Moved to wordpress

This blog has moved to preachrr.wordpress.com. Please visit and check out the latest posts and images. God bless!

Neanderthals were not sub-human cavemen

Soon after its discovery in 1856, the first Neanderthal skull was examined by anatomist Rudolph Virchow. He determined that it did not belong to a separate species of primitive human, but rather to a modern human afflicted with rickets (Vitamin D deficiency) and osteoporosis. Later study confirmed this analysis in 1958. In 1978, Erik Trinkaus (the world's foremost expert on Neanderthals) concluded, "Detailed comparisons of Neanderthal skeletal remains with those of modern humans have shown that there is nothing in Neanderthal anatomy that conclusively indicates locomotor, manipulative, intellectual, or linguistic abilities inferior to those of modern humans." Why, then, does the cartoonish image of the hairy, stooped caveman persist? Perhaps because this image is critical to human evolutionary theory and they will go to great lengths to retain their unofficial mascot.

Evolution of a car

Lava flows downhill from a volcanic eruption. It melts iron ore in some rocks and this molten metal floats up to the top where it cools on the crust and forms into thin metal skins. As it crashes down the mountain, these skins roll and bend as they bounce off debris. Some of the metal chunks break off and form themselves into gears, rods, nuts, bolts, and wheels. As they tumble along, they come together into complex working assemblies (like transmissions and carburetors). The lava flows through a grove of banana trees and heats the sap which then transforms into a rubber compound which wraps itself around the wheels (and nowhere else). When the lava hits the beach, it heats the silicon in the sand into thin, glass sheets. When the whole mess reaches the ocean, it cools and hardens into the form of...a Model "T" Ford coupe. Sound ridiculous? So is the notion that random chemical reactions produced the human being who thought up this ridiculous scenario.

Tha amazing stomach cell

Consider the human stomach. It produces up to three quarts per day of hydrochloric acid which can dissolve iron nails but doesn't harm itself. Why not? It is lined with mucus which is alkaline (and neutralizes the acid). It sheds cells and replaces them at the rate of half a million every minute. That means we get a completely new stomach lining every three days. Stomach cells have a cell wall which is totally impenetrable, not allowing even CO2 to pass through to the acid side. The other side, which faces away from the acid, has a normal cell wall which allows CO2 and nutrients to pass into the nucleus of the cell. No other cell in the body is made this way. Rightly did David say, "I am fearfully and wonderfully made" (Psalm 139:14).

Sun is shrinking too fast for Big Bang to be true

According to astronomers, the sun is shrinking (albeit very gradually). Its diameter is shrinking by a rate of almost 0.2 second of arc per century. This means that the sun would have been twice its present size less than ten million years ago. 100 million years ago, it would have made the earth's atmosphere far too hot to sustain life. 200 million years ago, it would have touched the earth! How do these calculations reconcile with the evolutionist assertion that the earth is some 4.6 billion years old? Clearly, they do not.

Gilliland, R.L., 1981. "Solar Radius Variations" Astrophysical Journal 248:1144-55
Snelling, Andrew. "That Matter of the Shrinking Sun." Answers in Genesis (September 1989).

Challenges to evolution are suppressed

W.R. Thompson said, "There is a great divergence of opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution, but even about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusions. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the nonscientific public to the disagreements about evolution. But some recent remarks of evolutionists show that they think this is unreasonable. This situation, where scientific men rally to the defense of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate, is an attempt to maintain credibility with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties. This is abnormal and undesirable in science" (emph. added--RL). I heartily agree with this assessment. The most shocking aspect of this comment is where is was found: in the introduction to the centennial edition of Charles Darwin's landmark book Origin of Species.

Kathleen Kenyon's Jericho theory falls flat

In the 1950's, Kathleen Kenyon determined from excavations at Jericho that the walls did not fall down as the Bible records and that the city was not even there at the time of the Israelite conquest around 1400 B.C. However, more recent excavations (deeper down) has revealed that the city was standing at the time and that the large city walls did indeed fall flat as recorded in the Book of Joshua. Additionally, there were remains of scorched grain found in storage areas. This would not have happened during a normal, lengthy siege by an invading army. The grain stores would have been depleted. The evidence does, however, align perfectly with the biblical account that the city fell after only seven days and that everything in it was burned.

Khoog/globe of the earth (Isa. 40:22)

Isaiah 40:22 refers to the God who "sits upon the circle of the earth." The Hebrew word for 'circle' is khoog. It literally means a sphere or globe. Isaiah wrote his book in approximately 725 B.C. and his contemporaries all "knew" that the earth was flat (and likely resting atop giant elephants). The idea of a flat earth persisted until Columbus sailed to the Americas and Magellan circumnavigated the globe in 1520. It was always round. It did not become round when mankind made this discovery. So how did Isaiah, not being a sailor or astronomer, know this over 2,000 years before men "discovered" this truth? God told him.

Eighty-foot Texas canyon in three days

An Oct. 5, 2007 article from the Associated Press reports on a new canyon which was gouged out of the earth by a Texas reservoir overflowing its dam. It cut an 80-foot deep gorge in just three days. The article then states, "[That] doesn't compare with the world's most famous canyon. It took water around 5-6 million years to carve the Grand Canyon, which plunges 6,000 feet and is 15 miles wide at its widest point." Let's take those figures and compare the two. The Texas canyon was formed by 70,000 cubic feet of water emptying from the reservoir. It cut 80 feet deep in three days. Take those same ratios and apply to the flood of Noah. Water flowed in and receded for just over a year, but let's just use the nice, round number of 350 days for easier math. By this same ratio, over the course of 350 days of similar flow the Grand Canyon would be 9,333 feet deep! And that is just using the flow rate of one little Texas lake. What would a global flood which drowned the tallest mountains on earth accompanied by massive tectonic and volcanic activity do? The Grand Canyon should have been over 50% deeper after just a year of flooding. So how can it have taken the "mighty" Colorado River 5-6 million years to cut the Grand Canyon?
"Texas Canyon Was a Rush Job" (AP) by Michelle Roberts Oct. 5, 2007