Piltdown Superman

When calling Earth, Saturn, the solar system, and so on, "young", it is relative. But it gets a mite awkward to use titles like, "Saturn is not Displaying Evidence for Billions of Years Even After Additional Information is Acquired". However, that is what we see happening. The second-largest planet out yonder has been studied intensively, and the evidence is bad medicine for believers in billions of years. Secularists and churchian compromisers are committed to deep time so Papa Darwin can work that old black magic.  Worse, it indicates that everything was created much more recently than they want to admit. Credits:  NASA / JPL-Caltech / Space Science Institute (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) The moons of Saturn reveal that they are a fraction of their assumed age, so secularists use the tried 'n' true method of Making Things Up™. This includes wild guesses about life on the moons, and illogical guesses about space rocks impacted Encel

Geologists who believe that the earth is billions of years old are constantly being surprised when observed data does not fit their deep-time presuppositions. This becomes even more pronounced by various celestial objects in our own solar system ( such as Pluto and Charon ). It should be eminently logical, Captain, that if an idea does not have supporting evidence, it should be abandoned , but the deep-time and evolutionary narratives take precedence. So, how about that volcanic eruption on Mars? Cerberus Fossae image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / University of Arizona (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) As we seen down here on Earth, secular scientists often use fundamentally flawed dating methods. It does not go well, and they should know better. As with other moons and planets in our solar system, geological activity is occurring. This should not be happening if our solar system was billions of years old. Rescuing devices, storytelling, and guesswork for cosmic evolu

Devotees of Darwin and deep time often act like the Chicxulub impact was the only  cause of dinosaur extinction, but they are expressing the most common view and ignoring (or are unaware of) other ideas in the secular science industry — the majority view is not a guarantee of truth. In addition, there are several problems with hot Chicx that have been brought to light. It is not surprising that Christians and creationists want to know if and how the Chicxulub event contributed to dinosaur extinction. Credit:  NASA  (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Indeed, where does it fit with Genesis Flood models? Like their secular counterparts, creation scientists have various models and theories. When it comes to not only ancient history and forensic science, but how the Flood affected plate tectonics, climate change, landforms, the Ice Age, and more — theories are going to conflict. For example, see the highly technical discussion in " Flood impacts reinforce volcanic cool

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

If you study on it, the insistence of naturalists that life must exist elsewhere in the universe is irrational. They deny evidence for the Creator that is all around them (Rom. 1:18-23), but believe in their invisible friends when no evidence exists. Artist conception of the James Webb Space Telescope in action Credit: NASA (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Over the years, people have tried to determine the possibility of extraterrestrial life out yonder. The moon? No sign of it, not even microbial life in the rocks brought back by astronauts. Venus? Conditions there make life out of the question, despite a hysterical claim that there might be a stinky indication. Mars? Secularists keep trying and coming up empty. Looking further, exoplanets (extrasolar planets) were found. With better equipment, scientists have been able to determine the sizes and atmospheres of many. They even selected a "Goldilocks Zone" where if a planet orbited a star, the conditions

Stars come and go, or so they say. The most spectacular exit from the cosmic stage is by a supernova. Astronomers have several ideas on how stars make their exits, but nobody has actually seen a star form. Galaxy NGC 2525 with supernova SN 2018gv Credits:  NASA , ESA, and A. Riess (STScI/JHU) and the SH0ES team; acknowledgment: M. Zamani (ESA/Hubble) Modified at Big Huge Labs (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents by anyone) Sure, secular astronomers and cosmologists make claims that there are "stellar nurseries" and such, but those are based on presuppositions of cosmic evolution. Biblical creationists know that God created the stars during Creation Week, and some creationists think that it may  be possible for a star to form because God also created the laws of physics, elements, and all, but that would not really be a big deal. There is no empirical evidence of stars forming. Because creation is running down, we have seen and will continue to see stars expir

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. 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

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. 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 co

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.  Occator Crater on Ceres in false colors  Credits:  NASA/JPL-Caltech/UCLA/MPS/DLR/IDA (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

There was a time when, with scant knowledge of Venus, people fantasized about it being a sort of paradise. That was spoiled by increases in science and technology; no life could exist there. Now because Venus stinks, there must  be life there. Idunn Mons on Venus image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / ESA (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) I heard it said of Venus, "Baby, she's got it!" Not a chance. If you're into extreme heat and pressure, clouds of sulfuric acid, volcanoes,  a day there is almost as long as an Earth year,  and other things that make it low on recommended lists of vacation spots,  have a nice trip. Scientists are excited because the toxic, odoriferous gas known as phosphine may have been detected in its clouds, and as far as we know , it is given off by living things. So, life on Venus is the only possible explanation? Must be something interesting to survive all those other conditions, huh? Of course, it would need something

Whenever there is a noticeable celestial object in the night sky, people tend to make efforts to see it. As well they should. Annual meteor showers are interesting. Comets, however, garner more attention, possibly because they are less common. Have you ever stopped to consider them? Credit: Unsplash /  Tim Dennert F'rinstance, comet C/2020 F3 (NEOWISE) was discovered, and was eventually close enough to be seen with the naked eye . (By the way, it's thought that those annual meteor showers are from the debris of comets.) Comets can only last with an upper limit of 10,000 years, which is far too small to fit old solar system narratives. Various rescuing devices are concocted using the principle of Making Things Up™ and then passed along as science. So, they have to be replenished. One of the alleged sources for comets is the Oort cloud, which has no observational evidence and the concept is self-refuting; it can't work. (One jasper with Atheism Spectrum Disorder decl

Volcanic activity on Venus has been suspected for a while,  which may dislodge Earth from its position as the only planet  that is currently active.  There are moons  showing volcanic activity and others that are suspect. While Venusian volcanism does not threaten old cosmos paradigms, this and other factors make secularists mighty uncomfortable. Credits: NASA , JPL-Caltech, ESA, Venus Express: VIRTIS, USRA, LPI The evidence is indirect. Scientists saw indications of prior activity, but it's hotter than the hubs of Hades. Space probes from the former Soviet Union landed there, but they didn't last long . It involves models based on images from more recent spacecraft. Some researchers are saying that the lava flows are several years old — not several million or billion Darwin years old. A big problem for secularists is that this indicates plate tectonics on Venus. Creationists agree with their secular counterparts that plate tectonics exists, but they do not have an ex

It seems that our moon is trolling materialists. Secular astronomers and cosmologists have no verisimilar explanations regarding its origin, but they cling to faulty stories rather than admit that it was created recently along with the rest of the solar system. Credit:  NASA  / ISS /  Col. Jeff Williams  (usage does not imply endorsement of site's contents) Some resort to the poorly-considered method of counting craters so they can provide Darwinists the deep time that they demand. Our moon, like others in the solar system , show that they are far younger than materialists expect — or desire. It is cooling and shrinking , which contributes to tectonic activity. Then there are the many paradigm problems caused by lunar volcanoes ... We have a couple of recent items about how the moon is putting burrs under the saddles of secular scientists and defying cosmic evolution. The neat theories for the origin of the moon and its subsequent evolution unravel when you try to stu

It has been discovered that Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is receding from that nice planet much faster than cosmic evolutionists expect. Moons recede. They do that. However, the rate at which Titan lit a shuck out of there causes considerable consternation. Titan with clouds image credit: NASA / JPL / University of Arizona (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Indeed, secular scientists are constantly denying evidence for a young solar system ( see " Saturn Scientists Dodge Age Issues " .) None of the secular ideas for the formation of the solar system are good, so the best of the worst is the nebular hypothesis. Essentially, everything formed at the same time (never mind that Venus and Uranus defy the edict had have retrograde rotations, as well as some moons). Earth's moon is receding, and using uniform assumptions against secularists, it would have been impossibly close to Earth in the past. Titan would have needed to form in a different p

When discussing volcanoes, people are likely to mention explosive eruptions, plumes of hot lava, ash from Mt. Tambora giving the world a " year without a summer ", and so on. Perhaps some will think of the secret base of Ernst Stavro Blofeld , which later erupted in real life . Not all volcanoes project lava. Possible mud volcano on Mars, Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / Univ. of Arizona Out yonder in our solar system are volcanoes that present water vapor, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and so forth. Jupiter's moon Io spews lava. It is interesting that there is increasing evidence that Mars had volcanoes that erupted mud, and Mars has landforms that are presumed to have been carved out by water. Some very interesting research and models have been conducted using conditions there. Ironically, secular geologists have no evidence of water on Mars to cause mud volcanoes and landforms, but deny the global Genesis Flood on our planet which is mostly water. Tens of thousa

"Houston, we have a problem." "Whazzat?" "I say again, Houston, we have a problem." "This is Tom the Trucker in doing the 'breaker 1-9' thing in Omaha, sorry. Can I help anyway?" "That DLA0817g Wolfe Disc is fouling up our naturalistic cosmology!" Credits: Original, DLA0817g Wolfe Disc Artist Impression NRAO / AUI / NSF, S. Dagnello Then I used Big Huge Labs for the billboard effect Tom proceeded to point out that the scientists, rooted in presupposing naturalism, called the discovery "a challenge" because it didn't fit the Big Bang paradigm. They also said it appears to be quite a bit like our own Milky Way galaxy, but they only have inferences about its appearance, and it took three years after its discovery to learn that Wolfe rotates. That's not supposed to happen. Also, Tom pointed out that the phrase, "Houston, we have a problem" had its source with the Apollo 13 mission, but tha

Secular scientists are committed to naturalism and huge amounts of time. Evolution needs this time, so they chant, "We're in this together" and find alleged evidence for millions of years — even if they have to manufacture it. The Milankovitch theory about ice ages is weak, but they cling to it and ignore its flaws. Assembled with graphics from  Clker  clipart The Milankovitch idea is use to supporting not only ice ages, but deep time, deny the truth of recent creation, and even support global climate change. A paper that allegedly validated the theory, but that paper was shot down by a biblical creationist . Because the narrative is more important than actually doing science, the obedient lapdogs of naturalism wrote about the paper and rode a side trail completely around problems with it. That's indoctrination, not science. An overview of the Milankovitch (or astronomical) ice age theory appears in the May 2020 issue of Physics Today . This theory (hypothesis

The sun is the main cause of global warming, as we all should know. It makes things hot and a trip in the desert can be mighty unpleasant. Science articles tell us about all the explosive energy going on within, but if the sun were a living thing, it would have a good nature when compared to its peers. Credit: GoodFreePhotos Similar stars get rowdy, staying out late at night, disrespecting its parents — okay, bad analogies. But other stars can be ill-tempered in comparison with our own ball of fire. We can expect stars of different categories to be far more active, and any planet orbiting one could not have life on it. Even our own has the capability to wipe out life on Earth, but we have the assistance of Earth's magnetic field . Why doesn't it? Mayhaps its because our Creator formed the earth to be inhabited (Isaiah 45:18), which is something that materialists cannot begin to comprehend because of their paradigms. And they have no reasonable alternative explanations.

Not too long ago, we saw a ridiculous rescuing device for the failed Big Bang in the idea of a cosmic bubble . A more long-standing rescuing device is dark matter , and even some creationists believe it exists. However, there is still no evidence for it, and another attempt to rescue the rescuing device has failed. Supposed dark matter ring in galaxy cluster Cl 0024+17 Source:  NASA , ESA, M.J. Jee and H. Ford (Johns Hopkins University) (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Neutrinos are elusive because they have very little mass and are electrically neutral. Big Bang enthusiasts have tried to associate neutrinos with their concept, and then came up with sterile neutrinos  — "When you want to keep neutrinos as pets, to you get them fixed, Cowboy Bob?" Good luck finding a physicist to perform the surgery. Anyway, scientists are squabbling about evidence, and some are saying there isn't any. Others are saying that there is so evidence. Sorry to break it to

We have seen many times that the Big Bang that anti-creationists know and love is not anywhere near the original. It got its name because of the alleged explosion way back when . Evidence does not fit observed data, and the Big Bang has been Frankensteined yet again. Image credits:  NASA, ESA, Hubble Heritage Team; Reprocessed by  Maksim Kakitsev  ( CC BY-NC 2.0 ) (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents by anyone, anywhere) A recent serious problem for the Big Bang speculations is the Hubble constant . There are conflicting results, and this should not be so if the science was valid. What's a secularist to do? Use the tried-and-true complex scientific method of Making Things Up™. In this case, float the idea that we live in a cosmic bubble that is different from the rest of the universe. Of course, there is no observational support, but is can be used as a rescuing device to keep the naturalistic narrative going. Cosmic evolution and biological evolution can'