Hey, since I’ve only been intermittently (at best) writing posts on here, I’m just going to put my research posts over on my other blog, and I may write a quick post on here with the title of what was posted and the gist of what it is about, just so if I have other posts on top of it you can do a search and it will be accessible. I may one day come back over here, if my life becomes unbusy, but considering this summer is as unbusy as it gets, I highly doubt that will happen. 😛 So I’m going to be posting at http://rinielsmusings.wordpress.com.


So I’m really busy during my last week of school and haven’t had time to write. However, for some reason, I wrote this on a comment on a different blog, because I found it extremely interesting. I’ve been writing a report on Mt. St. Helens that I have to present tomorrow, and while this isn’t in the report, I did find it interesting.

There was an area with a radius of 60 miles where absolutely nothing was heard. Scientific-y stuff made simple(keep in mind that sound waves travel faster in warmer air and tend to be refracted toward cooler temperatures), the sound waves bent upward toward cooler air at high altitudes, hit about fifteen miles where air temperatures began to rise because of the sun, and were refracted back toward the ground, about the shape of a flattened doughnut. The sound continued to bounce back and forth, so there were alternating zones of loud and quiet at increasing distances from the volcano. Awesome, huh?

Random science fact of the day: check. ^_^

Sorry it has taken me so long to write. I’m finally finding time to post and catch up on letter and book writing. I know I also said two or three posts ago that I would be keeping my science posts smaller. And while I meant that…I may end up making them longer than I mean to, simply because it’s hard to break off in the middle of something. So today I wish to speak on DNA and the information it contains.

First of all, it may be necessary that you understand how DNA is synthesized. I could write that out, but then this post would be huge. So if you get lost, I would recommend just finding a simple explanation, because you don’t need a complicated one to understand this post. Moving on.

DNA has been described as being even more complicated than a computer’s coding. While it has only four letters, it is so detailed in how it must be arranged to accomplish anything. If you want something to accomplish a certain task, the DNA must be arranged in the correct order. And if you want this thing to do something else, new information, or DNA must be added. For instance, if you want your computer to run a new kind of program, you have to download something to the hard drive; aka, feed it information. The computer needs instructions on how to do what you want it to do.

But where did this information come from, the instructions necessary to build these proteins to make DNA? A lot of people will talk about the ‘prebiotic soup’ – chemicals that existed on the primitive Earth prior to life. However, even if the right chemicals were present to create a living cell, instructions for the specific configurations would be needed to form the structures necessary for specific functions.

So let’s sum up a DNA molecule briefly. DNA has vour bases: adenine, thymine, cytosine, and guanine. This is where DNA stores info. These bases instruct the cell on how to build different sequences of amino acis, which when arranged differently will create different proteins.

A protein is a linear arrangement of amino acids. Because of the force exerted between amino acids, the proteins fold into very specific 3D shapes. These shapes are irregular, and can only change so much in order to fit into a catalyst site to catalyze a reaction or form structural molecules, linkers, or parts of molecular machines (if you didn’t understand that, just understand that they can only take on certain shapes to work). The 3D shape that allows proteins to perform a function was derived from a 1D sequence of amino acids. If you rearrange any of the acids, you’d set up a completely different combination of force interactions and the protein would fold differently. So the correct order is necessary to fold into a shape of a functional protein.

DNA is much like a library that houses instructions to build proteins, the building blocks for larger components and structures. The organism accesses the info it needs so it can build these components. To build one single protein, you typically need 1200-2000 bases.

But how did the DNA get there? Bill Gates said that “DNA is like a software program, only much more complex than anything we’ve ever devised.” Scientists use a scientific principle of reasoning known as uniformitarianism. This concept is the idea that our present knowledge of cause-and-effect relationships should guide our reconstruction of what caused something to arise in the past. For example, if you find ripple marks preserved from the ancient past in sedimentary rock strata, and you see the same kind of ripple marks being formed in lake beds as water evaporates, you can infer using uniformitarian reasoning that these ripples on the strata were formed in a similar process.

So the simplest cell we study or evidence in fossil record requires information stored in DNA or some other info carrier. And we know from experience that info is habitually associated with conscious activity. Using uniformitarian logic, we can reconstruct the cause of the ancient info in the first cell as being the product of intelligence.

Before I go into this post, I’d like to make clear that a) I don’t condemn people that swear, and b) I don’t believe swearing is ‘worse’ than any other sin. James 2:10 says, “For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.”  So we are told that when we commit one sin, we have ‘broken the law’, meaning that we have sinned and messed up, period. Not “I messed up less than he did”.  All have sinned and require forgivness.

I chose to do a post on this because I’ve noticed that people in my youth group will sometimes swear, or admit to swearing outside of church. When they ask me what I think about swearing or ask if it bothers me, I tell them that I don’t like it and think it’s wrong, and they counter that they don’t think the Bible condemns swearing. What amuses me is that they then say that curse words are used in the Bible. So I wanted to see if I could find these verses and see what the Bible has to say about language.

So let’s look at some of these supposed swear words. First off, damn. Damn has a very literal meaning. To damn somebody is to, for lack of better translation, doom them. Nations may be damned, or certain people, meaning doomed to hell. And now we come to another word: hell. Hell is a literal place, not a swear word. Nor is it ever used as one. Hell is a place of eternal suffering, separation from God. Not a way to express anger. Ass is a donkey, folks, not an idiot. It is also never used as a swear word. Piss is also used in the Bible, but also in its literal sense. It is never used in an offensive or crude way. Bastard is also used properly, ie for an illegitimate son, not as a derogatory term for somebody. Words such as the f-word or s-word are not found in the Bible, though a friend of mine told me they were. It is also a sin to use God’s name in a way not reverent. Exodus 20:7 says “You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.” God’s name is holy; don’t abuse it.

As for verses that speak of using improper language, the one most obvious would be Ephesians 4:29 – “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.” I’ve never heard a swear word that builds somebody up. But we also see in this verse that it’s not just a sin to swear, but use any words or phrases that are unkind and would hurt somebody. So saying ‘freaking, shoot, or crap’ are really just as bad as swear words. Also, calling somebody stupid or saying a girl is ugly is a sin. The only difference is that in our language we count these words and phrases as less vulgar than some other things that could be said. But really, they are just as much a sin.  When we say such things, we hurt not only others but also ourselves.

Matthew 5:22 – “But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.” (Raca meaning literally ‘empty head’, in our language, idiot or moron). While saying these things won’t send you to Hell, you will be held accountable for them at judgement. Matthew 12:36-37 – “But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” 

Matthew 15:18-19 – “But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.” What comes out of our mouth reflects who we are inside. Not what goes in, but what we let come out.  When we swear or say mean things, we are losing control of ourselves. James 3:4-5a: “Look also at ships: although they are so large and are driven by fierce winds, they are turned by a very small rudder wherever the pilot desires. Even so the tongue is a little member and boasts great things.” Our tongues are powerful. We are to learn to control them. The Bible speaks of it so many times. Most of James 3 is devoted to talking about controlling the tongue. We have to keep a reign on what we say so that we can build each other up, and strengthen each other and give encouragement. Not tear down and offend.

Provers 10:31 says, “The mouth of the righteous brings forth wisdom, but the perverse tongue will be cut out.” We are supposed to be like Christ, and our actions and words should show who we stand for. We are supposed to be different from the rest of the world, in it but not of it. James 3:10 says, “Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be so.” He continues, saying, “Thus no spring yields both salt water and fresh.” While cursing here isn’t used as swearing, per se, it does mean unwholesome and degrading talk. We can’t have both. We can’t say swearing is okay and be following the correct path. That sin needs to go. Just like so many others.

So is swearing a sin? Most definitely. We need to be more uplifting and show people the love that Christ has shown us. We need to be an example and tame our tongues so that only edifying talk comes from our mouths.

I’m preparing some different science posts today, since I have nothing to do, which I’m finding boring in a sick sort of way. Why would I want to be doing school work? I really don’t know. But anyway, as I was going through my notes, I discovered this page amidst my fifty others, and found it rather interesting.

I don’t know about you, but my science teacher has explained that science cannot justify a Creator because it cannot be tested, and is therefore not falsifiable. It’s purely a moral conviction. But is this true?

Ironically, it’s being called unfalsifiable by the people falsifying it. Miller proposed a test that would falsify the claim that intelligence is needed to produce an irreducibly complex system (IRC). To understand what this means, you have to understand what irreducibly complex means. Darwin wrote in his Origin of Species, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” Now, a system or device is irreducibly copmlex if it has a number of different components all working together to accomplish the task of the system, and if you were to remove a component, the system would be unable to function. An IRC is unlikely to come about through Darwin’s process, piece by piece, as the system must be fully present in order to function.

So what was being proposed by Miller was a test that he said could falsify the claim that has been made saying that only God can produce an IRC. For example, I claim that there is no unitelligent process to produce flagellum. To falsify this claim, I’d have to find one unintelligent process that could produce said system. Darwinists claim that some unintelligent process could indeed produce the flagellum. To falsify that, you’d have to show that the process couldn’t have been created by any potentially infinite number of possible unintelligent processes. Which is impossible to do.

So which claim is falsifiable? Design.

Since my blog isn’t necessarily for my writing endeavors, I decided to create different blog for my books and random musings or personal posts. The new site is http://rinielsmusings.wordpress.com. There I will post my book and works in progress and other posts mentioned above. GalvanizingTruth will now be solely dedicated to apologetics in history and science, and Bible studies. While I’d like to keep everything on one blog, everything is irrelated, so I figured it would be best to separate the two subjects. rinielsmusings is currently ‘under construction’, as the internet likes to call it, so while you can access it, right now it is currently a little bit sketchy. But it will be fine in a day or two, if all goes well.

So I said I would have one last post on cosmological evidence for Creation and life on other planets. But as I was looking over my notes, I realized that there is really just a lot more about how fine-tuned and perfect the Earth’s position is, some stuff about our sun’s flares and red dwarfs, our moon, other phenomena and plate tectonics. And while that’s all very interesting (not really, unless you like cosmology, unlike me), it really doesn’t disprove evolution in any way or affect the debate. So…I’m going to skip past it. If you want to know what my notes say, comment or something and I will write about it. However, there just really isn’t anything. Well, there is one more comment on cosmology that I’d like to make, so here goes.

The first substance typically required for life to exist is something that most would expect to hear: good ol’ dihydrogen monoxide. Or simply put, water. If water stays liquid long enough on a planet, supposedly life will evolve like it did on Earth (according to evolutionary scientists, the first cells were birthed in water, and then worked their way up to multicellular organisms, then plants, which eventually made their way to dry ground).  However, there are twenty-six elements necessary for a human to survive, and sixteen for bacteria. Intermediate life forms sit somewhere between the two. That’s a lot of elements, even though it may not sound like it. The basic building block for living organisms is typically carbon. We are carbon-based life forms.

Is it possible, though, that maybe a different-based life form could exist? Couldn’t life forms exist with a different element for a base? Well, as interesting a concept it is, it simply wouldn’t work. Chemistry is one of the better understood fields of science, and scientists know that you can’t get certain atoms to stick together in sufficient number and complexity to give you large molecules the same way carbon is able. And you can’t get liquids to dissolve as many chemicals as you can with water, so the water is necessary as well.

So that’s it for cosmology (yay!). There will continue to be science posts, but they will be shorter. I plan to mix science posts, some historical posts (which I will get to eventually), Bible studies, and personal and random posts all together on this blog. If you have any suggestions of things to write about, please let me know. I’m also considering posting my story I wrote online, because I am actually thinking about writing a sequel to it. I have no storyline for it yet, and I’m somewhat terrified of posting my story online because I’m not a very confident writer, but maybe somebody will critique me, which would be fantastic. And mildly depressing because I hate seeing how bad I am at writing, but I guess it’s part of learning how to write, so I will just have to be confident that I shall improve. I’m also planning to figure out the language of Quenya, so if random phrases that look weird start popping up, I’ll try to remind myself to translate, or you can go look it up yourself if you’re curious enough.

Now I just have to figure out how to learn Quenya…