Posts

Showing posts from September, 2013

The War on Christmas — Book Review

Image
Disclosure: I was given an advance copy of The War on Christmas: Battles in Faith, Tradition and Religious Expression , edited by Bodie Hodge, for review purposes. There was no requirement for me to write a favorable review. It is available in paperback at Answers In Genesis, New Leaf Publishing, Barnes and Noble, Amazon and others. What is going on, anyway? Christmas has been a part of Western culture for many years, and we did not need to worry about people getting "offended" at the use of the "C word". To be blunt, saying "Happy Holidays" is disingenuous; if there were no Christmas, there would be no "Black Friday" to get retailers back into the black, no gift exchanges, no special family gatherings. We all know what the holiday is! Now, the cashier where you buy your Christmas gifts can, in many cases, get in trouble for saying "Happy Christmas". Businesses have a "Holiday Party" in December and exchange gifts, but

Endocrine System Evolution — Saying It Makes It So!

Image
One of the most common explanations offered for the existence of complex systems, whether in biology, the cosmos or other areas, comes down to "Evolution Did It". No wonder people are confused about evolution, it is assumed by faith and then presented as a scientific fact! For example, the endocrine system is an amazingly system of regulation in the bloodstream. Hormones are released, and a kind of cell-to-cell communication takes place. Cells that are not targeted are not involved. The explanation is that it evolved that way. But how? What is the mechanism? Is there any evidence, or is it just an evolutionary worldview that is asserted? Instead of depending on time, chance, mutations and guesswork, creationists already know that such intricate marvels are evidence of the Creator's work in action. A student of zoology would be surprised to learn that, although researchers know much about the function of our endocrine system, they know essentially nothing about it

Those Pesky Definitions

Image
In a previous article, we examined how definitions of terms can greatly influence the path of a conversation and the conclusions that are reached . People will define terms based on their experiences, biases and worldviews. Sometimes they will use indistinct (and even prejudicial) words out of uninformed enthusiasm, but often, they are selected with a desire to manipulate others. When defining scientific terms (or "science" itself), people with a naturalistic worldview will seek to keep God out of the system, even though scientific processes prospered under a biblical worldview. For that matter, science can be defined to exclude God but also render disciplines such as psychology, sociology and so on to be "unscientific", and astrology becomes scientific. (One tactic is to use the fallacy of reification to turn "science" into some kind of entity, as in, "Science says...") Some people cannot distinguish between operational and observable scie

"Deadly Disclosures" by Julie Cave — Book Review

Image
For someone who is not all that experienced in doing book reviews — here I go again! Deadly Disclosures  is not the kind of book that I expected to read. Most of my reading these days is nonfiction. (I agree with some other people that so much of Christian fiction is poorly written and unbelievable, "preachy", with the main character becoming a Christian and then everything comes up roses. The committed Christian life is not easy.) The e-book was on sale at Answers In Genesis , and I thought I would give a Christian mystery with a creationist viewpoint a try. I'm glad I did, and have to restrain myself from diving into the next two books of the trilogy because of time commitments. Julie Cave shows her talent in several ways. We received plot twists, suspense, emotion and other things expected in a murder mystery. There are little extras that add color and realism to the story, including humor and quirks in the characters (I like the occasional sarcasm). Certa

Jurassic No-Parking

Image
Remember that movie about extracting DNA from amber and then engineering dinosaurs that run rampant? Suspense, people getting eaten, music by John Williams, produced by Steven Spielberg, fabulous special effects? Wasn't true to the book in several ways, but never mind about that now. It was a propaganda tool for evolution and millions of years, but I think they were simply using what was commonly accepted as science, though it was historical science with some speculative operational science added to the story. Neat idea about extracting DNA from amber, though. stock.xchng/EdwinP Ain't happening, Zeke. DNA deteriorates too much. It is useless after thousands of years, let alone, after millions of years. The stuff (and the Earth itself) just is not that old. Claims of ancient  DNA  hundreds of thousands of years old may be false.  No  DNA was found in an insect encased in amber said to be 10,600 years old. The article on Science Daily suggests that a study publis

Strange, the Universe Does Not LOOK That Old...

Image
The "Big Bang" idea is constantly in trouble except in the minds of fundamentalist evolutionists. Scientists keep adjusting their conjectures about the age of the universe to fit observed data. (Of course, merely asserting something based on unprovable evolutionary presuppositions is the opposite of real science.) Sometimes, they have to adjust their speculations. Image location: Hubblesite (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) The more we look, the more we see that the universe has the appearance of maturity for far too long according to evolutionary timetables. Worse for them, there is diversity in the galaxies that does not fit the traditional "In the beginning was nothing, which exploded for no reason and then the orderly, complex universe formed" model. Evidence continues to mount that the universe and its contents appeared mature from the beginning. Surprising abrupt diversity near the start :  Galaxies were diverse, like those seen

More Genetic Discoveries Refute Evolution

Image
We had the fiasco of " junk DNA ", where evolutionary scientists examined certain aspects of the genome, didn't understand some things and called them "junk". When more extensive examination of the genome was undertaken, those genes were no longer considered junk. There was also the "pseudogene" follies, where something else that was not understood was considered worthless and tagged "pseudogenes", actually very important . Now "orphan genes" are making evolutionists miserable. Photo date 1919. PD-US (1923). Some genes are common to living organisms, causing evolutionists to claim that commonality is proof of evolution instead of evidence of a Master Designer. But there are "orphan genes", unique to particular species, that are not only problematic to evolution, but friendly to biblical creation. An important category of "rogue" genetic data that utterly defies evolutionary predictions is the common occu

Can an Aerospace Engineer be a Creationist?

Image
Taken behind our apartment complex. The NCSE/BCSE task force are looking for me. Main Title Theme from the Television Series "Airwolf" by Sylvester Levay on Grooveshark Some evolutionists cannot distinguish between historical science (origins research) and observational (practical) science. There are those who believe that if you do not have the "proper" view of origins (evolutionary), then you are not really a scientist and are likely to make space rockets crash. Such views are not only ignorant, but bigoted. The fact is that your view of origins does not affect your ability to do real science. Creationist scientists  are  "real" scientists. Like so: Dr Dewey Hodges has been a professor of aerospace engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta since 1986. A native of Tennessee, he received his M.S. (1970) and Ph.D. (1973) degrees in aerospace engineering from Stanford University in California. For sixteen years, he was a res

Trust Me — I'm an Evolutionist

Image
Once again, it needs to be said: Scientists are human.  They have the same tendencies toward avarice, nobility, bias and so on that regular people have. But regular people put them on a pedestal and make them almost super human, without emotions and totally objective. How fair is that? Also, science fields are high-pressure and can be ruthless, demanding results . When you take a person who wants to succeed in a rough environment, well, they can give in to their sinful nature a bit more readily that some people. Evolutionists presume that evolution is true, and argue from there. Using their Darwin Spectacles, they see "evidence" of it that actually does not exist (or worse, miss data that refutes evolution and gives evidence for the Creator). Some are so religious about their evolutionary mindset, they will resort to any means necessary to get someone to believe in their imaginary gods of chance, time, mutations, natural selection and so on. Their worldview affects the

Are Evolutionists Tolerant? Nope!

Image
Those undaunted defenders of Darwinism are stepping up their attacks. Allow people to see the flaws in evolution? Present evolution honestly in textbooks? Ranging from the fury of the "New Atheists", to the propaganda mills like NCSE, to the dishonest BCSE and the useful idiots who support them , to the wandering evolutionists who patrol the Web — academic, intellectual and religious freedoms are receiving more pressure all the time. Some people are not even allowed to have a private opinion that disagrees with evolution! Some recent cases of intolerance against  Darwin skeptics are so extreme, they defy all logic or propriety.  Yet when Darwinists promote radical ideas, they get a pass. The Discovery Institute is on a campaign to defend the career and reputation of a Ball State University professor, Eric Hedin, who dared to present both sides of the debate over intelligent design instead of just the pro-Darwin side (see Evolution News & Views).  Not only t

Audio Saturday: More about Dinosaurs and Man

Image
A while back, I did a review of  Chronicles of Dinosauria: The History & Mystery of Dinosaurs and Man . Today's link to "Real Science Radio" reviews Dire Dragons  by Vance Nelson. Also, Bob and Fred discuss evidence that dragons and man lived together. You can download or listen here .

Mudskippers — The Evolutionists' Worst Nightmare

Image
Just a mudskipper. No Gilligan, Mary Ann, Ginger, Professor... morgueFile/dantada In the "Just So Stories" of Darwin's Cheerleaders, the mudskipper has been proclaimed "the creationist's worst nightmare". This is based on massive circular reasoning, arbitrary assertions, imaginative cladistics and abundant presuppositions. However, when stripping away the "Aha! Gotcha! Proof of evolution!" attitude and taking a closer look at the critters, we see something different: Evidence of intricate design by the Creator, and yet another refutation of evolutionism. If you have ever seen a wildlife documentary on tropical mangrove swamps, you will likely have observed mudskippers at work and play. These unusual fish, about 15 cm (6 in) long, are a type of goby. Swimming in water, they seem no more remarkable than other fish. However, once the tide goes out to expose the mudflats, it’s a different matter altogether. Comedians among fishes Mudskippe

Bill Nye Almost Debates

Image
Bill "I Play A Scientist On TV" Nye, poster boy for evolutionism propaganda, probably came as close to meeting the debate challenge  from Answers In Genesis as he ever will.  Nye has been badmouthing creation science, showing his lack of understanding of it, displaying ignorance of science itself (ironic, because he did observational science on television), creating straw man arguments about creationists and generally making a fool of himself — to thunderous applause from the bigoted Evo Sith. A forum was aired on Al Jazeera America discussing the inclusions of criticism of evolution in Texas textbooks. Judging from Dr. Georgia Purdom's account, Bill Nye acted like a typical evolutionary ideologue who must protect  "science" from scrutiny. He expressed his opinions, but they were without actual substance. Much like so many others who attack creation science. Bill Nye the Science Guy and Kathy Miller from the Texas Freedom Foundation represented the

Chilling Effects of Bad Ice Age Models

Image
Ice age theories and models keep coming and going. And some get brought back, even though they are defective. Evolutionary geologists presume that the Earth is billions of years old, and they presume that evolution is true. After all, in the view of evolutionists, an ancient planet is essential for evolution to happen. However, ice age models simply do not fit the observed data and have serious problems. U.S. Geological Survey/photo by Shad O'Neel Secular geologists have a dreadful time attempting to explain how an ice age starts and, worse, how it stops. Compounding the problem is that they believe in several ice ages that cannot be properly explained. So, despite the problems, they dredged up a failed model from 1941 at gave a try at forcing some data into it to make it work. Creationist do not have these problems. The Flood models fit the data and concepts with far less strain than the secular versions. Paleoclimate modelers believe they have finally solved the myster

Dark Matter Doesn't Really

Image
The majority of evolutionary cosmologists and cosmogonists hold to the "Big Bang" theory of the origin of the universe. (Many do not believe in the Big Bang, however.) From this explosion came order and complexity. When problems occur, the theory gets adjusted and "retrofitted" to account for some of the observed data. Sort of like the imaginary "Multiverse" . Of course, biblical creationist scientists do not need to resort to such contrivances. Source: Hubblesite.org Using circular reasoning and presuppositions, these secular true believer cosmologists made up the idea of "dark matter". (By the way, it's interesting that secularists who hate presuppositional apologetics from Christians use their own version so often.) Starting with the assumption that the Big Bang is true, and that all of the matter in the universe cannot be accounted for, the rest of the matter in the universe must be dark, unobserved, unverified — and lots of it.

Ribose, Phosphate, Mars and the Origin of Life

Image
Origin of life researchers are getting desperate. By saying that life may have originated in outer space and then found its way to Earth ("panspermia") and then evolved, they are only pushing back the question and making things worse. Not only do they push the problem out into space , they have to postulate a believable model of how it arrived through space, survived the trip through our atmosphere and so on. And yet, they're saying that life may have arisen on Mars, even though there is no chance of life there . Some postulate that we are all actually Martians . NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS There are contradictory papers about life originating on Mars, and they are stymied by RNA, phosphates, ribose and water. All of these desperate attempts to explain away the Creator lead to serious facepalm responses. A second article proposes life began on Mars, prompting some observers to point out the failures of naturalistic origin-of-life theories. After Steven Benner pro

Book Review — Chronicles of Dinosauria

Image
— Cowboy Bob Sorensen Having been a follower of the Chronicles of Dinosauria Facebook Page for a few weeks, I was increasingly interested in getting a copy of the book, despite my huge backlog of reading material. So I inquired about the possibility of buying an autographed copy. Richard Dobbs, the illustrator, sent me a copy and the request that I write an honest opinion of the book. So, there's the history and a disclosure: I was given Chronicles of Dinosauria: The History & Mystery of Dinosaurs and Man without charge for review purposes, and I am not expected to write a positive review. My honest opinion is that this book is definitely worth owning! I'll start with the layout. This is not a huge volume, and I was easily able to read it in one day. (And look forward to reading it again.) Author Dave Woetzel describes the book as a "scrapbook", and it does have a scrapbook appearance to it. There is nothing boring in the page design, and the ill

Another Grand Canyon?

Image
Another canyon has been discovered. It's longer than the Grand Canyon, but not as deep. This canyon is under the ice of Greenland, so it took the advanced technology (including radar, which mapped cloud-shrouded planet Venus) of NASA's " Operation Icebridge " to find it. The existence of this huge canyon under the ice defies geological assumptions about the age of the Earth and ice ages. Instead, it may very well be a source of information for young Earth creationists. A canyon longer than Grand Canyon has been discovered under the ice of Greenland.  Scientists are surprised that it has persisted through the ice ages. Science Magazine announced the discovery of a giant “mega-canyon” in bedrock under Greenland’s ice pack by airborne radar in  NASA ’s Operation IceBridge.  The BBC  News includes a radar map of the canyon, and a video explaining the significance of the never-before-seen feature. It’s less than half as deep as the Grand Canyon (800 m) but ove

Troublesome Venus

Image
As most people know, Venus is the planet closest to Earth, and second from the Sun. For thousands of years, people have looked at it in admiration and wonder. Like the moon, Venus goes through phases. Unlike the moon, Venus appears to have different sizes during its phases. Galileo documented this effect, which began the overthrow of the geocentric (the Earth is stationary and everything orbits it) systems of Ptolemy and Aristotle, and the establishment of the heliocentric (Earth orbits the Sun) system that we have today. NASA/ NSSDC Photo Gallery From an evolutionary cosmology perspective, Venus is a very naughty girl, what with confusing scientists and all. Scientists thought that she was very similar to Earth, and called a "twin". Well, an evil twin. She rotates the wrong way, has a toxic atmosphere and is the hottest body (no, not that way , I mean literally hottest) in the solar system. Creationists are not bothered in the least by the contrary "behavior&qu

Evolutionists and Assumptions

Image
One of the most frequent problems that creationists have with evolutionists is that they refuse to do their homework. That is, they will indulge in prejudicial conjecture (making uninformed assertions) as well as building straw man arguments against creationists. They do not know what we believe and teach, and will rely on the equivalent of rumors to form their opinions. Many times, we have to correct evolutionists about what evolutionist actually believe! Voyager 2, NASA One area where evolutionists humiliate themselves is when they assert things that are simply untrue (including how evolution makes useful predictions). While there are many false claims about creationists, I will focus on one: The untrue assertion that creationists do not make valid predictions. One fellow challenged me on Twitter to give just one  creationist prediction that was true. I told him about Dr. Russell Humphreys and his predictions about planetary magnetic fields , which were proven correct and the