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

Thursday, January 31, 2019

Exoplanets are also Young

Despite all the tall tales, speculations presented as science, and rescuing devices, secular astronomers and cosmologists are consistently unable to make the universe seem old. Accumulated evidence continues to affirm that our solar system is young, and star formation ideas continually fail. What about those exoplanets?

There are many reasons to believe the solar system and the universe itself are young. Outlandish ideas are brought in to salvage the belief of materialists that everything is very old.
Credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Since hopes of finding life outside our solar system are disappearing quick-like, mayhaps naturalists can salvage an old universe formed by cosmic evolution. The accretion concept of planetary formation is the best of the worst, and it does not hold up very well. People will believe in deep time despite the evidence, not because of it, and they come up with other things that get their hopes shot down, such as the idea of dust rings forming planets. Not working out so well, old son. Maybe disk instability is the way to explain rapid formation of planets without having to admit the universe was made recently by the omnipotent Creator.
Observations cause a major upset in planet formation theory, and the time needed for evolution.

Two days ago, we reported the evidence for youth in Saturn’s rings and moons (19 Dec 2018). A new report from Science Magazine extends this youth out to the planets around other stars. Daniel Clery, in his article “Hints of young planets puzzle theorists,” gives observational evidence that the long-standing “core accretion” model for planet formation is wrong. At least 20 exoplanets have dust disks that can’t be as old as expected. Keep in mind that planetary scientists still make ‘reckless drafts on the bank of time’ (2 July 2007) as do the geologists, tossing around millions and billions of years like politicians with OPM (other people’s money). In this quote, Clery sounds like a politician realizing there’s not enough revenue for his favorite program.
 To finish reading, click on "Exoplanets Are Young, Too".

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

Wednesday, January 30, 2019

Geoengineering, Climate Change, and the Genesis Flood

Some scientists are planning an experiment with releasing what is essentially chalk dust into the atmosphere. They think a large cloud of the stuff may reflect sunlight and cause global cooling, which may be useful geoengineering against global warming. They have ignored some important details in their hubris, and inadvertently point to science that supports the Ice Age resulting from the Genesis Flood.

Scientists are planning a test to see if they can affect climate change. They inadvertently point to science that supports the Ice Age resulting from the Genesis Flood.
Credit: Add Letters
Secular scientists often pretend to have more knowledge than they actually possess. This is seen in many areas, such as calling some parts of DNA "junk", deciding that some body parts are "vestigial", thinking that the moon would be a really swell place for a colony, failed evolutionary predictions regarding the fruit fly, the exceptional arrogance utilized in human gene editing experimentation, and so many more. Global climate change models spectacularly fail (just ask Algore), which is partially because they use faulty data; those tinhorns cannot even get the weather right in a three-day projection — and they prophesy the end of the world.

Sure, climate change exists, and it should be studied properly. Taxing or exterminating humans will not change anything. The biggest climate change was the Ice Age after the Genesis Flood. Uniformitarian scientists cannot provide plausible models for their multiple ice ages. Climate change is needed for an ice age. Sunlight reflection and oceanic warming caused by the Flood's volcanism were key ingredients for the one Ice Age we did have. Meanwhile, this child is not to thrilled with doing anything more than researching climate change through chalk dust; highfalutin secularists who think they know more than they do cause big problems.
Scientists think that such a cloud, if large enough, could reflect a significant amount of sunlight back into space, causing noticeable cooling on Earth. They have good reason to believe this. The 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines belched out a large amount of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere. Through a series of chemical reactions, small sulfuric acid droplets formed and remained in the stratosphere for quite some time. These tiny droplets reflected enough sunlight back into space to cause a noticeable drop in global temperatures of about 1° Fahrenheit, a phenomenon that lasted more than a year. The SCoPEx scientists think that the right kind of particles, if injected into the stratosphere, could likewise cause cooling by reflecting sunlight back into space.
To read the article in its entirety, click on "Geoengineering and the Post-Flood Ice Age".

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

Tuesday, January 29, 2019

The Perplexing Black Mountain of Queensland

If you head on over to Queensland in the northern part of Australia, there is a spooky bit of real estate known as Black Mountain, or Kalkajaka. Aboriginal people give several areas there religious significance. Indeed, their name translates to "place of the spear", but some folks call it the Mountain of Death because of all the legends, disappearances of people and animals, sightings of supernatural things, and so on. However, the mountain and surrounding areas are intensely interesting to geologists.

We can take a look at a biblical creation science view of Black Mountain's formation through Flood geology.
Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Ben Cordia (CC by-SA 4.0)
It looks like something big was doing some digging, but it's got a passel of granite and boulders. Sometimes you can hear it cracking in the hot sun after a cold night — which might inspire some imaginations. Uniformitarian geologists have their ideas that don't quite stand up to observational evidence. Let's take a look at a biblical creation science view of its formation through Flood geology.
As you first approach Black Mountain, 25 km south-west of Cooktown in North Queensland, it looks like it has been burned in a bushfire. However, the dark colour comes from the immense jumbled pile of black, blocky boulders, some as big as houses, that cover the whole mountain (figure 1). The intact solid granite core is said to lie beneath the jumbled broken blocks. The boulder fields of Black Mountain National Park form an impressive and distinctive landscape of international geological significance.
To read the rest, click on "Origin of Black Mountain, North Queensland, Australia". There are numerous links in the article for people who want to learn even more. The video below is supposed to start at about a minute and a half into it.

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

Monday, January 28, 2019

The Mysterious Narwhal

In cold, dark oceans lives a kind of whale called the narwhal. Kind of unsettling at first because of that single long horn growing out of its head like the mythical unicorn horse thing. It is difficult enough to study creatures who cannot have a discussion and answer questions, but even more so with elusive sea critters.

The narwhal is a whale with a horn on its head, which is really a tusk — a very long tooth — which has special purposes.
Narwhal illustration from Harper's, 1902, via Flickr / Internet Archive
The horn is used to puncture ships below the waterline, causing them to sink —

"No, Cowboy Bob, you're thinking of the Nautilus submarine in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea".

Oh, right. Well, the submarine did have a pointed thing, but never mind.

As I said earlier, it can be difficult to learn about elusive sea creatures. There are many speculations that seem reasonable, and we can hope for further research. The horn is not a horn, but a tusk — a very large tooth. Unlike our teeth, the sensitive part is on the outside, and the narwhal may be able to sense changes in water salinity and temperature. They seem to use it for hunting, and even fencing with other males.

There is no sign of evolution. Some creationists believe this tusk feature developed in comparatively recent years. This may fit the engineered adaptability hypothesis where creatures were created with the ability to adjust to the needs of their environments.
Like the horned white horses of ancient lore, narwhals, called the unicorns of the sea, are mythical—or at least nearly so. In remote areas around the Canadian Arctic and Greenland, these elusive whales dwell in an ice-covered region cloaked in darkness for half the year.

Most people recognize narwhals by their famous long tusk. But when asked to explain the tusk’s purpose, most people don’t have a clue. Even scientists aren’t fully sure. But such a prominent feature—a 9-foot (2.7 m) tooth—doesn’t arise by chance and keep getting passed down as a defining family feature unless there’s a reason. We just don’t know what it is yet.
To read the rest (which has a couple of good pictures) or to download the audio version, click on "Narwhal — Unicorn of the Sea".

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

Saturday, January 26, 2019

Taking a Stand for Biblical Creation

We seem to be living in a time of laziness and short attention spans, and it’s getting worse. People want flashy entertainment in movies, but how often do people read books nowadays? For that matter, writers of weblogs are being advised to keep it short. If someone writes a detailed comment about a post or article, they may get a tl;dr (Too long; didn’t read) reply. It was originally used in response to unnecessarily long, tedious comments, but now it’s thrown around with reckless abandon — even on good comments.

This is not the time to hide your light. If you believe in the gospel beginning from the first verse, what are you doing to spread the truth? Here are some recommendations.
Credit: Freeimages / Christian Carollo

Short Attention Spans and Social Media

I reckon one problem in today’s society is that people are tightly scheduled, even down to the minute. We don't want to take the time to read and learn. Another problem that adds to shorter attention spans is social media. (At The Question Evolution Project, we can post a link to a brilliant article, and five people click “Like”. Post a picture with a funny caption (often called a meme), and “Likes” can be in double or triple digits.) People like the funny pictures that do not take up much of their time.
Twitter is a great place to have a serious intellectual argument. I'm being facetious. Some people think the ideal length of a Tweet is 100 characters. Although they expanded their maximum character limit, less is considered better. Conversations on there get confusing, especially when almost anyone can jump in. Some people seem to expect deep stuff on Twitter, but it's not going to happen. Post a link to something outstanding, you may or may not get people clicking on it.

Promoting Shallow Thinking

It seems like reading and thinking are hard work, and social media are not helping. If you do have the time and attention, do a search of Bible verses that tell us to spend time in the Word, get good teaching, grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus, and so on. The Christian life is an ongoing process and a lifelong commitment. Some people do not spend time reading their Bibles, in prayer, in fellowship, or getting good teaching — then they wonder why their spiritual lives are lackluster. The Christian life takes commitment.
Likewise, we can find a corral-full of Christians who claim to believe the biblical account of creation and want to refute evolution. Unfortunately, they do not exhibit knowledge of creation. When challenged by anti-creationists who have studied up on stock objections, these Christians are intimidated and the unbeliever claims to have won an "argument" or "refuted" the creationist. Captioned pictures are good in their own way, but not by themselves. I occasionally use them as illustrations in posts and articles but do not expect one to carry a deeper message all by its lonesome. If you study on it, people cannot learn much from just a picture.

Do Your Homework

Did that subtitle give you a little bit of anxiety like it did to me? Even so, the point is valid because learning never stops. It is good to share posts and pictures, but if we are serious about communicating the messages of biblical creation science and biblical authority, we should have a good working knowledge of the subjects. Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying we have to own advanced degrees on everything we discuss. Those who wish to attack us often expert the average Joe or Jane to be an expert on every subject, but that is a distraction. Related to this is being able to know where to look. Search engines can be your friends, as are the search functions on major biblical creation science sites.

Another aspect of doing the homework is to keep up with the sites: keep reading (despite the short attention span prevalent in the culture), watching videos, listening to presentations, and so on. I'll allow that looking at a computer screen can be tiring, but many browsers have "reader" functions, and I use free add-ons to send articles to my ebook reader (like this one, and another one that lets you save in different formats). Although I run a creation science ministry, there is no money coming in so I have a day job. Fortunately, I am able to convert videos to audio, and use the text-to-speech function so I can listen to books and articles at the workplace. (Yes, the robotic voice can be tedious, but you get used to it.) These things may give you some ideas, such as listening to material on your commute and so on.

We must also learn how to use our cognitive skills. God gave us minds and expects us to use them. Learn the basic logical fallacies for two reasons. First, so you can spot them when an anti-creationist is reacting to something you said or wrote (here are some lessons on those). Second, so we can do our best to glorify God with good reasoning. This sounds more difficult than it really is, but if you put some work into it, the rewards are eternal. Although this article is a bit lengthy and you might want to get comfy, I recommend reading "Loving God with all your mind: logic and creation".

Most importantly, don't be like a passel of other professing Christians and have no real knowledge of what and why you believe. Our theology drives our apologetics. 2 Peter 3:18 tells us to grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord. While it is good to become skilled with the basics of biblical creation science (many articles have sound theology and discuss biblical authority), we cannot have tunnel vision and let everything else go.

Standing Firm

There are some things to keep in mind when dealing with atheists, evolutionists, and other anti-creationists. Many of these points come from my experiences and the experiences of others:
  • Our faith is based on the Word of God, not on the ever-changing whims of human science philosophies. Many "facts" of science change, sometimes within hours. There is also a great deal of bad research and even fraud in the secular science industry. If our faith is based on those ideas, we're in a world of hurt.
  • Evidence is important, but should be presented in the correct framework. The unbeliever should not be elevated to the magisterial position of putting God on trial.
  • Do not be ashamed of the gospel. While some people think it is fun to ridicule Christians and especially biblical creationists, there is no reason to be ashamed of being a creationist or of the gospel.
  • Keep them on the subject. Many times, we can be asked to provide evidence for something. When we do this, they often jump to some other subject. This is often an indication that they do not wish to learn, but are intent on justifying their own fundamentally flawed worldviews.
  • Related to the above point, do not let them put you on the defensive. This is a manipulative tactic. Irrelevant attacks on God, people, misrepresenting the subject, and so on also show that they do not wish to learn. There comes a time to "shake the dust off your feet" and move on. Use your discernment.
  • Admit if you do not know the answer. Don't bluff. Sure, you can speculate as long as you make it clear that you are offering an opinion. When possible, use those search functions and find answers. Some people will claim victory with the logic of, "I asked the creationist a question. I did not get an answer. Creation science if false. Evolution is true. There is no Creator God!" Their egos are not our problem. We just have to do our part to the best of our ability. This may mean admitting ignorance.
  • Be gracious to honest enquirers, and don't let your pride be a problem. While a blasphemous attack may require a strong response, some folks are mighty tactless but actually do want answers. Jesus woudn't cuss someone out, neither should you.
  • You can participate in Question Evolution Day, annually on February 12. It can be where you are using the internet and adding the #questionevolutionday hashtag. Also, you can set up an event in a home or church; there are many possibilities.
Question Evolution Day is annually on February 12
Question Evolution Day is a global event.
It happens annually on February 12 (Darwin's birthday).
There is no charge to participate.

Nobody Said it would be Easy

Someone may object, “But people will say mean things about me, and I might be labeled as a science denier or something if I stand up for the truth of biblical creation!” Really? Ian Juby, Ken Ham, Dr. Jonathan Sarfati, David Rives, Eric Hovind, as well as many others who range from famous to obscure all get “labeled”, stalked, ridiculed, misrepresented and more. (I have a criminal cyberstalker who hates me and biblical creation science, called God a liar, rebels against God's Word — and is "more Christian" than I am! I didn't even know I had entered a contest... That nonsense won't make me quit.) There is a picture of Jesus with the caption something along the lines of, "I never said it would be easy. But it's worth it".

We have it easy in the Western world right now, but persecution is increasing; Christians in atheist and Mohammedan countries are severely persecuted and even murdered for being Christians; often even daring to own a Bible is a crime! Persecution has happened to men and women of whom the world was not worthy, and this happened from the beginning. We need to pray and put on the whole armor of God, and be ready to destroy speculations against Christ. Don’t be afraid of the pronouncements of the ungodly. It ain’t easy, old son. But we need to proclaim the truth and authority of the Bible — from the first verse. Don't be hiding your light.

What are you doing to help spread the message?

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

Friday, January 25, 2019

More Dinosaur Tracks and the Genesis Flood

Dinosaur trackways have been around for a while, and biblical creationists are giving them quite a bit of attention lately. Although soft tissues in dinosaurs and other critters have been found, defying deep time speculations of secularists, tracks are also problematic for secular scientists. The Brobdingnagian trackways down yonder in South America are worthy of note.

Another area of dinosaur trackways is extremely large and still more evidence for the Genesis Flood.
Credit: Jerry Daykin (CC by 2.0)
We know that tracks made in sand, clay, or other squishy stuff are not likely to fossilize because this process must happen rapidly and under the right conditions. The Cal Orcko tracks are numerous, first discovered in 1985 by a limestone mining company. When further tracks were uncovered in the 1990s, they realized that a bit of a mountain full of tracks existed.

If you have a notion to see the trackways for your ownself, better get a move on because they may not be available much longer. Interesting that they can be seen deteriorating in just a few years, but secularists expect us to think they lasted for millions of Darwin years, isn't it?

No, the various dinosaurs were not taking a hike up the hill. That formed much later when the land was uplifted by plate tectonics instigated by the Genesis Flood. Also, they appear purposeful, as if all of them were fleeing, not dancing.

After the fossilization process and uplifting, the mining company's discovery caused consternation and weak speculations among secular geologists. Creationists do not have any difficulty with the find, which supports Flood models.
In 1994, Bolivian workers quarrying high-grade limestone for cement reached a layer with too much quartz, a hard mineral, so they left it alone. As quarrying continued, more and more of the unwanted layer was exposed, forming a huge cliff and revealing hundreds of dinosaur trackways. The tracks are of at least eight different kinds of dinosaurs, including a pair of titanosaurs and a herd of 16 ankylosaurs. The layer also contains the longest dinosaur trackway in the world, over 500 m (1,640 ft), by a small theropod, possibly a juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex.
These rocks are part of the El Molino Formation which extends over much of Bolivia. The Vilquechico Formation of Peru and the Yacoraite Formation of Argentina contain similar dinosaur trackways, and all three are suspected to be merely different parts of the one continent-wide formation.
To finish reading, click on "The Cal Orcko (‘Lime Hill’) dinosaur trackways". The video below has some interesting pictures. Note the weak secular "explanation" of how the footprints formed, the obligatory "millions of years", and how the apparent fleeing was ignored.

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

Thursday, January 24, 2019

Picture the Tripod Fish

Tripod designs are efficient, whether to steady a camera or maybe Martian fighting machines with heat rays and stuff. Objects built with three legs are quite sturdy and secure, very unlikely to wobble. One surprising place to find a tripod is in the deep blue sea. Well, not so much blue at such depths. The tripod fish sets itself up on the sea floor and waits for supper.

The tripod fish lives deep in the ocean and has special features that affirm creation and defy evolutionary explanations.
Credit: NOAA via Wikimedia Commons
They are not hunters as you may have gathered, preferring instead for zooplankton to come drifting along. If you've watched fish in an aquarium, they move up and down while staying horizontal. That is from using the swim bladder. Tripod fish have those as well, but they are only suitable for the tremendous depths and pressures where they live. They can also reproduce without a mate. There are many features built into the tripod fish that clearly highlight the Master Engineer's work, and thwart evolutionary explanations.
One of the least–well-understood ecosystems in the world is the deep-sea floor. This is understandable. The deep sea can only be reached using robotic submersibles and larger submarine vehicles. This difficulty in reaching the habitat has been a significant barrier to the study of the deep-sea fauna. However, even with these barriers, some creatures have still been studied. One such creature is the remarkably specialized tripod fish. The tripod fish is a truly unique creature that exhibits remarkable evidence of God’s hand in his creation.

Tripod fish are denizens of the deep sea, living up to 6000 meters below the surface. They have a near-worldwide distribution and are uniquely designed for their lifestyle. Instead of swimming along the bottom looking for food, this fish lets its food come to it. However, unlike frogfish or similar fish that rely on camouflage and ambush to nab their unsuspecting meal as it comes swimming by, tripod fish do not need to move to hunt.
To read the rest, set yourself up at "Tripod Fish: Denizens of the Deep Sea".

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

Wednesday, January 23, 2019

The Downward Spiral of Gene Editing Ethics

In late 2018, Dr. He Jiankui produced the first genetically-modified babies (see "Genetic Human Experimentation and Ethics" for commentary and a link to an insightful article). Jiankui used the CRISPR gene editing system, which takes skill and intelligence. Scientists with both secular and Christian worldviews condemned his actions. Essentially, those twin girls are human guinea pigs.

The gene editing in China that made children into human guinea pigs is not only an act of arrogance, but can lead to further unethical practices.
Assembled from graphics obtained at Openclipart
While scientists (like other folks) want to know what makes things work, but sometimes a little knowledge leads to a passel of hubris. People with a materialistic worldview — believing that life is the product of time, chance, and random processes — are not likely to show good judgment when it comes to ethics. Jiankui's wild gallop outraged both secular (materialists) and Christian professionals, which gives an indications of how egregious his transgressions were. Even the leftist-leaning publication The Atlantic published a list of problems with his work.

Just step up on the hill and get a bigger perspective. Scientists don't know everything, especially about the human genome. This tinhorn decided to tamper with genetics of children, which will affect many areas of their lives. Some of these effects will not be manifest right away. People like this make their own ethics at their own convenience. The end justifies the means, mein Herr! Without a biblical worldview that submits to the Creator, biological experimentation can quickly become a convenient evil for the elite.
A Chinese geneticist, Dr He Jiankui, has caused a firestorm for modifying babies’ genes using a technology called the CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing tool. Professor Jiankui is an associate professor in the Department of Biology of the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, China. By using intelligent design to modify natural genes, the well-educated Chinese scientist hoped to improve the genetic package in two girls. CRISPR-Cas9 exploits existing genetic tools and technology, such as bacteriophages, that were designed by God to perform specific tasks. Ironically, evolutionists believe a massive number of largely random mutations, without the help of any intelligence, turned single celled creatures, such as bacteria, into modern humans. We evolved by mistake, they believe, with no design or plan.

Uncharted Territory

In short, CRISPR and other technologies allow technicians to bring in genes from outside of the cell and incorporate them at specific locations inside a host cell. The report on the experiment said that Professor He Jiankui “helped make the world’s first genetically edited babies—twin girls by the pseudonyms Lulu and Nana—by altering their DNA while they were embryos to become resistant to future HIV infection.” One major concern was the possibility that gene editing could have unforeseeable negative consequences down the road. The gene altering could adversely affect other genes, or may adversely affect the immune system. In short, it is an experiment into uncharted territory that could have disastrous effects on the twins in the future.
To read the rest of this important article (there is some technical information in the middle), click on "Scientists Must Avoid the Slippery Slope of Designer Babies".

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

Tuesday, January 22, 2019

Zircon Crystals and Dating Methods

Several years ago, biblical creationists commenced to doing research in the Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth (RATE) project. This detailed physics and chemistry work was upsetting to proponents of deep time. Secularists have tried to wave off the results to no avail.

Helium in zircon crystals reveal that the earth is far younger than secularists want to believe. This upsets secular scientists but they cannot refute the facts.
Volcanic eruption in Hawaii image credit: Unsplash / Marc Szeglat
Scientists, whether naturalists or creationists, start with their presuppositions. Dr. Russell Humphreys (who accurately predicted the magnetic fields of several planets based on the biblical view of creation and was far more accurate than secular scientists) was at the forefront of the RATE project. They examined granitic rock that was supposed to be 1.5 billion years old. Radioactive processes produced helium in the rocks, and the helium/zircon measurements support an age of the earth that is thousands, not billions, of years old.
Zircons are tiny crystals of zirconium silicate (ZrSiO4) that originate in igneous rock, which forms when volcanic magma cools. It’s a very stable mineral that melts at 2550°C. Zircon is harder than quartz and almost as hard as diamond. Because of these characteristics, zircon is the mineral most frequently used in various radioisotope dating methods for dating rocks assumed to be at least a few hundred million years old. Its ability to retain impurities within its crystal lattice is very important in establishing the validity of these dating methods.

Zircon crystals usually contain trace amounts of uranium (U) and/or thorium (Th) when they cool. Once the zircons solidify, the uranium and/or thorium are trapped in the zircons’ crystal lattice and begin to undergo radioactive decay. As they decay, they produce helium and cause defects in the crystal due to radiation damage.
To finish reading this technical article, click on "Helium Retention in Zircons Demonstrates a Young Earth". The short video below gives a simplified introduction to the process. In related news, a less technical article about radon gas also supports recent creation. To read this, click on "National Radon Action Month and Creation".

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

Sunday, January 20, 2019

The Sky is the Limit for Cosmic Tall Tales

It is probably human nature to wonder how something happened, such as when someone gets new employment or when a vehicle is seen in a ditch. Following close on the heels of why is the question of how something happened. Secular scientists disrelish admitting that they really do not have the answers to many things, so they use the scientific principle of Making Things Up™. This is frequently evident in the tall tales of cosmologists and cosmogonists.

Secularists prefer stories instead of modifying their ideas in light of evidence. In fact, some are lying outright about cosmology and cosmogony.
Credit: ESA/Hubble & NASA, Acknowledgement: Sarajedini et al
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site content)
There are a couple of things that we have seen here many times before. First, scientists are like the rest of us and interpret data based on their presuppositions. Second, the narrative (which includes models) drives the interpretation. If facts interfere with the story, the facts are put out to pasture. Two articles are linked below that illustrate how secularists would rather tell cosmic evolution stories than admit that they Creator did the creation work more recently than they wish to admit.
For example, a newly discovered galaxy far, far away was not as large in size as expected. Many other galaxies found at this stage of their story were much more massive, but the high dust content of this new galaxy meant that somehow it must have evolved from the primordial gas much earlier than expected. It should have been an ‘infant’ galaxy due to its size but was found to be a ‘mature’ galaxy due to its dust content even though it is small in size.

This new one is now simply rebadged as being ‘typical’. In short, it doesn’t matter what is discovered, now or into the future. The story will always be re-written or amended or embellished. In cosmology this is what is called ‘science’. As indicated, I call it good storytelling.
To read this first article in its entirety, click on "Cosmic storytelling — The never ending big bang story". The next article below is also quite startling.

Dark matter is a rescuing device utilized to prop up the Big Bang. Neither idea has any evidence to support it. Although dark matter has never been observed or responded to tests, it has been inferred and asserted — often by ignoring other possible explanations for what has been seen in stars and galaxies. The tall tales of "science" are spread around as if they were the products of genuine research, but some of these sidewinders are downright dishonest. In one instance, you'd think they'd been chawin' on the peyote buttons again.
So dogmatic are astronomers about their beloved dark matter, they will lie to the press, confidently asserting it has been discovered. To see the lies, the alert reader has to keep focus on the question, ‘what is dark matter?’ Just as a believer in ghosts cannot allege that rustling leaves in the trees is an effect of a passing ghost, cosmologists cannot assume that motions among galaxies or stars is an effect of dark matter, which they cannot describe. What is it? What is it made of? Without those answers, the term ‘dark matter’ is a placeholder for ignorance.
To read this doozy in its entirety, click on "Astronomers Lie About Dark Matter".

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

Saturday, January 19, 2019

When Angry Anti-Creationists Attack

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Every once in a while, disciples of Darwin want to slap leather with biblical creationists but lack civility, logic, and science. (They get especially obstreperous with Question Evolution Day up yonder.) Here are a few things to consider. I like to draw from my own experiences to keep things personal and relatable, and I can be more accurate about what is going on. This post has more graphics than usual.

Smoke of a .45, 1905, Charles M. Russell
It is mighty helpful to have a handle on the subjects we're challenged on and know how to deal with these types. We can expect ad hominem remarks as well as straw man, red herring, poisoning the well, and other logical fallacies. One ridiculous charge is that biblical creation science is the domain of "fundamentalists", which is not only an ad hominem, but a red herring (distraction) and a straw man (build up something inaccurate to tear it down). What kind of "fundamentalist"? There are several, and if they mean Christian Fundamentalism, well, those old boys weren't exactly friendly to recent creation. You don't have to be a Christian or a Fundamentalist to reject evolution and deep time.

Many of these owlhoots congregate on atheist and evolutionist forums where they can ridicule Christians and creationists. I lack belief that it is possible for them to disagree with everything we say, and I think they are fastidiously opposed to admitting that we make valid points. (In one particular case, hateful people were challenged to "Say Something Nice" and also find areas of agreement, but the challenge was ignored.) For the most part, I have dealt with atheist trolls at The Question Evolution Project and some on Twitter.

Keep an eye out for calls to "be reasonable" or complaints that creationists are "unwilling to learn". Like leftist politicians, atheists and evolutionists will accuse us of being rigid because we do not abandon the truth and accept their views; you will be hard pressed to find one of them who is willing to leave his position. Any compromise or yielding does not come from those who ride for the anti-creation brand. Keep watching for it and you'll see what I mean.

Atheistic evolutionary evangelist in action with loaded and poorly-worded question. Click for larger.

This one is self-refuting, presupposing naturalism and that his view is "factual".
I wonder what the Thought Police will do because I violate such "laws"? Probably say mean things. Big deal.
(Click for larger.)

This little dandy is from Fazebook:
Excerpts from messages sent to TQEP. I shook the dust off my feet by blocking him.
(Used under Fair Use provisions for educational purposes. Click for larger.)
There are several things to see in this next example. A criminal cyberstalker reacted to this post on how Earth's magnetic field is failing more rapidly than previously thought:

Anti-creationists try to buffalo biblical creationists, but we can see their flawed arguments and attempts at manipulation.
Click for larger, original is here
Let's take a closer look at this rant.
  • First, the ad hominem in the title and elsewhere that "YECs" are lying. He has been repeatedly informed that simply because he disagrees with or hates creation science, it does not mean we are lying. (Such an accusation without evidence makes him the liar.) Science is a method, and evidence is subject to interpretation.
  • In addition, he is lying about the magnetic field indicating a young earth, which can be found on major creation science sites.
  • We lie about "real" dating methods, but in actuality, there is a great deal of fake science and dishonesty about secular dating methods. They ignore or dismiss numerous dating methods using their own uniformitarian assumptions that indicate the earth is young.
  • He used the genetic fallacy (rejecting the material because he dislikes the sources) and complained about bias. Then he hypocritically cites a biased, discredited atheistic source (one of the links there does nothing). He also cited the secular source PNAS (the "real" science) — which was examined in the article that I linked to previously.
  • "Sorensen: 'one of the strongest evidences for a young earth is our magnetic field ...''. The others are even more stupid and wrong?" Another ad hominem and a straw man.
  • His final link is to an article that is not only irrelevant, but older than the article I linked to which dealt with important new information.
Over the years, I have collected many screenshots (several of which have appeared in my posts and articles), but this article is long enough as it is. Also, there are many other logical fallacies used against us such as appealing to consensus and popularity, neither of which are guarantees of truth. Do not be buffaloed by manipulative tactics of anti-creationists who are attempting to protect their fundamentally flawed presuppositions. Keep them on topic, and don't be flustered. Dare to be different and stand up for the truth. I would like to recommend an article that I believe will be very helpful, "Games evolutionists play: The Name Game".

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

Friday, January 18, 2019

Furiously Fast Fossils?

As creationists have been pointing out for a mighty long time, we do not see any sign of fossils forming today or in the recent past. Interesting if you study on it, because there are billions of the things all over the earth. Uniformitarian dogma tells us that present processes are the key to the past, but that does not explain what is observed.

Secularists tell a story that fossils take a long time to form, but they know as well as creationists that this is not so.
Archaeopteryx fossil at "secret" University of California Museum of Paleontology
Credit: Paul Abramson / Creationism.org
When something dies, it gets scavenged. The Master Engineer put cleanup crews in place ranging from microorganisms to larger creatures that aren't so particular about what they eat. (Leftovers from the big critters get taken care of by the smaller ones, including the micro stuff.) Something else we have been saying for a long time is that things have to be buried quickly so things can commence to fossilizing; it is conditions, not time, that cause fossils for the most part. This has even been demonstrated in labs. The conditions for all these fossils happened with the global Genesis Flood.

Secularists know that fossilization must happen quickly and under the right conditions, but the narrative about millions of years to make fossils happen is still being told.

There are different kinds of fossils as well. In fact, the word is often used rather loosely, and that's why dinosaur bones are referred to as fossils even though they're not permineralized. In the following link, you can even see a kind of fossilization process through a home experiment.
Everyone knows that the fossils we find all over the world took millions of years to form—scientists proved that years ago, right?

Actually, even secular geologists recognize that fossils form rapidly. If they didn’t, the organism would decay so quickly there would be almost nothing left to fossilize!

Scientists constantly test ways to understand and replicate the process of forming fossils. Taphonomists (those who study how to make fossils) have demonstrated the astonishing speed of fossilization. Some fossils can be generated in days, or even hours!
To read the rest of this very short article and the bit of fun, click on "Experiment: Fast-Formed Fossils".

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

Thursday, January 17, 2019

Fuzzy Pterosaur Flusters Evolutionists

Mayhaps it is just my imagination, but it seems that there has been a passel of news about dinosaur feathers in the news lately. Darwinists cannot give evidence for dinosaur-to-bird evolution, nor can they give a plausible hypothesis for the alleged evolution of the feather itself. Now there is a new problem with pterosaur fuzz.

If feathered pterosaurs were found, it would cause several problems for evolutionists.
Credit: Pixabay / Efraimstochter
Since the narrative drives the interpretation of the evidence, and Darwinoids see what they want to see, fuzzy areas in fossils are taken to be "feathers", but that claim is not supported. Naturally, the secular science industry press is all atwitter about these alleged feathers. Several problems arise, including how feathers on pterosaurs would mean that feathers were contemporaneous with dinosaurs and predated birds. What next, will they extrapolate to feathered crocodiles?

Of course, secularists cannot allow themselves to discard their self-refuting notions and cowboy up to the fact that the world is young, or that dinosaurs, pterosaurs, birds, and everything else were produced by the Creator.
Fuzz has been found on a pterosaur. That’s not news. But split ends on some fibers are electrifying the evolutionary imagination.

The media are in a flap about “feathers” on a pterosaur. Here are some of the breathless headlines, built on the assumption “Whatever exists, it evolved.”
To read the rest, fly on over to "Darwinists Imagine Feathered Crocodiles".

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

Wednesday, January 16, 2019

Plankton Puzzles for Evolutionists

Plankton are tiny aquatic things that float along in the oceans, and are the chuck wagon for other creatures to chow down on. Sometimes the microscopic plants called phytoplankton pile up in one area, causing what is called a "bloom", which is a concern because they may take up too much oxygen that other creatures need. (Zooplankton are tiny animals.) There are some things about plankton that defy evolution and affirm creation.

Plankton are far more complex than previously realized, and they have some surprises that affirm creation and defy evolution.
NASA photo by Jesse Allen of bloom in Hood Canal, Washington
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
There is no such thing as a "simple cell" anymore. The more cells are investigated, they are discovered to be amazingly complex. Plankton produce a sulfur compound that adds to the global sulfur cycle. Certain plankta do that complicated food thing called photosynthesis, which is remarkable in itself. Then there are sensors on the cell surfaces so they can move into areas with different salt levels. Here, I'll let you read about these things in this short article: "Not-So-Simple Plankton". The short video below has some interesting information, and they threw in the obligatory unscientific "millions of years" and evolutionary assertion, but that is minimal.

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

Tuesday, January 15, 2019

Spider Dummies and Evolutionary Storytelling

Spiders are actually more intelligent that many people believe, and studies are showing this. If you study on the notion, you can see from the complexities of webs that orb-weaver spiders make, plus the specified complexity of their design to make the webs quickly and accurately. How about spiders that build dummies or decoys?

Two species of spiders on opposite sides of the world build large dummies in their webs.
Credit: Freeimages / Odan Jaeger
Not only do studies of spiders' intelligence and the web-making activities point to the work of their Creator, but two in the genus Cyclosa (in the Araneidae family) on opposite parts of Earth make decoys out of things that happen to be conveniently laying around. ("New species", meaning, "we haven't seen them critters afore now".) Sometimes they make very large decoys, other times the spiders add stuff to the web so they can hide in them. Working web threads to shake the dummies to bother predators is also utilized, probably so trespassers will light a shuck out of there.

Evolutionists have no cogent explanations for decoy-building spiders, creationists have plausible speculations.
Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Lee Saborio via Angela Saborio (FAL 1.3)
At the time I am writing this post, the pictures on the article linked below are not appearing, but you can see some at this link.

Proponents of scum-to-spider evolution cannot provide an adequate explanation for the intelligence of spiders, their design, and their activities. Two species building dummies? Probably the secular miracle of "convergent evolution", or the equally vacuous non-answer, "It evolved". Creationists have some puzzle pieces to assemble, but their speculations are much more reasonable.
Camouflage is a design feature used by many creatures to protect themselves in this sin-cursed world. Typically, camouflage is used to imitate an environment in order to blend in and hide.

A related form of ‘deception for safety’ is called mimicry, in which a creature impersonates another species. For instance, to lower its chance of being eaten, it might imitate (in appearance, behaviour or both) a very unpalatable or poisonous species that a predator knows to avoid. Some creatures even mimic specific predators that frighten other predators away.

Recently, two independent studies have revealed a creature that mimics itself! And one could say it does so in a ‘big’ way.
To read the rest and get the analysis of evolutionary guesswork, click on "These spiders aren’t dummies (or are they?)"

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

Monday, January 14, 2019

Fossils and — Lip Reading?

The article that is featured below was written with an interesting analogy, that being if fossils could talk, scientists might try to read their lips. What happens is some amazingly bad science where fossils are made to "say" things that are nothing more than deep time and evolutionary assumptions, not science.

If paleontologists could do lip reading on fossils, they would have them "say" things that are the opposite of the truth.
Credit: Pixabay / oTschOo
Have you ever tried to read lips? It can be difficult to get right (such as when my wife tries to silently tell me something and I have to be told outright later). Sometimes even expert lip readers can get it wrong. Other times, people can "translate" with completely wrong information, such as what secular scientists do with fossil propaganda. The world's oldest flower exists, therefore, it evolved. Millipede trackways overturn evolutionary beliefs, but new words can be added to reduce the damage. Starfish ancestor is too far evolved, which should overturn evolution, but instead forces a "rethink". Amazing how far secularists will travel to advance their worldview and deny the Creator.

Read about these fossil lip stories and others by clicking on "Bad Lip Reading with Fossils".

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