Piltdown Superman

It is easy to assume that the stereotypical Scandinavian today indicates how the Vikings of centuries past appeared. While it is known that the Vikings were explorers and reached North America long ago, there is other evidence of how much they got around. Credit: Flickr / Katherine (take a look at the caption for background) ( CC BY-ND 2.0 ) It seems to be human nature to move around, as we have seen with the Neanderthals, Denisovans, Celts, and other ancient people groups. Modern researchers raided Viking burial grounds and conductive intensive research, and saw that like other folks, they managed to spread their DNA around. However, they also discovered that DNA was shared into  Scandinavia. Trace genetics, culture, history, and so on back far enough and you'll find support for the biblical narrative of the dispersal at Babel. The activities of the Viking Age (793–1066 AD) radically shaped the demographic landscape of Europe—along with its politics, culture, and demographics—in

There are some creationists who advise against using the Laws of Thermodynamics, entropy , and that sort of thing in discussions about evolution. We tend to misuse these things. It is a fact, though, that everything winds down. This applies to you and me. Background image: Pixabay /  PixxlTeufel , modified with COVID-19 image, then FotoSketcher In a way, it should be obvious. Your vehicle will not become less rusty or repair itself. Machines wear out and break down. Foundations in buildings settle and cracks appear in various places. People grow old and die, and then have to stand before their Creator. Before we continue, I suggest reading " Mendel's Accountant Continues to Fluster Evolutionists ". It's not essential, but helpful. Genetic entropy  is extremely strong for affirming recent creation,  and for refuting deep-time minerals-to-misotheist evolution. Although our Creator built in processes to repair our DNA and mitigate damages, mutations do occur and accumula

Scientists really like computer simulations and models. (If you tell a scientist that you have a new one, well, there's goes your evening of binge-watching CSI .) Proponents of particles-to-programmer evolution have them for mutations, natural selection and the like. The Mendel's Accountant  program is superior. Thanks to Why?Outreach for the graphic Gregor Mendel (peas be upon him) pioneered the science of genetics. Darwin's disciples added the fact of mutations to Darwin's version of natural selection, claiming neo-Darwinism was the answer to questions about origins — especially if they remove any possibility of the Creator. Of course, deep time is essential. High priests of evolutionism like Clinton Richard Dawkins have used computer simulations to support evolution, but like I've said many times, the program depends on the data. It also is subject to the adjustments made by the programmers. Darwinists bragged about their successful scenarios (essentially dealin

Folks are a mite confused about this GMO thing, and there are strong passions on both sides of the issue. Some see this genetic manipulation as evil, so some food merchandisers proudly proclaim, "No GMOs!" Others see it as a tremendous scientific boon. Both images found at Pexels Angry fox:  Vinicius Altava ; Statue facepalm:  karatara There are views all over the map, and a great deal of emotion. Some people who are against GMOs manipulate emotions and say that they're dangerous, and this child suspects that most people have no knowledge of the controversy. What's the hubbub, Bub, about Genetically Modified Organisms? I'll allow that genetic modification where people modify the gene itself has not been happening for all that long, but a form of genetic modification has been around for millennia. There are foods that we eat that are the product of artificial selection (Darwinists consider artificial selection a form of how natural selection causes evolution, but n

Back when I went to school, I was fortunate when I could hitch a ride on a passing Stegosaurus. Another fiction of bygone days is that cells were simple. As science progressed, complexities of the cell became more and more apparent. Credit: Wikimedia Commons /  NHS National Genetics and Genomics Education Centre  ( CC BY 2.0 ) Believers in muck-to-mycologist evolution are confounded by explaining the origin of the first cell, let alone the irreducible complexity of the cell cycle. Before a cell can get its motor running and head out on the cell-division highway, it must go through several stages. It must duplicate its DNA, and those tiny molecular machines minimize mutations so cells don't run out of control. The entire process testifies to those who can understand of the Master Engineer's genius. The cell cycle is one of the most important biological processes. It describes how cells multiply in number by duplicating the information in the parent cell before dividing into two

It becomes difficult to reason with atheists and evolutionists. Some of us want to have meaningful conversations, and we are met with arguments akin to, "You st00pid creatards are wrong because atheism and evolution and stuff". They base their "thinking" on invalid assumptions, such as those in a recent Y chromosome study. Made at Pablo Secularists who believe that human males are going extinct  have made some serious errors in that area, and some of the same problems are still recurring. They claim Neanderthals became extinct 40,000 Darwin years ago. The prediction that the Y chromosome is shrinking and will disappear has a challenge from a study from this Neanderthal Y chromosome study. DNA is fragile, and continues to deteriorate even after death. A crime lab technician cannot reasonably expect to test DNA after someone has been long dead. Under the right conditions, it can last a while. That's why scientists were able to do a study on Neanderthal DNA and the

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen During October 9-11, a free online viewing of  Dismantled: A Scientific Deconstruction of the Theory of Evolution was announced. It was publicized here as a component in an article to discuss false accusations by atheists of Christian profiteering. We will focus on the movie itself now. Image taken from a screenshot of the trailer by Back2Genesis Dismantled  raises the question early on, a question that people have wondered for millennia: Where did everything come from? There have been many speculations throughout time, but the main considerations can be narrowed down. One is that life, the universe, and everything are the result of blind natural processes and chance; we are lucky accidents. The other idea is that the book of Genesis is real history. Rational people want evidence to support ideas. The movie makes the case for the differences between operational  and historical  science. Some people get on the prod about this (including a scientist who is a Chr

It seems that scientists would learn from their mistakes, especially after being humiliated for decades over the insipience of referring to some parts of DNA as "junk". New research demonstrates even more how sufficient research is needed before waving off things that are not understood. Image assembled from components at  Clker  clipart Not only did the assumption of evolution hinder research, but they married that idea up with the fallacy of arguing from ignorance. Essentially, "We don't know what this part of the genome does, it doesn't code for proteins, so it must be junk from our evolutionary past. Because evolution." An important thing for them to learn is that the Master Engineer puts things in place for specific purposes. Recent research from the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (OIST) continues to highlight how evolutionary theory influenced scientists to foolishly conclude that DNA in organisms not used to co

When Darwinists tell the tale of whale evolution, people should be able to liken it to a just-so story without much effort. But no, naturalism demands stories that resemble, "Life evolved in the sea, some went on land and evolved further, others went back into the sea and became whales". Because evolution. The Whale Beached  by Esaias van de Velde, 1617 Since they have no actual science to back up their story, evolutionists began blubbering until they came up with the idea of using phylogenetics. However, we already saw that this is based on personal preferences, omitting important information, and circular reasoning (see " Phylogenetics — Based on Worldviews "). Piling up speculations and fake science has become far too common in evolutionism, but hey, give the people what they want, right? Although phylogeny is easy to dismantle by knowledgeable people, Darwin's cheerleaders attempted to use genetics. It's interesting. Some genes are not the same i

These denizens of Arctic and sub-Arctic waters are showing that another evolutionary prediction regarding how they are supposed to bond is false. They are also known to spend time with others who are not so close in genetic terms. Cropped from  Unsplash / Mendar Bouchali The predictions of Darwinists would have them being with their kinfolk most of all, but our Creator gave variety to his creatures who are not subject to the speculations of secularists. Mayhaps if they'd take off their Darwin spectacles and conduct observations  on these interesting and social mammals without faulty presuppositions, they could do better science work. Beluga whales don’t select their friends according to what Darwinists would expect, a new Florida Atlantic University study shows. The research findings are taken from ten Arctic beluga whale ranges, including Alaska’s Yakutat Bay, Cook Inlet, Norton Sound, Canada’s Husky Lakes, Russia’s Gulf of Anadyr, and a small population by Norway’s Svalb

One of the tenets of particles-to-pathologist evolution is that it has no purpose, despite the way its adherents treat Evolution and Natural Selection as if they were entities that could make decisions. Some treat them as intangible forces. Then random mutations are added. It appears that this was mostly made at Atom Smasher However, it appears that mutations are not quite as random as we've been led to believe. Oh, sure, Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ are uninformed about the mythology they promote, but there are evolutionists who are actually spreading misinformation — random doesn't exactly mean random. Digging deeper, most mutations are harmful or neutral. Neutral mutations are so small that the gibbering god of Natural Selection overlooks them. Also the accumulation of mutations on a small level cannot lead to upward evolution. Lateral changes, yeah, that happens. Darwinoids are deceptive and dealing from the bottom of the deck. Anything to deny the Creator, you kn

No need to get excited, this post is not going to saddle you with technical details. The science of genetics that was initiated by Gregor Mendel (peas be upon him) has been growing in recent years, and recent developments are unfriendly to universal common ancestor evolution. Credit: CSIRO/ Garry Brown  ( CC by 3.0 ) (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) In their determination to establish that humans are related to apes, the chimpanzee genome was sequenced. Only, not really. It was very incomplete so it was stitched together . (Some atheists have lied outright to protect their faith, one even claiming that every creature has had its genome sequenced!) With better and more honest science and technology, the gap between human and chimp DNA is widening . New areas of the human genome can be more accurately sequenced now, and creationists expect more bad news for evolutionists. Most people might be surprised to learn that the human genome has not been fully sequenc

Although some believers in universal common ancestry deny reality and insist that modern humans and Neanderthals are only distantly related, a recent genetic study gives lie to their beliefs. What do bears have to do with it? Image cropped and enhanced, original: Flickr / Clemens Vasters ( CC BY 2.0 ) Some owlhoots reluctantly admit that Neanderthals, Denisovans, and modern humans were able to interbreed, but they try to rescue Darwin by saying that this was essentially a fluke — on the edge of biological compatibility. (I reckon they're desperate to deny recent creation.) Come on, man, that's a bunch of malarkey! Values for genetic distance were studied, including various bears and relatives of dogs. What do bears and Neanderthals have in common? This study. It affirms not only that they could interbreed and apparently were happy to do so (we all have some of their DNA), but we are more closely related genetically to Neanderthals than some bears are to each other. B

Although the Bible is completely accurate in everything it touches on, it has a strong emphasis in history. Archaeology has never contravened anything in it. Darwin's acolytes believe that if the ancient people of the Bible existed, they were stupid brutes.  This is false. Mostly made at  Image Chef Secularists should cowboy up and stop denying that the Bible is right every time! (The secular science industry press humiliated themselves by trying to prove the Bible wrong about the Canaanites , but they only showed that the press are unwilling to do actual research.) These folks were intelligent and sophisticated (morally degenerate, however). Not only were they genetically distinct, but their genes live on, although admixed. A new study finds that the the Canaanites before the Conquest were a distinct people, as the Bible says. A gene study of ancient DNA from 73 individuals in 9 Bronze Age sites confirms that Canaanites were genetically distinct, yet became admixed with

Hemoglobin (HGB) is one of thousands of proteins designed by our Creator. We know that it carries oxygen through the bloodstream, but hemoglobin (Hgb) was designed Hgb to fulfill a number of detailed functions. Even the oxygen delivery is regulated for various needs. Credit: Pixabay /  Narupon Promvichai The intricacies of the biology of living things continue to become more amazing and complex as more research is conducted, including a surprising blood component that was recently discovered . Believers in universal common descent evolution cannot adequately explain Hgb and its specified complexities, so they simply evosplain it away . There are also Hgb molecules produced by humans for fetal development as needed for various functions. Also, organisms that breathe air experience regulation from Hgb so that when the need for oxygen is lower (at rest), not as much is delivered. The opposite is also true. Further, the gas nitric oxide is needed and Hgb extends its extremely short

Scientists operate from their worldviews, so it is entirely reasonable to get a notion and see if there is any evidence to support it. Secular biologists and so forth presuppose goo-to-geneticist evolution. There is a problem with the number of chromosomes between humans and apes, so something "must" have changed. Evolutionists believe that there was chromosome fusion in human history, and that's why apes have a couple more than we do. They have a suspected site for this and papers have been written on it. Many important factors have been overlooked and even ignored, and a creation scientist has done his own research showing that this alleged fusion is yet another tale of mystery and imagination for the Darwin Zone. We were created differently from the animals, pilgrim, and in God's image. One of the more popular arguments used for humans supposedly evolving from apes is known as the chromosome fusion. The impetus for this concept is the evolutionary problem that

For a long time, it was thought that DNA was the lord of genetic molecules to rule them all. When research indicated that genes can effectively jump and reattach, scientists circled the wagons and responded not only with ignoring the material, but also with hostility. Since then, it has been bad news for Darwin's followers. Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net / Stuart Miles As an aside, the strong reaction against research and the efforts to protect the paradigm of unchanging DNA reinforces the point that scientists are not "follow where the evidence leads" dispassionate automatons. They are people. Since evolutionary dogma is based on purposelessness, one may expect that if genes detach themselves and wander off, it would make matters worse for the organism. Unfortunately for naturalists, research shows that this detaching and reattaching in other areas is an important function. Not only does this further exemplify the work of the Master Engineer, it also shows the foo

The octopus is popular in adventure movies, animated cartoons, and even as the main course. They are difficult to study because they seem ill-tempered at times, but are considered very intelligent. The hands at the Darwin Ranch do not like them. Not a bit. Octopuses have a habit of being recalcitrant toward evolution. Image credit:  NOAA Okeanos Explorer Program Like some of the other denizens of the ocean, they are skilled at camouflage . Except that they take it to levels that are exceptionally detailed. If you sequenced the genome of an octopus, you'd confirm findings that its genome is surprisingly large . Octopuses are also consummate escape artists as well as taking what they want.  Some creation deniers are so amazed at this creature, they speculate that it couldn't have originated on Earth, but somehow came from outer space! Can't be considering the obvious truth that this is another example of the Master Engineer's handiwork, nosiree. Yes, even though t

We recently examined a prairie schooner-full of articles introduced in two posts ( beginning with this one ) that demonstrated how the hands at the Darwin Ranch were busy rewriting their conflicting versions of human origins. Rusty Swingset, the foreman, got frustrated and went bowling. H. erectus fossil remains have paleoanthropologists trying to salvage or work around the Out of Africa (OoA) and Multiregional models. Credit: Flickr / Ryan Somma ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) Essentially, Homo erectus was used in the idea that humans evolved in Africa and then saddled up to ride for other parts of the globe. The OoA model has had supporters and detractors slapping leather with each other for quite a spell, and several other models have been proposed to evosplain the data: those skulls in 'Straya don't belong there because evolution. Genetic research makes them worse for evolutionists. These finds are fine with biblical creationists, but there is some disagreement in their ranks re

In Part 1, we saw that proponents of evolution have a mess, and they are constantly needing to rewrite human evolution because the facts do not fit the narrative. As we continue, we see that other scientific disciplines are also recalcitrant to evolutionary ideas. Background image :  The Passion of Creation ,  Leonid Pasternak, 1880s Radiometric dates assigned to Neanderthal remains conflict with archaeological finds, and the radiometric dating methods used are based on circular reasoning. In addition, these dates were disingenuously adjusted to fit what scientists wanted — especially when they were more compatible with biblical timelines. The archaeologists discovered that the Neanderthals engaged in the same kinds of activities that modern humans would enjoy. A recent report in the journal Science mixed detailed archaeological finds with stories about human origins. As is typical, age assignments for fossils fit evolutionary time instead of the Bible’s much shorter timeline