Welcome To Our Community!
Are you concerned about America? Join our community, where you can post your own articles and content, without leftist censorship. Team up with us today and make your voice heard!
Join Us!

The Ark Encounter in Kentucky is a Shocking Rebuke to Evolutionists!

Conservative Angle

Conservative Angle Administrator
Staff Member
Feb 22, 2018
3,260
988
113
conservativeangle.com
Don Boys, Ph.D.

http://donboys.cstnews.com/the-ark-encounter-in-kentucky-is-a-shocking-rebuke-to-evolutionists

The “ark encounter” in Northern Kentucky is just that—an encounter. It is almost breath-taking in size and engineering. It is seven stories high and a football field-and-a-half long making it the largest wood frame structure in the world. It tells the biblical and historical story of a global flood in the days of Noah.

The stunning, world-class exhibits provide detailed explanations of how Noah and his family survived the global flood that destroyed the rest of the world. Moreover, there are explanations of how Noah could have handled the problem of feeding all the animals, removing animal waste, procuring water, and other daily chores that were required. Obviously, Noah and family did not sit around and sing religious songs day and night.

The human figures representing Noah and his family are more professional than anything I have seen in other museums. It seemed most visitors made comments to that effect.

It has a petting zoo and the Ararat Ridge Zoo that has exotic animals from all over the world—yaks, kangaroos, emus, and ostriches.

Critics tell us that such a massive job could not have been done during the early days of civilization because of the lack of tools, but they can’t know that for sure. No doubt, Noah hired local workers since it was a huge job. The ark was a “floater,” not one that sailed. It was about 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and had three decks with a window around the top, and one door. That window provided the necessary oxygen and light for its inhabitants which is one of the immature criticisms by modern critics of creationism.

The ark was equivalent to 522 standard stock cars as used by railroads! “Well, all right, so it was a big boat; but it wasn’t big enough to hold every variety of animals in the world, about 50 million species,” says an honest critic. Well, no one says it did! What Noah did was take two of every species of land-dwelling, air-breathing creatures. He did not take every variety of dog, cat, etc.; but two cats, two horses, two dogs, etc., in the boat. Only one of the 200 plus varieties of dogs went along! That does make more room, doesn’t it?

On major talk shows, I have had evolutionists snicker about the ark and world Flood saying, “Wait a minute, are you telling me that more than 200 varieties of dogs came from one pair of dogs?” My reply is, “Yes, that is what I’m saying.” They continue to snicker and then I reply, “After all, you expect sane people to believe that everything on earth came from rocks and dirt!” My position is far more sensible, scientific, and scriptural than theirs!

Furthermore, Noah took with him very young animals; after all, there was no reason to take full grown elephants, bears, or apes. The smaller animals would be easier to handle, would take less space, would require less food and water, etc. The average size of animal in the ark was smaller than a sheep, so there was plenty of room in the ark with room to spare for living quarters, storage, etc. The size of the ark is not a legitimate criticism, but Flood critics continue to use it. It is interesting to note that in A.D. 1858, the largest vessel of her type in the world was the P & O liner Himalaya, which was 240 feet by 35 feet. The ark was much larger and had the proper proportions for seaworthy vessels. How did Noah know that thousands of years before shipbuilders developed the art of shipbuilding?

Flood critics have objected to the Genesis story because the ark and Flood is a perfect framework for what appears in the geological record. The world Flood is a much more reasonable explanation for the present condition of the earth than the fairytale of evolution, so the critics must protect their untenable positions by seeking to discredit the ark and the universal Flood. A world flood account, where only a few people survived usually after obedience to some “god,” is found in more than 200 different cultures. Of course, those stories were corrupted versions of the original Flood of Noah.

I have been told on talk shows that Noah could never have chased down all the animals and herded them into the ark, and they ridicule Noah chasing down vicious animals to capture them and to determine whether they were male or female. But of course, the Bible does not say that he did. Only uninformed Bible critics make that accusation. Genesis 7:9 records, “There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.”

Genesis 6:20 promised, “two of every sort shall come unto thee.” So, the silly idea that Noah spent years searching for all the animals to place in the Ark is not supported by Scripture. Why is it so unusual for the animals to make their way to the ark at the proper time? After all, the salmon swim upstream to spawn even if they have never been there; birds fly south for the winter and back again in the spring; and there are numerous other incredible automatic responses from God’s creatures, which cannot be explained by the experts!

We are told that the Flood was not universal, that it was only a local flood along the Tigris River, because unbelieving scientists must never permit anything supernatural since then they would have to give an account to a personal God whom they have rejected, resisted, and refused for a lifetime. However, you don’t have to be too bright to realize that if it were only a local flood, there would be no need to build an ark! People could have simply climbed the nearest hill until the waters receded! Furthermore, it was God’s purpose to destroy a degenerate race, and His purpose could not have been realized by a local flood that carried off only a few thousand people. The local flood theory doesn’t hold water just as evolutionary mythology does not hold water.

World geology clearly supports a global flood. What happens when a fish or sea creature dies today? We have all seen the results: the body floats on the surface of the water or sinks to the bottom where it is devoured quickly by other fish. But the fossil fish are often found very well preserved in sedimentary rocks. Over large areas of the world, billions of specimens are found in a state of agony, but with no mark of a scavenger’s attack. Fossils of dinosaurs and other creatures have been unearthed in positions that suggest violent and sudden death. In fact, many entire skeletons of duckbilled dinosaurs have been excavated in a swimming position with the head thrown back as if in death throes. Evolutionists have had to scramble madly to explain why so many land animals died violently and suddenly in water, but the answer is simple: They were buried quickly in sediment of the waters during the universal Flood.

Remember that all creationists recognize the billions of fossils that have been uncovered; however, you must understand that fossils do not come stamped with their birthday! Three questions arise: How old are the fossils? How did they die? Were they covered quickly or slowly? There are remnants of a worldwide Flood all over the Earth. Marine crustaceans have been found in the Alps, twelve thousand feet above sea level; hippopotami have been unearthed in England; and about twenty mammoths were dug up near the Neckar River in Germany. Hordes of dinosaurs, mixed with other creatures have been found buried together, all dying the same way. Evolutionists cannot explain that very unusual phenomenon

Huge fossil beds have been discovered where billions of creatures’ remains were buried together. One such place is the Karoo Formation of South Africa that contains 800 billion vertebrates such as reptiles. And many of those creatures, when alive, did not share the same environment, yet they were buried together! Evidently, they had one thing in common: escape the Flood.

The world was covered with water; earthquakes rumbled from pole to pole; seaquakes disturbed the oceans and seas; violent storms whipped across the face of the globe and massive waves churned up violent whirlpools as lightning streaked across the heavens. (Noah and his family were safe inside the ark, built according to God’s plan.) During the year of flood, the churning water laid down sediment over three-fourths of the Earth. Only one-fourth of the world’s rock is volcanic rock. Proof that the Flood covered our highest mountains is seen in the sedimentary rock that covers those mountains. Sea fossils are found on all the mountains of the world! Furthermore, geologists have found a field of pillow lava on Mt. Ararat at the 14,000-15,000 foot level. Pillow lava is formed only under water! Any evolutionist can call me collect when he has a convincing non-flood explanation.

Evolutionists tell us that the sedimentary stratum were not laid in a short period of time, but over long ages lasting billions of years! However, geological evidence suggests otherwise. It is obvious to the unbiased person that massive amounts of vegetation were carried by swirling waters and dumped in various locations. Then, layers of dirt and mud washed over those lower layers of vegetation and were deposited followed later by another layer of vegetation. All this took place in a very short period of time.

The vegetation was pressed by the various layers of dirt and more vegetation, producing the coal seams in the eastern part of America and other parts of the Earth. Evolutionists deny the Flood (since it supports the Bible, and the Bible reveals God), but they can’t refute the evidence of the Flood. Creationists and evolutionists don’t disagree on geology, but on the interpretation of geology. The critics of Flood Geology have a massive problem with the fossils found in the rock and coal strata. Often, upright trees are found through different seams of coal (that took millions of years to form according to evolutionists). A good example of this is found in the Craigllieth Quarry in England where an eighty foot tree was discovered that intersected up to twelve different stratum of limestone! How could a tree live millions of years so that the stratum could be laid around it? Why didn’t it rot as trees do today? Evolutionists are strangely silent.

Noah’s Flood answers the major problems as to the geological condition of the Earth, but unbelieving scientists’ knees begin to jerk incessantly when an ark and a universal Flood are discussed. They would say the ark and universal Flood are too preposterous to be accepted as fact even by the ignorant folk of Noah’s day. But, of course, the “ignorant folk” in Noah’s day missed the boat—just as the evolutionists today!

Boys’ new book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published recently by Barbwire Books; to get your copy, click here. An eBook edition is also available.

(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives; ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis, wrote columns for USA Today for eight years; authored 18 books and hundreds of columns and articles for the internet and print media publications; and defended his beliefs on hundreds of talk shows. These columns go to newspapers, magazines, television, and radio stations and may be used without change from title through the end tag. His web sites are www.cstnews.com and www.Muslimfact.com and www.thegodhaters.com. Contact Don for an interview or talk show.)
 

JPConservative

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2018
322
302
63
Littlehampton, UK
Seriously, CREATIONISM?
Utterly embarrassing that any Conservative subscribes to this nonsense. I became a Conservative because I care about facts and evidence.

According to St Thomas Aquinas:

"Those things that pertain to the faith are distinguished in two ways. For certain things are of themselves the substance of the faith, such as that God is three and one, and this kind of thing, in which no one is permitted to opine otherwise. . . . But other things are only accidentally the substance of the faith, insofar namely as they are handed on in Scripture . . . such as many historical facts which can, without danger, be unknown by those who are not obligated to know. And on this kind of facts, even the Fathers held diverse opinions, explaining sacred Scripture diversely. Thus concerning the beginning of the world, there is something that pertains to the substance of the faith, namely, that the created world had a beginning, and all the Fathers agree on this. But how it began and in what order it was made pertaining to the faith only accidentally, insofar as these opinions are handed on in Scripture, whose truth the Fathers, holding diverse opinions, handed on by diverse explanations."

Many of the Church Fathers understood the Genesis account as a myth, allegory, or God's way of explaining creation to a scientifically illiterate people.

http://www.thomisticevolution.org/disputed-questions/interpreting-genesis-1-with-the-fathers-of-the-church/
 

JPConservative

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2018
322
302
63
Littlehampton, UK
Point one: Genetic Bottleneck:

If all land animals and humans underwent such a drastic reduction in population we would see the evidence of such a bottleneck in the genetics of all land animals today as we see in the genetics of the cheetah. with all the health problems it creates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck
https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/070701_cheetah

Point two: Aquatic life:

Many types of aquatic life can only live in salt water (oceans) or freshwater (rivers or lakes) a change in salinity will kill them. If the Earth flooded in the way the Genesis account described, the majority of aquatic life would have become extinct due to the brackish waters.

https://www.livescience.com/32167-can-saltwater-fish-live-in-fresh-water.html

Point 3) The Ark would sink:

It is simply impossible to build a ship made of wood to the size and dimensions mentioned in Genesis. Due to tidal forces and warping it would sink.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest_wooden_ships

Point 4) Other problems with the Ark:

A) Freshwater, the amount of fresh water needed to supply only the 8 people would have been 6000L, all the animals using 2L per day and AIG count and assuming only 200ml were needed per animal gives a requirement of over 1 million litres of fresh water.
B) Food, how was the food stored for the animals, whilst some animals can live on grain many can not. What did the carnivores eat? How was their food stored?
C) Methane, the production of methane on the Ark as described in the Genesis account would have killed every living thing within the Ark, or caused it to have exploded as the only source of light would have to have been from combustion.

Point 5) After the flood
A) All plant life would now be extinct due to having been wiped out in the flood, all seeds would be buried under a thick layer of sediment.
B) All animal life would be distributed evenly across the Earth, Marsupials ould be unable to get to Australia.

 

JPConservative

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2018
322
302
63
Littlehampton, UK
Now let us turn to the age of the Earth.

Why the Earth must be old:

There are several lines of evidence:
1) The oldest living organisms could be up to 80,000 years old, the oldest trees were hundreds of years old when Noah's flood was supposed to have happened. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-40224991
2) Chinese culture existed before and survived Noah's flood. http://en.people.cn/200212/05/eng20021205_108006.shtml
3) Radiometric dating shows that the Earth is 4.54 Billion years old


 

JPConservative

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2018
322
302
63
Littlehampton, UK
Creationist objections to Evolution.

Irreducible Complexity:

The Eye.

Creationist often claim that the eye is Irreducibly Complex. However, Charles Darwin explained how a simple photosensitive layer of cells could evolve into the eye.

Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real.

In the Articulata [animals with segmented bodies, like worms and caterpillars] we can commence a series with an optic nerve merely coated with pigment, and without any other mechanism; and from this low stage, numerous gradations of structure, branching off in two fundamentally different lines, can be shown to exist, until we reach a moderately high stage of perfection. In certain crustaceans, for instance, there is a double cornea, the inner one divided into facets, within each of which there is a lens-shaped swelling. In other crustaceans the transparent cones which are coated by pigment, and which properly act only by excluding lateral pencils of light, are convex at their upper ends and must act by convergence; and at their lower ends there seems to be an imperfect vitreous substance. With these facts, here far too briefly and imperfectly given, which show that there is much graduated diversity in the eyes of living crustaceans, and bearing in mind how small the number of living animals is in proportion to those which have become extinct, I can see no very great difficulty (not more than in the case of many other structures) in believing that natural selection has converted the simple apparatus of an optic nerve merely coated with pigment and invested by transparent membrane, into an optical instrument as perfect as is possessed by any member of the great Articulate class.

If we must compare the eye to an optical instrument, we ought in imagination to take a thick layer of transparent tissue, with a nerve sensitive to light beneath, and then suppose every part of this layer to be continually changing slowly in density, so as to separate into layers of different densities and thicknesses, placed at different distances from each other, and with the surfaces of each layer slowly changing in form. Further we must suppose that there is a power always intently watching each slight accidental alteration in the transparent layers; and carefully selecting each alteration which, under varied circumstances, may in any way, or in any degree, tend to produce a distincter image. We must suppose each new state of the instrument to be multiplied by the million; and each to be preserved till a better be produced, and then the old ones to be destroyed. In living bodies, variation will cause the slight alterations, generation will multiply them almost infinitely, and natural selection will pick out with unerring skill each improvement. Let this process go on for millions on millions of years; and during each year on millions of individuals of many kinds; and may we not believe that a living optical instrument might thus be formed as superior to one of glass, as the works of the Creator are to those of man?

From Origin of Species
 

JPConservative

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2018
322
302
63
Littlehampton, UK
How retroviruses demonstrate common descent.

The molecular sequence evidence gives the most impressive and irrefutable evidence for the genealogical relatedness of all life. The nature of molecular sequences allows for extremely impressive probability calculations that demonstrate how well the predictions of common descent with modification actually match empirical observation. Common descent is a deduction that directly follows from premises based on empirically observed molecular evidence. In addition, knowledge of biological molecular mechanisms and structures, combined with macroevolutionary theory, has given very specific, novel, and testable biomolecular predictions.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html
 

JPConservative

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2018
322
302
63
Littlehampton, UK
Here are some series to watch if you want to understand evolution.

The titles by AronRa are:
Systematic Classification of Life & Foundational Falsehood Of Creationism.
The playlists can be found here https://www.youtube.com/user/AronRa/playlists

The title by Thunderf00t:
Why Do People Laugh at Creationists?
https://www.youtube.com/user/Thunderf00t/playlists

The title by Potholer54:
Our Origins Made Easy and How to Confuse a Creationist
https://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54/playlists

How to confuse a Creationist:
 

JPConservative

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2018
322
302
63
Littlehampton, UK
CA,
I have provided sources from three scientists.
Thunderf00t (Phil Mason PhD) is a chemist whose speciality is in organic chemistry.
Aron Ra PhD is a palaeontologist.
Potholer54 (Peter Hadfield PhD) is a geologist.

All three men are experts in their fields.

If anyone still believes in Young Earth Creationism after watching any of those videos, please explain why.
 
Reactions: Conservative Angle

JPConservative

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2018
322
302
63
Littlehampton, UK
Did you know that you can be a Christian, and believe that the earth is billions of years old? You can even believe in evolution and be a Christian. There is no conflict between science and the Bible...all one needs is a proper understanding of how to merge science and the Bible. To learn more about old earth creationism, see Old Earth Belief, or check out the article Can You Be A Christian and Believe in an Old Earth?

http://www.oldearth.org/theistic_evolution.htm
 
Reactions: Conservative Angle

Conservative Angle

Conservative Angle Administrator
Staff Member
Feb 22, 2018
3,260
988
113
conservativeangle.com
This is the article author's reply to the comments above.

Thanks for sending me the comments from one of your readers about my article. I am delighted to provide a quick response; quick because I have just returned home and am weeks behind. You may send my response to him or publish it:

Thanks for responding to article dealing with the Ark Encounter. I am always honored when anyone takes time to read my books and articles. However, I note that you did not really respond to one fact or position I took! How about some answers!

Moreover, I note that you quoted a statement from Thomas of Aquinas, a brilliant author, philosopher, and theologian--but of course, a Roman Catholic. And only a "saint" if he knew Christ in the forgiveness of sins. But my critic made much of some Church Fathers; however, some of them would be ridiculed today because of their outrageous, unbiblical, even pagan beliefs.

The early church leaders lived close to the time of Christ and the apostles; plus, many staunchly defended the faith against the first major heretics. Some gave their lives for the faith. However, even they, with their commitment, courage, and character also harbored error and even strange, scandalous, and silly teachings.

The Gospel of Thomas, (unknown author) as early as A.D. 40, ran off the rails by commanding nudity during baptism! “Jesus said: ‘When you unclothe yourselves and are not ashamed, and take your garments and lay them beneath your feet like the little children (and) trample on them, then [you will see] the Son of the Living One, and you will not be afraid.’” Jesus did not say that!

It seems they removed their clothes out of fear that a demon might hide inside a fold and be baptized with them! Silly and scandalous teaching so early in church history.

The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (A.D. 95) stoops to pagan mythology when it declared, “Let us consider that wonderful sign [of the resurrection] which takes place in Eastern lands, that is, in Arabia and the countries round about. There is a certain bird which is called a phoenix. This is the only one of its kind, and lives five hundred years.” Even such notable non-Christians as Herodotus, Lucan, and Pliny the Elder, along with Isidore of Seville (a professing Christian) propagated that same error! Some even said that the bird is resurrected after each life and can live 1400 years!

It is amazing what sane, educated, and professedly orthodox people believed and please note that Clement was bishop at Rome and knew the Apostle Peter. Some say Peter consecrated him as bishop yet Clement thought the Greek phoenix was a fact! Unbelievable!

Tertullian was one of the most respected and quoted of the early Fathers. He also taught, “Without baptism, salvation is attainable by none.” So, Tertullian taught baptismal regeneration!

Origen, considered one of the most alert, astute, and active minds of the early church, even castrated himself thinking he was obeying Matt. 19:12! Gibbon wittily commented, “As it was Origen’s general practice to allegorize Scripture, it seems unfortunate that, in this instance only, he should have adopted the literal sense.”

Self-castration! I would not call Origen alert, astute, and active but dumb, dumber, and dumbest.

Origen declared, “It is not possible to receive forgiveness of sins without baptism” (Exhortation to the Martyrs 30 A.D. 235). Here was another famous early church leader who taught baptismal regeneration!

Origen rejected the literal teaching of Scripture asserting that the reader would find many passages in the Gospels that were untrue events! He believed God had created other worlds and would do so again in the future. Origen was another mixed up dude!

One of the most famous early church leaders was Augustine who declared, “In the Church, therefore, there are three ways in which sins are forgiven: in baptisms, in prayer, and in the greater humility of penance.”

He even went further to teach baptism of infants! “The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic” This famous theologian declared, “The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration.” Not according to Scripture.

In 420, he declared, “Baptism washes away all, absolutely all, our sins, whether of deed, word, or thought, whether sins original or added, whether knowingly or unknowingly contracted.” How do followers of Augustine handle his teaching of baptismal generation?

Augustine said, “It is better that men should be brought to serve God by instruction than by fear of punishment or by pain. But because the former means are better, the latter must not therefore be neglected….Many must often be brought back to their Lord, like wicked servants, by the rod of temporal sufferings, before they attain the highest grade of religious development.”

By that teaching, Augustine laid the foundation for the bloody Inquisition in Europe by the Roman Church in dealing with “heretics.” Yet, he is a spiritual hero to most uninformed and confused Christians.

I could provide many other examples of early Church Fathers who taught outrageous things and few modern Christian scholars refuse to deal with their heresies.

Again, thanks for writing and whatever you believe about Church Fathers, I would be delighted if you refuted my article.

Sincerely in Christ,

Don Boys
 

JPConservative

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2018
322
302
63
Littlehampton, UK
CA,

Thank you for posting his reply, it was interesting. I must admit a degree of puzzlement by his response. I was not attempting to defend the Catholic Faith in my quotations but merely show that the Biblical literalism is not the only interpretation of the Scriptures.

It is a shame that he did not respond to the scientific evidence I posted, as that is far more interesting and relevant to the conversation. I hope he sends a reply to the scientists I sourced, namely:
Charles Darwin, Peter Hadfield PhD, Phil Mason PhD, Aron Ra PhD, Bill Nye, and the scientific literature I sourced.
 
Reactions: Conservative Angle