老虎机稳赢方法

“It is absurd for the Evolutionist to complain that it is unthinkable for an admittedly unthinkable God to make everything out of nothing, and then pretend that it is more thinkable that nothing should turn itself into everything.”
― G.K. Chesterton

“It is not a matter of whether one is biased or not. It is really a question of which bias is the best bias with which to be biased.”
― Ken Ham, The Lie: Evolution

“For evolution to be true, there would have been innumerable transitional forms between different types of creatures. Therefore, for every known fossil species, many more must have existed to connect it to its ancestors and descendents [sic]. This is yet another example of evolutionary conclusions coming before the evidence. Really, the claim is an implicit admission that large numbers of transitional forms are predicted, which heightens the difficulty for evolutionists, given how few there are that even they could begin to claim were candidates. . . .

Evolutionists believe that mutation provides new information for selection. But no known mutation has ever increased genetic information, although there should be many examples observable today if mutation/selection were truly adequate to explain the goo-to-you theory. . . .

Adaptation and natural selection are biological facts; amoeba-to-man evolution is not. Natural selection can only work on the genetic information present in a population of organisms--it cannot create new information. For example, since no known reptiles have genes for feathers, no amount of selection will produce a feathered reptile. Mutations in genes can only modify or eliminate existing structures, not create new ones. If in a certain environment a lizard survives better with smaller legs, or no legs, then varieties with this trait will be selected for. This might more accurately be called devolution, not evolution. . . .

Note that even if such a mutation were ever discovered, evolutionists would still need to find hundreds more to give their theory the observational boost it desperately needs.”
― Jonathan Sarfati, Refuting Evolution 2

“Population genetics calculations suggest that in 5 million years (one million years longer than the alleged time between Ambulocetus and Rodhocetus), animals with generation lines of about ten years (typical of whales) could substitute no more than about 1,700 mutations.6 This is not nearly enough to generate the new information that whales need for aquatic life, even assuming that all the hypothetical information-adding mutations required for this could somehow arise. (And as shown in chapter 9, real science shows that this cannot occur.)”
― Jonathan Sarfati, Refuting Evolution: A Response to the National Academy of Science s' Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science

“An all-out attack on evolutionist thinking is possibly the only real hope our nations have of rescuing themselves from an inevitable social and moral catastrophe.”
― Ken Ham

“If amino acids can only be made where there is no free oxygen in the atmosphere, and porphyrins can only be made when there is free oxygen, then these things needed by every cell could not have existed together to form the first cell! What鈥檚 more, many of these compounds are antagonistic. They will combine and destroy each other鈥攁nywhere except within a living cell.”
― Lawrence O. Richards, It Couldn't Just Happen: Fascinating Facts About God's World

“Many of those who accuse the Christian God of being a 鈥済enocidal god鈥� because of the Flood, support the genocidal killing of millions of children in their mother鈥檚 wombs, which is a double standard fallacy!”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“What does this mean? Simply that to make DNA, you have to have DNA in the first place! You have to have the DNA code within the cell before you can make more DNA code. Without the complete code in the first place, there is no way to make the code necessary for every living cell!”
― Lawrence O. Richards

“Fossils do not require long ages to form. In fact, they must form quickly, otherwise the organism鈥檚 softer tissues and even bones suffer decay (shells or teeth enamel naturally take longer to disintegrate).”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances . . . could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, ABSURD in the highest possible degree.”
― Ken Ham, Inside the Nye Ham Debate: Revealing Truths from the Worldview Clash of the Century

“Historian Bill Cooper鈥檚 research in After the Flood provides dates from several ancient cultures.9 The first is that of the Anglo-Saxons, whose history has 5,200 years from creation to Christ, according to the Laud and Parker Chronicles. Cooper鈥檚 research also indicated that Nennius鈥� record of the ancient British history has 5,228 years from creation to Christ. The Irish chronology has a date of about 4000 b.c. for creation, which is surprisingly close to Ussher and Jones! Even the Mayans had a date for the Flood of 3113 b.c.”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“The online encyclopedia, Wikipedia, has entries that tend to change rather often and is biased toward the religion of secularism. Even so, they write: Typically a steep-walled, narrow gorge is inferred to represent slow persistent erosion. But because many of the geological formations of Canyon Lake Gorge are virtually indistinguishable from other formations which have been attributed to long term (slower) processes, the data collected from Canyon Lake Gorge lends further credence to the hypothesis that some of the most spectacular canyons on Earth may have been carved rapidly during ancient megaflood events.7 Notice that the religion of secular humanism still reigns supreme in this quote. The encyclopedia refuses to give the possibility of a global Flood (Noah鈥檚 Flood) being the triggering factor (as well as subsequent factors resulting from the Flood) for many of the great canyon鈥檚 formations. Instead they appeal to 鈥渕egafloods.鈥� But regardless, major floods and other catastrophes destroy the idea of millions of years and long ages.”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“Turning hard material (e.g., bones) into fossils is easy in a lab setting, but in 1993, scientists were even able to make fossils from soft animal tissues! New York Times鈥� Science Watch reports: Scientists have for the first time produced fossils of soft animal tissues in a laboratory. In the process they discovered that most of the phosphate required for the fossilization of small animal carcasses comes from within the animal itself.”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“Another milestone with geological implications is day 150. At this stage of the Flood we are told that the ark came to rest in the mountains of Ararat. This implies that modern mountain building, at least in what we now call the Middle East, had begun (see also Psalm 104:8鈥�9).19 Furthermore, if our current understanding of mountain building is correct, for the mountains of Ararat to have been formed requires the Eurasian Plate, African Plate, and Arabian Plate to be colliding with one another (perhaps with some contribution from movement of the Indian Plate).”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“Kinds are like the dog sort (including dingoes, wolves, coyotes, domestic dogs, etc.), cat sort (including lions, tigers, cougars, bobcats, domestic cats, etc.), horse sort (ponies, Clydesdales, donkeys, zebras, etc.), and so on. There is variation within these kinds especially since the Flood, but not evolution where one kind changes into a totally different kind over long periods of time 鈥� which is not observed anyway (e.g., amoebas turning into dogs).”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“Those that entered the ark in pairs were for the purpose of repopulating their kind after the Flood. This is why the female is paired with it. But the sacrificial clean animals were obviously not required to go in pairs as they had no mates and their function was not to keep their kinds alive after the Flood (Genesis 7:36). Sacrifice costs the sacrificer something. If not, it really isn鈥檛 a sacrifice. King David later recognized this (2 Samuel 24:24”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“The Hebrew phrase in Psalm 104:8a is the basis for the correct translation of mountains rising and valleys sinking. This shows that mountains and valleys during the Flood were not the same height as they are today. Even today mountains and valleys are changing their height; volcanic mountains, for instance, can grow very quickly, such as Surtsey (a new island) or Paricutin (a volcanic mountain in Mexico that formed in 1943).”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“If we take ocean basins and bring them up and take mountain ranges and continents and bring them down to a level position, there is enough water to cover the earth 1.6 miles deep (2.57 km deep), so there is plenty of water on the earth for a global Flood. Yet there was only the need for the highest underwater peak during the Flood to be covered by 15 cubits (22.5 feet or ~6.8 meters based on the small cubit to 25.5 feet or ~7.8 meters based on the long cubit) per Genesis 7:20.”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“The mountains of Ararat are part of the larger mountain chain called the Alpide Belt or Alpine-Himalayan Belt. This range extends from Spain and North Africa, through the Alps and Middle Eastern ranges (like the mountains of Ararat), and through the Himalayas down the Malay Peninsula and Indonesia, almost reaching Australia. It makes sense that these Alpine mountain ranges were all formed about the same time during the Flood鈥檚 mountain-building, which coincides with the valley sinking phase (ocean basins going down).”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“In general, placental animals would move slower than marsupials, which can collect their young (e.g., in pouches) and continue migrating. Many placental animals need to stop and settle for a time to raise their young but, theoretically, great varieties of land animals could have gone to any region of Europe, Asia, and Africa.”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“In other instances, some of these animals may have made it to a particular area and become extinct for various reasons 鈥� ultimately due to sin, of course! One objection to this is that we should find fossils of them if they lived in an area, but this is fallacious.2 Paul Taylor states the following regarding this subject on fossils: But the expectation of such fossils is a presuppositional error. Such an expectation is predicated on the assumption that fossils form gradually and inevitably from animal populations. In fact, fossilization is by no means inevitable. It usually requires sudden, rapid burial. Otherwise the bones would decompose before permineralization. One ought likewise to ask why it is that, despite the fact that millions of bison used to roam the prairies of North America, hardly any bison fossils are found there. Similarly, lion fossils are not found in Israel even though we know that lions once lived there.”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“Most believe the Flood of Noah triggered the Ice Age. The rising magmas, lavas, and hot waters associated with continental plate movements would have caused ocean temperatures to rise. Also, fine ash from volcanic eruptions probably lingered in the upper atmosphere in post-Flood years, which, unlike a greenhouse effect, would reduce the sunlight for cooler summers. So the mechanism for such a rare event was in place due to Genesis 6鈥�8. But what happens in an ice age? A lot of water is taken out of the ocean and deposited on land, so the ocean level drops.7 This exposes land bridges. One well-known land bridge was the one that crossed what we call today 鈥渢he Bering Strait鈥� from Alaska to Russia, so it is easily feasible for animals to have walked from Asia to North and South America.”
― Ken Ham, A Flood of Evidence: 40 Reasons Noah and the Ark Still Matter

“Furthermore, a cell has no ability to improve its basic function. Bacteria that becomes resistant to antibiotics are still bacteria. Fruit flies that develop mutations are still fruit flies. Moths that change color are still moths. Birds that develop longer and shorter beaks are still birds. Therefore, one organism has no natural ability to change into another organism. (chapter 10)”
― Eric Bermingham, Creation vs. Evolution

“The cat varieties today have developed by natural and artificial selection action on the original variability in the information (genes) of the original cats, resulting in differing combinations of information, and thus, speciation. Therefore, only a few "cat" pairs may have been needed on Noah's ark.

This "speciation" is NOT "evolution", since it is based strictly on the created information already present, and is thus limited. Evolution from amoeba to man, however, requires new information to arise, and by natural processes. Put another way: one involves thinning of gene pools (natural selection/speciation), the other an expansion (evolution). Thus, for dinosaurs (or any other creature) to evolve, there would have to be a mechanism to produce information from disorder by chance (this has NEVER been observed to happen), and continually add in new information so new types could evolve.

But true science has only observed that it takes information to produce information - information NEVER arises by chance. Thus, the evolution (in the Darwinian sense) of dinosaurs is impossible.”
― Ken Ham, The Great Dinosaur Mystery Solved!

“Interestingly, like many of the insects, scorpions appear deep in the rocks of the earth. And they are easily recognized in those deep rocks for what they are - scorpions. The reality is that scorpions abruptly appear in the rocks in their completed forms. It's true there used to be scorpions that are no longer with us, but this is no help to the theory of evolution. Nevertheless, scorpions suddenly appearing in the rocks as scorpions is precisely what we would expect on the basis of the Biblical model of creation.”
― Vance Nelson, Untold Secrets of Planet Earth: Monumental Monsters

“Evolutionists, not having the supposed common ancestor for this superorder of insects, simply assume it must have existed. This is not science, however, but blind faith. If they had actual fossil evidence showing how these insects originated by a slow and gradual evolutionary process, having in their possession actual fossils of the early stages to the later stages, then they would not need to "assume" or "speculate". The fact of the matter is, these insects abruptly appear in their complete form in the fossil record showing no hint they evolved from any other insects through any intermediate stages. This is exactly what would be expected based on the Bible.”
― Vance Nelson, Untold Secrets of Planet Earth: Monumental Monsters

“A child in a Christian school class asked her teacher, "How could anybody create everything in six days from nothing?" Another very discerning young student blurted out, "But God is not just anybody!”
― Ken Ham, The Lie: Evolution

“Please allow me to wax philosophical. The purpose of eyesight, as well as insight for that matter, is for you and I to be in awe of not just creation itself but of the very One who created it. I will confidently propose that this is the purpose behind creation. Consider this: Evolution cannot explain purpose. It can only explain function. Science can explain how and why you and I function. It might even suggest your function within society. However, science alone will never give you the answer to your ultimate purpose for being on this Earth.
鈥淟et鈥檚 suppose you go to an art museum. While pursuing the halls of art, your eyes are directed to a certain painting. You become fixated on that painting. It is beautiful. The painting is so mesmerizing and beautiful that you are taken with the image it conveys. You begin to speculate on the story behind the painting. You become emotional and even shed a tear as you stare at it in wonder. For a brief moment in time you become immersed in the essence of this work of art. What is happening here? The one who designed and created the painting did so in order to perhaps bring about an emotional response from the viewer. You didn鈥檛 look at the painting and wonder about the chemical makeup of paint or the composition of the canvas mat or what type of device was used to apply those chemical compounds to the mat. You didn鈥檛 measure the dimensions of the frame. No. The painter gave that painting a purpose. While the painting itself is remarkable and beautiful, the ultimate purpose of it is to direct you to the one who created it. We give honor to Rembrandt, Monet, Goya, Van Gogh, and Picasso. Why does evolution deny that we give honor to the One who designed, created, and gave beauty to you and me, or to any other created thing? For sure, some evolutionists will try to say that the method the grand Creator used in His creation was evolution but will continue to ignore any mention of His creative hand and minimize other accounts such as the evidence for the origin of life in Scripture. They suppress the truth as they give high honor to their evolutionary theories that they guard with defiance.
鈥淭he appearance of design isn鈥檛 just a common sense factor; it comes from a scientific explanation to which I have spoken here tonight.
鈥淓ach one of you has the ability to hear, read, study, and think on everything that goes into your mind. While we do well to consider objective theory, we still must then decide for ourselves what it is we are going to believe. We are not just lab rats responding to stimuli. We have the ability to reason, love, express emotions, think deeply on matters, and create things鈥攏ot just as an evolutionary function but from our innate giftedness and developed talents.
鈥淕ive much consideration to what is true. Consider what is splendid and beautiful and magnificent. Think on things that are right or lovely or worthy of your admiration. Reflect on those things, not just as some facts of science but on the effect these things have on your very heart and soul. There is a word for those thoughts and feelings that penetrate deep within the depths of your soul. The word is visceral. No other creature on this privileged terrestrial ball has this ability. Visceral feelings are not merely a product of our DNA or the chemical and electrical impulses within our brain. Evolution offers no explanation for these deeply rooted expressions of artistic and creative thoughts and ideas. These things come from our Creator. May we not merely skim the surface of wisdom and knowledge without ever going deep. These things are meant to propel you to a deeper awareness of the world around you. They are even meant to propel us to the eternal realm.”
― Richlon Merrill, Skimming Eternity: The Astonishing and Revelatory Discovery from Neutrinos and Thought Transmission

“What had Van Maanen seen? The best answer is that Van Maanen saw what he expected to see. He was so convinced that the objects that he was observing were rotating clouds of gas within our galaxy that he managed to see rotation where none existed. This ought to be a humbling example for scientists. Most scientists are so convinced that evolution is true that they claim to see evidence where none exists.”
― Danny Faulkner, Intro to Astrophysic: A Study of God's Universe from a Biblical Perspective

“This story illustrates powerfully how Darwin's theory, together with how it is often promoted to the public, can bias investigators and lead them along blind alleys. The "science" that supposedly has "proved" evolution is not capable of doing any such thing because it deals with past events. This means that it is more equivalent to forensic science, where clues are gathered which have to be very carefully weighed by experts in a court of law. The jury must then decide what the truth of the matter is from the balance of probabilities. Looking back, it is apparent that there was never powerful evidence for a stooping brutish, ape-like Neanderthal man, but that some evidence was withheld from the "jury" of public opinion.”
― Sylvia Baker, Bone of Contention: Is Evolution True