Piltdown Superman

Every once in a while, you may encounter one of Darwin's Cheerleaders proclaiming the "fact" of evolution because evolution has science going for it, so you'd better shape up. They seldom admit (and many do not realize) that science is a philosophy of interpreting evidence relying on a materialistic worldview. Sure, there are some aspects of evolution that have appear to have empirical evidence, but that is often based on conflating variations with common-ancestor evolution. The rest of the alleged evidence is based on conjecture or even outright storytelling. One of the most risible concepts that Darwinists present is convergent evolution. Organisms having similar traits but are mostly unrelated (such as sonar in bats and dolphins) each evolved the characteristic separately. Such weak reasoning is based entirely on assumptions, presuppositions, circular reasoning, and personal preferences; there is no actual evidence for it. Such efforts to deny the work of

According to telegraphs from the gang at the Darwin Ranch, Earth has experienced five mass extinction events. These are separated by huge numbers of years and are based on a number of assumptions. They don't rightly have the evidence going for them.  Credit: Col. Jeffrey N. Williams , International Space Station 13 Crew, NASA Biblical creationists have a far different take on the so-called extinction events. There was actually one very big event: the Genesis Flood. This is supported by scientific evidence, including volcanism, rock layers in megasequences, lots of water moving very quickly, and more. Secularists dislike the Genesis Flood geology from creationary scientists because it indicates that Earth is far younger than is dreamt of in their philosophy. And minerals-to-minerologist evolution requires huge amounts of time. They get mighty irritated when their long ages are taken away — especially by scientific evidence. What an amazing world we live in, and what an ama

UPDATE D :   Four  links added below the featured article , and another important update was added 11 April 2017. A reader of The Question Evolution Project contacted me about the "big news" that NASA discovered seven new planets that are in what is called the habitable zone. I had not investigated the story very much since these stories tend to be ridiculous: "It's Earth's twin, except it would be like living in lava ". I chose to wait for a response from a creationist organization so I didn't have to step in piles of evolutionary dogma and hysteria, and the wait paid off, as you'll see below. Possible surface of TRAPPIST-1f, credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech Secularists go daffy over news of possible planets in the habitable zone, and their lapdog press joins in the fun by spreading exciting but actually very fake news. Many speculations, but only a thimbleful of actual science. Why the excitement? So secularists can deny that Earth is a s

Although some owlhoots try to say that evolution is only about biology, we know that they're being disingenuous. Darwin's fake science concepts have been used to "scientifically" justify immoral behavior , and are at the root of other evils in Western society. While the field of psychology is evolutionary and God-denying in nature , evolutionary psychology is incoherent at best, and controversial even among evolutionists. It's quackery. Made at Image Chef In this pseudoscience (along with evolutionary thinking in general), there is nothing special about humans except that we're more highly evolved than other animals. We are reduced to responding to stimuli, and our behavior is strictly functional, without God and biblical morality. Our behavior is "explained" in speculative evolutionary terms, many of which are contradictory and worthy of the tabloid press. The Christian worldview, beginning at creation, is the only way to make sense of the h

An article in The Washington Post discussed an excellent mammoth skull has been discovered on Santa Rosa of the Channel Islands, which doesn't fit. It's not a pygmy mammoth, which were native to the area, and it's not a Columbian. Is it a variation of the dozen or so currently known mammoth species, or something entirely new? And — how did it get there, anyway? Mammoth sculpture image cropped from Pixabay / hansbenn The Post had some misstatements of facts, and included some obfuscation on the word evolution, using evidence and conclusions that biblical creationists agree with Darwinists about, but imply that molecules-to-mammoth is responsible. They also had some problems with the dating claims, and a few other alternative "facts". The time frame and the location of the beastie can be explained with the creation science model of the Genesis Flood and subsequent Ice Age. According to a report recently published in The Washington Post , researchers have

Ever hear of having a relationship "warts and all"? Kind of ugly wording, but it makes the point that someone accepts both the good and the bad of the other party involved. The face of the secular science industry covers up its flaws, especially regarding common-ancestor evolution and global warming. It has a bad complexion, and tries to cover up numerous flaws, which causes trust issues. Image credit: Pixabay / kinkate There are methodological errors, such as poor estimates of wildlife, observer interference, publication bias canonizing "facts" in science, storytelling to influence acceptance of untrue evidence, terribly flawed peer review. From there, move to moral errors, including misconduct (and covering it up), scientific racism. Then we have a passel of logical errors: leaving self-defeating proposals that are laughable from the get-go remain unchallenged, a solvent involving gene transfer being promoted as evidence of evolution, a dreadful concept of

According to secular geologists, the Hawaiian islands are millions of years old. This figure is primarily reached through the highly suspect methods of radiometric dating. Biblical creationists have presented into evidence for the age of Earth controversy many items that are ignored by secularists and religious compromisers, such as " 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe ". Image credit: NASA/GSFC/JPL, MISR Team (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Uniformitarianism, the belief that the slow, gradual processes observed today have been constant and unchanging, can work against secularists. Using their assumptions and methods, the observed rate of erosion for the Hawaiian islands shows that they cannot be millions of years old! In fact, recent creation and the Genesis Flood geology presented by biblical creationary scientists are by far the best answers to the age and formation of the islands. Secular scientists claim the Hawaiian

Every once in a while, the hands at the Darwin Ranch at Deception Pass get a mite ornery and go looking for someone to slap leather with. Those of us in creation science ministries will, to varying degrees, encounter "debate" challenges from fundamentalist evolutionists. These come from people who are vituperative atheists, bullies, cyberstalkers , and those who simply want to try and make fools of creationists. I have seen many who express purile rage at God and his people, but are woefully uninformed as to what biblical creationists actually believe and teach. Instead, their primary sources are atheopath Websites who present biase d disinformation. Image credit: Pixabay / janeb13 Although I do not engage in actual debates, I have learned quite a bit about them in recent years. A basic concept that I agree with, whether for a formal debate or an intelligent discussion, is to be respectful toward your opponent. Another concept is that debates and discussions should

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen EDIT:  Two encore showings, March 2 and March 7.  Certain details of this post will be out of date in less than a week. However, the principles contained herein will remain relevant — especially the second part of this article. Corrected 2-19-2017, I mistakenly wrote that the writer/director/producer was Del Tackett . Those credits belong to Thom as Purifoy, Jr. Dr. Tackett is the host of the movie. Is Genesis History? is a 2-hour documentary film that is scheduled to appear in American cinemas on Thursday, February 23 . That's all the time we have. I hope the DVD release date in April is correct, or perhaps it will be available online. My online search for Is Genesis History? yielded many results, including show times, praise, and enthusiastic reviews from Christians (such as this one from Eric Hovind ). The movie is the product of a great deal of work and includes interviews with many experts in their fields, and the primary focus is to equip Chr

Although not graphic, the following post and the link featured contain mature content.  When discussing Darwinian evolution and its variations, the topics often include the end result of evolutionary thinking. Some people try to avoid these subjects, and disingenuously say that evolution is just biology, nothing more. We have seen how Darwin has permeated society, including "scientific" racism, abortion, euthanasia, laissez-faire capitalism, evolutionary psychology, and more. Image credit: Freeimages / deafstar Evolution has been used to justify male promiscuity, since a man can produce a large quantity of sperm cells and fertilize many women, and that is supposed to give him an advantage. Women are supposedly careful, shy, alluring, and very selective so they can mate with the best possible man she can obtain. Interesting that our Bible-based morality involves commitment, and the emotional reactions to unfaithfulness support biblical morality and not evolution — ex

A recent study of the Great Chinese Famine resulted in faulty conclusions and incomplete research on famine effects passed on to offspring, especially because the paper did not identify a causal mechanism. Researchers claimed that metabolism causes altered metabolism, but it only discussed a relationship between famine and metabolism. Image credit: Pixabay / TusitaStudio Before we continue with the research, a bit of history. The Great Chinese Famine of about 1958-1961 had several causes. Most egregious was Chairman Mousie Dung's incompetence. He was told that sparrows eat grain seeds, so he ordered sparrows killed — by the millions. Without the chirpie birdies around, locusts and other insects they ate went on a crop-eating rampage. People were starving, and Mao didn't release food in warehouses. The drought of 1960 made things even worse. Now, back to our research paper. Like the famine was not the result of a single cause, neither is the result presented. In additio

Although cesarean sections (c-sections) for difficult childbirth was well-established in the 20th century, the practice of cutting open the womb to save a child has been around quite a spell . Difference is, it used to be done when the mother was dead or dying, whereas nowadays, all participants are likely to stay alive. Borrowed from The Princess Bride , 1987 In their persistent quest to give Darwin credit for perceived changes, some scientists were presenting the idea that the so-called obstetrical dilemma. This is supposedly where a woman's pelvis needed to evolve to give birth to larger-brained babies, but also the apelike ancestor needed to evolve bipedalism. So, c-sections may be influencing natural selection. But this idea has serious difficulties, and ignores how our Creator brilliantly designed the human female pelvis for childbirth. Also, once again the Darwinoids are playing bait 'n' switch games, equivocating with the word evolution when none is in evi

It seems that dinosaurs have always had had some popularity over the years, especially for children, but I reckon that their popularity has escalated in recent years. And why not? There's an element of mystery to them, and they've been the subject of many stories in movies, print, and so forth. Dinosaurs have also been used as a tool for evolutionary propaganda to reach the young (to see how evolutionists are attempting to offset children's inborn belief in God, see " Accelerated Evolutionary Indoctrination of Children "). When handled properly, the subject can work in the favor of biblical creationists, a fact that sometimes causes rage among secularists . One thing I learned early on in my creation science studies is that too many parents do not know that answers for questions about Earth's age, evolution, creation, and dinosaurs can indeed be found if people will bother to look. Parents cannot bluff their children. If you don't know, then admit it

Secular scientists have several theories about the formation of the solar system. That's because none of them explain all the data, so they settle on selling us a bill of goods with the " accretion theory ". Everything's slow and gradual, and eventually, Earth formed. Then came the oceans. Sunset at Sea , Ivan Aivazovsky, 1899 The assumption was that Earth was a hot blob of stuff that cooled. How did the oceans get here? After all, this planet is seventy percent water, after all. Meteorites brought the water from outer space. Had to be a whole heap of them, too. This is another assumption based on deep time, slow cosmic evolution, and that meteorites have the most pure forms of the original contents of the solar system. Earth is somewhat contaminated by — something else that is assumed. Lots of circular reasoning here, folks. However, secularists are tearing down the old concept because of meteorite analysis. More assumptions, but the established belief on th

While there are honest evolutionary scientists who seek to find and promote evidence of all live evolving from a common ancestor, their militant comrades use skulduggery to promote their worldview. In this instance, the Neanderthal was fully human (as affirmed by archaeology, DNA, anthropology, and more, presented on this site several times), but some insist on portraying Neanderthals as less-than-human brutes. Things get worse, as we shall see. Credit: Unknown, Public Domain, even used at NASA Why do some folks continue to believe that Neanderthals were not quite human and a link to our evolutionary ancestry despite the evidence? They want to. It fits their paradigm, and they are adverse to admitting that the evidence refutes evolution and supports special creation, and that is anathema to them. Portrayals of Neanderthals have been based on presumptions of evolution and on chimerical visions, but not on evidence. Science isn't supposed to work that way, old son. Even in r

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Today is both  Question Evolution Day  and Creation Sunday , a convergence that will not happen again until 2023. This causes excitement for some people, while others are annoyed. Interestingly, the postmodernism that permeates Western society is self-contradictory: people who hate such events need them. I'll 'splain later. There was a time when movies and television had, for the most part, distinct good and evil characters. (In old Western movies, the stereotype portrayed good guys in white hats, bad guys in black hats.) Later, characters were introduced that were more believable because they were flawed — the anti-hero. One Western character was played by Clint Eastwood, referred to as The Man With No Name. He was not "good" by any stretch of the imagination, but he was our focus as someone to favor. Lines between good and evil were blurred, and audiences were occasionally bemused when the bad guy had more relative goodness than the good

Those of us who know that Earth has a magnetic field probably don't think about it every day. Why would you? Out of sight, out of mind. Unless you're a scientist that's paid to do that kind of thing. But it's up there, protecting our joyous wet oblate spheriod from many unpleasant things including cosmic rays, solar flares, carnivorous squid from the planet Kootulu, and more. "There are no carnivorous squid in space, Cowboy Bob!" No? Thought I read that somewhere. Oh, well. Image credit: NASA / Goddard Space Flight Center Conceptual Image Lab Purveyors of the "deep time" mythology are beleaguered by the numerous difficulties in keeping their ideas plausible. Creationists have shown for a long time that Earth's magnetic field cannot be as old as secularists desire , and a number of rescuing devices have been considered. They still don't work, partly because scientists don't understand the field in the first place, but the bigges

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen As I have stated in articles, interviews, and so on, Question Evolution Day has many layers. Ultimately, it's about proclaiming the gospel and removing a huge naturalistic stumbling block. While we're hoping to prompt honest evolutionists to question their indoctrination and see that fish-to-fish packer evolution is abundant in storytelling but sparse in evidence, QED has some other aspects on which I need to focus. QED is an effort to encourage people to take a stand for creation (and more so in 2017, because the event coincides with Creation Sunday ). Participation ranges from having events, sharing a post with a #questionevolutionday and/or #qed2017 hashtag on social media, Sunday services, or other ideas. A reason for this event is because of censorship, censure, discrimination, and bigotry against those who oppose Darwin. If you study on it a spell, you should see that there's no legitimate reason for someone to oppose our freedom of spe