Yoel Natan Books: The Jewish Trinity & Moon-o-theism

Yoel Natan is author of the books "The Jewish Trinity", "T.J.T. Sourcebook" and "Moon-o-theism," a book that shows Allah was a pre-Islamic South Arabian war-god and moon-god. See: www.yoel.info.

Monday, July 06, 2009

More evasion from evolutionists

Scientists have said that dinosaur bones and other fossils are
not suseptible to C-14 dating, however, the permineralization
of the animal bones means the carbon is mostly there and
not leeched out, and thus the fossils could be C14 dated.

Now it turns out that a soft tissue fossilization of a dinosaur
not only has carbon intact, but amino acids. Amino acids
break down into nitrogen, oxygen and carbon mainly (or
perhaps exclusively), so C-14 dating could be conducted on
the carbon residue.

The article says that the reason amino acids are present,
but protein is not present, is that "Proteins" are "complex
molecules that degrade easily over time," implying that amino
acids themselves are not complex, and are inert and don't
easily degrade over time. The fact is that no amino acid should
last intact for 80 million years, but an amino acid lasting a few
thousand years since the Flood is plausible. Moreover, amino
acids are complex enough that nearly all amino acids found
in nature are from biogenesis and are not produced by
inorganic processes. For instance, in the 1950s when a scientists
figured out how to create amino acids in a beeker, that was
considered big news.

To summarize, the article doesn't mention C14 dating,
and it implies that it isn't that remarkable when amino acids
last 65 million years, but it is remarkable when proteins
do. In fact, it is beyond belief that either amino acides or
proteins could last that long. However, amino acids could
last a few thousand years better than proteins last the same
amount of time, so that is why only amino acids were found
in this case.

Christine Dell'Amore
National Geographic News
June 30, 2009

Excerpt: Protein-recovery techniques used on the skin and a claw detected amino acids, the building blocks of proteins. Proteins themselves, complex molecules that degrade easily over time, were not found, however.

Wednesday, July 01, 2009

Taxes spent to support evolution and multiculturalism

Evolutionists are upset that creationists spent $17 million to build a creation museum, so it's interesting to read about the high finances of evolutionists. For instance, NASA wants to correct its history of sending just white men to the moon, especially since NASA is best known for its decidedly un-PC and supposedly sexist statement by Armstrong "...One small step for a man one big step for mankind." So no doubt NASA will send a rainbow coalition to moon even though just sending an unmanned mission could have resulted in more science experiments at much less cost. Why spend the money on inner city schools when one can spend it making multicultural history? While on the moon making several multicultural exploits, as a sideline they'll do some science and try to confirm that there is water on moon, which scientists think will improve the odds of evolution occurring around the universe. Now it comes out that NASA could just buy proven technology moon rockets for $6.6 billion, but instead wants to buy the latest models for $35 billion. $35 billion is 2,059 times as much money as was spent on the Creation Museum!

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Evolutionists' failure to distinguish evolution from science is just a propaganda ploy

Here's another case where evolutionists try to
take up the mantle of science, and imply that
evolution and science are indistinguishable, and
that any distinction made between evolution and
However, creationists and evolution skeptics have
no problem distinguishing hard science from the
soft science of evolution, so evolutionists failure
to do so is just a propaganda ploy--a ploy to say
that creationists are anti-science. Here an example:

Excerpt: Miller and other paleontologists object to numerous other
aspects of the museum they say imply science is doing more harm than good.

related:
http://answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/06/27/news-to-note-06272009#adm
The Associated Press reports on “scientists” studying their “foes”: us! The comments from the paleontologists who visited our Creation Museum are not scientific, however, and instead concern whether we are “demonizing” those who believe in millions of years. Thankfully, the article also gave space for comments from our own Dr. David Menton.

Monday, June 22, 2009

Evolutionists show their ignorance about the complexity of life

Evolutionists recently dug up an animal that has similarities
to an elephant. It has no tusks, but only enlarged encisors,
and it has no trunk, but it's skull is similar. Based on this
alone they confidently proclaim it is an ancestor of elephants.
They ignore, however, that the DNA that gives rise to tusks
and trunk, and the brain part to control the trunk, probably
involves an encylopedia set worth of information. This new
information would have to occur through successful successive
mutations passed down each generation. This is way too
much to ask mother nature to accomplish even in a billion years.

show much smaller tusks than current animals', 22 Jun 2009

excerpt: The animal's relation to elephants was determined via analysis of the specimen's teeth and skull. While it lacked a trunk, the animal had an enlarged first incisor, which researcher Emmanuel Gheerbrant of the National Museum of Natural History in Paris says represents a primitive tusk.

News to Note, 27 Jun 2009
Excerpt: The second concerns Eritherium azzouzorum, said to be the oldest known elephant ancestor because “two of the creature’s lower front teeth jut a fraction of an inch out from its jaw.” Thus (says one scientist), “This is some kind of precursor of the tusk of the more modern [elephant].” It sounds like plenty of guesswork and interpretation are going into those conclusions as well!
--------------

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Evolutionists show their bias once again

28 Jun 2009 Update: UK scientist has Big Bang skeptic's
petition signed by 200 PhD scientists, and he says that
among scientists and in UK schools, observations that
observations are judged right or wrong based on whether
they support the Big Bang. In other words, the Big Bang
is a theory in search of evidence, and the same could be
said of evolution.

27 Jun 2009 Update: More on how evolutionists are opperating
on superficialities. After years of saying that chimpanzees were
humans' nearest relative, now evolutionists are saying it is the
orangutan. It seems the whole chimpanzee-human connection was
based on only 2 unique physical characteristics! Of course, the
untrained eye would see more, but that just shows how evolution
is based on superficialities:
Evolutionists like to say that the DNA of monkeys and humans
are only 2% different, but what they don't tell you is that
the human genome is 3 billion base pairs long, so two percent
represents 60 million base pairs difference! If each base pair
was a mile-long road, that road would circle the earth 2,410 times!

The difference between monkeys and apes could be as large as 8%,
or 240,000,000 base pairs. Why the different findings? Evolutionists
reporting their findings on sensitive issues that affect the creation vs
evolution debate is rather like dictators reporting on the results of
elections. In other words, the results are fixed in their favor as much
as possible without totally shredding their court-imposed credibility,
just like elections in unfree countries! (This reminds me that the world's
worst dictators all believed in evolution, and that reminds me of how
the NY Times loved Stalin (see Walter Duranty). The same could be said
of evolutionists and radiometric dating. Only those results that agree with
their presuppositions are reported and the rest are trashed. For instance,
when is the last time you've heard of C14 dating conducted on dinosaur
soft tissue samples, amber, or carbon-laden fossils? In fact, evolutionists
refuse to do and report such test so as not to give creationists any ammo. Today's news provides another example of what I'm talking about:

New to Note, 27 Jun 2009: Excerpt: A University of Leeds press release offers another quiet mention
of how “problematic” and “unreliable” molecular clock dating methods are.
But as is usually the case, no one mentions the inaccuracies of the old
method until a new one is devised to replace it.
17 Jun 2009 Original Entry:
Jeanna Bryner writes that dinosaur-to-bird evolution is apparent
from the forelimb bones. She wrote the shared ancestory is so
clear that even a school kid can see it. Bryner is wrong since
the school child can only see the superficial similarity, but the question
of whether the similarity arose form a common designer, or from
common ancestery, or both through creation and speciation, is
another question. So what Bryner really means is that the similarity
in form lends itself to schoolroom indoctrination in evolution by
propagandists who are backed by the US court system.

A closer look at the homology between birds and dinosaurs
suggest that there was only a common designer, and not shared
ancestery, because there are fundamental differences between
dinosaur forelimbs and bird wings, the so-called "digit dillemma."
Thus, a child might "see" evolution only because the teachers
have exposed the child to pro-evolution arguments, and shielded
the child from contrary arguments.

Fossil may solve mystery of dinosaur fingers New find reveals transitional step between 5-digit creatures, modern wings James Clark / LiveScience The hand of the Limusaurus inextricabilis paratype, showing the vestigial first finger and robust second and third fingers. LiveScience
Excerpt: Bird wings clearly share ancestry with dinosaur "hands" or forelimbs. A school kid can see it in the bones. But paleontologists have long struggled to explain the so-called digit dilemma.
----------
----------


Friday, June 12, 2009

Evolutionists admit they were lying about the dino-bird connection all along

Well, okay, but this is about as close as they ever come to
admitting they've been lying to the public over an extended
period of time:


“It’s really strange that no one realized this before."

See also AiG.

Thursday, June 04, 2009

The Cost of Media Bias

The Cost of Media Bias (8 minute video).

Tuesday, June 02, 2009

High fuel prices put an end to the arms race on American roads

GM made all its money on financing/mortgage profits and on gas guzzling 
SUVs and light trucks the last couple decades. Their putting vehicles on the road
that were unsafe for other drives due to their immense size and weight fueled a
sort of "arms race." Everyone had to have a bigger vehicle in order to feel 
safe on the road. Thus, GM's business strategy was similar to the profits made the 
defense industries during the Cold War arms race. Meanwhile, the GM strategy was 
just to outlive the bulk of its retirees (from the time when the company was really big) 
until it could become profitable again:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,628070,00.html

http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,druck-628093,00.html
-----------

Saturday, May 16, 2009

Study High school teachers influence student views of evolution, creationism

1 May 2009

excerpt: Students whose high school biology class included creationism (with or without evolution) were more likely to accept creationist views as entering college students. Similarly, students exposed to evolutionism but not creationism were more likely to accept evolution in college. For example, 72 to 78 percent of students exposed to evolution only agreed that it is scientifically valid while 57 to 59 percent of students who were exposed to creationism agreed that it can be validated.

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Republicans own policies led to economic and political wrecks

Republicans are out of power now because they allowed businesses
to overcharge and otherwise abuse consumers in a range of areas,
which abuses mounted up and led to the current bank crash and
recession. Many beleaguered Americans felt they had no other option
than to vote for Obama. Republicans derided Obama as the messiah,
but Republican policies are what made voters feel they needed one!

Unaffordably High Medical Costs
Did you ever wonder why there is a nationwide computerized
credit record and scoring system, and yet no nationwide computerized
medical record system? Also wonder why its hard for consumers to 
file for bankruptcy, yet businesses are bailed out and their executives
get golden parachutes. You can thank the pro-business, anti-consumer
Republicans for that. Turns out the drug companies have been against the 
idea and lobbied against computerized records since such a system would 
allow for cost-effectiveness studies of the health care system. Even with 
Obama in office, drug companies are spending huge amounts
of cash to fight drug comparison studies:
Merck, Biogen boost lobbying to defy Obama’s drug comparisons, 17 Apr 2009
The above article also mentions how the drug companies have successfully 
blocked competition, too:
The companies successfully pushed a 2003 Medicare prescription law that kept the government from negotiating lower prices and blocked repeated efforts to allow the importation of less-expensive drugs from Canada.
As a result, medical costs have ballooned to "$2.5 trillion, or 18 percent of the economy"
(see above article). This made US manufacturing uncompetitive compared to countries
with socialized medical care since health care is factored into the price of each product.
This led to a trade imbalance and outflow of money from the US. Of course, no one was
ever short of credit since foreign countries were more than willing to lend to the US,
but this quickly leads to unsustainable consumer, business and government debt.

Another reason for the high medical costs is the high salaries nurses get because of the
artificial shortage of nurses. It is hard to get qualified faculty to teach nursing because
being a nurse in the field is so lucrative. So in 2008, 50,000 qualified students were
turned away from nursing school due to faculty and building shortages. Of course, if
Republicans had helped build nursing schools, there would be plenty of faculty because
there would be plenty of nurses, and working in the field would not be so lucrative as
to draw away all the nursing teachers! So this is a Republican-made shortage, and also
it drives up medical costs skyhigh.

Unaffordable Housing

The banking industry lobbied to reduce regulation, so no one in Washington really
knew what was going on in the housing market. Soon it was a huge speculative 
bubble leading to predatory lending and over-valued houses.  When the bubble
burst, foreclosures resulted, and the equity which allowed consumer purchases 
vanished. Moreover, many mortgage companies went out of business, and the
banks were bailed out, yet consumers have gotten little to no help with their end
of the bargain.

The mortgage companies remind one of a legalized ponzi scheme where, while 
the economy was good, they profited immensely, but when the economy went 
bad, they flopped. Ironically, the real criminal ponzi schemes lasted longer through
the recession before they went belly up!

Unaffordable Gas
Pro-business Republicans were against regulating the stock market, and
it turns out that the tripling of the gasoline prices for a year was the result
of a manufactured shortage and panicked futures market speculation. 
The unaffordable gas also lead to higher food prices.

Unaffordable Food

Pro-business Republicans thought that ethanol was a good deal even
though scientists said it didn't make environmental sense, and couldn't
survive without government subsidies of 50 cents per gallon. Moreover,
it could never supply more than a few percent of the transportation 
needs. Yet more money was poured into ethanol, thereby driving up
food prices since biofuels competed against food crops for fertilizer and 
land. This competition eventually did ethanol in since the higher price
of corn led to higher prices for ethanol, so the ethanol subsidy wasn't 
enough to sustain the business.

Since the price of gasoline went up, natural gas prices rose in sympathy.
This made ethanol more expensive since natural gas is used to make
fertilizer and also to dry the corn.

Unaffordable Education

The cost of higher education has been rising much faster than the 
rate of inflation, often due to predatory lending to students. Schools
found that they could jack up tuition and fees and they'd still have 
enough students thanks in large part to federal student loans and
predatory credit card companies.  In the 1990s Congress removed
most loan protections for students, and students cannot ever get out
of repaying federal student loan via bankruptcy. So some individuals
end up repaying student loans after they are eligible for Social Security,
with the government automatically deducting the payment from their
checks. Even those who are permanently disabled cannot escape 
student loan debt.

Colleges often touted studies that showed college graduates could 
afford to take out student loans since they would make so much 
more than those who did not attend college. However, those 
studies did not take into account that those who made the 
astronomical salaries after college probably had no need to take
out student loans in the first place. A more accurate study would 
investigate how students who had to take out huge students loans 
are fairing after college. This would show that many of them are 
in the poorhouse, and often default on student loans and other 
forms of debt. Also, instead of showing the average income of 
college graduates, only income from salaries should be considered,
and income from all other sources such as the lottery and inheritences
should be factored out. Moreover, only the mean income should be
reported.

So students would take out massive student loans convinced by
their colleges that they would make a lot of money after college.
The banks would initiate the loans to students extracting 
hundreds of dollars in fees right off the top, and then turn around 
and sell it to federal agencies like Sallie Mae. So the banks could 
make huge loans without any risk! This is similar to how banks 
made huge subprime loans to low-income debtors 
knowing they could resell the mortgages to federal agencies like
Sallie Mae and Freddie Mac. Just as this created a huge housing 
market bubble, i.e, incredibly high prices for houses, it creates 
unbelievably high prices for college. So, as one can see, once again
the banks, colleges and credit card companies are protected by the 
government, while Republicans allow consumers to be preyed upon.
For more on this, see The Student Loan Scam (2009) by Alan 
Michael Collinge, or similar books.

Conclusion

After several years of Republic policies, the pigeons came home to 
roost. When consumers felt they could no longer afford life, they 
voted for a savior, that being Obama.
------------
related links:

February 26, 2009
Despite Surge of Interest in Nursing Careers, New AACN Data Confirm That Too Few Nurses Are Entering the Healthcare Workforce

Passing the NEED Act of 2009 Would Address Resource Concerns at Schools of Nursing and Spark Future Enrollment Growth

WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--According to new survey data released today by the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN), less than half of all qualified applicants to entry-level baccalaureate nursing programs were enrolled last year despite calls to increase the number of well-educated registered nurses (RNs) in the U.S. workforce. Though interest in nursing careers is high, the latest data show that almost 50,000 qualified applications to professional nursing programs were turned away in 2008, including nearly 6,000 applicants to master’s and doctoral degree programs.