Points of Origins

Newer Earth-Like Planets? What's the deal?

2012-01-26T08:23:00.000-06:00

Yes, it's true. I get so tired of the evo-atheist strivings to prove there's a universe without God. Don't make any mistake about it. That's what they're up to ... constantly ... even if they know it or not! DrJ

Vid-short from Answers in Genesis

2012-01-05T06:01:00.001-06:00

http://medias.answersingenesis.org/video/90-2-071-cto-evolution-refuted.mov?e=1326258000&h=6a7d84af812454c18821f178223e9ce9

Here's a cool little video on the difference between micro-evolution versus macro-evolution, from the Answers in Genesis folks! Enjoy it (it's short). DrJ

"No Intellligent Life Down Here?"

2011-12-12T12:00:00.007-06:00

Hey Dr. J! All the rave on the online news forums are about a major milestone in discovering earth's 'twin' as in a planet which supports life. Do you think there's any plausibility of actually finding it? Or is it just to be regarded as the evo's usual garbage? James

Scores of "pictures" of extrasolar Earth-like planets ... have been published in many sources, but none of them is anything more than an "artist conception" of the planet in question!

The latest "class M planet" touted up before this month, was the one just a few months ago in September in the New York Times -- also an artist conception. You should click on the link at the end of this post to see the video and read the report that I made on the discovery ... at that time.

This, folks -- is the only existing photograph of any planet outside our solar system, until now. As you can see, such images do not show anywhere --near-- the "detail" of the artist conceptions. It seems that "science" has moved out of the facts/evidence business and is now fully-vested in the -- Urban Myth business!! These evo-important myths ... have been sustained by huge media-help for the past 50 yrs ... and it's getting exponentially worse all the time!

Here's a diagram created from the Infra-Red images of the three planets and their star, lest you missed them in the frame above. (take at the Keck Observatory)

Here is a computer color-enhanced image of the same photograph. It doesn't help much, either. Evo's are only too happy to have us envisioning vast numbers of intelligent civilizations all across the galaxy ... all in the name of claiming -- "See! Evolution --is-- true! Life is -- everywhere!"
When they haven't in reality found it -- ANYwhere (but here, of course)! Sigh.

Check out DrJ's report on the "September 2011 finding" of an "Earth-like planet" for further reference!
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=214238551970846

"killer" Bible-science proofs -- reader quest

2011-11-29T10:50:00.000-06:00

POINTS OF ORIGINS with Dr. Jackson Creation Truth Foundation www.CreationTruth.com

Dr. J, thank you for your last response. I have a favor to ask: Would you be willing to cite some killer, yes I say killer, examples from the Bible that point to why science and scripture go hand in hand? And what are your thoughts on irreducible complexity?

Chris in Ft Wayne IN

Chris bro, I hope this portion of one of my PPT presentations below works and helps you much. And ... IC is real, as is ID ... but neither of them can "finish the job" as can Biblical Young-Earth Creation science can -- and the evo's have mounted a great effort to find exceptions to this "incomplete" IC rule (as I have intimated). God bless you little brother, DrJ

Thanks are due to my good friend John Heffner, who contributed most of these slides to me!

Student reports from Univ of MD last nite !!

2011-11-15T11:28:00.002-06:00

Dear Readers, here're a few comments from fellow-believers after last night's "bar-room brawl" of 200 plus. Q&A was rudely dominated by the (invited) members of the Freethought Society (alias, "we hate Christians" club -- sheesh, were they mean!). It might give you an idea of how these things go out on the battlefield in Jedi-Sith warfare. Love in the Savior, Dr Jackson

Hello Dr. Jackson! I wanted to give you a huge thank you for coming to the University of Maryland and discussing the evidence for Creationism. As a Catholic and an aspiring scientist, I love hearing talks such as these. Truth be told, I feel I owe you an apology on behalf of all the students that harassed you and were simply rude to you. I found the Q & A to be silly at times - people just spewed their beliefs at you, but nobody seemed to contest any of the 'big' things you talk about (at least the things I considered 'big'). I thought many of your examples were excellent, and was saddened to see other scientists simply refuse to extend their imagination and curiosity to the possibility of a God. Isn't that what science is about - curiosity and learning? I don't like that God and science appear to have split and become opposite each other to many in the scientific community. Anywho, thank you wholeheartedly for the talk - I really enjoyed the time I spent listening to you. Have a wonderful week! Julia, University of Maryland, Neurobiology & Physiology

Dear Dr. Jackson, I want to begin applauding your presentation at UMD. The atmosphere obviously became heated with Darwinist students and that one professor on the side. I was unable to express any appreciation for your presentation nor get your e-mail from you personally (I had to ask the microphone lady). You said you were a Bible literal and young Earth creationist. You briefly tried to explain how you fit your beliefs with current data about the Earth's history until there were more interruptions. How do you deal with the stress of these events? Obviously, the frustration was visible, but I think you maintained composure and calmness amidst some very irritated audience members. This is probably my most important question! I hope you are able to find time to answer my questions. Thank you, Nicolas, Univ of Maryland

Audio Links for DrJ in Illinois last Sunday!

2011-11-05T12:53:00.000-05:00

POINTS OF ORIGINS with Dr. Jackson Creation Truth Foundation www.CreationTruth.com

"QC Creation Science Association Part 1" Dr. Charles Jackson
"QC Creation Science Association Part 1" Dr. Charles Jackson
just go to the below web address, and look for the two messages you see above

http://www.fbcsilvis.com/audio.html?a_list=a_list3

These two messages were given by DrJ at 1st Bapt of Silvis on the last trip to Iowa-IL.
They are each less than an hour, if you would like to hear DrJ's voice teaching ... ha
God bless, Doc Jay

Bible / Homosexuality question from WV

2011-08-15T17:52:00.000-05:00

POINTS OF ORIGINSwith Dr. Jackson Creation Truth Foundation www.CreationTruth.com

Dr. Jackson, I've been talking with a friend on the subject of the legitimacy of the bible ... he was having trouble with believing that homosexuality was a sin ... that I couldn't use the bible for an argument because ... with it being so old, it could have been messed with. I said there is tons of proof that the bible is the same as it was when it was first wrote. He was agreeing with me for a while but then he sent me this link. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44117239/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/?gt1=43001
I know God's word is true and I've watched your videos and even seen you speak at church camp on creation, so usually I have a pretty good argument against this kinda stuff. But I have no idea how true this story is and how to refute it. How can I argue against this news article? And what proof is there in the science world that you are not born as a homosexual. Thanks so much Dr. J! God bless, Bobby in WV

Bobby, this kinda thing gives me the creeps. Y'know why? 'Cuz the people who claim we don't know what we're talkin' about when we use the Bible as an authority -- they don't know any better! And yes, of course, DrJ has proof, as always. All ya gotta do is ... read the article more carefully. Let's take a look. The title is "Scholars seek to correct 'mistakes' in Bible" Look at this -- even they put the word "mistakes" in quotes! That oughta tell ya somethin' -- even before you start reading this Bible-bashing article! So what's their reasoning?
"The scholars note where the text we have now differs from older versions."
Oh okay, so they're assuming that the older versions are the better versions, are they? Let's keep reading.

"The Book of Jeremiah is now one-seventh longer than the one that appears in some of the 2,000-year-old manuscripts known as the Dead Sea Scrolls."

The average person might now think, "well gee, they look like they're tryin' ta be fair about this whole thing, man. Maybe the Bible --has-- been added to over the centuries." But then -- just look -- at what these so-called genius "scholars" do next! Let's keep reading.

... the 1,100-year-old Aleppo Codex, considered the oldest and most accurate version of the complete biblical text in Hebrew. The Bible Project's version of the core text — the one to which the others are compared — is based on this manuscript.
Something is "considered" (by who?!) to be the "most accurate version" (how do they know??) and so then they base their whole project on this Aleppo text bein' true! -- why?! 'Cuz they like it! And look -- check it out! -- they even admit -- the Dead Sea Scrolls are twice as old -- as their Aleppo text. So why don't they base their whole project on the Dead Sea Scrolls -- if older is better?! Huh?!
Bobby, it's because ... all they wanna do is sound like smarties over and above all the rest of us. They have --just-- contradicted themselves. They don't know if the Bible is wrong, or if we're using the "wrong" version of it! They have -- no way -- of knowing this. All that they have is a way of -- guessing this! 'Sounds to me like they're really no smarter than you or me on this one, young brother! And ... the Bible says, "in the last days there shall come scoffers." (2 Peter 3:3) Hey -- these guys are just living proof that the Bible prophecies -- are true! They -- are the scoffers!

And as for the question of homosexuals "being born that way" ... there have been inconclusive studies on the hypothalamus gland and the Y chromosome which proved nothing. But, the Bible does say that we are indeed all born into sin. It's just how that sin ends up expressing itself that's different from person to person. We're all born wanting to kill anyone who disagrees with us and ... well ... we all have to fight off that evil temptation, too. Homosexuality is no different. It's just another sinful imagination in the heart of sinful man. And Jesus can deliver men and women from that evil temptation too! Amen. Jesus died so that we "might have life and might have it more abundantly" (John 10:10) -- not so that we could argue about what our anatomy clearly says about how our body parts are supposed to be used. Think about it. That's actually an easy one to figure out! In the way the truth and the life, DrJ

"Archie" flying low today

2011-08-01T10:46:00.000-05:00

I need to thank fellow Creationist David Buckna for alerting me to this development, so that I could comment on it today. Here is the source in World News Daily -- Saturday July 30, 2011
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=327285

Archaeopteryx is touted in all science books as "the missing link."

But even many evolutionists believe that this is not so.

What's worse is how their fossil-age story does not agree with their evo-age story for the evolution of birds from dinosaurs ... and you can see this problem in the textbooks.

National Geographic tries a poor effort at justifying this heinous travesty of justice in science. Sigh.
The original piece is from July 1998, and the upper comment is from just last year!

Keep an eagle-eye on these dino-bird evo's. Their theories are truly only ... for the birds. Keep thinking. DrJ

Human Gills & Whale legs?! -- a reader question

2011-03-09T11:08:00.007-06:00

DrJ. Currently in Zoology class we are talking about evolution. Why do human embryos have gill slits? He [professor] tried to use as evidence we came from fish, which is obviously not true. Also he pointed out that whales have a femur and pelvis that are pointless to them and that they only have it because their "common ancestor" (whoever that is) had this. Why do they have these? Do they have a function? Thanks Dr. J for all that you do and for being a strong leader for Christianity.

Your Bro in Christ, Ryan

Even famous evolutionists realize that it is a matter of history, that the "gill slit" evidence ... was all a fake.
Stephen J. Gould says so here on the left in the Natural History journal. The high school biology book above also admits Haeckel faked his drawing ... but says that it doesn't matter -- it still shows evolution!?

Here's what real embryos look like under a microscope, compared to Haeckel's misleading drawings.

Here's what U-Cal Berkeley has to say about the matter on their "one-stop" evo-site. They say ... we have gill slits ... when no embyologist in the world would agree with them on that point!

The only resemblances that we have to fish ... is that we are both vertebrates.

Yes, whales do have these bones, but they are very far from being without function! ... just like our coccyx (tailbone), appendix, wisdom teeth, and tonsils ... and "junk" DNA!

Origin of Life -- by Shelby Smith

2011-03-03T12:13:00.001-06:00

[Shelby Smith is a co-worker of mine at Creation Truth Foundation. He recently completed the Masters degree in Science Education. He specializes in field outings and other group science activities with home-school/Christian-school students. He is a scholar and Bible-believer. You may visit his blog at www.CreationTruth.com under "Blogs" under "Shelby's Blog."]

Origin of Life

The faith based question, "When did life begin" is still trying to be solved by the evolutionary community to no avail. Darwin, himself, began with the idea that it all started in some warm little pond. Günter Wächtershäuser decided it must have arose in the deep see hydrothermal vents. Francis Crick and Leslie Orgel were privy to believing the idea of directed panspermia or that it was seeded here by aliens. Michael Ruse said in the "Expelled" movie life arose on the backs of crystals. Many said no oxygen could be present for life to exist, but the evolutionary interpretation of the data has shown that it was already present when life arose.

The latest idea came from Phillip Holliger and a team in a laboratory in Cambridge late last year. They say that heat may not be the solution to the problem and that instead of being warm primordial soup it was more like a gazpacho (i.e. cold soup). This is all because they placed an RNA molecule 190 amino acids long in a test tube and stuck it in the refrigerator for a while. The team showed the RNA could produce a chain of amino acids like the first life would be expected to do. However, this chain was only 32 amino acids long and could not even replicate itself given substantial time. Although it made much more progress in cold conditions this still does not explain how the first RNA got there to begin with! We see this experiment began with an intelligent source placing the components to make life in the test tube and even though the research team does not deny the problems they still believe that life arose from nothing. Therefore, with no data to support these claims we have, once again, a faith based idea! The soup boils down to believing in a Creator who specially created everything or it arising by chance from nothing.

Rachel Ehrenberg (Oct. 23, 2010). “Primordial soup served up cold: icy baths may have nurtured earliest replicating molecules.” Science News, vol. 178 #9 p. 11.

Young-Earth / Old-Earth ... a question

2011-02-22T08:10:00.000-06:00

Dr. Jackson,

I was presenting the idea of bringing you to El Paso, TX and in the process, I got hit with several 'Old Earth' theories and comments. Due to time, I couldn't address them then and there, but it made me realize something. I've noticed that just about every argument I've heard defending 'Old Earth' has its roots in 'interpretation' and 'it could have happened that way'. If there are others that don't have this at their core, I haven't heard them. However, the arguments for 'Young Earth' have mostly had a root of 'Let's seek out the truth' and 'How do true science and the Bible line up?' I do know that no model we can ever present is perfect and illustrate every aspect of what really happened, but Young Earth as you have preached, is perhaps the only one that has a foundation of seeking the truth. Any thoughts?

Charlie Wolcott

Published author of "Battle Cry- Adventures in the Kingdom of Heaven"

Oh my Charlie, well, I couldn't have said it better myself.
All old-earth models tend heavily toward compromise ... for the sake of "friendship with the world" which we know is "enmity with God." Sorry ... it just looks like that and ... I gotta call'em like I see'm. They are wanting "the praise of men" rather than the approval of God.
Anyway ... the biggest problem is ... death before sin.
Not only are all OEC models based on "it might have been" junk ... but they all also contain ... death before sin. That is totally against what the Bible teaches, and so must be rejected -- that is -- if ya wanna go with the Bible.
Thanks for your question/inquiry/comment Charlie.
And get with Bob Dugas at Bob@CreationTruth.com or call 1-888-57-TRUTH
to reserve me to come to UTEP again! God bless, DrJ

US Teachers Reject Evolution !!

2011-02-08T10:12:00.000-06:00

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/science/08creationism.html
The New York Times "Science" section yesterday carried the story, "On Evolution, Biology Teachers Stray From the Lesson Plan." The article goes on to describe the research results outta Penn State found in the 1/28/11 issue of the prestigious journal Science, saying only 28% of teachers actually teach evolution -- but that 13% actually teach creation in their classes! Yeah, for our side!
The article lies (or believes a lie) when it says that teaching creation science has been declared "unconstitutional" -- that's just an urban myth -- as anyone can check on! And if it was illegal, wouldn't 13% of all teachers be put in prison? They said 25% of all sci teachers in Michigan teach creation! ( I just --knew-- Michigan was cool ! ) So, it's not just in the southern "Bible Belt" regions.
Well, what do the evo-Sith Lords of evolution have to say about the survey results??
Dr. Moore is doubtful that more education is the answer. “These courses aren’t reaching the creationists,” he said. “They already know what evolution is. They were biology majors, or former biology students. They just reject what we told them." Well gee, I wonder why !!

“With 15 to 20 percent of biology teachers teaching creationism,” he continued, “this is the biggest failure in science education. There’s no other field where teachers reject the foundations of their science like they do in biology.” Well gee, again -- guess why !! You keep thinking. DrJ

Kangaroos & the Ark

2011-02-04T16:17:00.001-06:00

[DrJ] You met me when you came to east Texas and spoke for Real Talk at the colleges. I have a question you could maybe help me with. After Noah's flood, the ark landed on the mountains of Ararat in Turkey. How did animals get to places like Australia? or Japan? And why are there only certain species on each continent. Also, Evolutionists believe in "Pangea", I think its very far fetched but is there evidence for plate shifting during the flood? Thanks so much for your time, God bless you.

During the height of the Ice Age, sea levels dropped down far enough that this -- was the map of the Bering Sea area which now separates Russia from Alaska with open ocean waters -- today.

During the Ice Age, that area which is now shallow ocean, was all above-water, for at least a few centuries ... more than enough time for humans and animals of various kinds to make the trip from Europe/Asia to North/South America.

The same would also be true of the now shallow seas that separate the Indonesian Islands and Australia and New Zealand ... from the greater Asian continent.

As for Pangaea -- yes -- most creation scientists believe that, like the Ice Age, we and the evolutionists disagree not on "whether" but on "when" and "how fast" that both continental drift and the Ice Age ... happened.

The most popular Creation Model says that Rhodinia did re-configure into the shape of Pangaea, during the Flood and that this all happened totally underwater in a time span of only 5 months. In the last phase of continental movement --catastrophic during the Flood-- the continents were moved into their current resting places, and have pretty much been unmoved ever since.

Global Warming?

2011-02-01T15:07:00.000-06:00

hello, [My OSU] professor reviewed a chart showing the steady increase in measured levels of carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere. It is obvious that this course is shaping up to be an indoctrination in global warming instead of facts about weather. How should we as Christians view global warming? Any info and insight you could provide would be much appreciated. I want to stand for truth.
Jonathan in OK

Green Gas makes Stars -- Not !

2011-01-17T14:47:00.001-06:00

The recent discovery of a green cloud of gas near our Milky Way galaxy, has evo's a-twitter telling each other their fantasy-tales about stellar evolution theory -- or how stars form all by themselves without God.

This is as messy, scientifically, as their stories of how life got started all by itself without God ... but just as absolutely essential to the doctrines of their atheistic faith!

Gas clouds can't contract down into stars, because contracting clouds heat up and then just expand back out again, totally reversing the process that would become necessary for stars to "make themselves" by contraction due to gravity.

These big gas clouds in space (or "nebulae" as they are called) are talked about by evo's as "stellar nurseries" or "places where baby stars are born" -- not in this lifetime they're not!! This is totally make-believe.

At the CTF blogsite at www.CreationTruth.com (see "Blogs" and then "Dr. Jackson's Blog") I go into this simple fact of high-school chemistry.

Here, I go into how the "star birth" phenomenon has --never-- been observed to actually happen (even though we see stars dying off all the time ... we call them supernova stars).

At www.TheJediCreationist.blogspot.com I go into the graviton-wave excuse that the evo's give as to "how" nebulae can overcome the simple gas laws, to go on to the glorious process of "stellar evolution." Of course, that evo-thot is bogus, too! DrJ

Inductive versus Deductive reasoning : an Evolutionary flaw

2011-01-05T09:38:00.001-06:00

I fully wish to give credit for the seminal thinking on this topic to two of my favorite creationists. One is my elder brother Dr. Gary Parker, who said to me at a joint gig in FL once ... "Evolution hides in the grey areas, in the uncertainties." I also wish to credit, more recently, young creationist Shawn Karon who pointed out to me ... that all evo-"evidences" and evo-"proofs" ... indeed all of evo-thinking altogether! -- is all and only ... firmly has it's basis in -- yep, you guessed it -- Inductive Thinking.
Lemme give you an example.
When you are going on a personal hunch ("hypothesis" or "educated guess") you are thinking inductively. You are going on your instincts and your perceptions of a situation. When you design an experiment to test the hypothesis, you are also using your best instincts. But you still are only guessing and still do not know anything -- you are still being inductive.
When you do the experiment, make observations, collect data, and test your hypothesis ... using the scientific method and good experimental technique ... compiling the data using standard statistical analysis -- now you can say something definitive about your inductive thinking -- you have moved into the deductive realm.
No evo-position has so far gained any solid basis in the deductive ... at all.
No data supports it, nor can support it. Evolution is a fantasy. The scientific method keeps it totally in the realm of the conjecture ... in the realm of the inductive.
God bless. Take care. Keep thinking. DrJ

New "Oldest Human" Teeth

2010-12-30T14:57:00.001-06:00

"Ancient Teeth May 'Change Whole Picture of Evolution' "
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/12/27/ancient-teeth-change-picture-evolution/?test=faces
"Researcher say teeth go back 400,00 years; others say claim is premature"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40820248/ns/technology_and_science-science/?gt1=43001
"Ancient Human Remains Found in Israel"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101227/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_ancient_teeth

Thanks to Shane, GW, Karl and Pete for these links.

So, you might be wondering -- what's the big deal? It's just another human tooth? It's big, as usual, to an evolutionist -- because, as usual, it totally throws off their evo-story -- again!

A definitely human tooth was found near Tel-Aviv in Israel, that evo's dated at 400,000 yrs. How did they know? Simple -- the evo's just "dated them according to the layers of earth where they were found". (MSNBC 12/27/10) (Once again, evo's feel no need to justify the "circular reasoning" of dating fossils by rocks and dating rocks by fossils.)

Well, since it's twice as old as it's "supposed to be" ... how come they're so sure it's not a monkey tooth? That's easy. Simian molars have a Y-indented crown while humans have an X-indentation on the top of each molar. That's why the evo's are "punting" and saying this "must" be a Neanderthal tooth (since they've all admitted now that Neanders were really humans, just like we creationists have been saying for decades).

But why is this such an evo-worry for them? The accepted theory is that Homo sapiens originated in Africa and migrated out 80,000 years ago ... the remains could mean that modern humans in fact originated in what is now Israel. (MSNBC) So that means human migration --didn't-- fan out from Africa ... but maybe more like (gee, I dunno) where Mount Ararat and the Tower of Babel were ??! ... and not only that human origins are geographically where the Bible says but ... that they're much closer back to the beginning than the evo's thought ??! Yeah -- I'd be worried too -- if I hadda believe -- what they believe in! You keep the faith! You keep thinking. DrJ

Make Your Stand Alongside DrJ ( by "follower" Vicaronaroll )

2010-12-17T15:30:00.001-06:00

Standing up against the scientific bigotry of the evo-siths

Deuteronomy 31:6 "Be strong and courageous, do not be afraid or tremble at them, for the LORD your God is the one who goes with you. He will not fail you or forsake you."

Joshua 1:9 "Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous! Do not tremble or be dismayed, for the LORD your God is with you wherever you go."

My [fellow] young brothers in Christ,

I stand shoulder-to-shoulder and as one in spirit with Dr. J and your other older brothers in this web-community encouraging you to not fear those who belittle, badger, and bully any who are independent enough in their thinking and beliefs to challenge the unscientific and unverifiable lies of Darwinistic macro-evolution. Their so-called scholarship and expertise in matters of the origins of the universe and life on our little planet have been and are continually being successfully challenged and refuted by others in their own scientific community who also happen to be believers in the Lord Jesus Christ and the universal, eternal and absolute truths of the Bible, from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21 and all points in between.

And here is a little quote from the evo-siths’ own god, Charles Darwin himself, that you might use against any who are unwilling to give any and all theoretical perspectives, including the Genesis creation account, the only extant eye-witness account of the origin of the universe and life on earth, a fair, unbiased, objective, and thorough examination: “A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question.” (from the Introduction of The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin) Or as God puts it so very much better, “A wise man will hear and increase in learning, and a man of understanding will acquire wise counsel” (Proverbs 1:5) and “He who gives an answer before he hears, it is folly and shame to him.” (Proverbs 18:13)

I encourage you to:

1. Expose yourself to as much of the wise counsel that God has enabled men like Dr. J to amass for the defense of Genesis chapters 1-11, including the biblical account of creation and the universal flood of Noah’s day;

2. Become proficient at its use as Jedi knights in the battle for truth against the powers of darkness and their minions within the atheistic, materialistic, evolutionist camp of the scientific community;

3. Never cease asking questions of all sides of the issues, listening with a discerning but inquisitive heart, mind, and spirit.

4. Pass on to others what you have learned.

“Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might. Put on the full armor of God, so that you will be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore, take up the full armor of God, so that you will be able to resist in the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm.

“Stand firm therefore, HAVING GIRDED YOUR LOINS WITH TRUTH, and HAVING PUT ON THE BREASTPLATE OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, and having shod YOUR FEET WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL OF PEACE; in addition to all, taking up the shield of faith with which you will be able to extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. And take THE HELMET OF SALVATION, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. With all prayer and petition pray at all times in the Spirit, and with this in view, be on the alert with all perseverance and petition for all the saints, and pray on [your own] behalf, that utterance may be given to [you] in the opening of [your] mouth, to make known with boldness the mystery of the gospel, for which [you are] an ambassador in chains; that in proclaiming it [you] may speak boldly, as [you] ought to speak.” (Ephesians 6:10-20, changes respectfully made)

Your fellow bond-servant of the Lord Jesus Christ,

vicaronaroll

note from DrJ

you can do these things Vic suggests at 4 web-communities run by DrJ

1 -- this one at www.DrJ-PointsofOrigins.blogspot.com for your creation-evolution news updates.

2 -- and/or at www.TheApprenticeCreationist.blogspot.com for those who are new to this topic.

3 -- and/or at www.TheJediCreationist.blogspot.com for those who are further along in this topic.

4 -- and/or at www.TheCreationistCrossroads.blogspot.com for those working in the field (advanced).

Oh just "Subscribe" to them all -- ha, ha -- and become a "Follower" on every one of them!

More on no-Arsenic Life !

2010-12-09T14:51:00.001-06:00

NASA's claim of a "new form of life" found "evolving" on Earth ... has really gotten blasted big-time by other scientists around the world. Read the whole thing at

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20101208/sc_yblog_thelookout/scientists-poking-holes-in-nasas-arsenic-eating-microbe-discovery (Thanks G W for this source!)

But here are some of the rebuttals -- they didn't find -- any such thing as "a new life form evolving!"

"I was outraged at how bad the science was," University of British Columbia

when NASA scientists removed the DNA from the bacteria for examination, they didn't take the steps necessary to wash away other types of molecules. That means, according to the critics, that the arsenic may have merely clung to the bacteria's DNA for a ride without becoming truly ingrained into it.

NASA scientists fed the bacteria salts that contained trace amounts of phosphate, so it's possible that the bacteria were able to survive on those tiny helpings of phosphate instead of the arsenic.

"This paper should not have been published," University of Colorado

"I suspect that NASA may be so desperate for a positive story that they didn't look for any serious advice from DNA or even microbiology people," UC-Davis

Shrimp Gumbo

2010-12-09T14:24:00.002-06:00

Okay guys, as spectacular as the evo-dated "360 mill yr old" shrimp fossil from OK was ... it was not all that we had expected.
I can find no verification of the shrimp "meat" nor of the shrimp "pigment" within the literature nor in the study reports.
The fine detail of the preservation of even the muscle fibers ... is still stunning and an embarrassment to the evo's (which they have tried to bolster up with their acid-water, still-water, deep-water explanations).
The age being pushed back "125 mill yrs" closer to the truth (the First Week of time on Earth) is good for us.
The fact that this shrimp isn't any different from shrimps today (even tho' fish changed into humans during this same amount of time, supposedly) is also good for us.
The find is good for us ... on the time and appearance points.
The find is inconclusive on the protein-preservation point.

However ... in 2006 ... complex biological pigment molecules ... had already been found in a supposedly 350 mill yr old crinoid ("sea lily") fossil. Amen? Amen. God bless y'all. Yer teacher, Dr Jackson

Arsenic-based life from "Space"? -- not

2010-12-06T18:49:00.000-06:00

POINTS OF ORIGINS with Dr. Jackson
Creation Truth Foundation www.CreationTruth.com
https://webmail.liberty.edu/owa/redir.aspx?C=d4f875837bab4a9d903b65b35e508ec4&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.politicsdaily.com%2f2010%2f12%2f04%2fdoes-a-new-life-form-mean-god-is-dead%2f%3ficid%3dmain%7cverizon%7cdl1%7csec1_lnk1%7c188214
Thanks Bonita, for the link from the LU source.
http://scienceblogs.com/webeasties/2010/12/guest_post_arsenate-based_dna.php
Thanks Ian, for this rebuttal source within the secular science community.

Ian Juby points out, the "new" DNA did not dissolve in water. If Arsenic (As) were in the backbone, it would have (instead of Phosphorus).
Even evo-stih PZ Myers says that the case for implications against religion in this matter is way "overstated."
This is of no concern nor import. Even if Arsenic in the DNA backbone were verified, it wouldn't proved evolution of life (just modification of it)
and it wouldn't prove extraterrestrial life (unless assuming that it didn't come from Earth is valid, even though we found it on Earth). Keep thinking. DrJ

Shrimp makes Gumbo of Evolution Time Scale!

2010-11-27T16:43:00.000-06:00

The fossil shrimp from Oklahoma
and a recent shrimp.
Credit: Rodney Feldmann/NOAA

POINTS OF ORIGINS with DrJ Creation Truth Foundation www.CreationTruth.com

www.icr.org/article/5781/ and www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-oldest-fossil-shrimp-muscles.html
thanks Pete for the PhysOrg source ( see also Journal of Crustacean Biology )
Researchers from Kent State and Ohio U have found something even more spectacular in favor of the Young-Earth Creation than the "68 mill yr-old" t-rex blood cells, or even the "80 mill yr-old" hadrosaur bone cells, or even the "90 mill yr-old" Santanaraptor muscle tissue or even the "350 mill yr-old" pigments found in a crinoid fossil.
This time -- it's shrimp tail meat found in the "350 mill yr-old" fossil layer!
"Even the muscles of the fossil are preserved." reports PhysOrg.com "not only remarkable because of its age, but also due to its preservation. In this case, the muscles that once made up the tail part of the shrimp were preserved. This is extremely rare in fossils."

The tail meat was even still pink! The actual meat -- was still there!

Proteins must disintegrate into amino-dust within 100 thou yrs -- max!

This protein sample is not 350 mill yrs-old.

It died 4358 yrs ago, during Noah's Flood!

Keep thinking! Yours, DrJ

DrJ's Creationist Web-Communities

2010-11-26T11:10:00.000-06:00

Dinosaurs, Part 5 of 5

2010-11-22T08:05:00.000-06:00

The series on dinosaur extinction and soft tissue, concludes today at
www.TheApprenticeCreationist.blogspot.com
Thank you for your patronage. God bless, DrJ

New YouTube Post!

2010-11-19T17:38:00.000-06:00

New Genetic Information ??

(the newest installment of the SFAU debate on biological diversity)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5P1fey3H_8