In Response to an Atheist

25 September 2008

In Response to an Atheist

In response to Mr. H.J. McCloskey, self proclaimed atheist, who wrote, “On Being an Atheist,” I would like to dispute his claims, from evolution, regarding the teleological view, to his claim that it is more comforting being an atheist. I would like to provide various examples to back up my counterarguments, as I feel that they provide very good evidence to contest Mr. McCloskey’s claims. Though no proof can be provided to disprove his points, I will do my best to diminish his positions and make them look less noteworthy.
Speaking of theists, Mr. McCloskey claims, “They feel that there must be a first cause, a Creator, who brought everything into being, and who now ‘holds the whole world in his hands.’” He then argues that they don’t think far enough nor hard enough about the problem of an uncaused cause, who must be a necessary existing being, to see that this argument is less conclusive than it seems at first sight. This is his address to the cosmological argument, which says there is a first cause. I believe I can answer him with Scripture, and a little science.
Colossians 1:15-17 states:
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in Heaven, and that are in Earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Scientists have discovered a substance called laminin, which literally is the glue to all tissue. It is actually a protein that holds the body together. Laminins are described as “components of the basement membrane” of blood vessels, a thin mesh-like structure beneath the cells of the blood vessel surface (epithelium)” (Van). They contain three chains – the alpha, the beta and the gamma and attach to cells, interceding the connection, movement and orderliness of cells into tissues in embryonic development (Bioinformatic Harvester). Why is this significant in response to McCloskey’s statement? The reason is that laminin is in the shape of a cross, testifying to the existence of Jesus Christ, His creation and His holding them together, as Colossians 1:17 says, “by him all things consist.”
The above, as I said earlier, is not proof of God’s existence, but certainly is an amazing discovery, which persuades the cosmological argument to look at the reality for the need of an uncaused cause. Thomas Aquinas, Samuel Clark, Richard Taylor and Gottfried Leibniz all claimed that “God is the necessary cause of the existence of the universe both now and as long as the universe has existed, even it has always existed. God is the reason why there is a universe at all, regardless of whether the universe is young, old or infinitely old” (Evans 52). God is a necessary being, who has created everything, and by Him all things do exist. In 2nd Peter 3:10 it states, “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the Earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” Scientists know that if atoms are not contained and held together by an electromagnetic charge, that they will explode (Quantum AetherDynamics Institute). There is a theory that when Jesus comes back with all His great power, thunder and lightening that He will essentially set off an EMP (electromagnetic pulse), which will leave the world in the “Dark Ages” again (Fox). If this is true, and Jesus can do this when He comes to gather the saints, then certainly, He can be the source that holds the electromagnetic band that surrounds the Earth, which holds all the atoms together. When He comes for the gathering, it should be a mimic of what Y2K was thought to be, but when He returns for His Second Coming, He will let go of the electromagnetic charge completely, which is a good evidence to prove 2nd Peter 3:10.
We must also remember that the theory of no cause would cancel out the theory of theory of ex nihilo nihil fit, which states that from nothing nothing is produced (Merriam Webster). John Anning says, “If there were ever a time when absolutely nothing existed; no space, no molecules, no light, no gravity, not a hint of anything, absolutely nothing, what would we have now? - Absolutely nothing!” because of the ex nihilo nihil fit theory (Anning). He goes on to say, “To violate this fundamental law of reason is to violate all truth as we know it. If it were possible for something to come from nothing, (self created) it would have to be, before it is” (Anning).
McCloskey also questions the belief that there is an all-powerful and perfect God and goes on to call Him malevolent and perhaps, even bungling. Again, this cannot be proven, as God wants us to live by faith. Jesus told the Disciple Thomas, “Because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed” in John 20:29, and so God does not provide irrefutable proof of His existence in any way, yet those who have eyes to see and ears to hear can perceive and acknowledge that He is all-powerful and perfect. Many of us have seen miracles, which surpass the laws of nature. Certainly, they are testimonies for His power, but we can see His perfection in creation. The entire world is an ecosystem, which works together perfectly. There is the food chain, which provides nourishment for all creatures and prevents over population in the animal species. Plants take in carbon dioxide and turn it into oxygen, and mammals breathe oxygen and replace it with carbon dioxide for the benefits of the plants. There are animals, which are created for specific purposes, such as buzzards and vultures, which keep the Earth clean, while shrimp, catfish and other species clean the seas and ponds. The bees pollinate our crops, which provide us our food; all the while God sends rain to hydrate them. Every resource that we can think of is at our fingertips, and we have everything necessary to survive within our sights. Nothing on Earth is lacking, and this testifies for a perfect creation and a perfect Creator.
Another good point that could be introduced here is the story of atheist, Whittaker Chambers. He was a member of the Communist Party, and was a spy for the Soviet Union. One morning he was sitting by his daughter as she ate in her highchair, and began to examine the intricacy of her ear, and realize that only a perfect God could make such a perfect appendage, and he thought, “No, those ears were not created by any chance coming together of atoms in nature. They could have been created only by immense design” (Thompson). God certainly knows how to show His glory in His design, with attention grabbers such as this example, but it is up to man to open his heart, acknowledge and reciprocate with the wisdom, which God gives to those who ask.
Mr. McCloskey also treats God as a limited being. Of course, Christians acknowledge that God is not limited, in that He, as Christ – God incarnated, rose from the dead. To raise anyone from the dead is a feat of unsurpassed capability; however, to prove this to an atheist is another story. This theory diminishes Him and perhaps moves His power to be equal with nature, to make Him an impersonal and finite being that is a product of pantheism or, maybe more appropriately, panentheism. God is supernatural though, and is above nature worship, as He is the one that created nature, as discussed above. This point made by McCloskey is equated to the question, “Can God create a rock so heavy He can’t lift it?” To ask this question suggests that “God is such an all-powerful being that He can do anything, even fail” (Deem). Deem continues to say, “This is like saying that since God is all-powerful He can be not all-powerful.” Mr. McCloskey’s argument here is weak.
Yet, I believe that McCloskey’s real reason in calling God a limited being was implied in his statement, “It is that the world we know is a world containing a great deal of evil, in particular, avoidable suffering endured by innocent humans and animals.” Mr. McCloskey seems to forget or ignore that we live in a world, which has been cursed because of sin. The curse affects everything from humans, to animals, to plants, to the Earth itself – which has become overgrown with weeds if no one is around to keep it up. For punishment of mans’ sins, and Mr. McCloskey does acknowledge that there is evil, which is sin – and man must suffer. There is no man without sin, and most of the suffering that man endures is brought about by consequences of his own transgressions. Of course, there is suffering of the innocent, but God has provided a way out of that in His own time, by offering His Son, whom if He is accepted, will wash away all tears and suffering. We must remember, just as Socrates did – this world is a mere image or pattern after something better above. Until we reach that reward, nothing is perfect and suffering must be encountered and dealt with, but God has promised that nothing will be laid on us that we cannot bare. However, this whole scenario has reminded me of an interview with Ann Graham Lotz, which she once did on The Early Show with Jane Clayson. According to Breakthechain.org, when Jane Clayson asked her about the September 11th attack on the World Trade Center, she replied:
For years we have told God we didn't want Him in our schools. We didn't want Him in our government and we didn't want Him in our finances. And God was being a perfect gentleman in doing just what we asked Him to do. We need to make up our minds - do we want God or do we not want Him. We cannot just ask Him in when disaster strikes.
This is as good of an explanation about how the world is an evil place, without citing the limitation of a Creator and His ability to create a perfect world as one can get, and, in turn, places the limitations on the creation.
In addition, pain is a response, which tells us that we are in danger. For instance, if one is cooking a meal and accidentally touches the burner on the oven with her hand, then her nerves send a message to the brain, which tells her to remove the hand from the burner before it is burnt worse. Pain is a necessary reflex, which keeps us from becoming hurt worse. Mr. McCloskey argues that if God were perfect that there would be no pain, but pain only goes to show how good He is, in giving us such a perfect warning system as it is. Usually, when the body has pain without having an accident, it points to a more serious condition within the body, such as an infection. Pain is God’s alarm system, in which we know to acquire help in order to maintain our health. And of course, pain does assist in spiritual growth in these circumstances, as when we do experience pain we usually pray, and when God answers prayers it goes to build faith and edify one’s belief.
Regarding the teleological argument, McCloskey next focuses his attention on evolution, and states, “One can reject the argument from design by rejecting its premise, that there is evidence of design and purpose,” but one can turn this around and reject the premise of evolution based on what we know about the evolutionists’ claims. First of all, one example that we can use is the whale. Some whales have a pair of bones embedded in their tissue to strengthen the pelvic wall and act as an anchor (Wieland). Yet evolutionists claim that the bone is a vestigial organ, and is even a remnant of a leg – proof that the whale is about to evolve into some type of land animal. A second great example is that of the archaeopteryx, which evolutionists claim is a transitional species between a reptile and a bird. The bird has teeth and so the evolutionists declare that is a characteristic carried on from the reptile family, of which it evolved. The fact is that many bird fossils also possessed teeth (Wieland). Another claim that the evolutionists use to try to make the archaeopteryx a missing link is the fact that it has claws on its wings. This claim has been disproved, however, because there are modern birds, which have claws, such as the touraco (Lyons). Scientists have tried to make many links between different species stand up to their theory, but all of them have been shot down. This dilutes McCloskey’s statement, “If no one knows anything about evolution it is easy to fall onto the error of seeing adaptation to environment as evidence of design and purpose.”
If evolution were true, then all people, plants and animals would share a common ancestor, which came out of the primordial soup. No such fossil has ever been found linking all flesh and flora in such a way. No new traits have ever been found in any creature – only mutations of already existing traits. The truth is that mutations rarely occur and no new species has ever been created from those mutations (Thompson). This is the reason that evolutionists claim that the evolutionary process is slow and takes millions of years to progress – there are no examples of such processes today. Since no common ancestor can be found, and no increase of traits can be sited, but only mutations of prior existing traits can be located, then the Bible must be correct regarding creationism. That is because of a feature in nature, which Aquinas mentioned, called beneficial order. He means that everything is created in an orderly fashion, which results in beneficial results, and is evidence of an intelligent designer (Evans 61). Creation must be orderly and not drawn out. Therefore, the need for indisputable proofs goes back to McCloskey, and the burden is now laid down that evolution has no distinct proofs, and must, therefore, say that the Bible is true, and that something was either created or that it has always existed, and that would ring false with the Second Theory of Thermodynamics, which states that all processes of nature have a tendency toward decay and disintegration (Huse 60). This is also in agreement with what Thomas Aquinas claimed, “many entities in nature act for an end, or telos” (Evans 60). And this also concurs with the statement “If God does not exist, then both man and the universe are inevitably doomed to death” (Craig 57).
This leads to the statement made by McCloskey, which indicates that God is a malevolent, imperfect designer. I have already established above His perfection, but now shall defeat the charge that McCloskey holds, which claims God has animosity with evidence of His benevolence, or rather omnibenevolence, as He is perfectly good. As I stated earlier, God has created a beautiful, amazing Earth with all the resources that man needs to live his daily life. There is not one thing that mankind lacks. Man has severely contaminated the once perfect Earth with sin, pollution and tyranny, but that does not take away the fact that God did create it perfectly. In addition, as also stated earlier, He sent His Son down to Earth, to become man, as a way of salvation away from this damaged Earth, and if one accepts then in God’s own time, man will have the ability to move on to a paradise beyond what he has ever imagined. What could be less malevolent than that? That is what is called good and perfect love. God calls Himself our Father, and how could a personal Father have hatred or ill will for His children? His Word states, “If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? Or if he asks a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent? Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?” - Luke 11:11-13.
McCloskey claims that by taking advantage of this compassionate and merciful act that one must have faith, and that he defines faith as taking a risk. I do admit that having faith in God is taking a risk in some ways. After all, most people who come to Christ have not studied Him, but come in an emotional whim when they are down to their last hope. Many people have to be broken before they see that their lives are lacking something and need to be fixed. However, once one does begin to study, as when one is saved the Holy Spirit does pull him to study these things, then he will begin to see great things that fit together as a giant jigsaw puzzle. For instance, God has created seven feasts for His people. Jesus has already fulfilled some of them with His first coming, and the last feasts will be fulfilled with His second coming. One begins to see that almost every character in the Old Testament is a typology of Christ, and that everything is a shadow or pattern of something, which was to come or that which is yet to come. God has filled His Bible with glorious stories and examples, and the way that it is written, no group of men over such a great time could ever write it so accurately or brilliantly without the divine guidance of God. When one accepts Christ, and the Holy Spirit begins to live in him, then he obtains magnificent discernment to know these things. Without the study of God’s Word, however, believing is just that – a risk that one has to take, and that is why when someone is baptized into faith and never reads a Bible, he or she is robbed of such beautifully established evidence. Of course, we are to live by faith alone, but we are also suppose to study the Word diligently and to be ready with answers (2nd Timothy 2:15). Therefore, the risk cannot be said to be reckless or irrational, since the Holy Spirit guides God’s people to study and to be completed in truth; therefore, the initial risk usually turns into solid faith.
McCloskey subsequently says that it is reasonable to have faith in an old friend, but that it is different with God, because there is no past knowledge of such a good and perfect being. However, I dispute that. Archeological studies have proven this over and over – for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. First of all, there is the case of the Hebrews crossing the Red Sea, with the Pharaoh’s men behind them. God parted the sea for the Hebrews, but then drowned the Egyptian army. Ron Wyatt, and archeologist found chariot wheels and remnants of bones in the sea, and he also located memorial pillars, which mark the place where the sea was split (Berean Publishers). I will now use the great deluge as evidence. It is a very peculiar phenomenon of how seashells have been found atop of mountains (Temple). This could only happen if the seawater spilled out onto the land deep enough to cover the highest mountains, yet they have been located there. In addition, large stockpiles of many different types of species’ skeletal remains have been found in caves, as if some type of large flood washed them in there together. One cave in Chile has presented such a phenomenon. The bones are there in a cave, with no footprints around it. The cave has a salt stream leading into it, but the cave is in one of the driest deserts in the world – supposedly the driest. However, when the researchers stepped into the cave it was so wet that their feet sank, and yet there is no evidence of a water source below the cave (Britt). How is this explained if not by a flood? How about this one? This is the newest proof of a flood that I am aware of. There are lakes and rivers under the ocean. You could see that isn’t unusual, as there are mountains under there too, and it has been proven that there is a river, which flows backward under the Black Sea (CNN.com). But it’s true, according to Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary. Environmental Graffiti, who has taken the source a bit farther, and has said that before the oceans there were shallow pools of water, which were cut off from the ocean and dried out, becoming essentially concentrated pools of brine. When the ocean water returned, the shallow areas became lakes under the great body of water. Nothing else could have caused such a shift to move an entire ocean except a flood. This is a great testimony for the proof of past knowledge, pertaining to God.
McCloskey then takes the opportunity to discuss the moral argument, and brings into evidence the evil in the world, such as pain, poverty and hardships and even examples of such people as Hitler. McCloskey briefly talked about this earlier in his article, but brings up the fact again. This time, however, he brings into play the term free will, and asks if it would not be true that God would have created a world in which men always freely chose what is right. That would be an ideal world, but because of man’s pride and lustful desires it is not so. God created man to partake in fellowship with Him. However, He wanted man to do it freely because he loves Him. God had to test man, and thereby placed the Tree of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden, which was Adam’s and Eve’s home. Adam was told to work in the garden and to keep it or guard it. That was Adam’s first mistake. He let Satan in the garden by not keeping it properly (Cloud 5). Then while Adam was away, Satan tempted Eve by appealing to her senses and her pride (to be like a god) and she ate of the forbidden fruit, followed by Adam also committing the act. However, if Adam and Eve would have maintained their innocence, then there would be no evil in the world today, and everyone would love God freely and act morally right in a free manner, as well. Because of man’s disobedience, we are now paying the consequences of our insubordination. This can also be seen in the example of parents who have children. If the parents raise the children up in a godly, prayerful way, and yet one commits murder or rape, are the parents responsible? No, and neither are the consequences theirs, but the child must pay for his or her own sin, and this is why when Cain killed Abel, Cain is the one who was marked. God gave us free will, and with that comes consequences should we make the wrong decisions, just as the saying “with rights come responsibilities” goes.
And if there is no God, then why does it matter if people have morals? Who judges their virtues and values (Craig 61)? Different cultures have different morals and values, and who decides which ones are right (Holmes 19)? Why would it matter who’s been right if there was no God? And if man is just a “lump of slime that evolved into rationality” this really diminishes the question of owning morals (Craig 63). This would make him basically worthless. It is God breathing the soul into the dust that gives life meaning. Without this the clay is worthless. And for that matter, why do we weep and mourn for those we lose – our children, our parents and grandparents, and our dear friends when they die? Their lives have proven to be nothing if we have no God, and if their lives are worthless, why do we grieve as if we have lost a treasure? Without God, why is there racial status and discrimination? One bundle of evolved goo with reasoning skills is only worth the value of the next package of goo with the same skills. It makes no sense.
Mr. McCloskey then makes various claims about a Super Being, who is perfect in every respect, yet allows such evil. He says, “Protestants try to solve the problem by explaining that God is a finite being who is all-good, but not all-powerful, who does the best He can who needs our help because His best is often disastrous.” This is a new one on me. Being a Protestant, I have never heard that. Conservative, fundamental Christians believe that man can do nothing with out Christ (John 15:5), and that through Him we do all things (Philippians 4:13). For a Protestant to say otherwise would constitute blasphemy of the highest degree. I can’t see McCloskey’s purpose in this statement or any truth to it, unless he is referring to Liberal Christians, and they are in error to begin with. Obviously, this claim does not work on his behalf.
McCloskey tries to define what evil is, and defines it as what some call punishment for sin, and that God uses it to warn people to mend their ways. God does chastise those He loves, so that they will get back on the right track of serving Him, but most pain and diseases are caused by disobedience, and are consequences and products of that disobedience. For instance, if one smokes cigarettes for many years, the chances of he or she developing lung cancer, or throat cancer or some other type of cancer are very high. If one eats lots of fatty foods, then obesity will set in and so will the diseases that accompany it. If one is sexually promiscuous, or engages in homosexual activity, then the percentage of risk of contracting HIV or some STD is then at a very high rate. The Word of God says that we reap what we sow, and this is very clear in these cases. We are also told that when we defile the Temple of God (our bodies) then they will be destroyed. There are cases in which God does use punishment to chastise His people out of love, but when they repent and return to Him, He always restores them to the original state they were in or better, for instance, because of King David’s sin of adultery, God took his son, which was a product of that act, but then He gave him another son from Bethsheba, who became a great and wise king. It was the same with Abraham, who had an adulterous affair with Hagar. She and Ishmael were sent away, but God gave him Isaac, who was a great man of God, and who became one of the great patriarchs.
In the view that McCloskey gives on comfort, he says that it is more comforting being an atheist than a Christian. He says that God cannot provide that comfort, because He is ultimately responsible for such things that cause the need for comfort, such as diseases, death and accidents. I have already established that this is not the case, but that these things are most of the time caused by sin and disobedience, therefore, God is not the responsible cause. Regarding the comfort, however, Raymond Zhang and Sherry Xu would disagree. Former atheists, they lost their 9-year-old daughter, as she was a victim of an abduction and murder. The couple found no comfort in their daily lives, and agonized over her death. Atheism offered no comfort to them. A pastor and his congregation began to pray for them and visit their home, and the couple finally accepted Christ into their hearts. Raymond said at the memorial service for his daughter, “Cecilia had to lie on the cold ground for five months in order for us to prepare their hearts to know God, and Sherry said, “While God did not grant what they wanted, she could not deny that in the months since Cecilia's disappearance, they had truly experienced God's grace and presence” (Paddey). So, it cannot be ascertained by all atheists that it is more comfortable to have no faith in disastrous times. The Zhangs proved that false for Mr. McCloskey.
In conclusion, I believe that Mr. McCloskey and other atheists make these allegations against God, for an escape – to live an easy and carefree life, without guilt, responsibility or accountancy, yet God has plainly said, that all men have a measure of faith, and that creation declares His glory. Therefore, atheists have no excuse not to believe, and in fact, since God has said that man does hold a measure of faith, then it seems that atheists only suppress that truth for their pleasure. I once heard a former atheist say, “It’s easy to not believe in God’s existence until you are ready to die, and then you begin to rethink things.” I can’t remember who he was or where I heard him, but I do remember that he had about died, and that God gave him a second chance. I don’t know much about Mr. McCloskey, other than the views he expressed in his short article. I don’t know if he is living or dead, but if death has visited him, then I sincerely hope that he began to rethink things, as well. Everyone looks for security… some for security on this Earth, such as Mr. McCloskey, but how can one find security in the midst of everything that changes? The seasons change, the weather changes, landscapes change, clothes wear out, jobs wear out, people wear out, just as with the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which was discussed earlier, but the only thing that is stable and offers security is Jesus Christ, who changes not and is the same yesterday, today and forever. I hope that Mr. McCloskey did or will find that security, whichever case may be appropriate.


















Works Cited
Anning, John. “Origins of the Universe. A Philosophical Perspective.” A Philosophical and
Theological Perspective of Origins and Faith. 2008. 2 October 2008.
< http://www.johnanning.com/origins.html>.
Batten, Don. “Teeth Developing in Bird Embryos - Does it Prove Evolution?”
AnsweringGenesis.org. 11 June 2008. 21 Sept 2008.
< http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/0611teeth.asp>.
Berean Publishers. “Pharaoh’s Drowned Army.”24 Sept 2008.
.
Bioinformatic Harvester. “Human protein: Q5THA1 - Laminin, beta 3 (Fragment).” 25 Sept
2008. .
Breakthechain.org. “She Said He Said.” 23 May 2003. 24 Sept. 2008.
.
Britt. Robert Roy. “Incredible Discoveries Made in Remote Caves.” Live Science. 31 July 2008.
26 Sept 2008. .
Cloud, Bill. “The Serpent in the Sanctuary.” Shoreshim. Spring/Summer 2007. p5.
CNN. “Explorer's Discovery Could Change Theories of Noah's Flood.” 17 Sept 2000. 26 Sept
2008. .
Craig, William Lane. “The Necessity of God and Immorality.” Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth
and Apologetics. Crossway Books, 1994.
Deem, Rich. “Can God Create a Rock So Heavy He Can't Lift It? - Can God Truly Be
Omnipotent?” The Heavens Declare the Glory of God – Harmony Between the Bible and
Science. 31 March 2006. 2 Oct 2008.
.
Environmental Graffiti. “Lakes… 650ft Beneath the Waves!” 25 Sept 2008. 26 Sept 2008.
< http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/featured/lakes650ft-beneath-the-waves/2413>.
Evans, C Stephen. Philosophy of Religion: Thinking About Faith. Downers Grove: Intervarsity
Press, 1982.
“Ex nihilo nihil fit.” Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2008. Merriam-Webster Online. 2 Oct
2008. 24 Sept 2008. .
Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary. “Secrets of the Gulf Expedition, March 2007 -
- Brine Seep at East Flower Garden Bank.” 7 Feb 2008. 26 Sept. 2008.
< http://flowergarden.noaa.gov/image_library/brineimages.html>.
Fox B. “Lightening, Thunder and the Mystery of the Rapture.” The 4 Horses of the Apocalypse
End Times Post. 11 Aug 2008. 24 Sept 2008.
< http://endtimespost.org/rapture_alerts.htm>.
Holmes, Arthur F. Ethics: Approaching Moral Decisions. Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press,
2007.
Huse, Scott M. The Collapse of Evolution. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983.
Lyons, Eric. “It’s a Bird! It’s a Dinosaur! It’s …Archaeopteryx!” ApologeticsPress.org. 2003. 22
Sept 2008. < http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/1821>.
Paddey, Patricia. “Atheist Parents Lose Child but Find Faith.” CanadianChristianity.com 25 Sept
2008. .
Quantum AetherDynamics Institute. “Energy From Atoms.” 2000-2005. 24 Sept 2008.
< http://www.16pi2.com/free_energy_from_atoms.htm>.
Temple University. “Something Strange in the Mountains.” Temple Law School. 11 Sept 2002.
26 Sept 2008. .
Thompson, Bert. “Neo-Darwinism: A Look at the Alleged Genetic Mechanism of Evolution.”
ApologeticsPress.org. 24 Sept 2008.
.
Thompson, Jack. “Whittaker Chambers Echoes in Elian Case.” NewsMax.com. 24 May 2000. 25
Sept 2008. < http://archive.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/5/23/194916>.
Van, Sandra. “The Laminins.” Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. 6 Apr 2005. 23 Sept 2008.
.
Wieland, Carl. “The Strange Tale of the Leg on the Whale.” AnsweringGenesis.org. June 1998.
22 Sept 2008. 




© 2010 Kimberly Padilla, A.A Religion