Evolutionists Joyfully Celebrating Indoctrination

Like any skilled totalitarian knows, it is vitally important to control broadcast, social media, the press, the courts, and so on. Free speech is a pretense, where it is supported — but only when approved sentiments are uttered. From there, the Ministry of Truth indoctrinates people through propaganda. Evolutionary propaganda is becoming increasingly successful.

Background image furnished by Why?Outreach

Darwin's disciples in the secular science industry and academia are smarter than we are, even though they think we evolved from the same primordial slime. Just ask them. So, they get to decide what people think. (Not that they want to teach people how to think, just what to think.) They are gleeful about their victories — but they are not winning because of convincing evidence and devastating logic, but through activist judges and legislation that favors the worldview of atheistic naturalism.

It is interesting that many scientists and academicians simply assume evolution because that's all they've been taught, and they do their jobs with little or no homage to Darwin. Others reject evolution, but because of pressures of naturalists, lose their jobs or clam up about their creation beliefs.

There are still many people outside of the elitist circles who have the audacity, the unmitigated gall, to reject evolution not only on theological grounds, but on scientific grounds as well. Unfortunately, many professing creationists don't bother to actually learn the material. When an atheist or evolutionist who has learned the talking points, the creationist gets trounced. Guess clicking "Like" on captioned pictures didn't do so much for you, huh? 

Showdowns between creation scientists and evolutionary scientists are very few, because the evidence is on our side. In fact, atheopaths are ornery cusses when dealing with informed creationists who call them out on bad logic and fake evolutionary news. Creation science information ministries like the one you're looking at right now exist to equip Christians and creationists with not only evidence, but logical thinking and valid theology. This site also links to several other biblical creation science sites to help equip you.

Anti-creationists correctly state that few average creationists or intelligent design supporters can defend their belief. Pair one with a well-informed evolutionist and he or she will often lose the debate. In my experience, though, the average evolutionist likewise cannot defend his or her worldview. They just “know” evolution is true, but unless they undertake a long-term detailed study of the problems of evolution, or unless their career specialization concerns evolution, most scientists have little in-depth knowledge of the problems with evolution.

This assessment appears to apply to the author of the paper reviewed here published in Nature. Nonetheless, evolution prevails in government schools. The author of a new article in Nature, Ann Reid, boasts:

To read the rest of this informative article, click on "Journal Brags that Darwin Indoctrination Works". Be sure to see the related post, "Evolutionists Indoctrinating Your Children".



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

More Whopper Sand and the Genesis Flood

Secular geologists, probably eating hamburgers, pondering "Whopper Sand" and rescuing devices they can employ. Whopper Sand cannot be adequately explained through uniformitarian concepts, and are best explained by creation science Genesis Flood models. Here are two more problems for them.

This "oil painting" is a USDOI photo that was run through FotoSketcher
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents by either party named above)

This child occasionally wonders if people who are going about their business get a mite irritated when science folks swoop down on their activities. Oil companies found resources in areas that deep time proponents think shouldn't be there. The layers are very thick, too.

Another major oil discovery in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico has been recently announced. Equinor, a Norwegian-based oil company, and partners Progress Resources USA Ltd. and Repsol E&P USA Inc. made the proclamation last week. This is another well that appears to have found mysterious sands, such as the Whopper Sand found previously in the deep waters of the Gulf.

. . . 

Unexpectedly, major oil companies have found new resources in sand layers that should not be there. Uniformitarian scientists still cannot explain how thick Paleogene sands could reach these water depths or even these distances offshore. But drilling proves again and again that these sands are thicker and more extensive than geologists ever imagined.

You can drill into this first of two articles by clicking on "Another New 'Whopper Sand' Discovery". Don't forget to come back for the other one.

The Whopper Sand thing has been baffling secular scientists for quite a while, and a recent ad hoc attempt to explain them is based on speculations that are contrary to observable science. The best explanation can be seen with creation science Flood geology, which has abundant evidence — despite nay-sayers who refuse to honestly consider it.

Recently, Joshua Rosenfeld made a new attempt to explain an ongoing conundrum in secular geology.1 Although a mystery to those holding to a uniformitarian worldview, it is easily solved by accepting the reality of the global Flood.

. . . 

It is well accepted in secular geology that thick pure sands cannot be transported out to sea this far (200-plus miles). Geologists have found some channelized (river-like) sands and turbidite deposits and some gravels in the distal and deeper parts of the Mississippi Delta. But these deposits are thin and were likely caused by about a 300-foot drop in sea level during the Ice Age.

To read the entire article, click on "A Whopper Mystery for Nearly 20 Years".






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

Dinosaur Footprints and a Fossil Pterosaur in Britain

It appears that the British have some noteworthy paleontological discoveries regarding dinosaurs. We shall first consider some impressive impressions. Not only are there some excellent dinosaur footprints, but the mudstone has some surprisingly clear skin impressions of skin.

The footprints belonged to an assortment of dinosaurs including an anklyosaur, iguanodontians, and others. Seems that there have been more and more dinosaur footprints discovered lately, and in this case, a cliff collapse brought them to light. Footprints do not cooperate with uniformitarian (slow and gradual) dogma because they not only are formed quickly, but must be buried quickly. When exposed, scientists have to race over there quick-like. (Maybe they have a 1959 Cadillac ambulance with a funky siren named Paleo-1 or something.) Footprints won't last too long after being exposed.

Beautifully preserved dinosaur footprints found recently near Hastings in southern England are the most diverse and detailed ever found in the UK. More than 85 of these trace fossils, representing at least seven species, were discovered and documented by a Cambridge University research team. “As well as the large abundance and diversity of these prints, we also see absolutely incredible detail,” said lead author Anthony Shillito. “You can clearly see the texture of the skin and scales, as well as four-toed claw marks, which are extremely rare.”

To read the rest, make tracks over to "Dinosaur footprint treasure trove found in Britain". Next, we have a British pterosaur.

According to universal common ancestor evolution, it is a surprise to find this pterosaur in a plant debris bed. It's not the common type of flying reptile, either. It just suddenly appeared, and they have no idea how it allegedly evolved. (That's because it was created, not evolved, pilgrim.) The finding also fouls up the evolutionary timeline, pushing it back about forty million Darwin years. Such discoveries not only confound evolutionists, but support the Genesis Flood. Sorta like the footprints do.

The very first tapejarid pterosaur identified in the United Kingdom was recently found on the Isle of Wight along the southern coast of England. But the discovery also raises some questions that are uncomfortable for uniformitarian scientists.

Tapejarids are extinct flying reptiles that have “elaborate soft tissue head crests” and a few other anatomical differences from other pterosaurs.

You can finish reading by clicking on "First Tapejarid Pterosaur Found In Great Britain".





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

Secularists Scratching their Milankovitch

Secular scientists are committed to naturalism and huge amounts of time. Evolution needs this time, so they chant, "We're in this together" and find alleged evidence for millions of years — even if they have to manufacture it. The Milankovitch theory about ice ages is weak, but they cling to it and ignore its flaws.

Assembled with graphics from Clker clipart

The Milankovitch idea is use to supporting not only ice ages, but deep time, deny the truth of recent creation, and even support global climate change. A paper that allegedly validated the theory, but that paper was shot down by a biblical creationist. Because the narrative is more important than actually doing science, the obedient lapdogs of naturalism wrote about the paper and rode a side trail completely around problems with it. That's indoctrination, not science.

An overview of the Milankovitch (or astronomical) ice age theory appears in the May 2020 issue of Physics Today. This theory (hypothesis, really) holds that Earth’s rotational and orbital motions influence Earth’s climate over long ages, pacing the timing of ice ages. Creation scientists, on the other hand, think that a single Ice Age followed the Genesis Flood.

The article mentions the famous 1976 “Pacemaker of the Ice Ages” paper that convinced many scientists of the validity of the theory. This paper showed a good match between climate cycles inferred from two Indian Ocean deep-sea cores and cycles calculated from Earth’s astronomical motions. However, before they could obtain their results, the Pacemaker authors used the age of the most recent “flip” or reversal of the Earth’s magnetic field, known as the Brunhes-Matuyama (M-B) magnetic reversal, to assign ages to seafloor sediments in a third core from the western Pacific. In effect, they used this magnetic reversal and uniformitarian assumptions to confirm the times in the supposed prehistoric past when ice ages occurred. Some of these ages were then transferred to the two Indian Ocean cores and used in the Pacemaker analysis.

You can read the rest by clicking on "Physics Today Article Ignores Monster Milankovitch Problem". Also, if you're inclined to read a much more technical article, visit "Have uniformitarians rescued the ‘Pacemaker of the Ice Ages’ paper?"





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

Evolution and Human Consciousness

Believers in particle-to-protester evolution have struggled for a mighty long time to cogently explain the origin of consciousness. Not just awake or asleep, but the way that humans have far more ways of exhibiting the ability to think and having a mind. This is obvious when comparing us to apes.

Image modified from morgueFile / lemai13

Ever have an ape make a snide remark disparaging your intelligence? Of course not, that was a silly question. The Bearded Buddha scientifically evaded the problem of the divide between human consciousness and the lack of it in apes, and engaged in wishful thinking. When evolutionists use what is essentially "maybe someday", that's not science, old son.

There are some criteria that seem reasonable that show how humans think on a much higher level than apes. One of these is the use of tools. Sure, chimps can bang rocks against walnuts to open them up, but they cannot design and build tools of any complexity. Another example is artwork. Even the ancient cave paintings showed surprisingly intricate detail. Then we have written language. Parties involved have to both understand it when they communicate in writing. (Incidentally, a new study claims that Hebrew is the first written language.) There are more criteria, but these three are insurmountable to Darwin's disciples. That is because we were created in God's image, so we have minds and intelligence.

One of the most significant gaps, actually a chasm, between modern humans and their putative common ancestor is mind, often generally called human consciousness. The research reviewed here reveals an unbridgeable chasm exists between animal and human minds. Some animals have certain senses that are superior to humans, such as eyesight, but no animal can work algebra or trigonometry problems, write poetry, monographs, or even a short thoughtful letter to a friend. Nor can any animal calculate a Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (PPMCC), let alone understand the meaning of statistical results.

Nor can they calculate stress loads on bridge trusses, or a thousand other problems that are a common part of school, business, and life, in spite of the fact that the lower primates have allegedly had a lot of evolutionary time to achieve some of these skills. The most recent estimate by evolutionists is that “modern humans appeared quite abruptly in eastern or southern Africa sometime between 150,000 and 200,000 years ago and went on to conquer the world.”

To continue thinking about these things, click on "The Origin of Human Consciousness Stymies Darwinists". You may also like the articles linked in "The Origin of Consciousness".





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

Our Good-Natured Sun

The sun is the main cause of global warming, as we all should know. It makes things hot and a trip in the desert can be mighty unpleasant. Science articles tell us about all the explosive energy going on within, but if the sun were a living thing, it would have a good nature when compared to its peers.

Credit: GoodFreePhotos

Similar stars get rowdy, staying out late at night, disrespecting its parents — okay, bad analogies. But other stars can be ill-tempered in comparison with our own ball of fire. We can expect stars of different categories to be far more active, and any planet orbiting one could not have life on it. Even our own has the capability to wipe out life on Earth, but we have the assistance of Earth's magnetic field. Why doesn't it? Mayhaps its because our Creator formed the earth to be inhabited (Isaiah 45:18), which is something that materialists cannot begin to comprehend because of their paradigms. And they have no reasonable alternative explanations.

The unique nature of the sun is causing many experts to scratch their heads.

Extensive studies show that most sun-like stars demonstrate about five times the magnetic activity of our sun. Others reveal that the stars most similar to our sun vary in brightness about twelve times more than the sun in a given solar cycle.

In other words, the sun in our solar system is much more stable than other similar stars.

Why does this matter? New York Times writer Adam Mann describes what would happen if the magnetic activity of the sun were intensified like we see in other stars:

To finish this hot article, click on "Our Calm Sun: Crazy Coincidence or Deliberate Design?"






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

Dark Matter Does Not Occupy the Universe

Not too long ago, we saw a ridiculous rescuing device for the failed Big Bang in the idea of a cosmic bubble. A more long-standing rescuing device is dark matter, and even some creationists believe it exists. However, there is still no evidence for it, and another attempt to rescue the rescuing device has failed.

Supposed dark matter ring in galaxy cluster Cl 0024+17
Source: Hubblesite.org (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)

Neutrinos are elusive because they have very little mass and are electrically neutral. Big Bang enthusiasts have tried to associate neutrinos with their concept, and then came up with sterile neutrinos —

"When you want to keep neutrinos as pets, to you get them fixed, Cowboy Bob?"

Good luck finding a physicist to perform the surgery. Anyway, scientists are squabbling about evidence, and some are saying there isn't any. Others are saying that there is so evidence. Sorry to break it to you, but wishing doesn't make it so. Try as you might, you cannot escape the truth that God created the universe, and he did it much more recently than you folks want to believe. No stellar evolution, and no biological evolution either.

Everyone loves a controversy. There is a new one brewing, and some astrophysicists are very unhappy because their pet paradigm is in trouble again.

Dark matter, the stuff that allegedly comprises up to 85% of the matter content of galaxies in the universe, has just hit another road block:

To learn about the fuss, click on "Dark matter in trouble again".



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

Getting Dirty with Blind Mole-Rats

If you say that the blind mole-rat is ugly, I am certainly not going to slap leather with you on the street at high noon. We can put that part aside and look at the critter for what it is and appreciate the design of the Creator. Some tinhorns with limited understanding say it was not designed properly.

Let me kiss your neck and smell your hair
Image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Максим Яковлєв (CC BY-SA 4.0)

This concept of, "God fouled up because the design doesn't fit my personal preference, therefore God doesn't exist and EvolutionDidIt" is a form of dysteleology.

Upon intelligent examination, we learn that the blind mole-rat has several extremely interesting features. Unlike other burrowing animals, it does not use its front claws. It shovels with its mouth and teeth! It does have eyes, and while they do not provide sight, they do have an important function. Also, the BMR is resistant to cancer and is being examined to see if that feature can be used in humans. Evolutionists cannot rationally claim that the BMR was not designed.

A skeptical social media post is making the claim that the lesser mole-rat (one of several blind mole rats) is evidence against intelligent design, and implicit in the charge is that this somehow invalidates there being an all-wise God, the intelligent designer of all of creation. One example of the post is below.

A friend of mine who's an evolutionist used this example (Lesser Mole Rat "Spalax leucodon") to disprove the idea of an intelligent design. The reason is that this mole rat Is blind and can only use the eyes covered under his layer of skin to differentiate between day and night.

. . . 

Before debunking this completely unfounded and illogical claim, we should familiarize ourselves with the blind mole-rats. It should be noted that there are several different taxonomic groupings of the blind mole-rats (BMRs). In point of fact, the genus Spalax mentioned in the above social media post is no longer considered valid for at least three species of blind mole-rats.

You can dig into the full article by clicking on "Blind Mole-Rats: Evidence for Intelligent Design". 



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

Canaanite Genetics and the Bible

Although the Bible is completely accurate in everything it touches on, it has a strong emphasis in history. Archaeology has never contravened anything in it. Darwin's acolytes believe that if the ancient people of the Bible existed, they were stupid brutes.  This is false.

Mostly made at Image Chef

Secularists should cowboy up and stop denying that the Bible is right every time! (The secular science industry press humiliated themselves by trying to prove the Bible wrong about the Canaanites, but they only showed that the press are unwilling to do actual research.) These folks were intelligent and sophisticated (morally degenerate, however). Not only were they genetically distinct, but their genes live on, although admixed.

A new study finds that the the Canaanites before the Conquest were a distinct people, as the Bible says.

A gene study of ancient DNA from 73 individuals in 9 Bronze Age sites confirms that Canaanites were genetically distinct, yet became admixed with Hebrews after the Conquest. A press release reprinted by Science Daily says that Canaanites were culturally distinct as well, as the Bible describes them. Though genetically similar to Arabic and Jewish groups living in Israel today, the Canaanites had originally migrated to the Levant from distant lands to the east, who continued migrating into the area for centuries.

I'd be much obliged if you'd read the rest of the article by clicking on "Canaanites Were Genetically Distinct". There is also related news for you below.

The Old Testament records significant military action against a Canaanite city named Hazor. Secular mockers rejected the Bible's historical account because evolution, and because they refused to believe its accuracy. However, once again the doubters were proven wrong in many ways.

Hazor was an ancient city located in northern Israel. References to Hazor (also Chatsôr) appear in various periods of Old Testament history. It is first mentioned in the book of Joshua, under whose leadership the Israelites captured the city, burned it with fire, and killed its king (Joshua 11:10–11). By the time of Deborah and Barak, the Canaanites must have regained control of the city, because the Israelites once again defeated and killed the king of Hazor (Judges 4:24, refer 4:2). Unfortunately, many modern scholars insist that the Bible cannot be trusted in what it reports about these time periods. Yet, despite these critics, Hazor provides a wonderful illustration of how the biblical authors recorded history with remarkable accuracy.

You can read the rest of the article for old times' sake (history play on words intended) by clicking on "Canaanite Hazor—the Bible got it right! — Uncommon knowledge of the ancient city preserved in Scripture".



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

Secular Scientists Baffled by Antarctic Rainforest

Antarctica should be predictable to secular scientists. Drill some ice cores, study penguins and such. Things like frog fossils, those five fossil forests, and so forth have been perplexing, however. A new discovery really puts burrs under uniformitarian saddles: remnants of a rain forest. How did that get there?

Photo courtesy of Ted Scambos and Rob Bauer,

National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of Colorado, Boulder

(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)

The mosey-along-slowly processes of uniformitarianism are applied to plate tectonics, so plants that are doing right well further north are inexplicable to secular geologists. By taking the observed data and plugging in to a creation science Genesis Flood model, things make a heap more sense.

A recent study published in Nature has evolutionary scientists baffled. The researchers reportedly found an ancient rainforest in Antarctica, of all places. The study’s authors claim this part of Antarctica was very close to the South Pole at the time the forest thrived, at about 82° south latitude.

How could a temperate rainforest exist this close to the South Pole and survive four-plus months of total darkness each year? A biblical perspective solves this mystery.

You can read the rest of this reasonably short article by clicking on "Flood Model Solves Antarctica Rainforest Mystery".





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

Evosplaining the Perplexing Tapir

There is a critter that could be filed as, "Something the Creator made to fluster scoffers", along with creatures like the pangolin, echidna, hoatzin bird, and others. The tapir confuses many people because it has characteristics reminiscent of several animals. It also thwarts particles-to-paleontologist evolution.

Credit: Unsplash / Dušan Smetana

Using circular reasoning and the scientific principle of "It sorta kinda resembles certain things", the tapir does not conveniently fit into categories. They evosplain it through failed attempts at homology, but alleged similarities plop onto the dusty trail as science advances. Saying that "it's primitive" and "it evolved" are not satisfying, old son.

While the tapir seems to be found mainly in the Southern Hemisphere, its fossils have been found on practically every continent. Darwin's deceivers cannot provide a rational analysis of the fossils, since there are no appreciable changes. One owlhoot claimed that it did all its evolving before the Eocene, implying that it happened after the fossil record. No, it was created recently to be what it is and to do what it does so well. No ad hoc evosplaining can change reality. You savvy that, pilgrim?

A Malayan tapir (Tapirus indicus) that escaped from the San Diego Zoo was recaptured a few days later when the Zoo “received a call from a woman shrieking into the phone that a ‘rhinoceros’ was loose in the sewer.”

The misidentification may be understandable, given many people have never seen a tapir (pronounced like ‘appear’, or less commonly, like ‘taper’ or even ‘tarp-ear’).

Tapirs have been mistaken for hippos, pigs, anteaters, even elephants, as well as rhinos. They have been described as being a “hodge-podge” of varying animal characteristics. In Thailand, the word for tapir is p’som-sett, meaning ‘mixed scraps’, a kitchen phrase referring to the tapir looking like a blend of parts left over from the creating of other animals.

To read the rest of this interesting article, click on this link with an enormous name, "The tapir".





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

Still no Sign of Bat Evolution

It is supposed to be baseball season in some areas, so we can talk about bats. Well, not those bats. These are the flying mammals that some folks think look like rodents, and they do not move the needle on the cuddly meter. Evolutionists are attempting to salvage bad ideas about how they evolved.

Flying fox (fruit bat) image credit: Morguefile / kconnors

Bats have been in the news because some folks think they're good eats (maybe getting diseases after eating them is a status symbol, I dunno). For a long time, Darwinoids have been striking out on bat evolution ideas. These creatures were obviously created to be distinct, and they have many characteristics that thwart taxonomy. Lots of bat species fluttering around, too. An article in Smithsonian tries to conjure up some rescuing devices, but these are examined and rejected.

I have been writing about many of evolutionists’ greatest puzzles for over a half-century, producing close to 1,500 publications. Now this puzzle has been added to my long list of evolutionary puzzles I have written about, including the evolution of just about every animal on planet Earth. The bat puzzle is a major problem for evolution because bats, unlike any other known life form, are unique as flying mammals. Just about every distinctive trait of bats is unique – so unique that it has been difficult for taxonomists to classify them. They are the only flying mammal. A flying squirrel only glides; it cannot fly. They not only fly like a bird, but walk like a penguin, and use radar (echolocation) like whales and dolphins. They can be very nasty and will bite to defend themselves. Most mammals (cats, dogs, bears, deer, sheep and all primates) are cute, or at least not ugly, but bats have a reputation of being one of the ugliest mammals alive. Most bats are nocturnal, and thus we don’t see bats very often because they usually fly around only at night. They hang out in dark attics, caves, and hollow trees during daylight hours.

You can finish the article by following the link to "Bat Evolution? Still Looking".





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

Evolution, Paganism, and Gender Confusion

Although real science affirms what most of us know (that men and women are different), there are some people who do not like their genders. In fact, new words have been manufactured to distinguish between sex (what you were born with) and gender (whatever way you identify yourself). Some people resent the way they were born and want to change (gender dysphoria). There are several causes.

Credit: Pixnio / Bicanski

Although there are some strange twisting of science, critters know what they are and don't resent being male or female. It is politically and culturally incorrect to mention the fact that there are people who transitioned to having the appearance of the other sex and regretted it, but there are those who say, for example, "I am a woman trapped in a man's body!" — as if he would know. Research is showing that gender dysphoria has nothing to do with genetics or biology. And they have the nerve to call biblical creationists "science deniers"!

The differences between men and women are not only distinct, but important. We have some articles here for your education and edification, and the links contained herein (including that last link immediately above) may be useful resources for you.

The first article is a rather blunt rebuke to not only those who manipulate troubled people for leftist, but especially for Darwinists who attempt to work evolution into the fact that men and women are different. The first section is about upper body strength, but the evolutionists leave behind both science and logic to indulge in telling just-so stories.

Story about human sexual dimorphism backfires on Darwin, ricochets onto transgenders.

Men are better fist-fighters. So what else is new? What’s new is a new evolutionary tale that will make some culture warriors angry. This sexual-selection story came from Darwinians at the University of Utah:

To read the rest of our first installment, click on "Punching Darwin’s Lights Out". Next we'll look at one of the basic causes of gender confusion.

The ideal at creation was one man and one woman in marriage. After the Fall (Genesis 3:1-24), not only did genetic degradation begin, but people also decided that they didn't see fit to obey God's created order. Some people today hate God so much, they want to destroy marriage.

Used under Fair Use provisions for educational purposes (click for larger)

Stay with me on this because it will be a mite startling. Paganism waned, but assorted versions and neo-Paganism began to rise, as seen in 1960s philosophies, the New Age, and other notions becoming more common today.  Indeed, evolution is an ancient pagan religious view, so it is not surprising to see evolutionary concepts in various "causes" in modern society. This ties in with how modern pagan ideas are found in the transgender movement!

For much of the twentieth century, the western world lived under the umbrella of the Christian worldview. People, even though they may not have been Christian, generally built their presuppositions about the world on the Christian worldview. For example, marriage would have been rightfully understood to be one man and woman united in a lifelong covenant under God (see Matthew 19:3–9). However, the western world now rejects the idea that there is one eternal, true, and living creator God who has revealed himself to his creation and defined what morality, marriage, and sexuality is. While many things have no doubt helped erode the Christian worldview in the west, there can be no doubt that the Darwinian revolution that began in the 1800s paved the way for the sexual revolution that took place in the 1960s.1 Today, we are seeing the fruit of the sexual revolution reaped in western culture as many of the radicals of the 1960s have long occupied influential places in government, universities, and media and have used these platforms to spread their worldview. In our modern western culture, the twisted and corrupt changes that are taking place display themselves in the following behaviors (among others):

You can read the rest of the article by clicking on "Paganism and the Transsexual Revolution". Next, we'll take a look at how to respond to gender confusion in our culture.

While it is easy to put folly on display when dealing with political activists, Darwin science twisters, and those who want to jump on the latest bandwagon of rebellion, we need to remember that there are also people who are genuinely hurting and need compassion. We also have some difficult maneuvering because we don't want to compromise on the truth but still have to live in a culture that has strong pagan leanings.

No issue has more exposed our fundamental divide than that of transgenderism, the view that some people are born in the wrong body, essentially, and so must take action to bring out their true “gender identity.” Said differently, those who advocate the acceptance of transgender humanity believe that a girl can be trapped in a boy’s body—and vice versa—and thus should take steps to change their body so that it accurately reflects who they truly are.

. . . 

In an age like this, what should Christians do? More to the point: As debates over the nature of humanity rage, what should Christians say? Here are three basic points to guide believers who wish to speak the truth about the creative order and human design in a confused society and a rebellious age.

To read this article in its entirety (or listen to the audio version, I did that three times), click on "Gender in our Culture—Cutting Through the Chaos". Christians also may appreciate this sermon by Dr. Richard Mohler, free to listen online or download the MP3 (I recommend downloading, it's a mite long) titled "What Does Scripture Say about Gender?" We have one more article to consider, plus a podcast.

A plain reading of Scripture makes it obvious that God identifies himself as male. However, there are a few renegade scholars who try to tell us that this is strictly metaphorical, and they cherry-pick some verses and indulge in eisegesis to support their views while leaving out important material that does not fit their agendas. There is even a feminist Bible that turns Scripture inside out! Ironically, since God self-identifies as male, these social justice warriors are misgendering God! This article is rather deep, but it should prove to be a helpful resource when dealing with erroneous notions about God.

These days, the issues of gender and sexuality are very controversial, particularly in Western societies. Steadily, over a number of decades, the traditional perspective has been undermined. We have now reached the point where the current politically correct stance, under the guise of tolerance for all, has become emboldened in its cause and is hostile to any challenge. (In other words, modern ‘tolerance’ has, ironically, become intolerant of all but its own viewpoint.) Thus, we have seen a major retail store willing to place female shoppers at risk of potential sexual predators and voyeurs—and consequently to drive away a significant number of customers and to lose profit—solely to promote the cause of transgenderism and gender fluidity. We have seen a young Christian baker in Northern Ireland condemned in court, simply for refusing to bake a cake that would promote same-sex marriage. We have seen the publication of “gender-friendly” translations of the Bible, even one in which God is presented as female (see below).

To see the entire article, click on "Does God Have A Gender? — A Biblical Response to the Gender of God".

Finally, a podcast by Dr. R. Albert Mohler on the disastrous ruling by the United States Supreme Court.

Part I: The Flawed Legal Logic in Yesterday’s Supreme Court Decision on LGBTQ and Discrimination

Part II: What Is the Proper Role of the Supreme Court? Hint: It’s Not What It Did Yesterday — Legislate

Part III Textualism? Originalism? Strict Constructionism? The Differences in the Terms Really Matter

To listen or download the MP3 (the transcript was not yet added at this writing), click on "Tuesday, June 16, 2020".



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

Kabwe 1 Skull and Redating Human Evolution Again

Proponents of universal common descent have a difficult job, since they have to continually redate various various aspects of evolution. Especially when it comes to humans. Well, if accuracy and results are not that important, it is steady work. For example, the Kabwe 1 from Zambia, H. heidelbergensis.

Kabwe 1 skull cast image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Gunnar Creutz (CC BY-SA 4.0)

The skull is thought to be part of an "archaic human" subspecies, H. heidelbergensis, and related to H. erectus, which was an ancient human that has been found in many places. For that matter, the Kabew 1 skull is from Zambia, but its relatives were found in Heidelberg. Ancient humans moved around and spread out quite a bit, and didn't even use private jets. The reason this skull (which has been around for about a hundred years) is garnering attention is because the date has been reassessed, and that in turn is causing problems for the human evolution timeline. These problems keep happening to folks who deny the truth of recent creation. Adam and Eve were our ancestors, not something descended from apelike critters.

We have two articles for your perusal. Similar, but they have different areas of emphasis. This first one discusses the problems of dating methods. These are based on presuppositions of deep time and naturalism, but the methods themselves are fundamentally flawed.

Christopher G. asked about a revised date published in April 2020 for the Broken Hill Skull found in Zambia in 1921. He referred to a report from Gizmodo magazine “Humanity’s Origin Story Just Got More Complicated”

. . .

Christopher’s question was, “Why does an archaeological sample provide different dates through uranium dating. And why was the ‘thin mineral coating’, briefly mentioned in the article, responsible for a such a revised date?” Please help.

CMI’s geologist Dr Tasman Walker responded (edited for the web):

. . .

The issue of dating is confusing to many people because they do not appreciate that researchers can essentially get any ‘date’ they like depending on what sort of date they are looking for. The dates they obtain depend on the samples they select, the sort of sample processing they undertake, the dating methods they use, and the way they interpret the results. And of course, that is all very much driven by their belief system, or worldview.

You can read the full, uncut version of the article by clicking on "Dating Kabwe 1, the Broken Hill skull from Zambia — Why is Homo heidelbergensis so much younger than previously thought?" Remember to come back for the next one!

The Kabwe skull is rather complete, but it has been the subject of controversy since its discovery. The dating wreaks havoc with human evolution because of the alleged sequence of ancestors. Instead, they were contemporaries. Heads will roll.

"I hope that's the last joke, Cowboy Bob."

Reckon so. Let's move on.

“Fossil Skull Casts Doubt over Modern Human Ancestry”

. . . 

This headline above was not from a creationist-friendly publication but, to the contrary, was from a pro-evolution publication. It illustrates what creationists have been saying for decades: that to many scientists, human evolution has become a so-called scientific consensus that is not to be doubted, even when the facts contradict it. The result is that scientists, the courts, academia, the media, and even many, or even most, clergy and Christian colleges are on the side of evolution. What we have on our (the anti-evolutionism) side are the facts, and this is yet another article in a scientific publication that shows the persistence of belief in evolution in spite of the facts.

To finish reading, click on "Kabwe Skull Casts Doubt on Human Evolution". Yippie ky yay, secularists!



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

Four Short Dinosaur Articles

With an abundance of material, I thought it best to combine links to these articles into one post. Each of these is a quick read but they have some interesting information about how paleontologists are baffled by new discoveries — including how one fossil blatantly defies deep-time reckoning.

Credit: Pixabay / GeorgeB2

Our first entry is about sex. Katie, bar the door! Just kidding. It's more about how difficult it is to determine the sex of dinosaurs. There have been many speculations over the years, but it's mighty difficult when all you have are bone fragments and fossils (reasonably complete skeletons are rare). Since paleontologists agree that dinosaurs were probably reptiles, perhaps a comparison with existing reptiles could help. Seems reasonable.

Recently, a new study led by Queen Mary University of London concluded that dinosaur bones tell us little about their sexes. In the past, secular scientists have made various claims about the ability to make sex determinations in dinosaurs. Most concluded that female predatory dinosaurs (theropods like T. rex) were likely larger than males. However, that appears to be unsubstantiated by the actual data.

This new study examined living reptiles to see if their bones alone could determine the sex of the animal. The research team worked with gharials, an endangered crocodilian species.

To finish reading this first short subject, click on "We Still Can’t Determine the Sex of Dinosaurs". Don't forget to come back for the second piece.

It may come as a shock to some folks, but dinosaur movies are not exactly documentaries. Why should they be? People are watching terrible lizard chomp fests for entertainment, and the movie makers want to make money. If you think about it a spell, unless something can be demonstrated to be wrong, the writers' and directors' guesses are just as valid as those of the experts.

Those shows depict dinosaurs like the Velociraptor as large, cunning hunters that worked in groups. Well, the actual Velociraptor of the fossil record were not to be feared; they were the size of chickens, so one good kick and you're home free. Once again, examining the habits of modern reptiles as well as examining isotopes in fossil teeth, gives researchers reasons to believe that dinosaurs were solitary creatures.

A new study published in Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology has found that the behavior of dinosaurs in movies is not very accurate at all. This should come as no surprise because many movies portray dinosaurs as bigger, faster, and smarter than they likely were in life. In fact, most dinosaurs in movies are more fantasy than reality.

In fact, lead author Joseph Frederickson from the University of Wisconsin's Weis Earth Science Museum has found the hunting behavior of theropod dinosaurs, like the Velociraptor, more likely hunted alone rather than in packs like many movies portray. He added:

You can find out more by clicking on "Dinosaur 'Raptors' Likely Hunted Alone". That's two short subjects, two more to go.

Lately, we've been seeing reports about the comparisons of feet and legs between humans and apes, and learned that the stiffness of the human foot and the lack of it in apes further confounds evolutionists. A good deal of information can be determined from the structure of dinosaur legs as well. The Creator designed some critters to be runners, some to be walkers. Looks like the Tyrant Lizard King was not going to chase down your jeep as you drove off.

A new study published in the journal PLOS ONE has found that T. rex had legs made more for walking, rather than running. Their long legs were well designed for sustained foraging.

T. Alexander Dececchi (from the Department of Biology, Mount Marty College in Yankton, South Dakota) and colleagues from several institutions began their article by stating,

Limb length, cursoriality and speed have long been areas of significant interest in theropod [meat-eater] paleobiology, since locomotory capacity, especially running ability, is critical in the pursuit of prey and to avoid becoming prey.

However, their current study revealed that long leg length in large dinosaurs does not necessarily equate to high running speeds.

To finish our third short article, click on "T. rex Had Legs Designed for Walking". Our final installment is problematic for evolutionists.

Your average evolution devotee believes that fossils are in an orderly progression from simple organisms to complex. However, that's the sanitized version. To look at the bigger picture, fossils appear out of order, in the "wrong" places entirely, and this dinosaur had some traits that don't fit the narrative. If naturalists would drop their preconceptions and examine creation science models, they would see that the Genesis Flood is the best explanation for the observed evidence.

A new study published in the journal Gondwana Research has identified a rather out-of-place bone from a theropod dinosaur called an elaphrosaur that apparently didn’t eat meat. In fact, it was toothless. Adding to the mystery, it was found in rocks thought by secular scientists to be 40 million years too young. Furthermore, the dinosaur was found in a location that is claimed to have been close to the South Pole. Something doesn’t add up.

The new dinosaur bone was found in 2015 near Cape Otway, Victoria, in southeastern Australia by a volunteer named Jessica Parker. It was identified as a vertebra from an elaphrosaur, or “light-footed reptile,” and is the first of this kind of dinosaur found in Australia. This group of dinosaurs fall in the ceratosaur category of theropod dinosaurs, having similarities with Dilophosaurus, a Jurassic dinosaur common in the Western USA.

To reach the startling conclusion of our quartet of short articles, click on "New Australian Dinosaur Surprises Evolutionists".






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

Observational Evidence for One Ice Age

Secular geologists have upped the ante on the number of ice ages to about fifty, but biblical creation scientists maintain that there was only one. A big problem for secular scientists is that their concepts are inconsistent, and other problem is the failed Milankovitch Theory. New evidence supports a creation science Ice Age model.

Yedoma containing large ice wedges in northern Alaska
Credit: Mikhail Kanevskiy;
University of Alaska Fairbanks, Institute of Northern Engineering via USGS (PD)

Multiple ice ages are forced into the Milankovitch Theory for the sake of the deep-time narrative, but the actual evidence supports only one Ice Age — which was subsequent to the Genesis Flood. Yedoma is permafrost containing organic material and a passel of ice. These yedomas have been associated with climate change (both for today and climate fluctuations found in Greenland ice cores), but fears of them influencing climate today do not seem based on good science. Yedomas cause insurmountable problems for uniformitarian geologists.

A revival of the astronomical theory of the Ice Age caused this shift from four to eventually 50 ice ages. It started from a paradigm-changing ‘verification’ of the astronomical theory of the ice ages by Hays and colleagues. The astronomical theory has since been assumed as fact, and has been used extensively for Ice Age research and dating pre-Ice Age strata. A new reinforcement syndrome was established.

. . . 

Glaciers move and deposit rocks and soil in unique ways. These deposits provide abundant evidence for only one ice age. Sequences in some areas can be interpreted as from multiple glaciations, such as at the boundary of ice sheets. However, these areas could just as easily be seen as the deposits of multiple pulses from one glaciation. 

. . . 

Just recently, another indicator of just one ice age has emerged. Yedomas are a special type of permafrost that contain a large amount of organic matter (about 2% carbon by mass) and from 50 to 80% ice by volume. The ice is in the form of large ice wedges and ice layers and lenses. Permafrost covers 23 million km, or 24%, of land in the Northern Hemisphere. Yedomas cover substantially less—1,387,000 km in north-east Siberia, Alaska, and Yukon Territory of north-west Canada. They are often tens of metres thick with a maximum of about 50 m. Permafrost was 52% greater at the peak of the Ice Age than today, having expanded south of the boundaries of the ice sheets and subsequently melted back toward higher latitude.

It would be really cool if you would read the entire article. Just click on "Yedomas show one ice age".





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

Cosmic Bubble and the Big Bang

We have seen many times that the Big Bang that anti-creationists know and love is not anywhere near the original. It got its name because of the alleged explosion way back when. Evidence does not fit observed data, and the Big Bang has been Frankensteined yet again.

Image credits:  NASA, ESA, Hubble Heritage Team;
Reprocessed by Maksim Kakitsev (CC BY-NC 2.0)
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents by anyone, anywhere)

A recent serious problem for the Big Bang speculations is the Hubble constant. There are conflicting results, and this should not be so if the science was valid. What's a secularist to do? Use the tried-and-true complex scientific method of Making Things Up™. In this case, float the idea that we live in a cosmic bubble that is different from the rest of the universe. Of course, there is no observational support, but is can be used as a rescuing device to keep the naturalistic narrative going. Cosmic evolution and biological evolution can't happen if there was on kaboom. It's almost amusing to watch these owlhoots weave and dodge the truth of recent creation.

To read about these antics and also get a dose of science, click on "Cosmic Bubble Hypothesis Highlights Another Big Bang Problem".





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