Part 2 - Those Who Are Unable to See the Fact of Creation
The theory of evolution is a philosophy and a conception of the world that produces false hypotheses, assumptions and imaginary scenarios in order to explain the existence and origin of life in terms of mere coincidences. the roots of this philosophy go back as far as antiquity and ancient Greece.
All atheist philosophies that deny creation, directly or indirectly embrace and defend the idea of evolution. the same condition today applies to all the ideologies and systems that are antagonistic to religion.
The evolutionary notion has been cloaked in a scientific disguise for the last century and a half in order to justify itself. Though put forward as a supposedly scientific theory during the mid-19th century, the theory, despite all the best efforts of its advocates, has not so far been verified by any scientific finding or experiment. Indeed, the "very science" on which the theory depends so greatly has demonstrated and continues to demonstrate repeatedly that the theory has no merit in reality.
Laboratory experiments and probabilistic calculations have definitely made it clear that the amino acids from which life arises cannot have been formed by chance. the cell, which supposedly emerged by chance under primitive and uncontrolled terrestrial conditions according to evolutionists, still cannot be synthesised even in the most sophisticated, high-tech laboratories of the 20th century. Not a single "transitional form", creatures which are supposed to show the gradual evolution of advanced organisms from more primitive ones as neo-Darwinist theory claims, has ever been found anywhere in the world despite the most diligent and prolonged search in the fossil record.
In their attempts to gather evidence for evolution, evolutionists have unwittingly proven by their own efforts that evolution cannot have happened at all!
The person who originally put forward the theory of evolution, essentially in the form that it is defended today, was an amateur English biologist by the name of Charles Robert Darwin. Darwin first published his ideas in a book entitled the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection in 1859. Darwin claimed in his book that all living beings had a common ancestor and that they evolved from one another by means of natural selection. Those that best adapted to the habitat transferred their traits to subsequent generations, and by accumulating over great epochs, these advantageous qualities transformed individuals into totally different species from their ancestors. the human being was thus the most developed product of the mechanism of natural selection. in short, the origin of one species was another species.
Darwin's fanciful ideas were seized upon and promoted by certain ideological and political circles and the theory became very popular. the main reason was that the level of knowledge of those days was not yet sufficient to reveal that Darwin's imaginary scenarios were false. When Darwin put forward his assumptions, the disciplines of genetics, microbiology, and biochemistry did not yet exist. If they had, Darwin might easily have recognised that his theory was totally unscientific and thus would not have attempted to advance such meaningless claims: the information determining species already exists in the genes and it is impossible for natural selection to produce new species by altering genes.
While the echoes of Darwin's book reverberated, an Austrian botanist by the name of Gregor Mendel discovered the laws of inheritance in 1865. Although little known before the end of the century, Mendel's discovery gained great importance in the early 1900s with the birth of the science of genetics. Some time later, the structures of genes and chromosomes were discovered. the discovery, in the 1950s, of the DNA molecule, which incorporates genetic information, threw the theory of evolution into a great crisis, because the origin of the immense amount of information in DNA could not possibly be explained by coincidental happenings.
Besides all these scientific developments, no transitional forms, which were supposed to show the gradual evolution of living organisms from primitive to advanced species, have ever been found despite years of search.
These developments ought to have resulted in Darwin's theory being banished to the dustbin of history. However, it was not, because certain circles insisted on revising, renewing, and elevating the theory to a scientific platform. These efforts gain meaning only if we realise that behind the theory lie ideological intentions rather than scientific concerns.
Nevertheless, some circles that believed in the necessity of upholding a theory that had reached an impasse soon set up a new model. the name of this new model was neo-Darwinism. According to this theory, species evolved as a result of mutations, minor changes in their genes, and the fittest ones survived through the mechanism of natural selection. When, however, it was proved that the mechanisms proposed by neo-Darwinism were invalid and minor changes were not sufficient for the formation of living beings, evolutionists went on to look for new models. They came up with a new claim called "punctuated equilibrium" that rests on no rational or scientific grounds. This model held that living beings suddenly evolved into another species without any transitional forms. in other words, species with no evolutionary "ancestors" suddenly appeared. This was a way of describing creation, though evolutionists would be loath to admit this. They tried to cover it up with incomprehensible scenarios. for instance, they said that the first bird in history could all of a sudden inexplicably have popped out of a reptile egg. the same theory also held that carnivorous land-dwelling animals could have turned into giant whales, having undergone a sudden and comprehensive transformation.
These claims, totally contradicting all the rules of genetics, biophysics, and biochemistry are as scientific as fairy-tales of frogs turning into princes! Nevertheless, being distressed by the crisis that the neo-Darwinist assertion was in, some evolutionist paleontologists embraced this theory, which has the distinction of being even more bizarre than neo-Darwinism itself.
The sole purpose of this model was to provide an explanation for the gaps in the fossil record that the neo-Darwinist model could not explain. However, it is hardly rational to attempt to explain the gap in the fossil record of the evolution of birds with a claim that "a bird popped all of a sudden out of a reptile egg", because, by the evolutionists' own admission, the evolution of a species to another species requires a great and advantageous change in genetic information. However, no mutation whatsoever improves the genetic information or adds new information to it. Mutations only derange genetic information. Thus, the "gross mutations" imagined by the punctuated equilibrium model, would only cause "gross", that is "great", reductions and impairments in the genetic information.
The theory of punctuated equilibrium was obviously merely a product of the imagination. Despite this evident truth, the advocates of evolution did not hesitate to honour this theory. the fact that the model of evolution proposed by Darwin could not be proved by the fossil record forced them to do so. Darwin claimed that species underwent a gradual change, which necessitated the existence of half-bird/half-reptile or half-fish/half-reptile freaks. However, not even one of these "transitional forms" was found despite the extensive studies of evolutionists and the hundreds of thousands of fossils that were unearthed.
Evolutionists seized upon the model of punctuated equilibrium with the hope of concealing this great fossil fiasco. As we have stated before, it was very evident that this theory is a fantasy, so it very soon consumed itself. the model of punctuated equilibrium was never put forward as a consistent model, but rather used as an escape in cases that plainly did not fit the model of gradual evolution. Since evolutionists today realise that complex organs such as eyes, wings, lungs, brain and others explicitly refute the model of gradual evolution, in these particular points they are compelled to take shelter in the fantastic interpretations of the model of punctuated equilibrium.
Is there any Fossil Record to Verify the Theory of Evolution?
The theory of evolution argues that the evolution of a species into another species takes place gradually, step-by-step over millions of years. the logical inference drawn from such a claim is that monstrous living organisms called "transitional forms" should have lived during these periods of transformation. Since evolutionists allege that all living things evolved from each other step-by-step, the number and variety of these transitional forms should have been in the millions.
If such creatures had really lived, then we should see their remains everywhere. in fact, if this thesis is correct, the number of intermediate transitional forms should be even greater than the number of animal species alive today and their fossilised remains should be abundant all over the world.
Since Darwin, evolutionists have been searching for fossils and the result has been for them a crushing disappointment. Nowhere in the world – neither on land nor in the depths of the sea – has any intermediate transitional form between any two species ever been uncovered.
Darwin himself was quite aware of the absence of such transitional forms. It was his greatest hope that they would be found in the future. Despite his hopefulness, he saw that the biggest stumbling block to his theory was the missing transitional forms. This is why, in his book the Origin of Species, he wrote:
Darwin was right to be worried. the problem bothered other evolutionists as well. A famous British paleontologist, Derek V. Ager, admits this embarrassing fact:
The gaps in the fossil record cannot be explained away by the wishful thinking that not enough fossils have yet been unearthed and that these missing fossils will one day be found. Another evolutionist paleontologist, T. Neville George, explains the reason:
Life Emerged on Earth Suddenly and in Complex Forms
When terrestrial strata and the fossil record are examined, it is seen that living organisms appeared simultaneously. the oldest stratum of the earth in which fossils of living creatures have been found is that of the "Cambrian", which has an estimated age of 530-520 million years.
Living creatures that are found in the strata belonging to the Cambrian period emerged in the fossil record all of a sudden without any pre-existing ancestors. the vast mosaic of living organisms, made up of such great numbers of complex creatures, emerged so suddenly that this miraculous event is referred to as the "Cambrian Explosion" in scientific literature.
Most of the organisms found in this stratum have highly advanced organs like eyes, or systems seen in organisms with a highly advanced organisation such as gills, circulatory systems, and so on. There is no sign in the fossil record to indicate that these organisms had any ancestors. Richard Monestarsky, the editor of Earth Sciences magazine, states about the sudden emergence of living species:
Not being able to find answers to the question of how earth came to overflow with thousands of different animal species, evolutionists posit an imaginary period of 20 million years before the Cambrian Period to explain how life originated and "the unknown happened". This period is called the "evolutionary gap". No evidence for it has ever been found and the concept is still conveniently nebulous and undefined even today.
In 1984, numerous complex invertebrates were unearthed in Chengjiang, set in the central Yunnan plateau in the high country of southwest China. Among them were trilobites, now extinct, but no less complex in structure than any modern invertebrate.
The Swedish evolutionist paleontologist, Stefan Bengston, explains the situation as follows:
The sudden appearance of these complex living beings with no predecessors is no less baffling (and embarrassing) for evolutionists today than it was for Darwin 135 years ago. in nearly a century and a half, they have advanced not one step beyond the point that stymied Darwin.
As may be seen, the fossil record indicates that living things did not evolve from primitive to advanced forms, but instead emerged all of a sudden and in a perfect state. the absence of the transitional forms is not peculiar to the Cambrian period. Not a single transitional form verifying the alleged evolutionary "progression" of vertebrates – from fish to amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals – has ever been found. Every living species appears instantaneously and in its current form, perfect and complete, in the fossil record.
In other words, living beings did not come into existence through evolution. They were created.
Deceptions in Drawings
The fossil record is the principal source for those who seek evidence for the theory of evolution. When inspected carefully and without prejudice, the fossil record refutes the theory of evolution rather than supporting it. Nevertheless, misleading interpretations of fossils by evolutionists and their prejudiced representation to the public have given many people the impression that the fossil record indeed supports the theory of evolution.
The susceptibility of some findings in the fossil record to all kinds of interpretations is what best serves the evolutionists' purposes. the fossils unearthed are most of the time unsatisfactory for reliable identification. They usually consist of scattered, incomplete bone fragments. for this reason, it is very easy to distort the available data and to use it as desired. Not surprisingly, the reconstructions (drawings and models) made by evolutionists based on such fossil remains are prepared entirely speculatively in order to confirm evolutionary theses. Since people are readily affected by visual information, these imaginary reconstructed models are employed to convince them that the reconstructed creatures really existed in the past.
Evolutionist researchers draw human-like imaginary creatures, usually setting out from a single tooth, or a mandible fragment or a humerus, and present them to the public in a sensational manner as if they were links in human evolution. These drawings have played a great role in the establishment of the image of "primitive men" in the minds of many people.
These studies based on bone remains can only reveal very general characteristics of the creature concerned. the distinctive details are present in the soft tissues that quickly vanish with time. with the soft tissues speculatively interpreted, everything becomes possible within the boundaries of the imagination of the reconstruction's producer. Earnst A. Hooten from Harvard University explains the situation like this:
Studies Made to Fabricate False Fossils
Unable to find valid evidence in the fossil record for the theory of evolution, some evolutionists have ventured to manufacture their own. These efforts, which have even been included in encyclopaedias under the heading "evolution forgeries", are the most telling indication that the theory of evolution is an ideology and a philosophy that evolutionists are hard put to defend. Two of the most egregious and notorious of these forgeries are described below.
Charles Dawson, a well-known doctor and amateur paleoanthropologist, came forth with a claim that he had found a jawbone and a cranial fragment in a pit in the area of Piltdown, England, in 1912. Although the skull was human-like, the jawbone was distinctly simian. These specimens were christened the "Piltdown Man". Alleged to be 500 thousand years old, they were displayed as absolute proofs of human evolution. for more than 40 years, many scientific articles were written on the "Piltdown Man", many interpretations and drawings were made and the fossil was presented as crucial evidence of human evolution.
In 1949, scientists examined the fossil once more and concluded that the "fossil" was a deliberate forgery consisting of a human skull and the jawbone of an orang-utan.
Using the fluorine dating method, investigators discovered that the skull was only a few thousand years old. the teeth in the jawbone, which belonged to an orang-utan, had been artificially worn down and the "primitive" tools that had conveniently accompanied the fossils were crude forgeries that had been sharpened with steel implements. in the detailed analysis completed by Oakley, Weiner and Clark, they revealed this forgery to the public in 1953. the skull belonged to a 500-year-old man, and the mandibular bone belonged to a recently deceased ape! the teeth were thereafter specially arranged in an array and added to the jaw and the joints were filed in order to make them resemble that of a man. Then all these pieces were stained with potassium dichromate to give them a dated appearance. (These stains disappeared when dipped in acid.) Le Gros Clark, who was a member of the team that disclosed the forgery, could not hide his astonishment:
In 1922, Henry Fairfield Osborn, the director of the American Museum of Natural History, declared that he had found a molar tooth fossil in western Nebraska near Snake Brook belonging to the Pliocene period. This tooth allegedly bore the common characteristics of both man and ape. Deep scientific arguments began in which some interpreted this tooth to be that of Pithecanthropus erectus while others claimed it was closer to that of modern human beings. This fossil, which aroused extensive debate, was popularly named "Nebraska Man". It was also immediately given a "scientific name": "Hesperopithecus Haroldcooki".
Many authorities gave Osborn their support. Based on this single tooth, reconstructions of Nebraska Man's head and body were drawn. Moreover, Nebraska Man was even pictured with a whole family.
In 1927, other parts of the skeleton were also found. According to these newly discovered pieces, the tooth belonged neither to a man nor to an ape. It was realised that it belonged to an extinct species of wild American pig called Prosthennops.
Did Men and Apes Come from a Common Ancestor?
According to the claims of the theory of evolution, men and modern apes have common ancestors. These creatures evolved in time and some of them became the apes of today, while another group that followed another branch of evolution became the men of today.
Evolutionists call the so-called first common ancestors of men and apes "Australopithecus" which means "South African ape". Australopithecus, nothing but an old ape species that has become extinct, has various types. Some of them are robust, while others are small and slight.
Evolutionists classify the next stage of human evolution as "Homo", that is "man". According to the evolutionist claim, the living beings in the Homo series are more developed than Australopithecus, and not very much different from modern man. the modern man of our day, Homo sapiens, is said to have formed at the latest stage of the evolution of this species.
The fact of the matter is that the beings called Australopithecus in this imaginary scenario fabricated by evolutionists really are apes that became extinct, and the beings in the Homo series are members of various human races that lived in the past and then disappeared. Evolutionists arranged various ape and human fossils in an order from the smallest to the biggest in order to form a "human evolution" scheme. Research, however, has demonstrated that these fossils by no means imply an evolutionary process and some of these alleged ancestors of man were real apes whereas some of them were real humans.
Now, let us have a look at Australopithecus, which represents to evolutionists the first stage of the scheme of human evolution.
Australopithecus: Extinct Apes
Evolutionists claim that Australopithecus are the most primitive ancestors of modern men. These are an old species with a head and skull structure similar to that of modern apes, yet with a smaller cranial capacity. According to the claims of evolutionists, these creatures have a very important feature that authenticates them as the ancestors of men: bipedalism.
The movements of apes and men are completely different. Human beings are the only living creatures that move freely about on two feet. Some other animals do have a limited ability to move in this way, but those that do have bent skeletons.
According to evolutionists, these living beings called Australopithecus had the ability to walk in a bent rather than an upright posture like human beings. Even this limited bipedal stride was sufficient to encourage evolutionists to project onto these creatures that they were the ancestors of man.
However, the first evidence refuting the allegations of evolutionists that Australopithecus were bipedal came from evolutionists themselves. Detailed studies made on Australopithecus fossils forced even evolutionists to admit that these looked "too" ape-like. Having conducted detailed anatomical research on Australopithecus fossils in the mid-1970s, Charles E. Oxnard likened the skeletal structure of Australopithecus to that of modern orang-utans:
What really embarrassed evolutionists was the discovery that Australopithecus could not have walked on two feet and with a bent posture. It would have been physically very ineffective for Australopithecus, allegedly bipedal but with a bent stride, to move about in such a way because of the enormous energy demands it would have entailed. By means of computer simulations conducted in 1996, the English paleoanthropologist Robin Crompton also demonstrated that such a "compound" stride was impossible. Crompton reached the following conclusion: a living being can walk either upright or on all fours. A type of in-between stride cannot be sustained for long periods because of the extreme energy consumption. This means that Australopithecus could not have been both bipedal and have a bent walking posture.
Probably the most important study demonstrating that Australopithecus could not have been bipedal came in 1994 from the research anatomist Fred Spoor and his team in the Department of Human Anatomy and Cellular Biology at the University of Liverpool, England. This group conducted studies on the bipedalism of fossilised living beings. Their research investigated the involuntary balance mechanism found in the cochlea of the ear, and the findings showed conclusively that Australopithecus could not have been bipedal. This precluded any claims that Australopithecus was human-like.
The Homo Series: Real Human Beings
The next step in the imaginary human evolution is "Homo", that is, the human series. These living beings are humans who are no different from modern men, yet who have some racial differences. Seeking to exaggerate these differences, evolutionists represent these people not as a "race" of modern man but as a different "species". However, as we will soon see, the people in the Homo series are nothing but ordinary human racial types.
According to the fanciful scheme of evolutionists, the internal imaginary evolution of the Homo species is as follows: First Homo erectus, then Homo sapiens archaic and Neanderthal Man, later Cro-Magnon Man and finally modern man.
Despite the claims of evolutionists to the contrary, all the "species" we have enumerated above are nothing but genuine human beings. Let us first examine Homo erectus, who evolutionists refer to as the most primitive human species.
The most striking evidence showing that Homo erectus is not a "primitive" species is the fossil of "Turkana Boy", one of the oldest Homo erectus remains. It is estimated that the fossil was of a 12-year-old boy, who would have been 1.83 meters tall in his adolescence. the upright skeletal structure of the fossil is no different from that of modern man. Its tall and slender skeletal structure totally complies with that of the people living in tropical regions in our day. This fossil is one of the most important pieces of evidence that Homo erectus is simply another specimen of the modern human race. Evolutionist paleontologist Richard Leakey compares Homo erectus and modern man as follows:
Leakey means to say that the difference between Homo erectus and us is no more than the difference between Negroes and Eskimos. the cranial features of Homo erectus resulted from their manner of feeding, and genetic emigration and from their not assimilating with other human races for a lengthy period.
Another strong piece of evidence that Homo erectus is not a "primitive" species is that fossils of this species have been unearthed aged twenty-seven thousand years and even thirteen thousand years. According to an article published in Time – which is not a scientific periodical, but nevertheless had a sweeping effect on the world of science – Homo erectus fossils aged twenty-seven thousand years were found on the island of Java. in the Kow swamp in Australia, some thirteen thousand year-old fossils were found that bore Homo Sapiens-Homo Erectus characteristics. All these fossils demonstrate that Homo erectus continued living up to times very close to our day and were nothing but a human race that has since been buried in history.
Archaic Homo Sapiens and Neanderthal Man
Archaic Homo sapiens is the immediate forerunner of contemporary man in the imaginary evolutionary scheme. in fact, evolutionists do not have much to say about these men, as there are only minor differences between them and modern men. Some researchers even state that representatives of this race are still living today, and point to the Aborigines in Australia as an example. Like Homo sapiens, the Aborigines also have thick protruding eyebrows, an inward-inclined mandibular structure, and a slightly smaller cranial volume. Moreover, significant discoveries have been made hinting that such people lived in Hungary and in some villages in Italy until not very long ago.
Evolutionists point to human fossils unearthed in the Neander valley of Holland which have been named Neanderthal Man. Many contemporary researchers define Neanderthal Man as a sub-species of modern man and call it "Homo sapiens neandertalensis". It is definite that this race lived together with modern humans, at the same time and in the same areas. the findings testify that Neanderthals buried their dead, fashioned musical instruments, and had cultural affinities with the Homo sapiens sapiens living during the same period. Entirely modern skulls and skeletal structures of Neanderthal fossils are not open to any speculation. A prominent authority on the subject, Erik Trinkaus from New Mexico University writes:
In fact, Neanderthals even had some "evolutionary" advantages over modern men. the cranial capacity of Neanderthals was larger than that of the modern man and they were more robust and muscular than we are. Trinkaus adds: "One of the most characteristic features of the Neanderthals is the exaggerated massiveness of their trunk and limb bones. All of the preserved bones suggest a strength seldom attained by modern humans. Furthermore, not only is this robustness present among the adult males, as one might expect, but it is also evident in the adult females, adolescents, and even children."
To put it precisely, Neanderthals are a particular human race that assimilated with other races in time.
All of these factors show that the scenario of "human evolution" fabricated by evolutionists is a figment of their imaginations, and that men have always been men and apes always apes.
Can Life Result from Coincidences as Revolution Argues?
The theory of evolution holds that life started with a cell that formed by chance under primitive earth conditions. Let us therefore examine the composition of the cell with simple comparisons in order to show how irrational it is to ascribe the existence of the cell – a structure which still maintains its mystery in many respects, even at a time when we are about to set foot in the 21st century – to natural phenomena and coincidences.
With all its operational systems, systems of communication, transportation and management, a cell is no less complex than any city. It contains power stations producing the energy consumed by the cell, factories manufacturing the enzymes and hormones essential for life, a databank where all necessary information about all products to be produced is recorded, complex transportation systems and pipelines for carrying raw materials and products from one place to another, advanced laboratories and refineries for breaking down imported raw materials into their usable parts, and specialised cell membrane proteins for the control of incoming and outgoing materials. These constitute only a small part of this incredibly complex system.
Far from being formed under primitive earth conditions, the cell, which in its composition and mechanisms is so complex, cannot be synthesised in even the most sophisticated laboratories of our day. Even with the use of amino acids, the building blocks of the cell, it is not possible to produce so much as a single organelle of the cell, such as mitochondria or ribosome, much less a whole cell. the first cell claimed to have been produced by evolutionary coincidence is as much a figment of the imagination and a product of fantasy as the unicorn.
Proteins Challenge Coincidence
And it is not just the cell that cannot be produced: the formation, under natural conditions, of even a single protein of the thousands of complex protein molecules making up a cell is impossible.
Proteins are giant molecules consisting of amino acids arranged in a particular sequence in certain quantities and structures. These molecules constitute the building blocks of a living cell. the simplest is composed of 50 amino acids; but there are some proteins that are composed of thousands of amino acids. the absence, addition, or replacement of a single amino acid in the structure of a protein in living cells, each of which has a particular function, causes the protein to become a useless molecular heap. Incapable of demonstrating the "accidental formation" of amino acids, the theory of evolution founders on the point of the formation of proteins.
We can easily demonstrate, with simple probability calculations anybody can understand, that the functional structure of proteins can by no means come about by chance.
There are twenty different amino acids. If we consider that an average-sized protein molecule is composed of 288 amino acids, there are 10300 different combinations of acids. of all of these possible sequences, only "one" forms the desired protein molecule. the other amino-acid chains are either completely useless or else potentially harmful to living things. in other words, the probability of the coincidental formation of only one protein molecule cited above is "1 in 10300". the probability of this "1" occurring out of an "astronomical" number consisting of 1 followed by 300 zeros is for all practical purposes zero; it is impossible. Furthermore, a protein molecule of 288 amino acids is rather a modest one compared with some giant protein molecules consisting of thousands of amino acids. When we apply similar probability calculations to these giant protein molecules, we see that even the word "impossible" becomes inadequate.
If the coincidental formation of even one of these proteins is impossible, it is billions of times more impossible for approximately one million of those proteins to come together by chance in an organised fashion and make up a complete human cell. Moreover, a cell is not merely a collection of proteins. in addition to proteins, cells also include nucleic acids, carbohydrates, lipids, vitamins, and many other chemicals such as electrolytes, all of which are arranged harmoniously and with design in specific proportions, both in terms of structure and function. Each functions as a building block or component in various organelles.
As we have seen, evolution is unable to explain the formation of even a single protein out of the millions in the cell, let alone explain the cell.
Prof. Dr. Ali Demirsoy, one of the foremost authorities of evolutionist thought in Turkey, in his book Kalitim ve Evrim (Inheritance and Evolution), discusses the probability of the accidental formation of Cytochrome-C, one of the essential enzymes for life:
After these lines, Demirsoy admits that this probability, which he accepted just because it was "more appropriate to the goals of science", is unrealistic:
The correct sequence of proper amino acids is simply not enough for the formation of one of the protein molecules present in living things. Besides this, each of the twenty different types of amino acid present in the composition of proteins must be left-handed. Chemically, there are two different types of amino acids called "left-handed" and "right-handed". the difference between them is the mirror-symmetry between their three dimensional structures, which is similar to that of a person's right and left hands. Amino acids of either of these two types are found in equal numbers in nature and they can bond perfectly well with one another. Yet, research uncovers an astonishing fact: all proteins present in the structure of living things are made up of left-handed amino acids. Even a single right-handed amino acid attached to the structure of a protein renders it useless.
Let us for an instant suppose that life came into existence by chance as evolutionists claim. in this case, the right and left-handed amino acids that were generated by chance should be present in nature in roughly equal amounts. the question of how proteins can pick out only left-handed amino acids, and how not even a single right-handed amino acid becomes involved in the life process is something that still confounds evolutionists. in the Britannica Science Encyclopaedia, an ardent defender of evolution, the authors indicate that the amino acids of all living organisms on earth and the building blocks of complex polymers such as proteins have the same left-handed asymmetry. They add that this is tantamount to tossing a coin a million times and always getting heads. in the same encyclopaedia, they state that it is not possible to understand why molecules become left-handed or right-handed and that this choice is fascinatingly related to the source of life on earth.13
It is not enough for amino acids to be arranged in the correct numbers, sequences, and in the required three-dimensional structures. the formation of a protein also requires that amino acid molecules with more than one arm be linked to each other only through certain arms. Such a bond is called a "peptide bond". Amino acids can make different bonds with each other; but proteins comprise those and only those amino acids that join together by "peptide" bonds.
Research has shown that only 50 % of amino acids, combining at random, combine with a peptide bond and that the rest combine with different bonds that are not present in proteins. to function properly, each amino acid making up a protein must join with other amino acids with a peptide bond, as it has only to be chosen from among the left-handed ones. Unquestionably, there is no control mechanism to select and leave out the right-handed amino acids and personally make sure that each amino acid makes a peptide bond with the other.
Under these circumstances, the probabilities of an average protein molecule comprising five hundred amino acids arranging itself in the correct quantities and in sequence, in addition to the probabilities of all of the amino acids it contains being only left-handed and combining using only peptide bonds are as follows:
As you can see above, the probability of the formation of a protein molecule comprising five hundred amino acids is "1" divided by a number formed by placing 950 zeros after a 1, a number incomprehensible to the human mind. This is only a probability on paper. Practically, such a possibility has "0" chance of realisation. in mathematics, a probability smaller than 1 over 1050 is statistically considered to have a "0" probability of realisation.
While the improbability of the formation of a protein molecule made up of five hundred amino acids reaches such an extent, we can further proceed to push the limits of the mind to higher levels of improbability. in the "haemoglobin" molecule, a vital protein, there are five hundred and seventy-four amino acids, which is a much larger number than that of the amino acids making up the protein mentioned above. Now consider this: in only one out of the billions of red blood cells in your body, there are "280,000,000" (280 million) haemoglobin molecules. the supposed age of the earth is not sufficient to afford the formation of even a single protein, let alone a red blood cell, by the method of "trial and error". the conclusion from all this is that evolution falls into a terrible abyss of improbability right at the stage of the formation of a single protein.
Looking for Answers to the Generation of Life
Well aware of the terrible odds against the possibility of life forming by chance, evolutionists were unable to provide a rational explanation for their beliefs, so they set about looking for ways to demonstrate that the odds were not so unfavourable.
They designed a number of laboratory experiments to address the question of how life could generate itself from non-living matter. the best known and most respected of these experiments is the one known as the "Miller Experiment" or "Urey-Miller Experiment", which was conducted by the American researcher Stanley Miller in 1953.
With the purpose of proving that amino acids could have come into existence by accident, Miller created an atmosphere in his laboratory that he assumed would have existed on primordial earth (but which later proved to be unrealistic) and he set to work. the mixture he used for this primordial atmosphere was composed of ammonia, methane, hydrogen, and water vapour.
Miller knew that methane, ammonia, water vapour and hydrogen would not react with each other under natural conditions. He was aware that he had to inject energy into the mixture to start a reaction. He suggested that this energy could have come from lightning flashes in the primordial atmosphere and, relying on this supposition, he used an artificial electricity discharge in his experiments.
Miller boiled this gas mixture at 100 0C for a week, and, in addition, he introduced an electric current into the chamber. At the end of the week, Miller analysed the chemicals that had been formed in the chamber and observed that three of the twenty amino acids, which constitute the basic elements of proteins, had been synthesised.
This experiment aroused great excitement among evolutionists and they promoted it as an outstanding success. Encouraged by the thought that this experiment definitely verified their theory, evolutionists immediately produced new scenarios. Miller had supposedly proved that amino acids could form by themselves. Relying on this, they hurriedly hypothesised the following stages. According to their scenario, amino acids had later by accident united in the proper sequences to form proteins. Some of these accidentally formed proteins placed themselves in cell membrane-like structures, which "somehow" came into existence and formed a primitive cell. the cells united in time and formed living organisms. the greatest mainstay of the scenario was Miller's experiment.
However, Miller's experiment was nothing but make-believe, and has since been proven invalid in many respects.
The Invalidity of Miller's Experiment
Nearly half a century has passed since Miller conducted his experiment. Although it has been shown to be invalid in many respects, evolutionists still advance Miller and his results as absolute proof that life could have formed spontaneously from non-living matter. When we assess Miller's experiment critically, without the bias and subjectivity of evolutionist thinking, however, it is evident that the situation is not as rosy as evolutionists would have us think. Miller set for himself the goal of proving that amino acids could form by themselves in earth's primitive conditions. Some amino acids were produced, but the conduct of the experiment conflicts with his goal in many ways, as we shall now see.
F Miller isolated the amino acids from the environment as soon as they were formed, by using a mechanism called a "cold trap". Had he not done so, the conditions of the environment in which the amino acids formed would immediately have destroyed the molecules.
It is quite meaningless to suppose that some conscious mechanism of this sort was integral to earth's primordial conditions, which involved ultraviolet radiation, thunderbolts, various chemicals, and a high percentage of free oxygen. Without such a mechanism, any amino acid that did manage to form would immediately have been destroyed.
F the primordial atmospheric environment that Miller attempted to simulate in his experiment was not realistic. Nitrogen and carbon dioxide would have been constituents of the primordial atmosphere, but Miller disregarded this and used methane and ammonia instead.
Why? Why were evolutionists insistent on the point that the primitive atmosphere contained high amounts of methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), and water vapour (H2O)? the answer is simple: without ammonia, it is impossible to synthesise an amino acid. Kevin McKean talks about this in an article published in Discover magazine:
After a long period of silence, Miller himself also confessed that the atmospheric environment he used in his experiment was not realistic.
F Another important point invalidating Miller's experiment is that there was enough oxygen to destroy all the amino acids in the atmosphere at the time when evolutionists thought that amino acids formed. This oxygen concentration would definitely have hindered the formation of amino acids. This situation completely negates Miller's experiment, in which he totally neglected oxygen. If he had used oxygen in the experiment, methane would have decomposed into carbon dioxide and water, and ammonia would have decomposed into nitrogen and water.
On the other hand, since no ozone layer yet existed, no organic molecule could possibly have lived on earth because it was entirely unprotected against intense ultraviolet rays.
F in addition to a few amino acids essential for life, Miller's experiment also produced many organic acids with characteristics that are quite detrimental to the structures and functions of living things. If he had not isolated the amino acids and had left them in the same environment with these chemicals, their destruction or transformation into different compounds through chemical reactions would have been unavoidable. Moreover, a large number of right-handed amino acids also formed. the existence of these amino acids alone refuted the theory, even within its own reasoning, because right-handed amino acids are unable to function in the composition of living organisms and render proteins useless when they are involved in their composition.
To conclude, the circumstances in which amino acids formed in Miller's experiment were not suitable for life forms to come into being. the medium in which they formed was an acidic mixture that destroyed and oxidised any useful molecules that might have been obtained.
Evolutionists themselves actually refute the theory of evolution, as they are often wont to do, by advancing this experiment as "proof". If the experiment proves anything, it is that amino acids can only be produced in a controlled laboratory environment where all the necessary conditions have been specifically and consciously designed. That is, the experiment shows that what brings life (even the "near-life" of amino acids) into being cannot be unconscious chance, but rather conscious will – in a word, Creation. This is why every stage of Creation is a sign proving to us the existence and might of Allah.
The Miraculous Molecule: DNA
The theory of evolution has been unable to provide a coherent explanation for the existence of the molecules that are the basis of the cell. Furthermore, developments in the science of genetics and the discovery of the nucleic acids (DNA and RNA) have produced brand-new problems for the theory of evolution.
In 1955, the work of two scientists on DNA, James Watson and Francis Crick, launched a new era in biology. Many scientists directed their attention to the science of genetics. Today, after years of research, scientists have, largely, mapped the structure of DNA.
Here, we need to give some very basic information on the structure and function of DNA:
The molecule called DNA, which exists in the nucleus of each of the 100 trillion cells in our body, contains the complete construction plan of the human body. Information regarding all the characteristics of a person, from the physical appearance to the structure of the inner organs, is recorded in DNA by means of a special coding system. the information in DNA is coded within the sequence of four special bases that make up this molecule. These bases are specified as A, T, G, and C according to the initial letters of their names. All the structural differences among people depend on the variations in the sequence of these bases. There are approximately 3.5 billion nucleotides, that is, 3.5 billion letters in a DNA molecule.
The DNA data pertaining to a particular organ or protein is included in special components called "genes". for instance, information about the eye exists in a series of special genes, whereas information about the heart exists in quite another series of genes. the cell produces proteins by using the information in all of these genes. Amino acids that constitute the structure of the protein are defined by the sequential arrangement of three nucleotides in the DNA.
At this point, an important detail deserves attention. An error in the sequence of nucleotides making up a gene renders the gene completely useless. When we consider that there are 200 thousand genes in the human body, it becomes more evident how impossible it is for the millions of nucleotides making up these genes to form by accident in the right sequence. An evolutionist biologist, Frank Salisbury, comments on this impossibility by saying:
The number 41000 is equivalent to 10600. We obtain this number by adding 600 zeros to 1. As 10 with 11 zeros indicates a trillion, a figure with 600 zeros is indeed a number that is difficult to grasp.
Evolutionist Prof. Ali Demirsoy was forced to make the following admission on this issue:
In addition to all these improbabilities, DNA can barely be involved in a reaction because of its double-chained spiral shape. This also makes it impossible to think that it can be the basis of life.
Moreover, while DNA can replicate only with the help of some enzymes that are actually proteins, the synthesis of these enzymes can be realised only by the information coded in DNA. As they both depend on each other, either they have to exist at the same time for replication, or one of them has had to be "created" before the other. American microbiologist Jacobson comments on the subject:
The quotation above was written two years after the disclosure of the structure of DNA by James Watson and Francis Crick. Despite all the developments in science, this problem remains unsolved for evolutionists. to sum up, the need for DNA in reproduction, the necessity of the presence of some proteins for reproduction, and the requirement to produce these proteins according to the information in the DNA entirely demolish evolutionist theses.
Two German scientists, Junker and Scherer, explained that the synthesis of each of the molecules required for chemical evolution, necessitates distinct conditions, and that the probability of the compounding of these materials having theoretically very different acquirement methods is zero:
In short, the theory of evolution is unable to prove any of the evolutionary stages that allegedly occur at the molecular level.
To summarise what we have said so far, neither amino acids nor their products, the proteins making up the cells of living beings, could ever be produced in any so-called "primitive atmosphere" environment. Moreover, factors such as the incredibly complex structure of proteins, their right-hand, left-hand features, and the difficulties in the formation of peptide bonds are just parts of the reason why they will never be produced in any future experiment either.
Even if we suppose for a moment that proteins somehow did form accidentally, that would still have no meaning, for proteins are nothing at all on their own: they cannot themselves reproduce. Protein synthesis is only possible with the information coded in DNA and RNA molecules. Without DNA and RNA, it is impossible for a protein to reproduce. the specific sequence of the twenty different amino acids encoded in DNA determines the structure of each protein in the body. However, as has been made abundantly clear by all those who have studied these molecules, it is impossible for DNA and RNA to form by chance.
The Fact of Creation
With the collapse of the theory of evolution in every field, prominent names in the discipline of microbiology today admit the fact of creation and have begun to defend the view that everything is created by a conscious Creator as part of an exalted creation. This is already a fact that people cannot disregard. Scientists who can approach their work with an open mind have developed a view called "intelligent design". Michael J. Behe, one of the foremost of these scientists, states that he accepts the absolute being of the Creator and describes the impasse of those who deny this fact:
The result of these cumulative efforts to investigate the cell – to investigate life at the molecular level – is a loud, clear, piercing cry of "design!" the result is so unambiguous and so significant that it must be ranked as one of the greatest achievements in the history of science. This triumph of science should evoke cries of "Eureka" from ten thousand throats.
But, no bottles have been uncorked, no hands clapped. Instead, a curious, embarrassed silence surrounds the stark complexity of the cell. When the subject comes up in public, feet start to shuffle, and breathing gets a bit laboured. in private people are a bit more relaxed; many explicitly admit the obvious but then stare at the ground, shake their heads, and let it go like that. Why does the scientific community not greedily embrace its startling discovery? Why is the observation of design handled with intellectual gloves? the dilemma is that while one side of the elephant is labelled intelligent design, the other side must be labelled God.19
Today, many people are not even aware that they are in a position of accepting a body of fallacy as truth in the name of science, instead of believing in Allah. Those who do not find the sentence "Allah created you from nothing" scientific enough can believe that the first living being came into being by thunderbolts striking a "primordial soup" billions of years ago.
As we have described elsewhere in this book, the balances in nature are so delicate and so numerous that it is entirely irrational to claim that they developed "by chance". No matter how much those who cannot set themselves free from this irrationality may strive, the signs of Allah in the heavens and the earth are completely obvious and they are undeniable.
Allah is the Creator of the heavens, the earth and all that is in between.
The signs of His being have encompassed the entire universe.
1. Charles Darwin, the Origin of Species: By Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, London: Senate Press, 1995, p. 134.
2. Derek A. Ager. "The Nature of the Fossil Record." Proceedings of the British Geological Association, vol. 87, no. 2, (1976), p. 133.
3. T.N. George, "Fossils in Evolutionary Perspective", Science Progress, vol.48, (January 1960), p.1-3
4. Richard Monestarsky, Mysteries of the Orient, Discover, April 1993, p.40.
5. Stefan Bengston, Nature 345:765 (1990).
6. Earnest A. Hooton, Up From the Ape, New York: McMillan, 1931, p.332.
7. Stephen Jay Gould, Smith Woodward's Folly, New Scientist, 5 April, 1979, p. 44.
8. Charles E. Oxnard, the Place of Australopithecines in Human Evolution: Grounds for Doubt, Nature, No. 258, p. 389.
9. Richard Leakey, the Making of Mankind, London: Sphere Books, 1981, p. 116
10. Eric Trinkaus, Hard Times Among the Neanderthals, Natural History, No. 87, December 1978, p. 10, R.L. Holoway, "The Neanderthal Brain: What was Primitive?", American Journal of Physical Anthrophology Supplement, No. 12, 1991, p. 94
11. Ali Demirsoy, Kalitim ve Evrim (Inheritance and Evolution), Ankara: Meteksan Yayinlari 1984, p. 61
12. Ali Demirsoy, Kalitim ve Evrim (Inheritance and Evolution), Ankara: Meteksan Yayinlari 1984, p. 61
13. Fabbri Britannica Science Encyclopaedia, Vol. 2, No. 22, p. 519
14. Kevin McKean, Bilim ve Teknik, No. 189, p. 7
15. Frank B. Salisbury, "Doubts about the Modern Synthetic Theory of Evolution", American Biology Teacher, September 1971, p. 336.
16. Ali Demirsoy, Kalitim ve Evrim (Inheritance and Evolution), Ankara: Meteksan Publishing Co., 1984, p. 39.
17. Homer Jacobson, "Information, Reproduction and the Origin of Life", American Scientist, January, 1955, p.121.
18. Reinhard Junker & Siegfried Scherer, "Entstehung Gesiche Der Lebewesen", Weyel, 1986, p. 89.
19. Michael J. Behe, Darwin's Black Box, New York: Free Press, 1996, pp. 232-233.


With Abby off at school, it is a chance to work on learning more with Kenzie. She knows all her letters, and we have been working on mastering her sounds. We’ll be doing the activity I’m showing you today with every letter of the alphabet. You may have seen my tutorial on sewing a reversible bag. Today I decided to put the bag to use. I had some punch out letters and attached them to the bag with tape so it would just be a temporary addition.
Next, we wandered around the house looking for A words to put in our bag. We found an apple, alligator, ambulance, airplane, apron. As we walked around, we kept on making the two A sounds.
We took our bag to the chalkboard, emptied it out and wrote down all of our words. Then, I had Kenzie locate and trace the A’s in the words. Finally, she was able to write the letter A on her own. In case you are wondering, she is 3 1/2. It is a great preschool or kindergarten activity.


As an extended service of _____________________________________________, you will receive fact sheets to help you learn how to investigate, select and use waste minimization opportunities for your industry. Reducing or eliminating hazardous substances is an important business decision. When you use hazardous chemicals in your processes, you are not just making a one-time purchase of the material, you are also paying for:
These costs add up, and finding alternatives to these substances should be a priority. Alternatives are available and often out-perform old process equipment and chemicals.
Proper storage and disposal Permits Protecting worker health submitting required reports training employees
How can auto body repair shops' pollution prevention efforts help industrial laundries?
Often small amounts of hazardous materials are left in industrial shop towels and wipes after use. The wipes are usually not treated as hazardous waste and are often cleaned by industrial laundries for re-use.
Wipes and towels from auto body repair shops often contain cleaners, oils, solvents and paints composed of hazardous materials. These chemicals are transferred to the industrial laundry's wastewater during washing.
Auto body repair shops' efforts to reduce the amount of hazardous substances they use and discard in wipes will reduce the pollutant load in the laundries' wastewater. Pollution prevention efforts to substitute less hazardous cleaners, oils, solvents and paints will benefit both auto body shops and industrial laundries.
The pollution prevention ideas in this fact sheet may help you lessen the overall impact of your facility on the environment as well as potentially reduce operating costs.
Identify and Use Less Hazardous Paints and CoatingsWHO TO CALL FOR HELP
Less toxic paints and coatings mean less hazardous materials left on shop towels and wipes.
- Consider using paints and coatings with less hazardous ingredients.
Identify and Use Less Hazardous Solvents and Cleaners
Less hazardous cleaners mean less hazardous materials left on shop towels and wipes.
- Consider using cleaners and solvents with a lower volatile organic compound (VOC) content.
- Consider using water-based or citrus-based dillmonine cleaner in place of solvents.
Reduce the Amount of Solvents and Cleaners Used
Employees often have ideas on how to use less solvents. Check with them.
- Use a spray bottle or plunger can to deliver solvents where they're needed.
- Don't dip shop towels or wipes into open solvent containers.
- Reduce the size of the shop towel or wipe. You'll reduce the amount of solvent used at the same time.
- Consider reusing shop towels or wipes for repetitive tasks.
- Keep used wipes and towels in closed containers between uses.
- Limit the amount of solvent available for use each day.
Spray Gun Cleaning Tips
- Consider developing a multiple stage cleaning process with a soak stage using partially spent solvent.
- Keep spray guns in proper working condition. This minimizes cleaning effort and solvent use.
- Immerse only the spray gun tip when cleaning.
Recover Solvents and Cleaners from Towels and Wipes Before They Are Sent to the Laundry. Recovery methods include:
- Gravity Drain
- Hand Wringing
- Automatic wringing
- Centrifuging--explosion proof
- VOC stripping using steam
- Use a liner (mesh type bag) in the used towel/wipe collection container to keep the wipes above any free liquid in the bottom of the container
- Don't put towels or wipes with free liquid into the collection container--wring them out first
- Recovered solvents may be reused
- Share Material Safety Data Sheets for materials used in your shop with your launderer
- Collect, store and transport used shop towels and wipes to the laundry facility in closed containers
- Don't use shop towels or wipes to clean up spills of hazardous materials or to dispose of excess materials
- Sort shop towels or wipes according to the types of materials they may contain
For Free, Non-Regulatory Assistance and Referrals, contact PPRC.
Produced by the Northwest Partnership for Environmental Technology Education for the Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center,
513 First Ave. West, Seattle, WA 98119
phone: 206-352-2050, fax: 206-352-2049, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org, WWW address: http://www.pprc.org


Glossary of Generalized Anxiety Disoder Terms
Definition of hedonic treadmill
Definition of learned helplessness
Description of norepinephrine
Description of serotonin
Definition of manic episode.
Major Depressive Episode
Definition of major depressive episode
Definition of negative reinforcement
Definition of substance abuse
Definition of substance dependence
Definition of panic attack and how it is related to generalized anxiety disorder
Definition and description of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD)
Social Phobia (Social Anxiety Disorder)
Definition of social phobia and how it can be related to GAD
Definition of agoraphobia and how it can be related to GAD.
Definition of specific phobia and the various subtypes.
definition of mood disorder
Description of depression
Discussion of psychotherapy related to generalized anxiety disorder
definition of an anxiety disorder


Patient data is more accessible than ever thanks to patient and provider mobile connectivity. Data protection and patient ID verification have become critical parts of health care infrastructure. Providers want to identify their patients as quickly as possible, if they’re in need of emergency treatment, but they also need to ensure the data they're reading is accurate and secure.
Read this guide to understand how different health care patient ID verification technologies and trends, including single sign-on, data breach protection and response, and more, have affected and will continue to shape the health IT industry.
Table of contents:
Identification numbers or codes can be used to authenticate doctors and verify the accuracy of patient data. Hospitals also use IDs to control what information doctors can access through the use of their mobile devices. Read more to see other ways in which IDs are currently used in health care facilities.
Single sign-on in health care
Single sign-on technology enables doctors and patients more convenient access to their information by giving them one login name and password that grants them access to various processes. Read how else single sign-on is used to protect and grant access to critical data.
Patient info data breaches
Instances of compromised or stolen data are preventable through patient and physician education. However, there have been examples of data breaches in which patient information has been exposed, including a notable breach at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston.
Future patient ID options and regulations
A national system consisting of a unique patient ID for every American has been a stated goal of some health care personnel. This is one possible option for secure patient identification in the future. There are other areas, like cloud and mobile devices, that are changing the way that health care IDs will be used.


Words Are Powerful
Speech -- the ability to convey ideas and feelings through words -- is unique to human beings. It can be a tremendous blessing, but it's also ripe for abuse.
The words our children choose to use in expressing themselves help create their personal window on the world.
Positive forms of expression can help our children grow into positive, optimistic people who view the world around them with generous and hopeful eyes. Negative forms of expression, such as defamatory, mean-spirited speech, will cultivate in them a negative, cynical view of the world.
Speech That Is Evil
It's easy to fall prey to a destructive pattern of speaking badly about others and gossiping -- to the point where it becomes a recreational activity! In order to enjoy the many people in our lives, we have to stop verbalizing the negativity and focus on their positive virtues. This takes a lot of effort but is essential in raising happy children.
If we're always finding fault, we will naturally be dissatisfied, disappointed and displeased, and so will be our children.
Raising happy children requires us to impart to our offspring the ability to look at everything positively --situations, places and material objects. Most important of all is how they view people.
Torah calls "evil language" anything negative, even if it's true.
The Hebrew term for speaking badly of others is called lashon hara, literally "evil language." Interestingly, the Torah calls "evil language" anything negative, even if it's true. (Slander -- malicious, false information is called motzi shem ra, literally "giving another a bad name.")
In sharp contrast to the Western adage about sticks and stones not hurting, Judaism looks very gravely upon misuse of speech. Our tradition teaches that lashon hara can destroy many lives, even unintentionally, in one fell swoop:
- the person speaking,
- the person spoken about,
- and the person spoken to.
Let's look at why.
- The person speaking: Although you briefly become the center of attention when you dish out a juicy piece of gossip, in the long run people start mistrusting you. "Gee, I wonder what she says about me when I'm not around." People don't trust gossips and will avoid confiding in you. In the end, you're killing your own reputation. Furthermore, because you are misusing the gift of speech that God gave you, you are also lessened in His eyes.
- The person spoken about: The person under discussion is, of course, being killed in everyone's eyes. Whether the information is true or false, it is hard to take back defamatory words already spoken and undo the character assassination already committed. That person's reputation is forever blemished.
- The person spoken to: Interestingly enough, this is the person who is the most culpable, even though s/he is seemingly the innocent one. All s/he did was listen! But the Talmud says that listening to lashon hara is even worse than speaking it; the person had the power to stop it and didn't. Now the transgression is complete.
Exceptions to the Rule
Of course, there are times we are all owed to speak share negative information about others; in fact, there are times it is an obligation to do so. For example - when a friend is about to be become financially involved with a person we know to be unethical, or seriously dating a person we know to be abusive or otherwise unsuitable. Or when a child has information that will prevent harm from occurring.
Beware of the excuses children and adults often use for speaking lashon hara:
- "But it's true!" Lashon hara specifically refers to sharing derogatory information when it is true. Spreading vicious lies is far worse!
- "If she were here I would say it to her face." Maybe you would, and maybe you wouldn't. In any case, it is still forbidden.
- "Everyone knows about it." Does this justify you adding fuel to the fire? Even if it is on the front page of the newspaper, you are still forbidden to speak about it.
Teaching our children to avoid speaking lashon hara takes a concerted effort. Experiment with the following tools:
- Teach by example. Showing children that it's a priority for you is perhaps the most important lesson. Don't let them hear your gossiping with your friends or relatives. Don't let them hear you laughing at other people's expense. Even better than "don't let them hear you" is not doing it -- whether they're in earshot or not.
- Discuss the importance of avoiding lashon hara. Help your children identify what is and isn't proper speech. Talk about how improper speech can hurt others and how it hurts the person speaking lashon hara. There are a number of excellent Jewish books that can help you.
- Discourage "tattling." When your kids come to "tell on" someone, tell them you aren't interested in reports of someone else's bad behavior, but that you're available if they need help or advice.
- Get in the habit of not using names. There's no need for you to know the names of problem students at school unless you'll have a direct role in addressing the issue. Focus the discussion on your child's feelings, worries and concerns. If he or she needs protection that requires your intervention, tell him or her that it is proper to tell you the name of the offending child.
- Don't fall into the trap of casual lashon hara. At dinner and at other family times, bring books to the table to discuss or talk about current events. When you discuss what happened in each person's day, focus on what they learned that day and how they felt. Show your children that there are more interesting things to talk about than other people's poor behavior.
- Give positive reinforcement. Be sure to commend your kids when they manage to tell you about school or neighborhood problems without mentioning who was involved. Let them know that you're proud of them - and that God is too.
- Reminders! Tape a reminder to the telephone: "No Lashon Hara!" Put up signs on the fridge and in other prominent locations around the house.
- Study it. Read a small section of the laws of lashon hara each day during dinner or at your Shabbat table. Encourage discussion and examples.


Gasoline prices have increased rapidly during the past several years, pushed up mainly by the sharply rising price of oil. A gallon of gasoline in the US rose from $1.50 in 2002 to $2 in 2004 to $2.50 in 2006 to over $4 at present. Gasoline prices almost trebled during these 6 years compared to very little change in nominal gas prices during the prior fifteen years. The US federal tax on gasoline has remained at 18.4 cents per gallon during this period of rapid growth in gasoline prices, while state excise taxes add another 21.5 cents per gallon. In addition, many local governments levy additional sales and other taxes on gasoline. Gasoline taxes have not risen much as the price of gasoline exploded upward.
The price of gasoline is much lower than in other rich countries mainly because American taxes are far smaller. For example, gasoline taxes in Germany and the United Kingdom amount to about $3 per gallon. Some economists and environmentalists have called for large increases in federal, state, and local taxes to make them more comparable to gasoline taxes in other countries. Others want these taxes to rise by enough so that at least they would have kept pace with the sharply rising pre-tax fuel prices. At the same time two presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton and John McCain, proposed a temporary repeal during this summer of the federal tax in order to give consumers a little relief from the higher gas prices. We discuss the optimal tax on gasoline, and how the sharp increase in gas prices affected its magnitude.
Taxes on gasoline are a way to induce consumers to incorporate the "external" damages to others into their decision of how much to drive and where to drive. These externalities include the effects of driving on local and global pollution, such as the contribution to global warming from the carbon emitted into the atmosphere by burnt gasoline. One other important externality is the contribution of additional driving to road congestion that slows the driving speeds of everyone and increases the time it takes to go a given distance. Others include automobile accidents that injure drivers and pedestrians, and the effect of using additional gasoline on the degree of dependence on imported oil from the Middle East and other not very stable parts of the world.
A careful 2007 study by authors from Resources for the Future evaluates the magnitudes of all these externalities from driving in the US (see Harrington, Parry, and Walls, "Automobile Externalities and Policies", Journal of Economic Literature, 2007, pp 374-400). They estimate the total external costs of driving at 228 cents per gallon of gas used, or at 10.9 cents per mile driven, with the typical car owned by American drivers. Their breakdown of this total among different sources is interesting and a little surprising. They attribute only 6 cents of the total external cost to the effects of gasoline consumption on global warming through the emission of carbon into the atmosphere from the burning of gasoline, and 12 cents from the increased dependency on imported oil. Perhaps their estimate of only 6 cents per gallon is a large underestimate of the harmful effects of gasoline use on global warming. Yet even if we treble their estimate, that only raises total costs of gasoline use due to the effects on global warming by 12 cents per gallon. That still leaves the vast majority of the external costs of driving to other factors.
They figure that local pollution effects amount to 42 cents per gallon, which makes these costs much more important than even the trebled cost of global warming. According to their estimates, still more important costs are those due to congestion and accidents, since these are 105 cents and 63 cents per gallon, respectively. Their figure for the cost of traffic accidents is likely too high ‚Äìas the authors' recognize- because it includes the cost in damages to property and person of single vehicle accidents, as when a car hits a tree. Presumably, single vehicle accidents are not true externalities because drivers and their passengers would consider their possibility and internalize them into their driving decisions. Moreover, the large effect of drunk driving on the likelihood of accidents should be treated separately from a gasoline tax by directly punishing drunk drivers rather than punishing also sober drivers who are far less likely to get into accidents.
On the surface, these calculations suggest that American taxes on gasoline, totaling across all levels of government to about 45 cents per gallon, are much too low. However, the federal tax of 18.4 cents per gallon is almost exactly equal to their figure of 18 cents per gallon as the external costs of global warming and oil dependency. To be sure, a trebled estimate for global warming would bring theirs up to 30 cents per gallon. However, the federal government also taxes driving through its mandated fuel efficiency standards for cars, although this is an inefficient way to tax driving since it taxes the type of car rather than driving. Still, the overall level of federal taxes does not fall much short, if at all, from the adjusted estimate of 30 cents per gallon of damages due to the effects of gasoline use on global warming and oil dependency.
Any shortfall in taxes would be at the state and local levels in combating externalities due to local pollution effects, and to auto accidents and congestion on mainly local roads. Here too, however, the discrepancy between actual and optimal gasoline taxes is far smaller than it may seem, and not only because single vehicle accidents are included in their estimate of the cost of car accidents, and accidents due to drunk driving should be discouraged through punishments to drunk drivers. One important reason is that congestion should be reduced not by general gasoline taxes, but by special congestion taxes- as used in London and a few other cities- that vary in amount with degree of congestion (see our discussion of congestion taxes on February 12, 2006). Congestion taxes are a far more efficient way to reduce congestion than are general taxes on gasoline that apply also when congestion is slight.
In addition and often overlooked, the sharp rise in pre-tax gasoline prices has partly accomplished the local pollution and auto accident goals that would be achieved by higher gas taxes. For higher prices have cut driving, just as taxes would, and will cut driving further in the future as consumers continue to adjust the amount and time of their driving to gasoline that costs more than $4 a gallon. Reduced driving will lower pollution and auto accidents by reducing the number of cars on the road during any time period, especially during heavily traveled times when pollution and accidents are more common.
The effects of high gas prices in reducing congestion, local pollution, and accident externalities could be substantial. These authors estimate the size of local driving externalities, aside from congestion costs, at 105 cents per gallon. Even after the sharp run up in gas prices, this may still exceed the 28 cents per gallon of actual state and local taxes, but the gap probably is small. It surely is a lot smaller than it was before gas prices exploded on the back of the climb in the cost of oil. In effect, by reducing driving, higher gasoline prices have already done much of the work in reducing externalities that bigger gas taxes would have done when prices were lower.


HAD Edmund Cartwright thought for one moment of the hardship and misery he was about to unleash on a vulnerable section of society, he would never have sat down to invent the power loom.
Cartwright (1743-1823) was a Church of England minister, with a clergyman's love for his fellow man, so he would have been mortified to watch the long, agonising death throes of the hand-loom weaving industry that his invention caused.
The 18th century was full of men who excelled in several different fields at the same time, but if anyone deserved the description of polymath, it was Cartwright. Born into a landed family in Marnham, Nottinghamshire, he was one of three brothers who all became nationally famous.
John, born in 1740, would be one of Britain's best-known radical politicians while George, the eldest (born 1739) followed his army career by becoming a fur trapper and explorer in Canada. He earned the sobriquet of “Labrador Cartwright,” and was the first man to bring Eskimos to Britain – a family of five accompanied him back after one voyage and became favourites at Court.
Edmund was educated at Wakefield Grammar School and University College, Oxford. He became a fellow of Magdalen College and while there, made a name for himself as a literary critic and a poet. His mythical poem Armine and Elvira ran to several editions and was described by Sir Walter Scott as “a “very beautiful piece.”Cartwright was marked down for the church and in 1772 he was appointed curate of Brampton, near Wakefield, moving, seven years later, to become vicar of Goadby Marwood in Leicestershire. It was here that his ingenuity first surfaced.
Attending the sickbed of a young boy who was dying from putrid fever, or typhus, he spotted a tub of yeast in the room. Recalling an old tradition that rotting meat suspended over yeast would become pure and sweet again, he dosed the youngster with it – and cured him.
He treated several other parishioners in the same way and with the same result, and the treatment was widely adopted by 18th-century medics.
Still, Cartwright might have settled for rural obscurity in his rectory had it not been for a chance holiday encounter.
THIS was Cartwright's first attempt at loom building - before he had seen how others did it.
So, how did a man of the cloth become a man who made cloth? Cartwright tells the story of his invention in his own words, in an interview later in life with a representative of the Encyclopædia Britannica:
“HAPPENING to be at Matlock in the summer of 1784, I fell in company with some gentlemen of Manchester, when th conversation turned on Arkwright's spinning machinery. One of the company observed that as soon as Arkwright's patent expired, so many mills would be erected and so much cotton spun that hands would never be found to weave it.
"To this I replied that Arkwright must then set his wits to work to invent a weaving mill.


Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is an anxiety disorder that is characterized by excessive, uncontrollable and often irrational worry about everyday things that is disproportionate to the actual source of worry. This excessive worry often interferes with daily functioning, as individuals suffering GAD typically anticipate disaster, and are overly concerned about everyday matters such as health issues, money, death, family problems, friend problems, relationship problems or work difficulties. Physical symptoms can include fatigue, fidgeting, headaches, nausea, numbness in hands and feet, muscle tension, muscle aches, difficulty swallowing, bouts of difficulty breathing, difficulty concentrating, trembling, twitching, irritability, agitation, sweating, restlessness, insomnia, hot flashes, rashes, and an inability to fully control the anxiety. These symptoms must be consistent and on-going, persisting at least 6 months, for a formal diagnosis of GAD to be introduced. Generalized anxiety disorder is estimated to occur in 5% of the general population. Women are generally more affected than men .
Page 1 of 2
Dating Advice For Men


Like butterflies? Enjoy birds?
Garden with Vermont plants.
Native plants can help turn your yard into a wonderful wildlife preserve. They provide butterflies, birds and bees the habitat and food they need to survive and reproduce, in turn supporting other forms of wildlife that get energy directly from plants or by eating something that has already eaten a plant.
When land is converted to lawn or planted with non-native plants imported from Europe or Asia, native insects have a hard time finding something to eat because they are adapted to use particular plant species for food, lay eggs and hide from predators. Insect diversity and populations drop significantly when native plant species disappear - gardens with native plants have three times as many insect species and 35 times as much insect biomass as those with non-natives. Smaller populations means insects are not fulfilling the critical role they play in an ecosystem's food web.
Here are a few things you can do to create a wildlife and insect haven in your yard:
Plant native perennials, shrubs and trees. They offer birds the best variety and most abundant source of seasonal seeds, fruits and insects. Click here for a list of native Vermont plants and the insects they support.
Replace lawns with woodlands, meadows, native gardens and shrubs. Reduce the need for labor-intensive, gas-consuming lawn care by planting low-maintenance, native vegetation.
Provide pollinators a range of species that bloom throughout the season. Perennial beds do not include the seasonal variety that bees and other pollinators need. Include late-blooming native asters, goldenrods and sunflowers in your borders and meadows.
Whenever possible, leave leaf litter alone. Many insects overwinter in leaf litter, so leaving it on the ground allows many species of moths and butterflies to make it through Vermont’s long winters. For example, leaf litter frequently contains moth eggs, so those moths cannot survive if leaf litter is bagged and sent to the landfill.
Maintain naturally "messy" areas - leave woody debris alone. Many bees live alone or in colonies in twigs, stumps, dead branches or wood, and some birds nest on the ground and forage in leaf litter for insects.


Please Note: By clicking a link to any resource listed on this page, you will be leaving the KidsHealth site.
Sickle Cell Disease Association of America
This group provides education, advocacy, and other initiatives to promote awareness of and support for sickle cell disease programs.
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS)
NINDS offers research information related to neurological disorders.
United Cerebral Palsy
This organization provides information about cerebral palsy (CP) as well as new research and therapies.
National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities (NICHCY)
NICHCY is the national information and referral center that provides information on disabilities and disability-related issues for families, educators, and other professionals.


Take any point P inside an equilateral triangle. Draw PA, PB and PC
from P perpendicular to the sides of the triangle where A, B and C
are points on the sides. Prove that PA + PB + PC is a constant.
Can you decide whether two lines are perpendicular or not? Can you
do this without drawing them?
The centre of the larger circle is at the midpoint of one side of an equilateral triangle and the circle touches the other two sides of the triangle. A smaller circle touches the larger circle and. . . .
X is a moveable point on the hypotenuse, and P and Q are the feet
of the perpendiculars from X to the sides of a right angled
triangle. What position of X makes the length of PQ a minimum?
The circumcentres of four triangles are joined to form a
quadrilateral. What do you notice about this quadrilateral as the
dynamic image changes? Can you prove your conjecture?
It is impossible to trisect an angle using only ruler and compasses
but it can be done using a carpenter's square.
Find the area of the shaded region created by the two overlapping
triangles in terms of a and b?
Position the lines so that they are perpendicular to each other.
What can you say about the equations of perpendicular lines?
ABCD is a square. P is the midpoint of AB and is joined to C. A line from D perpendicular to PC meets the line at the point Q. Prove AQ = AD.
At the time of writing the hour and minute hands of my clock are at
right angles. How long will it be before they are at right angles


Since 2002, when HAVA was enacted, computer scientists have released over three dozen studies of the software-based voting systems rushed in by HAVA. Every one of these studies has concluded that software-based optical scanners and DREs (direct record electronic systems, often known as “touch screens”) are vulnerable to undetectable manipulation and error. While any machine, including a lever voting machine, can be hacked, software enables a single individual to change thousands of votes in a few minutes without leaving a trace.
The inner workings of the software-based machine are invisible. Systematic exploits enable massive vote switching in minutes. In contrast, to affect the outcome of an election conducted with lever machines is labor-intensive since each machine must be individually rigged, increasing the likelihood that the crime would be caught; levers are not capable of systematic exploits. Vote flipping, common on electronic machines, is also not possible on a lever machine. Tampering to a lever machine can be detected because the working parts of the lever machine are visible, as contrasted with software, which is invisible to all but the programmers. Regardless of how the software has been programmed, self-erasing malware can be introduced into an electronic system but not into a lever system. Certification of computerized systems is a ruse because no amount of certification testing will make voting computers secure.
- The National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Federal government’s own technical advisers, found that certification testing cannot provide security or reliability:
[E]xperience in testing software and systems has shown that testing to high degrees of security and reliability is from a practical perspective not possible.” (Emphasis added.)
- A 2007 report authorized by the California Secretary of State found that with software-based voting machines:
An attack could plausibly be accomplished by a single skilled individual with temporary access to a single voting machine. The damage could be extensive – malicious code could spread to every voting machine in polling places and to county election servers.
- Finding error or fraud in software code has been shown to be prohibitively expensive and time-consuming due to self-erasing code and the fact that code can be several hundred thousand lines in length, according to the 2008 ACCURATE Report (A Center for Correct, Usable, Reliable, Auditable, and Transparent Elections):
[N]o matter how hard one looks for errors or faults in voting system software, there is no way to guarantee that one has found them all. Even if no errors or faults are found, there is no way to guarantee that none exist….
- Notwithstanding the pre-election certification of the optical scanners and even with security seals in place, in 2006 the University of Connecticut established how easily election results can be falsified on an optical scanner:
An Accu-Vote Optical Scan can be compromised with off-the-shelf equipment in a matter of minutes even if the machine has its removable memory card sealed in place. The basic attack can be applied to effect a variety of results, including entirely neutralizing one candidate so that their votes are not counted, swapping the votes of two candidates, or biasing the results by shifting some votes from one candidate to another….
Such vote tabulation corruptions can lay dormant until Election Day, thus avoiding detection through pre-election tests…. [V]oters could be unaware of any discrepancies between their cast votes and the internally recorded votes.
- A 2007 Florida report demonstrated how viruses can be introduced and propagated from a single machine to every other computer in the jurisdiction as well as from one election to the next. Each county will use an Election Management System (EMS) computer (commonly known as a “central tabulator”). The central tabulator reprograms the optical scanners before every election using a memory card that tells the machine who is on the ballot and how to count it, and then accumulates and reports precinct-level results after an election. Florida’s study demonstrated how a virus introduced to a single machine would spread to every other machine in the county via memory cards:
A cleverly constructed virus can cover its tracks so that infected machines could not be detected by ordinary means and an appropriately programmed virus could self-destruct and erase all its tracks…. [I]f carefully constructed, it can allow an attacker to transfer program control to her own malicious code. Once this happens, the attacker controls the machine.
- A 2006 Princeton University report “describes how the virus propagates … via memory cards, without requiring any network.” NY’s wireless ban would not prevent this massive attack because all computers in a county communicate with the EMS central tabulator, which in turn communicates with each computer in the county:
An infected machine will infect any memory card that is inserted into it. An infected memory card will infect any machine that is powered up or rebooted with the memory card inserted. Because cards are transferred between machines during vote counting and administrative activities, the infected population will grow over time.
- A 2006 report commissioned by California’s Secretary of State corroborated that these attacks to optical scanners cannot be discerned by election officials responsible for ensuring the accuracy of the election:
There would be no way to know that any of these attacks occurred; the canvass procedure would not detect any anomalies, and would just produce incorrect results. The only way to detect and correct the problem would be by recount of the original paper ballots.
- A 2007 report commissioned by Florida’s Secretary of State reaffirmed that election results could be readily compromised by an individual with only brief access to an optical scanner, by replacing the memory card with one preprogrammed to read one candidate’s votes as counting for another. The report also found “The attack can be carried out with a reasonably low probability of detection….”
Flaws in the Optical Scan software enable an unofficial memory card to be inserted into an active terminal. Such a card can be preprogrammed to swap the electronically tabulated votes for two candidates, reroute all of a candidate’s votes to a different candidate, or tabulate votes for several candidates of choice toward a different candidate.
- In 2007, Ohio’s Secretary of State released the Evaluation and Validation of Election Related Equipment, Standards and Testing (EVEREST) study, which revealed, among other things, the ineffectiveness of requirements –such as NY’s — that the source code be escrowed to secure the software. The EVEREST team was able to penetrate all of Ohio’s voting systems, including Sequoia’s optical scanner, without the source code. None of these attacks could have been detected or prevented by knowing the source code. The EVEREST report concluded that software-based systems are “insufficient to guarantee a trustworthy election.”


Life Club is what regular schools don’t provide: the opportunity for your child to become a creative and confident English speaker. Life Club brings students of a common age group together to participate in teacher-led activities, socialize, and have fun in an English-speaking environment.
Life Club focuses on building your child’s confidence, communication skills, and awareness of English speaking cultures through fun performances, speech and drama activities, and authentic experience held outside of the traditional classroom setting.
We believe that the most effortless and effective learning happens while the student is having fun. The non-traditional environment of Life Club helps your child gain the skills and confidence to use real-life English.
As a component of the Efekta System, Life Club reinforces the language learned in the classroom and through iLAB.
Life Club is made up of various activities including games, speech and drama performances, holiday parties, music appreciation, movement, social interaction, arts & crafts, and multi media presentation. All these in English, all the time!
Read more about this product.
The Life Club Themes
Life Club creates a link between English language learning and a broader educational curriculum. The Life Club themes are based on mainstream school subjects such as Science, Geography, History, Art, Mathematics, Music, and Health. This cross-curricular approach also offers students an ideal opportunity to refresh and to revise what they have done and learned in other subject areas, so that their knowledge becomes more active. This makes both learning and teaching English more interesting and memorable.
This theme is aimed at helping the students realize and nurture their talents and skills. The sessions will provide the students the opportunity to discover their and each other’s talents.
Related Subjects: Arts, Social Science, History, Sports, and Music.
Under the Sea
This theme presents the great bodies of water, the natural resources, and many fun things about the sea. Students will learn new interesting trivia through the game shows.
Related Subjects: Social Science, Natural Science, Geography, and Sports.
The Little Green Explorer
This theme is about the environment, natural resources and the world in general. It seeks to create awareness among students on how to take care of the environment. Students will learn the basics of news reporting and interviewing during the sessions.
Related Subjects: Natural Sciences, Geography, and Health.
This theme is about satisfying the curiosity about things and events around students. The Secret Detective theme seeks to open the students’ eyes to the value of research, experimentation, and inquiry.
Related Subjects: History and Science.
Everybody, especially kids, is interested in animals, wild and domesticated alike. This theme helps the students discover the many creatures that surround them. Through the sessions, they will learn how to appreciate and care for animals and wildlife.
Related Subjects: Natural Science and Social Science.
This theme will specially focus on the beauty of the universe. Space Wonders presents the topic of space exploration and the science involved in it.
Related Subjects: Astronomy, Astrology, History, Science, and Technology.
Super Duper Heroes
This theme introduces universal heroes and their adventures to students. The theme can help the children to better understand the concept of good deeds, manners and social responsibility. The topics include famous heroes who made a difference to the world. Through role-play, students get to be their own heroes, with or without the superpowers.
Related Subjects: History and Social Science.
The World Over
This theme introduces culture in different English-speaking countries other than The United Kingdom, Australia and the United States of America. Students will become more familiar with countries and cultures around the world.
Related Subjects: History, Language and Social Science.
Happy Birthday (For Small Stars only)
One’s birthday is probably the most important day of the year. This theme introduces the concept of western birthday parties to the students. They will learn the Happy Birthday song, decorate the room, play party games, make birthday cards, decorate birthday cookies, and make and wrap birthday gifts. The students will be involved actively in the preparation of an exciting birthday party for Roddy!
Related Subjects: Music, Arts, and Sports.
The Life Club Session
A Life Club Session is composed of various activities such as Speech and Drama, Social Interaction, Games, Music, Movement, Visual Presentation, and Arts & Crafts, based on a relevant theme. Through these, students experiment with language in a low-stress, fun, and secure English environment. A typical Life Club session will involve the students practicing a range of language skills as they carry out the activities. These will be integrated into the activities and will be practiced together. As most of the sessions will have members who are at different levels and ages, there is a strong emphasis on open-ended tasks and activities. These will allow for more student involvement and will help to promote the students’ autonomy.
The teacher should be seen as a group leader or facilitator, assisting and guiding the students as they engage in the activities. The teacher aims to provide learning opportunities whenever possible.
Life Club for Parents
EF encourages active parental involvement in each student’s learning. To this end, Life Club for Parents is conducted in the school at least once a month. Life Club for Parents gives suggestions on how to support and reinforce at home what your child has learnt in class and in Life Club.
EF introduces your child to foreign cultures in a playful, hands-on way, without very detailed background explanations. Through Life Club for Parents, EF can provide you with the background information necessary to understand cultural aspects at a level that is accessible only for adults.
Life Club for Parents includes special interest sessions which have been designed to broaden your knowledge in the field of education in order to support your child’s learning development at home.