[geocentrism] Re: Evolution

  • From: "Jack Lewis" <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:55:41 +0100

Dear Paul,
2nd L.O.T. = 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
The stuff that I sent you was simply for your information regarding 
insurmountable evolutionary problems. I don't have the time to waste having 
lengthy discussions about a subject I know to be true.  It is my experience in 
talking to evolutionists about their problems that no sooner do I make a valid 
point to them they then say something like, "Ah yes but what about..." and go 
off into another area and nothing ever gets resolved. I won't do that anymore 
because basically I'll only discuss one thing at a time and that is 
abiogenesis. The level of agreement or disagreement will determine whether I 
continue the discussion or not. We either resolve this question or we end the 
discussion. My intransigence on this is because without it there will be 
nothing to evolve. There is no way that you can get round this statement - it 
is fundamental, foundational and cannot be by-passed. 

Therefore I am prepared to discuss the impossibility of abiogenesis and nothing 
else until it is resolved. 

What is the obvious contradiction you were referring to below?


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Paul Deema 
  To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 4:01 PM
  Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Evolution

  Jack L

  From Jack Lewis Wed Sep 12 18:10:56 2007

  If you think that the article about abiogenesis is merely an anecdote then 
you clearly have no idea what evolution is about. If you want more information 
about what creationists say about the 2nd L. O. T. check out this site 
http://www.icr.org/article/86/ its not too long an article. [ What is 2nd L. O. 
T.? ]

  I was in a bit of a hurry and I'd forgotten about this item. It is not a 
simple anecdote, but it is a simplistic attempt to disprove an incredibly 
complex proposition with a few references to carbon atoms and right and left 
handedness. Then we find this -

  It has been found that the proteins in living cells are almost all 
left-handed. It would be lethal to a cell, by preventing metabalism, if a 
right-handed molecule was inserted.

  Can you reconcile this obvious contradiction?

Other related posts: