Piltdown Superman

stock.xchng/liqfx Fossil graveyards have been discovered for many years, and more are being found. The fossils recently discovered in Geebung (near Brisbane) fit the biblical creationist Flood geology model quite well, despite the attempts of uniformitarian evolutionists to say otherwise. Overpass construction at Geebung, a northern Brisbane suburb, has dug up fossils of crocodiles, frogs, fish, shells and plants, buried in the last stages of Noah’s Flood, about 4,500 years ago. A piling rig recovered the fossils from a layer of oil shale some 15 m underground and dumped them in a spoil heap, where they were noticed. The fossils were within an area of sedimentary deposits that geologists have called the Petrie Formation. These cover an area of some 50 km north of the mouth of the Brisbane River. The Petrie Formation is one of a number of Tertiary basins in the Brisbane area, which include the Booval and Oxley Groups south of the Brisbane River. These basins consi

As I write this, it is not yet August in 2013. Summer in North America is well under way. Many areas in the United States have had saturating rainfall. That leads to standing water. Which, in turn, become breeding grounds for mosquitoes. And mosquitoes are the deadliest creature on Earth, since they carry so many diseases. The key word in "West Nile Virus" is virus . That means there is no cure. Fortunately, the conditions needed to infect a person are comparatively small, and most people do not exhibit symptoms. Credit: Freeimages / Gabor Bibor However, the West Nile Virus can be fatal in humans. Take precautions against being bitten, willya? Evolutionists offer explanations that do not make sense about the actions of the virus, and about natural selection; humans and other animals are "dead ends", because the virus cannot be passed along. Also, although the virus has mutated, it has not mutated into a non-virus. Because West Nile virus does not multipl

NASA/Jenny Mottar Let's look at the sun. No, not directly! When we explore what we know about the purpose, location, layers, immensity, complexity and more, it brings a sense of wonder. It should also bring a sense of thankfulness, as it is perfectly placed to make life on Earth possible. Here is a perspective from a creationist astrophysicist. Don't worry, most of it is written for us regular people. It may appear small in our sky at a distance of 93 million miles, but the sun is actually 109 times the diameter of Earth and over a million times the volume of Earth. The sun is the largest single object in our solar system and comprises 99.86 percent of all its mass. If a ten-pound bowling ball represented the mass of the sun, then all the planets, moons, comets, and everything else in our solar system could be represented by the combined mass of one nickel and one penny. Jupiter would be the nickel. The sun is comprised almost entirely of hydrogen and helium

Baker's Yeast / stock.xchng/chrni13 When scientists make predictions based on their theories, it should be good for science. Even false predictions. When the prediction does not work, the theory can be further examined, modified or discarded. On the other hand, our knowledge can be increased if it is correct. Evolution is loaded with false theories and errors. There are too many to honestly call evolution a valid scientific theory. Instead, excuses and accommodations are made. Recently we reported on a false prediction of evolution and gave some of the details . Evolution predicts that different kinds of genes, each found within a group of species, should tell the same story about evolution. They should produce similar evolutionary trees. Evolutionists have touted this fact of nature, and how it confirms a key prediction of evolution, for years. They call it a consilience of independent evidences. But increasingly, as we look under the hood and examine the details, we

Old, old questions: What is reality? Where does it come from? Is it a product of our minds and perceptions, or something more? Why haven't the Cubs won the World Series since 1908? PD/Govard Bidloo (modified) In a random chance universe, science is not possible. This is especially clear in astronomy , which relies on extremely complicated mathematics. Yet, numbers themselves are not material things , so when someone insists on pure naturalism, he is tacitly denying his own worldview when he uses numbers, since mathematics itself could not exist through evolution ! Some people neurotically attempt to create their own realities through bad logic: God is not real and if you believe he exists, you are a reality denier. People like this, and other evolutionists, attempt to explore the nature of reality. They fail miserably because they leave out the Source. Also, something does not become reality simply because one wishes it to be so. Philosophical questions about “reality

Scientists are not the dispassionate, objective paragons of virtue on pedestals that people imagine. They are human, and subject to the same selfish desires that other people have . (They may even appreciate it if they were not expected to live up to unrealistic ideals. Just a thought.) Some are greedy, some are noble. When it comes to origins science, however, I am convinced that the most important goal for many is to get people to believe in evolutionism. (But avarice is not limited to evolutionists by any means.) There is fraud in scientific papers , peer review is becoming pointless , fraud in evolutionary education , data manipulation , retractions and more. And it is growing. It would be bad enough if the epidemic was confined to evolutionism, but it also affects health care and life sciences. It's not all fraud. There is a generous amount of carelessness and incompetence, but never mind about that now. The Piltdown hoax is one of the most famous cases of fraud in

Few of us can look up into the night sky and not feel awe at the magnificence in the universe that we can see. It becomes even more amazing when we know a bit about astronomy. NASA/JPL-Caltech/T. Pyle (SSC) The order and complexity of the universe testifies to the wisdom and power of the Creator. If chance and random processes ruled, astronomy would be impossible. It did not happen by itself. One of the wonderful things about astronomy is that it is so different from our everyday experience. Things are not what they might seem at first glance. Who could have guessed that those tiny little specks of light in our night sky are actually “suns” hundreds of times larger than Earth? Who would have suspected that the “evening star” is actually a rocky planet about the same size as our own? How unexpected to find that the solid earth beneath our feet is actually moving at 67,000 miles per hour around the sun, all the while spinning like a top! God has constructed the uni

The moon and other celestial objects are still causing considerable consternation to cosmologists. Conundrums like the origin and  magnetic fields  of the moon, chondrules in meteorites and the formation of stars (lots of assertions for this, but no actual evidence) are causing evolutionary cosmologists to cast their hands upward in expressions of confusion. Yet, many still cling to their faith in "science of the gaps", that "maybe someday" an answer that fits their preconditions will be found. Biblical creationists do not have these problems, since the science fits creationist models. One would think astronomers would not be stumped in 2013 by common objects like the moon, meteors and stars.  But they are.  It’s driving them mad. Moon madness :  The  lunacy begins with Earth’s moon.  Here is a body man has walked on, and he still doesn’t understand it.  National Geographic discussed “ The moon’s mystery ,” dispensing with all three of the most popular origin

When a variety of plant and animal fossils are jumbled together in one place, uniformitarian geologists and paleontologists insist on defying sensibility by insisting that it's "slow and gradual". (And there is more than one "fossil graveyard".) Image credit: NPS.gov   Many scientists have conceded that the old explanation does not work, but to go as far as admitting that the geological evidence supports the global Flood is apparently unthinkable to them. Not just horses and fish, but—like a whole ancient zoo buried together—lizards, alligators, stingrays, snakes, squirrel varieties, bats, long-tailed turtles, lemur-like primates, birds, frogs, insects, and sycamore, palm, and fern leaves were all fossilized in Wyoming's Green River Formation. A new book showcasing some of the more spectacular fossils provides secularists another opportunity to reinforce their ideas about how these diverse creatures were encased in what became a giant rock formation

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Now, don't get ahead of me and anticipate I'm going to say. And I'm going to assume that many people have heard enough about the Zimmerman trial , so I'm only planning one article. This is not an analysis of the night of the shooting, nor is it going to place blame on evolution for the events of that night. In-depth political ramifications of the trial will be left to others to discuss. Instead, I'm going to make comparisons and contrasts about the way people analyze evidence. In the George Zimmerman trial, like any other, evidence was obtained and examined. Witnesses were interrogated and then they testified. The jury deliberated and, in Zimmerman's case, returned a "not guilty" verdict. In American trials, a guilty verdict is supposed to be rendered " beyond a reasonable doubt "; people do not have to be proved innocent. stock.xchng/creationc I heard and read about George Zimmerman's shooting of Trayv

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Edi ted 11-11-2015 The Genetic Fallacy is, in simplest terms, rejecting something because someone does not like the source. For example: Th e text in the image shows not only that the commenter does not like ICR, but includes other fallacies as well, including the ever-popular   ad hominem . And he wonders why he was banned from the Facebook Page? Seriously? Virginia Heffernan formerly wrote technology and culture for the New York Times.   She admitted recently that she is a creationist . Well, what kind of creationist, I'm not certain. (If she wants to discuss these things , biblical creationists will be glad to assist her.) What matters to her detractors is that she rejects evolution. This led to a slew of ridicule. Hamilton Nolan of "Gawker" said : "We are not saying you're a bad person, Virginia, but you should probably expect that, from now on, when people read your musings on, say, the future of internet commun

" The Question Evolution Project " began on Facebook late January of 2012. We've climbed up to 1,500 "Likes" in that time, and only 1,000 of those are my spare accounts. (That's a joke. No refunds on the jokes.) The future looks bright, creation science is growing, the truth about the folly of evolution is being proclaimed and the Creator is glorified. We have haters, defamers, libelers — it happens when you go against evolutionary dogmatism, as the big name creation science organizations know full well. This kind of evil never sleeps. On we go!

Mustard Plants - MorgueFile/citysafari Earlier, we marveled at photosynthesis . But what happens at night? Plants still use food during the night. It involves using just the right amount of starch molecules. Still move evidence of a master Designer at work! A new study came out showing how plants utilize an efficient form of mathematics to precisely calculate how much starch to consume as food during the night. During the daytime, plants make carbohydrates through photosynthesis and store a portion of them as starch molecules. The cells then metabolize that starch as a food source during the night to fuel cell growth and development. One researcher said, "If the starch store is used too fast, plants will starve and stop growing during the night. If the store is used too slowly, some of it will be wasted." However, the plant must use its food reserves judiciously and dynamically by controlling the rate of its metabolism along with the amount of starch used during th

Ptolemaic Astrology,  Andres Cellarius  A basic guideline for biblical creationists is that the Bible is foundational. Like secular scientists, creationists propose models and put forth ideas and see if they are supported by Scripture as well as observational and experimental data. One thing that evolutionists and creationists have in common is that origins science  is historical  in nature — nobody can reproduce creation or evolution. For example, a fossil does not exist in the past, it exists in the present. Examination of the object can be done with current testing methods and so forth, and scientists hold to their presuppositions and worldviews. Geocentrism , the idea that the Earth is the center of the solar system (or the universe), was based on philosophies, astrology and mathematics from ancient Greece. The model proposed by Ptolemy was popular for centuries until creationist astronomers like Galileo and Copernicus (and others) demonstrated that it was not accurate, and

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen This is not a science article, it is an editorial based on my observations, experiences and those of other people. Those of us who reject evolution (whether from science, theology or both) encounter proponents of evolution who seem to have made it their personal crusade to put us in our place. They are so determined to silence us, they speak without knowledge. Some go on quests to give one-star ratings at Amazon's now-worthless reviews, even though they have not even read the books ! This says a great deal about their supposed integrity. Frequently, we have people making comments at The Question Evolution Project on Facebook who, although they have not read the material, are still certain that creationists are wrong anyway.  Many are willing to lie outright, but they only manage to humiliate themselves. The humiliation increases when someone wants to take the time to point out their tactics . Then they scream, "Libel!" and "Liar for

"But the word 'dinosaur' isn't in the Bible, Cowboy Bob!" That is because the the word had not been invented for thousands of years. However, there are some interesting descriptions in the book of Job. I cannot embed the audio since the site I use is down, you can download the one-minute MP3 here .

Just how old is the universe, anyway? How do we know? Can assertions be substantiated, or do we just get more assertions and tall tales? NASA, ESA, J.-Y. Li (Planetary Science Institute), and the Hubble Comet ISON Imaging Science Team Using evolutionary methods, comets are expected to only be able to last a comparatively short time. That means they should have all been used up if the universe was billions of years old. How do they get out of this? Imagination. In this case, the Oort Cloud . (Or is it the Kuiper Belt ? I keep getting the stories mixed up, as they are both far-fetched.) Comets and things are waiting out in space to be stirred up by something, although a plausible mechanism has not been put forth. It would be far better if they actually accepted the scientific evidence that the universe is far younger than evolutionists want to believe. They they would not need to resort to the complicated scientific principle called "Making Stuff Up". In September 20

Public Domain Illustration Stone tools in the Tertiary? Rubbish! That would change too many ideas of when humans diverged from apes. Therefore, the tools must not be actual tools, but rather, acts of nature or accidents mistaken for tools. Actually, there are strong indications that man was using stone tools much sooner than evolutionary presuppositions will allow. That is, they are in the wrong place. Sure, some things from nature and geologic conditions can resemble tools, but the trained eye can spot intelligence rather than superficial resemblances. Approximately between 1860 and 1930, in some cases even later, there was a discussion about flint findings from Paleocene to Pliocene strata which were similar to tools. The findings show typical marks of human processing. Nevertheless they were rejected as human relicts on the grounds that they had been formed by geological processes. But after decades of research there is still not the least indication of any reasonable sci

Once again, proponents of evolution are presenting "answers" through circular reasoning. Using the assumption that evolution is true, they use circular reasoning as a means of explanation for human characteristics. stock.xchng/justino307  The story goes that since humans do not have fangs, claws, great speed and so forth, it was necessary to evolve the ability to throw. Words like "probably", "we can surmise", "would have" and other vague terms while still asserting that evolutionary "theory" is essential to understand the mechanics of throwing. Not only is evolution misrepresented, but it is completely irrelevant to the ability to throw. Add to this the implication that evolution is some kind of intelligent entity that confers a benefit on organisms, and you can see how much faith is involved in evolutionism. Science news sites are talking about the evolution of human throwing, but it’s mostly speculation based on prior faith