Piltdown Superman

Sometimes, i's interesting to spend time speculating on "what if" in a fantasy world. Maybe Chuckie had never been born. Or perhaps he continued his studies in theology and became a Bible-believing pastor (theology was his only formal schooling, after all). It could be that he would continue his apprenticeship and become a medical doctor. Imaginably, he pursued is one-time interest in taxidermy with John Edmonstone. Or he could have run away and left no news. At any rate, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life , plus The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex and other things would not have been written. Perhaps Alfred Russel Wallace would have been the one to write his version of evolution and become a hero to God deniers. Maybe...perhaps...imaginably...could be...could have...it's like reading evolutionary science, yes? There are people who think that Charles Darwin was

One of the more common expressions uttered by proponents of evolution is "evolutionary advantage". Essentially, they see an organism's particular characteristic and "explain" it in terms of some kind of evolutionary advantage. Sometimes this explanation is somewhat plausible, but many times, they are humorous; almost as if you were to say that short people have the evolutionary advantage of not having to stoop to pass through doorways. This is why some of us claim that they see evolution almost everywhere (blessed be!), but are mainly the products of imagination. In addition to the nonexistent whys  of evolution, the hows  are also missing; no fossil record, and so forth. Pixabay / katja Finding any evolutionary advantage to the seahorse is extremely unlikely. It is a fish that has many unique characteristics in addition to the obvious horse shape. No other fish spends most of its time swimming upright, its eyes work independently, the father does the b

In our last installment , we saw that Darwin's Desperate Cheerleaders are ignoring facts from paleontology and geology, and trying to make an ancient bird into a feathered dinosaur. This post has two more items that need your investigation. Megalosaurus, a bird-hipped dinosaur Some Darwinists are so intent on determining the origin of flight that they see feathers in all sorts of dinosaur fossils. It has been speculated that dinosaurs had feathers, and then branched into two kinds: Lizard-hipped (which allegedly evolved into birds) and bird-hipped (which did not allegedly evolve into birds, despite having an advantage in the hip department). I actually laughed when I read that. Things that look like feathers to some enthusiastic scientists actually have almost no resemblance to them. Here are two articles that show why the feathers are from the land of imagination. First: The media have jumped all over a discovery of fuzz on a small ornithischian dinosaur, ignoring the ev

Bringing you exciting news using my unregistered assault keyboard from a hidden location. Fundamentalist evolutionists are going to go haywire again when their dogmas and presuppositions are exposed. "What ineffable twaddle!" I cried, slapping the magazine down on the table, "I never read such rubbish in my life." "What is it?" asked Sherlock Holmes. "Why, this article," I said, pointing at it with my egg spoon as I sat down to my breakfast. "I see that you have read it since you have marked it. I don't deny that it is smartly written. It irritates me though. It is evidently the theory of some arm-chair lounger who evolves all these neat little paradoxes in the seclusion of his own study. It is not practical. I should like to see him clapped down in a third class carriage on the Underground, and asked to give the trades of all his fellow-travelers. I would lay a thousand to one against him." "You would lose your mo

No, the Frink dating method has nothing to do with the romance and marriage between Mr. and Mrs. Frink. Rather, it is the Oxidizable Carbon Ratio method postulated by Douglas Frink. Like other methods used to try to determine the age of items, it relies on several assumptions about the dating process. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers SPA Archaeologist Jeremy Decker records a piece of fire-cracked rock, one of a series of artifacts showing where prehistoric people built a hearth. Also, the OCR method is calibrated with carbon-14, another dating method that requires many assumptions. But at least Frink points out difficulties in his process that need to be worked out instead of rushing in as a hero of science. So this, too, is not a reliable method to conjure up long ages for the sake of evolution. MM from Australia asked about a new dating method called “oxidizable carbon ratio” (OCR) dating, which was brought to his attention by a friend. It

One problem that creationists have is that we have to deal with Darwin's Drones who want to negate what we have to say with proof of evolution. (Some are more reasonable and simply want to give what they consider to be evidence of evolution, not "proof".) Creationists and Intelligent Design proponents do not have a problem with evidence, because what Darwinists have to offer in defense of their worldview is weak. Have you ever seen a creationist haiku on a tombstone before? The most frequent problem we have is when evolutionists present what they consider evidence, and it has been dealt with by creationists already or even discarded by evolutionary scientists. They seldom do their homework. Unfortunately, these things keep popping up and are even in textbooks and so forth. We often know their material better than they do. This article presents two items that are touted as evidence for evolution that should be buried. One is a claim that since some members o

People who are not used to spending time far above sea level often get altitude sickness because the the air is thinner and their bodies have to work harder to get enough oxygen. Invaders of and travelers to Tibet need to use extreme care at the " Roof of the W orld". Not only is altitude sickness unpleasant, in such extremes, it can be fatal. So how about them Tibetans, huh? Tibetans did not simply get used to the altitude, they thrive in it. F reeimages / Niko Nami We've learned that the Neanderthals and Denisovans got around , as traces of there genes are in many places. It turns out that the Tibetan people have a genetic variation that is only found in one other people group, the Denisovans. Of course, scientists saw evolution where it does not exist. When the evidence is examined without evolutionary presuppositions and biases, it actually points to something that secularists do not want to hear: The dispersion of humanity from the Tower of Babel. Extrem

The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone is a wide area around the Chernobyl nuclear reactor disaster. Because of radiation, it is very highly restricted and controlled by the State Emergency Service of Ukraine. Scientists are granted limited access to perform studies. One of the areas of research involves DNA damage in birds. Some of them are actually resistant to radiation! This indicates more of the biological intricacies that the Creator designed in his creation, and does not support evolutionary ideas. It has been 28 years since Chernobyl's nuclear power plant suffered a catastrophic meltdown in Ukraine. People are still not permitted to live near it because radiation levels remain dangerous, but plants and animals long ago pioneered the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. A new study revealed surprising hints that certain birds' internal biological tactics cope well with the harmful radiation. Publishing in the journal Functional Ecology, European scientists described results from a

Secular scientists have several suggestions supposedly explaining the start of the planets. None of them work. Every naturalistic explanation for the origin of the universe and the planets has serious flaws. Interestingly, even though what is observed in our own solar system baffles evolutionary cosmogonists and cosmologists , they seem to think that the accretion speculation (the most popular) will hold together. Artist's concept of Kepler in the distant solar system. Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech So the absurdity is extrapolated to exoplanets. However, the exoplanets are making things worse, not better, for evolutionary ideas about the universe. Really, the evidence supports recent creation by the Designer. Astrophysicists, are being ‘knocked into a cocked hat’ by the results from the planet-finding Kepler space observatory. Almost a thousand new ‘exo-planets’ have been confirmed and another four thousand candidates are waiting to be assessed. So what’s the proble

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  EDIT: Please also read this related, more recent article, " Faker Alert for Facebook ". Enemies of creation science are not content to deal with the topics. Instead, they want to "protect" what they call "science" (which includes equivocating "science" with "evolution"), attempt to outlaw the its teaching in schools , misrepresentation, ridicule and other ways to silence us. In addition, they use other nefarious tricks. Earlier today, I helped sound an alarm about fake Facebook accounts impersonating Creation Ministries International and Dr. Jonathan Sarfati (which have since been removed after action from CMI). This is nothing new, since there are often warnings made about impersonations of Ken Ham, Eric Hovind, Ray Comfort and other Christians and creationists. (It happens to "regular" people and ministries as well as the "big names".) Atheists and evolutionists are not content to

Evolutionary geologists and paleontologists have found several triceratops fossils in one area. Based on their erroneous presuppositions, they stated some things as facts that are not facts at all. What they do know is that there are many triceratops skulls with some variation in a great deal of rock. These secular scientists are presuming age of the rocks in which the triceratops gang was buried, and that it took millions of years to do it. They also assume that variation is the same as evolution, but have no explanation for how or why this alleged evolution occurred. But we have come to expect circular reasoning from evolutionists . There are two huge problems for them. First, the geologic evidence is for rapid burial. Second, actual science refutes their position and supports the Noachian Flood that biblical creationists believe. Triceratops skulls entombed in Montana’s Upper Cretaceous Hell Creek Formation tell a story, but not the tale of being trapped by the sands of

Once again, secular scientists have used their presuppositions to force-fit information, then proceed to do a half-hearted job at explanations — then leave it. The explanation is accepted and then put into textbooks with a truckload of other semi-investigated findings. Later, some other scientists decide that something needs another look, and the whole thing needs to be retooled. Given the track record of evolution and old-earth devotees, bad information is likely to remain uncorrected in textbooks for many years, if ever. In this case, the so-called Messinian salinity crisis. This involved having the Mediterranean Sea dry up repeatedly over millions of years, but the evidence does not support the claims. Also, the scientists partially left their own presuppositions to invoke the word "catastrophe", which was not well received by other uniformitarian geologists. Further investigation is warranted, and biblical creationists need to give this project serious examination

As we observed in the last exciting episode , the "mosaic" of human evolution is more like a scattered jigsaw puzzle. Part of the problem is from making conclusions based on incomplete evidence. Another problem is insisting on evolutionary presuppositions even though the evidence does not fit. Imagine this scenario. You go to an auto mechanic because something just isn't right. The mechanic says, "There are several possible causes for this. I'm going to pick one and make repairs based on that one and ignore the rest". Would you trust that mechanic? Me, I'd go to my usual mechanic, who looks at the possibilities and reasons to the best conclusion. Heidelberg Man (Homo heidelbergensis) was one of the alleged ancestors for various branches of humanity's evolutionary tree. This bad boy was another one with several possible variations scattered over a wide area. Now the debate has increased beyond his place in evolutionary history — he may not h

To hear the popularizers of human evolution tell it, the progression from simpler life forms through apelike ancestors all the way to modern humans is a well established mosaic, except for the occasional missing link, and it is all "settled science" and the scientific consensus. The reality is far different, and more like a jigsaw puzzle with scattered pieces. There are false starts, former transitional forms that have been reclassified as fully human or fully ape, embarrassments and frauds. Settled science and consensus? There is considerable disagreement within the evolutionary community. All they have is the presupposition that evolution occurred, then try to force the evidence into their monkey scheme. So, this "mosaic" is nothing of the kind. The fanciful tale is that bits and pieces of bones that are widely scattered, and ancient humans supposedly evolved various traits, and then here we are. The truth of human origins is not found in imaginative paleon

— Cowboy Bob Sorensen Going to make you think about some deeper things today, and linking to three articles. Plus a bonus song at the end. People have criticized creationists for pointing out the fruits of evolutionary thinking. Some have said things like, "Evolution is just biology, nothing more". When I hear something like that I wonder if that person is uninformed, disingenuous or something else. The fact is that ideas have consequences, and evolution is not just biology, geology, cosmology and other things, but a worldview. Evolution is treated like some kind of entity that has goals and makes decisions, which is consistent with its ancient pantheistic pagan roots. Scientists are not dispassionate and totally objective automatons . Using materialistic presuppositions, evolutionary scientists attempt to find the human soul and the source of free will in the brain . But processes of evolution cannot account for logic, the soul, free will — or morality. Making morali

People who get their information about hyenas from children's stories and people who get information about creationists from atheists get the same result: fiction. In reality, hyenas are not cowardly scavengers, but relentless hunters with immense stamina and great speed. Strong, too. (Well, except for the one called the aardwolf, which is a kind of hyena but much smaller and eats creepy-crawly things.) And that noise some of these man-killers make that sounds like laughing? It isn't. Pixabay / valerieBaron The hyena is also an irritation to evolutionary classification. Where to put it on the failed tree of life? It has been considered in the dog family, the cat family and related to civets, having some characteristics of both cats and dogs. This creature is another testimony of the Creator — and neither the hyena nor its creator is to be trifled with. Many people in the west are accustomed to thinking of the hyena only as a scavenger, as in The Lion King. Actually

Evolutionary biologists try to observe, make sense of and explain evolution. Obviously. They want to see it, it's their job. Unfortunately, much of what is called evolution is nothing of the kind. This conflation is misleading, since it implies that the small changes that biologists find are support for molecules-to-man evolution. Pixabay / JamesDeMers For example, some forms of clover have a defense mechanism of releasing low-potency cyanide when being munched. Others are missing the gene for this. Not just a mutation, but completely missing. Therefore, evolution. Not hardly. Clovers come in a wide variety of sizes, and some of them hold interesting surprises. Plant biologists have been studying one trait in particular, and it keeps showing up—or disappearing—in peculiar patterns. Do these patterns illustrate evolutionary changes or does something entirely different switch off this trait? The trait under scrutiny involves clover-leaf tissue that releases cyanide when c

It has been said here several times that scientists are people. They have biases, errors, carelessness, and are prone to avarice like other people. Perhaps more so, since they wish to promote their perceptions of truth from their worldview. Secular scientists have more pressures, because they are trying to get the "next big thing" to bolster evolutionism and get that funding money. Pixabay / WikiImages Many people have idealized and unfair concepts of scientists. They see them as working strictly from the facts and will "follow where the evidence leads. Sure, many try to be objective and seek scientific truth, but secularists start from fundamentally flawed presuppositions. Not only incapable of logical thinking, but placing scientists on a ridiculous pedestal. If people did their homework, they would learn that scientists have been reluctant to admit the truth, committed outright fraud, allowed false conclusions to run unchecked (then blame the science