Piltdown Superman

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen People who pay attention to the origins debate are likely to have noticed that Darwinism advocates, especially on the web, are exceptionally passionate. Many of these folks really get on the prod if someone dares to write, speak, or even whisper words of doubt about evolution. This is hypocritical, as the same people often claim that they want "tolerance" and "discourse", but have no tolerance of those who reject any or all of materialistic evolution; so-called "freethinkers" often oppose people who think in a manner for which they disapprove. Credit: Freeimages / hamidreza ahmadi For that matter, Charles Darwin said in Origin , " A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts  and arguments on both sides of each question; and this cannot possibly be  here done". However, he apparently did not have any intention of discourse with people who doubted his conjectures. Instead, it was appare

People have been attempting to find, or at least determine, the location of Eden. They want to saddle up and ride over to the Garden of Eden, but they are going to have a long trip for many reasons. For one thing, the garden was in  Eden (Gen. 2:8), and Eden itself was a special place on Earth. The Garden of Eden , Thomas Cole, 1828 You may be asking yourself why it would be so difficult to find Eden, since there are significant clues in Genesis. Notice that the description in Gen. 2:10-14 names the rivers in the present tense? Many creationists believe that several people wrote Genesis , and those were preserved by God until the Holy Spirit guided Moses to compile them. The usual explanation offered by biblical creationists regarding the impossibility of finding Eden is that the global Genesis Flood was catastrophic, and nothing would remain. Some people who are ignorant of the effects of the Flood use the names in Genesis as markers, but descendants of Noah would have likely n

Although archaeologists and geneticists tend to get along like farmers and cattle barons in the Old West, there are times when their work can have an uneasy truce. There was an ancient group known by an unflattering name. Do the Beaker  people ring a bell? Actually, it's worse: Bell Beaker.  Although they migrated and did some conquering along the way (and displaced 90 percent of the Britons), they are known for their pottery . While pottery is important to archaeologists, it also raises questions about travel, cultural assimilation, borrowing styles, trade, and so on. Credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Thomas Ihle  ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) Was there only one Beaker culture that did all that traveling and raising hob? There are examples of their pottery in diverse areas, and genetic research seems to support that there were two Beaker groups. While the secular study plugged in the standard ages of man from evolutionary to prop up the deep-time narrative, they did mine some important infor

It may come as a shock to some people in postmodern Western cultures, but males and females are indeed different. Most people have known this for millennia. (This cowboy is glad for the differences. Occasionally sad, but mostly glad.) Unfortunately, there are logic and science deniers who not only enable those who are mentally ill, but make a profit with " gender reassignment " surgeries and such. Mostly made at Break Your Own News God made two sexes (Gen. 1:27, Mark 10:6). That's it. His plan for marriage was one man and one woman to be joined for life. Our sex is determined before  birth through genetic and epigenetic activities, chromosomes and stuff that are far too difficult for evolutionists to explain. When we fill out medical forms, the checkbox for your sex is not simply a matter of statistics, but for medical purposes; men and women react to medications differently, for example. Sleep cycles, motor skills, and other differences are clearly evidence, despi

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

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen There have been a few biblical creation science movies made lately that have been released in cinemas. Those have been through special arrangements for one night only, but audiences have received them enthusiastically, and there are occasional extra showings added. Unfortunately, they have not been in locations where I can attend, so I have to wait for the videos to be released. One of these was Is Genesis History?, first shown in the United States on February 23, 2017. DVD cover from Is Genesis History? The short description: More than a Documentary The film is the first step on a journey toward understanding the history of the Earth according to Genesis. Follow Del Tackett as he travels across the continent with over a dozen scientists and scholars to see fascinating new evidence for creation and a global flood. I was able to rent a streaming version of the video and watch it on the television through our Roku device, and I regret not watching it

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Several months ago, I read and reviewed Noah: Man of Destiny , by Tim Chaffey and K. Marie Adams. Just before Christmas, I was pleasantly surprised that Noah: Man of Resolve was one of the e-books on sale at Answers in Genesis, so I grabbed it. I'm telling you how I obtained my copy so you know that I purchased both books and was not given promotional copies or anything. The publisher and authors probably do not even know that I exist, let alone that I am writing reviews. It has been made clear that this is a trilogy, as seen in part of the name, "The Remnant Trilogy". (See how that works?) I suspicion that all three  were written as one large book and then separated into sections. I'm thinking that because the authors don't have continuity errors from book one to book two, which are more likely to happen when authors spend a lot of time off in their writing. Also, books one and two have "a glimpse of" preview of the next book

Scientists who are involved in biology disagree on the definition of species. Sometimes this happens with individual critters, but the broader use of the term is also disputed. It is the lowest ranking in taxonomy below genus, most often defined as organisms that can mate to produce fertile offspring . Doesn't always work that way, however. Liger at the Novosibirsk Zoo / Wikimedia Commons / Алексей Шилин We hear about hybrids, often in the plant kingdom. Animal hybrids usually cannot reproduce, and one of the most famous examples is the mule, from a male donkey and female horse. There are other hybrid animals as well. Darwin's imaginary "Tree of Life" gets its branches all tangled up with species interbreeding, and sometimes, the hybrids can breed with the parents, creating havoc for scientists at the genus level. It may be slightly less surprising when the matings happen in captivity, but they happen in the wild as well. Materialists like to reject any cons

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen After all the reading and MP3 listening that I do, it was nice to read a work of fiction for a change. Noah: Man of Destiny by Tim Chaffey and K. Marie Adams is the first book of The Remnant Trilogy. Seems like whenever you get the first book of a series, it is not self-contained and you want to continue — if it's good. This child liked the book and wants to keep going. Disclaimer: none. I bought this book all by my lonesome. Nobody gave me a promotional copy or anything like that. I guess some legal-type people want to know about such things. I'd be open to receiving promotional copies of the next two books, unsubtle hint, wink wink nudge nudge. I did not review this on Amazon where I purchased the ebook because they allow trolls to run free and attack other reviewers. Especially creationists. Also, Christian and creationist material on there is frequently attacked by people who cannot even be bothered to read it. This happens frequently, so I&

There's a prairie schooner-full of legends about creation, the global deluge, humanity's dispersal, and a heap of other things. Skeptical scholars tend to presuppose that the Biblical record of history, especially the early chapters of Genesis, is not the written Word of God. To do this, they need to make a number of assumptions and ignore important details. Something I reckon is a big stumbling block is the dating of the manuscripts. Some tinhorns will be on the prod and say, "Those ancient documents were dated as being hundreds of years older than Moses supposedly lived". We've seen how dating methods can be inaccurate, and it also raises questions regarding which manuscripts were dated, and what dating procedures were used. People will also look at the similarities of the documents and, based on their presumptions and biases against the biblical manuscripts, assume that Genesis was copied by the Hebrews from other peoples' myths. Something they need

It is not uncommon for atheists to use selective citing from the Bible, cherry-pick incomplete or utterly false "facts" attributed to history, and a wagon train-full of dreadful reasoning in their efforts to claim that the Bible is untrustworthy. Then they cheer their own brilliance, which is merely justification of their rebellion against our Creator.  One method is to find some similarities between ancient Near East texts and the book of Genesis, and then claim that Genesis took its inspiration from pagan sources. While there are some similarities, there are also very distinct differences that show how Genesis is unique. Those get ignored to preserve the narrative and reach the conclusion that Adam did not even exist. No need to do thorough research or logical thinking, or consider that the ANE texts were inspired by true history (which is found in Genesis), then corrupted in other texts. See how that works? Unfortunately, there are liberal "Christian" owlh

When you're going to drain a swamp, you have a pretty good idea about where the water is going to go. Things are mighty different when draining a flooded planet. Believers, mockers, and inquirers want to know where all that water went when the Genesis Flood was done with and the Ark settled on the mountains of Ararat. I'll allow that it's a fair question, and it seems common. God pulled a giant drain plug at the bottom of the ocean — "Quit playing, Cowboy Bob!" Well, it is a kind of funny picture. The answer is actually simple — at first. The mountains rose, the ocean floors went downward. Water ran off the continents and formed the oceans. Now, I have a skeptical nature, and I don't want to present you with something that seems to be pious assertions. While the Bible is inerrant, models from creationists, evolutionists, or whomever else are not above reproach. Is there evidence to support the Genesis Flood model? Mt. Everest from space image credit:

For me, stargazing is a wondrous thing, but I'm not good with constellations. F'rinstance, I don't get seeing Cassiopeia on her throne, just a kind of W shape. That one over there, a scorpion, you say? Not happening for this child, sorry. Odd that I can see figures in clouds but not in constellations. Especially on a clear night, there's all kinds of other stars making it hard to pick out the ones in the constellation. Big dipper (or "plough")? Yes, I can see that. And the little one, too. No, I don't see the Great Bear in it. Oh look, a shooting star! Starry Night over the Rhone , Vincent van Gogh, 1888 Those constellations have some mighty fanciful tales associated with them, don't they? What people may not know is that the same basic story is found in diverse areas of the globe, in different cultures. How is that? Getting into the history of constellations, star maps, and the biblical timeline, looks like this may help support the Genesis disp

How could Adam have named all the animals? I'll allow it's a fair question, but scoffers and under-informed Christians seem to read Genesis 2:19, then use the modern definition of species, see that modern taxonomy has millions of them, and assume it either didn't happen or was simply an allegory. Nobody could have that much time, even the "very good" newly-created man, they might say. Adam Naming the Animals, Theophanes of Crete , Wikimedia Commons Of course, it would help if they read a mite further to Genesis 2:20 and they would see that he gave names to livestock, beasts of the field, and birds. (Reading things in context is a good way to guard yourself against false teachings in general.) That rules out a whole passel of species right there. But what really went on? A bit of science as well as Scripture puts things into perspective. How could Adam have named millions of different species on Day 6 if it was only 24 hours? This is a common objection to

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen As discussed here several times, proponents of microbes-to-metallurgist evolution have a mighty dim view of our ancestors. Evolutionists see them as brutish creatures that had been more like ape than man, with intelligence yet to evolve. Of course, this is all based on evolutionary presuppositions and assumptions, not on evidence. (I wonder how many further assumptions were made in formulating the so-called " Paleo Diet "?) But when evolutionist try to slap leather with biblical creationists, they shoot themselves in the foot — nothing more humiliating than being shot with your own gun, but figuratively, that happens to them all the time. I'm saying that  even according to evolutionary "evidence", archaic humans such as Neanderthals showed remarkable intelligence and culture. This is a mite disconcerting to Darwinists, to say the least. De "Weinig" Toren van Babel  by Pieter Bruegel the Elder, 1563 It's been said