Roland Earnst Archives

September 3, 2026September 2, 2026

Giants and the Laws of Physics

A recent animated movie depicting David and Goliath showed Goliath as enormous. How tall was Goliath? The Bible says Goliath was “six cubits and a span,” which is about nine feet nine inches (3 meters). That is a large man but within the realm of possibility. The tallest man in modern recorded medical history was Robert Wadlow, who, in 1940, was slightly under nine feet tall. The children’s story of Jack and the Beanstalk depicts a giant of enormous proportions. In Homer’s “Odyssey,” Odysseus meets the one-eyed giant Cyclops, who can pick up a person in one hand. Are these legendary giants depicted in movies and storybooks possible in real life? Let’s consider giants and the laws of physics.

In 1638, Galileo Galilei wrote a document arguing that the way giants were depicted in folklore would not be possible. A human’s bone structure supports that person’s weight and is geometrically designed for optimal function. If you scaled up a human while keeping the same proportions, the bones would be stronger. If you increased both cross-sectional bone dimensions by 10 times, the strength would increase by 10 times 10, so the bone would be 100 times stronger.

At the same time, however, the body’s volume would increase by 10 times. The increased mass would be 10 times 10 times 10. Bone strength scales with the square, while volume scales with the cube. In other words, the weight of the body would be 1000 times greater. You now have bones that are 100 times as strong, but they must support a body mass that’s 1000 times greater. The fact that the bone structure could not support the weight is the problem of giants and the laws of physics. Increasing the size of the human body would require a much larger increase in the bone structure. That is why the leg bones of elephants are proportionally much thicker than the leg bones of dogs and cats.

Sometimes movies depict flies or other insects becoming huge because of some science-fiction apparatus. But if a fly became larger than a human, keeping the leg thickness in proportion, the legs would not be able to support the creature. A fly increased to only ten times its normal size would weigh 1000 times as much and be unable to fly. If a water bug that walks on the surface were increased 10 times in size, it would sink because surface tension would not support 1000 times the weight. Again, giants and the laws of physics are not compatible.

On the other hand, what would happen if humans were scaled down, as shown in science fiction movies? If scaled down by a factor of 10, the miniature humans would have bones that are 100 times weaker, but they would weigh 1000 times less. They could potentially carry a much larger load relative to their size. That explains how ants can carry loads several times their weight.

The bottom line is that humans are designed to do what we need to do, and ants are designed to do what they need to do. Science fiction movies about enlarging insects or shrinking humans are purely fiction. Goliath was a giant by human standards, but he was not as large as depicted in the recent animated movie. Regardless of his size, David did not defeat Goliath by his own strength. He clearly said it was by the power of God. (See 1 Samuel 17:45.) David was victorious because he trusted the same God who designed humans and ants – and the laws of physics.

Reference: mit.edu

September 2, 2026September 1, 2026

Dolly Parton’s Grace

Entertainer Dolly Parton recently passed away from cancer at age 80. Her singing career began when she was only ten years old and continued for the next 70 years. I read an article about an interview she had with journalist Barbara Walters in 1978. The article was written by Dorie Clark, who taught communication at Columbia and Duke Universities. She praised Dolly Parton’s grace in handling a situation where someone talked down to her.

Barbara Walters was a prominent TV journalist, and Dolly Parton was a young rising star. Walters asked questions that could be considered insulting put-downs, criticizing her lower-class origins in Tennessee. Parton handled it with poise and grace while preserving her dignity. Parton began by briefly talking about growing up as one of twelve siblings in Tennessee. Walters interrupted by asking, “Dolly, where I come from, would I have called you a hillbilly?” Walters was obviously demeaning her at the very beginning of the interview.

Dolly Parton’s grace comes across when she responds to an insult by accepting the “hillbilly” label. She didn’t become offended or argue. She reframed the label by saying her people are proud, practical, and wise rather than backward or ignorant. I thought about how skeptics often try to demean Christians. “You mean to tell me you are one of those ignorant people who believe in Jesus, God, and the Bible?”

When we are confronted by an unbeliever in that way, do we cower, become angry, or strike back? Perhaps we should follow Dolly Parton’s grace when someone tries to put us down. Dolly’s response was, “We were very proud people, people with a lot of class. It was country class, but it was a great deal of class… Most of my people were not that educated, but they are very, very intelligent. Good common sense, horse sense, we called it.” Walters went on to ask Parton if she felt that she was a joke. Dolly took it in stride, when others would take offense. She said, “I am sure of myself as a person. I am sure of my talent.”

You can criticize her for her actions and style, or you can love her for her talent, confidence, and charity. My point is that we should demonstrate Dolly Parton’s grace when someone criticizes us for being one of “those ignorant Christians.” By being confident in what we believe and ready to defend it with facts and evidence, we can stand up to those who try to insult us for our faith. Instead of getting angry, we can show skeptics that Christians are intelligent, common-sense people who demonstrate God’s love for everyone, even those who criticize us for our faith. Soon in the interview, Barbara seemed to have a new respect for Dolly. Christians should learn from Dolly Parton’s grace to face criticism with confidence and truth.

References: You can read the article on msn.com and watch the interview on YouTube.com

August 27, 2026August 18, 2026

Neuron Computing Power

For three decades, experiments have suggested that the dendrites connected to neurons in the brain can compute information on their own. That could explain the amazing neuron computing power that scientists have underestimated.

A team of researchers at the University of Texas Southwest Medical Center used new voltage-imaging technology to record activity in the brains of mice. Each neuron has dendrites that branch out from it. In the past, scientists thought dendrites merely connected neurons, allowing information to move from one neuron to another. This research indicates that individual dendrites compute information. Rather than each neuron acting as a single processor, neurons are more like neural networks, with dendrites computing information on their own. They can serve as memory devices and compute information before it reaches the neuron cell, increasing the neuron computing power.

This new understanding of dendrite architecture as a tree-like network suggests our brains have more processing power than previously understood. Each neuron has more capabilities than previously known, and receiving input from its dendrites and thousands of neighbors allows our brains to achieve much in a relatively small space with minimal power consumption. At a time when people worry about the space and power needed to run huge data centers across the country, we realize we have an amazingly efficient data center in our heads.

Right now, your brain is reading this information, receiving input from your surroundings, generating conscious experience, and piloting your body, including all your internal organs. Your brain’s 86 billion neurons are aided in computation by sprawling branches of dendrites that are also performing computations, storing memory, receiving input, and sending output to the rest of the neural network. The textbook diagrams of neurons with only a few dendrites are not accurate representations of the neuron computing power in your brain.

Humans have not only this amazing, living computer, but we also have a soul at work guiding the computer software. Truly, we can say to God, “I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.”

Reference: scientificamerican.com

August 26, 2026August 18, 2026

Moths Smell With Their Wings

Moth wings have a soft look because they are covered with sensitive hairs. These multifunctional hairs provide moths with flying stability, temperature regulation, and a sense of taste. Yes, moths taste with their wings, but a new study indicates that moths smell with their wings.

The study, published in the Journal of Experimental Biology, was conducted by the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology in Germany. The researchers found that tobacco hawkmoths (Manduca sexta) have receptor proteins in their wings that detect both smells and tastes.

Examination with an electron microscope showed that some of the hairs are porous. Further analysis showed that the wings have genes for detecting scents. They can detect the odor of organic compounds present in the leaves of nightshade plants, where they prefer to lay their eggs.

Knowing that moths smell with their wings reminds us that the more we learn about God’s creation, the more we are amazed at the diversity of living things and the way each has been given what it needs to survive.

Reference: popsci.com

August 25, 2026August 18, 2026

Notions of Evolution

Ancient insects were often trapped in amber and beautifully preserved. Researchers found ground beetles in the genus Loricera in amber from Myanmar, radiometrically dated to 99 million years old. Both adult beetles and larvae were present. Remarkably, they are indistinguishable from today’s living specimens of Loricera beetles, both adults and larvae. This means these beetles have survived unchanged even through the mass extinction that wiped out the dinosaurs and the vast majority of life on Earth. According to an article in Wired magazine, “the Loricera beetle’s survival story challenges conventional notions of evolution.”

When evolutionists find that a species has remained unchanged for a long period, they explain it by saying it was because the species lived in a stable environment. However, in this case, these beetles have remained unchanged through changing environments, changing climate, and a worldwide mass extinction. The researchers had to admit that the beetles “have exhibited significant evolutionary stasis, both in terms of individual species morphology and community structure.” In other words, despite massive environmental changes, there has been no evolutionary change.

According to the “notions of evolution,” natural selection causes massive changes in living things over time and can even produce rapid, explosive changes such as the Cambrian Explosion. When species show “stasis” over eons of time through massive ecological changes, biologists call those species “living fossils.” In other words, the doctrine says that unguided evolution through natural selection acting on random mutations can explain anything. Gunther Bechly, writing on scienceandculture.com, accurately stated regarding the theory of Darwinian evolution, “…a theory that is always perfectly consistent with any possible outcome is not explaining anything.”

Reference: scienceandculture.com

August 24, 2026August 17, 2026

The Difference Between Bees and Flies

I was sitting on my deck, enjoying a cool drink on a summer afternoon, when a bee kept buzzing around me and trying to get into my drink. Then, on closer examination, I realized this wasn’t a bee; it was a fly! How can you tell the difference between bees and flies?

Certain flies, especially hoverflies or drone flies, imitate bees. The various species can resemble a bee’s shape, have black-and-yellow stripes and hairy bodies, buzz around like bees, and feed on nectar from flowers. But they are not bees. You could call them fake bees, hoping to fool potential predators–and me. These bee imitators can fool you unless you look closely and know the difference between bees and flies.

One major difference is that flies have only one pair of wings, while bees have two pairs, even though their transparency may make it hard to see both pairs. Another difference is the eyes. The eyes of flies are large and cover most of their heads, but bee eyes are much smaller. Flies also have short, stubby antennae, while bees have long, slender ones. One crucial difference, as far as I’m concerned, is that bees have stingers, but flies don’t.

When one creature imitates another, it’s called Batesian mimicry. It happens among many species. A viceroy butterfly looks similar to a monarch butterfly unless you look closely. What’s the point of Batesian mimicry? Monarch butterflies have a toxic, bitter taste that deters potential predators, while viceroys do not. The monarchs get their unpleasant taste from the milkweeds their larvae feed on. One bite will scare away potential predators. Viceroys benefit by avoiding predators, even though they might make a delicious meal for a bird.

Getting back to the difference between bees and flies, bees are generally avoided because of their potential to sting. By looking like a bee, flies gain protection from their enemies. That shows great cleverness on the part of those hoverflies or drone flies, as well as the viceroy butterflies. Or does it? Actually, I’m sure those flies didn’t choose to look like bees. The cleverness goes back to the Creator who gave the insects that special protection. God provides for his creatures, including us. For that, we can be thankful.

August 20, 2026August 17, 2026

Sardis: Dead Faith or Victorious Faith

In chapters 2 and 3 of the book of Revelation, Jesus addresses seven churches in Asia Minor, today’s Turkey. Archaeology in modern Turkey has uncovered artifacts in the ruins of those ancient cities, including Sardis.

Sardis was one of the seven cities Jesus addressed, and archaeologists recently uncovered a statue of a young man with well-preserved details. The statue is more than seven feet tall and dates to the fifth century B.C. Because it was buried face down, the face’s details were preserved. Although the statue was carved 2,500 years ago, during the Roman period it was used as part of street paving, with its back and the back of its head serving as paving stones. Details of the clothing are visible, and he appears to be holding a fruit in his hand.

Sardis was once the capital of the Lydian Kingdom and later became an important city in the Persian Empire. In the first century, when Revelation was written, it was part of the Roman Empire known as Asia Minor. Sardis was home to a Christian church that Jesus addressed in Revelation 3:1-6.

Jesus told the church in Sardis that they had a reputation for being alive, but they were dead. He said, “Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die.” He calls for them to obey and repent. Jesus reminded them that they did not know when He would come, but it was certain and would be like a thief taking them by surprise.

What would Jesus say to the Church today? He told the church in Sardis that a few people had not “soiled their clothes,” and they would walk with Him dressed in white. To those who overcome the world (are victorious in their faith), Jesus said He “will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and His angels.”

Today, when our faith in God is tested by things of the world, Jesus encourages us to have a victorious faith. No matter how bad things may seem, God is still in control.

Reference: foxnews.com

August 19, 2026August 17, 2026

Random DNA Mutations

In the 1960s, Japanese biologist Motoo Kimura introduced the neutral theory of molecular evolution. It advanced the idea that most random DNA mutations are not driven by survival of the fittest but by pure chance. Now a team of scientists at the University of Michigan has published a new study saying that beneficial mutations arise more frequently than Kimura had believed. However, they say that a changing environment often prevents those mutations from spreading through an entire population. In other words, environments change more quickly than mutations can spread through populations.

Random DNA mutations arise by chance, and natural selection removes the unhelpful ones. The new study determined that only 1% of amino acid mutations are beneficial. That doesn’t sound like a very big percentage, but it is larger than what Kimura suggested. Even then, those mutations don’t spread to the entire population of a species.

To conduct this study, researchers at the University of Michigan used yeast cells, which live for only 3 hours. That brief generational time allowed them to study 1320 yeast populations over 800 generations using 100 different growth media to create different environments. Environmental changes effectively erased a mutation’s advantage before it could spread through an entire population. In addition, mutations that are beneficial in one environment are usually harmful in another.

In all research, random DNA mutations have not been shown to create new species or higher orders, but they do change and refine existing species. Even with mutations in yeast populations, whether they were beneficial or otherwise, the result was still yeast. The same could be said in other cases, such as dogs or cattle, where we can see mutations resulting in new variations among those animals, but they still remain dogs or cattle.

As we have said before, microevolution does not prove macroevolution. Even if the uncommon mutations are beneficial, they are often lost because they don’t spread through the entire population. Evolution cannot explain the diversity of life on planet Earth.

Reference: msn.com

August 17, 2026August 17, 2026

Trees Are Good for Your Health

Trees are good for your health. That’s the conclusion of various studies, including recent research in Chicago. Over 11 years, researchers analyzed annual satellite measurements of Chicago’s tree canopy and more than 220,000 death records from the health department. They found a correlation between tree canopy coverage and the number of deaths in those neighborhoods. The results were published in the journal GeoHealth in August 2026.

Trees bring us comfort, coolness, and beauty. The study found that in neighborhoods where the tree canopy was shrinking, death rates were climbing, and where the tree canopy was increasing, death rates fell. The researchers noted that you can’t say for certain that losing trees causes more people to die, but it’s interesting that the trends move together.

One reason increased tree canopy could lower summer death tolls is the cooling effect trees provide. In neighborhoods where trees provide more shade, the streets and homes are cooler. But other factors seem to be involved, because, according to the study, year-over-year percentage-point increases in tree canopy were tied to roughly a 10% drop in mortality.

The greatest reduction in health-related deaths was in three areas. Not surprisingly, two of those areas were cardiovascular and respiratory, which could be related to heat. The third area was mental-health-related deaths. What effect can trees have on mental health?

Could it be that the beauty of trees provides a certain amount of mental comfort to ease anxiety? Trees are good for your health, not just physical health. Trees provide shade, but they can also create a soothing, peaceful atmosphere. Trees absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen into the air. God has given us trees for many uses, including construction materials, fruits and nuts, and beauty. We could not live without trees.

Reference: livescience.com

August 13, 2026August 10, 2026

Helpless Newborn Babies

Anyone who has raised a child from infancy knows it’s a lot of work over several years and can be exhausting. When humans are born, they are far less developed than virtually any other mammal. Even the great apes are more developed at birth than humans. Helpless newborn babies have weak neck muscles, soft skulls, and underdeveloped brains. These traits change as the human brain becomes far more developed than that of any other animal, including the apes.

Helpless newborn babies require parents to spend much more time holding, caring for, and working with their infants. Why should human babies have soft heads and underdeveloped brains? One factor is the size and shape of the birth canal through which the skull must pass. Of course, the much larger brains that develop later give us the ability to do many things–not just walking upright but also reasoning, creating, and living out the life for which God designed us.

Gorillas, orangutans, chimpanzees, and bonobos are born more physically independent than human babies, and they also have less cranial deformity at birth. God must have a reason for requiring humans to be more involved in raising their offspring than other animals and primates. The responsibility of childcare and support is an essential part of becoming a human created in God’s image.

The Bible contains instructions for parents because God has given us a great responsibility. Raising those helpless newborn babies into productive adults is a great challenge for two parents in a solid marriage. It is not up to “the village” or the educational system or social media to bring our children to a point where they can be all that God intends for them to be. Parents can be thankful to God that He has allowed us to help form the next generation. (See Deuteronomy 6:5-7 and Ephesians 6:4.)