Piltdown Superman

The primary purpose of sexual activity is reproduction. Unlike humans, very few animals seem to actually seek it out as a form of recreation. S exual reproduction is one of the most baffling problems for evolutionists to comprehend; t hey try  to explain its origins, but fail . In some ways, it's inefficient, and asexual reproduction may be better.  There was a study where evolutionary scientists claimed to have an explanation as to why sex persists, but to keep evolutionary mythology going, these owlhoots conveniently left out a key observation. The fact remains that this method of procreation was designed by the Creator, and did not evolve. I reckon that since materialists do not believe in the afterlife, sexual reproduction is their attempt at having immortality by having young 'uns and passing along their genes. Biologists from the U.K. conducted a 10-year-long experiment on common flour beetles to help understand why insects keep on using sexual reproduction despi

Every once in a while, Darwin's Drones will make simplistic remarks like, "Evolution is true. DNA proves it!" They are probably fans of Clinton Richard Dawkins, who made similar disingenuous remarks himself. Problem is, that tinhorn knows better. PublicDomainPictures / Pixabay.com DNA is amazingly complex, its code is very sophisticated. It has several important functions to not only keep living things alive, but to help us reproduce after our kind. No, DNA could not possibly be made by evolution. Instead, the Creator designed it for very intricate purposes. According to leading atheist Professor Richard Dawkins, the most compelling evidence for evolution is found in DNA. In his book, The Greatest Show on Earth , he states that the DNA code (that is, the DNA language) is the same in all life forms—a fact, he claims, that “shows more clearly than anything else that all living creatures are descended from a single ancestor.” This statement, however, is very mislead

Another fossil of snakes with legs has been found. At first, the response might be, "Big deal", until people realize that the critter had four legs. This has received attention in both creationist and secular circles, especially since it's causing slime-to-snake evolutionists some consternation and dispute. The "image Generator" picture does not do justice to French newscaster Melissa Theuriau. This one is more flattering. The dispute is whether or not the fossil is that of a snake. It has many snake features, but also not  snake features. Although it had legs, don't get it fitted for cowboy boots because those legs weren't walking legs, but appear to be used for grasping. It is considered a terrestrial snake, not a marine one, which adds to difficulties for evolutionists to place it in the proper alleged transitional sequence. But they can't find an evolutionary order for it because snakes were created, they didn't evolve. The four s

Psychology has been around in one form or another for a long time. We wonder why we act the way we do, why tinhorn anti-creationists want to "prove" their superior intelligence by acting like angry children (which includes libel, lying outright, and trolling), why the woman in the upstairs apartment throws leftover chicken on the lawn instead of using a garbage bin, and more. Sometimes, psychology is fun to ponder. Sigmund Freud / Max Halberstadt / Wikimedia Commons / PD Unfortunately, modern psychology is primarily based on materialistic and evolutionary ideas; perhaps that is why there are many schools of thought, and variations on those as well. None of them has the answers, old son. A psychologist present a buffet-style treatment drawn from several sources. Ironically for me, in my apostate time, I benefited from a variation on "probablistic atheist" Albert Ellis' REBT (who said that his views had nothing to do with his therapy methods). Psychology i

Have you ever been riding down Mexico way, maybe in the Chihuahua Desert, when a snake spooks your horse, it rears up, and you get thrown into a patch of bunny ears cactus? Me, neither. That cactus doesn't have the typical long pointy spines that you see in picture books, movies, and television. No, these bad boys are very fine, and come out in bunches at even a light touch. I reckon they hurt real bad, and people need first aid right quick. And yet, this cactus ( Opuntia microdasys ) has inspired biomimetics to help with oil spills. Opuntia microdasys / Wikimedia Commons /  Stan Shebs Scientists studied the special spines on this cactus and how they relate with water. This in turn may help recover spilled oil below the surface of the water. But where did these special spines come from? They are obviously designed for their purpose, just like the spines on other cacti. The following article discusses the technology of the biomimetics idea, as well as how evolution does not e

One trick that evolutionist tinhorns use to dry-gulch creationists is to dismiss their evidence out of hand. Another trick is to misrepresent their research. David Montgomery has done both, showing a lack of integrity, bad scholarship, and plain old laziness. Professor Montgomery is talking from his uniformitarian, naturalistic presuppositions (as expected, everyone uses their presuppositions, after all). But he also uses logical fallacies of insufficient evidence , straw man misrepresentations of both church history and the abundant evidence presented by creationist scientists in his field.  Simply laughing off the creationist view out of hand is ridiculous. Seeing the bad reasoning on his part, however, that dismissal is not surprising. If he took a serious look at the evidence provided by Flood geologists, Montgomery should be able to see that the evidence refutes his uniformitarian views. Recently David Montgomery, professor of earth and space sciences at University of W

Advocates of fish-to-fortune-teller evolution insist that it is supported by predictability. Not hardly. Fact is, when evolutionists are not actually hindering scientific progress by clinging to their paradigms, they are baffled by what they actually observe.  Snow Leopard / Pixabay / Skeeze "Did you see that snow leopard?" "Yeah, I spotted him." "Not funny, Cowboy Bob!" Yeah, I should stop using old jokes. But then, evolutionists should stop riding that worn-out old nag (their worldview) and get a fresh horse (evidence shows creation, not evolution). Speaking of the snow leopard, cats need low altitude because their hemoglobin isn't good at carrying blood. But the snow leopard is way, way up there in low-oxygen areas.  Other research baffling evolutionists include how natural selection actually can impede the formation of new species, bunches of new bacterial phyla gnawing at the evolutionary tree of life, sunflowers are pushing back the