Piltdown Superman

Out at the Darwin Ranch, Russell Watchtower of the Ministry of Truth and his pal Al Buehterawl were a mite giddy. Word has it that they were all excited about a new report on the horse evolution. Although the horse series has been touted as one of the best examples of evolution, it is full of difficulties . The flimsy story is something that biblical creationists have been using for many years as an example of interpreting data from a fundamentally-flawed presupposition, ignoring other possibilities for observed data, and just bad logic. But those old boys are thrilled that the mystery of the disappearing toes has been solved. Horse hoof, Pexels / Barbara Olsen Darwin's disciples selected candidates for the horse lineage from (among other things) size. They also claim that over time, the toes on the critters reduced until we have the single hoofed animal we see today. That has been a problem. Some evolutionists think that all four toes are still present, but vestigial. Hail Darwin,

This is the second of two installments, Part 1 is here . Several times, atheists and other evolutionists on teh interwebs attempt to wave off the Cambrian Explosion by downplaying its importance. One tinhorn challenged me by demanding to know why it is important, and how creationists deal with it. If they do not know its importance, they should not be apologists for evolution and deep time. But I think people like this enjoy attempting to put creationists on the defensive. It has been a major difficulty for many years, and efforts to solve the problem are doomed to failure. Life on Cambrian Miaolingian sea, WikiComm / Zhixin Sun et. al . ( CC BY 4.0 ), modified at PhotoFunia Note that in all of these things, evolutionists believe  despite  the evidence, and even resort to bad science and bad logic to protect Darwin from mean looks as he saunters down Evolution Street. They get downright deceptive. That's right, I said it!  No amount of tampering with data or reimagining it can cha

As discussed previously, the Cambrian Explosion is classified by secular scientists as happening over 10-25 million Darwin years. Animals with very different body plans are found, but there is no evidence of precursors . This has been a problem all the way back to Darwin, and evolutionists have been attempting to solve it ever since. There has been a great deal of recent news and noise by secularists presenting rescuing devices only to have them wither in the cold light of reason. Yes, some evolutionists want to cut through fake science. We have five articles, three today and two tomorrow, to consider. Diorama of the Burgess Shale Biota, Flickr / James St. John ( CC BY 2.0 ) Creationists know that the Cambrian Explosion is best explained by the Genesis Flood, but secularists reject that out of hand. Gotta have that naturalistic philosophy intact, you betcha! So we watch as evolutionists work on plans and others shoot them down. One was a speculation that the sudden increase in diversi

For some reason, I never thought Katy would, but katydid. Fossilize, that is. And this fossil is extremely detailed, unlike those ammonites and things we find in the river or quarry. There have been quite a few fossils found lately that are very intricate. This katydid fossil shows so much detail, it works against particles-to-paleontologist evolution: All of the minutiae are like their modern counterparts, so no evidence of evolution. We looked at the recurrent secular miracle of convergent evolution . Here is stasis , another popular miracle among Darwin's disciples. Katydid (Tettigoniidae), Flickr / Insects Unlocked (public domain) Evolutionists want things both ways, since evolution is a "fact" and pretty much like an irresistible force (except when it's an entity making choices and decisions), or there is stasis where organisms didn't change after millions of Darwin years. Paddlefish , sharks,   tunicates , alligators,  coelacanths , and many other critters

When the word Egypt is mentioned, several things can come to mind: Arid conditions, the Nile River, sand, Moses, God humiliating Pharaoh, a passel of whales  — wait, what? Sure. Things change over time. Indeed, the Sahara itself was once a nice place to go swimming . Whales in the desert are not easily explained by uniformitarian dogma. Indeed, the Valley of the Whales signage uses the ludicrous “dies and sinks to the bottom” boilerplate story for fossilization. In this case there are numerous whales as well as other creatures. Wadi Al-Hitan (Whale Valley), WikiComm / Guy Debonnet ( CC BY-SA 3.0 IGO ) To have numerous well-preserved fossils (scientists can see what some had for last meals), it takes a catastrophic event. Creation science models of the Genesis Flood provide far better explanations than secular Just-So Stories. In fact, Flood geology here goes beyond fossilization and explains landforms as well. In the grand scheme of evolution, the legs of land-based animals developed

My wife baked a trilobite pie the other day... Okay, it was really a pecan pie, but I immediately thought of trilobite fossils. Too bad those critters are extinct, and I would like it if some were found alive as living fossils . Those things fluster believers in molecules-to-musician evolution. Actually, trilobites also fluster evolutionists. Advances in technology show that they had amazing eyes and visual acuity . Trilobites are associated with the Cambrian Explosion , which is also a sore spot for secular scientists. "Trilobite pie," Flickr / Cowboy Bob Sorensen  ( CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 ) Secular paleontologists typically believe in slow 'n' gradual processes over millions of years that shaped today's landforms. Fossilization supposedly happened slowly as well, but that idea has been demonstrated to be ludicrous many times over. Because the evidence doesn't fit their narrative, some secular scientists are appealing to catastrophic events. Trilobite Fossils, Unsp

Over the years, I have featured several articles on the alleged transitional form, the ape with kaleidoscope eyes, commonly known as Lucy. Earnest evolutionists try to slap down biblical creationists and other Darwin doubters claiming the ape from afar ( Afar is far from here, anyway) with talking points. A big problem with popularized science is that folks get notions lodged in their craniums, but retractions and refutations are often ignored. Indeed, knowledgeable creationists often correct believers in universal common descent with the facts. A great deal of information about Lucy in the public mind is wrong. Modified photo by Wikimedia Commons /  Shalom ,  kaleidoscopes from Freeimages /  Frizzy Lee Those who insist in atoms-to-ape evolution frequently present A. afarensis as a link as if scientists were in complete agreement, which is false. Lucy is contested as a link between apes and humans, and the walking upright thing is also a source of disagreement. Its status is sketch

Added link about altering facts to fit views on 10 July 2023. As we have seen many times, people interpret evidence according to their worldviews. For example, an evolutionist can see a trilobite fossil and say that it is millions of years old, a biblical creationist uses the same evidence and interprets it as representing the Genesis Flood. Nobody is strictly neutral. Secular scientists are thought to be objective, following where the evidence leads, but that does not happen when the narrative is paramount. It is adjusted so Darwin's frown will turn upside down and people continue to be hoodwinked. Darwin Approves of Evoluton Fairy Tales, modified from Favourite French fairy tales / Barbara Douglas , 1921 In The Face of Evil , a 1977 "Dr. Who" story, The Doctor was given these words by writer Chris Boucher: You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common, they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views,

Some folks make a big deal out of saying that marine reptiles such as plesiosaurs, ichthyosaurs,  thalattosuchians , and so on were not dinosaurs. It is a classification thing, we get that, but no need for being fastuous about it. Moving on. Those water dinosaurs (I had to do that) — marine reptiles of dinosaur times cause consternation for secular paleontologists because a priori  presuppositions of evolution are not supported by evidence (see " Paleontologists Dodging Important Ichthyosaur Questions " for one example). Their research on locomotion is...interesting. Varieties of ichthyosaurs. WikiComm /  Nobu Tamura , compiled by Levi Bernardo ( CC BY 3.0 ) Darwin's disciples want to know how they evolved and adapted. Creation scientists argue from their own presuppositions and say that they did not evolve, and the evidence is nonexistent. Michael Benton said that scientists "know" some things, but how? Were they there ? Obviously not. This is a historical vie

In a way, it should not be surprising that a jellyfish was discovered way down in the deep blue sea — well, not so blue at such depths. More like black because light does not reach there. We have not explored the sea extensively because of darkness, pressure, temperatures, and more. We looked at how anemones are unfriendly to believers in descent with modifications evolution a while ago. They are so delicate, fossilization is rare. Jellyfish are also fragile and the proper conditions are necessary for fossilization. Jellyfish Atolla reynoldsi ,  NOAA ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ), modified at PhotoFunia The fossil record shows something that is unsurprising to biblical creationists: Jellyfish have always been jellyfish even after millions years in the conventional dating system. They were created to be what they are. Sure, there are varieties. But no sign of transitional forms in all that time. The eyes of the box jellyfish are baffling to secular scientists. Maybe A. reynoldsi  has some interes

Sea anemones are not helpful to evolution. These friends of clownfish did not fossilize easily, like their jellyfish cousins. Apparently anemone fossils are rarer than those of jellyfish. Like with so many other creatures, there is no sign of evolution in the fossil record. The old story of something dying and sinking, then getting covered up and eventually become permineralized into the fossils we all know and love is false, but secular dogma. That is why secular scientists are started by fossils of soft creatures, organs, and the like. Sea Anemone, Flickr / Bernard Spragg (public domain) For something to fossilize, it requires rapid burial. This provides the materials as well as the conditions lacking in the typical secular story. The overwhelming majority of the billions of fossils that were buried all around the globe are marine organisms. This easily indicates the Genesis Flood. Interestingly, secularists are also discussing rapid burial. Unsurprisingly, they do not mention the

Think of Them! , the 1954 movie where atomic blasts caused ants to mutate into giants that ate people. Excellent science documentary. Well, except for the fact that mutations do not work that way at all, and it is impossible for ants to get that big . Relatively speaking, ancient ants and other creatures were giants in comparison to those living today. There were ants called  Titanomyrma by paleontologists, comparable in size to a small wren. Secular scientists saw their fossils in various places, but their arrival in Canada did not fit their paradigm. Titanomyrma gigantea , Wikimedia Commons / Ghedoghedo ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) A Titanomyrma  fossil was found in Canada caused no small difficulty to secular scientists, such as how they crossed continents during cold times. Some weird speculations were proposed, but no go. If scientists would tear down the Darwin Wall and consider creation science Genesis Flood models, they would not need to evosplain things with nonsense. Evolutionary scie

President Ronald Reagan said, “It isn’t so much that liberals are ignorant. It’s just that they know so many things that aren’t so.” Similarly, Darwinists believe a lot of things that aren't so — and that they made up themselves. Consider  Cratonavis zhui . No, it is not a menu item. Secular scientists have problems with placing dinosaurs (see " Strange Dinosaur Classification is Strange " for one example). Now we have yet another Archaeopteryx to become a failed transitional form between dinosaurs and birds. Dinosaur bird thing via PxHere I'll allow that they have reasons for their confusion, but they are viewing through their Darwin spectacles instead of being as objective as they should be. Evolutionists often use viciously circular reasoning by assuming evolution to prove evolution, and C. zhui  has features that are similar to dinosaurs. It supposedly has a dinosaur head and a birdlike body There are several reasons to reject this as an example of evolution. In J

Sometimes people knock ants off flowers because they think they are intrusive. But that is like bursting into the home of someone and chasing out visitors, only to learn that the visitors were invited guests. Many times, ants and flowers have a mutually-beneficial relationship: Plants provide shelter and nutrients, ants disperse seeds and help defend the plants. Besides, ants like to climb things. Charlie Darwin and his followers have long insisted that flowers and plants evolved together, but they have no evidence. Flower with ants, Pixabay / wal_172619 When checking the fossil record, ants have always been ants. Sorry, Charlie, no transitional forms or signs of a common ancestor. Biblical kinds  of ants are found ( kinds  are close to the  family  classification in biology), but secularists will not consider that. I gave Chuck a floral wreath at  PhotoFunia In addition to the lack of transitional forms in the fossil CD — I mean, record — the Bearded Buddha lamented the  abominable my

The short article featured below uses an analogy of finding a smartphone in a coffin with an Egyptian mummy, and how people would naturally think of shenanigans. After watching some so-called scary videos, people express truly bizarre opinions: Some would say that the device is proof of time travel . There are things found in paleontology that are just as strange to believers in deep time, but are numerous and cannot be dismissed as one-off anomalies. When soft tissues were found in fossils (not just impressions), some people denied their existence. Turtle Fossil, Wikimedia Commons / Daderot ( CC0 1.0 ) Soft tissues, biomolecules, and other things kind of give the world a teenage look — certainly not a senior citizen appearance. The latest entry in the list are bone cells, proteins and blood vessels from a turtle. There are too many soft tissues to dismiss, and secular scientists are looking for ways to explain how short-lived materials can exist after millions of Darwin years . They

Before the predominance of profanity, people would sternly warn someone not to give them any lip. Basically it meant not to be disrespectful, but could also mean to stop talking, or other things. Or get mouthy. Tyrannosaurus rex has been portrayed as giving lip. It may be literal. Like so many other things in paleontology, further studies result in rethinking how critters looked and sometimes how they acted. After examining bones and teeth, some paleontologists think that T. rex may have had lips. T. rex with lips image generated with AI at Bing I told the AI art generator to give it human lips because reasons and stuff. Lizard lips to go with lizard hips... Interesting that it took decades for people to catch on to the idea of dinosaurs having lips, since lips are useful. It is an interesting development in paleontology, but there's no way of knowing if the idea is right — unless an exceptionally well-preserved fossil or mummified body was found. That may not be such a surprise th

A fundamental tenet of universal common descent evolution is that humans evolved from fish, and ultimately, from minerals. There had to be creatures evolving limbs from fins, and  Tiktaalik roseae got evolutionists all het up, but that was a failure . Other critters supposedly evolved from land back into the water, and the Thalattosuchia are considered candidates for that as well. Here we get into word salad, where they are referred to as marine crocodiles, but are not classified with crocodilia. Whatever. Thalats and such were crocodile relatives, then. Saltwater Crocodile, Flickr / Bernard Dupont ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) Just like the original transition from water to land, there is no evidence of moving from land to water. Some evolutionists got a notion to use computed tomography, and they think they found a confirmation for their biases. Their article used the complex scientific principle of Making Things Up™ in lieu of evidence. Sure is a great deal of time, money, education, and more

My friend Hammond Suisse was talking to some of the hands from the Darwin Ranch in town, and there were a mite glum because of recent reports on fish lizards (ichthyosaurs). They knew that the narrative about evolving and re-evolving did not hold water. Now this. Despite claims of fundamentalist evolutionists, there are fossils out of sequence. Since there is no reasonable evidence for the evolution of those extinct marine lizards, one owlhoot came up with the idea that they evolved in bursts . Now there is an ichthyosaur fossil in the wrong place. Ichthyosaur, Copyright Expired Science Illustrations /  Heinrich Harder , 1916 Way up yonder, north of Norway, is an island called Spitsbergen. The source of the consternation was found there. No signs of evolution, this monster (some of these wet dinosaur cousins were huge ) was fully formed and in rocks that are dated by secularists as 250 million years old. That is too old for the evolutionary scenario, but right in keeping with the fact

Trilobites have long been an icon of evolution (Russell Watchtower at the Darwin Ranch has a big 3D picture of one on his wall), but trilobites do not support it. The more scientists study them, the more they learn things that testify of creation and oppose Darwinism. We saw before that trilobites had exceptional optics , and there is a new development: median eyes, common arthropods. It was long thought that trilobites did not have them. Very useful for sensing objects while critters are moving. This discovery is inconvenient for evolutionary dogma. Trilobite, US Dept / Interior, BLM (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) For a long time, it was believed that these critters didn't have the extra eye part. The reasons given for why the discovery was late are, well, plausible. Ocelli (median eyes) were put in place from the beginning by the Creator, and evolutionists cannot say they "emerged" or "developed" later. Oopsie! The propaganda mill was put

Back when Darwin roamed the earth, he called the ginkgo a living fossil. Some organisms with that moniker disappeared from the fossil record, then were found alive and well ( such as the coelacanth ). Others have remained essentially unchanged over alleged millions of years when compared to their fossils. A frequent rescuing device when something remains unchanged is stasis : It had no need to evolve. To be blunt, that is a stupid excuse because a lot can happen over all those years. No, one reason it did not change is because the earth is not as old as evolutionists claim. Gingko leaves in autumn, Wikimedia Commons /  Joe Schneid  ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) Moving on from the living fossil aspect, people can easily find ginkgo biloba supplements in "natural" food stores and in vitamin sections of stores. Like with many health benefit claims, those not fully researched . Coordinated international research would be nice. Ginkgo is a large, hearty tree. It also has a large genome — bigge