Sand and Life Design

Sand and Life Design

Sand is one of many things vital to life on Earth, but we generally ignore the connection between sand and life. Sand comes in many different colors and chemical compositions. Silicon and oxygen make up the sand in the Great Lakes area where we live, while Florida’s sand consists of calcium and oxygen. Sand has multiple uses in construction, and it can hold large amounts of water, making it useful in water resources. Because water flows very slowly through sand, we use it in bags to stop the rapid flow of water. Sand mixed with organic material makes soil. Sand and life are closely tied together.

In the northern parts of the world, most of the sand results from the breakdown of granite and other volcanic rocks. Granite contains orthoclase, a pinkish mineral that dissolves into clay. The orthoclase is mixed with other dark-colored minerals that break down, and water carries them away. The toughest material in granite is the last to remain, and it weathers into sand.

I had a college professor who took us to a cemetery to look at the headstones. Dates were carved into the headstones, so we knew how long they had been exposed to the elements of wind, rain, and ice. In the oldest section of the cemetery, the headstones had been reduced to sand because they were made of granite which breaks down. Limestone headstones get tougher with time and generally survive longer.

The world’s oceans have a different connection between sand and life. For example, parrotfish produce 70% of the sand in the Pacific Ocean. These fish eat coral, biting off small chunks and digesting the organic material in the coral polyps. The fish discharge what is left, and it falls to the ocean floor as sand. In areas of the world rich in clams, oysters, snails, and other sea animals with shells, much of the sand is produced by waves grinding up the shells of these creatures.

Lake Michigan’s beaches look very different from those in Florida. Sand in Lake Michigan comes from granite that has been broken down by plant roots and the freezing and thawing of water. The beach sand contains granules of magnetite (an iron mineral) and other dark-colored minerals. In Florida, the sand is ground up of seashells with no dark minerals, making it very white. Some sand near volcanic activity will be green or black as the dark soluble minerals have not had time to weather out.

The processes that produce sand and other materials critical to life on this planet show design. Interactions between the elements and living things enable life forms to adapt to their environments in various climates and conditions. The more we study and understand the processes and how they interact, the more we see that a wonder-working hand has gone before to prepare a place for humans to dwell.

— John N. Clayton © 2022

Reference: Planet Earth airing on PBS April 8, 2022.

Meek or Weak – What’s the Difference?

Meek or Weak – What’s the Difference?

Jesus said, “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth” (Matthew 5:5). A regular challenge to Christianity is that it’s a group of weak people. Those who make this challenge don’t understand the difference between being meek or weak. These words are not synonyms but very different concepts.

The word translated as “meek” is “praus” in Greek. According to a Greek dictionary, it means “power under control as in a soothing medicine, a gentle breeze, a broken colt horse.” Nelson’s Bible Dictionary explains, “Meekness is an attitude of humility toward God and gentleness toward men, springing from a recognition that God is in control. It is strength and courage under control, coupled with kindness.”

The current crisis in Ukraine is because a very weak man (Putin) has control of the Russian military. He follows other weak men, such as Hitler, in bringing pain and suffering to innocent humans while he sits in comfort far away from where his weakness is being displayed. He is an example of power that is not under control.

We see the classic example of meekness in Jesus Christ. Christ shows His meekness in a plea to all of humanity, “Come to me all of you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am meek and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light” (Matthew 11:28-30).

The yoke Jesus calls us to take on is being kind, gentle, fair, forgiving, and peaceful. It is not giving up power but putting it under God’s control. Those who are weak don’t know how to live except by violence and abuse. When Jesus was on Earth, no one accused Him of being weak. Instead, people said, “What is this, for with authority and power He commands … and the fame of Him went out into every place in the country around” (Luke 4:36-7).

Considering meek or weak persons, the Bible contains stories about meek heroes and weak people. For example, Abraham meekly gives his nephew Lot the first choice in dividing the land given to him. Lot takes advantage of Abraham’s strength to support his own weakness (Genesis 13:7-9). Joseph shows meekness in dealing with his treacherous brothers (Genesis 45:3-5). Saul, in his weakness, could not handle David’s success (1 Samuel 18:7-9). Simon wanted Paul’s power and tried to buy it (Acts 8:9-24). Governor Felix was too weak to handle the truth (Acts 24:24-27). King Agrippa was too weak to become a Christian (Acts 26:27-29).

Jesus showed meekness in the extreme by how He faced death. John 10:17-18 quotes Jesus saying that no one could take His life from Him, but He had the power to lay it down. When Peter demonstrated weakness by taking out a sword and slashing away at his enemies, Jesus told him to put the sword away. He said, “Don’t you think I could pray to my Father and He would give me more than twelve legions of angels?” (Matthew 26:50-54). As a Christian, I am weak only when I don’t have the strength to measure up to the meekness that being a Christian requires.

I will never reach the meekness of great Christians of the past. I marvel at Paul, who changed from being an opponent of Christ to one of the meekest men who ever lived. I have not always shown meekness and have sometimes been very weak. Even Paul struggled with the challenge of being a Christian. Read Romans 7:14-8:2. The yoke Jesus offers is easy because God helps us. He is looking to save and not condemn us.

— John N. Clayton © 2022

The Mighty Seahorse Threatened

The Mighty Seahorse Threatened

“The mighty seahorse” suggests a massive stallion galloping across the ocean’s waves. The reality is that these amazing fish range from 5⁄8 inch to 14 inches (1.5 to 35.5 cm), and they are threatened.

There are 46 identified species of seahorses, and the scientific classification is Hippocampus from the ancient Greek for ‘horse” and “sea monster.” This fish has a head like a horse and eyes that function independently and can rotate like a chameleon’s. They have a pouch like a kangaroo and a prehensile tail like a monkey. Instead of scales, their skin is covered with boney plates, spikes, and lacy skin extensions. They swim in a vertical posture using their dorsal fin for power while steering with their pectoral fins. They anchor themselves using the prehensile tail to grab onto a fixed object.

The reproductive system of the seahorse family is unlike any other group of animals. The male and female connect face to face with their tails entwining, and the female impregnates the male by depositing massive numbers of eggs in his pouch. Then, several weeks later, the males eject up to a thousand baby seahorses who will drift with the current, eventually settling down on seagrass or coral or any fixed object on the seafloor.

Seahorses eat smaller forms of sea life, including copepods, shrimp, and fish larvae. They are themselves part of the food chain eaten by larger fish. Commercial fishing operations catch 76 million seahorses a year, and human exploitation has endangered these animals.

Human understanding of all the agents of change and balance in the oceans is very limited. The role of the seahorse in the functioning of a healthy ocean has only recently become understood. The ocean system has a complex influence on life on the land. As we learn more, the complexity speaks of a design that makes chance an unlikely cause. God’s design of life on Earth is clearly seen through what has been made (Romans 1:20). The mighty seahorse is an excellent demonstration of that design.

— John N. Clayton © 2022

Reference: National Geographic, April 2022, page 72-85.

Jonah’s Icefish and Animals of the Cold

Animals of the Cold include Jonah's Icefish and Ooligans

Deep-sea biologists from Germany accidentally discovered a massive colony of icefish nests under the ice in Antarctica’s Weddell Sea. The fish known as Jonah’s icefish have formed a colony the researchers estimate to contain 60 million nests 500 meters below the sea ice. The animals of the cold always amaze us.

Jonah’s icefish are nesting fish that carve out circular nests with rocky centers on the seafloor, where they lay over 1,000 eggs. Other ocean and freshwater fish species form nests, including bluegills that nest in the lakes of the midwestern United States. However, bluegill breeding colonies are limited to a few hundred individuals, not millions. Like bluegills that feed on small aquatic life and are food for larger fish, Jonah’s icefish play an essential role as food for the Weddell seals, and they feed on the abundant plankton in the Antarctic waters. 

When it comes to animals of the cold, Jonah’s icefish are like the ooligan (eulachon) fish of Alaskan waters in that their blood is full of antifreeze compounds. Ooligans have so much oil in their bodies that if you dry the fish and put a wick in its mouth, it will burn like a candle. In Alaska, a nickname for the ooligan is the “candlefish.”

Many animals are specially designed to live in very cold conditions. For example, one of the books in our children’s book collection is titled Animals of the Cold, written by Charlsey Ford. As well as the ooligan, that book discusses the musk ox, ice worms, and the Kermode bear. All of these animals are specially designed to live in the extreme cold. 

We see God’s design in every ecological system on our planet. Each time we find a new example, we are amazed at God’s creative design of life. Romans 1:19-22 reminds us that “We can know there is a God through the things He has made.” Jonah’s icefish is another excellent example of that truth. 

— John N. Clayton 2022

References: Science News February 12, 2022, pages 12-13, and Current Biology volume 32, issue 4.

The complete set of our children’s books is available HERE.

The Purpose of Beauty

 The Purpose of Beauty - Sunset

Humans are obsessed with beauty. We try to make ourselves more beautiful with clothing and cosmetics. We seek to create beauty in music and art, and we continually long for something even more beautiful. But, what is the purpose of beauty, and how can we explain excessive beauty in nature? That is what we have called “the problem of beauty,” which we have discussed all this week.

Beauty is not to provide protection or to solve problems. The purpose of beauty is to bring joy, peace, and meaning to life. However, as we seek beauty, we long for something even more beautiful. We strive to create it, and we desire to find it in people and in nature.

The prophet Isaiah in a vision, saw God’s throne room where one seraph cried out, “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts, the whole earth is full of His glory” (Isaiah 6:3). God’s glory is displayed in the beauty we see on this planet. The curse of sin has marred that beauty, but it still peaks through. It reminds us of the Creator of “every good and perfect gift” (James 1:17). Theologian N.T. Wright asked the question that we all face at some time, “If the earth is full of God’s glory, why is it also so full of pain and anguish and screaming and despair?” That is what we call “the problem of pain.” I think we can see a glimpse of the answer in the purpose of beauty.

I suggest that humans appreciate and desire beauty because God created us in His image.
God creates beauty in the world around us to give us a sample of what is possible. When we see beauty, we long for more because we always find imperfections in the beauty we see here. Beautiful peacocks die. Colorful fall leaves turn brown and fall to the ground. The beauty of a sunset is fleeting. We long for more. We want to know what more God has in store for us.

The apostle John saw a vision of what God has waiting for those who accept His gift of eternal life. In Revelation chapters 21 and 22, he struggled to describe it in terms of the familiar, such as gold, pearls, and jewels, but he knew those words were inadequate. Perhaps the purpose of beauty in the world around us is to show us a glimpse of the glory of God’s beauty. We long for the revelation of the pure beauty of God’s kingdom. As we struggle to answer the problem of pain, perhaps the answer is before our eyes. The problem of beauty is only a hint, a clue, a sample of the ultimate beauty. I can’t wait to see the real thing.

— Roland Earnst © 2022

Designed with Purpose and Beauty

Designed with Purpose and Beauty

Charles Darwin published his book On the Origin of Species in 1859, and Ernst Haeckel published drawings of embryos in his book The Natural History of Creation in 1868. Haeckel intended his somewhat inaccurate drawings to support Darwin’s theory by showing that embryo development reflects evolutionary development. As we said in yesterday’s post, those who reject the idea of a creator God try to explain what appears to be designed with purpose and beauty by saying it has no purpose and no designer. Beauty in living things can be a problem, or it can be a blessing, depending on whether you accept or reject the Designer of life.

Physicist and Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg is an atheist who rejects belief in God because of the problem of pain, which we can summarize as: “Why would an all-powerful and loving God allow pain and suffering?” Weinberg explains his view in his book Dreams of a Final Theory. However, he can’t explain the problem of why living things appear to be designed with purpose and beauty. He made the understatement of the century when he wrote, “I have to admit that sometimes nature seems more beautiful than strictly necessary.”

Evolutionary biologist and atheist Richard Dawkins, writing in his book Climbing Mount Improbable, told about a time when he was driving through the countryside with his six-year-old daughter. The girl was excited about seeing “pretty” wildflowers. Dawkins asked his daughter what she thought was the purpose of wildflowers. She replied, “To make the world pretty, and to help the bees make honey for us.” Dawkins said he was sorry that he “had to tell her that it wasn’t true.” According to Dawkins, biology is the study of things that appear to be designed for a purpose, but his atheism forces him to argue that there is no purpose.

The living world around us shows many examples of the problem of beauty. Various species sing songs and perform dances that go beyond what survival would require. Gibbons sing duets, and birds of paradise display their beauty with song and dance. Bower birds go to excess extremes to create works of art. The peacock’s beautiful tail is extravagant from a survival perspective. These animal attributes seem inefficient and not a method to adapt to the environment. They certainly go beyond survival of the fittest to what David Rothenberg, a philosopher at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, calls “survival of the beautiful.”

Is it possible that the excessive beauty of living things is merely an accident, or is life designed with purpose and beauty? What is beauty, and why do we care? We will conclude this discussion tomorrow.

— Roland Earnst © 2022

Beauty in Nature

Beauty in Nature - Peacock
Peacock with Tail Spread

For the past two days, we have talked about beauty in nature and how it often seems to defy the evolutionary principle of survival of the fittest. Darwinists refer to “emergent order” as the process of living things coming into being without any design or intelligent guidance. Instead, they say it was accomplished by a set of simple rules laid out originally by Charles Darwin and refined into what is now known as Neo-Darwinism.

In his 1859 book On the Origin of Species, Darwin presented his principle of natural selection. However, he realized that natural selection acting on random mutations couldn’t explain the “selection” method used in all cases. Moreover, he was troubled by the excess beauty in nature. He saw unnecessary frills and flourish, which he could not explain by natural selection. A year after that book was published, his frustration caused him to write, “The sight of a feather in a peacock’s tail, whenever I gaze at it makes me sick.”

To cover those cases where natural selection can’t explain the beauty in nature, he introduced “sexual selection” in his 1871 book The Descent of Man, and Selection Related to Sex. Sexual selection involves the beauty often seen in male birds in general and peacocks in particular. According to Darwin’s sexual selection theory, the reason for the beauty of the peacock’s tail is that the peahens prefer such gaudy but impractical decorations. The same principle applies to many other species, such as bower birds or birds of paradise, where the males display striking colors or impressive actions to attract a mate.

German zoologist and eugenicist Ernst Haeckel was also an artist. He popularized Darwin through his artwork published in several books. His drawings depict the beauty he saw in even one-celled animals called Radiolaria, and he attributed the beauty to natural selection and mathematical principles. Haeckel was so enamored by Darwin’s hypothesis that he went out of his way to promote it in books of drawings.

Haeckel’s drawings sometimes showed his bias for Darwinism. For example, in The Natural History of Creation (published in German in 1868 and later in English), he displayed drawings that compared human embryos with embryos of various animals, suggesting that the development of those embryos repeats the path of evolution. However, he manipulated his illustrations to prove his point. Other scientists later pointed out the flaws, and his dishonesty discredited his scientific credentials.

However, the books of Haeckel’s drawings were best sellers in their day, and they are still selling even today. Nevertheless, those drawings did not prove design without a designer. We have called the question of how excessive beauty in nature could have evolved by natural selection “the problem of beauty.” Yesterday, we said that we prefer to call it the blessing of beauty—a blessing from God. However, atheists do not see it as a gift from the Creator, and they try to explain it away as accidental. They suggest that what appears to be designed for a purpose has no purpose and no designer. We will look at that tomorrow.

— Roland Earnst © 2022

The Blessing of Beauty

The Blessing of Beauty -Nightingale Song
Nightingale Singing

Yesterday, we talked about the problem of beauty. The question is: “How could natural selection acting on random mutations create beauty which seems to have no survival value?” I suggested that natural selection acting on blind chance mutations cannot explain all of the beauty we see in animals and plants. Let’s continue to think about this as we examine the blessing of beauty.

The blessing of beauty involves more than just visual beauty. A humpback whale’s intricate and beautiful song lasts for half an hour. Does it have anything to contribute to the survival of these mammals? Well, in a way, it does. When human technology reached a point where the humpback’s song could be heard and recorded in the 1960s, more people than whale hunters got a chance to hear it. The exposure of that song to the general population of humans played a large part in the passage of laws preventing the slaughter of those animals. But that is evidence for human appreciation of beauty, not evolutionary natural selection. For those who suggest the male humpbacks use their songs to attract females, there is little to no evidence that the females are even paying attention.

No proponent of Darwinian evolution would suggest that humpback whales are even remotely related to nightingales, but those birds also contribute to the blessing of beauty. They sing long, complex, and beautiful songs, but rather than singing into the ocean, nightingales sing from twilight into the night. As those small birds sit on a branch singing, they make themselves easy prey for predators. Instead of singing for hours in the darkness, why don’t they just be quiet and stay safe until morning?

When scientists tape-recorded nightingales and slowed down the tape, lowering the pitch a couple of octaves, they discovered something very interesting. The result was that the nightingale’s song sounded much like the song of a humpback whale. On the other hand, if you take the humpback whale song and speed it up while raising the pitch, it compares to a nightingale’s song. Why should they be so much alike? Evolutionists like to call this sort of thing “convergent evolution.” I have another suggestion. Perhaps they got their music from the same original Composer.

Since the beauty of bird songs often goes beyond attracting mates for the survival of the fittest, do the birds sing because they love to hear music? I think they are merely doing what their Creator programmed them to do. But why did God design and program these animals to sing? Perhaps the blessing of beauty is God’s gift to us. Beauty brings us joy, eases our stress, and touches our emotions. Because God loves us, He created beauty for us to enjoy. The beauty around us provides an earthly sample of the beauty God has planned for us beyond this life. In other words, beauty is another evidence that God exists. With that in mind, the problem of beauty becomes the blessing of beauty.

Tomorrow, we will look at how beauty was a problem that, according to Darwin, “makes me sick.”

— Roland Earnst © 2022

The Problem of Beauty

The Problem of Beauty

One of the challenges that skeptics use to argue against the existence of God is often called “the problem of pain.” The argument goes something like this: “Why would an all-powerful and loving God allow pain and suffering?” We have dealt with that problem before, including on our website whypain.org. However, there is a contrasting argument for the existence of God that some have called “the problem of beauty.”

The problem of beauty asks the question: “How is it possible that evolution by natural selection could create such beauty in living things?” In other words, “How could natural selection acting on random mutations create beauty which seems to have no survival value?” Darwinian evolution operates on the survival of the fittest. So how can the seemingly simple process of natural selection or survival of the fittest explain many cases of beauty which seem to make animals less fit and thus less likely to survive?

Look around, and you will see beautiful designs that naturalistic evolution attempts to explain without a designer. Why do male cardinals have the beautiful red color? Why do butterflies have such exquisite designs and colors? Some animals display beautiful colors that make them more vulnerable to predators. Birds make sounds that we can describe as beautiful music. A male bird may sing for an hour, announcing himself not only to prospective mates but also to predators. How can those beautiful features promote the survival of the fittest?

Peacocks, lyrebirds, flowers, starfish, butterflies, and seashells all display beautiful features that cannot be fully explained as survival benefits. In some cases, they may be at least partially explained by mathematical principles. But then, where did mathematical principles in our three-dimensional world originate except from the Creator of all things. Why does the nightingale sing beautiful songs to the darkness? Why do some lizards display colorful crests? How can colorblind cuttlefish change their colors at will not just to camouflage but to send messages to other cuttlefish or predators or just to dazzle any observer? Why do flowers display not only beautiful colors but also soothing fragrances? The beauty of nature is visual, auditory, and even fragrant. Most of all, it is priceless.

It seems that natural selection acting on blind chance mutations cannot explain all of the beauty we see in living things–both plants and animals. If natural selection can’t explain it, does that indicate evidence for design by an Artist? Furthermore, how can we explain the fact that humans can recognize and appreciate beauty? Is that because the Artist created us in His image? These questions point out the problem of beauty. I hope you will join me as we continue to consider this problem tomorrow.

— Roland Earnst © 2022

Archaeology in Jerusalem Today

Archaeology in Jerusalem Today

The work of archaeology in Jerusalem is changing with the current national political situation and the use of new scientific tools. Three religions have an interest in Jerusalem. Judaism has great interest in the Western Wall. Islam is very concerned about the Dome of the Rock. Various Christian sects express interest in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

The obstacles to progress in archaeological excavations in Jerusalem are many and quite complex. First, the Israel Antiquities Authority controls all Jerusalem excavations. They will not give any permits to Palestinian teams and rarely grant permits to foreigners.

In Jerusalem, the chief building stone was a relatively soft limestone that was easy to quarry and got harder when exposed to the air. This stone was reused over the centuries by tearing down the remains of an ancient culture and using the limestone for new construction, leaving little evidence of the past. There was virtually no wood in the area, so standard dating methods like dendrochronology and carbon 14 were impossible.

Another problem with archaeology in Jerusalem is that treasure seekers used violent and unscientific methods as these untrained people pillaged the area. They were often looking for an item claimed to have mystical powers, such as the Ark of the Covenant. Dreams of wealth and notoriety were their goals.

Still complicating the situation is that while early archaeologists were Christian believers who saw archaeology as a means to verify the integrity of scripture, modern archaeologists are “overwhelmingly made up of agnostics and atheists.” They have often allowed their personal beliefs to attach a negative bias to whatever artifacts they find.

Despite these challenges to archaeology in Jerusalem, researchers are progressing in understanding the city’s history thanks to new scientific tools. Geomagnetic instruments with great sensitivity allow researchers to use changes in the Earth’s magnetic field to date some artifacts accurately. New laboratory techniques enable researchers to learn from tiny bone fragments and detritus that reveal the diets and diseases of people in the past. Much of archaeology in this century is going on in the laboratory, where scientists analyze the uncovered artifacts.

Archaeological work is hard, but Webster defines “science” as “knowledge,” and new scientific techniques provide us with knowledge. That knowledge continues to support the accuracy of the biblical narrative. While nationalism, politics, and Zionism complicate archaeology in Jerusalem, the unfolding story supports the accuracy of the Bible. The science of archaeology must be supported by the facts, not the opinions of archaeologists.

— John N. Clayton © 2022

Reference: Article on Jerusalem Archaeology by Andrew Lawler in the April 2022 issue of Scientific American.

The Does God Exist? ministry has produced a series of videos on archaeology and the Bible available on DVDs with a study guide HERE. Or you can view them for free HERE.