It is man's dream to live a longer life. Explorers searched for The Fountain of Youth. Diets and supplements abound, to provide for health and longer life. The medical profession seeks to extend life. Researchers search for causes and cures for old age, and yet, men still die.
We can hook people up to every machine known to man, desperately trying to keep people alive. But when their spirit leaves the body, all that effort is for nought. A dead body will begin to decay, even while machines breath for it and process the bodily functions.
Now an international team of scientists, based at Newcastle University, in North-East England, believe they have found the cause of old age and age-related illnesses. Their research involves a "system biology" approach, involving computer modeling and experiments with cell cultures and genetically modified mice.
Their conclusion: they now believe cells send out a specific internal signal, when serious damage is done to its DNA. This damage is done by the general wear and tear of life and the signals trigger the creation of oxidizing "free radical" molecules, which in turn tell the cell either to destroy itself or stop dividing.
The result is wrinkling of the skin, toughening of the texture, weaker function of muscles and organs, and all the other signs of old age. Apparently, it is the damaged DNA that causes cancers and the ability of the cells to quickly produce these corrective molecules, in a sufficient number, that makes the difference between those who get cancer and those who do not.
Isn't "Mother Nature" amazing? Just imagine how long it must have taken for these cells to mutate into this protective methodology! All this from an explosion of unknown particles, eons ago.
Or, it could be from an infinite, intelligent, purposeful Person, Who designed, built and sustains the known universe, along with all it's systems for purposes known only to Him.
This new research replaces the old research. You see scientists still don't really know why people and animals die, nor how to stop it. The Bible says it's because of sin [Gen. 2:17]. But the evolutionist considers the idea of God to be so repugnant he can't possibly accept this simple solution.
So...he continues his search for The Fountain of Youth! And each new discovery ends in disappointment or leads to a new possibility. Everywhere he looks points him right back to The Bible. It must be frustrating for him.
A discussion of current issues in light of the Bible. Broadcast each Sunday night 8-11 pm (EST) http://www.ustream.tv/channel/sunday-night-bible-forum www.thebibleforum.net
Showing posts with label Science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Science. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Friday, May 1, 2009
NASA's Billion Dollar Gambit
It should be clear by now that the world is divided between those who believe in God and those who don't. It takes a number of forms, but the really big money is in the world of science.
The Issue? Evolution v. Design. Or, more specifically, how the universe began? Has it always been here? That's the Steady State Theory. Or did it have a beginning? That's the General Relativity Theory.
No reputable scientist believes The Steady State Theory any longer. Einstein and host of others have demonstrated, beyond doubt, that the universe had a beginning.
But how did it begin? The accepted answer these days is The Big Bang Theory. There is credible evidence, from a number of sources, that the universe is expanding from a theoretical beginning point. The heavenly bodies are not expanding to fill up the universe. Rather, the universe is expanding.
But every result requires a cause, according to science. If it's a natural cause, it needs a natural beginning. Some sort of natural material must be present BEFORE the Big Bang. Of course that means there is time and space BEFORE the beginning, which is not simply confusing but impossible.
If the cause is outside the natural, that's the definition of supernatural. And, of course, that's what the "Law of Causality" says:
Everything that had a beginning, had a cause
The universe had a beginning
Therefore the universe had a cause
Agnostic Astronomer, Robert Jastrow, in his book: The God of The Astronomer, wrote: "astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the origin of the world."
In this battle, the stakes are high. The Bible's assertion of God as The First Cause cannot stand without destroying the materialist's entire world.
So, NASA is spending a billion taxpayer dollars to find anti-matter in space. They're sending up a rocket to pursue the theory that The Big Bang ocurred when matter and anti-matter collided.
Of course, like grabbing a tiger by the tail, NASA has not indicated what they will do with this anti-matter, should they find it. Putting it in a container would bring it in touch with matter and there would then be an explosion, destroying both.
But, regardless of the outcome, the question will remain: Where did the anti-matter come from?
Stay tuned.
The Issue? Evolution v. Design. Or, more specifically, how the universe began? Has it always been here? That's the Steady State Theory. Or did it have a beginning? That's the General Relativity Theory.
No reputable scientist believes The Steady State Theory any longer. Einstein and host of others have demonstrated, beyond doubt, that the universe had a beginning.
But how did it begin? The accepted answer these days is The Big Bang Theory. There is credible evidence, from a number of sources, that the universe is expanding from a theoretical beginning point. The heavenly bodies are not expanding to fill up the universe. Rather, the universe is expanding.
But every result requires a cause, according to science. If it's a natural cause, it needs a natural beginning. Some sort of natural material must be present BEFORE the Big Bang. Of course that means there is time and space BEFORE the beginning, which is not simply confusing but impossible.
If the cause is outside the natural, that's the definition of supernatural. And, of course, that's what the "Law of Causality" says:
Everything that had a beginning, had a cause
The universe had a beginning
Therefore the universe had a cause
Agnostic Astronomer, Robert Jastrow, in his book: The God of The Astronomer, wrote: "astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the origin of the world."
In this battle, the stakes are high. The Bible's assertion of God as The First Cause cannot stand without destroying the materialist's entire world.
So, NASA is spending a billion taxpayer dollars to find anti-matter in space. They're sending up a rocket to pursue the theory that The Big Bang ocurred when matter and anti-matter collided.
Of course, like grabbing a tiger by the tail, NASA has not indicated what they will do with this anti-matter, should they find it. Putting it in a container would bring it in touch with matter and there would then be an explosion, destroying both.
But, regardless of the outcome, the question will remain: Where did the anti-matter come from?
Stay tuned.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Maybe Now It Makes Sense
Over the last 10 years suicide among young people (10 - 24 years of age) has increased 10-fold. Suicide is now the 3rd leading cause of death among this demographic. There are now twice as many suicides as deaths from HIV/AIDs. More females than males consider suicide, but four times as many males die by this method than females.
It is not fair to make sweeping generalizations about such a serious situation. However, there are some interesting and informative statistics.
The children committing suicide largely feel as though they are cut off from family, friends and any meaningful relationships. Feelings of hopelessness and worthlessness, a family history of depression, feelings of isolation, physical or sexual abuse and the lack of a social support system are just a few of the emotional issues that accompany suicide.
My opinion is that we're playing around with fundamental social structures like family and sexuality and worth, reaping the logical result.
The psychological community responds to all this by insisting parents make sure children feel a sense of worth. Of course, this means simply telling a child how special they are, whether they are or aren't. Any engaged parent can tell you this just creates monsters. Young people who think they're special are now sure of it!
In the "old days" parents gave children credit for doing worthwhile things. And the accomplishments of worth reinforced positive feelings of worth. A worth that translates into productivity rather than destruction.
Children were an integral part of the family structure. They had a place. They had a job. And they knew who they were and where they stood. Today our children are living a disconnected life and wondering what's the use.
Where does all this come from? We'll here's a suggestion:
Richard Dawkins -- noted Darwinian Evolutionist -- said, "Life has no higher purpose than to perpetuate the survival of DNA...life has no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference."
William Provine -- another Darwinianist -- said, "There are no gods, no purposes, and no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death....There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning in life, and no free will for humans."
Is it possible that, after 70 years of this kind of instruction in our Schools and government-sponsored indoctrination, we have an entire society that believes these things?
On the other hand, noted scientists like Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle (Father of Modern Chemistry), Michael Faraday (Father of Electromagnetism), Louis Pasteur, Charles Babbage (Computer Science), Lord Kelvin (Thermodynamics) and scores of others were men and women who believed the Bible.
It was the fact that the universe was orderly (the product of intelligent design) that both motivated and encouraged them to continue in their research and study. A random universe can have no scientific hope. If things don't work the same way every time, how can you make sense of them or quantify them?
And, it would seem, a social structure without hope is equally discouraging.
It is not fair to make sweeping generalizations about such a serious situation. However, there are some interesting and informative statistics.
The children committing suicide largely feel as though they are cut off from family, friends and any meaningful relationships. Feelings of hopelessness and worthlessness, a family history of depression, feelings of isolation, physical or sexual abuse and the lack of a social support system are just a few of the emotional issues that accompany suicide.
My opinion is that we're playing around with fundamental social structures like family and sexuality and worth, reaping the logical result.
The psychological community responds to all this by insisting parents make sure children feel a sense of worth. Of course, this means simply telling a child how special they are, whether they are or aren't. Any engaged parent can tell you this just creates monsters. Young people who think they're special are now sure of it!
In the "old days" parents gave children credit for doing worthwhile things. And the accomplishments of worth reinforced positive feelings of worth. A worth that translates into productivity rather than destruction.
Children were an integral part of the family structure. They had a place. They had a job. And they knew who they were and where they stood. Today our children are living a disconnected life and wondering what's the use.
Where does all this come from? We'll here's a suggestion:
Richard Dawkins -- noted Darwinian Evolutionist -- said, "Life has no higher purpose than to perpetuate the survival of DNA...life has no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference."
William Provine -- another Darwinianist -- said, "There are no gods, no purposes, and no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death....There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning in life, and no free will for humans."
Is it possible that, after 70 years of this kind of instruction in our Schools and government-sponsored indoctrination, we have an entire society that believes these things?
On the other hand, noted scientists like Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle (Father of Modern Chemistry), Michael Faraday (Father of Electromagnetism), Louis Pasteur, Charles Babbage (Computer Science), Lord Kelvin (Thermodynamics) and scores of others were men and women who believed the Bible.
It was the fact that the universe was orderly (the product of intelligent design) that both motivated and encouraged them to continue in their research and study. A random universe can have no scientific hope. If things don't work the same way every time, how can you make sense of them or quantify them?
And, it would seem, a social structure without hope is equally discouraging.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)