Piltdown Superman

Every once in a while, something so outrageous comes across the news feed and I want to cry out, "Who pays these jaspers?" But we already know the answer, because they are paid from grants and the secular science industry — much of this is our tax grotzits at work. Consider bioastrology — I mean, astrobiology. Perhaps this child is not right in the head, but it seems that a field of science needs something to study. Atheists and evolutionists have no evidence for their invisible friends (a position held by blind faith), but they take their pseudoscience seriously . Once again, there are unfounded speculations of life on Enceladus. Enceladus image credit:  NASA/JPL-Caltech/SSI/PSI Those plumes of methane may be signs of life in hydrothermal vents under a huge ice crust. While there are thermophiles (organisms that live in hot temperatures) on Earth, there is no reason to think they formed out yonder. Bioastrologers — there I go again, I mean astrobiologists — are ignoring scie

Through indoctrination classes, Darwinian propaganda documentaries, and other places, many people have heard of how peppered moths were solid evidence for evolution. Light moths on dark backgrounds became bird chow while dark moths did well. Indeed, H.B. Kettlewell said that the Bearded Buddha would have been happy to see this. However, Kettlewell was a #liar4darwin. Despite the fraud in his videos and photos, this fake news is still in textbooks. (So are the fraudulent embryonic recapitulation drawings by Haeckel the Jackal.) I am once again asking why, if there is so much solid evidence for the "fact" of evolution, do they need dishonesty to promote it? 1931 peppered moth image source: Flickr / Ben Sale  ( CC BY 2.0 ) As will be demonstrated in the following two articles, natural selection is not evolution . Was Kettlewell potted when he made his claim? There was no added genetic information, no vertical evolution — peppered moths did not evolve into something else. (A vi

As you probably know, biblical creationists believe the Bible indicates that Earth is only a few thousand years old. This is contrary to the atheistic naturalism narrative of 4-1/2 billion years. Radiometric dating cannot support that number without unwarranted assumptions , and evolutionary population genetics is even more ridiculous. Darwin's disciples have to play fast and loose with observed data to make it appear like their presuppositions are valid. Storytelling has its rewards because people obtain phony-baloney jobs — unlike having a degree in, say, history of art. Credit: RGBStock /  Sanja Gjenero Anyone making a hypothesis or model works from presuppositions, then attempts to see if data and testing bear them out. Creationists and evolutionists make assumptions. Using very conservative assumptions about population growth, it is easy to reach a figure consistent with today's population. For evolutionary views that humans have been around for hundreds of thousands of y

When critiquing a theory, hypothesis, worldview, or whatever, it is necessary to see if it is logical and consistent within itself. Ideas of universal common ancestry evolution require that living things began as simple organisms and became more complex over time. This is consistent within itself. People with a worldview based on atheistic materialism must believe in evolution. However, observed evidence does not support evolution, and scientists frequently remark about being surprised at how findings do not fit the belief system. Pantolambda by Heinrich Harder, 1920, via Wikimedia Commons This is because they are locked into erroneous views, and we have seen many times that they try to evosplain away their predicaments. A recent post about cave women, DNA, and Neanderthals  shows how unyielding evolutionists are troubled by discoveries. Similarly, they presuppose that mammals of yesteryear were "primitive". Because evolution. Because dating methods. But examining what is kn

Many people, including Christians, erroneously believe that the age of the earth has been conclusively proven to be about 4-1/2 billion years old. Although serious mathematics is involved, the essence of the method is rather simple. Chip away a rocky outcropping and take a sample to the lab and ask them nicely (as well as paying a fee) for them to tell you its age. From there, you know the age of the earth. Just kidding, such a thing does not happen. Assembled and modified with components from Clker clipart The unstable radioactive element and the stable isotope in a rock are measured. The unstable decays and leaves the stable. Rate of decay and other factors are calculated to give the number of years. But that rock that you chipped away? Not happening, at least regarding Earth's age. Secularists and their churchian allies believe that rocks on the earth are not reliable indicators, so they assume meteorites are more pure, and calculate from those . There are other assumptions to

If you start in London town, it takes about twelve hours to drive to Loch Torridon, a place that got Darwinists all excited about fossils that look like tiny balls. (If you go to Kelso , that is the wrong way. People who start out there, however, still have almost six hours to drive.) Several science disciplines are involved in discussing these balls found in phosphate deposits, such as geology and biology. This ties in with their beliefs about the origin of life. Loch Torridon image credit: Freeimages /  Ceitidh MacMaster The articles we are going to examine has some technical material, and it is split in two parts. Evolutionists make a passel of presuppositions regarding the fossils that look like balls of cells. They evosplain that they are primitive, and that the ancestor of all living things (who never receives birthday cards or phone calls) was even more primitive. Well, that part is consistent with their views. It is becoming more frequent for scientists to find exceptionally we

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Having written thousands of posts and articles, and having shared even more at The Question Evolution Project and elsewhere, there have been several times I tried to provide information on negotiating posts and videos.  There are many available, and some are long.   This does not only apply to social media, but it is obvious that a wagon train-load of material is found there. The whole thing is a buffet of information: take what you like. As you can see here, material is offered that covers a wide variety of formats. How can someone make use of things? Background image: Pixabay / Gerd Altmann , ebook reader insert is my own A number of resources I have used are going to be mentioned. For your own sake and mine, use discretion. A site that was safe for me yesterday may not be safe for you today. Probably, but no guarantees. First, the Basics The most obvious course of action is to save the link as a bookmark/favorite in your browser. However, things can get over

After every few thousand years, it is always a good idea to give your desert a new coat of varnish or stain to vertical rock surfaces. It not only helps protect the rocks, but adds aesthetic appeal. Actually, people do not need to perform this task at all; it is being done for us. It is a very thin coating that is in the range of dark red colors, even to nearly black. The color results from the amount of manganese and iron , and is mostly from atmospheric dust. Native Americans scratched out their own graffiti in it. Credit: NPS / Neal Herbert (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Scientists now have a better handle on how the stuff originates: microbes in photosynthetic bacteria. (Researchers must have thought the science wasn't quite good enough, so they threw in a few Hail Darwins to make it sciency science. This taints it.) The amount of deposition, however, defies uniformitarian (slow and gradual processes over a mighty long time) assumptions. Instead, it is ye

Stormie Waters took some time off prospecting and was in town with Ruby Slippers, and they came across some of the hands from the Darwin Ranch. When those owlhoots have a bit of the firewater, they tend to speak more honestly and freely. While some deny that the origin of life has anything to do with evolution (keeping up the narrative for the secular science industry, you know), some admit that they have a problem figuring out how organisms went from single to multiple cells. Volox Aureus  image credit: Cropped from Flickr / Proyecto Agua  ( CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 ) "Communities" like Volox do not qualify as multicellular organisms. It's not an easy matter of suddenly having more material to work with. All must have the same genetic makeup, a new internal system of organization that never existed before, and more. As science has progressed, we see that cells are not so simple, and they have jobs within an organism. They have a level of communication as well. The specified compl

If you want to use some expensive words and show off, go on a nature hike and point to a fern and mention that it is a seedless vascular plant . There are several kinds of these plants in existence, and paleontologists at the Darwin Ranch were thrilled about diverse fossilized specimens. Scientists referred to those seedless vascular plants as "primitive", but as indicated earlier, such things are in existence today. And they are not primitive. They are, in fact, efficient wetland dwellers. Credit: Flickr / Drew Avery  ( CC BY 2.0 ) They had some serious problems with the plants. The most notable is that they were found in a very south latitude, and it was far too cold and much of the year had insufficient light for their growth. Issues like these were not mentioned in the research paper. In addition, the plants were fossilized in a layer that was rich in sand that includes marine creatures. When a creation science Genesis Flood model is applied, the observations make sense.

There is no need for me to go into an organ recital about the many we have within us. Skin is an organ on the outside. In Star Trek: TNG , a fictitious alien referred to humans as " ugly bags of mostly water ". Some people look mighty fine in their skin. (Me, not so much.) It is true that we are mostly water, but it would not do to be wrapped in paper or plastic. Our Creator designed skin to keep us intact, and it is flexible. Some people can rub you the right way Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos / Ambro Research reveals that skin is more complex than previously thought. (Of course, we've seen many times that believers in universal common ancestor evolution tend to underestimate instead of admitting that the Master Engineer is skilled beyond our understanding.) The Mayo Clinic has a technique to heal skin wounds that stimulates our built-in system to commence repairs. Other research sheds light on how skin cells can be shed and replaced without all that liquid coming out. "

There is much attention given to space exploration, but it seems to this child that the ocean gets short shrift. As with biology and outer space, there are many discoveries coming to light from the world down under the waves. Consider the coral reefs. Corals are mostly found in marine environments (except for the "impossible" coral reefs at the mouth of the Amazon River , of all things). Michigan's state stone is the petoskey , which is fossilized corals that are now extinct. Just thought I'd mention it since I lived in Michigan my first 40 years. Palmyra Atoll, NOAA photo by  Erin Looney Corals confound Darwin's disciples . These tiny animals act like plants and build their own homes. Those homes eventually turn into coral reefs, which are amazing ecosystems that only cover a small percentage of the ocean floor. Lots of mutualism (symbiotic relationships) happen in the reefs. They not only benefit a huge amount of marine life forms that homestead there, but are i

Just a few days ago, Cliff Swallows (assistant foreman to Rusty Swingset at the Darwin Ranch) was in town, and he commenced to sharing how the ranch hands were mighty confused about some recent findings that apply to human evolution. Although your run-of-the-mill believer in universal common descent thinks this is an established fact, that is not the shape of things in the secular science industry. In fact, knowledgeable and honest paleoanthropologists will admit it. Recent announcement about skulls require the rewriting of the evolutionary story. Again. Main image courtesy of Why?Outreach (modified), "Dragon Man" insert modified from an original by Gary Todd at Flickr What's up with the skull found in Israel? It's claimed to be an ancestor of Neanderthals because of how they interpret data based on deep time and naturalistic presuppositions. This "ancestor", based on very little information, lived and interacted with modern humans. Also, the skull size is

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Recently, I was surprised by a weblog article, " Now creationists are white supremacists. Wait, what? " That really takes the rag off the bush ! I commenced to gathering thoughts so I could use it as a springboard, but then asked my contacts at Creation Ministries International , who replied that they were going to respond. Here we go. There are several instances where " Denial of Evolution Is a Form of White Supremacy " by Allison Hopper agitated so many people — in addition to its glaring stupidity.  Scientific American  is known for anti-creationist hit pieces, and they let this opinion thing fly without checking the facts. Background image credit: Pixabay /  Beate Bachmann This amazing new offal is reminiscent of the  Paul Braterman attack on Ken Ham and creation science in general  — which also was allowed to post despite glaring falsehoods. This is much worse, and since Scientific American  and Hopper are not dry gulching an individual