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

Friday, November 30, 2018

Incredible Preservation of Lung Tissue

The subject of well-preserved soft tissues in dinosaurs is fascinating (and also infuriating for dust-to-diplodocus evolutionists). Reports of these discoveries in other critters are also noteworthy. Evolutionists have to work from deep time presuppositions, so they are flustered by discoveries that do not fit their worldview.

A bird fossil with remarkably-well preserved soft tissues was found in "dinosaur era" rocks. This further refutes the  dinosaur-to-bird evolution concept.
Archaeorhynchus fossil image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Ghedoghedo (CC by-SA 4.0)
One "impossible" fossil discovery is of an arthropod where bits of neural tissue were preserved. Stormie Waters told me that there is considerable consternation up at the Darwin Ranch about another fossil find: a bird. Whether or not scientists are using fossil loosely, to mean permineralized or if the tissues themselves were intact. Either way, soft tissues are delicate things, and a true bird with avian lungs in the "dinosaur age" exists. The feathers were looking mighty good, too. This further refutes the dinosaur-to-bird evolution concept. Both dinosaurs and birds were created recently, evolution is not a factor. Yippie ky yay, secularists!
For the first time, soft tissue showing details of lung structure have been found in a fossil bird said to be 120 million years old.

PNAS just printed a paper with another soft-tissue bombshell: Wang et al., “Archaeorhynchus preserving significant soft tissue including probable fossilized lungs.” It’s not the first fossil of Archaeorhynchus spathula, a pigeon-sized bird sporting a fantail and avian lungs. It’s also not the first fossil with probable lung tissue. It is, however, the first fossil showing details of avian lung tissue so well-preserved as to determine the lung structure. The soft tissue traces appear in pairs, supporting the idea that they are preserved lungs rather than other organs.
To read the rest, click on "Soft Lung Tissue Found in Modern-Looking Bird from Dinosaur Era". Here is a similar article, "Fossilized Bird Lung Inflates Confidence in Creation".

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

Thursday, November 29, 2018

Microbal Disperson and the Genesis Flood

Both creationists and Darwinists study biogeography, which is the dispersal of living things around the globe. Creationists say that critters (more precisely, macroorganisms) dispersed after the Genesis Flood by various means. Some creationary suggestions (such as rafting) have been supported by secular scientists. What about on the microorganism level?

This is a slide culture of a Streptomyces sp. bacteria, which had been cultivated on tap water agar.
Credit: CDC / Dr. David Berd (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Microbes do not have a history of traveling well, but many of the same kinds (biblical kinds apply here as well as on the macroorganism level). The paper linked below discusses how evolutionists cannot explain the biogeography of microorganisms, but the Genesis Flood is the most plausible model. It is rather technical and lengthy, but people with knowledge of science can still get something out of it as well as those with advanced training.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the claims made within microbial biogeography to see how Noah’s Flood applies to it. In this paper, there will not be a treatment of all ecosystems, but more of a focus on soil ecosystems. To do this, the fossil record is surveyed as scientific evidence for a global Flood. Then, a brief survey of macroorganisms and microorganisms are offered to highlight apparent discrepancies in biogeography. From the discussion of microorganism biogeography, a definition of the microbial kind is proposed around the family or genus level. Having established the microbial kind, different dispersal mechanisms are evaluated for their plausibility in providing the global distribution of the microbial kind over land (which is discussed next). Then, the biblical case for Noah’s Flood becomes the primary mechanism in place for producing global biogeography of the microbial kind in soils. A model for the Flood as a mechanism of microbial biogeography is offered with a specific case study in the soil bacteria Streptomyces. Finally, evidence from microbial biogeography is briefly discussed in terms of competing worldviews.
To read the entire paper, click on "Living Evidence of a Global Catastrophe: How Microbial Biogeography Supports Noah’s Flood".

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

Wednesday, November 28, 2018

Genetic Human Experimentation and Ethics

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Big news from Hong Kong. An announcement made there Monday, November 26, 2018, that He Jiankui used CRISPR gene editing technology to produce the first modified babies. Many scientists are outraged. This kind of "medical research" is, to be blunt, human experimentation. It is also illegal in the United States and other parts of the world.

An announcement in China involves the birth of genetically modified babies. Such activity is illegal and considered unethical in most of the world, and many serious considerations are raised.
Background image courtesy of Why?Outreach
A large part of the concern involves ethics. Some American scientists are upset that we did not do it first because we would have done it right. It sounds like their teeth are on edge from sour grapes at not being the first to succeed. Would they have done the genetic altering more ethically? That'll be the day! These people want laws changed to break "biological shackles" for their experimentation.

Bible-believing Christians know that people are created in the image of God. Materialists have a worldview that advocate Scientism and evolution, and they reduce humans to mere biological functions. Their view of ethics does not have a consistent moral foundation, so it would not be surprising to this child to learn that secular scientists in the West modified their ethics as well as the genes of children. Indeed, they are not meddling with the immediate child or children, but subsequent generations.

Complaints of secular scientists do not hold much credibility when given examination, especially their actions and attitudes in recent history. This kind of thing has serious ramifications, and such tinkering will only escalate since our Creator is not allowed in the lab. Someday , such science may become Orwellian. It is getting closer to that in China, since they are far less opposed to ethical and moral considerations in science. Not surprising, since China is known for trampling human rights in general.

The inspiration for this article came from an insightful podcast by Dr. Albert Mohler. I'd be much obliged if you'd read the transcript or listen to it. To do so, click and look for "As scientist claims first babies have been born using gene-editing technology CRISPR, the ethical implications are massive". The rest of the podcast should be mighty interesting for you as well. 

This article may be expanded later if additional relevant information becomes available.

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

Tuesday, November 27, 2018

The Engineered Adaptability of Sorghum

Many of us are familiar with having syrup on our flapjacks or splurging on the sweeter (but more expensive) real maple syrup. Ever had sorghum syrup? It is similar to molasses and can be quite sweet, to go easy on it until you know what you want. There are other uses for this flowering grain that is in the grass family. Some varieties of this genus can grow as tall as an adult. Sorghum has many uses including cereal and feed for livestock. It also has a way of thwarting evolutionary tales.

Sorghum is drought-resistant. Researchers have seen the relationship between microbes on the roots and how they all adapt to drought conditions.
Sorghum crop near the coastal town of Ayr in central Queensland
Credit: CSIRO /  John Coppi (CC by 3.0)
This stuff is resistant to drought, which is one reason it is popular in many parts of the world. Research on Sorghum bicolor shows that when it detects a drought coming on, it changes its root system to compensate. Microbes on the roots that have had the pleasure of a mutually-beneficial relationship fade away, and other microbes take over. And back again, as needed. Proselytizers of particles-to-plant evolution can only hem and haw, offering no reasonable model or explanation for this activity. Yet again, we see that the Master Engineer has designed something to adapt to its environment.
The drought tolerance of a popular grain, sorghum, makes it an important global food crop. A recent study finds that sorghum manipulates soil conditions to promote a beneficial change in the microbes living on its roots when water is scarce. The complex systems conferring such tight cooperation between plants and microbes point to a wise Creator for their origin far more reasonably than the mystical scenarios invoking strong “positive” and “negative” selection events offered by the researchers.
To read the rest, click on "Sorghum and Bacteria Cooperative Design".

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

Monday, November 26, 2018

Secular Miracles for the Big Bang

If you use a common but erroneous secular definition of miracle as meaning, "Something is impossible, but it happens anyway", then Big Bang stories are loaded with them. The original Big Bang has been patched together like a Frankenstein's monster and has little resemblance to the original tale. Since it does not work, secularists resort to Making Things Up™ and buffaloing the public with cosmic evolution stories.

The Big Bang does not work. To rescue it, secularists use propaganda and appeal to their own version of "miracles".
Image derived from a NASA illustration
(Usage of original does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Atheists have their own secular "miracles", and secular cosmologists add ponies to the miracle corral as well. Apparatchiks will come up with big talk about how the Big Bang has answers to all sorts of cosmogony questions — except when they don't. For that matter, they invoke bad science and secular miracles to explain the origin of our lil' ol' solar system.) Quite a lot of work to deny the work of the Creator.
A leading cosmologist’s account of the current big bang theory makes no sense unless the hearer is already committed to believing it.

. . .
Sutter is an astrophysicist at Ohio State University, and a popularizer of astronomy for radio, tours and magazines. He begins with his typical dramatic flair, glamorizing the big bang theory . . .
. . .
Maybe you have been in a situation where someone makes a presentation, talks up his project or widget, gets everybody excited, then says, “There’s just one little problem….” He proceeds to mention a difficulty that is fatal to the project, undermining all the prior hype. That’s what Sutter does next:
To find out what this is all about, click on "Big Bang Cosmology Needs Miracles". You may also like Dr. Henry Richter's article, "The frantic search for extraterrestrial life".

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

Saturday, November 24, 2018

Dating Methods, Archaeology, and the Bible

Archaeology is a fascinating area of study when it is used properly. It is certainly something I would not want to do, what with carefully digging in specific areas and examining things in the rain, under the hot sun, and so on. Be careful, can't break something important! My back wouldn't tolerate that. (Even more challenging by my way for reckoning is underwater archaeology.) Originally, archaeologists knew that the Bible was accurate, but secularists would still try to find excuses to scoff at it.

Although the Bible has been proven reliable, archaeologists use flawed secular methods to obtain inaccurate results.
Credit: US National Park Service
One famous case was that of the Hittites. People would say something to the effect of, "Archaeology has never found the Hittites, therefore, the Bible is wrong." That is an inexcusably fallacious argument from silence. It ignores the antiquity of the regions, and the fact that some folks are so selfish, they actually build homes and cities where archaeologists want to excavate. The nerve of some people, living and stuff. By the way, the "no Hittites found" remark was made even more foolish by the discovery of those ancient Hittites.

There are archaeological digs in places that have comparatively recent history, and many are supplemented by eyewitness accounts. Obviously, the further back you go, the more uncertain the dating can be. Then archaeologists bring in uncertain dating methods. The results obtained often conflict with history, such as the Viking bones in England.

What about the dates in the Bible as opposed to carbon-14 dating? Since the Bible has many details about dates, we can get a pretty good idea of when certain things happened. Of course, some owlhoots will say, "The Chinese civilization is older than the fairytales about your God that were written down by illiterate goat herders!" Good going, Poindexter. You just negated all historical writing by indicating it had to be written by eyewitnesses. Worse, you presuppose that the Bible is wrong and that the carbon-14, dendrochronology, and other dating methods of secularists are always right. Instead of using the eyewitness accounts in the Bible, secular scientists prefer their erroneous dating methods. This is probably because their ways are "more scientific" because they help support deep time speculations. We presuppose the truth of the Bible, which is self-affirming.
But what of claims of civilisations that, according to the biblical timeline, would pre-date the Flood? Is it reasonable to accept that a wheel discovered in Slovenia is between 5,100 and 5,350 years old, or that agriculture flourished and building projects were undertaken 12,000 years ago? Are these dates still in the biblical ‘ball-park’? Where do we draw the line when archaeologists claim that the oldest pottery is 18,300 years old, or the remains of “Mungo Man”, (the first reported Australian human), are 62,000 years old? Are these more recent ‘dates’ derived by more reliable methods than the highly questionable radiometric dating techniques used to argue that rocks are millions of years old?
To read the entire article, click on "How old? When archaeology conflicts with the Bible".

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

Friday, November 23, 2018

Engineered Adaptability through Logic

Some folks get a mite intimidated by the subject of logic, expecting highfalutin philosophical lingo and such. We are not going into that, even though it can be interesting. Everyone uses logic, but most do not even realize it. It is also the basis of computers and other electronic equipment.

Darwin was wrong. Instead of organisms responding to "pressures" that cause change, they were designed to adapt. Living things even use logic switches, all the way down to the cellular level!
Original image from Clker clipart, then modified
The basis for logic in electronics is very binary. Zero or one, on or off, yes or no, and so on. Contingencies are built on that ("If yes, then do this thing, else do something else") based on the sophistication of programs. It is amazing that living things have built-in logic systems.

The continuous environmental tracking (CET) model that is being designed by the Institute for Creation Research is demonstrating that Darwin was wrong. He utilized pantheism, such as external "forces", natural selection, and vague "pressures" to cause organisms to evolve. In reality, organisms are designed to adapt by the Master Engineer through internal mechanisms. Living creatures have internal logic switches all the way down to the cellular level.
When it comes to the biological function of adaptability, ICR’s model hypothesizes that if human engineers can use a tracking system to detect and maintain surveillance of a moving target, then creatures could employ a similar strategy to track and adapt to changing conditions. Human-engineered tracking systems incorporate three well-matched elements: input sensors, programmed logic mechanisms to regulate an internal selection of adaptable responses, and output “actuators” to execute responses.

Research demonstrates that organisms utilize these same elements to track changing conditions and produce highly regulated, targeted results that are typically characterized as rapid and repeatable.1 A previous article in this series discussed the key role of the sensors creatures use to track changing conditions. Three take-home lessons were:
To read the article in its entirety, click on "Engineered Adaptability: Logic Mechanisms Direct Creatures' Innate Adaptability".

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

Thursday, November 22, 2018

Giving Thanks to our Creator

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Although this is Thanksgiving Day in these here United States, this article is not only for today, nor is it just for Americans. People get overwrought about their concerns (some of them are mighty small if you get the right perspective), and we tend to shilly-shally about thanking God for the things we do have.

It is Thanksgiving Day in America, but giving thanks to God applies to everyone. Not just on this one day, either.
Credit: Unsplash / Priscilla Du Preez
Some of us commence to feasting with our friends and kinfolk, watch the Big Game, doze off (blaming it on the nonexistent "turkey coma"), have a few laughs, and saddle up for home. I hope y'all thanked your hosts for the victuals and hospitality. Did you say a prayer of thanks earlier? Just curious. Some people get their Thanksgiving meal at the homeless shelter. No, I'm not feeling bad about the good things I have, and neither should you. Just giving a bit of perspective.

There's something called grace.

"She passed away thirty years ago, Cowboy Bob!"

No, I'm not talking about a person. It gets a mite confusing, and mayhaps someone can explain it to me simple-like so I can understand it better. What I do understand is that the grace of God is a free gift; it is his unmerited favor that cannot be earned. God set the stars in the sky, made the sun and moon, established laws of physics, gave us understanding of the laws of logic, lets the rain fall on the just and the unjust —all of this is called common grace. Atheists mock God, and too many of God's people want the gifts, but not the Giver of gifts (Rom. 1: 19, 21). I reckon that when we are ungrateful for God's gifts, we are being like unbelievers, saying in our hearts that there is no God (Psalm 14:1). That is, when we take God's grace for granted or choose to sin against him, we are acting like he is not there. You savvy that?

We are saved by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8-9), even though we deserve death (Rom. 3:23). Salvation is his gift (Rom. 5:8, Rom. 6:23) and we become children of God (John 1:12). Jesus died on the cross for your sins and mine. He was buried and then bodily rose from the dead on the third day, defeating death. God's justice requires Hell for us because we are all wretched sinners, but in his mercy (giving us what we do not deserve), we can repent and have eternal life. When Christians sin, we can make things right with God (1 John 1:9). Giving thanks to God is important! Learn a bit about how thankfulness is expressed in Scripture. It is seen in the Psalms, and look for the word "thanks" in the New Testament as well. 

Followers of Jesus have been redeemed by the blood of God the Son, the Creator and Sustainer of the universe. Stop and ponder all that he has done for you, and give thanks.

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

Wednesday, November 21, 2018

Dance of the Binary Stars

You may not realize it, but when you look up at the stars and say, "That one there!", there is a good chance that it is a binary system. Yes, there are quite a few pairs of stars. Secular cosmologists base their speculations on the Big Bang and assume that the universe is billions of years old. From there, they work up to the idea that binary star systems are very old. That is not necessarily the case.

Secular cosmologists believe that binary stars develop over billions of years because of the Big Bang. Creation science research shows that is not the case.
Credit: NASA, ESA, H. Bond (STScI), and M. Barstow (University of Leicester)
via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 3.0)
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)

While all scientists work from their presuppositions, scientists can also be hindered by them. Why investigate when you "know" what is happening? There are several instances of creationists doing research and upsetting various evolutionary ideas — including stellar evolution.

Another atheopath troll making up his own reality (click for full size)

Binary stars are fun for both professional and amateur astronomers because they can see the changes in them. In their dance, they eclipse each other and transfer energy. This slows them down in their orbits, and this has been seen to occur much more rapidly than is expected in deep time conjectures. The actual results indicate a much younger universe than secularists want to believe.
The variation in a binary star’s apparent brightness during an eclipse reveals helpful details about both stars, including their temperature, atmosphere, geometry, mass, and much more. Without binary stars, we could only guess what the nature of stars is! We find that they are suns similar to our own, burning in the heavens!

As a creationist who believes God created the universe only a few thousand years ago, I have discovered that these fascinating two-in-one stars shed light on another aspect of our vast, mysterious universe. These stars must be young . . . a finding that undermines deep time theories of binary star evolution!
To read the entire article or download the audio version, click on "New Light from Binary Stars".

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

Tuesday, November 20, 2018

Replay the Tape of Life

Two main philosophies in evolutionism seem to be contradictory, but some folks try to marry them up anyhow. One of these is contingency, where many factors influence evolution and no one can predict what will happen. They must be annoyed with other evolutionists who (falsely) claim to have made evolutionary predictions.

Two main philosophies in evolution are at odds, and pantheism is more blatant.
Credit: Pixabay / Joshua Wilson (modified)
The opposite view is structuralism, where the universe causes biology to make certain kinds of organisms. Natural selection is given credit for making choices and having directionality. You can see why paganism and goddess worship are more blatant in evolutionary "science" nowadays, and that any kind of design has nothing to do with the Master Engineer. Whatever philosophy these secularists choose, they are still working on a form of the satirical-but-accurate Stuff Happens Law.
Similar features show up in evolutionary-unrelated groups. What does this mean?

Stephen Jay Gould famously asked what what happen in evolution if one could “replay the tape of life” and start over. Would humans result, or would the products of natural selection be unrecognizable? Gould strongly defended the latter position. He even doubted that intelligence or consciousness would emerge.
To read the rest, click on "Does the Stuff Happens Law Converge?"

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

Monday, November 19, 2018

Insects, Arachnids, and Surviving Cold Weather

Here in the Northern Hemisphere, winter is about a month away according to the calendar — as if seasons actually obeyed calendars. Meanwhile, the Southern Hemisphere is anticipating spring. Various creatures have to deal with the weather if they live in areas of extreme temperatures. 

Various creatures have ways of adapting to extreme cold when they have to. Have you wondered about those crawling and flying things?
Winter NightKonstantin Korovin, 1910
If you think on it for a spell, you might get to wondering why there are so many different ways that living things survive the cold. Not many can stay indoors and watch a John Wayne picture like I can. Seems like if evolution were true, there would be some uniformity for survival, but all we hear is something like, "EvolutionDidIt". The Master Engineer seems to like variety. Some creatures have a kind of antifreeze, like the Eastern box turtle or Antarctic icefish, for example. What about insects and arachnids? They have their ways as well.
On hot July days you might miss winter’s chill. In higher latitudes, however, it’s the coldness that needs mitigation. For example, Arctic insects and arachnids are cold-blooded, so freezing to death is a real possibility!
How can insects and arachnids withstand frigid forces of frost and freezing The answer highlights a strong apologetics argument for creation. Evolutionists are routinely guilty of the oversimplification fallacy, as if creature survival traits implement “one size fits all” simplicity.
To read the rest of this short article, click on "Withstanding Winter Weather".

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

Saturday, November 17, 2018

Psychology, Creation, and Awe

A university science project had a good start but was very incomplete. The students wanted to study awe. Different people have a sense of awe in different ways. Saddle up and ride over to the Grand Canyon in Arizona, or maybe venture to Victoria Falls on the  Zambezi River. Perhaps kayaking in Norway will do it for you. I get a sense of awe looking up at the night sky and thinking about our Creator's handiwork. But how can someone measure awe?

University students did a psychological study on the nature of awe. Psychology attempts to replace Christianity with its own materialistic, atheistic, and evolutionary views.
Credit: Freeimages / Henning W. Smith
The university study looked good at first, but there were many variables that needed to be included. In addition, psychology is by its nature evolutionary, atheistic, and materialistic , so the research was biased in that direction. Also, it can be debated whether or not psychology as a whole is a science. Worse, psychologists attempt to replace Christianity and creation with a false religion. Awe can best be experienced by getting in touch with the Creator and praising his work.
Psychologists get their hands into everything, but the objectivity of their science is questionable.

People are complex beings. They can be manipulated, but they can also resist manipulation. It’s impossible to know all the background factors and variables they may exhibit in certain situations. Let’s see how well science can measure “awe” – which psychologists at the University of Buffalo took on as a science project. Did they gather true knowledge, or just buffalo their readers?
To read the rest, click on "Can Psychology Measure Awe?"

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

Friday, November 16, 2018

The Science of Cuteness

Most of us have probably had the experience of approaching a group of people that are raving about how something is so cute and adorable. They are often excited about a baby, whether human or otherwise, or a pet. Those adjectives are subjective; cutness is often in the eye of the beholder. However, we seem to have an innate reaction to young'uns. Part of this may be a reaction to their helplessness.

Basement Cat is "cute-ing", as I call it.
Cat experts claim that laying on the back like this is a sign of trust and contentment.
Aside from making with the cooing sounds, responding to something we find as cute actually has an emotionar reaction within us to protect, and also releases the hormone oxytocin, which is good for us.  Proponents of universal common ancestor evolution basically say EvolutionDidIt in their homage to Darwin, but they really have no idea why we react to cuteness.

Biblical creationists have a far different take on our reactions. Before I continue, I want to mention that when I submitted an article, I was cautioned against asserting that a benefit (in this case, our response to cuteness) is really the result of the Master Engineer's design. We can infer and draw from other lines of reasoning, but should be careful about asserting too forcefully. That said, there are indications that our Creator did indeed have a purpose for our responses. One of these is that he facilitates relationships, and wants us to have empathy for creatures under our care.
How did you respond the last time you saw an adorable bunny, a rambunctious kitty, a big-eyed bear cub, or a delightful puppy? Your warm feelings are no accident. Scientists are discovering that everyone (or nearly everyone) has them.

. . .

Meanwhile, the pet industry is booming. Other organizations are dedicated entirely to rescuing abused animals. Commercials tug at our heart-strings and provoke outrage simply by showing a needy animal.

. . .

Have you ever wondered why we find certain animals so adorable? Interestingly, this question has spurred much curiosity in both the creation and evolution communities. The evolutionist wonders what survival benefits “adorable” imparts to an organism. A creationist wonders if the Creator intentionally included cute in His plan for creation.
To read the entire article or download the audio version, click on "The Science of Adorable".

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

Thursday, November 15, 2018

Searching for Space Aliens Increasingly Preposterous

Once again, the hands at the Darwin Ranch over at Deception Pass have been gnawing on the peyote buttons. Huge amounts of money are being spent on SETI and other efforts to find their imaginary friends: space aliens. They reckon that if intelligent life is out there, wants to be found, and has a hankering to talk with us, that would justify their faith in evolution and rejection of the Creator.

The SETI cult is getting more outlandish in its unscientific speculations.
Background image furnished by Why?Outreach (click for larger)
After all, since life cannot happen by chance here, so it must have happened out there and made its way here later. That does not solve the abiogenesis problem. I heard a phrase that applies: they're just kicking the can down the road. The SETI people are acting like a cult, using intelligently-designed equipment to search for signs of intelligence from creatures that were supposedly not formed by intelligence.

A "study" suggests that aliens might be purple. Why is that? What is the evidence, since nobody has actually had one come up and say, "Howdy! I'm not from around these parts, I'm from way far away up yonder." The MeerKAT radio telescope array is going to be more accurate in searching for — they don't rightly know. No, wait! Dark matter and dark energy (occult forces of physics that have never been seen) may have the answer. Some French folks say that just because we don't find aliens, that doesn't mean they aren't there. Funny how ghost searchers can't use that logic, or if we use it on atheists who reject evidence for God, they ridicule the statement.

That interstellar asteroid ‘Oumuamua cruised within telescope range and then took off for parts unknown. Scientists still do not know what it is, especially since it didn't move in an expected manner. Is it an asteroid? A comet? Maybe it's an alien probe that's just passing through. Or a different kind of alien spacecraft that was using a kind of sail technology. Could it be a probe using a sail?

You can read about these items and more by clicking on "SETI: A Fact-Free Occult Cult with Money". Also recommended: "The Origin of Life Circus Adds Old and New Acts". Remember, people get paid for making unsupportable statements and calling them "science", especially when it promotes the Bearded Buddha.

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

Wednesday, November 14, 2018

Evil and Worldviews

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

When people use the word evil, it can have different meanings. Angry atheists can call Christians evil for exposing their bad logic. Sometimes, people are referred to as evil simply because they do not like someone else. If you think on it, such casual references take away from what can be considered as genuinely evil. Today we are going to look at two kinds of evil in California — one is moral, the other is natural.

Two stories from California prompt us to look at what we call "evil". One is the shooting in Thousand Oaks, the other is the series of wildfires.
Credit: NOAA Environmental Visualization Laboratory
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
First, there is the murderous rampage in Thousand Oaks. As of this writing (you may want to search for updates as information is gathered), a shooter planned his murderous attack where he killed twelve people before killing himself. Most people will not have a problem referring to this as evil.

The next item to be referred to as evil is the abundance of fast-moving wildfires. News reports include words like "ruthless" and "furious". Those are inaccurate words to use, because they commit the fallacy of reification, where non-entities (the fires) are given human characteristics, such as volition. 

In an atheistic evolutionary worldview, to call such things evil is inconsistent. The murders are simply a human bundle of chemicals acting on its impulses, and there should be no judgment of right or wrong. In the second, this universe is here by accident anyway, and stuff happens. The world keeps on turning.

However, the biblical worldview is consistent and we are justified by responding with outrage at murder, and compassion. We care about people because we are created in God's image. Also, we care about wildlife and other aspects of God's creation in California. Only the Christian worldview has the necessary preconditions of intelligibility — beginning from the first verse of the Bible.

Now I'd like to turn you over to Dr. Albert Mohler, who inspired this post. To hear the podcast or read the transcript, click on "Two stories about death and evil—one moral evil, one natural evil—dominate weekend headlines out of California".

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

Tuesday, November 13, 2018

Taking Up Space — Book Review

The book "Taking Up Space" by Steven J. Wright deals with the sanctity of life, and has national healthcare crises. It will grab the reader's attention and also cause some serious thinking.
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

On Saturday, October 20, I had just finished reading a Western novel, which I do from time to time to "decompress". Shortly after lights out, Steven J. Wright sent me a message that I discovered the next morning. He wondered if I would do a review of his new novel, Taking Up Space, which was going to be published very soon. (After all, I wrote about his novel The Deception back in twenty aught thirteen.) I warned him that I would have to mention things I did not care for as well as positive, and he was okay with that. This child saddled up with some free ebook reading material under no obligation to give a glowing review. So, that's the disclaimer as well as a personal anecdote.

Most folks don't know that I am writing up a review for a book, video, or whatever. This was an interesting experience. I was corresponding with Mr. Wright and giving him progress reports as well as some thoughts along the way.

Although you have seen some book reviews on this site, I actually read very little Christian fiction. Writers (and movie makers) tend to have stereotypical characters, get preachy, and give sappy endings. Not in this case. Mr. Wright did not write a "Christian" novel here. Instead, it is a novel from a Christian perspective about the sanctity of life. A couple of times (don't tell anyone this, it'll spoil my tough guy image), I was almost moved to tears — both of sadness and anger. There's your first indication that you get involved in the story.

It is not difficult to imagine a writer with a secular worldview adding graphic violence and excessive profanity. No profanity here, and most of the violence is short. This shows that a good story can be told without going into such things.

Some of the material was influenced by the author's experiences. Wright mentions a place called The Sinks in the Smoky Mountains, a place he has visited several times. An exceptionally evil character that is introduced early in the book has the nickname Black Dog, which came from one of the Bell Witch legends. Steven is acquainted with the Bell Witch tales. Part of the book deals with the elderly and infirm, and their quality of life. He works with the elderly and handicapped, so he has direct knowledge of some of these subjects.

I like short chapters, and Taking Up Space has 37. This not only helps busy readers have a place to put it down (if they can) but to advance storylines. Yes, there are several stories here. We are introduced to important characters in the early chapters as the book progresses. I still wondered, "Who are these people, and what are they doing in my story?" The threads come together for the most part, directly or indirectly.

We have an unwanted pregnancy, weaselly legal manipulation, two national crises (this was the big story), and a section on euthanizing the handicapped and infirm. Although Mr. Wright does not use the term, eugenics is involved. Eugenics is closely tied to abortion, rejecting the sanctity of life. This is what happens when people reject our Creator's plans values.

One bad habit I have when reading or watching a show is to try and predict what is going to happen. That did not work very often here. I would be thinking, "I know what's gonna happen", and be wrong. That's a good thing because I think predictability is good in science, but undesirable in novels, movies, and so on.

I suspect that we all know, or have been one ourselves, an "armchair quarterback". That is, someone with an opinion on how to solve problems for which he or has little or no real knowledge. (Sure, you've read the player's statistics, so you know that the coach fouled up by not putting in one player and removing the other. But you weren't there.) Likewise, some folks think they can solve problems their spouses have at their places of employment, or how the government can deal with healthcare. But "solving" one problem can create others.

There are many times where the answers are not easy, and additional problems remain unforeseen. Mr. Wright shows how some subjects are far more difficult than we may imagine. I could write articles on several aspects of Taking Up Space or maybe have discussions in forums. Perhaps a simpler thing to say: this book can make you think.

That said, I still recommend Taking Up Space because it is thought-provoking, gives a strong pro-life position, has believable characters (with faults as well as qualities), intriguing storylines, and more. It certainly is not boring! For that matter, you might want to have members of a group each get a copy and use it for discussions.

Taking Up Space is available in both paperback and Kindle versions. Hey, just in time for Christmas shopping!

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

Monday, November 12, 2018

Ichthyosaurs Provide Genesis Flood Evidence

Before we commence to showing how ichthyosaurs are frustrating for Darwin's disciples and deep time proponents, I found out that something useful has been reissued. My Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Ring™ is kept in a glass case most of the time, but it shows signs of wear. Now trolls and other purveyors of evoporn can all have a new version!

Image furnished by Why?Outreach (click for larger)
Now, down to business. A somewhat baffling critter during dinosaur times was the ichthyosaur, which resembled dolphins and reptiles. There were several different kinds, and their name is Greek for "fish lizard". Dinosaurs had no evolutionary past, and their aquatic pals were also problematic, so instead of admitting that the logical explanation is recent special creation, evolutionists tried to come up with ancestors for ichthyosaurs. They failed, and not even their decoder rings could help. In reality, ichthyosaurs are examples of the design work of the Master Engineer with their fecundity as well as apparent swimming and hunting abilities.

Ichthyosaurs (fish lizards) were aquatic creatures that lived in dinosaur times. Evolutionists cannot provide evidence for their history, and their fossils testify of the Genesis Flood.
Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Haplochromis (CC BY-SA 3.0)
These creatures were rapidly buried. Not in one or two instances, but in various parts of the world — some were buried in the process of giving birth! Yet another clear indication of the global Genesis Flood.
One of the earliest complete fossils discovered was Ichthyosaurus, discovered between 1809–1811 by a pair of children in England. While parts of other Ichthyosaurus skeletons had been discovered previously, the English find was the first complete specimen. Since then thousands of ichthyosaur skeletons have been discovered, including numerous complete specimens. These unique creatures have captivated paleontologists for two centuries. They are well studied, and research on their skeletons has provided evidence for incredible design and the global flood.
 To finish reading, click on "Ichthyosaur: Evidence of Design and the Flood".

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

Saturday, November 10, 2018

Imitating the Rainbow Weevil?

Mention a weevil to a farmer, and you are likely to hear about how certain kinds destroy grain. You may have had them in your stored food. Even so, studying science and creation can provide some amazing insights into the work of the Master Engineer, and the rainbow weevil of the Philippines even inspires imitation.

The rainbow weevil of the Philippines displays the colors of the rainbows in each of its spots, which baffles evolutionists.

Because it displays all the colors of the visible rainbow in its spots, researchers want to examine it for applications (biomimetics) in areas that involve optics. These rainbow spots are the product of complex cell structures, which defy evolutionary explanations.
The beautiful glossy rainbow weevil from the Philippines is unique for the spectacular rainbow colored spots on its thorax and forewing. These circular spots produce all the colors, and in the same order, as those found in a rainbow in a series of successive rings. Many insects exhibit the ability to produce different types of colors, but it’s unusual for one to exhibit such a vast spectrum.

Researchers are deeply interested in understanding and mimicking this amazing engineering for many types of advanced applications. One team just published a paper evaluating the weevil’s novel trait.
To read the rest of the article, click on "Complex Engineering in Weevils Befuddles Evolution".

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

Friday, November 9, 2018

Our Stupid Evolutionary Ancestors

If you study on it, you might realize that human evolution scenarios are insulting to our intelligence. According to Darwin's disciples, our alleged ancestors were on this here planet for a mighty long time. They must have been dense as fence posts because they basically did nothing since they arrived — didn't bother to invent fence posts, even. Or develop agriculture. That goes against human nature, old son. 

Evolutionists insult our intelligence by claiming that after humans evolved, they did nothing for a few hundred thousand years.
Image provided by Why?Outreach, caveman insert from openclipart and modified
Evolutionists make a number of excuses when spinning yarns about our ancestors. Have your intelligence insulted and accept it because evolution. Ignore the fact that Neanderthals never were the dim-witted creatures that evolutionists pretended, but were upgraded to fully human (but "archaic") humans. Some of these tinhorns actually try to make climate change a factor in evolution. Kind of makes you lose your faith in Darwin, doesn't it? We were created recently, and the first man and woman were very intelligent, as were their descendants. Decay began shortly afterward, which may explain the lack of reasoning abilities in supposedly educated people.
Knowing what we know about human beings, ask if the Darwinian story is credible. In just 6,000 years of recorded history, humans went from grass shacks to the moon, computers, and supersonic flight. Darwinians, by contrast, say that nobody ever thought of a farm, a permanent dwelling, or a domesticated animal for at least 50 times as long! They believe that modern humans, as anatomically and mentally as capable as any of us, subsisted in caves as hunter-gatherers for over 300,000 years. And if you add in the Neanderthals, Denisovans, and Homo erectus (all upright-walking tool makers with controlled use of fire, capable of long-distance migration), they stretch human history back over a million years, approaching 200 times the length of human civilization! How can anybody believe that? Our ancestors would have to be complete idiots to go that long without ever inventing anything better than stone tools. Was there no Einstein or Edison among them?
To read the entire article, click on "Darwinism Makes Human Ancestors Out to Be Morons".

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

Thursday, November 8, 2018

The Next Ice Age

Some of us are old enough to remember when people were on news programs and interviews discussing the impending, irreversible ice age. They talked about how bad things would be, doom and gloom, all that nonsense. Then they changed their tune and started talking about global warming and ignoring important evidence so cultists like Bill Nye and his followers could spread fear and push for globalization. Al Gore was getting money and attention, but was way off in his predictions. Under the global climate change moniker, they can have it all: global warming and an ice age.

Before the global warming hysteria, we were given alarming promises of a coming ice age.
Credit: Pixabay / Natalia Kollegova
Secular scientists and compromising old earth Christians believe that there have been several ice ages in the earth's past. However, they cannot agree as to methods and mechanisms for it, especially since an ice age cannot be caused simply by colder temperatures. They cannot give a reasonable prediction of coming disasters.

The most common "evidence" is found in the astronomical (Milankovitch) theory, which relies on a paper that has been discredited. Biblical creation science models rely on the Genesis Flood, which includes volcanoes and plate tectonics. The global Flood will not happen again, we have God's promise on that, so there will not be another ice age. Let's get some things straightened out.
I remember the first time I saw the movie The Day After Tomorrow. I was fairly young, with a wild imagination, so when our community experienced a hailstorm shortly after, I thought we were about to experience another ice age. (I even started planning how my family and I would survive.) Now, years later, with a more informed understanding of the science behind the (actual) Ice Age, I am convinced that there is no reason to fear we will experience another ‘big freeze’. Unfortunately, most people don’t know what caused the Ice Age, and that only the biblical creation model explains it. This has resulted in some (I think unwarranted) panic and confusion on issues like ‘global warming’ and whether or not the earth is heading into another ice age as in the above movie. Let’s put those worries to rest.
To continue reading, click on "Will there be another Ice Age?"

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

Wednesday, November 7, 2018

Genome Evolution Train Wreck

In another post, I mentioned how the head honcho at the Darwin Ranch wants to bring in anger management experts. Fossils are being uncooperative with evolutionary views, and the staff are on the prod lately. Geology has been shown to be an ally of recent creation. Now they have broken open the fire water at the Ranch. The study of genetics, pioneered by Gregor Mendel (peas be upon him), is also supportive of biblical creation science.

Another train wreck for evolutionists is the human genome.
If interested, you can find the original 1895 photo at Wikimedia Commons,
and the source of the DNA image is at openclipart
Using bad science, the human genome was falsely declared to be loaded with "junk" DNA. Scientists who actually wanted to do something useful instead of making up tall tales to "prove" evolution undertook the ENCODE project, and learned that most of DNA is not junk. That's what creationists have been saying all along. Of course, some scientists reject the findings because evolution. Gotta keep that narrative going and deny the Creator his due, you know. 

The belief system previously resembled the idea that our genome was just coasting, waiting to be touched by the wand of the evolution fairy. Recent findings are refuting evolution right down to the genome.
A new study just came out that analyzed vast amounts of data from human genome samples from all over the world. Based on the evolutionists’ own theoretical model of evolution, 95% of the human genome is “restrained”—it can’t evolve.

According to the popular neutral model of evolutionary theory, much of the human genome is nothing but randomly evolving junk. All of this so-called neutral DNA that is allegedly not under any “selective restraint” only serves as fodder for functional new genes and traits to somehow magically arise and thus provide the engine of evolution.
To read the rest, click on "95% of Human Genome Can't Evolve".

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