Piltdown Superman

My photograph of dark matter The existence of "dark matter" is something that is popular in astronomy and astrophysics. It has never been observed (except in my photograph, above). Instead, it is inferred. No, it is not fictitious like the Oort Cloud, because its gravitational effects on objects seems to have been observed. Interesting...something that cannot be seen, touched, measured or physically detected is promoted by scientists, but they reject the Creator because he cannot be seen, touched, measured or physically detected to their satisfaction. One fits their presuppositions and worldview, the other does not. There appears to be no dark matter in our part of the galaxy. Alternative explanations and theories are offered, some that may even be better than dark matter. But they are rejected because they do not fit. Here, take a look: A new Chilean study has found that there is essentially no "dark matter" in the solar neighborhood. Dark matter is the nam...

I thought I was going back to the one-minute audio pieces today, but something came up on Friday that I could not resist sharing. This is a one-hour audio from a show called "Crosstalk" on "VCY America". The full, uninterrupted show is available for purchase, but you can get quite a bit out of the free version. In the "MP3" option, the MP3 is launched immediately. My suggestion is that you save the link to your computer so you have more flexibility. Click here for the show and the write up of "The Fossil Record: A Problem for Evolutionists" .

Fossils defy standard uniformitarian explanations as to their formation. The process is supposed to be gradual, over millions of years. However, examination of fossils and sediments shows that creatures had to be buried rapidly. Further, the fossilization process had to have occurred in less time than evolutionists want to allow. Standard explanations fit the presuppositions of evolutionary geologists, but they do not fit the facts. The pattern found in ancient rock is better explained by the catastrophe of a global flood at the time of Noah. Marine biologists have scoured sea floor sediments for decades, finding living creatures in the mud but never fossils in the process of forming. That's because when a sea creature dies, its carcass is totally recycled within weeks. So, if a creature's soft parts are going to fossilize, it has to happen extremely fast. Certain sedimentary rocks, like those of the Burgess Shale in Canada, contain large amounts of fossilized sea creatu...

One of the mantras that evolutionists chant involves the words "natural selection" and "mutation". These are supposed to happen over long periods of time. But the cold-water octopus did not get the memo. Instead, it tolerates cold water extremes in a surprising way — as if it was designed by a Creator instead of blind chance. Octopuses are not warm-blooded animals, yet the speed with which their nerves transmit signals depends on temperature. So how do those that live and move in sub-zero Antarctic waters function just as well as those inhabiting warm, tropical waters? The answer surprised researchers. Two biologists from Puerto Rico who studied the cephalopods hypothesized "on the basis of conventional natural selection" that the proteins involved in transmitting nerve impulses evolved because the cold water "selected" individual octopuses with cold-adapted mutations. But the research pair, publishing in Science, did not find the anticipa...

An atheistic, evolutionary worldview is irrational. According to its adherents, evolution is an unguided process that is unpredictable. Expecting uniformity and predictability in nature, laws of logic to exist and so on is inconsistent with this belief system. And yet, evolution is presented as if it had intelligence. In fact, evolution is wise enough to design mutually beneficial symbiosis between different organisms, it appears. To hear evolutionists tell their stories, evolution is able to choose, plan, make decisions and carry out its wise plans. There was a book written by a priest named Nogar that seemed to have a weird religious New Age-y approach, The Wisdom of Evolution. We keep hearing about "natural selection", which indicates that if there is selecting happening, there is a selector. Watch a nature documentary and listen for the "just so stories" of evolutionary propaganda ( stories, not facts ) and listen for the way that evolution is portrayed a...

Although believers in evolution and uniformitarianism insist that scientists are strictly unbiased and objective, willing to follow where the evidence leads, such beliefs are based in fantasy. Also, people like that forget what is obvious about human nature: Not only are scientists people, but they have their own biases like the rest of us. Biases and presuppositions in favor of uniformitarianism could not accept the concepts of Ice Age megafloods until there was so much evidence, they were forced to admit that they happened. Water, Freeimages / ZoofyTheJi Creationist scientists are trying out their own models about the relationship of these Ice Age megafloods with the global Noachian Deluge. The data seem to fit rather well — far better than for uniformitarian viewpoints. It took 40 years for mainstream geologists to accept the Lake Missoula flood, despite hundreds of pieces of obvious evidence. The acceptance forced many geologists to shift from strict uniformitarianism (...

When someone has an "evolution is true" worldview, they are forced to reinterpret facts to suit their presuppositions. This gets embarrassing when they deny the global Genesis Flood and have to explain sea animals buried in volcanic ash, and creatures that do not fit into the failed "Tree of Life" . Also, they are trying to use "evolutionary history" when there is none. Of course, creationists do not have these problems. Something seems wrong with this picture: deep sea creatures living in the dark were preserved in ash from a land volcano. Science Daily just picked up on a press release from Oxford University that came out two weeks ago: the discovery of exquisitely-preserved Ediacaran creatures.  Both articles explained that the Ediacaran fauna appear to bear no relationship to the Cambrian animals that came (in Darwin years) millions of years later, even though “ where exactly they fit in the tree of life is unclear. ”  The discoverers believe ...

Although some evolutionists are supposedly amazed when they are told that there is equivocation, the fact is that such equivocation is actually prevalent. (Of course, this is rooted in their "evolution is a fact" presuppositions.) How do you defend equivocation? With more equivocation, of course. If anyone doubted that evolutionists equivocate, or that such equivocation is prevalent, they need doubt no more. I recently pointed out several examples of evolutionists equivocating on evolution. When they proclaim that evolution is an obvious fact, they are referring to the origin of species by random mutation, genetic drift, natural selection and a host of other explanatory mechanisms evolutionists employ when needed. This claim goes against the scientific evidence. Evolution may or may not have occurred. That is an ontological claim that can be argued. But there is absolutely no question the origin of species by evolution is not a fact. That is an epistemological claim which i...

Creation Ministries International has a section on "15 Questions for Evolutionists". These are questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer. (There is a video after point two of which I am rather fond, but I have a bias.) They do try to answer them, but do not fare well. At the bottom of the page are some of the objections and attempted answers. Click here and give it a whirl . Oh, and don't forget that February 12 is " Question Evolution Day "!

Foot soldiers in the war against those of us who dare to question the "fact" of evolution portray scientists in glowing terms. They are eminently logical, follow where the evidence leads, never have biases, are exceptionally honest and so on. (Of course, such praise makes them seem like automatons rather than people — if you believe such praises in the first place.) People who actually believe this lofty view of evolutionists are shocked — shocked, I tell you — at the suggestion that some scientists may have biases and engage in sneaky behavior. A very common shell game is conflation (or equivocation) on word meanings. The term "evolution" can mean many things. When the faithful chant that "evolution is a fact", they may actually be right when using some definitions of evolution. However, they are not right when they take one meaning of evolution and switch it with microbes-to-microbiologist evolution. When I explained that evolutionists equivocate by...