Win an iPod Touch

>> Monday, June 21, 2010

This is a Sponsored Post written by me on behalf of Charter. All opinions are 100% mine.

Father's day might be over but you can celebrate father’s day every day. If you were not able to give your dad a present on Father’s day, now is the time to give him an iPod Touch. Do you know that Charter is having a special deal on Father's Day? You heard it right! Charter has other deals as well such as a gift card to Home Depot or other retailers worth $300 when you purchase Charter's best bundles. A hundred people can win an 8GB iPod Touch, and the good news is you don't need to purchase anything to enter. The reason why Charter is giving away iPod Touches is to promote its new mobile app for iPods, iPhones and Blackberries. This app will give you the world of Charter is at your fingertips. You can get updates, fun extras, and facebook only deals on Charter’s Facebook page. They have all kinds of great bundles available. So if you are looking for great internet services, why not checkout Charter today for more details. Enter now to win an iPod Touch. So what are you waiting for? This is your chance to win an iPad Touch. You might be one of the lucky winners.
Visit my sponsor: Charter is mobile Father's Day


Noah’s Flood Global or Local and the Media Bias

>> Sunday, June 20, 2010

Why do people believe in the Bible? How does the Bible compare to other religious texts? Is there a difference between other religious texts and the Bible?

People are constantly attacking the Bible and saying there isn’t any evidence that supports it. Someone commented on one of my prior posts saying there isn’t any evidence for the Bible, but they are wrong. I want to first talk about Noah’s Flood. What really annoys me is when the Discovery Channel or the History Channel does a special on Noah’s Food saying, “Did Noah’s Flood really happen?” The whole special has one geological expert on it that makes statements like, “There isn’t any geological evidence that supports a global flood.” Are they saying that the Discovery Channel or the History Channel couldn’t find one geologist who believes in a global flood to give a counter argument? I can give you 10 in about 10 minutes. The truth is that there is loads of evidence to support a Noah’s Flood, and there is huge evidence to support the Bible.

Another flood article located at this site: has statements such as “Oceanographer Bill Ryan was part of the team that revealed how the Mediterranean was formed 5 million years” and other statements like “Was Noah's Flood a symbol for real people who were driven from a real homeland by a real flood? In an extraordinary geological detective story, two of the world's greatest earth scientists travel to the Black Sea to reveal evidence of a mighty torrent that poured through the Bosphorus with the power of over four hundred Niagara Falls. Did this catastrophic event, only 7,500 years ago, become the stuff of ancient storytelling and the origin of the Biblical Flood?”

First they are spouting out another date that means nothing to anybody but evolutionist. How do they really know that it was 5 million years? Is there really a dating method that can date something accurately to 5 million years? However, the video is really about endorsing the local flood idea and not the global flood idea. I guess they will later explain how the Chinese legends had flood stories, and how the Native Americans had flood stories, and how Australian Aborigines had flood stories. I guess they plan to explain that in their next documentary. I guess they will explain how the Fossil ‘graveyards’ are found worldwide and in rocks of all ‘ages’. Only a global flood could achieve such an event. Maybe in their next unbiased flood documentary they will cover how the Dinosaurs and many other prehistoric creatures died out suddenly. Only a catastrophe such as a global flood could have produced this result. Just maybe, when the media actually attempt to film a documentary concerning Noah’s Flood that is accurate, we will learn about some of the facts that are actually true.


Arguments for Evolution

>> Thursday, June 10, 2010

What I am referring to as evolution is the belief in no God and that life started at the Big Bang and evolved into what we are today. I realize that evolutionist like to separate the views of the evolution of man and the Big Bang, but most evolutionist also believe in the Big Bang and the whole entire view point is what I will be addressing here.

Quote from evolutionist:
"And you cite..... what now? I have read several essays by scientists about evolution. Adaptation and natural selection have been observed, and from there it's simply a matter of time to reach speciation. Which, for that matter, has also been observed. While the fossil record is incomplete, some transitional forms have been located, and assuming that the holes are due to the rarity of fossilization is just as valid as assuming that the missing transitional forms don't exist."

This is from the website. Creationist do believe in adaptation.

Creationist believe in a creator because life does not come into existence by chance (this has never been observed in science). Creationist believe in a creator which has been believed as long as man has been on the earth. Evolution has not been a widely accepted view point until Darwin.
Lets discuss some of the primary arguments for evolution (See my next posts for rebuttals):

1) Evolutionist believe in the Big Bang (Unless you are someone like Hugh Ross who doesn't truly believe in the Bible so they adapt the Bible with evolution): This theory believes that intelligence comes from non-intelligence, that the earth is billions of years old and that over billions of years we evolved by random chance and random mutations into what we are today.

2) Evolutionist believe in macro-evolution which means that we evolved from a completely different Kind.

3) Evolutionist believe that the earth is billions of years old. (So do other people who adapt the Bible to evolutionist theories)

4) Evolutionist do not believe in a world wide flood caused by God, but other forms of natural disasters such as the ice age.

"Many ...believe in evolution for the simple reason that they think science has proven it to be a `fact' and, therefore, it must be accepted... In recent years, a great many people...having finally been persuaded to make a real examination of the problem of evolution, have become convinced of its fallacy and are now convinced anti-evolutionists."
-- Henry Morris, former evolutionist.


The Science of Evolution

>> Wednesday, June 2, 2010

If Evolution is supported by so many facts, then why does the latest gallop poll show that less than 40 percent of the American people believe in Evolution? In America, students learn Evolution in elementary school, junior high, high school, and even college. All of the public institutions and many private institutions still teach Evolution? But somehow they still haven't convinced the majority of the masses that it is true. Even though the Internet is dominated by Evolutionist propaganda, people are still not buying into this theory. People have said that Evolution is a fact for the longest time and now with Ardi, they are rethinking their theory. I thought it was already declared a fact?

There are all types of evolution that people hear of such as cosmic evolution, stellar evolution, macroevolution, microevolution and chemical evolution. Most supporters of evolution probably don't even know the difference because they usually get confused by calling their evidence macroevolution when in reality, it is only microevolution.

according to Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary means "comparatively minor evolutionary change involving the accumulation of variations in populations usually below the species level" (2009)

Microevolution is the only type of evolution that happens today and even Creationist believe in Microevolution. The other type of evolution has never been observed happening. It is amazing to me that there still are so many supporters of evolution.

One major problem with the theory of evolution is that of irreducibly complex systems. According to Michael Behe, the author of Darwin's Black Box, an "irreducibly complex system" cannot be made by minute, consecutive changes of a previous system, since any change to remove a part of an "irreducibly complex system" will result in non-functionality (1996). This means that if one part is missing, the whole system will fail. The problem that challenges the theory of evolution is that an organism cannot evolve if it cannot live with one part missing. Michael Behe (1996) gives an example of a mousetrap as an irreducibly complex mechanism. The mousetrap has five basic parts to it: hammer, spring, catch, holding bar, and platform. If any one of these parts were missing, the whole mousetrap would fail to function.

The problem with the theory of Evolution is that we know more about science today than when Darwin was alive. The cell is way more complex than Darwin was aware of, and Darwin did not know about irreducibly complex systems like scientists do today.

Darwin might not even believe in his own theory if he was alive today.

Macroevolution is, according to Merriam Webster Online Dictionary, "evolution that results in relatively large and complex changes (as in species formation)" (2009). "Species formation" is referring to changes outside a species, e.g., a chicken evolving into a hamster. There is only one problem with macroevolution, and that is that there is no proof for it.

One of these problems is in the genetic code. The genetic code can change within the species from generation to generation, but it cannot have new information added to it. For instance, a person could take a wolf and pick out one trait like a black colored coat, and then breed it for several generations until all they would get are black wolf puppies.

Read More


  © Blogger template Palm by 2008

Back to TOP