Piltdown Superman

The short article featured below uses an analogy of finding a smartphone in a coffin with an Egyptian mummy, and how people would naturally think of shenanigans. After watching some so-called scary videos, people express truly bizarre opinions: Some would say that the device is proof of time travel . There are things found in paleontology that are just as strange to believers in deep time, but are numerous and cannot be dismissed as one-off anomalies. When soft tissues were found in fossils (not just impressions), some people denied their existence. Turtle Fossil, Wikimedia Commons / Daderot ( CC0 1.0 ) Soft tissues, biomolecules, and other things kind of give the world a teenage look — certainly not a senior citizen appearance. The latest entry in the list are bone cells, proteins and blood vessels from a turtle. There are too many soft tissues to dismiss, and secular scientists are looking for ways to explain how short-lived materials can exist after millions of Darwin years . They

Before the predominance of profanity, people would sternly warn someone not to give them any lip. Basically it meant not to be disrespectful, but could also mean to stop talking, or other things. Or get mouthy. Tyrannosaurus rex has been portrayed as giving lip. It may be literal. Like so many other things in paleontology, further studies result in rethinking how critters looked and sometimes how they acted. After examining bones and teeth, some paleontologists think that T. rex may have had lips. T. rex with lips image generated with AI at Bing I told the AI art generator to give it human lips because reasons and stuff. Lizard lips to go with lizard hips... Interesting that it took decades for people to catch on to the idea of dinosaurs having lips, since lips are useful. It is an interesting development in paleontology, but there's no way of knowing if the idea is right — unless an exceptionally well-preserved fossil or mummified body was found. That may not be such a surprise th

People are inclined to feel awe over many disparate things including music, expanses of nature, great buildings, and so on. Sometimes it can be overwhelming; I have been moved to tears by great classical pianists seeming to become one with a concerto — and showing joy in the process. People in groups seem to share a sense of unity when experiencing something awesome. Atheists may try to deny awe because it seems religious, but they feel it too. Indeed, many places in the Bible tell of people overwhelmed with awe when shown the glory of God. It seems that we are born that way. Bridal Veil Falls, Waikato, New Zealand, Flickr / Adam Campbell ( CC BY-ND 2.0 ) The concept of awe has been difficult for scientists to define. They try to study it, but it is an intangible part of humanity like consciousness or the soul . (You don't see our alleged evolutionary cousins the apes staring at the night sky in awe — it is uniquely human , and we were created to have it.) But it is human nature

What image comes to mind when the word scientist  is used? Frowning, deep in thought, very serious, having intellectual conversations with other scientists, and so on. They gather facts, do unbiased research, and reach conclusions so they can spread their knowledge and better the world. Not hardly! Like other people, they have biases, vices, and operate from presuppositions. One would probably not think of scientists as carrying Jelly Babies in lab coat pockets or being comedians. An examination of a paper on how critters developed powered flight was unintentionally funny. Flying Squirrels, Rawpixel / John Audobon , 1845, modified at  PhotoFunia Evolutionists assume evolution to prove evolution, then they invoke evolution to evosplain it to the unwashed masses. (No matter that the work of the Creator is the logical conclusion based on an honest examination of the facts, that's not allowed.) The flying squirrel and a few other mammals have extra skin that is used to glide. Bats also

A fundamental tenet of universal common descent evolution is that humans evolved from fish, and ultimately, from minerals. There had to be creatures evolving limbs from fins, and  Tiktaalik roseae got evolutionists all het up, but that was a failure . Other critters supposedly evolved from land back into the water, and the Thalattosuchia are considered candidates for that as well. Here we get into word salad, where they are referred to as marine crocodiles, but are not classified with crocodilia. Whatever. Thalats and such were crocodile relatives, then. Saltwater Crocodile, Flickr / Bernard Dupont ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) Just like the original transition from water to land, there is no evidence of moving from land to water. Some evolutionists got a notion to use computed tomography, and they think they found a confirmation for their biases. Their article used the complex scientific principle of Making Things Up™ in lieu of evidence. Sure is a great deal of time, money, education, and more

Many creatures are wonderful to behold, and the specified complexities used by the Master Engineer are amazing. Some critters are considered ugly or even repellant, but people can get past " the eww factor " to appreciate them for what they are. It is easy to appreciate waterfowl — the family Anatidae — such as ducks, swans, geese, and others for their beauty. Many are sources of food (although people are reluctant to eat swans ). Some migratory birds are protected by law but can also become nuisances. Common Loon, Unsplash / Jeremy Hynes The existence of feathers is an insurmountable hurdle for Darwinists, which are arranged on waterbirds to keep them buoyant. Glands and preening help with waterproofing. In addition, they have a passel of hollow bones so they are not weighted down and prevented from flying. The webbed feet are also products of brilliant design, helping them move efficiently in the water. Each feature defies molecules-to-mallard evolution, and taken together

My friend Hammond Suisse was talking to some of the hands from the Darwin Ranch in town, and there were a mite glum because of recent reports on fish lizards (ichthyosaurs). They knew that the narrative about evolving and re-evolving did not hold water. Now this. Despite claims of fundamentalist evolutionists, there are fossils out of sequence. Since there is no reasonable evidence for the evolution of those extinct marine lizards, one owlhoot came up with the idea that they evolved in bursts . Now there is an ichthyosaur fossil in the wrong place. Ichthyosaur, Copyright Expired Science Illustrations /  Heinrich Harder , 1916 Way up yonder, north of Norway, is an island called Spitsbergen. The source of the consternation was found there. No signs of evolution, this monster (some of these wet dinosaur cousins were huge ) was fully formed and in rocks that are dated by secularists as 250 million years old. That is too old for the evolutionary scenario, but right in keeping with the fact

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen This is an article I would rather not write, but my experiences and thoughts may be useful to others. Maybe I will get insight from them. A spell back, I was confused by Dr. Todd Wood who appeared in the creation science film Is Genesis History . Well, it was afterward that I was confused. He seemed to be advocating for baryons-to-biochemist evolution . After a bit of investigation, I wrote an article discussing both my confusion and also about a video he made that seemed to settle things. Todd Wood with Del Tackett, Is Genesis History screenshot, modified with FotoSketcher Although I am a nobody, I was hoping that he would respond to the article. That didn't happen. After a while, I stopped paying attention to Dr. Wood's activities. Then some articles from Answers in Genesis got my attention. They were doing a series on young-earth evolution , which is something new to me. The idea seems contradictory, because evolution demands deep time and a denial

With the possible exception of Darwinistic laissez-faire capitalists , most people think it is a good idea to take care of the environment. Today is Earth Day. (No coincidence that it is also Lenin's birthday .) Good work for the environment was hijacked by leftists, but now they are more concerned with foisting anthropogenic climate change on the masses. Some are so weird, they want to give rivers and lakes personhood status ! These people are evolutionists, but ironically, caring for the environment is in keeping with biblical creationist principles. Cattle, Pixnio / Hagerty Ryan, USFWS Back in Genesis, God gave Adam and Eve responsibilities to care for the Garden. This is called the dominion mandate . We are stewards and receive many of the benefits, but ultimately, God is the owner (see Psalm 50:7-15). It is not an exact comparison, but Mark 12:1-12 has the Parable of the Tenants. They worked for the owner and received some of the goods, but he retained all the rights — even a

Hands at the Darwin Ranch over at Deception Pass are excited about how the James Webb Space Telescope is checking out exoplanets: that means evolution. This great and expensive accomplishment is getting some great views of the heavens, but the main goal is to find extraterrestrial life. If there is life, it must have evolved, right. Not hardly! So far, however, it has inadvertently supported creation science predictions instead of materialistic views. Sort of causing secular views rapid unscheduled disassembly... Extrasolar planets are plentiful , but unsuitable for life. Mayhaps the JWST will provide more information. HD 149026b (Smertrios), NASA / JPL-Caltech / T. Pyle (SSC) (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Despite the artwork, nobody really knows what these planets look like. One listed as HD 149026b is also called Smertrios, after a character that eventually merged with the Roman god of war. It is one of those "hot Jupiters", big and unpleasant. Smert

Curious that a British exclamation of approval is uncommon in the formerly United States, but this child is not using it in a literal way. The mantis shrimp smashes things — except for those that have harpoons instead of smashing claws . This predator has a resemblance to the praying mantis because of a second pair of limbs, hence the name. But it is not a shrimp, only distantly related to them. The mantis shrimp slaps down its prey very hard, very fast. Peacock mantis shrimp, Wikimedia Commons / Rickard Zerpe ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) Believers in stardust-to-stomatopod evolution cannot come up with plausible explanations for this critter's development. Study on it. That claw catapults at high speeds with a special mechanism. In fact, the bubbles made are even more devastating that the initial strike because of cavitation  (which would have been powerful in the Genesis Flood ). Get your finger too close and you may regret it . They also have exceptional vision which is being studied for

Trilobites have long been an icon of evolution (Russell Watchtower at the Darwin Ranch has a big 3D picture of one on his wall), but trilobites do not support it. The more scientists study them, the more they learn things that testify of creation and oppose Darwinism. We saw before that trilobites had exceptional optics , and there is a new development: median eyes, common arthropods. It was long thought that trilobites did not have them. Very useful for sensing objects while critters are moving. This discovery is inconvenient for evolutionary dogma. Trilobite, US Dept / Interior, BLM (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) For a long time, it was believed that these critters didn't have the extra eye part. The reasons given for why the discovery was late are, well, plausible. Ocelli (median eyes) were put in place from the beginning by the Creator, and evolutionists cannot say they "emerged" or "developed" later. Oopsie! The propaganda mill was put

People with Atheism Spectrum Disorder and other Darwinists get on the prod when biblical creationists and Intelligent Design folks get mighty ornery when we say that some creature thwarts, defies, baffles, or something similar in regard to evolutionists. There are quite a few. That dark thing scurrying over there...no, not a large mouse or a small rat. Look at that face, it is split into tentacles like it belongs in an H.P. Lovecraft story. There are several things about the star-nosed mole that mystify not only evolutionists, but the scientific community. Star-nosed mole, Flickr / gordonramsaysubmissions ( CC BY 2.0 ), modified at PhotoFunny For some reason, this child expected the star-nosed mole to reside in more exotic areas. It lives in the Northeastern U.S. and on up into Canada. The first thing that baffles evolutionists is that there is no evolutionary history. Beyond that, star-nosed moles have an exceptional sense of smell. The big puzzler is that the nose has exceptionally

Believers in universal common descent have a rough time using the science they claim to love. They also like to slap around logic, presupposing that everything evolved — which means they believe it without evidence as a starting point. Then commence to using circular reasoning. Another tactic they use is to suppress inconvenient evidence (the fallacy of exclusion ). Because certain living things have traits in common, Darwinists say this is evidence of evolution (often using the non-answer, convergent evolution ). Since apes and humans have traits in common, this is evidence of a common Designer. Macaque will not make tools, original image: Hippopx With their failed historical science machinations, evolutionists are bringing tears of embarrassment to Papa Darwin's eyes lately. Pieces of stone were found and attributed to ancient "hominids," but one bunch in Brazil was made by made by monkeys (possibly a brazillion of them). Another time, hilarity ensued when it was learn

Back when Darwin roamed the earth, he called the ginkgo a living fossil. Some organisms with that moniker disappeared from the fossil record, then were found alive and well ( such as the coelacanth ). Others have remained essentially unchanged over alleged millions of years when compared to their fossils. A frequent rescuing device when something remains unchanged is stasis : It had no need to evolve. To be blunt, that is a stupid excuse because a lot can happen over all those years. No, one reason it did not change is because the earth is not as old as evolutionists claim. Gingko leaves in autumn, Wikimedia Commons /  Joe Schneid  ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) Moving on from the living fossil aspect, people can easily find ginkgo biloba supplements in "natural" food stores and in vitamin sections of stores. Like with many health benefit claims, those not fully researched . Coordinated international research would be nice. Ginkgo is a large, hearty tree. It also has a large genome — bigge

Misotheists and other evolutionists frequently use dysteleology arguments, which basically mean that they think something was the product of bad design, therefore, no Creator. The human eye  and the panda's thumb  are two of their favorites. Not too long ago, we considered similar claims about knee joints . This time we go a mite lower and dispense with bad design arguments about the human foot and ankle. Like knees, feet and ankles give us problems. The Master Engineer cannot be blamed when people do not use them in keeping with their design. Feet and ankles, Unsplash / Jan Romero Professor Nathan Lents wanted to slap leather with creationists and Intelligent Design proponents (and possibly to bolster the faith of fundamentalist evolutionists). Like other evolutionists, he apparently argued from ignorance instead of knowledge of the subjects he discussed. Lentz wrote a book about the things that are supposedly products of evolution, no designer need apply. It did not go well. Befo

The age of the American cowboy on the great cattle drives was from 1866 to 1886. They moved longhorns from Texas to railheads in Kansas, but the need for that work ended when railways were established further south. They knew, and other folks who work with horses know, that a horse and rider essentially become a unit. American Indians, Mongol warriors, and other groups of people throughout history also learned the joys and efficiency of working with horses. Reality and history do not fit Darwinian beliefs, however. A Turk Surrenders to a Greek Horseman , WikiArt / Eugene Delacroix Evolutionists essentially believe that our ancestors swung down from the trees, but they were too stupid to do much. So, they sat around in caves for a huge amount of time, presumably waiting for their brains to develop. The evolutionary timeline of history has a whole lotta nuffin, then many accomplishments in a tiny section at the end of the timeline. Sense it makes no. When history is examined, people are

Our Creator has designed us so we are able to receive multiple stimuli, yet are not overwhelmed by too much too soon. Talking to another person in a room full of other people who are talking, yet speech from most of the others do not register on our minds. When it comes to touching and feeling, we have a similar system in place. There is a great deal happening at this very moment as I am still recovering from knee surgery. Several stimuli from the laptop, various minor bodily pains, those are in the background. Hand touching water, Pexels / Ashutosh Sonwani You got a lotta nerve! That phrase really has little to do with nerves. I have one nerve left, and you're getting on it! Aside from the obvious remark about losing patience, that may actually have a physiological basis. Some areas of our skin are far more sensitive than others (and we often seek to have them stimulated), but excessive stimulation can actually be painful. Sensitivity comes from nerve placement, as God designed us

In the first part , we examined evidence that Ham, a son of Noah, was elevated to deity status by the ancient Egyptians. Numerous comparisons between Genesis and linguistics, plus recorded history, make this concept highly probable. The author draws from additional material in the second article to support his claim. Some are admittedly speculative, and it becomes difficult because of the tremendous amount of time that has elapsed. Egyptian symbolism became modified and additional symbolism had been added for special purposes. Statue of Horus, Temple of Horus at Edfu, Flickr / Warren LeMay  (given to public domain ) Noah might have been flattered, being the father of a god. Well, there are linguistic connections between Noah and two of Egypt's gods! We know that eight people were on the Ark. Like other cultures around the world , Egypt has a global flood legend with notable similarities to the biblical account — Horus/Ham features in it. Enmity between Horus/Ham and his brothers ha

People seem to taunt the prince of the power of the air (Ephesians 2:2) with names like  Devil's Tombstone in New York, Devil's Soup Bowl in Michigan, Oregon's  Devil's Punchbowl , and so on.  (Then there are sports teams.) A more interesting location is Devils Tower National Monument . It is a sacred place to Indians, and the English name was probably a mistranslation of the Lakota . The apostrophe was dropped in the official name, but people still tend to put it in there anyway . Devils Tower is quite large, and it has baffled geologists for a long time. Devils Tower, USGS / Carol Wippich (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) The first big mystery is its formation, and another mystery is why it is standing there all by its lonesome. Then those huge columns that are fracturing and seen in debris at the base. If it were millions of years old, the tower should be a pile of rubble. Secularists won't like this, but geology incorporating the Genesis Flo

Creationist and Intelligent Design folks often take the ejecta from Darwinists that is paraded as actual science, showing flaws in their reasoning, and more. It is necessary to remind people that the flaunted peer review process has many problems; just because a paper passes does not guarantee truth. One may wonder if peer review is a tool used to advance a materialistic agenda and deny the Creator rather than promote scientific research. Peer review or not, much research boils down to Just-So Stories to advance evolutionism. Storyteller by Anker Grossvater, 1884 A couple of writers wrote a paper in an effort to elevate evolution to the level of hard sciences. It passed peer review — which supports speculations that the process is horribly flawed and probably agenda-driven. There are numerous logical fallacies (a good reviewer would have spotted those and pulled back on the reins) and other things that should make taxpayers demand their money back. For that matter, Darwin's Flying