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

Saturday, November 30, 2019

The Problems of Evolving onto Land

We have been taught that science is a search for knowledge and that it flourishes with challenges, but that seems to have a caveat of, "Except evolution". It is also unfortunate that instead of being taught critical thinking skills, people accept stories that Darwinists evosplain to them. That is not in keeping with true science.

Evolutionists believe that creatures moved from the sea and onto dry land. There are innumerable problems with this belief.
Images found at Clker clipart were modified
We saw recently that there are numerous problems with the idea that dinosaurs evolved into birds (as articles linked here discuss), but I don't rightly recollect that we hear so much about how seafaring life got the bright idea to become landlubbers. The icon of the walking Darwin fish is a mockery of the Christian fish image, rejecting the Creator and replacing him with secular miracles.

That's right, I said it! Atheists and evolutionists have their own secular miracles, including the sea-to-land business. There is no evidence at all that fish learned to walk on land. Then we have the bigger picture of other living things moving onto land and all the modifications involved that have no evidence. Darwin's acolytes often use the time-tested principle of Making Things Up™ and believing by faith — and expecting gullible people to do the same. They spend a great deal of time, energy, and money in their efforts to deny the truth that we are created by God, and that he told us our responsibilities in the Bible.

Don't get me wrong, evolutionists are not our enemies. Yes, some are devious and intent on convincing people that our Creator is unnecessary or does not even exist. However, many are deceived and trapped in a system that will not allow contrary views and evidence that refutes deep time and fish-to-philosopher evolution. Some scientists are unaware that creation science has the answers they seek. It is more than presenting evidence, it is a spiritual matter. We can do our part to support and educate those who doubt Darwin and question evolution. The truth is available.
In the world of animals, a great chasm exists between aquatic and terrestrial creatures. Consequently, to imagine the changes required to go from a body designed for breathing and navigating in water to one enabling an animal to breathe air and move on land is regarded by Darwinists as one of the most profound evolutionary transitions that ever occurred. Not only is the origin of the limbs a major issue, but the transition from fins to limbs “is one of the critical events in the history of vertebrates.” Specifically, evolutionary theory requires evidence of the transition from lobe-finned fish to tetrapod life forms. Evolutionists assume this transition occurred about 400 million Darwin years ago in the Devonian Period. No evidence exists to fill in this major gap, but a new study titled “Early tetrapods had an eye on the land” hints at some progress. How promising are these new findings?
To read the rest, click on "Did Evolving Fish Cry 'Land Ho!' and Walk onto Land?"

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

Friday, November 29, 2019

The Remarkable Formation of Pyramid Rock

Tourists who head over to Melbourne, Australia sometimes get a notion to visit Pyramid Rock on Phillip Island. This triangular mass is interesting to geologists — especially Genesis Flood geologists. It was not built by human hands, but by several factors including volcanic activity.

Pyramid Rock provides a fascinating illustration of volcanic activity and Flood geology. Uniformitarian views cannot adequately explain what is observed.
Cropped from an image on Wikimedia Commons by Pavel Špindler (CC by 3.0)
You can see the different colors. For the most part, we are seeing basalt perched on granite, which involves different volcanic activity. Secular geologists would agree with biblical creationists that a whole heap of erosion happened, but not on the timeframe or circumstances. Uniformitarian geology does not work, but the activity of the Genesis Flood provides an adequate explanation.
The boardwalk to the lookout gives an excellent view of the black basalt columns crammed along the base of the steep cliff. The same columnar jointing is visible in Pyramid Rock in the distance, as well as in most of the headlands and wave platforms that surround the island. And Phillip Island is only part of the area of land that was covered by hot, fuming lakes of molten basalt lava, now referred to as the Older Volcanics.
The basalt outcrop in the foreground on Phillip Island itself and the pyramid in the ocean were once connected, but the intervening rock has been eroded away. You can judge something of the depth of a single lava flow from the length of the columns. As you look at these rock outcrops imagine the extent of the lava flow and its depth. Imagine, too, the huge volume of basalt rock that has been removed by erosion since the rocks solidified. This is just one of many lava flows stacked one upon the other that is visible on the island.
To read the entire article, click on "The fascinating geological history of Pyramid Rock, Phillip Island, Australia".

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

Thursday, November 28, 2019

That Thanksgiving Dinosaur Idea

Today is Thanksgiving Day in the United States, and many of us are blessed to have a grand feast. The most traditional part of this is turkey. While we should be thankful to our Creator and Redeemer for all that he has done for us, we do not need to be accepting the philosophy that the turkey evolved from dinosaurs.

Some evolutionists will tell you it is a fact that Americans eat the descendants of dinosaurs on Thanksgiving. That is the opposite of the truth.
Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net / hin255
While it is an article of faith for evolutionists to believe that birds came from dinosaurs (a "fact"), many posts on this site alone show the insuperable problems of this position (actual facts). Indeed, dinosaurs and birds existed together, and not all evolutionists have signed on to that opinion. Mixing evolution with biblical Christianity interferes with our worship. We may even use this time to point out the truth of creation — with grace and discretion, of course.
Ever mindful to immerse the world in evolutionary mythology, the Smithsonian.com’s “Dinosaur Tracking” column on Thanksgiving Day zoomed in on your turkey’s genealogy. While it is good to be aware of the currently popular classification system, it is vital for us to make our children—who are constantly exposed to evolutionary dogma from many directions—understand the implications of calling a bird a dinosaur.
To gobble up the rest of this article, click on "Dinosaurs for Thanksgiving".

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

Wednesday, November 27, 2019

Those Slobbering Apes

Here in the US of A, it is the day before Thanksgiving. Folks might be salivating at the thought of gathering with kith and kin and strapping on the feed bag. Hopefully, most of us will remember to give thanks for our blessings. Speaking of salivating, proponents of molecules-to-monkey evolution analyzed ape saliva.

Add to the string of failures to link humans and apes, like this gorilla, is a study of saliva. You guessed it, we are different.
Credit: Unsplash /  Adam Bignell
As we have seen, researchers keep coming up with nothing when they try to find anything but the most cursory similarities between apes and humans. (For example, DNA is a tricky thing, and depending on which part of it was analyzed, gorillas are more closely related to humans on the failed evolutionary tree than chimpanzees, our alleged closer cousins.) It turns out that this latest analysis ain't worth spit to evolutionary systems. That is because we were created separately, and did not evolve from a common ancestor, old son. We're very different from critters. Still, the research was somewhat interesting, I reckon.
In their quest to try and find some sort of evolutionary similarity between humans and apes, scientists have compared DNA, proteins, anatomy, behavior, and every other conceivable feature. But many of these attempts showed that a huge chasm of dissimilarity exists with no distinct evolutionary connection. And now, a new study comparing saliva between humans and apes is once again showing the uniqueness of humans and the failure of evolutionary reasoning.
I know you're busy, but this is a short article. To read the rest, click on "Ape Spit Radically Different from Human". Also, when you're at your Thanksgiving gathering or something similar, try not to think about slobbering gorillas.

Humans are unique, and we’re the only creatures on earth that celebrate holidays, such as Thanksgiving. And since the Bible says that God made us in His image, we have many, many reasons to be thankful.

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

Tuesday, November 26, 2019

Early Humans Sailed Too Soon

If you find yourself out in the Greek islands, take a look for one named Naxos. It is not huge, about 166 square miles or about 430 square kilometers, and the population pushes 20,000. Artifacts found on Naxos were determined to be from ancient travelers, and this is causing consternation among Darwinists.

Early humans defied evolutionary beliefs by sailing to the island of Naxos early in their history. This supports creationist expectations.
Credit: Pixabay / WeeFee_Photography
According to secular reckoning, the artifacts were dated at 200,000 years old. Naxos is ancient, but that's stretching it quite a bit. And the stuff isn't theirs anyway. Scientists commenced to cognating and realized that ancient humans must have boated over there. This was not chartering a boat for a three-hour tour that got shipwrecked, either, because apparently the journey happened frequently.

Evolutionists believe that ancient humans were stupid, sitting around for many thousands of years wasting time by painting on cave walls, searching for free WiFi, fighting neighboring tribes, and so on. But for everyone to do basically nothing for so long is contrary to human nature. The truth is that such evolution did not occur and Earth is far younger than materialists want to believe. Creationists know that humans were created intelligent from the beginning.
Stone tools and bones on islands show that Neanderthals and other “archaic Homo” individuals must have sailed there.
Paleoanthropologists have been wiping egg off their faces for years now, after continual findings reinforce the fact that Neanderthals were just as smart and capable as we are (29 April 2019), not dumb caveman brutes like evolutionists had portrayed for a century.
Earliest occupation of the Central Aegean (Naxos), Greece: Implications for hominin and Homo sapiens’ behavior and dispersals (Science). Unless you’re Jesus, you don’t get to an island by walking on water. How did artifacts dated at 200,000 Darwin Years get to islands in the Aegean Sea? This paper tentatively suggests that the makers boated there. Unless geologists can prove land bridges, or that the islands were in shallow water that enabled wading, that’s the only reasonable explanation – and it changes the view of the intelligence of Neanderthals and other “hominins” that were supposedly more primitive than modern humans.
To read the rest, hoist the mizzen mast and voyage on over to "Early Humans Sailed to Islands".

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

Monday, November 25, 2019

Guppies and Natural Selection — but Not Evolution

It has been established for many years that Darwin was wrong, natural selection is not evolution. Sure, his followers believe that natural selection and mutations work in conjunction with evolution, but natural selection itself does what it is supposed to do. So why do so many evolutionists, including those in a study of guppies, disingenuously claim that evolution occurred?

Some Darwinists still falsely claim that natural selection drives evolution. A study of guppies showed natural selection but no evolution.
Credit: Flickr / Mark Turner (CC by 2.0)
Guppies are generally good-natured and frequently included in a community tropical aquarium. Very attractive. They breed a lot, too, even in captivity. Guppies are found down Trinidad way for the most part, and scientists did some studies on them. What they found were some great examples of natural selection (a concept that creationists affirm), but they said that the guppies exhibited evolution. That'll be the day! In addition, they demonstrated why peer review is failing because of what this child considers circular appeals to authority. No guppies were adapting and doing exactly what the Master Engineer designed them to do.
Guppies are among the most well-known of aquarium fishes. They come in a vast array of patterns and colors and are wildly popular among dedicated aquarists thanks to their colors and the ease of breeding them. However, because of where they are found in the wild, guppies have been extensively used as model organisms for evolutionary biologists. Evolutionists have claimed that guppies are an excellent example of natural selection and evolution. However, there is much to carp about in their interpretations of natural selection in guppies.
To read the rest, click on "Natural Selection in Guppies".

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

Saturday, November 23, 2019

Intolerant Tolerance from the Secular Science Industry

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Science is supposed to be about  the search for knowledge, and scientists are inaccurately considered to be dispassionate seekers of objective truth. Actually, scientists can be just as avaricious as you and me, and the secular science industry is allowing itself to be hijacked for leftist causes. Creationists, Christians, and other people cannot be tolerated by these sidewinders.

Secular scientists are increasingly active with the political and cultural left. They demand that we accede to their views and are intolerant of Christians and creationists.

In an episode of The Briefing, Dr. Albert Mohler discussed how Brigham Young University was dropped from job postings by a couple of geology organizations because of their morality code. While I reject Mormon views, they have a right to have and practice their beliefs without being coerced to change them. Recently, I asked someone who is involved in hiring at his company if they were interested in views of applicants. That company (like most others, I reckon) are more interested in the ability of people to perform the job. The organizations affecting BYU are giving political and cultural correctness the priority.

I remember a comment someone made when I mentioned that people like David Coppedge have been fired for their creation science views. The commenter said that he didn't want someone with the wrong views of science involved in rocket science when lives are at stake! No, Buttercup, creationists, evolutionists, and others can work side-by-side and get their jobs done efficiently in such fields.

Someone who knows that creationists actually believe and teach can easily see on websites, forums, literature, lectures, videos, and so on that we are not accurately represented. We take our stand on the authority of the Word of God, and our detractors hate us for that. I can testify from observations and personal experience that some anti-creationists and atheists want creationists and Christians negated or effectively destroyed. This hatred includes leftists who promote those things that are contrary to Christian faith and practice. Biblical creationists go back to the foundations of both science and the gospel message, which is probably the main reason that anti-creationists censor and censure us. Ironic how they dictate to us their version of "tolerance", but are so utterly intolerant of those who will not accede to their demands, isn't it?

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

Friday, November 22, 2019

Animals Designed to Communicate

Those of us who are owned by pets know how they inform us of their needs and desires, whether food for food, affection, or other needs. We have had cats who can express themselves through nonverbal ways, and know when they are pleased. Communication is common in what are considered higher animals.

Humans communicate with animals, and animals with each other. This is by the plan of the Master Engineer, and evolutionists have no explanation. Frenchie, around 2006.

There are several aspects for communication (whether complex or simple), which rules out incidental signals. Some amount of volition between the sender and receiver is needed, and the Master Engineer enabled animals to have some amount of communication with humans and with each other. This, too, is something that proponents of particles-to-pussycat evolution are unable to explain.
Making sense of biological senses is a losing battle for evolutionary theories, and explaining complex creature communication is even worse. Why? Because evolutionists have no real explanation for why communication occurs. Chance processes couldn’t have assembled the key ingredients needed for the elaborate messaging we witness in the animal kingdom.
Higher (i.e., nephesh-possessing) animals routinely send forms of purposeful signals to influence the behaviors of other animals or even humans. To appreciate this, we must distinguish between animals using environmental cues and those employing communicative signals.
For the rest of this short but interesting article, click on "God Crafted Creatures to Communicate".

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

Thursday, November 21, 2019

The Recapitulation Zombies of Evolution

We think they are dead, but Darwin's acolytes keep using the black magick of scientism and wishful thinking to bring them back. Not living organisms, but their bad ideas. In this case, the idea that an unborn child goes through evolutionary stages in its development. This has been proven false for a mighty long time, pilgrim, but it is still used to justify abortion.

The idea of recapitulation and Haeckel's fake drawings are still brought back to justify abortion and promote evolution.
Original image credit: Pixabay / Ahmadreza Heidaripoor
If scum-to-sorcerer evolution were "settled science" or a fact, there should be no need to use bad logic, misrepresentation, startlingly bad mistakes — and outright fraud. When posting about Haeckel's fake drawings on social media, people said those long-discredited things coupled with the rejected recapitulation idea can be found in modern textbooks. As any knowledgeable propagandist can tell you, concentration and repetition coupled with the Big Lie are effective tools to influence the undiscerning.

Devious Darwinists seem to be trying to make intellectual zombies of the public. One tinhorn said that even though the drawings were fake, the concept is true. Or perhaps he simply does not understand his own mythology. (Also, Dan Rather used forged documents in an attack on George W. Bush: the story was "correct" even though the documents were fake. That's logic, uh huh.) Ja, meine Herren, ze end justifies ze means!  

Some evolutionists are imprisoned by academia and training, knowing nothing other than evolution. Others are reprobates, and when they are shown the truth, they run away, screaming, "Galileo Figaro, the facts are very very frightening!" We must not let them get away with bringing back zombified fake science. People are determined to deny the God of creation.
So entrenched has evolutionary theory become, Darwinists keep looking for ghosts of vanished human ancestry in the human body. It was false when Ernst Haeckel falsified embryo drawings; it is false now. In chapter 10 of Dr Jerry Bergman’s book Evolution’s Blunders, Frauds and Forgeries, Bergman shows how this so-called “Biogenetic Law” that ontogeny (the development of the embryo) recapitulates phylogeny (the evolutionary history of the animal) has been used to justify racism and abortion. He quotes W. J. Bock in  who wrote in Science as far back as 1969...
You can find out the rest by clicking on "Recapitulation Theory Zombie Needs Permanent Burial".  For your further education, there are several links beginning with "Still Using Haeckel's Drawings to Lie for Evolution".

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

Wednesday, November 20, 2019

Getting to the Root of Plant Communication

This post stems from a pair of related articles that will be linked below regarding the surprising abilities of plants to communicate. Earlier, we read about some of this in "Tree Mail in the Wood Wide Web". This field is growing, and researchers are conducting some interesting experiments.  

Strange as it may seem, plants can communicate in interesting ways both above and below ground. This is baffling to evolutionists.
Credit: Unsplash / Lukasz Szmigiel
When working on this here post, I commenced to woolgathering about an old Lost in Space episode about semi-intelligent plants that were communicating with each other. They had a ruler of sorts, Tybo, who was a giant intelligent carrot, and wanted to turn the Robinsons (the space travelers) into plants. 

"The Great Vegetable Rebellion" was considered awful by the actors and even the writer, but the dreadful part of Tybo was performed well by Stanley Adams (who also played the part of Cyrano Jones on the Star Trek episode, "The Trouble with Tribbles"). Although that show was chock full of silliness, it hinted at the truth that plants can communicate. This post stems from a pair of related articles that will be linked below regarding the surprising abilities of plants to communicate. 

There are several ways plants communicate above ground, but I think that if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around, it does not cry out and say, "Hey! A little help here?" Instead, they communicate through chemistry. They have different kinds, and are not species-ist by only helping out their own kind, but also communicate with others. These messages include warnings of herbivorous predators as well as "calling for help" to draw predators who are chomping on them. Darwinists have no idea how or why this happens, especially outside of the family tree.
Plants have an awkward predicament. Since they’re unable to simply get up and walk, or even shout when in danger, we often think of plants as passive receivers of whatever the environment throws at them. As one group of authors noted, “Plants are dumb and deaf, and plant communication runs counter to human common sense.” However, plants are far from passive. In fact, plants are highly active and communicative. Plant communication comes in many forms and is found across many plant families. But how do scientists explain how and why plants developed this complex system?
To read the rest of this first installment, did into "Plant Communication: How Plants Learned to Talk". Then we have another one to follow.

So we have a little knowledge of the way plants communicate above ground, but apparently roots and such do more than just draw up moisture. They communicate using chemicals below ground, even attracting or repelling microbes. Again, they are not always isolated to their own kinds, but communicate to other species. Frustrates evolutionists, but creationists are not surprised. Impressed at the work of the Master Engineer, but not surprised.
It is well known that plant roots exude chemicals into surrounding soils. Less well understood is the ability of these chemical signals to attract or deter certain microbes. Plants like rockcress, potatoes, sugar cane, and members of the mustard family have been demonstrated to have these effects on the microbe populations in the soil around them.7 Sometimes, microbes return the favor, producing what amounts to growth hormones for rockcress plants. It appears plants are not having a one-sided conversation with their microbe counterparts. Mutually beneficial symbiosis makes sense with God’s originally created “very good” world, and we still see some of this today.
To read the entire article, click on "Plant Communication: Into the Roots". I do not know when we will dig up similar material. 

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

Tuesday, November 19, 2019

Pigeons Puzzling Evolutionists Again

Charles Darwin tried to do some selection experiments on pigeons, but they remained what they are like they are supposed to do. Much more recently, experiments on the brain power of baboons was studied because of the presupposition that humans are closely related to them. Then came starting experiments involving pigeons.

Primates and pigeons have something in common, but it does not support evolution. Pigeons have surprising cognitive skills.
From Zoologie. Oiseau. / New York Public Library / Jomard, M. (Edme-François), 1809
It turns out that pigeons performed surprisingly well a spatial concepts involving fine art and numbers. Problem is, this requires primates to have a certain area of the brain that allegedly evolved for such functions. Pigeons do not have this brain business. Evolutionists resort to the non-explanation of "it evolved", that handy-dandy catch-all excuse for when they have no model or any idea how said evolution is supposed to have happened. That's because particles-to-poultry evolution did not happen, and humans were created separately from animals and birds. You savvy that?
The study was the latest research endeavour that among other things was trying to answer an evolutionary puzzle: Why can people read? This involves the capability for what is known as orthographic processing—being able to visually form, store and recall words, such as writing them in the air in front of you. The problem for evolutionists is that there hasn’t been enough time for the part of the human brain believed to be needed for reading fluency, namely, the visual word form area (VWFA) to have evolved:
You can read the entire article (it's not overly technical) by clicking on "Pigeon Revision: Brainy birds trump bookish baboons". 

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

Monday, November 18, 2019

Build a Denisovan Face

Remember Hesperopithecus haroldcookii, or his more common name, Nebraska Man? It seems mighty presumptuous to build an individual, his wife, animals, the landscape, all from a single tooth. That was silly enough, but it turned out to be the tooth of a pig that was extinct in that area. Oopsie! This overreach came to mind when I was reading about constructing the facial characteristics of Denisovans from DNA.

Evolutionists want to try to use genetics to determine what the Denisovans looked like. They are actually admitting that they were humans, not evolutionary ancestors.
Denisovan cave image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Xenochka (CC by-SA 4.0)
Scientists got the notion that they can get an idea of what the Denisovans looked like by using DNA, epigenetics, and comparison to humans alive today. Never mind that the DNA has deteriorated over time and is likely to be contaminated. What we do learn is that the Denisovans were another group of humans descended from Adam, and not critters from the failed evolutionary tree. 
Denisovan fossils are represented by only a few teeth, a finger bone, a bit of a mandible (jawbone), and either a leg or an arm bone fragment. These isolated bits and pieces have been found in two locations. One was a Russian cave in the Siberian Altai Mountains close to the borders of Kazakhstan, China, and Mongolia. The other location was farther south in a cave on the Tibetan Plateau. From these teeth and bone fragments, DNA has been sequenced and compared to modern human groups.
You can read the full article by clicking on "Denisovan Epigenetics Reveals Human Anatomy"

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

Saturday, November 16, 2019

Turkana Boy and the Darwin Disciples

The cloud of dust indicated two riders approaching my spread. As it turned out, Stormie Waters and her pal Ruby Slippers rode down from Deception Pass. They were all het up because personal combat was ensuing again at the Darwin Ranch, this time over how to interpret Turkana Boy.

Evolutionists are agitated by a single incomplete skeleton. There is much disagreement, but Turkana Boy is not friendly to Darwinism.
Turkana at Kenya museum, image credit Wikimedia Commons / Akrasia25 (CC by-SA 4.0)
Whenever there are fossils, bones, and artifacts, evolutionary scientists commence to disagreeing. (Actually, that's a good thing in science.) Most fossils and such are sparse and scattered, so there is much to cuss and discuss. Even the more complete Turkana Boy sparks many areas of controversy, including things like his age, whether he is a he or she, the H. Erectus or H. ergaster, and if he or she was deformed. The secular science industry's fake news branch has not given this guy much coverage because the dating methods used rule him out for being an evolutionary ancestor of humans.

There is only one incomplete skeleton. To extrapolate that there was an entire "race" like this is seriously over-reaching, but they did that in the past with Nebraska Man and Piltdown Man. (If Marvel comics or someone does an action thing with Nebraska Man and Turkana Boy, I want royalties.) Also, since bones do not tell the full story of a person or creature, reconstructions are inferred and imagined by the artist. All the debating comes from faulty evolutionary presuppositions; we were created as one race with a great deal of diversity. Turkana is the opposite of helpful to Darwin's disciples.
The Turkana Boy or ‘Nariokotome Boy’ discovery was recently mentioned by Tomkins and a popular website that deals with human evolution. Called a “nearly complete” skeleton and well preserved (though missing most all of the hand and foot bones), it is actually only 40 percent complete based on the assumption that bones from one side of the body can accurately determine the traits of the bones on the other side. They thus can be used to construct some missing bones. Actually, aside from Lucy, Turkana Boy is the most complete evolutionary pre-human skeleton ever discovered. Most claimed early-man fossils consist of a few teeth, plus broken skull and other bone fragments. From these, entire species and populations are concocted by Darwinians.
To read and learn more, click on "Turkana Boy Hurts Evolutionary Narratives".

And now, ladies and gentlemen — Not Kanye West and not Jamie Foxx:

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

Friday, November 15, 2019

Underdetermination and Cosmology

People tend to use cosmology when they are really discussing cosmogony, but that is not surprising because the fields tend to overlap. Scientists riding for the cosmic evolution brand tend to get a mite pretentious and make proclamations about how the universe formed and operates, then get surprised when their beliefs turn out wrong.

Secularists often indicate that the evidence requires naturalistic explanations for the origin and development of the universe. Actually, it has a fatal flaw.
Image credit: NASA, ESA, M. J. Jee and H. Ford et al. (Johns Hopkins Univ)
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Secularists reject recent creation, and do not even consider the evidence for it. There are several materialistic models for the origin and development of the universe, but they are continually changing. The Big Bang is the best of the bad ideas, so secularists cling to it and continually patch it up.  Atheists and anti-creationists show their lack of knowledge regarding science and fields related to astronomy by insisting that the evidence requires certain conclusions. Not hardly! This is where underdetermination comes in.
Can we definitively know the global structure of spacetime? This is a good question. It is one that is actively discussed within the area of the philosophy of modern physics. . . .
However it is a question that highlights the fundamental weakness of cosmology and hence of cosmogony. (Cosmology is the study of the structure of the cosmos whereas cosmogony is the study of the origin of the universe.) That weakness is the inherent inability to accurately construct any global cosmological model, i.e. a model that accurately represents the structure of the universe at all times and locations. The reason for this is underdetermination.
. . . 
In the philosophy of science, underdetermination means that the available evidence is insufficient to be able to determine which belief one should hold about that evidence. That means that no matter what cosmological model one might conceive of, in an attempt to describe the structure of the universe, every model will be underdetermined. 
To read the entire article, be determined and click on "Cosmology’s fatal weakness—underdetermination". 

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

Thursday, November 14, 2019

Grand Canyon Flood Origin and Observable Evidence

Geologists who presuppose deep time and that present processes explain the distant past reject the Genesis Flood. That is to be expected, even though the Flood explains many features of geology. Unfortunately, the narrative drives the evidence for secularists, and some are even deceptive in their dismissal of the catastrophic formation of the Grand Canyon.

Deep-time geologists claim that the Genesis Flood could not have formed the Grand Canyon. Their straw man model is refuted by observable facts.
NPS photo by Erin Whittaker
They will say that the Flood cannot happen and propose a model. Makes sense from a cursory glance: although the Grand Canyon is full of sedimentary rocks (deposited by water), the soft stuff deposited by the Flood would collapse. That is not what we see. However, their model is a false representation and is refuted by observable evidence. This is only one example of problems with their paradigm.
Old-earth geologists claim that observations contradict the Flood model origin for Grand Canyon. However, recently exposed sediments at Lake Mead refute their claims and instead fully support the Flood model.
To read the entire article, click on "Observations Support Grand Canyon Flood Origin".

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

Wednesday, November 13, 2019

The Fading Magnetic Field is Important

One of the numerous facts used by biblical creationists that indicates a young earth is the decay of the magnetic field. Secular owlhoots know that this has been happening, but they try to salvage their deep time beliefs with assorted and unprovable concepts. They also try to wave it off as unimportant.

Secularists cannot escape the fact that the fading magnetic field is evidence for a young earth. Some even claim that it does not matter. Wrong!
Image credit: NASA
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
After all, it's been there for billions of years, they think, and are apparatchiks for the Darwin Party. If the Bearded Buddha needs huge amounts of time, they'll find it for him, you betcha! Some are implying that it will be somewhat inconvenient, but ignore other important facts. Also, they have their uniformitarian paradigm (slow and gradual processes), assuming that the decay rate will not increase later. Our Creator put that magnetic field up there to take care of this here planet that we call home.
Earth’s magnetic field is vital for life, but it is decaying. To keep it going billions of years, evolutionists gloss over facts.
On Live Science, Stephanie Pappas asks, “What if Earth’s magnetic field disappeared?” Our planetary shield is “important for life,” she admits, and it is decaying in strength, she confesses. But she downplays its protective function. One reason is that evolutionists need their billions of years for the Stuff Happens Law to have time to mold humans out of bacteria. But they can’t have their precious billions of years, because the magnetic field is measurably decaying by 5% per century. It could not have lasted billions of years, and will be long gone before a billion more years could transpire.
To read the rest of this attractive article, click on "Why Magnetic Field Decay Matters".

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

Tuesday, November 12, 2019

The Amazing Gift of Vision

In the early days of printers and the internet, ASCII code was tediously used to draw pictures, such as these cats. Our brains take the visual stimulation and recognize what pictures mean. This is called skeletal recognition, probably because of the "bare bones" approach. It is different from shape recognition.

Human vision is extremely fast and intricate. These processes testify of the skill of the Master Engineer, not evolutionary random processes.
Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net / Renjith Krishnan
We see a shape or have a glimpse of something and often recognize it, just as with the examples mentioned previously. It helps if we have reference points, such as having seen animals or objects so we can make the association. (Mayhaps that is why people are afraid when they see something completely alien to them.) We also make these connections exceptionally fast. Researchers praise Darwin, blessed be! But the intricacies of human vision testify of the work of the Master Engineer, not foolish faith in random chance processes.
Human vision is incredible. The human eye and brain are adept at recognizing objects, often even when they are not fully visible or oriented at different angles than usual. For example, by seeing just a silhouette of a cat, even small children can identify what the animal is. Making out the faintest trace of a streetlamp in fog, our eyes instantly relay to our brains the identity of the object. Seeing a bird in the sky with wings on the downstroke or upstroke does not confuse us; we can clearly recognize the shape as a bird. On average, the time it takes for this process of perception and recognition is within 70 milliseconds, or about half the time of an eye blink. Although we often think of our eyes as what we see with, we really “see” with our brains. Except for the lens and cornea, the rest of the eye is really part of the brain.
To read the rest, click on "Human Vision: Amazing Uniqueness of Human Eyesight".

 For the lyrics to this 1984 song by Prodigal, click on "Electric Eye".

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

Monday, November 11, 2019

The Beginning of Dogs

It may be interesting to know that there are certain things that microbes-to-mutt evolutionists and biblical creationists are in agreement. Then we diverge. Dogs originally came from a wolf-like ancestor, and humans managed to domesticate them. The when, where, and how of this has no agreement. But that is to be expected.

While evolutionists and creationists agree that dogs originated from a wolf-like ancestor, creationists have a plausible model for the origin and domestication of dogs.
Credit: PIXNIO / bicanski
Materialists fallaciously assert that the varieties of dogs are examples of evolution, even though most arrived on the scene in the last 200 years or so through artificial selection. Such changes have definite limitations. No, breeds are not separate species; they are all in the same subspecies. The evolutionary model for dog origins is ineffective and evolutionists are in disagreement — they should be in disagreement, since they have no transitional forms to support their speculations. They are also in disagreement on the origin of the domestication of the critters, basically evosplained with doggerel.

Creationists are working on their own models. We believe that dogs are all a part of the same created kind, and when secular presuppositions are stripped from the science, dog diversification and domestication are compatible with the post-Flood biblical timeline. A creation science perspective with biblical history cannot be dogmatic —

"Not funny, Cowboy Bob!"

Okay. Creationists admit that the model for the dog timeline is speculative, it also makes a great deal of sense.
Much work has been done by evolutionary scientists attempting to trace the origins of Canis lupus familiaris (domestic dogs). While many insights from this research are helpful, there are good scientific reasons to reject the proposed timeframe for the domestication of wolves (Canis lupus), the proposed phylogenetic relatedness of the Canidae family to other families in the evolutionary tree, and the use of variation within domestic dogs as evidence for the evolution of canids from the same common ancestor as all other living things. In contrast, inferences from the historical biblical texts provide a better model for the biological variation observed within domestic dogs and other canids, as well as for potential timeframes and geographical locales of initial (post-Flood) domestication of wolves into dogs. In light of biblical chronogenealogies used in dating the Flood and Babel events, initial post-Flood domestication would have taken place c. 2521–2200 BC. Possible narrower date ranges as well as geographical locales of initial domestication are given in light of different sets of assumptions concerning the chronology of biblical events and interpretations of the current scientific data.
To read the article, click on "Creationist modelling of the origins of Canis lupus familiaris—ancestry, timing, and biogeography". They have several related articles ad the end of that one. While I'm at it, you may also like some of their relatives: "Coyotes Have Gone to the Dogs" and "Post-Flood Dispersion and the Red Fox".

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

Saturday, November 9, 2019

Monkeys, Neuroscience, and Music

While searching for a video, I came across several blocks of music that were assembled to relax various animals as well as one for pets in general. I reckon that this is based on assumption and wishful thinking (and marketing, since music for critters CDs are being sold by pet suppliers). They may not be sophisticated music connoisseurs. Monkeys seem to consider music nothing but noise.

Researchers wanted to find out how monkeys react to music — because evolution. We are wired differently because we were created differently.
The Monkey who had Seen the World by Edwin Henry Landseer
Some assets of the Darwin Party worked from the presupposition that since monkeys and humans evolved from a common ancestor, our brains must work alike. Therefore, why not find out what music appeals to macaques and humans, because evolution. The monkeys were not interested. We're wired differently.

Evolutionists began to marvel again about the mysteries of the human brain, stroked their beards, and fired of some sciencey-sounding nonsense. Well, of course they should marvel! After all, they are the creation, and we have a Master Engineer who designed our brains. However, they choose to suppress the truth that we were created in God's image, so no wonder they seem surprised that we are different from animals.
Experiments show that monkeys prefer noise over music, even though they have brain similarities with humans.
A neuroscientist at the National Institutes of Health wondered if monkeys could relate to music like humans do. After all, their eyes probably see like ours; do their ears hear like ours? Katarina Zimmer at The Scientist tells the story of experiments that Bevil Conway undertook to try to answer the question. In short, as the title of the article states, “When Humans Hear Music, Monkeys May Hear Noise.”
Using functional MRI machines (fMRI), Conway and colleagues watched what brain areas lit up when humans and macaques listened to musical tones and then to noise.
To go bananas and read the rest, click on "Music Is Noise to Monkeys".

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

Friday, November 8, 2019

The Athletic White-Tailed Deer

Many years ago, my mother told of an encounter with a deer when she was driving on a highway one evening (we lived in Michigan). Instead of  waiting, the fool beast ran alongside her car and then jumped over it. My mother saw the hind legs as it went onward. This adds to what many people know, that deer are fast runners and strong jumpers.

White-tailed deer are common in North America and then some. They show the Creator's design for their eat-and-run lifestyles.
Cropped from a nice scene on Freeimages / Juha Soininen
Then there's the story of the woman who called the radio station to complain about the deer crossing signs. She was upset that the deer didn't obey the signs. If that call happened (and there are several versions of the story), I think it was probably done as a prank.

On a more serious note from TQEP's Public Service department, a good guideline for motorists is to never assume that there is just one. If you stop for one in the road, keep an eye out for others. I can verify this from more than one experience.

Let's move on.

There are many of the deer kind around the world, and the white-tailed deer that are common in Canada, the United States, and even parts down further south exhibit our Creator's design. They can hide and run from predators. If you invite them over to a social function, expect them to eat and run because they were designed for that. For that matter, they survive on things that other critters would not find digestible.
I’ve loved these fleet-footed beauties since childhood, and my wonder has only grown deeper as I’ve studied them as a veterinarian.
These are the most common large wild mammals in the Americas. They can be found from southern Canada, throughout most of the United States, down to Central America, and even into parts of South America. Their extensive range is a direct result of their amazing adaptability. They are able to live in a variety of habitats, from the forests of the northeastern U.S. to the swamps of Florida, from farmlands to desolate desert.
To read the entire article, click on "White-Tailed Deer—All-American Athletes".

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

Thursday, November 7, 2019

Dinosaur Eggs and Challenges to the Genesis Flood

There are millions of fossilized dinosaur eggs around the world, but they may not stand out to someone who is not trained to notice them. After all, they are fossilized. These eggs are more concentrated in some areas than others, and secularists fixing to lynch biblical creationists present some challenges.

Dinosaur eggs have been used by secular geologists against biblical creation science. Creationists have a model to answer these objections.
Fossilized dinosaur eggs at Indroda Fossil Park
Image credit: Wikimedia Commons / S. Ballal (CC by-SA 3.0)
Secularists have raised some challenges for Genesis Flood geology that are interesting at first glance. However, observed evidence regarding dinosaur eggs is also difficult for those geologists to answer as well. Creation scientists have the Briefly Exposed Diluvial Sediments model that provides satisfactory answers to objections of secular geologists.
Other features, such as mud cracks, raindrop imprints, bird tracks, channels, and burrows, have been reported at some egg sites. In addition, some dinosaur remains seem to have been scavenged. Skeptics argue that these features together with dinosaur eggs and nests represent normal activity over a long period of time and would need far more time than Noah’s Flood provides. However, as with all challenges against the Genesis Flood, a careful examination of the evidence reveals that there is no problem.
To read the entire article, click on "Dinosaur eggs point to the global Genesis Flood".

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

Wednesday, November 6, 2019

Green Beans and Bioengineering

My mother insisted that I eat the green beans on my plate, but they were not all that thrilling. She would say that they have vitamins and we know much more now than we did back then about the health benefits of green beans. Interestingly, they have an internal mechanism that loosely resembles one of our own.

The common green bean was designed by the Master Engineer to respond to injury.
Credit: Pixabay / Sonja Langford
 When we have a wound, the blood will clot and the flow will stop (unless someone has a health condition). The Master Engineer also devised something similar for the beans. They need the sap to flow, but if a part is broken, that's where callose plugs come into play. Try to get a disciple of Darwin to evosplain that to you and come away with a satisfactory answer.
When bean plants are bruised or bitten by a caterpillar, what if the valuable sap in the plant’s vascular tubing kept flowing to the injury site, leading to an unrestrained loss of sap? That’s comparable to an injured human or animal losing blood. In humans and animals, injuries are often mitigated by blood clots (coagulation) and/or scab formation. But what about bean plants? Is there no hope against losing sap when internodes or tendrils are broken off or otherwise damaged?
 To read the entire article, click on "Green Bean Bioengineering Shows Creator's Care".

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

Tuesday, November 5, 2019

An Elephant is now a Person?

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

I never thought that by the time I turned sixty, I would be writing about the foolishness of people who want personhood status for animals. It happened. It made a bit of sense when some activists failed in their attempt to obtain legal status for a chimpanzee since they resemble humans somewhat. But an elephant?

Animal rights extremists want to give personhood status to an elephant. There are several reasons why this is a foolish idea.
Credit: RGBStock / Stella Bogdanic
Just over an hour south of me at the Bronx Zoo is an elephant named Happy. Animal rights extremists are unhappy and want the elephant to have personhood status. Let's ride this short side trail a spell. A woman was a vegetarian for many years, but ate a hamburger and was converted. Now she's a butcher and a pig farmer. She did the vegetarian thing because she was converted by reading a book by "bioethicist" Peter Singer. That name should get the attention of some people, as he is known for animal rights, but also abortion and infanticide. Don't eat meat because animals have rights, but kill your unborn child who is not a person. Yeah, makes perfect sense. Okay, back to the original trail we were riding.

We should talk about the elephant in the room (heh!), namely, where rights come from in the first place.

Rights are not the product of simple assertions or declarations, or even wishing very, very hard. While governments may grant some people certain rights, those rights ultimately come from God our Creator — a fact that America's founding fathers recognized from the get-go. We are created in God's image, not the product of particles-to-pachyderm evolution. If evolution were true and we were all biologically related, would granting rights make sense then? That'll be the day! To be consistent, evolutionists should say that we crawled up to the top of the food chain, so we're in charge now and we do what we see fit in order to improve our survivability and pleasure.

The story that inspired this short article came from Dr. Mohler. He has some very important insights to offer, and I'd be much obliged if you would give it a listen or read the transcript. To do that, just click on "Happy the Elephant Goes to Court: Lawyers Argue that a Bronx Zoo Elephant Is a Person Just Like You and Me".

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