Creation and Hermaphrodite Animals

A lonely female notices that the population is getting a mite sparse and there are few or no males available for mating. What can she do? Well, if she is one of the species of hermaphrodites, switch over and become a male. Yes, there are a few critters equipped by our Creator to do this.

Credit: US National Park Service / Caroline Rogers

This is hermaphroditism, and most of its representatives are invertebrates. (A fake science version of this was an important plot point in Jurassic Park.) About two percent of bony fish have this trait. Believers in fish-to-fire marshal evolution occasionally give a pretense at explaining how this attribute came to be, but they are merely faith assertions, not science. From a creationist point of view, it makes sense to realize that the Master Engineer equipped these creatures with one of the ol' switch-a-roo characteristics.

Reproduction is a complex, widely varied process, depending on the animals involved. For some animals, it merely involves the duplicating of itself. For others, it is necessary to find a mate. This process can be very difficult or very simple, depending on the species, and different creatures deal with this in different ways. One way that organisms have been designed to deal with the reproduction issue is hermaphroditism, in which individuals have both reproductive organs. This condition is most commonly found in fish, but other animals exhibit it as well.

To read the rest of the article, click on "Hermaphroditism in Animals".

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

Lunar Water Cannot Last Billions of Years

My soda was warm, so I wanted to stop by the moon and get some ice. I stopped by one of the hidey-hole craters and it was gone, having been smashed and scattered by a meteoroid or something. Another error for deep time, ice on the moon is not forever.

Sure, these perspective things can be overused, but this one is pretty good.
Credit: Unsplash / Valery Sysoev

First they find water on the moon which threatens one of their lunar origin theories, now this.

Water ice gets tucked away where it is hidden from sunlight and the solar wind, and it is supposed to last a mighty long time. However, secular scientists did not take into account all the activity up there that spreads the ice around and causes it to get out of Dodge. Rescuing devices like comets and the like seem weak — desperate, even. The truth is that the earth, moon, and everything else were created a few thousand years ago.

The water detected on the moon by orbiters can only last thousands of years, not billions.

A NASA press release says, “Inside Dark, Polar Moon Craters, Water Not as Invincible as Expected, Scientists Argue.” An animation at the top shows why: meteoroids and the solar wind destroy it.

You can read the rest by clicking on "Moon Water is Young".

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

Young Deep-Space Objects

We have seen numerous examples of how Earth and the rest of our solar system are younger than secular cosmologists expect, so it should be interesting to take a look out further. Current cosmogony has the universe clocking in at a tad over eleven billion years old, but the observed evidence does not support this.

M72 globular star cluster, credit: NASA, ESA, Hubble, HPOW

Cosmic evolution as well as real science depends on certain laws and rules. When observed data are recalcitrant, secularists circle the wagons and deploy rescuing devices that make things worse. The article featured below presents an overview of four examples of how deep time and the facts are not on good terms.

Secular astronomers claim our universe is unimaginably ancient—almost 14 billion years old. Yet the Bible clearly teaches that God created the universe in the relatively recent past, about 6,000 years ago. A previous Impact article described how observations in our own solar system are much more consistent with recent creation than with long ages. But what about observations beyond our solar system? Are “deep space” observations more consistent with a young universe or an old one?

To finish reading, click on "Deep-Space Objects Are Young".




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

Log Rafts and Animal Dispersion

Biogeography is the expensive word for how critters became spread around the world, and it is studied by both secular and biblical creation scientists. Creationists suggest models of how living things reached their destinations after — or during — the Genesis Flood. Proponents of universal common ancestor are left treading water with no answers.

Image credit: morgueFile / stickerstack

We have discussed animal dispersal before including the red fox, and also material on how animals can raft across oceans, including observed of animals using whatever was available to travel the Pacific after a tsunami. Evolutionists and atheists have ridiculed the idea of floating log rafts and the like, but some are hitching a ride on this concept.

Mat and raft concepts have been floating around for many years. Dr. Steve Austin presented a floating mat model for coal seams, and others began developing this model for animal and plant biogeography. The following article discusses some of the history of the model, its continuing development, and how evolutionary explanations fail.

One of the more regular accusations hurled at creationists is that the animals that came off the ark could not have reached the remote areas of the world, such as islands and the Americas after the flood. This paper will discuss the shortcomings of evolutionary ideas regarding biogeography and demonstrate how a creation model fits what we observe today.

To read the full article, click on "Floating Log Rafts — A Model for Post-Flood Biogeography".



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

Evolution and Back Pain

My friend Stormie Waters was in a discussion with her friend Ruby Slippers about back pain. They rode on over to my spread and wondered if I knew about it. So I commenced to doing what any cowboy would do, and looked up back ailments from reliable sources.

Credit: Freeimages / kubelik2

The story goes that people who have back pain can blame it on evolution, as we got up from walking on all fours too soon. Evidence? Loose associations, circular reasoning, and especially Darwinian presuppositions. This is another area where evolutionary thinking has hindered medical science.

There are all sorts of treatments suggested and prescribed, but they do not help. In fact, some are even harmful. There are secular scientists who are catching onInstead, medical doctors and scientists would be far more helpful if they realized that we were created, not evolved, and there are more effective ways of alleviating pain. That is good news for me because there is seldom a day that goes by where I am not hurting.

The headline of the latest New Scientist says it all, “The back pain epidemic: Why popular treatments are making it worse,” adding, “Chronic back pain is on the rise – in part because the way we treat it often does more harm than good. It’s time to think differently about our aches.” The problem is not small. Up to 90% of all Americans suffer at least one debilitating episode of back pain during their lives.  Furthermore, back pain is one of the leading causes of disability around the world. In the U.S. alone, it costs 635 billion dollars a year in medical bills and loss of productivity.

To finish reading and learning, click on "Evolution Did Not Cause Back Pain". Although the article is more thorough, the short video below is also helpful:



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

Carnivorous Caterpillars in the Post-Fall World

Way out yonder in Hawaii, they have themselves a few carnivorous caterpillars. These moth larvae in this isolated area are the only ones known to essentially hunt for other insects. But in an originally very good world at creation, how did this behavior come about?

Credit: Clker clipart

There are other critters that display unexpected carnivory and rather anti-social behaviors that appear to have been designed for such purposes.This does not fit evolutionary models because it appears that genetic patterns have been modified but no new genetic information has been added. Biblical creationists know that there is some explaining to do regarding this predation, drawing from the Bible (including the meanings of Hebrew words), and non-aggressive behaviors (such as vegetarian eating habits in carnivores).

Carnivorous caterpillars are some of the more intriguing insects found in Hawaii. While there are more than a thousand species of Eupithecia moths worldwide, the caterpillars of only six of them — all found in Hawaii — are known to be carnivorous.

These caterpillars attach one end of themselves to the surface of a plant and lie in ambush. When an unsuspecting insect comes along and brushes against the bristles on the lower half of the caterpillar’s body, it instinctively whips around and catches its prey with its claw-like ‘legs’.

To bite into the rest of the article, click on "Killer caterpillar with ‘sting’ in its tail".

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

The Early Bird was Fossilized

Way back when, Archaeopteryx was considered the oldest bird fossil for quite a while. Archie was also considered a transitional form, part reptile and part bird. Unfortunately for owlhoots riding for the Darwin brand, this critter caused them a heap of problems. Then came the next bird and things became worse.

Protoavis image via Wikimedia Commons (CC0 1.0)

Archaeopteryx was studied many times and it was finally agreed that it was a true bird. Even so, it was in the "wrong" place in Darwin years, convoluting evolutionary timelines for alleged dinosaur-to-bird evolution. While Archie is better known (Betty, Reggie, Veronica, Jughead, and the others were not fossilized), Protoavis was discovered and less discussed because it is considered the oldest bird fossil, but this bird is more bird than the other bird. They have these problems because of their uniformitarian presuppositions. The Genesis Flood and a recent creation paradigm provide better explanations for what is observed. Yippie ky yay, secularists!

In 1983, paleontologist Sankar Chatterjee described Triassic bird fossils from west Texas. They belonged to a bird kind he named Protoavis. Talk about out of place! The Tecovas Formation from which Chatterjee’s teams collected several Protoavis fossils has an evolutionary age assignment of about 75 million years before Archaeopteryx, which is already too old to fit evolution. No wonder Chatterjee wrote, “From the beginning, Protoavis was received with much skepticism.”

To read the rest of the stone-cold article in its entirety, click on "The World's Oldest Bird Fossil".



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