Piltdown Superman

Many of us in sleek industrial societies consider it a bit of a thrill to gnaw on a chunk of actual honeycomb. We are familiar with rectangular chunks of the hexagonal cells, but the sugarbag bees kick it up several notches. Sugarbag bees doing regular bee stuff Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Graham Wise ( CC BY 2.0 ) These bees (say that three times fast...don't you feel silly now?) build very intricate structures. Interestingly, they forego the familiar hexagonal shape and comb style used by their buzzy brethren. Some owlhoots riding for the Darwin brand decided that since their combs resemble crystals, it could all happen by chance without the need of the Master Engineer. (Which is a fallacious, invalid comparison in the first place.) Of course, since the narrative is more important than genuine research, this fake news easily falls apart under examination. Small, stingless bees of the species Tetragonula carbonaria , from Southeast Asia and Australia, are known to bui

The hands at the Darwin Ranch get all a-twitter over discoveries in paleontology, but have a nasty habit of leaving important details laying in the rain by the bunkhouse door. A recent example involves an ichthyosaur that was fossilized during chow time. Of course, they presuppose millions of Darwin years and use the old "fossilization takes a mighty long time" idea to try and hornswoggle people again.  Perhaps the secularists didn't want to consider the implications of the neglected facts.  Creationists know that the evidence doesn't support their deep-time notions, and have the unmitigated gall to think and ask questions.  For example, if fossilization takes so long, why was the predator ichthyosaur unable to digest its prey even a little? Add this to other examples of extremely rapid fossilization and the increasingly-present soft tissues, and the evidence points to recent creation and the Genesis Flood. Here is another example of an ichthyosaur that was

There are several things on which secular and creation scientists agree, and one of these is plate tectonics.  The disagreements come about regarding how the whole shebang started, the rapidity of early tectonic activity, and the age of the earth. Image credit: US Geological Survey (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) "But Cowboy Bob, they have a new model!" Indeed. And that's how what we've tried to teach about rational thinking, presuppositions, and worldviews comes into play. The computer model, like any other, can only operate on the data that it is given. GIGO. Secular scientists used presuppositions based on their deep-time worldviews, and came up with a "what if" or "maybe" model. Even so, it actually explains nothing about how plate tectonics originated and other factors in the process. Biblical creation science models provide superior explanations. Yes, they admit to using  their  presuppositions regarding the tru

Way back in 1925, John Scopes of Dayton, Tennessee, was arrested and put on trial for allegedly teaching evolution. The whole thing was a set-up by the falsely-named American Civil Liberties Union to put creation on trial. Dr. Robert Carter investigated what was actually in the textbook,  A Civic Biology, Presented in Problems by George W. Hunter. Modified from an illustration in the textbook (public domain) As mentioned, the case happened in 1925, but A Civic Biology  was written in 1914. It was not only outdated, but loaded with evolutionary and secularist views. Some of the evolutionary material was deceitful (equivocating change  with evolution , plus a passel of outright false statements). Scientific racism and eugenics are also included in the textbook. Public domain photo via Wikimedia Commons There are a couple of things for which I would have liked to have seen references or further explanation. One is that the word Caucasian  is outdated and no longer in use. A

Secularists ridicule Christians and creationists for rejecting naturalism and believing in the Creator God of the Bible, then they believe in all sorts of fake miracles of their own design . This is increasingly common in origin of life scenarios. Mostly made at Glass Giant , which no longer appears to be functioning Science, logic, the orderly universe, and more only make sense in the biblical worldview — beginning with Genesis 1:1. Materialists cannot account for these things. Ironically, many times knowledgeable creationists have to correct feckless mockers on their own mythology; they "know" we're wrong, but cannot provide cogent arguments for their positions. Some anti-creationists claim that the origin of life has nothing to do with evolution, which is gelastic even on the surface. (Apparently textbook writers, evolutionists like David Attenborough , and others need to be informed that abiogenesis —  chemical evolution —  is irrelevant to the Bearded Buddh

Someone pointed out that there are campaigns to save the more attractive and cute things, but those we consider unattractive tend to be neglected . While the following material is targeted toward creationists, there are principles that can be useful to unbelievers as well. Cute Frenchie being cute ("Frenchie" because of the beret-like black patch) When I post material about unattractive critters, I often put remarks about putting aside personal distaste and appreciating how things were designed by the Master Engineer. Indeed, God created things for a purpose. (Creationists recognize that they were changed by the Fall of man.) So often, people make statements or have prejudices from personal preferences and lack of information. Get the bigger picture.  My wife cares for me, keeps me fed and watered, even though I am in no wise a handsome gent. So I got that going for me, which is nice. Suppose you were on a camping trip and wished that all mosquitoes would drop d

Once in a while, the unwashed masses get a glimpse into the workings of the secular science industry. Radiocarbon dating is not a closely guarded secret, but people tend to assume that scientists do not make assumptions. That is false. A new calibration for carbon-14 was proposed. To quote Nuke, " It did not go well ". Modified from an image at Pexels by  Francesco De tommaso Radiocarbon dating has many variables, and there have been discrepancies between historical records and the presupposition-based dating methods. It's not just creationists who have pointed this out for a mighty long time, secular scientists know it as well. (Biblical creationists have postulated that there were many changes to affect dating results during the Genesis Flood, which have been supported by evidence.) The new method is going to cause consternation and have a kind of ripple effect for established and new results. The latest calibration curve for radiocarbon dating is raising eyeb

We have seen time and again that apparatchiks for the Darwin Party promote evolution despite  evidence, not because  of it. It would take a wagon train full of changes to change dinosaurs into birds, and that is not found. Sometimes they refute themselves, as in this study regarding feathers. Credit: Pexels / Jan Kopřiva There are major anatomical differences between birds and dinosaurs, including skeletal structures, breathing — and feathers. Indeed, feathers are actually quite complex and indicate the craftsmanship of the Master Engineer. He even planned for birds that fly to molt in a specific manner, but non-flying birds don't pay that no nevermind. A fossil called Microraptor was examined and put a burr under the saddles of researchers. It has characteristics of a unique bird, but since the narrative has logic and science flying out the window, it is considered a feathered dinosaur. With none of the characteristics. Bad news for those who believe in dinosaur-to-bird

There was a time when, with scant knowledge of Venus, people fantasized about it being a sort of paradise. That was spoiled by increases in science and technology; no life could exist there. Now because Venus stinks, there must  be life there. Idunn Mons on Venus image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / ESA (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) I heard it said of Venus, "Baby, she's got it!" Not a chance. If you're into extreme heat and pressure, clouds of sulfuric acid, volcanoes,  a day there is almost as long as an Earth year,  and other things that make it low on recommended lists of vacation spots,  have a nice trip. Scientists are excited because the toxic, odoriferous gas known as phosphine may have been detected in its clouds, and as far as we know , it is given off by living things. So, life on Venus is the only possible explanation? Must be something interesting to survive all those other conditions, huh? Of course, it would need something

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Howdy. Time for one of my more unusual articles. Although I dislike to spoil the surprise, the video that inspired this article is a joke. No, I am not denigrating the quality, but saying it really is  a joke. The way my mind works, I saw what ThioJoe did and was inspired to connect it with appeals to the dubious authority of Darwinists. Taken from public domain images here and here , then heavily modified While Joe's YouTube channel has many helpful and interesting technology-related videos ( such as this one ), he also has a playful streak. Most of his pranks have notes in their descriptions ( this one does not , apparently he expects viewers to have a few brain cells), others caused me to take notes. Mayhaps he'll do a video on blogging sites since I'm fed up with this one. Since the spoiler is out, let's commence to discussing this here video. The US Federal Reserve has a secret: you can get free money from them. Of course, it'

Although they typical denizen of social media with atheism spectrum disorder pretends that the distinction between historical and operational science was invented by biblical creationists for the purpose of deceiving people into believing in our holy and righteous Creator, that is the opposite of the truth . Credit: US Bureau of Labor Statistics (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Historical science is forensic by nature, attempting to reconstruct events of the past with tools and procedures available in the present. However, it is mighty difficult to falsify things like, say, the origin of the universe or fish-to-forensic anthropologist evolution. A principle of science is that something must be falsifiable . Science doesn't prove anything so much as find reasons to accept ideas. Ideally, if a theory is shown to have exceptions or errors, then it has been falsified and something new is added to the mix. Sometimes the postulate is entirely discarded. While

There was a character put forward to show how clever scum-to-speech pathologist evolutionists can be, and that was known as Nebraska Man . That bad boy, his family, surroundings — everything was built from a single tooth. And that belonged to a pig. The fake science dino-bird paper reminded me of that. Mostly made at Vukki Tombstone Maker  (be careful poking around that site, possible malware) What we have is a rush to publish without due diligence in research. Once again, a fossil is found in amber. After consulting their Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Rings® and blowing on the whistle, scientists decided that it was of a dinosaur evolving into a bird. Gotta keep the narrative going, don'tcha know. What did they really  find? A skull, some beak, and a bit of tongue, so the researchers worked from skimpy data and massive naturalistic presuppositions. But artists' conceptions prove evolution, right? They violated their artistic licenses. The paper was published but h

People who are into action video games are probably familiar with the concept of disabling your opponent and then taking away weapons, armor, and so on for your own use. There is a creature known as the nudibranch  that does something similar. Spanish Shawl nudibranch image credit: National Park Service /  Nicole Ornelas The nudibranch is classified as a gastropod of which there about over 60,000 species. It is a kind of sea slug, of which there are more than 3,000 species. (If you listen closely, you can hear each one singing, "I've Gotta Be Me".) It's mighty hard to come up with general rules. They live in the depths of the ocean, except when they don't. They're very small, except when they're not. They're extremely colorful, except when they're not. They're poisonous, except when they're not. You'd think that if they followed any semblance of evolutionary rules, there would more uniformity. Darwinists assume they evolved, but

You know about tree resin, right? Although it is similar to and easily confused with sap, it is an important part of many trees and plants. It is heavier, resists being dissolved in water, and was even used by ancient people in shipbuilding. It also traps and preserves critters. Credit: Freeimages /  Antonio Natale A recent find of insects in amber shows that their colors are still present even after alleged millions of years, which should not happen according to secular beliefs, but there they are. (Darwin supporters are known to deny science in biosignatures .) The colors are iridescent, meaning that they are seen through reflections and such and not simply because of pigments. The peacock feather in the picture above is iridescent. How did iridescence happen? Evolutionists make unscientific claims that they somehow evolved, and that they evolved many times. Unfortunately, people accept these faith-based assertions as observational science, but there are no plausible models o

This one should make you prick up your ears. Darwin's disciples have been spectacularly wrong about many things and humiliated when actual science trumps their speculations.  Consider so-called vestigial organs/structures . Evolutionists do not understand them so they  evosplain  them away. Now they are tickling our ears. Credit: Pixnio /  Bicanski As usual, naturalists presuppose evolution, then offer speculations about what happened millions of Darwin years ago to pass along as actual scientific research. "Since dogs, cats, and other critters use their ears to help them focus on certain sounds, humans must have had that ability. After all, since some people can wiggle their ears a little, that  must  have been in our evolutionary past, right?" Arguing from ignorance (not understanding something) and futile fake science are ridiculous. New research, albeit self-contradictory, helps show their folly — and that biblical creationists are right in believing that there

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen A spell back, I was riding out near Stinking Lake (which is not as bad as it sounds) when I happened across Jacqueline Hyde, the romantic interest of Rusty Swingset from the Darwin Ranch. She surprised me by telling me that Rusty has been getting way to clingy lately. I commenced to telling her about the Ceratiidae female anglerfish. Someone  finds this female anglerfish, Cryptopsaras couesii , attractive Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Masaki Miya et al. ( CC BY 2.0 ) It just so happened that a supporter of The Question Evolution Project had sent me a link to an article to investigate. It was written by Dr. Toshiro Saruwatari of the Ocean Research Institute, University of Tokyo, and was rather interesting. Also startling that Dr. Saruwatari did not feel the need to pay homage to Papa Darwin. ( Wikipedia didn't have much to say  about evolution except to throw out a line of speculation based on the illogical process of phylogenetics ). Instead, he wr

It must be stated that evolutionists and biblical creationists present material based on their worldviews. Unfortunately, professing Christians who ride for the Darwin brand elevate evolution over scriptural authority to the point of twisting the Bible to fit their presuppositions. Case in point, the creature known as Behemoth. Image source before modification: US National Archives (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Biblical creationists tend to believe that Behemoth described in the book of Job was probably a sauropod dinosaur that hadn't quite gotten the notion to go extinct yet, but evolutionists reject that out of hand. We also hold to the view that the Bible is inerrant in the original manuscripts, but liberals reject that. I reckon it makes it easier to perform eisegesis and tamper with meanings. We know that word meanings change over time and usage. Argument  is commonly used to describe an emotional exchange instead of a reasoned discussion and pr

It seems that scientists would learn from their mistakes, especially after being humiliated for decades over the insipience of referring to some parts of DNA as "junk". New research demonstrates even more how sufficient research is needed before waving off things that are not understood. Image assembled from components at  Clker  clipart Not only did the assumption of evolution hinder research, but they married that idea up with the fallacy of arguing from ignorance. Essentially, "We don't know what this part of the genome does, it doesn't code for proteins, so it must be junk from our evolutionary past. Because evolution." An important thing for them to learn is that the Master Engineer puts things in place for specific purposes. Recent research from the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (OIST) continues to highlight how evolutionary theory influenced scientists to foolishly conclude that DNA in organisms not used to co

Many people have seen squirrels on their hind legs, a trait they have in common with prairie dogs and other rodents. Meerkats are not rodents, but they have this hind leg posture. It is useful to watch for danger and sound a warning like a good sentinel should. Meerkats did social networking before it was cool. Deal with it. Credits: Freeimages / Tom Low , then run through PhotoFunia Their society includes the boss lady and her main man, then everyone else is subordinate. Meerkats also have members of their society that act as guardians, mentors of the young, and more. Interestingly, if raised in captivity, those learned traits are lost. Creationists believe that the abilities to learn and teach are part of what was "frontloaded" when they were created. (Incidentally, there is no sign of evolution in the fossil record, even after 2-1/2 million Darwin years.) Evolutionists cannot give a plausible explanation about their learning and teaching abilities. Meerkats display

They sure picked the right location for the Darwin Ranch, taking Folly Road and heading toward Deception Pass. Not only do the ranch hands work mighty hard at deceiving us, but they hornswoggle themselves, too. Evolutionists have denied actual science about biosignatures and are doing so with ancient microbes. Credit: StockSnap /  Salvatore Ventura The narrative of naturalistic evolutionism must  be preserved at all costs. Deep time beliefs have been falsified by pollen in the "wrong" places  but evolutionists wave this off. However, as with the biosignatures, microbes buried in deep sea sediments are claimed to be about 100 million Darwin years old and revived. The obedient press for the secular science industry saddled up and jumped the fences to promote the story without a modicum of critical thought. Circular reasoning, presupposing the age of the layers, and a passel of  propaganda   storytelling all ignore the rational explanation that those microbes were buri