Skip to main content




https://answersingenesis.org/o.../georgia-purdom/bio/

Dr. Purdom graduated with a PhD in molecular genetics from Ohio State University in 2000. Her specialty is cellular and molecular biology. Dr. Purdom’s graduate work focused on genetic regulation of factors important for bone remodeling.

She has published papers in the Journal of Neuroscience (under her maiden name Hickman), the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, and the Journal of Leukocyte Biology. She is a member of the American Society for Microbiology and American Society for Cell Biology. Following graduation, Dr. Purdom served as a professor of biology for six years at Mount Vernon Nazarene University in Ohio.

Dr. Purdom is a member of the Creation Research Society and serves on the editorial board and executive council of BSG: A Creation Biology Study Group. She serves as a peer reviewer for Answers Research Journal and Creation Research Science Quarterly. Dr. Purdom, along with Dr. Joseph Francis of Master’s College, are co-founders of the Microbe Forum. This forum sponsors research, collaboration, and conferences in the field of creation microbiology.

Dr. Purdom’s scientific research focuses on the roles of natural selection and mutation in microbial populations. She seeks to understand the original, created, “very good” roles of bacteria in the pre-Fall world and genetic mechanisms that have led to their adaptations and pathogenicity in a post-Fall world. She has presented her research in this field at two Microbe Forum conferences and the 2008 International Conference on Creationism. Dr. Purdom also has published papers in the 2008 Proceedings of the International Conference on Creationism and Answers Research Journal. In addition, she has numerous lay-friendly and semi-technical articles in Answers magazine and on the AiG website.

Dr. Purdom’s expertise in natural selection was crucial in her design of the Natural Selection Is Not Evolution exhibit at the Creation Museum. She is also interested in studying the formation of stromatolites, animal speciation after the Flood, and the Intelligent Design Movement.

As a former biology professor, Dr. Purdom has the experience necessary to make scientific concepts understandable to a wide variety of people. She has both general and in-depth presentations and is a regular speaker in the Creation Museum Speaker Series. In addition, she has spoken at many AiG conferences.

Dr. Purdom also has a passion to help women understand the importance of Genesis for their roles as wives and mothers and is an excellent choice to speak to women’s groups. As a wife and mother herself, she has a vested interest in understanding what Genesis has to say to women.

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

http://americanloons.blogspot....-georgia-purdom.html

Encyclopedia of American Loons

#329: Georgia Purdom

 
Purdom is a molecular biologist and young earth creationist associated with Answers in Genesis. Her view of science is summed up here, if you can stomach it. She is fond of the “different worldviews” gambit, and has pointed out (with Jason Lisle) that “[t[he Christian worldview accounts not only for morality but also for why evolutionists behave the way they do. Even those who have no basis for morality within their own professed worldview nonetheless hold to a moral code; this is because in their heart of hearts they really do know the God of creation, despite their profession to the contrary. Scripture tells us that everyone knows the biblical God, but that they suppress the truth about God (Romans 1:18-21)” – a good, question-begging (though that’s not its worst sin) premise for a fruitful debate.
 
She is a frequent contributor to AiG’s journal “Answers”. To vol.2 she contributed (with John Francis) the article “More Abundant than Stars”, rambling on about the fledgling field of “creation microbiology” in an attempt to review the literature. They proposed to classify microbes according to baraminological concepts (no experiments, data or evidence provided). She also contributed “The Role of Genomic Islands, and Displacement in the Origin of Bacterial Pathogenicity” – another review paper about bacteria without evidence, data or experimental results, and without any testable hypotheses presented – just a rambling rant on how bacteria adapts (but don’t evolve!). It ends, though, with the one substantial claim: “From the creation perspective, all bacteria were originally created ‘good’” (as in the “good” bacteria in our digestive system), then along came the Fall … and that says it all, doesn’t it? No evidence, just a peevish point about how “[a] creation model is needed to understand how bacteria become pathogenic in a post-Fall world.” Surely evolutionary theory won’t give us that, so evolution is false. (It seems like one of Purdom’s favorite pastimes is to confuse and contradict herself on the evolution of bacteria)
 
She was also, with Menton and Andrew Snelling, one of the AiG associates behind the op-ed designed to correct some “misconceptions” about them.
 
As a good loon, Purdom is of course able to take any strong evidence for a hypothesis to be evidence for a completely opposite one by applying the standard creationist data handling rules: distort, mangle, quote-mine, confuse and assert. She was an early critic of Richard Lenski’s famous experiment, entering the fray even before ultramoron Andy Schlafly launched his helplessly gomeric attacks.
 
Purdom has claimed that there is a direct link between evolution and the Holocaust – not in terms of the standard, refuted claims that **** ideology was somehow based on evolution (it wasn’t; it was hardcore and explicitly creationist), but because once you start compromising on the Biblical account of creation it is a step down the path to full-blown genocide.
 
Diagnosis: Moronic hackjob with a real education and a pathological inability to admit that evidence and data are kinda important in science. She’s diligent, and as such moderately dangerous.

Salt, my Friend,

 

Your post is typical of atheist chatter.   You post the writings of an atheist blogger who will not even identify himself/herself.  On the blog site, there is a "see my full profile" link.  But when we click on that link -- the page is empty!   Well, I guess that pretty well describes the atheist mentality -- EMPTY!

 

Bless your heart -- no matter how much you rant against God -- HE  IS STILL HERE.   And, I am sure He is smiling at your naïveté on one hand - but, sad at your spiritual darkness on the other.

 

My Friend, regardless of how loudly you declare God does not exist --  YOU WILL one day stand before Him in judgment.  And, unless you drastically change your direction in life, the outcome will not be pleasant.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

If You Died Today

Attachments

Images (1)
  • If You Died Today
Last edited by Bill Gray

I am no atheist.   I am a trained scientist with over 40 years of experience in the profession of biology. But I am not a Darwinian evolutionist.  I believe in microevolution, but macroevolution is gradually going into disrepute, as more information is developed in the field of molelcular genetics/molecular physiology, informaition that renders untenable some of the fundamental assumptions of conventional Darwinian evolution.

 

Answers in Genesis, unfortunately is something of a two-bit, simplistic apologetics organization, headed by a controversial and somewhat cantankerous character, Ken Ham, whose defense of creationism is vulnerable to legitimate criticism.

 

A much more professional organization that offers convincing arguments against conventional evolutionary theory is the Discovery Institute.  One of its scientists, Stephen Meyer, has written several books that should be read by any serious student of the evolution-creation controversy.

 

Check out the reviews of this book by Meyer:

http://www.amazon.com/Darwins-...420683550&sr=1-1

 

There is a tendency, often expressed in this forum, to automatically line up with the evolutionist viewpoint, even when the persons doing the aligning understand little or nothing concerning the actual points at issue in the current dialog.  The notion that "intelligent design" is simply a disguised version of mainstream creationism is just one erroneous notion peddled by those who ought to know better.

Last edited by Contendah

Evidence for a Young Worldhttps://answersingenesis.org/a...e-for-a-young-world/

Abstract

Here are fourteen natural phenomena which conflict with the evolutionary idea that the universe is billions of years old. The numbers listed below in bold print (usually in the millions of years) are often maximum possible ages set by each process, not the actual ages.

1. Galaxies wind themselves up too fast.

The stars of our own galaxy, the Milky Way, rotate about the galactic center with different speeds, the inner ones rotating faster than the outer ones. The observed rotation speeds are so fast that if our galaxy were more than a few hundred million years old, it would be a featureless disc of stars instead of its present spiral shape.1 Yet our galaxy is supposed to be at least 10 billion years old. Evolutionists call this “the winding-up dilemma,” which they have known about for fifty years. They have devised many theories to try to explain it, each one failing after a brief period of popularity. The same “winding-up” dilemma also applies to other galaxies. For the last few decades the favored attempt to resolve the puzzle has been a complex theory called “density waves.”2 The theory has conceptual problems, has to be arbitrarily and very finely tuned, and has been called into serious question by the Hubble Space Telescope’s discovery of very detailed spiral structure in the central hub of the “Whirlpool” galaxy, M51.3

 

2. Too few supernova remnants.

Crab Nebula Crab Nebula (photo courtesy of NASA)

According to astronomical observations, galaxies like our own experience about one supernova (a violently-exploding star) every 25 years. The gas and dust remnants from such explosions (like the Crab Nebula) expand outward rapidly and should remain visible for over a million years. Yet the nearby parts of our galaxy in which we could observe such gas and dust shells contain only about 200 supernova remnants. That number is consistent with only about 7,000 years worth of supernovas.4

3. Comets disintegrate too quickly.

According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to be the same age as the solar system, about five billion years. Yet each time a comet orbits close to the sun, it loses so much of its material that it could not survive much longer than about 100,000 years. Many comets have typical ages of less than 10,000 years.5 Evolutionists explain this discrepancy by assuming that (a) comets come from an unobserved spherical “Oort cloud” well beyond the orbit of Pluto, (b) improbable gravitational interactions with infrequently passing stars often knock comets into the solar system, and (c) other improbable interactions with planets slow down the incoming comets often enough to account for the hundreds of comets observed.6 So far, none of these assumptions has been substantiated either by observations or realistic calculations. Lately, there has been much talk of the “Kuiper Belt,” a disc of supposed comet sources lying in the plane of the solar system just outside the orbit of Pluto. Some asteroid-sized bodies of ice exist in that location, but they do not solve the evolutionists’ problem, since according to evolutionary theory, the Kuiper Belt would quickly become exhausted if there were no Oort cloud to supply it.

4. Not enough mud on the sea floor.

Mud in the sea Rivers and dust storms dump mud into the sea much faster than plate tectonic subduction can remove it.

Each year, water and winds erode about 20 billion tons of dirt and rock from the continents and deposit it in the ocean.7 This material accumulates as loose sediment on the hard basaltic (lava-formed) rock of the ocean floor. The average depth of all the sediment in the whole ocean is less than 400 meters.8 The main way known to remove the sediment from the ocean floor is by plate tectonic subduction. That is, sea floor slides slowly (a few cm/year) beneath the continents, taking some sediment with it. According to secular scientific literature, that process presently removes only 1 billion tons per year.9 As far as anyone knows, the other 19 billion tons per year simply accumulate. At that rate, erosion would deposit the present mass of sediment in less than 12 million years. Yet according to evolutionary theory, erosion and plate subduction have been going on as long as the oceans have existed, an alleged three billion years. If that were so, the rates above imply that the oceans would be massively choked with sediment dozens of kilometers deep. An alternative (creationist) explanation is that erosion from the waters of the Genesis flood running off the continents deposited the present amount of sediment within a short time about 5,000 years ago.

5. Not enough sodium in the sea.

Salt in the sea

Every year, rivers10 and other sources11 dump over 450 million tons of sodium into the ocean. Only 27% of this sodium manages to get back out of the sea each year.12,13 As far as anyone knows, the remainder simply accumulates in the ocean. If the sea had no sodium to start with, it would have accumulated its present amount in less than 42 million years at today’s input and output rates.14 This is much less than the evolutionary age of the ocean, three billion years. The usual reply to this discrepancy is that past sodium inputs must have been less and outputs greater. However, calculations that are as generous as possible to evolutionary scenarios still give a maximum age of only 62 million years.15 Calculations16 for many other seawater elements give much younger ages for the ocean.

6. The earth’s magnetic field is decaying too fast.

Electrical current in the earth's core Electrical resistance in the earth’s core wears down the electrical current which produces the earth’s magnetic field. That causes the field to lose energy rapidly.

The total energy stored in the earth’s magnetic field (“dipole” and “non-dipole&rdquo is decreasing with a half-life of 1,465 (± 165) years.17 Evolutionary theories explaining this rapid decrease, as well as how the earth could have maintained its magnetic field for billions of years are very complex and inadequate. A much better creationist theory exists. It is straightforward, based on sound physics, and explains many features of the field: its creation, rapid reversals during the Genesis flood, surface intensity decreases and increases until the time of Christ, and a steady decay since then.18 This theory matches paleomagnetic, historic, and present data, most startlingly with evidence for rapid changes.19 The main result is that the field’s total energy (not surface intensity) has always decayed at least as fast as now. At that rate the field could not be more than 20,000 years old.20

7. Many strata are too tightly bent.

In many mountainous areas, strata thousands of feet thick are bent and folded into hairpin shapes. The conventional geologic time scale says these formations were deeply buried and solidified for hundreds of millions of years before they were bent. Yet the folding occurred without cracking, with radii so small that the entire formation had to be still wet and unsolidified when the bending occurred. This implies that the folding occurred less than thousands of years after deposition.21

8. Biological material decays too fast.

DNA

Natural radioactivity, mutations, and decay degrade DNA and other biological material rapidly. Measurements of the mutation rate of mitochondrial DNA recently forced researchers to revise the age of “mitochondrial Eve” from a theorized 200,000 years down to possibly as low as 6,000 years.22 DNA experts insist that DNA cannot exist in natural environments longer than 10,000 years, yet intact strands of DNA appear to have been recovered from fossils allegedly much older: Neandertal bones, insects in amber, and even from dinosaur fossils.23 Bacteria allegedly 250 million years old apparently have been revived with no DNA damage.24 Soft tissue and blood cells from a dinosaur have astonished experts.25

9. Fossil radioactivity shortens geologic “ages” to a few years.

Radio Halo Radio Halo (photo courtesy of Mark Armitage)

Radiohalos are rings of color formed around microscopic bits of radioactive minerals in rock crystals. They are fossil evidence of radioactive decay.26 “Squashed” Polonium-210 radiohalos indicate that Jurassic, Triassic, and Eocene formations in the Colorado plateau were deposited within months of one another, not hundreds of millions of years apart as required by the conventional time scale.27 “Orphan” Polonium-218 radiohalos, having no evidence of their mother elements, imply accelerated nuclear decay and very rapid formation of associated minerals.28,29

10. Too much helium in minerals.

Uranium and thorium generate helium atoms as they decay to lead. A study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research showed that such helium produced in zircon crystals in deep, hot Precambrian granitic rock has not had time to escape.30 Though the rocks contain 1.5 billion years worth of nuclear decay products, newly-measured rates of helium loss from zircon show that the helium has been leaking for only 6,000 (± 2000) years.31 This is not only evidence for the youth of the earth, but also for episodes of greatly accelerated decay rates of long half-life nuclei within thousands of years ago, compressing radioisotope timescales enormously.

11. Too much carbon 14 in deep geologic strata.

Carbon 14

With their short 5,700-year half-life, no carbon 14 atoms should exist in any carbon older than 250,000 years. Yet it has proven impossible to find any natural source of carbon below Pleistocene (Ice Age) strata that does not contain significant amounts of carbon 14, even though such strata are supposed to be millions or billions of years old. Conventional carbon 14 laboratories have been aware of this anomaly since the early 1980s, have striven to eliminate it, and are unable to account for it. Lately the world’s best such laboratory which has learned during two decades of low-C14 measurements how not to contaminate specimens externally, under contract to creationists, confirmed such observations for coal samples and even for a dozen diamonds, which cannot be contaminated in situ with recent carbon.32 These constitute very strong evidence that the earth is only thousands, not billions, of years old.

12. Not enough Stone Age skeletons.

Evolutionary anthropologists now say that Homo sapiens existed for at least 185,000 years before agriculture began,33 during which time the world population of humans was roughly constant, between one and ten million. All that time they were burying their dead, often with artifacts. By that scenario, they would have buried at least eight billion bodies.34 If the evolutionary time scale is correct, buried bones should be able to last for much longer than 200,000 years, so many of the supposed eight billion stone age skeletons should still be around (and certainly the buried artifacts). Yet only a few thousand have been found. This implies that the Stone Age was much shorter than evolutionists think, perhaps only a few hundred years in many areas.

13. Agriculture is too recent.

The usual evolutionary picture has men existing as hunters and gatherers for 185,000 years during the Stone Age before discovering agriculture less than 10,000 years ago.35 Yet the archaeological evidence shows that Stone Age men were as intelligent as we are. It is very improbable that none of the eight billion people mentioned in item 12 should discover that plants grow from seeds. It is more likely that men were without agriculture for a very short time after the Flood, if at all.36

 

Salt, my Friend,

 

The author of your link is a very elusive fellow.   I searched numerous web sites for info on him -- and the only thing I could find regarding this expert was: 

 

Mark Isaak has written numerous articles on the creation/evolution debate.  He is the editor of the "Index of Creationist Claims" on the acclaimed website www.talkorigins.org.

 

Wow!  So that is what makes an atheist an expert -- write numerous articles.

 

I guess that makes me a real expert -- for I written many hundreds of articles.   So, I guess from now on you can just call me "Bill Gray, the Expert!"   Amazing!

 

Bless your confused little heart!

 

Bill

Casper The Friendly Ghost

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Casper The Friendly Ghost
Originally Posted by Contendah:

I am no atheist.   I am a trained scientist with over 40 years of experience in the profession of biology. But I am not a Darwinian evolutionist.  I believe in microevolution, but macroevolution is gradually going into disrepute, as more information is developed in the field of molelcular genetics/molecular physiology, informaition that renders untenable some of the fundamental assumptions of conventional Darwinian evolution.

 

Answers in Genesis, unfortunately is something of a two-bit, simplistic apologetics organization, headed by a controversial and somewhat cantankerous character, Ken Ham, whose defense of creationism is vulnerable to legitimate criticism.

 

A much more professional organization that offers convincing arguments against conventional evolutionary theory is the Discovery Institute.  One of its scientists, Stephen Meyer, has written several books that should be read by any serious student of the evolution-creation controversy.

 

Check out the reviews of this book by Meyer:

http://www.amazon.com/Darwins-...420683550&sr=1-1

 

There is a tendency, often expressed in this forum, to automatically line up with the evolutionist viewpoint, even when the persons doing the aligning understand little or nothing concerning the actual points at issue in the current dialog.  The notion that "intelligent design" is simply a disguised version of mainstream creationism is just one erroneous notion peddled by those who ought to know better.

Well stated Professor Contendah.

Happy Birthday to Stephen Hawking.the little devil has made it 73 years. I like him, he's one of my favorite liars. He has been lying about dark matter and dark energy for years and still hasn't captured any. I'll bet he has actual photos of exo-planets in living color on his walls beside pictures of Jesus.

Last edited by Former Member

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrKZBh8BL_U

Yet another video showing us how the human eye evolved.  Notice absolutely no mention of the biological and genetic mechanisms necessary to make this possible. Why? Because there aren't any!  The public is just supposed to believe it happened because after all if the eye didn't evolve we wouldn't have eyes (Hello circular argument!).

I thought the end of the video was particularly interesting about scientists trying to come up with a "better" design for the eye. I have read about these bionic implants and so far they have only minimally (and I mean minimally) restored a little bit of vision (ie. ability to detect shadows). We are a long way from even understanding the eye God did design much less trying to improve on it.  Evolutionary story-telling at its finest! [Dr. Purdom]

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×