Resonse to Friend Regarding Evolution Before Our Eyes

This post is in response to a couple articles my good friend Blake presented to me. 
Animals That are Evolving Right Before Our Eyes
Ant Species May Support a Controversial Theory on Evolution

First of all, I am always glad to get interaction and discussion involved. I don't have all the answers to all the skeptics questions, and I always welcome expanding my knowledge and hearing an alternative position. 

Let me begin by stating that the creationist model requires great flexibility and adaptability within the animal kingdom. This adaptability is made possible by having an enormous amount of already-programed genetic information available to the creature that allows certain traits to become apparent via natural selection. Over the years, through breeding and isolation, certain traits are kept and others are whittled away. Think of it as once there was a lot of information and now we see loss of information. Thus we should see examples of de-evolution such as example #7 and the skinks from #4 and #3 from the first article. 
In #7, an increasing number of elephants did not have tusks, due (probably) to the demand for ivory. Elephants without tusks (which have existed previously) have a better chance of breeding now than before the ivory-driven elephant poaching. This is natural selection. This is not upwards, onward evolution. The elephants without tusks has less information than elephants with tusks. These elephants, along with the skinks that are losing their legs are losing capability, not gaining new ones. I hate that we are seeing this take place.
 #6, dogs are super smart and adapt to their environment. These Russian dogs ride the subway and rob people blind using charm and strong-paw techniques. Coyotes have always impressed me with their hunting/survival tricks. I'm sure these dogs learned what works, and passed it on to their pups, generation to generation, just like a mother lion teaches her young to hunt.
#5 Fish became immune to toxins dumped by humans. I believe this is an example of incredible design. The creator of this fish (and many other fish) hooked it up with the ability to recognize and overcome toxins!  
#4 Lizards dance to stay alive. Apparently these lizards have figured out that to get lethal fire ants off of them they can shake. This trait appears to be learned and passed from generation to generation. Although cool and all, not evidence for the origin of species. It also claims the legs are evolving to be longer. Look at greyhounds, they have long legs as well, from selective breeding. Humans selected desirable traits from pre-existing information; the nature did it for the lizards. Fortunately the creator made room for the creatures to populate and adapt to the earth and it's various environments and demands. Animals can specialize, but do not become new creatures.  
#3 Lizards became omnivores, when they previously were carnivores. The lizards evolved a new muscle that slowed their digestion to allow them to eat veggies. I am pretty sure that a thorough examination of the pre-1971 lizard innards genome would show a cecal valve gene. It didn't just invent this valve/muscle; this is present in other lizards and even humans.
That's all I have time for now, I will post more later!
 

Bible Contradictions: Response to Scientia Perceptum

This post is in response to Scientia Perceptum's claims that the gospel accounts of the resurrection of Jesus Christ contradict one another.
I already explained to him how the different accounts of which women went to the tomb differ but do not contradict. None of them state that Mary Magdalene went by herself, but only mentioned her as the more significant person in the group.  
SP also brought up that one book records an earthquake and the others do not, and that the description of the stone being rolled away differs as well. But if you read the gospel accounts on these items, they also differ, but do not contradict. I believe the differing stories help bolster the credibility of these accounts. If they read the same, SP would instead be claiming the writers conspired to collaborate on their stories.

Also, I must add that if the disciples wanted to make a believable story that helped boost their standing among early Christians and spread their "new religion", they would not tell a story of women (who were thought of as second-class citizens during that time) finding the empty grave while the disciples were in despair and doubt.

 

The next objection SP brought up was that it seems as if in one account (Matthew) there is an angel sitting on the stone in the midst of a violent earthquake when the women arrived to the tomb, meanwhile Mark says that the women walked into the open tomb to find an angel inside. Contradiction? No. Matthew does not state that the angel was sitting on the rock when the women arrived, but that he did so as he terrified the guards during the earthquake after rolling away the stone. So by the time the women arrive the angel is inside the tomb with his counterpart (according to Luke there was also a second angel). The angel then directs the women to come to the place where he lay to see that he was not there. Tombs in that day were cavernous and this being the tomb of a rich man, we would expect there to be some space within the tomb itself.
The major key points of the account are present in the accounts. Even the fine details hold up to the scrutiny of sharp minded critics like SP.
I hope you take time to read the resurrection accounts in the scriptures for yourself. They give hope and show the life that is possible by faith in Christ.

5 Evidences of Noah's Flood--Evidence #4: Bent Rock Layers and Polystrate Fossils

For evidence number 4 in this series, I will highlight rock strata. The layered rocks shown in the pictures below were formed with the older layers on the bottom with the newer layers on top. Creationists and evolutionists agree on this. They disagree on the amount of time that passed between the layers forming. Evolutionists will claim millions of years while a creationist would claim days or even hours. But what does the evidence show? One doesn't need to be a geologist to observe these layered rocks for themselves! Just drive along a highway through mountains or hills that required the road workers to cut through the mountain or hillside. I can't think of an area where I haven't seen these rock formations. They are everywhere, and there are unique features that can be observed within them.

Sedimentary rock in the Garden of the Gods, CO

 Tightly Bent Strata

Although much of the strata is flat, as shown in picture above, some of it is bent (below). Creationists and Evolutionists agree that strata is laid down flat and that there should be no bend in the rock. But what do we make of rock such as these:



Bent strata near Green River, WY. Not bad for going 80 mph down the interstate!

Bend rock layers

Sullivan River, British Columbia

Obviously these formations did not start out like this, so what could have made them bend so sharply without breaking?

In my day job and in science in general, it is commonly said that the most simple explanation is usually the best and correct. Let's look at the two explanations and see which one explains the evidence the best:

Evolution: The rocks were laid down layer-by-layer over many tens of thousands or millions of years. By the time a new layer was built up, the ones beneath it were hardened. Once fully formed, somehow the rock was subjected to tremendous heat and pressure (it would have to be buried very deep underground) which caused the rock to lose rigidity and bend into these tight curves without breaking, cracking, or completely melting. Then, in order for us to see these rocks today, they had to return back up to the surface, cool down, and re-harden. [1]

Now, foundational to the creationist model is that the mountains and continents were pushed up as a result of the flood bursting up from the fountains of the deep (Genesis Ch 7). The mountains we see today are a result of massive mid and post-flood plate tectonic activity. 

Creation: While some of the strata was still soft from having been laid down by the flood, mountains were pushed up through these layers and this caused the strata to bend. Note: in this model the strata stays at the surface, where we see it today. This is very simple, and a powerful evidence for the creation model. [2]

The creationist model is simple and makes the most sense, especially since this is a commonly observed phenomenon.

 

Polystrate Fossils

Ok, that word is made up, but it works. Poly meaning many, and strate meaning layers. A polystrate fossil is one that cuts through many layers of sedimentary rock. The most common (understandably) are trees [3].


Story behind this partially uncovered polystrate tree fossil. Photo courtesy of Ian Juby [3] 

If these rock layers formed over thousands and millions of years, how did the tree stay intact during the burial? Dead trees rot and are broken down by insects, and do not last very long after dying. If a tree dies, doesn't it fall over, anyway? How does it last long enough and stay vertical?
Once again, creationists have a simple, reasonable solution: it was buried suddenly. Each layer represents a new flood deposit (tides alone could likely account for at least 4 layers a day during the year long flood). In this case the trees were buried upright with no evidence of decay between layers. A recent event helps illustrate this process well: After the eruption of Mt St Helens, Spirit Lake provided a modern, scaled down version of trees being buried vertically in sediment.    
 
 “I tell you,” Jesus replied, “if the people keep quiet, the stones will cry out.” [4]



More bent strata pictures
Additional article, maybe a little cooler than mine
[1] http://www.oldearth.org/plasticdeformation.htm
[2] https://answersingenesis.org/geology/rock-layers/rock-layers-folded-not-fractured/
[3] Morris, J. 2009. A Classic Polystrate Fossil. Acts & Facts. 38 (10): 15
[4] Luke 19:40 paraphrased