The Language of Plants

Where does human language come from? There is no known mechanism as to how human speech “evolved.” No theories are supported by evidence. Even noted linguist Noam Chomsky admits that there is no clear path for the “evolution” of human speech.

What about animals? Many species have intricate systems of communication. Blue whales, the largest animals on Earth, sing songs that travel hundreds of miles. Bees use a “wiggle dance” to tell other bees where to find nectar. The dances are complex, and various wiggles tell other bees how far and in what direction. Somehow, without attending a single dance class, the bees know how to do and understand precise dances that give three dimensional directions. It strikes me as ridiculous to claim that these and hundreds of other animal “languages” were developed through any step-by-step process of trial and error, of keeping the best mistakes.

Language is a subject Darwinian evolutionists prefer to ignore. Do you really think blue whales got together to decide what their songs mean? That bees sat around and agreed that shaking the thorax means the nectar is south? We have left plausibility far behind.

And then there is communication between plants. Yes plants! Some plants, when attacked, give off signals that tell other plants to create chemicals to discourage attacking animals. Plant communication was laughed at when first discovered, but dozens of rigorous scientific studies reveal a hidden world of communication, and there is much more to be learned. I don’t see how any rational person could claim plant communication “evolved.” We are talking about organisms without brains and generally without the capacity to move. Note that the plant being eaten gains no evolutionary advantage by warning other plants.

For plants to communicate, both plants have to know that a certain signal, chemical or other, means that certain steps should be taken. You need that agreement, and you need mechanisms to send and receive the signals – for humans, vocal cords and ears. Then you need the ability to take action – for the plants, increase production of compounds designed to discourage predators. The system is obviously irreducibly complex; if you take away any of the parts the system no longer works. The pieces could not have separately “evolved.”

Only God could have designed human eyes, ears, and vocal cords, and given us the gift of language. Only God could have designed communication systems for animals, and for plants.

And so I ask you to use your gift of language, your ability to communicate through speech, writing, and actions, to spread the good news of modern science. As I have noted in post after post, modern science absolutely reveals the existence of God. Together we can spread a message of hope, and defeat the Atheist claim that we are chemical scum, and the universe is a meaningless place. Those who deny obvious facts are without excuse. As St. Paul wrote two thousand years ago:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

Romans 1:18-20 (emphasis added).

I think God made systems that allow plants to communicate to reveal his power and glory. When you look closely at “the things that have been made,” you see God.

Thanks for reading. I’ve been dealing with medical issues that have slowed me and my posts down. But the science of God and creation keeps growing, and I have much more to share.

Doug Ell

Caesar Proclaimed the Resurrection

My last post was prompted by an article from the Associates for Biblical Research. While poking around their website, I learned an astonishing fact.

In the late 1800’s, a French collector acquired an ancient stone from Nazareth. The stone, now in the Louvre in Paris, is a marble tablet about 24 inches by 15 inches. It contains an edict by Emperor Claudius (AD 41-54) ordering the death penalty for stealing bodies from Jewish tombs. Bodies?. Grave robbers steal valuables, not bodies. Why would stealing bodies from Jewish tombs, a pathetically trivial subject for the Empire, merit an imperial decree?

Below I quote the Book of Matthew. This comes immediately after the death of Jesus on the cross:

The next day, the one after Preparation Day, the chief priests and the Pharisees went to Pilate. “Sir,” they said, “we remember that while he was still alive that deceiver said, ‘After three days I will rise again.’ So give the order for the tomb to be made secure until the third day. Otherwise, his disciples may come and steal the body and tell the people that he has been raised from the dead. This last deception will be worse than the first.”
“Take a guard,” Pilate answered. “Go, make the tomb as secure as you know how.”
So they went and made the tomb secure by putting a seal on the stone and posting the guard.

The scene is set. Jesus is dead. Powerful Jewish leaders, the chief Priests and Pharisees, post their top guards and make the “tomb as secure as [they] know how.”

Now back to Matthew.

After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men. The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay.”

This is the key event of the Christian faith. Jesus is risen. Matthew tells us the cover-up began immediately.

While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, telling them, “You are to say, ‘His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.’ If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.

That’s the cover-up. Tell everyone a totally disorganized group of backwoods, uneducated disciples came in while the elite guards were sleeping, and not only were able to unseal a large stone but, even more amazing, were able to do it without waking the guards. Not a believable cover-up story, but that is the best they could come up with. The empty tomb was on public display; they couldn’t deny that.

As the Book of Ecclesiastes says, “there is nothing new under the sun.” Government propaganda lies are not new. Almost two thousand years ago, the Emperor of Rome, then the most powerful person in the world, tried to prop up this absurd story that uneducated peasants snuck by an elite guard and opened a sealed tomb while the guards were sleeping! Emperor Claudius probably issued the edict when he took control in 41 AD, at the request of his childhood friend, Jewish King Herod Agrippa I. That’s just eight years after the Resurrection. The authorities wanted to control the situation. Tensions between the Romans and the Jews were high, partly because just before his death Caligula (whose assassination brought Claudius to power) had ordered that his statute be placed in the Temple in Jerusalem. Also, the news of Jesus’s Resurrection had spread, Jesus had appeared to hundreds of people (500 at one time, according to St. Paul), and the Romans and Jewish leaders were trying to control what they perceived as a serious political threat. No doubt as news of the Resurrection spread travelers came to Nazareth to learn more about Jesus.

The cover-up continues to this day. Notoriously anti-God Wikipedia writes. “As the original location of the stone is unknown, no clear argument can be made for the stone to be a Roman response to the empty tomb story.” Seriously? They can’t figure out the argument? What else could the Roman edict be about? And exactly what difference does it make what spot in or near Nazareth the stone originally occupied? Nazareth was an absolute no place in the Roman Empire, a small backward town on the wrong side of the tracks. To find an edict from a Roman Emperor anywhere in the vicinity, with a message so clearly aimed at denying the Resurrection, is astonishing.

The Resurrection is the most documented event in the ancient world. It changed the world more than any other event. As Billy Graham said: “There is more evidence that Jesus rose from the dead than there is that Julius Caesar ever lived.” Without the Resurrection, there is no reason why all (but one) of his disciples chose to suffer a brutal death rather than deny Jesus. No one dies for a lie. There is no other explanation for the growth of the Christian church.

Even Caesar proclaimed the Resurrection! He affirmed the most important event in history. He just didn’t mean to do it.

Thanks for reading.

Doug Ell

The Old Testament and the Chronology Back to Adam

I recently learned there are different versions of the Old Testament. One is the Masoretic Text, or MT. The MT was put into its present form in the 10th century by Talmudic scholars. Another version is the Septaugint, which means 70 in Latin, also known as the LXX. The LXX was created much earlier, perhaps around 250 BC by Hebrew scholars at the request of King Ptolemy II of Egypt. It is the first translation of the Bible, and is written in Greek.

Opinions differ on which is more reliable. The Orthodox Church leans toward the LXX. The New Testament contains quotes from the LXX. However, some believe the LXX omits parts of the books of Job and Jeremiah. The Old Testament in today’s Christian Bible is a translation of the MT.

The two versions have different chronologies going back to Adam. For the most part, the list of patriarchs is the same. For the most part, the life spans of the patriarchs are the same. The key difference is in “begetting” ages, the time elapsed from one generation to another. For example, in the LXX Seth is born when Adam is 230, and Adam lives another 700 years after Seth’s birth, for a total of 930 years. In the MT Seth is born when Adam is 130, and Adam lives another 800 years after Seth’s birth, again for a total of 930 years. If it were just Adam, you might think this a simple mistake. However, this exact 100-year difference in the space between generations appears for 12 patriarchs (six before the Flood, six after), and, in the case of Nahor, Abraham’s grandfather, there is a difference of 50 years. This is no accident. Someone or some group deliberately either added 1250 years to the time going back to Adam, or shortened that time by 1250 years.

Scholars have debated which chronology is accurate for two thousand years. Most ancient Christian scholars argued for the originality of the LXX’s primeval chronology, and that consensus lasted over 14 centuries until the Reformation.

The Winter 2018 issue of Bible and Spade, the magazine of Associates for Biblical Research, contains an excellent article on this conundrum by Henry B. Smith Jr. He concludes “the MT’s primeval chronology was deliberately reduced in the second century AD by 1250 years.”

Why? Smith provides a motive. Around 150 BC, an unknown author deceptively claiming to be Moses penned the Book of Jubilees. In Hebrew tradition a jubilee is a period of 49 years. Jubilees rewrites Biblical history into periods of 49 years. In Jubilees, Joshua enters and conquers Canaan on the 50th Jubilee since creation, or exactly 2450 years after creation. To make this work, the author had to do some serious cutting, and slashed 1250 years off the begetting ages.

Jubilees claimed to be a new revelation, originally written ages before on “heavenly tablets” that pre-dated the Torah. Jubilees was extremely popular, and considered authoritative in some early traditions. Smith suggests Jubilees induced Hebrew scholars to adopt lower begetting ages.

Jubilees proposed lower begetting ages than found in the LXX, and the MT authors ultimately adopted many of them. For the first five patriarchs, from Adam to Mahalalel, the MT slices exactly 100 years off the begetting age, as was done in Jubilees. However, for three of the next four patriarchs –Jared, Methuselah, and Lamech – the begetting ages were not reduced. Why not? Smith suggests that the authors of the MT realized that these additional reductions would result in patriarchs (other than Noah and his sons) living beyond the Flood.

One of Smith’s most compelling arguments is that the longer chronology in the LXX is affirmed by at least four independent ancient works. One of these is Antiquities of the Jews by Flavius Josephus, who was a very careful historian. Smith writes: “All reliable external witnesses before AD 100 outside rabbinic influence unanimously testify to the longer chronology.”

This is deep subject, and I can offer only a glimpse of the issues and arguments. I have brutally oversimplified. There are many issues in the chronology back to Adam. However, the 1250-year difference in the begetting ages between the MT and the LXX is the most important. Some try to discredit the LXX, because in some later copies Methuselah lives beyond the Flood, but that has been shown to be a copying error from early versions.

Associates for Biblical Research uses archeology to confirm the biblical record. Smith’s article is important because under the MT chronology there isn’t enough time. If the Flood occurred around 2500 BC, as some might place it based on the MT, many of the dates established by archeological findings and historical records don’t work well. Smith dates the Flood at 3298 BC, and Creation at 5554 BC. These dates leave adequate time for repopulation after the Flood, the Tower of Babel, and the spread of humanity.

I must note I find this post disturbing. I am suggesting the Bible in your house is not completely accurate. I don’t like that, and it doesn’t feel right. I am not telling you what to believe. My goal is to give you facts you may not be aware of, and let you decide.

This post doesn’t contradict in any way the enormous evidence of modern science that the universe and life were designed. This post doesn’t contradict in any way the overwhelming scientific evidence the Earth is young. In past posts I have touched on some of that, such as dinosaur “soft tissue,” Flood memories in societies around the world, and strong DNA evidence. With the LXX chronology, we get times that agree with the archeological and historical evidence.

Thanks for reading.

Doug Ell

The Institute for Creation Research

Thursday I was privileged to spend a few fantastic hours at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). I visited with staff and scientists at their Dallas campus, and previewed the Discovery Center. When finished, hopefully next year, it will feature a state-of-the-art planetarium, animatronic dinosaurs (imagine a flying pterosaur swooping down!), fossils, a model of Noah’s Ark, geological evidence of the Flood, and so much more.

I met many of their distinguished scientists, dedicated and humble people who spurned more lucrative positions to confirm God’s word. Their powerful intellect was matched only by their passion. We shared the wonder of some of my favorite subjects, like the DNA evidence of recent creation and a real Adam and Eve, the mind-blowing technology of life, multiple discoveries disproving the Big Bang theory (spiral galaxies, absence of anti-matter, blue stars, double stars, comets, and heavy elements, to name just a few), and the evidence for a single ice age.

If want to know the literal truth of Genesis, read their publications, and, when it is finished, get yourself to Dallas and the Discovery Center. ICR offers a fire hose of evidence. An easy way to start is by signing up for their free monthly magazine, Acts and Facts, which is available here.

One of their favorite subjects, one we came back to again and again, is dinosaurs. They noted the term “dinosaur” is relatively new; before that they were called dragons. I saw an enormous fossil head of a 35-foot-long sea monster that was instantly buried during the Flood. I saw fossils with authentic, preserved dinosaur proteins, tested by a secular lab to be just thousands of years old. The worldwide discoveries of dinosaur “soft tissue,” original blood in some cases, shatter the secular myth of an old Earth.

ICR needs funds to complete their Discovery Center. I invite you to join the cause and be part of this exciting project. You can donate here.

Let us thank God for the Institute for Creation Research. They are a beacon of hope in our confused world.

Thanks for reading.


One, Two, Three, What Are We Marching For?

I went to college during the Vietnam War. I marched in demonstrations and got tear-gassed on the National Mall, a classic case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I have a lot of great memories from those days, and one is of a catchy tune from a band called Country Joe and the Fish. Here is the first verse of the refrain:

And it’s one, two, three,
What are we fighting for?
Don’t ask me, I don’t give a damn,
Next stop is Vietnam;

Click here to check out the video from Woodstock if you have a minute.

This coming Saturday, April 14, perhaps one million people worldwide will “March For Science.” And I can’t help asking myself, reminiscent of Country Joe and the Fish, what exactly are they marching for?

The principal website gives some reasons. “I march because science is my favorite subject.” “I march because science makes beer taste better.” (I did not make that up.) “I march because I like turtles,” and so on. These are all fine, but marches are really about sending a political message. What is the political message?

Clearly, one is the environment and climate change. I too want to protect the environment, although I think it worth noting that science does not clearly establish a connection between man-made activities and global warming. Harvard Professor Willie Soon has been viciously attacked just for questioning the connection, and noting studies that man-made carbon particles generally are out of the atmosphere within four years.

Another political reason is to get more funding for science. Not a bad goal, but I don’t think the marchers are asking for an increase in their taxes to pay for that. Not clear whether they want to cut health, social services, veterans pensions, or what.

Beyond that the stated reasons in this year’s website get deliberately vague. “I march because I’m afraid of what happens if we start to confuse strongly held opinions with facts.” A Wikipedia entry states this includes “acceptance of the scientific consensus on evolution.” It appears that last year the principal website was more direct, and stated that “The diversity of life arose by evolution.”

That is political. It’s scientism, not science. It’s naked belief that science can explain everything without God. One of the ironic facts here, as I’ve pointed out before, is that the top biologists worldwide absolutely know that Darwin’s theory of molecules-to-man evolution can’t begin to explain where the fantastic amounts of information arose to build every creature on Earth. You don’t get technology like the human brain by keeping the best mistakes, by a process of mutation. It is also an established fact that there is absolutely no explanation for the origin of life without God. So the truth is that many people will march in support of their strongly held opinion, contrary to science, that Darwin’s theory explains everything and that you don’t need God.

The marchers ignore the over 1,000 Ph.D. scientists who have signed the Dissent From Darwin petition, many at the cost of their careers. The marchers ignore the DNA evidence that we are all descended from a single man and a single woman, exactly as the Bible tells us. I suspect many of the marchers are marching against God.

If you want to march for better beer, go for it. But please don’t march for the false religion of Scientism, and please don’t march to silence the true science that proves God.

Thanks for reading.


The Irony of Stephen Hawking

Stephen Hawking was exceptional. He fought ALS for 55 years, perhaps longer than any other person. Despite being confined to a wheelchair for most of his life, and unable to communicate fully, he made significant contributions to physics.

But Hawking had a blind spot when it came to God. Even though his own discoveries pointed to God, he refused to believe.

He died March 14 at age 76. When he was born, most people thought the universe was eternal – that it had always existed. Hawking helped change that view, helped convince others the universe had a beginning. As I show in Chapter 7 of Counting to God, this now undeniable scientific conclusion points to a first cause, a cause outside of time and space. It points directly to God. Yet Hawking refused to accept his own evidence. In an interview, he stated:

Before we understand science, it is natural to believe that God created the universe. But now science offers a more convincing explanation.

But his problem, and the problem of every other Atheist, is that there is no scientific experiment or fact-based theory that can explain a universe created from nothing. One of the most respected laws of physics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, states that mass/energy cannot be created or destroyed. Hawking denied the First Law. He wrote “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.”

Voltaire wrote: “To the living we owe respect, to the dead we owe only the truth.” The truth is Hawking’s statement is one of the most illogical statements ever made. As English mathematician John Lennox pointed out, it is triple nonsense. First, where did gravity come from? “Who put it there? And what was the creative force behind its birth?” Second, how can a law of physics create something from nothing? “The laws of physics can explain how the jet engine works, but someone has to build the thing, put in the fuel and start it up.” Third, what was the torch, the first cause, to start the process? “Who lit it, if not God?”

Hawking’s books sold millions, but many languished unread on coffee tables. It wasn’t just because they were difficult; it was because in key ways they didn’t make sense. Hawking tried to use math and geometry to avoid the question of how time began. He compared asking what happened before the universe was created to asking what’s south of the South Pole. He invented a concept of “imaginary time,” where time has multiple dimensions like the surface of the Earth. But imaginary time is just that, imaginary. It’s cute math to deny God, but without a shred of scientific evidence.

The fine-tuning of the laws of physics, Chapter 8 of Counting to God, was another major problem for Hawking’s Atheism. In his youth, he developed a formula that showed how fine-tuned gravity had to be for the universe to not fly apart and to not collapse on itself. Paul Davies used that formula to compute that the gravitational constant was fine-tuned to at least one part in a number with 60 zeros. Getting that precision by chance is like picking a special, marked marble out of a pile of marbles 100 light years in diameter, big enough to include thousands of stars. Hawking knew that. He wrote:

The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron. . . . The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life.

Yes, fine-tuning is a “remarkable fact.” It is also remarkable, and ironic, that Steven Hawking could prove fine-tuning but not accept God.

His story was worthy of a movie, and indeed became one in the award-winning 2014 film The Theory of Everything. But because Hawking rejected God, he missed the true theory of everything. It has three letters: G O D. Only God can explain a universe created from nothing. Only God can explain the fine-tuning of the universe. Only God can explain the enormous amount of information needed to build every living creature.

Thanks for reading. Have a blessed Easter.


The Glory of the Peacock

Have you ever seen a peacock? The tail – “train” – opens like a fan, and explodes with colors and patterns. Here’s a short video:

The sight is glorious.

How did the peacock get its tail? The secular world insists all creatures “evolved” by a process of keeping the best mistakes, by mutations that just, “accidentally,” happened to create incredible technology. I’ve shown mathematically why that theory, Darwin’s “goo-to-you” theory of evolution, is nonsense, why mutations only destroy information; they can’t create it.

Darwin knew nothing about DNA and genes, but he did know his theory did not explain the peacock. The oversized, glorious tail of the peacock slows it down. The tail does not help the peacock get food, avoid predators, or otherwise survive. How did such a beautiful tail “evolve” without God? In 1860, a year after he published his theory, Darwin wrote:

“The sight of a feather in a peacock’s tail, whenever I gaze at it, makes me sick!”

Eleven years later Darwin tried to solve the problem. He invented a “theory of sexual selection.” The basic idea was that the peacock’s tail had the value of attracting females (peahens), and therefore had “evolved” without God. In other words, Darwin claimed that peacocks with sexier tails had better luck with the peahens, and passed on their genes to the next generation. It’s a “just-so” story worthy of Kipling, and does nothing to explain how the whole process got started, where the information and technology came from to build the first peacock tail, but it was enough of a fig leaf to satisfy generations of Darwinists that the problem had been solved.

Until a research team tested it. After a seven year study, researchers announced in 2007 that “the peacock’s train is not the object of female sexual preference – contradicting Darwin’s theory of sexual selection.” In other words, females mated with “poor-quality” peacocks as often as with “flashy, high-quality” peacocks. Darwin’s ‘theory of sexual selection’ fails to explain the very thing Darwin concocted it for! More hard scientific evidence (like the rejection of “junk” DNA and the absence of intermediary forms in the fossil record) that Darwin was wrong.

And the colors! Those brilliant, iridescent colors of the peacock don’t come from dyes. They are produced by super small geometric structures of atoms, designed to intensify certain wavelengths of light. To design that structure, and to build the factories to produce and assemble it, is stunning, futuristic technology.

Just like Darwin in 1860, evolutionary biologists today should feel sick looking at the glory of the peacock. A glory that reflects, in a very small way, the glory of God.

Thanks for reading. Please share the good news of true science. Together we can change the world.


The DNA of Eve

One spectacular achievement of modern science is the ability to sequence DNA. We can now “read” the exact DNA code of you, me, and every other living creature. Human beings have about 3.2 billion letters of DNA code in almost every cell. By “reading” the code, and comparing differences, we can trace genealogy and recreate the history of the human race. When we do that, we get fantastic confirmation of the Bible.

You may have heard of “mitochondrial Eve.” It is now commonly accepted, even by Atheist scientists, that all human beings are descended from a single female. This woman, this mother of all humanity, they call “mitochondrial Eve.” Of course, people who believe in molecules-to-man evolution aren’t suggesting the Bible is true, but they are agreeing with the Bible that we are all descended from a single female. Secular scientists will tell you that mitochondrial Eve lived about 200,000 years ago. The Bible tells us Eve lived around 6,000 years ago.

Mitochondria are energy factories in cells. They have their own DNA, and each person receives their mitochondria DNA, also called mtDNA, only from their mothers. By measuring differences in mtDNA from one person to another, we can measure the “genetic drift” from mutations over generations, and get an idea of how closely people are related. If we know the total number of mtDNA differences in human beings, and know how fast mutations/differences pile up over generations, we can estimate the time back to Eve, Biblical or otherwise.

The original studies assumed that mtDNA mutations occurred as at the same rate as mutations in normal DNA. The data now reveals a much faster rate of mutations in mtDNA than in normal DNA. If Eve lived 200,000 years ago, the total number of differences in mtDNA among humans living today should be around 470. If Eve lived 6,000 years ago, as the Bible tells us, the total number of differences in mtDNA should be around 80. Guess what — the measured number is 80!

Science again proves the Bible is correct. You might also be interested in an earlier post noting that, using differences in DNA from the Y chromosome, which men inherit only from their fathers, the data indicates that all men are descended from a single man who lived about 4,500 years ago. (Hint – there was a big flood.) You can find it here:

Going back to Eve, the mtDNA analysis confirms the Bible in a second important way. If you look at a chart (Answers magazine, Jan-Feb 2018, Vol. 13 No. 1, page 59) connecting related individuals according to their mtDNA, you will find three points, or “nodes,” from which all mtDNA is related. These nodes represent the wives of Noah’s three sons. They are close to each other on the chart, because they were each possibly 10th generation descendants of Eve. From these three nodes the chart spreads out, as the mtDNA of all humanity is descended from one of these three women.

Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson, who has a Ph.D. from Harvard in cell and developmental biology, recently published an excellent book titled “Replacing Darwin.” I hope to write more about this exciting book. Dr. Jeanson has studied mtDNA differences in a variety of species. In every case, from chickens to fruit flies roundworms to bakers yeast, the data contradicts the predictions of millions of years of evolution. The actual number of mtDNA differences is much less than those predictions.

It is sad that our “popular” media purposely ignores scientific results that confirm the Bible. Instead, our biased media hypes stories intended to make the Bible look unreliable. I noted a few months ago where it was reported, and read by hundreds of millions of people, that DNA testing of people living today in Lebanon contradicted the Bible. These stories got it absolutely backward, because the DNA findings were exactly what the Bible says, that, despite God’s instructions to kill all Canaanites, the Israelites disobeyed, and let some live. Here is my post on that:

How are we to overcome this enormous bias, this deliberate withholding of the truth? I am not aware of a single major newspaper, magazine, or TV channel that reported the new data on mtDNA mutations, this stunning discovery, this scientific revelation that Eve lived about 6,000 years ago. Perhaps the only way to fight this bias is through the combined efforts of ordinary people, people like me and you. Friends don’t let friends be Atheists, at least not without exposing them to science that reveals God.

We need to spread the good news of true science. Together we can change the world.

Thanks for reading.


Smarter Than You Think

Answers in Genesis publishes a bimonthly magazine called “Answers.” The scientific evidence for God will astound you. In this post I draw largely from an article in their January-February 2018 edition.

According to Darwin’s theory of evolution, complex animals “evolved” from simple life forms. This pagan idea that you can put life on a scale, from simple to complex, goes back at least to Aristotle. It predicts simple life should not be intelligent, and certainly not capable of advanced thinking. It predicts humans are the most advanced, with apes just below, and simple animals have little to no intelligence.

Guess what? Like so many other predictions of Darwin, it’s been disproven:

  • Forager ants recognize themselves in the mirror. If a dab of paint is applied to their face, they see it and try to wipe it off. This mirror test is called “self-awareness,” and is used to distinguish between humans and apes. Some apes don’t pass; but forager ants do. Also passing are some birds (magpies), dolphins, elephants, and at least one fish (manta ray).
  • Those little chickadees in your bird feeder can describe objects to each other. They use syntax in their chirps – the order carries meaning, like words in a sentence. Syntax was considered limited to humans. How does the ability to communicate in a language with syntax arise from a Darwinian process?
  • Prairie dogs also have a complex language of chirps. They can tell each other a predator’s size, shape, color, location, and speed—even the color of hikers’ shirts.
  • Scrub jays have “theory of mind.” They have the ability to think about what others are thinking. If a scrub jay sees another jay watching it, it will fake burying seeds, and actually bury the seeds when not being watched.
  • Vampire bats share food. But if another bat doesn’t reciprocate, the deadbeat is refused further meals.
  • Jays and crows remember hundreds of places where seeds are buried. Personally, I can’t keep track of my car keys.
  • Octopuses recognize and remember faces. One loved to squirt a particular volunteer.
  • I had a friend who, years ago, kept a pet snake. (I have no idea why.) He ultimately realized that, at night, the snake would use the plumbing, climbing in and out of sinks and toilets, to escape the room in which it was locked and roam the house. Then, before morning, it would return to the room it started from, to hide its ability to roam. That was one smart snake!

Most people don’t realize Darwin’s theory is not a scientific theory. No experiment or scientific result can disprove it. When the predictions of Darwinists are proven false—such as the prediction of “junk DNA,” squarely rejected by over 400 scientists working on the ENCODE project, or the prediction of useless, “vestigial” organs, proven false in case after case—Darwinists ignore the results. If science cannot disprove a theory, then the theory is not based on science.

So-called “simple” animals show an astonishing degree of intelligence. What about us? Are we smart enough to look at the evidence and think clearly? If we do, we see God. We are not descended from pond scum; we were created by a divine being.

Thanks for reading. Please share the good news that true science reveals God. The world needs hope, and together we can change the world.

Doug Ell

The Eye of the Scallop

Who knew, right? Scallops have eyes? Well, believe it or not, they do. And not just any eyes, but eyes with space-age technology. If you look hard at the eye of the scallop, you will see the magnificence of God.

Next year NASA hopes to launch the James Webb Space Telescope, to study the universe through infrared light. James Webb will use an array of 18 hexagonal mirrors, each focusing light to a single sensor. This array, or grid, technology is used in today’s largest and newest telescopes, and now NASA intends to launch one into space.

Scallops have dozens of eyes; one species has up to 200, most of which are neon blue. Each eye reflects light using mirrors made up of – ready? – a grid of crystals. Here’s one description:

The mirror consists of flat, square guanine crystals, each a millionth of a meter wide. They tessellate together into a chessboard-like grid. Between 20 and 30 of these grids then stack on top of each other, with a liquid-filled gap between them. And the layers are arranged so that the squares in each one lie directly beneath the squares in the one above. The crystals and the gaps between them are respectively 74 and 86 billionths of a meter thick, and these exacting distances mean that the mirror as a whole is great at reflecting blue-green light—the color that dominates the scallop’s underwater habitat.

This type of crystal – made of guanine (one of the “letters” of DNA) – normally grows in prisms, not flat squares. The scallop has to shape each crystal into a flat square with exactly the right dimensions. The crystals are not inanimate objects; they are within living cells. The cells then communicate with each other to “tessellate” into the exact perfect grid for the scallop to see, and the grids somehow know how to stack up 20 or 30 deep exactly on top of each other with exactly the right distance between them.

This amazing recent discovery is worth repeating. Special cells contain a crystal with precise dimensions. These cells communicate to form precise grids, and the grids know how to stack up, precisely aligned on top of each other, 20 to 30 layers deep.

Scallops have two retinas, or light detection areas. The mirror is tilted a bit relative to the retinas, so that it projects “light from the center of the animal’s visual field onto the upper retina, and light from the periphery onto the lower one.”

Scallops can see tiny particles. Scientists don’t know how the signals from the dozens of eyes are combined, but somehow the brain of the scallop has the ability to process dozens of images, up to two hundred separate signals, and see clearly.

Get the picture? Space-age technology using a complex grid mirror perfectly designed to see through blue-green light, that focuses simultaneously on things in the center of the field of vision and on the periphery, and then combines the signals. As The Atlantic, which is not a religious magazine, gushed, “the whole structure is a master class in precision engineering.”

Amen! But then, sadly, the magazine attributes this precision engineering to “the evolutionary process,” by which they mean it formed according to Darwin’s theory of keeping the best mistakes. There is no “search” button in Darwinian evolution; change only comes through random mutations, 99.99% percent of which are harmful or at best neutral.

We are supposed to believe you can get “a master class in precision engineering” from random mutations? This structure is irreducibly complex. Without all the pieces, put together just right, it won’t work. It’s like a mousetrap, only much more complex. It couldn’t have arisen by chance.

Compare the two systems. First is NASA’s new telescope, with one grid mirror and a single detection area. Second is the eye of the scallop with 20 to 30 grid mirrors precisely aligned one on top of other, focusing light into two detection areas, and a brain that combines the signals from up to 200 of these eyes. We know the James Webb Space Telescope was designed. Beyond doubt, the eye of the scallop was designed.

The theory of intelligent design, that God designed every living creature, predicts we will find complex structures in living creatures. The eye of the scallop is proof of God. As St. Paul wrote almost 2,000 years ago:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

Romans 1:19-20, with emphasis added. In the things that have been made, we see God. And those who deny it are without excuse.

Thanks for reading. Please share the good news that science proves the existence of God. Together we can overcome the sad Atheist paradigm that life is meaningless. Together we can restore hope. Together we can change the world.

Doug Ell