Piltdown Superman

Back in 1986, Ukraine was a part of the Soviet Union. There was a disaster at the Chernobyl reactor, which caused many fatalities and had some worldwide effects. It is interesting that when scientists discuss what will happen after nuclear disasters, including war, long-term habitability predictions are bleak. Because of high radiation, there is an exclusion zone where access is possible but strictly limited. Other areas are less dangerous. Radiation is equated with mutations and death, yet critters like dogs are doing well . Tree frogs there are proclaimed as evidence for evolution. Eastern tree frog, WikiComm / K.Kalaentzis ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ), modified at PhotoFunia Black tree frogs adapting to radiation levels are obvious examples of natural selection, which is something that knowledgeable creationists accept. Is it because black frog lives matter, Cowboy Bob? You betcha. Anyway, do we see evolution? That'll be the day! Lighter-colored frogs do not have enough melanin to surviv

If you mount up and ride out Montana way and look near Glendive, you will come across  Makoshika State Park . It takes up an impressive 11,538 acres and does the usual state park things like camping, hiking, hunting, and so on.  Makoshika also has activities that they call educational because it is a part of a massive playground of paleontologists, the Hell Creek Formation. That means dinosaur bones and fossils. There is a wagon trainload of them for study and for secularists to evosplain the demise of dinosaurs. Rock formation in Makoshika State Park, Wikimedia Commons / Larry D. Moore ( CC BY 4.0 ) Storytellers commence chattering about the Chicxulub impact by a big rock from space and how it was responsible for dinosaur extinction. That story is unraveling . Also, dinosaur blood vessel grooves and other things are still in existence, but should not exist in the conventional deep time narrative. If secularists stripped away evolutionary presuppositions, they could examine the eviden

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  The title is a nod to the movie that inspired this here article, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance . Note the big spoiler alert , so if you were planning on watching that 1962 black-and-white classic, you might want to save the link to this article for later. John Ford was a legendary director, but some reports say he was miserable to work with. Despite this, John Wayne credited Ford for developing his acting skills. A good director brings out the best in actors. (If you study on it, some pictures with great actors are crummy because of poor directing.) Lee Marvin portrayed Liberty Valance as an ornery cuss quite well. An Argument with the Town Marshall / Frederic Remington, 1907 Many of Duke's films had a fun elements, but this picture was grim. Senator Ransom Stoddard (James Stewart) came back to the town of Shinbone and told his story to reporters. I said Liberty Valance was ornery, but that's understatement — he would beat people (including Ransom St

Something I learned and have been passing on to readers is the importance of definitions . When dealing with atheists and other anti-creationists, get those definitions nailed down! Many people claim to know about evolution and natural selection, only to reveal that they want to dispute creationists at all costs. A furious atheopath barked, "Natural selection is  evolution!" Another insisted, "Changes in alleles is the  scientific definition of evolution!" As mentioned before, knowledgeable creationists often need to correct internet atheists on their evolutionary mythology. Endler's guppy, iNaturalist / David Barros Cardona ( CC BY-NC 4.0 ) Before proceeding, it is important to discuss how society today holds to the nihilistic philosophy of postmodernism . Adherents believe that there are no absolute truths; you have your truth, I have my truth, and that's groovy. Except for that Bible stuff and insistence that Jesus is the  way,  the  truth, and the life

Atheists and other anti-creationists have a tendency to say that the Bible is "fairy tales," but they clearly have only a cursory knowledge of its contents. Fairy tales tend to use "Once upon a time..." and do not have details. The Bible has specific details. Particles-to-paleontologist evolution is touted as science, but it is vague historical science at best. While evolutionists cannot give dates and times, there should be some specifics. A writer at LiveScience  got herself a notion to tell readers how ten traits in animals evolved. It did not go well. Charles Darwin, magic fairy of evolution generated with AI at NightCafe Many of the explanations offered were infested with bad reasoning. Worse, some actually ignored basic facts of science and displayed ignorance not only of evolutionary mythology, but animal anatomy and behavior. This child believes that the secular science industry succeeds at bushwhacking so many people is that they do not have logical thinkin

Time and time again, materialists demonstrate disdain for freedoms of speech and thought. One way this is demonstrated is when misotheists insist that certain things cannot be questioned, such as atoms-to-atheist evolution. They frequently tell people what  to think. Such an approach is contrary to true science. Indeed, it suppresses free speech — and thought. Biblical creationists encourage critical thinking, which includes asking questions. Not just to clarify, but difficult questions as well. Materialists have a tendency to leave important or even obvious questions unanswered in their reports. Question mark in system, Pixabay / Gerd Altmann (Geralt) Some very basic questions can raise the hackles of secularists, and if consumers of secular science will study on some things, they can ask probing questions as well. Asking such things takes some of the power out of the propaganda efforts; shut up and believe. This is good practice in critical thinking and may prompt secularists to be

The name comb jelly  does not sound like a real creature. (Indeed, the awful Pexels search engine produced none of them, instead showing people with gel in their hair.) They are almost transparent and seem gelatinous, often with colors that seem like something out of a science fiction movie. Comb jellies have tentacles so they can eat zooplankton and occasionally small fish. They are not jellyfish despite the resemblance, and their tentacles do not sting. They are common in oceans and seem to like being near the shores of the Americas best . Comb jelly, Wikimedia Commons / Alexander Semenov ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) There are about 150 known species of these critters, but some believers in universal common ancestor evolution think they are the descendants of the common ancestor in the distant past. It seems almost a game, jelly fanciers or sponge folks, who will win the prize of determining the ancestor? Let's see if they can explain the complex nervous systems and reproduction of these &q

As biblical creationists have pointed out for quite some time, the study of origins is historical in nature. Both creationists and evolutionists use science in their efforts to determine what happened way back when. Something I learned from Ken Ham at a creation science seminar many years ago was the simple question, "Were you there?" (I used it in presentations of my own as well.) A follow-up question is, "Do you know anyone who was there?" Asking this cuts through a wagon train-load of bluster and assertions, and evolutionists get mighty agitated. Night sky, Pixnio / pattomolina They dislike it because some folks think for themselves instead of accepting evolutionary propaganda. It also puts a bit of pressure on secularists, and we need to keep that up. Evolutionists and atheists appeal to the authority of evolutionary and deep-time scientists, but they usually evosplain things and expect people to accept it. "Were you there?" also reveals the lack for c

It is bad enough that believers in molecules-to-Mario evolution present incomplete and often erroneous science, but they also encourage long-refuted evolutionary dogma. On several occasions we have encountered blatant falsehoods used to prop up this atheistic myth of origins. Everyone makes mistakes (including faulty reasoning), but to repeatedly use false information is downright deceptive. Seven years ago, a disingenuous video titled "Proof of evolution that you can find on your body" was posted, and at this writing has over 37 million views and 407 thousand "likes." Hammond C3 organ, WikiComm / Emilio Muñoz (Public Domain), modified The video focuses on so-called vestigial organs (or structures) that have supposedly lost their functions during the process of evolution. Claims of vestigial things have been debunked, as we have seen regarding "junk" DNA , the  Palmar Grasp Reflex in infants, how the famous appendix is actually important , and more. One

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Up yonder near Deception Pass lies the Darwin Ranch, but if you go without an invite, watch out because the Winkie Guards get a mite irritable about trespassing. An exception is when the ranch hands feel generous and share the peyote with them. We have seen in numerous posts that evolutionary thinking has actually been harmful to medical science. Such thinking has been a waste of time and money in other areas of science as well (for example, see " The Absence of Alien Contact "). It is a vexation to see supposedly educated folks get paid for doing nothing useful. Modified from a photograph at  Pixnio Tinhorns like Bill Nye the Leftist Propaganda Guy and others claim that science cannot advance without evolution, but that falsehood is easily refuted. Still, they proclaim it. There is a "meme" on Fakebook at Evolution is a Lie of a game show contestant being asked, "Which branch of the sciences has Darwinian evolution advanced the most sin

As we have seen several times, evidence must be interpreted, and people interpret it through their worldviews. People say evolution is a scientific fact, but there is considerable disagreement among its proponents. Mayhaps it is a form of a circular reasoning game people play with their own minds (also inserting confirmation bias), but many evolutionists only see the evidence that fits their presuppositions. A recent book on bird evolution seems to be typical of the absurd agenda-driven thinking that we read about so many times. Modified from Freeimages / Kenn Kiser Professor Douglas Futuyma wrote the book under discussion here. He tipped his hand on his propagandist approach in a previous book where he used discredited arguments to support evolution. Like others, he is an anti-creationist, and makes some statements that, from a logical and scientific perspective are...truly bizarre. Doug talks about bird fossils even though he admits they do not help evolution. Also, he appeals to the

Believers in universal common have been known to patronizingly tell creationists and other evolution doubters to go to a natural history museum and learn. What people see are exhibits with tendentious usages of evidence, displays involving artistic license, and so on. Actual science, not so much. Remember, facts do not speak for themselves, but are interpreted according to worldviews , and then presented. Secularists presuppose evolution and make that their starting point. Unfortunately, many are so convinced that it is true (despite contradictory or nonexistent evidence), they play fast and loose with their presentations. Australopithecus afarensis , WikiComm /  Wolfgang Sauber ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) Take a look at photos of  A. afarensis  (Lucy) models as well as other illustrations. I found some where a male specimen is gazing heavenward, as if contemplating the mysteries of the universe. Another exhibit has Lucy overjoyed that Alan arrived at the museum — or is that Steve? One model has

Those of us with healthy skepticism and some critical thinking skills find Darwinist propaganda a vexation, plain and simple. It is often expressed in various forms of artwork, such as in our alleged apelike ancestors where they have whites in their eyes — which cannot  be known, but it makes them look like they have vestiges of humanity. Dinosaur displays in museums omit modern birds, but they coexisted even according to evolutionary standards. Examples of illustrations based more on imagination than fact are numerous. Natovenator polydontus hunting fish, Nature Communications Biology /   Yusik Choi ( CC BY 4.0 ) Propaganda can be effective in displays, but their impact is drastically increased by crafty wording. Jay Seegert mentioned in a video  that people are impacted by headlines, and perhaps they actually read some of an article. However, they seldom realize that evolutionists are pulling the wool over their eyes, and the "evidence" for evolution is actually nonexist

If you have a close relationship with a bird, maybe even have it perch on your finger, notice that the feet have scales. The hands at the Darwin Ranch, up yonder near Deception Pass, are joining in with other evolutionists to claim that this is evidence that dinosaurs evolved into birds. Unfortunately, too may people are unwilling or unable to use critical thinking. They go along with what "scientists say," and accept evolutionary indoctrination. A search of this site and others by biblical creationists show numerous reasons why dino-to-bird evolution is ridiculous despite recent media portrayals. Rooster feet, RGBStock / Kevin Tuck Birds' feet have scales ( even on ducks ), dinosaurs had scales, therefore, evolution. No, that is absurd, using the fallacies of affirming the consequent as well as insufficient evidence . (Some mammals have scales, but nobody seems to be claiming that they evolved from dinosaurs.) To use expensive words, the  integumentary system involves

As we have seen numerous times, secularists are thrilled that the number of people are believing in minerals-to-microscopist evolution is increasing. At the same time, they  increase their indoctrination efforts . We saw what their bleak worldview does to young people . When a person is under the control of drugs or alcohol, in a cult, exhibiting harmful behavior, etc., friends and family may stage an intervention. A wake-up call, if you will, in an effort to correct the situation. The secular science industry does not want "consensus" science questioned, and some sidewinders want to have interventions to make people agree. Good sheep obey the consensus, image used:  Jo-Anne McArthur at Unsplash According to the United Nations, " We own the science ." That should tell you a great deal right there. Many creationists, including myself, encourage people to use critical thinking and spot logical fallacies. This is especially useful when someone is attempting to deceive

It is a fact that the youth of today have an increasing amount of depression, hopelessness, mental illnesses and more. This can be directly linked to the negativity influencing their lives. As I write this, Americans are getting excited about Halloween. Have you given that any thought? There is a glorification of the occult, death, fear, horror, and Satan. In the store today, I saw many  violent toys, costumes, and trick-or-treat accessories such as bloody knives. This is fun? I believe it adds to the bigger problem, and kids face violence in the real world. Young Girl Thinking , Jules Breton, ca. 1860s (?) The mind can be likened to a garden, so we have to be careful to plant good things. Imagine if listeners to rap or heavy metal left it alone for thirty days (or even one week) and cultivated other musical interests, even if it was the same style without lyrics. See how their outlooks on life and their mental states improve. The same goes for movies, television, reading material, an

Russell Watchtower, who heads up the Ministry of Truth at the Darwin Ranch, is a devious sidewinder. That is an asset in his job. His department has been using popular media and other things to honeyfuggle the public, making dinosaurs messengers of evolutionary propaganda. The secular science industry is mighty appreciative. Speculations are presented in movies as reasonable, even factual, despite lack of evidence. Indeed, sometimes the evolutionary storyline defies scientific truths. An example of propaganda trumping science is how secularists insist dinosaurs evolved into birds, yet true birds existed at the same time as dinosaurs. Dinosaur image from  ICON0.COM at Stockvault Another myth is that dinosaurs were warm-blooded, but that is contrary to observed facts as well. Like modern reptiles, dinosaurs showed inner workings that God designed them to be cold-blooded. (For more about warm- and cold-blooded studies, see " Warm-Bloodedness Not Explained by Evolution .") You c

Believers in universal common ancestor evolution want others to believe as they do, so they commence to posturing. Since people are willing to bow down to what they perceive as superior knowledge by scientists, they tend to self-censor any questions. We have seen numerous times that Just-So Stories are passed off as serious research (a recent example is in the  post about electric fish ), but they evosplain much without giving any real science. Since all life supposedly began in the sea, evolutionists must explain how plant life developed on land. Hedge Bindeweed, my photo modified with FotoSketcher Mayhaps the self-censoring of questions and objections is partly because people are not taught critical (logical) thinking skills much nowadays. They might see in an article all the assertions without evidence, and appeal to secular miracles.   Yes, secularists have their own miracles, but they have antipathy toward admitting it, so they rename them. Sound familiar? Atheists and Darwin'

It is common knowledge that the secular news media are, for the most part, heavily biased toward the political left. This obviously influences their reporting — which seems more like propaganda than actual journalism. After all, journalists are expected to investigate and ask hard questions. There are a few reporters who want to do their jobs. Unfortunately, they are obscured by the lapdog majority. In the secular science industry, leftist causes and Darwinism are paramount as well as symbiotic. The public wants answers and is getting annoyed with the science press. Sausages by Amanda Lim at Unsplash (modified, obviously) In an article on an Intelligent Design site titled " Why Are Science Reporters So Credulous? ", David Klinghoffer points out that secular science journalists are assembling press releases instead of doing genuine reporting. He quotes Nicholas Wade, who indicates that journalists put scientists on pedestals which hinders doubt or healthy skepticism. The secu

Proponents of universal common descent are rejoicing that more people are accepting evolution, partly through having  escalated their indoctrination efforts toward children . They actively censor Intelligent Design and creation science material with the excuse that they are "religious". That is disingenuous since evolution is foundational to atheism and the religion of secular humanism: They are promoting religion in public schools . Why is it so important to secularists to present only a naturalistic view and derail the learning process? Mostly made at PhotoFunia A frequent piece of rhetoric by secularists is that evolution is essential for medicine. That is the opposite of the truth. As regular readers have seen, evolutionary thinking is harmful  to medical science . Professionals and educators find it to have no practical value and just don't want it . But that doesn't stop some tinhorns from capitalizing on the coronavirus panics , and ramping up their censorship