Piltdown Superman

We frequently see how evolutionary scientists are amazed and annoyed because the facts do not comport with their presuppositions. In addition, we also see that they tweak, ignore, deny and make up wild stories to force-fit observed evidence into their evolutionary worldview. This does not work. In reality, the evidence fits the biblical creationist models. Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams have fun providing so many examples of evolutionists (chemical, stellar, biological) being jaw-dropping surprised, shocked, even stunned and horrified, when their huge discoveries contradict some of the most fundamental predictions of their materialist theories. You can read the write-up and listen to the audio at " RSR's List of Shocked Evolutionists ". Also, you may like the parody of Kanye West's "Gold Digger", which is "Bone Digger" by ApologetiX, at the bottom of this page.

If you listen to Darwin's Cheerleaders, belief in the Bible (especially a recent, six-day creation) is the domain of the mentally incompetent or scam artists. However, there are actually many scientists, past and present, who reject evolution and accept Genesis as literal history . In addition, there are many non-scientists who believe the Bible as well; scoffing does not equal intellectual superiority — or truth. NASA/JPL-Caltech Astronomy and astrophysics are disciplines that one would consider "off limits" to creationists, especially with black holes, huge distances and so forth. Not hardly. Some are able to cast off "deep time" presuppositions, believe the Bible and also be productive in their fields. Dr. Jonathan Sarfati had a discussion with Dr. Markus Blietz about such things. After progressing through the rigorous German schooling, Markus eventually specialized in astrophysics. In particular, he explains: “My Ph.D. work was about a special cl

When reading or listening to evolutionists, some of the metaphysical elements of their worldview becomes apparent. Evolution itself is often spoken of as if it was an entity, with volition to select and even direct the changes in organisms. This is a form of pantheism. Evolution is not a being or a force. (There is only one Creator, and evolution was not his method of creation.) Nor can any creature decide to evolve another feature — or evolve itself into something else. No animal can plan ahead how it will evolve, so why do some evolutionists talk like they do? “ 500-million-year-old creature was on the way to evolving jaws ,” Sid Perkins titled his short article in Science Magazine, accompanied by an artist’s conception of “ one of the world’s oldest known vertebrates ”—a Cambrian creature named Metaspriggina from Canada.  The thumb-sized swimming creature possessed “ eyes, muscle groups and the support for gills ,” the article says; the upward-pointing eyes were “ large and

The debate has raged for decades whether or not dinosaurs are warm-blooded or cold-blooded. They had to be cold-blooded because they were just overgrown, terrible lizards, yes? However, since an ancestor for bird evolution could not be found, dinosaurs were nominated as candidates for the bird ancestor position and given the status of warm-blooded. Dino-to-bird evolution is the dominant viewpoint for evolutionary scientists, but it is not unanimous. There are problems with it, including the fact that dinosaurs ate birds , and dinosaur fossils have been found with modern birds , so those facts should destroy the "theory" right there. Evolutionists get desperate to deny the Creator, and give evolution undeserved credit for all sorts of change , further reducing origins science to absurdity. There is hope in the dino-to-bird camp. New studies indicate that instead of either/or regarding dinosaur warm- or cold-bloodedness, it may be neither/nor . Unfortunately (and de

The overriding viewpoint for evolutionary geology is uniformitarianism; the present is the key to the past. Geologic processes are observed and measured in the present, and then the assumption is that these rates have been the same throughout geologic history. However, not only do these conflict with biblical creationist models on the age of the earth, but they even contradict the expectations of secular scientists. Pixabay/WikiImages Problems down south. Antarctic ice has been rising and falling at rates that are far too rapid for evolutionary assumptions. Worse for them, the rates are not constant. This is problematic for uniformitarian geology, but not for young earth creationists. Land is not supposed to rise this fast. Generations of geologists have been trained to think in terms of slow and steady processes to explain Earth features. New results show that the continental crust underlying Antarctica is rising rapidly as parts of its massive ice sheet have been melting awa

When NASA sent the Cassini spacecraft to Titan (the largest moon of Saturn), certain things were expected to be found based on their ancient universe and evolutionary presuppositions. Titan was baffling already, because it has a dense atmosphere, which was a puzzler right there. Image Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech Worse for secular scientists, Titan was recalcitrant by acting decidedly young. With Cassini using radar and other instruments to map its surface, tellers of cosmology tales are in high gear finding truly remarkable "explanations" to force Titan into pretending to be old. It makes more sense to admit that the ancient universe paradigm is wrong and that the data fits a young universe. As the Cassini orbiter makes its 103rd close pass by Titan, have long-agers found ways to keep it billions of years old? Space.com announced the 103rd flyby of Titan by Cassini, and it’s a daring one: just 2,274 miles above the surface at 13,000 miles per hour; PhysOrg annou

Evolution has been an excuse to deny God and help atheists pretend that they are "intellectually fulfilled" . There are other people who are seeking to have faith in God, but the presentations of evolution as a fact cause them doubt and confusion. It is not surprising, since people are not trained in critical thinking, but blind obedience. Society has come to the religion of Scientism , elevating science and making scientists its priests. Further, evolutionists present their beliefs in slick packages with great storytelling. Of course, they leave out facts that controvert their presentations. When people actually examine the evidence, they will see that evolution does not have a leg to stand on or a tail by which to swing. The evidence supports what the Bible says, and it also supports biblical creation science. A letter to CMI and the response by a former atheist is presented. I watched David Attenborough’s Rise of Animals today. Although I cannot accept life from z

It's a bit distracting to be writing this while the cat is snoring. I should record it, people won't believe the log-sawing.  Creationists keep pointing out that there are fossils out of order according to the geologic column, and Darwin's Cheerleaders come up with various rescuing devices to keep from discarding it. Similarly, there are things that just do not belong according to archaeology, history and so on. Rather than admitting that evolution has been refuted seven ways from sundown, people will resort to speculating that ancient space aliens are the answer, or simply cover up the many anti-evolution smoking guns. Spend a half an hour on this video by Ian Juby for " Genesis Week " and see some information about artifacts that fluster evolutionists . They really should abandon their "theory", the evidence supports the biblical creation model far better than their conjectures. ADDENDUM: A three-part article on OOParts can be found at the

It seems to be happening with increasing frequency that the more scientists discover, the more there is to learn. Regarding DNA and the human genome, some of the surprises are because of the presuppositions of evolutionists (and yes, "evolutionist" is  a word , even though some of them do not like it). Since part of the genome was not understood, it was presumed "junk" and not studied properly. That specter has come back to haunt them repeatedly. In this case, hundreds of proteins have been identified, and they were in areas called "junk". Using a creationist paradigm (and yes, "creationist" is a word, but creationists do not seem to object to it) believing that God created amazingly complex things and we should discover what makes them tick, perhaps there would not be so many surprises. Once again the oft-repeated phrase "More complex than previously thought" has been used to describe new research cataloguing thousands of prot

This post has two featured articles on a related topic from the same source. Give a listen to the music at the end of this post, too. First, secular "peer review" process has some serious flaws , especially regarding origins science. Creationists often receive glib comments of the woefully uninformed that resemble: "Get your creationist nonsense peer reviewed and then maybe I'll read it". Although creationists do have peer review , people making comments like that are implying that creationists should subject their material refuting evolution to the secular process. Picture furnished by Michelle Studer Peer review is a good idea and many people work hard to keep up the standards, however, it is time-consuming and expensive. But there is also bad science, recalled papers, bias and fraud — especially when trying to prove evolution with the sacred cow of peer review. The first featured article discusses that some are saying that peer review as we know it

Is there an echo in here? Clinton Richard Dawkins says that teaching creation science to children is child abuse. Bill Nye the Propaganda Guy spouts off prejudicial conjecture about how people who disbelieve in evolution are harming science.   Neil deGrasse Tyson uses his status to spread untruths about the same kind of thing. All three of them are guilty of conflating "science" with "evolution", and speaking falsehoods about the importance of a "proper" belief in origins (that is, evolutionism) for the progress of real science. None of them really understand the nature of science. It all comes down to faulty presuppositions making a failed worldview. Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, in an interview posted on National Geographic’s website on June 6, wants to “fix” adults he considers “scientifically illiterate.” His 13-part series Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey claims its aim is to promote science literacy, but by this phrase and the content of many of

Peat bogs are given a dire image from movies, television and literature. Sure, wetlands can be dangerous places to walk, so you need to know what you're doing . But they are also interesting places for historians and archaeologists. People, plants, various creatures and thousands of lawyers reside there. The peat itself is useful in many ways. freeimages/ColinBroug But how old are they? Some scientists will refer to peat bogs as evidence that the Bible is wrong and that the earth is old. This is done through assumptions and flawed dating methods, the worst of which is picking a sample of the deposition that fits their worldview and ignoring other data. Uniformitarian dating methods are highly misleading. Indeed, other data indicates more rapid deposition, and is in keeping with archaeological evidence. But scientists who believe that the book of Genesis is history, not myth, understand from the Bible that the global Flood occurred about 4,500 years ago. Peat bogs of toda

“If you insist on teaching your children false-hoods—that the Earth is flat, that "Man" is not a product of evolution by natural selection—then you must expect, at the very least, that those of us who have freedom of speech will feel free to describe your teachings as the spreading of falsehoods, and will attempt to demonstrate this to your children at our earliest opportunity. Our future well-being—the well-being of all of us on the planet—depends on the education of our descendants.”  ― Daniel C. Dennett, Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life Darwin's Drones are constantly increasing their efforts to get people to believe in materialistic evolution. Perhaps they are upset that America, which makes significant contributions to the world in science and technology, still has a significant number of the population rejecting godless evolutionism . Some atheists make the absurd faith-based assertion (wishful thinking, really) that all cre

Release the Kraken! Anyone for calamari? Well, you can have my portion. However, when it comes to the giant squid, I guess they're not good eats, so stay with the smaller varieties for that . Let the sperm whales dine on them. Giant squids have been elusive (partly because of where they live, deep in the ocean, for which they are well designed) and considered the stuff of fanciful legends because of evolutionary presuppositions. Except for the unlikeliness of them attacking ships at sea, recurring legends like this often have a basis in fact. Creatures did grow larger long ago, and we have not explored all that much of the ocean, really, so it should not be such a surprise that giant squids have been found. What else is down there, I wonder? Tales abound around the world of the existence of awesome creatures and events. For instance, the hundreds of stories of a global Flood, with amazing parallels to the original in Genesis, give strong support to the truth of the Bible’s re

You know that geologic column that is presented in textbooks where the simplest life forms are at the bottom and the more complex life forms are at the top? It does not exist in the real world. The truth is, the thing is fouled up beyond all recognition.  Using uniformitarian and evolutionary assumptions (as well as a generous dose of circular reasoning regarding "index fossils" that supposedly indicate the age of the layers), the orderly progression is presented as fact. It fools many people who believed their teachers who, in turn, believed their teachers. Many people will assert that the fossil record proves evolution, but that is not the case because many fossils are in the "wrong" place , so their assertions are based on misguided faith, not on actual scientific evidence. The best explanation is the global cataclysm of Noah's Flood as presented in biblical creation models. During a recent televised debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham, Mr. Nye clai

Although there has been a variety of canines, both wild and domesticated, for many years, selective breeding has provided more and more breeds in recent years. It seems that they have been companions for humans for most of history, being companions, hunters, protectors, lap warmers and so on. A great variety, but also with some startling similarities all the way down to the genetic level. Dogs In Landscape - Setters and Pointer, George Morland, 1792 Personally, I am more of a cat person.  While there are many varieties of cats, there are many more varieties of dogs. And dogs are probably easier to study. Proponents of evolution have tried to explain the variations by invoking natural selection. That does not explain much, especially when it comes to behavior modifications. Instead, the explanation lies in genetics traced back to the original dog kind. The Creator had all this in mind when he programmed their genes. The American hairless terrier is one of the newest official

Evolutionary presuppositions seem to be like angry snakes because they keep biting their handlers over and over. Evolutionary anthropologists and paleontologists assume that evolution is true, that the earth is billions of years old, that ancient humans were stupid brutes &c. The more they learn about ancient humans, the more they realize that not only were they fully human and not some silly semi-simians ( interbreeding is a strong indication of this fact ), and they had greater capabilities (such as advanced cave painting skills ) than they were expected to have. 1907(?), PD Yet again, evolutionists are startled by discoveries. Early humans used spears and showed signs of culture. If they would drop their failed presuppositions and use the biblical timeline, they would come to vastly different (and much more realistic) conclusions that do not need constant revision to be force-fit into their timelines. Researcher says, “It just goes to show that the easiest way to be w

"Ow!", he cried out into the uncaring darkness of the living room. "What happened?", she asked, almost concerned. "You left out a number six and I tripped over it. Can't you put those things away when you're through with them?" What a stupid concept. Numerals are not tangible objects that can be tripped over or skipped across a pond. If you write the number "6" on a chalkboard, you have a representation of the numeral six, not "sixness" itself. If you erase that number from the chalkboard, the numeral of six continues to exist. Laws of logic are also intangible. You cannot put the law of identity in your pocket. You can type it out and then delete what you typed, but deleting your physical representation of the law does not cause it to cease to exist. Atheists and evolutionists are generally materialistic in their presuppositions. That is, they claim that the only reality is the material world, those things perce

In their desperate attempts to explain the origins of the universe, living things, life itself and so on without God, secularists get hasty in their pronouncements. Once the latest great thing is proclaimed, the Evo Sith ridicule creationists by posting links — and embarrass themselves because they were arrogant too soon. In this case, the "smoking gun" proof of the Big Bang (a series of conjectures without substance ) and "inflation" was in dispute a short time after it was announced is receiving further criticism. Now scientists are saying that this "proof" is possibly nothing but dust . The scientists who thought they had proof of the Big Bang inflation disregarded this consideration, and may be regretting it. A word of caution to creationists who are alarmed at scientific findings: don't be. Just wait a while. Besides, our faith is not based on the latest whims of science, but on the unchanging Word of God. In March 2014, a team of radio

Butterfly flight is an intricate process. It entails very quick, precise motion with minute muscular control. Everything for the complex and precise process of flight must be in place at the same time, or else nothing works, nothing makes sense. Yet, Darwin's Cheerleaders want us to believe that it was through time, chance, natural selection and so forth. "Butterflies", Odilon Redon, 1910 It looks like they simply flap their wings. In fact, the rapid process is simply too fast for us to see; there is really quite a bit going on. Butterflies have never ceased to dazzle and amaze mankind with their colours,1 patterns, and just as importantly, their incredible flying abilities.2 The earliest recorded paintings of these beautiful creatures were found on the 3000-year-old3 tomb walls of an Egyptian named Nebamun, an “accountant of grain” ... during the reigns of Thutmose IV and Amenhotep III. The surviving fresco containing the butterflies can be seen at the British M

Once again, the more we learn, the more we realize that we do not know so much after all, and there is much more to learn. In this case, life "out there" in space. Evolutionary cosmogonists, cosmologists and astronomers have been playing the odds, assuming that of all the stars in the universe, many must have habitable words — we got one, didn't we? Plugging into the presuppositions that life evolved here, and it must have evolved on those other words, and there are exoplanets out there, that settles it. No, it doesn't. Artist's conception of Kepler-10 and planets — Image credit: NASA / Ames / JPL-Caltech (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Although planets may exist in the habitable zone, there are other problems to overcome for them to be able to support life. There are new problems being ascertained as well, including planets that should not even exist according to evolutionary schemes (but are not a problem for biblical creationists)

Do you realize that no matter how much you know, there’s an infinite amount more to know? Which means, no matter how much you know, you don’t know how much more there is to know anyway, which means no matter how much you know, you don’t know how much you do know or don’t know in relation to whatever there is to know (which you don’t know what it is anyway) which means you just don’t know much at all. — Ken Ham The more scientists study DNA, the more discoveries there are to make, the more they find out that there is a great deal yet to learn . The assumption that every living thing speaks the same language turns out to be in error, and certain "stop" and "go" instructions in some organisms can mean something completely different in other organisms. Image * After Some of the Evo Sith claim that DNA is proof of evolution. The intricacies of the DNA language are definitely not that! Rather, DNA is further evidence that life was designed by an infinite

Occasionally, some creationists will post comments along the lines of, "I'll only teach the truth of creation to my kids, none of that evil-ution stuff in my house!" Unfortunately, this well-intentioned mindset does a disservice to young people because they cannot be insulated from evolution because it is pervasive and foundational to all sorts of evil. freeimages.com / "Studying Hard" / twinkledee Instead, we must present evolution — but within a biblical framework. We need to show not only the evidence that overwhelmingly supports creation and the Bible, but also the flaws of evolution that are seldom presented in a secular setting. Further, we need to teach them to think critically so they can see the flaws in the logic of evolution's proponents, and that evidence is interpreted through worldviews. Otherwise, when evolution is presented to them as fact (including "evidence" that is nothing more than speculations, hypotheses and even gu