Piltdown Superman

Believers in descent with modifications evolution claim to have science on their side, but certain evidences for evolution are simply false. One is phylogenetic trees , which are diagrams of hypotheses and conjectures. They are not evidence. Another is homology . Note that the root word is the Greek word for same , and used in words like homogenous. In homology, if critters have things in common like each having two eyes, tails, external ears, heads on necks, etc., then boy howdy! They must have evolved from a common ancestor. Not hardly! Horse and Cow in a Meadow , Paul Gauguin, 1885 Essentially, a presupposition  is something that is assumed to be true without proving it beforehand. Many times for the sake of discussions, things are presupposed by the mutual understanding of readers or listeners. Other times, as regular readers have seen (just kidding, I wonder why I keep doing this when so few read it), evolutionists presuppose evolution and then confirm their biases, which is circu

The Big Bang story has been built, rebuilt, cobbled, and Frankensteined in general. When told by card-carrying members of the secular science industry, it sounds tidy and almost plausible. It brought on both cosmic and biological evolution. Looks good on paper. However, the tale is told as if scientists were trucking along in complete unity. Nope. Cosmologists and cosmogonists in the ranks disagree. It is also presented without any actual science, driven by presuppositions and mathematics that support them. The cosmological constant problem may be a good reason to put the thing down. Made at  photofunny  with a  NASA / ESA  image (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Something that supports science itself is how scientific laws (as we understand them) are consistent and predictable, which fits both Intelligent Design and biblical creation science views. A scientist made a claim that is...truly bizarre: The fundamental principle called the cosmological constant  — isn'

Some people read or watch mysteries for the challenge of solving them, but many have noted that writers withhold information. In reality, detectives have to find and use the evidence they have in the here and now to reconstruct what happened in the past. This is forensic science. In a courtroom, evidence is presented so a verdict can be reached. Both the prosecution and defense may be more interested in winning the case rather than reach the correct conclusion. Distractions, glossy presentations and wording, misleading logic and more can be utilized. Legal work, FreeDigital I mages /  I ndypendenZ Atheists and other believers in universal common ancestor evolution present their case, but do not take all the evidence into account. The secular science industry has biased presentations in museums, documentaries, and so forth. Those can be slick, compelling, and entertaining; they want to win. People who are interested in reaching the truth need both sides of the story. Biblical creationis

That moment when "Imma have me a sammich" sounds like a good idea, but there is a problem. Opening up the bread wrapper, pulling out the bread, and — mold spots. You cannot discard those slices and trust the rest, either, because it spreads unseen and can be harmful . People have a confused trust/distrust relationship with the secular science industry. It has been shown numerous times here and elsewhere that they have a leftist bias and that their ethics are craptacular. The leftist corruption spreads throughout science, the media, entertainment, sports, and more. Moldy bread, Flickr / Lynn Friedman ( CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 ) I am once again telling you that there are people working in the secular science industry that have some integrity and want to do their jobs, but the organizations are heavily biased. Unfortunately, secularists embrace materialism (essentially, atheism) and therefore reject the Creator, who is the ultimate source of morality and ethics. They uphold evolutionar

People who have read material or watched videos about fossils have invariably come across trilobites, since there was a passel of them. They are associated with the Cambrian Explosion , where way down yonder in the Cambrian layer, life forms suddenly appeared — with no signs of evolutionary ancestors. Trilobites are icons of evolution, but they are quite trying to Darwin's disciples. Aside from appearing fully formed, they were intricate. Advances in technology allowed scientists to learn that they had impressive optics , for example. Recent pristine trilobite fossils further trouble evolutionists. Trilobite, US Dept / Interior,  BLM  (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) The fossils were discovered in a Morocco mountain range, which is not exactly the kind of place to seek marine organisms. They were preserved in ash, and even the complex digestive tract was preserved. What has been discovered about trilobites, including this bunch, fits the expectations of biblical

When people call something a pseudoscience , the meaning depends on who is making the claim. The definition is vague and malleable like a putty you can squish between your toes and track onto the carpet. It is used to provoke negative emotions, often by those who are attempting to protect consensus in the secular science industry from scrutiny. Ironically, Wickedpedia defines and discusses pseudoscience , and its material can be used to define evolution as a pseudoscience. Further, pseudoscience supposedly lacks falsifiability — a frequent problem in evolutionary research. Phrenological skull, WikiComm / Osama Shukir Muhammed Amin ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) Phrenology was, to state it simply, the study of the brain and skull to determine behavior. It was also considered for use in criminology. Phrenology is listed as a pseudoscience, but was it really that or simply discredited by better science? Asking for a friend. Several fields considered pseudosciences (astrology, f'rinstance) are pro

Consciousness has long been a problem for materialists, as they cannot define, understand, or explain it. Is consciousness (the soul) a physical part of the brain? That idea has been ruled out . Secularists cannot explain it through evolution , either. The secular science industry has been supporting leftist causes , and one of those is abortion. A recent study is incompatible with evolution. Experiments on brain activity in infants were conducted, and it was learned that the brains of unborn children reacted in the same way — indicating consciousness. Pregnant woman holding ultrasound, Hippopx The fact that babies are conscious is not a new discovery, and has been known for some time. Expectant mothers and fathers often talk to the unborn child, and some Christian parents read the Bible and pray so the child can hear. Soon after my second child was born (delaying his entry into the world for an extra month), he was being held. I spoke, and he turned his head in my direction. Yes, he k

Knowledgeable biblical apologists understand several things about worldviews, including how they must be internally consistent. Atheists and evolutionists frequently ignore logic while pretending that science and reason support their beliefs. That is a characteristic of an inconsistent worldview. Another indication of a faulty belief system is the reliance on arbitrary assertions. So is circular reasoning, such as assuming evolution in order to prove an instance of evolution. Changing or assigning new meanings to words and phrases also indicates a weak worldview. A couple of evolutionary psychologists presented irrational material about consciousness. Brain and consciousness, Pixabay /  Gerd Altmann  (Geralt) Like others involved in the secular science industry, psychologists presuppose atoms-to-atheist evolution and build from there; they do not question whether or not evolution happened in the first place. In this instance, two psychologists suggest consciousness may have evolved not

Every once in a while, there will be news about a gospel, Bible fragment, or other ancient text that purports to provide special insight. People get all a-twitter about these things, thinking that knowledge can be gained from texts that were omitted from the Bible. Here is an expensive word that may impress your friends if you use it: pseudepigrapha . Essentially, it is an ancient text that is falsely attributed to a famous person. There are quite of few of those things. An infancy gospel is credited to Thomas, and I doubt he would approve of it. Apostle St. Thomas / El Greco, ca. 1612 One of my suspicions as to why people like rejected writings is that people want to feel special, and having what appears to be knowledge that others don't have may give them that imagined superiority. Indeed, that also fits with Gnosticism . While Gnosticism does not really have one definition and has changed over the centuries, essentially it means special esoteric knowledge. Also, they tend to b

So, how about those Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, huh? Really impressive things worth writing home about... Except for one, all we have are stories and historical records. The Hanging Gardens of Babylon have been misnamed for more than one reason. According to traditional accounts, the gardens did not exactly hang, but were grown on roofs and things in the palace of Babylon. But the moniker did not get corrected. History is sketchy about them, and not written by eyewitnesses. Checking more closely, they were probably in a different location altogether. Hanging Gardens of Babylon, Wikimedia Commons / 19th century illustration (PD) People who bother to read their Bibles should recognize the name of Assyria. It was a kingdom. Vicious, nasty people at times. That was a reason Jonah did not want to obey God and call Nineveh, the capital, to repentance. He wanted God to punish them, and was disappointed that they did repent for a while. Later on, they went back to being bad dudes. Ass

Chromosomes contain a great deal of information, far more than just eye color, height, stature, and all that good stuff. Some of Darwin's disciples decided to compare the Y chromosomes of humans and several types of apes. Although they hailed it as good news for evolution, in reality...it did not go well. Right from the get-go, errors were happening. For one thing, the source was too big by using several sources of Y chromosome information. Another problem is that the comparisons were between modern humans and apes because of assumed evolution directions. Human chromosome Y, WikiComm / National Center for Biotechnology Information , U.S. National Library of Medicine (PD) (Usage does not imply endorsement)  Y chromosomes are difficult to sequence because of repetition, mutations, deletions, and more. Secularists tend to evosplain genetic differences away by assuming evolution did it. Of course, no mechanisms or supporting evidence is offered. Circular reasoning, arbitrary assertions

"Whatcha doing with those logs, Sid?" "Oh, hey, Trevor. I'm lashing them together so I can make a raft and go out yonder on the Atlantic. Gonna bring along some of those rat things for company. Wanna come along?" "It's a mite tempting, but whoever heard of monkeys taking a trip on a raft? I'll stay here. Got evolving and stuff to do." Years ago, I posted about critters rafting, and folks with Atheism Spectrum Disorder used prejudicial conjecture as a ridicule device. While raft  has connotations of a small floating object, the rafts under discussion are often quite massive. Rafts, morgueFile /  stickerstack Biblical creationists have used the ideas of land bridges and rafting as methods of animal dispersal (biogeography) after the Genesis Flood (see " Animal Dispersal by Raft " for example). Secular scientists laughed, but then realized they had their own problems with biogeography. They eventually began using the rafting idea themsel

Charles Darwin took the ancient pagan beliefs of evolution,  changed the meaning of natural selection, then presented the product as his theory. It needed rescuing from the get-go, so he also bundled sexual selection  with it at no extra charge. To oversimplify, the best-looking critters are chosen to mate and spread their genes while the unattractive or drab should disappear. It works to some extent in the animal kingdom and is supposed to apply to humans as well. Although it sounds plausible on the surface, sexual selection does not work. Victorian Fashion, Columbian magazine, February 1844, from Copyright Expired A recent study shows that the concept was never valid and not handled properly in the scientific community. Something that does not fit the purely physical aspect of sexual selection is the fact that people do not select mates strictly on appearance. Women want men who can be providers, for example. (It may be surprising, but it has been suggested that abusive men attract

Living monotremes are marsupials, but not all marsupials are monotremes. Believers in universal common descent admit they have trouble finding the alleged ancestors of either group. Monotremes are especially puzzling because they are mammals that lay eggs. The majority of marsupials live down Australia way (and some in New Guinea), and both of the existing monotremes are residents of 'Straya. Research on monotremes had the usual hopes of learning about their evolution, but if the authors were paying attention, they received an unpleasant surprise. Echidna, Pixabay /  PublicDomainImages Remember, Darwin expected evidence to be found to support his conjectures — which is the opposite of how science is supposed to work. Then and now, the search is on for transitional forms (something in process of turning into something else), and there should be a huge number of the things. With monotremes and marsupials, a study shows more diversity millions of years ago according to secular reckoni

When someone claims to be a former creationist, there are many telling signs that invariably appear. One is lack of knowledge of biblical creation science. Second, poor knowledge of theology. Third, they attack creationism, defend evolution and especially an old Earth. In their passionate efforts, the fourth trait is to show misunderstanding of dating methods. There are other things apostates show, but their claims that dating methods prove an old Earth are of interest at this time. Also, they are welcomed by atheists and other anti-creationists. Zircon octahedral crystal, Flickr / candiru (PD) Radiometric dating is often treated as a creation killer since biblical creationists hold to the earth being thousands of years old while these dating methods seem to show millions or billions of years. Contrary evidence, or evidence supporting recent creation, is downplayed. (I remember an atheist bringing up the age of the earth and using a preemptive strike with the genetic fallacy , saying

Believers in universal common descent presuppose evolution, so they get excited when a fossil is found that can be manipulated into supporting their paradigm. Facts without the deep time and evolutionary assumptions more readily support recent creation and the Genesis Flood. A fossilized shark was discovered down Arkansas way, and Darwin's disciples are excited about how this new discovery can provide information about evolution. Part of the thrill is that cartilage was involved, and that stuff does not fossilize very often. Shark, Pexels / Marc Derndorff When I say new discovery , I mean that it was found in the 1970s. Recently, it was analyzed with CT-scans and given digital reconstruction. (That technology is impressive.) They assigned it a new genus and species name. However, it's still a shark with no evidence of evolution. Also, others were fossilized with it, indicating the rapid burial characteristic of the Flood. There were some other surprises where sharks have been f

This post is unusual in several ways, especially since the author is in the ID camp and not friendly to biblical creation science. Links are given here for information and to try to prompt readers to think. Although creation is not mentioned, the subject is still of interest to creationists. Scientists are considering the idea that less complex living things may actually be sentient. (Some are even pondering the idea of sentience in cells, but that idea seems to be too much too soon.) Insects have tiny brains, but show intelligence in facial recognition, for example. Wildflowers in Oneonta Forest Preserve, Unsplash / Cowboy Bob Sorensen (modified at PhotoFunia ) Materialism is the belief that material is all that exists, no God or spirits, and naturalism is its kid brother. That is,  nature  is all that exists. New word alert: panpsychism . This belief is that all living things have some consciousness. Although there does not appear to be any real conflict between naturalism and panps

These creatures are quite interesting, and some people even specialize in studying them. Scarab seems kind of formal, and the common name is dung beetle . This is a good time to wonder if the Creator was showing his sense of humor, as these beetles were designed to use dung for survival. The scarab was sacred to the ancient Egyptians. One reason is that they symbolized death and rebirth, and part of that was because their sun god supposedly rolled the sun across the heavens each day. Seems kind of inefficient. Dung beetles having a ball,  Pixabay /  debbiedejager Dung beetles need great balls of poo to survive, so they confiscate it in an unusual way: going backward. They do not have their eyes on the prize, but rather the other end, pushing it with their back legs. Amazingly, they know where they're going. Not all scarabs navigate by the light of day, either. Darwin's disciples try to evosplain the behavior, but fail. Dung beetles are dependent upon animal manure for their ex

The secular science industry desperately wants life to exist elsewhere in the universe, but those who believe this  walk by faith, not by science . Despite lack of evidence, huge amounts of money are spent to see if anything can be found supporting their speculations. Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ on teh interwebs insist that the origin of life is separate from evolution, deliberately ignoring that the OoL is also known as chemical evolution or abiogenesis. Life supposedly evolved from dead things and some organic chemicals, and the search is on out yonder in the rings of Saturn. Saturn image: NASA / JPL / STScI (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Secularists do not get a freebie on the origin of life so they can build from there. That's why so many scientists are working on the problem. Saturn's rings have a few of the components necessary for life, but no useable water. Time is vitally important in particles-to-planetologist evolution, and those rings (some of

Finding extraterrestrial life is exceptionally important to the secular science industry. Readers of creationist sites have seen that lotsa grotzits have been poured into attempts to find ET, but nothing has ever been found. Astrobiology? Nothing to study. They do not want to settle for microbes, it has to be intelligent alien life. One of the biggest arguments makes a bit of sense on the surface: So many stars, there must  be life out there so we can dance with space aliens in the pale moonlight . Cranky Alien image by Why?Outreach There are glimmers of hope for true believers, but it disappears under scrutiny. Like the prank of tying currency on a string, hiding, and yanking it away when someone reaches for it. But secularists keep chasing and hoping, though tere's no observed science involved. Only blind faith. Many maybes and what ifs about extraterrestrial life, such as water on Mimas . Water is necessary for life, and if there are signs of evolution out yonder, mayhaps it hap