Piltdown Superman

Research scientist Jacob Haqq-Misra wrote an article that appeared in the Boston Globe  on September 11, 2016 about the origin of life called " A better theory of intelligent design ". (I wonder why something of this nature was in a newspaper like that instead of in a more specialized publication.) Makes it sound like something new and impressive, what with being written by a scientist and appearing in a prestigious newspaper and all. Not hardly. Turns out that it was actually a rehash of old news while slapping leather with biblical creationists and Intelligent Design proponents. The ideas of panspermia (simple life that came from outer space) has been around for a long time. Since goo-to-guru evolutionists cannot account for the origin of life (abiogenesis)  here, it must have begun out yonder.  Somehow, existing life in space hitched a ride on a meteorite or something and survived the flaming crash to Earth. Such an idea just won't work . That doesn't solve th

Scientists have the same facts available. Working from their naturalistic worldviews, their speculations on the origin of life (abiogenesis) are as organized as a cattle stampede. This should not be surprising, since they reject the truth that is clearly revealed in God's Word and prefer to create their own mythology. Some evolutionists don't cotton to the notion, so they distance themselves, claiming that "Origin of life has nothing to do with evolution". Yes, it does. I reckon the two best possibilities for such a claim are ignorance, and outright lying. That's right, I said it! This video on the scientific case for the origin of life should clear things up. Although some scientists resort to pushing the problem out into space (panspermia), but Ceres and comets are not giving much hope for that. Other scientists still try to find ways to find it right here on Earth. They are unscientific and often contradictory. That water puddle may be where it all b

In our last exciting episode , we explored how evolutionists speak with forked tongues. First, they say that abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution. Then, they spend time explaining and attempting to defend it. Although they try to distance themselves from the insurmountable problem of giving a rational explanation for abiogenesis, the problem remains. Secularists do not want to admit that the evidence points to the Creator (it would mean that we had better find out what he has to say!), and they postulate some pretty outrageous things. The amazing design and complexity of the universe is written off to mere chance, we're the lucky ones in the multiverse. Add to that the idea that since life could not have arisen here, it must have arisen out there. Life came from space. Just ask the aliens who planted it here. Yes, this fundamentally flawed tale is considered by some to be a serious scientific hypothesis, even though there is not a shred of evidence to support it.

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen "There's life in other worlds. Maybe they'll come to Earth helping man to find a way..." — Mike Pinder, "My Song", on Every Good Boy Deserves Favour by the Moody Blues , 1971 Something occurred to me about yet another way that evolutionary thinking has led to a tremendous waste of time and money: SETI . The whole thing is silly, with astronomical (heh!) odds against finding signals from intelligent life "out there". There are all sorts of excuses and wishful thinking  masquerading as science that stretches credulity , but frankly, that's what evolutionism is: Accept their authority by faith, suspend your common sense and disbelief. Scores of assumptions are made and connected regarding the origin of the universe (using the current popular premise of the Big Bang). The "odds are" that since life evolved on Earth, then life must have evolved  elsewhere in the universe. Further, since the universe is