Welcome to the home of The Question Evolution Project. Presenting information demonstrating that there is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution, and presenting evidence for special creation. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Saturday, April 21, 2018

"Alien Intrusion: Unmasking a Deception" Video Review

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Since the movie project Alien Intrusion: Unmasking a Deception was first announced by Creation Ministries International, I've been chomping at the bit to see it. Unfortunately, I was unable to see the movie in the cinema. Trusting past experience, reviews from various people, having read the book, and so on, I did something that I've never done before: pre-ordered five copies of the DVD. Now that I've seen it, I can tell you that I'm glad I did. (I think my brother just guessed what he's getting for Christmas.) This isn't strictly a review, since I have a few things of my own to add.

"Alien Intrusion: Unmasking a Deception" is now available on video in many areas
Image courtesy of Creation Ministries International
As with the book by Gary Bates, the video of Alien Intrusion required a huge amount of research. There is video footage from past documentaries and interviews, as well as quotes from various books and such. There were some excellent CGI moments as well. The video was equal to, and often surpassed, the quality of secular documentaries I've seen on various subjects.

Maybe you saw John Schneider on television in The Dukes of Hazzard some 35 years ago, or more recently as Superman's stepdad in Smallville. Didn't occur to me that he has a great voice for narration, and he was an excellent choice for Alien Intrusion. Seems to me that some shows can be ruined by having a good narrator do most of the talking, but Schneider was not played out. Other people had their turns at speaking as well. We hear from Gary Bates, CMI scientists like Dr. Robert Carter and Dr. Jonathan Sarfati, UFO researchers, experiencers, and more.

The movie begins with the framework for alien life: the Big Bang. You've probably come across (or even believe yourself) that it's ridiculous to assume that Earth is the only inhabited planet in the universe, and there must be other life out yonder. Such statements are ultimately based on the Big Bang and assumptions stemming from that belief. However, the science behind it is severely lacking. Further, the impetus behind the belief in extraterrestrials is atoms-to-aliens evolution. After all, we "know" that life evolved here, so it must have, by the huge number of worlds based on Big Bang assumptions, evolved elsewhere in the universe. Therefore, aliens.

We are also given an overview of the fascination with aliens presented in various media. People have wondered about the existence of beings on other worlds for a mighty long time, with authors like Jules Verne writing about space travel, H.G. Wells presenting a Martian attack on Earth, and others. With moving pictures, space travel and aliens were prominent in many stories. Seems like things really took off (heh!) during the Cold War. If you study on it a spell, you can see how many of those classic movies from the 1950s were using alien invasions to represent our fears of attacks from the Soviet Union.

If we allow for the sake of discussion that extraterrestrials exist, there are several problems that arise. One is, why would they travel trillions of miles from various places to come here? Also, the logistics of their travel are insurmountable.

Alien Intrusion points out that these alleged aliens keep changing their stories. Imagine:
"We are from Venus."
Sorry, uninhabitable.
"We meant to say, Mars."
"You know about Proxima Centauri b. Nice and close to Earth."
That planet's star gets on the prod and emits solar flares that would destroy all life.
"Our translators are acting up, sorry. We are from the planet you call Kepler-78b".
Rocky, way too hot, and secularists say it shouldn't even be there.
"The Pleiades, then."
Why bother? New Age spiritists "channel" your ilk. Could have saved yourselves a trip.
For that matter, I remember reading some investigative reporting by Frank Edwards on flying saucers. People claimed to have seen entities that fit what was described on old science fiction pulp magazines, popular novels, and movies. After the elongated "grays" became popular, those were the most commonly encountered. No sign of creatures in silver suits and bubble helmets anymore.

Alien Intrusion points out that a high percentage of people believe in Unidentified Flying Objects, and that UFO has become synonymous with alien spacecraft in the minds of many people. (Actually, a UFO is something that is as yet unidentified. Simple, really.) There are also many people who claim to have seen UFOs, had close-up encounters, and even been abducted.

All those people claiming to have had sightings cannot all be hoaxers. Many have strong reputations for being rational and objective. These people have various occupations, locations, philosophies, and so forth, and seem to exhibit little or nothing in common. Can't just write them off, old son. Many are so traumatized, they do not discuss their experiences; you may know some and be unaware of their inner torments. The Christian church should be the first place of counsel and refuge, but most Christians are uninformed about such things, so experiencers seek solace in their own support groups. These groups can lead to deception.

I'll allow that many aspects of seem implausible, and the movie points out that many encounters cannot be scientifically investigated. Some people claim to have been levitated, taken through ceilings and walls, even making journeys to other worlds. They believe such things have happened, and exhibit psychological reactions. Can't very well investigate such things, though.

Not all of the sightings themselves be rejected as errors, since they are documented in many ways. Indeed, some US government officials have gone on record that some sightings were covered up. (Sorry, the "Roswell Incident" has a prosaic explanation, although it was shrouded in secrecy.) Since most UFO reports — including those from indisputable, authentic sources — describe them defying the laws of physics, it has been suggested that they are not extraterrestrial, but transdimensional. That is, from a parallel universe. Although parallel universes are frequently referenced in Big Bang secular cosmogony, there are some people who present the view that spiritual entities (such as angels and demons) are transdimensional as well. This transdimensional aspect may tie in with the reports of people moving through solid objects with their abductors, but I'm just speculating.

The movie also makes a strong case for something that has been postulated by several people. Namely, that UFOlogy and alien experiences have become a de facto religion. The earlier question about why they supposedly came such long distances and changing their stories about their origins (and having various appearances at first) also applies to what they have to say. Alien encounters are a major part of New Age religions (do a search on "channeling aliens"). What do they say? Each is an ancient alien race that is more highly evolved and wants to help us evolve as well. They want to bring us a new religion as a part of humanity's spiritual evolution, so throw away that dusty old Bible you haven't been reading or believing anyway. Various people are told by aliens that they have been chosen to bring forward a new religion.

Consider that through the ages, there have been beings of various sorts in many cultures, whether Celtic, Native American, or from other places. They are distractions from the truth. Let's cowboy up and face it: Satan will use whatever means to redirect people away from the truth of the gospel. He doesn't care if you're into cults, atheism, evolutionism, the occult, UFOlogy, liberal theology, politics, or whatever.

Alien Intrusion: Unmasking a Deception makes a very strong case that extraterrestrials are, in fact, demonic and not physical beings. For example, when Bible-believing Christians are being harassed, they call upon the name of Jesus and the abductions stop. Some "aliens" even exhibit fear of Jesus. Why should physical beings from very far away care about what they consider a religious figure? Because they know he is the Creator, God in the flesh, our Redeemer. That is the deception that this movie unmasks, and it makes a very compelling case. 

People who knew me long ago would be surprised at what I've said here and over the past few years, because I used to believe that aliens existed. My views were inconsistent, because I also rejected evolution, and believed aliens were created. Then I got both my science and theology in order. But I still watch and read science fiction, suspending my disbelief.

There is a strong gospel message that is strongly presented at the end. This involves biblical passages, some theology, and testimonies of researchers and experiencers. Unfortunately, the church as a whole has dropped the ball in this area, as there are many traumatized and hurting people who can be helped but are forgotten (or unknown in the first place). People who are not believers can be made aware of the truth of Scripture and how they can be delivered from spiritual oppression, whether from demons pretending to be extraterrestrials, or others.

I do have one minor problem. The movie seemed to be ending about three times before it actually concluded. This was probably because of what I anticipated from other documentaries, where the narrator has the last word. So, wait for the credits.

Y'all knew from the onset that I liked this movie. I am hoping that you will see it and even use it as an educational and outreach tool.

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Friday, April 20, 2018

Archaeopteryx and Pterosaurs Together

In our last exciting episode, we saw how modern bird fossils have been found in places that frustrate minerals-to-mallard evolutionists. There are additional developments in paleontology that make matters worse for their fundamentally flawed worldview.

Research shows that pterosaurs and Archaeopteryx flew at the same time

It seems that pterosaurs were doing right well until they were't. That is, they did not just decline gradually, but they appear to have pretty much stopped suddenly. Secularists try to use the asteroid impact extinction story (where all sorts of other critters inexplicably survived while others wound up taking a dirt nap). There's no evidence for this sudden demise, however, just speculation. A recent discovery in a phosphate mining area showed a pterosaur with a wingspan the size of "a small plane", about nine meters (30 feet). That bad boy would spook the horses something fierce! Wouldn't have made the cowboys comfortable, either.


In the same time scheme (according to Darwin years, that is), pterosaurs and Archaeopteryx lived at the same time. (I'll call him Archie, since I can't spell Archaeopteryx.) Biblical creationists have been pointing out for decades that Archie was a true bird, and not a transitional form between dinosaurs and birds like Darwin's disciples claim. Secular scientists have agreed that Archie was a true, ancient bird, and it was capable of powered flight. Oh, sure, some still cling like a crazy ex-girlfriend to the transitional form notion, and others claim that creationists are trying to "deliberately mislead Christians about this creature" when we present evidence, but they cannot change reality: birds and dinosaurs were created separately — and recently.

To read about these flying things, click on "Pterosaurs and Birds Flew Together".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Thursday, April 19, 2018

Modern Bird Fossils Fluster Darwinists

Although evolutionists try to deny it, modern-type bird fossils are found in the Cretaceous layer

Fossils that are not found in the established order put burrs under the saddles of evolutionary paleontologists. Darwin set the stage for modern evolutionism, where organisms go from simple to complex in gradual progressions. The fossil record does not show this.

Modern-type birds are not supposed to be found in the Cretaceous, and when biblical creationists point out that such fossils are indeed found there, Darwinoids scoff. They say we're misrepresenting the facts, uninformed, or even liars. (Yeah, that makes sense! Lying to convince people about the holy God the Creator and his written Word, the God who hates lies, and we do that — absurd on the face of it.) How about honestly examining the biblical creationist material?


However, creationists are accurately using the material of evolutionists against them, and showing that their interpretations of the evidence are wrong. Although your typical village Darwin bot may appeal to outdated, biased material in Wikipedia or an atheistic propaganda clearinghouse, he or she will not change reality. Fact is, Earth is young, and evolution in the Darwinian sense never happened, old son. The fossils do not support materialistic worldviews.
Since at least 2009, when Dr. Carl Werner published Living Fossils the second volume of his Evolution: The Grand Experiment series, creation researchers have used the argument that modern-type birds have been found in the same Cretaceous layers with dinosaurs. Dr. Werner cited several examples from paleontological literature in his book, and there have been additional papers written more recently which also made similar claims (a few of which will be examined). But a recent tactic has been to denounce creationist claims along these lines, or to claim that these examples are erroneous or misrepresented. This article will examine some secular paleontological literature and put forth a case to rebut the claim that there are no examples of modern-type birds found in Cretaceous rock layers.
Don't get all a-twitter, you can finish reading the article by perching on "Modern Birds in the Cretaceous?"

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Wednesday, April 18, 2018

The Planet that Should not be There

Seems like the goal of the secular science industry is not to learn and interpret data, but to make naturalistic pronouncements. This may play well with atheists and other owlhoots advocating long ages, but discoveries should be teaching them a bit of humility. Not happening, Hoss.

Kepler-78b should not exist because it frustrates secular cosmologists and materialistic planetary formation ideas
Artist's conception of Kepler-78b, credit: Wikimedia Commons / Hemsley Jenkins (CC BY-SA 3.0)
Here, we'll look at space exploration. Regular readers of this site (and the linked sites as well) have seen numerous items that have startled or shocked secular astronomers and cosmologists because they exhibit signs of youth, not an ancient universe. This is primarily because these scientists are operating from naturalistic presuppositions, denying the Creator who made everything much more recently than is dreamt of of in their philosophies.


Also, planets both in our solar system and outside (known as exoplanets) get cosmic evolutionists on the prod because they are in defiance of planetary formation concepts. Kepler-78b "shouldn't exist", but there it is anyway. Not much of a vacation spot, though. Hot, rocky, in the "wrong" place...ever notice they they still haven't found anything remotely possible of habitability?
. . . scientists today repeatedly encounter evidence that thwarts theories of evolutionary origins and long-age timelines. An example is the exoplanet Kepler-78b, about 20% larger than Earth and weighing twice as much, recently discovered in the constellation Cygnus. Its discovery is so confronting to planetary formation theories that a media release by the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) proclaimed, “Kepler-78b is a planet that shouldn’t exist.”
To read the rest of this short article, click on "Kepler-78b: The “scorching lava world” that 'shouldn’t exist'". For a similar article, click here.

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Tuesday, April 17, 2018

Praying Mantis Vision Opposes Evolution

Humans and several critters have what is called stereo vision, which gives us the ability to ascertain depth, distance, and so forth. Such vision is not all that uncommon, but you would not expect to realize that the praying mantis is the only insect known to have this ability.

3-D vision in the praying mantis flusters evolutionists and affirms special creation
Credit: RGBstock / David Abernethy
Sight itself is an intricate process. Light is received by the eye, then the brain processes the information so that the organism can make sense of it, often in a hurry. (Ever see a horse shy away from a rattlesnake that it saw but the rider didn't?) 3-D vision is even more complicated. It alone is in opposition to molecules-to-mantis evolution, but to be found in an insect is further evidence of the Master Engineer's craftsmanship. The research on these critters is rather fascinating, and I found it a bit amusing as well.
In the animal kingdom, many types of creatures use stereo vision to determine the distances between them and visible objects. In humans, each of our eyes records a slightly different version of what is observed. These two different views are then accurately merged in our brains to produce a single image—computationally using the differences between the two images to allow us to visually gauge depth and distance. This process, referred to as stereo vision, isn’t unique to humans. Animals like monkeys, dogs, bats, cats, and horses also use it.

Interestingly, in the vast world of insects, the only creature to have stereo vision is the praying mantis. This is a big conundrum to evolutionists because all other types of insects have eyes on the sides of their heads—a visual set-up which requires a completely different type of neurological processing system.
To read the rest, click on "3-D Praying Mantis Vision Confounds Evolution".


Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Monday, April 16, 2018

Evolutionists Get Away with Saying Ridiculous Things

We expect Darwin bots to say ridiculous things on forums, social media, and so forth. They often do not understand their own mythology or the workings of science. Ironically, biblical creationists often need to correct them. When trained scientists jump the corral fence and go running off into fantasy lands, that is a bit more concerning.

The secular science industry media let materialistic nonsense go unchallenged

Darwin's Flying Monkeys© in the secular science media ignore their journalistic duties, allowing plenty of piffle to remain unchallenged. After all, they're promoting materialism and denying the Creator. Sharing a secular presuppositions somehow makes these things acceptable. You don't have to be a scientist to spot nonsense. Unfortunately, people in general are not skilled in critical thinking, and accept what "scientists say" as truth. Of course, they'll change their minds later on so many things...


David Coppedge rounded up some of these items: Stephen Hawking knew what happened before the fictitious Big Bang, Michio Kaku knows what space aliens would look like, we evolved so that we sleep less than apes, so we're prone to get Alzheimer’s Disease (this is evolutionary teleology, which contradicts alleged evolutionary processes), and more.

To read about these items, click on "Media Give Absurdity a Pass If It Is Materialistic". For a related item, see "Most Common Phrase in Evolution Media: 'Earlier Than Thought'". One more, if'n y'all don't mind: "Unchallenged Darwinism Produces Sloppy Science".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Saturday, April 14, 2018

Esoteric Evolutionism Eliminates Science

Evolution itself is not the invention of Charles Darwin, but instead, is an ancient pantheistic religion that Darwin got all gussied up and put forward as science. His ideas have been adjusted for over 150 years because they do not work. As we have seen in several recent posts, Darwin's disciples are becoming increasingly unscientific and mystical in their pseudoscience.

Evolutionists are conjuring up weird ideas about religious consciousness
Credit: Pixabay / arturo_ngeek
Natural selection is not understood by evolutionists, and some are putting forward a version that is loaded with mystical overtones. Evolutionists conjure up forces as unscientific rescuing devices to cover the failures of scientists' conjectures. There are more, but let's take a gander at some really fun stuff. Fun, if you're into weirdness masquerading as science.

Secularists cannot account for the origin of life (often trying to distance themselves from it, dishonestly claiming it has "nothing to do with evolution"). Nor can they account for consciousness (or the soul) itself, although they try to find the source of it in the brain. 

Now scientists are showing their desperation to avoid the Creator's truth by invoking something similar to "The Force", New Age religious notions, or maybe some American Indians' Manitou religion where everything has some degree of consciousness. What are Darwin's handmaidens smoking, anyway? The idea has no science, and is entirely based on blind faith. 

In addition, evolutionary thinking has not only hindered real science over the years, this kind of strangeness hollers "Whoa!" to science itself! Atheists and evolutionists arbitrarily define science as naturalism, and even if the logical conclusion is that the Master Engineer designed an organism (or that Darwin was wrong from the get-go), it is not science by their assertions. See how that works? It's who they are, and how they hijack science.
Evolutionary secularists often fancy themselves as hard-nosed empiricists who are immune to the allures of “magical” thinking. However, as the inadequacies of materialistic naturalism become more and more obvious, we shouldn’t be surprised to see them embracing mystical ideas—a trend noted by ICR founder Dr. Henry M. Morris more than 30 years ago.

The origin of life and the origin of consciousness are arguably the two most difficult things for evolutionists to explain. They must insist that life somehow came from non-living chemicals even though there is zero experimental evidence for this.
To read the rest, migrate yourself over to "Evolutionary Mysticism and the End of Science".


Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Friday, April 13, 2018

Dinosaur Soft Tissues and the Age of the Earth

Evolutionists and religious compromisers make rescuing devices for the implications of dinosaur soft tissues

One of the biggest issues that gets proponents of universal common ancestor evolution and other old earth advocates on the prod is dinosaur soft tissues. Although soft tissues and such have been found previously, the work of Mary Schweitzer and microscopist Mark Armitage analyzing dinosaur blood and soft tissues really brought the subjects into prominence.

Some evolutionists try to deny it, even saying that biblical creationists were misrepresenting the discoveries or outright lying. But the subject simply will not go away. Some of us won't let it. So, secularists and their religious useful idiots keep the excuse mill at the Darwin Ranch running at full steam.

Compromiser Dr. Hugh Ross has a kind of cult following and some strange beliefs. He has an associate, Dr. Fazele Rana, who has written a book that is a thinly-veiled attack on biblical creation science. It may seem convincing, but Rana did poor research (none of it with the tissues in question under a microscope). He also blatantly misrepresented important facts and ignored others in his quest to manufacture rescuing devices to explain away the implications of dinosaur soft tissues: they were created recently, and did not live millions of years ago.
Soft sheets of fibrillar bone and stunningly preserved osteocytes recovered from a Triceratops horn at Hell Creek, Montana, cannot be explained by the interpretations tendered by Dr Fazale Rana in his book Dinosaur Blood and the Age of the Earth. Rana’s obvious misunderstanding and mischaracterization of the Triceratops horn soft tissues are examined and corrected herein. Simply parroting the talking points of evolutionary scientists on dinosaur soft cells does not explain their presence, therefore careful work must be done to explain them.
To read the rest, click on "Utterly preserved cells are not remnants—a critique of Dinosaur Blood and the Age of the Earth". You may also want to see "The Mark Armitage Legal Victory and a Clarion Call for Laity to Carry the Torch in the Creation-Evolution Controversy".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Thursday, April 12, 2018

Mystical Natural Selection Tour

Although evolution through natural selection alone has been largely rejected, drummers for Darwin continue to claim it is essential. A spell back, we looked at how evolutionists were trying to predict a natural process and instead supported the Stuff Happens Law. Some other jaspers also inadvertently supported the Stuff Happens Law by claiming that it's not "fitness" that leads to survival, but just plain luck (see "Natural Selection? No – Sheer Dumb Luck"). Seems like evolutionists are appealing to luck with greater frequency. Mayhaps they're inspired by Clinton Richard Dawkins and his Mount Improbable foolishness. Keep reading, things are getting stranger.

Evolutionists are confused about natural selection and evolution. Now there's a move to make a mystical version of natural selection.
Generated at RedKid.net
Some of the problems evolutionary scientists are having could have a simple explanation: they are unclear on the concept of natural selection. For that matter, scientists disagree on evolution (often attributing variations and minor changes to their blind, mad, gibbering god). It is an all-purpose tool used to explain practically anything in nature, behavior, and so on. Evolution gets too much credit, but it actually does not explain anything well at all.


W. Ford Doolittle and Andrew Inkpen conjured up a new concept of natural selection that gets downright mystical. "It's the song, not the singer" — The process of evolution is of primary importance, and they base it on the nitrogen cycle, with hints of the false goddess Gaia. Sorry, folks, but Darwin was wrong, and so are his protegees. We were created in God's image. That's why evolutionary scientists are confused by things that just don't work.

To read about this stuff, there are two articles submitted for your amazement. First, "Darwinians Cannot Agree on What Natural Selection Is". The follow-up is "New Version of Natural Selection Goes Mystical".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Wednesday, April 11, 2018

Weeds are Surprisingly Important

A plant is considered a weed partly because it came along and asserted itself without so much as a "by your leave", interfering with the plants that are being cultivated for beauty or food. Persistent, resilient, and with a habit of taking over if left unchecked, weeds are actually doing what the Master Engineer intended.

Things we consider weeds are actually a part of the Master Engineer's plan
Credit: Unsplash / James Lee
If you step back and study on it a spell, you'll see that weeds serve a purpose. We prefer it when they serve their purpose somewhere else. They actually anchor the soil so it doesn't all erode away after construction, for one thing. Also, the lowly dandelion is highly nutritious — all of it, so you can cook up some dandelion greens. Some things considered weeds have medicinal value as well. Don't be getting a notion to be eating or medicating with things you don't know, however. 

Remember the post about how the volcanic island of Surtsey and other newcomers are coming along quite well? Some of the first plants to help the ecosystem develop were what we consider weeds. Also, they would have been instrumental in stabilizing growth on Earth after the Genesis Flood. While we don't have to like weeds, we can appreciate the Creator's reasons for making them.
What is a weed? According to Merriam-Webster, a weed is “a plant that is not valued where it is growing and is usually of vigorous growth.” Put simply, weeds are unwanted plants with too much personality.

I have a love-hate relationship with weeds, especially crabgrass. As an avid gardener, this fearless plant was once my sworn enemy. I’m sure it has singlehandedly sabotaged the careers of more than a few horticulturalists. Not many plants can lay siege to a flowerbed or a row of lettuce with such unrelenting tenacity! But careful observation of God’s world reveals that even crabgrass is designed for a purpose.
To read the rest, click on "Why Did God Make Weeds?" You may also want to check out "Plant Disperal After the Genesis Flood".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Tuesday, April 10, 2018

Engineered Adaptability or Intangible Evolutionary Forces?

We have been seeing how Darwin's followers have been appealing to ad hoc stories, unscientific and illogical hypotheses, incompetent evosplaining, and even animism to keep their pantheistic worldview intact. They even resort to evolutionary teleology, which is contradictory to their belief system. I reckon that they know their beliefs are not supported by science, and are simply the product of desperate, blind faith. They are also determined to find excuses to deny their Creator at almost any means available.

The Master Engineer designed organisms to adapt
Credit: Pixabay / Christian Reil (slightly modified)
In the Engineered Adaptability series, we have seen that Darwin believed in external influences to cause evolution. This idea is not tenable, though evolutionists persist in continuing to ride that owlhoot trail. Instead, evidence shows that organisms have been engineered to adapt to conditions, instead of having conditions force them to evolve. 

Naturalistic scientists are further increasing their mystical views in natural selection (I'll get to that in a later post), and appealing to external "selection pressures" as well as the fact-free concept of "convergent evolution". 

It is interesting that evolutionists insist on the "fact" of minerals-to-minerologist evolution, but when something is found in nature that has been deemed extinct for millions of Darwin years, then found alive and virtually unchanged from the its fossil record counterpart, it was "stasis". That is, it did not have to change. That means for all that alleged time, there were no environmental "pressures", no genetic changes, nothing happened because it wasn't needed. Yeah, that's "science", old son, and it covers everything but explains nothing.

In reality, the sans science, sans facts, sans reality rescuing devices deny the evidence. The evidence shows that the Master Engineer designed organisms to adapt. But they were not designed to change into something completely different.
Darwin’s followers appear to be comfortable embracing totally contradictory explanations for the same thing. When diverse groups of organisms share nearly identical traits, evolutionists see that as solid evidence of descent from a common ancestor. But when similar traits can’t be due to common descent, they see it as equally solid evidence for evolution. This is called “doublethink” in George Orwell’s classic novel 1984, which features a fictional totalitarian regime that cunningly uses misnomers or deceptive redefinitions as a means of thought control.

You have to pay close attention to disentangle evolutionary “doublethink.” The fact that many organisms share highly similar, non-inherited traits is actually strong evidence against evolution, pointing instead to the information underlying common design. So, evolutionists invented convergent evolution, a mental construct devised to rescue their theory from conflicting observations. For example, they claim the echolocation ability shared by some bats and whales somehow evolved convergently through identical genetic changes in both groups.
To read the rest of this very interesting article, click on "Engineered Adaptability: Active Environmental Tracking Explains Similar Features". You may also want to see a closely related post, "Sensors Engineered in Living Things".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Monday, April 9, 2018

Language Study Supports Biblical Timeline

There is turmoil again at the Darwin Ranch, and they are not happy. This seems to be a frequent occurrence. The Dravidian language in the south part of India is mighty old, and the root of the language tree is evidence that humanity has not been around nearly as long as evolutionists want to believe.

A study of Dravidian langauges in India supports the biblical timeline and troubles evolutionists
Credit: Freeimages / miette-1
If you find yourself down India way, you'll find that there is no single "Indian" language, but Hindi is the most prevalent. The Dravidian languages have fewer people speaking them, but there are still quite a few people who use them.

A study showed that Dravidians were in India long before other people groups migrated there, and their presence is supported by history and archaeology. This fouls up the evolutionary timeline, as Darwinists have humans evolving quite a long time ago, but they have an irrational dry spell of humans doing nothing for most of that time. Such a silly idea defies human nature.

What really puts a burr under the saddles of evolutionists is that this more recent dating of language fits the biblical timeline. Remember hearing about the confusion of languages at the Tower of Babel, after the Genesis Flood? It's not just a story, it really happened. This is yet another confirmation of the accuracy of the Bible, and of recent creation — even if it was inadvertent.
If modern humans left Africa 185,000 years ago or more, why does the oldest language in India date back less than 3% of that time?

How old is the oldest human language? It’s tough to say. Using linguistic analysis and statistics, scientists from the Max Planck Institute have estimated the date of the Dravidian family of languages on the southern parts of India at 4,500 years old. Phys.org reports that Dravidians were present a thousand years before Indo-Aryans arrived in India. 80 derived dialects of the ancient language family are still spoken today by some 220 million people.
To read the rest, click on "Oldest Language in India Only 4,500 Years Old".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Saturday, April 7, 2018

No Chance for Naturalistic Origin of Life — Part 2

In a previous exciting installment, we examined how abiogenesis (life arising from non-life) has serious problems from the get-go. If you have ever read or watched science fiction, you may have encountered reorganization or relocation scenarios. That is, put the story on a distant planet, or in the far future where Earth was mostly destroyed by a war or other catastrophe. Seems like Darwin's lab-coated disciples do this in reverse for their tales: since conditions on Earth make abiogenesis impossible, go back in time and imagine a different world so that life could spontaneously form.

Evolutionists are continuing to come up with outlandish scenarios for the origin of life.
Credit: Unsplash / Lucas Vasques
Under scrutiny, we see that life requires water and oxygen. However, water is a serious impediment in the spontaneous formation of those nucleotides that are necessary for the formation of life. Some riders of the owlhoot trail are attempting to deny the Creator's work by suggesting that life formed in formamide. (Careful, I though the world was "formaldehyde" at first.) Never mind that formamide is not naturally plentiful on Earth, and is toxic to cells. Then these pseudo-scientists suggested that maybe perhaps sometime it could be radiation made life evolve in those conditions.

In the previous post linked up topside, the atmosphere was discussed. Even though geologic evidence reveals that our atmosphere has been pretty much the same throughout Earth's history, evolutionists imagine a different scenario and build their speculations on it anyway.


Like a desperate movie producer, they throw in some attention-grabbing items. How about asteroids? Yeah, and we can zap stuff with lasers, pretending we're simulating conditions on Earth back then just after the asteroids hit! Nothing useful was found, however, and they proceeded to collect grant money that came from taxpayers. This is modern science, old son: storytelling without evidence, logic, or even science. Hail Darwin, blessed be! Oh, please.
In addition to original research and data analysis on important themes in the origins debate, ICR scientists also evaluate the progress of secular research reported in many scientific publications. One of the fruits of this research was noted in last month’s Acts & Facts Impact article on the topic of abiogenesis—the supposed development of life from non-life. It reviewed the history of research on the origin of life and showed how utterly futile the evolutionary explanations of the alleged naturalistic beginnings of life really are. The article wasn’t able to include all the important recent scientific publications on the topic, so we’ll cover some of those here.
This is very interesting, and to finish reading, click on "Abiogenesis: Water and Oxygen Problems".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Friday, April 6, 2018

Impact Craters and the Genesis Flood

We see impact craters on the moon, Mars, Mercury, and a few on Earth. Not much of a view of Venus because of its dreadful atmosphere and conditions, and not much to smack into in the gas giants. Their moons have some. Oh, and Pluto. Can't forget that one. Creationary scientists as well as those of the secular persuasion are trying to understand why so few are seen here, but the "Late Heavy Bombardment" myth is being put out to pasture.

There are far fewer impact craters on Earth than on other planets
Crater Lake image credit: Freeimages / John Vician
Some creationists propose that there were two bombardments, one at creation, and another at the time of the Genesis Flood. Our focus is on the latter, and much of the information about craters and basis is gained from examining the moon. To determine this particular model, the dynamics of velocity, size, composition of asteroids and such have to be considered. Then, factor in what happens when an impact is made and a crater or basin is formed.

Obviously, biblical creationists reject radiometric dating and deep time that are axioms for secular scientists. Impacts may have been one of the trigger events to open up the fountains of the great deep (Gen. 7:11). At any rate, during the Flood, there would have been less scarring of the earth's surface, and geological activity would have erased many of the signs of the impacts. Here, let's take a look at the article:
The moon is the standard by which to estimate the number of craters on the earth. The number of craters greater than 30 km by evolutionary age categories is about 1,900. Scaling to the earth and considering the greater gravitational cross section results in 36,000 craters greater than 30 km. Based on very larger craters on the moon and Mars and the size frequency distribution on the moon extrapolated to the earth, about 100 craters greater than 1,000 km in diameter and a few up to 4,000 to 5,000 km in diameter should have occurred on Earth. This tremendous bombardment must have occurred very early in the Flood, tailing off during the rest of the Flood with a few post-Flood impacts. Such a bombardment would be adequate to initiate the Flood. The evidence for such an impact bombardment very likely can be found in the Precambrian igneous rocks and suggests that the Precambrian is early Flood.
To read the rest of this impactful article about a new model-in-process, click on "How many impact craters should there be on the earth?"

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Thursday, April 5, 2018

Upside-Down Armored Dinosaurs

Sometimes I get to cognating that perhaps ignoring pertinent information and doing incomplete work are included in the criteria for being an evolutionary biologist. Read back several posts, and you will find several egregious examples of these things.

Ankylosaur fossils are usually found upside-down
Rock strata image before my tampering by Jebulon at Wikimedia Commons
In this instance, we have the ankylosaur fossils. You wouldn't cotton to having one of those beasties coming your way and making you think it's an M1A3 Abrams tank or something. So, why is it that most of their fossils are found upside down?

Remember, we have fossils to work with, plus some evolution-defying soft tissues now and then. But no living specimens to weigh, measure, and otherwise examine. That doesn't stop some devotees of Hanuman the monkey god from offering praise to Darwin and presenting incomplete conjecture. One idea is the "bloat and float" concept. They drowned, bloated, inverted, got carried around by the water until the carcasses beached, then they fossilized. Not hardly!

Numerous inconvenient facts were ignored, including other fossilized critters of similar size, how armored dinosaurs did not seem to be frequenting oceans, lakes, and rivers, and how they were found fossilized in their inverted positions on several continents. 

The ankylosaurs would have been quite heavy, so what moved them? The clearest explanation that secularists dismiss out of hand is the Genesis Flood. Ever see motor vehicles swept away in videos of local floods? The Genesis Flood was far more powerful, so moving armored dinosaurs is entirely plausible. In addition, the Flood would have done the rapid burial needed for fossilization. The ridiculous bloat and float story should not have seen the light of day without actual scientific research and consideration.
Why are 81% of ankylosaur fossils found belly up? With clever storytelling, you can accommodate this to evolution’s long ages.

Paleontologists since the 1930s have wondered why ankylosaurs (heavily-armored dinosaurs) are usually found buried in an upside-down position. It’s been a common anecdote among fossil hunters, so the Canadian Museum of Nature decided to investigate. A paleontologist with the museum, Dr Jordan Mallon, counted 26 of 32 known ankylosaurs—over 80%—that were reported found fossilized on their backs. He considered possible reasons:
To finish reading, click on "Most Armored Dinosaurs Found Upside Down". For a similar article with some additional information, click on "Genesis Flood Explains Bloat-and-Float Dinosaurs".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Wednesday, April 4, 2018

Our Stable Sun

No, I do not mean that Junior is cleaning up after the horses. Stable, as in, not changing easily. We have a sun that is rather constant, giving a reliable source of heat without going to extremes. Those hot and cold days are basically because of changes in weather and the orbit of Earth, not from wild solar activity.

Proxima Centauri can help us appreciate our stable sun
Credits: NASA/SDO
For being so big and mostly empty, space is mighty dangerous. Our solar system was placed by our Creator in a special section, away from bursts of gamma rays that would destroy life. Our sun gets on the prod now and then, shooting out solar flares and such. We are protected (for now) with our own deflector shield and atmosphere, so those flares disrupt communications and such, but don't blast away the oceans or irradiate life to extinction.

I'm old enough to remember the television show Lost in Space, and have been able to have fun with it on rerun stations. The original series ran from 1968-1968, and was set in "the future" (1997), with the Jupiter 2 heading out Alpha Centauri way. That is the closes star system to us, and the closest star is Proxima Centauri. It's a grumpy red dwarf that recently went haywire. Good thing the Robinson family never found their way to it. (Robot shouts, "Danger!" Danger", then emits showers of sparks.) Our Creator knew what he was doing when he designed Earth, the solar system, our galaxy, where he put us, and the universe itself.
Astronomers recently detected an enormous but short-lived increase in radiation from the nearby star Proxima Centauri. This radiation burst, known as a flare, caused the star to become a thousand times brighter for ten seconds. Our sun also has flares, but those flares are much smaller. At the time of its peak brightness, the Proxima Centauri flare was ten times brighter (in the measured wavelengths) than even the largest flares emitted by our sun. This is another reminder of how our sun is especially designed for life on Earth.
. . .
The lead scientist on the team, Meredith MacGregor, described how the flare could affect the nearby exoplanet:
To find out what Meredith said and to read the rest of the article, click on "Stellar Superflare Reminder: Our Sun Is Special".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Tuesday, April 3, 2018

Cuttlefish and Camouflage

Yes, I did say camouflage. It's based on the French word for disguise, camoufler. Disguising itself is something the cuttlefish does quite well, and it is quite impressive. Seems a bit surprising that the critter can hide itself, what with having all those bright colors and all.

The cuttlefish is an evolution-defying example of the Master Engineer's design skills
Credit: Freeimages / John Boyer
It's first trick: it's not a fish, exactly. It's a cephalopod, like it's squid and octopod cousins. The name came from the shell-like bone on the inside, the cuttlebone. Why fish was tacked on is anyone's guess. Also, the cuttlefish is not exactly huge.

The cuttlefish can change its appearance on the fly (so to speak), even in the process of swimming! When stalking for food, it can mimic kelp, the ocean floor, a black-and-white chessboard, or something else. (Okay, so it doesn't cotton to imitating chessboards in the wild, but it has been observed doing so!) Excellent eyesight and intelligence help the camouflage process. In addition, it has very smooth skin, but can change its texture as well.

So many detailed components together in one critter at the same time, working in unison for a purpose. This is another example of the Master Engineer's handiwork, and I reckon the cuttlefish is laughing at evolution all the while. For that matter, one that was dated at 37 million Darwin years has the impossible (to long agers) soft tissue. Evolutionists should cringe at the mere mention of cuttlefish.
Though the cuttlebone is unique to cuttlefish, the thing that makes them seagoing superstars is their unparalleled camouflaging skill. Cuttlefish can dramatically alter the colors, patterns, and even texture of their skin. Several interconnected designs are necessary for this to occur, and only an ingenious Creator could put them all together. Between their sharp eyesight, color sacs, specialized muscle cells, and supersized brain, no other creature in the animal kingdom can change its appearance the way cuttlefish can—and all in the blink of an eye.
To read the article in its entirety (or download the MP3 version), click on "Masters of Disguise".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Monday, April 2, 2018

Five New Fossil Forests Evosplained

Way down Antarctica way, a fossil forest was found. That is interesting in and of itself, but the research began contradicting themselves. One notable example is that they said the tree stumps had turned to stone, but amino acids were found. This is only the beginning of their evosplaining.

Five more fossil forests were discovered in Antarctica, explained by bad science
Original image credit: Jacques Descloitres, MODIS Rapid Response Team, NASA / GSFC
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Later, five more of these things were found. A good story about the expedition was spoiled by some illegitimate conjectures and homage to Darwin, blessed be! Researchers used the scientific principle of Making Things Up™ in the course of their evosplaining. The strange effort to bring in the Permian Extinction story and apply it to global climate change (yes, really) is also baffling. Bad science, bad logic. Happens a lot nowadays.

These findings are a threat to long ages and indicate that the earth is young, so researches invoked a weak "It's shrouded in mystery approach". (Sometimes, that is appropriate in theological matters, since we cannot understand everything about our infinite Creator. But it is a cheap escape when alleged scientific facts are being asserted.) Even a cursory reading of the report shows desperate attempts to preserve long ages (and therefore, evolution, which requires them). Quite a bit of effort to deny evidence of the Genesis Flood and recent creation, n'est-ce pas?
The extent of fossil forests buried in the coldest continent on earth continues to grow and astound explorers.

Last November 17, 2017, we relayed findings about fossil forests discovered by Erik Gulbransen’s team in Antarctica, with wood “so well-preserved in rock that some of the amino acid building blocks that made up the trees’ proteins can still be extracted.” Now, National Geographic reports that five new fossil forests have been found. The article is part discovery and part adventure story, as the team endured incredible hardships in “one of the harshest environments on the planet.”
To read the rest, click on "More Fossil Forests Found in Antarctica".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Sunday, April 1, 2018

The Resurrection, Creation, and the View from the Hill

Back in the olden days, I had a professor who frequently talked about "getting up on the hill", and similar phrases. He did not explain it, he just used it. Finally, I figured out that he was talking about getting a broad perspective. It can also be expressed as getting the big picture or a broader perspective. Things like that.

Get up on the hill for the big picture and see how creation affects the gospel message
Photo by adrian on Unsplash
Knowledgeable creationists will not tell you that believing in a literal six-day recent creation is essential to salvation (although atheopaths lie that this is one of our teachings). It is a "side issue", but that does not mean creation is unimportant. Not by a long shot!

Getting the right perspective helps us realize that adding long ages, evolution, and other things to God's Word is damaging to the gospel message. Ultimately, the death, burial and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead becomes irrelevant!
While many Christians still consider the Creation doctrine a fringe issue, a proper understanding of the Christian message finds creation at its core—a necessary, foundational component of the Christian worldview—without which Christianity flounders around in illogic.

It's helpful to think of creation as the "big picture," which answers the vital questions. Who made us? Who is God? What does He expect of me? What is sin? What is the penalty for sin?
To read the rest of this short article, click on "Creation's Easter Message". 

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!