Darwinism Dissected -- Theories and Life

To put it simply, I love this resource. It unfolds the things in Darwins life that lead to him coming up with his theories and making the various voyages that he did. It talked about Darwins life, his Darwinistic views, philosophical issues with his theories, and 5 relevant philosophical problems due to todays science. What I liked about it was how simple it was to understand in a sense that it didnt aruge over the nitty gritty details about a random ribosome or protein. It just layed out the problems that Darwinism presents and left it to the audience to try and figure out if his theories are probable. 

I would rate this site a 10+++

Protein Folding 'Proves' Intelligent Design -- What is Proof Mean Anyways?

According to Intelligent Design enthusiasts the 'Folding Protein' is yet another piece of evidence to lay upon the stack of reasons that our world was created and designed with thought and purpose in mind ( I am really not trying to rhyme.. I promise). Because proteins are the most complex molecules in our bodies and we produce more than 10,000 different kinds of them. Basically, the protein folds into its 'native state' which is a complex three dimensional structure. Without being able to fold the entire protein wouldnt be able to function correctly. In fact, it would actually be toxic to the cell. The complexity of the shapes and sized the protein is able to fold into is incredible. Intelligent Design scientists use this new research data to help prove their ideals and worldviews. 

I thought it was interesting to see how the proteins are complex in every way and in every process. I would rate this resource a 10.

Reasons To Believe.. In God/Ribosomes..

This is yet another site that uses the intricacy of Ribosomes to act as evidence in the case for intelligent design. The resource basically states that ribosomes act centrally by catalyzing the chemical reactions that bond amino acids. This job makes ribosomes vital to the human cell and, thus, survival. 

They go on to say that the ribosome and machines like it take purpose, time, and design to make. This goes on to prove the existence of God (watch & the watchmaker). I would recommend this source.

The Protea-What?!?

What I found interesting about this resource is the angle the authors chose to take to demonstrate the intricacy of the cell and its components. The title was, "Even the cells dumpster is an intricate machine" and after reading this article I couldnt agree more.

The proteasome is a barrel-shaped molecular machine. It has a flip-top lid like those trash cans with the foot pedal, only this one is much more elaborate: it validates the trash, pulls it in with a motor, and shreds it inside. Even further, every part of the cells "trash can" is intricate. The lid structure is composed of 19 more protein parts which guard the entry gate and check the credentials of each protein that enters.

Overall, I was amazed at the intricacy of the cell and it compelled me to more fervently believe in creation/intelligent design and renews my faith in the Lord though I am in no way shape or form a scientific being whatsoever. 100% would recommend this.

Genetic Mutation-How are we all not mutated?!?

I was amazed by this article because it illustrated the commonly overlooked fact that if one thing goes wrong with our cells the manifestation can have a devastating impact on our lives and functioning. Even though the haploid human genome contains three billion nucleotides just one single pair mutation can have significant physiological effects on the human body. (One example was sickle cell anemia). Mutations are significantly different from polymorphism because mutations almost always imply something "wrong" with the body while polymorphism occurrences are normal variations.

Even more astonishing is the fact that DNA can change for a number of different reasons and only one change shows physically. That was the main thing about this article that amazed me. It seems like more people should have genetic mutations because of how simple it is for the body to make one and how complex it is for the body to get everything perfectly right.

I would suggest this article to anyone who would like to discover the complexity of the body or renew their knowledge of mutations. It is a good source.

The Cambrian Explosion - Analysis

The Cambrian explosion is something that has baffled and intrigued many scientists, Christians, and the "regular" theologians who wonder about origins every now and then. Some think that the Cambrian Explosion was the first sign of life on this planet ever while others believe this time period signifies life emerging from single cell organisms that lay waiting to transform millions of years prior. Whatever the opinion, I have found that it is difficult to decipher what the evidence tells us. For someone with a naturalistic presupposition or worldview, the evidence could, in some way, support their belief system. For a creationist and/or Christian there are elements of the Cambrian explosion that could support their belief system. It doesnt seem that the evidence is overwhelming to support either side significantly. 

This website/resource was very helpful in the areas of defining terms and laying out the information in a way that all could decipher it and come to their own conclusions. I would recommend this site for my fellow classmates who are interested in writing about the Cambrian Explosion on the wiki-page. 

The site covers: Trace Fossils, Geochemical observations, Phylogenetic techniques, scientific term explanation, precambrian life and much more. I would give this site a 10/10. 

 

Actual Site:

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Cambrian_explosion

Can Evolution Explain Morality-Analysis

Morality is something many evolutionists have struggled with because it is something that seems to separate humans from animals. Social psychologists (those who study how a person relates to a group of people, community, or organization) are intrigued by what motivates people to engage in altruistic behavior and what compels people to uphold their moral code even in the midst of opposition. 

The article outlined three main reasons (supporting evolution) why morality exists and why people engage in altruism:

  1. "Do unto others" as you would like them to do to you, as a means to getting them to treat you that way--in other words, hoping that they will reciprocate.
  2. Treat people who are special to you--relatives, friends, members of the same group or nation--as you would like to be treated, but not merely as a means to getting them to treat you that way.
  3. Treat every human being (and perhaps other animals too) as you would like to be treated, even when they are not likely to reciprocate, even if they are not likely to retaliate if you treat them badly. (This is sometimes called "universalistic" morality, in contrast with "tribal" morality.)

Darwin and Darwinian theory followers tend to believe in concept number two which is called "the kinship theory" in social psychology terms. I find it interesting that even when humans do something out of pure selflessness those actions can be twisted into a support for Darwinism. Theories supporting evolution will always twist human like qualities into animal like qualities. I would recommend this article. I believe it gives insight into what Darwin Theory says about morality and altruism and can be a good support for the argument against his theories.

Here's the actual site:

http://www.humanities.mq.edu.au/Ockham/y64l052.html

Human Evolution: Did we come from Monkeys? Video Response

First of all, I love youtube. Sometimes it just helps me focus a little better when reading gets tiresome. Second of all, this site is something YOU DON'T want to use to support any topic on the wikipedia page. The author/maker of this video is guilty of various logical fallacies and asserts presuppositions that sway the information and cannot be trusted as unbiased. 

I love the phrase, "People deny their monkey-hood." Wow. I didn't agree with more than half of what he said. He built his argument based on a belief that we DID in fact come from apes and from there all the information he bent to fit his idea of origins. His main arguments came from DNA comparison, similar body types, and fossil heritage. He was also clear to define the terms monkeys vs. apes and used various pieces of media to support his (and other scientists) theories alike.

The only facet in which I would recommend this site is to be amused at the amount of crazy ridiculousness we as Christians/Creationists are up against. It is insightful to get a glimpse of what an educated evolutionist believes. DO NOT use this site for any information that could be considered true.. This is just educational for insight into the convoluted lens called: Evolution theory.

Polymorphism: What is it? What does it mean?

I really liked this paragraph found within my post:

"A polymorphism that persists over many generations is usually maintained because no one form possesses an overall advantage or disadvantage over the others in terms of natural selection. Some polymorphisms have no visible manifestations and require biochemical techniques to identify the differences that occur between the chromosomes, proteins, or DNA of different forms. The castes that occur in social insects are a special form of polymorphism that is attributable to differences in nutrition rather than to genetic variations."

I found that this site was helpful in supporting a creationist perspective. It also highlights the differences between micro and macro-evolution (specifically when it talks about the social insects). I have learned over the years of speaking with various people about evolution that the definition of terms is vital to understand and embrace different perspectives on origin of life. When analyzing this site, I would trust the information and use it to further a point being made or build on a theory. It seems like a good resource for a compilation of knowledge. Overall, I would suggest it for use.

 

The actual site: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/468786/polymorphism