Bio 21 C

Bio 21C rev 2008

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize

Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005

Introduction

  1. 1  Biology for the 21st Century testifies on human origin
  2. 2  Longevity, the flood and genetic disorders
  3. 3  Age of the Earth
  4. 4  Biology for the 21st Century explains life
  5. 5  The Life Science Prize acid test for Biology for the 21st

    References Biography Cartoons Index

Introduction
Definitions. Let us begin Biology for the 21st Century by establishing definitions for science,

devolution, evolution, Genesis, biology, the biosphere, biology testing, the elements of scientific evidence (objective, valid, reliable, calibrated), various speculations, and what constitutes anti-science.

Science is systematized knowledge from observations and experiments. Science requires that an experiment to be successful must yield the result at least 95 times out of 100 trials.6 Devolution is the sequence toward greater simplicity or disappearance or degeneration. Evolution is the development of an organism from its chemicals or primitive state to its present state. Genesis is the first book of the Bible. Biology is the science of living things and the biosphere is all living things. Before accepting anything as biology, biology testing for the 21st century requires passage by stringent tests for scientific evidence. For scientific evidence, objective means without bias, not subjective. Given a protocol, any competent scientist following it should obtain the same results. Valid means it measures what it says it measures. Reliable means it measures consistently. Calibrated means that it is referenced to the standard if it measures indirectly. Thoughts outside the above definitions of evidence may be speculations if consistent with the laws of physics, chemistry, and biology. They may be fantasies if straightforward yet violating those laws. They may be inverted fantasies if they are the opposite of reality. If represented as science, anti-science includes superstitions, the plausible falsehoods of pseudoscience, frauds, fraudulent misrepresentations, fantasies, inverted fantasies, and forgeries.

The author tested devolution, evolution, and Genesis for scientific evidence, acid tested with the Life Science Prize (p. 20), reported the test results, discussed and concluded based on the results.

Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D. 16291 Magellan Lane, Huntington Beach, CA 92647-3524 March 15, 2007 jmastropaolo@socal.rr.com http://www.josephmastropaolo.com/ Summary and Conclusions

Biology for the 21st century is based on objective, valid, reliable, and calibrated observational and experimental evidence that any researcher may confirm. The U.S. Census Bureau historical estimates indicated an original human couple several thousand years ago. Observational and DNA evidence indicated that they were fully human whereas the ape-man and chemical-to-human alternatives were based on frauds and forgeries. Furthermore, medically verified, ever increasing, human mutations confirmed universal devolution, eliminated ape-men and evolution, and inferred a worldwide flood.

The age of the Earth by direct, historical records was found reliable at 6,800 ± 850 years old whereas confidence limits found the 19th century indirect methods unreliable. The 20th century radioisotope indirect methods were found significantly biased, invalid, unreliable, uncalibrated, and if calibrated still entirely unreliable, invalid, and useless for any estimate for the age of the Earth. The only scientifically responsible conclusion was that the Earth is 6,800 ± 850 years old.

The laws of engineering confirmed the design of each life form and the entire biosphere for interdependence and survival endurance as confirmed by biology for the 21st century. Each life form exhibits genetic reserves for dynamic survival in fixed, manifested, and latent overlapping niches in a biosphere of vast variation. The vast variation and the latent unmanifested individual and population dynamic genetic reserves are proof positive of mega-engineering that evolution could never provide.

The Life Science Prize, the default judgment, and the reward (Chapter 5) are proof that evolution is

an inverted-fantasy religion based on vitalism superstitions 2,500 years old completely outside the realm of science, the exact opposite of reality, and taught exclusively by frauds, forgeries, brass and bluff in the public schools in violation of the state Education Codes and the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. Whereas, Genesis read literally is scientifically tenable and devolution is a universal law.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 2 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

2 3 7 11 15

Century 20 23 24 27 28

Chapter 1
Biology for the 21st Century Testifies on Human Origin.

This report begins with a biology graph of the world’s population. The source is the U.S. Census Bureau, World Population Information, Historical Estimates of World Population. The graph tells us that the current population of the world is about 6.5 thousand million, or 6.5 billion people. Looking back to earlier times, we see that world population was continually less and began with an original couple several thousand years ago. (http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldhis.html) See Figure 1.

Now, questions arise about this original couple. One question concerns what they were like. Were they like us? Or, were they like apes? Or, monkeys?

For the last 3,500 years or more, people have believed that the original couple was like us and their names were Adam and Eve. Contrarily for the last 100 years or so, biology textbooks have been claiming that the original couple looked like a cross between a chimpanzee and a modern human being. Both cannot be true. We can argue about this or we can ask biology to continue testifying. Biology by definition always tells the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Once we learn the truth, then let us comment wisely like true philosophers, true lovers of wisdom.

Biology testifies from observations that anyone can confirm. For thousands of years, billions of people have observed billions of babies being born and those babies have been without exception human babies. Biological observation thereby testifies that the original couple was Adam and Eve, and they were fully human just like us. Biology also can provide the reason for these billions of consistent observations. What we are like is determined to some extent, but not entirely, by our deoxyriboneucleic acid (DNA). Biologists have recently discovered that there are 145 known repair genes that protect the integrity of DNA and therefore its fidelity during reproduction.56 At least 145 of these cellular machines continuously monitor chromosomes to make sure that the parents’ DNA is exactly passed on to the next generation. Biochemical errors are sensed and repaired. Also, the genetic material does not permit the birth of human children that are crossbreeds with chimpanzees or monkeys or anything else. Therefore, biology testifies that humans have always been humans, chimpanzees have always been chimpanzees, and crossbreeds never existed. Biology testifies with absolute consistency that Adam and Eve were like us.

Biology also testifies about the nature of individuals from observations that anyone can confirm. Individuals are most perfect when conceived. At the instant of conception, the individual has the least number of disorders and therefore the most vitality. With aging, the disorders increase and that leads to the death of cells, then tissues, then organs, then vital organs, and finally the entire individual dies. Without exception, billions of people for thousands of years have seen billions of individuals born in their utmost vitality, then progressively lose it to die of old age. Biology testifies that all things, viable and non viable alike, are ravaged by time and that process is found with absolute consistency throughout the universe and has been called, devolution, since 1882 (2. Biol. The Oxford Universal Dictionary).

Biology observes that the individual is the unit of the population and, like its units, the population is most perfect when conceived with the first couple. Largely because of chemical and radiation pollution in the environment, genetic disorders appear in the population and progressively increase in number, variety, and severity while decreasing the age of onset. The signs are an increase of children born with genetic disorders that become lethal and that appear earlier in life. When parents are no longer able to have children, or their children die of their disorders before puberty, then the population becomes permanently extinct. Biology testifies that all things, individuals and populations alike, are ravaged by time and that universal process is called, devolution.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 3 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

New human genetic disorders have been catalogued since 1966. The present tally is in excess of 17,000 medically verified new genetic disorders.35 See Figure 2. Biology teaches us that in earlier times

genetic disorders were continually less and likely were zero in the original couple. If so, then Adam and Eve were genetically perfect and therefore physiologically superior to us. Damaged from pollution in the environment, their DNA lost vitality by developing genetic disorders that were passed on to their descendants. With time, their DNA was ravaged and, like the rest of the universe, devolved throughout the generations. Let us represent the superior vitality of Adam and Eve by graphically showing them larger than modern humans. Now, let us put together Figures 1 and 2 and see what they tell us. See Figure 3.

The biology in Figure 3 states that humanity began with Adam and Eve and they apparently came into existence with flawless DNA, which they passed on with protected integrity to all humans alive today. Therefore, vitality was greatest in Adam and Eve and has since devolved toward extinction from ever increasing genetic disorders. Biology thereby teaches that the individual is the model of the population. Both have greatest vitality at conception and thereafter both devolve from disorders toward permanent extinction. And that is exactly the opposite of what current biology textbooks claim. Instead of Adam and Eve, the biology textbooks claim ape-men. Instead of universal devolution, the biology textbooks claim the exact opposite, evolution. So, which is correct, the testimony of biology for the 21st century or the 19th century claims in biology textbooks? Both cannot be true, for they are mutually exclusive.

The ape-men claims in biology textbooks. In biology textbooks, instead of an original couple, Adam and Eve, that look like us, one finds examples of ape-men. One of the earliest was the “speechless” ape-man, Pithecanthropus alalus.54 That presents us with an apparent controversy. Which is true, biology for the 21st century or the ape-men in the biology textbooks? See Figure 4.

Investigation of the “speechless” ape-man, Pithecanthropus alalus, revealed that it was not only a forgery, but a brazenly embellished forgery. This fake mocked science because it was pure fiction that an evolutionist commissioned an artist to draw, and this embellished fiction was brazenly given a scientific name. Furthermore, when exposed as a forgery, the forger, Ernst Haeckel, refused to admit the truth to correct his crime against biology. He thereby began a tradition of polluting the literature with brazen forgeries artistically rendered and embellished with scientific names. This polluting technique militates against biology because biology is based on the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Henceforth, we shall call such pollution, anti-biology.22,54

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 4 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Thus, the evolutionists’ concocted controversy collapsed. Adam and Eve were like us. The ape- man, Pithecanthropus alalus, was an embellished forgery, an excellent example of anti-biology. Biology thereby validates the historical Adam and Eve and the consistent trend throughout the universe of devolution. Evolution and ape-men are recent examples of the embellished and brazen pollution techniques in the literature identified here with the summary appellation, anti-biology. For this study, Pithecanthropus alalus is evolution anti-biology exhibit #1.

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. If a subject, like alchemy or mysticism or astrology, pretends to be science but is composed of falsified evidence, then it is not the duty of bona fide scientists to track down and expose every fraud and forgery. It is enough to adopt judicial practices, for the law courts also depend upon the whole truth in order to dispense justice. Given false testimony by a witness sworn to tell the truth, the court applies, “Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, false in one thing, false in everything. The doctrine means that if testimony of a witness on a material issue is willfully false and given with the intention to deceive, jury may disregard all the witness’ testimony.” (Black’s Law Dictionary) If the testimony on ape-men, or any other evolutionist claim, is willfully false with the intention to deceive, as is the case of the speechless ape-man, then all evolutionist testimony is disregarded. By that principle, biologists and the public may disregard all evolutionist testimony, whether in or out of biology textbooks, just as they would disregard all testimony from alchemists or mystics or astrologers. For those seriously seeking the truth about the universe and life, it saves much time and effort.

For those wishing more about the ape-man deceptions, read on. Those that have had enough may go directly to the next chapter.

More ape-man deceptions. In biology textbooks from 1912 to 1952 there was another ape-man, Eoanthropus dawsoni, the dawn man discovered by Dawson. Planted in a gravel pit at Piltdown in England, this “Piltdown man” was concocted from a piece of human skull and the jaw of an orangutan both dyed brown with the teeth artificially abraded to simulate human flat wear. It was another forgery that mocked science. It was given a scientific name and a sculpture made it appear part chimpanzee and part human.53 Here is evolution anti-biology exhibit #2. See Figure 5.

Continuing the anti-biology tradition of Ernst Haeckel, an artist was commissioned in 1922 to give the world, and the Scopes trial, a rendering of Hesperopithecus harold cookii, the western ape-man discovered by Harold Cook. The alleged evidence was a single tooth, which was neither human nor ape nor a mosaic of human and ape-like features. It was the tooth of an extinct pig. Note the level of talent shown by the artist, for not only is the nonexistent ape-man shown but also his wife and the primitive flora and fauna. Here is still another example of brazen evolutionist anti-biology, evolution anti-biology exhibit #3.27 See Figure 6.

In 1906, a live “missing link” “ape-man” was exhibited to 40,000 spectators per day at the Bronx Zoo. This was the African pygmy, Ota Benga. When the religious leaders objected, they were silenced by the New York Times with, “evolution is now taught in the textbooks of all schools” and Ota Benga was “scarcely more than apes or monkey.” And to head off any refutation of evolution, the New York Times proclaimed that evolution “is no more debatable than the multiplication table.” The family of this noble human being were murdered when he was taken prisoner and brought to the United States of America. Ota was abandoned when no more money could be made with him and he subsequently committed suicide because he was unable to earn return passage to his homeland.7 No one was ever punished for these crimes against humanity. Here we have evolution anti-biology exhibit #4 and an example of evolutionists killing human beings without punishment. See Figure 7.

Biological studies on “ape-men.” Oxnard did complex multivariate statistical analyses on fossil bones. This multi-dimensional method on the measurements of many fossils employed rotations by

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 5 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Figure 5. Eoanthropus dawsoni, the dawn man Figure 6. The Nebraska ape-man forgery. discovered by Dawson, the famous Piltdown man Evolution anti-biology exhibit # 3.
forgery of 1912 to 1952, evolution anti-biology exhibit #2.

Figure 7. “Missing link ape-man,” African pygmy, Ota Benga, abused to suicide by evolutionists, evolution anti-biology exhibit # 4.

means of matrix algebra and a computer and found the opposite of what the biology textbooks represent. Man is not related to any other kind of life form. Evolution is based only on similarities and this objective, valid, reliable, calibrated study found conclusive dissimilarities. The textbooks require students to believe on faith the exact opposite of what biology indicates and this biology is not brought to any student’s attention. Oxnard found, “Nor, however, can man be described as a mosaic of other forms. In almost all studies man lies quite separately from the spectra of non-human species . . . ” None of the biology textbooks let the student see the Oxnard reference. That censorship is the antithesis of biology and education. Once again, the biological evidence convicts the evolutionists and their biology textbooks of anti-biology, of purposeful deception.39

More recently, a study was done on an alleged fossil bone and on the bones found in anatomical atlases. The occasion was a 2001 cover story in Time magazine, based on an article in Nature, claiming that a fossil toe bone, supposedly 5.2 million years old, proved that it belonged to an ape-man, Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba, that walked upright. The author, Haile-Salassie, claimed the bone had a mosaic of human and chimpanzee characteristics. On the cover of Time was a chimpanzee-like ape-man with blue eyes – all concocted from one of the three bones in one toe.25 See Figure 8.

Haile-Salassie’s claim was strange because Oxnard found no similarity between human and chimpanzee bones. I did biological geometry and correlational analyses on the morphology of that toe bone and came to 12 conclusions based on the objective mathematical correlational evidence: (1) the fossil bone had some similarity to human bone, (2) the fossil bone had dissimilarity to monkey (baboon) bone, (3) the fossil bone had most dissimilarity to ape (chimpanzee) bone, (4) if the nearly infinite transmutations of evolution in defiance of the laws of physics could occur, then the fossil bone could not be ancestral to baboons, (5) if the nearly infinite transmutations of evolution in defiance of the laws of physics could occur, then the fossil bone could not be ancestral to chimpanzees, (6) baboon and chimpanzee bones were similar, (7) baboon and human bones were dissimilar, (8) most dissimilar were chimpanzee and human bones, (9) therefore, this invented ape-man, Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba, is a fraud because it bore similarity only to human bone. It had no mosaic similarities to monkey bone and

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 6 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Figure 8. The alleged ape-man that walked upright concocted from one bone of one toe. Evolution anti-biology exhibit #5.

surely not to chimpanzee bone. (10) The only bones with mosaic characteristics were monkey and chimpanzee bones and their similarities were to each other, not to human bone. (11) Time magazine and the journal, Nature, promoted this fraud so similar in imagined appearance to the Piltdown forgery of 1912-1952 (see Figure 5). Furthermore, the analyses of atlases in this study proved that all alleged ape- men must be frauds or forgeries. (12) Therefore, Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba of 2001 is a forgery in the evolutionist tradition of imaginative art given a fictitious scientific name and date of origin thereby mocking and polluting biology. For this study, this is evolutionist anti-biology exhibit #5.34 See Figures 8 and 9.

Figure 9. Geometrical and correlational analyses proved that Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba was another brazen anti-biology ape- man fraud and the atlas analyses proved all ape-men must be frauds or forgeries.34

Here we have another objective, valid, reliable, and calibrated biological study and it confirms the Oxnard study. Both studies conclude the exact opposite of the letter to the editor of Nature, which letters are not peer reviewed, and the exact opposite of the cover story of Time magazine. The biological evidence is the exact opposite of what the biology textbooks teach in their evolution chapters.26,31,36 The ape-man concept evidently is based on consistent, brazen, anti-biology and magazines and journals like Time and Nature apparently collaborate with that anti-biology.34

The only scientific objective, valid, reliable, calibrated studies, which any biologist may verify, prove all so-called ape-men are frauds or forgeries.39,34 To date, no contrary evidence has overturned these scientific objective, valid, reliable, calibrated studies. Therefore, the ape-man alternative to Adam and Eve is based on the anti-biology of frauds and forgeries whereas the historical Adam and Eve are based on sound biology. Thus, slavery, genocide, and the denial of the brotherhood of all humanity are the ravings of irrational, psychotically inclined, anti-moral, inverted fantasticos and criminals.

Chapter 2
Longevity, the Flood, and Genetic Disorders.

The historical account of Adam and Eve also tells us that all other living things came into existence in the same way, that is they were created. (Genesis 1:1) Biology gives us the inferential evidence that Adam and Eve were genetically perfect.35 That in turn suggests that all other life forms were created genetically perfect, for they were created days apart in the same way. (Genesis 1:1) There were only two human beings and therefore no cities and no pollution to damage the DNA of any life form. So,

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 7 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Adam and Eve apparently lived in an environment of pristine air, water, and soil where all flora and fauna were genetically flawless. The same historical records tell us that human longevity on such a nearly brand-new Earth was about 900 years. Those records then tell us of a worldwide flood accompanied by a decrease in longevity from 900 to 70 years within the first post-flood millennium with most of the decrease in the first three centuries. Neither biology nor the historical records can tell us whether the flood was a direct or indirect cause of the progressive decline in longevity. If it was causally associated, then we may infer that the flood instigated the beginning of genetic disorders. We may also infer that those beginnings were associated with a global diffusion of chemical or radioactive contamination carried by the flood, possibly from the “fountains of the great abyss.” (Genesis 7:11) See Figure 10.

Figure 10. The association of the worldwide flood with the beginning of genetic disorders and the documented decline in longevity.

While we are analyzing Genesis, we may as well consult this historical source for the date of the worldwide flood. That date is approximately 1,650 years after creation. From that time, this historical source also reports that human longevity declined about 90% in a curvilinear fashion. That in turn suggests that the beginning of the curvilinear rise in genetic disorders, as documented from recent scientific medical data35, began after the worldwide flood with most of the genetic damage occurring in the first three centuries. See Figure 10.

Evolutionist alternatives to creation, from chemicals to a cell. The Stanley L. Miller experiment is shown in virtually every biology textbook to suggest that a living cell could evolve chemically by natural means. Miller circulated methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), water (H2O), and hydrogen (H2) through a series of glass chambers containing boiling water, an electrical spark, and a trap. After a week, he found trace amounts of the amino acids glycine (NH3CHCO2H) and alanine (NH3CHCO2CH3).28 We can see that the NH3 part of each amino acid comes from the ammonia NH3. The CH part of each amino acid and the CH3 of the alanine comes from the methane CH4. The electrolysis of water will release the oxygen (O2) for the CO2 in each amino acid. Miller suggested that the early Earth had a reducing atmosphere, one containing methane, ammonia, water and hydrogen.37 The evidence is that the early Earth did not have a reducing atmosphere.58 The Bunsen burner, sparking device, trap, condenser, stopcocks, glassware, and protocol were carefully engineered and Miller neglected to mention where in nature they may be found. Yet, not even two L-type amino acids could be synthesized with a single polypeptide link toward a tiny first step on the way to a biologically useful protein, let alone a living cell. Thus, the textbooks mislead the students into believing without evidence that amino acids and eventually a living cell could have evolved without engineering in the volcanoes and lightning storms on the early Earth. The textbook writers neglect to tell the students that those two amino acids, formed from constituent chemicals, cannot make anything living and that lightning and volcanoes have been observed killing plants and animals but never causing anything to spring to life. They also neglect to mention the untold millions of missing parts beyond the 20 essential L-type only amino acids polypeptide enchained and uniquely sequenced by the hundreds and thousands in order to come close to what is known about the structure of a living cell.28 See Figure 11.

Rather than write hundreds of words on why this is misleading propaganda, let us instead illustrate with an understated analogy of the Miller experiment and save much labor. Let us take a quantity of iron ore, some charcoal, some sap from a rubber tree, and some sand. Let us throw the lot into an active volcano and examine some of the expelled lava. We may find some traces of steel from the iron ore and the carbon of the charcoal. The sap may vulcanize and make rubber, and the sand may melt and make glass. (This would be analogous to Miller boiling and sparking the precursors for the amino

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 8 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

acids.) Continuing with the volcano analogy, the textbook may say that after billions and billions of trials and errors there evolved spontaneously better and better pistons, cylinders, whole engines with spark plugs and transmissions, axles on four wheels with rubber tires under bodies of steel with glass windows,

Figure 11. The Stanley Miller apparatus to make amino acids from constituent chemicals to suggest that chemicals can evolve to a living cell.37 Evolution anti-biology exhibit #6.

windshield wipers, headlights, and tanks full of gasoline. Like the textbook writers’ suggestions about living cells, we may lead the students to believe that brand-new automobiles popped out of volcanoes on the early Earth billions of years ago. After all, automobiles are countless millions of orders of magnitude simpler than a living cell and this analogy is countless millions of orders of magnitude easier to believe than the Miller evolution fantasy. See Figure 12.

For those without access to laboratory glassware or volcanoes, yet desirous of using the Miller concept, the demonstration may be done with some readily available household staples and a bread machine. The flour, water, salt and yeast are put in the bread machine and after three hours, rather than the week required by the Miller apparatus, out comes the bread. Given the Miller logic, this would permit the evolutionist claim that bread evolved billions of years ago on the primitive Earth. See Figure 13.

Evolution’s first living cell. According to evolution, the first living cell, the moneron, was a Protamoeba primitiva gathered from the slime of the ocean floor and it was shown reproducing.24 See Figure 14. Subsequent investigators found that it was an inert globule of sulfate of lime that could not be alive and of course could not reproduce. It was a brazen forgery, another excellent example of anti- biology.2,4,44 Furthermore, the experiments of Redi, Pasteur, and Tyndall proved that life making itself is a vitalism superstition that may be traced back to ancient Greece and the worship of Cybele, the great Mother of all the gods, and Gaea, mother Earth personified.16,17,55 So, the evolutionists’ first living cell, Protamoeba primitiva, with forged drawing and false scientific name, was another brazen forgery. Therefore, here is evolution anti-biology exhibit #7. See Figure 14.

Figure 12. Using the Stanley L. Miller anti-biology concept (Figure 11) to convince students that automobiles evolved billions of years ago on the early Earth.

Figure 13. Using the Stanley L. Miller anti-biology concept (Figure 11) to convince students that bread evolved billions of years

ago on the early Earth.

Evolution’s forged first cell transmuting to the entire biosphere. A life form changing to another life form has never been observed nor is there any experiment to demonstrate it. The evolutionists’ first cell, the forgery Protamoeba primitiva, Figure 14, changing itself to every life form up to

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 9 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

the fish is based on vitalism superstition coupled to forgery, that is, multilayered anti-biology, not biology. From Madness in America, we do find amongst the 19th century superstitions about insanity the low brow to high brow arrangement of life forms.20 The progression is from fish to serpent to crocodile to bird to dog

Figure 14. The “missing link” cell was a forgery.24,2,4,22,44 Evolution anti-biology exhibit #7.

to monkey to idiot to savage (the American Indian chief Black Hawk was used as a model and was considered the same as an Ethiopian) to half-civilized man (Mongolian) to civilized Caucasian (Daniel Webster). Apparently, this superstition is what evolutionists have depended upon for evidence and it is another example of their affinity for anti-biology to justify the lethal abuses of slavery and genocide. Here is evolution anti-biology exhibit #8.20 See Figure 15.

Figure 15. The pseudoscience of facial angles from fish to Caucasians. Evolution anti-biology # 8.20

The evolutionist use of facial angle to suggest that Africans are ape-like provided pseudoscientific justification for the lethal abuse of slavery as well as the lethal practice of imperialism.20 See Figure 16.

The use of facial angle by evolutionists to justify the conquest and enslavement of indigenous people is well known. What is not as well known is the use to demean certain white nationalities such as the Irish. In comparing an Irishman to a dog, it was said, “Among the Irish, the community takes to dirt- digging more naturally than to anything else.”20 This may have provided pseudoscientific justification for reserving the dirt-digging jobs for the Irish immigrants to America. See Figure 17.

Figure 16. The pseudoscience of facial angles from apes to Africans. Evolution anti-biology exhibit # 9.20

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 10 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Figure 17. The pseudoscience of facial angles from dogs to Irishmen. Evolution anti-biology exhibit # 10.20

Summary. So far, we find the evolutionist concept of the first cell making itself is based on the Stanley L. Miller sham and the moneron forgery. Evidently, there is no biological or chemical evidence to show how an original cell made itself, then changed itself to all the life forms that ever lived. The use of facial angle to suggest that fish evolved to humans and that certain humans are inferior to others is 19th century Madness in America20 pseudoscience that was identified as anti-biology more than a century ago. The absence of evidence, refuted pseudoscience, and forgery are all that can be found to support evolution from chemicals to humans.

Chapter 3 Age of the Earth

Genesis reports the ages of the progenitors as the generations of humans unfolded from Adam and Eve to recent times. The calculated age of the Earth from these historical records are in the thousands of years as solar years are counted and recorded on calendars. If the Earth is only thousands of years old, then evolution would not have had time to achieve its sequence of miracles in defiance of the laws of thermodynamics and engineering. Although a very old world would mean the extinction of the entire biosphere, evolutionists nonetheless began their search for indirect indicators of an ancient Earth. They thereby were forced to add immortality to their list of miracles for their inverted evolutionary version of the biosphere. The evolutionist indirect methods do not count solar years and must be calibrated to that standard. Let us see whether the historical Genesis or the methods of evolutionists are objective, valid, reliable, and calibrated science. To do that, let us first take a simple example to review the concept of reliability as tested simply with confidence intervals.

Suppose the scores for measuring the height of a child in centimeters (cm) by method A are 100, 99, 101, 98 and 102. The mean is 100 and the standard deviation (SD), a measure of variability, is 1.6. Now, suppose by method B the scores are 10, 190, 1, 199 and 100. The mean is 100 but the SD is 95. Suppose by method C the scores are 0,0,500,0,0. The mean is 100 but the SD is 224. Obviously, A is the most reliable and C the least reliable. But if we consider only the mean, they seem the same. One way to expose the reliability of each method is to describe a range from two SD above the mean to two SD below the mean. That range, a confidence interval, will contain the true value with a 95% certainty.6 For method A the confidence interval is 97 to 103, for B – 89 to 289, and for C – 124 to 324. Should we reject any of these methods? Obviously, the child’s height cannot be negative, a height below the level of the floor, so we reject methods B and C on the grounds of unreliability. That leaves only method A with a 95% probability that the true height of the child is between 97 and 103 with the best estimate, the mean, at 100 cm. Now, let us apply this objective, scientific, reliability, confidence interval test to the methods for determining the age of the Earth. Let us examine first the historical method.

The historical direct method for finding the age of the Earth. One of the earliest records on the age of the Earth was the Rabbinical Chronicles of about 1550 B.C. that gave a creation date of about 5,760 years ago from the present time, approximately 2000 A.D.23,17 About 150 A.D., Theophilus gave the creation date as about 7,529 years ago.10,23 In about 225 A.D., Julius Africanus gave a date of 7,500 years ago.10 In 382 A.D., the Roman Catholic Vulgate gave a date of 7,199 years ago.23 In 1654, Ussher gave the date as 6,004 years ago.23 For these historical data, the mean and standard deviation (M ± SD) are 6,798 ± 851 years. If we allow a confidence interval of plus two SD to minus two SD from the mean, as we did for the height example above, then the age of the Earth at the 95% level of confidence would be between 5,096 and 8,500 years ago. There does not seem to be anything that would cast doubt on this range of dates. Therefore, objective science requires acceptance of the direct estimate of 6,798 ± 851 solar years for the age of the Earth by the historical method.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 11 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

The 19th century indirect estimates for the age of the Earth. Several evolutionists of the 19th century claimed that the Earth was millions of years old. In about 1800, Buffon estimated the Earth’s creation date and, from the year 2000, the date would be 75,032 years ago.10,23 In 1850 from solar thermodynamics, Lord Kelvin estimated 25 million years ago.11 From geology in 1860, Darwin estimated 100 million years ago.14 In 1870, Lord Kelvin revised his estimate to 100 million years ago.10 In 1897, he revised it again and this time to 40 million years ago.57 In 1899 from ocean salinity, Joly estimated 100 million years ago.10 These indirect estimates by scientists in the 1800’s averaged, M ± SD, 60,845,839 ± 44,747,534. If we allow the plus to minus two SD from the mean as was done for the historical estimates, then the age of the Earth at the 95% level of confidence would be between 150,340,908 years ago and 28,649,230 years into the future. Obviously, the Earth has been in existence for thousands of years and any set of data estimating it coming into existence millions of years into the future must be rejected out of hand. For that reason, the indirect estimates from the 19th century must be rejected. Altogether, they represent evolution anti-biology exhibit # 11.

The 20th century indirect estimates for the age of the Earth from radioisotopes. Radioisotopes were discovered at about the turn of the 20th century and in 1921, they were used to indirectly estimate the age of the Earth. In 1921, the estimate was 1.5 billion years old.10 In 1931, the estimate was 1.6 to 3.0 billion years old10; in 1932, 1.6 billion29; in 1930 to 1940, 200 million40; in 1947,
2 billion47; in 1952, 1.6 billion19; in 1955, 2.5 billion38; in 1957, 3 billion50; in 1961, 3.3 to 5 billion, 2.1 to 5 billion, 3 billion1; in 1962, 2.6, 3.29, 3.4 to 5.0, 4.3 ± 0.4 billion30; in 1963, 3.5 billion43, 2 billion57; in 1966, 4.55, 4.75 billion18; in 1968, 4.5 billion49; in 1971, 4 billion52, 5 billion15; in 1975, 4.5 billion11; in 1978, 4.5 billion32; in 1981, 4.6 billion12; in 1984, 4.8 billion40; in 1991, 4.54 billion years old13. These data averaged, M ± SD, approximately 2.61 ± 1.79 billion years for the age of the Earth. If we allow plus to minus two SD from the mean as was done for the historical and 19th century estimates, then the age of the Earth at the 95% level of confidence for radioisotopes would be between 6.19 billion years old and 971 million years in the future. Obviously, the Earth has been in existence for thousands of years and any set of data estimating it coming into existence nearly a billion years into the future must be rejected out of hand. For that reason, the indirect estimates from the radioisotope data of the 20th century must be rejected.

Bias. Besides unreliability, another reason for rejecting the radioisotope data is their bias for older ages of the Earth. Note that the estimate in 1921 was 1.5 billion years old whereas the estimate in 1991 was 4.54 billion years old. These data would have us believe that in the 70 solar years from 1921 to 1991 the Earth, and everything on the Earth, aged 3.04 billion years. Such bias is another reason for rejecting the indirect estimates from radioisotopes. See Figure 18.

The bias in radioisotope dating yields an age of 3 billion years for a man and a car. See Figures 19 and 20.

Calibration. Another reason for rejecting the radioisotope data is that they evidently were not calibrated to solar years. Radioisotopes are not clocks. They are radioactive elements that devolve to lower elements. That means that their rate of decay along with a list of assumptions, some of which are known to be false, must be referenced to the standard solar year. The standard is something known to be true. For example, if a rock originates by solidifying from the lava of a volcanic eruption and radioisotope dating is considered competent to determine the age of that rock, then the calibration is to equate the apparent age from the radioisotopes to the real age from the date of the eruption. The equation may subsequently be used to obtain real ages from apparent radioisotope ages. To my knowledge, this has

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 12 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Figure 19. Man 3 billion years old Figure 20. Car 3 billion years old according to according to the bias in radioisotope dating. the bias in radioisotope dating.

been done twice. Let us see how well radioisotope years calibrate to actual calendar years.
There is a case in the literature of a rock that was known to be 10 years old having been formed

in the eruption of Mt. St. Helens. It was sent in for radioisotope dating and it was dated as 340,000, 350,000 and 2.8 million years old, averaging 1.163 ± 1.42 million years old.3 If we construct a calibration equation by letting 1.163 million radioisotope years equal 10 actual years, then the 4.5 billion radioisotope years for the age of the Earth calibrate to 3,868 actual (solar) years for the age of the Earth. These data indicate that if radioisotopes are calibrated, then they yield an age of the Earth that is too young because it would mean that the Egyptians, for example, built the pyramids in outer space more than 800 years before the Earth existed. See Figure 21. It would also mean that evolution would not have had enough time to work even if the laws of physics were reversed and the biosphere evolved instead of devolved. Let us also note that the evolutionists say that dinosaur fossils are 65 million years old according to radioisotope dating. That would yield a calibrated actual age of 65 years in the past from the year 2000 or about 1935. Dinosaurs strolling around Times Square, or anywhere else in the world, in the 1930’s would have caused quite a sensation. See Figure 22. That also means that the supposed age of 5.2 million years for Haile-Salassie’s alleged Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba ape-man would have calibrated to about five years ago, a modern man, which would be consistent with the geometrical, morphological, correlational analysis.25,34 These data indicate that radioisotope dating is grossly biased, invalid, unreliable, and uncalibrated for fossils as well as for an age of the Earth or the universe.

From another rock of known age in a different study, and from the radioisotope age of that rock, the rock gave a calibrated age of the Earth of 1,314 years old compared to the 4.5 billion years by radioisotope dating.51 This calibrated radioisotope age for the Earth is more ridiculous than the results from the previous calibration and demonstrates again why raw radioisotope estimates must be rejected. When radioisotope dating is calibrated against an object of known age, as every competent scientist would require, then in the above two cases the results are so invalid as to be comical. We also note that the unreliable nature of radioisotope dating is revealed in the calibrations as well as in the reliability analyses. A calibrated age of the Earth of 3,868 years old is not consistent with a calibrated age

Figure 21. Calibrated radioisotope dating Figure 22. Calibrated radioisotope dating
puts the pyramids in outer space 800 years puts dinosaurs in N.Y.C. and elsewhere in 1935. before the Earth existed.

of 1,314 years old. For science, calibrations with errors of 1% are considered tolerable, but not 66%. Altogether, the unreliable, biased, invalid, uncalibrated ages of the Earth from radioisotopes are evolution anti-biology exhibit #12.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 13 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Summary. From the history of radioisotope ages of the Earth from 1921 to 1991, the method evidently is biased, invalid, unreliable, and uncalibrated which disqualifies it fourfold for any scientific research. These gross, inherently unscientific characteristics make radioisotope dating scientifically useless for an age of the Earth or for the age of any fossil. Scientists therefore admit that there is no objective, valid, reliable, calibrated retrospective indirect clock to estimate the age of the Earth.

The requirement for objective, valid, reliable, and calibrated scientific evidence demands the acceptance of the historical direct estimates and the rejection of the 19th and 20th century indirect methods for estimating the age of the Earth. Therefore, 21st century science supports the historical records in solar years reported in Genesis 1-11 and refutes the biased, invalid, unreliable, uncalibrated indirect methods of the 19th and 20th century.

The surface of the Earth has been buffeted too much for dating purposes. Parker observed, “we have to conclude that practically all continental matter has been reworked, i.e. there is no ‘juvenile’(original igneous) matter in the continents.”40 That means that pretending that the surface of the Earth is undisturbed, that the daughter decay elements will be neatly packaged next to the parent radioisotopes for age calculations is a sham. The surface of the Earth has been earthquaked, volcanized, washed with torrents, scraped with glaciers, flooded, desiccated, wind blown, tornadoed, hurricaned, tunneled, avalanched, perhaps tectonically subducted, struck by lightning, polluted, poisoned, mined, strip mined, paved, eroded, pelted continuously by meteorites and possibly comets, for thousands of years. It is well known that radioactive elements are water soluble. The worldwide flood alone would no doubt have stirred and swirled the Earth’s surface sufficiently with tides and eddies to obviate radioisotope dating. The Earth has not been preserved in its original pristine condition in a controlled laboratory environment just waiting to be analyzed. For thousands of years, the Earth has been an open, kneaded, flooded, rummaged, polluted, and plundered planet. That is probably why radioisotope dating calibrations are so rare and those that are done yield such unreliable results. Radioisotope dating has been, is, and apparently always will be so unreliable that it is worthless scientifically as a retrospective clock.

An old Earth is the opposite of what evolution needs. Evolutionists would like to say the Earth is old to provide ample time for evolution to work. We know this is a topsy-turvy desire because time yields devolution, the exact opposite of evolution. Given an old age, the biosphere would have devolved to extinction and the Earth would be as barren as the moon. The only way evolution can imagine an old Earth and an extant biosphere is by adding another layer to its stack of inverted fantasies, immortal life forms. No life form can escape mortality, all extinctions are permanent, and nothing can evolve. Furthermore, the evidence from medically verified new genetic disorders (mutations) in humans is likely a sample of the entire biosphere and suggests extinction in the not too distant future. The historical record of increasing extinctions is evidence for biosphere devolution to permanent extinction, the exact opposite of the inverted fantasy, immortal evolution.33 A young Earth does not give evolution enough time to work its inverted fantasy and an old Earth would be lifeless. Evolution’s dilemma is pitiful.

Summary. Biology for the 21st century supports the Genesis account of a genetically perfect Adam and Eve created about 6,800 ± 850 years ago on a newly created Earth with a genetically flawless biosphere and pristine air, water, and soil, which rendered human longevity of about 900 years. Medical science has documented an accelerated rise in new genetic disorders during the last half century that confirms devolution, refutes evolution, and suggests the worldwide flood as a possible direct or indirect cause of the associated drop in longevity to 70 years. Thus, historical records, biological and medical science, and scientific inference support Genesis 1-11 as literally understood. The examination of the evolutionist alternatives, from the alleged chemicals for the first cell to humans, consistently found the anti-biology of forgeries, frauds, fraudulent misrepresentations, as well as pseudoscience, invalidities, unreliabilities, and uncalibrated estimates or no evidence whatsoever. Therefore, biology confirms Genesis 1-11 as literally understood and unequivocally refutes evolution.

The Genesis age of the Earth of about 6,800 ± 850 years old was found scientifically tenable whereas the 19th and 20th century indirect estimates were scientifically untenable. For those unable to believe in a directly determined young Earth from historical records, the alternative is to believe from biased, unreliable, and uncalibrated indirect estimates that the Egyptians built their pyramids in outer space 800 years before the Earth existed, dinosaurs roamed New York City and elsewhere in 1935, and senior citizens are 3-billion-year-old ambulating fossils.

The missing-link first cell, Protamoeba primitiva, as well as the ape-men from Pithecanthropus alalus to Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba of 2001 are forgeries in the evolutionist tradition of imaginative art given fictitious scientific names thereby mocking and polluting biology.

All mutations foster morbidity or mortality, the exact opposite of the biological advantages alleged by evolution as its primary means for evolutionary change. New mutations are accelerating as reality would predict rather than diminishing as evolution would predict.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 14 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Evolution claims to be biology, yet cannot be observed and has no experiments. It requires belief in the opposite of the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, and engineering. It is an inverted fantasy, and must be believed like the monolithic state supported religion of the public schools, which violates Amendment I of the Constitution of the United States of America, the prohibition of a state supported religion.

Conclusions. In all respects investigated, Genesis read literally was found scientifically tenable whereas an old Earth was found scientifically untenable and evolution was found an inverted-fantasy religion of the public schools in violation of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Chapter 4
Biology for the 21st Century Explains Life

This chapter documents the biology that exists in the real world. That eliminates evolution which exists in an upside down world of frauds and forgeries. Biology for the 21st century is the science that every person may observe, test for validity, reliability and calibrate. It develops an understanding of life as scientists and engineers use the disciplines of science to comprehend the real world. Above all, it wants the truth about the universe and especially life.

For life appreciation, let us imagine how life was created. As we have seen, any living thing is so complex it makes the imagination ache to try to comprehend it. Nevertheless, let us put ourselves in the place of the engineer whose assignment is one life form. First, the universe must be designed. Apparently, the stuff used for this construction is energy, possibly because of its engineering plasticity. For life forms, energy in the form of solids, liquids and gases give the needed versatility. Like the non viable part of the universe, life forms also will run down. Now, a fundamental design decision must be made. When the life form runs down and dies, will the engineer need to standby to create anew? If the engineer is human, then the answer is affirmative because humans are not intelligent enough to provide the alternative. However, this engineer has intelligence that dwarfs ours and decides to design reproduction into each life form. In that fashion, the creative process can be done once and, with the proper built-in behaviors, go on from generation to generation by itself. For technical reasons, the life form will be built mainly of proteins which have a short life. To give each generation an ample life span with time to reproduce, built into each cell will be mechanisms to replicate the proteins, cells and organs – and the means to pass on those mechanisms to the new cells. These two basic design decisions give a life form a replication vitality for an ample life span for each generation and a reproductive vitality for many generations. We may think of these as provisions for the endurance of the individual and its generations.

All of these provisions for endurance will require a ready reservoir of energy. The reservoir must be enormously large because it must be delivered in huge amounts over long periods of time without seeming to change much. The only way to solve that problem is to design a star. To prevent incinerating the life form, the star must be placed at a long distance from the planet on which the life form will reside. A star like our sun 93 million miles away that will convert four and a half tons of its own mass every second 21 and seem like only a drop was taken from an ocean of energy would be the right size at the right distance. So much for the preliminary requirements. Now on to the life form.

We have seen that, like a universe, a life form must be designed for endurance. It must be brought to life genetically perfect in a genetically perfect biosphere in a non viable environment least likely to degenerate its genetic materials. The genetic disorder evidence reported in Chapter 1 attests to the logical speculation that every life form originally had its genetically perfect Adam and Eve in a genetically perfect Garden of Eden and prediluvial Earth. And by the way, that was obvious to our genetically more intelligent ancestors. No good engineer would build something worn out and ready to die. No human or animal or plant does that. What is built is built new to give it a reasonable lifetime. Logically, that is what this mega-engineer would do.

The uniqueness of each life form depends upon minimizing redundancy. For example, if plants with their extremely complex chlorophyll engines can produce the oxygen, then animal designs may be spared the burden of chlorophyll engines. Instead, animals may be designed with extremely complex muscle engines that draw on that ocean of oxygen to support the high metabolic rates required by swift movement. In turn, the by-products of animal metabolism may be recycled by the stationary plants. This symbiotic division of life-giving labor establishes one of the basic principles for the design of an individual life form. The immediacy of its survival is dependent upon benefits from other life forms. For our mega- engineer, an independent life form is not practical and not worth considering. The way to design for an interesting life form would be in the direction of an interdependent biosphere and that is what we observe.

Indispensable and unlimited variety. Variation of types. The biosphere also must be designed with vast variabilities to withstand environmental extremes and usual extinctions from devolution. There

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 15 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

must be plants that thrive in wetlands and others that thrive in deserts, in oceans and others in mountains, in arctic regions and others in the tropics. As an environmental cycle makes one kind scarce, a variant may thrive. If one becomes extinct, then a variant without that vulnerability may take its place. To give all life forms longevity, the biosphere needs to be designed with variants similar enough to take over in case of the extinction of a relative, but different enough to not have the vulnerability causing the scarcity. The biosphere is composed of every conceivable life form without reason if evolution were true, and with imperative reason if creation is true. From trillions of observations by billions of observers for thousands of years, all life forms are fixed and they survive magnificently because of their countless interdependencies, immense variation, and vast overlaps.

Variation within types. Biology is based on observation and experiment. To test the fact that the biosphere is based on an apparently unlimited variability within types, seek out two or more segments of any life form that are of the same type. Seek out two leaves from the same branch or two adjacent blades of grass or two siblings or identical twins. They will be different. Even identical twins, which arose from the same genetic material, are not identical because their development is different and they are therefore anatomically, functionally and behaviorally different. They have different fingerprints and iris patterns. So, the key to survival is such vast variety that some members of the life form will survive no matter what extreme is presented in the environment. For biology, that is why lethal is defined as what kills 50% of the population. Killing 100% would not be practical because it would take too long, may not be achieved under experimental conditions, and thus would be unwieldy for use in research.

Evolution claims sameness, “homologues,” to suggest the similarities that in turn suggest a sequence. The examples in the biology textbooks are obviously false, but they are the best that can be found in a biosphere where nothing is the same, not even in the same organism. All faces are different, and even the right and left sides of the same face are different. Right and left limbs are different mainly but not only because they are mirror images. Everything varies in nature. Natura universa varia est.

Proof positive of the Creator. Cookie cutters, prints, and assembly lines yield sameness because the master pattern has been used mechanically to mass produce each individual item. Contrarily, each hand-made article is different because the artist has been uniquely made from engineering capable of unlimited variation. Thus, every artistic expression is unique, whether attempted in the present, like anything made by hand, or in the future, like a child. The inescapable variety, non viable and viable alike, is the signature of the original creator, the mega-artist. Everything in the universe is signed like a painting or a sculpture or a life form and of course even the signatures are unique. In the schools, evolutionists must actively censor this fact with ceaseless propaganda and brainwashing because the unlimited universal variety everywhere ceaselessly whispers, “created.” Cookie cutters, once created, are brainless like the evolution concept and like it must yield “homologues,” which also like evolution do not exist if one examines. Universally observable, this is scientific proof of a mega-creator and absolute disproof of the opposite extreme, brainless cookie-cutter evolution. Discerned by science, let us henceforth define this mega-creator with a capital C, Creator.

Vast variation. Natura universa varia est. I cannot find a single case of a living thing that is the same as another living thing. Even leaves that come off the same stem in exactly opposite positions are different in size, vein pattern, and the shape of the stem from the main stem. See Figure 23. I call it Vast Variation. If you cannot find an exception, then this may be an objective, observable scientific proof of the Creator. And this apparently is an original proof, for I have not heard or read it before.

Figure 23. An example of vast variation, natura universa varia est. See text.

Vast variation seems to hold for the non viable world as well. That seems to be a proof that non viable and viable realms were masterpieces of the same Creator. Again, I sense that an exception cannot be found and that this is an original, objective, observable scientific proof of the Creator.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 16 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Vast variation eliminates evolution. Evolution has no brain, cannot make anything, cannot know what variation is, and, if it could know, it could not think of how to make the same thing but with non critical differences. Evolution cannot make anything, but if it could, all of them would be the same as if made by a cookie cutter. That apparently is why evolutionists never find “homologues,” and never will. Nothing is the same.

Geometries. Non life and life seem to have form in order to exist. Humans know Euclidian geometry composed of circles, squares, triangles, rectangles, pentagons, and so on. These shapes may be described with formulas, but they are not the shapes in nature. Fractal geometry is repetitive and can approach the shapes of nature, though not quite. Something like snowflakes, shorelines, trees and so on may be simulated with fractal algorithms, but again they miss the geometries of non life and life. Evidently, there is no known geometry that can describe non living structures or living structures because each structure is different, though similar to the others in its group. It is as if each object’s geometry is unique, but if that were the case then the originality burden on the Creator would be so immense as to be unimaginable. Yet, if admitted because it is observed, then why go to all that trouble? Why not mass produce pieces and put them together in interesting ways? Perhaps, the answer lies in what it would say about the Creator and the effect on the creatures. The creatures would recognize the Creator as little more than a Tinkertoy maker and creation as a playground for children but a boring place for adults. Life would have too little meaning and could not survive for myriad other reasons as well. To make a world worth living in, the only alternative is to individually design each object, non viable and viable alike. The living geometry may be entwined with the vast variability of every molecule of every cell in every organism. Perhaps, organisms are built from individualized functions to the unique structures. This seems unlikely because we were taught that structure delimits function and logically structure should precede function, for that is the way humans design their machines. Given human intelligence, perhaps so. Yet, we observe vast variation and all of it works. That may be reason enough to spell Creator with a capitol C.

The evolution concept aimed to appropriate the vast variability of the non living realm by fantasizing that it created the vast variability of the living realm with the forces in the non living realm. It was the best guess to fulfill the atheistic requirement of no God. It failed because it required the vitalism superstitions to arise from the non living realm and the experiments of Redi, Pasteur and Tyndall amongst others proved that life is reproduced from life and never from the non living realm. It also failed because the vast variability of life forms is significantly different from the vast variability of the non living realm. If we let the geometries of the non living be Unknown NL, then let the geometries of the living be Unknown Z. They are not the same and Unknown Z is orders of magnitude more complex and more variable in that complexity than Unknown NL. Both are vastly variable but that is where the similarly seems to end. In summary, neither kind of geometry, NL and Z, can be described or explained. The source for the single case or the aggregate in each realm of course also cannot be described or explained. To be honest, we must admit both are beyond human intelligence. We must also admit that claiming the source is brainless, like evolution, is not only scientifically untenable but also the ultimate intellectual insult to the whole human race. Contrarily, claiming that the source is both intelligent and creative to extremes beyond human understanding, then such a Creator is logical and scientifically tenable.

Survival and aesthetics. It would be a boring, rather simple-minded design to have a biosphere of only one variety of one type of plant and only one variety of one type of animal, for just one kind of catastrophe might extinguish it all. The graduated array of life forms each with its own variabilities would be the design of choice for survival and for aesthetics. It is a test of engineering competence to bring forth a creation that not only provides the structural and functional necessities but also is a work of art. The most competent engineers do this to show that the necessary specifications did not exhaust their ingenuity.

To test the concept that aesthetics are vital, we may observe that the non viable and viable portions of the universe have their own unique geometries, which are neither Euclidian nor fractal, the two main types humans might use. We have no names for them and that is one of the reasons we refer to them as “natural.” We must also note the relationship to the variety for survival. Survival requires a dynamic functional mastery of any environmental extreme and that is delimited by structures which are determined by geometries. Enormous variety to survive is rooted in the variety of geometries which render the structures which delimit the appropriate functions manifested, or from the genetic reserves (see further on). That immense variety provides an inimitable panoply of forms in motion for an aesthetic experience that defies description, analysis or synthesis. It is the source of terms like, joie de vivre, the joy of living, an ultimate of aesthetic experience. Unlimited variety is the key to the dynamics of life observed everywhere in the biosphere whereas evolution would be ultimate boredom if it could ever come into existence. Variety, vast variation, is the spice and the necessity of life.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 17 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Biosphere summary. The engineering of one life form with a modicum of endurance requires a proper star at a proper distance from a proper planet populated with an interdependent biosphere of complementary organisms capable of self repair, arousal alterations, and reproduction. The vast variation of types of organisms with partial overlaps provide a survival resilience for the entire biosphere as a global organism. The vast variation in each organism’s population provides a survival resilience for that unit of the biosphere. The vast variations and intricately balanced interdependencies required mega- engineering beyond the powers of humans to understand. Biology textbooks that credit chance and mindless evolution instead of mega-engineering treat their students to multiple intellectual insults.

Punctual survival by precise genetic reserves. Let us say that our mega-engineer has decided to create the monarch butterfly. This is a good example because the whole life cycle of one individual from one allotment of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) may be observed in 60 days. Except for genetic disorders in the reproductive chain, this individual may just as readily represent the first or the middle or the final individual just before extinction. It is statistically the sort of representative sample that scientists strive to provide for their experiments. For the big question of whether life forms are evolved or created, here is an experiment affording the direct observation required by biology and as many observations as may be needed. We need not depend on the superstitious, refuted, spontaneous generations of evolutionists claiming nearly infinite miracles over millions of years in defiance of the laws of physics. Instead, biology devises experiments that are successful at least 95 times out of 100 trials.6 The experiment below fulfills all of the requirements of biology because it may be observed with high validity, reliability and objectivity during countless repetitions. It proves beyond the vaguest shadow of a doubt that the butterfly was created from the DNA of its egg. Biology authorizes us to so conclude whether it is the second monarch butterfly to have ever existed, the middle one, or the last one just before extinction. We observe this creation, like all life form creations, arises from DNA. That suggests that the second generation of all life forms were begun from DNA and every life form, like everything else in the universe, is a creation. Science justifies this conclusion because we observe exclusively trillions of creations and not one instance of evolution. Creation is not only necessary, it is also more than sufficient. There is no need to call upon the evolution superstition for any kind of supplement. As Ockham’s razor states, “Pluralites non est ponenda sine necessitate,” multiplicity ought not to be posited without necessity. For biology, superstitious miracles like evolution are unnecessary in the extreme because they are anti- biology, the fraudulent opposite of reality.

Unique sequential genetic reserves. The monarch butterfly egg is an oval about one millimeter in length with twenty longitudinal ribs strengthened by five hundred perpendicular struts that make it look like the superstructure of a cathedral dome engineered for high mechanical strength. With a waterproof glue stronger than the egg structure, it is fastened to the underside of a milkweed leaf after inspection for no other eggs, then a piercing and testing for nutritional value by the female monarch butterfly.

From the egg in three days, a caterpillar two millimeters long hatches. It has sixteen legs, four antennae, six simple eyes, a spinneret to spin silk pads for molting, and a mandible to chew the milkweed leaf in order to gain 2,700 times its birth weight. It molts five times then spins a chrysalis around itself and in fourteen days hatches as a monarch butterfly. Now it has six legs, four wings covered with a million aerodynamic scales (which had to be specified in the DNA like every molecule of every structure), two antennae complete with smell organs, two compound eyes each composed of 6,000 simple eyes, a proboscis for drinking nectar, sexual organs, behaviors for mating and for selecting appropriate milkweed leaves for the laying of fertilized eggs, and the ability to fly twenty-four miles an hour while navigating a three-thousand-mile migration with all the navigation equipment on board in the size of the head of a pin. Shortly after completion of their reproductive functions, male and female become dehydrated and die.42

The life cycle of the monarch butterfly teaches that in the seemingly inert egg are all of the genetic instructions to form a sixteen-legged creature crawling on the leaves of one plant as well as all of the coding and information needed to transform that creature to one with four wings and the ability to fly and navigate three thousand miles. There was no physical manifestation of the caterpillar when it was an egg, just as there was no physical manifestation of the butterfly when it was a caterpillar. In other words, there was a manifested morphology while there were unmanifested in the organism’s genetic reserves meticulously planned transitional morphologies and functions. To observe such remarkable transformations in the space of sixty days teaches an important lesson on the capacity of an organism’s genetic reserves. These incredibly complex transformations, which no human engineer can blueprint and mindless evolution could never accomplish, occur once in a rigorous order to attain adulthood and do not occur again. Every multicelled organism has them. Some life forms do not transform from sixteen legs to six legs, some do not transform from pedestrians to flyers, but the transformations are no less remarkable. Every multicelled life form must grow and develop from an egg or seed to an adult configuration and that requires continuous structural and functional alterations that are beyond human

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 18 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

comprehension. Humans have a hard enough time engineering a machine of fixed configuration with no progeny and no self repair that will yield its wanted function without breaking down or wearing out prematurely. There are other types of genetic reserves.

Cyclical genetic reserves. When the arctic fox has a gray coat of fur in summer, which blends with the tundra, it has in its genetic reserve the white fur that it will wear in winter. The fox’s white fur in winter blends with the snow but its genetic reserve still contains the gray fur for the following summer. Similarly, the rock ptarmigan draws from its genetic reserves almost continually to display feathers of mottled reddish-brown in spring, then brownish-gray in fall, then white in winter. Trees leaf and bloom in spring, then fruit in summer. Leaves become pied and drop in the fall. Birds nest and rear young in spring and summer, then migrate in the fall. These periodicities are from the organism’s cyclical genetic reserves and go on for its lifetime with punctuality and precision. The fox has white fur for the first snowfall, not the last, and gray fur for first thaw, not a week or a month later. And it never grows red or green or orange or blue fur by trial and error like evolutionists would have us believe. If its cyclical genetic reserves were not engineered for precision and punctuality, it could not survive a single change of season.

Arousal genetic reserves. Exercise in the heat arouses the genetic reserve to synthesize heat- shock proteins that enable activity in the hot environment.5,45 Activity patterns arouse new proteins for muscle actin and myosin contractile filaments.41 Skeletal muscle hypertrophy and bradycardia are aroused from training, and skeletal muscle atrophy and tachycardia from bed rest. An increased concentration of red blood cells and 2,3-diphosphoglycerate are aroused by sojourns at high altitude, then lost by a return to sea level.8,48 New collateral coronary arteries are synthesized in two months to get around blocked arteries.46 New bone cells are aroused by fractures and new scar tissue from abrasions, burns, cuts, or tears. These are but a few of the innumerable genetic reserves manifested by arousal that are built into each life form in the biosphere. They cannot be incorporated by evolution because the organism will not know what is needed until the event and it will not survive unless the need is immediately satisfied. Vacant-minded evolution cannot plan or organize or coordinate or command or control because it is brainless. What is brainless is thoughtless to the extreme and cannot comprehend or act in what is complex to the extreme, life and survival.

All genetic reserves function at once. From conception to death, the DNA of the life form makes available as needed all genetic reserves and there is no interference amongst them. For example, the life form may arouse simultaneously the separate proteins for heat shock and altitude as it climbs a mountain on a hot day, then the proteins to raise centrally the metabolic rate to withstand the bitter cold at night. Always at the ready, the abundant genetic reserves may manifest themselves in any appropriate pattern at any time without interference. They provide each life form with remarkable arrays of morphological, functional and behavioral mechanisms to meet punctually and precisely the variabilities of the environment and to survive the extremes. And they do it right the first time. They do not do it by magic or brainless iteration over alleged millions of years as evolution would have us believe. If the arctic fox had to evolve its white coat by brainless evolutionary iteration, it never would have survived. Like every life form, it needed the punctuality, versatility and precision of all its genetic reserves from conception or it would never have even been born. That required mega-engineering which in turn required mega- intelligence.

Structural definition is locked. The basic structure of a life form is partly determined by the configuration of its DNA and other genetic materials. These, together with repair genes to protect DNA fidelity, not only give the life form its fixed definition but they also provide the lock to prevent any wandering toward or away from any other life form. The only change time can produce is devolution, like genetic disorders, toward extinction.

Latent population genetic reserves. Latent in the Chihuahua are the DNA for the Great Dane as well as the vast array of intermediates amongst those and other extremes. If allowed to breed ad libitum these designs manifest themselves. The manifestations of hidden designs have puzzled evolutionists and have been misinterpreted by them as evolution toward and away from the extremes, like bacterial resistance to antibiotics. When antibiotics are discontinued, then the original array of vast variation manifests itself again. The susceptible strains were latent in the DNA of the non susceptible strains. Each bacterium carried the latent vast array of variation in its DNA and was capable of expressing it. This is what the evidence revealed by rotation of the experimental factor, the antibiotic.

An organism individually survives by means of its vast latent genetic tissue reserves that may be called into manifestation sequentially, cyclically or by arousal. As a population, the organism survives by its individuals being assigned an initial morphology from a vast array carried in the DNA of all of its members. If certain members do not survive, their designs are not lost because the survivors latently carry them and may express them in future generations. In that fashion, the original biosphere design of checks and balances for the survival of all life forms finds consistent success and stability.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 19 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

For example, for environment A, variant A of every life form survives but all siblings B through Z perish. The B through Z designs are latent in A and are expressed in later generations. Subsequently, the environment changes to B and now the B variants survive but the A and C through Z do not, but still remain latent in B and may be expressed in later generations. And so on. Thus, extreme upsets in the environment must wipe out every single individual, or couple, or in subsequent benign times the original array and distribution of the population will reestablish itself from the latent genetic information of any survivors. From this latent resilience, the communities of life forms maintain their interdependencies, checks and balances as they survive the environment and its extremes. Such is the mega-design for the endurance of the biosphere.

Such a mega-design is mega-intricate and required mega-engineering from a mega-intelligent mega-engineer capable of mega-creativity that also resulted in mega-beauty. We could shorten all that by saying, mega-creator. Or, Creator. Or, we could just use the three-letter word that many megalomaniacs seem to loathe with malice, God.

Adaptation, acclimation, and acclimatization or dynamic physiological design? If a person exercises, the heart rate will increase and this is called a physiological response. If a person trains for weeks with exactly that exercise, then the heart rate will be lower than the initial response. That lowered heart rate for the same exercise the evolutionists call, adaptation. If such a modified response is instigated by an environment, then it may be called, acclimation. If in response to a change in climate, then it may be called, acclimatization.8 Evolution misleads us because the response is mediated by the autonomic nervous system, which is an integral part of the individual’s design from its DNA. The modified response is an integral part of the individual’s ever-changing physiology as modified by the aroused genetic reserves. Those reserves will synthesize the appropriate new proteins whether the stimulus comes from within, like the exercise, or from outside like the climate or something else in the environment. By inventing three unnecessary names, the evolutionists not only mislead us but they also complicate what is easy to understand. Each life form has a dynamic structural and physiological design. The dynamic physiological design in every living organism provides precise and punctual dynamic survival for all individuals, all populations, and the entire biosphere. The inverted fantasy, evolution, never has done and never will do any of those myriad imperative functions. With no brain, it is absolutely stupid.

Life is a mega-invention. To say that life has purpose is such an understatement that it borders on fiction. From the nano-architecture and function of the cell to the plan, organization, coordination, command and control of tissues, organs, entire organisms, populations of organisms, and the entire biosphere, the engineering at even the lowest level is too far beyond all human intelligence aggregated to use terms like purpose or intelligence or even mega-intelligence or mega-engineering. A new concept with a new name is needed. For the moment, let us coin the word, zilligence, as taken from the word, zillion, and meaning here of such immense magnitudes and dimensions that it defies definition. Life then has been zilligently engineered with nearly infinite arrays of originality within and between units. That kind of engineering goes beyond the meaning of engineering and yet another word is needed. For this concept, let us coin the word origineering to convey the universal observation that every element within and between all organisms has been uniquely designed not only to satisfy life requirements but to also exhibit originality from a seemingly limitless number of pallets of vast variation. Then observation suggests that life is an invention zilligently origineered for dynamic survival. Although all life events require an energy conversion, the events themselves are different and the organism even in adult configuration lives dynamically with never ending originality and inventiveness.

The seemingly infinite harmonious variations send aesthetic, consciousness, and spiritual experiences soaring toward the source. Even in the boorishly stifling mazes humans build and call, cities, one may appreciate the astonishing array of felicitous colors, tastes, aromas, fragrances of plants, trees, flowers, fruits, fields, brooks, lakes, and oceans. Most impressive is that every color and shape, every kind of flower and bird has been invented. We cannot imagine anything that cannot be found in nature so vast yet so ever changing. For example, we may look at the sky and never see that formation of clouds ever again. Two snowflakes nor two of anything are ever the same

To say that life has purpose is borderline fiction. To say it is the grandiose mega-invention origineered by a zillience is closer to reality. To say that it mindlessly evolved is the grossest intellectual insult ever devised in all of human history by the most brazenly deceitful of human minds. Causing a likely permanent loss of confidence and motivation, it disgusts students with a taste for science.

Summary. The life forms of the biosphere are endowed with manifested and unmanifested genetic reserves that provide growth and development from fertile egg or seed to adult configuration. The cyclical and arousal reserves provide dynamic survival resilience with precision and punctuality. The vast variation of the population is latently carried in each individual and permits the re-establishment of the

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 20 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

population after a catastrophe if one breeding pair survives. These facts have been censored and replaced by frauds and forgeries by evolutionists and their biology textbooks for more than a century.

A Consequence of Teaching Evolution. Those who hallucinate that the nearly infinite spontaneously generated evolution miracles are true and deny the reality of the laws of physics are, according to the medical dictionary definition, psychotic, not scientists, and students sense it. The imposition of the evolution psychosis on students suggests to them that science is demented with no reliable place for rational, intelligent endeavor. The current effect on science and mathematics students is that they are being stupefied to 50% of their fourth grade endowment by the time they reach twelfth grade and many no doubt are being alienated permanently from science and the language of science, mathematics. See Figure 24.

*Figure 24. Student achievement in science and mathematics in the U.S.A. declines from 4th through 12th grade. Only 4% of the world’s children exceed those of the U.S.A. in 4th grade science whereas 55% exceed them by 12th grade. Only 28% of the world’s children exceed those of the U.S.A. in 4th grade mathematics whereas 70% exceed them by 12th grade. These data suggest that the ubiquitous but demented evolution instruction in science and mathematics has stupefied 4th grade science talent by more than 13 fold and stupefied 4th grade mathematics talent by 2.5 fold. See National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, Before It’s Too Late, A Report to the Nation from the National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C., 2000, p. 10.

A Remedy. An effective remedy is to teach the laws of physics in elementary school. Students should be taught that all structural events yield devolution, never evolution. The outrageous, psychotic falsehood, evolution, must be expunged from every class of every curriculum in every school. If these were done, then it is likely that science and mathematics achievement in twelfth grade would reflect 100% of the talent level of fourth grade instead of only 50% or 40%.

Chapter 5
Evolution Is Superstitious Vitalism and the Life Science Prize Proves It

One of the earliest references to evolution is associated with the ancient Greek goddess Gaea, also known as Cybele, the nature deity, the Great Mother of all the gods, the Earth personified. She was the mythical mother of Prometheus, the Titan, who formed a man of clay, animated it and thereby created mankind. This myth contains the idea of creating life from non living matter. Here may be the earliest suggestion for the event on which evolution depends for its beginning: the generation of life from non living matter originating in the vitality of Mother Earth. Quite probably well known to ancient Greek philosophers, this ancient myth may have provided some ideas for Anaximander’s concept of evolution.10

For Anaximander (611-549 B.C.), the universe was infinite, without morals and in possession of the vital forces which give rise by struggle to every living thing and bring all living things by struggle to extinction. He taught that the Earth at first was a fluid, and with drying the land appeared. Evaporation formed the clouds and heat gradients made the winds. He also held that all living things arose very gradually from the original fluid and all land animals, including mankind, had earlier been fish. From Anaximander we may recognize concepts held by evolutionists today: a molten primeval planet, a primitive fluid spontaneously spawning the simplest life forms, the earliest life forms living in the sea and proceeding by small steps to all complex forms, particularly all terrestrial plants and animals. For Anaximander, man was once a fish 9 or as an infant was produced first in a fish and was protected by it until it could fend for itself. This bears a resemblance to the current evolutionist belief “… we belong to a

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 21 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

highly specialized group of bony fishes.” 15 We also find the concept made famous by Charles Darwin that struggle is the way superior life forms exterminate inferior life forms.5 See Figure 25 below, Anaximander’s imagined cycle of life.

*
Figure 25. Anaximander’s imagined cycle of life and Cybele likely providing the magic.

For Anaximander, all life from amoral vital forces would arise, then progress from struggle. Subsequently, that struggle would regress all life to extinction, then the cycle would be repeated. The modern evolution concept has the fittest thriving and thereby evolving to higher forms by extinguishing the less fit. The modern survival by force of contention with competitors shows an acceptance of the evolution portion of Anaximander’s imagination, but it omits the part in harmony with the laws of physics, the devolution-to-extinction portion.

Anaxagoras (500-427 B.C.) also expounded an evolutionary concept for animal and human life. For Anaxagoras, the universe was pervaded by a Cosmic Mind which gave order to the primeval seeds and from a vortex guided them toward the development of organic life.9 With Empedocles (490 – 430 B.C.), he outlined a concept of evolution saying that in a former time he was a flowering shrub, a bird, and a fish that swims silently in the sea. He maintained that nature produced every kind of form and organ. He also said that nature will cause the eventual decay to the primitive formless primeval mass, thereby giving with Anaximander an early definition of devolution, the opposing disintegrating process.9

Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) believed that vital forces spontaneously generated eels. Although physically impossible, the mystical concept of the spontaneous generation of life is a step forward for evolution as a self-sufficient supreme creator because the deities and their progeny, like Prometheus, may be entirely left out of the process. Aristotle’s emphasis on definitions required a reference to a genus or class. For example, he would say that man is an animal.9 We see those classifications currently in the designation of fossils. Aristotle also described the current evolutionary idea of “homologous” structures, which he rightly called, analogous structures. 9,14 For example, he said that the bird’s feather is the analogue of the fish’s scale.8,9 He also described the embryological similarities amongst animals. He taught that the human embryo develops like the chick. As we shall see further on, this supposed circumstantial evidence from embryology was fraudulently embellished by Ernst Haeckel, the German evolution zealot of the nineteenth century, and is still present in modern biology textbooks.14,16,17,18,20, 21,22,25,26 Aristotle rejected Empedocles’ idea that natural selection took place by accidental mutations. For Aristotle, evolution was driven from within each organism to achieve its fullest potential. Here he departed from the modern evolutionist adherence to Empedocles’ idea of an aimlessly wandering self-sufficient process.

Aristotle also imagined that the structures of the embryo were formed by the minute particles from every part of the adult that gathered in the reproductive organs and were thereby inherited. This soma (body) seed fallacy is what Charles Darwin called, without attribution, pangenesis, and the minute particles that imaginatively customized the hereditary material Darwin called, gemmules. 6

Aristotle’s spontaneous generation and other Gaean evolution imaginings made their way to Rome and to the goddess, Tellus. After the fall of Rome, the ideas were preserved by the rise of Islam during the Dark Ages. In the Arabian city of Cordoba in Spain, these writings were rediscovered by the European renaissance scholars. By such military and cultural conquests, the Greek imaginings about evolution made their way to western Europe.

Cybele was the nature deity and the mythical Great Mother of all the gods in Asia Minor. Her cult spread to Greece in the 6th century B.C. where she became associated with the Greek goddess Gaea, Mother Earth personified. According to Greek theogony, Gaea was the mother of the Titan, Prometheus, the plasticator and animator, who created mankind by forming then animating a clay figure. Anaximander, Empedocles and Aristotle believed in spontaneous generation. For Anaximander, life arose and diversified all by itself. Empedocles said it had no direction. Aristotle specifically stated that eels were spontaneously generated from Mother Earth. These pagan myths apparently influenced these famous Greeks to believe in the vitalism inherent in Mother Earth.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 22 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

The Roman, Virgil (70-19 B.C.), in his pastoral poetry gave detailed instructions for the raising of swarms of bees from the carcass of a suffocated steer.16 Here we have an expression of the belief that if the instructions are followed, then bees will be spontaneously generated from dead steer meat. We know that Aristotle held sway throughout the middle ages so let us leap ahead to the Renaissance. In Antony and Cleopatra, Shakespeare (1564-1616) had Lepidius say: “Your serpent of Egypt is bred now of your mud by the operation of your sun; so is your crocodile.”15 Here is an expression of the belief that snakes and crocodiles may be spontaneously generated from an inorganic mud merely by the application of sunshine. There also was a common belief that dead meat spontaneously generated maggots, a goose could be evolved in one generation from a lowly barnacle, and horsehair dropped in water would come alive. These superstitions and others were propagated by vitalism and evolution to the 20th century.14

The scientific investigation of maggots from meat may have begun with the controlled experiments of 1665. Francesco Redi put meat in three jars, one open, one closed with gauze and the third closed with paper. Flies laid their eggs on the meat in the open jar. The eggs hatched to maggots, then young flies. Unable to reach the meat, flies laid their eggs on the gauze of the second jar and the maggots hatched on the gauze, not on the meat. No eggs were laid on the paper or the meat of the third jar, so it remained free of maggots. With this repeatable experiment, Redi proved scientifically that life, the maggots, comes from life, the flies, and not from non life. 17 This proved that the spontaneous generation of maggots was superstition. However, the vitalists would not give up. They maintained that the microorganisms that grow in a culture broth or that ferment beers or wines were spontaneously generated.

About 1854, Heinrich Schroder and Theodor von Dusch demonstrated with their experiments that bacteria were not spontaneously generated, either. With cotton wool, they filtered the bacteria out of the air going into their culture flasks. The cultures remained unaffected. But this did not satisfy the vitalists.

In 1864 the archetype scientist, Louis Pasteur (1822-1895), proved without filters that the microorganisms causing fermentation were airborne, not spontaneously generated as the evolution vitalists insisted. Pasteur also provided reproducible evidence that the airborne distribution of microorganisms is not uniform. Besides these undisputed experiments, Pasteur successfully applied his findings to his work on vaccines for chicken cholera, anthrax and rabies. Yet in spite of all this reproducible scientific evidence and without one experiment to the contrary, the evolution vitalists like Charles Darwin, as well as modern biology textbook authors, like Johnson, and Miller and Levine, and Hickman and Roberts and Larson, and many others, persisted in propagandizing the ancient Greek spontaneous generation superstitions of 2,300 years earlier.1,2,4,7,8,9,10,12,17

Unlike Darwin and his ilk, however, true scientists like Dr. Joseph Lister did not dishonor this new knowledge but rather applied it to surgery in 1865 by sterilizing for atmospheric germs with carbolic acid. Lister thereby prevented putrefaction in compound fractures.17 Like Pasteur and Lister, scientists replace superstition with repeatable experiments and apply the new knowledge to the relief of human suffering. Antiscientists like Darwin and Haeckel resorted to superstition and fraud to support their ancient vitalism religion masquerading as science to the detriment of all life forms, as we shall see further on.

In 1877, the physicist, John Tyndall, with an ingenious apparatus and protocol proved most rigorously that life cannot arise from non life. His apparatus demonstrated that light was invisible in a clean chamber and visible when dust with its invisible cargo of bacteria was introduced. His protocol provided for the cycling of sterilizing heat which killed the bacterial spores that hatched and became vulnerable after the first thermal stress. This seemed to settle the issue scientifically for all time. See Figure 26 below for the apparatus used by Redi, Pasteur and Tyndall in their reproducible experiments that have never been overturned and that forever refute the superstitious spontaneous generation miracles that are the foundation of evolution.17

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 23 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

*
Figure 26. The classical experiments of Redi, Pasteur and Tyndall, never overturned, proved that the superstitious vitalism foundation of evolution was absolutely false.

Yet without any evidence whatsoever, biology students currently are taught that the nearly infinite miracles of the spontaneous generation of life structures and functions from non life did occur on the early Earth.9,10,12,17 The students are not told how these miracles occurred. Incredibly, the students are actually taught that spontaneous generation otherwise is impossible.9,12,17 In other words, the early Earth mysteriously performed nearly infinite miracles that nature no longer can perform. The only logical inference for students is that Cybele, or some other witch or wizard, performed the magic. But no matter who allegedly did it, those nearly infinite spontaneous generations violate the laws of physics and by dictionary definition are miracles. So, the student must believe in these nearly infinite miraculous transmutations from non life to life, probably by the intervention of Cybele, strictly as an article of faith in the pagan religion called, evolution.

By teaching the spontaneous-generation pagan religion as the science of evolution, the biology establishment of the United States has set back science education more than 2,000 years and the effect on science students has been catastrophic. Worldwide, our science talent in fourth grade is above 95 % of the other nations but by twelfth grade the evolutionists have stupefied them down to 45%.13 (See Figure 24.) Enforced ignorance by U.S. public schools could hardly have done more damage. That is why the greatest imperative legally, culturally, and educationally is to expunge evolution nationwide. The U.S. Constitution forbids the establishment of a state religion and evolution by dictionary definitions is a state religion.3,11 See Appendix B.

References
1. Assmuth, J. and Ernest R. Hull. 1915. Haeckel’s frauds and forgeries. P.J. Kennedy & Sons,

New York, pp. 74-76.
2. Becker, David R. 1999. The monera fallacy. Watchmaker 6 (2): 14-18.
3. Constitution of the United States of America. 1787. Amendment I, “Restriction on Powers of

Congress [Section 1*.] Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” Ratified December 15, 1791. Note. This is
frequently cited in legal cases as the Establishment Clause, the prohibition of a state religion.

4. Darwin, F., ed. The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, London: John Murray, 1888, Vol. 1, p. 83.

5. Durant, W. The Story of Civilization, the Life of Greece. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1939, pp. 139, 339, 669.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 24 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

6. Encyclopædia Britannica. Chicago: William Benton, Publisher, 1965, Vol. 10, p. 777; Vol. 13, p. 614.

7. Grigg, Russell. Ernst Haeckel: evangelist for evolution and apostle of deceit. Creation Ex Nihilo 18(2): 33-36, 1996.

8. Haeckel, Ernst. Naturliche Schopfungsgeschichte, 1868, p. 144, Figure 1.
9. Hickman, C.P., L.S. Roberts and A. Larson, Integrated principles of zoology, Mc Graw Hill,

Boston, 2001, pp. 22, 29, 30.
10. Johnson, G. B. Biology, Visualizing Life. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1998, p. 195. 11. Mastropaolo, Joseph. Evolution Is Lethal Antiscience. Creation Research Society Quarterly 38:

151-158, 2001.
12. Miller, Kenneth R. and Joseph Levine. Biology. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall,

2000, p. 346.
13. National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, Before It’s

Too Late, A Report to the Nation from the National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C., p. 10, 2000.

14. Phin, John. The seven follies of science. London: Constable & Company Ltd, 1912, p. 201–203, 207–208.

15. Shakespeare, William. Antony and Cleopatra, 1608, Act 2, Scene 6.
16. Virgil (Publius Virgilius Maro), 70-19 B.C., Book Four of Georgics.
17. Wistreich, G.A. and M.D. Lechtman. Microbiology. New York: Macmillan Publishers, 1980,

pp. 17-22.

The early Earth and energy laws. A biology textbook shows the early Earth as molten with exploding volcanoes and many meteors in a sky dominated by a giant sun.10 There is an accompanying strong suggestion that this imagined catastrophic landscape mysteriously influenced the laws of physics to cause life to spring from non life, then run wild and wily beyond belief by spontaneously generating the nearly infinite nanomachines in every single-celled then every multi-celled organism past and present. Fortunately for the real world but unfortunately for evolution, there is no sign that the laws of physics were ever different in the past than they are now and there is much evidence that these laws are immutable. Besides the early Earth ploy, evolutionists obfuscate the Second Law of Thermodynamics because it requires devolution, the opposite and excluder of evolution. Let us examine what physics has to say about evolution, the past, the Second Law, and devolution.

Event Law. In order for evolution or anything else to happen, an energy conversion must take place. If there is no available energy or for some other reason no energy is converted, then nothing happens. The time line of history is countless events from countless energy conversions. A knowledge of the energy laws will permit an accurate retrospective view of time and what may or may not have been possible on the early Earth. Although personally presented to the Framework Committee by this author, this law was purposely omitted from the California Science Framework, which is representative of many state science frameworks.2,9

Other Energy Laws. Put the case that to permit any event, perhaps an evolutionary event, we would like to create some energy so that we may subsequently convert with it and thereby obtain some life event. Unfortunately, this cannot be done because the First Law of Thermodynamics will not permit the creation or destruction of any energy. We are limited to the use of whatever energy is available. And because none can be created or destroyed, total energy remains the same in the universe. This at first may seem strange because one would think that the countless events streaming down through history would use up a great deal of energy and that used energy would vanish. With some correction, our intuition has merit. Some of that converted energy does not disappear but rather becomes unavailable for any future event. Although personally presented to the Framework Committee by this author, this law was purposely omitted from the California Science Framework, which is representative of many state science frameworks.2,9

The universe requires that the energy for an event must be obtained from a quantity of available energy. When that available energy is converted, some of the converted energy becomes unavailable for future conversions. It disappears only from the store of available energy, not from the universe. Nevertheless, available energy always runs down, and for another event to occur, some kind of machine must bring more to the event site. Unavailable energy always accumulates, and for another event to occur, some kind of machine must clear it from the event site. This is called the Second Law of Thermodynamics and it defeats the evolution concept. Brainless evolution knows nothing of energy laws or the engineering of machines to acquire available energy or dispose of unavailable energy.7

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 25 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Now, we see clearly why reality in the past or present or future is summarized with natura semper scalas descendet, nature always goes downstairs. Nature always devolves. Nature never evolves except in vitalism superstitions or inverted fantasioes. Although personally presented to the Framework Committee by this author, this law was purposely omitted from the California Science Framework, which is representative of many state science frameworks.2,9
. Second, after every event some of the converted energy had to become unavailable for future events. Third, time ravages everything because its events diminish its future, available energy, while stifling its continuation with unavailable energy. Time stops everything. Time builds nothing. That testifies that evolution lies by telling us that time built every living thing. Time destroys every living thing. Natura semper scalas descendet.

No matter its form, every structure was made from energy and must obey the energy laws. That is why living things die and go extinct and never spontaneously arise, natura semper scalas descendet. That is why the evolutionist must teach students that reality is just the opposite of what it is or make them believe in the miracles performed once and only once without witnesses by the early Earth. Natura semper scalas descendet applies to every structure in the universe, non viable and viable alike, past and present and future.

Chapter 5
The Life Science Prize Acid Test for Biology for the 21st Century

Extensive searching of the literature failed to uncover one scintilla of scientific evidence in support of evolution. In fact, just the opposite was found. Evidently, evolution is an inverted-fantasy religion taught by frauds in the public schools in violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. The question arose as to how one could be sure that such a travesty is real. The answer was to challenge the world’s leading evolutionists with a substantial reward for the scientific evidence and give a default-judgment if they had none. If the evolutionist community is hiding their evidence, then the challenge, the reward, and the default-judgment should bring it out into the open for scientific scrutiny.

Evolution is an inverted-fantasy religion. In physics, the arrow of time points downward because everything in the universe, viable and non viable alike, is ravaged to death by time. In evolution, the arrow of time contrarily points upward forever. In biology, every mutation leads to disease and death whereas evolution would have us believe that mutations are beneficial and creative. All life forms are vastly variable but fixed in type, but evolution would have us believe that secretly in the past every life form wildly changed to every other kind, then secretly stopped forever. Yet, nothing in the universe, viable or non viable, has ever wandered to become another object. Biology tells the truth that ape-men are forgeries, but evolution makes drawings of them, gives them scientific names, and represents as true what is known to be false. Reliable historical documents testify that the Earth is young, but by biased, invalid, unreliable, uncalibrated indirect anti-science evolution insists the Earth is so old that the biosphere would have gone extinct. Every living thing dies and either putrefies or rots to its constituent chemicals. The arrow of time points downward. Evolution by deception would have us believe that chemicals can build themselves into living organisms. Evolution’s fantasy arrow of inverted time points forever upward.

By an irrational religious faith alone, evolution requires us to believe that reality is exactly the opposite of what we observe. There is no religion except evolution that requires its believers to base their lives on inverted fantasies, on the exact opposite of reality. Like the human sacrifices of pagan religions, evolution preaches salvation by exterminating the weak. Yet, killing the weak of the biosphere exterminates our source of life, our source of oxygen, fresh water and food thereby committing us to suicide. The anti-morality in the anti-biology of evolution fosters biosphere and human extinction whereas the morality of biology commands protection of the weak by being good stewards of the biosphere and thereby preserving life. In the final analysis, evolution promotes a culture of death and permanent extinction whereas the object of biology is life. Historically, evolution’s inverted fantasy free of moral restraints has induced brilliant civilizations to prolonged national suicides.16 If the primary purpose of any society, any biosphere, is self preservation, then evolution is the ultimate, lethal, anti-social, anti- biosphere religion. It worships extinction, the summit of criminality.

The default-judgment challenge. Black’s Law Dictionary defines default-judgment as a “Judgment entered against a party who has failed to defend against a claim that has been brought by another party.” The most outspoken evolutionists worldwide bar none were challenged with the fact that evolution has no scientific evidence to support it, never has, never will, because it exists nowhere in the universe, never has, and never will. Furthermore, evolution is an inverted-fantasy religion based on vitalism superstitions 2,500 years old taught by fraud and forgery in the public schools in violation of the state Education Codes and the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. All of the evolutionists

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 26 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

challenged defaulted and were put on the Default-Judgment List below. Also challenged were entire organizations, like science teachers associations, university departments of biology and evolutionary biology, and the Nobel Prize Assembly (see below). Hundreds of evolutionists have thereby testified by their defaults that evolution is one of the greatest shams of the last 2,500 years, the time it was invented by Anaximander in ancient Greece. And Anaximander’s ancient, superstitious, vitalism sham presently rules biology, education, the media, culture, and politics in the United States of America. What a disgrace to the nation that sacrificed its best genetic material by the hundreds of thousands in wars against the genocide and the slavery preached by evolution in every biology classroom.

The Life Science Prize exposes the brass and bluff of evolution. The rules for this Prize are simplicity itself. The model is the world of sport where brass and bluff have been a way of life for millennia. Contenders put up their entry fees, contend in an appropriate venue according to pre- established rules, and the official awards the winner. The contest, not the bravado, determines the winner. Challenged braggadocios do not show up for the contest and lose by default.

Rules for the Life Science Prize

1. The evolutionist puts $10,000 in escrow with the judge.
2. The devolutionist, Joseph Mastropaolo, puts $10,000 in escrow with the judge.
3. If the evolutionist proves evolution is science, then the evolutionist is awarded the $20,000.
4. If the devolutionist proves that devolution, the opposite and excluder of evolution, is science, then the devolutionist is awarded the $20,000.
5. Evidence must be scientific, that is, objective, valid, reliable and calibrated.
6. The preponderance of evidence prevails.
7. At the end of the trial, the judge hands the prevailing party both checks.
8. The judge is a superior court judge.
9. The venue is a courthouse.

Selections from the Default-Judgment List as of January 2007. The challenged braggadocios, individuals and organizations, follow. In four years of intensive searching with a $10,000 prize and $1000 reward, not one evolutionist champion could be found worldwide, bar none. No evolutionist of any stripe will “put money where the mouth is.” This list is kept by public school creationist, Mr. Karl Priest. See http://www.csulb.edu/~jmastrop/prize.html for updates.

1. Dr. Massimo Pigliucci. Atheist and science professor, Tennessee University. (3-11-02) 2. Mr. Andre H. Artus. Atheist. No credentials provided.
3. Mr. Lee Bowen. Atheist. No credentials provided.
4. Dr. Angela Ridgel. Geneticist, Case Western Reserve University.

5. Mr. Dan Radmacher. Editorial page editor, Charleston Gazette. 6. Dr. James Paulson. Biochemist, University of Wisconsin.
7. Dr. Lawrence Krauss. Physicist, Case Western University.
8. Dr. Dennis D. Hirsch. Law professor, Capital University.

9. Mr. John Rennie. Editor, Scientific American. Author of ‘15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense.’ 10. Dr. Barbara Forrest. Professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana.
11. Dr. Steve Rissing. Professor in the Department of Evolution at Ohio State University.
12. Dr. Eugenie Scott. Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education.

13. Dr. Michael Shermer. Founder/director of the Skeptics Society.
14. Dr. Richard Dawkins. Oxford University, Professor of Public Understanding of Science.
15. Dr. Francisco J. Ayala. Donald Bren Professor of Biological Sciences, Dept. of Ecology & Evolutionary

Biology, Professor of Philosophy, School of Humanities, University of California, Irvine.
16. Dr. Joe Meert, Department of Geological Sciences, University of Florida.
17. Dr. Kenneth R. Miller. Professor of Biology, Brown University.
18. Dr. Lawrence S. Lerner. Professor Emeritus of Physics and Astronomy, California State University,

Long Beach, author of Good Science, Bad Science: Teaching Evolution in the States, which was

published in 2000 by the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation (http://www.edexcellence.net).
19. Dr. Adrian L. Melott. Professor of Physics and Astronomy, Fellow, American Physical Society.
20. Dr. Stephen W. Hawking. Lucasian Professor of Mathematics, Cambridge University.
21. Marilyn vos Savant. Listed in the Guinness Book of World Records Hall of Fame for ” Highest IQ.” 22. Dr. Douglas Theobald. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Colorado at Boulder,

claims to have “29+ Evidences for Macroevolution” which establishes “The Scientific Case for

Common Descent.”
23. Dr. Keith Carmichael. Chemical Engineer-DOW (retired).
24. Dr. Daniel C. Dennett. Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, Tufts University.
25. Dr. Peter Atkins. Chemistry, Oxford University, England.
26. Dr. Michael Ruse. Lucyle T. Werkmeister Professor of Philosophy, Florida State University. 27. Dr. Steven W. Squyres. Professor of Astronomy, Cornell University, and leading NASA

scientist in the search for extra-terrestrial life.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 27 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

28. Dr. Wilfred A. Elders. Professor Emeritus of Geology, University of California, Riverside. 29. Mr. Bill Nye. The Science Guy.
30. Dr. William Provine. Professor of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University. 31. Mr. Ed Blayton. Internet evolutionism activist.

32. Dr. Marshall Berman. Former New Mexico SBE member and Sandia physicist.
33. Ms. Amanda Chesworth. Former president of Internet Infidels, leader of the Committee for the

Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal Young Skeptics, CSICOPYS, and

crusader for establishing a Darwin Day.
34. Dr. Michael Zimmerman. Dean of the College of Letters and Science, Professor of Biology, University

of Wisconsin, Oshkosh, ecologist, newspaper columnist, Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

35. Mrs.Sharon Begley. Science Editor of the The Wall Street Journal, formerly Senior Editor at Newsweek magazine for 25 years.

36. Dr. Brian Leiter. Joseph D. Jamail Centennial Chair in Law, Professor of Philosophy, and Director of the Law & Philosophy Program, University of Texas.

37. Dr. John H. Marburger, III. Science Adviser to the President and Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

38. Chairman Professor Urban Ungerstedt, Deputy Chairman Professor Sten Grillner, Secretary Professor Hans Jornvall. Nobel Prize Assembly, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

39. Dr. Ernst Mayr. Alexander Agassiz Professor of Zoology, Emeritus. Harvard University. 40. Mr. Richard Carrier. Secular Web editor, Ph. D. candidate. Columbia University.
41. Dr. Edward O. Wilson. Pellegrino University Research Professor. Harvard University. 42. Dr. John F. Haught. Thomas Healey Professor of Theology. Georgetown University.

(Theistic evolutionist).
43. Dr. John S. Lemberger, University of Wisconsin Madison, Graduate Program Coordinator,

Science/Environmental Education.
44. Dr. Richard G. Colling, Science Professor, Olivet Nazarene University. Author: Random Designer:

Created from Chaos to Connect with Creator. (Theistic evolutionist)
45. Dr. Darrel R. Falk, Science Professor, Point Loma Nazarene University. Author: Coming to Peace

With Science. (Theistic evolutionist)
Organizations, Departments, Universities. All members were challenged.

1. Case Western Reserve University. Entire faculty via 15 department heads.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).
3. National Center for Science Education, “Steves” Group.
4. West Virginia University. 17 signatories of a secret letter to convince the West Virginia Board of

Education to censor any criticism of evolution.
5. Marshall University. 60 faculty members of the School of Science.
6. California State University, Long Beach. College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics. 7. University of California, Irvine. Eleven of the professors of evolution.
8. Oxford University (England). All identified professors of evolution.
9. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

10. National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). Over 40 officials. Spokesman, Dr. Gerald F. Wheeler, Executive Director, admitted that evolution never existed.

11. Seven presidents of geological societies that sought the censorship of a Young Earth Creation Grand Canyon book in a 16 December letter to Grand Canyon National Park: William I. Ausich (Paleontological Society), Robert E. Dickinson (American Geophysical Union), Cathryn A. Manduca
(National Association of Geoscience Teachers), John C. Steinmetz (Association of American State Geologists), Hans-Dieter Sues (Society for Vertebrate Paleontology), Barbara J. Tewksbury

(American Geological Institute), and Robert van der Voo (Geological Society of America).
12. American Institute of Biological Sciences. Dr. Joel Cracraft, President, and Dr. Richard O’Grady,

Executive Director.
13. National Association of Biology Teachers. (Wayne Carley, Executive Director; Cheryl Merrill,

Managing Editor, American Biology Teacher).
14. Society for Neuroscience (organization of basic scientists and physicians who study the brain and

nervous system).
15. Nobel Prize Assembly. Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
16. Wisconsin Society of Science Teachers. All of the Board Members (N=12) were challenged.

A $1000 Reward (see pp. 25,26) continues to be offered for finding an evolutionist who will complete a Life Science Prize trial. Not one has been found. http://www.csulb.edu/~jmastrop/prize.html Conclusion. All of these experiences confirm that evolution is an inverted-fantasy religion based

on vitalism superstitions 2,500 years old completely outside the realm of science, the exact opposite of reality, and taught by frauds and forgeries with brass and bluff in the public schools in violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. Genesis read literally is scientifically tenable and devolution, the exact opposite of evolution, is a universal law.

See the application form on pages 25 and 26 for the Life Science Prize and the reward.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 28 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

References

1. Ahrens, L.H., K. Rankama, S.K. Runcorn. Physics and chemistry of the Earth. New York: Pergamon Press, 1961. pp. 239, 240. 2. Assmuth, J. and Ernest R. Hull. Haeckel’s frauds and forgeries. New York: P.J. Kennedy & Sons, 1915. pp. 5-11, 74-76, 85-91. 3. Austin, S.A. Excess argon within mineral concentrates from the new dacite lava dome at Mount St. Helens volcano. Creation Ex

Nihilo Technical Journal 10 (3): 335-343, 1996.
4. Becker, David R. The monera fallacy. Watchmaker 6 (2): 14-18, 1999.
5. Benjamin I.J., B. Kroger, R.S. Williams. Activation of the heat shock transcription factor by hypoxia in mammalian cells.

Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 87: 6263-6267, 1990.
6. Blommers, P. and E.F. Lindquist. Elementary statistical methods in psychology and education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin

Company,1960. p. 274, 311, 342, 456.
7. Bradford, P. V. and H. Blume. Ota : the pygmy in the zoo, New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1992. pp. 186, 218.
8. Brooks, George and T.D. Fahey. Exercise Physiology: Human Bioenergetics and Its Applications. New York: John Wiley &

Sons, 1984. pp. 408, 409, 429, 457-458, 460-461, 479-483, 559.
9. Brown, W. In the beginning, compelling evidence for creation and the flood. Phoenix: Center for Scientific Creation, 2001. p. 272;

p. 2, the DNA for Figure 1, with permission.
10. Burchfield, J.D. Lord Kelvin and the age of the Earth. New York: Science History Publications, 1975. pp. 4, 5, 17, 152, 199, 204 11. Curtis, Helena. Biology, 2nd ed., New York: Worth Publishers, 1975. p. 17.
12. Curtis, Helena and N. Sue Barnes. Invitation to biology, 3rd ed., New York: Worth Publishers, 1981. p. 471.
13. Dalrymple, G.B. The age of the Earth. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991. pp. 375, 401-2.
14. Darwin, Charles. The Origin of Species: Or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. 1860. Chapter IX, On

the imperfection of the geological record, 1996 reprint, World Classics, p. 232.
15. Dott, R.H., R.L. Batten. Evolution of the Earth. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1971. p. 110.
16. Durant, W. The Story of Civilization, the Life of Greece. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1939. pp. 139, 296, 526, 529, 530, 669. 17. Encyclopædia Britannica. Chicago: William Benton, Publisher, 1965. 3: 650-651, 10: 777, 13: 614.
18. Faul, H. Ages of rocks, planets, and stars. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1966. p. 67.
19. Gamow, G. The birth and death of the sun. New York: Mentor Books, 1952. p. 9.
20. Gamwell, L. and N. Tomes. Madness in America, cultural and medical perceptions of mental illness before 1914. Ithaca: Cornell

University Press, 1995. pp. 70, 133.
21. Gribbin, John R. White holes: cosmic gushers in the universe. Granada Publishing Limited, Frogmore, St Albans, Herts AL 2

2NF. First Published in Great Britain by Paladin. QB 981, G78, 1977. p. 102.
22. Grigg, Russell. Ernst Haeckel: evangelist for evolution and apostle of deceit. Creation Ex Nihilo 18(2): 33-36, 1996.
23. Haber, F.C. Age of the world: Moses to Darwin. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1959. pp. 1, 14, 118.
24. Haeckel, Ernst. Naturliche Schopfungsgeschichte, 1868. p. 144, Figure 1.
25. Haile-Salassie, Y. Late Miocene hominids from the Middle Awash, Ethiopia, Nature 412: 178-181, 2001.
26. Hickman, C.P., L.S. Roberts and A. Larson, Integrated principles of zoology. Boston: Mc Graw Hill, 2001, pp. 12, 113, 114, 631. 27. Hitching, Francis. The Neck of the Giraffe, Where Darwin Went Wrong. New York: Tichnor & Fields, 1982. pp. 178-179,

202–214.
28. Holum, John R. Fundamentals of general, organic, and biological chemistry. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1998, pp. 568, 574. 29. Hotchkiss, W.O. The story of a billion years. Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Company, 1932. p. 49.
30. Jeffreys, H. The Earth, its origin, history and physical constitution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1962. pp. 275, 278,

280–282.
31. Johnson, G. B., Biology, visualizing life, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1998, pp. 178, 180-182, 217, 221 – 223, 227 32. Lanham, U. The sapphire planet. New York: Columbia University Press, 1978. p. 37.
33. Mastropaolo, J. Evolution Is Lethal Antiscience. Creation Research Society Quarterly 38: 151-158, 2001.
34. Mastropaolo, J. An Objective Ancestry Test for Fossil Bones, The Physiologist 45 (4): 343, 2002. TJ, The In-Depth Journal of

Creation 16(3): 84-88, 2002.
35. McKusick, V.A. 1998. Mendelian inheritance in man: a catalog of human genes and genetic disorders. The Johns Hopkins

University Press, Baltimore. 1998, Vol. 1, xiii – xviii. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Omim/dispupdates.html.
36. Miller, K. R. and Levine, J., Biology, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2000. pp. 284, 297, 722, 762.
37. Miller, Stanley L. A Production of Amino Acids Under Possible Primitive Earth Conditions. Science, Vol. 117, No. 3046,

May 15, 1953, pp. 528-529.
38. Moore, P. The story of man and the stars. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1955. p. 16.
39. Oxnard,C.E. The place of australopithecines in human evolution: grounds for doubt? Nature 258: 389-395, 1975.
40. Parker, R.B. Inscrutable Earth, explorations into the science of Earth. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1984. pp. 22, 34, 57. 41. Pette, D. and R.S. Staron. The molecular diversity of mammalian muscle fibers. News in Physiol. Sci. 8: 153-157, 1993.
42. Poirier, Jules H. From Darkness to Light to Flight: Monarch-the Miracle Butterfly. El Cajon, California: Institute for Creation

Research, P.O. Box 2667, 1995. pp. 3-45
43. Read, H.H. Geology, an introduction to Earth-history. London: Oxford University Press, 1963. p. 81.
44. Rupke, N.A. A summary of the monera fallacy, in Scientific Studies in Special Creation, ed W.E. Lammerts, Presbyterian and

Reformed Publishing Co., 1971. pp. 169-183.
45. Ryan, A.J., C.V. Gisolfi, P.L. Moseley. Synthesis of 70K stress protein by human leukocytes: effect of exercise in the heat.

J Appl Physiol 70(1): 466-471, 1991.
46. Schaper, W. The Collateral Circulation of the Heart. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company, 1971. pp. 7, 38.
47. Schuchert, C., C.O. Dunbar. Outlines of historical geology. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1931. pp. 16, 23.
48. Seiden, D. A quantitative analysis of muscle cell changes in compensatory and work-induced hypertrophy. Am. J. Anat. 145:

459-468, 1976.
49. Shimer, J.A. This changing Earth. New York: Harper & Row Publisher, 1968. pp. 18, 20.
50. Simpson, G.G., C.S. Pittendrigh, L.H. Tiffany. An introduction to biology. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co. 1957. p. 734.
51. Snelling, A.A. The cause of anomalous potassium-argon “ages” for recent andesite flows at Mt. Ngauruhoe, New Zealand, and

implications for potassium-argon “dating.” Fourth International Conference on Creationism, Pittsburgh, PA, August 3-8, 1998.

52. Tolstoy, I. The pulse of the planet. A Signet Book from New American Library, Times Mirror, 1971. p. 19.

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 29 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

53. Walsh, J.E., Unraveling Piltdown: The Science Fraud of the Century and Its Solution, New York: Random House, 1996. pp. 124, 125, 279.

54. Wendt, H. From ape to Adam, the search for the ancestry of man. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1972. pp. 82-83. 55. Wistreich, G.A. and M.D. Lechtman. Microbiology. New York: Macmillan Publishers, 1980. pp. 17-21.
56. Wood, R.D., M. Mitchell, J. Sgouros, T. Lindahl. Human DNA repair genes. Science 291: 1284-1289, 16 Feb 2001.

Supplement 2/28/05: http://www.cgal.icnet.uk/DNA_Repair_Genes.html
57. Woolridge, S.W., R.S. Morgan. An outline of geomorphology. London: Longmans, Green and Co Ltd, 1963. p. 17.
58. Yockey, H. P. Information Theory and Molecular Biology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992, pp. 234, 255, 257.

Biography

Joseph Mastropaolo has a B.S., M.S., Ph.D. in kinesiology and a Post-Doctoral Research Fellowship in human physiology. For four years, he researched the effects of physical activity on coronary heart disease while a National Heart Institute Research Fellow and Research Physiologist for the Chicago Board of Health. As Aerospace Physiologist for Douglas Space Systems, he published two monographs on life in space, one for humans and one for experimental animals, and received two Vice-Presidential Awards, one for Aviation Safety and one for Aviation Medicine. He taught undergraduate and graduate biomechanics and physiology at California State University, Long Beach for 26 years and was the physiologist for the Gossamer Condor and Gossamer Albatross human powered flight projects which earned a medal in physiology from the Royal Aeronautical Society for the Kremer cross channel challenge. He also has taught advanced comparative physiology. He has published 22 peer reviewed science articles in scientific journals and was principal investigator for 17 grants. Much of this work on 21st Century Biology and the Life Science Prize was presented at the Third International Catholic Conference on Creation at Christendom College, Front Royal, Virginia, October 16, 2004, under the title, Biology Eliminates Evolution and Confirms Genesis 1-11. 2006 0215

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 30 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

Index

A

acclimation 20 acclimatization 20
actin 19
AdamandEve 3,4,5,11,14,15 adaptation 20

amino acids 8,9,24
ammonia 9
Anaximander 21
anti-biology 5,6,7,9,10,11,12,13,14,18,20 antibiotic resistance 19

antiscience 2,20
ape 2,3,5,6,10,24
ape-men 2,4,5,6,7,10,13,14,20 Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba 6,7,13,14

B

baboon 6
bacterial antibiotic resistance 19

Hesperopithecus harold cookii 5,6 history 11,12,14,23,24

biology textbooks Buffon 12

C

3-7,16

cartoons 27 chemical evolution chimpanzee 3,5,6,7 chlorophyll 15 Constitution, U.S. correlation 6,7,13 creating life 15 Creator 16-18,20 Cybele 9

D

Darwin, Charles
definitions 2
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) 2,3,4,7,18,19,

20,23,24

natura universa varia est 16 Nebraska ape-man 5,6

O

Ota Benga 5,6

P

Pasteur 9,17
Piltdown ape-man 5-7,24 polypeptides 8
Protamoeba primitiva 9,14 proteins

devolution disproof

E

1-5,14,15,20 16,18

R

ravages of time Redi 9,17 Religion reproduction

S

3,4,20

2,15,20,21,23 3,15

Earth, age
Eden 15
engineering
Eoanthropus dawsoni 5,6

slavery
speechless ape-man
standard deviation (SD) 11,12 structure delimits function 17 superstitions 2,9,10,17,18,23
T
Toe bone ape-man 2,3-diphosphoglycerate
Tyndall 9,17
V
variation 2,15-17,19,20 vitalism 2,9,21,23

31 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005

evolution extinction

G

Gaea 9
genetic disorders
genetic reserves
God 17,20
Great Mother of all the gods 9 H
Haeckel 4,5,23

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis

8,9 2,15,20,21,23

12,22,23

2,8,9,11-15,20,22-24 2,6,11,15-20

2,4-24 4,11,14-16,18,20

2-4,7,8,14,18,20 2,17-20

6,7,13,14 19

homologies

I

Inverted fantasy

L

Life Science Prize, reward

M

mean 11,12 mega-engineer mega-engineering mega-intelligence Miller, Stanley 8,9,23 missing link ape-man missing link cell monarch butterfly monera 23,24 moneron 9,11 Mother Earth 9 mutation 2,14,20 myosin 19

N

16-18
14,15,20

10,21

15,18,20 2,19,20 18,19

5,6 10 18,24

4,5,14

2,21,23, 25,26

Biology for the 21st Century and the Life Science Prize 32 ©Joseph Mastropaolo, Ph.D., 2005 Tested Devolution, Evolution, and Genesis