Welcome to the home of The Question Evolution Project. Presenting information demonstrating that there is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution, and presenting evidence for special creation. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

Spacing Out in the Final Frontier

Ever since way back when, mankind has looked at the heavens and wondered what's up there, and some had notions of actually going there. In the 20th century and extending into nowadays, progress has been significant. While space probes are impressive in their own right, having men land on the moon and operate space stations is foudroyant. I reckon it's human nature to want to go further.

Earth is our home space exploration NASA LRO view
NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) view of Earth from lunar orbit
Credit: NASA/Goddard/Arizona State University
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Mind you, Earth can be considered a mighty large spacecraft itself. It was put here by the Creator for a reason, and we were designed to live on it. Significant difficulties exist for protracted space flight, such as collisions with objects, radiation, and other things. Two worth highlighting are the psychological difficulties and the physical problems of being without gravity.
Through the imagination, we can soar through distant galaxies. Sooner or later, physical reality hits home.

Amazing, isn’t it, that space travelers in the movies can walk normally and breathe the air no matter what planet they land on. It may save money for Hollywood, but is it realistic? A couple of articles suggest otherwise. For better or worse, we humans are stuck here.
To read the rest, fly on over to "Your Mind Can Space Out, But Your Body Belongs on Earth".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Quasars Further Disrupt Secular Cosmology

One of the strangest critters in the cosmos is called a quasar. The name is short for quasi-stellar radio source, but I like the sound of quasar. They were detected by the interference they made in transatlantic telephone lines (because in the olden days, pioneers in covered wagons didn't have good signals for their cell phones, so they had to use transatlantic phone lines instead, and quasars caused problems in the calls). I was joking with you about the covered wagons thing, but there really was interference in transatlantic phone lines. In the 1930s, a physicist with Bell Telephone found the interference was coming from our own Milky Way galaxy. In the 1950s, the problem children were identified.

Quasars cause problems for Big Bang cosmology
Artist's impression of a quasar in galactic dust
Credit: NASA/ESA/G.Bacon, STScI (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Quasars are thought to be the very bright and "loud" part of some galaxies, probably caused by black holes in the center. These things have been baffling for a mighty long time, and problematic for Big Bang cosmology. A newer problem for secular views is that they change their form (including dimming and a change in redshifts). Some scientists think that quasars are "early" galaxies that become more standard later on, but the changes seen do not fit their paradigm. According to cosmic evolution, the changes should take thousands or millions of years, but are happening in extremely short times. This sort of thing fits nicely with biblical creationist views.
Quasars are very high redshift astronomical objects with broad emission line (BEL) spectra. The latter is very different to that in the usual ‘normal’ galaxies. This means the objects’ redshifts and BEL spectra can be used to identify them.

And because of their high redshifts they are assumed to be very distant, very luminous active galaxies with super-massive black holes at their hearts, powering them to emit prodigious amounts of radiation over all wavebands of the electromagnetic spectrum.

Most of the high redshift objects in the universe are quasars. The redshifts of galaxies and quasars when interpreted within big bang cosmology—the greater the redshift the greater the distance—means that the most distant objects are seen at a time when the universe was youngest.

Following big bang thinking, quasars are then considered to be just galaxies in some early stage of development—back closer in time to the big bang—than the usual spiral and elliptical galaxies we might see with much lower redshifts.
To read the rest, click on "Changing-look quasars: how do they fit into a biblical creationist model?"

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Monday, May 8, 2017

Widening the Human-Chimp DNA Gap

Down yonder at Deception Pass, just up the Yellow Dog Creek a mite from the Darwin Ranch, you'll come to the Evolution Propaganda Mill. If you go to visit, they'll be less ornery if you bring cookies. One of the most successful products of evolutionary propaganda is the idea that humans and chimps are somewhere around 98 percent similar in the genome, therefore, evolution is true and there is no Creator God. That's how atheistic reasoning works.

Human chimpanzee DNA not as similar as we were told
"You go ahead, I'll finish watching this Bill Nye comedian."
Credit:  credit: morgueFile / lightfoot
How did we get to that point? Well, sequencing even a simple genome is actually quite difficult and takes computers with some horsepower. Working with humans...oh, boy. The chimpanzee genome is a tricky beast in its own right, and the genome isn't fully figured out yet. Original sequencing was done with inferior equipment and had heavy contamination with human DNA. Also, circular reasoning was involved because Darwinists assumed common-ancestor evolution. Add bad reasoning and incomplete science and you get the claim that humans and chimps are so similar. New research from a creationary scientist lowers the similarity quite a few points. But, similarities in the genome exist. Why not? There are similarities in the genome of humans with sea sponges, too. Similarities exist because the Designer didn't see a need to start over and make everything totally different, just like we do with our designs, you savvy?
“The DNA of humans is 98% similar to chimpanzees.” Who hasn’t heard that claim before? It’s usually stated as a settled fact and quoted to prove indisputably that we share a common ancestor.
But what does this kind of statement really entail, and how do we really know how similar one creature’s DNA is to another? The answers from my field of research—genetics—might surprise you.
To finish reading (or download the audio version), click on "The Untold Story Behind DNA Similarity". For additional information on this subject, click on "DNA Variation Widens Human-Chimp Chasm".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Saturday, May 6, 2017

The Spirit of the Origin of Life

The problems of the origin of life (OOL) on Earth are astronomically difficult, and one disingenuous rescuing device that the Evo Sith utilize is to claim that OOL has nothing to do with evolution. (We can quickly dispense with that falsehood at this link, and move on.) Despite the insurmountable difficulties, there are still materialists that insist on making the impossible appear plausible.

This is real soup. There was never an evolutionary primordial soup.
Credit: Morguefile / Alvimann
Abiogenesis models are packed with a passel of presumptions, including the "reducing atmosphere" (a concept that has been largely abandoned nowadays) in the failed Miller-Urey experiment, and the experimenters cheated by putting in a trap to remove the amino acids from the environment that would have destroyed them. There are some worse speculations today involving animism. No, it's not praying to animals, but a primitive belief that everything has a spirit. So, some materialists are violating materialism by believing that the spirit of molecules in fool's gold (iron pyrite) must have compelled them to work together to eventually form life. This is in keeping with the pantheistic tendencies of evolutionism. Are the minds of these scientists degenerating because of their rebellion against the Creator? I reckon so.
What is the spark that turns molecules into life? For the materialist, it’s the spirit of imagination.

Illustra’s film Origin presents a calculation by Doug Axe, PhD biochemist at the Biologic Institute who worked at Cambridge University, who figured out the improbability of a relatively small functional protein of 100 amino acids. The chance of getting such a protein under ideal conditions, he said, is one in 10161. This probability is so inexpressibly low, it gives a reasonable person confidence it will never, ever happen anywhere in the entire universe—just getting one smaller-than-average functional protein. The simplest cell we know has over 300 different proteins. And that’s just one of the numerous problems the film presents that should rule materialistic origin-of-life theories completely out of court.

So why do evolutionists persist in their view that life emerged by chance? Look at a press release from the University of Wisconsin-Madison that begins optimistically, “Experiments test how easy life itself might be.” How can a miracle of chance this improbable be easy?
To read the rest, click on "OOL’s Gold and Animism". For further origin of life foolishness, take a look-see at "OOL Foolishness Is Out of Control". 

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Friday, May 5, 2017

Steeling Designs

Maybe I've been reading too many plays on words, but the misspelling in the title is intentional. Biomimetics is where scientists study nature and come up with imitations ideas for our own use. Inspirations include the pitcher plant, firefly, spider webs, and many more. The great irony here is that secular scientists use their education, equipment, training, and so forth to try and intelligently design something that they think is the product of evolution through chance and random processes. No, Hoss, God designed the critters you're studying as well as your mind. Give credit where it's due, you savvy?

Credit: Freeimages / patryk krause
Tough and strong are not the same thing. Tough stuff gets flexible, and hard stuff can break. How do you get a good steel with properties of both? By studying the way our Creator designed the microstructure of bones!
How does one build a structural material that withstands stress and fracture? The answer is to copy optimal designs from living systems because they far exceed man's ingenuity. Recently, an improved steel was developed by copying human bones.

Human and animal bones are optimally designed to be lightweight, incredibly strong, and resist fracture and fatigue. These bones are also self-healing and fully integrated—both physiologically and structurally—with the rest of the body. Bones are excellent examples of God's creative genius.
To read the rest, click on "Improved Steel Copies Bone Microstructure". 
Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Thursday, May 4, 2017

The Origin of the Cat Family

Basement Cat is one of the created cat kinds.
Basement Cat was feeling affectionate and came up to see me, helping me get in touch with my inner felines. The purr machine works quite well. Interestingly, the some of the great cats purr as well, and do other things that we see in Felis catus (domestic house cat), including play with a ball. Sometimes Basement Cat thinks she's a panther or something, acting like the hiss is a roar. Her big cousins do the hiss thing, too. Here's a divergence: most domestic cats are not fond of water, but tigers are very fond of it.

Proponents of life evolving from a common ancestor have had it mighty difficult to classify the cat family members. "Early" cats according to evolutionary mythology were classified into two lineages, but without significant justification. Cats existing today are able to hybridize, which is one of several reasons that biblical creationists say that cats probably are members of a single kind, in this case, called a holobaramin. Creationists do believe in speciation, as that is one of the created mechanisms for diversity, adaptation, and repopulation after the Genesis Flood.

Unlike Basement Cat sitting on my leg, the following article is not cute and fuzzy. It contains some serious science. I'm presenting this "hard science" for people who want some technical creation science in addition to the lay-level material that I usually present. And I love cats.
Based on previously reported hybridizations, cats have long been considered to belong to a single basic type. However, there has been discussion concerning whether great cats and small cats might represent independent sister clades. Recent DNA sequencing data confirm that such distinctions are not fundamental in nature and that all cats share a common genetic ancestry. More recently described hybridizations between great cats and small cats, along with various other studies described in the present article, further support the hypothesis that all cats belong to a single clearly delineated basic type. The Nimravidae (paleosabers), the Machairodontinae (neosabers) and the genus Panthera, each underwent a prominent radiation during the tertiary period. All three taxa represent cat-like placental carnivores, and they may all have arisen from the same basic type.
If you're ready to read the rest (expect to take about half an hour), click on "The family of cats—delineation of the feline basic type". Note that the authors are creationists, but use the standard terminology when referring to the geologic column.

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Wednesday, May 3, 2017

More Signs of a Youthful Solar System

Big ideas are often thwarted by little things. In this case, "little" is a relative term; I can't stuff dwarf planet Ceres and Saturn's moon Enceladus into saddlebags and ride across the Arizona territory with them, after all. At any rate, when compared to planets and so forth, small things are causing cosmic evolutionists some big trouble. They get a mite ornery when their theories fail to predict what is discovered way out yonder.

Enceladus one of several bodies defying deep time
Tiger stripes on Enceladus, credit: Cassini Imaging Team, SSI, JPL, ESA, NASA
(usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
According to ASS (Age of the Solar System), ice volcanoes on Ceres should not have the energy to be active. Likewise, the Rosetta orbiter is reporting that Comet 67P is breaking up (they're comets, they do that). The south pole of Enceladus has a whole heap of activity that cannot be explained, so scientists resort to a cheap trick to rescue their deep time belief system. It takes a great deal of commitment as well as cognitive dissonance to reject evidence for a recent creation of the solar system (and the entire universe for that matter). To read about these items and more, click on "Small Planetary Bodies Unexpectedly Active". For a related article on the troubles that Titan is causing secular astronomers and cosmologists, click on "Dry Titan Has Static Cling". 

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!