Your Subtitle text

For the first time in Publishing history...Reversing 160 years of falsehood –– sharing the true spirit of quantum science from Albert Einstein and Max Planck both, this book goes where no one has gone before –– showing not everyone even agreed with Darwin, especially not the most revered and famous science minds of our time...

Click here to purchase the Paperback!  
Click here to purchase the e-Book instant download!!
 Click here to Contact Lachlen French

“The idea of an orderly universe is inconceivable without God.  The grandeur of the cosmos confirms the certainty of creation. One can’t be exposed to the law and order of the universe without becoming aware of a Divine Intent.”
Dr. Werner Von Braun, mastermind of the V2 rocket and the space program of the United States for two decades, from a speech at Taylor University:
The Pesky Eyeball

Bypassing the recent wave of Creationism in the US and its criticism of Darwin’s theory, a number of objections can be made against the notion of natural selection, some of which I will mention here. Such intricate changes have arisen in nature, involving such immensely complex series of mutations, that mathematicians find it almost impossible to attribute these to blind chance.

Rattray Taylor mentions several instances of features which evolved long before they were of any advantage so that they hardly can have been caused by natural selection. Even Darwin himself was occasionally seized by doubt while contemplating organs of extreme perfection”. 

'The eye gives me a cold shudder’ he wrote.”

(Noske, Barbara [anthropologist], “Humans & Other Animals: Beyond the Boundaries of Anthropology” Pluto.

Darwin was bothered by the eyeball because it has so many systems that need each other to work Together to provide SEEING, and it appears they all arose at once in a perfect systemization of systematic harmonies and teamwork creating Vision only together. If you don’t have the lens, all other aspects (perfectly here, and housed) do not matter. Or if all is there except the retina (and the wondrous rods and cones within it) everything else is pointless.  Darwin said –

“What shall we say of the eye? Is it conceivable that this transcendent organ with its power of adjusting its focus to different distances and of letting in more or less light – with its nearly perfect correction for chromatic and spherical aberrations, could’ve formed by the accumulations, through natural selection, of infinitesimally slight variations, and each useful to its possessor. I confess, that there’s no language at first that seems too strong to condemn the absurdity of such a notion.”

(Darwin, C.R., in Stauffer, R.C., ed., “Charles Darwin’s Natural Selection: Being the Second Part of His Big Species Book Written From 1856 to 1858,” [1975], Cambridge University Press: Cambridge UK,
By admitting the inconceivable Darwin seems open-minded, but he really wants folks to just forget the inconceivableness and accept his theory. The EYE is a System of Systems working Together. And vision does not work if all are not present. So once again, he said something self-sabotaging of his theory.

If it’s ever shown that systems have to arise together, simultaneously to survive forward (impossible by his own admission) then his theory’s proven wrong. It looks like the eyeball proves that, thank you Charles.
Disproof #4
All Creatures' Eyeball Systems are Simultaneous for each. Each system, iris, lens, etc, needs to Be there simultaneously.

An eyeball’s many systems work Only together (along with the beautiful optic nerve and brain of course) and they all need to Arise Together or there’s no Vision (in ANY Creature on Earth before having all of them there). In all of history, through their eyes, no creature will see, if just one aspect is missing.

When you apply Darwin’s Successive Modifications idea on accidental eyeballs in millions of creatures, it becomes untenable. Imagine spherical bulges on faces that mutated first, but with no lens, iris or pupil? Ugly. Unuseful. Blind. Foolish idea.

This is the idea behind successive changes. They happen one step and one mutation at a time. How many thousands of years would creatures go around blind before they EACH fortuitously mutated an iris or lens. See the eye needs every part now, or it is blind.
But remember a supremely important point of statistics. The eyeballs were not just one miracle of sight in humanity’s experience; they were an accident of dumb luck in every species according to Darwin, till they all developed completion. Come on. All those lenses had to be a fortuitous accident in many untold millions of species. How could that accident fortuitously occur in all species? All the retina accidents too? and the spherical-eyeball accidents? All the liquid aqueous humor accidents? All the optic nerve and Brain accidents occurred in all species?

If they’re accidents why do eyeballs look alike everywhere? Friends when we get into the brain as an accident of dumb luck, it become becomes purely farcical. It’s an impossible creation. And grey matter looks the same in all these “accidents?”  Please.
Folks get real. Secularist Darwinism just wants everything to be an accident so there's no Prime Mover in the universe, prior to it all. What is this aversion to an intelligent infinite conscious prime mover anyway? Where does it come from, this aversion? They may not want to answer to, or for anything?
They have a completely visible agenda. If they can live as if they’re the supreme in life – their esteemed career, position, authority, their conscience, their decisions, their interests are theirs to juggle and control –  yet their emptiness in life and heart also affects things too in having nothing to look up to, or forward to, in a black emptiness of non-existence, soon coming for them, in their view. I actually have so much loving gratitude-appreciation for an infinite consciousness so responsibly sponsoring all this, guiding it in amazing wisdom I don’t comprehend people hating it or averting it.

This is just like the ‘infinite number of universes theory’ secularist Darwinians have postulated. Why did they postulate an infinite number of universes? Simple. So this universe would not be a miracle of mathematic perfection, all throughout it, so that we can even HAVE a Universe. In fact whenever you hear this idea, realize they have no evidence for it, or indicator of it. It is a mere postulate based on not wanting our universe to be perfect mathematically for existense to be.

See, this universe is so mathematically perfect for life to exist; even the ratio of force between the Strong and Weak nuclear forces inside every atom in the universe is perfect - to give Matter its very existence for our existence, to enjoy bodies.
If there is NOT that ratio of force in every atom in this universe, our bodies will never come to exist, as no matter exists, giving us a unique and individual, precious experience. If the ratio of force were slightly stronger, all the cosmic material IN Space would simply be one large object of non-importance, and no life experience would ever be there. If it were slightly weaker, no matter would ever form at all, anyplace. It is mathematically perfect right where its balance exists.

If consciousness is in us the microscopic [like it is down here on Earth everywhere] it has to be in the macroscopic prior. This is the Commutative Law of mathematics - something comes from some Thing. I know we’ve heard of the something from nothing theory for so long that it’s become commonplace in our mind. But we must get out of the habitual Darwinian patterning in our minds, and go back to pure logic and true insight. Who can actually imagine something arising from nothing?

Since we all really know that something here now is here because someone or something brought it here – my car, shoes, lunch, you, me – we should see that if consciousness is in the cosmos it came from consciousness in the cosmos previously. Consciousness did not spring from NOTHING. It did not arise from dirt. Nor did it arise from water. It did not arise from a molecule of carbon and oxygen and nitrogen. It did not arise from a spike of electricity from there to there (as if we even knew that happened); It arose from itself propagating itself.
Website Builder