Piltdown Superman

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Sometimes, anti-creationists riding the Owlhoot Trail want to slap leather with creationists but they don't bring a gun to a gunfight. They don't even bring a knife or a pointed stick. I reckon they don't want to say anything meaningful, they just want to "prove the st00pid dumb creotard" wrong. Problem is, they show their own lack of thought and look mighty silly. Courtesy of Why?Outreach Too many people read just the caption of a picture or a few lines of text and then leave a comment. Unfortunately, this short attention span trend is common and seems to be growing, and the ignorant comment is a bane to many Page owners and bloggers. I shared this picture, " The Lincoln Memorial Disproves Old Earth Theories " about stalactites and stalagmites that had formed quickly under the memorial. Apparently, this guy didn't bother to pay attention to the excerpts in the caption or look at the two links. He complained, "

Are there volcanoes on Venus? In some ways, that seems fitting, what with Venus being exceptionally hot and full of toxic gasses. However, it's supposed to be billions of years old, and that would cause difficulties for "deep time" advocates. Other "old" objects in the solar system are not acting their age, including Pluto , so Venus can join the party. Computer-generated image of Sapas Mons on Venus / Image credit: NASA/JPL Back in 1982, the Soviet Union's Venera 13 and 14 probes to Venus transmitted images that scientists suspected were a volcano, which they named Sapas Mons. Galloping ahead to 2010, research showed further evidence that Venus is geologically active . Saddling up for another hard ride to 2015, scientists reveal that they believe Venus to be not only volcanically active, but them thar hills are young , old son. Which strongly indicates that Earth and everything else was created recently. The tortured surface of Venus appears to ha

When someone points out that evolution has not, and cannot, be observed, you run into problems with definitions. Sometimes there are multiple meanings to words and people can"talk past" each other, so it's best to nail down the definitions for potentially hazardous terms. Like evolution,  which has several definitions. You can encounter someone asserting, "What's the problem? Evolution is just a change in allele frequencies, and has been frequently observed. Therefore, evolution is true". (This is occasionally accompanied with an abusive ad hominem  like, "...you ignorant creationist fool, you".) Problem is, that owlhoot is being sneaky by changing up the meanings of the word evolution.   It's a logical fallacy called equivocation .   Image by Why?Outreach  Sure, creationists know full well that there are variations (such as eye color). But that's not evolution in the amoeba-to-atheopath sense, no new information is added, and

Because the giant panda has the configuration of a carnivore, some evolutionists say that it is an evolutionary failure, or left behind by evolution. This speculation is based on evolutionary presuppositions and limited thinking, and entirely unwarranted. Modified from "Giant Panda Tai Shan" / Fernando Revilla / Wikimedia Commons These critters are baffling, I'll allow. They are classified as bears and have the innards of carnivores, but primarily eat bamboo. A lot of it. Bamboo isn't exactly full of protein and other nutrients, so what gives with these black and white vegetarians? It turns out that they know how to get what they need, their Creator gave them the right equipment, despite the protestations of Darwin's Disciples. Is the giant panda a poorly evolved vegetarian? Or highly specialized, well-designed herbivore, a living link to a time when all animals were vegetarians? Despite having teeth, jaws, and a short digestive tract typical of the mor

In July 2013, I posted material on how there are still some people who believe that the Earth is nicely bolted down. Yes, despite observable science, they hold to the geocentric view, that the sun goes around the Earth, and not the geokinetic solar system we know and love. Some of this comes from an insistence on clinging to misunderstood Bible verses. To see that post, click on " Geocentrism — An Embarrassment to Creationists " and especially the article that is linked. "Bolted Earth", modified from an image by NASA's Earth Observatory Before we get to the good stuff, I have to give some information from the Irony Board. There's a Page on Facebook called "Evolution is a Religion of Origins" . While they post some occasional good anti-evolution material, it is run by a vituperative Sacred Name cultist . If you disagree with the One True Church™, you're a pagan. While I believe that the teachings of Roman Catholicism do not  lead to sal

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen I'm a bit late to this party. The book Evolution's Achilles' Heels  was released in July 2014, and the DVD came out in October 2014 (see the trailer at the bottom). Once my finances stabilized, I went to the stable, saddled up and purchased the book-DVD combo pack. That means Creation Ministries International did not give me anything, financial or otherwise, for writing this here review; I bought the items by my lonesome. In fact, they don't even know about the review yet. Haven't read the book yet, but I'm looking forward to it and will give that a review later on. First off, some basic information. You want credentialed scientists? You got 'em! The 15 Ph.D. scientists in the Evolution's Achilles' Heels  video discuss seven areas where evolutionary theory fails, but they don't go into a lot of heavy scientific lingo. The video is 96 minutes long, and the sections are separated so you can find them easily if you don

Typical portrayals of Stone Age and Bronze Age people is unflattering, to say the least. They were stupid brutes that didn't know how to do much except hunt and gather, and then began to develop agriculture. But this is based on evolutionary presuppositions. Evolutionary paleontologists and anthropologists keep getting surprised when more information gets telegraphed into Fort Darwin, as ancient people were far more advanced than assumptions give them credit for. Modified from "The Tower of Babel" by Gustave Dore The so-called Bronze Age was actually very dynamic, showing that people had their own cultures and were migrating. An ambitious project of sequencing human DNA from that era surprises secularists, but not so much for biblical creationists, since the results support the biblical timeline back to Babel. Scientists used new techniques to sequence 101 ancient human genomes believed to be from Bronze-Age populations in Europe. Their findings indicate a massiv

I t's been pointed out many times that scientists are not the impartial paragons of virtue that many people believe. When it comes to fame and fortune, some can be sneaky sidewinders — just like us reg'lar folks. Using bad science, just-so stories, and even fraud are almost expected when trying to prove goo-to-geologist evolution, since it happens so much in the cult of evolutionism . Even so, many of us reckon that they should be living up to higher standards. Seriously, what kind of ethical standards and integrity can be expected from people who hold to a materialistic worldview? When they deal from the bottom of the deck, they're following a "survival of the fittest" paradigm; having scientists police the integrity of scientists is like asking a burglar to hold your wallet while you make a phone call. The final authority for ethics and morality is the Creator, who revealed his plan in his written Word, not another materialistic method. The frequency

The geologic column exists in many textbooks, but is not found in nature. It is presented in a nice, tidy order where simple life forms are at the bottom, with more complex evolving up to the top. However, the geologic column and index fossils are constructs of the imagination . Some owlhoots have trolled, "The geologic column proves evolution, and there are no fossils out of order". They don't know what they're talking about, there are fossils "out of order" according to evolutionary timelines. So, it exists, but not in the way microbes-to-mechanic evolution want us to think . Modified from an image from the US Geological Survey Do biblical creation models do a better job of explaining what we find in the fossil record? That's a mite difficult. There is a general order to be had in the fossil record, and the Genesis Flood models explain a great deal. Yes, there are disagreements among Flood geologists as to the details — which is not much of a

Advocates of algae-to-astronomer evolution come up with some wild exaggerations and unmitigated fabrications to bolster their worldview. It's mighty bothersome when professing Christians pull the same shenanigans in the pursuit of ridiculing Christians who have a high view of the Bible and creation. These claims can be dispensed with through simple logic and science. Wikimedia Commons / Didier Descouens Dr. Joel Duff made some abnormal assertions about stone artifacts. He claims that they number in the trillions, and that there is no way they could be mistaken for the work of nature. In addition, they are dated with typical uniformitarian circular reasoning. The numbers do not withstand scrutiny, and this owlhoot doesn't bother to consider flood activity that would easily explain many of the things he thinks are man-made tools. A recent posting at the Naturalis Historia website confidently claims that trillions of artifacts found in Africa and elsewhere prove that th

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Although an earlier article from 2014 was reasonably popular, I reckoned I had to rewrite it. Same stable, different horse. Edited 12-28-2021 What is a cult, really? As I have emphasized before,  definitions are important  so that everyone is speaking the same language. People have different connotations of the word "cult", such as black magic rituals in front of scary idols in far off places, mass suicides (such as the People's Temple led by  atheist Jim Jones ), small groups, and so on. Most cults have some degree of truth in them as well as things that appear valid but are twisted. Others think of pseudo-Christian groups like the  Christadelphians ,  Jehovah's Witnesses ,  Mormons , the Sacred Name cultist's (now defunct) Page on Facebook that pretends to be creationist , and so on. Some members of groups that are called "cults" get burrs under their saddles over the word because it is so emotionally charged, has associat

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Both creationists and evolutionists expected Pluto to be mostly ice, with perhaps a small rocky core. Preliminary findings reveal that there are many features on Pluto and Charon that were quite unexpected and downright baffling for believers in an ancient solar system, but less surprising for biblical creationists. See " New Horizons, Pluto, and the Age of the Solar System ", " Pluto Inbound Image Stuns Scientists ", " Pluto Is Young ", and " Is Pluto Another Geyser World? 'Shocking” Images Baffle Scientists' " for information from creationist perspectives. Pluto from New Horizons . Image Credit: NASA, Johns Hopkins Univ / APL, Southwest Research Inst Scientists presenting the information on Pluto pointed out several features and admitted that Pluto looks young. Naturally, evolution's Luddites will be scrambling to find excuses to justify clinging to "deep time". We should expect a wagon-loa

Darwinists want things both ways. On one hand, evolution is force that nobody can stop. On the other hand, when confronted with evidence of no evolution, they fall back on "stasis", meaning, "It didn't have to evolve, so it didn't. A banquet-sized salamander fossil of six feet (two meters) shows no appreciable change with its modern amphibious counterparts (like other fossils reveal), so evolution didn't come calling at their doors. Credit: US NPS photo For that matter, they "see" evolution even when there is none present, and when there is no evidence, just an assumption that it's evolution what done did whatever characteristic we see. What really takes the rag off the bush is that even though Darwinoids are plumb out of evidence, they invoke their own god of the gaps , one owlhoot goes it a mite further and says that very slight changes in salamanders show the "invisible finger of evolution". More like waving their finger in

People who operate from a secular uniformitarian "deep time" worldview are baffled by the magnetic field of the moon, offering unsupportable conjectures based on poor reasoning. The best explanation is that the moon was created recently with the rest of the solar system. Original image credit (before modification) by NASA. Analysis of rocks brought back from Apollo 11 shows that the moon did have a magnetic field at one time, but there is little to none now. Scientists commence to assuming, without evidence, that since the Earth has a dynamo, so did the moon. They might oughta think things through before offering "evidence" that won't hold up. A recent paper by Clèment Suavet et al. in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows that uniformitarian scientists, who assume the world is billions of years old, are still very puzzled about the moon’s magnetic field. They don’t understand why it was formerly strong but now doesn’t exist, and h

Many of us have had the experience of jumping into water at the wrong angle and getting a bad smack, and it gets worse with a higher starting point. Divers in competition can gracefully slip into the water from 33 feet (10 meters), but great heights can be dangerous and even lethal . Gannets are large sea birds that do this to hunt fish from as high as 250 feet (90 meters), and do it repeatedly. Northern Gannet / Pixabay / agerezs The entire thing is very complex. Northern gannets do their hunting for five months, then spend the other seven months of the year living on the sea. There are many features in place for their survival, and everything has to be in place, at the same time, or nothing works or makes sense. Of course, proponents of slime-to-sea-bird evolution praise the puny false god of evolution, but don't have anything to support their faith. With all this complexity, the logical conclusion is that their Creator designed everything; simply asserting EvolutionDidIt