Welcome to the home of The Question Evolution Project. Presenting information demonstrating that there is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution, and presenting evidence for special creation. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Friday, July 31, 2020

An Underwater Earth in the Archean Period?

Secular geologists were making waves by saying that the earth was entirely covered by water a few billion years ago, and some people wondered if they were affirming the Genesis Flood. That'll be the day! This is about worldviews and definitions.

Secular scientists are again saying that Earth was completely covered with water billions of years ago. No, this does not support the Genesis Flood.
Credit: StockSnap / Travel Photographer
Because secularists are committed to naturalism and deep time, their narrative requires tendentious interpretations of what has been observed. The old news about submerged Earth in the Archean Period (which followed the Hadean Period, named because the newly-formed Earth was as hot as Hades) is part of their shipbuilding. Various "events" in our history had to have eras that support Darwinism, and history is constructed on that. However, their history is not supported by the evidence.

The world was indeed covered in water, but not in the way materialists say. In the far more rational worldview of biblical creation science, these eons are only useful as reference points. The true history of the earth is found in the Bible, and the evidence in geology supports creation science Genesis Flood models.
In early March 2020, scientists Benjamin Johnson and Boswell Wing claimed in Nature Geoscience that some 3,200 million years ago the ancient earth was completely covered in water, and that there was not a single continent standing above sea level. A few people sent us media reports of this claim and others posted it on Facebook asking if it is scientific confirmation of Noah’s Flood, which the Bible says covered the whole earth. The short answer is “No”. We explain the reason here in some detail.
To find out what's happening, click on "Was earth covered in water '3200 million years ago'?"

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

Thursday, July 30, 2020

Looking for Narwhals in all the Noisy Places

Narwhals are medium-sized whales, sometimes called "unicorns of the sea". That is because of the long tusk (not a horn) that protrudes. They are found in Arctic areas including Canada and Greenland, but are a mite difficult to study. A new research technique produced some interesting results.

The narwhal has been difficult to study, but impressive research reveals more about how our Creator made them able to adapt to their sea lives.
Since I have been unable to find an image that is not
copyrighted, here is an illustration from 1809 by George Shaw.
Those Arctic waters are noisy in the first place because of ice cracking and other things. Interesting that narwhals are skittish around the noise of boats with motors. With the assistance of some Inuit people, researchers were able to do some underwater recording anyway. They make a racket all their own.

Not only are they communicating with each other, they have echolocation. Narwhals have baffled evolutionists with their ability to hybridize with beluga whales, and they were clearly designed by our Creator to be able to adapt for life in their unique areas.
Recently, after audio-recording underwater in Greenland’s fjords, two geoscientists published research on vocalizations made by narwhals. The sounds included shrill whistle tones, repetitive clicks, knocking sounds, buzzing noises, and even some tonal pulses inaudible to human ears. Complicating the situation, narwhals routinely summer near calving icebergs, so their natural surroundings are often noisy.

. . .

Narwhals (also spelled “narwhales”) habitually summer underwater in the frigid glacial fjords of Northwest Greenland’s coastal ocean-waters, and other waters blend into the Arctic Ocean. But because these marine mammals shy away from motor-driven boats, they have not been well studied by modern Arctic Ocean ecologists.

. . .

However, this narwhal shyness has been circumvented by two geophysicists, Dr. Evgeny Podolskiy and Dr. Shin Sugiyama, whose research focus in cold climates. Their most recent research on narwhal noises is unprecedented. It provides a starting point for documenting different noises narwhals make as social communications. The research also investigates how narwhals use sound to echolocate underwater to find prey, such as fish, squid, and shrimp, and physical structures such as icebergs.
The article linked here did not indicate if the researchers did homage to Darwin, which would have detracted from their impressive work. To read this article in its entirety, click on "Noisy Narwhals in Greenland’s Frigid Fjords". For related material, see "The Mysterious Narwhal".

This short video is interesting, but sound is not needed.

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

Wednesday, July 29, 2020

Brave Evolutionists try to Stomp on Bombardier Beetle

The bombardier beetle has been an icon for creation science for decades. Indeed, I used it myself in lectures back in the early 1990s. It has been an example of irreducible complexity even before the term existed. The hands at the Darwin Ranch tried to give this critter the hippo stomp.

The bombardier beetle has been an icon of creation science. Evolutionists tried to stomp on the concept but have no science, just propaganda efforts to confirm their biases.
Australian bombardier beetle image credit:
Wikimedia Commons / Peter Halasz (CC by-SA 3.0)
It was startling enough before, what with packing heat (literally!) inside and flustering attackers with a hot spray — with accuracy — but not blowing itself up. As time went on, it was learned that its tiny Gatling gun was operating in short bursts. This is convenient so it doesn't rocket itself into the next county. Also, Professor Andy McIntosh studied it intensively and developed practical applications.

This bug is a Maleus Malificarum to materialists, so they wanted to stomp on the concept that it is clear evidence of the Master Engineer at work. Occasional things were posted at various evolutionary and Darwinist propaganda clearing houses, but they didn't amount to much. There was a more serious effort recently that may have looked good to those wanting their naturalistic biases confirmed, but closer examination reveals that it is little more than something dropped along the dusty trail.
Evolutionists bravely take on a creation icon: the bombardier beetle. Does their explanation work?

Evolutionists are very cocky people. They feel it unnecessary to pay any notice to creationists at all. But when they do, it is only to show Darwin’s superiority, with a brief put-down to anyone who questions the omnipotence of his Stuff Happens Law. Once in awhile, it seems, they want to reassure the peasants that King Charles is still on the throne, and can take all comers, even those religious-fundamentalist creationist wackos. A case in point appeared in a press release from the Stevens Institute of Technology on June 16:
To see a refutation of a refutation of evolutionary propaganda, click on "Bombardier Beetle Answered by Evolutionists".

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

Tuesday, July 28, 2020

Neanderthals and Bears have Something in Common

Although some believers in universal common ancestry deny reality and insist that modern humans and Neanderthals are only distantly related, a recent genetic study gives lie to their beliefs. What do bears have to do with it?

Some Darwinists deny reality and claim that Neanderthals interbreeding with modern humans was a fringe thing. A new DNA study settles that idea.
Image cropped and enhanced, original: Flickr / Clemens Vasters (CC BY 2.0)
Some owlhoots reluctantly admit that Neanderthals, Denisovans, and modern humans were able to interbreed, but they try to rescue Darwin by saying that this was essentially a fluke — on the edge of biological compatibility. (I reckon they're desperate to deny recent creation.) Come on, man, that's a bunch of malarkey!

Values for genetic distance were studied, including various bears and relatives of dogs. What do bears and Neanderthals have in common? This study. It affirms not only that they could interbreed and apparently were happy to do so (we all have some of their DNA), but we are more closely related genetically to Neanderthals than some bears are to each other. Biblical creationists are pleased by the recent creation-affirming results, naturally. Secularists should stop fighting the truth.
In this new study, the researchers developed a genetic distance metric to predict the fertility of the first generation of hybrid offspring between the mating of any two mammalian species. They did this by analyzing genetic sequence from different mammal species that were already known to produce viable hybrid offspring. By correlating genetic distance with offspring fertility, they showed that the greater the genetic distance, the less likely it would be that the offspring would be fertile. Then the researchers effectively used the genetic distance values to determine thresholds of fertility for various mammals.
You can read the full article by clicking on "Humans and Neanderthals More Similar Than Polar and Brown Bears". Also, other links to articles demonstrating that Neanderthals were fully human can be found at "Those Sophisticated Neanderthals".

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

Monday, July 27, 2020

The Gazelle and the Master Engineer

We have seen several times that creatures are not only designed, but they can be examined (indeed, appreciated) from an engineering perspective. Someone can design a motor, but successful engineering anticipates its performance under demanding conditions. Consider the gazelle.

We see clear evidences of how creatures are intelligently designed by our Creator, but go a step further and consider the gazelle from an engineering perspective.
Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net / GY
Predators looking to add a gazelle to the menu can run very fast, but in short bursts. If the gazelle gets a head start, it can get out of Dodge and keep on going before the pursuer runs out of steam. That means heat is generated and needs to be dissipated. In addition, the vertebral columns of gazelles are designed for the long run as well as agility. Other critters are distinctly different in this area. Darwin's acolytes may say, "It evolved", but that is faith and louche non-science.
Gazelle is the common name for a number of small antelopes of the family Bovidae and subfamily Antilopinae. They are characterized by a sandy color, with a streak of white or red on the side of the face. Both male and female gazelles typically have horns that are curved forward and are ringed base to tip.

. . .

The subject of this article is “Engineering the Gazelle” and we will be looking at just two amazing aspects of the design of these animals that display the tremendous engineering involved:

A. Engineering Field: Heat Transfer – Application: Gazelle Cooling System.

B. Engineering Field: Biomechanics – Application: Gazelle Vertebral Column.
You can pronk on over to the full article at "Engineering the Gazelle".

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

Saturday, July 25, 2020

Fact Checkers for Evolution

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

People familiar with softball and baseball probably know about how a catcher will frame a pitch. If it comes close to the strike zone, the catcher can make subtle movements to make it appear like a strike to the umpire, even if it is not there.

Self-proclaimed fact checkers frame their narratives similar to the way a catcher frames a pitch.
Credits: Original from FreeImages / Julie Elliott-Abshire, modified with PhotoFunia
See what I did there?
On one hand, it can be a form of cheating, but on the other, the catcher can make a good pitch look like it missed the strike zone. There is a similarity in this to people and organizations who are self-proclaimed fact checkers. Someone pointed out that the name is a bit misleading, as facts are facts. True, but how facts are presented or framed can inform or deceive people.

There are two areas of poor logic involved here. The first is an appeal to authority fallacy, which means that if a certain person, group, site, or organization made a proclamation, it must be true. However, many so-called fact checkers are simply people with computers doing things that the rest of us can accomplish as well. Also, there are times when someone is an authority on a subject but is also wrong if using faulty or nonexistent documentation.

We have to be careful when considering another area of poor logic: the genetic fallacy. In the briefest terms, it is rejecting information because of the source. I lost count of all the times that anti-creationists rejected information because it came from creation science sources —

"You were keeping count, Cowboy Bob?"

Well, if I had started, I would have lost count by now.

The truth of something should be evaluated on its own validity. However (this is the tricky part), there are times when claims can be treated with extreme skepticism when the source is demonstrated to have been misleading and outright dishonest. Also, if they have agendas.

For example, the political outfits Factcheck, Politifact, Snopes, and others are not only heavily biased to the left politically, they have bad reputations. If you head on over to atheist and anti-creationist sites, you are highly unlikely to find accurate representations of Christianity and biblical creation science, yet they claim to "fact check" by using other bigoted sources. It works in a circle.

If you've followed the links in the preceding paragraph, you will notice that I used sources that are not leftist. That's because the mainstream news media has been caught lying or framing claims to the left, and I simply don't trust them.

You have probably heard of quote mining, which is a frequent charge against creationists when we cite evolutionists. (I showed how viperine these people can be in "That Quote Mining Monkey Business".) Pay attention, Hoss. When accused of quote mining (assuming you're not being a weasel your ownself), the ones making accusations need to show that the quote was inaccurate, taken out of context, and the speaker or writer did not mean what was said. Savvy? When challenging accusers with these things, I've been greeted with silence, or else they change the subject and attack. That means they've lost.

In the spirit of, "Who watches the watchers?", we need to know who is checking the alleged fact checkers. Many times, they are framing their remarks by omitting important details, using inaccurate or incomplete quotes, edited or incomplete video footage, and so on.

In this postmodern culture, truth is relative or even nonexistent in the minds of some people. This view is self-refuting and unlivable, which makes it ironic when people complain about lies and injustices. "Do the right thing!" Really? Who makes the rules?

In reality, everyone has some sort of ultimate standard. Atheists tend to have shifting standards based on pragmatism and personal gain. When atheists accuse me of lying about evolution, for example, I have asked them that if I really was lying, why would that be wrong according to an evolutionary worldview? They cannot give a coherent reply.

Jesus told us that we would be hated. I believe that biblical creationists are more hated than typical church-goers because we uphold truth, logic, rational thinking, and the ultimate standard of the Bible. People hate scriptural authority. The truth is that God's Word is final. That's a fact, and you can check it yourself.

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

Friday, July 24, 2020

Slowly Loving the Venomous Loris

Found in jungles of Southeast Asia and thereabouts, these cute and cuddly-looking critters can be dangerous. No need to run screaming from the building, deaths to humans from their bite are rare. You can walk away. The moniker slow loris is appropriate.

A creature known as the slow loris is cute, but potentially lethal. Unlikely, but possible. The Master Engineer provided it with some unique and unusual qualities.
Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Aprisonsan (CC BY-SA 4.0)
There are a few venomous mammals (including several types of shrews), but they are not known to be fatal to humans. However, the slow loris can give a defensive bite that is potentially fatal. Ironic, because they are used in the exotic pet trade — don't even think about it! The slow loris uses its lack of speed to its advantage, and it also has the ability to mimic venomous snakes. It is another example of the provisions built in by the Master Engineer.
Slow lorises are small primates that dwell in the jungles of Southeast Asia. While other primates like monkeys swing and leap through the trees, slow lorises sneak across branches. Even the quicker members of the loris kind, the slender lorises and the pottos, climb at a cautious pace. But if you’re tempted to think slowness is a handicap, not so fast. The slow loris’ sluggishness contributes to a feature called crypsis—the use of stealth to avoid predators and to hunt.
To read the entire short article or download the audio, click on "Slow Loris: Fuzzy Can Be Fatal".

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

Thursday, July 23, 2020

Darwinists Want to Give a Fish a Hand

When proponents of universal common ancestry evolution insist that the fossils prove evolution, biblical creationists ask for the transitional forms. You know, where something is indisputably evolving into something else. They trot out variations and different sexes, but nothing convincing. 

Darwinists think they found a fish that was evolving a hand. They forgot humiliations by using bad science before in their efforts to deny the Creator.
Elpistostege watsoni fossil image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Placoderm2 (CC BY-SA 4.0)
There should be billions of actual transitional forms if evolution were true. Instead, we get evolutionists fighting tooth and nail for every possible candidate for a transitional form. What's this one fish hand thing? Yes, some are claiming to have definitive proof that the lobe-finned fish Elpistostege watsoni was evolving a hand. The evidence is dubious, and not everyone in the evolution camp wants to hop on that bandwagon.

Indeed, a few similarities in a fossil or two does not indicate evolution of limbs. Consider the amazing complexity of the hand that the Master Engineer designed. See "Hand Signals of Design".

Are there other possible explanations for what was found? No, because evolution! (And some balatrons accuse us of confirmation bias.) Never mind the coelacanth that made fools of evolutionists. They claimed it was extinct and evolving, but it was found alive and well — what was presumed by bias confirmers had a different function. There is also the embarrassment of the tiktaalik. Some people will not learn, because as well have seen so many times, the naturalistic narrative is more important than the facts. Denying the work of the Creator is paramount to these owlhoots.
In order for the bizarre theory of evolution to be validated, evolutionists must show how inorganic non-life organized itself into carbon-based (organic) life. They also must show how major transitions in animals occurred, including how fish became the first tetrapods. This means fish fins would need to slowly turn into feet and legs. As one secular journal said, “The evolution of fishes into tetrapods—four-legged vertebrates of which humans belong—was one of the most significant events in the history of life.”
You can read the rest by using your Creator-designed finger and clicking on "Was a Fossil 'Fish-Hand' Discovered?" A related article with additional insights is found at "Did Fish Evolve Hands?"

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

Wednesday, July 22, 2020

Titan Rapidly Fleeing from Saturn

It has been discovered that Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is receding from that nice planet much faster than cosmic evolutionists expect. Moons recede. They do that. However, the rate at which Titan lit a shuck out of there causes considerable consternation.

The rate at which Titan is receding from Saturn startles secularists and causes them many difficulties. Biblical creationists are not bothered in the least.
Titan with clouds image credit: NASA / JPL / University of Arizona
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Indeed, secular scientists are constantly denying evidence for a young solar system (see "Saturn Scientists Dodge Age Issues".) None of the secular ideas for the formation of the solar system are good, so the best of the worst is the nebular hypothesis. Essentially, everything formed at the same time (never mind that Venus and Uranus defy the edict had have retrograde rotations, as well as some moons). Earth's moon is receding, and using uniform assumptions against secularists, it would have been impossibly close to Earth in the past. Titan would have needed to form in a different place than was originally assumed, and this causes problems throughout secular cosmology. Recent creation does not have all these problems and the need for reworking bad theories.
A recent news release from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) announces that new examination of the data from the late Cassini spacecraft indicates that Saturn’s moon Titan is moving away from the planet at a higher rate than previously thought. What are the implications of the fact that the moon is moving away? A bit can be said about the time scale of the age of the Saturnian system.
To finish reading, click on "Titan Is Running Away from Saturn". For a similar article with additional information, see "Titan Receding from Saturn Faster than Expected".

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

Tuesday, July 21, 2020

Propaganda for Children is a Tree Ring Circus

In a previous post we saw how naturalists are indoctrinating children. After all, secularists control public thought control systems commonly referred to as schools, so they have their minds captive for many hours in a year. That is not the only method.

A children's book is being used to indoctrinate in the bad science of tree ring dating. Once again, the narrative is more important than evidence and truth.
Credit: Unsplash / Aleksandar Radovanovic
Another effective means of propaganda is though storybooks. I was talking with Trevor "Red" Schnapper the other day, and he told me about a book for children that he encountered. It was about counting tree rings. This is, to use the expensive word, dendrochronology. (In case you're curious, you can see the word components. -ology is "the study of", dendron is for "tree", cronos is time — but I see you checking the chronograph on your wrist and know it's time to get back to the subject.) Like many other kids, I was taught that one ring means one year of growth.

That seems good on the surface, but there are factors involved that sometimes the sidewinders at the indoctrination centers don't bother to tell people. Counting tree rings is unreliable. Boy, those deceptive deep-time proponents sure are fond of layers, aren't they? This stuff is being pushed on children despite the bad science involved. Remember when Joe Biden said, "We choose truth over facts"? For naturalists, the narrative is more important than actual evidence and logic. The truth they ignore is that the earth was recently created.
A new book on tree rings—Valerie Trouet’s Tree Story — blends some serious tree science with some uniformitarian mythology. The book is being heavily promoted by Johns Hopkins University. Aimed at young readers, it will indoctrinate children into the same old mythology about trees, implying that tree ages can be determined by counting growth rings.
Wooden you know, you can read the rest by clicking on "Children’s Tree Book Rings of Evolutionary Agenda".

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

Monday, July 20, 2020

Painting with Octopus Ink

That is a title I did not expect to use. Although a group of fossil octopuses was discovered in 2009, it was not until a few years later that the lovely and talented Esther van Hulsen was commissioned to paint a picture of it using its own ink.
Using the ink from a fossilized octopus raises several questions about the age of the earth. This, and the fossil itself, supports creationist claims about the Genesis Flood.
If the octopus was Keuppia levante, it may have looked like this
Image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Smokeybjb (CC BY-SA 3.0)
Using the dried-out ink sacs of cephalopods for writing and art is not a new idea, but the effort by Esther was large and highly publicized. Many questions arise that trouble proponents of deep time:
  • How could a soft critter like an octopus be fossilized slowly?
  • Why is the ink sac still extant after 95 million Darwin years?
  • Why is the pigment of the ink, a kind of melanin, still stable?
  • Shouldn't everything be permineralized after all that alleged time?
  • How do you reconcile this and the discoveries of soft tissues and even DNA — which should not exist according to your paradigm — with observed facts?
The narrative among secularists is that the earth is very old. This gives Darwin time to peep and mutter so he can work his magic. However, the evidence, including the existence of octopus fossils, indicates a young earth and rapid burial by the Genesis Flood. Yippie ky yay, secularists!
A rather unusual painting hangs in Oslo’s Natural History Museum, Norway. Displayed beside a magnificent fossil octopus is a painting meant to depict it when alive. What makes this painting so unusual is that the ink used to paint it came from the same ink sac that can be observed in the fossil. It is quite literally a painting in the present made from pieces of the past.

While evolutionists claim the fossil octopus is 95 million years old, it serves instead as a demonstration of the rapid deposition of sediments during the Noahic Flood some 4,500 years ago.
You can read the rest by clicking on "A painting ‘95 million years’ in the making?" There is a short video below. Never mind it's promoting false science and has no sound, we can get a glimpse of the artist (in Brooklyn, pronounced "ottist") at work.

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

Saturday, July 18, 2020

More Follies with Darwinian Racism

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Although some acolytes for Charles Darwin try to deny it, his racism has been abundantly documented (here is a sampling), so we have no need to spend much time on that. To go further, we will examine how presuppositions based on "race" and "primitive people" influenced the treatment of ethnic groups.

Darwinists are constantly surprised at how intelligent and advanced people they consider intelligent were. This is based on personal preferences and presuppositions.
Modern Comanche by Frederic Remington, 1890
Once again, however, it needs to be stated that racism (despite the fact that genetically and biblically we are all one race) is ancient, and was exacerbated by Darwinian views and "scientific racism"[1]. One problem with deeming people to be primitive is the evolutionary concept that our ancestors swung down from the trees and commenced to developing consciousness, hunting, language, and civilizations.

Evolutionists have been repeatedly surprised that their presuppositions have been demonstrated to be fatally flawed. Roads discovered beneath ancient Roman roads in Britain[2], early humans were sailing to Greek islands[3], an ancient Israeli city was quite advanced[4] — and the sophistication of Neanderthals really puts burrs under the saddles of evolutionists[5]. For that matter, there are modern humans with facial features that "belong" to our alleged evolutionary ancestors[6]. Of course, biblical creationists are not constantly challenged to rewrite history and evolution textbooks because our beliefs do not correspond with the facts. We presuppose the truth of the Bible and are consistently shown to have the facts on our side.

In more recent times, Native Americans were called primitive, but they were judged by people who were from a different culture, mostly white Europeans. My culture is better and more civilized than your culture because it's mine and I like it. While Native Americans did not seem to have written languages and some tribes were constantly moving around[7], they were living their lives — probably without thinking, "I sure hope we become civilized someday". Primitive is often equated with stupid, and those people were intelligent. They just did not do things the way people from Western cultures thought they should live.

When Charles Darwin was taking his trip on the Beagle, there was a run-in with the Fuegians. These people were considered primitive, but some were captured and taken to Britain (one died there early on), Christianized (or at least, they played along), educated, and shown to the king and queen of Britain. After the Fuegians were back home, they quickly reverted to their original ways. It's not so much savage hearts or a primitive nature, they simply had no need of Western trappings[8].

Our Creator made only one race, but there are many ethnicities. Those who call others primitive should keep that in mind. In addition, they should realze that such a view is based on personal personal preferences and presuppositions — and many of those are based on Darwin's failed worldview.

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

Friday, July 17, 2020

Secularist Crystal Gazing and Earth's Magnetic Field

Secular geologists have struggled to explain the origin of Earth's magnetic field, and recent research has made things worse. Yes, we know that it has had reversals and they have happened more rapidly than previously thought. Their latest efforts to explain the origin of the field amount to zircon crystal gazing.

Secular scientists cannot determine the age of the earth's magnetic field. Their attempts resembling zircon crystal gazing have not gone well.
Original image before modification courtesy of Why?Outreach
Here's how it allegedly happened. Like teenage girls having a sleepover party that start messing with a spirit board, the hands at the Darwin Ranch (up yonder by Deception Pass) were having themselves a hootenanny. Even Rusty Swingset, the foreman, joined in. He had a bit too much firewater, and draped the curtains over his back so he could play super hero before dancing with his lady friend Jacqueline Hyde (she still wasn't herself that day). Then they decided to perform some divination on the age of the earth with zircon crystals. It did not go well.

Results were contradictory, and even fouled up the timeline again: the age did not go back far enough. Somewhere, somehow, mayhaps over the rainbow, the answer for what drove the magnetic field for a heap of time may be found. Biblical creationists know that their dating methods are fundamentally flawed, and that the Genesis Flood greatly affected Earth's magnetic field.
When did the Earth get its magnetic field? It’s important because life depends on it. Watch MIT fumble and stumble over the question.

Consumers of science news often get triumphant-sounding assertions about things, leading the reader to assume that the experts know what they are talking about. A typical statement might say, ‘The Earth’s magnetic field originated 3.5 billion years ago from a dynamo caused by stirring of molten iron in the Earth’s core, and reverses its polarity in 100,000 year cycles.’ Here’s a sample from Live Science last September, where reporter Stephanie Pappas adds some sugar and spice to fresh expert cud:
To learn more about the failure of secular scrying, click on "Origin of Geomagnetism: Bumbling in the Dark Past".

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

Thursday, July 16, 2020

Humans, Marsupials, and Fingerprints

People who watch or read about crime know the importance of fingerprints, and that no two can be alike. The study of fingerprints is dactyloscopy. You may notice a similarity between that word and Pterodactylus, which is derived from the Greek for "winged finger". It may be a surprise to learn that some marsupials have fingerprints.

We know that fingerprints are unique identifiers, but the ridges and such help us pick up things. Other creatures have this, including some marsupials like the sugar glider.
Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Joseph C Boone (CC BY-SA 4.0)
There are marsuipials that have similar characteristics to us, but not all. Those that need the raised ridges have them. (Go ahead, look at your fingers and see how some parts are raised in patters.) These help them to get a grip. Our Creator provided for not only us, but for critters in their unique habitats.
With only three types of fingerprint patterns, what makes every individual unique? These patterns are distinguished by tiny details called minutiae. Just one fingerprint has over 150 minutiae characteristics. . . unlike anyone else in the world who lived in the past, is alive in the present, or will be born in the future.

. . .

Humans are not the only living thing that God created with unique fingerprints and friction ridge skin. He also gave certain animal kinds—primates, some marsupials, and certain weasels—friction ridge skin to help them thrive in their environments. This helpful trait points to our intelligent Creator God who made everything for a purpose (Proverbs 16:4). Think about it: Would marsupials such as sugar gliders or koalas benefit from the nonslip surface provided by friction ridge skin? Do they climb and grasp food? Yes, and God not only equipped them with this feature but also gave them unique identity in their print patterns.
You can grab onto the entire article or download the audio version by my favorite reader at "Marsupial Fingerprints: These Hands Were Made for Gripping". Also, there is a fascinating video by the author at "The Forensic Science Behind God’s Fingerprint Design".

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

Wednesday, July 15, 2020

Nodosaur Fossil Further Testifies of Genesis Flood

Back in 2017, we examined news of a nodosaur (related to the ankylosaur) in "Nodosaur News is Good News". Biblical creationists were pleased with the findings, and further information provides additional support for the Genesis Flood. Darwin's fan club made some ridiculous statements.

Evolutionists still say that critters sank to the bottom of the ocean and were gradually buried. This nodosaur contradicts the secular slow-and-gradual mendacity.
Suncor nodosaur fossil photo credit: Wikimedia Commons / Machairo / CC BY-SA 4.0
Secularists used their Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Rings™ to decide on the mendacity that something dies, sinks to the bottom of the water, gets gradually buried, then turns into a fossil — unbelievable. Anyone with a knowledge of animal death knows that there are scavengers, bacterial activity, and so on that will not leave something alone so it could fossilize.

In this case, the nodosaur had all the signs of being buried rapidly. In fact, scientists were able to determine what it had eaten. Also, what was a land critter doing way out yonder in the sea and getting its ownself buried with things normally found in water? That's the Flood, old son. Slow and gradual processes over long periods of time do not answer the obvious questions.
In 2017, a large dinosaur was discovered washed out to sea, similar to the dinosaur bone found 70 miles off Norway’s coast. Only this one was partially intact, nearly perfectly preserved, and still contained its last meal fossilized inside its gut. Recently, a group led by paleontologists from the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Palaeontology examined the stomach contents of the dinosaur and reported their findings in Royal Society Open Science.

Gizmodo reported on the dinosaur when it was first discovered.
You can read the rest by clicking on "Dinosaur Washed Out to Sea with Its Last Meal".

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

Tuesday, July 14, 2020

Impact of French Atheistic Deep-Time Beliefs

When I first saw the material that is linked below, I was not exactly enthusiastic. While I do have some interest in history, I was not all that interested in the history of France. I was glad I paid attention, however, because we can follow the connections and see the impact it has for us today.

The two articles linked here show how atheistic beliefs about deep time influenced France, and then Britain, and onward.
Credit: Pixabay / Gerd Altmann

It has been said that no movement occurs in a vacuum or because of a single incident. We can follow the origins of various events of history. The Russian Revolution of 1917 didn't begin with Lenin, evolution was an ancient religion before Erasmus and then Charles Darwin picked it up, the American civil rights movement did not being with the staged Rosa Parks incident, and so on.

Evolution and deep time are entrenched in civilizations. The British were influenced by the French (but downplayed that for the sake of national pride), and the French were influenced by paganism and the so-called Enlightenment (read: rejecting the Creator and the authority of the Bible). Not only did this French influence spill over into Britain and eventually into Darwinian evolution, but also into other countries. 

Atheism and Deism embraced these views, and professing Christians became roundheels to the desires of secularists. The French Revolution was not about reason, but an angry rebellion against God — which included mass murder. Here are two admittedly lengthy papers for your edification.
Belief in deep time and an evolutionary process grew in late 17th-century and
18th-century France. There were a number of reasons for this: growing religious struggles, political unrest, and interest in non-Christian religions from ancient Greece, Egypt, and the Indian Sub-continent. During the middle of the 18th century there was also growing agitation for revolution, but suppression by the powers of State and Church only encouraged the revolution. Undermining the scriptural account of creation and the Flood arguably became part of the process of undermining the existing order, although that may not have been the initial or full motivation. In the 17th century the struggle between Protestantism and Catholicism over Church authority was at its height in Europe, and the Jesuits were central to that struggle into the 18th century. Following the work of the Jesuit-trained Descartes, an excessive skepticism in the name of reason was directed towards knowledge gained through Scripture, although with far less skepticism directed towards beliefs from eastern religions or the human imagination.
You can finish the first paper by clicking on "Deep time in 18th-century France—part 1: a developing belief". This lays the foundation for the second part where things get even more interesting.
The first part to this paper showed how, in 18th century France, the influence of non-scientific factors encouraged belief in deep time and a rejection of the Noahic deluge. There was a prior commitment, through Cartesian methodology, to remove the testimony of Scripture from science, and to prefer fallible human inductive inferences. There was also misrepresentation of the geological evidence where it supported Scripture; a growing preference for deep time and evolution, that partly stemmed from Eastern religions; and growing political agitation for revolution. This paper discusses, albeit briefly, how these influences from France shaped beliefs in Britain during the 18th century, specifically through the work of David Hume, Erasmus Darwin and James Hutton. Then it will be considered how these 18th century beliefs were re-shaped by Charles Lyell and Charles Darwin for 19th century consumption. The link to France was seemingly written out of the narrative, and the overt paganism was removed, while retaining the flawed naturalistic methodology that arbitrarily rejected biblical testimony. As part of this process a slow and silent attack was used against Christianity to avoid causing open offence, that is until after the publication of Darwin’s Origins.
To see where this all leads, click on "Deep time in 18th century France—part 2: influence upon geology and evolution in 18th and 19th century Britain".

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

Monday, July 13, 2020

Fish Engineering Stymies Evolutionists

Despite their pyretic adoration of goo-to-guppy evolution, materialists are frequently stymied by examples of the Master Engineer's handiwork. Their louche "it evolved" excuses are based in faith, not empirical science. We will look at evolution-defying metabolism, body design, and dodging predators. Don't carp, the linked articles are short.

Three short articles are linked that showcase the work of the Master Engineer and leave evolutionists at a loss to give plausible explanations about fish. This one is a guppy.
Credit: Wikimedia Commons / 5snake5 (CC0 1.0)
Evolutionists presuppose that life began in the oceans, and that our distant ancestors were fish. Therefore, onward and upward evolution would show more advanced traits in land dwellers than in fish. As we've seen many times, you can't find something if you don't look for it — or if you're not thorough. A complex metabolic process was discovered in fish that "should not" be there.
A complex metabolic process called Chaperone-Mediated-Autophagy (CMA) was thought to be a recent evolutionary development in land vertebrates as it was only previously documented in mammals and birds. Now it has been found to be fully operational in fish—once again demonstrating that a lack of human knowledge is not evidence for evolution.

Autophagy is an amazingly complex and ingenious process in which cells are able to degrade and recycle their own damaged or dysfunctional components. It not only allows for the efficient recycling of important molecules and biochemical structures, but produces a stable equilibrium between interdependent cellular elements and physiological processes. In other words, it’s essential to life.
To finish reading, click on "Complex Metabolic Process in Fish Startles Evolutionists". We have more related material below.

Another area where design is evident is the bodies of fish. Aside from their abilities rise and fall (buoyancy from the swim bladder), fish are able to swim quickly and efficiently. In fact, they are being studied for designs for humans (biomimetics). Unfortunately, secularists want to steal the designs while refusing to give credit to the Creator.
Engineering-minded scientists have taken notice that many types of fish have bodies shaped like a low-drag airfoil that are characteristic of airplane wings. Now, a new research study has proven that the engineered mechanics of this design in fish provide optimized movement and thrust for swimming.

Human-designed airplane wings have a rounded leading edge combined with a smoothly tapered trailing section that is uniquely shaped to reduce drag while moving through the air at high speed. . . . researchers wanted to know more about how fish body design enabled them to use their unique shape to efficiently produce high levels of thrust during high-speed propulsion.
The full article can be read at "Fish Body Design Reveals Optimized Swimming Mechanics". Our final installment below is both amazing and fun. At least, I fin so.

Have you had the satisfaction of duping someone, say a playground bully, into falling for a subterfuge so you could escape? When cichlids see guppies, they think it's chow time. However, guppies were given a special ability to get their predators to attack in a certain way by signaling them, then the guppies can dodge and escape!
Recent research published in the journal Current Biology1 reports how gutsy guppies confront a regular predator, the voracious pike cichlids, like a matador. They attract the attacker to a location that can be dodged from. Then, at the last instant, the guppy pivots to safety.
Trinidadian guppies behave like matadors, focusing a predator's point of attack before dodging away at the last moment, new research shows.
The toreador trick depends upon the guppy flashing its eyes at the attacker. Specifically, the threatened guppy attracts conspicuous attention by turning its irises black, so the predator aims at the guppy’s head. After the predator lunges at a committed angle of attack, the guppy dodges.
You can read the entire thing by clicking on "Guppies Dodge Predators Like Spanish Bull-Fighters". You'll thank me later.

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

Saturday, July 11, 2020

How to Fold Rocks

The best way to fold layers of rock is to grab on with both hands and push down. No? Well of course not, those are rocks, not sheets of paper. If you saddle up and ride out Utah way to Dinosaur National Monument, then take a look around near the Quarry Visitor Center, you will see some impressive rock folding. Do you wonder how that happened?

All around the globe, instance of rock folding can be found. Secular geologists cannot explain them but the Genesis Flood provided the necessary conditions.
Credit: US National Park Service (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
It takes a tremendous amount of force to do this. Ask uniformitarian geologists how it happened, and you'll likely get some song and dance about millions of years. That's convenient. However, folded rocks are found in large areas all around the globe, and rocks have an unfortunate habit of breaking. They had to be soft and pliable at some point. The truth is, it is conditions, not time, that cause rock folding. These necessary conditions can be found in creation science models of the Genesis Flood. That's hard evidence for a recent creation.
When I was studying at university, I inspected numerous rock outcrops on geology excursions.  At the majority of outcrops where the rocks were folded, lecturers would explain that the rock must have been deformed while the sediment was still unconsolidated and saturated with water.

They said this because, although the rocks were obviously severely deformed, there was hardly any fracturing.  We all realized that the rock could not have been brittle when it was folded so tightly.  It must have been soft and plastic.  If the rocks had been hard and solid before they were deformed, they would have fractured, not folded.

In my work as a geophysicist, I have observed many examples of soft sediment folding...
To read the full article, click on "Warped Earth". Interesting to note that the article is from 2002, and proponents of deep time still have no plausible answers, just arbitrary assertions.

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

Friday, July 10, 2020

Those Marvelous Martian Mud Volcanoes

When discussing volcanoes, people are likely to mention explosive eruptions, plumes of hot lava, ash from Mt. Tambora giving the world a "year without a summer", and so on. Perhaps some will think of the secret base of Ernst Stavro Blofeld, which later erupted in real life. Not all volcanoes project lava.

Not all volcanoes produce lava. Some give mud, and research indicates that there were mud volcanoes on Mars.
Possible mud volcano on Mars, Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / Univ. of Arizona
Out yonder in our solar system are volcanoes that present water vapor, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and so forth. Jupiter's moon Io spews lava. It is interesting that there is increasing evidence that Mars had volcanoes that erupted mud, and Mars has landforms that are presumed to have been carved out by water. Some very interesting research and models have been conducted using conditions there. Ironically, secular geologists have no evidence of water on Mars to cause mud volcanoes and landforms, but deny the global Genesis Flood on our planet which is mostly water.
Tens of thousands of volcano-looking features exist across the northern lowlands and other areas across Mars. In the past, these volcanoes were thought to be caused by lava flows from the planet’s interior. However, a new study published in the journal Nature Geoscience has postulated that many of these “volcanoes” may have actually flowed mud, not lava.

Petr Bro┼ż from the Czech Academy of Sciences in Prague and colleagues from several institutions across Europe conducted 21 mudflow experiments. Many of their experiments used subfreezing temperatures and atmospheric pressures less than that of Earth in an attempt to simulate the conditions on Mars.
To finish reading, click on "Many Martian Volcanoes May Be Mudflows".

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