Piltdown Superman

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Humor is something I have studied for years, if one includes watching television. Study  is a word that I would like to use, but to be more accurate, I have pondered it off and on for about 135 years. There is a difference between humor and laughter. Some people laugh because they are nervous and are attempting to self-soothe and perhaps garner sympathy from other people. Other times, people laugh because they find something genuinely funny or see the humor in a situation.  The Laughing Violinist / Gerard van Honthorst , ca.1624 My own sense of humor has evolved over the years, inserting genetic material from old American comedies, other people, comedians, and British styles. Subtle things appeal to me, and I occasionally insert humor into my posts and articles. I wonder if people catch them, however, since I don't have "I see what you did there" comments on Fakebook and Tweeter. We often laugh when something takes us by surprise, as mentioned on

Going into the second half of 2022, my unregistered assault keyboard is clean and ready for action! An idea in the  Star Trek universe was the cloaking device , which made Klingon and Romulan spaceships invisible. The Hawaiian bobtail squid has a camouflaging method that can be likened to the Star Trek  gadgets, and it was in place before the spaceship thing was a gleam in Gene Roddenberry's eye. The little bobtail squid, which at first glance has a resemblance to an octopus, glows in the dark. It is not designed to do that by itself, but instead has help from bioluminescent bacteria. This win-win situation requires an amazing level of specified complexity. Bobtail Squid about to get out of Dodge, NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research (site endorsement not implied) These little dumplings start getting the necessary bacteria shortly after birth, having tissues that kill the other microbes; the bacteria they want are already immune. Then it feeds — cultures — the bacteria. W

There are four types of hearts in living things, and even after many years of trying, Darwinists are still having a dreadful time explaining their evolution. They presuppose evolution in the first place. Despite all the failures of evidence for it, few stop to wonder if their foundation is sound or sand. Hearts allegedly evolved from an open system  in simpler organisms into the complex closed systems  up to four-chambered hearts. Evolutionists admit that "little is known" about how all the necessary changes could take place. Model of human heart, Unsplash / Robina Weermeijer Numerous modifications would be necessary for the heart to evolve into multi-chambered. Also, there are changes necessary in the entire organism, since blood is needed for organs and other things to function. Creatures would need to survive while their irreducibly complex systems were changing. Evolutionists know  it evolved (Hail Darwin! Blessed be!), but they don't even try to explain how it happen

Scientists (especially geologists) of the biblical creation science persuasion as well as their secular counterparts have given Mount St. Helens intense scrutiny after is 1980 eruption. Creationists see that it is powerful evidence for the Genesis Flood . A scientific model needs to be built on evidence. Models for the Genesis Flood need to not only explain geological features, but also have evidence for the earth's recovery after the global cataclysm. It is possible to put the puzzle pieces together from what is observed today and the uniformity of nature. Anthracobia melaloma , Flickr / Lukas Large ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ), modified at BigHugeLabs We saw in " Amphibians Support the Genesis Flood " and " Mount St Helens, Arthropods, and the Genesis Flood " that Flood models are supported in the way that organisms recover disturbance areas. Some think that the first living things there were fungi. That may not seem impressive, but when digging deeper (sometimes literal

Think back to those thrilling school days when you were taught that there were three main beliefs about the universe in the secular science industry. The most popular is the heavily-Frankensteined Big Bang, which violates scientific laws . Another unscientific idea was the steady-state universe that continually replenished itself. The cyclic  or oscillating  model presents the idea that the universe goes way out, slows down, then collapses in on itself, setting up another Big Bang. It keeps on a-trucking back and forth. Now a "new" idea has been proposed using the also-unscientific oscillating model. Made at photofunny with a NASA / ESA image (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) In their efforts to deny the Creator and evidence of a young universe (at least, younger than is convenient to atheistic materialism), Big Bang proponents utilize things like dark matter  and dark energy . Those things cannot be detected, scientists have no idea how to do it, and by

Over yonder past Deception Pass, you can find the Darwin Ranch. Rusty Swingset is the foreman. He can be pleasant when he is not overworked or moody. Today he is on the prod because of a report on the seafloor spreading. This involves that fun phrase, oceanic plate subduction . The idea that the earth has moving plates on its outer shell, some of them continent-size, began to take hold in the 1960s. When they collide, something has to give. That is where one plate asserts dominance and the other is pushed underneath. What has been observed is troubling to uniformitarian geologists. World Ocean Floor, Library of Congress / H. Berann et al. Uniformitarianism is the secular doctrine that geological processes were slow and gradual over great periods of time. Plate tectonics  is the description of how those plates are moving (the older theory was called continental drift ). Right now, they're moving, subducting, and so on at a slow and constant rate. The predominant view of biblical cre

A term that has become common in recent years is fact check , predominantly used in political matters. It seems that fact-checking organizations (as well as individuals) are bolstered by appeals to their authority and popularity — as well as those who want their biases confirmed. Who checks the checkers? The Snopes site was outstanding for looking up information and refuting silly urban legends, but it became disingenuous when supporting leftist politics . The FactCheck outfit claims that Snopes is reliable (this post has a mix of good and bad information, but supports leftist sources), but they are biased themselves . Negative biases are used when fact-checking the Bible using archaeology. Study room at Qumram, Israel - Flickr / Dennis Jarvis  ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) Although this may seem like the genetic fallacy , it is worth considering the presuppositions of people making assertions and challenges. Many times on social(ist) media, people will simply make claims. For example, in Matthew

Since evolutionists have a tendency to move the goalposts by changing dates and other trickery, it is a rare thing for them to admit that they have wrong ideas. Some failed icons linger quite a while (such as Haeckel's fraudulent embryo drawings ), others that have been are quietly ignored. Charles Darwin's Tree of Life has been used for over 160 years, but it appears to have been rapidly losing favor over the years. There are numerous variations that are presented. In fact, some evolutionists reject them completely. Kill it with fire! The unmodified Tree of Life image is here . Those who read the previous post (" The Mostly-Complete Fossil Record ") and followed the link to the article featured therein (do people still use that word?) will have noticed a reference to the Tree of Life. It also mentioned that the creation orchard of life is a better explanation for what is observed in the real world. Of course, fundamentalist evolutionists reject the creation orchard,

Dreadful reasoning under the pretense of science is not a new phenomenon, having been a problem for many years. A glaring example that is often overlooked is how when the Bearded Buddha wrote Origin of Species , he presented his theory and admitted that fossil evidence did not support it. He did not admit that his conjectures were wrong. He blamed  the fossil record . In addition, his disciples continued to have faith that evidence would be found. That is the opposite of science, old son. The Fossil Record, made at PhotoFunia using a photo by  Alejandro Quintanar at Pexels The owlhoots who believe in the General Theory of Evolution are working from their worldview to interpret data. Fine, everyone does that. But they have a tendency to try and force the data into their paradigm and blame the fossil record for being "incomplete" when their speculations fall flat. It's not working, Wilberforce. Some evolutionists are willing to play the cards they've been dealt to so

Secular scientists have found possible evidence of a severe drought thousands of years ago. The dating is obviously contentious with the biblical timeline, and even those scientists are not in agreement with their dating methods. With additional information, it seems to support the famine in Egypt when Joseph was the administrator for the pharaoh. The dating methods used by secular scientists are saturated with evolutionary assumptions, all of which are unprovable. We need to get up on a sizeable hill to get the big picture. Nile River by satellite / MODIS, NASA GSFC (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) The Bible provides accurate history, and naysayers have been refuted many times. With that in mind, part of the big picture is the narrative in the late chapters of Genesis. Joseph was a mite arrogant it seems, so his brothers sold him, and he eventually wound up in Egypt. Read it for yourself for the details, but remember that Joe was given the meaning of Pharaoh's

The sixth movie in a series of dinosaurs running amok and killing people, Jurassic World: Dominion  has people all a-twitter. Others, not so much . Perhaps its defenders like models and CGI dinosaurs. I saw the previews and the special effects, at least, are very impressive. Some folks want a movie with accurate portrayals of the dinosaurs and so forth, but there are a few problems. One is that studio is in the entertainment business and wants to make lotsa grotzits (as evinced by the fact that this yet another sequel), not a documentary project. Worse... ...they don't know, Margo ! Atheists and Darwin's disciples disprize when biblical creationists ask, "Were you there?" I saw an assertion that the Velociraptors  were not only wrong in these flicks (too big, for one thing), but they were supposed  to have feathers . This feathered dinosaur nonsense is based on "protofeathers" or "dino fuzz", therefore, they were on their way to becoming birds. But

When you hear of New York, do you think of that big city, full of buildings, crime, tightly-packed people, and all that good stuff? Somehow, everything north of the center of the universe and Westchester County is "Upstate New York." We have a whole whack of dedicated nature areas. For example, Catskill Park is a huge area that is set apart to keep human activity to a minimum, and the Catskill Center outfit keeps watch over several places. That is just in my neck of the woods at the "foothills of the Catskills." There is much more really upstate, including state parks and such. A bit of nature at Esopus Park Trail, Unsplash / Cowboy Bob Sorensen Don't disunderstand me, this doesn't make New York special! Many regions around the world are set aside for nature and environmental concerns. But for some people, that is not enough. There are extremists who want to rewild . That includes bringing in predators to roam free, and some wanting to include an exorbit

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Some things pertaining to evolution are not common knowledge. For example, there are many  strange religious ideas presented as empirical evolutionary science . In addition, people have the notion that evolution was invented by Charles Darwin, but he did not come up with the idea all by his lonesome: Evolution from a common ancestor is actually an ancient pagan belief. Although science thrives on challenges, folks like to protect the consensus and are slow to accept better ideas. One example is phlogiston. That was the stuff that was thought to cause burning. When that idea was overturned because of better science , it met resistance and was slow to extinguish. Of course, evolution itself is protected red in tooth and claw by the secular science industry, and evidence refuting it and supporting biblical creation science are repressed with a vengeance. Some ideas, however, are allowed to be heard and presented — as long as they do not favor the Intelligent Desig

Japan launched a peregrine falcon into space in 2014. That is what hayabusa means in Japanese, and JAXA took a notion to send Hayabusa2 out to an asteroid named Ryugu. Hayabusa2 sent landers down to the asteroid, and some were successful. After returning to the probe, samples were returned to Earth. Some of the material was shared with NASA, who in return expects to share samples from their own study of asteroid Bennu in 2023. Hayabusa2 will continue its mission. Ryugu asteroid, Flickr / JAXA / Kevin M. Gill (background changed) ( CC BY 2.0 ) Space exploration is fascinating. Too bad it seems to be driven by a desire to uphold evolution and pretend that God does not exist. Despite the lies of misotheists, abiogenesis  has a great deal to do with evolution. Indeed, another name for it is chemical evolution . A great deal of time and money are spent on getting life from non-life, which would support foolish notions that the Creator does not exist. Ryugu had amino acids, which are consi

Several times in the past, I have mentioned Darwin spectacles. That is a metaphor for an evolutionary worldview that colors and distorts what is observed so owners believe things can only be explained from an evolutionary perspective. Mayhaps I should cobble the picture I have so that it includes blinders . Evolutionists can get so conditioned in their thinking that they become oblivious to how they are making much out of nothing. Fossils show that beetles burrowed into coconuts, but the report is actually meaningless. Coconuts, Pixnio / Toper Domingo They burrowed when fossilization happened, they do it today. Also, beetles have always been beetles (with the exception of John, Paul, George, and Ringo). Insects interact with plants, as any grower knows. But the blinkered bespectacled writers of the paper "see" millions of Darwin years, but do not ask questions that should be obvious. They certainly  are unable to see that the evidence easily supports recent creation. Some re

It is said that one of the best examples of evolution is the whale story, which makes Darwin smile and his disciples light prayer candles in celebration. Except that it is not all that impressive, relying more on imagination than reality. If evolution were true, would they need to use tall tales and deception to keep it breathing? This kind of stuff is rampant. As regular readers have seen, evolutionists use faulty reasoning and bad science to manipulate people into believing their worldview. A new paper evosplains whale craniums. Humpback whale breaching,  NOAA  (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Remember, any evolutionary change requires a multitude of gradual changes over long periods of time. There should be evidence to back up their claims. It's not happening, old son. Tales are told with miracles and magic going every which way, omitting important considerations, little to no evidence —then appealing to clades. Those are generally the products of the complex

As a biblical creationist, this child has challenged atheists and evolutionists about why they feel compelled to convert us to their worldviews. After all, they could simply go about their business, quietly snickering to themselves. Using that principle, why bother to refute Flat Earthers? Ironically, atheopaths often use an ad hominem  such as, "You doubt evolution? Betcha think the earth is flat, too!" (The president of the Flat Earth Society is an evolutionist and believes in global warming .) More importantly, some professing Christians believe Flat Earth propaganda, and twist Bible verses so they can pretend to be superior to the rest of us. Polaris time exposure, Unsplash / Javier Esteban Many articles refuting Flat Earthism are listed here , several of which are by the author of the article featured below. This time, claims that Polaris, the North Star, are refuted. The first one is based on perspective, not science: that the star does not move. This is easily refuted

There are several kinds of critters that have the flying  moniker, but they do not actually fly. Those that have been designed by the Creator to spend some time in the air can glide  impressive distances. No need to fault people for calling them flying whatevers, because they do appear to be doing so for a moment. Flying frogs? It is not Spiteful Sebastian flinging them into the pond, but there are several kinds of tree frogs that can glide nicely (controlled fall) when they have a mind to. Wallace's flying frog ( Rhacophorus nigropalmatus ), Flickr / Khao Sok National Park  ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) Is this natural selection at work? It's probably involved, though some Darwinists invoke the non-science term parallel evolution . That'll be the day! Remember Alfred Russel Wallace who also came up with the idea of evolution by natural selection, but Darwin got the credit? (If Wallace had written a book first, we may have been given a kinder, gentler evolution because Alf believed in a

One of the frustrations of writing creation science material is the need to say things again, especially regarding things that normal people already know. However, there are advances in science that reinforce the truth of creation. In this case, males and females are different. There are people who deny science and say that we are not binary. One new finding shows that we are different all the way down to the genetic level . There are still more discoveries that our Creator stashed away to be discovered. Man and Woman, RGBStock / Scott Snyder Atheists and other believers in universal common ancestor evolution despise the truth of creation, but except for those in the secular science industry that support political leftism, they realize that they agree with us that there are only two sexes. What they will not admit is that this is the way our Creator planned it. Every computer program, or ‘software’, can be reduced to a sequence of two numbers—zero and one. . . . In the binary system, i