Piltdown Superman

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Since the movie project Alien Intrusion: Unmasking a Deception was first announced by Creation Ministries International , I've been chomping at the bit to see it. Unfortunately, I was unable to see the movie in the cinema. Trusting past experience, reviews from various people, having read the book, and so on, I did something that I've never done before: pre-ordered five copies of the DVD. Now that I've seen it, I can tell you that I'm glad I did. (I think my brother just guessed what he's getting for Christmas.) This isn't strictly a review, since I have a few things of my own to add. Image courtesy of Creation Ministries International As with the book by Gary Bates, the video of Alien Intrusion required a huge amount of research. There is video footage from past documentaries and interviews, as well as quotes from various books and such. There were some excellent CGI moments as well. The video was equal to, and often surpassed,

Big Bang cosmology has an expected sequence of events, but the cosmos is not cooperating with the stories. We have already seen that lithium, the lightest metal, is only expected to appear in certain stars . Instead, it gets secular cosmologists on the prod because it keeps showing up where it is not supposed to be. Credit: NASA /JPL-Caltech/STScI (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) The existence of lithium is detected through spectroscopic analysis . (Kids, if you're looking for a career in science, consider spectroscopy, since it is used in many areas.) More stars have been detected to be rich in lithium, and as usual, the cosmic evolution excuse mill has been working overtime. via GIPHY Unfortunately for secularists, the speculations used to possibly solve the problem raise more questions. The biggest problem is their insistence on cosmic evolution instead of admitting that the universe was created recently. Then they wouldn't have these conundr

Secular cosmologists conjured up the Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe, which was reluctantly accepted over other models such as the oscillatory and steady-state. Over the decades, serious flaws were discovered, so astronomers fudged data and came up with a prairie schooner full of patches for the Big Bang. One failed fake science patch is the concept of "dark energy" . Severely modified from an image at Clker clipart. "But Cowboy Bob, the Big Bang must be true, because here we are!" Yeah, that's the kind of thinking that tinhorns like this one use to justify the fictitious, evidence free rescuing device called the Oort cloud. Looks like a form of the affirming the consequent fallacy mixed with ad homiems , straw man arguments and the irrelevant thesis fallacy, but never mind about that now. But do  mind that people think illogically like that. Some cosmologists kept on fiddling with data and determined that this nice little universe we

An interesting story about the merging of neutron stars (who did not bother to consult the Federal Trade Commission on their merger) involved some interesting information on their history and detection. This necessitates material on gravity waves, and some of Uncle Albert Einstein's work. From there, we were given some Big Bang cosmogony, chemistry, and chemistry's weird great grandfather that nobody likes to talk about: alchemy. The Alchemist / David Teniers the Younger Way back yonder in medieval times, some folks were attempting sciencey stuff by attempting to convert base metals (copper, lead, tin, and so forth) into gold. Imagine the devastating impact on economies if they succeeded! Alchemy was distantly related to chemistry for reasons that should seem obvious. We get exceptionally dense neutron stars commencing to merge, and the interaction supposedly produced a passel of gold. Problem is, it's all based on Big Bang presuppositions on the origin of the uni

In any field of science, there has to be some degree of presumption. Scientists have to presume the uniformity of nature and its laws (although secularists refuse to admit that God, who created everything, upholds the universe by his power). When getting further into evolution-related fields, more presumptions are made based on naturalistic presuppositions. This is clearly seen in cosmology — which is not even science , but a philosophy. Credit: NASA / ESA (modified) Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents Cosmic owlhoots Krauss and Scherrer wrote a paper that may not have been entirely serious, saying that cosmologists in the future may not have the necessary information to make the correct conclusions about the universe that today's scientists have made. What, nobody keeps or refers to records? The authors got the bit in their teeth and galloped off with the presumption that they are correct in the first place in the here and now. (Reminds me of the tinhorns who

Rational people think that if a hypothesis or theory is not supported by evidence, it is discarded and everyone moves on to something better. Unfortunately for science and reason, the Big Bang has been tweaked, adjusted, had the top sawed off and stapled on the bottom, sprayed with patchouli essential oil, run over with a steam roller — okay, I'm exaggerating just a bit. The fact remains that the Big Bang has failed, but instead of being discarded, it is modified for further failures. Then modified again, repeat as needed and call it science. Credit: NASA/GSFC (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) The current patch involves dark matter, dark energy, and other things involving "dark". There is no evidence that these things exist, but cosmic evolutionists cling to these things anyway. It should be obvious why: they despise the rational alternative, that God created the universe, and much more recently than fourteen billion years or so ago. Lack of scie

Excuse me while I check the status of my unregistered assault keyboard... okay, we're ready to continue bringing you evidence affirming creation and showing that there are many serious questions about minerals-to-materialist evolution. Ready? Theoretical astrophysicist Dr. Lawrence Krauss has made a name for himself on the owlhoot trail by promoting atheistic materialism and cosmic evolution by using sciencey words to promote irrational concepts. He believes that everything came from nothing, but redefines nothing as (my paraphrase here) something that we call nothing. He has written books that his followers (many of whom are disciples of Clinton Richard Dawkins, who also has much to say that has very little meaningful content) happily purchase and believe that they contain evidence for his views. That'll be the day! Credit: Pixabay / Gerd Altmann Krauss has a book that seems to have borrowed from an epic film about Jesus, and called it The Greatest Story Ever Told — S

Interesting how believers in deep time have shallow standards — two of them. It was a joke when creationists suggested that one means animals used to spread around the world was through "rafts" , but it was all right when evolutionists saddled up and rode along. The disputed research of Barry Setterfield into the slower speed of light received ridicule from secularists , but when Big Bang proponents postulate a varying speed of light , that's science. See? Just two examples of their double standards. Credits: Modified from Pixabay / CandaceHunter with NASA/ESA The Big Bang concept has never worked. Whenever a "yeah, but..." objection was raised, a rescuing device was sewn on, such as inflation, dark matter, dark energy, dark lady , dark whatever, other odd things; the original Big Bang has little resemblance to the patchwork quilt that is presented as cosmological "science" today. Much of this has to do with the horizon problem, which continua

The Big Bang and cosmic evolution have many things going for them — on paper. Start with some assumptions, do some calculations, make impressive pronouncements, let the sycophantic science media get the bit in their teeth and gallop to the public . But do not, under any circumstances, let actual science interfere with grandstanding. Evidence is bad medicine for speculations in secular cosmogony and cosmology. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech Since observed evidence causes problems for secular cosmogony concepts, secular scientists come up with rescuing devices. Dark matter, dark energy, dark other things that have never been observed but look good for calculations abound, and "explain" why spiral galaxies hold their shape after assumed zillions of years. These things have not been observed, only inferred according to presupposition s (see " Dark Matter Remains Missing "). Another rescuing device is to come up with new physics, and even find a new theory of gravity t

Y'all understand multiverse, right? It's when a song has a lot of, well, verses. " Amazing Grace " has — "You made me facepalm very hard with that one, Cowboy Bob." Moving on... There are many suppositious remarks about parallel universes, and some of those universes are just like ours with very slight changes. If you were able to saddle up and ride sideways through these universes, eventually the changes would add up and you might find, say, Clinton Richard Dawkins as a respected biblical creationist, Rome never fell, dinosaurs are common pets, and so on. Some very interesting stories have arisen from the parallel universe concept.   I've even read that some think every decision that is ever made causes a new universe to form where the unmade choice in this one has been made in that one. Another fine image by Gerd Altmann ( geralt ) at Pixabay Folks are adding the multiverse to the foundering Big Bang choplogic, and astronomy is being dragged

Back in the olden days, we were told in school that molecules make everything, and molecules are made of atoms. Atoms are made of protons, neutrons, and electrons, with protons having a positive charge, neutrons are neutral, and electrons are negative. Right, got it. Is class dismissed yet? Not hardly! Image credit: Pixabay / geralt People toyed with the idea that if we could get extreme magnification, we'd see that there's another universe way, way down yonder with stars, galaxies, planets and intelligent beings. That's been pretty much dismissed, except for the final moment in the first Men in Black movie. If you want an interesting story from 1932 about a race from down there that comes up here to try and take over the world, click on "The Seed of the Toc-Toc Birds", by George Henry Weiss . As research and knowledge progress, scientists should be humbled that there is still more to learn. There are several subatomic particles in quantum physics. (No,

Here is one of those words that some people need to clarify. When someone is spending money for the sake of obtaining possessions, sometimes to impress other people or perhaps because they have to simply own things, they can be referred to as a materialist. But this word means something else in science and metaphysics: a materialist believes that the material world is all that exists, there is no God. Evolutionary thinking, which is based on materialism, has hindered science many times. People assume that there is no God (but then arrogantly use logic, which is non-material and is a part of God's nature), then they make philosophies of science. Even though the scientific evidence and logical conclusions should tell these owlhoots that God exists and made the universe (Romans 1:18-23), secularists commence to making up a heap of tall tales to avoid the Creator. When the evidence rears up on its hind legs and shows the folly of their ways, they dream up more tall tales, pronto (

Cosmic evolution has many of the same problems that get biological evolutionists on the prod. The more science and technology develop, the more we learn that naturalistic conjectures don't amount to a hill of beans when examined under the cold, pitiless indifference of facts and logic. So, they try to sew more patches on the quilt of whatever "theory" is under discussion. The patchwork quilt of the Big Bang seriously needs to be discarded. The Big Bang was (and sometimes still is) referred to as an explosion , but that idea has generally been replaced by inflation.  That's because the evidence found didn't support the speculations, so the Big Bang has been tweaked and adjusted with ad hoc  assumptions and unprovable guesses; today's Big Bang is not your grandfather's Big Bang. One part of the Big Bang is Hubble constant, a parameter used to calculate the expansion rate of the universe. This requires a number of assumptions (including that the Big Ba

Looking up at the night skies can bring a sense of awe at God's handiwork (Gen. 1:16, Psalm 8:3-4). Ever check out the night skies in, say, Montana, Arizona, or Chaco Culture National Historical Park (down New Mexico way)? Great places to break out a telescope. Ever wish you had one of those big ones? Abell 901/902 supercluster image credit: ESO ( CC BY 4.0 ) Back when telescopes were newfangled devices, stargazers thought they had them all counted. As telescopes advanced, more stars were discovered, and galaxies full of stars. Then clusters. And then superclusters. Still more structures and such are being discovered, and advocates of deep time are going haywire over how what they see goes against their predictions and give even more problems for the Big Bang evolutionary cosmology. Well, sure, that kind of cognitive dissonance is bound to happen when people keep trying to deny that God created the universe, and he did it much more recently than they'll allow. To see

One of the hallmarks of Big Bang cosmologists is the ability to continually modify their story to dodge the facts. (We saw something very similar in the post about phylogenetic trees , too.) When in doubt, resort to the complex scientific principle of Making Stuff Up®. Things called green pea galaxies  caused some mighty fancy footwork over at the Hawking Honky-Tonk. Image assembled from Clker clip art and a NASA image of the M-81 galaxy . Now, don't get all het up, these aren't galaxies made of green stars. The green light comes from a combination of circumstances between the stars. These galaxies are much smaller then other galaxies, and are round, so when you put it all together, can't say as I blame them for calling them green peas. Some folks will tell you that these galaxies are a problem for creationists, but that's only from the string of storytelling based on cosmic evolutionary presuppositions — not from actual facts. What they are less likely to admit

Secular cosmologists continually conjure Big Bang cosmology, loading it with excessive occult baggage in their efforts to deny the Creator. Mythology masquerading as science regarding the origin of the universe is continually changing and relying more on powers of "darkness". Image from Clker clip art The wizards of the Big Bang invoke dark matter and dark energy, which are placeholders for what is not known, but believed by faith. Evidence keeps mounting against the Big Bang, but they're locked into their fatally flawed worldview. This "science of the gaps" keeps on getting money and, and they have been making excuses for many years. Sorry, old son, that ain't science. To read all about it, click on " Occult Cosmology Mutters Dark Matters ".

We know full well that the nature of science is to explore through various means and increase in knowledge. Ideally, theories and models are modified if needed, or even discarded. The more we learn, the more there is to learn — but even when data conflicts with secular worldviews, the worldviews prevail. Astronomy and space exploration show this extremely well. Remember when there were seven planets in this solar system? Of course you don't, the eighth planet, Neptune, was officially noted in 1846. Pluto became the ninth planet in 1930, but with bigger and better telescopes, it was downgraded to "dwarf planet" status in 2006. Once Pluto was "visited", scientists were surprised . This is right in keeping with the way other members of our solar system were shown to be active , not acting as old as secularists expected them to be. There's a heap of evidence against the Big Bang, but it's constantly cobbled and patched together to keep going. After all,

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen On the October 25, 2015 podcast of "The Weekly Worldview" , Doug McBurney accessed his "Science — Really?"  file for some interesting items. Stuff that fungus-to-fighter evolutionists pass off as valid scientific research is just plumb loco a lot of the time, and Doug had a doozy to share. Image: ClkerFreeVectorImages / Pixabay Some owlhoots decided that the human hand evolved the ability to make a fist for the sake of punching an opponent without as much pain . They need to get out of the lab more and experience real life. If you throw a punch with your fingers in the proper position (the picture above is pretty good), that's a start. But if your thumb is sticking out, you risk breaking it when you strike. Also, the proper motion needs to be used for an effective hit. Once again, Darwinoids offer speculation without evidence, and it's based on the presupposition that we were st00pid brutes in the past. Nor do they explain h