Witamy w serwisie internetowym Polskiego Towarzystwa Kreacjonistycznego

Mieczysław Pajewski, Kryzys ewolucjonizmu

"Na Początku...", 26 kwietnia 1993, t. I, nr 2, s. 9-13.

Michał Ostrowski, Konwergencja - argument za stworzeniem (streszczenie)

 

Michał Ostrowski, Konwergencja - argument za stworzeniem

Artykuł ukazał się w wydawanym przez PTKr czasopismie "Na Początku...", wrzesień-październik 2003, nr 9-10 (172-173), s. 342-365.

Rozdział 5. Odkrycia XXI wieku

"Problemy Genezy" 2021, t.XXIX, s. 211-247.

Rozdział 4. Odkrycie XX wieku

"Problemy Genezy" 2021, t. XXIX, s. 187-210.

Rozdział 3. Wielki Wybuch - Biblia nauczała o nim pierwsza!

"Problemy Genezy" 2021, t. XXIX, s. 177-186.

Rozdział 2. Moje sceptyczne poszukiwania

"Problemy Genezy" 2021, t. XXIX, s. 171-176.

Rozdział 1. Inspirujące nocne niebo

"Problemy Genezy" 2021, t. XXIX, s. 167-170.

Rozdział 1. Inspirujące nocne niebo

"Problemy Genezy" 2021, t. XXIX, s. 167-170.

Tim Clarey, Ph.D., "Książka The Genesis Flood – przełamanie uniformitarystycznej geologii" [*]

Opublikowanie "The Genesis Flood" [Potop z Księgi Rodzaju] autorstwa dra Johna C. Whitcomba i dra Henry’ego M. Morrisa w 1961 roku zrewolucjonizowało i ożywiło współczesny naukowy kreacjonizm.

Tim Clarey, Ph.D., "Czego dowiedzieliśmy się z erupcji Góry Św. Heleny" [*]

 

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

New Scientist 16 April, 2008;

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

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

William Dembski, "The Intelligent Design Movement" (1998)

Cosmic Pursuit, Spring 1998; http://www.arn.org/docs/dembski/wd_idmovement.htm

"Intelligent Design?" (2002)

Natural History, April 2002; http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/nhmag.html Three proponents of Intelligent Design (ID) present their views of design in the natural world. Each view is immediately followed by a response from a proponent of evolution (EVO). The report, printed in its entirety, opens with an introduction by Natural History magazine and concludes with an overview of the ID movement. The authors who contributed to this Natural History report are: Richard Milner and Vittorio Maestro, ed. (introduction) Michael J. Behe, Ph.D. (ID) and Kenneth R. Miller, Ph.D. (EVO) William A. Dembski, Ph.D. (ID) and Robert T. Pennock, Ph.D. (EVO) Jonathan Wells, Ph.D. (ID) and Eugenie C. Scott, Ph.D. (EVO) Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. (overview)

Stephen Nichols, "When America Put the Bible on Trial. The Scopes Monkey Case a Century Later" (2021)

March 31, 2021; https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/when-america-put-the-bible-on-trial

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.

Stephanie Pappas, "What fueled humans' big brains? Controversial paper proposes new hypothesis"

https://www.livescience.com/human-brain-evolution-prey-size.html W plejstocenie, od 2,6 miliona lat temu do 11 700 lat temu, znacznie zwiekszył się mózg ludzki. Uczeni z uniwersytetu Tel Avivu postawili nową hipotezę: gdy zabrakło dużych zwierząt, mózg ludzki musiał się powiększyć, by umożliwić polowanie na mniejsze zwierzęta.

Andreas Lange et al., "Structural and functional characterization of a putative de novo gene in Drosophila"

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | (2021) 12:1667 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-21667-6 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications | Comparative genomic studies have repeatedly shown that new protein-coding genes can emerge de novo from noncoding DNA. Still unknown is how and when the structures of encoded de novo proteins emerge and evolve. Combining biochemical, genetic and evolutionary analyses, we elucidate the function and structure of goddard, a gene which appears to have evolved de novo at least 50 million years ago within the Drosophila genus. Previous studies found that goddard is required for male fertility. Here, we show that Goddard protein localizes to elongating sperm axonemes and that in its absence, elongated spermatids fail to undergo individualization. Combining modelling, NMR and circular dichroism (CD) data, we show that Goddard protein contains a large central α-helix, but is otherwise partially disordered. We find similar results for Goddard’s orthologs from divergent fly species and their reconstructed ancestral sequences. Accordingly, Goddard’s structure appears to have been maintained with only minor changes over millions of years.

Adam Adamczyk, W sprawie pseudonaukowej teorii Inteligentnego Projektu - list otwarty do polskich uczelni (2020)

https://www.kwantowo.pl/2020/11/08/w-sprawie-inteligentnego-projektu/