19 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-211/30/2017 19

20 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-2“Where did all the information come from? As far as scientists know, information only comes from preexisting information. So this is one of the most difficult and insoluble puzzles for Darwinian evolution—and one of the most powerful evidences that confirms the biblical account of creation. “What Is Information? “So what is meant by information? Simply put, information is a conceptual, nonmaterial entity (something that exists) that conveys meaning, which can be used to make something, to do something, or to communicate something. “It is the basic ingredient of producing anything functional in this world, and the key to functionality is organization. Information is needed to build any organized system, such as a machine. It is the fundamental building block of the created universe. Without information it would be impossible to make, do, or communicate anything, and life itself could not exist. 11/30/2017 20

21 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-2“The only place information can originate is from a higher source of information. My work as a computer scientist is a good illustration. If you want to build a computer system, all the information that goes into that system must come from a higher source of information: a computer designer and a software engineer. “To discover that higher source of information for our entire universe, we must look to the Bible for the answer. In John 1:1, God’s Word states, “In the beginning was the Word [Christ]”; and in Colossians 2:3, “in whom [Christ] are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” Wisdom and knowledge include information. So, according to the Christian worldview, every bit of information in our universe existed prior to the creation, because it was hidden (contained) in Jesus Christ. 11/30/2017 21

22 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-2“In Genesis 1 and Psalm 33 the Bible clearly reveals that Jesus spoke His universe into existence through only His Word: all the mass, all the energy, and of course, all the information. “All information existed before the creation of the material universe, arising only from the nonmaterial, biblical God (John 4:24). Information is a fundamental, nonmaterial entity, separate from mass and energy. This means information has no material or physical existence. You cannot see it, touch it, smell it, or taste it. You cannot weigh it on a scale like a bag of sugar or store it in your refrigerator. Yet it is as real as and has more importance and power than any physical or material entity that exists. 11/30/2017 22

23 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-2“Other important nonmaterial entities exist. First and foremost is God. Others are outgrowths of information, which I call the children of information, including logic, mathematics, the laws of science, thoughts, emotions, morality, truth, justice, love, hate, intelligence, and consciousness to name a few. The most important and useful things in our universe have no physical existence, yet we use them every moment of our lives. So does every plant, insect, bird, and animal in existence. “The Unseen Language of Life “Dots and dashes of Morse code are arranged into words in books. In the same way, DNA molecules store information for complex proteins using four nucleotides. Where did this language come from? 11/30/2017 23

24 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-2“Information’s Special Connection to Matter “Because information is not a property of matter, a rock does not contain or create information. Interestingly, to store, use, or display information in our world, a material medium is needed: a piece of paper to display written words, a schematic to detail the design of a Boeing 747, a DVD to store songs and movies, DNA to record protein instructions, and your brain to know how to drive a car. 11/30/2017 24

25 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-2“This nonmaterial characteristic of information is easy to demonstrate. For example, all cell phones require a computer that runs a software program (the information) to control all the phone’s functions. If you weigh the phone, it has a specific weight (say, 4.6 ounces or 130 g). If you delete the software program (billions of bits of information), the phone has the same weight but is now just a useless hunk of metal, silicon, and plastic. “Without information, nothing in this universe would live, operate, or communicate. For example, a Boeing 747 has over six million parts but cannot fly without nonmaterial, organized information. Suppose that all these parts could be manufactured and assembled by chance without prior knowledge of aerodynamics and engineering—the pieces still could not fly. Even more information is needed to fuel the machine and then fly you safely from Chicago to Beijing! 11/30/2017 25

26 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-2“An Interesting Conclusion “This leads to an interesting conclusion: information is major evidence that disproves the evolutionary, materialistic worldview and strongly confirms the biblical worldview. “You see, information is in all life: it is contained in the DNA of every living cell of every plant, animal, and human being on this earth. It is the blueprint that tells a cell how to grow, reproduce, and operate. It explains why you grew up with the body of a human and not a carrot. 11/30/2017 26

27 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-2“DNA is the most complicated, intricately organized computer program and database system in existence. It is also the most compact information storage mechanism known to man. The question is: where did all its information and programming come from? “Evolution depends on unguided, random, and accidental processes over millions of years. Yet mutations and natural selection have never been proven conclusively to add the kind of genetic information required to produce life. At best, they merely shuffle around existing information. In fact, mutations and natural selection often remove information from DNA. 11/30/2017 27

28 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-2“Secular scientists must answer the question, “How could a purely materialistic system like evolution add nonmaterial information to the DNA computer system to change one kind of creature into another?” Also, “How did the first cell obtain the information and control system necessary to fuel its ‘engines’ and keep them running (metabolism)?” Darwinian evolutionists have yet to answer these questions. “Material entities cannot create nonmaterial entities. Hydrogen and rocks do not create information contained within DNA molecules. In In the Beginning Was Information, Dr. Werner Gitt, a renowned specialist in information theory, showed that only nonmaterial entities (such as God and man’s spirit) can create new information. This gives very strong support to the biblical worldview. 11/30/2017 28

29 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-2 三个谜题进化论无法解决-2“So we can rest comfortably in our 747s, knowing intelligent beings built them safely from highly organized and detailed information the Creator placed in the universe for our benefit and His glory. Evidence of God’s wisdom is all around us, not just in the physical world but in the intangible information that keeps life running. “Brian A. Catalucci has a master of science in computer science and engineering from the University of Colorado at Boulder. He is presently an adjunct speaker for Answers in Genesis and is currently working on his PhD dissertation in theology and apologetics.” Thank God for Brian…… 11/30/2017 29

30 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 30

31 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 31

32 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-3 三个谜题进化论无法解决-3“Irreducible Complexity “Darwinian evolution requires that every complex component of life arose step-by-step. The discoveries of genetics and cell biology have highlighted this impossibility, which scientists still can't explain --- by Nathaniel Jeanson “When Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, he insisted that evolution occurred only in small steps, not big leaps. This element was so important that he made it the defining test of evolution: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down” [emphasis added].3 “Since 1859, the discoveries of genetics and cell biology have collapsed Darwin’s theory—in ways that he never would have imagined. 11/30/2017 32

33 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-3 三个谜题进化论无法解决-3“Irreducibly Complex Cells “Consider the information storehouse of the cell, DNA. One of the ways the cell attempts to meet its changing needs is by extracting information from DNA. To do so, the cell must locate the appropriate instructions quickly on the correct strand and then express them at the right time to address the right problems. Without the cellular locating and timing tools already present, the information in DNA would be inaccessible and useless to the cell, and the cell would eventually cease to exist. Without cells, evolution would be dead. 11/30/2017 33

34 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-3 三个谜题进化论无法解决-311/30/2017 34

35 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-3 三个谜题进化论无法解决-3“Finally, in a normal, healthy cell, RNA is eventually chemically translated into another cellular language—that of proteins. Organisms produce thousands—even tens of thousands—of proteins to perform varied functions. These tiny machines transport molecules from one section of the cell to another; they transform other chemicals to extract energy; they send signals to various parts within the cell; they help the cell divide into two cells—and the list goes on and on. Translating RNA into protein requires a host of cellular parts, presenting yet another roadblock to step-by-step evolution. Without proteins, the evolutionary origin of species would never occur. 11/30/2017 35

36 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-3 三个谜题进化论无法解决-3“As fascinating as these examples are, they only scratch the surface of the irreducible complexity locked within each cell.4 If these simplified illustrations sink evolution, what hope does Darwin have in the vast ocean of interdependent, complex systems? “All or Nothing “Nearly every creature alive today requires information to flow from DNA to RNA to proteins. These are three very different kinds of molecules, but none of them can function without the other two. DNA depends on RNA and proteins to function; RNA depends on DNA and proteins; and proteins depend on DNA and RNA. “All three had to be in place at the same time for them to function. Dr. Michael Behe coined the term irreducible complexity to describe such mutually interdependent systems within cells. 11/30/2017 36

37 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-3 三个谜题进化论无法解决-3“No Escape from Darwin’s Test “Not surprisingly, these findings have forced the evolutionary community to propose creative solutions to the apparent contradictions between Darwin’s original hypothesis and cell biology. Their attempts to rescue evolution fall into four major categories. 11/30/2017 37

38 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-3 三个谜题进化论无法解决-3“First, evolutionists from Darwin on have appealed to the power of artificial selection—mankind’s ability to domesticate and breed wild species to produce profound biological changes. The problem with this counter-explanation is that it requires a change in the original definition of evolution. Darwin didn’t title his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Intelligent Creation. Instead, he proposed that the mechanism was natural selection—no human or divine activity involved. In contrast, artificial selection requires intelligent people to oversee the process, making this analogy a non-starter. 11/30/2017 38

39 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-3 三个谜题进化论无法解决-3“The second attempted solution has a similar problem. Perhaps, the evolutionists say, cellular “scaffolds” once sustained simpler intermediates until the complex, interdependent parts of the cell were completed. They say that since the erecting of a bridge requires scaffolds and intermediate pieces until all parts are connected, why not the cell? For this analogy to work, the evolutionists must, once again, play loose with the definition of evolution. The construction of a bridge involves intelligent human activity. Evolution by natural selection does not. 11/30/2017 39

40 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-3 三个谜题进化论无法解决-3“A third effort arranges organisms into apparent hierarchies— for example, from fish to amphibians to reptiles— based on similarities among species. If species can be arranged into a series, evolutionists argue, couldn’t they have evolved from a common ancestor? The problem is that evolution requires—as per Darwin’s explicit statements—a specific step-by-step explanation at the cellular and molecular level, not a vague hierarchy. “Finally, evolutionists have appealed to something they call “neutral evolution”—changes in DNA that do not result in a change in biological function. In contrast, evolution by natural selection requires changes in biological function. By definition, natural selection requires a biological component—say, a part of a cell—to be functional before it can be selected. 11/30/2017 40

41 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-3 三个谜题进化论无法解决-3“CREATIONISTS HAVE LONG POINTED OUT THE IMPOSSIBLE ODDS OF EVOLUTION BY CHANCE. “While the weakness of this explanation is hidden at first pass, it is actually the most implausible of all. At its core, neutral evolution is a synonym for pure luck, turning the question of evolution into a matter of probabilities and chance. Even if we grant the evolutionists the process of neutral evolution, creationists have long pointed out the impossible odds of evolution by chance, and neutral evolution does nothing to escape the obvious implications of Darwin’s original “step by step” test. 11/30/2017 41

42 Three Puzzles Evolution Can’t Solve-3 三个谜题进化论无法解决-3“Thus, the only way to rescue Darwinian evolution—the strictly naturalistic, survival of the fittest, small-steps process—is to redefine it. By redefining the essence of what Darwin proposed and changing it to something entirely different, evolutionists are implicitly acknowledging that Darwinian evolution doesn’t work. “As Romans 1:18–25 explained so long ago, the Creator is “clearly seen” by the things He has made, and evolutionists have no scientific basis for contradicting this fact—according to Darwin himself. “Nathaniel Jeanson received his PhD from Harvard Medical School, specializing in the role of Vitamin D in regulating blood stem cells. He spent several years as a research associate for the Institute for Creation Research and now does research for Answers in Genesis.” Thank God for Nathaniel’s contribution. 11/30/2017 42

43 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 43

44 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 44

45 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s TimelineThe Answers In Genesis website published an article written by  Brooke C. Nelson on October 5, I now quote his article below: “Do you remember as a child looking into the sky to find shapes in cotton-ball clouds? How often did you see the same shape as someone else? For my family, we saw very different animals or objects, and it was only when we specifically pointed out distinct features that we could agree on a shape. “Similarly, how likely is it for cultures scattered across the globe to see the same shapes in the stars? Ursa Major and Ursa Minor, the Big and Little Bears with distorted tails, are well-known constellations in today’s world because they are easy to spot, hold the asterisms we know as the Big Dipper and Little Dipper, and are important for finding the North Star. Even though these bears have long tails unlike any bear we know today, they caught the attention of the Ancient World as well. 11/30/2017 45

46 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s Timeline“In Roman legend, Jupiter had a lover, Kallisto (or Callisto), who conceived and birthed a son. Jupiter’s wife, Juno, was jealous and cursed Kallisto by turning her into a bear. Years later the son, Arcas, was hunting and came face to face with his mother. Not knowing the bear’s identity, Arcas pulled back an arrow (or a spear in some versions) but Jupiter, to protect Kallisto, intervened and turned Arcas into a bear. To further protect them from Juno’s wrath, he decided to cast them into the sky out of her reach. The weight of the bears as he hurled them into the sky by their tails was enough to stretch the tails into the long ones they have today. Juno, though, found one last way to curse them when she convinced the god of the sea to forbid them to enter the water to rest, so evermore they are forced to wander around the North Pole.1 11/30/2017 46

47 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s Timeline“The Finns, Arabians, Phoenicians, Persians, and inhabitants of northern Asia also call this constellation a long-tailed bear.2 Some say this could be cultural crossover throughout the years, but then why would North American natives see the same picture of a long-tailed bear in the sky, as reported by four early-comers in the late 1600s early 1700s?3 “Multiple tribes of the New World, including the Iroquois and Algonquin, have a legend something like this: a giant, magical bear was threatening a village of people and their food. In order to protect themselves, villagers sent their best hunters to track and kill the bear. Mile after mile the bear grew tired; the hunters drew closer until one was able to fatally wound the bear. The bear, in his magic, ran off the earth, straight into the heavens, and took the hunters into the stars with him. As the crimson flow from the wound dripped down onto earth, it turned the colors of the trees red, the mark of autumn. After the hunters spent a winter in the sky, a spirit reentered the bear. The bear rose up, and the chase began again. The hunters killed the bear each autumn, but each spring a new bear came to life to run. 11/30/2017 47

48 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s Timeline“Oceans separate cultures and people, yet so many see the bears in the sky, just as if you and your buddy were looking at clouds and found the same shape. “Thus, circling the globe from the valley of the Ganges to the great lakes of the New World, we find ourselves confronted with the same sign in the northern skies, the relic of some primeval association of ideas, long since extinct.“4 “DID THIS CONSTELLATION NAME AND IDEA ORIGINATE AT THE SAME PLACE AND FROM THE SAME PEOPLE BEFORE BEING SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE EARTH? 11/30/2017 48

49 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s Timeline11/30/2017 49

50 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s Timeline“It begs the question: Did this constellation name and idea originate at the same place and from the same people before being scattered throughout the earth? Claudius Ptolemy in the 2nd century AD meticulously mapped coordinates in ecliptic latitude and longitude for over one thousand stars known to him via legends and his own eyes. Throughout a year, he would have seen all visible stars—winter constellations, summer constellations, and everything in between. Mapping them would have given him a large circle of stars centered at some pivot point. In a time-lapse photo of the night sky, what star does not move? Rather, what point does the sky pivot around? If you answered Polaris (the North Star), you are mostly correct. More accurately, the sky pivots around the North Celestial Pole (NCP), but the North Star is very close to it (less than a degree away). The amazing thing about Ptolemy’s chart is that it does not pivot around the North Star at all! The NCP being somewhere else in the past means it has moved from its position in Ptolemy’s time to now point at the Polaris. 11/30/2017 50

51 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s Timeline“Within the last few hundred years, E. W. Maunder and R. A. Proctor along with others have looked at Ptolemy’s star map and realized the North Celestial Pole is different now because of a phenomenon of physics called precession. 11/30/2017 51

52 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s Timeline“When you spin a top, it rotates quickly around an axis that goes through two points—the handle and where it touches the table. The earth is like a top spinning on an axis, and that axis of rotation gives us 24-hour days—one complete spin. As the top spins, it begins to wobble, looking as if it will fall over. This wobble is centered on a different axis—one from where the tip meets the table, perpendicular through the center of the circle around which it wobbles. This motion of wobbling around an axis, or precession, is due to the force of gravity; the force is due to spinning, or torque. The earth undergoes precession just as a top would because the sun’s gravitational pull on the earth’s equatorial bulge produces a torque. You can imagine the earth’s precession: the axis giving us the 24-hour days traces out a circle in the sky that takes approximately 26,000 years to complete. As the wobble of the earth continues, the NCP (local 24-hour pivot point) moves through the sky. Therefore the North Star will not always be the North Star, nor has it always been the North Star because the earth has been wobbling for ages. 11/30/2017 52

53 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s Timeline“So how does this help us discover when the constellations originated? Using Ptolemy’s map of the stars, Maunder and Procter found the pivot point, NCP, at the time the stars were given to Ptolemy and, using the precession of the earth, traced back to the time the constellations originated. Maunder explains this process and comes to the conclusion that constellations began around 2,800 BC.5 Procter came up with the date 2,100–2,200 BC.6 Using similar methods and Ptolemy’s map again, “Maunder considers that the designers of the figures lived, in all probability, between 36° and 42° north latitude.”7 Others have done the same calculations, and all converge on dates in the third millennium BC in latitudes between 30° and 42° north.8 11/30/2017 53

54 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s Timeline“What does this mean for us today? Well, for those who believe in a land bridge between Asia and Alaska 10–12,000 years ago, it presents the problem of how people developed the same constellations as absurd as two long-tailed bears. The fact that some cultures across the globe have the same constellations in their night sky supports the idea that all people groups once were together sharing information. But if people did not develop the constellations until the third millennium BC, then how did Native Americans see two bears in the sky, as did people in the Old World, when the physical link between the Old World and the New World was severed thousands of years earlier? “THE TIME PERIOD FOR THE ORIGIN OF THE CONSTELLATIONS AS WE KNOW THEM IN THE THIRD MILLENNIUM BC COINCIDES WITH THE BIBLICAL TIMELINE. 11/30/2017 54

55 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s Timeline“Interestingly, the time period for the origin of the constellations as we know them in the third millennium BC coincides with the biblical timeline. The Flood and Tower of Babel were in the third millennium BC. Furthermore, the latitude range of the origin of the constellations agrees with the biblical location of the post-Flood society on the Plane of Sumer. If the constellations developed at that time, then as people dispersed after God’s judgment at the Tower of Babel, they would have taken the constellations with them. Thus the land bridge connecting Asia and the Americas existed much later in the biblical chronology than in the secular chronology. Though modifications in the constellations were inevitable, one would expect some common elements, such as the two bears, to persist. 11/30/2017 55

56 Do the Big and Little Dipper Support the Bible’s Timeline“It is improbable that more than one culture would have developed two long-tailed bears among the constellations independently. It is far more likely that similarities between different constellation systems is the result of a common origin rather than a coincidence. Hence the presence of Ursa Major and Ursa Minor in the constellations of diverse cultures bears testimony of the reliability of biblical history at the earliest epochs of post-Flood and post-Babel human migration. “Brooke C. Nelson wrote this while at Answers in Genesis as an intern with Dr. Danny Faulkner during the summer of 2016.” 11/30/2017 56

57 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 57

58 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 58

59 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？The Answers In Genesis website published an article written by Dr. Danny R. Faulkner on October 1, I now quote his article below: “The thought that aliens might be living on other planets may sound innocent enough. But lurking underneath are some deep theological dangers. “A 2012 survey reported that more than a third of Americans believe aliens have visited the earth, and only about one-fifth do not (the rest were undecided). With ET believers outnumbering non-believers nearly two-to-one, the intense fascination with aliens is obvious. Aliens permeate our society, as evidenced by warm and fuzzy—and sometimes not-so-fuzzy—ETs on every Cineplex marquee. 11/30/2017 59

60 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“Given all this hype, should Christians care? Does the Bible have anything to say? In case you’re worried that you might have missed the Bible’s account of an alien visitation, let me assure you that it does not actually mention ETs or flying saucers. However, as with so many other issues, biblical principles help answer whether flying saucers and ETs are real. It’s not a trivial question. 11/30/2017 60

61 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？11/30/2017 61

62 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“Where Do ETs Come From? First, let me clarify a few terms. A UFO is not the same thing as a flying saucer. UFO stands for Unidentified Flying Object. Whenever a person sees an object in the sky and he doesn’t know what it is, it is a UFO. Once a UFO is identified, it becomes an IFO, or Identified Flying Object. Many objects can be UFOs—bright stars, planets, satellites, meteors, auroras, aircraft, and weather balloons, to name just a few. When a UFO remains unidentified, it does not mean that it is a flying saucer—it just means that we have not yet figured out what it was. What is a flying saucer? That is not a precise term, but it generally is understood to be a spacecraft piloted by an alien. Another term for an alien is an ET, or extraterrestrial. 11/30/2017 62

63 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“Assuming for the moment that flying saucers and ETs are real, where do they come from? The obvious answer is that they must come from other planets, so this issue is more a question of whether life exists on other planets. For about three centuries, people have been aware that planets might orbit other stars. However, this suspicion was not confirmed until the mid-1990s, when astronomers first discovered an extrasolar planet, a planet orbiting another star. We now know of nearly 2,000 extrasolar planets, with new discoveries frequently being made. It now appears that extrasolar planets may be common. 11/30/2017 63

64 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“Most arguments in favor of life existing on other planets rely upon probability. Given the trillions of stars in the universe and the likelihood that many of those stars have orbiting planets, what is the probability that we are alone in the universe? But this approach assumes that life naturally arises wherever the conditions are conducive for life to exist. From the Bible, we know that this is not how life came about on the earth. Rather, God specially created life on this planet. It would be inconsistent to believe that God created life on earth but that life arose naturally on other worlds. So if life exists elsewhere, God must have created it too. That makes the existence of ETs a theological question, and a very serious one. 11/30/2017 64

65 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“How Would ETs Fit into God’s Greater Purpose? God certainly could have created life on other planets, but is this consistent with what we know about the purpose of God’s works? In the beginning, God created the earth first, and He made the heavenly bodies throughout the rest of the universe to serve the inhabitants of earth (Genesis 1:14–19). Isaiah 45:18 makes a distinction between God’s role for the earth and the heavens (the rest of the universe). It says that God did not create the earth in vain, but that He made it to be inhabited. While the Bible is not geocentric (placing the earth at the physical center of the universe), the earth is the center of God’s attention. Humans—and not ETs—are God’s primary concern in the universe. 11/30/2017 65

66 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“This raises a host of other theological questions. According to Romans 8:18–22, Adam’s sin affected the entire universe. What effect did man’s fall and the subsequent curse have on ETs? Did they fall because of Adam’s sin, or was there an Adam-like ET that sinned on each inhabited planet? Holding ETs accountable for Adam’s sin does not seem just. To ETs, Adam would amount to an alien. A gospel message that begins, “A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away . . .” trivializes the gospel. 11/30/2017 66

67 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“Equally trivial would be to propose an Adam among every alien race who sinned and brought each respective race under the penalty of death. In order to secure their salvation, Jesus would have to be born, live, die, and rise again on countless planets. Even skeptics have noted that this is the logical consequence of believing in human-like beings on other worlds. For instance, John Adams observed in his diary on April 24, 1756, that if many other worlds were inhabited as people then thought, then Jesus would have to die on each of those worlds. Effectively, this questions whether the existence of ETs can be compatible with the gospel of the New Testament. 11/30/2017 67

68 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“This is a fair question to ask. Unfortunately, while many skeptics raise this question, few Christians take it seriously. Skeptics use it to ridicule Christianity. If life is common in the universe, they conclude it’s just as probable there is no God. However, you can answer the question in a very different way. If the God of the Bible and the gospel are real, then ETs are not. 11/30/2017 68

69 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“No Room for ETs “We can glean many more principles from the Bible that seem to close the case against ETs. Jesus told His disciples that He would leave to prepare a place for them in heaven (John 14:2–3). Furthermore, Jesus is now seated at the right hand of the Father (Mark 16:19; Acts 2:33). Jesus’ place is now with the Father in heaven; His work is complete. This would seem to preclude multiple missions of redemption on other worlds. Finally, Hebrews 10:12 states that Jesus made one sacrifice for sin forever. That clearly rules out Jesus’ repeating His sacrifice in other places throughout the cosmos. 11/30/2017 69

70 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“If ETs are not real, then what should we make of numerous unexplained UFO sightings? First, realize again that an unexplained UFO sighting does not constitute a genuine flying saucer. Just because we have not explained a sighting by means other than a flying saucer, that does not mean that such an explanation is not possible. Second, many hoaxers and hucksters have promoted UFO sightings, some just for fun but others because it’s such a lucrative business. 11/30/2017 70

71 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“Satanic deception may also be at play. Most people who strongly believe in alien visitations believe in evolution and reject the authority of Scripture. They are well aware that alien life conflicts with the teachings of the Bible. To them, the reality of ETs disproves the Bible. Given that belief in ETs is so powerful in turning people away from the truth, the possibility of satanic deception is quite real. “So while alien visitations might have a fun place in frivolous fiction, the heart-felt belief that life really does exist elsewhere can have eternal ramifications. 11/30/2017 71

72 Is Belief in Alien Life Harmless? 相信外星人是无害吗？“Dr. Danny Faulkner joined the staff of Answers in Genesis after 26½ years as professor of physics and astronomy at the University of South Carolina Lancaster. He has written numerous articles in astronomical journals, and he is the author of Universe by Design and The New Astronomy Book.” 11/30/2017 72

73 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 73

74 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 74

75 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题The Answers In Genesis website published an article written by   Mark Ward, Jr. on October 1, 2015; last featured October 14, I now quote his article below: “Even atheists admit that people who err about origins aren’t necessarily “ignorant, stupid, or insane.” There is a fourth option—and God’s Word would agree with them. “Our most prominent global-village atheist, Richard Dawkins, said a few years ago, “If you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but I’d rather not consider that).”1 “That’s us creationists. And despite his coy demurrals, his subsequent public statements suggest that he is all too ready to consider us not just stupid but wicked. 11/30/2017 75

76 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“I’ll let Dawkins’ four adjectives structure my article, but I’ll reveal my main point up front: I actually agree with Dawkins on something very important, the idea that knowledge is a moral issue. “Ignorance “First let me take up the charge of ignorance. My field is New Testament studies, not science. I admit, therefore, to being comparatively scientifically ignorant—though I wonder how much I differ in that respect from most believers in evolution. Along with the great majority of Westerners, my formal science training ended the last day of high school (or perhaps a few weeks before ). I hold to scientific postulates that were handed to me, just as they were handed to most people, from trusted authorities. 11/30/2017 76

77 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“IT IS, IN DAWKINS’ VIEW AND MY OWN, IMMORAL TO DENY THE TRUTH. “I do have a liberal-arts graduate level of knowledge of the Copernican revolution, and I’ve read a few science books along the way. But it would be impossible for me to “prove” via formal scientific methodology any of the fundamental tenets about the natural world I accept, such as the reality of the force of gravity and of the earth’s revolution around the sun. 11/30/2017 77

78 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题11/30/2017 78

79 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“Likewise, I have a basic understanding of the mechanics of evolution. I’m aware that it is not exactly a new idea. Darwinism has undergone this or that revision but has, in the main, swept the biological field. Like most readers of this magazine, I know about the Galápagos finches and the HMS Beagle. I’ve read about gene mutation and natural selection. I’ve also examined in some detail the olive branch proffered to me by evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould, the idea of Non-Overlapping Magisteria. “There surely is much I don’t know in every field of human endeavor, but concerning evolution, at least, I can’t plead ignorance. 11/30/2017 79

80 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“Stupid “But stupidity? How can I deny this charge without sounding self-congratulatory and arrogant—something a Christian like me considers immoral? I don’t think I’m stupid. I have enough intellectual facility, at least, to write prose my mother admires. Since “stupid” is only a pejorative form of “ignorant,” I won’t say more. 11/30/2017 80

81 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“Insane “As for insanity, I’m reminded of C. S. Lewis’ classic, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. When little Lucy comes back through the cloak closet in which she’d hidden for only a few moments, telling tales of a wintry land with talking animals, her older siblings are concerned precisely for her sanity. Highly logical Professor Kirke tells them, “One has only to look at her and talk to her to see that she is not mad.”2 So, well, do I sound crazy? 11/30/2017 81

82 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“Wicked “Dawkins has left us with only one option: I (along with countless other apparently sane, educated young-earth creationists) am “wicked.” This charge, which he says he’d rather not consider, grants that important point about knowledge that I mentioned earlier, namely that knowledge is a moral issue. It is, in Dawkins’ view and my own, immoral to deny the truth, especially when you have adequate access to that truth and sufficient intelligence and opportunity to process it.3 11/30/2017 82

83 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“Dawkins’ view accords well with the Bible. King Solomon, the Bible’s only recorded naturalist, says, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge” (Proverbs 1:7). The wisest man in the Bible (1 Kings 3:12) says you can’t really know anything in all its right relations until you lay one fundamental building block. At your heart’s deepest level there must lie a fear of the one true God. “So we’re left with what liberal Enlightenment secularism fears most. One of my favorite epistemologists (students of knowledge), Stanley Fish, calls it “the irreducibility of difference.”4 We’re left with dueling authorities. 11/30/2017 83

84 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“Authority #1: “The God of the Bible says that you can’t really or truly know anything unless you are rightly related to Him. The Bible calls people who don’t fear the Lord “the wicked” (Psalm 36:1). “Authority #2: “Most Western scientists affirm that “the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry.”5 Dawkins calls those who don’t accept this overwhelming evidence “the wicked.” 11/30/2017 84

85 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“Evidence “At this point, Dawkins is sure to claim that authority has nothing to do with it. He believes he is even-handed, objective, and consummately neutral, simply pointing to the evidence—notwithstanding creationist conspiracy theories. “It may surprise some readers that I know how he feels. I know what it’s like to play whack-a-mole with a conspiracy theorist. You patiently and cogently answer some nonsensical argument he offers, only to see him pop out of another hole spouting more of the same. Every counterargument you make becomes, in his twisted world, an unassailable proof of his position. I can understand why the scientific in-crowd feels this way about me. 11/30/2017 85

86 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“Yet I would say to my dear secularist, evolutionist, materialist (or deist), mainstream, well-educated Western friends: to put it a bit indelicately, that is the way I feel about you. I admit that you might appear to have me on my heels with regard to some important questions, such as the question of starlight and time.6 I do not have a fully satisfactory way of reconciling the biblical account with our ability to see supernovae that, by our best lights, happened millions of light-years away. I even feel your pain when “the Bible says so” only sounds like a non-answer. 11/30/2017 86

87 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“Yet I get something worse than a non-answer when I ask evolutionists which turtle the big bang is standing on.7 One obviously intelligent person told me on the question-and-answer website Quora, “Asking what happened before the big bang is like asking, ‘What’s north of the north pole?’” A search of Quora reveals that many intelligent, educated people find this argument compelling; it’s popularly attributed to Stephen Hawking himself. 11/30/2017 87

88 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“What makes them think that directions on a sphere are a good analogy to the creation of the universe? And what scientific principle permits them to exclude the most important event in the universe’s history from its most basic law (without which science as we know it would be impossible): namely, effects always come from causes?8 “The north pole argument doesn’t sound like a scientific description of nature; it sounds like a religious appeal to the supernatural. It’s a non-answer. It sounds like Terence McKenna’s tongue-in-cheek description of modern secular science: “Give us one free miracle and we’ll explain the rest.”9 They are flipping open an alternate Bible. I just don’t have enough faith to join that religion. 11/30/2017 88

89 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“I’m all for science. But there is no agreed-upon definition of science that can solve all disagreements. Science is not a neutral arbiter, as Stanley Fish would say, “that sits above the fray, monitoring its progress and keeping the combatants honest.” Science is, instead, “an object of contest.”10 Which authority gets to determine what counts as science? Will it be God, or not-god? 11/30/2017 89

90 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“Back to Wickedness “Whereas I’m willing to admit to being a non-expert who is uncertain about the correct scientific answer to some important questions (though qualified Christians have proposed various answers), most lay evolutionists I encounter seem self-assured in a faith they refuse to see as a faith. But I won’t call them ignorant, stupid, or insane. “That leaves one option, according to Dawkins: wickedness. Why would so many educated, apparently rational people refuse to face up to the inherent weaknesses in their materialist cosmology? Why are they so willing to speak as if the big bang is a settled result of modern scientific research when the big bang model is built on such an inherent flaw? 11/30/2017 90

91 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“I’ll let an evolutionist answer that question. Brian Clegg, Cambridge-educated science writer, spoke to Time magazine about the big bang a few years back. He asked, “Why did it happen at all? There is no sensible answer for the Big Bang unless you move over into the religious side and say, “Well, it began because God began it.” That’s why quite a lot of scientists are nervous about the Big Bang. They quite prefer having something that doesn’t require somebody sort of poking a finger in and saying, “Now it’s starting.”11 11/30/2017 91

92 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“I’m not a member of the scientific community, so I cannot comment from experience why some scientists might or might not want to leave room for God. But I am a student of the Bible. I have always found it very interesting that the Apostle Paul spoke with clarity and precision on the issues raised in this article. Paul used moral terminology (italicized below) to describe those who reject the evidence of creation: 11/30/2017 92

93 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题““For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools. (Romans 1:18–22) “It is wicked to suppress the truth when we who are made in God’s image have sufficient intelligence and opportunity to process it. Paul reveals that we all have those things, and so he joins Richard Dawkins and me in seeing truth as a moral issue. 11/30/2017 93

94 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“I say this not triumphantly but compassionately, from sinful human to sinful human. The Bible says all scientists know deep in their hearts that there is a Creator of eternal power. “What is wickedness anyway, in an atheistic, materialist worldview? It’s an arrangement of atoms—perhaps a mugger’s fist hitting your skull—that you don’t happen to prefer. But your preferences are only another atom-arrangement, this time inside your skull. 11/30/2017 94

95 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“You know this argument doesn’t work. You know that morality is really real; and, more important, God says it is real. There is a right and there is a wrong, and the triune God ultimately defines both. Some things are true and others are false. Majority rule does not determine truth, but again, God does. “Truth is not plastic, differing radically among cultures. Truth is moral. It is right, and falsehoods are wrong. “Scientists do a great deal of good in this world. But the scientific model of materialistic evolution is—I’m compelled to say it—wicked. 11/30/2017 95

96 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题“Atheists on Morality “Achievement of your happiness is the only moral purpose of your life.” Ayn Rand (1905–1982), Russian-born American novelist who founded objectivism “The greatest happiness of the greatest number is the foundation of morals and legislation.” Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832), British philosopher who founded modern utilitarianism “No species, ours included, possesses a purpose beyond the imperatives created by its genetic history.” Edward O. Wilson (1929–), American biologist, father of sociobiology “Outside human desires there is no moral standard.” Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), British logician who helped found analytic philosophy 11/30/2017 96

97 Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue 无神论者同意：真理是道德问题““Morality is a collective illusion, genetic in origin, that makes us good cooperators.” Michael Ruse (1940–), British philosopher of science “Modern science directly implies that there is no ultimate meaning for humans.” William Provine (1942–2015), American historian of science, leading opponent of Intelligent Design “Dr. Mark L. Ward Jr. received his PhD in New Testament Interpretation from Bob Jones University Seminary in He writes and edits Bible curriculum materials for 7th–12th grade students and aids in promoting the Christian worldview-shaping vision of the Bible Integration Department at BJU Press.” 11/30/2017 97

98 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 98

99 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 99

100 Climate-Controlled Coworkers 气候控制的同事The Answers In Genesis website published an article written by Dr. David Menton on July 1, 2015; last featured October 2, I now quote his article below: “The Creator gave a few select animals—such as horses and camels—unique abilities to serve alongside people in harsh environments. “Two animals often mentioned in the Bible are horses and camels. God clearly had our needs in mind when He created these amazing creatures. They are raised for transportation, carrying burdens, and fighting battles. Both are uniquely suited to labor with us in the heat of the day, but in very different ways. 11/30/2017 100

101 Climate-Controlled Coworkers 气候控制的同事“We can work in the heat because of about two million sweat glands all over our bodies, capable of producing up to two quarts of water per hour! When sweat evaporates, it cools the skin, helping us maintain our normal body temperature. “Most mammals are not like this. While nearly all have active sweat glands in their footpads (where water keeps them soft and flexible), few have sweat glands that cool their whole body. Think of it, have you ever seen a sweaty dog or a sweaty cat? 11/30/2017 101

102 Climate-Controlled Coworkers 气候控制的同事“The Sweaty Horse “The only animal you are likely to have seen dripping sweat is a horse. The horse’s ability to sweat profusely allows it to work with us in the heat of the day. “Indeed, down through the centuries, humans and horses have worked, traveled, and fought together. Horses are mentioned over 150 times in the Bible, beginning with Joseph trading food for horses and cattle during the seven-year drought in Egypt (Genesis 47:17). 11/30/2017 102

103 Climate-Controlled Coworkers 气候控制的同事“Horses secrete sweat into their hair follicles so that the sweat emerges along with their growing hair. Unlike clear, watery human sweat, horse sweat is white and lathery. Why? It has been discovered that horse sweat contains a detergent called latherin that promotes the rapid, even spread of sweat over the horse’s oily skin and hair. “The Unsweaty Camel “Unlike horses, camels are specialized for desert conditions where water is not easily available. Their strategy is to lose or secrete as little water as possible. So how do they endure the heat? 11/30/2017 103

104 Climate-Controlled Coworkers 气候控制的同事“Studies have shown that the camel is designed to allow a considerable rise in body temperature before resorting to sweating. In addition, a dehydrated camel can drink up to a third of its body weight in water when it’s available and tolerate severe dehydration when it’s not. Thanks to its long, powerful legs and large, padded feet that don’t sink in the sand, the camel can travel up to 100 miles (161 km) a day. No wonder they are called the “ships of the desert.” 11/30/2017 104

105 Climate-Controlled Coworkers 气候控制的同事“God designed both of these amazing creatures to work with humans in honoring our Maker and Savior. The wise men who came to bear gifts and worship Jesus are a picture of this cooperation. They are traditionally pictured as riding camels, but some believe they rode horses. The Messiah Himself chose a donkey, a close relative of the horse, to carry Him into Jerusalem on that first Palm Sunday. Let us all be similarly devoted to Him who saved us from sin, death, and the power of Satan. “Dr. David Menton holds his PhD in cell biology from Brown University and is a well-respected author and teacher. He is professor emeritus at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. Dr. Menton has many published works and is a popular speakers for Answers in Genesis–USA.” 11/30/2017 105

106 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 106

107 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 107

108 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not RequiredThe Answers In Genesis website published an article written by Dr. Andrew Fabich on September 28, I now quote his article below: “When I was taking my first General Chemistry class as an undergraduate at The Ohio State University, I never realized that my professor was the codiscoverer of the 21st amino acid. Amino acids are the individual building blocks that make up proteins. Each amino acid is important in making the right protein because one amino acid change can lead to diseases like sickle-cell anemia. While there are myriad amino acids, the standard genetic code found in living things only incorporates 20 of those amino acids. Discovery of the 21st amino acid (called selenocysteine) was significant because of the possibility to elucidate new protein combinations. Since discovery of the 21st amino acid (along with the 22nd amino acid pyrrolysine), we now know not all organisms incorporate these extra amino acids and some only rarely do so. The genetic code is very important because it turns the information in our DNA into proteins that do all the work in every single cell. If the genetic code is altered significantly, then life cannot exist. 11/30/2017 108

109 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“What Is the Genetic Code? “Evolutionists frequently cite the genetic code’s universality as proof of evolution from a common ancestor. The genetic code is the series of nucleotides that encode for a particular amino acid. Nucleotides are the Adenine, Cytosine, Guanine, and Thymine (ACGT) present in your DNA. During a process called transcription, the information from DNA is synthesized into RNA. When transcription occurs, all Thymines in DNA are replaced with Uracils in RNA. It is difficult to say exactly how many different kinds of RNA molecules exist,1 but the three forms of RNA important for the production of proteins from genes are messenger RNA (mRNA), ribosomal RNA (rRNA), and transfer RNA (tRNA). 11/30/2017 109

110 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not RequiredImage by Yassine Mrabet, via Wikimedia Commons. Image by Sponk, via Wikimedia Commons. 11/30/2017 110

111 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not RequiredImage by Dovelike, via Wikimedia Commons. 11/30/2017 111

112 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“mRNA is synthesized to carry the message in our genes (parts of our DNA that encode instructions for proteins) to the place where proteins are made, called the ribosome. When a gene is switched on, an enzyme called RNA polymerase synthesizes an mRNA transcript from the gene that eventually is turned into protein at the ribosome. Ribosomes are made almost entirely of rRNAs. rRNAs come from special genes with unique functions. rRNAs are only used in making the scaffold of the ribosome or to catalyze chemical reactions in the ribosome (like peptide bond formation which connects the amino acids together to make the protein). The last molecule involved in making a protein from mRNA is the tRNA molecule. tRNAs were originally predicted by the codiscoverer of the DNA double helix, Francis Crick. One end of the tRNA base pairs with the mRNA (called the anticodon in tRNA) while the other end is charged with the corresponding amino acid.2 mRNA molecules are read three letters at a time in what are called codons. These codons are the three letters that make up the genetic code and each encodes for a specific amino acid. 11/30/2017 112

113 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not RequiredmRNA Translation. Image by LadyofHats, via Wikimedia Commons. 11/30/2017 113

114 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not RequiredtRNA with the three anticodon bases highlighted in pink. Image by Dcrjsr, via Wikimedia Commons. 11/30/2017 114

115 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not RequiredImage by CFCF, via Wikimedia Commons. 11/30/2017 115

116 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not RequiredImage by GifTagger, via Wikimedia Commons. 11/30/2017 116

117 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“The genetic code was originally identified once these major types of RNAs were discovered. To crack the code, molecular biologists synthesized a string of U’s and found that the constructed peptide contained only phenylalanine. Because we knew that the genetic code incorporates the 20 essential amino acids, we knew that the codons of the genetic code must be read three nucleotides at a time.3 Over time, molecular biologists synthesized all possible combinations of the three-letter code from the four nucleotides and were able to crack the code entirely. 11/30/2017 117

118 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not RequiredImage by Dr. G. R. Kantharaj, Molecular Biology for Masters. 11/30/2017 118

119 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“One interesting aspect of the genetic code is that some amino acids have multiple codons. For example, my favorite amino acid with multiple codons is called leucine. There are six different codons for this amino acid, but others only have one codon, like the amino acid methionine. If you look closely at the genetic code, the third position in the codon can often be switched without changing the amino acid significantly and still have a functional protein. Technically, changing the third position (aka wobble position) can change the amino acid, but the changes in the wobble position often code for an amino acid with very similar biochemistry. Major differences occur when the second position changes because those mutations often radically change the amino acid and, thus, affect the biochemistry of the protein. Sometimes, those mutations introduce what’s called a stop codon. Stop codons do not carry an amino acid and are how the ribosome knows to stop making a protein. When a ribosome sees a stop codon, it falls apart because there is no tRNA carrying an amino acid—most of the time……. 11/30/2017 119

120 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 120

121 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 121

122 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required““Extra” Amino Acids “Even though life is overwhelmingly composed of the 20 amino acids, there are actually many different kinds of amino acids, well beyond the standard set of 20. Some of these “extra” amino acids are incorporated into proteins in our cells and are required for life. Selenocysteine and pyrrolysine are the two nonstandard amino acids and are incorporated into essential proteins, but at an extremely low frequency. While there are additional amino acids, the genetic code remains the same for nearly all of life. But because the genetic code is the same, scientists wondered whether that had any evolutionary significance for the origin of life. To address the uniformity of the genetic code, some molecular biologists have expanded the standard genetic code to incorporate novel amino acids, just to prove that they could. 11/30/2017 122

123 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“This team of molecular biologists recently introduced a new amino acid in the genetic code, using a novel amino acid from the laboratory to augment the genetic code.4 Not only have scientists successfully manipulated the genetic code, but there are also reports of incorporating nonnatural nucleotides besides the standard A, C, G, and T.5 Further magnifying the complexity of life, E. coli has 41 different tRNA genes for the 64 codons, and that sufficiently produces the 20 amino acids (i.e., 20 amino acids is less than the 64 possible codons).6While there is an abundance of tRNA genes compared to the number of amino acids, the problem with fewer tRNA genes than the number of codons in the genetic code is something called redundancy built into the genetic code. The primary issue with the evolutionary model to explain the redundancy of the genetic code is that no selective pressure exists to clearly demonstrate how multiple copies of nearly identical genes can exist. 11/30/2017 123

124 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“Furthermore, evolution cannot randomly put together the nonrandom (and precise) code present in all of life. We are not blindly claiming that God created everything, but we are claiming that God created everything because we know that random processes never lead to order. Intelligence is required to provide not just the parts but the precise pairing as well. If some group of scientists has to tinker with God’s original creation, they are not actually working with a random-chance combination of a genetic code appearing from nothing. Any evolutionist who makes a serious claim of expanding the genetic code needs to work in a universe that does not have any genetic code to start with. Having a genetic code in the first place is part of God’s creation, and man is just working with part of what has already been made. There remains no new information provided. The fact that there is a core set of amino acids with a few additional is not sufficient proof that evolution happened, is happening, or ever will happen. These scientists have proven that we live in a world created by God as stated in Genesis. 11/30/2017 124

125 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“Language Implies a Mind “The design of the genetic code is amazing, because all apparent molecular shortcomings (e.g., codon redundancy) are accounted for by additional cellular machinery. At the cellular level, there are protein complexes that exhibit such exquisite levels of design that they look like literal machines (the best example of a molecular machine is the bacterial flagella that looks like an outboard motor on a boat). Evolution of one molecular machine is impossible enough, let alone trying to believe that multiple molecular machines simultaneously evolved entirely correct at the exact same time or else you die. The number of tRNA genes present in any given organism are always in abundance rather than only the copies needed for life. Even though there are multiple copies of the tRNA genes, the cell knows how to control each and every one of them using molecular machines to do what they’re supposed to do. 11/30/2017 125

126 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“Evolutionists look at these molecular machines and just suppose that they evolved randomly to match everything perfectly. Rather than assume they match perfectly by accident, why not realize that these molecular machines were actually designed? Not only are the aminoacyl transferases designed to match the correct tRNAs with the correct codon and corresponding amino acid, but even the entire idea of the wobble position is also clear evidence of design.7 There is a concept within biblical creation that the presence of the wobble position demonstrates that God saw the Fall because of His omniscience (aka front loading) and overdesigned the genetic code. Redundancy in the genetic code protects us from harmful mutations that lead to diseases such as cancer.8 I remember talking about the genetic code while in graduate school and was amazed that no one pointed out that a programmed code has a Programmer. Evolutionists are so bent on apparent design that they miss the actual design before their eyes (John 3:19; Romans 1:28). 11/30/2017 126

127 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“The design of the genetic code is further demonstrated in how molecular biologists abbreviate the amino acids. Each amino acid is abbreviated initially by a three-letter code and then a one-letter code. Since there are 20 amino acids, there are twenty single letters used to abbreviate each amino acid. Even though the English alphabet has 26 letters in it, 20 letters for the 20 amino acids is not far from some other alphabets.9Thinking about the genetic code as an alphabet means that it has the complexity of a language, which strongly points to design. The similarity between the genetic code and spoken language has not gone unnoticed when discussing origins.10 Furthermore, the genetic code is more advanced than any known computer code because all computers are based on a binary code of 0s and 1s while the genetic code is quaternary (As, Cs, Gs, and Ts). If we know a tornado didn’t go through the landfill in Silicon Valley back in the 1970s to produce the first Apple computer, then evolutionists must reevaluate their faith in random chance building life based on a quaternary code. 11/30/2017 127

128 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“A quaternary code is far more complex than a binary code, and an entire language with grammar and syntax is associated with DNA. If we know that computers were designed in a relatively short amount of time by human intelligence, then it is even more important to recognize that every living thing must be significantly more designed than any computer. Furthermore, the origin of the genetic code (for as complex as it is) must also be recent and not ancient because it took humanity close to 6,000 years to build the first computer. If it took humans 6,000 years to build a computer using 0s and 1s, there is no way for random chance processes to produce any kind of life even over 11 billion years using As, Cs, Gs, and Ts; so it is beyond logical that an infinite God miraculously spoke everything into existence over six days. Life is not a random chance accident, but the expression of a mind with intelligence: our Creator God. 11/30/2017 128

129 “It is impossible to prove nothing did it. Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required? -2 有限的遗传代码证明不需要上帝吗？-2 “It is impossible to prove nothing did it. “A quick search of the Internet calls this genetic complexity problem by a variety of names. The problem of how complex our genetics are is something that even evolutionists ponder and discuss. With all the possible ways to produce language and, by extension, sequences of DNA, the problem is that there is no known random mechanism possible to create this information. Information always has a Source, unless you’re a blind evolutionist believing wildly in random chance. While I was taking biochemistry, I had one version of the comparison as follows: 11/30/2017 129

130 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not RequiredImage by Quibik, via Wikimedia Commons. 11/30/2017 130

131 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“It has been said that an army of dedicated monkeys, typing at random, would eventually produce all of Shakespeare’s works. How long, on average, would it take 1 million monkeys, each typing on a 46-key typewriter (space included but no shift key) at the rate of 1 keystroke per second, to type the phrase “to be or not to be”?11 “Without directly giving away how to solve this exact problem for future biochemistry students, the answer to this version of the question is that it would take 1.35 x 1016 years for the monkeys to accomplish this feat.12 But the practical issue with this answer is that the age of the universe is ~1.4 x 1010 years. The actual age of the universe (including the big bang and all of biological evolution) is not even a fraction of a percentage of the time it would take for this army of monkeys to type even this simple phrase. 11/30/2017 131

132 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“There is not enough time for just this simple phrase, even if a computer was used to direct the correct answer.13 If a computer program is used (as has been done by Richard Dawkins), then this would actually be accomplished because of the computer programmer and not the computer in and of itself. Claiming that a computer can solve evolutionary algorithms is like blaming car keys for vehicle accidents. No sane person blames car keys, but everyone (including the court of law) blames the driver behind the wheel and not just a part of the complex scenario. 11/30/2017 132

133 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“Chance-of-the-Gaps “Creationists are often accused of believing in a god-of-the-gaps that requires God’s presence to perform miracles X, Y, and Z.14 Some creationists should be blamed for making a god-of-the-gaps argument because there are often times when there is a reasonable explanation that does not require exercising blind faith. However, there are reasonable times when God is required to explain when He truly was at work because the alternative god of chance is unreasonable (e.g., when Jesus turned water to wine at the wedding in Cana of Galilee in John 2). Evolutionists will argue vehemently that evolution is true because there still is a chance that it could have happened. Chances are actually in favor of evolution not being true because it cannot overcome the odds. The irony of this scenario is that a recent study even tried to explain why there are only 20 amino acids and 64 codons.15 Evolutionists want a limit to the genetic code because the odds are already impossible for evolution; having even more possible combinations in the genetic code exacerbates miracle upon miracle. 11/30/2017 133

134 Is a Limited Genetic Code Proof That God Is Not Required“Placing a limit on the genetic code cannot rule out God’s existence. Finding limits to the genetic code is a confirmed prediction borne from Scripture because everything reproduces after its “kind” (Genesis 1:11). If our inference from Scripture is right that everything is supposed to reproduce “after its kind,” then there are boundaries in place from the created kinds that God made. As a result, there is no opportunity for additional forms of life to evolve while simultaneously allowing for a reasonable amount of variation at the species level. A limited genetic code highlights that all living things have boundaries, which is stated clearly in Genesis. Furthermore, those claiming to know why the genetic code is limited also imply that they know of the natural selection molecular mechanism that produced the genetic code in the first place. They neither offer an origin of the genetic code nor rule out biblical creation. In fact, the universality of the genetic code points to a common Designer—not common ancestry.” Thank God for Dr. Fabich. 11/30/2017 134

135 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 135

136 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 136

137 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family TreeThe Answers In Genesis website published an article written by Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell on October 13, I now quote her article below: “Fractures in humanity’s most famous evolutionary “ancestor” supposedly show that she fell to her death because she was too bipedal for her own good. “News Sources “USA Today: “Cracking an Ice Cold Case: Nearly 3.2 Million Years Ago, Lucy Dies. Now We Know How.” “National Geographic: “Did a Fall from a Tree Kill Lucy, Our Famous Ancestor?” “Science: “Did Famed Human Ancestor ‘Lucy’ Fall to Her Death?” “The Chicago Tribune: “Did Lucy Fall? Or Was She Pushed?” John Hawks: “Why I’m Skeptical About Lucy in the Skyfall” 11/30/2017 137

138 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“Everyone loves a mystery, and scientists are no exception. Take the famous Piltdown man—an amalgamation of medieval human and orangutan parts fraudulently cobbled-together and offered to the world as a real transitional ape-man. Was that human ancestral hoax the result of a conspiracy or the work of one man? A recent study has declared that the perpetrator was a single individual. (You can read more about that in “The Mystery of ‘Britain’s Greatest Hoax’ Solved?”) 11/30/2017 138

139 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree11/30/2017 139

140 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“Now the authors of a study in Nature claim to have solved human history’s oldest cold case: how and why our iconic, supposed ancestor Lucy died. And just as the scientific community originally fell for the fraudulent Piltdown man because it showed evolutionists the ape-man they assumed existed, so the authors of Lucy’s forensic analysis have colored their ultimate conclusions to fit their own evolutionary assumptions. They have started with interesting observations—possibly discovering Lucy’s cause of death—but then interpreted them within the context of an evolutionary story tailored to the personified Lucy of their dreams. 11/30/2017 140

141 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“Who Was Lucy? “Lucy is an extinct ape. The fossil was named because the Beatles song “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds” was playing in Donald Johanson’s camp when he discovered her partial skeleton in Ethiopia’s Hadar Formation. She is Australopithecus afarensis, long hailed as the evolutionary, bipedal mother of humanity. Perhaps more than any other fossil since her 1974 discovery, Lucy is presented as “exhibit A” by evolutionists in their attempt to show that humans evolved from an ape-like ancestor. A big part of Lucy’s legacy has revolved around the claim that Australopithecus afarensis evolved from arboreal ancestors to walk upright on two legs. 11/30/2017 141

143 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“Did Lucy Walk Like Us? “Studies of Lucy’s bones and those of other Australopithecus afarensis specimens reveal shoulders, wrists, and hands well suited for Lucy, the Knuckle-Walking “Abomination”? and hanging out in trees. Studies of the pelvis, spine, and legs of these specimens have produced reconstructions varying from those much like a chimpanzee’s to those that differ from modern apes but fail to match the arrangement needed for an efficient bipedal gait. At best, stretching these reconstructions to their limits, the afarensis ape might have been equipped to move its legs in some unique ways, but it was too unstable for sustained bipedal locomotion.2 (You can read much more about this in “A Look at Lucy’s Legacy” and “Lucy, the Knuckle-Walking ‘Abomination’?”) “Lucy did not walk like us. Nevertheless, with her small ape skull, Lucy is still touted as the poster child for bipedality over braininess—proof that our ancestors learned to walk upright on two legs before they learned to think on their feet. 11/30/2017 143

144 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“How Did Lucy Die? “University of Texas at Austin anthropologist John Kappelman and colleagues examined Lucy’s remains as well as CT scans of her bones in an effort to determine how she died. The pattern of fractures in Lucy’s bones has led Kappelman’s team to hypothesize that she fell from a tall tree—perhaps four to five stories high. They report the breaks in the upper and lower extremities, shoulders, pelvis, back, and head are consistent with those seen in humans who fall from great heights onto very hard surfaces. The authors write that she likely landed feet first, twisted forward to the right, and spread out her arms, sustaining numerous fractures as bones were rapidly driven into other bones by sudden vertical deceleration. Such trauma would have been accompanied by sufficient organ damage to cause imminent death, though of course no internal organs are preserved for examination. 11/30/2017 144

145 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“Support for their claim that Lucy died in a fall is the pattern of arm and shoulder breakages. Her upper extremities, especially on the right, are broken in the same way as the arms and shoulders of accident victims who reach out in an attempt the break their fall. Needless to say, fossils do not try to catch themselves when they fall, so the authors maintain the living Lucy did. 11/30/2017 145

146 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“Additional evidence demonstrating that these fractures were associated with Lucy’s traumatic death, the authors point out, is the fact that tiny pieces of splintered bone remained with the broken bones, trapped as they would have been by the living connective tissue covering the bones. These bits would have been strewn about and lost, they explain, if the bones had broken sometime after decomposition began. They propose that this also demonstrates the body was rapidly buried soon after death. Furthermore, Kappelman notes that the fractures he believes were sustained in the fall are hinge-like, greenstick fractures like those that typically happen in living bone rather than the sort of fractures produced by trauma to bones long dead. 11/30/2017 146

147 “Did Lucy in the Sky Fall? Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree? 因为露茜爬上我们的家谱树而下跌她的死亡？ “Did Lucy in the Sky Fall? “Kappelman solicited the opinions of orthopedic surgeons and consulted orthopedic literature to define the traumatic cause of Lucy’s fracture pattern. Some anthropologists are impressed with his study. For instance, Stony Brook’s William Jungers says, “The detailed, comprehensive analysis of her fracture pattern compared to the extensive human clinical literature on skeletal trauma . . . is especially compelling.”3 However, many experts note that Kappelman’s team did not explore nontraumatic causes for the breakages, particularly the likelihood that the bones broke after death. 11/30/2017 147

148 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“Paleoanthropologist John Hawks of University of Wisconsin-Madison comments that Kappelman’s team should have compared Lucy’s fractures to those in fossils that could not have fallen from great heights. By default, such fossil would have mostly been broken during the processes of burial and fossilization. Hawks says, “If they examined a large collection of faunal fossils from the same context, they would find similar patterns, not from falling out of a tree but from simple post-depositional breakage.”4 11/30/2017 148

149 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“And while the study’s authors note that some breakages in Lucy’s bones did not fit traumatic patterns and therefore likely occurred after death, a great number of fractures were put down to Lucy’s great fall. John Hawks comments that if all the fractures the study’s authors attributed to Lucy’s fall were truly her cause of death, “she didn’t fall out of a tree, she fell out of an airplane.”5 “I THINK THE METHODOLOGY FALLS SHORT OF PROVIDING A REALISTIC EXPLANATION FOR THE MAJORITY OF BREAKS IN LUCY'S BONES. 11/30/2017 149

150 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree““I think the methodology falls short of providing a realistic explanation for the majority of breaks in Lucy's bones,” says Arizona State University paleoanthropologist William Kimbel. “We see this kind of damage frequently in a wide variety of animals that did not fall from trees,” he explains, adding, “The authors did not go through the detailed, formal evaluation of alternative explanations of the breaks.”6 11/30/2017 150

151 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree““These authors make no effort to test the alternative hypothesis that these cracks and other breaks were made during the processes of fossilization and erosion,” says University of California, Berkeley, paleoanthropologist Timothy White. “In fact,” he says, “the authors appear to have focused only on the cracks that they could attribute to an imagined fall, ignoring the additional abundant cracks on Lucy and other fossils.”7 ““Elephant bones and hippo ribs appear to have the same kind of breakage,” says Donald Johanson, the Arizona State University paleoanthropologist who discovered Lucy. “It’s unlikely they fell out of a tree.”8Johanson believes the fractures are “undoubtedly the result of geological forces acting on the bones after they are buried during the process of fossilization.”9 11/30/2017 151

152 “Lucy’s Fall from Arboreal Space Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree? 因为露茜爬上我们的家谱树而下跌她的死亡？ “Lucy’s Fall from Arboreal Space “While the cause of Lucy’s death may remain a topic of debate and a subject for more exhaustive study in the future, the significance being attributed to her putative fall is very instructive. In fact, paleoanthropologist John Hawks suggests the authors took a detour from science into storytelling, acknowledging that while at least some of the fractures may have resulted from a fall, “the authors frame their hypothesis as a just-so story, and only examine evidence consistent with it instead of looking for contrary evidence.”10 11/30/2017 152

153 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“Let’s have a look at these stories. Could the authors’ presuppositions have influenced the way they viewed the evidence? Well for starters, if Lucy did die from a fall, then perhaps she did spend time high up in trees, maybe nesting or foraging as modern chimpanzees do. Despite anatomical features that show Lucy and her kin were equipped to climb, whether trees were a significant part of their habitat remains a topic of vigorous debate among evolutionists. Kappelman and colleagues believe they have put that one to rest, writing, “It is therefore ironic that her death can be attributed to injuries resulting from a fall, probably out of a tall tree, thus offering unusual evidence for the presence of arborealism in this species.”11 Of course, the word probably is significant: there are other tall things from which an ape can fall. For all we know, Lucy might have fallen off a cliff!12 11/30/2017 153

154 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“In any case, providing evidence that Lucy likely liked life in the tall wood too much for her own good isn’t quite enough to make the evolutionary point the authors have in mind. Remember, Lucy is popularly known as the first of humanity’s ancestors to climb down from the arboreal realm and evolve the ability to stroll around Africa upright on two legs. Regardless of reality, that is her legacy. Thus, although the authors do note that chimps sometimes sustain traumatic injury and death from falls, they find in Lucy’s misadventures a more sinister saga in which the villain is the very evolutionary change that supposedly put us on our feet. They write: ““We suggest that the adaptations that facilitated bipedal terrestrial locomotion compromised the ability of individuals to climb safely and efficiently in the trees; this combination of features may have predisposed these taxa [supposedly bipedal extinct apes like Lucy] to more frequent falls from height.13” 11/30/2017 154

155 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“Simply put, Kappelman explains, “It may well have been the case that adaptations that permitted her to live more efficiently on the ground compromised her ability to move safely in the trees—and may have predisposed her kind to more falls.”14 “For Kappelman, the story takes a tender, almost tear-jerking twist. “We can empathize with her in death, and what we think was her last desperate act, reaching out her hands to break her fall,”15 he says. “By understanding her death is how she came alive to me. Lucy was no longer simply a box of bones but in death became a real individual: a small, broken body lying helpless at the bottom of a tree.”16 11/30/2017 155

156 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“It is this personification of Lucy that apparently impressed Hawks (above) to accuse this study’s authors of spinning a sad story instead of sticking to the rigorous comparisons of observational science. However, we must point out that it is the unobservable and unverifiable evolutionary presumption that Lucy’s species was no longer anatomically suited for life in the trees—the insupportable determination to put her two feet firmly on the ground—that led the authors to ultimately imply that Lucy and possibly a host of other undiscovered bipedal apes like her were falling out of trees with epidemic frequency. 11/30/2017 156

157 “Why Evolutionists Need a Bipedal Lucy Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree? 因为露茜爬上我们的家谱树而下跌她的死亡？ “Why Evolutionists Need a Bipedal Lucy “EVOLUTIONARY PRESUMPTIONS INEVITABLY COLOR THE POPULAR INTERPRETATIONS OF SUCH FOSSILS. “Without any authentic big-brained ape-men, in the wake of the Piltdown fraud, the search for bipedal ape-men (and ape-ladies like Lucy) is the grail for evolutionists trying to show how humanity evolved. After all, walking around comfortably and efficiently on two legs physically sets us apart from living primate animals. Whether or not Lucy fell out of a tree, she and those extinct apes like her need to climb down and provide the illustrations for the evolutionary just-so story of how we humans came to be. Evolutionary presumptions inevitably color the popular interpretations of such fossils. 11/30/2017 157

158 Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree“When stripped of evolutionary presumptions, however, we find that science does not reveal that animals evolve into different, more complex kinds of animals. Nothing in experimental science demonstrates that humans did or could evolve from ape-like ancestors. God created both land animals and the first two humans on the same day, about 6,000 years ago. Nothing in observable science contradicts that truth, which we learn from Genesis, a record of God’s own eyewitness account of our origins. 11/30/2017 158

159 Thank God for Dr. Mitchell’s contribution.Did Lucy Fall to Her Death Because She Climbed Our Family Tree? 因为露茜爬上我们的家谱树而下跌她的死亡？ “Two Fatal Falls “An ape we now call Lucy may have fallen to her death a few thousand years ago—though not 3.18 million years ago as evolutionists currently claim. Her fatal fall is as tragic as the violent death of any animal that has died since Adam’s fall into sin about 6,000 years ago brought death into the world. However, Lucy’s demise does not represent either the death of our long lost relative or the cost of bipedal evolution.” Thank God for Dr. Mitchell’s contribution. 11/30/2017 159

160 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 160

161 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 161

162 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 The Answers In Genesis website published an article written by   Dr. Joe Francis on October 1, I now quote his article below: “Bacteria depend on tail-like structures called flagella to get around. But they’re not alone. Every creature, including most cells in your body, depends on similar structures to survive. “Inside your body are trillions of little hair-like whips attached to most of your cells. They are constantly moving, pushing debris out of your body and sensing the world around them. A couple of centuries ago, biologists assumed they were useless remnants of bacterial evolution. Now medical researchers have found those ideas were dead wrong. These structures are essential for life and are found in virtually every organism—from algae and plants to reptiles and mammals. 11/30/2017 162

163 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 “The complexity of these structures, which contain functional motors, astounds evolutionists, who cannot explain how so many intricate, interacting parts could arise together. Yet they remain doggedly certain an answer is within reach. Just one problem—they also have to explain how these motors adopted such different essential roles within each creature on the planet! How could creatures survive the development of critical systems by trial and error? “There is a logical explanation. From the beginning, an infinitely wise Creator and Life-giver designed these systems so He would be “clearly seen” in the things He has made (Romans 1:18). 11/30/2017 163

164 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 11/30/2017 164

165 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 “Two Different Motors“Ever since biochemist Michael Behe wrote Darwin’s Black Box in 1996, the whip-like appendage on bacteria, called the flagellum (plural flagella), has taken center stage in debates about the origin of life. But the debate gives the mistaken impression that the flagellum is a single type of machine that basically helps bacteria move around. This could not be further from the truth. “NO GRADUAL EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS CAN EXPLAIN THE VARIOUS FUNCTIONS AMONG CILIA. 11/30/2017 165

166 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 “Flagella belong to a larger group of structures, and they are not all the same. Under a microscope your cells and bacteria might look similar on the outside, but the internal parts can be very different, and the way they are built is different, too. “In fact, evolutionary biologists now admit that these types of complex machines are so different that one could not have evolved from the other. Both designs must have been created by God in the beginning, since all creatures today have inherited one or the other design. 11/30/2017 166

167 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 “Bacterial Flagellum “The bacterial flagellum is a long, spinning, whiplike structure that pokes through the membrane and cell wall and moves like the propeller on a boat (Figure 1). Bacteria construct these flagella by building a motor inside the cell. They then attach the motor to the whip, which is made by sending proteins outside the cell. Once complete, its shape and design won’t change. 11/30/2017 167

168 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 “Cilium“The other main type of whip-like organelle looks a lot like a bacterial flagellum, and (confusingly) it can also be called a flagellum. But it is very different. Another name for this structure is the cilium (plural cilia). To avoid confusion, we will call it that. Bacteria don’t have cilia, and other organisms don’t have the bacteria’s flagellum. “Cilia are not rotary engines but motorized machines made of nine sliding cables (called filaments) located underneath the cilia’s membrane (Figure 2). The filaments slide up and down inside the cilium, causing it to bend back and forth like a bendable paddle. Paddle locomotion is completely different from the rotary movement of a bacterial flagellum. “Cilia are not built the same way as bacterial flagella, either. They require very different proteins that work inside the cell rather than outside, and the proteins remain at work throughout the life of the cell, constantly changing the cilia’s length. 11/30/2017 168

169 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 “Two Motors, but Similar Roles“The interior design and motion of the bacterial flagellum and cilium could not be more different. Yet in some cells cilia perform the exact same function of moving the cell around. Throughout nature we see that the Creator often made structures that look the same on the outside but can be very different on the inside, and this is just another example. “Two Motors for Life “Bacteria move around with whip-like structures called flagella. Other creatures have whip-like structures called cilia. They may look similar—and do similar things—but their basic design is completely different. 11/30/2017 169

170 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 “Bacterial Flagellum (Figure 1)“The flagellum on bacteria is long and thin, turned by a complex motor underneath the cell’s membrane. This motor rotates like a screw. “Cilium (Figure 2) “The cilium on human, plant, algae, and most other creatures’ cells is short and thick. The motor consists of nine pairs of cables, called filaments. They move up and down in a coordinated pattern, causing a back-and-forth motion like a paddle. 11/30/2017 170

171 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 11/30/2017 171

172 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 “Many Different Functions“Explaining the origin of two complex motors is a challenge all by itself. But perhaps more intractable is how the cilium supposedly branched out into so many different life-saving duties. “Cilia play many critical roles that have nothing to do with locomotion. For instance, recent evidence suggests that cilia serve as “antennas” that sense the world around each cell. They are also essential in the function of the eyes, ears, pancreas, kidney, and brain. Strikingly, cilia even play a role in the early stages of human embryo development (helping move organs to their respective locations, such as the heart to the left side of the body). 11/30/2017 172

173 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 “No gradual evolutionary process can adequately explain all these various functions among cilia. Creationists easily explain it based on the principle that the Creator created a general design feature and then used it over and over. “If the Creator wanted to show that one designer made everything by creating similarity in His designs, why did He make the bacterial rotor so different from the cilium? One explanation is that the body needs to detect invaders. Many invaders are single-celled creatures that look similar to our own cells. So God gave bacteria a different flagellum structure that is easy for our immune system to detect. 11/30/2017 173

174 The Motor of Life 生命的电机 “The presence of these nanomachines reveals just a little more detail about our Creator’s imaginative mind. His handiwork shows we are truly “knit together” in fine detail (Psalm 139:13–14, NIV). Like the psalmist, we should recognize His creative genius, worship Him, and spread the news to others who need to know Him. “Dr. Joe Francis, chairperson of the Department of Biological and Physical Sciences and Department of Mathematics at The Master’s College, earned his PhD from Wayne State University and completed a post-doctoral fellowship at the University of Michigan Medical School. He is also an assistant professor for Liberty University Online.” 11/30/2017 174

175 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 175

176 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 176

177 Cold Feet 冷脚 The Answers In Genesis website published an article written by  Dr. Don DeYoung on October 1, I now quote his article below: “Try standing barefoot on a pile of snow and see how long you last. Ducks do it all the time and aren’t bothered. How is this possible? “The cold morning mist rises off the winter pond, as quacking ducks paddle playfully around the chilly water. On the bank nearby a mallard watches contentedly, its bare feet planted firmly on a thick layer of snow. If ducks are warm-blooded like we are, why don’t they freeze to death? 11/30/2017 177

178 Cold Feet 冷脚 “Their feathers provide excellent insulation for the rest of their bodies. But even if we bundled up in the warmest down coats in the world, we wouldn’t last more than a few minutes in bare legs and feet. “The answer revolves around heat loss. In humans, our blood is heated in the core organs and muscles, and then the heart pipes it straight down our legs to our feet, where a good deal of that heat passes through our skin into the snow. Cold blood then returns by another pipe up to the core, where it is reheated. But ducks and other winter birds take advantage of physics designed to minimize heat loss. 11/30/2017 178

179 Cold Feet 冷脚 “Chemical engineers have long understood that you can transfer heat between two pipes that are touching each other. Experiments show that if fluids in two different pipes move side-by-side in the same direction, about one-half of the heat is gradually exchanged between the two pipes. However, if the two fluids move in opposite directions past each other, nearly one hundred percent of the heat is transferred from the warmer pipe to the other. 11/30/2017 179

180 Cold Feet 冷脚 “That’s what happens in ducks, before the blood ever reaches their feet. As the pipe for warm blood (the artery) leaves the heart and runs down toward the feet, it passes next to the pipe for cold blood (vein) coming back from the feet. These arteries don’t just touch each other. They are closely woven together by a web of tiny branching blood vessels that brings the warm and cool blood into close contact. 11/30/2017 180

181 Cold Feet 冷脚 11/30/2017 181

182 Cold Feet 冷脚 “As a result, the blood transfers most of its heat before it ever reaches the feet. When the blood does reach them, it is often just above freezing temperature. Conversely, the returning blood is re-warmed before it even reaches the duck’s heart. “Virtually no heat is lost. In fact, the duck loses twenty times more heat through its feathers than through its feet! 11/30/2017 182

183 Cold Feet 冷脚 “Scientists call this engineering principle by the technical term counter-current exchange. But the Creator not only knew all about it from the beginning, He also put it to use in His creatures—long before modern human engineers discovered the principle and applied it to industry. “Perhaps you’re still wondering why duck feet don’t get frostbite from the cold. Unlike our legs, the legs on ducks are mostly hard parts, which don’t get hurt when frozen. Most of their muscles and soft parts are safely stored farther up the body. 11/30/2017 183

184 Cold Feet 冷脚 “Next time you see a mallard splashing contentedly in freezing water, stop and remember the wisdom of its Creator, and tell the person next to you about how wonderful He is! “Dr. Don DeYoung is chairman of science and math at Grace College, Winona Lake, Indiana. He is an active speaker for AiG and has written 20 books on Bible-science topics. Dr. DeYoung is currently president of the Creation Research Society with hundreds of members worldwide. His website is DiscoveryofDesign.com.” 11/30/2017 184

185 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 185

186 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 186

187 Selective Hearing 选择性听力The Answers In Genesis website published an article written by  Dr. Don DeYoung on October 1, I now quote his article below: “Your ears are delicate instruments, fine-tuned to hear a wide range of noises. What keeps them from being ripped apart by violent waves of loud vibrations? “Have you ever walked through a factory where the noise of rumbling machines filled the air, or an airport where planes constantly roared overhead? How could anyone work under these conditions without hurting their ears? It’s not just a problem in industry. Every day we repair our homes with noisy power tools and surround ourselves with blaring music. 11/30/2017 187

188 Selective Hearing 选择性听力“Yet most of the time, we hardly notice. It’s all because the Creator gave our sense of hearing a built-in safety mechanism that defies natural explanation. “Your eardrum is wonderfully designed to sense the tiniest changes in air pressure. But this has a potential downside. Loud, sustained noises could easily push the delicate parts of the inner ear beyond their safety limit, causing permanent damage. 11/30/2017 188

189 Selective Hearing 选择性听力“By God’s wise design, however, something special happens under these conditions. God put a series of three tiny bones in your middle ear to pick up most vibrations. For their protection, He attached two tiny muscles to the first and last of these bones (the malleus and the stapes). At the instant these bones begin to vibrate beyond normal limits, the brain senses danger and sends a signal to tighten the muscles and momentarily shut down the ear’s sensitivity. This happens in a split second and is involuntary, a phenomenon called negative feedback. “The inner ear is thus protected from injury. In an opposite situation, with very soft sounds, the muscles may loosen somewhat to increase sensitivity. This delicate balancing act allows us to hear a wide range of sounds without damage. 11/30/2017 189

190 Selective Hearing 选择性听力11/30/2017 190

191 Selective Hearing 选择性听力“Where Did This Protection Come From? “How could this built-in safety mechanism possibly arise naturally by evolution if early humans rarely experienced loud sounds other than perhaps thunder or the roar of a nearby predator? Constant loud sounds and background noises are a modern phenomenon, with industrial machinery, blaring audio speakers, and gas-driven motors. Yet the ear of the original humans was already fully equipped to protect us before these threats even arose. “It is reasonable to suggest that the all-wise Creator planned ahead to protect our ears from modern industry’s noisy environments. In contrast, evolution cannot explain how random mutations could possibly plan ahead for future needs. 11/30/2017 191

192 Selective Hearing 选择性听力“What Did You Say? “Our ears are tuned to hear a chorus of sounds each day, whether a croaking frog, the whistle of a train, the humming of a computer, or a beautiful singing voice. Imagine the range. Mariah Carey, one of the most versatile singers today, can hit five different octaves; a pianist can produce seven octaves; but our ordinary ears can detect ten! “A few animals, such as bats and whales, can hear higher pitches. (They rely on sonar to navigate because the signal doesn’t deteriorate very quickly.) Elephants, on the other hand, hear lower pitches. (Why? So they can share information in a pitch other animals can’t overhear!) But our range is quite impressive and meets all our needs. 11/30/2017 192

193 Selective Hearing 选择性听力“Sound is actually a vibration, like plucked violin strings that jostle air molecules. These invisible molecules then transmit the vibration through the air as minor pressure changes. Our ears can sense vibration frequencies between 20 and 20,000 cycles per second (hertz). High-pitched tones cause the ear to vibrate 20,000 times each second, or more than one million times in 50 seconds, without bursting. “The greatest danger to your ears is not high or low pitches but intense sounds (measured in decibels). Your ear must be prepared at all times to hear any intensity, from a mouse creeping behind your desk (nearly 0 decibels) to a jet engine (over 160 decibels). Your job is to take precautions or cover your ears. But God has given you help through the feedback mechanism. 11/30/2017 193

194 Selective Hearing 选择性听力“How appropriate that King David honored his Maker in Psalm 139:14, “I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvelous are Your works, and that my soul knows very well.” Hearing is a special gift from the Creator, who hears and sees everything: “He who planted the ear, shall He not hear? He who formed the eye, shall He not see?” (Psalm 94:9). See for Yourself . . . Sound waves do not travel underwater or along a string in the same way they travel through the air. You can test the difference with a simple experiment using a string and a kitchen fork. You can make the sound of a vibrating fork seem like a large, melodic church bell! 11/30/2017 194

195 Selective Hearing 选择性听力“Materials “Three feet of string “A metal fork and spoon “Procedure “Tie a small loop at one end of the string. Now pull the free end of the string most of the way through this loop. This results in a larger, adjustable loop, which you can temporarily attach to the fork. “Place this loop around the handle of the fork and pull the string tight. You may need to add a bit of tape to prevent the fork from slipping free. 11/30/2017 195

196 Selective Hearing 选择性听力“Dangle the fork at the end of the string and tap it with the spoon. A weak metallic sound will come from the fork. “Now wrap the free end of the string around your finger several times. “Hold the finger gently against your ear canal so that it closes the opening, with the fork suspended freely below. “Once again, gently tap the spoon against the fork. How does the sound compare this time? The deep, pleasant ringing may remind you of a church bell. 11/30/2017 196

197 Selective Hearing 选择性听力“The Lesson “After it is tapped by the spoon, the fork vibrates for a second or longer. When these sound waves move through the air, they die away quickly. The string, however, carries the vibrations directly through the bones in your skull to your inner ear, without their being lost in space. As a result, you hear a richer sound. 11/30/2017 197

198 Selective Hearing 选择性听力“The bell-like sound is mainly due to lower frequency vibrations (lower pitch), which the string carries directly through your bones to your inner ear. For further study, try different sizes of metal forks. A smaller size should vibrate more rapidly, giving a somewhat higher-pitched sound. “Dr. Don DeYoung is chairman of science and math at Grace College, Winona Lake, Indiana. He is an active speaker for AiG and has written 20 books on Bible-science topics. Dr. DeYoung is currently president of the Creation Research Society with hundreds of members worldwide. His website is DiscoveryofDesign.com.” 11/30/2017 198

199 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 199

200 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 200

201 Testing the Limits 测试极限The Answers In Genesis website published an article written by  Dr. Georgia Purdom on July 1, I now quote her article below: “Evolution would require an enormous amount of change. Modern laboratory experiments have tested bacteria’s ability to change. Is this ability truly unlimited? “Evolutionists face an insurmountable challenge. They believe that all living things descended from a single-celled common ancestor over the course of 3.5 billion years. For this to happen, an enormous amount of change had to occur. Massive amounts of novel genetic information had to be added to DNA on how to make brains, eyes, blood cells, and everything else that exists in modern living things but didn’t exist in the supposed original single-celled ancestor. 11/30/2017 201

202 Testing the Limits 测试极限“What could possibly produce all this change? Evolutionists credit one major source: genetic mutations. This mechanism must have enough power to add the seemingly endless amount of information that resulted in plants, animals, and humans. For evolutionists, mutations are the “magic bullet” that can do—and have done—virtually anything and everything. “But what does science in the laboratory show us? Are there limits to change? If so, then evolution would be dead in the water. 11/30/2017 202

203 Testing the Limits 测试极限11/30/2017 203

204 Testing the Limits 测试极限“Historical vs. Observational Science “We can’t observe what occurred in the distant past. No human has observed billions of years of evolution through mutations, and no human was present to observe God’s creation in six days. So how can we know which is true? “We don’t need laboratory studies to answer the question. God gave us His eyewitness account in Genesis. Since we know that He cannot lie (Titus 1:2) and that His Word is true (Psalm 19:7–11), we can trust that His account of the past, not evolution, is correct. So in a sense the Bible is our final answer when answering people’s questions about evolution; God’s Word is the ultimate authority for every Christian. 11/30/2017 204

205 Testing the Limits 测试极限“But that doesn’t mean we don’t or shouldn’t use scientific evidence. God’s Word is true, so what we understand from observational science should confirm—or at least be consistent with—the Bible. The inference from Scripture is that all creatures were to reproduce according to their kind (Genesis 1, 6, and 8), so we expect to see organisms making limited changes to adapt to changing environments, but not evolving into totally different kinds of organisms. “Although we can’t directly observe or test evolution or creation, we can use observational science—observable, testable, and repeatable science—to see which view of the past aligns with the evidence today. 11/30/2017 205

206 Testing the Limits 测试极限“Scientists have been carefully studying mutations in bacteria to see whether they have the power to produce essentially unlimited change or whether change is limited. Two major, long-term experiments have examined the common gut bacteria Escherichia coli to see how it adapts to changing environments. These famous experiments are often cited as prime examples of unlimited “evolution in action.” But on closer examination, they confirm just the opposite: limited change. 11/30/2017 206

207 Testing the Limits 测试极限“Evolving Ability to Break Down Lactose “Dr. Barry Hall, professor emeritus of the University of Rochester, New York, has done research showing how bacteria react to adverse environmental conditions, like starvation. Amazingly, bacteria can initiate mechanisms in their genetic programming to speed up the occurrence of mutations that allow them to survive in difficult environments. 11/30/2017 207

208 Testing the Limits 测试极限“E. coli normally has the ability to use a common sugar, called lactose, as a food source. Hall was able to mutate a strain of E. coli so that it could no longer use lactose (as a result of mutations in the lac genes).1 He then put the mutant E. coli back into an environment where lactose was the only food source. The only way the E. coli could survive was to develop the ability to use lactose again. After a period of time, E. coli developed this ability. How? 11/30/2017 208

209 Testing the Limits 测试极限“The answer was mutations in other genes that the E. coli already possessed (called ebg genes). When these genes are not mutated, the bacteria can use a small amount of lactose, but not enough to survive. In response to the starvation conditions, mechanisms were initiated that enhanced the ebg genes’ ability to use lactose. No new or novel traits were gained; preexisting genes merely made a very limited change, enhancing a function they already had. “Interestingly, Hall predicted that if both genes (the lac genes and the ebg genes) were made nonfunctional through mutations, additional mutations would occur in other genes so E. coli could regain the ability to use lactose.2 However, “despite extensive efforts,” Hall was unable to get such E. coli to survive on lactose. 11/30/2017 209

210 Testing the Limits 测试极限“MUTATIONS ARE LIMITED AND CANNOT ORIGINATE NEW AND NOVEL TRAITS NECESSARY FOR MOLECULES-TO-MAN EVOLUTION. “Despite the evidence, Hall concluded, “Obviously, given a sufficient number of substitutions, additions, and deletions, the sequence of any gene can evolve into the sequence of any other gene.”3 But Hall’s own experiments showed otherwise—a gene cannot just become a completely different gene doing something completely different. Mutations are limited and cannot originate new and novel traits necessary for molecules-to-man evolution. 11/30/2017 210

211 Testing the Limits 测试极限“Evolving Ability to Break Down Citrate “In 1988, Dr. Richard Lenski, an evolutionary biologist at Michigan State University, began growing cultures of 12 identical lines of E. coli. More than 50,000 generations and 27 years later, the experiment continues. Lenski has been observing changes in the E. coli as they adapt to laboratory conditions. “For example, some lines have lost the ability to use a sugar, repair DNA, or even move.4 In other words, they’ve gotten lazy, as they’ve adapted to the easy life in the lab, where food is plentiful! If they were grown in a natural setting with their normal counterparts, competing for limited resources, the mutant bacteria wouldn’t stand a chance. 11/30/2017 211

212 Testing the Limits 测试极限“In 2008, Lenski’s lab discovered a new change in one of their lines of E. coli. A New Scientist writer proclaimed, “A major innovation has unfurled right in front of the researchers’ eyes. It’s the first time evolution has been caught in the act of making such a rare and complex new trait.”5 But is this what really happened?  “Normal E. coli has the ability to utilize the substance citrate as a source of carbon and energy but only when oxygen levels are low. Lenski’s lab discovered that one of their E. coli lines could now use citrate when oxygen levels are normal.6 It’s easy to see that this was not the “making of a rare and complex new trait” because E. coli already had the ability to use citrate! These were mutations that changed when citrate could be used.7 “The types of changes in E. coli simply altered (in a very limited way) genetic information and functions that were already present. These changes did not add new genetic information that over millions of years could lead from microbes to man. 11/30/2017 212

213 Testing the Limits 测试极限“Bacteria—Designed to Change “Bacteria are “master adapters.” God designed them with special genetic mechanisms that can alter their own genetic information, and He even gave them the unique ability to acquire genetic information from other bacteria (see “Bacteria’s Unique Design—Pooling Resources,” Answers, January–March 2015, pp. 52–54). Bacteria serve vital roles in a variety of difficult environments. So God gave them both of these special processes to help them survive where they would have to adapt or die. “Yet their mutations—or any other type of genetic change—are limited so that bacteria can continue to function in the beneficial roles God designed for them. 11/30/2017 213

214 Testing the Limits 测试极限“This so-called “evolution in action” is likely not applicable to other types of organisms. It is widely known that bacteria differ greatly from other living things, yet these differences are rarely mentioned when it comes to research on evolution.8 Many evolutionists think that the changes in bacteria have continued in many other types of organisms over millions of years. Yet this thinking is problematic. Here are just a few reasons: “Bacteria are single cells, so changes need to occur in only one cell to be passed to the next generation. In multicellular organisms, changes would have to occur in multiple cells of a given tissue or organ to benefit the organism and reappear in a germ cell (sperm or egg) to be passed to the next generation. 11/30/2017 214

215 Testing the Limits 测试极限“Bacterial population sizes are usually large and generation times short. So bacteria can test different mutations quickly to find the most beneficial changes, and populations can recover quickly. For other living things, small population sizes and longer generation times are the norm, making such trial and error deadly. “Bacterial DNA is much more streamlined than the DNA of other living things. The genes in bacteria perform separate and distinct functions, so a mutation will likely affect only one function (for instance, a gene produces a single protein but nothing else). The genetic sequences of humans, in contrast, often have multiple overlapping functions (for instance, a sequence could be for a gene and regulation). So a mutation is likely to affect multiple functions, and one of the effects is bound to be detrimental. 11/30/2017 215

216 Testing the Limits 测试极限“Even with all the genetic changes that occur in bacteria, they still remain bacteria. Because of their short generation times and large population sizes, bacteria have reproduced far more than humans or animals could in billions of years. Yet the changes have led to nothing more than minor variations within the bacterial populations, not molecules-to-man evolution. If even the “master adapters” can’t evolve into something different, as observational science confirms, there is no chance that any other creature will be able to achieve this feat. 11/30/2017 216

217 Testing the Limits 测试极限“Experimenting with Change in Bacteria “Two famous sets of experiments have shown that mutations in bacteria enable them to utilize food in new ways. Is this “evolution in action”? On closer examination, the changes in bacteria merely altered preexisting genes and their regulatory components; they didn’t produce the types of changes necessary for molecules-to-man evolution. 11/30/2017 217

218 Testing the Limits 测试极限Hall's Lactose Evolution Experiment Requires Experimental Observations Showed Dr. Barry Hall The E. coli regained preexisting structure developed a strain Gain of novel and function. In other words, E. coli  of E. coli bacteria structures and initially had the ability to break down that lost its ability functions lactose (lac genes), it lost that ability to break down the through mutation of those genes, sugar lactose and then it regained that ability (through a cluster Gain of novel through mutation of similar but of genes called genetic information different genes (ebg genes). the lac genes). A that is directional Preexisting genetic information mutant strain later was altered, leading to nondirectional change.  began breaking Unlimited genetic Mutations in the ebg genes down lactose with change enhanced the bacteria’s ability another cluster of to break down lactose, genes it already but E. coli remained E. coli. possessed (called the ebg genes). 11/30/2017 218

219 Testing the Limits 测试极限Hall's Lactose Evolution Experiment Requires Experimental Observations Showed The genetic change was limited.  In other words, no alterations in any other gene in E. coli occurred that allowed it to break down lactose when the lac and ebg genes were made nonfunctional. Lenski's Citrate Evolution Experiment Requires Experimental Observations Showed Dr. Richard Lenski The E. coli did not gain novel observed a strain of Gain of novel structure or function. E. coli gaining the ability structures E. coli already had the ability to to break down citrate and functions break down citrate. under normal oxygen levels. Preexisting genetic information Before this change, it only was altered, leading to happened under low nondirectional change.  oxygen levels. Mutations in citrate regulation allowed E. coli to use citrate under different conditions, but E. coli remained E. coli. 11/30/2017 219

220 Testing the Limits 测试极限“Dr. Georgia Purdom is a speaker and researcher for Answers in Genesis. She earned her doctorate from Ohio State University in molecular genetics and spent six years as a professor of biology at Mt. Vernon Nazarene University.” Thank God for the contribution of Dr. Purdom. 11/30/2017 220

221 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 221

222 Sermons From Science -- Nov 2016 科学布道-- 2016年11月Sermons from Science have been published in both YouTube under the name “Pastor Chui” and their PowerPoint slides and corresponding videos in the website since 2011. The contents of this presentation were taken from different sources and in the Internet. May God have all the glory. Pastor Chui 11/30/2017 222

223 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ The Answers In Genesis website published an article written by   Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell on October 3, I now quote her article below: “Embryonic similarities said to prove reptile scales evolved into feathers and hair—the recapitulation myth rises again! “News Source “The New York Times: “Scales, Feathers and Hair Have a Common Ancestor” “Christian Science Monitor: “Feathers, Hair, and Scales: Do They Share a Common Ancestry?” 11/30/2017 223

224 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “Before a bird grows feathers or a mammal grows fur, its embryo must develop tiny, thickened spots that develop into feather or hair follicles. (These spots are called placodes.)1 Just as feathers and hairs are very different, so the way these placodes develop further into feather or hair follicles is very different. Reptile scales differ from both feathers and fur, and they develop in a way that is likewise very different from either. The dramatic differences between scales, feathers, and hair—whether in the developing embryo or in their mature form—have made it difficult to connect the evolutionary dots between reptiles, birds, and mammals. 11/30/2017 224

225 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “Evolutionists are convinced, however, that both birds and mammals evolved, though along separate paths, from reptiles. Therefore, they have searched diligently for a connection between the signature coverings of these three groups. Now evolutionary biologists Nicolas Di-Poï and Michel Milinkovitch believe they have found this scale-hair-feather connection in the previously undiscovered reptilian embryo’s placodes. “Many evolutionists believe, to varying degrees,2 that the observable changes a maturing embryo undergoes retrace the evolutionary journey it supposedly took to become what it is. (This popular evolutionary myth is called recapitulation—the belief that a structure forms in an embryo by following the same steps it presumably followed as it evolved its various forms over millions of years.) The discovery of placodes on reptile embryos is being seen as proof of the evolutionary connection between reptilian scales, bird feathers, and mammalian hair. 11/30/2017 225

226 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “Before their surprising discovery that reptile embryos had scale-associated placodes, Milinkovitch explains, “People were fighting about the fact that reptiles either lost it [the embryonic placode], or birds and mammals independently developed them [embryonic placodes]. Now we are lucky enough to put this debate to rest, because we found the placodes in all reptiles: snakes, lizards and crocodiles.”3 11/30/2017 226

227 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “Don’t Blink! “Before June 2016 scientists did not know that reptile scales were preceded in the embryo by anatomical placodes. Then Nicolas Di-Poï and Michel Milinkovitch reported in Science Advances that they found these placodes in snakes, lizards, and crocodiles. The placode-stage of a reptile embryo’s scales, it turns out, is very brief and easy to miss, only 12 hours. Reptile embryos also develop their short-lived, pre-scale placodes at different locations on their bodies at different times. The embryonic placodes for bird feathers and mammalian fur, by comparison, are more uniform in appearance and last much longer. By contrast, in a reptile embryo, “if you don’t look at the right place at the right time you don’t see any,” Milinkovitch explains. “If you look too early you see nothing, if you look too late it’s already a scale.”4 11/30/2017 227

228 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “Common Communication “Milinikovitch and Di-Poï not only found that bearded dragon, corn snake, and crocodile embryos all have a brief placode stage for each scale on their bodies, they also found that the placodes preceding scale development are very similar to the placodes associated with embryonic feather and hair development. The cells in the placodes are similar, for instance, being tall epidermal cells that multiply slowly, compared to surrounding cells. And these placodes all use the same molecular messenger to communicate with the underlying dermis. This common protein messenger, BMP4, triggers development of a lizard’s scale, a bird’s feather, or a mammalian embryo’s hair follicle. (BMP4 is a signaling protein controlling development in many parts of the embryos of many sorts of organisms.) Furthermore, the same sorts of genetic switches turn on the genes needed to produce the placode for the animal’s designated skin covering, whether scale, feather, or hair. 11/30/2017 228

229 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ 11/30/2017 229

230 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ This is Tugboat, a normal bearded dragon. Like most bearded dragons, Tugboat has scales. Naked bearded dragons, on the other hand, do not have scales. Their scales do not develop because of a mutation in both copies of the gene for making a protein called EDA. This protein coordinates proper embryonic development of many skin-associated structures in mammals, birds, and reptiles. Tugboat’s photograph courtesy of Katie McDuffee. 11/30/2017 230

231 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “Why Are Naked Bearded Dragons Naked? “While Milinkovitch and Di-Poï did not start out looking for placodes on embryonic reptiles, their landmark discovery was no accident. Their work began as a search for the reason naked bearded dragons are scaleless. When they looked for the genetic underpinnings of the bearded dragon’s nakedness, they discovered the mutation that causes naked bearded dragons to be born without scales is the same sort of mutation that causes abnormal teeth, nails, and sweat glands in people.5 The mutated gene is called EDA. The effects of the gene in the bearded dragon are “co-dominant.” In other words, lizards with one copy of the mutant EDA gene have fewer than normal scales, and lizards in which both copies of the gene are abnormal are completely scaleless. 11/30/2017 231

232 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “LIZARDS WITH ONE COPY OF THE MUTANT EDA GENE HAVE FEWER THAN NORMAL SCALES, AND LIZARDS IN WHICH BOTH COPIES OF THE GENE ARE ABNORMAL ARE COMPLETELY SCALELESS. “The comparison of the effects of EDA mutation in birds, mammalian animals, and humans to the fact the EDA-mutant bearded dragons also had an obvious skin abnormality—lack of scales—clued the researchers in to the importance of EDA in the proper embryonic development of skin-associated structures whether in mammals, birds, or lizards. 11/30/2017 232

233 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ ““We were like ‘Whoa! That’s the same gene,’” says Milinkovitch. “There must be a link here because this guy [the naked bearded dragon] doesn’t have scales, and in birds and mammals when that gene is mutated they don’t have hair or feathers.” Therefore, because visible placodes precede the appearance of hair and feather follicles in mammal and bird embryos, the researchers diligently searched for reptilian placodes and finally found them in several sorts of reptile embryos. “When we investigated normal snakes, normal crocodiles and normal lizards we found placodes everywhere,” Milinkovitch explains.6 Everywhere except naked bearded dragon embryos, that is. 11/30/2017 233

234 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “Because similar embryonic placodes with their associated signaling molecules precede the development of scales, feathers, and fur, Di-Poï and Milinkovitch conclude that birds, mammals, and reptiles all inherited the placodes that develop into feathers, fur, and scales from the same evolutionary reptilian ancestor. They write, “This set of new results coherently and conclusively indicates that most skin appendages in amniotes are homologous; that is, they all evolved from a shared common ancestor that exhibited appendages developing from an anatomical placode and expressing a set of signaling molecules still involved in the development of scales, hairs, and feathers of extant species.”7 11/30/2017 234

235 ““Conclusively” Shows “Shared Common Ancestor”? Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ ““Conclusively” Shows “Shared Common Ancestor”? “Clearly the discovery of embryonic prescale placodes in reptiles is a great example of observational science. Careful observations confirm that something no one knew existed really is present after all. And additional careful observations confirm that mutation in the gene encoding the same signaling protein—EDA—prevents normal development of various skin-associated structures in bearded dragons, birds, and people. 11/30/2017 235

236 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “From their reptilian placode discovery these scientists confidently infer an evolutionary tale. But is their conclusion as valid as they think? Not at all! These scientists did not observe anatomical placodes evolving into anything. Placodes are simply observable spots on an embryo that mature into some sort of structure such as a sensory organ or a skin-associated structure. The pattern of the placodes in the embryo mirrors the pattern of hair or feathers or scales in the maturing organism, be they body scales, wing feathers, or swirls of fur. Reptilian scale placodes mature into reptilian scales, just as feather placodes mature into bird feathers and mammalian hair placodes mature into hair follicles. Placodes do not demonstrate how the skin covering of one kind of animal could ever evolve into the skin covering of another. Placodes are not the evolutionary predecessors of anything. Neither do they replay evolutionary history as they develop into mature structures. 11/30/2017 236

237 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “THE ANATOMICAL CHANGES THAT TAKE PLACE IN ANY DEVELOPING EMBRYO ARE DRAMATIC. “Among evolutionists it has always been a common approach to look to embryos of various kinds of organisms to find evidence for the notion that one kind of organism could evolve into a new and completely different kind of organism. This is not surprising, for the anatomical changes that take place in any developing embryo are dramatic. Equipped with the worldview that life’s complexity evolved through natural processes, the evolutionary imagination can easily get the impression that embryonic development recapitulates evolutionary ancestry. 11/30/2017 237

238 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “The fraudulent “proof” of this idea, produced by Ernst Haeckel, was debunked long ago. (See “Recapitulation Repackaged and Re-Applied.”) Nevertheless, evolutionary biologists still turn to the embryo to determine the mechanisms of evolutionary change that could presumably produce various anatomical structures over millions of years. And in this case they not only postulate the possible mechanism for such change but also plainly claim that the similarity of embryonic structures and signaling molecules conclusively demonstrates shared evolutionary ancestry between the very different structures of the reptile’s scale, the bird’s feather, and the mammal’s hair. 11/30/2017 238

239 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “Embryonic, Not Evolutionary, Development “Embryonic development in each kind of animal follows the blueprint laid out in its DNA. Based on their distinct genetic instructions, diverse kinds of embryos exhibit similar regions associated with subsequent differentiation into very different structures. But the evolutionary change of one kind of animal into another has never been observed in experimental biology. Embryonic similarities do not supply the mechanism for such evolutionary change because embryonic development is simply following the path dictated in its own genome. No new information or genetic instructions are evolving. Embryonic similarities are an example of the common designs created by our Common Designer, the Creator God of the Bible. 11/30/2017 239

240 Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “Furthermore, the same messenger molecules not only trigger developments at different locations in the same embryo but also in the embryos of different sorts (reptiles, birds, mammalian animals, and humans). (For more examples of how this works, see “Do Walking and Waterfall-Climbing Fish or the Sonic Hedgehog Gene Reveal How Life on Land Evolved?” and “Does the Spotted Gar Harbor a Fish-Finger Connection?”) The use of many similar signaling molecules and genetic switches is another example of our wise Creator’s common designs, representing a sort of biochemical economy. Such common occurrences of many biochemical molecules is not a surprise at all since God created all living things to live in the same world, using the same basic resources and functioning with essentially the same sort of biochemistry and genetic code. 11/30/2017 240

241 Thank God for the contribution of Dr. Mitchell.Do Naked Bearded Dragons Reveal Common Ancestry of Scales, Feathers, and Fur? 裸体胡子龙是否揭示了鳞片，羽毛和毛皮的常见祖先？ “Reptilian embryonic placodes have not solved an evolutionary mystery. They are not evidence for the ancient common ancestry of reptiles, mammals, and birds. Rather they illustrate the fact that things with scales, feathers, or fur were created by the same God. And God’s reliable Word, the Bible, lets us know that He created all kinds of living things about 6,000 years ago during the earth’s first six days, not over millions of years.”  Thank God for the contribution of Dr. Mitchell. 11/30/2017 241

242 Gloria Deo 愿荣耀归上帝 11/30/2017 242