Piltdown Superman

Typical portrayals of Stone Age and Bronze Age people is unflattering, to say the least. They were stupid brutes that didn't know how to do much except hunt and gather, and then began to develop agriculture. But this is based on evolutionary presuppositions. Evolutionary paleontologists and anthropologists keep getting surprised when more information gets telegraphed into Fort Darwin, as ancient people were far more advanced than assumptions give them credit for. Modified from "The Tower of Babel" by Gustave Dore The so-called Bronze Age was actually very dynamic, showing that people had their own cultures and were migrating. An ambitious project of sequencing human DNA from that era surprises secularists, but not so much for biblical creationists, since the results support the biblical timeline back to Babel. Scientists used new techniques to sequence 101 ancient human genomes believed to be from Bronze-Age populations in Europe. Their findings indicate a massiv

I t's been pointed out many times that scientists are not the impartial paragons of virtue that many people believe. When it comes to fame and fortune, some can be sneaky sidewinders — just like us reg'lar folks. Using bad science, just-so stories, and even fraud are almost expected when trying to prove goo-to-geologist evolution, since it happens so much in the cult of evolutionism . Even so, many of us reckon that they should be living up to higher standards. Seriously, what kind of ethical standards and integrity can be expected from people who hold to a materialistic worldview? When they deal from the bottom of the deck, they're following a "survival of the fittest" paradigm; having scientists police the integrity of scientists is like asking a burglar to hold your wallet while you make a phone call. The final authority for ethics and morality is the Creator, who revealed his plan in his written Word, not another materialistic method. The frequency

The geologic column exists in many textbooks, but is not found in nature. It is presented in a nice, tidy order where simple life forms are at the bottom, with more complex evolving up to the top. However, the geologic column and index fossils are constructs of the imagination . Some owlhoots have trolled, "The geologic column proves evolution, and there are no fossils out of order". They don't know what they're talking about, there are fossils "out of order" according to evolutionary timelines. So, it exists, but not in the way microbes-to-mechanic evolution want us to think . Modified from an image from the US Geological Survey Do biblical creation models do a better job of explaining what we find in the fossil record? That's a mite difficult. There is a general order to be had in the fossil record, and the Genesis Flood models explain a great deal. Yes, there are disagreements among Flood geologists as to the details — which is not much of a

Advocates of algae-to-astronomer evolution come up with some wild exaggerations and unmitigated fabrications to bolster their worldview. It's mighty bothersome when professing Christians pull the same shenanigans in the pursuit of ridiculing Christians who have a high view of the Bible and creation. These claims can be dispensed with through simple logic and science. Wikimedia Commons / Didier Descouens Dr. Joel Duff made some abnormal assertions about stone artifacts. He claims that they number in the trillions, and that there is no way they could be mistaken for the work of nature. In addition, they are dated with typical uniformitarian circular reasoning. The numbers do not withstand scrutiny, and this owlhoot doesn't bother to consider flood activity that would easily explain many of the things he thinks are man-made tools. A recent posting at the Naturalis Historia website confidently claims that trillions of artifacts found in Africa and elsewhere prove that th

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Although an earlier article from 2014 was reasonably popular, I reckoned I had to rewrite it. Same stable, different horse. Edited 12-28-2021 What is a cult, really? As I have emphasized before,  definitions are important  so that everyone is speaking the same language. People have different connotations of the word "cult", such as black magic rituals in front of scary idols in far off places, mass suicides (such as the People's Temple led by  atheist Jim Jones ), small groups, and so on. Most cults have some degree of truth in them as well as things that appear valid but are twisted. Others think of pseudo-Christian groups like the  Christadelphians ,  Jehovah's Witnesses ,  Mormons , the Sacred Name cultist's (now defunct) Page on Facebook that pretends to be creationist , and so on. Some members of groups that are called "cults" get burrs under their saddles over the word because it is so emotionally charged, has associat

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Both creationists and evolutionists expected Pluto to be mostly ice, with perhaps a small rocky core. Preliminary findings reveal that there are many features on Pluto and Charon that were quite unexpected and downright baffling for believers in an ancient solar system, but less surprising for biblical creationists. See " New Horizons, Pluto, and the Age of the Solar System ", " Pluto Inbound Image Stuns Scientists ", " Pluto Is Young ", and " Is Pluto Another Geyser World? 'Shocking” Images Baffle Scientists' " for information from creationist perspectives. Pluto from New Horizons . Image Credit: NASA, Johns Hopkins Univ / APL, Southwest Research Inst Scientists presenting the information on Pluto pointed out several features and admitted that Pluto looks young. Naturally, evolution's Luddites will be scrambling to find excuses to justify clinging to "deep time". We should expect a wagon-loa

Darwinists want things both ways. On one hand, evolution is force that nobody can stop. On the other hand, when confronted with evidence of no evolution, they fall back on "stasis", meaning, "It didn't have to evolve, so it didn't. A banquet-sized salamander fossil of six feet (two meters) shows no appreciable change with its modern amphibious counterparts (like other fossils reveal), so evolution didn't come calling at their doors. Credit: US NPS photo For that matter, they "see" evolution even when there is none present, and when there is no evidence, just an assumption that it's evolution what done did whatever characteristic we see. What really takes the rag off the bush is that even though Darwinoids are plumb out of evidence, they invoke their own god of the gaps , one owlhoot goes it a mite further and says that very slight changes in salamanders show the "invisible finger of evolution". More like waving their finger in