NEEDLING WITH NOTHINGS IS NEEDLESS

F83W W W W World Wide Web Witness Inc. Home Page Contents Page for Volume What is New

NEEDLING WITH NOTHINGS IS NEEDLESS,

FIASCOS WITHOUT FRUITS ARE POINTLESS,

DECEPTION WITH GUILE IS DEGENERATIVE:

BUT TRUTH IS COMPREHENSIVE,

GIFT OF GOD

More particularly for those who have read such presentations as

Dig Deeper Ch. 2,
Christ not Culture ... Ch. 1,
Wake Up World! ..Chs. 4-6,
Serenity Not Serendipity ... Ch. 6:

this provides a ready way to shorten the presentation at a practical level, for ease of thought,
assuming it has already been founded.

10 VACANT SITES ON NOTHING STREET

It is undoubtedly strange HOW MUCH is built on nothing.

Take the offensive medley of machinations called evolutionism.

1) Where is the place where it is seen ?

An announcer, on a campus radio station, once offered to bring evidence from Adelaide University to SHOW evolution. All he had to do was to flex the finger and there would be the demonstration. However, as he kept distancing the microphone from me, it was difficult to give sufficient time to the point. It is not on show. It is a romantic, a cryptic and callow dream for the cognoscenti, an exercise in the esoteric, born of desire, brought up in boot camp under authority, and released like radioactivity on the unwitting. Yet it is NOT to be seen. Like the profoundly unconscious, it has NOTHING that it can do. Try stirring it up: it is always asleep, but not so are its proponents!

Such a cultural result is prime example of the effectiveness of diligent propaganda, from the various levels of propagandists, going downwards.

2) Where is it to be found ? NOWHERE. Of course there are excuses: it takes so long that you never see it. Clever minds should be able to find criteria of a UNIVERSAL process which MAKES EVERYTHING, and to apply them conclusively. Nevertheless, it is always found in hope, never in sight. Just as Dr Denton in his work, "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis," removes one by one the unevidential suppositions of evolutionism, as found in the human mind not in nature, so microbiology, he shows, has routine gaps and continuity is not to be found in any routine, far less systematic manner (cf. SMR pp. 114-123).

3) Where is the supporting indirect information ? NOWHERE. Not only does the microbiological arena present hierarchical considerations, discrete gaps, but the same is true of the sudden appearance of a whole host of basic designs, far more, says Stephen Jay Gould once chief of this sort of thing at Harvard, than exist now (cf. Wake Up, World! ...Ch. 6). This he famously attributed to the Burgess shale deposits in Canada, where he mourned and moaned in terms of his geological ideas, about their development, suddenness and exotic finesse, a virtual Innovation Capital there, with later loss the negative evidence for later evolutionary development of major design types.

4) Where is the inaugural information ? NOWHERE. Where is the opposite ? in every field, where the failure is made to appear less fatal than in fact, by the common desire to forbid anything actually happening, since this is not a thing you could ever see! I once took a post as an Army Captain in welfare, assured there was provision for Bible Classes in that post, but the Colonel concerned could not or did not show me the evidence. Later the function was denied. You MUST have evidence, if not at the first, then at the last. Delusive confusion is not difficult and in this world, the father of lies has a profound, if temporary influence.

5) Where are the countless objects where functionless foozles litter the earth from endless ... no, not efforts, not on this model, not attempts, not that either, well then, from variations of mindless type within hi-tech equipment. All these DYS-functional beginnings, where are they ? NOWHERE. These are not found. For anything that actually works in its integrated circuitries, which are co-extensive with life, there are no clear cases of failure; yet by the billions, these should be found to swamp the past, the digs, because mindless developments take a while, and are many, compared with those of the mind.

Thus, if I were a poet, and thousands of manuscripts were found of writings which were not published, and never were there any spelling errors, rhythm flops or cognition idiocies, it would be apparent that the only question would be this, Did someone else plant these in my premises (assuming I had 'passed on'), or were they actually mine ? The concept that unintelligence had made them (assuming they were of a quality that was notable, as are life examples technically) would be regarded as a thought for dodderers, for whom the old age pension was just as well, or for whom their earlier earnings were a mercy: a disorder of logic, defamatory of the author and incompatible with the way things work.

To use items

	of inferior complexity, compared with what is built, in such a way that there is
	an integrality about the result,
	a definable quality to the whole,
	a utility with which it is invested (whether or not the purpose implied appeals),
	maximal ordering and organising facility,
	programmatic code and the like,
	on the one hand,
	and functional felicity on the other:

all this, without intelligence is simply a contradiction in terms.

THOSE PARTICULAR features, the uniform solution with staggering miniaturisation and finesse, to problems of tiered types of reality, all this in terms of macro-physical law, comprehensibility by other minds, micro-mathematical marvels and the like: they require work. Objects have characteristics. Formation of non-intrinsic functions, unperformable by the basic blocks, with no scope or equipment visible for the purpose to make them so act beyond their own natures: it is this which is never found. This, as in all living tissue with nuclei, REQUIRES information about formation, and in integral cohesion, exhibits practical conversance with mathematical law, physical functionalities and synthetic power to integrate things of diverse kinds in a total and composite whole, abrim with conceptual connotation, linguistic manipulation, regulation detail and intelligence proliferation.

This IS the function of mind, and is found nowhere else BY OBSERVATION, let alone IN CONSISTENCY, nor are methods for such results disinterrable by the examination of waste-paper basket throw-aways, showing the way it was done (in fossil digs).

Their number is nothing. When it comes to naturalism-evolutionism, there is nothing quite like it: it is centred on nothing, finds nothing doing, and yet continually makes much ado about nothing, as if this activity could be a substitute for the creation cause it so endlessly lacks.

There is NO WAY it was done. Its evidence is the same as the means for such a building of synthetic comprehension, code and command to create. There is NOTHING there.

It was in such a contrary environment as this, that Gould was staggered Gould. WHY ? HOW ? where is there competitive advantage in what 'won', he asks, disconsolate and aggrieved, expostulatory and as if exhuming the bones of a relative from the grave. There is NO REASON and there is NOTHING. What is sought is not found. It did not happen like that, and HENCE did not leave the relevant trail. Information is not formed from nothing or incompetence for its classificatory cohesion and overall facility for mental agility^*1: it requires, a cohesive coverage of a case in relevant code, as an exercise of nothing, or air, or time, or space. It takes work by a rule, with imagination to choose the type and cohere with it systematically.

6) But where are the cell experiments made over large aeons of time before they came good and performed their hi-tech, consistent, overall synthesised, programmatically propounded jobs, in one part as in all, cohesively and continually ? No, not experiments, since the mindless CANNOT experiment, that requiring discipline, machination and comparison; and alas for naturalism, metaphors do not build (except for constructing sensations in the mind or spirit of man, which does not actually create a world, the more so, before man was in it).

Where then are the ... cell loony items ? You want more neutral language ? but of course, where are the cellular defectives, by the billion, over time, there in useless prodigiousness and prodigality, seen in this or that or alone, useless because of incompleteness, because of language defects (one bug can be a marvellous test of patience even for intelligence to find), because the information about the use of information usage, the second tier of non-productive DNA^*1A was not there, nor yet was it synchronously and uni-linguistically complete for interactive synthesis for with rest, so that there were not two coded systems in sync for time and place, for cohesion and for replication. It was not to be found, and is not, for nothing has no such credentials, and assuming what you have to account for is mere trickery and invalid from the outset. It is to come, moreover, for no known reason, since non-thinking mindlessness cannot envisage or hope or have a thrust or anything of that type, to select. If there were a knowable reason, the model would fail, since reason is first to be there, for a reason to be relevant, and that again, is merely begging the question.

In short, evolutionism is playing God, and not admitting thee plagiarism.

Endless must be the throw-aways (except with no mind, you cannot throw-away), so must be the failures. Never found is any one, alone, in this or that: foulings and farce are not the chronic comedy of the mindless machinating what it will do, though it is not there to think of it, or even to be a ghost or anything else, such as some scientists seem to like to make-up, in a strange assortment of logic-avoiding illusion. A ghost ? what is that ? if not a spirit. It draws things on ? then it understands things, and is intellectual, imaginative and comprehensively knowledgeable, and despite its limitations (because you need the maker of the things to draw on, and the ghost, and the existence of reason and logic to make the drawing on meaningful, let alone actualisable). The name, when the disguise is removed, is God.

All this then is the product of the Eternally Adequate. What more was needed for the vacuous and desired substitute to make however ?

Not only so, but there now being non-protein-coding DNA, information about information, rules as in grammar, items for correlation, re-arrangement, dextrous directive devices, the paraphernalia as in language dictionaries, or grammars, on HOW and WHERE and by WHAT MEANS there is to be repair or a variety of directive overview provisions, as with foremen in assembly lines. What then is the way ? Make as language, duplicate it, have the first intellectually meaningful coded language command things, and the meta-information, non-protein coding DNA, the grammar if you will, the cover-agency, and wed the two so that in simultaneity and mutual, inter-disciplinary facility (like some of the University Departments), they operate so that function and not something full of sound and fury, but signifying nothing is the result. Even that would be prodigious for nothing! and a flat self-contradiction.

First then from nothing get something, and then make it orderly, and then logical in the order-type, and then make all such arisings in the life area, to have the same language, then innovate systematically on this linguistic system, commands that have an eventive outcome, that is, possess something to BE ordered and susceptible to inter-coding co-operation, when it GIVES orders. With this, be agile, to make all this simultaneous, so that the fruitfulness of the whole, without which there is nothing but a sophisticated mess, arising from nowhere via anythingness, and this for no reason, and so dash in to render synthetic the thousands of volumes of equivalent INFORMATION which is necessary for this operation, and on which factually it depends.

Next, using the same language, prepare a dictionary or grammar or user-friendly manual, declaring the ways in which things are to be interpreted or executed or adjusted or adapted, on the basis already given, and ensure it has the same co-ordinative comprehensibility and correlative code terminology for non-bug interpretation. Then your two systems of code-making and non-code-making DNA can work harmoniously, the two arisings for no reason from nowhere out of nothing, with the whole magnum opus constructed with everything that lacks all needed, but does it anyway, like an angel before man.

When you have concentrated heavily and done all this, knowing that nothing is expected to WORK until both systems of univocal language, the commands and the rules and provisions, and both of these with the matériel, are conjoined, and all is interactive in detail and in chronological sequence, for time is of the essence; and when you have used your intelligence to the utmost, reflect what a mind you must have to have engineered all this, after first of all understanding in technical terms in every feature, here exhibited in phrases - though in fact to be fabricated in forms and formats, commands and correlations innumerable in the realm of thought, cognition, interpretation, keeping to rules, ruling what is to be directed; and then doing it all.

YOU had better do it, for evolutionism cannot. It has no basis, no law, no mind, no products of intellectually manipulable character, since it has no character, it has no sequential modes, since time means nothing to it, it has no dictionary, no manual, and no one language, for exclusive use; it has no testimony of potential so to construct law from non-law, mathematical enterprise from what is ignorant of all, having no mind, or to match linguistic code and its meta-information so that ANYTHING MIGHT WORK in what is perhaps the most monumentally extensive and intensive piece of code that ever came from anyone anywhere on earth, except the Maker, whose code lives inside man.

The failures of what cannot even try, and has no means of doing so, or invent, or command, having no mind with which to perform this mental operation: the billions of them ? Where are they ? They should litter the earth, were it not a quaint expectation to expect what lacks ALL that is needed to do it consistently as if it had all in its very possession, and used it with a comprehensive brilliance tof which man is now slowly beginning, as a spectator coming to gain idea.

Where are their forbears, these miscreants, these failures, these vast arrays of defeat, if you can have defeat of mindlessly - so then of futility ? Is death their womb ? Is immemorialised nothingness their father, and are these the spawn of the clueless ? Where are the attempts, in the attempted further coding to make not just cells but cell-containers, with organs and integrations of all of these, likewise, into synthetic totalities which have architectural facility in addition to the surge of allied numbers of the multi-partite compositions ?: for that is what they are in descriptive fidelity.

Where ARE these things ? Who as nothing composed them ? What is their number ? What is their author ? Why is He so brilliant in all logic, mathematics, productive technique, miniaturisation, synthetic engineering, event co-ordination with coded command, without even being there ? Is it a matter of name ? Do you want to call it then "event-synthesiser with event-content, as also the fabrication-construer and constructor, command creator, architecture enabler, imagination depicter" and so on ? Why ? The name God has such a signification.

There is NOTHING ELSE adequate, and His word makes you able to remember, stores thought in you. But what of NOTHING as author of something, and something of everything ? What SORT of a something ? and WHY ? and HOW ? and with what POWERS ? As noted, the name is well-publicised, it is God. As for the vacuum packed, space-removed, time evacuated nothingness, it neither could not DOES have any memorial to its many non-trying, non-experimental, not-recorded non-efforts to make anything anyhow.

Evidence is a beautiful word in the face of such extraordinary inability to concatenate thought with fact, and logic with thought as is the essential quality of the naturalistic disaster called evolutionism!

What is found in the fit preceptor, nothing ? Is anything a fit product for nothing ? Are there somethings from nowhere doing creative acts from no qualities, and making support mechanisms and ordered logical systems, for no reason, without reason as an agent, without space or time or any other legally organised synthetics ? We have no evidence, nor any way of founding them except on mere imagination, without consolidating and realistic thought. Meet evolutionism. There is NOTHING found of this. Nothing is their memorial in cell or structure, shattered non-workable dysfunctional disasters. Nothing is not creative, and leaves nothing. So it verifies itself as not the author, not the beginning, in evidential reality as in definitional necessity.

It is NOTHING of all of this event-tent from no content, that is found, even if it could be found. Of polished, synthetic, synchronised, linguistically expressed, symbolically commanded, unitarily construable, operationally amazing products, however, this world is full. Of their genesis, Genesis is explicit; and it meets the logical case, this alone verifiable and validatory with the remainder of the Bible, of all attempts to find the command FOR persons AS persons, in this ultimate construction of creative imagination: man.

To be sure, Peter Pan and Wendy were rather delicious in their goings and journeys, but then we do not have to ACCOUNT for these, for they do not invent themselves. A. A. Milne is not from nothing, but from parents by pro-creation, and his mind is not from nothing, and it is fitting for the exercise of cognitively controlled imagination, so they have reason for their existence in the book, Peter Pan and Wendy, and HE, the author, leaves a memorial of his mind. The mind of the One adequate, and that One alone, has left a memorial in you and me. It is not a memorial to nothing, but to what is adequate for all, and for the correlative creation of all that is meaningless without its physical, material, mental and purposive elements and imagination. We act in terms of this residue, this memorial, continually. It is used to abuse it, to dismiss it and its source, attesting the spirit of man which likewise is a given, highly evidenced.

WE are the memorial of that memory, imagination and mind. If we err, we at least can know better, by consulting the ALONE validated and verified^*1BOTHER CODE of commands and imagination, found in the Bible. It likewise is His memorial, who did not leave us orphans. Nothing is from nothing or produces nothing; and what was always is thus the only possibility, the adequacy of whom for all that followed, like you and me, and a few billion more, in mind, body and spirit simultaneously and synthetically, and in one overall unity, comes in a creation of creativity which is shown by His results. Our liberty is all too closely shown by the clownish contraptions of guilty guile which bedizen philosophy (cf. *3), master-mind politics and ruin whole nations, such as China and Russia, and indirectly and to a large extent, Great Britain which avoiding some of the most convulsive, has yet managed to inculcate with what is subversive of spirituality and gushing with godlessness, this flow of folly that animates the colleges and presents hideous collages of incoherent thought. Man is a memorial of liberty by his choice of compulsions, and his merciful eviction from the same by grace, in the domain of love and not of tyranny.

But as a memorial for mindlessness ? As Denton points out most explicitly, there is no type of procedure even from primitive to advanced in cell types. They were not; they are. Making what is not there by collation, synthesis, command, competence, understanding that is understandable in retrospect, is merely creation intensified.

Such is the multi-faceted evidence.

We create, being GIVEN much plus abilities of the same type, but lesser in power. Creating US AND those abilities is the larger case, allowing evacuation of the self-denying concept of nothing. We call the One involved (more than one would need another to make a system for them in which to co-operate), God. When we do it, we still call it creation; except that the universe including our logically potentiated selves, is a broader canvas, realised in practice and working, despite the abuse of the liberty noted.

7) Where are the examples of the failing mini-motors for protein folding production, which involved midgetry and sophistication of understanding for the relationship to the endless seeming laws, forms and provisions of the universe ? There is NOTHING found.

8) Where then is the evidence of logical tussles in evolutionary scientists ? for if it is all so ridiculously contra-evidential and anti-logical, surely some awaken a little sometimes ? Yes, they do. There is unremitting and immense war about the various impossible programs (some perhaps before breakfast, to suit the mind of the Dodgson literati). There was orthogenesis, there was the hopeful monster, there is punctuated equilibrium, there is neo-Darwinism. There is always hope, for there is never anything else. Check it out and see. WHEN is the OBVIOUS EXHIBITION of anything to be found, which evidences and attests such mindless procedures as are posited by the evolutionists creator programs, other than in HOPE. It may be presented in dream form, in wonderment format, in intensively indirect flair, but action ? never. It is found in NOTHING, and hope makes NOTHING. It needs what is competent for the case.]

Something may be found so spend billions of the money of a highly indebted USA, to look for it. Surely it must be there, extra-terrestrial intelligence ?

Why ? Does it normally come when matter is left alone. Has it ever be found to do
so ? Is there some characterisable attestation of such a procedure in the universe, of mind's innovations, of super-men rather than cultural dunces, dunned for their payments for their self-destructive theories, which never even approach theorems. Is death so productive ? Is time so ingenious ? Is all reality to be contradicted that causality may die^*1C, while being invoked in myths from time to time, in an inconsistency as daring as trying to fly on match stick, even when it is burning, imaging the hot air will give the lift! Contravention instead of creation pays a price in the entirety of irrationality, the acme of breach of scientific method, and the substitution of hope for actuality. These are hopes based on configurations of thought, never found mirrored anywhere but in the mind of man, to mirror the phrasing of Denton, who said this of "continuity in nature." It exists ONLY in the mind of man.

There is discontinuity. There is flexibility in thought; there is law in nature. There are possibilities within the attested and tested and verified powers of material things; thought is not one of them. Try it out and see. Imagine mental life into matter. It is simply other, works differently and has other moorings. Worrying about making everything an orphan from nowhere is merely a human pre-occupation, always absurd, always a matter of making nature by nature, which then has to be there to make itself so that it can come to be there. This is bringing a rabbit out of a hat, when there is no hat. Assuming what is to be done, in order to get it done. How brilliant a gambol, but it is no more coherent than rational. Indeed, this is all much worse than arguing in a circle : it is doing so in a whirl-wind of meaningless gabble. Nature comes from what is apt and adequate to put it there.

9) What is the finding here ? What is the evidence for the binding of mind, so that its logic can meaningfully investigate the word of the Eternally Adequate Being from nature ? Where is its infiltration of logic to come from, in mindless nature, and what is the source of mind, and its logical precursors, to which everything conforms, and configures, so that when mind is made, then nature is ready for it, being of the same mould, but here not as the reasoner, but the reasoned in its kind of construction. There is investigative mind (we have this), and there is mental construction (we check it out, with mind and mind what it has to show in evidence of its logic). There is man and there is nature; and there is the illuminative meeting of the two, of one kind, from one source, LOGOS.

Where is the evidence in nature of the mind maker ? NOTHING. Matter in its brilliant exposes of law, matrix, format and kind, and then mind to mind it, and spirit to want to do so ? NOTHING is what is found in nature in order, though it is a futile and irrational idea, to make it. Make it before it is so that it can be, so that it can then be given the gong for making itself ? TO say that it is not adept in thought, is a world of flattery. For this, there is as for else of naturalism, NOTHING to show. Nothing doing. Nothing does nothing. What sort of a world is irrelevantly so conceived, as though to become mindless in minding the source of mind, and all of what it is significantly mindful!

This is the eventless event! That, one may say, is flat self-contradiction. Precisely the intention in this: that this DESCRIPTIVE TERM is apt for the CONSCRIPTIVE CULTURE of illusion. It is all about events. The events are never found. Hence this event, and all its turmoiling stations for observation, has this self-contradiction IN ITSELF, that it never appears as event: only as imagined episode.

That, it is science ? It is very precisely its opposite. It is a mindless imagination based on nothing (the only other available source, to the everlastingly competent Creator, for incompetence by definition would not achieve competent functional results in a total system in total time: if it did, it would be a competent source).

10) Such naturalism is in all parts experimentally found to be productive of nothing. Productions of this type of hype have always been the work of tepid triflers, but now they appear to rush towards the office of being tedious torturers. Torturing the truth is not an unknown term; but when it is done in term time, it can apply to the living if juvenile butts!

It is an option instead of thought (you CAN make your mind a blank, and so forfeit the functionalities of its operation, and in this mirror matter the more), and in doing this, having the institution of all held in mind, or in imagined milieu, you get nothing, go nowhere, assume everything at once or in bits and have neither testimony nor attestation of any kind. The mind of man as reservoir has nothing to show. It is on the contrary, a show-and-tell item in itself, constructed, constrained, constricted, and even supplied with the liberty of spirit, to be abused, misused and employed in abuse, so that the personal is added to the programmatic in one magnificent symphony of univocal construction, seed of God who seeded the universe with His own mind. We are indeed in His image.

Like the seething hatred bringing illusion to many a divorce court, however, in evolutionism, in naturalism, fact is replaced by desire (in this case, anti-desire, which is the negative variety, or destructive desire, which is the militantly negative variety). When you consider the former of these, in the resounding conviction in Professor Lewontin's admission^*2, it may directly be seen.

Often by dreams of attainment to get it for yourself, is it sought, this little bauble of the universe with its prodigious stores of energy: this, rather than let it reside with the other party (in this case, God). Such readily become the only relevant propulsion to thought, and efforts to destroy the title deeds do little to show cause for ownership. Faith without works is the scope of it. Whether man (too late to be the creator!) nor anything more witless is competent; there is no ground.

When it comes to emotional motivation for its own part, it does not have to be explicit 'hatred,' only what is operationally capable of similar exploits. Moreover, such is the potential fragility of man when duped by deception, both those who do it and those who rue it, that the worst of perpetrators may desire to appear as benevolent as in first blush, some thought Hitler to be, or Mussolini, though the appearance did not last.

NATURE THE SOURCE OF NATURE -

THE GIVEN AS THE SOURCE OF IT

SOMETHING FROM NOTHING:
'NATURALLY NATURE INVENTED ITSELF FROM NOWHERE!'

Thus a complete and missionary style commitment to have nature the source of nature

(despite the fact that getting something by just having it there is not very scientifically rewarding to the listener, or expressive of logical requirements of cause and effect considerations, such as are normal in science, and necessary in logic^*2),

as appears in this instalment from Harvard, fits the desire of some.

It does not however, for reasons just given, fit the case. It is this and not the 'just-so' stories which Lewontin admits to be often the appearance of certain elements in naturalism, which drives. It is inconceivable to him that any other approach be made. The cost must be borne. Why ?

It readily becomes the cost of illusion and mandatism: the insistence on a cover or ground without ground, to which others should give obeisance (cf. Beauty for Ashes Ch. 3, and TMR Ch. 8).

This is a pre-condition, and that is impossible in science. It is circular reasoning, and it rides the circuit, a circuitous way of saying nothing. How can what is not already there put itself there in order to have the basis for itself! Only by begging the question, and reason does not need to beg, it demands its quarry, and finds its outings fruitful. This however is an innings out before it begins!

A Bible believer does not have to lay anything down, when using scientific method, because the evidence always attests. To be sure, he has his own understanding, but there is no need for him to erect this before thought; for thought can but verify it.

That is his conviction, and he is sure of it; but he would not wish to see thought about hypotheses removed, just because, as here in naturalism, they are impossible in type and devoid of evidence. They need to be given some review to prevent contagion, infection, and to show the proper working of scientific method. It is to be sure, not that the outcome is doubted - for whole regions of new knowledge may have to be assimilated, and one must be willing always to learn - but that the method rests, as for all, on what is found to work and to be rationally accessible, which in turn is in empirical fact, precisely the Bible, without comparison. Yet its tested and unique reality as explication, imperils no research; for all has to be open to what works in science, and given attention accordingly. Long ago, evolutionism did not work, and its list of failures grows simply longer (cf. SMR pp.140 and The gods of naturalism have no go!).

THAT means that there is NOTHING back of this naturalism and its handmaid, evolutionism, but faith, conviction, call it what you will, which INSISTS in advance of evidence, in admittedly drastic case, what the result will be for thought, when it faces the universe. ALL must agree, or lose opportunity. ALL must be taught this way, or lose competitiveness with those favoured for attending to the anti-evidential and the irrational! And yet they marvel at what is happening to the young, to the world, to its ways, to its morals and to its sustainability. Imagination is never a good God. You need actuality first, which evidences itself.

What then ? This harassment of thought, this ideational subversion which naturalism always implies, and in various ways, from time to time may admit, this abuse of logic, this drawing and quartering of scientific method contrasts with the approach proper or available for a Bible believing Christian for example. In this case, to be sure, we have a logically demonstrable background, and a doctrinally explicit formulation for the background.

SINCE however this is adequate in logic, and unique in satisfaction of that discipline, and meets every quiver of scientific method (when it is not merely a misnomer for the CULT OF THE FORBIDDEN^*2A), there is no problem. The data pour in and the doctrine applauds. Logic and not dreams is what is in place, and Romans 1:1`7ff. not only details the reason for alternative approaches, but in overall generality, characterises them. Even brilliant persons, we there find, can become fools because of a virtual worship of creation rather than the One who did the work to make the basics, and combine, synthesise, invent and create both their diversity and the splendour of their myriads of unities, forms of life.

The more micro-biology finds, the more the mind is attested, which contrived it in creative structures, ideationally describable forms, logically investigable ways, with creative commands for continuity of various types. What is the problem ? It disappears like dust when a strong wind blows the wastage away from a building site. If the wind removes even larger rubbish, that is, when the wind of evidential reality, intellectually investigable reality blows continually, and so leaves unceremoniously dismissed the idea that "it" was after all building itself, and even made the bricks before anything was there, and the laws for them and the systems of time and space which surround them the more void: then that is a deliverance from the desperation desire. Its dreams had the strength of gossamer and the foundations of vacuity.

Sometimes such winds blow many structures down before man awakens. That is what has been said from the first, since Genesis which draws attention to the beginning in the mind of God. It was so in the flood (cf. the revulsion from such things predicted in II Peter 3); in endless wars it is often so. In the current destabilisation and threats from depersonalised regimes and obliterative ones, it is all the more reminder.

Make yourself from nothing in inventive festering of fancy, and nothing is your due. It is easy to come to nothing, but not from it; except that the nothing for man, when that becomes his eventual consignment, is loss of dignity, place, departure from the wisdom of God as Father, and consignment to a site without the Saviour, that very One biblically and actually apt and able to remedy man's circuit breaks, anomalies and distempers, his sin and is severance from truth.

What then ? what is without what man in these ways detests or voided in his heart or avoided in his life, even the One from whom he departs: it has a destiny according to this. What he forsook, he shall not have. So does he inherit at the end of such is a life's foundation and direction, a world built with the granting of desire, contrary to design... freely founding in the conceived and now accomplished absence of his own need. Seeking to depersonalise God, he but depersonalises himself. Such is the end of that road.

THE UNCONDITIONAL CONTRAST OF CREATIVE REALITY,

THAT MADE THE MADE AND SOURCED THE DEPENDENT

Where then is the testimony of creation ? It is in EVERY case just where the self-creating ideas, applied to what is not there to have self-creating powers, that fey exhibit of naturalism, leave NOTHING as evidence. Each NOTHING result for that hypothesis, meets ALL for the fact of creation. Ask a question, always negated in answer in evolutionism, and receive an answer, always available, in creationism.

In the one, what is to be expected, is not found. In creationism, what is to be expected is what is found. Thus comes the verification in the testimonial attestation of non-continuity IN PRACTICE, amazing, contrived and comprehensible, allied to logically apt causality in procedure within the discontinuous, allowing subtle variation with in a type, of which Mendel's different colours were only one signal. Life is gorgeous; it is testing; it is thrilling; it is profound. It is a work of mind, and since there is decision, spirit, where imagination and compilation combine to create, it is investigable to mind with surpassing satisfaction. Thus come the laws, their intricacy, their intensive sophistication, their glorious interweaving, their alliance with form and format, their inherent specification potential met by exoteric performance, constant attestation of the acme of ability in the creator of contrivance, the legislator of dependent and delimited existence, the synthesis of significance to form a unity of the whole, for operational purposes as a this or that, man or amoeba.

They differ as do characters in a book; they interweave as a play in the hand of a dramatist. But mark this! the more the programmatic material base astounds with its triple layer of action prompting code compilation*, the more it contrasts not with an inherent disorder, but a volitional one. Man is not a program; he is inhabited by a prodigy of synthetically related examples of this. However he is also inhabitant in a spiritual realm, where understanding meets with will, wonder with desire and prioritisation is optional. In this, he may desire to avenge himself on himself, in grovelling guilt, repent in trustworthy sincerity to GOD, or avail himself (or indeed she may avail herself, for in this there is parity indeed!) of the means of oppression to safeguard his expression of himself, his will, his desire, his preference, his dream or his toxic attempt at the dissolution of truth in the interests of determination.

This has moral (which laws, which priority), intellectual (which model, which honesty or deception, which beguilement with hoped for bliss or attention to evidential reality), aesthetic, rational (or wilfully breached, deliberately irrational) and spiritual facilities. Man may opt for wisdom or woe; for guilt for the sake of convenience (as increasingly seems the way with secret service bodies, even in lands where one might have hoped for better^*2B), for glory or shame, values eternal in his own composition, or for the temporary thrill of the spiritual spill, lordly in witlessness, arrogantly calling it courage, or unyielding despair, which is but unyielding double dealing, setting the gift of God against the giver, as if this were moral or even operationally destined to last!

Here is glory indeed, and its very sensitivity and wonder is the measure of its potential glut of shame; its openness to wonder is the avenue likewise to a glory of meaning, a place with the Creator who also the Redeemer, has the measure of man, to heal or to set, unyielding in shame, objectively deserved, just as heaven would be hell for those who CANNOT abide the Lord, who both made and sacrificed Himself to achieve for man his free destiny^*3.

Here then lies a test for everyone created. It is also a challenge. If you turn your mind off, and follow the irrevocably and consistently anti-attested evolutionism for the universe, as its source, a process based on nothing with nothing to show for its hypothesised self, then of course you and God are at war. If you try to make a god who is involved in such continuity of nature, and uses it to create, then you merely invest God with features contrary to what the evidence requires. Nature did not create nature; and any god who is thought of as combining in this non-existent process is merely an idol, if worshipped, and a voluntary submission scourge if merely gaining conformity of man to the dream. As this also insults the God who did it differently, it is blasphemous, judgmental, unrealistic, war without wisdom or ground, and like all such war, certain of defeat. Being conscripted for such war, is a not uncommon academic requirement, both in secondary and tertiary fields in Australia to no small extent, and those who fall for it, are to be pitied. In vain is delusion and dream brought up in defence.

Those who suffer FROM it in the educational field are the more to be pitied for something which spiritually is especially difficult to differentiate from stark atrocity. Myth manufacture in one thing; myth indoctrination is another; exclusion of factuality in the process turns the atrocious into the domineering and the dictatorial. So does freedom begin to take wings, and as in Germany in the 1930s, it is for the best of all possible causes, making them get what you want them to get! That however is merely an exercise in degenerative dictatorship. If confusion is the god behind it, why worship it ? The truth is not obscured.

What is, is; what is not, is not. Confusing the two, so far from having nothing to do with human life, has everything to do with it. This is one of our functions, as human. It is the part of the thinker, and who but the smashed in mind do not think ? so that so thinking is a misuse of equipment, a slander in speech, libel in writing, when applied to God, if possible the worse when making Him a prey to the deception, as if involved in the myths of man, in His own actions!^*3A

But you do not have to pay ? You may get a nice big salary for following this line, have a comfortable profession and mix up the stuff with religion in your OWN WAY ? Wonderful, you add to distortion, confusion, and hope that all will be well, since judgment is not yet. Meanwhile this world smiles on you ? Perhaps. After all, Christ did note as seen in Luke, that "what is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God," (Luke 16:15). Want to be an enemy of God ? love this world and it is done, James declares. ^*3B. To do so, says James, IS to hate God. Love of this world and of God, these are disparate, like pneumonia as an operative reality, and breathing as a life support system. They are not conjoined without trouble or tragedy.

Much ado about nothing is the trade signature of evolutionism. Nothing needs to be done, it just happens, including anything from nothing. The subterfuge leaks to the moral level readily.

Lofty indeed such a vision of soaring myth, even if it be vitiated by the vice of irrationality; and to children under seven or eight, it could have wings and be pseudo-inspirational, if used as a romantic substitute for thought and realism. There, then, is an allied topic. There is the question of BRINGING UP what is presented complete with programmatic and non-programmatic elements, the child of the race, with attention to the later even by those who love to disparage the spirit of man! Not so is their attention to it.

Nothing, some add, needs to be done in discipline, except slight and suggestive steps. It happens with astute controls that are HOPED to work. Do not smack: how wicked to touch an offender! when young temper, tantrums, wildness, or bucolic excess comes into play, situations always readily able to lead to tragedy. So goes the rote. It is, however, not the due means of correction on the unformed which are at fault, though they are perhaps as often abused as is the materialist imagination that there is no responsibility for choice: it is the failure to realise that life and discipline CANNOT be separated, without tragedy.

Death and paraplegia are near enough. Action to aid realisation, shortly and sharply, amidst wise instruction, this wrought without temper, and with loving goodwill is a thing, on occasion, most wise. It cuts the cackle. For my own part, I was rarely smacked, though very direct punishment happened; yet there was clear and rebuking discipline of no uncertain character, for which I am profoundly grateful. It is amazingly easy to be foolish, and correction can save enormous follies, their autonomous expression: within the limits of love and the bringing up into understanding. Character does not happen. It is formed. The workings and ways for it are not material, though this may be used as designed for correction. It is a psychic event with psychic modes, moral formats and motivational features. Like thought, so mode of living is sui generis. They relate ? yes, but so does the ground to my foot.

Basing lessons, per repressive and indoctrinative non-scientific evolutionism, rampant now in a deluded land, on nothing, given various attributes as if nonchalantly and without thought, breeds the undisciplined, undirected, unvisionary, ill-adapted, ready-for-ruin breed. If followed through, such bases make the ground of the heart, ready for solicitation for anything to fill the gap. It may decide to be inconsistent and do the opposite of the alleged process ? Surely, but then the wimpish and woeful movement into total unrealism by reaction, moving on the baseless, in self-contradiction, readily becomes an addiction. Reality becomes mere defiance of the dream! But this does nothing to quell it...

There is much yap about the gap. Which gap ? the gap where consistent discontinuity attests creation, whilst continuity in the underlying realities attests the Creator. What are these continuities ? They include continuity of conscience, sin and psychic secession from God in a vast proportion of the human race, on the one hand; and salvation for the human race (John 3, Titus 2-3), on the other. Both of these intra-type procedures and performances continue. Sin does not change; salvation has no mutation. This is because the systematiser and maker of personality, of individuality with its concourse of commands, concerns, stimuli, appeals, exhortations and vision does not change. What He made does not change. It continues to do what specifications permit and liberty enables.

Liberty however can be assaulted. Breed without feed, and you improvise with reckless and inexcusable irresponsibility. This is common to the race ? it is a natural failure following an existential fall. Can it be rectified ? Since it is of life itself, it is not so, except by its Creator. How shall they find whom they reject ? but even if they awaken to His creative power, how will they believe in Him against the flow of King Culture, that rapacious rogue! Readily! for God has not lost His power, mighty to save as He is^*4, and the lost are as liable to divine deliverance now as before. It is just that the thrust of the typhoons of dust are very cutting, the savage winds of false doctrine, the delight of the spiritual meteorologists, as so often foretold^*5.

When righteousness, reason and reality decrease, as in Australian governmental circles more and more noticeably and indeed blatantly, and when these are forfeited by culture foreign to that of our foundation, and presented as dependent on nothing but notions, when mere illusions and allusions without foundation accrue in the land, then covered with carcinogenic dust, they do not grow, just as grapes do not grow on thistles. There is in this model, nothing on which to built, or to have been built; and where illusion rules, alas, even in such a nation of such blessing as this, this becomes like the Russian space mission to scoop rock from Mars: something that falls poisonously into the Pacific.

Theirs is no help in fallen life; but help, like creation, and salvation, is of the Lord (cf. Jonah 2:9). Paul to the Philippians in 2:15, put it like this, to those who had found in Christ the rock of reality, to give foundation to the faith in the Lord:

"that you may become blameless and harmless, children of God
without fault in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation,
among whom you shine as lights in the world..."

We are but reflectors of truth, geared to the Gospel, agents from the Lord, not sleeping as those who have hidden agendas, but awake and calling: Awake! There is a time when it is too late (Matthew 25:1-13).

NOTES

*1
Accordingly, it is hardly surprising that this industrious task of high order capacity to define, determine, relate, characterise is not a given. Handouts may be given by governments; but someone pays taxes. Information as we have noted from Professor Werner Gitt (The Desire of the Nations, Ch. 2, Epilogue , Jesus Christ: Defaced, Unfazed ... Ch. 4), is not found to compile itself but to be comprehensibly covered by what it takes.

In this case, it includes intelligence. Otherwise, it is like having a builder without lift, a writer without language, an architect without imagination or a war without spirits.

*1A

From Waiting for Wonder Appendix, we have the following.

So God made humankind, this institute of agents, people of purpose, imagination, rationality appetite and bent on discovery, subject to passion and able to be fashioned till the very angels might weep with joy. There are many kinds with their thematic variations, both in body and in mind, in thought and in vision. This, it is the remarkable contrivance, creation and compilation with one spirit and one mind apiece, man-kind.

Kinds do allow marvellous variety within them, with what had foolishly been dubbed 'junk DNA', non-coding automation, set in the midst of coding protein compilation to make zygotes, babes and children, youth and mankind. Man is no junk: look at his works, for both good and evil!

His so-called area of DNA misnamed 'junk' not so long ago, is now seen to have various arrangements of the utmost sophistication, allowing enormous complexities into which many are just beginning to peer, so that various diversifications on the original theme or kind, can occur, with control genes and transposons, mobile genetic units, able to make astute re-arrangements within the subtleties of immense mathematical precision which characterise the entire structure of the genome (cf. Journal of Creation, 2009, Vol. 23(2), pp. 110ff.).

As was earlier pointed out (op. cit. Volume 21(3), 2007, on pp. 111ff.), in a fascinating article by well-known biologist, Alex Williams:

"DNA information is overlapping-multi-layered and multi-dimensional; it reads both backwards and forward; and the 'junk' is far more functional than the protein code, so there is no fossilized history of evolution. No human engineer has ever even imagined, let alone designed an information storage device anything like it."

He proceeds to note that "the vast majority: is "meta-information - information about how to use information." Let us reflect on all of this. Now in the midst of wildly misnamed 'junk', we find the jewels of the crown, interpretative and collative, directive and explicatory background to the busy engineering of the protein-coding DNA. How often has it been necessary to point out on this site that magic is inoperative. You do not have things 'arise', for they require cause, and that in detail, and if you are going to have specific marvels of construction, you need specific marvels either of the power to construct, or of what such power has made in order that it may do it. With that, you need all that construction of a given finesse involves in imagination, conceptualisation and creativity, functions of person.

You do NOT, repeat NOT, have things wafting their way in on the wings of philosophy, rudely awakening specialists who are either unwitting or unwary or both, to the realms of delusion. You want it, it must be paid for, in cause cost. This world is not a dreamland.

Thus, to have this ultra-sophisticated, mathematical maestro level advent, you need the simultaneous advent of what is coded for command and what is coded to receive command; what is the instituted language for the production and reproduction of the same, and the performance of it. With this also, you need of course, what is available to BE commanded, commendably synchronised in its presence with the orders; for to order is of no use, whether chemically or in the Army, unless you have someone/something to order. A General without those to command is of little worth, and they must be integrated in one system where the fact of command and the mode of expression is understood, both to give and to get, while the means to institute, whatever these may be, persons, products or both, have to be synchronised with the issue of orders to the point that there is no mere wafting of sound, but intelligible symbols uttered in a plan of speech which allows semantic interpretation, programmed or personal, to act in the desired time-frame.

Thus there is for example, in the human kind case, need of making a threefold simultaneity of two coding specialisations not only with the same language, but with the same specification-symbol entry equivalents, to give and to receive; and with the correlative commands, the capacity to bring the stuff up for action upon it. For that, of course, it must be both there and in commandable condition, with all due technical specifications for the state in which it chemically exists, and is physiologically reachable.

Williams is especially interested in meta-information, which is information about information, such as any student, whether over long years or shorter ones, needs to understand in order to be semantically functional. You have to know language in order to convey it, how it works, where it goes and does not, and to be really effective, why! ^*T1

Thus, from Williams, we have further data (p. 115, op. cit.).

Not only is this meta-information case what is found, he declares, but in the regions yet to be more fully investigated, there appears to be a situation where all or almost all of this type of DNA is engaged in the work of gene regulation. This is an arena of current thrust in investigation. Rearrangements and circuits, orders, need some device to protect and to inject, and this meta-information seems full of it. Brilliant devices to use massive information structures to gain specialised variations on them, come with that fluency of mobility in the fixity of underlying structure which allows generic specifications to be adroitly adapted, like Mark I and Mark II automobiles, for example, as people await with expectation what variation on their desired make will be forthcoming. The mobile genetic units called transposons are one such device, which in one aspect, almost seem to resemble working mechanics, hands-on.

Williams moves (op.cit. p. 116), to note the work of Dr John Sanford of Cornell University, citing the latter's Entropy & Mystery of the Genome. Here, the mutative exercise considered is the genome, which as with most designs exposed to the elements, involves deterioration, not progress. This is what could be called the Gould phenomenon: things in terms of design KINDS or types, are going down, not up (cf. Wake Up World! Your Creator is Coming Ch. 6). This is in part the Werner Gitt phenomenon: information does NOT arise without intelligence. There are laws, and these need to be known and applied^*T1(Journal of Creation 2009, 23(2), pp. 96-109).

In other words, these are areas of a kind relative to humankind, the way they go at the physical and physiological level, in overview.

What then of this finding of Sanford of Cornell ? That is the correlative both of the Second Law of Thermodynamics and of the basics of information science. His contribution is reported as showing that "deleterious mutations are accumulating at an alarming rate in the human population and that both natural selection and even the worst possible nightmare scenario of eugenics is powerless to stop it." This results from the enormous synthesis of variables, in holistic accords, weak points arising after several thousands of years, in hidden and varied ways. What there is to select from is being impaired, and the old chestnut, that to remove the worst creates the best is seen in its practical drabness. The best is going down.

*1B

See

What is the Chaff to the Wheat! Ch. 3, and further on validity, see

Ch. 10 and Ch. 11 op. cit., as also Ch. 8 and

Licence for Liberty Ch. 2.