Piltdown Superman

We have seen many times that deep-time geology and universal common descent evolution have many serious challenges, but people still choose to believe them anyway. Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ patrol teh interwebs to screech at biblical creationists and throw propaganda links at us, telling us that everything is fine for evolution. Not hardly! It was bad enough for the hands at the Darwin Ranch to come up with rescuing devices for dinosaur soft tissues, DNA, and such. Now they have to contend with leaves  of all things. Fossil leaves image credits: Original at Flickr / Bonnie Kirkwood  ( CC BY 2.0 ), modified at PhotoFunia If you head out Idaho way and take the last train to Clarkia  (actually, find Moscow and head northeast), you can visit the fossil beds and even dig some up for yourself (see  some excellent pictures at this link ). This is actually exciting news for biblical creationists because, like dinosaur soft tissues, these leaves refute deep time up one side and down the othe

Yes, I know, half-life  refers to the amount of time it takes for something radioactive to go through changes and decay. For example, Carbon-14 is unstable and is thought to decay into nitrogen-14 after 5,730 years. The term half-life has been appropriated for other uses, including how long half of a drug takes to leave a body. It seems fitting that since DNA deteriorates, similar calculations and curves are used for that as well. Secular scientists (as well as some of their churchian allies) are committed to narratives involving millions and billions of years, so they have having trouble with dinosaur soft tissues existing today and come up with rescuing devices to evosplain them away . If the half-life of dinosaur DNA in bone is 512 years, secularists have a passel of problems. This is causing cognitive dissonance because DNA in dinosaurs exists, but according to the narrative, it cannot. (To quote Chico Marx , "Who ya gonna believe, me or your own eyes?") Debates are occur

Readers have seen many times here that secular scientists face a number of serious problems with the Ice Age. They offer ideas that sound like they were made up on the spot, such as numerous ice ages occurring, but there is no evidence because each one destroys evidence of the last one. Sure, you betcha! Another difficulty is that they cannot propose a plausible model of how any ice ages formed in the first place. Add to this the fact that disharmonious associations  exist. That is, fossils of creatures from diverse climates were discovered that should have never met. We have a pair of articles on these and related subjects to consider. Original image before adding text at Imgflip : Unsplash / Hannah Troupe I am once again asking people to remember that the word fossil  is used in a variety of ways. Most of the time, the word is used to indicate that things are permineralized (turned to stone). However, Ice Age fossils rarely show that characteristic. The "disharmonious" part

Adherents of minerals-to-microscopist evolution have problems with not only making their deep-time dogmas seem plausible to thinking people, but also providing rational explanations for huge gaps of time. Earth was populated by single-celled organisms for a inconceivably long spell. Then after humans evolved, they did nothing for a long while. Similarly, Earth had a boring billion years of no geologic activity. What gives? Cape Breton Highlands National Park Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Dr. Wilson  ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) Some scientists commenced to pondering why there seems to be a correlation between gaps in making mountains and the evolution of life, and they came up with a doozy of a hypothesis. It seems reasonable, but it's built on a number of presuppositions, including evolution, billions of years, radiometric dating, and more. Radiometric dating requires several assumptions that make it fundamentally flawed. As with so many other secular problems, when we run the data throu

Many of the stories used to support universal common ancestor evolution are just that: stories. We have seen many times that evolutionists presuppose many things (assuming that evolution happened in the first place), but they are piles of unwarranted assumptions. Consider the Great Oxidation Event. Fighter pilot with nice eyes wearing an oxygen mask Credit: Flickr / Aviatrix (public domain) We do like our oxygen, but scenarios for the evolution of Earth cannot allow for it because oxygen is deadly to chemical evolution (the origin of life myth). Somehow, when conditions were right, the GOE occurred. But like many other evolutionary tall tales, this needs rescuing. Some scientists think that it should be discarded, but others insist on keeping it on life support and adding material (the narrative is more important than facts and truth). All of the so-called science is nonexistent. What is worse is that because people try to justify their rebellion against our Creator and Redeemer, the

Owlhoots riding for the Darwin brand have made numerous assertions about the distant past based on their naturalistic presuppositions, but are frequently surprised when evidence contradicts their views. While everyone has and argues from their beliefs, secularists should have learned a bit of humility over the years. Coelacanth replica / Wikimedia Commons / Citron / CC-BY-SA-3.0 For a spell, the lobed-finned coelacanth was an icon of evolution because by pure imagination, it was thought to have used its fins to walk up on land and commence to evolving. When they were discovered after that yarn was spun, the supposed early legs were used for the fish's own purposes and had nothing to do with evolution. It was also essentially the same as it was all those Darwin years ago. A fossil discovery reveals that the coelacanth grew to be much larger long ago. Many things were larger back then. However, the fossil became an ichthyoid elephant in the room: where are all the fossils between it

When the numbers are not working out the way the Party desires, change them. It is known that DNA is a fragile molecule and cannot last indefinitely. When the Darwin Party's deep-time dogma was challenged by DNA in a mammoth tusk, they changed the numbers. Credit: Flickr / Andrew Wilkinson  ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) Naturalists protect their storyline. We have seen many other instances where they ignored data, tampered with the evidence, and lied outright. Not content to play the cards they're dealt, they deal from the bottom of the deck — or even print their own cards to stash in their sleeves to play as needed. We have two articles showing how these Darwinoids are acting in an extremely unscientific manner to deny recent creation and the Genesis Flood. That stinks, Sebastian. There is an upper limit on how long DNA can last. That number was adjusted because Darwin needs mega years to make his magick. Since the DNA in a mammoth's tusk was in permafrost, that changed things. Sure, c

If you hitch up your buckboard and travel down Brazil way, head northeast until you reach the Araripe Basin. The Santana formation has bunches of fossils. The critters are very well preserved. Unfortunately, proponents of the deep-time narrative narrative deny the facts. Credit: Flickr / James St. John  ( CC BY 2.0 ) Because the Bearded Buddha needs a passel of time in which to work his particles-to-paleontologist magic, secularists give it to him — even when it means denying sense and science. What is discovered here (and many other places) shows rapid burial of extremely large proportions — it is still more evidence of the Genesis Flood. Kind of makes you want to take one of these Santana fossils, wave it in the face of a secularist and say, "You've got to change your evil ways, baby!" Be smooth about it, though. The preservation of fine details is what has made Santana so famous. Every time I took a field trip, I especially looked for my favorite fossil, fish. You can

When secular scientists attempt to do historical science involving deep time, their reality checks keep bouncing. This is primarily because they have a worldview based on atheistic materialism, but observed evidence do not fit the narrative. Nothing left to do but use the standard practice of Making Things Up™. Image credits: Credit: X-ray:  NASA /CXC/Univ of Missouri/M.Brodwin et al; Optical: NASA/STScI; Infrared: JPL/Caltech (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) We have three articles on this theme to consider. The conflict between storyline and reality is seen in both universal common descent evolution and Big Bang cosmogony. In both kinds of evolution, these owlhoots constantly have to rescue their fundamentally flawed worldview with various excuses. They also say things like, "...earlier than previously thought". A lot. Not earlier than biblical creationists thought, though. We are not surprised by discoveries, so we don't have to saddle up and ride ove

Believers in uniformitarian processes and deep time assume that the rate of plate movement in the earth's crust has always been at centimeters per years. However, such ideas cause them many problems with scientific data, and they are unable to explain anomalies in plate subduction. Himalayas image credit: Flickr / lensnmatter  ( CC0 1.0 public domain) "Is plate subduction like when you get out the fine China plates, someone steals one, so you subduct it from the total number?" Uh, no. Plates of the earth's crust collide, albeit slowly these days, and one is pushed under the other. It is consumed , nom nom nom! This is part of the process of pushing up mountain ranges, such as the Himalayas. Secular scientists are unable to figure out how plate tectonics began in the first place, but biblical creationists have an excellent model for that . Flood geologists propose catastrophic  plate tectonics and runaway  subduction that was much faster during the Genesis Flood. Usin

Biblical creationists have long wondered about the world before the Genesis Flood, including why people lived longer. Speculations abound. One thing upon which creationists and secular scientists agree is that the atmosphere was different. Some interesting hyperbaric research ties into geology. Credit: Pixabay /  Sebastian Ganso There is evidence that the ancient atmosphere was much richer in oxygen and had greater pressure, which is indicated by fossils of very large critters. Hyperbaric chambers are used to treat patients with increased pressure and oxygen levels. Their cell metabolisms and telomeres in chromosomes are positively affected, and this may be an indication for why pre-Flood people lived such huge amounts of time. All of this is in preliminary stages as far as creation science is concerned, and it will be interesting to see what other creation scientists have to contribute. There are some strong indications about ancient Earth's atmosphere from this hyperbaric researc

As we are coming up on the tenth annual Question Evolution Day , we can hope that some believers in atoms-to anthropologist evolution may begin to realize that the narrative has problems. Consider the news about older cave art than previously known. Credits: Unsplash / Max Saeling , modified with PhotoFunia Out Indonesia way is the island of Sulawesi. Paintings of animals were found there, and secularists gave kinda-sorta-maybe dates that were older than the famous Chauvet (the Ardeche region of France) cave art. There are many facts to consider , and they should give a thinking evolutionist a passel of reasons to ask questions. According to evolutionary timelines and fact-free speculations, intelligence "emerged" eventually after we were done evolving from some apelike critters. Nobody knows when that allegedly happened , nor do they know about the "emergence" or self-awareness or artistic expression. Those scrawls from the Ice Age didn't help their belief sys

According to biblical creationists, the universe was created roughly six thousand years ago. This prompts hails of derisive laughter from misotheists and other evolutionists. What is considered a smoking gun against creation is the age of the universe through speed-of-light calculations.  Credits because their caption is so small NASA , ESA, and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA), none of whom endorse the contents on this site However, that gun shoots at the pistolero  as well as the target, as Big Bang proponents have serious problems with the amount of time that light can travel in their scenario. Meanwhile, believers in stardust-to-steelworker evolution claim that the age of the universe is a fact  (which has changed several times), but this is based on unproven and apparently unprovable assumptions — many of which are used to "prove" the age of the earth in radiometric dating, as we have seen previously. Biblical creation astronomers have pointed these things out for

Once again, the hands at the Darwin Ranch are mighty upset because science does not support naturalism. In this case, cosmic evolution, Earth's formation, and deep time. Rusty Swingset, the foreman out there, wonders why basic science was missed for so many years.   Credit: NASA / Dixon Rohr Researchers submitted a paper concluding that the earth's inner core should not exist. Because evolution. Reasons and stuff. Essentially, since they start with naturalistic presuppositions, and since people forgot to do important parts of the science, they cannot account for its existence. It does have a solid inner core which generates the magnetic field that protects us. It's a bit much to ask, but if they dropped the deep time stuff and believed God's Word, they would see that the world was created recently. Since the 1930s, observations of earthquake-generated seismic waves have indicated that the earth has a liquid outer core and a solid inner core. Now a team of researchers fr

Darwin's Handmaidens on teh interwebs and social(ist) media often utter words of profound wisdom: "Haw, haw! You idiots believe in that global Flood!" However, they reject the Genesis Flood despite the evidence. How do they react when secular sources indicate a massive flood? Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Nobu Tamura ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) While some evolutionists are quick to run off at the mouth and make proclamations that are not necessarily supported by evidence, a study was conducted over 20 years on dinosaur bones. (For supposedly having joined the choir invisible 65 million years ago, I reckon that their bones shouldn't be sticking up out of the ground like that.) They were disarticulated (not joined together), the bones were sorted from heavy to light, and other details. The data clearly indicates a huge flood. Biblical creationists have seen evidence of the global Genesis Flood in many places around the world. This includes sedimentary rock formations spanning huge

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Scoffers of the Genesis Flood often ask where all the water went, and biblical creationists point out that Earth is 70 percent covered by water. Also, if the earth were completely smooth, it would be completely covered by water. But there's more. Credit: NASA / ISS 42 / Terry Virts (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents by anyone) Something secularists detest (as do many old-earth creationists and theistic evolutionists) is that Genesis indicates the Earth was created out of water. Dr. D. Russell Humpreys based his accurate predictions of planetary fields on this. I reckon that if science contradicted creationism, we would light a shuck out of there. When materialistic assumptions and circular reasoning are stripped away, science supports creation; we have an especially good time with geology. I was spurred to write this here article because of one from 2018, " Science confirms Genesis Flood account, again ". While it is not a science

Like anyone else that commences to telling tall tales, secular scientists get their stories going but trap themselves. For example, they claim that Earth had five major ice ages that would have turned Earth into a snowball — with no mechanism for thawing even once! Then there are glacial striations. Gravelly Mountains image credit: USDA / Preston Keres Secularists believe that there were actually fifty (count 'em!) lesser ice ages in the Pleistocene, but each one conveniently ruined the evidence. But hey, look at the glacial striations in rocks, like them thar in the landslide on top of the Gravelly Mountains! (Also, there's tweaking the data from the ineffective Milankovitch theory .) A big problem with the so-called glacial striations is that they sure do look a lot like the results from rocks bouncing off one another. Actually, their ancient ice ages are explained by the one Ice Age and the Genesis Flood. Pleistocene sediments or geomorphological features before the last ice

Yet another discovery does not fit the old-earth paradigm. We have seen it in many fields of science, and this time, Greenland is the culprit — just like the Bill Nye-defying canons . Scientists were surprised to find a dry lakebed under the ice. Glaciers in northwest Greenland image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) To use the scientific vernacular, it is hugely big. The article linked below puzzled me at first because this was discovered by an observatory. Don't those things point upward and look out yonder? But they used satellites, and various scientific disciplines were involved to study the lakebed and indications for the amount of sediment. Using biblical creation science models, the aftermath of the Genesis Flood precipitated (heh!) the conditions that caused the Ice Age. Cataclysmic flood waters carved out a lot of rock in a hurry, and these led to tremendous sedimentary deposits. Plug in the model with the Greenland data, and

We recently looked at how it is reasonable to expect to find certain things if an idea is correct, and this is borne out in the Grand Canyon in support of creation science Flood geology . We need to visit there again and examine folded rock layers. Credit: US National Park Service (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Believers in deep time seem to want us to believe irrational and contradictory things. Sedimentary layers are supposedly laid down gradually over hundreds of millions of years, but using the complex scientific principle of Making Things Up™, these stiff rocks folded under proper conditions. (By the way, folded is used to describe curved layers as well as those which aremore dramatically folded.) Still waiting on empirical evidence to support these unobserved events in the distant past. When the data is plugged into creation science Genesis Flood models, what is observed makes a great deal more sense. One thing the secularists have right: sedimentary rocks

People familiar with The Question Evolution Project on Facebook should remember podcasts we posted of Dr. Ben Scripture of Scripture on Creation . (In fact, they interviewed me , and one of our topicss was Question Evolution Day .) Dr. Scripture contacted me with exciting news from his interview with Dr. Mark Armitage. File photo of Dr. Scripture (left), YouTube screenshot of Mark Armitage (right) We have two items of interest about how microscopy is not conducive to universal common descent evolution, the second of which will appear below. The one I like best is first. Mark Armitage is a bad man according to believers in molecules-to-microscopist evolution as well as proponents of an old earth. His crime? Having an article published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal  Acta Histochemica with Dr. Kevin Anderson about soft tissues in a Triceratops horn in 2012. Dr. Armitage had a successful job at the biological imaging facility at California State University, Northridge. The pr