Piltdown Superman

For ages, eyewitness testimony was considered reliable in a courtroom setting and other ways. Some people began to think eyewitness testimony is not valid, and forensic evidence is more important. Such a claim is ineffable twaddle, and the sidewinders creating doubt were using spurious methods! Credit: FreeDigitalImages /  IndypendenZ (yes, really) From an evolutionary standpoint, the concept is self-refuting. We are all just evolved pond scum, so the brains of witnesses are unreliable because evolution , so it's better to trust forensic evidence about the past — and interpret the evidence with our faulty brains! Remember, evidence does not "speak for itself". Biblical creationists and biblical inerrantists trust the eyewitness testimony of the Bible, and I reckon that this is one reason atheists and evolutionists reject eyewitness testimony. Nothing in the Bible, written by eyewitnesses, has been controverted by operational science or archaeology. Atheists reject miracl

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen As regular readers have probably observed, many of my articles were inspired by the work of others. This one from Revolution Against Evolution  was written in 2017, and is something that was useful for expansion. How can we reach a point where evil behavior is not only tolerated, but accepted and encouraged? Far too many people refuse to learn from history, and it is repeating itself today. There are many analyses of how Adolf Hitler came to power, but he was unlikely to have made it with a platform of exterminating Jews and other "races". It seems safe to assume that Eichmann, Göring, and his other henchmen would not have been given the time of day. Public domain image was modified, jigsaw effect from Big Huge Labs Small Beginnings Hitler's book Mein Kampf was a diatribe against Jews, but the full force of those philosophies was gradual. Propaganda was utilized, one point being that they were the common enemy. Another tactic was concentration and r

Time to saddle up and take a ride down Australia way. See that dog over there? Sure does look like a dog, but you had best leave it well alone, and keep it away from young children . That is the  dingo, the wild dog of Australia.  Who's a good doggie? No way! Think of it more like a wolf. Credit: cropped from Pixabay /  Michelle Maria While they have a strong resemblance to dogs and can interbreed with them, dingoes have distinct differences and are unique to Australia. They are classified as placental mammals, and 'Straya is littered with marsupials. Meanwhile, the opposite is the case in other parts of the world where placental mammals outnumber marsupials (apparently, the opossum is the only marsupial here in North America). Dingoes are also troubling for evolution.  Darwin's handmaidens are content to evosplain the dingo's existence with assertions, but have nothing plausible to offer. They are clearly of the  biblical dog  kind  (or possibly even a separate but rel

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Here in the formerly United States, there is currently a great deal of anger and violence happening. This society has been so secularized — indeed, paganized  — that many have forgotten the many blessings that our Creator has bestowed. One of these is science. Made at Pablo The American observation of Thanksgiving is not only unique, but is distinctly Christian. Why do you think secularists and atheists constantly attempt to rewrite history to remove God? Some have even taught in schools that the Pilgrims gave thanks to the natives.  Not hardly! Edward Winslow wrote in 1623 that "...wherein we returned glory honour and praise, with all thankfulness to our good God". As we have seen in previous posts and articles, our Creator has given us minds that he expects us to use. We draw inspiration from nature, use what has been given us for our bodily needs, and our thinking can glorify him through logic and science. Unfortunately, there are many people who cla

If you take a notion to visit the Grand Canyon, you can also see smaller canyons and several trails. One of these is the Bright Angel Trail, which was set up by the Havasupai folks. After they were told to get lost, Ralph Cameron improved on it and gave it its current name. Wonder what he would have thought about those tracks. Credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Jarek Tuszyński  ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) Just up yonder above the trackways, separated by fifty million Darwin years, is the Coconino Sandstone. Deep time believers cling to the uniformitarian narrative despite the startling hugely bigness of the flaws of wind-driven narrative. These include lizard tracks , mica in the sand , and more. In fact, biblical creationists have been pointing out this bad science for decades . But naturalists are like political leftists receiving fraudulent votes: if something appears to bolster something in their favor, no matter how absurd, they'll disregard the facts. Something widely known in geology is that

Most people have and use their five basic senses , so it may be surprising to learn that many animals could be considered to have sixth senses. This is not about occult things, but it is clear that the Master Engineer built special features into creatures. Credits: Original photo from Unsplash /  Yu-chuan Hsu , modified at PhotoFunia A quick aside before we move on, just an unscientific opinion. Sometimes things are considered psychic or a sixth sense in humans, but I think that some of these are based on lost abilities. Many abilities have been undeveloped or negated by industrialized societies where our ancestors would rely on and interpret input from their senses. Even now, we may realize that an air current has changed or a change in lighting and shadows indicated that someone drew near. Just wondering how much may still be built into us but has faded over time and disuse. Let's get to cognating on the critters, shall we? The beaks of pigeons have particles of magnetite that ar

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Centuries ago, I wrote " Working in a Quote Mine " about accusations by anti-creationists of "quote mining" by biblical creationists. That is, taking remarks by a proponent of molecules-to-miner evolution out of context, misquoting, or other trickery for our own ends.  Credit for image of burros at silver mine ca. 1900: LoC / Photochrom Collection The main advantage of mining for quotes over mining for nose gold is that it's easier to share the quotes. Even better, however, is that using quotes by evolutionists who admit that their belief system has serious problems is a technique in law called statements against interest . One of the tricks atheists use to dehumanize Christians and creationists is to lie about us. A lot. To say that we are digging up quotes to imply that some materialists suddenly announced, "My pals and I ain't riding for the Darwin brand no more" is sheer fatuousness . I reckon that anti-creationists mak

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Making fun of an institution through satire and parody can be found throughout millennia to illustrate perceived absurdities of belief systems. These are used for various targets, but the most common seem to be political or religious.  C. Richard Dawkins ridiculing Ray Comfort, image credits: Flickr / David Shankbone ( public domain ), modified with FotoSketcher So why attack individuals instead of ideas ? It seems like practically everyone does it. Just ask the uncool kids in school. This is far beyond satire or persuasion . A quote commonly (but probably erroneously) attributed to Socrates is, "When the debate is over, slander becomes the tool of the loser". This child sees a useful principle in that statement. Although it is common to encounter proponents of atheistic naturalism ridiculing biblical creationists in rallies, books, videos, and so on, it is greatly intensified on social(ist) media. With the option of anonymity, attacks increase with

With the tenth annual Question Evolution Day less than three months away, what follows is a useful article to get people thinking. It is not long or complex. When people think it is indecent to question universal common descent evolution, we have some points to raise and questions to ask. If we have the unmitigated gall to doubt Darwin, fundamentalist evolutionists often say, "Are you a scientist? Where did you get your degree?" These are the same sidewinders that say creationists don't do science, and scientists who are creationists are, therefore, not scientists. Note the double standard that defenders of evolutionism that are encountered online seldom have degrees themselves! It's acceptable to promote their views without degrees, but we must have degrees to question them. This is simply bullying and a kind of appeal to authority. It's who they are and what they do. What really grinds their goats is when we show that we have some knowledge and reasoning skills

Folks are a mite confused about this GMO thing, and there are strong passions on both sides of the issue. Some see this genetic manipulation as evil, so some food merchandisers proudly proclaim, "No GMOs!" Others see it as a tremendous scientific boon. Both images found at Pexels Angry fox:  Vinicius Altava ; Statue facepalm:  karatara There are views all over the map, and a great deal of emotion. Some people who are against GMOs manipulate emotions and say that they're dangerous, and this child suspects that most people have no knowledge of the controversy. What's the hubbub, Bub, about Genetically Modified Organisms? I'll allow that genetic modification where people modify the gene itself has not been happening for all that long, but a form of genetic modification has been around for millennia. There are foods that we eat that are the product of artificial selection (Darwinists consider artificial selection a form of how natural selection causes evolution, but n

I miss Basement Cat. Can you make a copy? We have pictures and even a video or two for reference. Oh, you need more to work with. What about if you make a copy using a living cat for reference, will that work?  Where are you going? I do not appreciate that look you gave me! What  does  it take to make a copy, anyhow? Let's back up a mite. Since believers in universal common descent insist that every living thing is the product of time, chance, random processes, mutations, and accidents. Shouldn't be to hard to do a cat from scratch (heh, she scratched me in rough play a few times!), you just have to get the parts. What, they're not available at the bit chain retail store or even on those big internet retailers? I could let you off the hook and say you don't have to build the entire feline machine, what with fast reflexes, sensitive olfactory apparatus, radar ears, inquisitive nature, and all that. Could you copy a cat then? Well of course not! Even if you tried, your re

Back when I went to school, I was fortunate when I could hitch a ride on a passing Stegosaurus. Another fiction of bygone days is that cells were simple. As science progressed, complexities of the cell became more and more apparent. Credit: Wikimedia Commons /  NHS National Genetics and Genomics Education Centre  ( CC BY 2.0 ) Believers in muck-to-mycologist evolution are confounded by explaining the origin of the first cell, let alone the irreducible complexity of the cell cycle. Before a cell can get its motor running and head out on the cell-division highway, it must go through several stages. It must duplicate its DNA, and those tiny molecular machines minimize mutations so cells don't run out of control. The entire process testifies to those who can understand of the Master Engineer's genius. The cell cycle is one of the most important biological processes. It describes how cells multiply in number by duplicating the information in the parent cell before dividing into two

It becomes difficult to reason with atheists and evolutionists. Some of us want to have meaningful conversations, and we are met with arguments akin to, "You st00pid creatards are wrong because atheism and evolution and stuff". They base their "thinking" on invalid assumptions, such as those in a recent Y chromosome study. Made at Pablo Secularists who believe that human males are going extinct  have made some serious errors in that area, and some of the same problems are still recurring. They claim Neanderthals became extinct 40,000 Darwin years ago. The prediction that the Y chromosome is shrinking and will disappear has a challenge from a study from this Neanderthal Y chromosome study. DNA is fragile, and continues to deteriorate even after death. A crime lab technician cannot reasonably expect to test DNA after someone has been long dead. Under the right conditions, it can last a while. That's why scientists were able to do a study on Neanderthal DNA and the

Unfortunately, I have to keep gnawing on this bone: scientists are people, too. They make mistakes and have biases. As such, they are not the impartial arbiters of truth and science that many people believe. Many want to do science, others manipulate data for their own agendas. Since nobody is a blank slate and everyone has some kind of bias, it follows that nobody is completely impartial. Try to present creation science materials to atheists and other evolutionists, they often cry, "But that's biased! Those liars for Jesus are trying to convince us of their views!" Brilliant, Sherlock! Doesn't everyone want to present an argument to convince others of their point of view? Also, the ad hominem  is entirely irrational — not only from it being a logical fallacy, but also because biblical creationists serve a holy God who requires righteousness and hates lying. To say that we are lying to get others to believe in God is utterly vacuous. As mentioned several times before,

Believers in deep time and universal common descent have a silly habit of believing that humans long ago were stupid brutes, freshly minted from evolving and the ink was not dry yet. Yet another archaeological find supports the views of biblical creationists. Portelet Bay, Jersey / Library of Congress, Photochrom Print Collection If you are on the southeast coast of the larger British Isles facing Normandy, France, you will also be facing the much smaller Channel Islands. They are in the English Channel (the French call it  la Manche ). Doing some island hopping, the second nearest to Normandy is Jersey. Some interesting scratchings were found on a plaque that was broken into ten pieces. They are dated at many thousands of Darwin years old, but their condition and other considerations make the great age implausible. It is interesting that not only did the ancient artist have to do self-expression in stone, but abstract thought is evident — something that atheism and evolution cannot ex

Once upon a time, it was dark and there was nothing. Suddenly, nothing exploded for no reason. This gave us an orderly universe with predictable planetary patterns, and eventually atoms-to-astrophysicist evolution. But the naturalistic origins myth is continually being shown to be just a fairy tale. Made with Paint dot Net , then at PhotoFunia Materialistic cosmologies expect order and predictability from the Big Bang, but our own solar system belies those notions. We have planets and several moons out yonder that rotate in a manner that doesn't fit secular models. For that matter, secularists have trouble explaining why the composition of the inner planets is rocky, outer planets are gas giants, then rocky stuff out even further. Then there's that gigantic wall of superhot plasma that surrounds our solar system like a bubble.  No, don't let secularists buffalo you when they pretend they have everything figured out. "So what about that hot Neptune thing, Cowboy Bob?&qu

The Kitzmiller v. Dover legal decision was one of the worst miscarriages of justice and violations of American freedom of our time. Atheists and other anti-creationists have celebrated it for years — which is both ironic and instructive for us. The ironic part is people having Atheism Spectrum Disorder cheer the ruling, saying that the judge was wise in declaring Intelligent Design a religious movement (and other words to that effect). Darwin's handmaidens will also tell creationists that we have no business discussing flaws in evolution if we are not scientists — but Judge Jones was not a scientist. Two standards, no waiting. Let me make this worse for them: they  have no business promoting evolution because they are not scientists themselves, nor can they criticize the Bible because they are not theologians. They get shot with their own guns that way. This decision was not binding outside of the school district, but anti-creationists have acted like it was a Supreme Court ruling.

Although the dirt-to-dinosaur evolution narrative precludes humans coexisting with them, there are historical evidences. We have examined some of these before, such as " St. David's Dragon ", the dinosaur on Bishop Bell's tomb , and others. There are others to consider. Spinophorosaurus  image credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Nobu Tamura  ( CC BY 3.0 ) Because of naturalistic evolutionary and deep-time presuppositions, Darwin's disciples evosplain away written historical accounts  and biblical depictions  of dinosaurs. If you strip away the storyline and assumptions to look at the evidence, it is not so easy to dismiss the fact that dinosaurs and humans coexisted. In addition to arguing from presuppositions, materialists argue from silence and ignore other possibilities. Is that a carving of a stegosaurus? No, because of this and that. Other possibilities neglected would be that it's a different dinosaur altogether, the carver was unskilled or made some adjustment