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

Monday, October 19, 2020

A Frankensteined Fish?

You probably know the story of Baron Frankenstein who stitched together various dead body parts and created a monster. (Note that Frankenstein was the scientist's name, not that of the monster.) A misnamed "frankenfish" was produced by scientists using two types of evolution-defying fish.

Scientists accidentally hybridized a sturgeon and a paddlefish. They were surprised these two kinds of fish found yet another way to defy evolution.
Credit: Freeimages / Martin Boose
That's right, the sturgeon and the paddlefish are closely related due to taxonomy, marriage, and global warming. However, they are separated my almost 200 Darwin years, so believers in universal common ancestor evolution are surprised that the two species managed to fall in love and make little hybrid fishies. Some have dubbed the offspring "Frankenfish", but that is greatly inaccurate for a hybrid. Do a search for Frankenfish and you'll see that this incorrect word has been used before. No evolution, no "creation". Just fish giving evolutionists something to carp about and quietly affirming recent creation.
In 2020, Hungarian zoologists described the hybridization of a Russian sturgeon and American paddlefish. Some sources have reported the scientists created a “franken-fish”—as indeed it looks quite bizarre. Researchers, however, are calling it the sturddlefish—with sharp fins and an elongated nose.

A hybrid in zoology is an offspring produced from a cross between parents of different genotypes (the precise genetic constitution of a cell or individual). For example, a zonkey results from a donkey crossed with a zebra; a liger results from a male lion and female tiger producing. This is not evolution, of course—they belong to the horse and cat kind respectively.

 To read the rest, sea "Was a Franken-Fish 'Created'?" Also recommended is "‘Impossible’ Hybrid Suggests Non-Darwinian Change".

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

Saturday, October 17, 2020

Video Review — Genesis Impact

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Under usual circumstances, the secular educational system has students under its control for several hours a day, weeks a year, many years. They are typically given the airbrushed versions of secular humanism and evolution. 

Genesis Impact is a video geared for students, but anyone can benefit from this presentation that shows serious flaws in evolution.
Image courtesy of Genesis Apologetics

Ironically, when Christian and creationist parents want to do what is right and teach their kids the truth, atheists and evolutionists say that we are "indoctrinating" them. Not hardly! In fact, they are doing the indoctrination, then accusing us of what they are doing themselves. It's okay to question evolution so you can learn how it happened, but it is streng verboten to question if it happened in the first place.

"Go to a natural museum history", they said. "You'll learn a lot." Yes, you'll learn how cherry-picked facts based on the naturalism narrative can be presented as scientific truth. Also, you can see from models and reconstructions how artists' conceptions are both fanciful and deceitful. And we are guilty of indoctrination?

Remember when I did a write-up for the Debunking Evolution series a spell back? The good folks at Genesis Apologetics never dismounted and put their ponies in the stable. They have produced several videos and Seven Myths series, and now Dr. Dan Biddle is leading the charge with Genesis Impact. As with Debunking Evolution, we are able to download a free PDF booklet and see videos that supplement the video.

I found out from their mailing list that the video is available for purchase and streaming rental, but I was able to see it free on Amazon's Prime channel. Now I'll give you my thoughts and observations.

Suspension of Disbelief

People who want to pick nits may criticize:
  • The docent (Reggie McGuire) who presented an evolution story allowed Christine (Hannah Bradley) to ask questions and present evidence for an hour.
  • There was a prairie schooner-full of dialogue that I consider a composite, discussions that could take place between individuals over days or even weeks presented in that hour.
  • She pulls out her phone, makes a connection, and shows video segments on the big screen. (We all know how time-consuming that can be in real life and didn't need superficial details, so it was good that they left those out.)
  • Most of the students were listening respectfully.

Show some Respect

Suppose you are a student who has been learning the truth about creation and how evolutionary evidence is tendentious and highly speculative. To go into a situation guns a-blazing may make you feel mighty fine, but it's counterproductive. While we are often attacked by internet atheists and Darwin devotees, we are to serve Christ with wisdom and grace despite possible raw nerves. It's far too easy to lose an argument (the real kind, not an emotional shouting match) by being obstreperous from the get-to.

Christine shows humility and shows critical thinking skills. She asks pointed questions that are not laden with accusations, and the docet allowed her to make her points.

Know Your Material

Christine said that she had been doing some research. You can set yourself up for a fall by challenging an expert, so do your homework. Nobody can memorize or remember everything, but to simply appeal to the Bible or public figures who support creation science will not be helpful. Remember that many people "think" with their emotions, so they won't care what a person or ministry says (genetic fallacy). Not to say that they cannot be referenced, but there is a time and place — later on up the road.

Cheap Stereotypes

You won't find those here, pilgrim. Some films portray atheists in such a way that the viewer might expect them to grow horns and fangs, then shoot lasers out of their eyes. This docent (Reggie McGuire has an excellent speaking voice, but never mind about that now) was clearly an unbeliever, but he was a decent docent. Also, Christine wasn't acting all highfalutin-like, giving a false victory to Christians by trouncing the docent.

There was an atheist in the audience who criticized Christine, which shows a bit of reality. She and others wouldn't fall for the distraction, but did what unbelievers often loathe: kept to the subject. F'rinstance, I can say, "Sure, my nose is weird. I also cheat at solitaire. But can you respond to my point about how the appendix is not a vestigial organ after all?"

Another cheap trick that was avoided would be to have a group of people falling on their knees, sobbing in repentance like in some comic book tracts. The docent did say, "You've given me a lot to think about". As Christians and creationists, we plant seeds. Some may never grow, and we may never see the results in the future. Remember, we are to be faithful, but it is the Holy Spirit who does the convicting and saving of souls.

Evidence and Faith

Regular readers know that I have problems with the Intelligent Design movement. Creationists use intelligent design arguments and evidence, but the ID movement avoids young-age creation and the Bible. Genesis Impact had a great deal of evidence, but it was not divorced from the gospel message; the idea that we can "leave God out of it" is contrary to Scripture. No, Christine didn't make her arguments with, "The Bible says..." Rather, she intelligently used evidence and brought in the Bible — gently — later.

Genesis Impact is not a showcase of dazzling special effects. That's good, because those would have detracted from the video. (Well, the effect of the video viewer at the beginning was impressive, and I didn't catch on that the very beginning and end were set, say, thirty years into the future.) Having read and watched a great deal of biblical creation science material over the years, much of this material was a review for me. A very useful review. By the way, the majority of the movie is about human origins. Genesis Apologetics has excellent videos about geology and the Genesis Flood, but those areas as well as radiometric dating are not emphasized. Fine, you can watch their channel for them. Or maybe there will be a companion movie later on.

People can use the main video, the supplemental shorter videos, and the booklet to lead a series of discussions. These can be a part of homeschooling, a family event, perhaps at a church function, or more. Use your imagination. I have to interrupt myself here and say that while the target audience is students, anyone who wants to learn about biblical creation science can benefit.

Once again, here is the main page for Genesis Impact, and clicking around the site can be useful to you. I normally dislike embedding videos that are more than about half an hour, but it's been a while since I've done that, and this is important. By the way, if you buy a copy, it's there when you need it even if your internet crashes or something.

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

Friday, October 16, 2020

Ice on Greenland Deposited Rapidly

Believers in an old earth refer to slow and gradual processes (uniformitarianism), and a big part of that involves ice depositions. This idea not only relies on several assumptions, but also relies on circular reasoning involving the Milankovitch theory. New research supports creation science models on ice depositions, the Genesis Flood, and the Ice Age.

Nuuk city in Greenland
Credit: Good Free Images / Oliver Schauf

Evidence has existed for a long time that ice accumulates rapidly, and one dramatic example involved airplanes that crash-landed there in World War II. There are times when secular scientists conduct research instead of following the herd mentality of "consensus science". Creation science Flood models involve extreme volcanic activity. Not only does this contribute to planetary cooling, but produces tephra (debris) and ash. These materials were detected in ice core samples, and the secular consensus was upended.
The millions of years is built upon assuming the astronomical or Milankovitch theory of ice ages which has many problems. When the researchers first counted the supposed annual layers, they only reached 85,000 years at the 2,800 m depth. Other scientists claimed this result was wrong because the time did not agree with that of deep-sea cores, also based on the astronomical theory. So, the researchers went back and increased the resolution of one instrument from 8 mm to 1 mm and counted 25,000 more annual layers between 2,300 and 2,800 m, and voila! It matched.

To find out what this excerpt is all about, see "New evidence for rapid Ice Age deposition on the Greenland Ice Sheet". You may also be interested in "Faulty Ice Core Ages and Tephra".

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

Thursday, October 15, 2020

Examining False Charges of Deluge Story Copying

Hopefully, I can move to a replacement for this awful Google-owned Blogger platform by the end of the year. Like Facebook, they force changes on its users that are dreadful.

Atheists and tinhorn "Christian scholars" level charges at the narrative of the Genesis Flood for being a copy of similar pagan stories. If so-called scholars actually did complete research instead of arguing from superficialities and anti-Bible presuppositions, they would not be making such foolish assertions.

Enemies of the Genesis Flood have fabricated the idea that the Hebrews copied pagan stories. This is easily refuted.
Library of Ashurbanipal / The Flood Tablet / The Gilgamesh Tablet / Wikimedia Commons /  (CC BY-SA 3.0)

As we know, there are global deluge story all over the world. Creationists believe that after the dispersal at Babel, the people took the historical account with them, but they deteriorated. One of the main problems with the idea of the Hebrews copying from pagan sources is that such a thing would be unthinkable to those Hebrews. The cultures of the ancient peoples in question were extremely different, and even a cursory comparison between the plagiarized novel-like approach on one side compared to the sacred trust and desire for historical accuracy on the other side should be obvious — the Mesopotamians were considering it literature or entertainment. There are other major factors to consider.

For a long time, the discovery of Flood literature in Mesopotamia outside of the Genesis account has prompted a higher critical argument that the Genesis account must have borrowed from the Babylonian and Assyrian versions of the Flood story. This thesis, however, can be seriously challenged based on recent archaeological work that expands both our understanding as to how ancient Mesopotamian religion functioned, and how their scribes related to their texts.

. . .

For these and other reasons, the long-held higher critical argument about an alleged textual exchange is now outdated. It is untenable to argue that Hebrew scribal tradition based their sacred history on a foreign text that not only had a hostile religious worldview to that of the monotheistic Israelite one, but was not regarded as historical and sacred by those who circulated them.

Although rather long, this interesting analysis should prove valuable to people who desire historical accuracy and useful information in defense of the Bible. To read all of it, click on "The Mesopotamian Deluge Accounts: Neither History Nor Revelation". You may also be interested in "Gilgamesh, Genesis and Myths". Also, "Another Gilgamesh Great Flood Pretender" deals with a fantasy of one of the sidewinders discussed in the "Mesopotamian Deluge" link, above.

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

Wednesday, October 14, 2020

Brain Complexity is Problematic for Evolution

Rusty Swingset, the foreman at the Darwin Ranch, tends to spill the beans about their weekly chapel meetings. While bowing to Hanuman the Monkey God, the ranch hands chant about simple life forms becoming more complex. A recent study of mammal brains short circuited that idea.

Research on brain size and neural connectivity refutes yet another bit of evolutionary dogma.
Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos / Renjith Krishnan

Biblical creationists affirm that God made life fully functional from the beginning, so we are not exactly surprised that big brains and little brains in mammals have the same complex connectivity. (For that matter, this is right in keeping with the knowledge that brain size has nothing to do with intelligence or evolution.) Many critters were never scanned before, which seems a mite surprising to me. The results of this study fly in the face of evolutionary dogma.

The evolutionary model of brain development predicted that the complexity of neural connectivity should have increased as brains became larger and the creatures more complex. However, a groundbreaking study has just been published showing that, across the spectrum of mammals, the levels of brain activity are equally complex. In other words, mammalian brain connectivity and its amazing complexity appeared suddenly and fully functional across the board with no evolutionary precursor.

To cognate on the rest of the article, see "Mammalian Brains Prove Evolutionary Disconnect".

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

Tuesday, October 13, 2020

Siberian Cave Bear on Ice

Siberia is famous for extreme cold and political prisoners, yet some people call it home. Imagine if you will some reindeer herders going about their routine and finding the frozen remains of a cave bear. They saw fit to make the finding known. We have a couple of articles on this subject for your consideration.

A frozen cave bear dated at 40,000 Darwin years old raises serious problems for secularists. Creation Science Ice Age models provide superior answers.
Assembled with items from Clker clipart
This critter was dated at many thousands of Darwin years ago, but was in surprisingly good condition. Such a huge amount of time assigned to it is based on the naturalism narrative, not science or even good sense. Ever put a slab of meat in your freezer and then find it again some time later, only to find it has deteriorated and not worth putting in a stew? That's in a well-controlled environment. We're supposed to suspend reason and believe what scientists say, follow the consensus, and believe that seasonal changes, earth movements, predators, and whatever else didn't bother it.
They say this bear, with soft tissue, organs, soft nose and all, died almost 40,000 years ago. Is that credible?

When thinking of fossils, one doesn’t usually think of hair, skin, and internal organs. . . . The scientists are flabbergasted at this first-ever discovery of a whole bear found in melting permafrost, with all its internal organs intact and even its nose soft and completely preserved. It looks like it died a few months ago. How did it get quick-frozen? How did it last up to 39,400 years in such a condition?

You can explore the rest by chilling out at "Ice Age Bear Found Intact in Melting Permafrost". I hope you'll bear with me and come back for the next fascinating article!

Another from Clker clipart
Something else to consider is the extreme contrast between uniformitarian and creation science geology. The naturalism narrative overrides the evidence when it comes to deep time and evolution, so we get tales best suited for telling around the campfire on the trail. Consider an icon of the Ice Age (and of Siberia to some extent), the woolly mammoth. They were all over the northern latitudes.

An animal is not likely to decide to make a home where it will freeze to death , dense fur or not. Also, food and water must be available, among other things. Ice Age critters had needs, and they obviously were met at one time. Using creation science Genesis Flood models for the Ice Age, observed facts make far more sense, and many questions can be answered.
These carcasses, particularly those of the woolly mammoths, present a major mystery to uniformitarian scientists. Millions of woolly mammoths lived in Siberia during the Ice Age. But today, Siberia’s winters are brutally cold, with lows often reaching -40 degrees Fahrenheit. In some places, temperatures occasionally reach -90 degrees Fahrenheit—colder than the surface of Mars! It’s very difficult to see how even woolly mammoths could endure that kind of bitter cold. To make matters worse, uniformitarian scientists think temperatures during the Ice Age were even colder than they are now!

However, the Flood Ice Age model easily solves this mystery.

You can learn quite a bit by reading the full article (I'll allow that the title is weak), "Was This Cave Bear Really 'Prehistoric'?" Also, the short video below (sound optional, no narration) is misnamed. It contains summertime scenes from a place that becomes the coldest on Earth:

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

Monday, October 12, 2020

The Geocentrism Resurgence

Most people accept, and even take for granted, the geokinetic (also called heliocentric) model but may not know it by name. In the briefest sense, the sun is the center of the solar system with Earth and other planets in orbit around it. For a long time, the geocentric view dominated astronomy and astrology.

This post contains links to articles describing the history of geocentrism, the modern resurgence, and thoroughly debunking that idea.
Planetary Orbits, Andreas Cellanius, 1660
The idea that Earth is the center of the solar system was reinforced by the pagan astronomer and astrologer Claudius Ptolemy, who built on Aristotelian ideas. His system was accepted by scientists for many years, and the heliocentric view took a long time to develop and gain acceptance. Although heliocentrism/geokineticism has been established, there is a baffling resurgence in geocentrism. (In addition, many flat-earthers are geocentrists.) Not only do many deny that Earth orbits the sun, but some geocentrists refuse to believe that it rotates on its axis!

One area that atheists ridicule Christians is by accusing us of being flat-earthers as well as believing in geocentrism. Unfortunately, there are professing Christians who believe in these unscientific views. What is worse is that through eisegesis and taking verses out of context, many of them believe they are superior to other Christians. To be blunt, when I encounter flat-earth geocentric creationists, I am embarrassed to be associated with them; creationists have enough problems without sharing the umbrella with believers in such things.

We have a couple of articles to consider. Biblical creation astronomer Dr. Danny Faulkner has put a great deal of work into these, and I hope you'll find them as interesting and useful as I do. By the way, keep an eye out for the sections on how scientists were entrenched in their geocentric views and resisted change. Also, how the view that aether was necessary so light could travel through outer space — think of how Darwinian presuppositions are the basis for failed biological and cosmological conjectures of modern evolutionists.

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

Friday, October 9, 2020

The ATLAS Comet and the Kuiper Belt

As it is with any science, knowledge increases over time and with better equipment. This is especially true with astronomy. Classifications of celestial objects seemed to be under control, despite the occasional anomaly. Those pesky creationists with their science facts required a lot of Making Things Up™ to protect the deep time narrative.

Secular cosmologists reclassified a small celestial object into something they falsely think will rescue them from observed facts of recent creation.
Gran cometa de 1882 by Jose Maria Velasco

Don't be disunderstanding me here. It's a common practice to add new terminology to describe new discoveries or to give legitimate reclassifications. (Want an example? Pluto is now considered a dwarf planet, much to my sorrow, because of it size, the abundance of similar objects, and other factors.) However, there was some serious redefining of an object with the poetic name of P/2019 LD2 (ATLAS).

It was a centaur, but because of a computer simulation that fits the deep time agenda, P/2019 LD2 (ATLAS) is now considered to be a comet. It is also a rescuing device from the Kuiper belt, there to save cosmic evolution from the evidence of recent creation. Cue dramatic hero music.

Asteroids and comets used to be much simpler. I remember when there were 2,000 known asteroids. Now the number is closing in on one million. I remember when a dozen new comet discoveries in a year was a bunch. But anymore, even a bad year would have far more discoveries than that. The total number of known comets now exceeds 4,000. And comets and asteroids once were distinct things: asteroids were rocky; comets were icy; and comet ices sublimed into gas that we could see. Furthermore, the orbits of the two types of bodies were very different. But as I’ve previously written, the distinction between the two groups has become blurred. In recognition of that blurring, in 2006 the International Astronomical Union established a new classification, Small Solar System Bodies (SSSBs) to include both asteroids and comets.

To read the rest, fly on over to "P/2019 LD2 (ATLAS): The Latest Proof of the Kuiper Belt?" Also, don't blame me for the weird appearance. Google, owners of Blogger where you're reading; this, decided to change the interface and made things much, much worse. I am seriously considering moving to another blogging platform.

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

Thursday, October 8, 2020

Continuous Environmental Tracking in Plants

The Institute for Creation Research is developing CET, the continuous environmental tracking model. This is based on studying living things from an engineering perspective, how our Creator has designed organisms to adapt to changes and even enable the survival of future generations.

Plants exhibit the work of the Master Engineer in their abilities to adapt and thrive.
Credit: Unsplash / Lukasz Szmigiel

It may seem at first glance that plants are extremely limited, what with being rooted in place and all. However, they can adapt (some changes are falsely attributed to neo-Darwinism) and have amazing abilities to communicate amongst themselves and even with other organisms — all the way down to the roots. There are many aspects of plant life that show the work of the Master Engineer.

All plants and animals were divinely engineered with innate systems of adaptation that track various aspects of their environment and respond accordingly—an internal ability known as continuous environmental tracking. While animals, including humans, display intricate adaptive systems, plants cannot get up and move around as a means to adjust to their environment. They have to adapt to their surroundings where they are planted. Therefore, the Creator has engineered them with amazing systems that sense and respond to important environmental cues such as day length, light quality, temperature, water availability, gravity, touch, and even chemical signals emitted by other organisms.

To harvest the rest of the article, see "Plants Model Continuous Environmental Tracking".

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

Wednesday, October 7, 2020

Striking News about the World Ceres

For several years, those bright spots on that world have been thought to be caused by salt. After commencing to cognate and get those mental wheels turning, secular scientists are realizing that Ceres is being recalcitrant to deep-time beliefs — like other objects in our solar system. 

Secular scientists are put out over news that further demonstrates that Ceres, and the solar system, are young. Yet more evidence for recent creation.
Occator Crater on Ceres in false colors 
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
This is not a hit with cosmic evolution concepts. Trying to steal huge amounts of time, they are caught off base. Assigning dates and causes to the salt, secularists still drop the ball because those dates are nowhere near the billions of Darwin years they want to see. Worse, they are not catching on that the activity is indicative of recent creation.
The bright spots on Ceres formed recently, say scientists, and activity could be going on today.
It’s been two years since the Dawn spacecraft ended its orbital reconnaissance of Ceres, the largest body in the asteroid belt, and mission scientists at Jet Propulsion Lab are finally announcing today, “News: Mystery Solved: Bright Areas on Ceres Come from Salty Water Below.” Accompanying the article are stunning new close-up images of Occator Crater with its bright spots.
To see why this is a problem for those believing the solar system is 4.5 billion Darwin Years old, look at these quotes in the article:
To get your mitts on the rest of the article, slide on over to "Asteroid Ceres is Young". 

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

Tuesday, October 6, 2020

New Research in Waterfall Formation

We admire waterfalls, sometimes captivated by the sound and motion. How many of us wonder how they form in the first place? Secular scientists, presupposing the deep time that Darwin requires and they provide, have said that the biblical timeframe is not possible. Recent research throws mud in their eyes.

Secular scientists have no idea how waterfalls form, but they assume deep time and gradual processes. New research contradicts those assumptions.
Credit: StockSnap / Joe deSousa
Streams or rivers have one or more knickpoints and knickzones. They supposedly formed by gradual plate tectonics, climate change, earthquakes, and other external forces. However, the processes that form waterfalls is unknown. Research with a new model shows that waterfalls can indeed be formed quickly, and this fits with Genesis Flood models.
Secular scientists make many assumptions about nature that lead to conclusions that contradict the Bible’s history. For example, they once assumed that clay particles settle very slowly according to Stokes Law, which means that the claystone and mudrock in the sedimentary rock record, which make up over 50% of the sedimentary rocks, would take millions of years to form. However, scientists have discovered that clay particles coagulate into floccules, called flocculation, which is a very common process in nature. This means the clay particles would have deposited much faster, and that there is no problem with the biblical timescale. Another assumed belief recently challenged is that waterfalls are the result of past tectonics or climate change.
To dive into the rest of the article, see "Waterfall formation may not need tectonics or climate change".

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

Monday, October 5, 2020

Look but do not Touch the Poison Dart Frogs

Bright colors in nature are often a signal to leave a critter well alone. If you saddle up and ride into the rain forests of Central and South America, you might find the famous poison dart frogs. They are not going to attack, but some are exceptionally deadly.

The deadly poison dart frogs are an example of the Creator's work, but are also being studied to benefit humans.
Dendrobates tinctorius credit: Wikimedia Commons / Olaf Leillinger (CC BY-SA 2.5)
You may have heard of contact poison, where toxins are absorbed through the skin. Some of these frogs, especially the golden one, are so dangerous that other critters have been poisoned by touching a place where it was earlier! Others are still deadly, and some leave a bad taste in a predator's mouth. The frogs with the strongest poisons are used by hunters who smear the darts of their blowguns on them. Interestingly, the neurotoxin is being studied to benefit humans. They are also an example of the Creator's work where they convert what they eat into a strong defense mechanism.
The family of poison dart frogs (Dendrobatidae) boasts over 245 species, displaying an astonishing array of colors and potency. The brilliant colors and patterns range from strawberry red, canary yellow, and sunny orange to metallic green and black with yellow polka-dots. When eaten, some merely taste bitter or irritate the predator’s mouth with burning or numbness; a few, however, are truly deadly, even to humans.
Despite their deadliness, these dazzling creations hold the promise of benefitting all our lives. How can this be, you ask?
To read the full article, hop on over to "Poison Dart Frogs — Drop Dead Gorgeous". For a related article, see "Puzzling Dart Frog Poison".

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

Saturday, October 3, 2020

"DisMANtled" Movie and Creationists' Money

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

It is common for Christians and creationists to be dry gulched by those with Atheism Spectrum Disorder who will say something like, "Yeah, those so-called ministries are getting rich of gullible idiots like you!" Such a comment is based on bigotry as well as ignorance. Plus a good deal of atheistic hypocrisy.

Atheists hypocritically accuse Christians and creationists of greed. The Dismantled movie, with a free viewing weekend, is one of may examples to give lie to that notion.
Original Dismantled image courtesy of Creation Ministries International (enhanced)
I remember a preacher talking about money and someone said that he must have a lot of money in the bank. He responded that he had a lot of money going through the bank. Faith-based organizations, like many secular outfits, rely on contributions and merchandise sales to pay the bills. Do executive directors make large salaries? Sometimes.  On the other hand, many pastors struggle to pay their own bills. Although creation ministries seek contributions and sales, most are not motivated by greed.

This section will be outdated in a couple of weeks, but the purpose of the article will remain valid. See the odd lettering in the title? Creation Ministries International has a video coming out that can be purchased on DVD — but free to view on the weekend of October 9-11, 2020. I'm looking forward to this, and pleased that scientists from several creation science ministries are involved. Click here for the site and times.

Atheists are fond of hating Ray Comfort, but they cannot honestly fault him about money. (People should read his book Comfort Food to see how he did — and does — things for people that you don't hear about atheists doing.) Ray makes movies, and they are pre-sold, sometimes with some bonus features. After a target date, they are released on social media video platforms.

Creation ministries give many things away:
  • CMI does not charge a set fee for speakers to come to your church
  • Many organizations have free webinars on social media, and a wagon train-full of videos available, but some sidewinders hack the DVDs and post the videos on social media, violating copyright laws and, possibly inadvertently, show disrespect for the ministries
  • Many have video presentations that are recorded for the purpose of posting for free
  • Some organizations have made book chapters and even entire books available for free
  • Let's not disremember that many thousands of posts and articles are freely available (many are linked from this site)
It is a fact that atheists are not doing much for the betterment of humanity. They do not have noteworthy charitable organizations, and are not building schools or hospitals, initiating relief efforts, and more. Those have been primarily initiated by ministries.

Sure, atheists make some charitable donations, but they hate God so much that many are on record as shunning charities that are run by churches (an excuse for being cheap, methinks). It could very well be that they want to uphold Darwinism, which is a cornerstone of atheism, so let the fit survive and the weak can die. When you read about their "charities", the donations are given and tax write-offs received by giving to organizations that do nothing more than support atheism.

I was going to research "Sound analysis hints sirens have an evolutionary link with wolf howls", but it's behind a paywall. The secular science industry charges lotsa grotzits to subscribe and also to researchers who want to be peer reviewed (open access may be an answer for many people). Do atheists mention such things when complaining about secularists? Not hardly! This is because atheists in general have double standards, and have unreasonable demands to make on people of faith. By the way, another reason creation science ministries need contributions is so they can subscribe to publications of the secular science industry for analysis.

This child is done laying the groundwork. You can do some searching and see for yourselves how the complaints of antitheists and anticreationists are not only false, but hypocritical. And don't forget to see Dismantled.

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

Friday, October 2, 2020

Lassoing the Biblical Leviathan

A spell back, we discussed the biblical creature known as behemoth and how liberal Bible scholars try to find excuses to support long ages — and sometimes evolution. Another hotly debated critter mentioned in the Old Testament is leviathan.

The fearsome creature leviathan is described in the Bible, rejected by liberal scholars and evolutionists. The truth does not fit their narratives.
Modified segment of "Carta marina" by Olaus Magnus, 1539
So, what is it? Biblical creationists believe it was probably a now-extinct dinosaur or something similar. Darwin's acolytes wave off any possible historical references to dinosaurs (called dragons before the word dinosaur was coined) because evolution. Dinosaurs died out millions of Darwin years before humans evolved. That's the narrative, despite many accounts of dragons (dinosaurs and the like) in history.

Liberal scholars say it's a mythological creature. I'll allow that there are some uses of the name in the Psalms and the book of Isaiah, but those are poetic devices. When I call dishonest evolutionists "sidewinders" or "weasels", that does not mean those creatures are nonexistent. Also, the mythology claim doesn't fit with the text in the book of Job. God goes into detail about this fearsome creature. Can you lasso it and put it into the corral, Job, old son? That'll be the day! Not you nor your ranch hands dare face this critter. God says that he made it, so he is its master.

Something else to consider is that there is nothing like it living today. Is that a reason to say that the leviathan never existed? Highly illogical, Captain. Scientists can only learn so much from the external appearances of fossils. (Would you like to wager that if all we had were fossils of the frilled lizard, nobody would figure out its comedic escape routine?) Fossils of leviathan may not have been found. Or perhaps they do exist but its described characteristics are not apparent. Savvy?

But again, what is it? There have been several possibilities put forward (some of these are linked earlier in this post), including some kind of crocodile relative. Sure, there are some things that may give that impression that it has some things in common with crocodiles, such as body armor. However, the greater part of the leviathan's description does not support this idea. It's time to give some serious examination of the biblical text.
God challenges Job by questioning his ability to capture Leviathan and make it his servant (Job 41:1–4). Leviathan is not a creature that little children can play with (Job 41:5) and is too large for traders to sell (Job 41:6).

God reminds Job that if he is even thinking of capturing Leviathan with harpoons or fishing spears, then he needs to consider the battle that will take place (Job 41:7–8). If Job does engage in battle with Leviathan, it will be the first and only time he does battle with this mighty creature. Leviathan cannot be subdued by any man: this is a false hope, as he “is laid low even at the sight of him” (Job 41:9). In other words, Leviathan is a creature who brings fear into the heart of man; whereas, he is afraid of no one (Job 41:33).

This brings God to state the most important issue:
To read all of this extremely interesting article, click on "Drawing Out the Biblical Leviathan". In addition, something else needs to be considered. Generally speaking, biblical creationists agree to uphold the Bible as the inerrant, written Word of God, and agree that models come and go. Another article presents a case for Deinosuchus. For this rather short article, click on "Leviathan: Legend, Croc, or Something Else?"

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

Thursday, October 1, 2020

Mosquitoes, Plants, and Creation

One of the ways someone can observe my fastest move is when a mosquito whines in my ear, which may startle someone standing nearby. Although not all species of mosquito draw blood, and only the females, I detest getting bitten. Most of you as well, I reckon. They apparently were not blood suckers from the beginning.

Further evidence that those mosquitoes that bite us are not the product of evolution. The purpose for the design of their equipment will surprise you.
Mosquito on elder plant image credit: Pixabay / zsuzstot
Their primary source of nutrition is actually plant nectar. Plants give off carbon dioxide and raise their temperatures at certain times, and display certain colors to attract skeeters in a mutually beneficial relationship. Other plants have similar behaviors for their own favored pollinators. Darwin's disciples cannot legitimately say that seeking blood is evolution because of their preference for, and equipment for obtaining, nectar.

Indeed, that tendentious source of evolutionary propaganda known as Wikipedia (accessed 9-28-2020) tacitly admits that evolutionary statements are made without scientific evidence: "Despite no fossils being found earlier than the Cretaceous, recent studies suggest that the earliest divergence of mosquitoes between the lineages leading to Anophelinae and Culicinae occurred 226 million years ago" . . . "Two mosquito fossils have been found that show very little morphological change in modern mosquitoes against their counterpart from 46 million years ago". When evidence is lacking, speculation and guesswork are presented as actual science.

Looking at the behavior of mosquitoes today and from the results of tests, biblical creationists are able to offer some far more reasonable speculations of their own.

It’s late evening. You’re relaxing on the backyard deck when suddenly they find you. Mosquitoes! One way they locate you is by tracking the carbon dioxide (CO2) to guide their way to a blood meal? Why else would they have this ability if not for parasitic purposes? Recent studies reveal there appears to be a good reason mosquitoes were equipped from the very beginning of creation to detect CO2.
To read the rest, buzz on over to "Why Mosquitoes Attack: Mystery Solved". Further reading: "Mosquito Flight Defies Evolution" and "Mosquitoes, Diseases, and Creation".

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