Mrs F. Brown from Cheshire, England, wondered why we only mentioned Democrat presidents in ‘Presidents and Evolution’, Creation 22(4):56. We assured her that (i) AiG is an apolitical organization; (ii) being Australian, the editors were not likely to have strong feelings about US domestic politics, and (iii) had we known of similar quotes from Republican presidents on this topic, we would have included them, too. But it is a fact that Democrats recently have been in the forefront of evolutionary causes like abortion-on-demand (both Planned Parenthood and Right to Life groups agreed that Gore was the ‘abortion candidate’ in the recent US election, e.g.), so there was a greater sample size, as it were.
Renton McLachlan from Porirua, New Zealand, wrote to tell us that his photo of the fossilized hat (23(1):10) was not in a ‘mining museum’, but in what is called ‘The Buried Village’, an open air museum dedicated to the Mt Tarawera eruption (whoops!).
Graham Wilson of East Lothian in England pointed out that ‘The mysterious giant squid’ 23(1):22 should have referred to Lord Alfred (not Albert) Tennyson. Or better: Alfred, Lord Tennyson.
I’m a fifteen-year-old hobby programmer who enjoys reading your literature tremendously. Re ‘Fruit flies spread wings’ 22(4):5—it doesn’t take long to learn that one tiny bug in a program can likely make the whole program not work. If I were to tell an evolutionist that I just copied my code, and it suddenly got better, they would not believe me.
It was saddening, but no surprise, to read your report ‘British Christians a “deviant minority”’ (22(4):7) about the decline in Christian belief in Britain.
As a British Christian I have no doubt that the blind acceptance of Darwinism is at the heart of this decline. In particular it is the cruel dog-eat-dog world-view of evolution which seems to ring ‘true’ with so many people’s experience of life—this is why, I believe, people accept a godless philosophy.
Also, Darwinism is a British invention. As Britain’s glorious past slips into history and disrepute, Darwinism seems like our last national treasure. To deny it, or even question it, would seem to many unpatriotic.
It is a challenge for us all to live like Christ and make a difference—showing practically that God’s ways are right—as well as preaching Christ and His infallible Word.
West Sussex, England.
I have to admit my chagrin when faced with another Templeton that has fallen from the ranks of ‘Bible Believers.’ Personally I had never heard of Charles Templeton prior to this article and am sorry to hear of his departure from sound doctrine. I was aware of Sir John Templeton who has become quite famous since his influence (Templeton Prize) with many big name Christians became known. Now we have two Templetons that have changed the truth of God for a lie and refused the only true salvation.
My wife and I are of the ‘Believing Templetons’. We have put our trust in God’s Son through His Word and forsaken personal opinions where they differ from His Word. Without His words we would be lost and have no light in this dark world.
AMES and LINDA TEMPLETON,
I was reading with interest your article in (1) about the hairs on humans. If I understood it correctly, we always have the same number but they just get fatter or thinner over time. So does that mean that the Lord doesn’t have to keep constantly altering [His count of] the number of hairs on our heads? [Matthew 10:30].
I suppose so, Jean, although keeping a changing tally would not present a problem to an omnipotent, omniscient God either—Ed.
Thank you for Mark Johansen’s excellent ‘The Living Database’ (22(4)). Re the inset ‘The chicken or the egg’—isn’t it rather a much stronger case of ‘irreducible complexity’?
- In the living cell we have much stored information.
- This information is written in the DNA-code (like this writing in Roman letters).
- It is further written on carrier molecules (like words on paper).
- A reading mechanism is built in.
- There is a copying mechanism built in.
- There are mechanisms to execute the instructions given in the information.
If only one of these is missing, the cell will not live and multiply. Thus it is irreducibly complex, so it must have been created by a supreme intelligence and cannot have evolved in small steps.