Hi fellow listers, I'm glad I'm in the company of those who like to research and discover things on their own, instead of taking everything the anointed medical establishment says as the final word. We like to share with each other, and, at times, we like to challange each other.
KD'C wrote: Any viewpoint can be confirmed, and belief validated to the satisfaction of the believer by the very nature of belief. True. None of us were there when life began, so we all take it on faith. You may believe in the Biblical account or you may believe in the theory of evolution. It's a matter of faith. Most of us have been bombarded with evolutionary propaganda in the schools, in the media, and in our public parks and museums. What we really know of the other - the politically uncorrect view? Were you told that creation science is religion and evolution is science? Did you know that many scientists believe in creation for scientific reasons. Don't swallow everything the "powers-that-be" have worked so hard to condition you to believe. Check it out for yourself. Search for the truth. I found the following at http://sudman.home.netcom.com/noevidence.htm The "Peppered moth" (biston betularia) example The "peppered moth" (biston betularia) example is commonly used as evidence for the theory of evolution. Almost all college biology textbooks talk about it at some point. It happened in England during the 1840's through 1895. Before 1848, ninety-eight percent (98%) of peppered moths were white. Many more of the white moths survived; they blended in with the trees much better than the black moths did. Then, in 1848, the black moths started increasing, until in 1895, there were ninety-eight percent (98%) black moths! What caused the sudden increase? If we look at this closely, we find that there was no evolution involved! What actually happened is that the pollution increased. This killed the white likens on the trees and turned the trees black. Predators could see the white moths better than the black moths, therefore more were eaten. When the pollution was reduced, the white moths were again less visible than the black moths, and everything returned to how it was before. There was no actual change in the moth, only in the ratio of black moths to white moths, therefore evolution did not take place. Although it is true that the peppered moth experiments conclusively prove the theory of natural selection (which isn't a debated theory anymore), they don't show evolution, since there was no actual change in the gene pool of the moths. Cris Colby (pro-evolution) comments in his Introduction to Evolutionary Biology, "The increase in relative abundance of the dark type was due to natural selection. The late eighteen hundreds was the time of England's industrial revolution. Soot from factories darkened the birch trees the moths landed on. Against a sooty background, birds could see the lighter colored moths better and ate more of them. As a result, more dark moths survived until reproductive age and left offspring. The greater number of offspring left by dark moths is what caused their increase in frequency. This is an example of natural selection." The whole example is full of holes anyway. For one thing, peppered moths don't even rest on trees during the day! They were laboratory-bred moths. As Dr. Carl Wieland comments, "The moths filmed being eaten by the birds were laboratory-bred ones placed onto tree trunks by Kettlewell; they were so languid that he once had to warm them up on his car bonnet (hood)." Dr. Wieland also comments, "And all those still photos of moths on tree trunks? One paper described how it was done - dead moths were glued to the tree. University of Massachusetts biologist Theodore Sargent helped glue moths onto trees for a NOVA documentary. He says textbooks and films have featured 'a lot of fraudulent photographs'." What, pray tell, is scientific about this? :) Maureen
