Piltdown Superman

Proponents of particles-to-poultry evolution have an unpleasant habit of seeing things that they want  to see — even though there's nothing there to see. We keep seeing announcements about some or other"discovery" supporting evolution, only to find out that evolutionists saddled up the wrong horse again. Funny how the retractions don't get nearly as much press as the original objects of excitement, isn't it? Modified Piltdown Gang  by John Cooke (1915) with image from openclipart The most notorious example of seeing what isn't there is probably the Piltdown Man fraud. That sidewinder fooled much of the scientific establishment for over forty years! Somewhat less famous was another fraud, Archaeoraptor . When this one was discovered, it was dubbed the "Piltdown Chicken". Something they have in common is that materialists were so intent on making the Creator irrelevant that they believed lies. (Perhaps they rush into believing nonsense because...

Creationists frequently encounter atheopaths and other Darwinistas who make inane demands resembling, "Show me just one peer-reviewed creationist paper!" You can tell up front that they don't want answers, otherwise, they'd be doing their own research and finding out that yes, creationists are indeed published in noted journals. (I recently gave one tinhorn a link to " Creationist Scientists and Journal Publication ", but he preferred to make childish attacks and refused to click on it. I reckon some people don't want answers.) Many folks expect that peer review is a guarantee of accuracy, and that something is established science if it undergoes peer review. Not hardly! Modified from an image at Clker clipart Creationary scientists have their own peer review systems and seek to honor God as well as strive for excellence in the process. Although all scientists are human after all, secularists seem more prone to plagiarism, misconduct, fraud, bias,...

Interesting that there's a whole heap of fossils in the Jehol Group (northeast China), and that seems to be the biggest source of alleged bird-to-dinosaur transitional forms. Lots of nice sedimentary rock to find things in, and then they commence to re-dating the layers when the fossils don't fit their paradigms. Have you noticed that Darwinistas don't let the facts get in the way of a one-sided propaganda rant? Those owlhoots don't just cherry-pick the data, they move entire cherry trees of data! Re-dating, a flock of fake fossils ( notably, Archaeoraptor ), secular scientists who think the whole dino-to-bird thing is garbage, evidence that interferes with their own theories — yep, the future is bleak for evolutionists. So, they deal from the bottom of the deck so they can claim they have the winning hand. Ain't happening. Creation still wins. In recent years the Jehol Group of China has provided evidence of catastrophic burial that contradicts curren...

The Evo Sith will argue from their worldview, we get that. Many are committed to naturalism, and reject any possibility that they are accountable to our Creator. Recent creation? Global Genesis Flood? Easier to teach a sidewinder to herd cats than to get many of these folks to even consider the possibilities. When they rely on evolutionary thinking, it shouldn't come as a surprise that they hide cards and deal from the bottom of the deck to not only promote their own careers, but to convince people that their paradigm is pristine and proper. It's survival of the fittest, isn't it? We shouldn't be surprised at all the storytelling and outright bad science used in the promotion of evolutionism, nor should be be surprised when fraud is involved. (Many people say that Piltdown Man was a "hoax", but I insist it was a fraud, and fooled many people for about 40 years.) But aren't scientists above such unconscionable acts? Not hardly! They're sinful hu...

A long, long, time ago, on a continent far, far away, a scientific expedition met its demise. In addition to trying to reach the South Pole, the Scott expedition wanted to prove Darwinian evolution by observing Haeckel's "law of recapitulation" in action with Emperor penguin eggs. Emperor Penguins / Photo credit: Dr. Paul Panganis , National Science Foundation Looks like the telegraph lines were down, because they were apparently unaware that Haecke's embryo drawings were known to be faked . The "law of recapitulation" was never true . Still, the expedition found out for themselves that recapitulation doesn't work. That's because there is no particles-to-penguin evolution, the facts support creation. During January–March 1912, Captain Robert Scott and four other optimistic members of the British Antarctic Terra Nova Expedition braved the bitter-cold summer weather of Antarctica’s Ross Ice Sheet, hoping to be the first to discover the South ...

There are people who insist that bacteria-to-blogger evolution is a fact . Most are deceived by the word games of evolutionists, redefining small changes as evolution when they're nothing of the sort. In addition, sloppy science practices lead to improper allegations of "proof" of evolution, and scientists themselves are often so locked into their worldviews that they are susceptible to fraud. " Piltdown Gang " by John Cooke, 1915 / Public Domain / modified One of the greatest frauds (generously referred to as a "hoax") in evolutionary history was truly super. "Piltdown Man" fooled much of the scientific establishment from 1912 until 1953. "Nebraska Man" was foolishness where that character, his family, environment, and so on were constructed from a single tooth — and that tooth turned out to be that of a pig that was extinct in the area! These, and more "proofs" of human evolution can be found, with supporting lin...

We expect Darwinists to argue from their worldviews, everyone does that. But when they commence to stating opinions based on their philosophical precommitments as scientific facts, that's over the line. Many evolutionists insist that dinosaurs evolved into birds  despite  contrary scientific evidence. Their rampant speculations have caused them a heapin' helpin' of trouble several times in the past (such as  Archaeoraptor, the fraud from Liaoning, China ). They're setting themselves up for another possible fall again. A good fossil that they called Zhenyuanlong has been found, so scientists and their sensationalistic press are stampeding to make wild-eyed claims of a feathered velociraptor. There are several problems with the scenario, including the fact that it came from fossil Souvenir Central in (wait for it) Liaoning, China. Lots of fake fossils come from China. The origins of this one are suspicious, and scientists are not in unison that it's a feathere...

Back on May 6, 2014, I posted about " Faking the Fossil Whales ". The subject was how Dr. Carl Werner documented altered whale fossils that were sold to museums, and the admission to altering was made in a video. Naturally, this generated heat from some owlhoots who were protecting their religion of evolutionism. After all, whale evolution is supposedly well documented — if you call storytelling from bits and pieces "documentation". I was attacked, Dr. Werner and radio show host Bob Enyart were impugned as well; it's a mite irritating to be called a liar by liars in the course of their lying. Rodhocetus  skull at University of Michigan Museum of Natural History / Wikimedia Commons / ellenm1 Some tinhorn came out of the gate with libelous accusations, and claimed that he had corresponded with Phil Gingerich, one of the people Dr. Werner interviewed on his video. Gingerich allegedly wrote in part, "I have been criticized for speculating that Rodhocet...

Unlike operational science that we use every day, spores-to-special-agents evolution is forensic (historical) science . Crime scene investigation attempts to reconstruct the past by finding evidence, interviewing witnesses, and so on so they can have present it in court. Evolution speculates about the distant past with no witnesses and very little evidence. For that matter, creation science is also forensic in nature, but has the foundation in the Bible, not in naturalism like most evolutionists use. Image Credit: Bureau of Labor Statistics Peer review is a process where papers are submitted and, like the name says, reviewed by peers. Creationists have peer review along with their secular counterparts. However, secular peer review is loaded problems , including recalled papers, bias, bad science, and even fraud . The biggest problem seems to be that secular peer review is driven by agendas. An ostensibly good process can put a burr under everyone's saddle when human avaric...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Edited 24 June 2024 In yesterday's post, points were made that atheists and evolutionists blatantly misrepresent the biblical creationist position  in their efforts to control education. They present evolution as indisputable scientific truth. One of the main problems with this is that people will simply accept such statements as accurate, and then expect creationists to defend positions that we do not hold. Educators present only the good side of evolution, often including (sometimes from ignorance) outdated and inaccurate information from textbooks . Indeed, some textbooks also contain fraudulent material . Creation science and Intelligent Design materials are actively suppressed, and evolution is sometimes required to be presented with no contrary information . Add this indoctrination to the additional problems that people tend to "think" with their emotions, and that students are not taught to think critically. Then we have Darwinoid...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  EDIT: Please also read this related, more recent article, " Faker Alert for Facebook ". Enemies of creation science are not content to deal with the topics. Instead, they want to "protect" what they call "science" (which includes equivocating "science" with "evolution"), attempt to outlaw the its teaching in schools , misrepresentation, ridicule and other ways to silence us. In addition, they use other nefarious tricks. Earlier today, I helped sound an alarm about fake Facebook accounts impersonating Creation Ministries International and Dr. Jonathan Sarfati (which have since been removed after action from CMI). This is nothing new, since there are often warnings made about impersonations of Ken Ham, Eric Hovind, Ray Comfort and other Christians and creationists. (It happens to "regular" people and ministries as well as the "big names".) Atheists and evolutionists are not content to ...

It has been said here several times that scientists are people. They have biases, errors, carelessness, and are prone to avarice like other people. Perhaps more so, since they wish to promote their perceptions of truth from their worldview. Secular scientists have more pressures, because they are trying to get the "next big thing" to bolster evolutionism and get that funding money. Pixabay / WikiImages Many people have idealized and unfair concepts of scientists. They see them as working strictly from the facts and will "follow where the evidence leads. Sure, many try to be objective and seek scientific truth, but secularists start from fundamentally flawed presuppositions. Not only incapable of logical thinking, but placing scientists on a ridiculous pedestal. If people did their homework, they would learn that scientists have been reluctant to admit the truth, committed outright fraud, allowed false conclusions to run unchecked (then blame the science...

The Evo Sith tell creationists to go to a natural science museum, maybe we'll learn the truth about evolution. However, a great deal of "artistic license" occurs since so many fossils and skeletons are extremely incomplete. More than that, there is dishonesty in museums . But the problem is big. Very big. Gray Whale / Wikimedia Commons / doryfour Evolution is bolstered primarily by ideology and a faulty worldview, not by actual science. This is shown by the repeated instance of recalled papers, biased peer review and even fraud. Here, we have the big news that scientists who supply museums with alleged fossils admit that they are fake. Creationist do not have to resort to such tactics. Ironic, since they accuse us of being irrational, rejecting evidence and believing on blind faith. Bob Enyart speaks with Dr. Carl Werner about the filmmaker's interviews with the scientists who supplied the primary whale evolution "fossils" to the world's lea...

The public has an idealized concept of scientists as being dispassionate, willing to follow where the evidence leads, unbiased — you know, not really human. They may not even want to be on the pedestal that some people put them upon. In fact, they have the same ambitions, moral failings and even biases just like us reg'lar folk. Quite likely, even more so.  The worldviews of evolutionary scientists compels them to promote their own dogma. It is fine to deceive students because the end (belief in evolution) justifies the means. Darwin's Cheerleaders are willing to troll, libel, defame, and use bad logic. Not surprising, really, since many scientists and especially their press are setting examples with poor reasoning. There should be no reason to criticize them for fraud and other shenanigans such as tampering with the data or telling "stories". Survival of the fittest is a part of evolutionary theory, remember? They are being consistent with their worldview. ...

People say that "science corrects itself". (But "science" is not an entity, so right away, they are guilty of the fallacy of reification .) This is not completely true. When it comes to evolutionism, proponents will resort to various tricks to keep their worldview going despite the evidence. There are anti-creationists who insist that creationists (especially biblical creationists) are "liars" and "fact deniers". Their basis for such accusations? It is primarily because we do not believe in the atheistic, old-earth, evolutionary interpretations of the evidence. Further, we promote evidence that refutes evolution and affirms a young earth. This is contrary to the spirit of scientific inquiry. Interestingly, those who call us "liars" are guilty of blatant hypocrisy, promoting not only bad science, carelessness (by people who should know better), deception and even outright fraud. Worse than this, shoddy research and dishonest pron...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Like many people even today, you may have been shown the 1960 movie Inherit the Wind, based on the 1955 play by the same name. Although it claims to be fiction, historical facts from the 1925 Scopes "Monkey" Trial are mixed in, making it appear to be historically reliable . In fact, Inherit the Wind is highly misleading, but used in education. Kirk Hastings gave some interesting comments and comparisons between fact and fantasy in Part XIII of his book What is Truth? For those of you who do not have that book handy, I have some links available for you. How much do you actually know about the events of the Scopes trial? Take the quiz . People "know" about the trial from Inherit the Wind, but the facts are radically different from the "docudrama". It has even deceived Christians who draw upon it as source material for a Bible study ! People should check out the facts before letting movies influence their beliefs. Cl...

Do evolutionists draw inspiration from zombie and vampire movies? I ask this because they keep bringing back some concepts that should stay properly dead. Haeckel's drawings, for example. For one thing, they have been proven to be outright fraud . But what do bad science and fraud matter when the priority is to get people to believe in evolution? So they dig up Haeckel's fake stuff again, give it a haircut, shiny shoes and new suit of clothes, and present the repackaged lies . The situation is grave.