“Birds Can Thank Dinosaurs for Their Gait”

Should birds thank dinosaurs? Some obviously think that they should.


Joel Kontinen

Old Darwinian views do not die easily. Recently, a British palaeontologist brought up the old belief that birds are the descendants of dinosaurs. This view is problematic in many ways. Lack of evidence is not the only criterion that speaks against it.

Anyhow, here is Mike Walley’s version of what birds can thank dinosaurs for:

“The bipedal birds with their crouching gait have the dinosaurs to thank for their posture. The birds, descendants from a group of Theropod dinosaurs, have a very different solution to standing on just two legs than our species H. sapiens.”

Science needs more than just slogans. The fossil record that Darwinists rely on actually suggests that birds co-existed with dinosaurs. Researchers assume that some of the “earliest” birds actually lived earlier than the dinosaurs they were supposed to have evolved from, so the entire dino-to-bird scenario is suspect.

Turning scales into feathers is also a problem that blind Darwinian mechanisms might not have solved. This kind of change would actually need a miracle and evolution does not have a miracle-maker.

If we examined the evidence critically, we would notice that the dino-to-bird hypothesis is not credible at all.

Source:

Walley, Mike. 2013. Birds Have the Dinosauria to Thank for Their "Crouching Gait". Ezine articles.

Nature Criticises Richard Dawkins for Spreading Misinformation

Richard Dawkins presents an overly simplified view of genetics, Nature columnist suggests. Image courtesy of Wikipedia.



Joel Kontinen

Francis Crick and James Watson discovered the structure of DNA in 1953. To celebrate the 60th anniversary of this groundbreaking find, the journal Nature presents an overview of our current understanding of human genetics.

Human biology has turned out to be much more complicated than what the popularisers of evolution have been willing to admit. Many Darwinians are reluctant to acknowledge their lack of knowledge and they keep on presenting an incorrect and grossly simplified view of genetics.

Recently, scientists have discussed and even hotly debated the role of Darwinian mechanisms, but Nature columnist Philip Ball laments that the public does not get to hear about this:

“Barely a whisper of this vibrant debate reaches the public.”

Ball mentions Richard Dawkins, who last year described the gene as

“a replicator with ‘its own unique status as a unit of Darwinian selection’. It conjures up the decades-old picture of a little, autonomous stretch of DNA intent on getting itself copied, with no hint that selection operates at all levels of the biological hierarchy.”

However, the concept of the selfish gene is a myth.

Ball suspects that the popularisers of evolution are afraid that breaking the simplistic model of genetics would increase criticism of evolution.

Nevertheless, Ball says that scientists should be willing to acknowledge that they know less than laypeople assume. Genetics is complicated. Scientists should be wiling to admit their shortcomings instead of presenting outdated views.


Source:

Ball, Philip. 2013. DNA: Celebrate the unknowns. Nature 496, 419–420. (25 April).

Inbred European Royal Family Members Illustrate Mosaic Law

Portrait of Charles II of Spain by Juan Carreno de Miranda. Image courtesy of Wikipedia.



Joel Kontinen

In past centuries, members of the European royal families often wed close relatives. “Inbred marriages, such as those between first cousins or between uncles and nieces, were the rule rather than exception,” writes Ewen Callaway in a recent Nature news article.

They often suffered from harmful mutations, or, as Callaway puts it, “inbreeding was probably to blame for the high rates of disease and early deaths in the family.”

European royalty illustrate why marriages between close relatives were forbidden in the Mosaic Law. With the passing of time similar harmful mutations increased in the same families.

While the Nature news article attempts to explain that the Spanish royals were evolving, the recent study in the journal Heredity that Callaway refers to, merely suggests that natural selection could have weeded out some of the worst consequences of inbreeding.

There is no need to appeal to evolution. Humans have built-in repair mechanisms that to some extent might counter the effects of living in a fallen world.

Charles II of Spain and other monarchs indicate that these was a good reason for forbidding marriages between near relatives.

Source:

Callaway, Ewen. 2013. Inbred royals show traces of natural selection. Nature News (19 April 2013).

Unmasking Fables, Promoting Truth, Upcoming Creation Ministries Conference in the UK

CMI’s upcoming conference seeks to unmask fables and promote truth.



Joel Kontinen


The Apostle Paul warned of the danger of believing in fables. However, that is exactly what many people, including Christians, do.

According to a very popular fable, the Bible cannot be trusted because naturalistic/materialistic science gives us all necessary answers to the big questions. To counter this not-very-intelligent claim, Creation Ministries International is hosting a one-day conference in Chessington, Surrey, near London, UK (the same venue as last year’s conference).

Creation Ministries International has held several interesting conferences in recent years. The coming weekend, the UK-Europe branch of the ministry is hosting a one-day conference entitled Unmasking Fables, Promoting Truth.

Last May, CMI’s one-day conference in Chessington, Surrey, UK, attracted 330 people . The programme was great.

This time, the speakers include Arthur Francis Green, Chairman of Foundation for Christian Education (UK), Dominic Statham, speaker and writer with CMI-UK/Europe, Dr Don Batten, senior scientist and speaker with CMI-Australia and Paul James-Griffiths of Edinburgh City Mission.

Darwinian Storytelling: Human Ancestor Came Down From the Trees, Then Went Back Again

Australopithecus sediba. Image courtesy of Brett Eloff, Wikipedia.






Joel Kontinen


Darwinian storytelling is intriguing. The recent story about Australopithecus sediba is both fascinating and absurd. New Scientist, for instant, decided to us this title for its story on this discovery, originally made in 2008: Our closest ape-like ancestor went back to the trees.

The hero of the story, published recently in the journal Science, has given rise to a lot of discussion in the Darwinian community, as they see some human-like features in Au. Sediba and then other features that tell a very different story.

According to New Scientist, Au. Sediba’s “arms and legs show it was far more comfortable swinging in the trees than most australopiths.”

The solution: this human ancestor came down from the trees and then went back again. Interesting? Yes. Credible? Definitely not, but Darwinian just so stories seldom are.


Source:

Barras, Colin. 2013. Our closest ape-like ancestor went back to the trees. New Scientist.com. (11 April).

It’s a Post-Darwinian World

Our world is becoming increasingly post-Darwinian. Image courtesy of Wikipedia




Joel Kontinen

We have all heard about postmodernism. Some would say that we are living in a post-Christian world, at least in the west. But how many have heard about post-Darwinism?

Darwinism with natural selection and mutations as the all-embracing explanations of just about everything used to have a long heyday, but judging from recent scientific discoveries (such as the role of molecular machines and the demise of junk DNA) and intellectual turning points (more scientists and philosophers are saying goodbye to Darwin), Darwinism is increasingly becoming outdated.

In other words, it’s a post-Darwinian world.

The Evolutionist’s Creed: ”Evolution is a Light Which Illuminates All Facts”

A Darwinist will assume that evolution explains this imaginary scenario. Image courtesy of José-Manuel Benito Álvarez, Wikipedia.




Joel Kontinen

Evolutionists have creeds that disclose a lot about the religious nature of Darwinism.

Theodosius Dobzhansky (1900-1975) was one of the best-known evolutionists of the 20th century. He claimed that ”Evolution is a light which illuminates all facts, a trajectory which all lines of thought must follow.”

The claim is clearly religious. Although Dobzhansky was a theistic evolutionist, he claimed roughly the same for evolution as Jesus said of himself: “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12, NIV).

Source:

Morris, Henry M. 1982. Evolution Is Religion, Not Science. Acts & Facts. 11 (5).