Omul cavernelor, Emil Silvestru, in Romania

În perioada 13-22 mai 2010, dr. Emil Silvestru se va afla într-un turneu în Romania prin care va promova cea mai recentă super-producţie a Creation Ministries International, Darwin: The Voyage that Shook the World (Călătoria care a zguduit lumea). Programul său va include oraşele: Bucureşti (13-14 mai), Sibiu (17 mai), Timişoara (19 mai)  şi Cluj-Napoca (22 mai). [sursa]

Timothy Standish live

Geneticianul Timothy Standish va susţine 4 seminarii la Capela Institutului Teologic Adventist din Cernica. Tematicile abordate vor fi după cum urmează:

Design-ul inteligent: Ce este și la ce ne folosește? (joi, 19 noiembrie 2009, ora 19)
Ușa de la capătul Universului (vineri, 20 noiembrie 2009, ora 19)
De ce Dumnezeu este Dumnezeu? (sâmbătă, 21 noiembrie 2009, ora 11)
De ce au importanță ideile? (sâmbătă, 21 noiembrie 2009, ora 16)

Acestea se pot urmări live şi pe internet pe site-ul eltis. Mai multe detalii despre seminar aici. Formatul va fi oarecum interactiv: se pot pune întrebări online.

Sursa: eltis.ro

Dinosaurs and creation

I have just read Don DeYoung’s Dinosaurs and Creation: Question and Answers and I think there are some crucial questions he did not fully addressed. Also, I have learned not to make speculative statements.

Here are some question that must receive serious answers on topics treated in this book (first the affirmation from the book then my question/comment):

– radioactive decay may have been accelerated in the past (which reduces the rocks true age). But are there any proofs that that is the case or is just a untested presupposition to fit the framework?
– apparent age may have occured at creation, curse, or flood. But is there any proof for that? And what does such a thing tell us about God? Could we be allowed to say that that is deceiving?
– is the migration of parent/daughter atom from the rock a well established fact? Examples.
– rock is not a closed system. Agree.

– the separation of continents probably happened during the year of Flood. Is there any theoretical proof? Is it enough just to throw around presuppositions? For ex.: the animation presented by Emil Silvestru – CMI Canada.
– no mountains, no deserts, no ice caps, no season change before the Flood. How could one know that? What empirical proof is there? Were the continental landforms different?
– what was the pre sun light source?
– do Genesis 1 and 2 contradict or complement each other?

– the “vapor canopy” theory must be discarded!
– the canopy doubled the air pressure to twice the value today
– Quetsalquatlus is evidence for the canopy. How?

– good 4 doubts on the Chicxulub event
– large scale erosion needs little time and a lot of water
– the sediments were laid down during the Flood
– sedimentary rock formation was controlled by tidal waves
– distinct fossil layers show ecological sorting based on animal location(now that s a scientific sentence!)
– 4 points against dino-bird evolution: the transmutation of scales to feathers, the finger digit difference, the lung structure, the eggs
– the diet needs of dinosaurs reclaims rich plants
– living fossils are evidence of Creation

– cryptozoology cannot be a challenge to evolution

– the Creation week was “obviously a time of supernatural events completely beyond our understanding”. This kind of (unproven) affirmations do great harm to the Bible because invokes a god-of-the-gaps, contradicts Genesis, contradicts the character of God, contradicts science.

– dino diet: just how did animals received supernatural adjustment of teeth structure and internal metabolism?
– fossils are testimony of supernatural creation. How?
– tar pits are post flood formations. Really? How did Noah manage to make a hydrophobe ark then?

– each dinosaur was superbly engineered for a particular lifestyle.  I would add: the power of adaptation, written in the genome and assuring its plasticity, put in the discussion enriches the study.

Rating: 6/10

Photo by LiftingShadows (C).

Evolutia, adevar sau minciuna?

Ken Ham a scris aceasta cartea intr-o perioada foarte buna pentru propagarea creationismului stiintific, in anul 1987.  In viziunea lui Ken Ham societatea in care traieste renunta la valorile crestine, ba chiar devine anti-crestina. Pacatul homosexualitatii, crimele avorturilor, renuntarea la institutia casatoriei, cresterea imoralitatii prin propagarea pornografiei si prin vestimentatia provocatoare sunt argumente clare pentru acest lucru. Care este insa cauza acestei degradari a societatii? Ken Ham a identificat aceasta cauza ca fiind renuntarea (si intoleranta) la absoluturile crestinismului. Daca Biblia nu mai este privita ca fiind Cuvantul inspirat al Celui care a creat universul si omul atunci inseamna ca omul poate decide ce e bine si ce e rau (religia umanista). Daca Biblia nu mai este Cuvantul lui Dumnezeu (si s-ar putea foarte bine ca nici Dumnezeu sa nu existe) atunci ceea ce scrie Geneza sunt doar legende pe care nu trebuie sa le mai credem. Autorul sustine ca evolutia este o religie ai carei aderenti cred ca timpul, sansa si lupta pentru existenta sunt cele raspunzatoare pentru aparitia vietii si nu Dumnezeu. [Trebuie precizat aici ca aparitia propriu-zisa a vietii este o necunoscuta in lumea stiitifica de azi. Exista doar speculatii, nu exista dovezi pentru o origine natural-spontana a vietii. Evolutia insa este cea razpunzatoare pentru dezvoltarea si diversificarea vietii].

Punctul de vedere creationist al lui Ken Ham este ca istoria universului si a pamantului poate fi privita din perspectiva a trei idei – creatia perfecta, corupta de pacatul omului si restaurata de Isus Cristos. Intelegerea Genezei este una literala: Dumnezeu a creat cerurile si pamantul si tot ceea ce exista pe el in sase zile de 24 de ore; le-a creat foarte bune, iar moartea si suferinta nu au existat. Cadearea omului in pacat au adus moartea iar accidentele de tipul mutatiilor si lupta pentru supravietuire a celui mai apt nu sunt decat decadere si coruptie. Astfel pamantul a fost distrus prin Potop, doar Noe si ceea ce era in arca scapand cu viata. Fosilele sunt definite de autor ca fiind miliarde de lucruri moarte ingropate in straturi de roca depuse de ape peste tot pamantul. Cristos prin Invierea Sa a biruit moartea si va face un cer nou si un pamant nou.

Ken Ham spune ca ceea ce crezi despre originea ta genereaza perspetiva ta asupra lumii. Daca nu exista un Creator al tau ci esti rezultatul unui proces orb care implica doar forte materiale atunci poti sa traiesti cum vrei, poti sa faci ceea ce vrei si nu vei fi responsabil in fata nimanui. Ken Ham spune ca cea mai atacata carte a Bibliei este Geneza, tocmai pentru ca ea constituie fundatia intregii Scripturii si pe ea stau cladite doctrinele crestine. Autorul prezinta cateva exemple extreme, care chiar daca nu sunt cauzate direct de catre viziunea evolutionista asupra lumii, isi gasesc o buna justificare prin prisma acesteia. Aceste rele sunt: nazismul, rasismul, crimele avorturilor, discriminarea femeilor, imoralitatea in afaceri. Ham pledeaza ca razboiul dintre crestinism si umanism poate fi castigat daca se castiga razboiul de la nivelul temeliilor si anume razboiul impotriva evolutionismului. Metoda este evanghelizarea creationista sau „creation science evangelism”. Metoda de predare recomandata este cea presupozitionalista (aratarea supozitiilor pe care oamenii de stiinta le au in interpretarea dovezilor) in opozitie de cea evidentialista (interpretarea dovezilor in functie de filosofia proponentilor). El vrea sa traga un semnal de alarma in lumea crestina si sustine ca odata tolerata eroarea evolutiei aceasta va declansa un proces de obisnuinta, de cooperare, contaminare si in final de capitulare in fata erorii.

Ham isi incheie pledoaria cu 2 Petru 3: 3-7 „ Înainte de toate, trebuie să ştiţi că în zilele de pe urmă vor veni batjocoritori plini de batjocură, care vor umbla după poftele lor şi vor zice: „Unde este promisiunea venirii Lui? Căci de când au adormit strămoşii noştri, toate rămân aşa cum au fost de la începutul creaţiei!” Ei înadins ignoră faptul că prin Cuvântul lui Dumnezeu au existat ceruri cu mult timp în urmă, precum şi un pământ scos din apă şi întreţinut prin apă şi că lumea de atunci a fost distrusă tot prin ele, când a fost inundată de apă. Însă cerurile şi pământul de acum sunt păstrate pentru foc prin acelaşi Cuvânt, fiind ţinute până în ziua judecăţii şi a distrugerii oamenilor neevlavioşi.”

Cartea mai contine si 20 de motive din cauza carora, in opinia autorului, Geneza si teoria evolutiei nu sunt compatibile precum si un scurt eseu aupra „zilei” din Istoria facerii.

Rating: 8/10

*Desi exista idei/ abordari de care nu sunt convins, acord acest rating datorita entuziasmului si fortei mesajului lui Ken Ham.

New hadrosaur species discovered!

velafrons_illustration.jpgvelafrons-coahuilensis.jpg

A new hadrosaur species was discovered in Mexico City. The scientist named the new creature Velafrons coahuilensis. Its name means “forehead with sails” due to its obvious skull features (vela=sails, frons=forhead).

The sedimentary layers in which the remains of the animal were buried were thick and their characteristics indicate something of the enormous magnitude of watery catastrophe (flood geology).

Item#6 Garnet-mica-schist/ Micasisturi cu granat

garnets.jpg

Şisturile sunt roci metamorfice larg răspândite existând multe varietăţi în funcţie de compoziţia mineralogică. Micaşistul prezentat aici este un şist bogat în muscovit, biotit şi clorit. Pe suprafaţa eşantionului – precum şi alăturat – se pot observa cristale de granat (un mineral din grupa silicaţilor – almandin în cazul de faţă), rezultat în urma proceselor de dezagregare şi alterare la care a fost supus micaşistul. Almandinul este un silicat de fier şi aluminiu Fe3Al2(SiO4)3 de culoare brună, luciu sticlos, clivaj absent şi spărtură neregulată.

Eşantioanele au fost colectate la sfârşitul lui 2002, pe Valea Arieşului la Sălciua, formaţiunele metamorfice aparţinând grupului Baia de Arieş.

micasist1.jpg micasist-cu-granati.jpg almandin.jpg

 

Schist are widely spread metamorphic rocks. In the image above there is a mica-schist, due to it`s composition in muscovite, biotite and chlorite. In fact, the sample is a garnet-mica-schist; garnets (almandine) are present due to the altering processes that the rock has suffered. Almandine is a iron-aluminium silicate, brown color, greasy to vitreous luster, no cleavage and chonchoidal fracture. These samples were collected in 2002, on Arieş Valley, Sălciua – ROMANIA.

 

So, this week`s item turned out to be a very complex one!

granat.jpg

 

The photos can be used if source is acknowledged.

Item#5 Citrine/ Citrin

citrin.jpg

Citrinul este o varietate de cuart. Numele provine din limba latina (citrus=lamaie) si se refera la culoarea data de impuritatile de fier, culoarea care poate varia de la galben la brun. Este destul de rar in stare naturala (gema prezentata aici). In medialion, o mostra de citrin obtinuta pe cale artificiala prin incalzirea ametistului.

citrin-artificial.jpg

Citrine is a quartz variety. The first sample is natural (rarely found in nature), the second one is an artificial item (heated amethyst).

The photos can be used if source is acknowledged.

Comment on BBC`s “War on science”

Well, well, well… BBC is concerned about the ID movement. They see it as a threat to science. So they did this “A war on science” documentary. And it seems that they take Intelligent Design as a “a new explanation”, although in the end they conclude that is just another form of creationism. It is the same old story, “a battle between faith and knowledge”, some kind of strange panic feeling being projected (when they state “the beginning of a dark age in science”). I am not that concerned. Are they worried? The video is worth watching, I would say… in the end the creationist do get some kind of publicity. Some kind of irony against the scientist can be felt and the editing of the video is clearly meant to influence the viewer`s sub-consciousness (like for example putting a very happy tune when stating that the creationism was finally banned from the curricula).
Creationist scientist who appear on this video: Phillip Johnson, Stephen Meyer, Michael Behe, William Dembsky. As you see, la crème de la crème… They talk about two important issues – the principle of irreducible complexity (by which he means that a system composed form various interacting and interdependent smaller parts could have not ‘evolved’, so that it would not have been able to develop while already functioning) and mathematical probability.
The evolutionist response is given by Kenneth Miller (who gives a reasonable answer in my opinion on the flagellum issue, but messing up with the message to the American people), Richard Dawkins (who is 99% percent “wright”) and of course all time superstar David Attenborough (I have to admit that he has a good point at the very end of the video, when stating “if you find something that you don`t understand, you can say that it was created by a divine spirit, …but answers nothing really. It simply says we don`t know”).
Another annoying thing was the so called set up for Cardinal Christoph Schonborn pro-Intelligent Design speech. The cardinal`s position is well known. So I consider that that was pretty low on BBC`s account. And the explanation of the Vatican`s Astronomy Observatory`s employee was hilarious: “If the pope [John Paul II] were living, he never gotten away with it”.

Some of the ideas (by the narrator) that lack irrefutable scientific support can be read below (please watch video for context):

“Natural selection explained how life evolved form the first simple organisms”.

[Natural selection is a process by which some of the favorable traits (which assure a greater adaptability to the changing conditions of the environment) in the parents are passed to the next generation and become more frequent in the phenotype of that particular organism. The better adapted organisms are more likely to survive in the environment and their population replaces the old one. In the end, the species can become very specialized, and it`s power to adapt if new environmental condition emerge drops. So it is very like too become extinct. Or to evolve, which has not been observed up to now, nor can be easily predicted having regard of the genotype constraints. Of course, mutations could interfere…. bla bla]

“The survival of the fittest allowed the species to change and developed until new species arrived, over billions of years, the diversity on earth”.
[That is quite a shortcut over them billions of year] 🙂
“They doubt that natural selection can produce the complexity of life”

[That maybe a careless statement. What produces in fact the complexity of life? Natural selection is a fact, we see it at work day by day. But what makes life be so complex? That`s a hard one for me… ]

Watch the video here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6227704432876595996

Dinozaurii Argentinei la Antipa!

Pana in luna iunie a anului 2008 la Muzeul Antipa are loc expozitia DINOZAURII din ARGENTINA – URIASII PATAGONIEI.

Daca voi ajunge prin Bucuresti si voi avea timp sigur voi face o vizita pentru a vedea scheletele acestor reptile magnifice.

Giganotosaurus carolini                Carnotaurus sastrei

gigano.jpgcarnotaurus.jpg

Tuarangisaurus cabazai

tuarangi.jpg

Alte detalii la http://www.antipa.ro/pexpozitii.php