The Walt Brown Effect: Q&A

* Jonathan from Thornton CO: On Day Two, God made the firmament to divide the waters below from the waters above, and that firmament [search for "two pastors"] was not the atmosphere, but the crust of the Earth!
* Pat from Aurora CO: Like in Walt Brown's catastrophism, today's geologists will admit to the massive Heart Mountain in Wyoming breaking apart in just "30 minutes!" The Heart Mountain Detachment in Yellowstone country originally consisted of carbonate rock at least 1650 feet thick that "covered an area of 1100 square kilometers [that] broke up into at least 50 large fragments and spread over an area greater than 3,500 square kilometers." And this, NOT over millions of years, but rapidly.
* Johnny from TOL: Calling from Tampa Bay, Florida, this evolutionist member of TheologyOnline.com argues with Bob that "evolution is not about an increase in information." Bob argues that the typical claim that evolution is evidenced by harmful mutations, disease, and a loss of information, is merely obfuscation, since both sides of the debate admit that degeneration occurs (things break down). And so, molecules-to-man Darwinists must prove an information explosion (supposedly from protozoan to human), which is not accomplished by their endlessly pointing to genetic loss and disease.
* Wayne from Tulsa OK: The ancient land bridges affected the migration of animals, including woolly mammoths. Also, if dead bacteria or amoebas are found on Mars or in meteorites, these will not have been from Mars, a dead planet, but obviously, from Earth, which is the Living Planet!
* Nathan from Dayton OH: Evidence against plate tectonics contrasted with evidence for Walt Brown's Hydroplate Theory.
* Vic from Aurora CO: After lamenting Johnny's call, Vic said that his wife never wanted to listen to BEL, but last night she started listening to the archived Walt Brown interviews, and she kept at it for hours! Also, the Gap Theory is debunked by God's statement in the Ten Commandments at Exodus 20:11 that "in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
* Alan from Denver CO: The Hydroplate Theory explains how woolly mammoths froze faster than food could digest in their stomachs, in that the fountains of the great deep launched water and rock into outer space as comets and meteorites, but much of the water that couldn't escape Earth's gravity came back down at the poles cold enough to freeze the mammoth exteriors to the required minus 175 degrees F.
* Brian from Denver CO: Walt Brown demonstrates that the continents on the early Earth did not fit together but that they eroded roughly parallel to the mid-Atlantic ridge. Yet today's textbooks are filled with provable error, like the fit of the continents (which requires massive trickery to perpetrate), and the debunked evolutionary claims about peppered moths and embryos having gills. Also, life being so wildly complex cannot begin by chance even if all needed chemicals were present (as rotting carcasses worldwide demonstrate a trillion times per second), and random changes cannot improve or increase functionality in interfaced complicated systems.
* The Age of Mitochondrial Eve: Read Walt Brown's report on the latest mutation rate research showing that Mitochondrial Eve is less than 10,000 years old!
* Ask questions or make comments: specifically about this Walt Brown program, at TheologyOnline.com! 
Today's TWO Resources: 1) Get an autographed copy of Dr. Walt Brown's fabulous book, In the Beginning! Order by clicking the link, or calling us at 800-8Enyart (800 836-9278)! 2) Or, you can enjoy the BEL Science Pack and watch tremendous documentaries, listen to Bob's Genesis Creation study album, read the best book on creation/evolution ever written, and hear a debate on the Age of the Earth!

MORE:

Walt rightly asks: Won't a species struggle with bad legs long before they evolve into good wings? Evolutionists at TheologyOnline.com try to distract from that powerful argument by insisting that theory suggests that wings evolved from ARMS, and not legs. Yes, it's true that current evolution theory includes the untenable concept that birds evolved wings from arms. However, current theory also suggests wings evolved from legs. So I provide these links in hopes of getting those guys to stop obfuscating and deal with the actual argument:

* Supposed Evolution of Wings "from Legs:"
Dinosaur: Evolutionary speculation suggests that the pterosaur may have evolved flight from the four-legged, ground-running Scleromochlus.
Insects: And regarding the phantasmal evolution of wings, OxfordJounals.org states, "the hypothesis that insect wings evolved from leg branches rather than as de novo outgrowths of the body wall [was] (argued for by Kukalová-Peck 1978 with molecular developmental data contributed by Averof and Cohen 1997)." And Discover.com: "In insects, Kukalova-Peck thinks--and recent genetic comparisons of crustaceans and insects have pretty much cinched the case--the flattened branches on the first segment of one pair of legs evolved into wings."
Bats: Softpedia.com "what probably prompted the appearance of bats from mouse-like rodents" and rodents don't have arms, but only legs. And a 2004 NewScientist article argues that bats evolved from mice, while admitting, "Bats have been an evolutionary enigma. That's because the oldest fossil bats look remarkably like modern ones, each having wings formed from membranes stretched between long fingers, and ear structures designed for echolocation. No fossils of an animal intermediate between bats and their non-flying mammal ancestors have been found. ... The lack of transitional forms has also led to speculation about the origin of bats, with some believing that primates are their closest relatives. Genetic studies now show they are closest to ferungulates, which include horses and pigs, or to the shrews and moles."

Errata: If you listen to this program, you will hear a post-production edit clearly identified, which indicates that on this show, I wrongly stated that the hypothalamus was considered vestigial. I erred, and Johnny from TOL rightly corrected me. I was wrong to include it among the organs that evolutionists claimed had no lost all or major functionality. It's part of the endocrine system, and science was retarded for more than 50 years, as much of the endocrine system was considered useless, which is one example of how Darwinism has impeded good science. Because of evolutionary dogma, medical science was slow to recognize functions of the tonsils, the appendix (which works in combination with lymph nodes, to filter out harmful bacteria, and because of it's location, it's in a prime spot to help protect the small intestines from bacteria in your large intestines), etc. But regarding the hypothalamus, I had heard that the pituitary and pineal glands, also part of the endocrine system, were considered vestigial. So to verify Johnny's claim, as soon as the program ended, I called a friend of this radio show, an endocrinologist back east, Dr. Joel Brind, Professor of endocrinology at Baruch College in NYC. Joel explained to me that the hypothalamus wasn't recognized early on, because it is not a distinct organ, it's not even a separate gland, but it is comprised of clusters of neurons in the brain, it's a part of the brain. And so I could understand why, when historically much of the endocrine system had been wrongly tagged as having lost all or major functions, the hypothalamus was not so identified, because it hadn't yet been recognized back when bias and ignorance moved evolutionary scientists to identify so many structures as vestigial.