Piltdown Superman

Some of the hands at the Darwin Ranch were having a party over yonder by Stinking Lake (which is not as bad as it sounds). It seems that they had received good news that their efforts to promote convergent evolution were progressing. Papa Darwin himself would be riding over to visit. Al Buehterawl noticed that I rolled my eyes and kind of snorted, so he took a deep breath and demanded to know why I had an attitude problem. I explained that convergent evolution is unscientific, based on circular reasoning, assumptions, and consensus. Charles Darwin as a cowboy on a horse, made with Img2Go Darwinism itself is an excuse to perform lazy scientific thinking , and convergent evolution ramps it up. Different critters have the same or very similar traits, bones, or whatever, but nothing else in common. They are not biologically related. Therefore, each evolved the same things independently. To be blunt, that is stupid. Homology is classifying things according to appearance and traits, and it i

Over at Evolution News and Science Today , an Intelligent Design site operated by the Discovery Institute, Alfred Russel Wallace is receiving a great deal of attention in his bicentennial year. Professor Michael A. Flannery has written a book and several articles about Wallace. A spell back, I wrote about whether or not we would have evolutionary theory if Charles Darwin had never been born . Since evolution is ancient, it would have been assembled and popularized in a "scientific" format. Alfie almost did that, but Charlie got to the publisher first. Alfred Russel Wallace, ca. 1865 A.F. Wallace did quite a bit of science, but he was eclipsed by Darwin . A problem for him both then and now is that he dabbled in many areas, some of which seemed frivolous. Wallace seemed like an interesting individual. But the Bearded Buddha focused on his own specific areas, which was apparently applauded instead of the multi-faceted aspects of Alfred. Also, Wallace was a kind of forerunner of

Sebastian the latrine digger at the Darwin Ranch (up yonder by Deception Pass) had cleaned himself up nicely and rode into town on payday. I happened across him at an eatery, and we had a nice lunch together. Conversation meandered, and he displayed a great deal of knowledge about cowboy life. He told me that the heyday of Texas-to-Kansas cattle drives ended long ago, but the need for horse-mounted livestock herders exists in many parts of the world — even in present times. We talked about how South American vaqueros and gauchos educated American cowboys, and I wondered why bolas never caught on here — but the bolas spider has that skill perfected. Bolas spider, Flickr / Judy Gallagher ( CC BY 2.0 ) To be blunt, these tiny spiders are ugly, making it a mite difficult to appreciate their interesting talent. A gaucho could twirl a bola (a cord with two or three balls or rocks for weight) and fling it at an animal, entangling its legs and bringing it down. Night-hunting bola spiders pref

We looked at how people suppress the truth about evidence for the Creator , now we will see an example of how ridiculous these efforts can be. Indeed, using evolution as a vague means of explanation is just an excuse for lazy thinking . Claiming to have examples of and proof for evolution is a good way to get the grant money flowing in. Consider flight, for example. As we have seen, Darwin's acolytes tend to ignore important material in their rush to claim victory for evolution. Mosquito, CDC / James Gathany (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Flight involves specified complexity. No problem, an alleged researcher can just shout down the questions by citing evolution repeatedly. Also, promise to explain how something evolved, but don't deliver. True believers will not notice. New PhD grad Jeff Gau puts on his Darwin-tinted glasses and announces, “We’re looking back 400 million years into how ancient insect muscles must have behaved from an evolutionary standpoi

Somewhere around 56 AD, Paul wrote the Epistle to the Romans. Presuppositional apologists such as this child frequently refer to Romans 1:18-23 which explains that evidence for God is obvious to everyone. They are without excuse, choosing to unrighteously suppress the truth. As I have stated before, science and technology progress and humanity discovers all sorts of things that testify of the Creator. These can be in the deepest parts of space or found under high-powered microscopes. Scientists are realizing that organisms appear to be engineered. Ribosome mRNA, Wikimedia Commons / LadyofHats (PD) When someone in the secular science industry uses words that even hint at design and creation, it's "Katie, bar the door!" time. They want the praise to go to evolution. Someone will say that things appear  to be designed but they really are not. That is a theological opinion, old son, not science. Indeed, some are skittish about discussing biological machines  because those ar

While box jellyfish are notorious for having painful or even lethal stings from their tentacles, this one is harmless to humans. Mayhaps it is because they are so tiny. These little fellas are north of South America and the Caribbean Sea around mangroves. They swim vigorously near the surface. One would not expect anything interesting out of these brainless creatures, but the Creator shows his design skill in even the tiniest organisms. These box jellies have a complex nerve system. Researchers were amazed that they showed associative learning, not just reflexive responses. Box jellyfish, iNaturalist / snigdhasehgal ( CC BY-NC 4.0 ) Of course, foolish scientists gave praise to Darwin and made up some unsupportable speculations about the "dawn of the evolution of the nervous system," since we're all related. Because evolution. Even with all the evidence of creation and design in extreme details, Darwin's acolytes still refuse to give glory to God for what they discove

In India and that area, extending into Southeast Asia and Northern Australia, is a genus of ten species called archerfish. Quite a range for a small group. Most are about the size of an adult human's hand, but one doubles that. What is interesting about them is how they get food. When people swim, they often play by getting a mouthful of water, compressing, and squirting out a stream for a few seconds. Not very powerful or accurate. The archerfish does something similar, but with great force and accuracy. Archerfish, Flickr / Feline Groovy ( CC BY-ND 2.0 ) There are many factors in play, including principles of sciences, that make this water jet ability even more amazing. Consider how it sees its perching insect target and accurately blasts it into the water — and has calculated where lunch will land, so it is there before it escapes. Speaking of jet, biomimetics gets involved, as people are studying the archerfish for (wait for it) inkjet printing. Once again, we see the brillian

As discussed on several occasions, biblical creationists use irreducible complexity arguments. These have been in use before Michael Behe coined the term. It essentially means that all the parts in certain organisms or devices must be in place at the same time or nothing makes sense. Zebrafish are a favorite of aquarists, and scientists like using them for study. Interesting new research startled some believers in descent with modifications evolution. A form of irreducible complexity was seen, but it happened in a different way! Zebra danio, Flickr / Bob Jenkins ( CC BY 2.0 ) Their hearts start early — too early to fit evolutionary ideas. The rest of the circulatory system has not been developed, but hearts seem to be enthusiastic about being put into their proper place. This is clearly an example of the Master Engineer's work. Harvard University Professors Bloomekat and Chi’s zebrafish research concluded that the “heart cells in zebrafish start beating suddenly and all at once to

There is an expensive word we need to define: anthropomorphizing. That means giving human characteristics to non-humans, such as those talking rodents in cartoons or animatronic bears in pizzarias. It seems to be human nature to give human traits to things. It is similar to reification , which is a logical fallacy. F'rinstance, "Science insists..." No. "Evolution gave this creature..." No, again. Those are concepts  that are given human characteristics. The part about reification is a bonus for you, now look at how the smart plants know that autumn has arrived here! Burning Bush changing colors, Unsplash / Cowboy Bob Sorensen , modified at PhotoFunia The vocabulary lesson may seem trivial, but there is something deeper going on that the author of the article linked below wants to present. Regular readers have seen that there are many plants that seem intelligent, even with the ability to communicate with each other . It has been claimed that plants "know&qu

It is easy to forget something or someone when we do not see them — or know that they are affecting us in the first place. American kids sign highschool yearbooks with pledges to always be friends, but those promises were just words. Did they know the names of the janitors? We see robins, the early birds, getting the earthworms but seldom realize that those creatures are marvels of design for their own ecosystems. In fact, earthworms and other organisms under our feet (ofttimes way under) were put here by the Creator to help our lives. Earthworm, Pexels / Karolina Grabowska , modified at PhotoFunia Watch a video of how earthworms move and you'll see that they were designed for their place in this world. They have muscles, and brains that tell the muscles how to work. Interesting that there are fossils of them dated to the Cambrian, but Darwinists can evosplain that away. People talk about "numbers of species" in the world, but soil biodiversity is not exactly understood.

The very existence of language  testifies of the Creator . Study on it. It takes a brain to hear and make sense of incoming sounds, then to use a person's speech hardware to give an intelligible response. There are also non-verbal signals used to communicate. The smell of desperation is in the air. Some Darwinoids got a notion to throw out all the complexities of language (and reject rational thought) because of evolutionary presuppositions. These folks are saying that grunts from chimpanzees correlate to how human language evolved. Wicked Witch Darwin and monkey scrying a chimp, modified from a graphic by Why?Outreach Remember the experiment of attempting to r aise a human child with a young chimpanzee ? That failed. Yet their grunts are supposedly the precursors of human language and give clues to its development. Not hardly! Was scrying (crystal gazing, etc.) a part of their scientific process? Interesting that our alleged evolutionary cousins have had supposedly millions of yea

Okay, a tree can only be friendly when it is given human traits in stories. But if one could actually be friendly, it would be the baobab (its counterpart would be the poisonous manchineel tree ). Nine species have been counted that have some basic similarities. A grown baobab may have been in place for a thousand years, so it has an impressive circumference. Leaves? It only grows them during the very short wet season. Although the top branches look like roots, the actual roots run deep. The Creator built it to survive those harsh conditions. Avenue of the Baobabs in Madagascar, Pexels / Beau Botschuijver Baobab trees have many uses. The leaves are edible, the branches trap rainfall, even the seeds can be eaten. The bark can be used to make clothing and rope. But baobabs are not in a hurry to grow, so they are difficult to cultivate — except researchers in Ghana have some promising work happening. These trees are in several diverse regions, which causes so much controversy among evolut

Reverend Thomas Bayes (1701-1761) could not have dreamed that his work would be extremely important in statistics, usually in the form of the Bayesian inference . It has been discovered that the human brain uses this advanced cognition ability — built in by the Master Engineer. There is no need here to delve into details of how the theorem or the inference work. Suffice to say that new information reaches the mind, then it is compared to existing knowledge to see if existing knowledge needs to be changed. X-ray-style image of skull and brain, Freeimages / Miranda Knox The complexity of the brain has long been a problem for evolutionists. Interestingly, the paper discussing the experiment that concluded that we are wired for advanced thinking skills is quite interesting. Evolution was mentioned needlessly in it, and the word  design was used. That is far more logical than to think evolution could build the complexities of the human brain. As neurological research continues, it will onl

There is an odd old man who walks his little dog around the apartment complex, and he talks to it as if he is hearing it ask questions and reply to his own. But I do not think this widower of several years is crazy — that is just how the relationship plays out. Evolutionists tell fanciful stories about the domestication of the cat  as well as how we got our canine friends . Unfortunately, an Intelligent Design organization's writer linked below accepts this storytelling as well as deep time, but the rest of his article is interesting. Women with dogs taking in the view, Pexels / Dmitriy Ganin We have a special rapport with our animal friends, and they become family members. They are given a great deal of time and affection, and money is spent on food, upkeep, medical bills, and more. When they die, many of us grieve . We give, but they cannot give back in kind. Sure, some do work, but you can't exactly hitch up a team of bearded dragons to pull a plow. There are folks who have

There are a few in the secular science industry who are not content with a simplistic " it evolved " response, they want do dig in deeper. Especially when something like the Venus flytrap has baffled them for years. The more they study, the more puzzling it is. This little plant from the Carolinas in the formerly United States has been treated like a toy by some people. It will not snap shut by just any touch. Similarly, a rapid increase in heat can cause it to snap shut. Venus flytraps, morgueFile / xianstudio Researchers tested the plants with heat to see what happens, and this child wonders if they had a bit of fun like some kids might. Imagine... "Whatcha doin' with that hot air blower, Bo?" "Gladja came along, Cletus. Watch this." He blows hot air on the Venus flytrap and it closes. Well, I would have had fun. Anyway, those plants are not going to close up shop just because it's a hot day. The blower experiment revealed that they shut their t

Creationists have been using the concept  of irreducible complexity for years, but the term was coined and defined in Darwin's Black Box  by Michael Behe in 1996. Irreducible complexity is frequently used by the Intelligent Design community, and some biblical creationists have picked up on it as well. One of our favorite examples is the bombardier beetle . It has an amazing defense mechanism that demonstrates the basics of irreducible complexity: Everything must be in place from the beginning or nothing works or makes sense. Indeed, if components existed separately, they might kill the organism. Fish spawn in an anemone (showing developing eyes), Flickr / prilfish ( CC BY 2.0 ) Dr. Jonathan McLatchie is a part of the Discovery Institute, a leading Intelligent Design organization. (Weak-minded atheists say that ID folks and creationists reject evolution because we don't understand it. That's a lie. Two glaring academic examples I can think of are Joel Tay of Creation Minist

This is something that caused me a bit of confusion, since I did not know two out of three words and messed up on one as well. Sulawesi bear cuscus? And it is not even remotely related to a bear, but kinda sorta looks like one if you squint a mite. Also, I confused it with that tasty Moroccan pasta called couscous . Sulawesi is the name of the Indonesian island where this critter primarily holds court. Our subject is about the only Australian-style marsupial in the Northern Hemisphere. Sulawesi bear cuscus, Wikimedia Commons / Ariefrahman ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) Secular scientists find its location quite puzzling: How did it get there? Also, some evolutionists think it's travel after the Flood is a "Gotcha!" for biblical creationists. That'll be the day! Informed people know that creationists and evolutionists have the same facts to work from . The differences come from worldviews that drive how we interpret  the evidence available. Sometimes we agree, like animal rafting,

A few days ago I hurt my leg, and Stevia Dolce, the baker from the Darwin Ranch came all the way down from Deception Pass to bring me some croissants and things. Those galoots have their origins stories all twisted, but they sure do eat well. Stevia had been having doubts about evolution, but instead of risking her job by asking questions that challenge their worldview, she saves her questions for other creationists and me. So I told her I would sit there masticating while she talked. Golden retriever chewing, Pexels / Barnabas Davoti Stevia stopped speaking and stared at me. I gave a short laugh and said it's the expensive word for chewing. It doesn't seem to be used outside medical, academic, and scientific circles. She mock-pouted, saying, "I came here with a list of things to talk about, now we got us a new one." It all came about because of an article I had just read. Here's a bonus that's not in the article: Digestion begins with chewing, and saliva has

There are people who believe that scientists gather evidence, follow where it leads, and reach conclusions. Such an idea removes the human element and neglects that they form ideas and see if they can find evidence to supports them. Scientists do have biases, opinions, presuppositions, avarice, and more because they are human. In empirical science, such things need to be kept at bay. They appear to be assets when it comes to telling human evolution stories, however. Human skeleton romance via PxHere There were many assumptions tainting the research discussed below, including how bipedal locomotion is really swell because it is efficient for travel and makes it easier for us to use tools. Those things are true, but researchers also assumed that humans are great apes and seemed to indicate that walking this way was desirable, therefore, we evolved. That's teleology (purpose), old son, and not allowed in evolutionary stories. Also in this dreadful research is the thought that a gene f

The 1981 remake of the song "Bette Davis Eyes" was a huge hit, but this child failed to see what was special about them. Could she move each one independently? Mayhaps a rewrite about someone who "has chameleon eyes" would be interesting. When discussing alleged facts by evolutionists, likely, probably, scientists think,  and other terms are used to dodge the issues but still promote their faith. In this case, discussing how the eyes and vision of chameleons operate practically require such words — the reptiles are not talking. Chameleon on a branch, Pixabay / Shilona We have examined the most obvious trait of chameleons before, the ability to change color . It seems their vision has been underrated, which presents problems to evolution. No other land animal has the independent eye motion which still makes sense because of the brain's intricacies. What we have here is yet another example of the Master Engineer's work. Most vertebrate animals have their eyes