Nowości

Mieczysław Pajewski, "Podziękowania" (1994) f

"Na Początku..." 12 grudnia 1994, nr 25-26 (51-52), s. 311-312.

Mieczysław Pajewski, "Podziękowania" (1995)

„Na Początku...” styczeń 1995, t. III, nr 1 (53), s. 23–24.

Mieczysław Pajewski, "Podziękowanie" (1995)

"Na Początku..." 1995, t. III, nr 4 (56), s. 96.

Mieczysław Pajewski, "Podziękowanie" (1995)

"Na Początku..." czerwiec 1995, t. III, nr 6 (58), s. 144.

Marcin Karłowicz, Ofiarodawcy na fundusz PTK (1995a)

"Na Początku..." wrzesień 1995, t. III, nr 9 (61), s. 216.

Marcin Karłowicz, Ofiarodawcy na fundusz PTK (1995b)

"Na Początku..." październik 1995, t. III, nr 10 (62), s. 240.

Marcin Karłowicz, Ofiarodawcy na fundusz PTK (1995c)

"Na Początku..." listopad 1995, t. III, nr 11B (64), s. 287-288.

Marcin Karlowicz, "Ofiarodawcy na fundusz PTK" (1996)

"Na Początku..." styczeń 1996, t. IV, nr 1 (67), s. 24.

Drobne komunikaty

 

Dr Ewa Abramczuk, Sprostowanie (1996)

"Na Początku..." kwiecień 1996, t. IV, nr 4A (70), s. 92.-------

Ken Ham, "Do tego zmierzamy?" (1996)

"Na Początku..." kwiecień 1996, t. IV, nr 4B (71), s. 113-117.

Zapis kopalny

 

"Rybak wstrząsa podstawami ewolucjonistycznego złudzenia" (1995)

"Na Początku..." listopad 1995, t. III, nr 11A (63), s. 252-253.

28. Marta Cuberbiller, Nierzetelny zarzut nierzetelności (2010)

"Idź pod prąd" lipiec-sierpień 2010, nr 7-8 (72-73), s. 12-13.

G.Chaoputier, J.Seifert, "Ewolucja czy kreacja"

Wywiad Beaty Zubowicz z G. Chapoutierem, J. Seifertem, PlusMinus, 49 (725), sobota-niedziela, 9-10 2006, s. A7, A10, w: Rzeczpospolita, 287 (7581),

Stephen Bartholomew, Jr., "Genetics Proves Absurdity of Whale Evolution" (2021)

In recent years evolutionists have increasingly promoted the evolution of whales as one of the most convincing examples of macroevolution. Their alleged evidence is a mounting number of fossils that they claim are of transitional creatures in this process. In the debate about this subject, creationists have generally focused upon these same creatures, particularly specific details of their anatomy. In essence, the debate boils down to evolutionists explaining why they believe these creatures are ancestors of whales and creationists explaining why they can’t be. Although this issue merits discussion, focusing too much attention upon it is somewhat myopic, for there is another area of investigation that deserves considerably more attention, which is the process that supposedly created these transitional creatures in the first place. This process is the central focus of this paper. Focusing primarily upon genetics, in particular mutations, it demonstrates that the evolutionists’ theory of whale evolution is not only flawed, but absurd. Although evolutionists agree that mutations are instrumental in the process of evolution, they generally include genetic drift, migration, genetic recombination, and natural selection as other contributors to the process. This paper demonstrates exactly why these other processes are all ultimately dependent upon mutations for the changes that are supposedly required. According to evolutionary theory, however, the ultimate initiator of the changes must be not only mutations but very specific mutations, beneficial ones. It will be shown that, according to evolutionists’ own descriptions, beneficial mutations do not create what is absolutely necessary for the process of whale evolution: entirely new physiological features, ones that would require DNA that never before existed.

2021

 

Carl Wieland, "AiG View on the Intelligent Design Movement" (2002)

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0830_IDM.asp

2008

 

Michael Le Page, "Evolution myths: Religion and evolution are incompatible" (2008)

New Scientist 16 April, 2008;

There are currently no criteria on which to search. Please add them using the 'criteria' tab.