Piltdown Superman

As said before, Question Evolution Day (12 February) is multifaceted. In addition to speech and academic freedoms, it is an encouragement to get people to ride up on the hill to look at the bigger picture — and think . Folks cannot simply accept the assertions of scientists regarding historical science and origins. There should be a passel of red flags dropping when reading explanations about a group of ichthyosaurs that were fossilized. One flag is that secularists have been attempting to explain it for decades. The latest effort is...truly bizarre; that should be a red flag all by itself. Shastasaurus altispinus (ichthyosaur), WikiComm / Dmitry Bogdanov ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) On a quick side note, people group critters like these, mastodons, pterosaurs, and others with dinosaurs. It makes things easier when issuing postage stamps and the Bag-O-Plastic-Toy-Figures. And casual conversation. Ichthyosaurs came in various shapes and sizes, and there are numerous types. Some rivaled (and poss

When one mentions South Dakota, Mt. Rushmore may come to mind. More exciting to geologists are the Black Hills and Badlands. Millions of people flock to Badlands National Park  every year. It would definitely be a different kind of experience. Secular geologists have their slow 'n' gradual uniformitarian views of how the rock formations came to be, but their stories do not support scientific facts. Indeed, creation science models of the Genesis Flood present far better explanations of what is observed. Badlands formations with prairie grasses, NPS Photo / Troy Hunt (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Clay, mudstone, shale, all that good stuff is claimed by secular geologists to have been laid down over long periods of time — just look at the way it is now! Sure, some of that is happening nowadays, but this shows a mighty big flaw in their paradigm. Present processes are not a guarantee that things happened tin the same way all along. Come on, man, that's ma

There have been many instances on just this site alone where some interesting research was conducted, but the scientists ruined it because they threw in the Darwin imprimatur. That is just an assumption, but the secular science industry wants such references despite their irrelevance. Extremely interesting research was conducted on ammonite fossils, and also using information from their nearest living relatives. Models were made using 3D printing, which were loaded with electronics and made to swim in water. The results were quite interesting. Asteroceras obtusum (ammonite), Wikimedia Commons / Nobumichi Tamura ( CC BY 3.0 ) The work conducted by the scientists was the result of extremely careful planning and engineering . As in those other instances, they gave themselves praise for their work (despite assumptions that were made and many limitations), but they threw around glory to evolution. (No word if they contacted the Darwin Ranch near Deception Pass to have prayer candles of C.

Down New Mexico way, there is a place called White Sands National Park because it has, well, white sands in the Tularosa Basin. The story goes that during the Ice Age, Lake Otero was in the Tularosa Basin. It was a nice place with a wet climate. This area is famous for fossilized footprints, and the radiocarbon dating came up with an age of 22,000 years for one particular set from the Lake Otero Basin. Since rock cannot be Carbon-14 dated, seeds that were found in the area were subject to the analysis. It did not go well. Lake Otero image cropped from NPS (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Those seeds were not dated properly, and the radiocarbon atoms did not come from the ancient atmosphere but from old water. After recalculating, the age originally assigned had to be discarded. They were way  off. Unfortunately for secular scientists, their desires for deep time and the methodology used raise several serious questions. Maybe if they get that correlation with the ma

With improved technology and analytic skills, well-preserved fossils are discovered more frequently. Older fossils are also being reexamined with new technology. Yet another fossil from the Cambrian is causing consternation for evolutionary paleontologists. Sometimes it is a bit surprising that previously-studied fossils are reexamined, and certain details are studied that could easily be overlooked. Bones and other hard things — sure those are are expected to be fossilized, but when brains and nervous systems were involved, paleontologists are surprised. Neurons, Pixabay / Gerd Altmann Tiny worms in the Cambrian were found to have brains. Even secular scientists will admit that brains are incredibly complex things, but to have such soft things fossilize cannot happen with the slow 'n' gradual scenario. The critters had to be buried quickly, like all those other organisms in the Cambrian, during the Genesis Flood. Once again, a rewrite of textbooks on "how brains evolved&q

Believers in universal common have been known to patronizingly tell creationists and other evolution doubters to go to a natural history museum and learn. What people see are exhibits with tendentious usages of evidence, displays involving artistic license, and so on. Actual science, not so much. Remember, facts do not speak for themselves, but are interpreted according to worldviews , and then presented. Secularists presuppose evolution and make that their starting point. Unfortunately, many are so convinced that it is true (despite contradictory or nonexistent evidence), they play fast and loose with their presentations. Australopithecus afarensis , WikiComm /  Wolfgang Sauber ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) Take a look at photos of  A. afarensis  (Lucy) models as well as other illustrations. I found some where a male specimen is gazing heavenward, as if contemplating the mysteries of the universe. Another exhibit has Lucy overjoyed that Alan arrived at the museum — or is that Steve? One model has

When biblical creationists discuss living fossils  and point out that critters remain unchanged over alleged millions of years, it is common for internet misotheists to wave off the problem and want us to be quiet. It bothered Papa Darwin his ownself, and he admitted that there is little to no difference between fossil forms and living counterparts. Remember, the fossil record is supposed to display the plentiful transitional forms in the evolutionary tree of life. One excuse evolutionists have for lack of changes is stasis : things did not change because they had no need. Ridiculous. Lack of change is hostile to evolution but is expected by creationists. Bivalve mollusk (white clam, in this case), HippoPx How scientists are able to tell different species of clams apart is beyond the ken of this child. A bivalve mollusk (clams are in that group) was discovered and determined to be one of those troublesome living fossils. Interestingly, many whales are filter feeders, gulping down huge

Long ago, the coelacanth was considered extinct. Its fossils got believers in fish-to-fire marshal evolution all excited because it had nubbin fins that they thought resembled feet. Yee haw boy howdy, this bad boy was a transitional form. It was evolving for land life as required by the Darwinian narrative! The geologic column has numerous problems including fossils in the wrong order and so-called ghost lineages (where certain fossils appear, disappear for a few million Darwin years, and then reappear). That stuff gets left out of the millions of years with transitions narrative. The coelacanth was not willing to be a part of it. Coelacanth,  NOAA  (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Evolutionists made their pronouncements about the fossils according to their presuppositions. Then the coelacanth decided to stop playing hide and seek. One was found, but not in good enough condition for detailed study. Eventually, more were found, and were pretty much identical to their

When given the right conditions, DNA can last a surprisingly long time without breaking down completely. There is a cave in Siberia that yielded information about the mysterious Denisovans, but very little is known about them. Like other people groups, they shared their DNA. This cave had mitochondrial (mt) DNA from three  groups of people, but researchers could not determine if they lived there at the same time. It appears that groups handed off that piece of real estate. There was a buildup of sediments in there as well, but secular dating methods are in disarray. Evolutionists are determined to force-fit different people groups into their classifications, but if they stripped away their assumptions, they might realize the differences between the groups are within ranges of people that we see even now. It would have been even more interesting if scientists went beyond examining mtDNA and considered nuclear DNA as well. At any rate, what was actually found is in keeping with biblical

Scientific models are supposed to change in light of new evidence, but earlier than thought  is expressed so often, evolutionists should get the signal that their presuppositions are wrong. First, descent with modifications. Next, innumerable changes. Then, one of our ancestors was a fish. Teeth, jaws, and all that good stuff gradually evolved. But the fossil record does not sing along with the sheet music provided by Darwinists. A new discovery prompts yet another substantial rewrite of fish ancestry. No wonder college students have to keep buying new textbooks every year. Fishing at Kāneʻohe Bay, Unsplash / Drew Farwell Interesting that these instances of frequently rewriting models because of new discoveries doesn't happen to biblical creationists. That should give secularists something else to think about. Especially since fossils do not support the gradual processes required by evolution. The evidence supports recent creation — with teeth, jaws, limbs, and so forth fully form

Some mighty interesting discoveries about Neanderthals are becoming more frequent. (Indeed, it seems like when I write up a post on them, another is waiting in my reading list for attention.) I spread out the posts. Some Darwinist holdouts want Neanderthals to remain as primitive brutes, but their humanity has been fully established . Although this Intelligent Design article supports conventional evolutionary years, it also discusses how they were sophisticated, and skilled at cooking . Another from the same source suggests use of eagle talons and feathers for ornamentation show they had symbolic expression  thought processes. Le Moustier Neanderthals, AMNH / Charles R. Knight , 1920 Researchers can determine some surprising things from fossilized bones ( e.g.,  the amazing eyes of trilobites ), and similar technology has been applied to Neanderthals. The result is that they could hear just fine. Frankly (mind if I call you Frank?), it seems that secularists would say that good hearing

The  Cambrian explosion  has been a persistent problem for evolution since the time that Darwin roamed the earth. A passel of fossils are found from major phyla in the Cambrian, but no sign of transitional forms. Darwin's acolytes try to evosplain it away, but the problem remains insurmountable. Fossils of some tube-like thingies were previously found that were the subject of speculation. Finally, paleontologists have an idea of what the builders looked like. They got more than they bargained for. Gangtoucunia life restoration, WikiComm / Guangxu Zhang, Luke A. Parry, Jakob Vinther and Xiaoya Ma ( CC BY 4.0 ) As we have seen several times before, so it happens again: When faced with evidence that doesn't fit their schemes, evolutionists ballyhoo a sort of victory or evolutionary insight. Their knowledge of evolution has advanced. No, it hasn't, Hoss. Fossilized, well-preserved soft tissues were discovered. Also, the Cambrian explosion is strong evidence for the global Gen

As indicated here numerous times, when it comes to origins science, secularists prioritize the narrative above logic and evidence. As we recently saw, Darwinoids have no problem with rearranging 35 million years in conventional dating for their purposes. Now we have human footprints that do not fit evolutionary schemes, so the age is conveniently redated. In addition, they use dubious reasoning and even the complex scientific principle of Making Things Up™. Unfortunately, people who are committed to their faith in evolution will accept such nonsense because it appears to support their views. What in the world is a "pre-Neanderthal," anyway? There was also reference to the failed Heidelberg Man story. The well-preserved  footprints were given a drastic increase in their assigned age, and all this stuff raises a number of questions that evolution's true believers are loathe to ask. It is clearly evident that human nature involves investigation, creativity, and making life

Decker Halls is working with the Darwin Ranch over yonder by Deception Pass, and we spoke for a spell about mammal evolution. I asked him what evidence they had for it, and he replied with the usual boilerplate rhetoric. I asked for specifics, and after nervously adjusting the bough of holly on his lapel, Dekker admitted there was not anything definitive. Sometimes his fellow believers in particles-to-paleontologist evolution can be ornery cusses when trying to sort out their numerous disagreements. Seal, Pexels / Daniel Lee Interesting that people claim that evolution is a fact, but there is quite a bit of serious disagreement in many areas. A study of skulls was undertaken to try to settle things down about mammal evolution. The usual " convergence " was stated, which is a way of saying, "We have no evidence for a certain critter evolving, so we say evolution happened in many, so it must be true" (or something like that). The study did not do well, and earliest an

Squamates. Sounds like something on sale at the supermarket along with kumquats and squash, but it refers to card-carrying members of squamata. That is the largest order of snakes and lizards. There are many fossils in storage at museums, many of which are not available for public viewing except on special occasions or privilege. Some have been tucked away for a mighty long time, and when they are finally examined (or reexamined), things get interesting in Darwinland. So, they had this lizard fossil in a cupboard... Tuatara, Flickr / Bernard Spragg. NZ (for Public Domain) Evolutionary paleontologists seem to have no qualms about playing fast 'n' loose with time. In this case, modern lizards originated thirty-five million Darwin years sooner than they thought. This child finds it interesting that although it is claimed that there are numerous transitional and other fossils supporting evolution, just one can derail the entire train. These things that cause disruptions in evoluti

Flying reptiles of the past have long been a source of amazement to many people, and there is a great deal of mystery surrounding them. As expected, they appear in movies and such. There are about 150 species defined from fossils, and apparently  Pterodactylus was the first kind discovered. A 2005 movie titled Pterodactyl  has some of the critters living in modern times with wing edges like guillotines. Those are also about three times the size of  Pterodactylus from the fossil record. If the movie makers had done a little homework, they should have called it Pteranodon . Better yet, name the flick after the bigger grouping, pterosaurs. I only watched a few minutes of the movie and suggest you skip it. Pterosaur replica, Pixabay / Efraimstochter (mosaic effect added) They are classified as reptiles, but do not have some reptilian traits. There is speculation that they were warm-blooded. One scholar said they have a mosaic of features. Because of an abundance of fossils (some are well

"To answer your question, I like walking on the beach, making jewelry, painting on cave walls — " "So, it looks like you can't bring your paintings over to my place, then." "Nope. Wanna come over and see my cave?" As discussed here several times,  it has been conclusively established that Neanderthals were fully human. Perhaps we are hardwired to want to reproduce and spread around our DNA. After all, God did  command at the beginning to be fruitful and multiply (Genesis 1:28). Do not be surprised if you get a DNA test and find Neanderthals in your ancestry. Family, Unsplash / Josue Michel , modified with FotoSketcher Some secularists are resistant to the fact that Neanderthals were simply another people group, but they appear to have disappeared. They, too, were descendants of Adam and Eve with distinct physical variations well within human limits. After the Flood, they were part of the dispersion at Babel. Some Darwinists want to deny reality and kee

This time, I am going to take you along a different trail. It is a series of articles from an Intelligent Design site worth considering. The ID movement has some serious limitations , but they do some good work in showing design   (obviously)  and flaws in evolution. When talking to typical evolution supporters, they often repeat material from secular news releases. We have seen that the press is often disingenuous and exceeds what evolutionary scientists actually claim. Darwin's acolytes claim to have mountains of evidence, but evolutionary scientists know otherwise. Ardipithecus ramidus , Wikimedia Commons / Sailko ( CC BY 3.0 ) One sidewinder actually said that human evolution is complete and has no gaps. That's the guy who gets quoted by evolution supporters who deny the Creator, but he's at odds with the majority of experts. That's right, there are disputes about evolution and major flaws in candidates for our ancestors are known. Unfortunately, people are impress

Charlie Darwin believed evolution by blind faith. His followers past and present accept it despite lack of strong evidence, hoping that their beliefs would be justified later. That is the opposite of science, old son. They have problems with living fossils that, in and of themselves, falsify evolution. Living fossils are creatures that were thought to be extinct but later found doing well, or that have gone mostly unchanged over alleged millions of years, such as sea lilies and feather stars. Darwin knew about them . Now someone is stepping up to evosplain the problem away. Sea lily (crinoid), Wikimedia Commons / Alexander Vasenin ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) People who know evolutionary concepts can see through attempts at rescuing Papa Darwin. F'rinstance, evolution is presented as almost an irrevocable force in nature; things must  evolve over millions of years. There are "evolutionary pressures" that force them to change — except when they do not  change, and that is called stas

Something other biblical creationists and I emphasize is the importance of definitions. Despite our efforts, the corral gate is occasionally left open, a pony wanders through, and clarification is needed. Some of the difficulty is because of assumptions by readers. For example, I was using the phrase special creation  and assuming that the definition was clear to everyone. Since I had that wrong, I wrote an article specifying which meaning I use . The concern about wording this time involves reports of soft tissues and fossils. Aerodactylus scolopaciceps with soft tissue, Wikimedia Commons / Steven U. Vidovic, David M. Martill ( CC BY 2.5 ) This is not the same as complaining about someone referring to pterosaurs and ichthyosaurs as dinosaurs (even though they were contemporaries and their names ended in -saur). Such brabbling can be waved off. The problem occurs when reports and other things refer to soft tissues . Those words make creationists prick up our ears like a Scottish terr