Piltdown Superman

Scientists like to get inside organisms to see what makes them go, but where do they draw the line? It's acceptable to donate human cadavers for medical research, but to take a living human embryo and watch it develop in a dish before killing it? According to evolutionary thinking, humans are equated with animals, and we are not specially created by God in his image.  This "meme" is making a point, not a joke. Interestingly, secularists are inconsistent with their ideas. There are protests against experimentation on animals (which led to the development of insulin to help millions of people with diabetes ), but there are millions of human abortions each year , partly from the "it's just a blob of tissues" idea. Scientists are wanting to extend the limit on life in a dish for a human embryo. Is it ethical? Is it moral? Not for those of us who believe that life is a gift of God and begins at conception. Indeed, taking the reasoning to its logical conc

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Hat tip to Doug McBurney for giving some inspiration for this article. The atoms-to-acrobat evolutionists at the Darwin Ranch have the view that people were stupid way back when. It's consistent with their philosophy, since we supposedly came from minerals, fish, animals, and up the ladder to where we are today. So, we're wired to be the best, right? Image credit: Pixabay / Cornfreak We're created in God's image but are in rebellion against him, so we're a mix of good and bad. Technological and medical advances, taming animals, the ability to compose music, write literature, and do all sorts of things that are not possible for animals to accomplish. We can also do something else that is unlike animals: self-destruct, whether individually, culturally, or destroy millions of our fellow beings in a short time. Also unlike animals, we can celebrate our downward spiral. We've made same-sex marriage not only legal, but want people

When someone claims to not have a philosophy of life (worldview from presuppositions and axioms), just ask a few questions. Yo u 'll find out that y es, they do have a worldview. Everybody has one, even if they haven't written it down in a journal or something. A big part of that worldview is the question of right and wrong . An atheist or evolutionist cannot give a coherent reason for saying that torturing children for fun is wrong, but the Bible-believing Christian has a consistent foundation to oppose it. The atheopath who goes haywire with trolling and bullying biblical creationists on teh interwebs because creationists are "evil" and "liars" — that ornery cu ss cannot say why his actions are "good" and creationists are bad, except for his opinion, culture, and relativism — a justification for "morality" that goes up in smoke. Image generated at fodey.com Secular scientists and their sycophantic press make proclamations a

One complaint that is raised against biblical creationists is that we're wasting our time dealing with a biological theory, but evolution is much more than that. Not only does it rely on various scientific fields, it is also a philosophy of life. This is ironic, since evolution is based on death. Evolutionary thinking has given us social applications of Darwinian principles in tyrants like Mao, Hitler, Stalin, and others . This, in turn, is based on eugenics, where the unfit are disallowed to reproduce — and are eliminated. Image credit: Pixabay / Skitterphoto The social Darwinism "science" of eugenics was popular in the United States, but fell out of favor when Adolph Hitler used it in his quest for power. However, eugenics never really disappeared. Eugenics has been used under different names, and is regaining popularity again. The worst way is the evolutionary eugenics is used to justify abortion. Taking the view that God created humans in his image gives a radi

As we can easily see, much of the secular press in the United States and elsewhere is biased toward leftist politics. Both of these are are in favor of abortion. It should not be surprising that much of the science reporting is also sympathetic toward killing unborn children, and evolutionary thinking is at the forefront. Evolution has been used to promote abortion , including the infamous fraud by Haeckel . It should not really be that much of a surprise, since morality cannot come from evolution (despite the claims of some adherents), morality comes from God . Evolutionists will even write abortion off not only as a result of natural selection, but even justify abortion for gender selection, which is usually to abort female babies. Seems like the ultimate punishment for the "crime" of being an unborn female. I recommend that you read " Abortion 'Science' Shows Its Deathly Bias ".   

Give us a kiss... It is becoming more frequent when "science" is promoting an agenda — usually, a leftist agenda. Sure, science is great when discussing sex properly and scientists are actually doing real science. But when we have bad science and pseudoscience being used to ridicule traditional sexual values, promote promiscuity and abortion, get involved in government-mandated contraception, supporting gender confusion — the false researchers and the science press do not keep their own domain and abandon their proper abode, there is a problem. Especially since so many people will accept what "scientists say" without question, even when scientist say things that have nothing to do with science. To what extent should scientists presume to offer advice about sexual matters? Beyond providing descriptions of body parts and how they work, science exits its domain when telling people how they should behave or think about sex. Yet repeatedly, editorials in jou

We know that Hitler was an evolutionist , and no, he was not a Christian . Other tyrants were atheist evolutionists . (Today's vitriolic evolutionists are scary in their own right.) Some of those re captioned Hitler things are hilarious, and I had to try my hand at it when I got the inspiration to have him upset about Question Evolution Day . It's nice that there's a template for it . Takes some time to get it right, though. Oh, and the actor that played Hitler? Excellent work. So anyway, this video is just under four minutes.

People say that "science corrects itself". (But "science" is not an entity, so right away, they are guilty of the fallacy of reification .) This is not completely true. When it comes to evolutionism, proponents will resort to various tricks to keep their worldview going despite the evidence. There are anti-creationists who insist that creationists (especially biblical creationists) are "liars" and "fact deniers". Their basis for such accusations? It is primarily because we do not believe in the atheistic, old-earth, evolutionary interpretations of the evidence. Further, we promote evidence that refutes evolution and affirms a young earth. This is contrary to the spirit of scientific inquiry. Interestingly, those who call us "liars" are guilty of blatant hypocrisy, promoting not only bad science, carelessness (by people who should know better), deception and even outright fraud. Worse than this, shoddy research and dishonest pron

"Greetings to the brightest audience in the country." I'm the QED Guy! Let me explain this audio. A few weeks ago, I was privileged to return to the airwaves from Bob Enyart Live . The first time, it was indeed live. This time, it was recorded. Looks like I was promoted, too. " Real Science Radio " has science discussions, and there are often interviews with real scientists. Guess my material on logical fallacies was worthwhile. Or he mixed up the recordings and played it on the wrong day. This discussion on logical fallacies, atheists and evolutionists was the final prompt for me to begin making the Piltdown Superman podcasts . (I hesitated to get fully into the logical fallacies series because I did not know when this show would be aired and posted.) Some of the items discussed on this show will be dealt with on the podcast, since Bob and I discussed several things in just a few minutes. One problem with logical fallacies is that several can be combined

In recent years, American voters were bombarded with questions about embryonic stem cell research for medical and other purposes , and if federal funding to destroy the lives of the unborn to further this research should be allowed. All sorts of claims were made about the benefits of ESR, but they were with little merit. It was mostly emotional hype based on leftist politics and the "right" to abortion. Meanwhile, adult stem cell research has been progressing. There are some startling benefits from the stem cells of humans — and some animals. The results are very encouraging, and human life does not need to be sacrificed. With adult and induced pluripotent stem cells in abundance, it should not be necessary to destroy human embryos to understand stem cell science. Research with adult stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) is continuing to produce amazing discoveries. Read about some of these amazing discoveries at " Stem Cell Science Can Pro

It is ironic that critics of the Bible misunderstand (deliberately, I believe) that it actually affirms the value of women — sometimes contrary to cultures of the times. In contrast, the evolutionary worldview devalues human life . "Survival of the fittest", natural selection, " It's only a fish going through evolutionary stages " and other excuses contribute to this concept . In many cultures, women are of lesser value. With the increase of abortion "rights" in the West, there is also an increase in abortions because the mothers do not want girl babies.  Here  is the real  "war on women"! Ironically, abortion is fundamental to "feminism" today, but history shows quite the opposite. What value does society place on women, born or unborn? Biblical Christianity stands in stark contrast, placing value on humans who are created in the image of God. Lita Cosner writes, Abortion-rights activists, especially among the modern fem

Flickr/Ed Uthman (image use does not imply endorsement of this post) Let me over-simplify: Neo-Darwinism relies heavily on a series of gradual mutations so that one organism can, eventually, turn into another organism. Microbes to microbiologist, goo to you, that sort of thing. This flies in the face of observational science. Everything has to be in place at the same time, or an organism cannot change, or even survive, because mutations are meaningless at best, but usually harmful. The startling complexity of DNA and genetics should make anyone an evolution denier with even a cursory glance at the processes. It helps illustrate the design and wonder of life. For example, embryonic development has genes that switch growth processes on and off... Here, let the author explain: As they say in the real estate business, location is everything. It looks like the same working principle applies to genes and their control sequences in the genome during embryo development. And not j

The "Meme" Police want these things to be funny. Too bad. This one is intended to make a point. Today is the 40th anniversary of America's legalization of the holocaust against the unborn. We hear about "a woman's right to choose" and other emotion-based "arguments" that are quickly refuted . Ironically, "Jane Roe" (Norma McCorvey) of "Roe v. Wade" fame, is now a Christian and pro-life campaigner. Abortion has roots in the devaluing of human life. The evolutionary worldview does this very thing, and has been the basis of many kinds of evil in the world . Molecules-to-man evolutionary thinking easily supports abortion . There are biblical and logical reasons to regard human life commencing at conception. Even many rabid abortionists today concede that the unborn does not suddenly become human when it starts to get its oxygen from air, rather than its previous source. Philosopher and ethicist and animal rights activist,

Biological evolution has been taken as a scientific truth in nature and misapplied to society as a whole, with all kinds of evil as a result. Tyrants have based their murderous regimes on evolutionism [ 1 , 2 ] , eugenics and abortion [ 3 ] , and more are based on evolutionary concepts like "survival of the fittest". Of course, Darwin's Cheerleaders are popularizing evolution with bad science, relentless publicity and rewriting history. Ideas have consequences. Over the past century evolutionary thought has become dominant in much more than just the historical sciences. Other branches of science as well as education, law, history, public policy and media have increasingly been influenced by the idea that the world arose spontaneously. This tremendous influence of evolutionary thought has consequences that are largely misunderstood. The misconception is that, while there have been some missteps along the way such as in the twentieth century’s eugenics moveme

Darwin stood for me like a mighty doorkeeper at the entrance to the temple of the universe. I was intoxicated with his minute, precise, conscientious and at the same time powerful, thought. I was the more astonished when I read . . . that he had preserved his belief in God. I absolutely declined to understand how a theory of the origin of species by way of natural selection and sexual selection and a belief in God could find room in one and the same head. — Leon Trotsky Eugenics Congress logo Stop and think about it for a few moments. Masquerading as "science" and "proven fact", the faith-based philosophy of evolution is used as a scientific justification for all kinds of evils in the world. Laissez-Faire Capitalism , Communism , Nazism's extermination of the "lesser races" , eugenics and more all evolved from a common ancestor called Darwinism. After all, it's "survival of the fittest", isn't it? While wars, selfis