References and Sources

References and Sources


Many of the expressed ideas were taken from ENCODE The National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) that launched a public research consortium named ENCODE, www.AnswersInGenesis.com, and other respectful websites and research papers.

References
  • Dr. Alex McFarland. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/04/30/ten-reasons-millennials-are-backing-away-from-god-and-christianity.html
  • http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/04/30/ten-reasons-millennials-are-backing-away-from-god-and-christianity.html
  • “Evolution in medical school: Do we need more of it?” http://archive.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/brainiac/2013/04/a_movement_to_m.html.



  • Mike Riddle, “Can Natural Processes Explain the Origin of Life,” in The New Answers Book 2, Ken Ham, ed. (Master Books, 2008). See also www.answersingenesis.org/go/origin
  • The Image in Mind: Theism, Naturalism, and the Imaginations. Charles Taliaferro and Jil Evans, The Image in Mind: Theism, Naturalism, and the Imagination, Continuum, 2010, 224ppl. $130.00 (hbk), ISBN 9781847064820.
  •  http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/29978-the-image-in-mind-theism-naturalism-and-the-imagination/


 "I am a creationist and an evolutionist. Evolution is God's, or Nature's method of creation. Creation is not an event that happened in 4004 BC; it is a process that began some 10 billion years ago and is still under way." — Theodosius Dobzhansky, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution" (1973) /wiki/Nothing_in_Biology_Makes_Sense_Except_in_the_Light_of_Evolution


  • Evolution: No Chance in a Billion Years. https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-against-evolution/probability/evolution-no-chance-billion-years/

  • Censored Biology .Phil Johnson MCE- On the “the Miller-Urey experiments”



  • Information, science and biology

by Werner Gitt: http://creation.com/information-science-and-biology 
(No Junk DNA, sic): - Mobile DNA Elements: The Seeds of Organic Complexity on Earth.
All web page references accessed above were between April and May 2017

  •   State-of-the-art computer modeling of plate tectonics has demonstrated that the processes ... occur catastrophically over a drastically shortened timescale [Baumgardner 1994a, b, 2003].
  • Leslie Pray, Ph.D. © 2008 Nature Education 
    Citation: Pray, L. (2008) Transposons, or jumping genes: Not junk DNA? Nature Education 1(1):32 https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/Transposons-or-Jumping-Genes-Not-Junk-DNA-1211 
    (Accessed May 26, 2017) 
  • "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.” Genesis 1:31.


  •   Table 2 bellow. Courtesy of Dr. Nathaniel T. Jeanson and Jeffrey P. Tomkins on May 11, 2017Human Origins from Ape-Like Primates or Fully Human People?https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/origins/human-origins-from-ape-like-primates-or-fully-human-people/

     
  • Table 2. Factually erroneous evolutionary claims about human-primate ancestry

      Evolutionary Claim    		 Actual Data
    Human-chimpanzee genetic identity is 98-99% Actual genetic identity is only 88% (i.e., 400,000,000 DNA differences exist between the two species)
    Humans are genetically closer to apes than to other animal species, unequivocally demonstrating common ancestry Relative hierarchies are characteristics of design
    Human chromosome #2 arose via fusion of two ape-like chromosomes
    The purported “fusion” site is actually a functional DNA element in a human gene

    Gene order along chromosomes has no function, therefore shared gene order demonstrates common ancestry    		  Gene order along chromosomes does indeed perform a function
     Humans and chimpanzees shared genetic mistakes (e.g., pseudogenes)
    Pseudogenes appear to be functional DNA elements, not mistakes
    Humans possess the broken remnants of an ancient chicken gene (vitellogenin) No such remnant exists; instead the “fragment” appears to be a functional DNA element

Additional Refences 

"Fuzzy words." Words that evolutionists typically use when they have no observable evidence to support their claims. (Mike Riddle)

“In a recent issue of Science News magazine, for example, we find the first fuzzy words in the article's title: "Bubbles may have sheltered early life." Did you spot it? Yes, it's the phrase "may have."

In the second paragraph, we read: "Such a snug hideout could have shielded microbes from ultraviolet radiation." Right – the words "could have".

In the next paragraph, a geologist is quoted as saying that the work is "very plausible" – another way of getting you to accept the scientist's wishful thinking.

In the remaining paragraphs, we find two more "could haves", a "may have", a "perhaps", a "might have" and two instances of "appeared to be".
"If microbes survived in these pockets on early Earth, they could potentially have done so on other planets such as Mars.

"The words "if" and "potentially" should have set off the critical thinking alarm bells in our minds.

Contrary to this “story-telling” approach, the Bible avoids fuzzy words and phrases. “The Bible doesn't try to trick or deceive us. Its words are true because its Author is Truth and His words endure forever.”

http://childrensmd.org/uncategorized/why-doctors-and-lawyers-homeschool-their-children-18-reasons-why-we-have-joined-americas-fastest-growing-educational-trend/http://childrensmd.org/uncategorized/why-doctors-and-lawyers-homeschool-their-children-18-reasons-why-we-have-joined-americas-fastest-growing-educational-trend/




Ocean Chemistry, Genetics and Biology http://www.logosresearchassociates.org/about

 http://members.iinet.net.au/%7Esejones/pattam01.html. Colin Patterson's address at the American Museum of Natural History, New York City, 1981, pages 1-5. Accessed August 25th, 2017.

Wells, 2002: Jonathan Wells, Darwinists Answer "Ten Questions" with Evasions and Falsehoods, 2002, http://www.discovery.org/a/1106

Darwinists Answer "Ten Questions" with Evasions and Falsehoods
Jonathan Wells - Discovery Institute- January 15, 2002
  "The NCSE introduces its answers to my Ten Questions by calling many of my claims "incorrect or misleading," and by maintaining that they are "intended only to create unwarranted doubts in students' minds about the validity of evolution as good science." The evasions and falsehoods listed above, however, make it clear that it is the NCSE's answers that are incorrect or misleading. If students have doubts about the scientific validity of evolution, their doubts are amply warranted not only by the systematic pattern of misrepresentations in biology textbooks, but also by the false and evasive statements the NCSE makes in defense of those misrepresentations.
Good science is the search for truth, and it searches for truth by comparing theories with the evidence. A good science education should present the evidence truthfully--especially the evidence for and against a theory as influential as Darwin's. Yet biology textbooks invariably present this evidence with a pro-Darwin spin, indoctrinating students rather than educating them. It seems that the National Center for Science Education, despite its title, wants students to inherit the spin". http://www.discovery.org/a/1106



Copyright   Computer Integrations, Inc. ©, 2017
No part of this article may be reproduced or copied without the author’s exclusive permission
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Home School Services

Hawaii School of True Science Academy Providing Teaching & Tutoring Services for Home School Students in Maui       All STEM Su...