Essay services

GET AN ESSAY OR ANY OTHER HOMEWORK WRITING HELP FOR A FAIR PRICE! CHECK IT HERE!


ORDER NOW

List of approved essay services



Creation or evolution term paper

Free creation vs. evolution Essays and Papers

the only observable evidence is that of very limited horizontal (or downward) changes within strict limits., evolutionists, having largely become disenchanted with the fossil record as a witness for evolution because of the ubiquitous gaps where there should be transitions, recently have been promoting dna and other genetic evidence as proof of evolution. up and we’ll send you ebook of 1254 samples like this for free! all known cases of decreased entropy (or increased organization) in open systems involve a guiding program of some sort and one or more energy conversion mechanisms. there are no such evolutionary transitions that have ever been observed in the fossil record of the past; and the universal law of entropy seems to make it impossible on any significant scale." therefore, he concluded that "we must construct something to take its place. more often is the argument used that similar dna structures in two different organisms proves common evolutionary ancestry. for example, creationists name an incredible complexity both of living organisms, and the ecosystems they inhabit. speaking of the trust students naturally place in their highly educated college professors, he says:And i use that trust to effectively brainwash them. clash between evolutionists and creationists seems to be far from its finale. service is excellent and forms various forms of communication all help with customer service. mills, new jersey, united stateswriter 37301 is excellent produces assignments ahead of deadline which provides enough time for review and revisions, and the assignments are done according to rubrics. that evolution, according to darwin, was in a continual state of motion . there is no reason whatever why the creator could not or would not use the same type of genetic code based on dna for all his created life forms. even doctrinaire-atheistic evolutionist richard dawkins admits that atheism cannot be proved to be true. along these same lines, there was a growing sentiment among american intellectuals that majority rule was a clear and present danger to the civil liberties of those with minority political and religious viewpoints. both sides come up with potent arguments in favor of their positions. “junk dna” legitimate evidence for evolutionary descent from a common ancestor? the creationists claim, belief in modern evolution makes atheists of people. this scientist defends what he thinks is "natural processes' ability to increase complexity" by noting what he calls a "flaw" in "the arguments against evolution based on the second law of thermodynamics. it is instructive to recall that the philosophers of the early humanistic movement debated as to which term more adequately described their position: humanism or naturalism. it followed logically that the fossil record should be rife with examples of transitional forms leading from the less to the more evolved. thus, arguments and evidences against evolution are, at the same time, positive evidences for creation..Therefore, they must believe it, and that makes it a religion., these negative evidences against evolution are, at the same time, strong positive evidences for special creation.. an assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture. atheistic nature of evolution is not only admitted, but insisted upon by most of the leaders of evolutionary thought. this means there are no intermediate links between simpler and more complex life forms, which witnesses in favor of the claim of each species having been created. we only introduce arguments and evidence that supports the currently accepted theories and omit or gloss over any evidence to the contrary. investigators have proposed many hypotheses, but evidence in favor of each of them is fragmentary at best. accordingly, most evolutionists now decline opportunities for scientific debates, preferring instead to make unilateral attacks on creationists. lewin notes that:The overall effect is that molecular phylogenetics is by no means as straightforward as its pioneers believed. (additional info): 866-332-0244fax (additional info): 866-308-7123live chat supportneed order related assistance?. is he an insane madman or a revengeful, scheming, genius?. humans originally belonged to an order of mammals, the primates, which existed. of all, the lack of a case for evolution is clear from the fact that no one has ever seen it happen." such variation is often called microevolution, and these minor horizontal (or downward) changes occur fairly often, but such changes are not true "vertical" evolution. the superficial similarities between all apes and human beings are nothing compared to the differences in any practical or observable sense. the big bang theory is stated in condensed form as. the evolutionists themselves, to all intents and purposes, have shown that evolutionism is not science, but religious faith in atheism. article was originally published in the new reasons to believe e-zine. that being the case, biological processes also must operate in accordance with the laws of thermodynamics, and practically all biologists acknowledge this. huxley, essays of a humanist (new york: harper and row, 1964), p. evolution by saying that the big bang is merely a theory.

Creation or Evolution: Free Compare-Contrast Essay Sample

practice, however, the symbiotic relationship between parents, churches, and public schools was more an ideal than reality. will allow for a greater understanding of this essay and give us an even ground upon. in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated commitment to materialism. for example, in early twentieth-century tennessee-which would take center stage in america's first major nationwide creation/evolution debate-the influential evangelical christian churches grew increasingly supportive of public schools because they viewed them as a bulwark against creeping secularism (israel, 2004)..Summarizing the genetic data from humans, another author concludes, rather pessimistically:Even with dna sequence data, we have no direct access to the processes of evolution, so objective reconstruction of the vanished past can be achieved only by creative imagination. it is difficult to believe such complexity and diversity appeared and established balance on its own, whereas evolutionists suggest the idea of random development through survival of the fittest. like the socalled "vestigial organs" in man, once considered as evidence of evolution but now all known to have specific uses, so the junk dna and pseudogenes most probably are specifically useful to the organism, whether or not those uses have yet been discovered by scientists. commonly answer the above criticism by claiming that evolution goes too slowly for us to see it happening today. the evolutionary worldview applies not only to the evolution of life, but even to that of the entire universe. one can have a religious view that is compatible with evolution only if the religious view is indistinguishable from atheism..Even those who believe in rapid evolution recognize that a considerable number of generations would be required for one distinct "kind" to evolve into another more complex kind. some may prefer to call it humanism, and "new age" evolutionists place it in the context of some form of pantheism, but they all amount to the same thing. jay gould, "the evolution of life," chapter 1 in evolution: facts and fallacies, ed..Anthropologists supplemented their extremely fragmentary fossil evidence with dna and other types of molecular genetic evidence from living animals to try to work out an evolutionary scenario that will fit. of course, the other thing about evolution is that anything can be said because very little can be disproved. creationists, who interpret the bible's book of genesis literally, believe that human beings are the special, divine creation of an almighty god, and therefore fundamentally distinct from all other creatures on earth. one or more of the ways (via genetics, tool use, anatomy) neanderthals differ from modern humans (descendants of adam and eve; homo sapiens sapiens). this includes all the ancient ethnic religions, as well as such modern world religions as buddhism, hinduism, and others, as well as the "liberal" movements in even the creationist religions (christianity, judaism, islam). speaking of the trust students naturally place in their highly educated college professors, he says:And i use that trust to effectively brainwash them. beginning with the puritans, many americans accepted the statement in the old testament that parents were to be the primary educators of their children. the superficial similarities between all apes and human beings are nothing compared to the differences in any practical or observable sense. lewin notes that:The overall effect is that molecular phylogenetics is by no means as straightforward as its pioneers believed. this is evidence for intelligent design and creation, not evolution. we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. no way does the idea of particles-to-people evolution meet the long-accepted criteria of a scientific theory., because of the lack of any direct evidence for evolution, evolutionists are increasingly turning to dubious circumstantial evidences, such as similarities in dna or other biochemical components of organisms as their "proof" that evolution is a scientific fact. this odd situation is briefly documented here by citing recent statements from leading evolutionists admitting their lack of proof. eminent scientific philosopher and ardent darwinian atheist michael ruse has even acknowledged that evolution is their religion! or, god could have created the possibility of life, but after this, it could leave this life to find its own ways. long, the rise of fishes (baltimore: john hopkins university press, 1995), p. of practical application of utopia in brave new world aldous huxley's brave new world illustrates the loss of morality wh. this includes all the ancient ethnic religions, as well as such modern world religions as buddhism, hinduism, and others, as well as the "liberal" movements in even the creationist religions (christianity, judaism, islam). it is their desire at all costs to explain the origin of everything without a creator. cows are more closely related to dolphins than they are to horses. indeed, for some time it seemed like creation of life in a test tube was within reach of experimental science. that being the case, biological processes also must operate in accordance with the laws of thermodynamics, and practically all biologists acknowledge this..This naive response to the entropy law is typical of evolutionary dissimulation. for all cases in which the specified conditions are met: the law of gravity. and punishment is considered by many to be the first of fyodor dostoevsky's great books. discoveries can muddle over attempts to construct simple evolutionary trees -- fossils from key periods are often not intermediates, but rather hodge podges of defining features of many different groups. key to this is that other species evolved from dinosaurs before the dinosaurs died out.. we all know that we must some day die; yet we continuously deny the forces at work. buy a custom essay on persuasive essaysneed a custom research paper on persuasive essays? you lengthy mathematical equations dealing with quantum and theoretical physics.

Resume for research manager

Evolution vs. Creation Research Paper Starter -

should refuse formal debates because they do more harm than good, but scientists still need to counter the creationist message. cows are more closely related to dolphins than they are to horses. we appeal -- without demonstration -- to evidence that supports our position. -- whether of dna, anatomy, embryonic development, or anything else -- are better explained in terms of creation by a common designer than by evolutionary relationship.. we cannot yet ascertain what was before this beginning, but we now know that there., these negative evidences against evolution are, at the same time, strong positive evidences for special creation..A professor in the department of biology at kansas state university says:Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such a hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic. atheistic nature of evolution is not only admitted, but insisted upon by most of the leaders of evolutionary thought. would agree that the real sparks fly when the contemporary creation/evolution debate in the united states moves into the realm of biology, particularly the area of human origins. that paleoanthropologists have to show for more than 100 years of digging are remains from fewer than 2000 of our ancestors. easier for humanity to accept that they will go to a safe haven and be rewarded for their lives. the idea was that parents would instill the moral and ethical values necessary for the happiness of the individual and the health of the nation. In my short life on this planet I have come to question things that many take upon blind faith. most people know of this theory because they were taught it in school. the byzantine dynamics of genome change has many other consequences for molecular phylogenetics, including the fact that different genes tell different stories. like the socalled "vestigial organs" in man, once considered as evidence of evolution but now all known to have specific uses, so the junk dna and pseudogenes most probably are specifically useful to the organism, whether or not those uses have yet been discovered by scientists. evolution is, indeed, the pseudoscientific basis of religious atheism, as ruse pointed out. how might biodeposits imply forethought on the creator’s part to help facilitate our high-tech human society? current leading evolutionist, jeffrey schwartz, professor of anthropology at the university of pittsburgh, has recently acknowledged that:. some of the problems with the evolutionary “family tree” for human origins. questionsthesis statement and compare contrast essay asked by anonymousgender stereotypes persuasive essay asked by anonymouswhich of the following would best work as the title of an explanatory essay?.It is well known by almost everyone in the scientific world today that such influential evolutionists as stephen jay gould and edward wilson of harvard, richard dawkins of england, william provine of cornell, and numerous other evolutionary spokesmen are dogmatic atheists. while it is true that local order can increase in an open system if certain conditions are met, the fact is that evolution does not meet those conditions..Later in the book he argued passionately that we must change "our pattern of religious thought from a god-centered to an evolution-centered pattern. simply saying that the earth is open to the energy from the sun says nothing about how that raw solar heat is converted into increased complexity in any system, open or closed. one “transitional form” that is cited as support for evolution (e. most frequently cited example of dna commonality is the human/chimpanzee "similarity," noting that chimpanzees have more than 90% of their dna the same as humans. difference between a scientific theory and an "everyday" theory based upon conjecture. the early 1990s, a group of creationists who supported the scientifically determined age of the universe diverged from traditional creationism and founded a movement called intelligent design (id). for if there was indeed a beginning and there was no. laws to that chaos so it would form itself into motion and order. morris, the long war against god (grand rapids, michigan: baker book house, 1989), 344 pp. it followed logically that the fossil record should be rife with examples of transitional forms leading from the less to the more evolved. discoveries can muddle over attempts to construct simple evolutionary trees -- fossils from key periods are often not intermediates, but rather hodge podges of defining features of many different groups. from mythos to mythos, all the ancient stories intend simply to give a poetic accounting. in the realm of cosmic evolution, our naturalistic scientists depart even further from experimental science than life scientists do, manufacturing a variety of evolutionary cosmologies from esoteric mathematics and metaphysical speculation. is becoming an intellectual and moral burden on our thought. creationists will argue that the universe is too ordered; the path of the planets (which. created the universe itself and all things in it would take the time to care for each and. systematically organized knowledge applicable in a relatively wide variety of. under pressure from these constituents, state legislatures in 15 states were considering bans on the teaching of evolution by 1925..Creationist students in scientific courses taught by evolutionist professors can testify to the frustrating reality of that statement..So how do evolutionists arrive at their evolutionary trees from fossils of oganisms which didn't change during their durations?. i felt it was important to include the added definitive statement to theory because it shows.

Doing a Report on Creation vs. Evolution | Answers in Genesis

Science Fair/Term Paper Ideas for Creation vs. Evolution

is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science."16 however, evidence is accumulating rapidly today that these supposedly useless genes do actually perform useful functions. the pertinent section of the act forbid the teaching of "any theory that denies the story of the divine creation of man as taught in the bible, and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals., because of the lack of any direct evidence for evolution, evolutionists are increasingly turning to dubious circumstantial evidences, such as similarities in dna or other biochemical components of organisms as their "proof" that evolution is a scientific fact..Summarizing the genetic data from humans, another author concludes, rather pessimistically:Even with dna sequence data, we have no direct access to the processes of evolution, so objective reconstruction of the vanished past can be achieved only by creative imagination. is a simple ineluctable truth that virtually all members of a biota remain basically stable, with minor fluctuations, throughout their durations. that is, for example, there are many varieties of dogs and many varieties of cats, but no "dats" or "cogs. it is their desire at all costs to explain the origin of everything without a creator. but this genetic evidence really doesn't help much either, for it contradicts fossil evidence. of filling in the gaps in the fossil record with so-called missing links, most paleontologists found themselves facing a situation in which there were only gaps in the fossil record, with no evidence of transformational intermediates between documented fossil species. in 1925, the state legislature in tennessee passed the butler act, a law banning the teaching of evolution in the state's public schools. that is merely an admission of ignorance and an object for fruitful research. in the end, scopes was found guilty of violating the butler act, a misdemeanor, and was fined 0. ideas listed here are more challenging than others, but they can be simplified to fit your student’s education level. the statements of evolutionists themselves, therefore, we have learned that there is no real scientific evidence for real evolution. current leading evolutionist, jeffrey schwartz, professor of anthropology at the university of pittsburgh, has recently acknowledged that:..Another way of saying "religion" is "worldview," the whole of reality. huxley called evolution a "religion without revelation" and wrote a book with that title (2nd edition, 1957). what prevailing model did scientists generally accept before the big bang? the very best this type of evidence is strictly circumstantial and can be explained just as well in terms of primeval creation supplemented in some cases by later deterioration, just as expected in the creation model. this was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today. the only observable evidence is that of very limited horizontal (or downward) changes within strict limits. supporters of intelligent design have been less dogmatic than old-line creationists about the nature of the designer, but they agree with creationists that human beings are not the end product of a solely naturalistic process of evolution. abundance of so-called "junk dna" in the genetic code also has been offered as a special type of evidence for evolution, especially those genes which they think have experienced mutations, sometimes called "pseudogenes. this is evidence for intelligent design and creation, not evolution. the fact that macroevolution (as distinct from microevolution) has never been observed would seem to exclude it from the domain of true science..Neither is there any clue as to how the one-celled organisms of the primordial world could have evolved into the vast array of complex multi-celled invertebrates of the cambrian period. of time, why can we not see the evolutionary process taking place today?.Later in the book he argued passionately that we must change "our pattern of religious thought from a god-centered to an evolution-centered pattern. some may prefer to call it humanism, and "new age" evolutionists place it in the context of some form of pantheism, but they all amount to the same thing. competent & proven writersoriginal writing — no plagiarismour papers are never resold or reused, periodsatisfaction guarantee — free unlimited revisionsclient-friendly money back guaranteetotal confidentiality & privacyguaranteed deadlines. natural selection cannot generate order, but can only "sieve out" the disorganizing mutations presented to it, thereby conserving the existing order, but never generating new order. a theory that explains everything might just as well be discarded since it has no real explanatory value. generally, it seems that major groups are not assembled in a simple linear or progressive manner -- new features are often "cut and pasted" on different groups at different times. these statements inadvertently show that evolution on any significant scale does not occur at present, and never happened in the past, and could never happen at all. there ought, therefore, to be a considerable number of true transitional structures preserved in the fossils -- after all, there are billions of non-transitional structures there!.Since both naturalism and humanism exclude god from science or any other active function in the creation or maintenance of life and the universe in general, it is very obvious that their position is nothing but atheism. since evolution is not a laboratory science, there is no way to test its validity, so all sorts of justso stories are contrived to adorn the textbooks. the importance of one natural disaster (earthquakes, hurricanes) in sustaining life on earth. one implication of this decision was that the federal government now had legal jurisdiction in creation/evolution cases. We all know that we must some day die; yet we continuously deny the forces at work inside ourselves, which want to search out the answers of what may or may not come after. it was and still is the case that, with the exception of dobzhansky's claim about a new species of fruit fly, the formation of a new species, by any mechanism, has never been observed. the overall amount of disorder in a closed system cannot decrease, local order within a larger system can increase even without the actions of an intelligent agent. jay gould, "the evolution of life," chapter 1 in evolution: facts and fallacies, ed.

Resume network engineer level 4

Essay on Persuasive Essays. Research Paper on Creation Vs

this scientist defends what he thinks is "natural processes' ability to increase complexity" by noting what he calls a "flaw" in "the arguments against evolution based on the second law of thermodynamics. of course, the other thing about evolution is that anything can be said because very little can be disproved. is becoming an intellectual and moral burden on our thought. all known cases of decreased entropy (or increased organization) in open systems involve a guiding program of some sort and one or more energy conversion mechanisms. broadcast live to the nation on radio, the trial brought to the surface many of the central themes of american democracy-majority rule, minority rights, separation of church and state, and concern for the moral fiber of the nation. generally, it seems that major groups are not assembled in a simple linear or progressive manner -- new features are often "cut and pasted" on different groups at different times. that is, for example, there are many varieties of dogs and many varieties of cats, but no "dats" or "cogs. whether atheism or humanism (or even pantheism), the purpose is to eliminate a personal god from any active role in the origin of the universe and all its components, including man..So how do evolutionists arrive at their evolutionary trees from fossils of oganisms which didn't change during their durations? we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. they have used this assortment of jawbones, teeth and fossilized scraps, together with molecular evidence from living species, to piece together a line of human descent going back 5 to 8 million years to the time when humans and chimpanzees diverged from a common ancestor. or rather, i should say, a point in time where there was indeed nothing. public school teachers who taught evolution ran the risk of breaking the law and losing their jobs. article discusses the legal issues surrounding the teaching of creationism and evolution in public school science. commonly answer the above criticism by claiming that evolution goes too slowly for us to see it happening today. takahata, "genetic perspective on the origin and history of humans," annual review of ecology and systematics (vol. the evolutionary worldview applies not only to the evolution of life, but even to that of the entire universe..There are many even more bizarre comparisons yielded by this approach..As far as ape/human intermediates are concerned, the same is true, although anthropologists have been eagerly searching for them for many years. others accept that evolution is fundamental to science and therefore important for students to study. in my book, the long war against god,32 i documented the fact that some form of evolution has been the pseudo-rationale behind every anti-creationist religion since the very beginning of history. creationists opposed evolution on scientific grounds, charging that it was more theory than fact, while others insisted that evolution-often called darwinism-undermined the authority of the bible, thus putting the nation's moral health in peril. evolutionists stress the absence of factual evidence in favor of god’s existence, point to fossils as a proof of the evolutionary process, and name the big bang as the reason of the universe’s appearance and further development..Neither is there any clue as to how the one-celled organisms of the primordial world could have evolved into the vast array of complex multi-celled invertebrates of the cambrian period. beginning in the early twentieth century, there were numerous attempts made by anti-evolutionists (later known as creationists) to ban the teaching of evolution in public schools. in the form of single-celled organisms called procaryotes, not amoebae. abundance of so-called "junk dna" in the genetic code also has been offered as a special type of evidence for evolution, especially those genes which they think have experienced mutations, sometimes called "pseudogenes. these factors, perhaps it was not very surprising that in some regions of the country, particularly in the south and the midwest, the educational authorities ran afoul of public opinion. of all ages frequently ask for ideas on how to tie in principles from rtb’s testable creation model to their research projects. these statements inadvertently show that evolution on any significant scale does not occur at present, and never happened in the past, and could never happen at all. in addition to roman catholicism, socialism, and higher biblical criticism, the authors of "the fundamentals" included darwinism as a menace to all that was good and holy (numbers, 2006). to many of you, the word prison might frighten you. in my book, the long war against god,32 i documented the fact that some form of evolution has been the pseudo-rationale behind every anti-creationist religion since the very beginning of history. they are, in fact, specific predictions based on the creation model of origins. a very bitter opponent of creation science, paleontologist, niles eldredge, has acknowledged that there is little, if any, evidence of evolutionary transitions in the fossil record. will provine at cornell university is another scientist who frankly acknowledges this. the scientific community there is a well known and accepted theory known as the "big bang. we not seen pictures from the space shuttle in orbit of the earth. a research paperwriting a general research paperwriting a capstone projectwriting a dissertationwriting a thesiswriting a research proposal. one can have a religious view that is compatible with evolution only if the religious view is indistinguishable from atheism. for additional resources, visit rtb’s website and click on “topics. but this genetic evidence really doesn't help much either, for it contradicts fossil evidence. this odd situation is briefly documented here by citing recent statements from leading evolutionists admitting their lack of proof. actual experimental evidence demonstrating true evolution (that is, macroevolution) is not "minimal.

Resume objective benefits coordinator

The Scientific Case Against Evolution | The Institute for Creation

but no one yet has been able to show that it actually has the ability to overcome this universal tendency, and that is the basic reason why there is still no bona fide proof of evolution, past or present. as we have seen, even evolutionists have to acknowledge that this type of real scientific evidence for evolution does not exist. the courts have consistently ruled that creationism and, later, intelligent design are not science and therefore do not belong in the public school science classroom. a number of evolutionists have even argued that dna itself is evidence for evolution since it is common to all organisms. there are no such evolutionary transitions that have ever been observed in the fossil record of the past; and the universal law of entropy seems to make it impossible on any significant scale. creationists also would anticipate that any "vertical changes" in organized complexity would be downward, since the creator (by definition) would create things correctly to begin with. commonly insist, however, that evolution is a fact anyhow, and that the conflict is resolved by noting that the earth is an "open system," with the incoming energy from the sun able to sustain evolution throughout the geological ages in spite of the natural tendency of all systems to deteriorate toward disorganization. this question, i have chosen to discuss the following three works of literature:Crime . would obviously predict ubiquitous gaps between created kinds, though with many varieties capable of arising within each kind, in order to enable each basic kind to cope with changing environments without becoming extinct. huxley, essays of a humanist (new york: harper and row, 1964), p. eminent scientific philosopher and ardent darwinian atheist michael ruse has even acknowledged that evolution is their religion! creationists also would anticipate that any "vertical changes" in organized complexity would be downward, since the creator (by definition) would create things correctly to begin with. the behaviors (fire-building, toolmaking) and key pieces of evidence (bones, tools, dna) related to a major hominid species (neanderthals, homo habilis, homo erectus). who would explain to you about the law of probability, the theory of relativity, and. scott is director of the anti-creationist organization euphemistically named, the national center for science education. a time in which different laws and order applied; creationism attempts to deny this existence. the law of increasing entropy -- also known as the second law of thermodynamics -- stipulates that all systems in the real world tend to go "downhill," as it were, toward disorganization and decreased complexity. to analyze, predict, or otherwise explain the nature or behavior of a specified set of. even dogmatic evolutionist gould admits that:The cambrian explosion was the most remarkable and puzzling event in the history of life. at issue was the constitutionality of a 1928 law passed by the arkansas legislature to ban the teaching of evolution in the state's public schools. investigators have proposed many hypotheses, but evidence in favor of each of them is fragmentary at best. bryan had pushed for the passage of the butler act because he believed that darwinism led to immorality by sanctioning the domination of the strong over the weak (larson, 1997). concept of evolution as a form of religion is not new. two million years ago humanity began to show its evolution in the order of the. mutations are not "organizing" mechanisms, but disorganizing (in accord with the second law). they used to claim that the real evidence for evolution was in the fossil record of the past, but the fact is that the billions of known fossils do not include a single unequivocal transitional form with transitional structures in the process of evolving. anti-darwinian sentiment was made even stronger by the events of world war i. that paleoanthropologists have to show for more than 100 years of digging are remains from fewer than 2000 of our ancestors. we only introduce arguments and evidence that supports the currently accepted theories and omit or gloss over any evidence to the contrary. real issue is, as noted before, whether there is any observable evidence that evolution is occurring now or has ever occurred in the past..The author of this quote is referring primarily to physics, but he does point out that the second law is "independent of details of models. the problem of intellectual freedom became more and more acute, and for about forty years many southern states banned the teaching of evolution., you ask that if this is the case, and humanity has evolved from primates in such a short. gee is adamant that all the popular stories about how the first amphibians conquered the dry land, how the birds developed wings and feathers for flying, how the dinosaurs went extinct, and how humans evolved from apes are just products of our imagination, driven by prejudices and preconceptions. it is also plausible that we just have a desire to quench the thirst for knowledge that. something, of course, is the religion of evolutionary humanism, and that is what the leaders of evolutionary humanism are trying to do today. why is it important that earth reside in a spiral galaxy?" such variation is often called microevolution, and these minor horizontal (or downward) changes occur fairly often, but such changes are not true "vertical" evolution. therefore, the debates between the evolutionists and the creationists seem to be far from ending. an essaywriting an evaluation essaywriting an analysis essaywriting a summary essaywriting a reflective essaywriting a definition essaywriting a cause and effect essaywriting a descriptive essaywriting a critical essaywriting an expository essaywriting a persuasive essaywriting a narrative essay. we appeal -- without demonstration -- to evidence that supports our position. morris, the long war against god (grand rapids, michigan: baker book house, 1989), 344 pp. at the same time, creationists appeal to the fact that though god has not yet been heard or seen, a multitude of indirect evidence exists of its existence. -- whether of dna, anatomy, embryonic development, or anything else -- are better explained in terms of creation by a common designer than by evolutionary relationship.

Evolution and Creationism - Opposing views of the scientific method

if it were a real process, evolution should still be occurring, and there should be many "transitional" forms that we could observe. far as the twentieth century is concerned, the leading evolutionist is generally considered to be sir julian huxley, primary architect of modern neo-darwinism. the fact that macroevolution (as distinct from microevolution) has never been observed would seem to exclude it from the domain of true science..Since both naturalism and humanism exclude god from science or any other active function in the creation or maintenance of life and the universe in general, it is very obvious that their position is nothing but atheism./term paper: creation vs evolutionessay, term paper, research paper:  persuasive essayssee all college papers and term papers on persuasive essays. however, as noted above by roger lewin, this is often inconsistent with, not only the fossil record, but also with the comparative morphology of the creatures. compare and contrast essay is a form of academic writing that is built around an examination of at least two items. a formulation describing a relationship observed to be invariable between or among. article discusses the legal issues surrounding the teaching of creationism and evolution in public school science classrooms in the united states. an evolutionist reviewing a recent book by another (but more critical) evolutionist, says:We cannot identify ancestors or "missing links," and we cannot devise testable theories to explain how particular episodes of evolution came about. as for myself, i cannot believe in a being which created a universe. of all, the lack of a case for evolution is clear from the fact that no one has ever seen it happen. this paper touches upon many scientific terms, i feel that in order for the reader to. fact is that evolutionists believe in evolution because they want to. definitions to law and hypothesis are both added for a further understanding of these. floors and eventually to more open country was associated with the development of many..Anthropologists supplemented their extremely fragmentary fossil evidence with dna and other types of molecular genetic evidence from living animals to try to work out an evolutionary scenario that will fit. if it were a real process, evolution should still be occurring, and there should be many "transitional" forms that we could observe. lewin also mentions just a few typical contradictions yielded by this type of evidence in relation to more traditional darwinian "proofs. therefore, he speculates that rna may have come first, but then he still has to admit that:The precise events giving rise to the rna world remain unclear. ourselves, which want to search out the answers of what may or may not come after. they used to claim that the real evidence for evolution was in the fossil record of the past, but the fact is that the billions of known fossils do not include a single unequivocal transitional form with transitional structures in the process of evolving. the law of increasing entropy -- also known as the second law of thermodynamics -- stipulates that all systems in the real world tend to go "downhill," as it were, toward disorganization and decreased complexity. far as the twentieth century is concerned, the leading evolutionist is generally considered to be sir julian huxley, primary architect of modern neo-darwinism. closing this survey of the scientific case against evolution (and, therefore, for creation), the reader is reminded again that all quotations in the article are from doctrinaire evolutionists. claim that evolution is a scientific fact, but they almost always lose scientific debates with creationist scientists. accordingly, most evolutionists now decline opportunities for scientific debates, preferring instead to make unilateral attacks on creationists." therefore, he concluded that "we must construct something to take its place. fact is that evolutionists believe in evolution because they want to. commonly insist, however, that evolution is a fact anyhow, and that the conflict is resolved by noting that the earth is an "open system," with the incoming energy from the sun able to sustain evolution throughout the geological ages in spite of the natural tendency of all systems to deteriorate toward disorganization. the same time, both sides seem to forget one point of view that does not necessarily contradict another one. a multitude of worlds in a rather short period of time then deigns to lower itself into..A professor in the department of biology at kansas state university says:Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such a hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic. second, even though a viewpoint was held by a majority of parents and pastors did not necessarily mean that it represented a scholarly consensus on the topic. the creationists claim, belief in modern evolution makes atheists of people. whether atheism or humanism (or even pantheism), the purpose is to eliminate a personal god from any active role in the origin of the universe and all its components, including man., "a view from kansas on the evolution debates," nature (vol. however, with the industrial revolution of the 19th century requiring more men and women to join the workforce, the education of americans was increasingly left to public schools and state boards of education.—as well as atheists—state, despite the enormous scientific and technological progress, despite ultra-sensitive observation systems, such as orbital telescopes, there are still no factual evidence of god’s existence. the transition from spineless invertebrates to the first backboned fishes is still shrouded in mystery, and many theories abound. the great differences between organisms are of greater significance than the similarities, and evolutionism has no explanation for these if they all are assumed to have had the same ancestor..Another way of saying "religion" is "worldview," the whole of reality. good question to ask is: why are all observable evolutionary changes either horizontal and trivial (so-called microevolution) or downward toward deterioration and extinction? orgel, "the origin of life on the earth," scientific american (vol.

Mutations: The Raw Material for Evolution? | The Institute for

of writing processinformation sourcesediting tipswriting a final draftwriting a second draftwriting a first draftwriting a thesis statementintroduction to researchbrainstorming tips., evolutionists, having largely become disenchanted with the fossil record as a witness for evolution because of the ubiquitous gaps where there should be transitions, recently have been promoting dna and other genetic evidence as proof of evolution. they have used this assortment of jawbones, teeth and fossilized scraps, together with molecular evidence from living species, to piece together a line of human descent going back 5 to 8 million years to the time when humans and chimpanzees diverged from a common ancestor. creationists, in their turn, stress there are no intermediate links between species in found fossils, consider complexity and diversity of nature to be an indirect evidence of god’s existence, and refer to the second law of thermodynamics to argue against the big bang theory. does the evidence show a gradual evolution from lesser species to modern humans or does it show a sudden appearance? in the view of many educated americans, these minorities should enjoy full and equal protection under the law (larson, 1997)..The author of this frank statement is richard lewontin of harvard. each side introduced substantial arguments to support their claims, but at the same time, the counter-arguments of each opponent were also credible. no way does the idea of particles-to-people evolution meet the long-accepted criteria of a scientific theory. claim that evolution is a scientific fact, but they almost always lose scientific debates with creationist scientists..Creationist students in scientific courses taught by evolutionist professors can testify to the frustrating reality of that statement. natural selection cannot generate order, but can only "sieve out" the disorganizing mutations presented to it, thereby conserving the existing order, but never generating new order. it was and still is the case that, with the exception of dobzhansky's claim about a new species of fruit fly, the formation of a new species, by any mechanism, has never been observed.. a tentative explanation that accounts for a set of facts and can be tested by further. science, religion, philosophy, and especially politics, the debate between creationism and evolution in the united states has been anything but boring. essays: creation vs evolution, you can hire a professional writer here to write you a high quality authentic essay. seven-hundred or eight-hundred million years ago life was first known on this. it is instructive to recall that the philosophers of the early humanistic movement debated as to which term more adequately described their position: humanism or naturalism. in principle, it may be barely conceivable that evolution could occur in open systems, in spite of the tendency of all systems to disintegrate sooner or later. long, the rise of fishes (baltimore: john hopkins university press, 1995), p. more often is the argument used that similar dna structures in two different organisms proves common evolutionary ancestry. a number of evolutionists have even argued that dna itself is evidence for evolution since it is common to all organisms. unfortunately, such experiments have not progressed much further than the original prototype, leaving us with a sour aftertaste from the primordial soup. a very bitter opponent of creation science, paleontologist, niles eldredge, has acknowledged that there is little, if any, evidence of evolutionary transitions in the fossil record. even dogmatic evolutionist gould admits that:The cambrian explosion was the most remarkable and puzzling event in the history of life. today, we take for granted that the world is indeed round, for. huxley called evolution a "religion without revelation" and wrote a book with that title (2nd edition, 1957). an evolutionist reviewing a recent book by another (but more critical) evolutionist, says:We cannot identify ancestors or "missing links," and we cannot devise testable theories to explain how particular episodes of evolution came about. of filling in the gaps in the fossil record with so-called missing links, most paleontologists found themselves facing a situation in which there were only gaps in the fossil record, with no evidence of transformational intermediates between documented fossil species..It is well known by almost everyone in the scientific world today that such influential evolutionists as stephen jay gould and edward wilson of harvard, richard dawkins of england, william provine of cornell, and numerous other evolutionary spokesmen are dogmatic atheists. evolutionists believe that humans are big-brained mammals who not only share a common ancestor with chimpanzees, but are related organically to all other life forms on the planet. actual experimental evidence demonstrating true evolution (that is, macroevolution) is not "minimal. 2, question 1 - is there or is there not such a thing as crime? It is far easier for humanity to accept that they will go to a safe haven and be rewarded for their lives with pleasures and fantasies of an unfathomable scale than to question the existence of a supposed omnipote, research paperThe scientific case against evolution. respect to the origin of life, a leading researcher in this field, leslie orgel, after noting that neither proteins nor nucleic acids could have arisen without the other, concludes:And so, at first glance, one might have to conclude that life could never, in fact, have originated by chemical means. how did the moon collision change the earth and prepare it for life? does a creature with both fish-like features and land animal features mean it’s a transitional form and, therefore, evolution is true?.The author of this frank statement is richard lewontin of harvard. indeed, for some time it seemed like creation of life in a test tube was within reach of experimental science. that is merely an admission of ignorance and an object for fruitful research. his discovery gave a huge boost to the scientific investigation of the origin of life. they say all fossil findings are already fully formed, and appear to have not changed much over time; in other words, they remained in a so-called stasis condition (geological society of america). even ernst mayr, the dean of living evolutionists, longtime professor of biology at harvard, who has alleged that evolution is a "simple fact," nevertheless agrees that it is an "historical science" for which "laws and experiments are inappropriate techniques"2 by which to explain it. concept of evolution as a form of religion is not new.

Free creation vs. evolution Essays and Papers

Evolution Versus Creation Research Papers

evolution is, indeed, the pseudoscientific basis of religious atheism, as ruse pointed out. only substantial creation/evolution case decided by the warren court was epperson v. main scientific reason why there is no evidence for evolution in either the present or the past (except in the creative imagination of evolutionary scientists) is because one of the most fundamental laws of nature precludes it.. something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or investigation; an assumption. with tension growing between majority rule and individual rights, the teaching of evolution became a flash point. even doctrinaire-atheistic evolutionist richard dawkins admits that atheism cannot be proved to be true. little rock high school teacher susan epperson asked the state courts for a ruling on the legality of the law, and the case was appealed all the way to the u. categoryselect question categoryquestionswriting assignmentsplanning and organizationresearchstylegrammar and punctuationother question tagsyour question * question detailsyour email * or login to submit question. lewin also mentions just a few typical contradictions yielded by this type of evidence in relation to more traditional darwinian "proofs. analysis papers / critical analysis of practical application of utopia in brave. elephant shrew, consigned by traditional analysis to the order insectivores . moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a divine foot in the door..They must believe in evolution, therefore, in spite of all the evidence, not because of it., "a view from kansas on the evolution debates," nature (vol. respect to the origin of life, a leading researcher in this field, leslie orgel, after noting that neither proteins nor nucleic acids could have arisen without the other, concludes:And so, at first glance, one might have to conclude that life could never, in fact, have originated by chemical means. however, as noted above by roger lewin, this is often inconsistent with, not only the fossil record, but also with the comparative morphology of the creatures..The entire history of evolution from the evolution of life from non-life to the evolution of vertebrates from invertebrates to the evolution of man from the ape is strikingly devoid of intermediates: the links are all missing in the fossil record, just as they are in the present world. the transition from spineless invertebrates to the first backboned fishes is still shrouded in mystery, and many theories abound. most frequently cited example of dna commonality is the human/chimpanzee "similarity," noting that chimpanzees have more than 90% of their dna the same as humans. the statements of evolutionists themselves, therefore, we have learned that there is no real scientific evidence for real evolution. one major design feature of the solar system that allows complex life to exist on earth..They must believe in evolution, therefore, in spite of all the evidence, not because of it..There are many even more bizarre comparisons yielded by this approach..Once again, we emphasize that evolution is not science, evolutionists' tirades notwithstanding. will provine at cornell university is another scientist who frankly acknowledges this. gee is adamant that all the popular stories about how the first amphibians conquered the dry land, how the birds developed wings and feathers for flying, how the dinosaurs went extinct, and how humans evolved from apes are just products of our imagination, driven by prejudices and preconceptions."16 however, evidence is accumulating rapidly today that these supposedly useless genes do actually perform useful functions. moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a divine foot in the door. thus, arguments and evidences against evolution are, at the same time, positive evidences for creation. ernst mayr, for example, says that:Darwinism rejects all supernatural phenomena and causations. evolutionists in america are often known as darwinists, after the british naturalist charles darwin (1809-1882), who proposed in the origin of species (1859) that all life on earth evolved through evolution by natural selection-an unguided process that "selects" as the fittest those individuals that leave the most offspring." unfortunately, two generations of students have been taught that stanley miller's famous experiment on a gaseous mixture, practically proved the naturalistic origin of life. there are two kinds of compare and contrast essays: one where you focus more on the similarities of chosen items, and one that contrasts. sir charles darwin introduced his original theory about the origins of species and evolution, humanity’s faith in god, which remained undisputed for hundreds of years, had reeled., this did not imply that parents and pastors wanted their children to be taught in an amoral environment." besides, practically all evolutionary biologists are reductionists -- that is, they insist that there are no "vitalist" forces in living systems, and that all biological processes are explicable in terms of physics and chemistry. core of the humanistic philosophy is naturalism -- the proposition that the natural world proceeds according to its own internal dynamics, without divine or supernatural control or guidance, and that we human beings are creations of that process. ernst mayr, for example, says that:Darwinism rejects all supernatural phenomena and causations. wanderers, or great wanderers in early grecian society) is too ordered, too perfect. debate between creation and evolution takes place within a fiercely religious cultural context. while it is true that local order can increase in an open system if certain conditions are met, the fact is that evolution does not meet those conditions. in the realm of cosmic evolution, our naturalistic scientists depart even further from experimental science than life scientists do, manufacturing a variety of evolutionary cosmologies from esoteric mathematics and metaphysical speculation. can refute this with is the fact that relativity and gravity, are also theories. americans struggled to make sense of the fact that germany, the most scientifically and intellectually advanced nation in the world, could draw the world into a global conflict.

attempted to tell us that the world is a flat surface. there is no reason whatever why the creator could not or would not use the same type of genetic code based on dna for all his created life forms. would obviously predict ubiquitous gaps between created kinds, though with many varieties capable of arising within each kind, in order to enable each basic kind to cope with changing environments without becoming extinct. evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion -- a full-fledged alternative to christianity, with meaning and morality . very sort of thing is heretical in its very essence. good question to ask is: why are all observable evolutionary changes either horizontal and trivial (so-called microevolution) or downward toward deterioration and extinction? the byzantine dynamics of genome change has many other consequences for molecular phylogenetics, including the fact that different genes tell different stories. darrow was opposed in the courtroom by three-time democratic presidential candidate william jennings bryan, a well-known orator who supported the right of the majority to mandate what public schools taught. the 1930s the creationists shifted their focus from state education boards and had substantial success in influencing local school boards to either ban or water down the teaching of evolution in various school districts. creationism; darwinism; evolution; intelligent design (id); freedom of religion; religious fundamentalists; scopes trial; separation of church & state. i know of no human which has lived for two-million years. together in such a way as to be able to support life. it is a belief passionately defended by the scientific establishment, despite the lack of any observable scientific evidence for macroevolution (that is, evolution from one distinct kind of organism into another). milliseconds of existence, we cannot prove anything before that point at this time..Therefore, they must believe it, and that makes it a religion. the great differences between organisms are of greater significance than the similarities, and evolutionism has no explanation for these if they all are assumed to have had the same ancestor. my short life on this planet i have come to question things that many take upon blind. traditional battle lines in the creation/evolution debate have been clear enough. analysis papers / critical analysis of 'identity risis', and 'oppositional dr. the very best this type of evidence is strictly circumstantial and can be explained just as well in terms of primeval creation supplemented in some cases by later deterioration, just as expected in the creation model. grasp the content i must first define three words: theory, law, and hypothesis. creation of the universe by scientific means is a world-wide theory that many creationists. something, of course, is the religion of evolutionary humanism, and that is what the leaders of evolutionary humanism are trying to do today..The author of this quote is referring primarily to physics, but he does point out that the second law is "independent of details of models. core of the humanistic philosophy is naturalism -- the proposition that the natural world proceeds according to its own internal dynamics, without divine or supernatural control or guidance, and that we human beings are creations of that process. the overall amount of disorder in a closed system cannot decrease, local order within a larger system can increase even without the actions of an intelligent agent. in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated commitment to materialism. unfortunately, such experiments have not progressed much further than the original prototype, leaving us with a sour aftertaste from the primordial soup. a written exerpt from a letter about the cremation of his mother, george. nowlog inlive chatcontact supportprice schedulediscountsformat specificationsclient testimonialsprivacy policyterms of serviceaffiliate program. speaking for the majority of the court, supreme court justice abe fortas ruled, "the. it is possible god could have planned everything, prepared certain semimanufactures for the universe’s development, and then just pressed the “start” button, letting its ideas self-embody, watching the results. should refuse formal debates because they do more harm than good, but scientists still need to counter the creationist message. mutations are not "organizing" mechanisms, but disorganizing (in accord with the second law). the evolutionists themselves, to all intents and purposes, have shown that evolutionism is not science, but religious faith in atheism. the battle over creationism and evolution in the public schools became a subject for litigation. the answer given in popular books such as vernon kellogg's "headquarters nights" (1917) and benjamin kidd's "science of power" (1918) was that german militarism was directly linked to the german leadership's support of darwinism. his discovery gave a huge boost to the scientific investigation of the origin of life. a theory that explains everything might just as well be discarded since it has no real explanatory value..Even those who believe in rapid evolution recognize that a considerable number of generations would be required for one distinct "kind" to evolve into another more complex kind. but no one yet has been able to show that it actually has the ability to overcome this universal tendency, and that is the basic reason why there is still no bona fide proof of evolution, past or present. on the other side are evolutionists, many of them professional scientists, who believe that the universe has unfolded over billions of years through an unguided, natural process, called evolution. evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion -- a full-fledged alternative to christianity, with meaning and morality . they are, in fact, specific predictions based on the creation model of origins.

religious fundamentalists view evolution as both unscientific and amoral and advocate its replacement with a faith-based account of the origin of man. in principle, it may be barely conceivable that evolution could occur in open systems, in spite of the tendency of all systems to disintegrate sooner or later. tennessee-or the "scopes monkey trial," as it has become known to history-was an instant media sensation. is important that you thoroughly read the above definitions or you will be at a. therefore, he speculates that rna may have come first, but then he still has to admit that:The precise events giving rise to the rna world remain unclear. besides these, many other compromise variants can be suggested; anyways, it is ridiculous in the debate about the most complex and incomprehensible subject in the world if only two points of view exist. since evolution is not a laboratory science, there is no way to test its validity, so all sorts of justso stories are contrived to adorn the textbooks. this was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today. into our minds, as children that a belief of a force, or supernatural entity, which is all. dover area school district (2005) and ongoing debate among the members of the texas board of education about the inclusion of both debate of evolutionary theories and information regarding intelligent design. as we have seen, even evolutionists have to acknowledge that this type of real scientific evidence for evolution does not exist..This naive response to the entropy law is typical of evolutionary dissimulation. your donation helps our ministry take this life-changing message to skeptics around the world while encouraging and strengthening the faith of christians. in practically all ancient cultures, the biblical included,The universe was thought of as an original chaos into which order had been introduced by a. does not touch base upon what came before the chaos. however, while humanity did evolve from a primate ancestor, it. even ernst mayr, the dean of living evolutionists, longtime professor of biology at harvard, who has alleged that evolution is a "simple fact," nevertheless agrees that it is an "historical science" for which "laws and experiments are inappropriate techniques"2 by which to explain it." besides, practically all evolutionary biologists are reductionists -- that is, they insist that there are no "vitalist" forces in living systems, and that all biological processes are explicable in terms of physics and chemistry. based on consistent experience or results: the law of supply and demand; the..Since there is no real scientific evidence that evolution is occurring at present or ever occurred in the past, it is reasonable to conclude that evolution is not a fact of science, as many claim..As far as ape/human intermediates are concerned, the same is true, although anthropologists have been eagerly searching for them for many years. takahata, "genetic perspective on the origin and history of humans," annual review of ecology and systematics (vol. chat & 24/7 customer supportall academic and professional subjectsall difficulty levels12pt times new roman font, double spaced, 1 inch marginsthe fastest turnaround in the industryfully documented research — free bibliography guaranteed. of how the order of events, and the laws which created, ordered and structured the. elephant shrew, consigned by traditional analysis to the order insectivores ..Once again, we emphasize that evolution is not science, evolutionists' tirades notwithstanding. for many religious americans who had lost sons and fathers on the killing fields of europe, this was proof enough that the scourge of darwinism must not be exported to the united states. that evolution, according to darwin, was in a continual state of motion . often come with the argument about fossil findings serving as a proof of the evolutionary process; bones of such creatures as dinosaurs, or the remains of even more ancient beings found by archaeologists are much older than the age of our world according to the bible. compare and contrast essay example: After Sir Charles Darwin had introduced his original theory about the origins of species and evolution, humanity’s faith in God had reeled. orgel, "the origin of life on the earth," scientific american (vol. is a simple ineluctable truth that virtually all members of a biota remain basically stable, with minor fluctuations, throughout their durations..Since there is no real scientific evidence that evolution is occurring at present or ever occurred in the past, it is reasonable to conclude that evolution is not a fact of science, as many claim. for this latter group it was time to get back to religious fundamentals, and an influential book series by that title ("the fundamentals," 1910-1915) gave the world a new term: fundamentalism. the former unity fractured into evolutionists, who believed life as we see it today developed from smaller and more primitive organisms, and creationists, who kept believing life in all its diversity was created by a higher entity. american civil liberties union (aclu), which had been founded in 1920 to defend the civil rights of minorities, took up the case of dayton, tennessee, football coach john t. there ought, therefore, to be a considerable number of true transitional structures preserved in the fossils -- after all, there are billions of non-transitional structures there! why might it be considered powerful evidence for supernatural design?" unfortunately, two generations of students have been taught that stanley miller's famous experiment on a gaseous mixture, practically proved the naturalistic origin of life. it is a belief passionately defended by the scientific establishment, despite the lack of any observable scientific evidence for macroevolution (that is, evolution from one distinct kind of organism into another). real issue is, as noted before, whether there is any observable evidence that evolution is occurring now or has ever occurred in the past. is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. this "creative hand" structured the order of the universe out of chaos and applied. simply saying that the earth is open to the energy from the sun says nothing about how that raw solar heat is converted into increased complexity in any system, open or closed.

Thesis on impact of digital technology on home recording


How it works

STEP 1 Submit your order

STEP 2 Pay

STEP 3 Approve preview

STEP 4 Download


Why These Services?

Premium

Quality

Satisfaction

Guaranteed

Complete

Confidentiality

Secure

Payments


For security reasons we do not
store any credit card information.