Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.3K

>One of the best arguments i've read is Genetic Entropy by John Sanford. Sanford is not just a geneticist, is the most renowned of all geneticists and inventor of GMO, although his name is now mud. He says in his book that because of his invention he is independently wealthy and can say what his colleagues can't afford to say (because they need jobs). That is that the more science and technology advances, the more the field of genetics proves evolution is impossible. In fact it proves the opposite: de-evolution. He says it's very likely the first humans lived hundreds of years. Says genetic information follows the 2nd law of thermodynamics -- entropy and that the gene pools of all species are less than 10,000 years old. He converted from atheism to Christianity because of his field of study. I've bought many copies for friends and family.

>>One of the best arguments i've read is Genetic Entropy by John Sanford. Sanford is not just a geneticist, is the most renowned of all geneticists and inventor of GMO, although his name is now mud. He says in his book that because of his invention he is independently wealthy and can say what his colleagues can't afford to say (because they need jobs). That is that the more science and technology advances, the more the field of genetics proves evolution is impossible. In fact it proves the opposite: de-evolution. He says it's very likely the first humans lived hundreds of years. Says genetic information follows the 2nd law of thermodynamics -- entropy and that the gene pools of all species are less than 10,000 years old. He converted from atheism to Christianity because of his field of study. I've bought many copies for friends and family.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (5).
[–] • 2 pts (edited )

Evolution is an idea or a philosophy. It isn't really science. The ideal and most wonderful aspect of science is a scientific study or experiment that is unbiased and not money corrupted. Sometimes instead of experiments you have a collection and evaluation of statistics, and this can be excellent as well. From there you have conjecture and case studies. These things don't really qualify as being scientific proof, but they can serve to inspire the creation of experiments and statistical studies.

Now let's consider how "scientific" evolution is. The best they have is observations and possibly experiments involving simple, microorganisms changing into something incompatible with the start. There is no observations of a cat becoming a dog or something like that. There are no observations or experiments where an animal changes its kind. The claim of evolution is that creatures change small amounts over large periods of time, but even the fossil record does not show this. They only show us huge changes from horse type A to B to C to D. These horses are significantly different. With advanced microscopes, we can actually visualize parts of things such as eyes. To get from eye type A to B, you will need 5 microscopic changes to all occur to go from one functional eye to another. What seems simple in the macro view is actually complex in a microscopic view. The odds of this happening by chance is something like winning the lottery 10 times in a row.

Finally, I will tell you a bit about Genesis. When you try to approach it as a detailed version of history and a scientific lesson, you don't get a good outcome. Ultimately, it is intended to be a spiritual book with a spiritual lesson. Chapter 1 God establishes who he is as creator. Chapter 2 God depicts his intentions for people. Chapter 3 God depicts a corruption of people by "the snake." We have a tree of life and a tree of the knowledge of good and evil. I once read someone's conjecture about how the tree of life is mentioned on both sides of the river of life and how it would have to be a vine tree to do this. Then later I read the book of Enoch and find it outright stating the tree of life is a vine tree. Then you get to Jesus in the gospel of John saying, "I am the vine, and you are the branches." Ultimately, Jesus is the tree of life. It says access to this has been cut off in Gensis, but now that access has been restored.

It says in bad English translations that you will get eternal life by eating from the tree of life. This is a translation of "chai le olam" and is better translated as the life of ages. There is no word in Hebrew that means eternal, and you would have to say "without end" to imply that. There is also no eternal past. Time and space were created by God and have a starting point. You can apply "olam" to the past or the future. Chai le olam is the life God intended for us to be living from the beginning, and the life we will be living in the end and continuously. You can access this life right now by the work of Jesus the messiah. People typically read Jesus saying that the only way to the Father is through him, and then they understand that to be an afterlife statement about going to heaven where the Father is at. He wasn't even talking about the afterlife. Right here in the present life, you can be restored to the Father God through Christ Jesus. If you don't think that is wonderful, than you have been deceived.