http://www.icr.

org/article/summary-scientific-evidence-for-creation/
http://esoriano.wordpress.com/2007/05/25/from-dust-to-man-a-scientific-proof/

They alleged that the creation of Adam is an anti-scientific nonsense, and God did not create Adam from a handful of dust, like the
Bible says. To my readers, see how these blatant liars are wrestling the words of the Bible. Their allegation and their pre-conceived
idea are not written in the Bible. Nowhere in the Bible can you find a verse that Adam was created by God from a handful of
dust. What is written is recorded in Genesis 2:7, which says:
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a
living soul.
While it is true that God created man from the dust of the ground, the phrase handful of dust is absent in the verse!It is conceived
it the minds of these perverts. Be that as it may, the information in the Bible is scientific! Granting, without accepting, that there is
such a thing as a handful of dust, whose hands will be the measuring hands for the dust that God will use in the formation of
Adam? People who cremate the dead have an idea of how much dust will be left of the human body after cremation. I am sure it is
not a sack of dust; but very close to a handful depending on the hands that holds them. And why is it scientific? God made man
from the dust; and when his body dies it decomposes and turns again to dust.
(Genesis 3:19) In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for
dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

What are the scientific proof that mans body came from the dust of the ground, as the Bible says? The human body is made up of
materials and minerals found on the surface of the ground, and not from the core of the earth.Oxygen, being the most abundant
element on the earths crust or on the ground, makes up 65 percent of the human body, and carbon, also abundant on the top soil
of the ground, is 18 percent, and hydrogen is 10 percent. The 59 elements found in the human body are all found on the earths
crust. This is amazing because what the Bible says perfectly match the scientific composition of a human body.
The ignorance of these imaginary people in what the Bible says betrays their alleged intelligence and knowledge in science. Of
course, the human body is not made up only of dust, but God mixed the dust to water to produce clay.
(Job 10:9) Remember, I beseech thee, that thou hast made me as the clay; and wilt thou bring me into dust again?
(Romans 9:20-21) Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why
hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another
unto dishonor?
The mixture is clay, understandably contains more water than dust. Who says that the information in the Bible is scientifically
nonsense? They are the ones that are nonsensical, and not the Bible!
The exact proportion of the minerals and materials, if maintained, make up a healthy human
body(http://www.emory.edu/EMORY_REPORT/erarchive/1998/September/erseptember.21/9_21_98Size.html). Excesses in these
materials will cause disorders and diseases. Excess of aluminum, for example, and iron, will be toxic for the human body. The
proportions of the abundance of the 59 elements on the earths crust, is amazingly represented in its presence in the human
body. Who says that the Bible is not scientific? These imaginary and anti-scientific people!
http://creation.com/
Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds
and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life
and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification". That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic
ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial
mutations are preserved because they aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations are passed
on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a
variation of the original, but an entirely different creature).
Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Natural Selection
While Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a relatively young archetype, the evolutionary worldview itself is as old as antiquity. Ancient
Greek philosophers such as Anaximander postulated the development of life from non-life and the evolutionary descent of man
from animal. Charles Darwin simply brought something new to the old philosophy -- a plausible mechanism called "natural
selection." Natural selection acts to preserve and accumulate minor advantageous genetic mutations. Suppose a member of a
species developed a functional advantage (it grew wings and learned to fly). Its offspring would inherit that advantage and pass it on
to their offspring. The inferior (disadvantaged) members of the same species would gradually die out, leaving only the superior
(advantaged) members of the species. Natural selection is the preservation of a functional advantage that enables a species to
compete better in the wild. Natural selection is the naturalistic equivalent to domestic breeding. Over the centuries, human
breeders have produced dramatic changes in domestic animal populations by selecting individuals to breed. Breeders eliminate
undesirable traits gradually over time. Similarly, natural selection eliminates inferior species gradually over time.

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Slowly But Surely...
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a slow gradual process. Darwin wrote, "Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight
successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps." [1] Thus,
Darwin conceded that, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by
numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." [2] Such a complex organ would be known as
an "irreducibly complex system". An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the
system to function. If even one part is missing, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. [3] Thus, such a
system could not have evolved slowly, piece by piece. The common mousetrap is an everyday non-biological example of irreducible
complexity. It is composed of five basic parts: a catch (to hold the bait), a powerful spring, a thin rod called "the hammer," a holding
bar to secure the hammer in place, and a platform to mount the trap. If any one of these parts is missing, the mechanism will not
work. Each individual part is integral. The mousetrap is irreducibly complex. [4]
Darwin's Theory of Evolution - A Theory In Crisis
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry
and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the
cellular level. Specified complexity pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist Michael Denton wrote, "Although
the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10
-12
grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory
containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand
million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world." [5]

And we don't need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible
complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin's day. Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye
with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the
correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the
highest degree."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Charles-Darwin-Theory-Evolution.htm
Darwin's theory of evolution is based on five key observations and inferences drawn from them. These observations and inferences have been
summarized by the great biologist Ernst Mayr as follows:
1) Species have great fertility. They make more offspring than can grow to adulthood.
2) Populations remain roughly the same size, with modest fluctuations.
3) Food resources are limited, but are relatively constant most of the time.
From these three observations it may be inferred that in such an environment there will be a struggle for survival among individuals.
4) In sexually reproducing species, generally no two individuals are identical. Variation is rampant.
5) Much of this variation is heritable.
From this it may be inferred: In a world of stable populations where each individual must struggle to survive, those with the "best"
characteristics will be more likely to survive, and those desirable traits will be passed to their offspring. These advantageous
characteristics are inherited by following generations, becoming dominant among the population through time. This is natural selection. It
may be further inferred that natural selection, if carried far enough, makes changes in a population, eventually leading to new
species. These observations have been amply demonstrated in biology, and even fossils demonstrate the veracity of these
observations.
To summarise Darwin's Theory of Evolution;
1. Variation: There is Variation in Every Population.
2. Competition: Organisms Compete for limited resources.
3. Offspring: Organisms produce more Offspring than can survive.
4. Genetics: Organisms pass Genetic traits on to their offspring.
5. Natural Selection: Those organisms with the Most Beneficial Traits
are more likely to Survive and Reproduce.
Darwin imagined it might be possible that all life is descended from an original species from ancient times. DNA evidence supports
this idea.
Probably all organic beings which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial life form. There is
grandeur in this view of life that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a
beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved. (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species)
In scientific investigations, it is permitted to invent any hypothesis and, if it explains various large and independent classes of facts, it
rises to the rank of a well-grounded theory. (Charles Darwin)
How extremely stupid for me not to have thought of that!



(Thomas Huxley's first reflection after mastering, in 1859, the central idea of Darwin's Origin of Species)
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so
positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. (Charles Darwin, Introduction to The Descent of Man,
1871)
In the struggle for survival, the fittest win out at the expense of their rivals because they succeed in adapting themselves best to
their environment. (Charles Darwin)
Man with all his noble qualities, with sympathy which feels for the most debased, with benevolence which extends not only to other
men but to the humblest living creature, with his god-like intellect which has penetrated into the movements and constitution of the
solar system- with all these exalted powers- Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin. (Charles
Darwin)
Nothing before had ever made me thoroughly realise, though I had read various scientific books, that science consists in grouping
facts so that general laws or conclusions may be drawn from them. (Charles Darwin)
I have no great quickness of apprehension or wit which is so remarkable in some clever men, for instance Huxley. (Charles Darwin)
We will now discuss in a little more detail the Struggle for Existence.
.. The expression often used by Mr. Herbert Spencer of the Survival of the Fittest is more accurate, and is sometimes equally
convenient. (Charles Darwin)
.. doing what little one can to increase the general stock of knowledge is as respectable an object of life, as one can in any likelihood
pursue. (Charles Darwin)
a scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections .. a mere heart of stone. (Charles Darwin)
I am turned into a sort of machine for observing facts and grinding out conclusions. (Charles Darwin)
The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an
improved theory, is it then a science or faith? (Charles Darwin)
Charles Darwin on God / Religion
I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created parasitic wasps with the express
intention of their feeding within the living bodies of Caterpillars. (Charles Darwin)
As for a future life, every man must judge for himself between conflicting vague probabilities. (Charles Darwin)
Believing as I do that man in the distant future will be a far more perfect creature than he now is, it is an intolerable thought that he
and all other sentient beings are doomed to complete annihilation after such long-continued slow progress. (Charles Darwin)
We can allow satellites, planets, suns, universe, nay whole systems of universes to be governed by laws, but the smallest insect, we
wish to be created at once by special act. (Charles Darwin)
I am a strong advocate for free thought on all subjects, yet it appears to me (whether rightly or wrongly) that direct arguments
against christianity and theism produce hardly any effect on the public; and freedom of thought is best promoted by the gradual
illumination of men's minds, which follow[s] from the advance of science. It has, therefore, been always my object to avoid writing
on religion, and I have confined myself to science. I may, however, have been unduly biased by the pain which it would give some
members of my family, if I aided in any way direct attacks on religion. (Charles Darwin)
http://www.darwin-literature.com/l_quotes.html
When I view all beings not as special creations, but as the lineal descendants of some few beings which lived long before the first
bed of the Cambrian system was deposited, they seem to me to become ennobled. (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, quoted
from John Stear, No Answers in Genesis)
What a book a Devil's Chaplain might write on the clumsy, wasteful, blundering low and horribly cruel works of nature. (Charles
Darwin, quoted by Richard Dawkins in A Devil's Chaplain, 2004)
When it was first said that the sun stood still and world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false;
but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei [the voice of the people is the voice of God], as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted
in science.
(Charles Darwin, reminding his readers that they should always treat "obvious" truths with skepticism, in the context of the
apparent absurdity of evolving a complex eye through a long series of gradual steps, in the famous passage added to later editions of
the Origin of Species (1872, p. 134), quoted from Stephen Jay Gould, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory (2002), chapter 1,
"Defining and Revising the Structure of Evolutionary Theory," p. 1 (the bracketed translation is Gould's)
False facts are highly injurious to the progress of science, for they often endure long; but false views, if supported by some evidence,
do little harm, for everyone takes a salutary pleasure in proving their falseness; and when this is done, one path toward errors is
closed and the road to truth is often at the same time opened. (Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man)
A celebrated author and divine has written to me that he has gradually learned to see that it is just as noble a conception of the
Deity to believe that he created a few original forms capable of self-development into other and needful forms, as to believe that he
required a fresh act of creation to supply the voids caused by the action of his laws. (Charles Darwin, Origin of Species p. 422)
About thirty years ago there was much talk that geologists ought only to observe and not theorize; and I well remember someone
saying that at this rate a man might as well go into a gravel-pit and count the pebbles and describe the colours. How odd it is that

anyone should not see that all observation must be for or against some view if it is to be of any service!
(Charles Darwin, letter to Henry Fawcett, who had defended Darwin before the British Association for the Advancement of Science
against a critic who said Darwin's book was too theoretical and that he should have just "'put his facts before us and let them rest,"
quoted from Michael Shermer, "Colorful Pebbles and Darwin's Dictum: Science is an exquisite blend of data and theory," Scientific
American, May, 2001)
How so many absurd rules of conduct, as well as so many absurd religious beliefs, have originated, we do not know; nor how it is
that they have become, in all quarters of the world, so deeply impressed on the minds of men; but it is worthy of remark that a
belief constantly inculcated during the early years of life, while the brain is impressionable, appears to acquire almost the nature of
an instinct; and the very essence of an instinct is that it is followed independently of reason. (Charles Darwin, Descent of Man p.
122)
I am aware that the assumed instinctive belief in God has been used by many persons as an argument for his existence. The idea of a
universal and beneficent Creator does not seem to arise in the mind of man, until he has been elevated by long-continued culture.
(Charles Darwin, Descent of Man p. 612)
I am aware that the conclusions arrived at in this work will be denounced by some as highly irreligious; but he who denounces them
is bound to show why it is more irreligious to explain the origin of man as a distinct species by descent from some lower from,
through the laws of variation and natural selection, than to explain the birth of the individual through the laws of ordinary
reproduction. The birth both of the species and of the individual are equally parts of that grand sequence of events, which our minds
refuse to accept as the result of blind chance. (Charles Darwin, Descent of Man p. 613)
But I own that I cannot see as plainly as others do, and I should wish to do, evidence of design and beneficence on all sides of us.
There seems to me too much misery in the world. I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have
designedly created that a cat should play with mice. (Charles Darwin, source unknown)