วันจันทร์ที่ 6 มิถุนายน พ.ศ. 2554

The Swinging 60s - The Evolution of Classic Songs That Shook the World

The 60s are considered a watershed decade in the history of music due to the many classic songs that appeared in this era that changed the sound and direction of music forever. The changes that took place in just 10 short years were simply enormous and its effects are still being felt and are still influencing today's musicians. The following article has been written to give you a concise rundown of the major songs and artists from this decade whose legacy is still being felt today.

At the beginning of the 1960s, Elvis was still the King and even more so when he released his first songs after returning from military service in Germany. Many of his songs such as "It's Now or Never" and "Are You Lonesome Tonight?" all became number 1 hits during this period. The early 1960s also saw the emergence of teen artists who for the first time achieved significant success on the charts. Brenda Lee made her debut with the classic song "I'm Sorry" at just 15 years of age and had a long career through the 60s and 70s. Matt Dinning's song "Teen Angel" also became a smash hit and continued with the theme of a lost teen love. All these young artists had a clean-cut image which would not last much longer in the 60s.

The early 1960's also see the start of the Twist dance craze instigated by the massive hit "The Twist" by Chubby Checker and this dance craze would continue until at least 1962. 1962 would also see the emergence of Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons with their first 3 singles all reaching number 1 in the United States ("Sherry", "Walk Like A Man" and "Big Girls Don't Cry").

However, 1964 would be the year that changed music forever. The arrival of the Beatles in America and along with it The British Invasion would completely transform the entire industry, especially in North America. The Beatles' appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show in February 1964 has been pinpointed as possibly the most important musical moment of the 20th century. It is their appearances on the show that kick-started Beatlemania in America and the rest of the world. No other band had ever caused so much hysteria and no other band has done since. The Beatles became mega superstars with their ridiculous chords, beautiful melodies, accumulating incredible commercial and critical success and 20 number 1 hits in the United States in just 6 years. No other singer or group has been able to match their success since and it's unlikely anybody ever will.

The Beatles' success also led to the British Invasion with artists such as The Rolling Stones and The Animals also becoming commercial successful in their own right during this period. Bands such as the Troggs and the Kinks emerged as pioneers of heavy metal which would emerge in its more well-known form in the early 70s but you can't help but recognize the influence of these early bands. "Wild Thing" and "You Really Got Me" are much listen songs from the 60s if you are a heavy metal or hard rock fan.

The 60s also saw the emergence of the all girl group The Supremes who are considered to the pioneers of RnB and soul with songs such as "Baby Love" and "Stop! In The Name of Love" still influencing today's Rnb artists. They had a total of 12 number 1 hits in the United States and are considered one of the most successful female vocal groups of all time.

The second half of the 60s saw a profound change in sound with the rise of psychedelic rock which was essentially rock music trying to represent experiences with hallucinogenic drugs. Drugs such as LSD were commonplace at the time and used by many artists such as The Beatles and hits such as "Strawberry Fields Forever" reflected this new type of rock. The popularity of this psychedelic rock did not last long as it simply became a transition from blues-oriented rock to progressive rock and heavy metal in the early 1970s.

The end of the 1960s also saw the arrival of the Creedence Clearwater Revival (CCR) with their distinctive Southern rock sound which would be the inspiration for many rock groups in the 70s such as the Eagles and Lynyrd Skynyrd. CCR experienced enormous commercial success in the United States in just a few short years and many of their songs such as "Proud Mary", "Who'll Stop The Rain", "Bad Moon Rising" and "Fortunate Son" are still staples of classic rock music stations.

The 60s were a significant period in the history of music whose legacy continues to live in the music of today. Artists from this period has inspired countless of music artists throughout history and there's no doubt that people will continue to look back on the period as a source of inspiration for future music.




Martin Sejas is the lead writer of http://www.AllTimeClassicSongs.com, a website dedicated to appropriately honoring 60s classic songs and other classic songs from other influential musical eras.

วันอาทิตย์ที่ 5 มิถุนายน พ.ศ. 2554

Food History - The Evolution of Our World From Bread to Cheesecake

Ever wonder about the origins of certain foods? Who was the first person to eat an oyster and why? What hardened meringue was used as medicinal candy to soothe children's sore throats? What food was served to those first Olympians in 776 B.C? What has been found in pits where human settlements lived 8,000 years ago? The origins of food are varied, ingenious and ever evolving and have not only made history, but are history.

One of the oldest known foods is credited for bringing cavemen together to live in communities rather than herd and hunt as nomads. Civilizations found various ways of growing, preparing grain and baking dough to become bread, a staple which was plentiful in summer and sustained them during winter. Excavated cities dating back to Pompeii have revealed the secrets of the ancient bakery where rich and poor alike, came together over bread. Wheat has been discovered in the remains of settlements from over 8,000 years ago stamping today's main grain as a link to our past.

One of the most delicious or dangerous delicacies on our menu is the Latin mussirio, or mushrooms. Like bread, fungi may also date back to prehistoric times and are marked throughout Greek, Roman, Chinese, Japanese and European culinary history. Mushrooms lack chlorophyll and therefore must grow from other things such as dead plants, tree roots or animals. We think of fungus as a bad thing, but where would be without yeast? We'd miss bread, truffles and the beer for our BBQs.

Then there's the poor, misunderstood mollusk. Many people shy away from their gray, shiny, slippery surfaces. Archeological evidence would point to oysters as coming out of their shells around the same time as dirt but details on this are as murky as the beds in which they're found. Oyster farming was well documented during the 4th century but was interrupted by the barbarian invasion and does not surface again till the 14th century as a privilege of the rich. It wasn't till the 19th century when oysters became more plentiful that dishes such as stew, fried oysters, oysters Florentine and oyster shish kabob began to emerge.

When Harvard graduate students Herbert Dick and Earle Smith went digging in a New Mexico bat cave, little did they know they would end up with 5,600-year-old popcorn. Smith and Dick unearthed various well-preserved corn cob fragments including several that were partially or completely popped. When dropped in oil, a few of the kernels still had a spark and exploded into white puffs. Throughout the centuries, popcorn has been used as food, in ornamental headdresses, as breakfast cereal during colonial times and as an attraction inside and out in front of department stores. During the depression, when other businesses went bust, popcorn, well, popped. What would a movie theater be without popcorn?

What were the first Olympians dining on between chariot races? You guessed it: cheesecake. Well, maybe not but historians believe it to have been on the first games' menu. It has also been traced back to 2,000 B.C through unearthed cheese molds. If the internet had been invented in 200 BC, cave-wives all over the world could have been sharing Marcus Porcius Cato's recipe for cheese libum, or cheese cake. From there, cheesecake spread from Greece to Europe then finally to America. This confection is celebrated by every region and culture and is one of the world's most popular desserts.

Originating in ancient Egypt, the marshmallow started out as a honey candy that was thickened and flavored with the sap of the marsh-mallow plant. This goo-filled growth appeared on banks near large bodies of water and in salt marshes. Nineteenth century doctors creatively extracted the plant's juices, boiled it with egg whites and sugar and whipped it into a meringue, that when hardened, was used as a children's sore throat lozenge. When gelatin replaced the plant's sap, its medicinal values as a cough suppressant, immune system booster and wound healer disappeared. The production process evolved as well with the invention of the cornstarch mold method which later gave way to the more modern extrusion process. This involved piping the sugary mixture through long tubes to be cut into pillowy, equal-sized shapes.

Years from now when archeologists unearth our society, we wonder what they'll learn from specimens such as pork floss, beef pizzle or the much loved Now and Later variety of pull-your-teeth-out candy chews. One can only wonder.....and keep good notes.




http://jgalvin911.wordpress.com/
https://www.sendoutcards.com/start/

วันศุกร์ที่ 3 มิถุนายน พ.ศ. 2554

Animal Ecology

Animal ecology is an important area of study for scientists. It is the study of animals and how they related to each other as well as how they related to their environment. There are various forms of animal ecology. This includes:

o Behavioral ecology, the study of the behavior of the animals with relation to their environment and others
o Population ecology, the study of the effects on the population of these animals
o Marine ecology is the study of animal life
o Evolutionary ecology is the study of how animals evolve over time to meet the demands on them

There are various other forms. By studying this information, scientists hope to learn more about what makes these animals prosper or what potentially holds them back. With animal ecology, there are many factors, most of which are human caused, that is currently threatening them.

There are many examples of this problem throughout the country. Perhaps the best examples, though, are in the water. A look at area lakes, coastlines and even marine life will show you just how much human environmental damage has hurt these animals. Animal ecology has changed drastically in an effort to keep up. Here are some examples of how the environment and human interaction has changed the scope of many animals.

o Animal habitats in many marine areas have ceased to exist. Coral reefs and other very delicate ecosystems have been harmed by human presence.
o In the arctic regions, melting ice has limited the lifespan of polar bears, which make the ice their home. Additionally, sea lions and other marine life that use the ice to rest on have been unable to do so.
o Dams and other waterway changes have hurt animal ecology throughout the country. Animals are no longer able to get to the source of water they need.
o Deforestation in jungles and other habitats has caused many of the only locations for animals to live to be wiped away.
o Sprawling city growth has also pushed animals farther and farther out of their natural habitats.

There are many other ways that animal ecology has changed. The goal of scientists is to find out what is happening and why it is happening that way. It is often very much a worry when animal species are dying or are unable to evolve naturally because of the drastic changes in their lifestyles and living areas. Through study of animal ecology, scientists hope to understand better what really is happening and what effect it will have both in the short and in the long term.




Annie Here
Get a Free Special Report On Save Our Planet

วันอาทิตย์ที่ 29 พฤษภาคม พ.ศ. 2554

Evolution of Biofuels

The biofuels that people are mainly familiar with today are the ones that are made from food crops, such as corn. The biggest debate regarding this, among those going green, is that too much food is being devoted to fuel, when it needs to be allocated for its original purpose, which is to feed humans or animals. While eating is one of the few things we must do to survive, in this day and age, having fuel is almost as integral. Therefore, a balance must be created so that there are enough resources for both the generation of food and fuel.

There are currently three generations of biofuels, and within the first generation, bioalcohol, biodiesel, and biogas are utilized. Bioalcohol is created by the fermentation of sugars or starches, and plants which are high in these are used to make this type of biofuel. Biodiesel is used for diesel engines, and can be made from heated vegetable oil. Biogas is created when organic materials biodegrade in the absence of oxygen.

While all of the above biofuels are effective, the bottom line is they still use food that could possibly be put to better use. Second generation biofuels are created from non edible food crops, as well as the stalks of edible foods. Cellulosic fuels are more difficult to make on a large scale, which is one of their primary drawbacks.

The third generation is algae biofuel. Algae requires little energy to grow yet can output more biofuel than any land crop. Algae is so promising that it may even be a method of completely replacing petroleum. Like cellulose, there have been problems extracting the essential oil from algae, and new techniques for extraction are consistently being researched.

An emerging, new type of biofuel that may turn out to be the fourth generation is fuel produced from microorganisms. If this project is successful, it could result in our being able to create all the fuel we will ever need.




Justin Kander helps run a green blog dedicated to helping people go green.

วันเสาร์ที่ 28 พฤษภาคม พ.ศ. 2554

Animal Life Around the Dead Sea

As the name signifies, nothing that has life can flourish in the Dead Sea. It is a massive water body that stretches for about 77 kilometers (48 miles) long and 5 and 18 kilometers (3 and 11 miles) wide. Lying calmly between Jordan and Israel, the lake houses a variety of minerals that are found on the surface of the earth such as sodium, calcium, magnesium and silica. These minerals get carried into rivers and ultimately in the sea when ever it rains, along with rainwater. The two most widely found elements in this Sea are sodium and calcium, which when combines form salt, making the water salty and due to this salinity, Dead Sea creates an extremely ruthless ambiance where animals cannot survive and flourish.

As far as the point of life in the Dead Sea is concerned, the only supportive statement comes from the source bacterium Haloarcula marismortui. It is one of the two species of bacteria that live in the Dead Sea. However, in the region scattered around Dead-Sea, a number of animals originating in Africa can be found, as this area was once a part of the north-eastern corner of the African continent. With the ongoing process of desiccation, a desert belt is formed which eventually isolated the animal population here from its original home. In fact, from this category of animals, the most popular habitant of Dead Sea region is the Rock Rabbit, a social herbivore. The mammal has pads on its short toes that help it climb easily in the rock fissures.

Although the Dead Sea region is specifically categorized as barren land, the rift does support a migration platform for nomadic birds, predators and others that fly to cover the distance from Africa to Northern Europe. These birds glide over the air currents in the mountain corridors, where a few get misled due to the blue color of the river, thinking it be a sweet water lake. These misguided birds come to rest on the Dead-Sea and finally close the chapter of their lives.

Further, the drift of continents cleared the way for Asiatic animals' entry and disturbed the African element that was unable to find survival with the changing climatic conditions. Many animals like crocodile, the rhinoceros and the hippopotamus got vanished from the region. The other African species restricted themselves to the area that still has some minimum possible conditions for endurance.

Another interesting habitant found in the area around Dead Sea is ants living on the tress. These ants build their homes in nests and capture and hold one of the region's vermin. Dead Sea does not provide suitable living environment for any of the multi-celled organism except for Ein Fashcha, a series of springs on the northern shore. A variety of fish and shell-fish, reaching to Ein Fashcha, got trapped by the blockade created by the rising absorption of salt in the waters of the lake.
   
At this point, a tributary enters the sea and brings along with it, these fresh water creatures fighting, for their survival. Unfortunately, they die soon after getting in touch with the highly concentrated salt sea. On the other side, the Asiatic migrants, surviving in the region around the Dead Sea, choose their terrain as per their nature. The very popular light-footed fleet gazelle houses in the open plains, whereas the ibex sticks to the cliffs.

Due to the heavy content of minerals in the massive body of water of Dead Sea, the survival of underwater life is not feasible. However, the continental rift supports survival of few selective animals in the areas around the Dead Sea.



วันพฤหัสบดีที่ 26 พฤษภาคม พ.ศ. 2554

The Tiktaalik Roseae - Another Missing Link Myth

Darwinist media organizations have embarked upon a new wave of propaganda aimed at portraying a fossil recently described in the journal Nature (i), (ii), (iii) as a missing link. The fossil in question is that of a fish, discovered in Arctic Canada by the paleontologists Neil H. Shubin and Edward B. Daeschler in 2004. Given the scientific name Tiktaalik roseae, the fossil is estimated to be 385 million years old. Evolutionists looking for possible candidates for their tales of a transition from water to land are putting the fossil forward as an intermediate form by distorting its "mosaic" features.

However, the claim of a transition from water to land is no more than a dream, because the physiological gulfs between terrestrial animals and fish cannot be overcome by any of the fictitious mechanisms of the theory of evolution. The latest attempt to make Tiktaalik roseae fit this scenario, which is supported out of blind devotion to the theory of evolution and rests on no scientific evidence whatsoever, is based on preconceptions and intentional misinterpretation. The facts the Darwinist media have concealed in their Tiktaalik roseae propaganda are set out below.

Tiktaalik roseae: A mosaic life form which is no evidence for evolution

There are three well-preserved fossil specimens of Tiktaalik roseae. Some 3 meters long, the creature exhibits various mosaic characteristics. (Mosaic life forms contain features belonging to different groups of life forms.) As in fish, it has fins and scales. Features such as its flat head, mobile neck and relatively powerful rib structure are found in terrestrial animals. The creature, whose name is derived from the Inuit language Inuktitut and means "a large, shallow-water fish," also has bones in its pectoral fins. Evolutionists distort these mosaic properties according to their own preconceptions and maintain that the animal is a transitional form between fish and terrestrial life forms.

Mosaic life forms, however, are very far from being the intermediate forms required by the theory of evolution. The present-day Platypus that lives in Australia, for instance, is a mosaic creature that possesses mammalian, reptilian and avian features at one and the same time. But nothing about it constitutes any evidence for the theory of evolution. Mosaic life forms are not what evolutionists need to find in order to back up their claims; they need to find "intermediate forms," which would have to be with deficient, only half-formed and not fully functional organs. Yet every one of the organs possessed by mosaic creatures is complete and flawless. They have no semi-developed organs, and there are no fossil series that can be proposed as evidence that they evolved from some other life forms.

The theory of evolution hypothesizes that a process based on random mutations, in other words on chance, took place. According to this claim, the millions of living species on Earth must have evolved from a vast number of intermediate forms, all subjected to chance mutations, and as a result had deformed, abnormal structures, and the fossils of these so-called intermediate forms should have been found. To put it another way, the fossil record should be overflowing with the remains of life forms that can only be described as freaks of nature. However, this is known not to be the case. When species emerge, they do so suddenly, with all their distinguishing features fully developed, and with no series of freaks among them. In his 1999 book Fossils and Evolution, Tom Kemp, curator of Zoological Collections at the Oxford University Museum, describes the position as follows:

In virtually all cases a new taxon appears for the first time in the fossil record with most definitive features already present, and practically no known stem-group forms. (Tom Kemp, Fossils and Evolution, Oxford University, Oxford University Press, 1999, p. 246)

The general picture concealed by evolutionists

Evolutionists attempt to give the impression that fossils actually support the idea of evolution. Yet the "missing link" concept is one that has been invented solely in the light of the needs of the theory of evolution and has no counterpart in the fossil record itself. The lack of fossil links alleged to connect species to one another has been known ever since Darwin's time. Excavations by paleontologists since Darwin's day have also failed to resolve this situation, which represents such a grave impasse for the theory of evolution and, on the contrary, have further confirmed the absence of any missing links among living groups.

E. R. Leach, author of the book Rethinking Anthropology, wrote this in his article in Nature:

Missing links in the sequence of fossil evidence were a worry to Darwin. He felt sure they would eventually turn up, but they are still missing and seem likely to remain so. (E. R. Leach; Nature, 293: 19, 1981)

A. S. Romer, one of the most eminent paleontologists of his time, said this on the subject:

"Links" are missing just where we most fervently desire them [to point to a transition between species] and it is all too probable that many "links" will continue to be missing. (A. S. Romer, in Genetics, Paleontology and Evolution, 1963, p. 114)

David B. Kitts, professor of geology and the history of science at the University of Oklahoma admits the absence of the intermediate forms required by the theory of evolution:

Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them. (David B. Kitts, "Paleontology and Evolutionary Theory," Evolution, Vol. 28, September 1974, p. 467)

The picture that emerges from the fossil record is completely compatible with creation. The record reveals that living things appeared suddenly and lived for long periods of time without undergoing any change at all. These facts can clearly be seen in an evaluation of evolution's fossil impasse by the American paleontologist R. Wesson in his 1991 book Beyond Natural Selection. Stating that the gaps in the record are real, Wesson goes on to say that the absence of a record of any evolutionary branching is quite phenomenal. Species are usually static for long periods. Species and genera never show evolution into new species or genera but are replaced by another, and change is usually abrupt. (R. Wesson, Beyond Natural Selection, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991, p. 45)

Some 250,000 fossil species have been collected to date, and there is absolutely no trace of intermediate forms in any of them. Evolutionists are behaving irrationally and unscientifically by ignoring this and embarking on campaigns of missing link propaganda.

The Error of Biological Inference from Skeletal Remains

When the bodies of vertebrates are fossilized, they generally leave no remains behind apart from bones. However, bones leave traces of only a very limited part of vertebrate biology, about 1%. When evolutionists begin interpreting the fossil remains of an organism, most of the information about its biology has been lost. Evolutionists, with almost no information concerning the organism's soft tissue biology "fill" the gap in their knowledge according to the demands of the theory of evolution, which they have adopted as a dogma long beforehand.

The intermediate form claims that evolutionists produce solely by looking at bones is no more than vague conjecture. In his book Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, the molecular biologist Michael Denton makes the situation very clear:

Because soft biology of extinct groups can never be known with any certainty then obviously the status of even the most convincing intermediates is bound to be insecure. (Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Burnett Books: London, 1985, p. 180)

Even the most convincing appearing intermediate forms for evolutionists can subsequently let them down very badly. One excellent example of this is the Coelacanth phenomenon.

Sensational reports show that evolutionists have learned nothing from the Coelacanth phenomenon

As with the latest fossil Tiktaalik roseae, the Coelacanth is a fish that evolutionists once fondly imagined to be a missing link in the transition from water to land. Evolutionists examined 400-million-year-old fossil Coelacanths, which was once believed to be extinct, and drew a number of evolutionary conclusions from the remains. For example, they maintained that the bony structures in its fins were feet that helped the animal walk across the sea floor, and they also claimed that it possessed primitive lungs. The important point here is this: All these assumptions were made in the absence of any information about the Coelacanth's soft tissue biology.

The erroneous nature of producing evolutionary fantasies in the absence of any information about the animal's soft tissues emerged following an important discovery in 1938. A living Coelacanth was caught, showing that it was not, as had previously been thought, an extinct life form at all. Furthermore, many more living specimens were caught in subsequent years. Evolutionists immediately set about examining the fish's anatomy and way of moving in its natural environment, and saw that the missing link assumptions they had ascribed to it were completely incorrect. The fish, which they had assumed to live in shallow waters and to move by crawling over the seabed, actually lived at depths of around 180 meters, and they also observed that its fins never made contact with the seabed at all. The structure they imagined to be an evolving lung turned out to be a fat-filled swim bladder that had nothing to do with respiration whatsoever.

The realization that the Coelacanth, which had once seemed such a convincing-looking intermediate form for evolutionists, was just an ordinary species of fish clearly shows that the intermediate form claim being made about this latest fossil is also based entirely on uncertainties and speculation, because it, too, is based on imaginative interpretation of soft tissues from the fossilized remains of an extinct life form. In short, the ongoing propaganda through the media is based on nothing more than the exaggeration of scientifically vague information in the light of evolutionist dreams.

Evolutionists' missing link propaganda actually works against their own claims

Whenever a discovery is depicted as a missing link, the evolutionist media always give the impression that a most extraordinary finding has been made, whereas this actually conflicts with their claims regarding the truth of evolution.

Were the theory of evolution true, then the geological strata would be full of fossil intermediates, and their numbers would be far greater than that of all the species living today or that ever lived in the past. Therefore, the discovery of missing links would be such a routine matter that it would have no news value at all.

Alternatively, if, as evolutionists claim, there were as much evidence for evolution as there is for the force of gravity, then reporting on missing link discoveries would be as nonsensical as reporting on a stone thrown into the air falling back to the ground. In the same way that we would regard a news report along the lines of "We threw a stone into the air and it actually fell back to Earth" as utterly insignificant, so we would regard reports reading "Paleontologists have discovered a new missing link" as equally insignificant. In short, if evolution were a "fact," there would be no need for any missing link propaganda at all.

The evolutionary series in which Tiktaalik roseae has been placed is based solely on preconception

One can see in some newspapers that the latest fossil has been inserted as an intermediate form between Acanthostega and Eusthenopteron. By doing this, evolutionists are seeking to give the impression that the fossil record supports evolutionary transitions and that the evidence for this is mounting up with every passing day. The fact is though that these series represent no evidence that the organisms in question evolved at all. For example, laying out a row of screwdrivers in order of size does not show that they are all descended from one another.

In fact there is no known evolutionary line of descent from Eusthenopteron to Tiktaalik roseae or from Tiktaalik roseae to Acanthostega. These life forms are separated from one another by morphological gulfs based on profound differences and millions of years of time. Evolutionists reveal only their own prejudices with the series into which they place Tiktaalik roseae. Henry Gee, editor of the journal Nature and also a paleontologist, admits that "missing links" and evolutionary series are the work of preconceptions:

New fossil discoveries are fitted into this pre-existing story. We call these new discoveries "missing links", as if the chain of ancestry and descent were a real object for our contemplation, and not what it really is: a completely human invention created after the fact, shaped to accord with human prejudices. . . . Each fossil represents an isolated point, with no knowable connection to any other given fossil, and all float around in an overwhelming sea of gaps. (Henry Gee, In Search of Deep Time, Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life, p. 32)

(For information on the invalidity of evolutionist claims regarding Acanthostega and Eusthenopteron see, http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/natural_history_1_07.html)

The myth of the transition from water to land: an illusory and dogmatic claim

The theory of evolution maintains that change in living things is based on the selection of beneficial differences among those produced by random mutations. However, it is a known fact that mutations have no power to cause anything to evolve by adding new information to living things' DNA. Mutations damage the genetic information in living things' DNA, producing effects that leave them deformed or dead. That is because the DNA sequences are exceedingly sensitive, and the effect on these of any mutation based on chance can only be harmful. For example, no random changes to the letters comprising a manual for an electronic device will turn it into a novel; it will merely damage the information in that manual. In the same way, it is totally impossible for mutations in a fish's DNA to acquire it a powerful skeletal structure capable of weight-bearing, to construct temperature regulating systems or systems for the use of water (involving such a complex organ as the kidney), or to cause gills to turn into lungs.

It is clear that if a fish does not undergo rapid change in different ways, such as in terms of its respiratory system, excretory mechanism and skeletal structure, it will inevitably die. Such a chain of mutations must take place that it must immediately acquire the fish a lung, turn its fins into legs, add a kidney onto it, and provide its skin with a water retaining structure. Systems of such vital importance to the animal either have to change instantaneously, or else not at all. Such a change is impossible through evolution, which is proposed as a chance-based and aimless process. Any rationally thinking person can see that the only possible explanation is to accept that fish and terrestrial life forms were created independently.

In short, the scenario of a "transition from water to land" is at a complete dead-end. Evolutionists have no consistent fossil evidence they can point to. In her book Vertebrate History: Problems in Evolution, the evolutionist paleontologist Barbara J. Stahl writes:

. . . [N]one of the known fishes is thought to be directly ancestral to the earliest land vertebrates. Most of them lived after the first amphibians appeared, and those that came before show no evidence of developing the stout limbs and ribs that characterized the tetrapods." (Barbara J. Stahl, Vertebrate History: Problems in Evolution, Dover, 1985, p. 148)

Conclusion: Evolutionists have to realize they will never get anywhere with outmoded propaganda techniques left over from Adolf Hitler

As has been demonstrated, the "missing link" notion is an unscientific one with no factual counterpart in the fossil record and used solely because of the requirements of the theory of evolution. The way that the Darwinist media cling so strongly to the idea is a method they resort to in order to spread their own ideologies among the public. Evolutionists have no evidence with which to spread their theory, which is the greatest scientific deception in history. All they can do in the face of the collapse, one by one, of such fossils as the Coelacanth and Archaeopteryx, and equine series once defended as evidences of evolution, consists of frequently and loudly ensuring that the missing link fraud is kept on the public agenda.

All these endeavors are a propaganda technique, as described in the Nazi leader Adolf Hitler's statement that a lie would be believed by many if repeated loudly and often enough.

Evolutionists must accept the fact that paleontology demolishes their theory, and must realize that constantly repeating their missing link tales will not alter the fact in the slightest.




ABOUT THE AUTHOR, HARUN YAHYA
Born in Ankara in 1956, Adnan Oktar writes his books under the pen name of Harun Yahya. The works of Harun Yahya have been translated into 41 languages. To date, his books have been purchased by 8 million people, and an equal number have been provided free to readers by various newspapers and magazines. You can read, free of charge, all the books Adnan Oktar has written under the pen name Harun Yahya on these websites http://www.harunyahya.com

1. http://www.harunyahya.com/new_releases/news/tiktaalik_roseae.php

วันอังคารที่ 24 พฤษภาคม พ.ศ. 2554

Evolution Is God's Creative Process

Today I was watching a TV program I had recorded a while ago. It was Richard Dawkins' The Genius of Charles Darwin. In the program, Dawkins visited a school and spoke with some children about the subject of evolution. The program offered some of the familiar evidence for evolution including Darwin's wonderful specimen collection, put together during his voyage on the Beagle, his pigeon breeding experiments and a look at a whole variety of fossils.

He actually took some schoolchildren to a beach to search for fossils; and they discussed the sequence of creation as recorded in the fossil record. Surprisingly, at least to me, quite a number of the children he spoke with had rejected the idea of evolution and were convinced that their own religious views offered better explanations of how life came to be. However, although descriptions of creation within certain religious texts may appear to be diametrically opposed to natural selection, evolution actually is God's creative process.

Of course, I am aware that such a statement raises other important questions, such as the question of the existence of the Spider Wasp we discussed recently, and indeed, as Dawkins and others have pointed out, the whole subject of animal suffering and its relationship to the idea of a creator God. In this article however, we will concentrate on the question of why evolution does not contradict the Bible and how it is possible for two apparently contradictory views to be simultaneously true.

Perhaps the best place to begin this deliberation is with a little analogy, so let's talk about the subject of light. According to scholars, sometimes light behaves like a wave and other times it behaves like a particle stream. It is neither a waveform nor a particle stream, but both at the same time even though this idea appears to be invalid, counterintuitive and plain wrong. As best as we can understand the matter, the fact is that light has a dual nature.

Exactly the same is true about the Bible's description of God's creation process. Yes, it is true that the Bible employs different language to describe the creation process, but none of this description is at odds with what scientists have found from fossils. What it is necessary to understand is that different perspectives on the same subject are often valuable in allowing us to form more complete and richer overall pictures. This is an important principle.

Quantum mechanics tells us that it is impossible to know the position and momentum of an electron at the same time. So what? Well, science has actually proved that, firstly, we simply cannot know the answer to some questions, and secondly, whilst we focus on either one of these characteristics of an electron, the other must remain uncertain. This is not because of any kind of deficiency in our ability to measure; it is a statement about the nature of reality.

Similarly, when different perspectives provide separate but equally valid descriptions of reality, just as with the uncertainty principle, whilst we focus on one particular perspective, the other necessarily becomes increasingly uncertain. That is what happens when broadcasters such as Richard Dawkins insist that the Bible suggests a recent creation date for the Earth, within thousands of years which, of course, it does not. It is the exactly same issue, though from the opposite perspective, when some Christians say that God created the fossils to 'test our faith' or that they are the imprint of the animals that didn't make it after the flood; comments which have no real place in an educated society.

When we accept that evolution is God's creative process, we liberate ourselves from trying to reconcile two different perspectives on the same truth. Moreover, we can begin to focus on the purpose of the Bible, which was never meant to be read as a scientific document to be compared and contrasted with modern scientific explanations of the creative process.




Now, the book that is changing the lives of thousands of people around the world can be yours completely free. Get your Free Copy of Change Your Mind, Change Your Life...
Change Your Life

Will Edwards is Founder of White Dove Books
http://www.whitedovebooks.co.uk