Piltdown Superman

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Something I try to emphasize, with extra emphasis on Question Evolution Day , is that people need to have healthy skepticism regarding claims of "evolution". We need to do some critical thinking. For example, what is this about hummingbirds evolving "weaponized" beaks for fighting and romancing? Credit: Pixabay/ Free-Photos Folks who ride for the Darwin brand will "see" evolution that isn't there, and use a bit bait 'n' switch (conflation) on variation and speciation to get people thinking that baryon-to-bird evolution is true. Watch for assertions, and when you read of hear them, you can ask yourself, "Where is this alleged evolution? What changed? Is a hummingbird changing into something else or is it still a hummingbird? Is there observed evidence?"  Plug your questions into your Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Ring™, and you'll get the default response of " it evolved ", which is u

What follows is an unpleasant reality of Darwinian thinking, which was based on presuppositions in a materialistic worldview. As biblical creationists have shown many times, evolution may look good as presented, but its foundations are flawed. Especially in psychology. Background image credit: Freeimages/ Miranda Knox Modern psychology is based on evolution, and it is downright dangerous . It is, to use the technical term, quackery . Researchers deceive their subjects , which raises ethical concerns. People are prescribed medications for depression, schizophrenia, and other conditions but doctors really do not know how and why things work. (I have known people who took "cocktails" of medications that would be shuffled and adjusted until the patient felt better. That ain't science, old son, that's a crap shoot.) One of the worst horrors in medical history is the frontal lobotomy. Using assumptions and piling story upon story, the idea was that our brain evolv

People who believe in deep time and particles-to-paleontologist evolution are not having success when studying amber. This tree resin trapped insects and other critters long ago, which trapped and encased them. It is an excellent way of preserving them, and has been friendly to biblical creation science and provided evidence for a young earth. Credit: Freeimages/ Krzysztof (Kriss) Szkurlatowski Many people are familiar with amber in jewellery, and some are fascinated by seeing bugs in it. Of course, uncluttered amber can also be mounted on a ring or in a necklace. They are told and pass along the secularists' claim that the amber is millions of years old, but that is based on tendentious interpretations of data and spurious dating methods. Mites were found in amber, and they were dated at 230 million Darwin years. Problem is, there wasn't any appreciable change between them and their modern counterparts. This is where Darwinists circle the wagons and cry, "Stasis!

Biblical creationists have maintained that the earth is thousands of years old, not billions, and creation scientists are repeatedly shown to be right. Oceanic salinity fails uniformitarian assumptions, and new research regarding the volume of ocean water menaces deep time beliefs as well. Mariana Trench map credit: Wikimedia Commons / Kmusser ( CC by-SA 3.0 ) If you venture toward Micronesia, look for an archipelago there called the Mariana Islands. They have themselves a nice trench there, and the deepest point could easily cover Mt. Everest! The continental plates are moving along, and when one hits another, one of the plates subducts (gets pushed under) another. Some researchers decided the very deep blue sea was a good place to check out subduction. What they found is that water is being subducted below the crust of the earth into the mantle. Lots of it. Once again, secular scientists are saying things along the lines of, "More than we expected". The whole she

One of the major problems with fossils is that scientists cannot get a complete concept of the critter under scrutiny, especially if it is rather complex. There are about a dozen Archaeopteryx fossils, some of which are good. It was considered a transitional form between birds and dinosaurs. When that was discredited, other speculations were presented. How about comparing Archaeopteryx with a similar living bird, the Hoatzin? Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Napowildlifecenter ( CC by-SA 3.0 ) Seems to me that the hoatzin is the platypus of the bird world. In both cases, our Creator seems to be having some fun with us and with devotees of baryon-to-bird evolution. There are very few decent fossils of the hoatzin, but those that do exist do not show any kind of evolution. Better yet, we can see the peculiarities and characteristics of this bird that defy evolution and affirm special creation. These include claws on the wings that only last for a short time in the young 'uns, pr

There was a time when educational institutions were places of learning, and for preparing young people to deal with the challenges of the world. Students were taught critical thinking and logic, and even how to present a strong debate. Not any longer. If a cowboy was to look at only the horses in one corral and claim that he has found the best horse in the whole wide world, that would be silly. Suppose he checked out the occupants of three corrals and made the same claim. Also silly. He might have a valid claim if he said, "I have examined the horses in three corrals, and the best one is that one over there." That's quite a bit more reasonable because he limited his claim and increased the amount of information that he had to work with. Biblical creationists (and a few others) lament how modern education does not do well in teaching critical thinking; creationists still try to teach people how to think, while secularists tell people what to think. We have seen b

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen This here article is going to take you on a different trail for a spell. The subject was recently discussed in " The Downward Spiral of Gene Editing Ethics ", but I had an inspiration from an unlikely source: a 1989 episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation called " Unnatural Selection ". Credit: Pixabay / Gerhard Janson Science fiction is a very flexible medium, especially if people are willing to suspend their disbelief . It lends itself to many possibilities for stories including deep philosophies, speculations about human nature, questions about reality, comedy, social commentaries (Rod Serling did this on The Twilight Zone . George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four presented dystopian views that are coming true, especially with leftist policies. ) Science fiction is also good for simply spinning a good yarn. There have been several instances where science fiction stories anticipated technology, yet tales set in the future utiliz

Before we start, here is a quick, humorous remark. Those of you who study logical fallacies with me can appreciate it even more: "Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana." It takes some people a while to get it. I think it is hilarious, and part of that is because I like humor with ambiguity. Here, we have two key words that flip meanings, flies and like. But apparently, we are supposedly related to the things via evolution. NASA  / Ames Research Center / Dominic Hart (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Being as how it's easy for researchers to do, they have been fiddling with making mutations in fruit flies for a long time. What do they get? Messed up fruit flies. Nothing changes into anything else, so there is no evolution. Those annoying bugs have a habit of defying Darwin. But there are genetic similarities between humans a many other things, including fifty percent of the banana genome. So they commenced to doing that Making Thi

Despite all the tall tales, speculations presented as science, and rescuing devices, secular astronomers and cosmologists are consistently unable to make the universe seem old. Accumulated evidence continues to affirm that our solar system is young , and star formation ideas continually fail. What about those exoplanets? Credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Since hopes of finding life outside our solar system are disappearing quick-like, mayhaps naturalists can salvage an old universe formed by cosmic evolution. The accretion concept of planetary formation is the best of the worst, and it does not hold up very well . People will believe in deep time despite the evidence, not because of it, and they come up with other things that get their hopes shot down, such as the idea of dust rings forming planets. Not working out so well, old son. Maybe disk instability is the way to explain rapid formation of planets without having to admit t

Some scientists are planning an experiment with releasing what is essentially chalk dust into the atmosphere. They think a large cloud of the stuff may reflect sunlight and cause global cooling, which may be useful geoengineering against global warming. They have ignored some important details in their hubris, and inadvertently point to science that supports the Ice Age resulting from the Genesis Flood. Credit: Add Letters Secular scientists often pretend to have more knowledge than they actually possess. This is seen in many areas, such as calling some parts of DNA "junk" , deciding that some body parts are "vestigial ", thinking that the moon would be a really swell place for a colony , failed evolutionary predictions regarding the fruit fly , the exceptional arrogance utilized in human gene editing experimentation , and so many more. Global climate change models spectacularly fail ( just ask Algore ), which is partially because they use faulty data ; those