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. בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ.

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Standing Firm for Creation Science Despite Opposition

— by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

When running this online creation science ministry, and being in contact with others who stand for biblical creation, we see some pretty vicious stuff from anti-creationists and misotheists. (When I say that I am a biblical creationist, I mean that I believe in a literal six-day recent creation as well as the global Flood, according to what the Bible teaches.) Evolution is a cornerstone for atheism and liberal Christianity (or a word I like to use for liberal religion, “churchianity”), and they detest those of us who will not compromise on what the Bible says.

Several creationist Pages on social media are what I consider "link mills", simply pasting links to creation science articles (sometimes sending them to sites that are, as a whole, opposed to our message even though the specific articles may be adequate). Some of us strive to aim higher, and are very selective in what links we post. In addition, we encourage people to learn how to think critically. When it comes to theological matters, we want to encourage people to think biblically, reasoning from the Scriptures.

I firmly believe that there are two things that prompt people to hate some creation science ministries more than others: The fact that we will put God's written Word first, and that we want people to think logically instead of with their emotions. Those two things are tremendous threats to anti-creationists. There are people who elevate current findings and interpretations of science above the Word of God. Most atheists have naturalistic presuppositions as a starting point to interpret evidence. Biblical creationists stand on the Bible as our starting point, and creation scientists propose models and make calculations based on recent creation. That's what scientist do, they start from their worldviews.

Evolution is crammed down our throats at every turn. It is asserted as unquestioned fact, usually without any contrary evidence offered. We present "our side of the story", and anti-creationists seek us out with vituperative attacks. (Unfortunately, many liberal Christians use the same naturalistic presuppositions as materialistic atheists, and actually side with them in attacking biblical creationists.) Many demand "equal time", but they already have the monopoly on origins information, and are actually seeking to suppress evidence that refutes evolution and affirms recent creation. Sometimes they seek to confuse people who are wanting to learn the creationist view of origins, Flood geology and so on.

Evolutionists have an advantage in that many Christians (along with too many people who have come out of government-run school systems) are unskilled at thinking critically. They will go after Christians with loaded questions, assertions, logical fallacies, ridicule and more (often taken from misotheist sites). Sometimes, they have legitimate questions. Unfortunately, there are Christians have not put much effort into learning how to think critically and to defending the faith. The disadvantages that the anti-creationists have include their own inability to think critically, that atheism is irrational and incoherent, and that evolutionism is loaded with assumptions, false assertions, fallacies and outright fraud. When Christians are actually equipped to challenge atheists and evolutionists, we stop them in their tracks because they are surprised to find people who have done their homework (unlike many atheists and evolutionists).

We try to be polite with atheists, but they detest having their wisdom and worldview challenged. When we stand up to them and show their errors, they resort to emotional reactions and attempts at manipulation. Many will often accuse us of anger, rudeness, dishonesty, stupidity and more when it does not exist. Some even go to various sites around the Web and "tell on us". If they even attempt to offer substantiation for their claims, they resort to selective citing, misquotes and straw men. I have one stalker in particular that spams 40-50 people, mostly creationists, in his efforts to shut down other creationists as well as me. Fortunately, this particular atheopath is not taken seriously by most people. There are some atheists that want to have respectful dialogue, but creationist sites seem to attract the angry types most often.

Like other creationists, it's my job to present accurate information and not to compromise and please people. (Note to some atheists: "Accurate", yes. Because you do not like something or disagree with the interpretations of evidence, that does not make it "inaccurate" or even a "lie".) If someone is angry because I exposed a "creationist" Page for being run by a cult and I lose readers at The Question Evolution Project, I won't lose sleep over it. Similarly, if people dislike our anti-abortion stance and leave, oh well. Theistic evolutionists and OECs (old earth creationists) ridicule us for our lack of compromise. So be it. Creationists are to present the truth and do it biblically, not attempting to please people by trying to make them feel good. Political correctness and coddling are not my primary considerations.

Being in a teaching position and in a ministry is an awesome responsibility. Not only are we going to be under stricter judgment from God, but we care about the people who sincerely, read the material and interact with us; I do not want to give bad information or send them to sites that oppose us. There will be mistakes, we are human after all, and we are trying to grow in both grace and knowledge. 

There are some who will say that we have arrogance because we will not compromise and insist that we are right. They can believe whatever they wish (if someone is going to think evil of you, there is nothing you can do to stop it), but the fact is that Christians have to come to God in humility for salvation, and the truth is in his written Word, the Bible. This includes the truth of creation. Science is very important, but we do not elevate it over God's revealed truth.

The attacks on Christians, and especially creationists, are increasing. Our freedoms are being eroded, including our freedom of speech as well as freedom of religion. Here is an example of an atheist Page that is engaging in criminal activity to harass a Christian that dared oppose their Mighty Atheist Wisdom®:

Used with permission and under Fair Use terms for educational purposes.
I understand that this same Page ridiculed me for saying that atheists' hatred toward Christians can (and has!) become violent. Then they did some cyber stalking and harassment. Are atheists above all laws, or just God's laws? Speaking of laws, I'm told that there is someone involved in police work as an Admin there. Maybe these things are acceptable where he comes from?
"More and more people are having a hatred for Christians . . . People behave in a manner consistent with what they believe. If they believe that Christianity's okay . . . they're going to behave very much differently than someone who believes Christianity is a hate-mongering, filthy religion that needs to be destroyed. People with different belief systems are going to behave in different manners based on the belief system that they have. We behave in a manner consistent with what we believe, not with what we don't believe. I have seen an increase in hostility towards Christianity from all types of groups..."
Matt Slick, "Matt Slick Live", 6-02-2014
Here is an excerpt from Matt's podcast that is very important:

I would normally direct you to the link so you can download the entire podcast, but it has disappeared. So, I took the liberty of uploading the 53 meg hour-long podcast to my cloud storage thing. I strongly urge Christians to download it and begin listening at about the 15 minute 55 seconds mark (you'll skip some technical problems). Click here for the download link.

We received a veiled threat message at The Question Evolution Project, and is somewhat alarming in light of Matt's observations. The screenshot has a big white space, sorry:

Screenshot taken from my Page, but I'm still insisting that Fair Use applies.

To take this a step further, people can lose their jobs for being creationists. One of the most recent instances as I write this is regarding Mark Armitage. He did his job and did it well, but was fired for being a Christian. Dr. Ben Scripture discusses the case, look for the audio series beginning on "8/14/14", click on "Scripture on Creation". Here is a short video:

Things are rough, and going to get rougher. We need to be able to defend the faith with greater fervor and skill, but also remembering that it is not our wisdom that brings someone to a saving knowledge of Christ, but the Holy Spirit. Our job is to make our best effort to share the truth. The best effort is to use and improve our thinking skills so we can present the gospel more effectively, and to be able to reason from (and rely on!) Scripture. Until Christ returns, we must stay faithful to our calling.

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Do Lunar Helium Measurements Threaten Creation Science?

Helium was detected on the moon during solar eclipses. There are claims that helium-3 is too abundant for the young universe models of biblical creationists, but there are problems with these claims. One is that it is rather difficult to actually measure. Another is that there are many assumptions involved. A third problem is that several factors that can lead to an abundance of He-3 are not taken into account by evolutionists, and the amount of helium on the moon is not a problem for creation science.
Helium-3 arises from the radioactive decay of tritium, a ‘heavy’ isotope of hydrogen containing one proton and two neutrons. Through beta decay one of the neutrons in the nuclei emits an electron and is converted into a proton; thus the new atomic nuclei has two protons and one neutron turning an isotope of hydrogen into an isotope of helium (31H → 32He + e). This decay process has a half-life of about 12.3 years. Helium-3 also arises from complex nuclear processes in the sun and the sun’s corona involving interaction between protons, deuterium and alpha particles, and the products can be emitted in relatively high concentrations from powerful solar flare events.3 In the depth of the earth, He-3 may arise from the radioactive decay of lithium-6.
You can read the rest in context by clicking on "Helium-3 capture in lunar regolith and the age of the moon".

Monday, August 25, 2014

Varieties of Evolutonists

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Experiences, observations and material that I have have read brought me to these speculations. With more time, reading and experience, I may adjust some of them later.

Some people will play with semantics, claiming that the word "evolutionist" is something contrived by creationists in an effort to malign proponents of evolution. Their "sources" for such an accusation are anti-creationist sites that simply make the assertion without evidence. The word evolutionist is indeed a valid word that gives a useful description, so I see no need to change my use of it.

Vehement anti-creationists
Having an online ministry brings out people who hate biblical creationists who will seek our Websites, Weblogs, social media areas and so on. They will lash out at us with assertions and ridicule (often calling us "liars" and "science deniers") because we disagree with naturalistic and atheistic interpretations of scientific evidence.

Example of bigotry and intolerance by irrational atheist. Have I just been threatened?
Fair use for educational purposes.

Many of these people are unable to construct a rational discussion, being content to rely on emotional reactions. Some ministries and creationist organizations will simply move on, because we have our work to do and cannot spend time with people who want to be vituperative. My belief is that they want to justify their hatred of and rebellion toward God, and attack the foundations of biblical doctrine. Most of these are atheists, but unfortunately some "religious" people join in.

Theistic evolutionists and Old Earth Creationists (OECs)
These reject the plain reading of Scripture, saying that a "literal" reading is ridiculous. However, creationists are not woodenly literal. We use the historical-grammatical approach like people do every day whether reading the Bible or other things. TEs and OECs insist on adding to the Bible and making it say things that are not there, as well as finding excuses to reject the six-day creation week. Why they join in with atheists in ridiculing those of us who believe the Scriptures as they are written is puzzling, but I suspect it is because they want to look intelligent in the eyes of the world. Ultimately, they deny the authority of the Scriptures that many claim to believe and rely on for their salvation.

Uninformed evolutionists
This heading is not intended to sound insulting or condescending. The fact is, people have evolution shoved down their throats at every turn. Government-run schools misrepresent evidence against evolution and supporting creation or Intelligent Design, use deceptive textbooks, suppress evidence against evolution, or they simply ignore it. They indoctrinate people into evolutionary thinking in this manner. The "good parts" that sound good to the indoctrinated are continually presented. So, what choice do they have except to believe it?

Sometimes they become curious about this creation science stuff that they've heard about and want to learn more. They start to investigate our side of the story, and begin to realize that important information has been withheld; creation science and ID are not the realm of "fundies", and do have scientific evidence.

These people may react with jeers at first, but we hope that they will take the time to read and honestly consider the material. In addition, we want them to see that a materialistic worldview is fatally flawed and self-refuting. Biblical creationists are straightforward about the fact that we use the Bible as our ultimate starting point instead of naturalistic presuppositions, and we want people to not only see that science is on our side, but ultimately to come to salvation through Jesus Christ.

The humanistic worldview is based on rebellion against God, elevating man over his Creator. It is an appeal to pride that goes back to the Garden of Eden, where Satan planted seeds of doubt with Eve, "Did God really say...?" From there, he went to an appeal to pride by insulting God and saying, "Your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God" (see Genesis 3 for the full account). Indeed, Satan was cast out of Heaven because of pride, and he appeals to pride even today to tempt man to reject God.

Evolution is the humanistic (atheistic) way to reject God and the authority of his written Word. It may come through complete atheism, or through compromising religious people. Those of us in creation ministries desire to show that God is the Creator, the Bible is true, science supports creation and biblical young earth models, and ultimately hope that people will come to faith in Jesus Christ.

Saturday, August 23, 2014

Another Neandertal Evolution Theory Turned On Its Ear

Evolutionary scientists had some basic guidelines for determining how to classify humanoid fossils and so forth. (For that matter, the concept that a larger brain meant that the owner was more intelligent was discredited.) Once again, we see that when more information is discovered, we also see that there is a great deal more information to be learned. Adjustments must be made.

Henry Vandyke Carter / PD

One of the criteria to determine if a skull belonged to a Neandertal was the layout of the inner ear — it was unique to them. Or so they thought. Since that same inner ear arrangement has been found in a non-Neandertal, some rethinking has been happening. The lines of biology are more complicated, and archaic humans traveled quite a bit. This may be startling for evolutionists, but it fits in very well with the biblical creationist timeline.
How can you tell a fossilized skull belonged to a Neanderthal? The comparatively large size and prominent brow ridges? Actually — until now at least — paleoanthropologists have looked at a more subtle feature: the shape of the labyrinth in the inner ear. This bony chamber cradles the human body’s balance organ—the semicircular canals—within the temporal bones on each side of the skull. The Neanderthal bony labyrinth differs from that of modern humans and other archaic humans in a suite of subtle but specific ways long deemed diagnostic of Neanderthals. But not anymore!

This discovery has shown some evolutionary anthropologists that their view of human lineages and migratory patterns is oversimplified. According to Washington University paleoanthropologist Erik Trinkhaus, the truth about human relationships and historical geography is much more of a labyrinth than evolutionary anthropologists have imagined.
You can read the rest by clicking on "Human Evolutionary Lineages Teeter on Neanderthal-Style Inner Ear".

Friday, August 22, 2014

Moons Spouting Off About Recent Creation

Are you familiar with the expression, "The same thing only different"? 'Tis a silly phrase and I really don't like it — except when it's useful. It came to mind when reading two articles about two moons orbiting two planets. Many of the events discussed were extremely similar.

Mosaic of Jupiter's moon Io, NASA / JPL / USGS
Ice particles on Saturn's moon Enceladus, NASA / JPL / SSI
Quite often, the solar system does not cooperate with stories given about its formation because of many anomalies; some things just don't work. With these two articles, we have two moons that are recalcitrant. Io (a moon of Jupiter) was rowdy, firing off huge amounts of volcanic material that should have been dissipated long ago according to deep time belief systems. In addition, Saturn's moon Enceladus is shooting ice into space. Enceladus should not be able to do this. In both cases, scientists used an implausible explanation and expect people to believe it, what with them being scientists and all. One very similar "theory", two different moons ejecting different materials. While the activity of these moons is fascinating, it does not cause biblical creationists to come up with ad hoc "explanations".

Here are the two articles, and they will not take you an astronomical amount of time to read them. First, "Solar System Geysers—Each a Fountain of Youth". Second, "Io Volcanoes Go Hyperactive".

Thursday, August 21, 2014

Mendel and Genetic Limits

Some people have the mistaken notion that so-called "microevolution" (small-scale changes in organisms) lead to "macroevolution" (goo-to-you). (Some atheists dishonestly charge that creationists made up those words to deceive people.) Use of these words is discouraged by creationists, as "micro" and "macro" involve change in a different direction.

Federal Republic of Germany, Gregor Mendel, 1984

While Charles Darwin was saying that small changes led to big changes, Gregor Mendel was experimenting with genetics, using peas. Mendel wondered if he could support Lamarckian evolution (a concept that Darwin disliked), and actually refuted it when he discovered the laws of genetics. His work also demonstrated the opposite of Darwin's speculations. Again we see that the Bible is right, things reproduce after its own kind and does not change into something completely different.
One of the “heroes” of evolutionists is Gregor Mendel, a European monk who experimented with plant breeding in the latter half of the 1800s. While his contemporary Charles Darwin specifically tried to replace belief in creation, Mendel claimed he was trying to understand God’s creation. Evolutionists like to quote Mendel’s findings as proof for their beliefs, but in reality he demonstrated the strict limitations of biological change.
Peas read the rest of this article at "The Limits of Variability".

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

You Have Some Nerve!

Critics of creation and Intelligent Design like to come up with certain physiological features and say, "That must be evolution, since it's done so badly. No God did that!" Such remarks are made from their evolutionary biases and not from sound reasoning. Unfortunately, other biased people take these pronouncements and run with them, thinking, "Checkmate, creationists!", but neither Darwin's Cheerleaders nor their mentors know what they're talking about.

Henry Vandyke Carter / PD

What they believe is evidence for evolution is, when examined by knowledgeable people, actually evidence for the Creator after all. Clinton Richard Dawkins made pronouncements that the human eye is poorly designed, and that has been thoroughly discredited. Dawkins, Don Prothero and others make similar foolish claims about the recurrent laryngeal nerve, but they not only misrepresent its functions, but demonstrate lack of knowledge of embryology and anatomy. Or perhaps they are blinded by bias. The truth is, this nerve also shows the work of the Creator.
A common claim by evolutionists is that the mammalian left recurrent laryngeal nerve was poorly designed because it travels downward past the larynx, then around the aorta and, last, back up to the larynx. They reason that a much shorter route directly to the larynx would be far more effective. This analysis concludes that the reasons for the longer route include both developmental and design constraints. Furthermore, the evidence for intelligent design of this arrangement is both obvious and compelling.

Evolutionists commonly claim that the human body is poorly designed, and that this proves it was not intelligently designed, but rather cobbled together by the unintelligent process of evolution. One of the most common examples of poor design cited by evolutionists today is that of the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN), which controls the larynx (voice box) muscles. The claim is often made by Darwinists that evolution is proved because examples of “poor or at least very puzzling design can be accumulated endlessly”, and one of the best examples is
“… the recurrent laryngeal nerve, which connects the brain to the larynx and allows us to speak. In mammals, this nerve avoids the direct route between brain and throat and instead descends into the chest, loops around the aorta near the heart, then returns to the larynx. That makes it seven times longer than it needs to be!”
The main argument is that the laryngeal nerve is poorly designed because it does not take the shortest route to the larynx, a condition also true for many other nerves. Examples include the optic nerves, which do not take the shortest route to the occipital lobe of the brain, but rather cross over at the optic chiasm for what are now known to be very good reasons rooted in optimal design.
I hope you have the nerve to learn the truth. To do so, click on "The left recurrent laryngeal nerve design in mammals is not poor design".