Posts

The Mysticism of Peer Review?

Image
Creationists frequently encounter atheopaths and other Darwinistas who make inane demands resembling, "Show me just one peer-reviewed creationist paper!" You can tell up front that they don't want answers, otherwise, they'd be doing their own research and finding out that yes, creationists are indeed published in noted journals. (I recently gave one tinhorn a link to " Creationist Scientists and Journal Publication ", but he preferred to make childish attacks and refused to click on it. I reckon some people don't want answers.) Many folks expect that peer review is a guarantee of accuracy, and that something is established science if it undergoes peer review. Not hardly! Modified from an image at Clker clipart Creationary scientists have their own peer review systems and seek to honor God as well as strive for excellence in the process. Although all scientists are human after all, secularists seem more prone to plagiarism, misconduct, fraud, bias,

Evolving the Third Way

Image
Ever since Darwin published On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life in 1859, his version of evolution has undergone a series of crises. His book underwent revisions, and he admitted that his story had serious flaws (such as the fossil record). As time went on, those pesky facts of science showed that it's not valid. Traditional evolution by natural selection was abandoned. Not willing to admit failure in light of new scientific evidence, the view became the Synthetic Theory (neo-Darwinism), where mutations were added to natural selection. Evolutionists are not in lockstep , and controversies continued. Some admitted that there was no evidence, but hey, there's no Creator God in their worldview, so they proposed a different idea that also has no evidence: evolution happens in bursts. The cell, genome, epigenetics, and other continuing discoveries further show that evolution is not supported b

First Animal Life — Older Than Cambrian

Image
For many years, the Cambrian layer contained the oldest animal life ("oldest" in Darwinspeak years). Other bewildering fossils had been popping up here and there, but were a curiosity. More were being found over the years. After the century got itself a notion to turn, in 2004 that is, the Ediacaran geologic system was designated and the geologic record gained a new track. Vinyl record generated at Says-It The Ediacaran system has a variety of critters, but they seem to be all soft-bodied, and they didn't make much of an impression. Speculations and disagreements ensued (but they did not stop this writer from making baseless assertions mixed with "maybe" terminology to keep the evolution faith). Biblical creationists have some ideas involving the Genesis Flood model that should shed some light on the situation. We’ve all heard about one of the great mysteries in paleontology: dinosaurs. They disappear from the fossil record without a trace. The disapp

Dark Matter of the Gaps

Image
Remember that television series Seinfeld? Personally, I found the thing annoying, but it was a big hit in the ratings. It was about nothing , but had sub-plots and complications . Kind of like the Big Bang. Scientific evidence? Nothing. Lots of complicating factors and rescuing devices to keep the thing from jumping the corral fence, and the biggest fudge factor of all is dark matter. Bullet Cluster image credit: X-ray: NASA/CXC/UCDavis/W.Dawson et al; Optical: NASA/STScI/UCDavis/W.Dawson et al. Since the Big Bang doesn't work, the invoke dark matter as a god of the gaps. (From that, astronomers, cosmogonists, cosmologists, theoretical astrophysicists and others have gone on to dream up dark energy, dark photons, dark...) Dark matter has never been seen, but cosmic evolutionists insist that this force awakens to comprise the overwhelming majority of the stuff of the universe. It can't be seen, but can it be proved to exist? Depends on who you ask, because these owlho

Evolutionists Find Early Man Troubling

Image
Proponents of spores-to-spectroscopist evolution like to tell biblical creationists how wrong we are, and they cite "evidence" from textbooks and the popular press. Those of us who have ridden the trail for a spell have seen numerous occasions where new discoveries in human origins cause turmoil for the hands at the Darwin Ranch. Modified from an image at Openclipart Time and again, there are troubles in evolutionary dogma where we read, essentially, "This changes everything, and we have to rewrite the evolutionary timeline". Even so, outdated and even false material shows up in textbooks, on documentaries, and especially on Internet posts by Darwinistas. They wouldn't have this problem if they didn't cling to their rebellion against the Creator and keep concocting false origins fantasies. Some of the latest problems involve Homo naledi, Homo floresiensis, and a really disturbing bit of news on Homo sapiens in Borneo, where they had just about everyth

The Mimic-Spinner and Other Imitators

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Imagine if you will a world that his hostile to human life. Everything has adapted, from the leaves of grass to insects to larger animals, for the sole purpose of destroying the human colonists The planet has double Earth's gravity, has unpredictable violent weather, earthquakes, and more. The colonists are losing the war for survival, but refuse to leave for one of the more hospitable worlds. Welcome to Pyrrus. This scenario came from author Harry Harrison (Henry Maxwell Dempsey) in his 1960 novel Deathworld. (Somebody slipped up, and this is one of his works that became public domain in the United States.) The colonists have a multitude of weapons, including a blaster that quickly ejects from its holster and into the owner's hand: Something whizzed in through the open window, tearing a hole in the protective screen. Kerk blasted it without changing stride, without even knowing he had done it. The decision didn't take long. Geared to swift

Anti-Creationists and Reasoning from Errors

Image
Many questions about creation, the Genesis Flood, the Ark, and other topics are to be expected. They happened a long time ago, and the Bible doesn't give us as much detail as some of us m ay think we need. There are times that questions come to mind, often during a lecture or in a conversation. It's mighty helpful to learn about logical fallacies, especially when opponents of biblical creation use them so frequently. We get a heap of them at The Question Evolution Project, and bad reasoning from the Evo Sith is common fare on many creationary sites and social media. They get really agitated when we point out the fallacies, and some get furious when they are not allowed to continue building arguments on foundations based on faulty arguments or premises . (It's possible on rare occasions to have a valid conclusion from a bad argument, but that's not a product of skillful re asoning . ) Some go riding down a trail to prove something, and this is the fallacy of the ir