Piltdown Superman

Out yonder past Deception Pass, the hands at the Darwin Ranch are frantically attempting to find evidence for evolution. One owlhoot named Lee Berger has had several discoveries that have been interesting in and of themselves. Unfortunately for evolutionists, he keeps giving them dead-end candidates. Image before text: The Angry One by Ferdinand Hodler Naturally, the media for the secular science industry got the bit in their teeth and ran with the latest story that human evolution's tree would be "shaken up". We've heard that song and dance before. While I detest the genetic fallacy (where something is rejected simply because of the source), there are times when someone's track record can give someone reasons to hesitate in accepting information. Berger (as is common with evolutionists) seems to neglect that some of the variations bones and fossils can be the results of fragment mixing, diseases or conditions, devolution, and other factors that can false

At first glance, this may look like a repeat of the recent post on research at Harvard supporting an Institute for Creation Research model of environmental adaptation. Actually, this is new information involving living cells. An interesting study on yeast cells was conducted to see if they had built-in mechanisms for gene expression. Credit: Pixabay / ractapopulous Engineers design things to respond to changes. This includes sensors and logic involving feedback to trigger responses. Darwin believed that organisms change because of their environments, but the ICR model states (and demonstrates) that the opposite is true: organisms were designed by their Creator to sense and respond to environmental changes. Yeast cells displayed "control theory" that engineers use, further confirming the creation science model. New research goes a long way in explaining how creatures actively sense their environment and adapt to it. One mechanism enables some organisms to track the ch

There is a song that says words sometimes have two meanings, but that is an understatement. We can be led the wrong way by erroneous assumptions about word definitions . Creation science ministries try to encourage people to learn how to think, in stark contrast to secularists who try to tell people what to think. With a bit of study, we can learn how to understand the malarkey of Darwinese. There are two posts featured here to emphasize the point. Modified from an image at FreeDigitalPhotos.net by Stuart Miles Although the Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Ring™ is useful if you can find one (the version with the whistle in it is a very expensive collectable), we really need to put our hearts and minds into interpreting Darwinese.  Watch for maybe, scientists believe, earlier than we thought, perhaps, and other words that the secular establishments pass of as "science" instead of earning their pay. Another big help is learning to spot basic logical fallacies . On

Since evolutionism is pantheistic in nature, we should not be surprised then its adherents appeal to animism regarding the origin of life or the usual "forces" and "evolutionary pressures" in their imagined explanations. If you ponder it a spell, evolution seems like magic more than science. Background image credit: Pixabay / Kai Kalhh Papa Darwin bushwhacked creationist Edward Blyth and stole his concept of natural selection , then then turned it upside down. Instead of culling the unfit and preserving the best members of a species, Darwin imagined it as a creative force. It was largely abandoned, but neo-Darwinism conjures up new life forms through mutations and natural selection. Like magic. via GIPHY Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ will use evolution to "explain" anything, even when phenomena are contradictory. If something explains everything, it really explains nothing, old son. The late Philip Skell was an evolutionist, and he had proble

Evolution is not supported by the evidence. Clam eyes have it, motion carried. Well, it seemed funny when I wrote it. Or were you unaware that those things on the beach and in the water that have hard shells have eyes? Supposedly simple organisms have simple eyes according to Darwinian mythology. Nope. Credit: RGBStock /  K Rayker The Master Engineer has surprised scientists with the specified complexity of eyes, even with clams, scallops, and such. Their eyes are very different from ours. Although their pupils expand and contract like ours, the light hits them in a different way. The retina is between the lens of the retina. Evolutionists all the way back to the Bearded Buddha thought that their eyes were simple, but they actually support special creation and defy evolution. Aside for the problems noted above falsifying Darwin’s rationalization, we now know that so-called simple eyes are not at all simple, but in some ways are more complex than the so-called highest, most evo

We have been observing the continuous environmental tracking (CET) model that is becoming a serious challenge to Darwinism. Instead of "pressures" on organisms causing them to change, CET is using an engineering approach. That is, how would the Master Engineer have designed living things to adapt to changes in the environment? Credit: Freeimages / Katia Grimmer-Laversanne The process of blockchain technology was developed for Bitcoin digital currency, but has grown into something that can be used in other areas of technology (and I reckon it will probably still be around even if Bitcoin falls out of fashion). Computers are linked and regularly update transactions. In a similar manner, DNA can be compared to computer programming that can account for both stasis and variation. Using blockchain technology, we can see how organisms and populations can rapidly adapt. Evolutionary selectionism believes that outside forces called selective pressures produce DNA modificat

Many years ago, I saw a poster version of the 1973 painting Overpopulation by John Pitre. It showed all the land filled with naked people , some even in the sea. This was quite possibly influenced by the 1973 book The Population Bomb by Paul Ehrlich, who was in turn presenting a Malthusian view. Unsplash / San Fermin Pamplona - Navarra Thomas Malthus was an economist who had some very pessimistic views of population and the struggle for existence, and was also an influence on Charles Darwin. Ehrlich is an anti-creationist who was influenced by Malthus and Darwin, and The Population Bomb frightened many people. However, his vision was seriously flawed. Interestingly, he is still highly respected by leftists. Is that why people still think drastic measures are in order? Hey, Grandpa! What's for supper? Maggot sausage and insect ice cream to save the planet and offset global warming, of course! These people are mentally ill. The work was obviously based on numbers, did no

One reason that Darwinian thinking has so many people hogtied is because the non-explanation of " it evolved " is used so freely. Add to this the phrase "scientists say", and too many people will accept such a remark without question. Venus flytrap image credit: CSIRO / Malcolm Paterson   (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) For me, good documentaries on living things are spoiled with assertions of "it evolved", as if homage to the Bearded Buddha somehow provides scientific validation. I'm sure some of you have felt the same way. Why not simply describe what is observed without delving into what is assumed about the subject's history? We have two examples in the article linked below. Folks riding for the Darwin brand commit circular reasoning and other bad logic by assuming evolution to prove evolution. In fact, two carnivorous plants defy evolution. Instead, they show specified complexity that could not have arisen by evolu

People who have followed the origins controversy have probably heard the term living fossil, originally used by Charles Darwin. This term essentially means that something living shows no appreciable change over millions of Darwin years. Wallace's Giant Bee is an ironic contribution. Megachile pluto , Wallace's Giant Bee drawing by Dr. Heinrich Friese This bee was made famous by Alfred Russell Wallace , a friendly rival of Charles Darwin, when Wallace was in Indonesia. It was thought extinct since 1981, but was found again recently. Nice when that happens. However, it also prompts evolutionists to come up with Just So Stories that rival Rudyard Kipling. You see, amber is quite a preservative, better than a typical fossil, so they have to explain away the lack of change. "Stasis" is a non-explanation that buzzes the wrong way for evolutionists' claims, and is just an excuse to get out of admitting that life was created recently. Every now and then one of the

Further development of the continuous environmental tracking (CET) model by the Institute for Creation Research has previously examined how organisms are designed to respond to environmental changes. This is the opposite of Charles Darwin's view and that of his followers. What about adaptation by populations? Credit: Unsplash / Chad Kirchoff This model takes an engineering perspective; the Master Engineer designed both individuals and populations to work together in order to solve problems. Since they are designed to adapt, there is no randomness involved. Organisms have adapted rapidly, rocking evolutionists back on their heels with exclamations of "faster than we expected". After all, their paradigm requires long ages and slow processes. At the population level, natural selection envisions these organisms locked in mortal competition with each other, with a few individuals emerging victorious at the expense of the rest of the population. They pass on their gene

Some people wonder why the fuss about origins. After all, Darwin proposed a naturalistic view of origins, so let the scientists slap leather on that and we can just go on about our business. Unfortunately, evolutionary views have been applied to many areas, and even prompted tyrants and wars. Mao Zedong ca. 1950 via Wikimedia Commons If you search this site, you will find links to articles on many outgrowths of Darwin's death cult, including eugenics, abortion, "scientific" racism, and more. It is worth noting that Darwin's sidewinders saw fit to get into wars. Darwinism played a prominent role in World War One , the Nazi race holocaust , communism , and more. Remember, the religion of atheism has evolution as a cornerstone, and millions of people were murdered by atheist evolutionists. What people may have forgotten (or neglected, since evolution is adored by "wise" people and many scientists) is that the atrocities in Communist China under Chairman

Although he has long since gone to his eternal reward, the ideas of Papa Darwin have been having some bad times lately. They have been slimed by the hagfish , natural selection has been shown to be useless in science , and now we see that they have been snakebit. Serves the sidewinders right. Western pygmy rattlesnake image credit: Wikimedia Commons/ Peter Paplanus ( CC by 2.0 )  Evolutionists have been unable to come up with a cogent model for the origin of snakes and lizards. They lost their legs? How? Ideas raise more questions than provide answers. They also have problems with the varieties of venom and where it came from. Yes, creationists also have speculations about venom as well. We do know that snakes show remarkable design, and did not evolve. The origin of snakes and snake venom has become more puzzling to believers in Darwinian evolution. (Note: For explanation of our usage of Darwin, Darwinism and Darwinian , see footnote.) [This fits the way I use those terms

Charles Darwin hijacked the principle of natural selection, turned it into a false god with creative ability, and called it evolution. His followers have done the same, and added a wagon train-load of nonsense forces like "selection pressures" and the like that caused modifications externally. Image courtesy of Why?Outreach from an idea I had Using the reality- and science-based creation science engineered adaptability principle, we see that critters are equipped with genetic switches so they can accommodate themselves to their environment. They are even able to sense changes. The Master Engineer didn't want his entire creation to go extinct, so he equipped organisms. You savvy that? The harsh lightning of reality is frightening to secularists. But what about creatures that have variations? Blind cave fish have lost their eyes, therefore, evolution. (Yes, Darwinoids really think that.) In reality, these little tetras testify of creation . Other creatures have v

Darwinists assert that organisms evolve because of unseen, undefined external forces, but the continuous environmental tracking (CET) model demonstrates that the opposite is true. The Master Engineer provided the means to detect and adapt to changes in environments, and organisms have logic mechanisms all the way down to the cellular level, and beyond. Credit: RGBStock / Guenter M. Kirchweger We have seen that living things have built-in logic mechanisms . Like systems built by human engineers, there can be a series of switches. No, we're not saying that horses calculate which fence to jump for better pastures or anything like that. These logic networks can even work at changing the genome. Octopuses can have their RNA molecules edited before they make proteins so they can have short- and long-term adaptations. For that matter, corals edit their RNA, which is problematic for deep time beliefs. There are other examples of internal logic systems as well. In this article, we’

Some folks get a mite intimidated by the subject of logic, expecting highfalutin philosophical lingo and such. We are not going into that, even though it can be interesting. Everyone uses logic, but most do not even realize it. It is also the basis of computers and other electronic equipment. Original image from Clker clipart , then modified The basis for logic in electronics is very binary. Zero or one, on or off, yes or no, and so on. Contingencies are built on that ("If yes, then do this thing, else do something else") based on the sophistication of programs. It is amazing that living things have built-in logic systems. The continuous environmental tracking (CET) model that is being designed by the Institute for Creation Research is demonstrating that Darwin was wrong. He utilized pantheism , such as external "forces", natural selection, and vague "pressures" to cause organisms to evolve. In reality, organisms are designed to adapt by the

Rusty Swingset, the ramrod over at the Darwin Ranch, is considering hiring a staff counselor or facilitating an anger management course. That is because evolutionists keep getting upset over findings that do not support evolution or deep time. Problems for evolutionists are seen in out-of-order fossils . More recent fossil finds have them screaming like the simian ancestors they think are in our ancestry. Modified from an image at openclipart with hologram malfunction effect It's mighty easy to simply assign a value to fossil ages using the Fit the Narrative Method™. Problem is, when folks pick and choose what they like, and then something else is discovered that conflicts with the earlier assigned value, panic ensues. You often hear, "Earlier than we thought". That's because secular origins science is based on numerous fundamentally flawed presuppositions, including deep time and that evolution happened in the first place. Mayhaps they should stop asking how

The engineered adaptability series and the development of the continuous environmental tracking (CET) model from the Institute for Creation Research is getting stronger, and I have been looking forward to new installments in their series. Indeed, we have seen several examples from other creationist organizations that also fit the model. Now we are going to see some of the background of Charles anti-design approach. Unlike many of Darwin's disciples, Chuck made an effort to understand the opposition. He was extremely familiar with the work Natural Theology by creationist William Paley , who used design as a teleological argument for the existence of God. Darwin commenced to distorting design arguments. He taught that organisms changed because of outside "pressures", and used a kind of mysticism to his version of evolution. The opposite is true. Engineered adaptability shows that organisms have built-in abilities to detect and respond to environmental changes accor

Devotees of Darwin can head down yonder to Ecuador and take a jaunt into the Pacific Ocean to see the sacred site known as the Galapagos Islands. Even though we hear about all the scientific research being conducted, people take vacations there. The Bearded Buddha made many observations there while making his voyage on the Beagle, but made seriously erroneous conclusions. Credit: RGBStock / Stella Bogdanic One writer referred to the Galapagos Islands as a "laboratory for evolution". Unfortunately, Darwin's disciples deceive others as well as themselves by conflating variation with evolution, implying dust-to-deceiver evolution. What we see is a passel of different critters, and varieties of those critters, just as the Master Engineer designed them to have. We do not observe evolution. A recent Livescience article is entitled “The Galápagos Islands: Laboratory of Evolution.” It addresses, among other things, “unique examples of plant and animal life.” The island

Votaries of minerals-to-monk evolution generally accept the view promulgated by Darwin that evolution is the result of external "pressures". These cause organisms to adapt and evolve very slowly, eventually turning into something else. Some owlhoots support evolution through fake science and bad papers that often go unnoticed. Creation science, meanwhile, presents reality: designed, targeted, rapid adaptations programmed by the Master Engineer. Assembled and modified using components from Clker clipart and Paint.NET Instead of external influences on organisms, evidence supports the continuous environmental tracking model. Things change, and they do it far more quickly than Darwin's disciples want. How about the showshoe hare? We know that it changes color from white to brown, and then back again. The change has changed as well according to the environment. Some evolutionists are admitting that things change quickly. Then they deal from the bottom of the deck

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen While doing data entry, I listen to podcasts, sermons, articles, and audiobooks. I decided to listen to a slightly older audio book: Robinson Crusoe, from 1719. It was not as cumbersome as I expected, and interesting to see changes in the English language. (By the way, the closing theme of Gilligan's Island had it wrong. They sang "...like Robinson Caruso", with an extra syllable. The Italian tenor Errico Caruso had nothing to do with uncharted desert isles.) Robinson was marooned on an island and spent many years fending for himself and improving his situation until he befriended a man he named Friday. Fast forward a bit. Crusoe and Friday saved some people from mutineers, but the rest of the bad guys were coming back. Upon this Will Atkins cried out, “For God’s sake, captain, give me quarter; what have I done?  They have all been as bad as I:” which, by the way, was not true; for it seems this Will Atkins was the first man that laid hold of t