Fann uppgiften här:

http://www.flashback.info/showthread.php?t=452572

I så fall har NWO verkligen lyckats bra med sin programmering av det arma människosläktet!

Vad tror ni?

Har precis läst Ages of Gaia, klockren bok borde läsas många intressanta synpunkter och belyser brister i Darwins evolutionstänkande.

Får väl gå med i ett hemligt sällskap så kanske man får veta alla hemligheter.

Quote:

Oj vad mycket samlat - vilket jobb! Väldigt bra gjort!

Darwinismen är ett av de större skämten vi har...

Något från detta forum:

Denna tråd, bilder och Darwin osv, framåt i tråden http://vaken.se/modules/newbb/viewtop ... t_id=28216#forumpost28216

Mars:
http://www.geocities.com/photon9999/bigpicture.htm?20057

Månen, naturliga skapelser... : http://www.telematica.de/telestar/html/copernicus_crater_.html

Det är slående många dubbelkratrar på Månen... in och ut... sexsidiga också... http://www.controversial-science.com/ ... ling-lunar-anomalies.html

Nuclear Subselene Tunneling Machines On the Moon:
http://www.subversiveelement.com/Moon2.html

http://www.geocities.com/planetaesceptica/lunar.htm?200527


Ignoring Fossils On Mars



http://www.enterprisemission.com/_art ... IgnoringFossilsOnMars.htm



ABSOLUTE PROOF OF ALIEN ARTIFICIALITY ON MARS



http://www.truinsight.com/absolute_proof_of_alien_artifici.htm

"Darwinismen är ett av de större skämten vi har... "
Darwins evolutionsteori om hur arter evolverar vet man ju att det stämmer, dock i det korta perspektivet. Det intressanta är ju bristerna i det långa loppet, den ger nog bara en del av sanningen. Men dina länkar om fossiler på mars :) det köper jag inte någonstans, skulle fossiler på mars helt motstå de slitningar som tiden utgör.

Quote:

Du får kolla upp mer.

Det på mars är inte gammalt, och tiden i sig sliter inte.

Det finns faktiskt inget sådant som att man vet att Darwins evolutionsteori stämmer i det korta loppet.

Här är en bild på dubbelkratrarna på månen, man kan välja större storlek på bilden
http://www.esnips.com/doc/d2be96be-ae ... chison_doublets-50procent

Här Tithonia-samhället på mars
http://www.esnips.com/doc/3e740e39-57 ... b0/tithonia26uw-50procent

Galapagosöarna är ju ett tydligt och bra exempel om styrkan på evolutionsteorin.

Quote:

hehe, jag var säker på att du skulle ta upp det - fortsätt du med finkspåret och annat.

finns en bra studie om abborrar i sthlm oxå som styrker den korta evolutionen =)

Quote:

Det där är ju artvariationer...

Så take the banana och varsågoda och skölj - Kent Hovind är ju kristen - men han fäller Darwinismen så den har bärts ut på bår för länge sedan. Att den alls prånglades ut via Sciencereligionen är inom en väldigt evil agenda:

[...]

Where Darwin Went Wrong

While he sailed around on that voyage, he brought with him some books to read. He brought his Bible (he had just gotten out of Bible College) and he brought with him this book, Principles of Geology. As Charles Darwin read this book, Principles of Geology, it absolutely changed his life forever. Later in life he said, "Lyell one of my favorite authors, has made a profound influence on my life." As he read that book, Charles Darwin began to doubt the Bible and began to think the earth is millions and millions of years old. That’s the book that changed his life. Studying about Geology. And it’s amazing how many kids go through seventh or eighth grade in regular public school and they are taught in their earth science book that the earth is millions of years old and it destroys their faith in the Bible and they don’t even realize it. It undermines it. Cuts it right out from under them. That’s where it all starts.

Later in life Darwin said, "Disbelief crept over me very slowly. I felt no distress." By the way, he did not repent on his deathbed. His wife started the rumor that he did and that rumor still circulates today. But the best research says he did not repent on his deathbed. He remained loyal to his atheism right up to the end. But that is the book that changed Charles Darwin’s life.

Leap of Faith

As Charlie sailed around the world, he came to the islands off the coast of Ecuador, South America, called the Galapagos Islands. There on those islands Charlie noticed there were fourteen different varieties of finches. He studied the finches carefully and he said, "You know what? I think all of these birds came from a common ancestor." I bet you are right Charlie—it was a bird. Which is all correct; they probably had a common ancestor. But then Charlie made a giant leap of faith and logic in his book, which I have right here. Charlie said on page 170, "It is truly a wonderful fact that all animals and all plants throughout all time and space should be related to each other." Whoa, now hold on a minute Charlie. I’ll go along with all of those birds coming from a bird, but that doesn’t mean the birds are related to the bananas. But isn’t that what he’s saying? Am I reading that wrong? Birds and bananas are related? That’s exactly what he was saying. See, what happened, Charlie got all confused with the two different meanings of the word evolution.

Now, there [are] two different Charlie’s. We’ve got Charlie Lyell and Charlie Darwin. Call them Chuck one and Chuck two or Chuckles for short if you’d like. But Charlie Darwin said, "All the animals and plants are related." Charlie actually observed what we sometimes call micro-evolution.

Micro vs. Macro Evolution

Now, I object to the use of that term. We really should just call it variation. It’s a variety. But they call it micro-evolution. Okay for the sake of argument, we will use their word but I don’t like the word. I think it is deceptive. Micro-evolution tells us that dogs produce a variety of dogs. Nobody is going to argue with that. Probably the dog, the wolf and the coyote had a common ancestor. But stand 30 feet away and look at it. It still looks like a dog. This is not a banana or a tomato, it’s a dog. Anybody can recognize that. And roses produce a variety of roses.

Now, if you are going to get into a discussion on evolution or a debate (I had one last week in Detroit, I’ve got one this week in Peoria, one two weeks next to that in Georgia)—if you are going to get into a debate on evolution, let me just tell you, you have to do this. First thing you must do is define the word. "What do you mean ‘evolution’?" Because there are two different meanings to the word and this is where all of the confusion comes in. And you will never get any place in the discussion unless you define the word. Micro-evolution is a fact of science. It is observable, it is testable, it is demonstrable it is also scriptural. The Bible says, "They bring forth after his kind." You might get a big dog or a little dog, but it is still a dog. And it could be the wolf, the coyote, and the dog are related. I wouldn’t argue about that. They are still the same kind of animal. And a three year old could tell the difference. Okay boys and girls, here we have a dog, a wolf, a coyote and a banana. Which one is not like the others? Well, duh. A three-year-old can figure that out. The Bible says, "The animals bring forth after his kind." Not after his species or variety. After his kind. Ten times that phrase appears in the first chapter in the book of Genesis. I think God wanted us to get the message. They bring forth after their kind.

But what happened, Charlie somehow in his mind made a giant leap of faith and logic from seeing the micro-evolution into believing in macro-evolution. See, macro-evolution says the dog and the rose are related if you go back far enough in time. And the ancestor ultimately was a rock. Now, the evolutionists really get upset when I say that but I say it anyway. I’m not trying to upset them, but I’m trying to make them realize how dumb their theory is. They believe 20 billion years ago, there was a big bang, where nothing exploded and produced everything. Figure that one out. And then 4.6 billion years ago the earth cooled down and developed a hard rocky crust. And it rained on the rocks for millions of years and turned them into soup. And the soup came alive about three billion years ago. And this early life form found someone to marry. (A pretty good trick!) And something to eat. And very slowly evolved into everything we see today. That is the evolutionary teaching in a nutshell.

One lady came to me after a debate one time. She taught at this university I was speaking at. She said, "Mr. Hovind, tonight you said that we believe we came from a rock! We do not believe that!" I said, "Well, ma’am, do you believe in evolution?" She said, "yes, I do!" I said, "Well, then do you believe that 20 billion years ago there was a big bang?" She said, "Yes, I do." I said, "Do you believe 4.6 billion years ago the earth cooled down and developed a hard rocky crust?" She said, "Yes, I do." I said, "Do you believe it rained on the rocks for millions of years and turned them into soup, and the soup came to life about 3 billion years ago?" She said, "yes." I said, "Well, then you believe we came from a rock." She said, "No, I believe we came from a macro-molecule." I said, "Where did that come from?" She said, "Well, it rained on the rocks for millions of years...." It finally dawned on her. She does believe we came from a rock.

[...]

Vad är då din teori? att vi kommer från mars? och vart kommer livet från mars ifrån? ifrån gud? jesus?

om du skall såga darwin så presentera gärna vad du själv tror

Quote:

Kom från... kom från Jesus... det låter väldigt besynnerligt.

Vi kommer väl från där vi kommer ifrån, någonstans var vårt ursprung, med ursprungliga föräldrar...nu är vi långt hemifrån - genom Devolution. Det där med mars är bara en liten sentida detalj - efter eoners eoners olika skeenden, med katastrofer, fullständiga "undergångar", mänkligheten i nya grottstadium... andra stuckit innan undergångar = aliens... dna-blandning osv, nya jordar - då är det ändå sent - inom det som är fallet ned till samsara, som man inte kan ta sig ut frånm förutom genom kultivering, innan/ovan denna grova nivån så var det inte återfödelse med fysiska kroppar som vi har nu, ju.

Det där om mars finns det en film om, "Project Redstar", den är bra kanske någon vet om det är utlagd någonstans, annars finns den på några hubbar på DC - har du DC, men inga bra hubbadresser för att ta hem material så kan jag maila dig.

Jag har skrivit så mycket på olika trådar, har inget nytt... Boken Zhuan Falun förklarar hur det är http://falundafa.org

Lite från några andra trådar, blandat och kanske inte så relevant, jag vet inte riktigt:

http://vaken.se/modules/newbb/viewtop ... t_id=25485#forumpost25485

Från ett annat inlägg:

But at the same time, these lives have community-like social relationships, and during social interactions among the group, some become bad and so they drop down. And at that level they again can’t stay there, and they become even worse, so they drop another level, and they drop, and drop, and drop, and finally they drop to this level of ordinary people. When they get to this level people are supposed to be destroyed, eliminated. But out of their great compassion, the Great Enlightened Beings purposely created this dimension of our human world.

Li Hongzhi, Zhuan Falun
------------------------------------

http://vaken.se/modules/newbb/viewtop ... t_id=30427#forumpost30427

http://vaken.se/modules/newbb/viewtop ... t_id=30454#forumpost30454

http://vaken.se/modules/newbb/viewtop ... t_id=31229#forumpost31229
---------

Kosmos upprätthålls av lagar, vad människan skapar som lagar är ju inget som kosmos "rättar" in sig efter. Visa ledare har väl i historien skapat samhälleliga lagar, som skulle vara i harmoni med lagarna "däruppe", himlens lagar, kosmos.

Det är inte jorden det handlar om - det är bara vad flummet därute får oss att fokusera på. Det kan inte ske annat på jorden än vad vi har blivit till. Vi ska rädda/klara oss bara. Själva jorden kan bara ruska lite på sig om människorna blir för jobbiga.
Det är en själv det handlar om. Vår egen ruttenhet.


Här är en annan person som skriver om det - kanske hans länkar till NASA bilder på just "TITHONIA CIVILIZATION" fungerar http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/ev ... tithonia-civilization.htm


http://vaken.se/modules/newbb/viewtop ... t_id=30099#forumpost30099


Jag har hänvisat till vad Konfuzius sa:
http://vaken.se/modules/newbb/viewtop ... t_id=28268#forumpost28268
http://vaken.se/modules/newbb/viewtop ... t_id=29047#forumpost29047

var många länkar :) skall återkomma när jag läst igenom det du postat, lär dock ta några dagar :)

vill du förstå honom hade jag läst Zhaun falun som novax nämner. mycket bra bok.

Neee dina länkar var inte särskilt övertygande, James lovestocks teorier kring gaia som komplement till darwin verkar mer realistiska enligt mig :)

Vad jag vet så finns det hur många gamla lämningar som helst på havsbotten och på land som inte på något sätt kan rymmas i Darwins teorier, det var en teori, men fakta har spolierat den.

Det där på mars och månen är ju en sak... det är övertygande - tvärtemot vad någon tyckte innan.

<nu har jag kollat på massa saker på nätet, hancock och Cremo, avancaread forntida teknik. Det är uppenbart så att det är en genomgripande historieförfalskning som serverats. Vem kan tas på allvar som hävdar Darwins teorier, det övergår då mitt förstånd.

darwins teorier fungerar på micro nivå, dock skall den kompletteras med james lovelocks gaia teori så har du helheten.

Det finns väldigt många gaiatjosanteorier - du säger då att en är riktig - på samma sätt har du sagt att darwinismen är riktig...

Det finns partiklar/planeter/solsystem/kosmossystem osv - det är samma sak - ett kosmos som det verkar vara när vi tittar "utåt" är "samma sak" som när en människa/väsen på en partikel tex inom vår kropp "tittar utåt" - ett enormt strålande kosmos, med solar (atomer) osv. Det är alltid "som ovan så nedan" - "som i det lilla så i det stora".

Ett som vi tycker gigantiskt universum är på en annan nivå, eller sett från ett medvetande på en högre nivå, som en partikel, eller molekyl.

Så Vintergatan är kanske bara en molekyl hos en större gud, eller människa eller vad man ska säga, kanske en molekyl/partikel i någons fingernagel... tex...

Jag skrev mer om detta i denna tråd
http://vaken.se/modules/newbb/viewtop ... t_id=30338#forumpost30338
http://vaken.se/modules/newbb/viewtop ... t_id=30454#forumpost30454

Jag klistrar i detta sammanhang in ett litet utdrag från:
Lecture in Sydney -96, Li Hongzhi

[...]

Modern science is unable to see this point because it cannot break through this dimension. What kind of dimensional form does our human race live in? I am telling everyone that this dimensional layer where mankind lives is between two kinds of particles. As for particles, those of us who have studied physics know that molecules, atoms, nuclei, quarks, and neutrinos are each a layer of particles. They are physical elements that constitute larger particles. Which layer of particles does mankind exist in? The largest things that we see with human eyes are planets, and the smallest things that we can see under the microscope are molecules. In fact, our mankind just exists in this dimensional layer between the planets and the molecules. We may find it very vast, very extensive, and incomparably big. I say that modern science is not advanced. No matter how far a spacecraft can fly, it cannot fly beyond this physical dimension of ours. However developed a computer is, it cannot match the human brain. Now the human brain is still a mystery. Therefore, the science of mankind is still very shallow.

Try to imagine it, everyone. Our human race lives in between these two kinds of particles of planets and molecules. Molecules are made up of atoms, then what is the dimension between atoms and molecules like? Modern scientists can only understand an atom as a point, one of its small structures. In fact, the place where atoms exist is also a plane, and the physical dimension formed by such a plane is also quite huge. It is only that what you have discovered is a point. Within this plane then, how big is this dimension? Our standard for measuring distances is always based upon the perspective of mankind’s own modern science to judge everything. You must jump out of the framework and the concepts of empirical science. In order for you to enter that dimension, you must comply with the forms of that dimension, and only then can you enter it. The distance from an atom to a molecule, as science understands it, is approximately two million atoms lined up, and only then can an atom reach a molecule. That is to say that this distance that it can understand is already quite vast. You cannot understand it from the standpoint of this present empirical scientific model of mankind. Then, please try to think about it for a moment. Isn’t it a dimensional layer in between from an atom to its nuclei? How great then is the dimensional distance between the nuclei and a quark? What about between a quark and a neutrino? Of course, the current science of mankind can only understand as far as neutrinos. Man cannot see them except for detecting them with apparatus to know their mode of existence. In fact, it is not known how far away they are from the original source of matter!

What I am talking about is the simplest form of dimensional existence. All physical substances of our mankind, including all substances that you cannot see in the air as well as those substances that we can see such as iron, cement, animals, plants, matter, and the human body, are composed of molecules. Mankind just exists on this plane of molecules, just like a 3-D painting. You live on this plane and you cannot escape it. Mankind’s science is also limited within this one dimension which it cannot even break through. Yet, people still claim how developed science is and disregard all other theories. Mankind’s technology cannot reach a higher understanding of the universe. If it were really able to break through this dimensional layer, it would see the mode of existence of life and the mode of existence of matter in other dimensions, as well as the structures in them made by time and space. However, our practitioners can see it. Only Buddhas are the greatest scientists.

When I talked about opening Tianmu (the third eye), I mentioned this issue. One can avoid using eyes to see things and look through this Tianmu of ours, namely between the two eyebrows, or from the Shangen as the Taoist School calls it. At the root of your nose, a passageway is opened directly to your Pineal Body. It is called the Pineal Body in medical science. Practitioners in the Taoist School call it the Niwan Palace, which refers to the same thing. However, in the front part of this Pineal Body, medical scientists have already found it equipped with all the component structures of a human eye. Modern medical scientists find it very strange. Why is there an eye inside? They consider it a vestigial eye, and they still explain these things with the theory of evolution. In fact, it just exists this way, and it is not at all degenerated. When one avoids the flesh eyes, of course, when these flesh eyes have been cultivated, the flesh eyes can also penetrate and also have this kind of supernormal capability. The Buddha Fa is boundless. Generally, when one avoids the eyes, avoids the eyes that are made up of molecules to look, one will be able to penetrate this dimension and see scenes in other dimensions. It is just such a principle. Therefore, practitioners can see things that ordinary people cannot see. Of course, some ordinary people occasionally have vaguely seen some unexplainable phenomena in their lifetimes. For instance, they may have seen a person pass before their eyes and disappear instantly, or they may have seen something or heard some sounds. That is probably the situation whereby they have actually vaguely seen or heard something in another dimension. Because one’s Tianmu is not sealed too tightly or his ears are not sealed too tightly, every once in a while he is able to hear the sounds of other dimensions or see some phenomena of other dimensions.

I’ve just spoken of this dimension in which mankind lives. Actually, this planet that our human race inhabits is neither the largest particle nor the largest substance. Beyond the planets there are still larger substances! Therefore, Buddha Sakyamuni’s eyes could already see quite microscopic matter in the extremely microscopic microcosm and could see quite enormous, macro matter in the macrocosm. However, at the end Buddha Sakyamuni could not see how big this universe ultimately is. Therefore, he made a statement, "It is big enough without exterior, and it is small enough without interior." How huge this universe is! Please think about how complex it is. It is unlike what mankind knows. Even for this dimension of ours, this form, it is quite complex! Besides this dimensional form, there is also a dimensional form that exists vertically, and within this vertical dimension there are also many unitary paradises. It is very complex. The unitary worlds that I am talking about refer to paradises, etc. Each dimension has different time-spaces. Do you think that the time in the dimension composed of atoms, can be the same as that in our dimension over here, which is made up of molecules? Its concept of space and its distance is also different from ours, and everything becomes different. Why do the extraterrestrial UFOs come and go from nowhere and fly so fast? They are traveling in other dimensions; it is just so simple. If man tries to understand the unexplained phenomena in the universe from his own current scientific perspective or uses this method to study cultivation practice or religions, he will never get it in his research. He has to change his way of thinking, and he must understand it from another perspective. In the history of man, science is not only today’s so-called empirical science that was discovered or invented by the Europeans. This is not the only path; there are other paths as well. For those ancient civilizations that have been discovered on earth and once existed in history, their courses of development all took different paths in understanding life, matter, and the universe. The ancient science of China also took another path. The Chinese culture, although the levels it involved were very high, yet because the people’s morality was no longer good, it had also been suppressed. Therefore, it was not passed down, and this lowest form of science from the West was left to man instead. Thus, it is rather inadequate.

I said earlier that man was not created in this physical dimension of ours and talked about the purpose of being a human being. If man continues to decline, he will face elimination, a thorough elimination, which is called, "extinction of body and soul." It is very frightening! Therefore, Buddhas want to save man precisely from facing such a helpless situation and to save you to heavens away from the suffering of mankind. That is truly and fundamentally solving the issue of human suffering. The starting point of people nowadays for believing in Buddhas is entirely different from that of people in antiquity who believed in Buddhas. In the past, people who believed in Buddhas worshipped Buddhas, cultivated Buddhahood, respected Buddhas, and did not have any other motives. People nowadays believe in Buddhas in order to ask for something from Buddhas. However, to Buddhas, this mind of pursuit is the dirtiest and the filthiest mind. Therefore, think about it, everyone. Buddhas are to save you, and yet, you pray for comfort and happiness among ordinary people. If you were really allowed to be blissfully happy and to live in great comfort among ordinary people, you really would not want to become a Buddha. You would be a Buddha right now. How can this be possible? Instead of your repaying the karma owed from lifetime after lifetime and the bad deeds that you have done, you only seek happiness. How can that be attained by pursuit? You have only one choice: to practice cultivation and only then can you eliminate the karma that you owe. Suppose that you do not wish to become a Buddha, you must be a good person, do more good deeds, and do fewer wicked deeds. Only then can you be happy in the future, and the life of your genuine self can be extended. However, it is possible that after your brain is cleansed at the time of reincarnation, you may be reincarnated into a bad environment, drifting with its tide to the brink of destruction.

Just now I mentioned that Buddha Sakyamuni said that this universe was big enough without exterior and small enough without interior. Perhaps some people still do not quite understand this statement. What did Buddha Sakyamuni actually see? He spoke of the theory of three thousand great worlds. Buddha Sakyamuni said that not only people living in other dimensions were like us with the same human physical bodies, but also there were three thousand such worlds that are like our human society. Within this Milky Way there are three thousand such planets. In addition, he also made another statement and said, "A grain of sand contains three thousand worlds." He said that within a grain of sand there were three thousand such dimensions like the one inhabited by our mankind. But, as for the size ratios for the people there, you cannot use the understanding and concepts of modern science to understand them as they exist in another mode of time and space.

Some people may find what I just said strange and incomprehensible. Try to think about it, everyone. The earth is orbiting with great regularity. Then, what difference is there between when electrons revolve around the nuclei and when the earth revolves around the sun? They are of the same pattern. If you could magnify an electron to the size of the earth and take a look at it, you'll see if there is life on it? What kind of matter is there on it? Buddha Sakyamuni said, "It is small enough without interior." To what extent did he see? In the microcosm of matter, he could already see something very microscopic. He said that in a grain of sand there were three thousand great worlds. Inside a tiny grain of sand there are three thousand great worlds. Then, try to think for a moment, everyone. If what Buddha Sakyamuni said is true, within that grain of sand, in that world, aren’t there also rivers, streams, lakes, and seas? Then, on the sides of those rivers, streams, lakes, and seas, isn’t there also sand? Then, within that grain of sand, aren’t there also three thousand great worlds? Then, in the sand within that grain of sand, aren’t there still three thousand great worlds? Exploring it further, Buddha Sakyamuni discovered that it was endless. Therefore, he made a statement and said, "It is small enough without interior." He did not see what the most original source of matter was. Of course, we talked about this most original source of matter in the past, so I shall not talk more about it here. If I say something too profound and too deep, people may not understand it, especially when many people do not quite understand the Chinese language, so I will not talk too much about things on this topic. I think that I will just say this much first. Now, you may raise some questions concerning cultivation practice and the study of the Fa, and I will answer them for you.

[...]

"Now is the moment of truth. No one would be so naïve as The parity code found in DNA is further evidence the
genetic code was deliberately created.

It also reminds us that DNA is designed to maintain
accurate copies and avoid changes in the information
it carries.

This means it was designed to NOT evolve. But rather
to reproduce its own kind forever."

----------

Läs hela:

ARCHAEOLOGY NEWSFLASH 70

Explorer Friend, this news is from Jonathan Gray
- www.beforeus.com You authorized this mailing
when you requested your free report on our web-site
or a friend enrolled you. See below for removal
directions.

SCIENTIST FORCED INTO A U-TURN

"We've made an awful mistake!"

Dismay was in Dean's voice. "A student has knocked
our theory to bits!"

Dr Dean Kenyon, Professor of Biology (Emeritus) at
San Francisco State University, was one of the
leading chemical evolution theorists in the world.

He co-authored "Biochemical Predestination", which
claimed

1. that the evolution of life was inevitable.

2. that proteins to produce living cells were formed
directly by forces of attraction between their parts.

3. that proteins are just formed together (self-assemble)
in chains, directly from amino acids, without any DNA
assembly instructions.

His theory was accepted with enthusiasm by the
evolutionary scientific community. But within just five
years after publishing, Kenyon suddenly had serious
doubts.

It began when one of his students asked, "How could the
first proteins have been assembled without the help of
genetic instructions?" (Proteins were the necessary
information to build the first cell.)

And then DNA was discovered. This would prove fatal to
Kenyon's molecular evolution theory. Kenyon confesses,

"The more I conducted my own studies, including a period
of time at NASA-AIMS Research Center, the more it became
apparent there were multiple difficulties with the
chemical evolution account.

"And further experimental work showed that amino acids
do not have the ability to order themselves into any
biologically meaningful sequences.

"The more I thought about the alternative that was
being presented in the criticism, and the enormous
problem that all of us who had worked on this field
had neglected to address, the problem of the origin
of genetic information itself, then I really had to
re-assess my whole position regarding origins."
(Unlocking the Mysteries of Life)

What he now had to address was this: What was the
source of the biological information in DNA?

"If one could get at the origin of the messages,
the encoded messages within the living machinery,
then you would really be onto something far more
intellectually satisfying than this chemical
evolution theory." (Ibid.)

The astonishing fact is that inside every
microscopic-sized cell, machines work together to
accomplish specific jobs and are shepherded by
other specially shaped machines to precise locations
where they are needed.

Learning this, Kenyon exclaimed, "This is absolutely
mind-boggling, to perceive at this scale of size,
such a finely tuned apparatus, a device, that
bears the marks of intelligent design and
manufacture!"

OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE OF A MASTER DESIGNER

This is observable evidence of thoughtful, programmed
designing by some Superior Mind. Evidence of
intelligently organized patterns.

MUSIC IN GENES

Something else. Did you know this? It was recently
discovered that DNA is linked to music!

If you like music, but think that you can't carry a
tune, you may be wrong.

Respected geneticist, Susumo Ono, believes he's
discovered music in genes - particularly human genes,
fish genes and rabbit genes. Susumo is a researcher
in DNA.

He asked himself, If we were to assign a musical note
to each chemical on the DNA strand and string those
notes together and play them, what would DNA sound
like?

So he did this - and the result was amazing.

He discovered musical patterns of notes, that again
reveal intelligence.

Susumo Ono was so astonished that he took his
findings to musicians.

And musicians, in turn, were astonished to hear
echoes of Bach, of Schubert, of Mozart in DNA
music.

Using the same formula for converting DNA into
music, Dr Ono worked backwards and translated
Chopin's funeral march into chemical symbols. It
came out cancer!

Skeptics naturally point out that these strands
of DNA produce only a string of single notes; it
is the musicians who fill in the rhythm and the
harmony.

But the bottom line is this: Whichever way you
look at it, the PATTERNS of single notes testify
to intelligence as the source of DNA.

Certainly it is not from a blind, accidental force
in nature.

IDENTICAL TO WRITTEN LANGUAGE

But there's more, much more.

Scientists at Bell Laboratories conducted studies
on the mathematical language in the DNA molecule.

And what did they find? Its mathematical pattern
is identical to that of conversational language.

Concerning DNA, Charles Thaxton states:

"A structural identity has been discovered between
the genetic message on DNA and the written messages
of a human language." (Charles Thaxton, "A New
Design Argument," Cosmic Pursuit 1, no. 2, Spring
1998)

Hupert Yockey explains:

"There is an identity of structure between DNA
(and protein) and written linguistic messages.

"Since we know by experience that intelligence
produces written messages, and no other cause is
known, the implication, according to the abductive
method, is that intelligent cause produced DNA and
protein.

"The significance of this result lies in the security
of it, for it is much stronger than if the structures
were merely similar.

"We are not dealing with anything like a superficial
resemblance between DNA and a written text.

"We are not saying DNA is like a message. Rather, DNA
is a message. True design thus returns to biology."
(Hubert P. Yockey, "Journal of Theoretic Biology")

Since there is no doubt in anyone's mind it takes
intelligence to write a language, it is evident that
it took intelligence to write the DNA code.

INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED 'SENTENCES'

Dean Kenyon was asked if DNA comes in intelligently
designed 'sentences'.

INTERVIEWER: "And is it true that when scientists
peer into the microscopic world of DNA, they find
not mere random arrangements, but well-written
'instruction books'?"

KENYON: "Yes. Masterpieces of immense intricacy and
subtlety."

INTERVIEWER: "And you argue that these biological
'sentences' in DNA could not have arisen merely by
material means, as evolutionists suggest?"

KENYON: "No. Just as the chemistry and physics of ink
and paper do not determine the order of symbols in a
printed text, but that order must be impressed on the
ink from the 'outside', so also the order of the
bases, or sub-units, in DNA [adenine, thymine, guanine,
and cytosine, or A, T, G, and C as commonly represented]
is not determined by the known chemical tendencies of
these individual sub-units, but instead appears to have
been impressed from the 'outside' on the sub-units to
create just those sequences that make biological sense.

The fantastic complexity and orderliness of the DNA code
- condensed into an incredibly tiny size - suggests the
work of a brilliant intellect rather than chance
processes.

It suggests that much thought has gone into their design
- just as human beings use intelligence to design and
construct computers, Jumbo jets, space craft and other
intricate equipment.

If radio signals were to be received from outer space,
they would be understood as evidence of an intelligent
source.

Why then should we not regard the message sequence on
the DNA molecule as prima facie evidence of an intelligent
source?

DESIGNED NOT TO EVOLVE

But that is not all! Gene code letters have built in
error protection!

Genes store information in long strings of DNA, in the
form of chemical letters, called A, T, C and G.

So that genes can be accurately copied, each gene
consists of two parallel strands of DNA held together
by links between the code letters of one strand and
those of the other strand.

The two strands are not identical. That is, A's do not
link to A's, and so on.

Instead, they are complimentary. A's always link to T's;
C's always link to G's.

Donail MacDonaill of Trinity College, Dublin, studied
that pattern of linkages between letters.

And he found that they form a parity code similar to
computer codes, to minimise mistakes during the
electronic transfer of information. (Nature science
update, www.nature.com/nsu September 18, 2002)

Now is the moment of truth. No one would be so naïve as
to believe modern electronic parity codes could have
evolved by chance. They were carefully planned by
software designers.

The parity code found in DNA is further evidence the
genetic code was deliberately created.

It also reminds us that DNA is designed to maintain
accurate copies and avoid changes in the information
it carries.

This means it was designed to NOT evolve. But rather
to reproduce its own kind forever.

Come to think of it, wouldn't that make evolution
scientifically impossible?

If you would like more information on this and a
treasure box of amazing facts, here's all you need
to do:

Just go to http://www.beforeus.com/evol.php
which is set to start blowing your mind wide open.

Thanks again for being on my newsletter list.

Take care,
Jonathan Gray
info@archaeologyanswers.com
------------------------------------------------------
Please tell your friends
------------------------------------------------------

Have you been enjoying the archaeology newsletters?
If you know someone who would find these facts
interesting, Click the URL below now to tell them,
or copy and paste the URL below into your browser.
http://www.beforeus.com
======================================================
If you have any questions, please email me at
info@archaeologyanswers.com
======================================================
International explorer, archaeologist and author
Jonathan Gray has traveled the world to gather data on
ancient mysteries. He has penetrated some largely
unexplored areas, including parts of the Amazon
headwaters. The author has also led expeditions to the
bottom of the sea and to remote mountain and desert
regions of the world. He lectures internationally.
======================================================
If you have received this mailing in error, or
do not wish to receive any further newsletter
mailings from us, simply click "Reply" and type
in the SUBJECT LINE "unsubscribe" to
info@archaeologyanswers.com