Piltdown Superman

You can download the MP3 version of the podcast here . The ad hominem  fallacy seems to be the most common. It is attacking the person instead of the topic. This is very easy to do, especially when someone throws down and indicates that they are not interested in rational discourse, they simply want to negate whatever you have to say with a distraction of insulting you instead of dealing with the discussion at hand. Edit: He kept at it. Some people do not learn.

Still more press problems that get evolutionists excited, thinking they have a smoking gun to blow away all of creation science. They get going with a "take that!" attitude when they get (yet again) misleading information from the press based in incomplete information from scientists. But if they bothered to do a bit more reading (and thinking), these fans of evolutionism might be a bit slower to be full of glee and have their joy turn into embarrassment. Again. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech One absurd estimate for "habitable" planets in the universe reached forty billion. This "science" is based on luck and odds, not observations. It is also based on evolutionary presuppositions and assumptions. Remember, the press wants to make money on sensational claims, such as saying a planet is very much like Earth if we lived on a molten blob . The scientific community does not help much, since they want to make money and give sensational information themse

Darwin's Cheerleaders are having a laugh at creationists' expense because they believe that a valid "explanation" for the soft tissue in dinosaur fossils has been found. Here we go again (sigh). Someone thinks there is a wonderful proof of evolution, and runs screaming down the street without examining the evidence. Image * After (modified) Carelessness gets scientists into trouble, and fundamentalist evolutionists get arrogant with incomplete, careless "findings" and pronouncements. In this example of the apparently never-ending parade of preposterous presentations, scientists are making excuses giving explanations for the soft tissues and red blood cells found in dinosaur fossils. Their bias showed early on, because they "knew" that no soft tissues could last for "millions of years", so they did not look for it. (This is reminiscent of the "junk DNA" fiasco , because evolutionary scientists assumed that because they cou

NASA/NSSDC For life to supposedly evolve, it first had to originate in the first place. And it had to start very simply. From rocks. But the more we learn about life, the more we realize that simple cells are not so simple. Even the parts of individual cells are amazingly complex. Going all the way down to the level of DNA, amino acids, sugars and so on, the right things have to be in the right place at the right time. The odds against life originating by chance are nil. Atheists, agnostics and evolutionists are admitting that life could not arise by chance. Some are going into mysticism (such as pantheism and the "Gaia hypothesis" ), or pushing the problem out into space . But that does not solve the problem of the origin of life. The complexity of life and the impossibility of it forming by chance are strong evidences for the best possible answer: the Creator. How did life begin? The origin of life is a vexing problem for those who insist that life arose through p

People have the illusion that scientists are dispassionate and are willing to accept the evidence. Tampering? Fabrication? Sloppy science? Outright fraud? No way! At least, they have learned their lessons from the past. That'll be the day. Prestige and money make scientists just as avaricious as us regular folks. People leave comments at The Question Evolution Project proclaiming the virtues of science (apparently their religion is Scientism) and spewing anti-creationist vitriol, seemingly unaware that the scientific community is not full of beings that are above the rest of us in intellect an morality. For example, yet again, sensationalistic reporting from incomplete evidence regarding our alleged evolutionary ancestors is an embarrassment. Of course, biblical creationists do not have to deal with faking it to get money and applause; we just have to tell it like it really is. Evolutionists do have a good propaganda machine, though. And yes, "evolutionist" is a

In the past, we have seen how the Evo Sith are willing to resort to fraud and lie to students in order to promote evolution. It is no surprise that they are willing to deceive the general public as well. We are given information that is inaccurate, incomplete, sensationalistic — sometimes even promoting information that disproves  evolution as evidence for  evolution! Loading up to spread evolutionary propaganda Image credit: Library of Congress Shenanigans from evolutionists, I tell you! Unlike evolutionary spin , dung is actually useful. In this 4-part audio series (about 29 minutes each) on Real Science Radio , Bob Enyart and Fred Williams interview Walter ReMine about some of the illusions presented by evolutionists when they attempt to convince us that evolution is a fact. They also spend time on cladistics and Haldane's Dilemma. Each page has written information as well as the audio. Links to the shows are below the picture. (One caveat, though. Enyart teaches t

The MP3 version of the podcast can be downloaded here . As promised (threatened?), I'm beginning the series on logical fallacies with an introduction and an overview. There is no need for people to be intimidated by an aggressive evolutionist and/or atheist who wants to destroy your faith. Just learn a bit about logical fallacies and you can realize when you're being taken for a ride.  In an online discussion, a friend made this comment to me: "There is a perfectly logical explanation for the skeptics' double standard and blindness. They have not only their own heart's rebellion, but a powerful blinding force from outside. Our job is to pray they be released to find life and joy." Also includes another edition of the "Atheopath Follies". Plus a bonus video below about how to do an argument!

So often, evolutionary science is a game of words. Remember the new golden rule, that whoever makes the definitions makes the rules . In this case, it's the term "living fossils". This is generally applied when a plant or animal is found alive and well, but had been declared extinct for "millions of years". The term "living fossil" is a bit of a loaded term, implying that evolution is true despite a bit of a glitch. They also want the best of both worlds. Evolution is a "fact", sometimes called a law as if it was a kind of inexorable force. So when these "living fossils" are discovered virtually unchanged, people will say something like, "It didn't evolve because it didn't have to". What fallacy is that, No True Evolution, or special pleading? stock.xchng / Fire Salamander / gc85 Salamanders are a bit different in the "living fossil" realm, since they have not been declared extinct while in hidi

This site is a resource offering more resources. The articles come from different authors (and I even write a few myself), and there are links from the excerpts to the full articles. From there, seekers can browse those sites for additional information. Also, there are many links to creation science sites so people can continue to search and learn. You can use that material to see how evolutionists are constantly being confronted with observations that do not comport with their naturalistic presuppositions and worldview. Instead of realizing that Occam's Razor applies  (restated, the simplest explanation is probably the best one) and that God is the Creator, they bulk up their speculations with further speculations and end up with a complicated jumble in which they put their faith. And the discoveries that support Genesis just keep rolling in. The history of the world and its life could hardly be more different between the Bible’s account and that of modern evolutionary na

Many years ago, I was given a twelve-inch vinyl record album from the "Talespinners for Children" series called "Moon Voyage". I had never heard of the "Talespinners" series before, and never obtained any of their other material. "Moon Voyage" was actually quite good, playing like a kind of historical radio drama and giving stargazing history. If I had a record player, I would consider buying it again. Perhaps we should start up a company called "Talespinners for Evolution"? There's money in evolutionary stories, you know. And they tell so many of them. For example, astronomers decided that due to the red shift, a certain galaxy must be the oldest one in existence. They conveniently forget " horizon problem ", and ignore other items, such as the brightness of stars in the galaxy, the fact that galaxies exist so far away fouls up the cosmology on the age of the universe, its appearance and other details. By arbitrari

In a previous post , Doctors Steve Austin and John Morris referenced a technical paper that they had published. After almost thirty years, the material is still relevant. Pike's Peak from Garden of the Gods / Library of Congress / PD Problems in uniformitarian geology discussed have not been satisfactorily explained. Instead, the Genesis Flood model explains what is plainly observed than evolutionary dogma. In last month’s edition of  Acts & Facts , I mentioned studies that Dr. Steve Austin and I presented in a technical paper demonstrating that the deformations in sedimentary strata at two sites better fit with the biblical Flood than with evolution’s long ages of deposition. We featured the first project site, the Split Mountain Formation in southern California, in that issue. Now we will examine geological evidence from the second site, the Ute Pass Fault in Colorado. Location and General Features The Rocky Mountains of Colorado were formed by “large revers

Modified from Noah's Prayer of Thanks After Leaving the Ark, by Dominico Morelli Today's article has an unusual genesis. Someone on Facebook posted comments about "hardcore huntress" Melissa Bachman's trophy hunting activities . This person is against trophy hunting, and referred to it as "murder". I am not a hunter, and detest killing animals for sport. But the person who was posting the comments insists that sport hunting is murder. Is it immoral?  That can be debated, because God gave man dominion over the earth ( Genesis 1.28 ), but we also are given responsible stewardship . I am not going to enter into an argument about whether or not sport hunting violates stewardship principles, but the Bible makes it clear that eating animals for food is acceptable — you cannot use the Bible to insist that everyone has a vegetarian diet . So, if you kill it and grill it, good for you. But to say that killing animals is murder?  This is a result of not

"Greetings to the brightest audience in the country." I'm the QED Guy! Let me explain this audio. A few weeks ago, I was privileged to return to the airwaves from Bob Enyart Live . The first time, it was indeed live. This time, it was recorded. Looks like I was promoted, too. " Real Science Radio " has science discussions, and there are often interviews with real scientists. Guess my material on logical fallacies was worthwhile. Or he mixed up the recordings and played it on the wrong day. This discussion on logical fallacies, atheists and evolutionists was the final prompt for me to begin making the Piltdown Superman podcasts . (I hesitated to get fully into the logical fallacies series because I did not know when this show would be aired and posted.) Some of the items discussed on this show will be dealt with on the podcast, since Bob and I discussed several things in just a few minutes. One problem with logical fallacies is that several can be combined

Since people today "think" more with their emotions than with their minds, they tend to be easy prey for those who want to manipulate and control them. Biblical creationists (and Christians in general) need to watch for trickery. More importantly, we need to be careful not to go beyond motivation and into manipulation. Also includes another edition of the Atheopath Follies. The MP3 version of the podcast can be downloaded here .

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Pieces of Light  by Julie Cave is the third book in the Dinah Harris series. Although it can be read as a "stand alone" book, I recommend reading the first two books, Deadly Disclosures and The Shadowed Mind to fully understand the characters and situations. I am not going to give out too much information and spoil the story for you.  Like the second book, Pieces of Light  does not follow a formula to seem like a rehash of the previous books. In fact, it opens with the killer writing his thoughts in a journal while in prison. Then we are taken back to how it started. Someone hates Christians and Christianity, saying that we're all hypocrites because of what happened to him — he was the victim of abuse by a church-going man that people thought was wonderful. His response when he was older was to bomb churches. But he did not want total devastation, he wanted to "make a statement". This book does not deal directly with evol

Comics have a connotation for being entertainment for people of lower intellects. It may be true in some instances, but comics have become very sophisticated in their storylines and artwork. They are also used to make statements, just as television, movies and other entertainment media are used for social, political and religious commentary. Comics were used for propaganda purposes, and were famous for that in World War II and onward. They can be used for good purposes: This was a gift to me from Kirk Hastings, author of What Is Truth? And they can be used for not such good purposes, such as promoting leftist political agendas like global warming and evolutionism. NASA is doing just this. A federally-funded  NASA  website about astrobiology has just launched an evolutionary comic strip.  Is this an appropriate use of taxpayer funds? “ The Abominable Snow Aliens of Europa ” was announced by  NASA ’s Astrobiology Magazine on November 4.  This was not the first attempt

For some of us, autumn stirs mixed feelings. Falling leaves, falling temperatures, cold rains and so forth remind us to prepare for the upcoming winter. They can get slippery after a rain, so watch your step. And those leaves keep on falling, getting into the rain gutters and on the lawn. People rake them up and put them in piles. Some cities allow them to be raked to the street to be picked up, and some clowns use half the street for their personal dumping ground, but I digress. Other people are able to burn the leaves, depending on where they live and whether doing so is a fire risk. Many people appreciate the fall foliage, often driving for many miles on a "color tour". Image courtesy of antpkr / FreeDigitalPhotos.net Why do the leaves come down? Why can't the doggone trees just hold onto the things, anyway? It would be less work for us, yes? Actually, there is a purpose to trees dropping their leaves. And a science, all the way down into a sequential gene co

NASA From some of the comments I have seen, there are anti-creationists who really would like to see creationists in space. All of us. Now. So we can stop troubling evolutionists with the facts and real science. One of the most amazing examples of atheistic bigotry and ignorance was in a comment, paraphrasing: "When you're miles above the Earth, you don't want your fate in the hands of someone that believes in fairy tales like the Bible". Not only did this guy display massive ignorance of creationist beliefs and capabilities, but seemed willingly ignorant of the fact that there are many creationist scientists. Back to my original point, creationists have indeed been in space. To cite my article and supporting links on " Atheists Can't Protest Everything ": There are  followers of Jesus who have been on space missions . What I think will be the biggest irritant of all [to atheists who protest things] is the fact that  Bibles were taken on NASA