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, October 1, 2014

Radiometric Dating and Reason


Some people are herded into the corral of "radiometric dating proves an ancient world". A herd mentality may not be such a bad thing if people were believing something that was the result of solid reasoning and good evidence, but the fact is, secular methods of radiometric dating are fundamentally flawed. Not only are there assumptions, but circular reasoning. And the circular reasoning is "validated" by additional circular reasoning. I reckon that the whole process is a wreck. Unfortunately, many Christians have bought into the atheistic conclusions and bad logic. Conditions during the Great Flood of Genesis play a significant factor in fouling up uniformitarian dating methods.
Radioactive dating is a key concept in determining the age of the earth. Many secular scientists use it to dismantle the faith of Christians and cause them to accept uniformitarian assumptions that, in addition to being scientifically erroneous, demand a figurative and distorted interpretation of Genesis. Being knowledgeable about such a widespread dating method is essential for Christians to address opposing arguments and critics. Is radioactive dating valid?
To finish reading, rock on over to "Clocks in Rocks? Radioactive Dating, Part 1". Yes, I'll try to post Part 2 when it's available, hopefully in one month.

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

More Modern Evolutionary Racism


Darwinists try to distance themselves (or even deny) the racism in evolution, although that is well established. So what do evolutionary anthropologists do? Use more racism in their "research". The basic presuppositions are that evolution itself is a fact, and certain ethnic groups are less evolved than white people. In this case, the logic goes further downhill.
A case of scientific racism? An anthropologist studied living Kalahari Bushmen for clues to the evolution of cognition.

Human beings are long, long past any evolutionary stage anthropologists could claim they were going through 400,000 years ago when our ancestors allegedly learned to control fire. (Michael Balter in Nature asserts that date, even though evidence of cooking goes back millions of years in the evolutionary timeline; 6/17/09.) So what are anthropologists doing listening to the campfire stories of living tribesmen to draw inferences about our evolutionary past?
To read the rest of this article, click on "How the Scientist Got His Just-So Story". 

Monday, September 29, 2014

Of Mice, Men and Evolutionary Assumptions


The misnamed "language gene", FOXP2 (forkhead box protein P2), is essential to language development and is a factor in learning. (Since it is found in many creatures, I wonder why Basement Cat doesn't learn not to get under my wife's feet so she won't get stepped on.) Experiments with "humanized" FOXP2 in mice showed some improvement in some tests but not in others. The research helped advance scientific knowledge about how this protein (encoded by the FOXP2 gene) operates.

At this point, we move from observational science into evolutionary presuppositions. The main assumption is that evolution happened, then the assumption that humans and apes diverged from a common ancestor. The difference between humans and chips with this gene is two amino acids. (Interestingly, evolutionists only care about chimpanzees, and ignore the fact that gorillas have the same gene, but gorillas are not "closely related" to humans.) This gene is only three amino acids in difference between humans and mice. Yet somehow, evolutionary scientists are thinking that the gene mutated from the alleged divergence between humans and apes, and we are the fortunate ones. There is no evidence or models for such mutations. Such extrapolations are unjustified and ignore other possible explanations — such as how the Creator designed them that way.
We adults envy the ease with which children can learn new languages. How do they remember what all those words mean and even how to pronounce them? How babies learn to speak is equally amazing and is still not fully understood. Genetically engineered mice now offer a clue to these mysteries. Evolutionists also believe they may explain how humans evolved the gift of gab.

“The Language Gene”
The gene FOXP2 is so clearly related to speech and language that it has been dubbed “the language gene.” FOXP2 is a regulatory gene found in humans and many animals—including primates, mice, birds, and fish. About 700 amino acids long, the protein FOXP2 encodes in humans differs by only two amino acids from that of chimps and by only three from mice. Some animals with defective FOXP2 gene are rendered unable to vocalize properly.

Only humans, of course, have the ability to use language, and FOXP2 is necessary for normal human speech. FOXP2 regulates many other genes, so how do we know this? Several members of a Netherlands family with severe difficulty forming words properly as well as problems putting words together and understanding speech were found in 2001 to have a defective FOXP2 gene. Now mice with a humanized FOXP2 gene have revealed a likely role for FOXP2 in learning to produce and understand the spoken word.
You can read the rest by clicking on "Mouse Memory Enhanced By Humanized 'Language Gene'".

Saturday, September 27, 2014

Evolution and Dumbing Down

The feeling that everyone else on the road is not smart enough to drive is most likely a product of your imagination. And admit it, you've had times where you've done less than spectacular things when tired, distracted or whatever.


There are studies indicating that IQ is indeed dropping (as we've seen before). While taking care of ourselves physically and mentally can help us to some degree, there is no way of staving off the overall genetic decline. This is another indication of the truth of the Bible, that everything is going downhill.
Are we dumber than our grandparents?

Social psychologists are tracking IQ scores and noticed a decline in the last decade after a steady rise since the 1950s. Some wonder if the recent downturn reflects genes that have been eroding all along. Are we evolving stupidity?

The concept of eroding genes—steadily but slowly marred by new slightly harmful mutations that occur every generation—has its proponents and detractors. New Scientist consultant Bob Holmes wrote, “The most controversial explanation is that rising IQ scores have been hiding a decline in our genetic potential.”

Holmes reviewed IQ score trends from Denmark, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Denmark, the UK, and Sweden. They show similarly rapid rises in postwar test results that peaked in the 1990s, and have steady declined since then.
You're clever folks, so you know how to finish the article by clicking on "Are We Evolving Stupidity?
 

Friday, September 26, 2014

"Bad Design" Claim about the Vas Deferens Refuted


Some evolutionists like to justify their beliefs in evolution and natural selection by claiming that a feature (such as the human eye) is the product of "bad design", so EvolutionDidIt. The "carrying away vessel", the vas deferens, of many males is one such feature that people like Richard Dawkins will regard as poorly designed. He made mistakes that someone with his training should not have made, and also went beyond his expertise to say that he could have done better. (Unfortunately, his disciples accept his words and spread them around in their efforts to negate creation science and Intelligent Design.) Dawkins' alternative designs do not withstand examination.

Not only is the vas deferens expertly designed for embryological development, but is efficient from biological, engineering and fluid mechanics viewpoints.
The vas deferens is an important part of the male reproductive system. However, some anti-creationists have recently criticized its route for being too indirect, thus something which no engineer would design. However, anatomists have already given good reasons for this structure, including the increased flexibility of the testes to move toward and way from the body to regulate temperature. Critics have also overlooked engineering considerations, providing enough length to build up power and to mix the essential ingredients of semen, and to avoid ‘ovalling’ (kinking in a soft pipe when bending).
You can read the rest of the article by clicking on "Vas deferens — refuting ‘bad design’ arguments".
 

Thursday, September 25, 2014

Lithium and Other Problems Require Major Cosmology Reconstruction — Again


Secular cosmology keeps needing repairs. Once they think they have something figured out, actual scientific data ruins their ideas. Observations (such as lithium content) are interfering with the Big Bang again, so new stories will need to be made up. If they did not have faulty presuppositions in the beginning, they would not have so many problems, would they? After all, the logical conclusion is that the universe was designed, not a product of an inexplicable explosion. You can read more about some of the new problems by clicking on "Big Bang’s Lithium Problem Gets More Problematic". Also, you can read "Big Bang Fizzles under Lithium Test".
 

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

"Walking" Bichir and Evolutionary Fantasy


Once again, proponents of evolution are conflating "change" and "adaptation" with "evolution", and then extrapolating changes as evidence of microbes-to-microbiologist evolution. Experiments done on bichirs, a fish that can move across land for short distances, produced modifications (you can have them in your aquarium, but watch out that they don't eat your other fish). Great, we have true experimental science in action. 

The assertions about evolution are entirely unwarranted, however. And no evidence of the multitude of changes that evolution would require. Backward assumptions are not evidence, they are fantasy. Unfortunately, proponents of evolution believe such unfounded conjectures to be the evidence that they desire. Another explanation that is conveniently omitted is that this is an example of the ability to adapt that was programmed into the bichir by the Creator.
Could a popular African air-breathing aquarium fish—the bichir—hold the key to mysteries underlying our presumably pre-terrestrial past? These fish aren’t lobe-finned like the ones evolutionists think evolved into terrestrial animals. Nevertheless, University of Ottawa evolutionary biomechanist Emily Standen and her McGill University colleague Hans Larsson decided to raise some bichirs out of water to see what would happen.

The bichir (or “dinosaur eel”) is a ray-finned fish that has both gills and lungs. Lungfish are lobe-finned fish with both gills and lungs. These fish pop their heads above the surface for air to supply or supplement their oxygen needs. Both gills and lungs appear very deep in the fossil record, so evolutionists debate which evolved first. This research focused on walking, however, not breathing.
You can read the rest by clicking on "Fish out of Water Said to Rise, Lift up Their Heads, and Walk".
 

Labels