Scientific Evidence for Creation with Frank Sherwin

That was my disclaimer, Terry.

Excellent.

Here we go.

Good evening, and thank you for joining us.

Creation Fellowship in Santee, and now online, has been meeting for 10 years, eight

years in person, and presently online for two years.

We are a group of people who come together to learn more about the six -day creation account that happened

some 6 ,000 years ago.

You can find Creation Fellowship Santee as a public page and a private group on Facebook.

You can watch past presentations on our video platforms at YouTube, Rumble, and

BitChute by searching Creation Fellowship Santee or just CFS

2020.

We often just say CFS.

BitChute is the Believer's Best video platform we encourage using BitChute.

YouTube has now censored two videos and gave me a warning on one.

When you do find us, please subscribe and like our videos.

If you have questions or would like to get on our emailing list, please send us an email at

creationfellowshipsantee at gmail .com.

I don't spam.

I send out one email a week letting you know who's speaking, and sometimes I'll send out two if there's some

really good information.

We're doing a new thing this year.

We're partnering with Throughout All Ages Ministry, which is a memory of Joe Gaona,

who recently passed away.

And his wife, Stacey, is now the CEO.

Go ahead, and Diane, let's go and tell us about Throughout All Ages.

OK.

Throughout All Ages Ministries incorporated 1530 Apologetics goes into the

public high schools to build up the students' character, to intellectually think about

their worldview, and weigh it with truth.

So for more information, you can go to throughoutallages .com.

You can follow Stacey Gaona on Facebook, and that's spelled S -T -A -C -E

-Y G -A -O -N -A.

And you can go to Christ Girl on YouTube to follow her story.

All right.

Thank you so much, Diane.

And now we're going to turn it over to Frank.

I'm sorry, Frank.

I think everybody knows you.

I don't have your bio in front of me.

So if you could go ahead and tell us a little bit about yourself, and then

begin your talk.

OK, well, thank you very much.

I appreciate it.

My name is Frank Sherwin, just like the faint.

I'm born and raised in Chicago, and then got my schooling done in

Colorado, both as an undergraduate, and then after getting my degree in biology and spending five years on the

city fire department in North Colorado, I went back to school, got my master's degree in

invertebrate zoology, with an emphasis in parasitology.

And from there, I went to Pensacola and spent nine years teaching

at Pensacola Christian College.

That's where 75 % of my children were born, is Pensacola.

Then at the end of the ninth year, we moved from Pensacola to right there in San Diego.

And I began working in 1996 with the Institute for Creation Research.

At that time, when I was in San Diego, ICR paid for a number of classes that I took at

UCSD and SDSU, such as two semesters of molecular

pharmacology, advanced vertebrate immunology, just a

host of classes that helped me to fine tune my work and research

in zoology, specifically.

But the big deal of being in San Diego was I

got to run the San Diego Rock and Roll Marathon.

And I actually finished.

And I never stopped.

And I wasn't last.

So that's my claim to fame for San Diego.

Thank you, Terry.

So I think what we'll do now is look at scientific evidence for creation.

Now, the average speaking speed is about 190 words per minute.

I clip right along at 350 with gusts up to 400.

And as the infamous King Henry VIII of England told his six wives,

I won't keep you long.

So we'll look at this scientific evidence for creation.

The critics of creation often say that there's no evidence for creation.

Creation is either something you believe in or don't believe in.

However, the Apostle Paul in the first chapter of the Book of Romans told us very clearly that God's

creation is not only seen, but then Paul added an extra word.

He said that God's creation is clearly seen, Romans chapter 1 and verse 20.

And so we're going to take a look at that.

I'm going to give you kind of an extended introduction to the scientific evidence for creation, make sure that

we're reading on the same page, and then we'll jump right into it.

So let's see.

It's not going forward.

Oh, maybe. Oh, right. Yeah, good.

So when we look at America's membership in houses of worship, it continues to decline last year, dropping below

50 for the first time in Gallup's 80 -year trend.

Two years ago, 47 % of Americans said they belonged to a church, synagogue, or mosque.

That's down from 50 % in 2018 and 70 % in 1999.

So things are going downhill in a hurry when it comes to houses of worship and

even pastors who believe the entire Bible from Genesis to the maps.

And by the way, that's a requirement for working at ICR.

We have to believe that God's word is true from the very first verse.

And indeed, we do.

72 of Americans polled way, way back in March of the year 2022

said that they don't attend religious services.

So statistically, if you go to places like Walmart or somewhere else, three out of every four people

that you see don't go to any kind of religious worship services, for

example.

I like this quote.

It's very sobering.

But this individual did his research search in 2016.

And he talked about why Americans' nuns, if you've heard of that before, the nuns left religion

behind.

This includes many respondents who mentioned science as the reason they don't believe in religious

teaching.

When they were pressed for specifics as to why they left Christianity because of science,

here are the two most common statements they made as to the

reason why.

The first statement was, learning about evolution when I went away to college.

And then the second one is doubly tragic because they said there's a lack of any sort of

scientific or specific evidence of a creator.

This might take you back to Romans 1, verse 20, where Paul makes it very clear that God's creation

is clearly seen.

Well, I like this.

This was said way back in the year 2022.

And this individual said, why does earth support life while Venus and Mars,

and for all we know, any other planet in the universe do not?

Then he said this very revealing statement.

It's one of the most fundamental questions in all of science.

Why are we here?

Why are we here?

Well, if you are a Christian, then you know very well why we're here.

But these are the same, this is the same question that has been asked through the centuries.

Why am I here?

Why are we here?

And we understand that the word of God, the Bible has a very clear answer to that.

Well, it gets into, for example, the evolution of life.

It certainly is not clearly seen.

This is one of my favorite quotes.

I have no idea who said it, but it works for me.

And here's what they said.

The evolution of life is a faith that unknown chemicals came together in an

unknown way, at an unknown place, at an unknown time,

using an unknown process to produce life.

And this is why evolution is taught as a fact in American taxpayer paid public schools,

because everything about, for example, the evolution of life is unknown.

And so, as we say in Texas, I'm against teaching

the next generation coming through the schools that they came from the fish.

I think instead they should be taught some really good science and leave the religion in the

philosophy department.

Well, evolution certainly is religion, as this quote you can see from just last year.

It was by a researcher by the name of Musser.

And Musser had 13 other evolutionists writing this article in

Science Magazine, volume 374.

And you can see what they said.

Sponges represent our distant animal relatives.

I cannot tell you how ridiculous that statement is.

It's not logical.

It's certainly not scientific.

And tragically, it is strictly anti -biblical.

But this is what they're saying, that this sponge is your distant evolutionary

relative.

Now, as a invertebrate zoologist, I like studying sponges like this, and you can just see the incurrent and the

excurrent canals that kind of takes on the shape of a face.

So this is not Photoshop or anything else.

It's just how it looks.

However, it should remind you of something.

And so, but again, when the evolutionists are

worried that creationists might get in there in the science classroom and teach religion,

it's okay.

Religion is already there.

Whenever they say really irresponsible statements like sponges represent our distant

animal relatives, there's absolutely no scientific validation for that at all.

Well, I love this quote, and I decided to add it very quickly.

And this is a quote by an individual who's now dead, but I certainly agree with what he said.

A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts

and arguments on both sides of each question.

I don't know about you, but I am in 100 % agreement with this individual.

I truly believe that a fair result can only be obtained by still fully stating and balancing

the facts, et cetera.

Well, the question is, who said this statement?

Who said this that so clearly shows that both sides should be balanced and weighed?

I think the answer might surprise you.

It's none other than Charles Darwin.

That's right.

Charles Darwin said that.

When I was living in San Diego, I was sent to go to a very small cramped studio

in downtown San Diego.

I had literally seconds to spare.

I got to that studio, sat down, the individual was behind the camera, the light went on,

and I was talking to Lou Dobbs on CNN Live.

And this is back in the late 90s.

And I found that I was debating an evolutionist, a very unpleasant

individual.

And so I kicked off my side of the story by using this quote.

And I think it's very, very apropos.

So millions of people on the Lou Dobbs Live were able to see this quote attributed to

Charles Darwin.

So I really emphasize that a lot.

This is especially true when it comes to American taxpayer paid public schools.

I think since our tax dollars are being used to teach the next generation, the student should hear both

sides of the story.

Now, what I'm not saying is they should hear about biblical creation.

I'm not saying that.

But I am saying very clearly that the students should hear the problems with evolution.

That's not teaching creation.

So when a teacher says you came from a fish, the teacher, it would be important that the students

understand that there's real scientific problems with saying that people came from fish, let

alone any other creature.

And again, without being redundant, this is our tax dollars at work.

So we must build our worldview on the Bible.

Now I'm talking as Christians and I'm not talking about public schools.

We as Christians, we who name the name of Christ should build our worldview on the Bible.

And certainly Genesis is the true origins account.

Some people think Genesis is just a story, but I hasten to add that all 50 chapters are written in the

historical narrative Hebrew.

In other words, that includes the first critical 11 chapters of this book of beginnings, the book

of Genesis.

And so we believe the Bible at ICR to be true from the very first verse.

We believe that the Bible and science, by that I mean empirical science, go together

just like butter and bread.

Science and the Bible are inextricably linked, absolutely

inseparable, just like politics and corruption.

And so we believe that the Bible is certainly true and that it mirrors what science and scientific

investigation and research, and that there's no problem between the two.

First Peter 3 .15 is something that my wife and I taught our four children as they were growing up, both in

Pensacola and then later in San Diego, that sanctify the Lord God in your hearts and be ready always

to give an answer.

That is the word apologia and apologetic to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope

that is in you with meekness and with fear.

Such a critically important verse in this sin sick society of which we now

live, we should be able to stand up, be bold in our faith, be bold in the Lord, draw upon

him and say that, yeah, yeah, we have been created in God's image, Genesis

chapter two.

In other words, we should be able to know why we believe what we believe.

Do you believe in creation?

Wonderful, that's commendable.

Now, why do you believe in creation as opposed to the strange theory that says we

came from invertebrates like sponges millions of years ago?

We also agree at ICR, the empty tomb.

What's so unique about Christianity?

Well, there's a number of things, obviously.

The first and foremost is the very first verse of the Bible.

It begins like no other religious writing in the world.

When you talk to a cosmologist, she or he will tell you we live in a universe, and it doesn't matter how secular the

cosmologist is, they would certainly say that we live in universe composed of

time and space and matter.

Maybe you've heard it said a time -space -matter universe.

Now, why is that significant?

Well, because in the beginning, that's time.

God created the heavens, that's space, and the earth, matter.

So in the very first verse of the first book of the book of books, we find God who has always existed

speaking into existence, we call that an ex nihilo creation, the time -space

-matter universe.

And by the way, we live in a universe, not a multiverse.

What does the prefix uni mean?

That's right, one.

So it's time, space, and matter, three in a universe, one.

Three in one, I think that's kind of interesting.

And so we also teach, of course, that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the

life, and that no one comes to the Father except through Jesus Christ.

And what else makes Christianity unique besides how the Bible begins?

Well, it's the empty tomb.

We worship the God who is there that is victorious over the grave.

Jesus Christ rose physically, and I emphasize the word physically, from the dead, showing once and

for all that he is God in the flesh.

Sometimes philosophers wring their hands and say, we could never know what God's like.

I disagree.

If you study the life of Jesus Christ, you will know exactly what God is like because he's

God in the flesh.

So what is science?

I think that we should emphasize this as creation scientists.

We shouldn't be afraid of science by any means.

We understand that science is a way of thinking God's thoughts after him.

And science is a systematic study, a phenomena, based on experimental investigation.

Again, we have no problem with that, with ICR.

We understand that empirical science is that which we can observe, test, and

repeat.

Indeed, at least 70 of empirical science is observation,

looking at a phenomena and taking notes.

We certainly have no problem with that at ICR.

Empirical science is observation, testing, repeating, and falsifiable as well.

And so I always emphasize the definition of science because the critics of creation sometimes say that

we never define what science is.

So there you go.

I like this quote from a former atheist.

He's not an atheist anymore because he died a couple of years ago, but his name was Linus Pauling.

He did a lot of research in vitamin C, and he said, science is the search for truth.

I agree with that.

I really agree with that.

Science is a search of truth, the effort to understand the world.

Here in the 21st century, we find a lot of secular individuals who are

engaged in the field of science who feel that science is subjective,

science is relative.

Hey man, what's true for you may not be true for me.

And some are even more cynical and say the truth doesn't even exist, which I just,

I'm flabbergast because why would that individual be in the field of science

if she or he doesn't believe that the truth exists since science is a search for

truth?

And so conversely, I find as a creation scientist, as an invertebrate zoologist,

it is eminently satisfying to think God's thoughts after him, to do research, to do

investigation, knowing that Jesus is the way and the, that's right, the truth

and the life, and that the Lord Jesus Christ is the truth.

And so to do research and investigation, we are thinking God's thoughts after him.

As a matter of fact, let me emphasize that doing scientific research from a creation science perspective

is a form of worship.

It's a form of worship.

And so we enjoy that very much at ICR.

So with that in mind, empirical science, let's look at this quote by Paul Sutter, no friend of

the creationist by any stretch of the imagination.

And he said this amazing statement, quote, at 13 .8 billion years ago, our

entire observable universe was the size of a peach and had the temperature of

over a trillion degrees.

And is this empirical science?

Can we observe, test and repeat what happened 13 .8 billion years ago?

I think not.

And so this is nothing more than a statement, a hypothesis.

And if pushed, I would simply ask the question, Dr. Sutter, how

do you know that?

How do you know that it wasn't 13 .6 billion years ago or 14 billion years ago?

And how do you know it was the size of a peach and that kind of temperature if it happened so, so long

ago?

In other words, that was a one -time event that occurred in the unobserved past.

Let me repeat that.

That was a one -time event that occurred in the unobserved past.

Now the atheist will turn that around and say, well, what about Genesis chapter one?

That was a one -time event that occurred in the unobserved past.

I certainly agree with that.

So do both of these statements take faith?

Yes, they do.

But there is one big difference.

And that is ours is a more reasonable faith.

The biblical position is more reasonable faith.

Why is that?

Because the atheist says in the beginning, nothing.

The atheist has to begin with absolutely nothing and then start from there.

We begin with God who has always existed.

Now that may not sound very scientific, but to say in the beginning, nothing, and we've got

everything from nothing, how scientific is that?

Can we put on a white lab coat, go into a laboratory, 21st century

laboratory, and show how something can come from absolutely nothing?

Obviously we can't do that.

So although it is true, both positions require faith, we have to understand

that ours is a more reasonable faith.

And the evolutionist has to have their faith ultimately in nothing.

Well, let's look at our created cosmos and understand that there's only three options for the origin of this universe.

Number one is it always existed.

Now there's a big thermodynamic problem with that.

If it always existed, it already would have burned up in what we call a heat death.

And so that doesn't work.

Door number two, it suddenly appeared from nothing.

And door number three, it was created supernaturally.

Now the evolutionists are caught on the horns of the dilemma.

They certainly understand that it couldn't have always existed and they aren't about to

become a creationist or something like that and say it was created supernaturally.

So the only option they have is door number two.

It suddenly appeared from, and this is what I talked about just a minute or two

ago, from nothing.

And I wanna share with you a quote by the wonder kid of the

expanding universe.

His name is Alan Guth out of MIT.

And Alan Guth said this in mid 1980s.

He might've well have said it this morning.

But he said, it has been tempting to go one step further and speculate, there's a good scientific word,

speculate that the entire universe evolved from literally nothing.

So there you have it from Alan Guth, who's no creationist, but he's forced to say

everything came from nothing.

That takes a lot more faith than I have.

I put my faith in the one who was there when?

In the beginning, in the beginning.

So God has given us tools for inquiry, hasn't he?

First of all, he's given us that three pound brain that's currently holding your ears apart.

That three pound brain has the most sophisticated accumulation of matter in the known universe.

Our three pound brain, the most sophisticated accumulation of matter in the known universe.

We will never, ever, ever understand the brain.

It is too complex.

It's too sophisticated.

They're always finding out more and more about the brain, even the neurons, the nerve cells

that make up the brain with its thousands of sodium potassium pumps that are pumping sodium

potassium out in a two to three ratio.

It's really an amazing, amazing accumulation of matter.

So God has given us logic, logic in this three pound brain, but he has also given, as you

see in the picture there, observation.

So using logic and observation, those are the tools of inquiry that God has blessed us with,

that God has given us.

And I would dare to say that sometime today, you have used both logic and observation

a bunch of times.

And these are the tools that God has given us.

Well, I like how earth is designed.

We all do as Christians.

We acknowledge the creator who designed the earth.

And evolutionists like to say, we inhabit no unique place in the universe.

And I have several quotes of leading evolutionists who say that, and you can see the hope that they have.

I hope, I hope, I hope we inhabit no unique place in the universe, because if we did, that would imply

some kind of supernatural placement, and they certainly don't want that.

But decades ago, this book, it's a dated book, but it still has great quotes.

It will never really go out of date.

It's called Rare Earth, and it's by two atheists.

These two individuals, Ward and Brownlee, had no theological ax to grind, but

they showed in this book, this significant book, why complex life is uncommon

in the universe.

Again, evolutionists, atheists want to say that, oh, life is just brimming over all over the universe.

Well, we certainly have not seen that yet.

And I would predict we'll never see organic life, sophisticated organic

life anywhere else in the universe.

It's just not there.

So these two secular authors beg to differ with what atheists say in the above quote there about no

unique place in the universe.

Earth is very special according to this well -researched book and here's some examples.

I didn't know this until a couple of years ago, but Earth has just the right rotation.

Not too fast, not too slow.

As Goldilocks says, it's just right.

And this is another Goldilocks problem for astrobiologists to consider.

Not only do you have to have a planet that's not too close to a star, but not too far away, but it's got to be in the

proper orbit.

It's got to be rotating at the right speed.

It's got to have something like the moon that is also orbiting the planet just as the

moon and planet is what we call a binary is orbiting the star.

And for in our case with the Earth, we orbit the star called the sun every

365 days.

But while that's happening, our moon is also orbiting the Earth, giving us

a very, very important physical parameters.

So here we have the habitable zone.

Planet size, as you see here with the Earth is just right, it's in the green zone, not too hot

and not too cold.

But what about our moon?

Our moon as it turns out is just the right size, just the right distance, just the right rotational

velocity, just the right density.

There is everything about the moon that has to be not just right, but

exactly right.

And that's what we find.

Two atheists wrote a book about the moon quoting all these parameters I just listed for you.

And once again, these two different atheists had no theological extra guide,

but they are giving you all sorts of statistics about how unique the moon is.

Finally, when it came to giving a title for this book, they had to be

intellectually honest.

They had to be intellectually honest and simply say in the title of the book, who

built the moon?

Do you remember I said in Romans chapter one, how the apostle Paul said that God's creation is not only seen, but it's

clearly seen?

This is a perfect example.

This book by two atheists who by the way, denigrate Christians and creationists in this book.

They wanna make sure that nobody thinks they're Christians.

But Paul says God's creation is clearly seen and it's clearly seen when two atheists give the

title to the book, who built the moon?

They could have said what?

But they said, no, the moon is simply too specific.

There's so many parameters about the moon that are so spot on, somebody

had to have built it.

Ergo Romans 1 .20.

It's unusual size and especially it's earth -like chemical composition have always been a mystery

that this individual said very recently.

It's unusual size, earth -like chemical composition, everything is just exactly right.

And by the way, the origin of the moon remains enigmatic.

That was said here in the 21st century, the puzzling origin of the moon.

And by the way, they have been finding insects on the moon.

A lot of people don't know they found the insects.

On the moon.

Scientists are calling them lunatics.

Thank you, thank you.

And so again, we look at the cover of this book, the title, and we can clearly see

how

Yes.

Was that really a joke.

Or do they find insects?

That was a joke, lunatics.

Okay, I will not put that in the question.

Then, thank you.

Okay.

Okay, so anyway, no life without the moon.

Life on earth would not be possible without the moon.

It keeps our planet's axis of rotation stable, which controls seasons and regulates our

climate.

Now, this is said in the secular evolutionary publication, PhysOrg.

It's online, it is no connection to any church or religious group.

And they said this just two short years ago.

You need the moon to have life on earth.

And so life simply wouldn't be possible without the moon.

And the moon just happens to be absolutely specific.

And it even helps to maintain the orbital velocity and

how the earth is at a certain tilt and all that has to do with the moon.

Well, let's take a giant step away from that and look at biology, the biological sciences and understand that there

is horizontal variation.

For example, in people, we see horizontal variation.

That's not evolution.

That is simply a variation that we see within the created kind, people created

in Genesis chapter two.

And so we have no problem with that.

So we see horizontal variation in people and in plants.

For example, roses.

There are approximately 13 ,000 identifiable varieties that is cultivated

hybrids of roses throughout the world.

And please note, they're all 100 % roses.

So the roses are not becoming any other kind of plant.

God has built into the roses a lot of genetic variability.

But again, it's always a rose.

And so we would call that horizontal variation just like the horizontal variation we see in people.

So people and plants, we see it all the time.

We see this observable kind of minor change.

And that's all we see.

We don't see, for example, macro evolution.

Now at this point, evolutionists will say, wait a minute, what about this?

And now this is not a Photoshop.

This is an actual picture.

The mom is seen over there on the left -hand side and Junior is seen in the center of the picture.

Look at the socks that Junior is wearing, okay?

And you can tell that mom is a zebra and the dad is not there,

but the dad is a mule.

And so we find that this creature is what they call a zonkey.

It's half donkey and half a zebra.

So they call it a zonkey, not a mule.

And so this is a zonkey.

Is this an example of evolution?

And the answer is no.

This is an example of minor variation within the horse kind, minor variation

within the horse kind.

And I've been with ICR for decades.

Never once have I heard evolutionists bring this up as an example of evolution.

They know what creationists know, and that is, this is just a variation of the horse kind.

So horizontal variation in animals.

Well, what about this?

This is a liger crossed between a tiger and a lion.

And this is a half a ton kitty.

I believe they're both dead now, but they were very, very big, about a half ton, 1 ,000 pounds.

And again, they were a variation of the cat kind

between the lion and the tiger.

And so even evolutionists admit, no, this is not real evolution.

This is just a variation of the cat kind.

So again, this is horizontal variation in animals.

So we can say this evening that there's horizontal variation, absolutely, in people, plants,

and animals, but there's no vertical evolution.

And that's what the debate is.

The debate today in the 21st century is, did we come from the fish?

Is this evolutionary progression from bacteria, the quote -unquote simple forms

of life, to people and dinosaurs and everything else?

Is that a fact?

And of course it is not a fact.

It's not observable, testable, repeatable science.

What we do see is the horizontal variation.

You get all sorts of varieties going on.

So we find created after their time.

Some of my favorite animals are the puppy dogs.

When we were living in California, we had a canardly dog.

You canardly tell what kind of dog it was.

That was a joke.

And so when we look at the varieties of dogs, we see the big dogs, the small dogs.

You can see, for example, those huge Mexican chihuahuas, those little bitty Great Danes, and

everything in between, even horribly mutated dogs like poodles.

So whether they're cold dogs or hot dogs, we find that dogs have always been what?

That's right.

Dogs have always been dogs.

And so there's all sorts of varieties of dogs that we can investigate and research and look into, but

they're always dogs.

How about this?

What kind of dog is this?

Well, this is a Labrador Retriever.

This is the most popular dog in Canada, the United States, England, Wales, Scotland,

all these countries.

This is the most popular dog, the Labrador Retriever.

How many different kinds do we have?

Well, we have the Golden Lab, we have the Black Lab, and what's the last one?

That's right, we have the Chocolate Lab.

And so labs have always been labs.

We find varieties of labs, but always labs.

So right here in the great state of Texas, we have some neighbors that live nearby.

And although we have the Gold Lab, Black Lab, and the Chocolate Lab, we're pretty

sure they have a Meth Lab.

Thank you.

Okay, good, the Meth Lab.

And so, but thank you, Terri.

So here's the question of the evening.

Where did domestic dogs come from?

That's the question.

Where did domestic dogs come from?

Well, obviously you would think that that's a no -brainer, but evolutionists

do not know where the domestic dogs came from.

And I emphasize that.

As a matter of fact, Michael Benton, he's an English atheist, a vertebrate paleontologist.

I have read his book cover to cover several times on vertebrate paleontology.

And he said, in regard to dogs, he said the history of today's dogs is still

contentious.

He said that in 2015, but leave that as it may,

in 2022, just two short years ago, Science Daily, which is no friend of the creationists,

but where the dog comes from and how old various groups of dogs are is

still a bit of a mystery.

They still don't know.

Now, just as a thing that I want to emphasize here this evening very quickly, and that is the evolutionists believe

we came from a sponge.

And you saw at least 15 evolutionists in that quote from Science Magazine that said, yes, yes, a

sponge is our evolutionary ancestor.

Now they're willing to say that, but they don't know where dogs came from.

And we have all these dogs that we can study over and over again.

So although they believe we came from a sponge, they have a terrible time trying to define and

describe where dogs came from.

That just doesn't add up.

So here's the question in my presentation.

Is it really possible to talk honestly and fairly about scientific evidence for creation?

Well, I believe it is because the Apostle Paul said in Romans 1 .20 that God's creation is not only seen, but

it's clearly seen.

And so the answer is clearly yes.

And so just in the remaining minutes we have here this evening, let's look at my field, which is

biology.

And I like what the psalmist said in Psalm 111.

The works of the Lord are great, sought out of all them that have pleasure

therein.

And we're gonna see some of the works of the Lord.

Certainly design means a designer, creation means a creator.

And things looks like they were architecturally made.

There must be an architect, exactly.

So this is the, I guess you would call this the poster child of the creation science movement.

And that is the flagellum, the rotary flagellum.

Do you see those whip -like appendages there, those threads?

Well, what we wanna do looking at this bacterial cell, the famous E. coli, of which there are dozens and

dozens of sub varieties of E. coli.

This is not the E. coli you find in your large intestine.

The E. coli in our large intestine only makes up about 1 % of our biome.

But some of the free living E. coli on the environment have these

flagella that helps it to move around.

And the flagella actually twist.

They twist very, very rapidly.

What scientists have done is to look how the flagella goes into the cell wall of the bacterium.

And by the way, this picture is an electron micrograph.

They actually had to magnify a single E. coli bacterium hundreds and

hundreds of times, if not thousands of times to blow up and see what this E.

coli bacteria looks like.

And as we look at these whip -like projections, we're gonna look and see how it actually fits

into, just take a look at any one of them there, and see how it fits into the side of the bacterial

cell.

So let's do that now.

Let's blow up just one little section there, how the flagellum goes in the side and see what it

looks like.

And here it is.

Do you see that grainy white and black picture there on the right -hand side of the screen?

That's an electron micrograph of the flagellum.

The reason why it's grainy and kind of unclear is because it had to be magnified

almost 1 million times.

So obviously you don't get the degree of detail that you would like.

And so what the illustrators have done is you can see on the left -hand side of the screen,

a very clear and sharp image.

That's because it's an artist's rendition.

And I would say it's 99 % correct.

I have no problem with that.

And you can see how the flagellar motor is hooked into the bacterial cell

wall.

And then the flagellum itself goes into the motor there.

So this is an amazing, amazing bit of natural technology designed by the

master engineer, the Lord Jesus Christ.

So what I wanna do very quickly is compare and contrast the flagellar

motor that you see there, that white and black picture, to a designed, well

-designed axle that you would find on the 18 -wheeler truck.

So there on the left -hand side of the screen, you see an axle.

And this axle, obviously evolutionist and creationist would agree that that

axle of the 18 -wheeler is designed.

Of course it's designed.

As I mentioned earlier, my son is a mechanical engineer, got his degree in Baylor.

And this is the kind of thing that he does in Detroit.

So this is designed.

And what I wanna do is compare this with the flagellar motor that's a million times

smaller.

And evolutionists say, although the axle is designed, no, the flagellum is not

designed.

Why are they saying that?

Because of their philosophy.

Their philosophy says design means a designer.

And they can't have that because that designer would lead them to the Lord Jesus Christ.

And they simply will not accept that.

And so we would say as Christians, as believing that in the beginning God created and the Lord Jesus

Christ is the creator, he not only created this flagellar motor, but in Genesis chapter one,

he created the stars also.

So all the trillions upon trillions of stars you see out there in the universe, the Lord Jesus created every last

one of those and has given them a name.

And so let's look at the flagellar motor as compared to the axle of an 18

wheeler.

And we find that they both have a drive shaft.

They both have bushing.

They both have a universal joint.

These are names that the evolutionists themselves have given to the flagellar motor that we saw in the

previous picture.

They both have a rotor.

They both have rings and get this, they both have a clutch.

You mean this flagellar motor that you have to magnify a million times as a clutch?

Yes, the National Science Foundation and overtly evolutionary organization

did some research about 10 plus years ago.

Here's what they found.

The flagellar clutch can be engaged and disengaged so that the flagellum

can move or not move.

God has actually designed this flagellar motor in this tiny bacterial cell that

using a high school or college light microscope, you're barely able to see at high

power that is 100X.

God has placed a clutch in this

incredible, incredible flagellar motor.

It's just amazing what they have been describing.

I look at this clutch of this flagellar motor and the hair in

the back of my neck goes up because I realized we are seeing the very fingerprints of the creator, the Lord

Jesus Christ himself.

Now, the apostle Paul certainly didn't know about this, but Paul said, because he'd look at the things like

the sunrise and the sunset, he would look at his hand.

He would look at the structure and function of birds and fish.

And he would say, God's creation is clearly seen.

Here we are over 2000 years later, we have all this technology at our disposal.

We certainly have no excuse whatsoever to see that here we have the clearly

designed features that come from the master designer, the Lord Jesus Christ.

Well, this is the motor system inside, inside this tiny bacterial cell that you can barely see

with a light microscope.

So inside this tiny bacterium that has this flagellar motor, you've got the

motor system.

The motor system just doesn't run willy -nilly.

It needs to have an entire system with which to run.

And so you have the rotary mechanism, you have the switch that makes it go clockwise or counterclockwise.

It can change clockwise to counterclockwise within a fraction of a millisecond.

There's assembly, regulation, coordinate synthesis, it goes with the regulation, bundle formation, energy

perturbation, signal switches, tumble regulator, all of that, all of that

is going on inside this impossibly tiny bacterial cell.

But wait a minute, it's good to have a motor system, but how does the bacteria

know where to go and where not to go?

The bacteria certainly doesn't want to go in an aqueous environment that is very

acidic, that has a low pH.

And so it has gonna have to turn around and go in the opposite direction to avoid that acidic, that

low pH.

How does it know to do that?

Well, the answer is it's got to be designed with a what?

With a sensory system.

So now you've got this sensory system that's going on at the same time, exactly the same time

as the motor system.

This sensory system is not simple at all.

It's very, very complex, as you can see from this diagram.

So you've got all of this plus a lot more that's going on inside of this tiny

bacterial cell that has these dozen or so molecular motors that attach

to the flagellum.

So let's go ahead and superimpose the sensory system with the motor system, just to show all

of this that's going on inside this tiny bacterial cell.

Now we begin to appreciate the complexity that's going on there.

And so we have the motor system and we have the sensory system all by complex biochemical

pathways.

You've got that flagellar motor that's moving with a complex clutch and everything else.

Oh, I forgot to mention, you've got to have the DNA.

It's a circular chromosome that's supercoiled.

You remember those old time phone cords?

If you're younger than 50, you don't know about these old time phone cords that we had before cell

phones.

But these phone cords were kind of like supercoiled.

And that's how the Lord Jesus has designed the circular DNA molecule inside the

E. coli cell that we've been talking about.

It's a supercoiled DNA molecule, but it has to duplicate itself.

And it duplicates itself, we call it replication, within just 25 minutes.

So you have one very supercoiled DNA molecule that's spinning and spinning, and these

nucleotides are coming alongside and making a second DNA circular

chromosome that is error -free, no errors.

So all of that is going on at the same time you have the sensory system, the motor system,

the molecular motor with the clutch.

Oh, I forgot, there also has to have energy.

And so when this bacterial cell is moving, it's got to undergo a process called

glycolysis in biochemistry.

I used to teach it at Pensacola Christian College.

Glyco is a carbohydrate, glysis means to break.

So glycolysis means to break carbohydrates like a six -carbon sugar.

And so that's what happens inside this very tiny bacterial cell.

You have a six -carbon sugar that's broken into two energy -rich three -carbon sugars.

Then those two energy -rich three -carbon units go through the pyruvate dehydrogenase

system.

And one of the carbons is cleaved off and the hydrogens that are on these three

carbons are cleaved off by a special kind of enzyme called nicotinamine adenine

dinucleotide phosphate.

And that carries it to a special system where we find that adenosine diphosphate is

phosphorylated into adenosine triphosphate.

And from there, it starts getting really complex.

So we can see that the Apostle Paul is spot on and certainly God's creation is

clearly seen looking at the tiny bacterial cell.

Well, this guy was Francis Crick.

He was a co -discoverer of the DNA molecule back in the early 1950s.

He was born and raised and went through his entire life as an atheist.

And he's not anymore because he died in 2004.

But Francis Crick was dead, death on Christians and creationists.

And he simply would not even consider it.

But he would run into philosophical problems as he said in his 1988 book, and I quote,

"'Biologists must constantly keep in mind "'that what they see was not designed, but

rather evolved.'".

Now, did you get that?

In other words, Paul is right.

God's creation is clearly seen.

So people like Crick, the atheist, or should I say former atheist, says, you know, we have to just keep

reminding ourselves it wasn't designed, it wasn't designed.

And you almost see them grabbing each other by their white lab coats and bouncing them up and down and saying,

it evolved, right?

It evolved.

Yes, it evolved.

And they're trying to convince each other that these systems that we just went through two minutes ago,

all came about by time and chance and natural processes.

That's the stuff of evolution.

But when we look at that bacterial cell, we can't help but see plan and

purpose and special creation.

And so no wonder Francis Crick went through his life saying, nope, nope, it evolved, it evolved, it

wasn't designed.

He just could not consider God in any manner, shape, or form.

And so I would leave you with this presentation seeing that yes, indeed, God's creation is

clearly seen.

And we get to know who the creator is, the Lord Jesus Christ, who came to earth 2

,000 years ago to live among us, to say the most incredible things that have ever been said

and do the most amazing things that have ever been done.

And then finally proving to the world once and for all that he was God in the flesh when

he rose physically from the dead.

We worship a risen savior.

And someday he's coming back soon.

He's coming back in power and in glory.

And he's mentioned first as the creator in Revelation and then the redeemer.

That we who name the name of Christ look forward to that day.

And we can't help but tell others, our neighbors, our friends, our coworkers about this great

creator savior who has paved the way to heaven for us by his shed blood.

If you don't know Jesus this evening, I pray you would come to know him someday by bowing your head,

admitting you're a sinner and receiving Christ into your life and being

wonderfully and marvelously born again as it says in John chapter three.

God help you to do it.

That's all I have.

Oh, okay.

Well, I was like, okay, that was awesome.

So I do have a few questions.

Most of them are mine.

Okay.

Usually the case.

And we're gonna just ask these questions while we're recording.

And then Terry, as soon as Frank answers the last question that I asked, we'll turn off live

stream and recording.

Are there any questions in Facebook live?

No, not so far.

But I'll let you know if any come up before we're done with the questions here.

Okay.

Bill's iPhone, apparently.

Bill didn't wanna talk but his iPhone does.

How does the atheist explain how the first Adam formed?

How did protons, electrons and neutrons come together and form the first Adam?

Thank you.

Yeah, that's a very good question.

I'm glad that he asked that question because the atheist must believe and I emphasize that word

believe that everything came from nothing.

And so too often Christians think that the atheist stock answer to our origins

is in the big bang.

And that's not correct.

The big bang does not even come close to explaining the origin of the universe.

The big bang only explains or tries to explain.

It doesn't do a very good job of it.

I won't get into the physics of that, but the big bang only attempts to explain

the expansion of the universe, not the origin of the universe.

So far, it's a big question mark for the atheists and I'm not criticizing them.

I pray that they'd come to know the knowledge of Christ, come to know to Christ.

There is no knowledge of how the universe came about to begin with before the big

bang.

In other words, the philosophical question is what happened five minutes before the big bang?

And so they still don't know what happened.

They hope that they would have some kind of answer to that and they don't so far.

So I'm just expanding on Bill's iPhone's question.

I thought, you know, if you listen to people who try to shove their science down your throat, that the

big bang explains everything.

No, it does not.

Okay, all right.

So some people don't even know what the big bang even means

and they're throwing it out there.

So basically what they're saying is in the beginning was a quantum

fluctuation.

That's what they say, a quantum fluctuation.

This quantum fluctuation, whatever that is, got so unstable that it blew up and that's

the big bang.

But where did that quantum fluctuation, whatever that is, where did that come from?

And that's always gonna be a problem for the atheists.

And how do secular people, scientists, scientifically

explain the difference between a living dog and a dead dog?

Are they not identically, physically, biologically and chemically?

Absolutely not.

You know, we worship the risen savior.

The apostle Paul addresses this in Acts chapter 14 and Acts chapter 17 when he talks to the

Epicureans and Stoics.

He said that we worship not a god, you know, a dead god of wood or stone, but he says,

he used three words, the apostle Paul, the living God.

Now that's what Paul said 2000 years ago and we would echo that, the living God.

Oh, no, dog.

I think the question that -.

Oh, dog.

Yeah, I know you've got that backwards, right?

You have a little bit of dyslexia.

Well, I'm not dyslexic, but okay.

So what about the dogs?

Okay, so a live dog and a dead dog are essentially the

same.

How does a secularist differentiate between the two other than using the word dead?

Since they are physically, chemically, et cetera, the same.

I think the question here is the soul.

The question reads exactly, how do secular people scientifically

explain the difference between a living dog and a dead dog?

Are they not identically, physically, biologically, and chemically?

Well, yeah, you know, basically, and you could say that about a person or amoeba or a blue

whale or any other living creature.

As we have that life force, we have something that, the difference between those dead

chemicals that are arranged specifically in a cadaver, what's missing is

that life energy, that life force.

And so, you know, that's about all I could say about that.

Animals have a soul.

I think, wouldn't it, that God breathed life into us?

Yeah, exactly.

And so, and back in the early chapters of Genesis, Genesis chapter two, yeah, God breathed in

life.

So that's, that would be correct.

I should keep, we should keep in mind that animals are in heaven.

Why would I say that?

Well, the book of Revelation, Jesus is returning on what?

A horse.

There we go, there we go.

So there are celestial stables.

But you know, that's a very controversial topic.

Yeah, I'm sure it is, yeah.

And today, my colleague had to put his dog down and he was

very sad because his wife passed away and now her dog passed away.

And I told him, I said, oh, well, Jackie's probably telling Daisy, how would he do?

And it's not something that I 100 % believe, but I was just trying to encourage him.

Yeah, yeah.

Well, good for you.

Yeah, that's always difficult.

And God has given us that, you know, that love that we have for

animals.

And we do, we have a very sincere and deep love for animals that I believe that's given to us by the Lord,

so.

Okay, and then my question is, what is your take on the multiverse?

And I ask that because I followed this one program and it's called,

I can't remember the name of it.

I watch it every week, Into the Multiverse.

Into the, oh, Mockingbird?

No, multiverse.

Oh, okay.

Multiverse, yes.

As one cosmologist said, I believe his name is Carr, C -A -R -R, the cosmologist.

He says, if you don't want God, then you better hope for a multiverse.

And that says everything.

A multiverse is inextricably linked to something called string theory.

If you really get down to it, and I'm not a physicist, so I cannot go into a lot of detail.

But basically, the multiverse concept is a philosophical

construct.

The evolutionists, the atheists have put it together to get out from under the thumb of God.

And so what do they say?

Well, this universe that we're inhabiting right now just happens to be one of many millions of

universes out there.

Just like bubbles upon bubbles upon bubbles, as you see when you get,

and when a washing machine overflows, you see all those suds, all those bubbles.

Those are like individual universes.

That's the analogy.

And so Carr says, if you don't want God, then you better have a multiverse.

And so that's the easiest way to explain the multiverse theory.

It's a philosophical requirement for those who do not want God.

Okay, thank you.

And then I made a comment.

Are there any strawberry labs?

I said there was a meth lab, but I didn't see a strawberry lab.

Yeah, I'm gonna add that.

I like that.

I'm gonna add to it.

I like that too.

And then I have one more question that I asked.

Why does the bacterial motor need to avoid the pH area?

The pH area?

Well, because if you have a low pH, that means a concentration of hydrogen ions

that might cause proteins to degrade.

And for example, when you crack an egg on a hot skillet, you find that the white portion

is just pure protein, and then it turns white.

Those are the proteins that are being degraded and messed up.

And so that's what the bacteria has to do, is avoid areas

that are not conducive for life.

We have a pH in our body of about 7 .3, 7 .4.

And so living things need to have a pH that is somewhere

around seven that is neutral.

Now, there are some very extreme exceptions to that, and that gets into special kinds of life

forms called extremophiles that can exist in very, very hot temperatures.

Like for example, bacteria living in geysers in Yeltsin National Park.

That gets into a whole different area there.

So yeah, but when you look at a bacterial cell that has these

organelles for locomotion, we are just absolutely flabbergasted at how they're able to move

and also avoid one area that's not conducive, that's not hospitable for another area where

they could perhaps find food like amino acids.

So that's another.

I drink pH balanced water.

Do you think that makes any difference?

None at all. Save your money.

Don't buy pH balanced water anymore.

Water is water.

Please.

Yeah, it's like, for example, buying these Gatorade and these electrolyte drinks.

I used to teach my students, but I taught anatomy and physiology, don't spend your money buying

Gatorade where you're just paying for a fancy label and food coloring.

Instead, get a glass of water and eat a bag of potato chips and you'll get all the electrolytes that you need.

Interesting.

Okay, thank you very much for that.

Terry, do we have any questions on Facebook Live?

Nope, no questions on Facebook Live.

Okay, so then we're gonna go ahead and end the live stream

and the recording.

Before we do that, shall we ask Frank how people can find him?

Oh, yes.

Thank you for the reminder.

I was not prepared today at all, Frank.

I had two weeks off and I've been traveling.

Okay, go ahead and advertise and then that way people can find your,

I know several of our attendees like to look at your materials.

So go ahead and give us -.

Last name Sherman, just like to paint, S -H -E -R -W -Y -N.

If you wanna contact me, just go to icr .org.

I -C -R, Institute for Creation Research, just those three letters, I -C -R .O -R -G.

And then you can go on the search bar and I have a number of articles that I've written.

I read, I write two articles a week, at least, sometimes more.

And I guess I'm on YouTube too.

I refuse to look at myself on YouTube, but if you go to YouTube, type in Frank Sherwin, you'll

see some of my presentations there.

Oh, and the canardly dog, that was a Kent Hovine thing.

You got me on that.

Yeah, I got that from Kent.

Yes, I'm just calling you out there.

Okay, all right, Terry, did I cover it all?

Yes, I believe so.

Okay, now we should hear the creepy voice.