Hover over Romans 1:20-22 for proof of God's existence, and over Matthew 5:27-28 for Judgment Day’s perfect standard. Then hover over John 3:16-18 for what God did, and over Acts 17:30-31 for what to do.

Monday, February 21, 2011

Amazing Scientific Discovery

New York, 4:47 EST, February 21. Evolutionary biologists at the Institute of Natural Biology in New York have discovered a well-preserved fossil of what they believe is a legless, carnivorous reptile. It was found deeply embedded in ice on the slopes of the province of Quang Ninh, in Vietnam [EDIT], and is believed to be 120 million years old. This snake-like creature clearly had vocal cords and may have been able to communicate audibly.

If scientists had found such a snake, would you believe it? I'm sure you would, if there was fossil evidence. After all, animals do have the ability to think. Who could argue with the overwhelming evidence that many have some sort of language, and that they have an understanding of what they are communicating? Dogs speak to each other in the night. Birds alert each other to danger, and elephants that mourn the death of one of their own, will trumpet some sort of communication to other elephants.

Then there's "Koko," the Western Lowland Gorilla, who, according to the animal's trainer, was able to understand more than 1,000 signs based on American Sign Language, and was also able to understand about 2,000 words of spoken English.

So it is clearly possible for an animal to make its thoughts known to human beings. But when I recently asked atheists if they thought animals could speak, there was instant mockery. I suspect that was because of the implications...could a snake or donkey talk, as portrayed in the Bible? No doubt it was deemed ridiculous because I was speaking of the miraculous and therefore involving God. But let's set aside the Supernatural for a moment and look at this from a purely natural perspective.

The consensus seemed to be that a snake could never talk, not because it lacked the intelligence to do so, but because it lacked vocal cords. After all, snakes, like many animals are very intelligent. Before you laugh at such a thought, think of the amazing seeing-ability of the eagle, the smelling ability of a bloodhound, or the skill needed for a bear to catch fish in his bare hands.

Unless you believe that they are all dummies, and that they were given incredible physical ability but left lacking mentally. But the two cannot be separated.

So, the thought that animals can't speak because they lack the physical means to do so, seems to be a correct deduction. But imagine if animals could speak. What secrets would they reveal? Doctor Doolittle did much to stir the human imagination.

But it's my belief that two animals did speak, not because of their natural ability, but because they were given supernatural ability. I also believe that one Man walked on water, fed 5,000 with five loaves and two fish, and many other mind-bogglers.

But don't laugh too much. If you believe in evolution, you believe that primates can audibly communicate. You even believe that they speak English and many other languages. This is because you believe that you are an English-speaking primate. Now that is funny.