Piltdown Superman

Ice age theories and models keep coming and going. And some get brought back, even though they are defective. Evolutionary geologists presume that the Earth is billions of years old, and they presume that evolution is true. After all, in the view of evolutionists, an ancient planet is essential for evolution to happen. However, ice age models simply do not fit the observed data and have serious problems. U.S. Geological Survey/photo by Shad O'Neel Secular geologists have a dreadful time attempting to explain how an ice age starts and, worse, how it stops. Compounding the problem is that they believe in several ice ages that cannot be properly explained. So, despite the problems, they dredged up a failed model from 1941 at gave a try at forcing some data into it to make it work. Creationist do not have these problems. The Flood models fit the data and concepts with far less strain than the secular versions. Paleoclimate modelers believe they have finally solved the myster

The majority of evolutionary cosmologists and cosmogonists hold to the "Big Bang" theory of the origin of the universe. (Many do not believe in the Big Bang, however.) From this explosion came order and complexity. When problems occur, the theory gets adjusted and "retrofitted" to account for some of the observed data. Sort of like the imaginary "Multiverse" . Of course, biblical creationist scientists do not need to resort to such contrivances. Source: Hubblesite.org Using circular reasoning and presuppositions, these secular true believer cosmologists made up the idea of "dark matter". (By the way, it's interesting that secularists who hate presuppositional apologetics from Christians use their own version so often.) Starting with the assumption that the Big Bang is true, and that all of the matter in the universe cannot be accounted for, the rest of the matter in the universe must be dark, unobserved, unverified — and lots of it.

Origin of life researchers are getting desperate. By saying that life may have originated in outer space and then found its way to Earth ("panspermia") and then evolved, they are only pushing back the question and making things worse. Not only do they push the problem out into space , they have to postulate a believable model of how it arrived through space, survived the trip through our atmosphere and so on. And yet, they're saying that life may have arisen on Mars, even though there is no chance of life there . Some postulate that we are all actually Martians . NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS There are contradictory papers about life originating on Mars, and they are stymied by RNA, phosphates, ribose and water. All of these desperate attempts to explain away the Creator lead to serious facepalm responses. A second article proposes life began on Mars, prompting some observers to point out the failures of naturalistic origin-of-life theories. After Steven Benner pro

— Cowboy Bob Sorensen Having been a follower of the Chronicles of Dinosauria Facebook Page for a few weeks, I was increasingly interested in getting a copy of the book, despite my huge backlog of reading material. So I inquired about the possibility of buying an autographed copy. Richard Dobbs, the illustrator, sent me a copy and the request that I write an honest opinion of the book. So, there's the history and a disclosure: I was given Chronicles of Dinosauria: The History & Mystery of Dinosaurs and Man without charge for review purposes, and I am not expected to write a positive review. My honest opinion is that this book is definitely worth owning! I'll start with the layout. This is not a huge volume, and I was easily able to read it in one day. (And look forward to reading it again.) Author Dave Woetzel describes the book as a "scrapbook", and it does have a scrapbook appearance to it. There is nothing boring in the page design, and the ill

Another canyon has been discovered. It's longer than the Grand Canyon, but not as deep. This canyon is under the ice of Greenland, so it took the advanced technology (including radar, which mapped cloud-shrouded planet Venus) of NASA's " Operation Icebridge " to find it. The existence of this huge canyon under the ice defies geological assumptions about the age of the Earth and ice ages. Instead, it may very well be a source of information for young Earth creationists. A canyon longer than Grand Canyon has been discovered under the ice of Greenland.  Scientists are surprised that it has persisted through the ice ages. Science Magazine announced the discovery of a giant “mega-canyon” in bedrock under Greenland’s ice pack by airborne radar in  NASA ’s Operation IceBridge.  The BBC  News includes a radar map of the canyon, and a video explaining the significance of the never-before-seen feature. It’s less than half as deep as the Grand Canyon (800 m) but ove

As most people know, Venus is the planet closest to Earth, and second from the Sun. For thousands of years, people have looked at it in admiration and wonder. Like the moon, Venus goes through phases. Unlike the moon, Venus appears to have different sizes during its phases. Galileo documented this effect, which began the overthrow of the geocentric (the Earth is stationary and everything orbits it) systems of Ptolemy and Aristotle, and the establishment of the heliocentric (Earth orbits the Sun) system that we have today. NASA/ NSSDC Photo Gallery From an evolutionary cosmology perspective, Venus is a very naughty girl, what with confusing scientists and all. Scientists thought that she was very similar to Earth, and called a "twin". Well, an evil twin. She rotates the wrong way, has a toxic atmosphere and is the hottest body (no, not that way , I mean literally hottest) in the solar system. Creationists are not bothered in the least by the contrary "behavior&qu

One of the most frequent problems that creationists have with evolutionists is that they refuse to do their homework. That is, they will indulge in prejudicial conjecture (making uninformed assertions) as well as building straw man arguments against creationists. They do not know what we believe and teach, and will rely on the equivalent of rumors to form their opinions. Many times, we have to correct evolutionists about what evolutionist actually believe! Voyager 2, NASA One area where evolutionists humiliate themselves is when they assert things that are simply untrue (including how evolution makes useful predictions). While there are many false claims about creationists, I will focus on one: The untrue assertion that creationists do not make valid predictions. One fellow challenged me on Twitter to give just one  creationist prediction that was true. I told him about Dr. Russell Humphreys and his predictions about planetary magnetic fields , which were proven correct and the