Piltdown Superman

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

We want to teach our children Bible stories in Sunday School and have them grow up to be strong believers, don't we? Sure, so we make images of Bible stories that are colorful and attractive and talk down to them. That happens quite a bit in Western churches, but there are some serious problems involved. Cartoon Noah's Ark, modified, original image credit Pixabay /  sferrario1968 One problem is talking down to kids with over-simplified versions of the events described in the Bible — they're not stupid, but can get the idea that Bible stories are not narratives, but fictional stories.  Then we have the unbiblical, or even anti-biblical, graphic illustrations of Noah's Ark that have almost nothing to do with the Bible's description. Some artists may mean well, but most illustrations fail. In addition, making cartoons is a long-established method of ridicule and misrepresentation — and we know how anti-creationists are fond of misrepresenting Genesis, God, creat

Many questions about creation, the Genesis Flood, the Ark, and other topics are to be expected. They happened a long time ago, and the Bible doesn't give us as much detail as some of us m ay think we need. There are times that questions come to mind, often during a lecture or in a conversation. It's mighty helpful to learn about logical fallacies, especially when opponents of biblical creation use them so frequently. We get a heap of them at The Question Evolution Project, and bad reasoning from the Evo Sith is common fare on many creationary sites and social media. They get really agitated when we point out the fallacies, and some get furious when they are not allowed to continue building arguments on foundations based on faulty arguments or premises . (It's possible on rare occasions to have a valid conclusion from a bad argument, but that's not a product of skillful re asoning . ) Some go riding down a trail to prove something, and this is the fallacy of the ir

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen If you study on it, you'll see that atheists, liberal "Christians", and evolutionists attack Genesis far more than any other book in the Bible. They know that Genesis is the foundation for all major Christian doctrines [ 1 ], so they seek to destroy it. You'd think that those folks would smile quietly to themselves about the st00pid fundie Xtians and go on about their business. What happens when creationists make their voices heard? Those atheists and their collaborators get burrs under their saddles. Libel, ridicule, misrepresentation, profanity, and so on ensue. Then there are protests, political pressure, lawsuits... Publicity photo courtesy of Ark Encounter As a brief aside, I've been libeled myself (and I'm nowhere near important), the latest by an alleged university professor [ 2 ], [ 3 ] claiming she was blocked on The Question Evolution Project's Facebook Page . Not hardly. She was never blocked/banned. This provide

Proponents of long ages and the extinction of dinosaurs millions of years ago assert their beliefs as if all scientists in the field are in agreement, and that ancient doom was a done deal. This involves arguing from their assumptions of deep time, and disregarding historical records and possible modern sightings of dinosaurs  (they don't like these because it threatens their "millions of years" paradigm). If you cognate on it, you'll see that many of the pictures and descriptions of dragons fit mighty well with what we expect dinosaurs to look and act like. Seems to me that it's even more so with the oldest records and artwork. Image credit: St George and the Dragon  by Paolo Uccello, 1470 Why would George slew his ownself a dragon? Because it needed killing. Oldest stories of this go back to about the tenth or eleventh century. Some of the records told how they could be mean things. In the biblical creationist model, dragons (remember, the word dinosaur  

Even in upstate New York, we can see a variety of birds at the feeder on our patio. My wife likes to admire several kinds, and we have a bit of fun looking them up in books and online. She likes the two kinds of woodpeckers that drop in, and giving peanuts to the blue jays. Jays are smart, too, which fits because they're related to crows and ravens, considered among the most intelligent birds. Malicious Advice Mallard is at it again. In some ways, evolutionists and creationists agree about some elements of speciation. We disagree when it comes to how such varieties came about, and from where. There's no evidence that they came from a common ancestor, and the South American origin story is based on Darwinian presuppositions. We have our presuppositions, too, and believe that speciation of birds that were on Noah's Ark during the Genesis Flood is a better explanation of scientific evidence. This involves the study of baraminology or biblical kinds, terms held in deri

Mockers sometimes say that the Bible is false because it contains miraculous events — especially that Noah thing. Oh, and Jesus rising from the dead. Can't have miracles because naturalistic presuppositions preclude such things. Then they may say something along the lines of, "But we  have science, and DNA proves evolution is true and the Bible is wrong!" Noah gives Thanks for Deliverance by Domenico Morelli, 1901 Nice arbitrary assertions, but they're worthless. DNA mutates, as any evolutionist that won his spurs knows. But at current rates of mutation extrapolated backward, t he human race can only be thousands of years old . What really gets Darwinists on the prod is when creationist scientists use data and confirm the Bible. A new study supports what biblical creationists have been saying all along. Yippie ky yay, secularists! Evolutionary teachings hold that all mankind arose from a population of ape-like ancestors from which chimpanzees also evolved. Bu

A question from Christians and skeptics alike is whether or not Noah had insects on the Ark. It's a fair question. Some of us would rather he had left some things off, but even the most irritating insects serve a purpose in the grand scheme of things, including "services" that we may have never heard of. Image credit: Morguefile / shanblan Did Noah bring insects on the Ark? The answer is a most definite maybe.  There are arguments both pro and con based in Hebrew language, biblical usage, and so on. But it's admittedly educated speculation, and nobody needs to throw down on someone else over it. Creationists have postulated models for how insects and animals may have conducted themselves on the ark. Many can survive without the protection of the Ark, but others probably needed shelter. In Genesis 6:19–20, God commanded Noah to take representatives “of every living thing of all flesh,” including those “of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Biblical creationists often hear criticisms from atheists and evolutionists who prefer prejudicial conjecture to actual answers (Prov. 18:2 HCSB). I commenced to pondering this while watching Creation in the 21st Century  ( one of the few biblically sound programs on the Trinity Broadcasting Network), where host David Rives interviewed Mike Snavely . There was a brief clip of a trapdoor spider grabbing lunch ( here is a video clip of one in action ), and I thought about Adam naming the animals. There probably weren't any trapdoors in Eden yet, so where did that name come from? Medieval painting of Adam naming the animals /Agios Nikolaos Anapafsas, Monastery in Thessaly, Greece Scoffers will say, "There's no way Adam could have named all the animals over the course of years, let alone, one day!" Let's do some homework that certain people are reluctant to do. First, read the text carefully in Genesis 2:19-20. He didn't name fish

We know the routine. Some sneering sidewinder says, "Ain't no way Moses got all them animals onto the Ark, especially dinosaurs. Too big!" Typically, these people haven't bothered to do their homework, they just have their opinions to express (prejudicial conjecture and begging the question). Everyone knows that dinosaurs fit through the door because they were heavily greased first, then stored in the overhead luggage compartments. " Dinos 1 " by Janusz Michalczuk / FreeImages Creationists have explained about dinosaurs (and the other critters) on the Ark many times. There is something else to consider: there weren't as many as people thought. A fossil would be found, maybe some bones, and then it would be classified. But it turns out that several fossils variations: scientists realized that they belonged to the same species at different stages of development. So, how did all of those dinosaurs fit on the Ark? As it turns out, the answer is, ‘M

Many people dismiss the idea that dinosaurs and people could have lived at the same time. Most are conditioned to think that way because they're constantly told dinosaurs have been extinct for millions of years. Microbes-to-man evolutionists need millions of years because their paradigm is threatened, else evolution can't happen on a young earth. But they have to come up with creative excuses when confronted with evidence from history and possible recent sightings of dinosaur-like creatures. When all else fails, some anti-theists resort to calling someone who presents evidence they don't want to face "liars" and "anti science". The biblical creationist perspective is that dinosaurs were created on Day Six along with man, they went onto the Ark with Noah and the other seven, and eventually died out from various causes. Are dinosaurs extinct, then? Probably. Mostly. When reading prophetic and apocalyptic material in the Bible, it is easy to read thro

There have been scoffers for many years who simply dismissed the Genesis Flood as a fanciful tale or a complete fabrication. (Worse, there have been liberal Christians who have agreed with atheistic interpretations of geology and said that the Flood never happened, that it was local, "tranquil", or some other nonsense.) Many flood legends exist around the world, and quite a few are only fit for jawing with folks to fill time while riding the lonely trail — nowhere near believable. Yet, many of the flood tales from around the world have elements in common with the Genesis account. The Great Flood / Artist unknown / PD Some scoffing scholars insist that since the "Epic of Gilgamesh" is the oldest legend of a global flood that we have on record, it must be the original, and Genesis is a copy of it. Even a superficial reading of the Gilgamesh story (written as a fantastical poem) shows that it's another story that has some of the same elements of the Genes

For a long time, the conventional explanation of fossilization was that something died and then was gradually buried. After millions of years, it became a fossil. Some people realize that such a scenario does not work in reality, and that fossilization requires rapid burial; conditions are more essential than time. Fossil graveyards, such as Dinosaur National Monument, have jumbled fossils. Many are intact, and some are bits and pieces. Secular geologists will invoke a form of catastrophe to explain what has been observed, but they will not defer to the best explanation, which is the Noachian Flood models of biblical creationists. At Dinosaur National Monument in Utah, a confused tangle of bones juts from a ridge of sandstone, chock-full of dinosaur fossils. The sandstone is part of the Morrison Formation, a body of sedimentary rock extending from New Mexico to Saskatchewan in the north and covering more than 1 million square kilometres (400,000 square miles) of the western US

Evolutionary geologists and paleontologists have found several triceratops fossils in one area. Based on their erroneous presuppositions, they stated some things as facts that are not facts at all. What they do know is that there are many triceratops skulls with some variation in a great deal of rock. These secular scientists are presuming age of the rocks in which the triceratops gang was buried, and that it took millions of years to do it. They also assume that variation is the same as evolution, but have no explanation for how or why this alleged evolution occurred. But we have come to expect circular reasoning from evolutionists . There are two huge problems for them. First, the geologic evidence is for rapid burial. Second, actual science refutes their position and supports the Noachian Flood that biblical creationists believe. Triceratops skulls entombed in Montana’s Upper Cretaceous Hell Creek Formation tell a story, but not the tale of being trapped by the sands of

People who get their information about hyenas from children's stories and people who get information about creationists from atheists get the same result: fiction. In reality, hyenas are not cowardly scavengers, but relentless hunters with immense stamina and great speed. Strong, too. (Well, except for the one called the aardwolf, which is a kind of hyena but much smaller and eats creepy-crawly things.) And that noise some of these man-killers make that sounds like laughing? It isn't. Pixabay / valerieBaron The hyena is also an irritation to evolutionary classification. Where to put it on the failed tree of life? It has been considered in the dog family, the cat family and related to civets, having some characteristics of both cats and dogs. This creature is another testimony of the Creator — and neither the hyena nor its creator is to be trifled with. Many people in the west are accustomed to thinking of the hyena only as a scavenger, as in The Lion King. Actually

Review of Refuting Compromise written by Dr. Jonathan D. Sarfati by Cowboy Bob Sorensen The title of this article was inspired by a someone's post. It said to take the title of a book you had read and add, "...with a chainsaw". I was just finishing up Refuting Compromise and realized that this addition fit quite well. Perhaps Dr. Sarfati will forgive me for adding to his words and not rebuke me, making me a liar ( Proverbs 30.6 ). But enough of my strange sense of humor. Refuting Compromise was written to deal with the bad apologetics of Dr. Hugh Ross, a "progressive creationist" (who also calls himself by the odd title of "day-age creationist"), and unfortunately, many people look up to Ross and his "Reasons to Believe" organization. When I purchased this book, it was because I felt that I needed it for reference, even though I had not dealt all that much with Rossites or spent time with Ross' teachings. It turns out that