Nobody
seems to have noticed, but the article which described the findings from a
50,000 year old toe bone contained a rebuke to the Darwinist theory of how life
began on earth.
The
story said that genetic researchers gathered nuclear DNA and mitochondrial
DNA from human-Neanderthal tissue. The researchers were able to
distinguish between nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA because the cellular
structure which contains them both was still intact after all that time.
Think
of it: all the matter necessary for life was present in this tissue and present
in a structure necessary for life, and existed in that state for 50,000
years, and nothing happened.
The
Darwinist theory of the origin of life on earth holds that somehow DNA formed
out of the inert matter of the primordial soup that was the earth’s oceans billions of years ago, and somehow a
cellular structure came into existence in which that DNA could reproduce both
itself and the structure, and somehow the two came together, and voila, life began. Yet, here is a case
where such a situation did obtain, and the inert matter remained inert.
Clearly,
something other than matter arranged in a particular way is necessary for life
to exist and for the reproduction of life, which is a crucial sign of life, to
commence.
Something
else, some divine spark, is necessary to animate otherwise dead matter.
There is nothing either in Darwinist theory or in biology in general
which can account for the requirement of this divine spark. Yet a
requirement is seems to be.
Darwinists
are committed materialists. Yet when those material conditions exist, as
they did in this case, life necessarily does not.
Every
advance in genetic research contains a disproof of Darwinism. The very existence of a science of genetics is a disproof of Darwinism.
A
pleasant thought especially at this time of year.
-30-
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment