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.

Saturday, November 1, 2014

Radiometric Dating and Reason - Part 2

A month ago, I posted about the most common form of radiometric dating methods. Some scientists are recognizing that these have some serious problems, and have decided to saddle up a different horse. They are proposing a new model called isochron dating. The math looks good, but there are still some major difficulties. These include several assumptions (including an old-earth fudge factor), and yielding results that are not only contradictory, but wildly inaccurate for rocks whose ages are actually known.
The Bible is quite clear about the origin and timeframe for the creation of Earth and the cosmos. If Scripture is inaccurate in this, then how can it be trusted in anything else? Some evolutionists throw out theistic evolution (God using evolution as His creative process) as a philosophical panacea, with the goal of leading people to conclude that Genesis is a myth. Like Nimrod of ancient times, they know they must provide an alternative (i.e., naturalism, specifically scientism—the belief that science alone can render truth about our world and reality) to biblical truth if they are to hold sway over the public in what is essentially a couched rebellion against God.

One of the indirect evidences that evolutionists universally appeal to is radioactive dating because it appears to supply the deep time their evolutionary models demand. But how accurate is their model, and how scientific is their approach?

In this article we’ll look at isochron dating. An isochron is a line on an isotope ratio diagram denoting rock samples. The slope of the line is related to the age of the samples.
You can read the rest by clicking on "The Iconic Isochron: Radioactive Dating, Part 2".

Friday, October 31, 2014

Ants, Evolution and Zombies

The zombie mythology has evolved over the years, especially since popular movies of cannibalistic walking dead people became popular. Older stories are that zombies are dead people who were reanimated through witchcraft, slaves to their master, and could only be set free (or killed, depending on the story) by stuffing their mouths with salt. I don't cotton to zombie stories, but from what I gather, the new version varies, and zombification is pretty much the result of a pathogen. Skip the salt, they need to be shot in the head. Whatever the myth, people were taken over and had no will of their own.

That's similar to evolutionary theory, now that I study on it. People get indoctrinated in the pathogen of evolutionism, and that helps fuel their rebellion against their Creator. Their father down below, who fell because of pride (Isaiah 14.12-14, Ezekiel 28.11-19), controls their wills and encourages this prideful rebellion. We have evolution zombies walking around, spreading their pathogen and causing others to become like they are. Creation science ministries have the cure, and we want to see goo-to-you evolutionism put six feet under where it belongs. But I'm going off on a tangent. 

This post is about creatures who are not supernatural, but act like zombies. No, they don't eat brains. These ants have been taken over by a parasitic fungus and are controlled by it. Amazingly, researchers realized that although the ants were spreading the fungus, the fungus did not cause a full-on zombie outbreak and wipe out ant colonies. If a parasite was that thorough, it couldn't survive. Although the scientists are giving evolution the credit for this destructive behavior, they have no clue as to what went on, or why.

Real life zombies, like those in fiction, must ensure the spread and survival of the parasitic pathogen that creates them. If the parasitic hosts all go extinct, so will the parasites. Thus, through a tactical duel with death, carpenter ant colonies uniformly infected with a zombie-making fungus survive and thrive without succumbing to a zombie apocalypse. The colonies survive even as token members are driven to unnaturally position themselves where their spore-shedding corpses can rain down infectious fungal spores on their former fellows.
I won't ant-tagonize you any more, you can read the rest by clicking on "Zombie Ants and Genesis".

Thursday, October 30, 2014

Faker Alert for Facebook

Someone is interested in giving me a reward. Atheopaths must hate this, they are fulfilling prophesy (Luke 6.22-23). The Question Evolution Project is hated so much of Facebook, there have been some trolling attacks, many from the same guy who is probably using a fake name (see the list of recently banned and reported, it can be made larger where it's posted). Now this tinhorn is drawing down on me. He's using the name of the Page as an individual, and sending messages, "Just wanting to let my fans know my page The Question Evolution Project has been hacked. Can you go unlike it, I'll be making another page shortly". Hacked? My account password is so strong, even I don't know it! I use a password safe to copy it from.

The fake profile, which may be taken down soon. Click for larger.
Not only does he have a fake profile under that name, but also set up at least two fake Question Evolution Project Pages (ours has been there for a few years, has over 3,400 "Likes" at this writing, and also has the words piltdown.superman in the URL). What he seems to have forgotten is that I have this site, which is linked to the Page on Facebook and posts there automatically. That gives good evidence that my Page is not hacked, since this post will automatically go there. And eventually to my Google Plus version as well. EDIT: I forgot the strongest evidence where the real Page is.Click on the Facebook badge in the right-hand column, and you go to the real Page!

Also, he gloated (scroll down, there's a passel of white space in the image):

Actually, I have some other things that bother me. People have been duped and made friends with this faker on just his say-so. Depending on their privacy settings, their personal information and friend lists are at risk. I have it on good authority that this guy has done a number of impersonations as well as troll attacks on other Christian and creationists. Do you think he's going to respect the privacy of Christians who accepted his friend requests? Not hardly! The "Good Without God" gang are willing to threaten Christians (see the article and screenshot here). Please read this article about spotting fakers on Facebook. Let's be blunt: These people are engaging in criminal as well as immoral activities. But this happens when they're under Satan's control (believing they're "freethinkers") and also unable to tolerate the truth of biblical creation science; they want us silenced.

Anyway, I've pretty well demonstrated that the Facebook Page is not hacked, and this guy is a liar. Stay safe, stay vigilant, and have a healthy skepticism. As for me, I'm keeping on in the power of God and remembering that these atheists are building up my treasure in Heaven.

Plant Intranet is Tree-mendous!

Many years of study have been invested in the study of plant communication. Not only with each other, but within themselves. It's like having branch (heh!) offices that communicate on a molecular level. Supplies are low at the fort, so a message is sent to the commander to send more on the next stagecoach. Actually, it resembles a kind of intranet with e-mail (tree mail?), but without spam. 

Assembled from components at Clker.com
Scientists hacked in and blocked the communication, and found out that yes indeed, the communication is not just idle chatter. Although evolutionists give credit for evolution, that is a catch-all claim that cannot be supported, Instead, this shows the work of the Creator and his provision for even "simple" things like plants.
How do roots respond to what the top of the plant experiences? With an elaborate communication system resembling email.
The authors of a paper in Science Magazine don’t use the words email or intranet, but the signaling system they describe fits that description:
To read the rest of the article, get rooted at "Plant Intranet Seen in Action".

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Are Long Ages Essential in Mineral Exploration?

Some people insist that the geologic column and belief in "deep time" are essential for people in geology-related fields to do real science work. I reckon this to be a uniformitarian version of the evolution mantra, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution". Not hardly. Neither assumption is true.

Yes, geologists use the geologic column, with its inaccurate assumptions of long ages, as a means of classification and reference. If they used the Great Flood of Genesis as a reference point, they would be more accurate in their work.
One of the most basic techniques is to observe the rocks in the field and plot the different kinds of rocks on a map. This would be the easiest, cheapest and most fundamental method of geological exploration. We also use magnetic methods, either on the ground or airborne. Other methods include aerial photography, seismic exploration, drill cores, gravity anomalies, and electrical methods. Plus we sample rocks from the surface and from drill cores to analyse their mineral content for resource potential. As you can see, all these techniques depend on making observations and measurements in the present and none of them gives any direct measurement of millions of years.
Read the rest of Tas Walker explanation in "Is the geologic column with its millions of years essential for mineral exploration?"

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

What's With All the Leafy Trees?

Evolutionary scientists are proposing an answer to why we see more trees with leaves than evergreens and so forth. It seems that examination of leaf fossils of the K-T boundary gave them the idea that a meteorite impact 65 or so million years ago was responsible. The resulting climate change caused the extinction of the dinosaurs and also gave the faster-growing seasonal plants an edge in the changing conditions over the slower-growing plants. Also, it was said that survival of the fittest does not apply, and some species had built-in properties that helped them survive. Wait, isn't that what creationists say about adaptation to change?

Found this big boy near my parking space.
The scientists established a series of conjectures about changes in trees that have me stumped. For one thing, catastrophic processes are invoked by the alleged changes of the meteorite impact, and this does not fit uniformitarianism. But then, some evolutionary geologists back off from their dogma and use catastrophe now and then when it's convenient. These scientists downplay some data in their report, and insist that their evolutionary interpretation is the only one, and adhere to their presuppositions. Fact is, their actual data fit biblical creation interpretations based on the Genesis Flood far better than the contrived "explanations" that were offered.
By turning the leaves of time at the K-T boundary, evolutionary scientists report they have found the reason fall is filled with leaves that change color. A University of Arizona team examined what they believe to be 2.2 million years’ worth of fossilized leaves from southern North Dakota’s Hell Creek Formation. “When you hold one of those leaves that is so exquisitely preserved in your hand knowing it's 66 million years old, it's a humbling feeling,” says the research team’s lead author Benjamin Blonder. Blonder and colleagues say their data correlates the evolutionary rise of deciduous trees with the famous meteorite that left the Chicxulub (pronounced cheek’-she-loob) crater near the Yucatan Peninsula.
Don't worry, I won't leaf you hanging. You can read the rest at "Timely Tale Tells Why Leaves Turn, Or Does It?"

Monday, October 27, 2014

DNA Redundancy — Not Really

Once again, we see several things happening at once. DNA is full of surprises, evidence shows the hand of the Creator's work, evolutionary scientists are surprised instead of seeing fulfilled predictions, and so on. As we keep saying, it's a great time to be a creationist, and I reckon it's only going to keep getting better.

DNA studies are showing codes within the code; what was considered a redundancy (maybe like a back-up plan) turns out to have even more function. Evolutionary scientists need a bit more caution and humility before declaring things "junk" or giving them some other write-off because they don't fit into their evolutionary presuppositions.
Discoveries of DNA sequence that contain different languages, each one with multiple purposes, are utterly defying evolutionary predictions. What was once hailed as redundant code is proving to be key in protein production.

Proteins are made of strings of amino acids encoded in the protein-coding regions of genes. A previous discovery demonstrated the same three-sequence series of letters in the DNA that code for an amino acid (called a codon), can also tell specialized proteins that turn on genes (called transcription factors) where to bind to the DNA in the genome. However, a new discovery is attributing even more function to the sequences of codons and overturning a widely held myth about the genome and how it functions.
To read the rest, click on "Dual-Gene Codes Defy Evolution...Again".