Posts

Showing posts with the label Dinosaurs

No Dinosaur Feather Evolution

Image
Got my unregistered assault keyboard ready for action. You with me to continue the adventures? We know that everyone has a worldview that contains assumptions and presuppositions. Scientists, along with us reg'lar folk, interpret what we observe through our worldviews, you savvy? Good. Even though there is no actual evidence that dinosaurs evolved in the first place, many of Darwin's disciples believe that dinosaurs evolved into birds. There is no evidence for such that flighty idea, either. What about feathers themselves? Unsplash / Alvaro Reyes There are a few dinosaur fossils that are said to have "protofeathers", but those are disputed. In addition, advocates of these claims must ignore other possible explanations for those impressions in the fossils. Even if a dinosaur did indeed have feathers, so what? It is not evidence that they evolved into birds. The feather itself is a complicated structure that the Master Engineer designed for several purposes, a

A Toast to Dinosaur Soft Tissue Rescuing Devices

Image
When an employer requires overtime, the employee is expected to work efficiently and accurately with available facts. Also, the use of intoxicants is not allowed. Seems that the hands at the Darwin Ranch (yonder near Deception Pass) are ignoring good work habits when they put in overtime at the excuse mill. Case in point, more shenanigans regarding soft tissues. When soft tissues were discovered in dinosaur bones and shown to be more than a fluke, evolutionists were stricken with the inability to explain what they considered impossible because they "know" that the earth is very old and that dinosaurs took a group dirt name millions of Darwin years ago. In today's exciting episode, we have some denial of reality with flagitious evoporn presented as science. New Soft Tissue Discoveries A Jurassic ichthyosaur was found with more than just remarkably-preserved tissues, but also skin and blubber. Good science was used to discuss the biology, but they ignored the icht

Bird Evolution and Secular Miracles

Image
To be an atheist or anti-creationists, someone has to believe in secular "miracles" of some sort . They believe in billions of years, the Big Bang, fish-to-fool evolution, and more despite evidence, not because of it. One of the most feather-brained bits of gullibility is that dinosaurs evolved into birds. Credit: RGBStock / Bern Altman If you study on the notion for a spell, you'll see that there's a passel of changes needed — far more than just having dinosaurs grow feathers and wings, then shrinking. The bone structure, breathing apparatus, the complex feathers themselves, and more need to be considered. Quite a few miracles of evolution. There are some links to help you out at " No Evidence for Dinosaur-to-Bird Evolution ". Modern bird fossils are found in the Cretaceous , and other problems are found to thwart the evolutionary timeline. The birds are extinct, but they lived and flew when dinosaurs lived. Darwin's disciples still manage to c

Ichthyosaurs Provide Genesis Flood Evidence

Image
Before we commence to showing how ichthyosaurs are frustrating for Darwin's disciples and deep time proponents, I found out that something useful has been reissued. My Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Ring™ is kept in a glass case most of the time, but it shows signs of wear. Now trolls and other purveyors of evoporn can all have a new version! Image furnished by Why?Outreach (click for larger) Now, down to business. A somewhat baffling critter during dinosaur times was the ichthyosaur, which resembled dolphins and reptiles. There were several different kinds, and their name is Greek for "fish lizard". Dinosaurs had no evolutionary past , and their aquatic pals were also problematic, so instead of admitting that the logical explanation is recent special creation, evolutionists tried to come up with ancestors for ichthyosaurs. They failed , and not even their decoder rings could help. In reality, ichthyosaurs are examples of the design work of the Master Engineer

Evolutionists Upset by More Early Fossils

Image
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

Fossils Frequently Fluster Evolutionists

Image
Years ago, I posted about fossils that are in the "wrong" place according to Darwinian beliefs. Angry atheists reacted with remarks that had the intellectual equivalent of, "Haw, haw! St00pid creatard thinks there are fossils out of place!" One offered to school me on the topic on his (now defunct) weblog. This was one of the earliest indications I saw that Darwin's Flying Monkeys© need schooling themselves, or that denial can be an ugly thing. Perhaps they should not listen to the claims of tinhorns like C. Richard Dawkins. Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Cheung Chungtat ( CC BY 2.5 ) This is not an isolated case. Fossils are frequently found in the wrong order, and evolutionists have to ride herd on the evidence to keep it from wandering away and interfering with their stories. For example, Confuciusornis was a very modern-looking bird. The narrative of dinosaurs evolving into birds needed damage control when it was discovered that dinosaurs ate birds lik

Silly Dinosaur DNA Research

Image
In the secular science industry, things are seldom as they appear — especially regarding origins. Now secularists are riding at a full gallop to the propaganda mill up yonder at Deception Pass. Do they really have dinosaur DNA? Somebody tell those owlhoots to bring those ponies back to the corral and step inside so we can talk a spell. First of all, to get real dinosaur DNA, you need to get it from a real dinosaur. I don't see any hereabouts, do you? Nor has anyone found some intact that hasn't degraded over the years. Evolutionary science and creation science are forensic in nature , so the researchers made numerous assumptions about the ancestry of dinosaurs. That's mighty difficult, since dinosaurs had no evolutionary past . In addition, they made the assumption that dinosaurs evolved into (or are closely related to birds), but such an idea is ridiculous . When unfounded, unscientific assumptions are made, the research can easily fall down like a house of cards. Thi

Tapestry Art and Noah

Image
Tapestries are an ancient art form, and were extremely popular in Europe during the Middle Ages. Perhaps the larger versions were used to cover the cold castle walls as well as appeal to the eye. Since this art was made by hand on a loom, it had an advantage of being somewhat portable. The Wawel arrasses can be found in Warwel Castle in Poland. Credit: Wikimedia Commons / KHRoN ( CC BY-SA 2.5 ) The king, Sigismund II Augustus, he liked him some tapestries, and had a passel of 'em. Celebrated 16th century artist Michiel Coxie (the "Flemish Raphael") was involved. His scenes involving Noah and the Ark included dragons, the word in use before dinosaur was coined. Coxie wanted to be faithful to the biblical text, and after all, dragons were mentioned in books at the time; dragons must have been on the Ark. Dinosaurs have appeared in old art, such as the Angkor Wat carving , those at Bishop Bell's tomb , possibly the Ica stones , and others. Darwin's discip

Rewriting Dinosaur Evolution Again

Image
Once again, the hands at the Darwin Ranch have to put in overtime at the propaganda mill. This is because the story dinosaur evolution needs to be reconfigured and rewritten yet again. This post will link to three articles — I have five or six available, but that is asking too much of y'all. Original image: The Passion of Creation by Leonid Pasternak, 1880s "Why does it need rewriting again, Cowboy Bob?" Evolutionists and other old-earth believers have their anti-creation assumptions and presuppositions. Then, they commence to plugging in data where it fits. When the data are recalcitrant to evolution, they torture the facts until they confess to whatever is needed. This includes changing the storyline. In today's exciting episode, we see how the narrative of dinosaur evolution keeps on shifting. What really takes the rag off the bush is when Darwinists claim that they have evidence for evolution that actually works against evolution , or get all fired u

Humans Causing Extinction

Image
The observation that humans cause animals to go extinct is not exactly startling news. For believers in atoms-to-atomic engineer evolution, I will ask again: why should anyone care that some animals are endangered , and will even become extinct? Biblical creationists have an answer, but evolutionists are inconsistent because we are the dominant life form and can do what we want.  But we do care and try to keep various animals alive despite the naturalistic worldview. (By the way, ever notice that people don't care so much about the survival of ugly critters? Someone shared that, and it stuck with me.) Y'all might be surprised that despite my provocative and seemingly callous questions above, I'm actually angry while writing this. Elk photo credit: Unsplash / Abben S I'm not against hunting per se, (if people eat what they kill), but I get mighty riled when tinhorns want to kill critically endangered animals for photos and bragging rights. Also, "tradition

Bishop Bell and the Dinosaur

Image
An annoyance for proponents of fish-to-fish warden evolutionists and other deep time enthusiasts are accounts of dragons in history . Remember, the word dinosaur had not been invented yet. The Bible also describes some critters that are only known to paleontology nowadays. After all, the Bible is a reliable history book. Spinophorosaurus image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Nobu Tamura ( CC BY 3.0 ) If you get a notion to head to England, then go north, you can find Carlisle Cathedral . (If you reach Lockerbie, you've passed it.) Why? Well, it's ancient, construction was begun in 1122. But for our purposes, there's the easily overlooked tomb of Bishop Richard Bell — it's under a rug in the floor. Etched in the brass are several critters, including some dinosaur-looking beasties. Long necks that look like they're dancing at a hootenanny, or maybe it's a bit of rasslin'. (I'm bringing that last one up because giraffes fight each other with their ne

Dinosaur Tissue Preservation and the Iron Maiden

Image
If you want to get the hands at the Darwin Ranch on the prod, just mention dinosaur soft tissues. This is because soft tissues in dinosaurs and other critters is a threat to old earth uniformitarianism. From there, particles-to-parasaurolophus evolution is severely inconvenienced. There are several articles on that subject here as well as other biblical creationist sites. Metallized triceratops profile derived from an image a Pixabay from  Dimitris Vetsikas Ever since Mary "Iron Maiden" Schweitzer got fame for herself because of dinosaur soft tissues, evolutionists at the Darwin Ranch have been running the excuse mill at full steam. (They don't even get overtime pay from their cheap bosses.) One of the premier excuses was formed by Schweitzer: iron as a preservative. Dr. Kevin Anderson was interviewed by Bob Enyart on Real Science Radio. (Dr. Anderson is one of the scientists in Is Genesis History? My review is here .) You see, Dr. Schweitzer reckons that iron i

Dinosaur Extinction and Chicxulub Revisited

Image
A common dogma perpetrated by the owlhoots at the Darwin Ranch is that a rock fell from space, smashed into the earth, and killed off the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. School children learn to repeat this as a mantra, but consensus, popular opinion, repetition, and those kinds of things do not make for science. Also, even though the asteroid impact thing is told as if all scientists are in agreement on this. That'll be the day! Artist impression of massive impact. Credit: NASA Goddard Creationist scientists reject the asteroid impact extinction concept for a number of reasons, especially because basic science and logic do not support it. This alleged impact at Chicxulub has a prairie schooner-full of problems, and further research shows that the whole thing smacks (heh!) of bad science. The truth is that everything was created recently, and dinosaur extinction is a result of the Genesis Flood, a concept that secularists reject because it doesn't fit their deep time

Dinosaurs Had No Evolutionary Past

Image
According to universal common descent evolution, everything has a lineage. When pressed for evidence of this, secularists will present stories, speculations, museum pieces based on speculations, and a passel of vague terms. When you cross-check these things with your Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Ring™, the answer is, "Ain't got a clue". Credit: Pixabay / Marek Jackowski The word has been out there, as a few secular scientists have admitted that there is no fossil history for dinosaur evolution. Biblical creationists have found a few of these reluctant confessions. A more significant, recent study has announced this same fact: no evidence of dinosaur evolution. Of course, they use some rescuing devices and circular reasoning to try to escape the fact that dinosaurs were recently created and not the product of millions of years of evolution. But those they are simply using the scientific principle of Making Things Up™ to salvage their narrative. via GIPHY

"Genesis: Paradise Lost" Movie Review

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen The idea of making Genesis: Paradise Lost dates back ten years. It  began in 2007 when Eric Hovind of Creation Today had a discussion with Ralph Strean, who would later become the director and a producer. They wanted to reach younger people with the truth of the gospel and its foundation in creation. After years of writing, CGI work, filming, and fund raisers, the project was completed and released in cinemas for one-night showings on November 13, 16, and December 11, 2017. Now it is available for the rest of us. This is the first part of a proposed trilogy, and is focused on the opening chapter of Genesis. Image courtesy of Creation Today "Did you say fundraisers, Cowboy Bob?" Yes, yes I did. After all, they don't have a $200-400 million USD budget like secular film studios have.The internet and its surly kid brother (social media) are conducive to many activities, including this kind. Several sites are established for these purposes

Dinosaur Soft Tissues and the Age of the Earth

Image
One of the biggest issues that gets proponents of universal common ancestor evolution and other old earth advocates on the prod is dinosaur soft tissues. Although soft tissues and such have been found previously, the work of Mary Schweitzer and microscopist Mark Armitage analyzing dinosaur blood and soft tissues really brought the subjects into prominence. Some evolutionists try to deny it, even saying that biblical creationists were misrepresenting the discoveries or outright lying. But the subject simply will not go away. Some of us won't let it. So, secularists and their religious useful idiots keep the excuse mill at the Darwin Ranch running at full steam. Compromiser Dr. Hugh Ross has a kind of cult following and some strange beliefs . He has an associate, Dr. Fazele Rana, who has written a book that is a thinly-veiled attack on biblical creation science. It may seem convincing, but Rana did poor research (none of it with the tissues in question under a microscope). He

Upside-Down Armored Dinosaurs

Image
Sometimes I get to cognating that perhaps ignoring pertinent information and doing incomplete work are included in the criteria for being an evolutionary biologist. Read back several posts, and you will find several egregious examples of these things. Rock strata image before my tampering by Jebulon at Wikimedia Commons In this instance, we have the ankylosaur fossils. You wouldn't cotton to having one of those beasties coming your way and making you think it's an M1A3 Abrams tank or something. So, why is it that most of their fossils are found upside down? Remember, we have fossils to work with, plus some evolution-defying soft tissues now and then. But no living specimens to weigh, measure, and otherwise examine. That doesn't stop some devotees of Hanuman the monkey god from offering praise to Darwin and presenting incomplete conjecture. One idea is the "bloat and float" concept. They drowned, bloated, inverted, got carried around by the water until th