Evolutionary Truth by Piltdown Superman

Welcome to the home of "The Question Evolution Project". 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.

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Audio Saturday: Dinosaur Soft Tissue


Some people are not keeping up with science, and yet try to defend evolutionism. When told that soft tissues have been found, some will say that it's a trick by lying creationists trying to get you to believe in a holy God that hates lying (makes perfect sense). Others say that it's just plain wrong, from an outdated study that lying or over-enthusiastic but uninformed creationists are using — you get the idea. Soft tissues should not even exist if they were as old as evolutionists want to believe.  Denial is natural when your evolutionary presuppositions are shown to be radically wrong.

The fact is, there are many reports of soft tissues being found and analyzed. Today's audio feature also has some impressive documentation. Click here to download the audio and see the article.



Friday, May 24, 2013

Penguins, Evolution and Tall Tales

A while ago, I posted an article about the amazing design of penguins' ability to swim. Now there's something even more amazing: Stories about how they evolved. There are claims that the puzzle of penguin evolution are "solved".

stock.xchng/saito 
There is a great deal of conjecture and outright guesswork, but nothing that resembles actual science. It makes much more sense to believe that penguins were actually designed the way they are, instead of making up tall tales to fit evolutionary presuppositions. After all, the fossil record is still a hostile witness to evolution.
Penguins are superb swimmers, well adapted to their Antarctic climate.  They use their wings to “fly” in a different fluid—water, not air.  The sight of a swarm of penguins darting through the water under the ice with speed and grace makes for dramatic film footage.  Most of the major science news sites (e.g., BBC News, National Geographic, Science Now, Nature News, New Scientist) are claiming that the “puzzle” of penguin flightlessness has been “solved” in a new study published in PNAS.  Earlier theories suggested that the lack of predators led to flightlessness, or that evolution had a hard time producing a wing that was good at both flying and swimming.
An international team took a different approach.  They measured the energy demands of flight.  There’s no question that maintaining flight in the air is costly.  Some birds, like cormorants and penguins, are good at both.  But if aerial flight is not required for successful feeding, a bird could focus its wings, feet, and other body parts on just the swimming.
You can read the rest of "The Evolution of Penguins", here.

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Continental Erosion Observations and the Global Flood Model

Tibetan Plateau - Jeff Schmaltz, MODIS Rapid Response Team, NASA/GSFC
Actualist and uniformitarian geologists are having to deal with more and more evidence for the global Flood. Current geology does not adequately explain observational evidence, including the coarse gravel sheets in south-central Asia. Rapid continental erosion and uplifts of mountains fit some creationist models.
Tall erosional remnants indicate rapid, continent-wide erosion, which is consistent with the Retreating Stage of the Flood. While the floodwaters were retreating and eroding the continents, resistant rocks were transported long distances, as has been documented for the United States. A similar pattern of coarse gravel transport is evident in the mountains of south-central Asia. These areas are south of the Himalayas, north of the Tibetan Plateau, all around the Tian Shan Mountains, southwest of the Zagros Mountains, and east of the Tibetan Plateau on the west edge of the Sichuan basin. The character of the coarse gravel shed from the rising south-central Asian mountains is best interpreted within the Retreating Stage of the Flood, which also implies that the Flood/post-Flood boundary is in the very ‘late Cenozoic’ in this area, assuming the uniformitarian timescale.
During the Retreating Stage of the Flood, continents and mountains rose above the floodwaters while the ocean basins and valleys sank, causing the waters to flow off the continents (Psalm 104:6–9). During the Retreating Stage, the runoff first caused sheet erosion as the continents rose, which transformed progressively, starting at higher altitudes first, into channelized flow. The channels were probably relatively wide at first (c. 75 km wide), and by the end of the Flood they were relatively narrow (c. 2 km wide). There is abundant geomorphological evidence for this runoff event, which occurred between Day 150 and 371 of the Flood, but the evidence is very difficult for uniformitarian scientists to explain.
Mounting evidence is increasingly portraying the Retreating Stage of the Flood as a period of continental erosion, so most of the sedimentary rocks left behind were likely deposited during the early part of the Flood, before Day 150.
To finish reading, rock on over to "Retreating Stage formation of gravel sheets in south-central Asia".

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

What About Humans and Dinosaurs Fossilized Together?

Some people will smugly ask, "If dinosaurs and humans lived together, why don't we find their fossils in the same strata?", as if this was a "smoking gun" refutation of Flood geology. Their "Gotcha!" question actually shows how little they know about paleontology (and conveniently ignores evidence that humans and dinosaurs did indeed live at the same time).

Fossilization is actually quite rare. Of the billions of fossils, the overwhelming majority are shallow marine organisms, trees, plants, algae and so on. This is testimony to catastrophic flooding. For actual vertebrates, the percentage of their fossils is one quarter of one percent. When looking for vertebrate fossils that consist of more than one bone, the number shrinks dramatically. Fossils of humans and other mammals are extremely rare.

Further, the question itself is based on a logical fallacy. Remember the saying, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" (or, argument from silence). These scarce fossils would have to be found and then identified. And would evolutionists actually admit to finding them, since it would add another nail in the coffin of the evolutionary worldview?
Dinosaur fossils have been found on every continent on Earth; humans have inhabited, and continue to inhabit, every continent on Earth. Thus, it would seem that if dinosaurs and humans really did live as contemporaries at one time, as creationists contend, human fossils would have been found alongside, near, or in the same strata as dinosaur fossils. So, is there evidence from the fossil record of their coexistence?
Admittedly, at times questions like these appear somewhat puzzling, at least on the surface. We know from the biblical record that dinosaurs and humans coexisted. Furthermore, many ancient paintings, figurines, rock carvings, and historical references confirm they were contemporaries upon the Earth. Still, many wonder why, at first glance, the fossil record seems not to substantiate creationists’ claims that dinosaurs and humans were contemporaries?
You really should read the rest of "Have Dinosaur and Human Fossils Been Found Together?" in context. It makes some excellent points.

Monday, May 20, 2013

Who Owns the Rights to Science?

Count the fallacies!
Also, Twitter "Tweets" are public. They said so.
People have a serious misunderstanding of the nature, origin and purpose of science. It is a method, a tool for acquiring knowledge. The definition of science cannot be determined by science, nor can any of the scientific methods. These definitions are philosophical in nature. When there are arbitrary, self-serving assertions such as, "You must be an atheist to use science", the entire process is misunderstood. Many people cannot differentiate between operational science and historical science. Further, many will equivocate "science" with "evolution", leading to the fabrication that evolution is science and misleading people who do not know the difference. 

Like the silly assertion above, I have had people say that Christians cannot do science because of their worldview. A scientist's belief in creation does not negate his or her ability to perform actual science. One of the most baffling remarks I ever encountered was when I pointed out that there are creationists involved in space missions. The comment was along the lines of, "If I was 200 miles above the Earth, I wouldn't want my fate in the hands of someone who believes in a Bronze Age book". Aside from the bigotry, it was also prejudicial conjecture and a circumstantial ad hominem

Other people have made silly assertions such as, "You hate science, so you have no right to use a computer, which was made by atheists!" Uh, right, Buttercup. Except it's fallacious. And no, we do not hate science, we just will not allow you to equivocate science with evolution.

morgueFile/cohdra

When returning from an appointment with Steve the auto mechanic, I realized that he is a scientist! Think about it. He observes a phenomenon (my "brake" light was on), relies on his training, experience, skills, intelligence and integrity (he could have used his superior knowledge to cheat me, others have done this in the past). He has solved problems for both my wife and me, and even found ways to avoid charging our belabored bank accounts unnecessary amounts. Steve is a Christian, and I do not think he believes in evolution. I do not know for sure. Why? Because his belief in origins does not affect his ability to perform the science of being a mechanic!


Despite the painfully obvious facts, secularists insist that atheism belongs to them, and that Christians are unable to do science stuff. (Atheists even seem to think that
they "own" dinosaurs!) They have a woefully inadequate understanding of science and its history.
Many people today insist that science can only be done by people who have a secular worldview—or at least by those who are willing to leave their religious views at the door as they enter the science lab. Several popular atheists and evolutionists have contended that people who reject the big bang and the evolution of living things are so backward that they cannot even be involved in developing new technologies. But is this really the case, or are these opponents of a biblical worldview simply making assertions that cannot be supported with facts and substantial arguments, having an incorrect understanding of true science?
A friend of the ministry was recently challenged by the comment that science can only be done through a purely secular evolutionary framework. We have decided to publish a response for the sake of teaching. Such statements are blatantly absurd and are a type of arbitrary fallacy called an “ignorant conjecture.” In other words, these people simply do not know the past, nor are they familiar with what science really is.
I fully believe that you would do well to read the rest of "Is Science Secular?"

Saturday, May 18, 2013

One-Minute Video: Dinosaur Death Throes

Occasionally, the one-minute audio bits from CMI have been made into videos after I downloaded them. So, what was going to be "Audio Saturday" is being replaced today (perhaps more often).


Archaeopteryx asphyxiation? Author unknown, fair use
PD/Fair Use
Dinosaur fossils have often been found with the creatures in unusual poses. These are characteristic of asphyxiation. Many fossils reveal that the critters were taken by surprise. Paleontologists are puzzled. Proponents of the Global Flood are not at all surprised.



Friday, May 17, 2013

Dinosaur Tracks Support Creationist Model

For many years, uniformitarian geologists claimed that fossils were formed over long periods of time. Something died, sank, was buried by sediment and so forth, and became a fossil. Some seem to still believe this, but it defies common sense and the most basic observations.


morgueFile/gracey 
One killer for the idea that fossils happen slowly is the very existence of their tracks. Yes, dinosaurs left tracks in mud. And it is apparent that different ones were attempting to deal with flood waters. This supports creationist models for the Noachian Flood.
What's so fascinating about dinosaur tracks? Maybe it's because their many mysteries beg for solutions. For instance, because tracks in mud are so short-lived today, how did dinosaur tracks ever preserve in the first place? Newly described prints bolster biblical creation's explanation of dinosaur footprints. 
Researchers working in China's Sichuan Province recently reported their discovery in the Chinese Science Bulletin. Their article documents several different types of dinosaur trackways, including two theropods (bipedal “lizard-hipped”), one sauropod (long-neck), and four ornithopods (duck-billed) all traveling in the same direction at about the same time.
You can wade over and finish reading, "Dinosaurs Swimming out of Necessity".      

Labels