Evolutionary Truth by Piltdown Superman

Welcome to the home of "The Question Evolution Project". There is no truth in goo-to-you evolution. We are bombarded with dubious evidence for the "fact" of evolution. Contrary evidence is suppressed. That is against the true spirit of scientific inquiry. Using an unregistered assault keyboard, articles and links to creation science resources are presented here so people can learn something besides materialistic propaganda. — Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Thursday, September 3, 2015

Impacting Large Cratonic Basins

A great difficulty for secular geologists to explain through uniformitarian views are the large cratonic basins. In fact, they even admit that their hypotheses do not cover what is actually observed. The Genesis Flood submodel explains these basis far better than the secular views.

A great difficulty for secular geologists to explain through uniformitarian views are the large cratonic basins. In fact, they even admit that their hypotheses do not cover what is actually observed. The Genesis Flood submodel explains these basis far better than the secular views.
Great Basin National Park / tpsdave / Pixabay
The origin of the basins is unknown by uniformitarian geologists, and the problem is compounded by the large volume of sediments, subsidence models have major problems, and other difficulties. (Geologists don't cotton to looking for numerous impact craters on Earth because they assume the planet is ancient, and impacts occurred long ago.) The properties of the basins, however, are consistent with an impact hypothesis in keeping with the Genesis Flood. The Earth is not ancient, and the evidence shows that it was created much more recently than some people are willing to admit.
Cratonic basins are mysterious features of the interior of continents. A saucer-shaped feature filled with sedimentary rock is formed but the mechanism of subsidence is unknown. These basins have collected thousands of metres of sediments that in most cases have received little deformation until uplift. Moreover, these basins commonly have thinned crust and an uplifted mantle underneath, and the said crust has relatively high density. Such features are amazingly similar to what is expected after impacts. A brief description of the Belt, Williston, Illinois, Michigan, and Hudson Bay Basins of North America shows that these basins fit an impact origin. Two other amazing basins from other continents, the South Caspian and Congo Basins, also described, can readily be explained by large impacts.
To finish reading this technical article from the Journal of Creation, click on "Large cratonic basins likely of impact origin".

Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Forensic Science and Origins

It seems that the most likely place to hear about forensic science is when it relates to law enforcement investigations, but it applies to other areas as well. With advances in science and technology, "cold case" crimes have been solved, and some were decades old. The 1888 Jack the Ripper murders have been "solved" several times, but each conclusion comes up lacking, even with DNA testing. Obviously, forensic science is historical in nature, using evidence that exists in the present to attempt to explain the past.

Forensic science is valuable, but has limitations, especially when a great deal of time has elapsed. Efforts to understand the 1637 Pequot massacre help illustrate forensic science and the study of origins.
Reproduction of John Underhill's 1637 woodcut of assault on fortified Pequot village / PD
The older the scene of investigation, the more sketchy the details become, even with modern methods. Scenes are contaminated in many ways, witnesses become unavailable (or dead, if something happened long enough ago), physical evidence may be lost or tampered with, and more. The massacre of a fortified Pequot village in 1637 has been undergoing investigation in an effort to reconstruct history. There are lessons to be learned not only about historical science, but the lessons and illustrations also apply to the study of origins.
The Pequot War in New England, during 1636–1637, climaxed in a morning firefight at Fort Mystick, in Connecticut. What really happened there? The explosive battle began and ended quickly, with many dead or wounded, some captured (and enslaved)—and many questions linger about who did what, when, where, how, and why.

The historic battle of Fort Mystick involved Puritans, Pequots, Narragansetts, and Mohegans. The site still bears silent witness to the triumphant yet tragic events of that day, providing physical evidence that forensic scientists can analyze for demonstrative clues.

The most extensive [forensic/archeological] work undertaken by the Battlefields Project has involved retracing the fateful events of May 25 and 26, 1637, surrounding the fortified Pequot settlement at Mistick (modern Mystic, Connecticut). When English forces stormed the village’s wooden palisades, it was to be the major turning point in the Pequot War, shifting the balance of power in southern New England permanently in English favor.
To read the rest, click on "Mystick Mystery: Scientists Investigate Connecticut’s Pequot War Battlefield".

Tuesday, September 1, 2015

Trees Leaf Evolutionists Puzzled

Still another puzzler for scum-to-sycamore evolutionists is the origin of trees. Not only is there no fossil evidence of their origin (the Wollemi pine has been pretty much unchanged for alleged millions of years), but trees are intricately engineered.

Still another puzzler for evolutionists is the origin of trees. Not only is there no fossil evidence of their origin, but trees are intricately engineered.
Nantahala National Forest, image credit: US Department of Agriculture
How plants make oxygen during photosynthesis is baffling today, so the origin of that process is even more mysterious to naturalists. Varieties of seed dispersal, the basic structure, the origin of wood — lots of evolutionary conjectures that stem from naturalistic presuppositions, but not from anything factual. Wooden you know, trees were created, not evolved, old son.
There are few things more beautiful and soothing than walking through a forest or grove of trees. Scripture has much to say about these majestic woody perennials, from the “fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind” (Genesis 1:11) to “the tree of life” that will be freely accessible to all believers (Revelation 22:2). A number of tree varieties are cited in the Bible, including cedar, oak, olive, and fig. Creationists maintain that trees have always been trees in all of their majestic beauty and design.

Evolutionists reject the biblical account of origins and must posit a strictly naturalistic origin of everything, from people to plants. Botanists estimate there are at least 60,000 identified tree species in the world, but what was their origin? In tracing the evolution of forest trees, evolutionist Elizabeth Stacy of the University of Hawaii Hilo says, “We know next to nothing about how they got here.”
To get to the root of the article, click on "Trees: An Engineering Wonder".

Monday, August 31, 2015

Rescuing Magnetic Field Speculations of an Old Earth

Earth's magnetic field cannot last for billions of years. Biblical creationists frequently point out this fact, and secular scientists also admit this fact. The evidence shows a young Earth, but that does not fit into the paradigm necessary for evolution to occur, so rescuing devices have been put forward. None have been plausible.

Earth's magnetic field cannot last for billions of years. The evidence shows a young Earth, so rescuing devices have been put forward. None have been plausible.
Image credit: NASA / Goddard Space Flight Center Conceptual Image Lab
Scientific explanations seem plausible on the surface, but deeper examinations show that they are philosophically-based, and the science falls apart.
The simple story for the public: a dynamo creates the Earth’s magnetic field. The real story: complex scenario needed to start it and keep it running.

Science is often like the two-headed Roman god Janus: one face for the insiders, a different face for the outsiders. Geophysicists have locked themselves into an explanation for the Earth’s magnetic field—the only one, in fact, that offers any hope for keeping it going for billions of years. That theory is the geodynamo theory. Since electromagnetic theory is sufficiently abstruse to keep all but certain college graduates able to fathom its intricacies, only a select few are able to see the problems. But since the public understands what a dynamo is if they know enough to say that a hydroelectric power plant turns a turbine that creates electricity, all the outside-facing face of Janus has to do is smile and say, “a dynamo creates the Earth’s magnetic field.” If asked what runs the dynamo, they have a stock answer: “convection in the Earth’s core.” Since everyone has seen water boil, they can feel satisfied with that explanation.

The public deserves better. When journal articles report problems with commonly-assumed notions like the geodynamo, they should hear about it in language they can understand. Here’s an excerpt from a recent paper in Nature by Anke Wohlers and Bernard Wood, followed by a layman’s translation:
To face the excerpt and read the rest of the aricle, click on "What You’re Not Being Told About Earth’s Magnetic Field"

Saturday, August 29, 2015

Podcasts — Michael Boehm Interviews Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Michael Boehm of Youth Apologetics Training interviews Cowboy Bob Sorensen about atheism, logical fallacies, creation science, and more.

As regular readers have probably noticed, I have previously mentioned Michael Boehm and his "Youth Apologetics Training" podcast. However, I had not heard of him until he contacted me through The Question Evolution Project on July 11 of this year. 

My immediate response was suspicion. In the past, I've had atheopaths try to set me up for humiliation on the Web and on Facebook, and I don't reckon arguing with people who hate God, the Bible, Christians, biblical creationists, and me, are a good expenditure of time and intellectual energy. So, I checked. Yes, Mr. Boehm has an extensive catalog of podcasts on many subjects (the older ones were about 15 minutes, often serialized). I gave a tentative "yes", and began listening to his podcasts on evolution.

Seems legit, no heresies found here. Do I disagree with him on some things? You betcha! Thinking people do that, you know. But they were not matters of any great importance. As I listened to his podcasts, I wondered why he needed me. He knows these things quite well. 

The show is "Youth Apologetics Training". I'm not a cool guy by youth standards. (I like to say, "There's a store in the mall called 'Cool and Hip'. They asked me to leave." Actually, don't think I've even been in there.)

My wife had to explain to me that Dr. Evil was doing the Macarena. I am so with it. Indeed.

Mike told me that he thought I had something to offer his listeners. Okay. Besides, the podcast is not loaded with lingo, and definitely doesn't talk down to people. That's good, I think that people want to be talked to, not "related to" in a put-on way. In addition, Boehm's audience includes many people who are not so young, either. I'm part of that throng. Besides, the name of the podcast is going to be changing.

We hit it off quite well, and Mike said that he wanted to record a second part the following week! Low self-image time here. He has interviewed Eric HovindIan Juby, Dr. Jonathan Sarfati, Dr. Charles Jackson, Dr. Donald DeYoung, Dr. Jason Lisle, Sandra Tanner, and many more. Me, I'm a nobody! Well, check that. I'm a nobody in the eyes of the world, just someone who has an online creation science ministry that he does after work and on weekends. But Jesus Christ, God the Son, died for me and has risen from the dead for my sins and yours. The Creator of the universe indwells me; I'm accepted by the one who matters most.

I said that angry atheists use the word "creatard" (or "creotard"). Here's one.

We discussed how atheists are getting more aggressive. (One problem is when they will fill up Amazon with one-star reviews without having read the book, heard the CD, watched the DVD, or whatever. Since Amazon does not bother to keep control of the trolls on their review system, I stopped using it, since it's often worthless.) Atheists will attack Christians (especially creationists), but we can be forewarned and forearmed against their buffaloing bluster.

 A problem with interviews, especially with people who don't do them frequently, is having the train of thought derailed. I wandered off and left some things hanging; hopefully, I'm more consistent with finishing thoughts in my writing. 

Mr. Boehm learned that this ol' cowboy's got a mouth on him, and he ain't afeared ta use it. We had some technical difficulties in the second part, so you'll notice some words getting a bit looooong on my end, but that happens. It's not overly distracting. (The best way to have an interview is with all parties involved in the same recording studio with expensive equipment.) I've heard similar audio oddities in interviews done over the phone.

The links to both parts of the interview are at the bottom. First, I'm giving links to some things that are pertinent to the discussions, (if people want more information). Interestingly, a couple of the articles appeared just before and between our recording sessions that fit right in: "Practical Evangelism: Taking the Roof Off" and "Feedback — Is Atheism a Religion?"

I made a reference to Duke Nukem. So, here you go:

If you still have a mind to, you can hear the interview. Part 1 is here, and Part 2 is here. Let's rock!

Friday, August 28, 2015

Convergent Evolution Through Convergent Illogic

Evolution is given credit for all sorts of changes, big and small, even when it's nowhere near reasonable. It is a puny god of the gaps, hailed with EvolutionDidIt® when there is no reasonable scientific explanation. Its equally inane cousin is what they call "convergent evolution". That is, different critters, plants, whatever, have similar characteristics, even though they are not related to each other. Nice policeman's exit (cop out). 

Evolution of the gaps is bad enough, but "convergent evolution" is a cop-out that avoids the logical conclusion that things were created with similar design features.

I can just imagine how they came up with the concept. Hint: not through logic and science. The logical answer is that things were created with similar design features.

Unfortunately, Darwinistas are "seeing" evolution where it isn't all too frequently. To read some of their proclamations, click on "More Examples of 'Convergent Evolution' Claimed". In a way, they're kind of funny.

Thursday, August 27, 2015

Finke River Troubles Uniformitarian Geology

G'day, Pilgrim. Beginning in the Northern Territory is one of Australia's largest and oldest rivers, the Finke River. But that's a mite misleading, because most of the time, it's not much of a river — except during a flood, then it's impressive. But uniformitarian geologists insist that it carved its way through mountain ranges, and that doesn't make much sense, what with the area being very dry and all.

Australia's Finke River defies old-earth uniformitarian explanations. The Genesis Flood model gives a far more realistic mechanism.
Finke River / Menphrad / Wikimedia Commons
If you plug in the Genesis Flood model, then you'll have a workable (sensible) explanation for the landform without having to explain how the Finke River had enough water to do the job, and with less than "millions of years".
The most remarkable feature here is that the river flows directly through the mountain range, rather than around it as would be expected. This phenomenon provides graphic evidence for the reality of Noah’s Flood, which elegantly explains how it happened. Mainstream geologists, although many of them went to Sunday school and church as kids, do not take the account of Noah’s Flood seriously in their professional work. Consequently they have to come up with fanciful scenarios to explain the impossible: how a mostly-dry, intermittent, river like the Finke could carve its way through high mountain ranges.
. . .

The landscapes of Central Australia are astounding, and provide stunning evidence for the reality of Noah’s Flood. The big issue that throws people off the trail is the dates that are quoted for the different geological events, dates of millions of years. However, not one of the geological features in the area has a label attached stating the date it was formed. All such dates are based on assumptions, by asserting that Noah’s Flood never occurred, and that continent-wide catastrophes never happened. Hence they assume millions of years.
To read the article in context, which also includes some important observations, click on "The Finke River near Hermannsburg, Central Australia, reveals evidence for Noah’s Flood".