Evolutionary Truth by Piltdown Superman

Welcome to the home of "The Question Evolution Project". There is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution. Evidence refuting evolution is suppressed by the scientific establishment, which is against the true spirit of scientific inquiry. Using an unregistered assault keyboard, articles and links to creation science resources are presented so people can obtain evidence that is not materialistic propaganda. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Saturday, January 21, 2017

Dinosaurs, Chickens, and Stuff

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

This is not going to be a long, complicated article. Y'all probably need a break from the heavy stuff, and I don't mind one myself.

A reader of The Question Evolution Project sent me a link to a one-minute video (which linked to a non-science article) about how scientists want to tamper with the DNA and chickens, help them get in touch with their inner dinosaur, and possibly bringing back a modified form of dinosaurs. Echoes of Jurassic Park, I suppose. (When we're done here, let's all meet at Kentucky Fried Rex for chow.) One serious question to consider is: why bring back things that were extinct? I reckon it depends on the motivation.

A couple of lighter items about "Jurassic Park"-style DNA tampering with chickens, and surprises in the devious intelligence of those birds.
Assembled and modified with Clker clipart graphics
What caught my attention is how scientists are assuming evolution in order to do this process, and ignoring the other scientists who reject dinosaur-to-bird evolution. How many times have we seen where evolutionary thinking has actually hindered scientific progress? They are arguing from their presuppositions (which is something we all do). What comes to mind is when Dr. Lovejoy shaved down a pelvic bone cast of Lucy the extinct ape into what it should have looked like. Both Lovejoy and these dino-to-bird DNA scientists are being ultracrepidarian, and some restraint would be in order. For the short video, click here, and the short, unimpressive article, click here.

In other fowl news, stupid chickens are not so stupid after all. Consider how some birds show musical innovation skills far beyond those of apes, even rivaling humans. There are birds that are more intelligent than apes, too. Then there's puzzler of the amazing flight plans of migratory birds. Hard to figure how many birds have amazing abilities, then do stupid stuff.

So what's up with chickens, other than being mighty tasty? Smarter than we may think. Someone got around to studying chicken intelligence, and found out that they're sneaky caitiffs. Manipulative, too. This fits, because they have basic math and reasoning skills. For a nice report that does not pay homage to the Bearded Buddha, click on "Chickens exhibit Machiavellian tendencies, scientists discover".

Perhaps we make value judgments and compare them to humans instead of realizing that they were designed with certain skills by our Creator. Maybe the DNA tampering will yield smart dinosaurs? Why not, since circular reasoning can be hatched up as "science" nowadays.

Friday, January 20, 2017

Connecting Mind and Computer

Materialists are physicalists: physical properties are all that matter, and when you die, you're worm food. No soul, no afterlife, no rewards or punishment, nothing. (Atheists have a message of hope? Not hardly!) Christians and others believe that we have a mind or soul that is independent of the body, and some materialists suggest that it may be real, but they can't find where it resides (see "The Quantum Soul?"). The mind is not the brain, but the mind uses the brain as its conduit, if you will. Some extremely impressive technology supports this belief.

Amazing technology used by an ALS patient illustrates that the mind is separate from the brain, and the incredible skill of our Creator.
Image credit: Pixabay / GDJ
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a neurological disease that destroys voluntary muscle movement, but often leaves the mind intact. A woman with ALS was fitted with a computer interface that gives her some remarkable abilities to communicate and some motion, which is caused by thinking about the motion. She can also pray without thinking about muscle movements. All of this shows not only the brilliant medical technology, but that our Creator's skills are still far above our comprehension.
A new bioengineered medical device was designed to treat people with a severe loss of neurologic muscle control. It affords a rare opportunity to clearly see some of the hidden relationships between mind, body, and designed interfaces.

The New England Journal of Medicine reported on a 58-year-old woman with normal cognition, but who lost voluntary muscle control due to severe amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). This woman with locked-in syndrome received a remarkable new treatment—a fully implanted brain-computer interface that links her brain's thoughts to the outside world.

The term "interface" is rather common, but many people don't know exactly what one is. A recent paper by Frank Sherwin of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and myself detailed the elements of a physiological interface and their vital importance. We showed how our immune system actually functions as an interface between our human body and the microbial world. We confirmed a fundamental principle of design in general: For two autonomous, automated entities with distinct boundaries to work together, they must be connected by an interface with three distinctive elements: 1) physical authentication mechanisms, 2) non-physical standardized protocols, and 3) a mutually accessible physical medium to both entities.
Don't even think about skipping out. You can read the rest by clicking on "Brain-Computer Interface Unmasks Mind-Brain Relationship".

Thursday, January 19, 2017

The Science Industry Supports Abortion

Regular readers know that I keep emphasizing that scientists are not the dispassionate automatons that many people think. They are not running around, gathering facts, then following where the evidence leads. Rather, they are human, having their preconceptions as well as good and bad character traits. It's been more obvious lately (or has the trend increased?) that the secular science industry has a definite leftist penchant (see references 7,8,9 at this link). It gets worse.

The science industry has serious problems with its moral compass, and is becoming increasingly activistic for abortion.
Image credit: Pixabay / Gerd Altmann
The scientific establishment also has some intrinsic moral problems, and needs to borrow a moral compass. Moral concerns of scientists would definitely be improved by biblical Christianity, especially since left-learning science institutions are increasingly activistic for the murder of unborn humans in the womb. If you study on it a spell, you'll see it's not all that surprising, since they deny God the Creator (therefore, denying that we are created in God's image), and try to make evolution a creator. It also follows that evolution has been used to justify abortion on demand, with "It's just a tissues", or, "It's in a fish stage of recapitulation", which was based on the fraud of Haeckel the jackal.

Is the feeling of justification by science part of the reason that pro-abortionists make their view a "rights" cause? My speculation is that science feeds society which feeds science in areas like this. Lena Dunham regrets never having had an abortion, which would apparently give her more credibility in her support of murder of a child that was created in God's image. 

Is the ending of human life trendy? Maybe we'll see combination hair, tattoo, and abortion salons soon. Albert Mohler has some insightful comments on this in his January 9, 2017 episode of The Briefing (you can listen or read the transcript). Further, Dr. Mohler discussed how religious people, including ultra-liberal "Christians", Hindus, and others, blessed an abortion clinic as "sacred. See or hear the January 12, 2017 episode of The Briefing for more about this immoral behavior.

Society is trending toward such casual treatment of human life, and the immoral views of the science industry fit right in. Meanwhile, there are still those of us who believe that defending the defenseless are some of the hallmarks of a just society

Further, the hysterical asperity spewed forth in a Nature editorial rivals that of cyberstalkers. They are demonizing those of us who believe that unborn lives should be protected, wanting access to baby parts in the name of "science". Secular scientists are objective? That'll be the day!
Is there any logical or empirical reason why science journals and secular reporters should always take the pro-abortion position?

Pardon, Big Science, your bias is showing. When it comes to abortion and other ethical controversies, secular journals and science editors almost always throw in their lot with the leftist, progressive, liberal crowd who chant for abortion on demand, unlimited access to embryonic stem cells, funding for Planned Parenthood, and other Democrat Party platform positions. Why is that? Don’t they realize they themselves could have been aborted? Do they have any scientific evidence that an unborn baby is not a person? No. The bias is clear; any restrictions on abortion are viewed as bad. Any limits on access to human embryos and fetal tissue are presented as a step “backward” for society. Here are some examples.
To see the examples and commentary, click on "Big Science Leans Pro-Death".

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Dinosaurs Done in by Dark Matter?

The hands at the Darwin Ranch have come up with another "theory' about the extinction of the dinosaurs. Why would they do a thing like that? Because none of the theories that have been passed around present adequate explanations of data. Also, someone needed money, so she wrote a book.

Since none of the current theories of dinosaur extinction work, a cosmologist made a new one. No facts or science, though.

Years ago, I was giving presentations about creation science and evidence against evolution. One thing I forcefully stated was that evolutionists present layers of "theories", but they are flawed all the way down to the foundation. In this case, a cosmologist invokes dark matter. This stuff is a rescuing device for the Big Bang, and has never been demonstrated to exist (so they keep making excuses for its absence instead of admitting it's paralogical). The spurious theory also involves the fictitious Oort Cloud, another rescuing device for the fact that comets would have been exhausted in an old universe. What stymies this child is how such pedagese not only gets accepted for publication, but is seriously considered, and Darwin's Drones unthinkingly accept words in their anti-creationist favor because it's from a scientist.

The best explanation for dinosaur extinction is the drastic changes on Earth after the Genesis Flood. Dinosaurs lived a while (a fact to which historical records attest), were probably hunted by humans, had trouble with the changed climate, and so forth. As for the dark matter thing that is fact- and science-free, don't be invoking stuff that doesn't exist and call it a theory, savvy?

Dark matter has been invoked to solve many vexing problems in astrophysics and cosmology. Now it seems it has been invoked to solve the evolutionists’ problem of extinction of the dinosaurs.

American theoretical physicist and cosmologist Dr Lisa Randall has developed a breakthrough five dimensional warped geometry theory. About two years ago she proposed a new hypothesis on dark matter which suggests the mysterious invisible substance that allegedly dominates the universe played a role in killing the dinosaurs. She even has written a book on it — Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs. In the book her new theory is summarised as follows.
To finish reading, click on "Dark matter caused the demise of the dinosaurs?"

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

Submerged Cypress Forest

If y'all have ever been way down south in Dixie (southern United States) or watched movies and such, you may have noticed cypress trees in wet areas like swamps and riverbanks. They like those areas, but they can be found in drier climes. Some got more moisture than they bargained for.

So, a cypress forest was discovered off the Alabama coast. Huh? How did that get there?
Image credit: Pixabay / skeeze
Back in 2004, Ivan the hurricane included in its list of changes the exposure of cypress stumps. These were submerged off the Alabama coast, and did not show signs of great age. Cutting into them will get you sap and the cypress tree smell. What happened to have them submerged and youthful? The Genesis Flood model of creationary scientists gives the best answer.
Sixty feet (18 m) beneath the green waves of the Gulf of Mexico, about 15 miles (24 km) off the Alabama coast, lie the remnants of an ancient forest of giant cypress trees.1 For hundreds of yards (meters), the stumps follow the lazy meanders of what appears to be an ancient river channel that flows down from the coast, near the place where two present-day rivers spill into the sea through the Mobile-Tensaw River Delta.

How did a forest ever grow here, and when did the ocean level rise enough to bury a forest and river? That’s an interesting question, showing that ocean levels have fluctuated dramatically since Noah’s Flood. Global warming and coastal flooding are not just modern worries!
I won't leaf you pining. All y'all can read the rest of this article (or download the audio) by clicking on "Alabama’s Underwater Forest".

Monday, January 16, 2017

Egesta-Rollers of the Lone Prairie

Some people need to get over the "ewww" factor to appreciate some critters for what they are, and how they're designed. I'm fascinated by certain reptiles, spiders, and so on (especially when dangerous ones are on television or behind glass). My wife gets the heebie-jeebies, though. So, if you can put bad feelings on hold and admire a creature for it's own sake, we're gonna have a ball!

The first reaction may be disgust. But if you study on it, you'll see that the lowly dung beetle is designed to perform a valuable service.
Image credit (cropped): Pixabay / debbiedejager
I'll allow that this post is difficult to write, but that's simply because I have to cowboy up and avoid using scatological humor. It ain't easy. The topic is the dung beetle (Egyptians worshiped the things, the artifacts are called scarabs). These little critters are on almost every continent, and love poo. Not only are they coprophagous (they eat it), but lay eggs and live in it, spread it around, and actually perform a vital function on the prairie. And the Serengeti Plains. And... (The stercoraceous material spread by Darwinistas has no value, unlike dung.) This lowly creature was designed by our Creator to perform a symbiotic function and to make life a little bit better on our special planet. Don't go teasing one by putting some coprolite in front of it.
Imagine the life of a dedicated dung beetle, collecting, moving, and hoarding dung—even raising its children on it. Talk about a lowly existence! Yet, from the dung beetle’s perspective, it’s completely normal; dung is what its life is all about.

Consider the valuable ecological service the dung beetle provides as it mundanely moves manure morsels. It uses herbivore-dropped manure to benefit itself and its family, as well as the habitat in which it crawls around. What is so valuable about herbivore feces that dung beetles actually fight over dung balls, energetically “stealing the ball” from one another as if dung ball-grabbing were an Olympic soccer game?
To read the whole article, roll on over to "Dung Beetles: Promoters of Prairie Preservation".

Saturday, January 14, 2017

Properly Dealing with the Facts

It has been rightly said that there is no such thing as one side having facts, and the other side having a different set of facts, all being filed away and waiting for action. Everyone has access to the same facts, and it is the interpretation of facts based on our worldviews that makes the difference. This is readily apparent in the origins debate, but it has applications in other areas.

The origins debate, and others, have people who desire to present "their" facts. Many times, they argue about things upon which they agree. It's those other items that provide the most interest.
Morguefile / Grafixar
One side of a debate may think that what they consider supportive facts are actually items that both sides are in agreement on. Some owlhoot may use the definition of evolution as "change over time", then give examples of change, as support for his position. However, that same definition and examples are likely to be things with which biblical creationists agree with him. There are interpreted facts that are out of the agreement zone that prompt the most useful discussions.
We at CMI have spent many hours writing and speaking on scientific and theological issues. We have said over and over again that one does not have to ‘turn off one’s brain’ when going to church and that there is a rich, intellectual foundation to biblical creation. We have disavowed conspiracy theories, and have encouraged others to do so as well.

Yet, the world seems to be sitting at a crossroads. After Wikileaks, Snowden, Snopes, ‘fact checking’, YouTube, etc., came on the scene, many people have grown skeptical about basic facts of science. This is compounded by the now-exposed lies of certain climate change advocates (e.g., the infamous “hockey stick” graph). And, it corresponds to a dramatic loss of confidence in most sources of authority, be it an authority in the secular, scientific, religious, or media realms.

Thus, we have suddenly been besieged by people who have huge questions about things that are easily shown to be true or not. “Did the United States land multiple astronauts on the moon?” “Are we at the absolute center of the universe?” Or “Is the earth actually global?”
I'll allow that it might be misnamed, but I still encourage you to finish reading this article by clicking on "How to think (not what to think)".