Re: Tiny Machines, Eiffel Tower, and Gecko Feet

Grendel wrote:

Stuff to think about....perhaps some things school teachers lurking around
might want to consider.

Abstract
Only an evolutionary worldview demands such an unscientific conclusion.

*what* unscientific conclusion? Yes I know if I read the rest I get to
find out,
but an abstract is supposed to be a useful summary.


Every child knows cars don't make themselves; neither do detailed enzymatic
machines at the subcellular level.

Recently released science stories

scientists arn't story tellers. We don't talk of Eienstein's Parables
or
Newton's cosy fire-side chats.


have not been kind to Mr. Darwin's strange
theory.

this is nonesense. No peer reviewed paper has seriously challenged
modern evolutionary biology.

It seems everywhere one looks there are stories that are an affront
to the just-so, natural-selection-did-it, interpretation.

I'm curious what is your explanation for the observed diversity of
life?
If it was one or more acts of creation. Then:-

- how many acts of creation were there?
- when did they occur?
- what was created?

for instance was every species that ever existed created from scratch?


The following are
three examples. The first involves tiny machines. As Bruce Alberts, an
outspoken critic of creation, states in Cell,

The entire cell can be viewed as a factory that contains an elaborate
network of interlocking assembly lines, each of which is composed of . . .
large protein machines. . . .

note "factory" and "machine" are metaphors. Something a surprising
number of people seem to have trouble spotting.


Why do we call the large protein assemblies that underlie cell function
machines? Precisely because, like the machines invented by humans to deal
efficiently with the macroscopic world, these protein assemblies contain
highly coordinated moving parts.1

More recently, two secular scientists discuss submicroscopic multicomponent
machines such as sliding clamps and clamp loaders, involved with DNA
duplication (see "Mending Mistakes," Acts & Facts, June 2004). They say this
process is "far from simple" and that "for each question answered, 10 more
crop up"-but they declare that the machines themselves have "evolved clever
strategies to perform their function"! 2 Only an evolutionary worldview
demands such an unscientific conclusion. Every child knows cars don't make
themselves; neither do detailed enzymatic machines at the subcellular level.

cars don't make themselves. But cells make cells. Dogs make puppies
etc.

The second story entails the lowly ocean sponge (genus Euplectella). It was
found to have a complex glass structure causing one evolutionist to say, "I
cannot imagine how a structure of this sophistication can be produced."3 Her
incredulity is warranted. Man can make glass-in a red-hot furnace. But the
sponge not only grows this glass lattice, but a thousand times smaller (the
nanometer scale) than what is seen in mechanical engineering. One secular
publication said the construction is "remarkable," "ingeniously engineered,"
and "clever."4 The natural "architectural wonder" is compared to the Eiffel
Tower. Why, then, after reading of these glass fibers, is it so unscientific
for the creationist to attribute such design to a master Designer?

I'd attribute it to a sponge. Plenty of (most) natural products cannot
be
duplicated by our technology.

Finally, people in tropical regions are familiar with the amazing agility of
the gecko-a lizard able to scramble across walls and ceilings in its quest
for insect meals or an insurance client. Scientists investigated this
gravity-defying creature and discovered how it is able to run upside down
and even hang by a toe-without glue or suction cups. The Creator has
designed the sole of each foot with a half-million tiny hairs, with each
hair in turn splitting into hundreds more. In the gecko's case, the
ultra-tiny elastic hairs bond onto the surface, where attractive forces
between the hairs and that surface are enough to support the creature.

Nature shouts creation!


--
Nick Keighley

.

Relevant Pages

  • Tiny Machines, Eiffel Tower, and Gecko Feet
    ... Only an evolutionary worldview demands such an unscientific conclusion. ... The first involves tiny machines. ... The entire cell can be viewed as a factory that contains an elaborate ... designed the sole of each foot with a half-million tiny hairs, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • SuSE 9.2: does tar work?
    ... I have installed SuSE 9.2 Professional on two different machines. ... On both of them /bin/tar does not work properly: it dumps core ... both on creation and extraction of archives. ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)
  • Re: Class factory cannot supply class - VBA
    ... This code runs fine in some machines but in some machines it ... throws an error on encountering the code for creation. ... it says runtime error class factory cannot supply class. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Ammending shared data
    ... We have a database created in 97 saved on network drive. ... Machines have been updated to XP. ... Can anyone shed some light on this and save a few grey ...
    (microsoft.public.access.conversion)