Piltdown Superman

Seeing evolution where it ain't and making unfounded declarations can be hard work, especially with the stress of keeping that grant money rolling in. So the hands at the Darwin Ranch have the occasional hoedown featuring a Western square dance . They do it academically, of course, and sometimes they don't even know they're dancing. In the case of Skull KNM-ER 1470, it was more of a freestyle dance. Let's take a look-see down memory lane — and see how the pigs won the prize. Bow to your partner, bow to your corner. Images combined from clip art at Clker . In 1972, a skull was found in Kenya. As usual, the evolutionists hurried to claim that this was a transitional form between human and ape. Promenade right. But right from the get-go, there were disagreements about dating. One bit of evidence contradicts another bit of evidence. Promenade left. Radiometric dating was conflicted, so using evolutionary and long-age biases, they picked out the dates the preferred.

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Biblical creationists often hear criticisms from atheists and evolutionists who prefer prejudicial conjecture to actual answers (Prov. 18:2 HCSB). I commenced to pondering this while watching Creation in the 21st Century  ( one of the few biblically sound programs on the Trinity Broadcasting Network), where host David Rives interviewed Mike Snavely . There was a brief clip of a trapdoor spider grabbing lunch ( here is a video clip of one in action ), and I thought about Adam naming the animals. There probably weren't any trapdoors in Eden yet, so where did that name come from? Medieval painting of Adam naming the animals /Agios Nikolaos Anapafsas, Monastery in Thessaly, Greece Scoffers will say, "There's no way Adam could have named all the animals over the course of years, let alone, one day!" Let's do some homework that certain people are reluctant to do. First, read the text carefully in Genesis 2:19-20. He didn't name fish

Taking a ride down Utah way (or maybe seeing panoramic views in Western movies), you might see stone pillars sticking out of the ground that look like they were from a game of mumbly-peg for giants. But that's the opposite of the truth in several ways: no giant hands or game involved, and they came up from under the earth. Image credit: FreeImages / " Rock in Kodachrome Basin " / Hervé de Brabandère Uniformitarian geologists have their explanation of how these things were formed, but they don't make a whole lot of sense. (Same thing happens with other formations around the world, for that matter.) They need  their millions or billions of years, despite evidence and skillful science, so there can be time for evolution to happen. Or so they mistakenly believe.) Biblical creation geologists plug in the observed data to their Genesis Flood model, and it makes quite a bit more sense. Secluded in the canyon country of southern Utah is a beautiful but often overl

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Edited 12-14-2015 Evidence supporting an old Earth has been iffy for a long time. Uniformitarian geologist Charles Lyell (a lawyer by trade) wanted to free the science of geology from Moses , and famously gave his own estimates of the rate of erosion for Niagara Falls despite  evidence to the contrary . Today, there is deceptive reporting in paleontology . " Dinosaur Fossils " image courtesy of  khunaspix / FreeDigitalPhotos.net Dishonesty is not surprising. After all, atheists and other anti-creationists are opposed to the biblical worldview, and are  living up to their own ethical standards . In addition, they don't look too kindly on scientific evidence that refutes long ages, and microbes-to-minerologist evolution requires huge amounts of time. Ain't happening, but they need the time for their Just So Stories. There have been numerous challenges to long ages of late from many places, so evolutionists are circling the wagons to de

That critter rustling through the brush over yonder in New Zealand isn't a mammal. Fact is, it's a bird. The kiwi. (New Zealanders are called kiwis, but I ask myself, "Why, man?" Well, better than being called a banded dotterel , I suppose. Maybe they call kiwifruit by the other name, Chinese gooseberry .) This bird doesn't look or act like other birds. Kiwi bird with kiwifruit / Image from Clker When you study on it, you'll find that this bird has bones that are unlike other birds, the wings are almost nonexistent, flight muscles are not there, and it has strong legs for running and kicking. It eats worms like many other birds, though. This critter is suited for living in New Zealand. Evolutionists have three main theories as to how it got there, but they don't hold up too well. Creationists have some ideas that make more sense in light of biblical creation and post-Flood circumstances. I reckon that God made this unique kind of bird to exhibit his

Various biological "clocks" have been used to support goo-to-geneticist evolution. There is a similarity in the flawed logic used to that of radiometric dating: assuming evolution and long ages, circular reasoning, and ignoring other pertinent data, for starters. Image assembled from clip art at Clker All y'all should know that any timepiece needs to be calibrated; doesn't make a lick of sense to have your pocket watch showing high noon when it's really quarter past ten. Also, if your clock is running too fast or too slow (or changes its rate), it's not going to give you good results in the long run. There are several biological clocks on the molecular level that are calibrated using deep time assumptions, have varying rates, and other important data are ignored. When evolutionary assumptions are left by the wayside and a direct empirical approach is used, the human race shows an age much closer to what biblical creationists say, and not supporting evo

Although nobody has seen them, astronomers are pretty sure that planets orbit other stars. We have some nice photos, but those are artists' conceptions. High-powered telescopes like the space-based Kepler give some data to work with. (Nobody had seen Pluto until they went out there and looked with New Horizons probe, remember.) Lots of time, effort, and money have been spent on finding a thousand or so exoplanets, with the hope of finding signs of life. People were betting the odds that there just had to be lots of planets out there, and just had to be life on them. Hope they didn't bet the farm. Artist’s concept of an exoplanet discovered by Kepler. Image credit: NASA Scientists are looking for the "just right" combination of planetary size, composition, star type, and other things to consider if a planet could be habitable. More considerations have narrowed the focus , making the chances of finding life out there ( any life, let alone, sentient) even less l