Scientific Laws have been observed and are used to explain how things have been and will be in the future. Scientific theories attempt to explain why the laws work as they do. Matt Anticole did an awesome job of explaining this in his TED-Ed video.
For example, Archimede's Principle of Buoyancy, which explains why objects float, has been tested and observed repeatedly, making it into a law. So have Newton's laws of motion been tested and observed.
There is another scientific law, the 2nd law of thermodynamics, which states that the "entropy of any isolated system always increases" which means that our Universe, which is an isolated system, gets more disorderly and simple over time.1 We have observed this law ourselves in how our bedrooms will become messy, cardboard left outside breaks down, our trucks get rust on them, and food molds. The only way to combat the 2nd law is to use energy and intelligence to repair items or clean rooms.
What happens when a scientific theory contradicts a scientific law? The theory has to go. A law is repeatable. It can be tested and observed. A theory is an attempted explanation. If even one example refutes the theory, the theory must be discarded or revised.
The theory of evolution states that the Universe and everything in it is going from simple to complex and becoming more organized over time. This is in direct opposition to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and in direct opposition to what you and I observe on a daily basis. This fact is one of the main reasons that the theory of evolution must be discarded or revised.
1 The Three Laws of Thermodynamics. Lumen. Introduction to Chemistry. Retrieved from: https://courses.lumenlearning.com/introchem/chapter/the-three-laws-of-thermodynamics/
Proof for the Worldwide Flood From History
Here in Alaska, we recently had a 7.0 earthquake that left plenty of evidence that it had occurred: Roads with sections 6 feet below the rest, broken windows of businesses, cracked drywall in houses, fallen ceiling panes, and really big messes of broken glass and spilled food in the houses and grocery stores. Thankfully, no one was greatly injured or killed, a miracle I thank God for, but you could tell that a big event had happened.
If a worldwide flood really did occur, then there should be evidence left behind, right? I mean, if something on that grand of a scale rocked the entire planet there would be clues.
You know what? There are. There's stretches of huge sediment over vast areas of the world with a diversity of plants and animals being buried and fossilized together. Also, a jellyfish fossilization graveyard in Utah, USA where all of the jellyfish are facing the same direction like a water current pushed them. (Jellyfish! Fossilized! They have no bones!) And, the petrified wood forests show evidence of a catastrophic water event uprooting them, because there aren't any fossilized branches with the wood, nor is there evidence of detritus around the petrified trees (that's the decomposing parts of the forest littering the forest floor.) There's evidence that a large dam left over from the flood carved the Grand Canyon.
All of these are fascinating and will be dealt with hopefully in forthcoming posts, but what I want to discuss today is historical proof for the flood.
The Bible says that the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat after some of the water had gone down. The 8 people coming out of the ark needed what all humans need: food, water, shelter. As the water receded, those items would have been harder to come by on the top of a mountain. They naturally would have traveled downward and settled by a river, like all ancient peoples. So, if the Bible's account were true, and there were no other people on earth, then the earliest human history should have taken place near Mt. Ararat as Noah's family began multiplying on the earth. Time would eventually produce settlements and cities and governments. What is so wonderful is that this is exactly what we see. The earliest civilization, Mesopotamia, lies just south of the base of Mt. Ararat! Take a look at this map:
Why isn't the earliest civilization in North America? Or Africa, Russia, or South America? It's because the Bible is true and the worldwide flood really happened.
If a worldwide flood really did occur, then there should be evidence left behind, right? I mean, if something on that grand of a scale rocked the entire planet there would be clues.
You know what? There are. There's stretches of huge sediment over vast areas of the world with a diversity of plants and animals being buried and fossilized together. Also, a jellyfish fossilization graveyard in Utah, USA where all of the jellyfish are facing the same direction like a water current pushed them. (Jellyfish! Fossilized! They have no bones!) And, the petrified wood forests show evidence of a catastrophic water event uprooting them, because there aren't any fossilized branches with the wood, nor is there evidence of detritus around the petrified trees (that's the decomposing parts of the forest littering the forest floor.) There's evidence that a large dam left over from the flood carved the Grand Canyon.
All of these are fascinating and will be dealt with hopefully in forthcoming posts, but what I want to discuss today is historical proof for the flood.
The Bible says that the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat after some of the water had gone down. The 8 people coming out of the ark needed what all humans need: food, water, shelter. As the water receded, those items would have been harder to come by on the top of a mountain. They naturally would have traveled downward and settled by a river, like all ancient peoples. So, if the Bible's account were true, and there were no other people on earth, then the earliest human history should have taken place near Mt. Ararat as Noah's family began multiplying on the earth. Time would eventually produce settlements and cities and governments. What is so wonderful is that this is exactly what we see. The earliest civilization, Mesopotamia, lies just south of the base of Mt. Ararat! Take a look at this map:
Why isn't the earliest civilization in North America? Or Africa, Russia, or South America? It's because the Bible is true and the worldwide flood really happened.
Soft Tissue Found in Fossilized Dinosaur Bones
Did you know that soft tissue, collagen, and red blood cells have been found intact in dinosaur fossils? This is my favorite proof. It was so amazing to learn that blood cells had been found in dinosaurs!
Two main cases are:
- In 2005 Mary Schweitzer discovered soft tissue and red blood cells in a Tyrannosaurus bone extracted from the Hell Creek Formation.
- In 2015, British scientists examined old fossils and found soft tissue and collagen (a protein) inside.
Do soft tissue and intact red blood cells seem to be better evidence for a young earth and worldwide flood or millions of years of evolutionary change?
Read the Evolutionary perspective on this discovery here.
Read the creation perspective here.
For more reading just google "Tyrannosaurus red blood cells."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)