Piltdown Superman

The Big Bang story has been built, rebuilt, cobbled, and Frankensteined in general. When told by card-carrying members of the secular science industry, it sounds tidy and almost plausible. It brought on both cosmic and biological evolution. Looks good on paper. However, the tale is told as if scientists were trucking along in complete unity. Nope. Cosmologists and cosmogonists in the ranks disagree. It is also presented without any actual science, driven by presuppositions and mathematics that support them. The cosmological constant problem may be a good reason to put the thing down. Made at  photofunny  with a  NASA / ESA  image (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Something that supports science itself is how scientific laws (as we understand them) are consistent and predictable, which fits both Intelligent Design and biblical creation science views. A scientist made a claim that is...truly bizarre: The fundamental principle called the cosmological constant  — isn'

Knowledgeable biblical apologists understand several things about worldviews, including how they must be internally consistent. Atheists and evolutionists frequently ignore logic while pretending that science and reason support their beliefs. That is a characteristic of an inconsistent worldview. Another indication of a faulty belief system is the reliance on arbitrary assertions. So is circular reasoning, such as assuming evolution in order to prove an instance of evolution. Changing or assigning new meanings to words and phrases also indicates a weak worldview. A couple of evolutionary psychologists presented irrational material about consciousness. Brain and consciousness, Pixabay /  Gerd Altmann  (Geralt) Like others involved in the secular science industry, psychologists presuppose atoms-to-atheist evolution and build from there; they do not question whether or not evolution happened in the first place. In this instance, two psychologists suggest consciousness may have evolved not

Proponents of universal common descent are highly skilled in the scientific principle of Making Things Up™, and they make lotsa grotzits for it. Peer review approves rubbish , they use bushwa logic to compare human and ape Y chromosomes , etc. The secular science industry is doing a number on hearts. Although they say all life came from a common ancestor, there is a variety of hearts in the animal kingdom. The Creator designed hearts to meet the needs of various creatures. Humans and apes share some similarities in design, so there are similarities in some in hearts as well. Heart diagram, Pixabay /  burlesonmatthew Did they consider other research that says we have heart problems because we evolved from fish ? Asking for a friend. These jaspers first presupposed evolution (and rejected creation), then told a story about the distant past. A few weasel words crept in like may suggest , but ignored the stark differences not only between heart styles. The physical differences between huma

In an unusual series of events, Lisa Myworries, supervisor of the Winkie Guards at the Darwin Ranch, sent word to me to help her get some supplies. Apparently the other ranch hands were busy, so I hitched up the buckboard, headed west on Folly Road past Stinking Lake, and on toward Deception Pass. Aside from a few glowers from the Winkie Guards, the trip was uneventful.  On the way back, Lisa started talking about birds. Woodpeckers are her favorite. She mentioned the shock-absorbing bone in their skulls. I was reluctant to correct her, but I felt compelled. Downy and hairy woodpeckers from Birds of New York  by Louis Agassiz Fuertes , 1910 & 1914 (PD) Correcting someone on a small detail is seldom worthwhile, especially a friend. If it must be done, it should be done gently. Let her keep her dignity. "Actually," I said, "that was a scientific truism for many years but was recently rejected. More deliberate thinking, better science, and all that good stuff. I mistake

If someone gets a notion to saddle up and ride to the extreme northeast of the US, going on through Maine in a certain place will get them to the Canadian province of New Brunswick. Some fossilized plants were found there that paleontologists described as "enigmatic." One reason for this wording is that they show an extreme amount of detail, which seems to be increasingly common among fossils nowadays. In addition, scientists were surprised at the complexity of the fossilized plants. Neither of these facts are surprising to creationists. Fossilized water fern (image adjusted), Fossil Butte, Wyoming, National Park Service (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Yet again, secular paleontologists are assuming deep time and evolution, which in turn dictates the way they interpret evidence. Creationists have the same evidence, but presuppose recent creation and biblical truth in their interpretations (see " What is Really Seen from the Webb Telescope " for

The article featured below is from a creationist peer-reviewed technical journal, so it is primarily by and for scientists. However, there are several parts that non-scientists can understand. We can skim through the details (mostly in the middle) and still learn some important things; let the scientists have the rest. Biblical creationists have long pointed out that everyone has the same facts, and the interpretation of the facts are vital. In addition, scientists are human: They start with assumptions and presuppositions which heavily influence the results of their research. The DNA of Neanderthals and Denisovans was used by members of the secular science industry to supposedly support evolution from apelike ancestors. Data were selected that should support their views. Drawing from work by  Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson , creation scientists were able to use much of the data to show how it relates to the sons of Noah. This supports recent creation. Causes of Neanderthal extinction are also

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Evolution News and Science Today  is run by the Discovery Institute, the leading proponents of Intelligent Design. Despite what propagandists for universal common descent evolution claim, ID is not  creation science in disguise. An article on that site, " Are Proponents of ID Religiously Motivated, and Does It Matter? " inspired this one. The author, Dr. Jonathan McLatchie, made some excellent points in his response to a critic, especially noting that logical fallacies were utilized — which is typical of advocates of evolutionism. Image by Cowboy Bob Sorensen, modified with FotoSketcher Dr. McLatchie pointed out that when the critic of ID claimed that they were religiously motivated, it was a genetic fallacy (also, it poisons the well) . What is too often ignored is the fact that secularists are religiously motivated themselves, as many have religions without deities. This screenshot from X (formerly Twitter) shows a religious attitude toward Dragon Ba

At one time, Christians were the main people doing science. (It was called natural philosophy  until the name was changed to science .) Christians and creationists were right at home here. Science operates by laws, and those were given by the Creator. They provide consistency. See how that works out? Eventually, Christians yielded to materialists. Much of that was through compromise on the authority of the Bible. Secular scientists reject the Bible in favor of naturalism. Both kinds of scientists have worldviews based on their presuppositions. Universe and Bible, Pixabay / Alex Myers and Maicon Fonseca Zanco What follows is going to be difficult for some people to accept, even creationists. Bible-believing Christians actually have an advantage in doing science. Indeed, Psalm 119:130 tells us that God's Word brings understanding. Not only does the biblical worldview rule out time, chance, errors as explanations for observed data, but Christians also have a basis for logic and scie

This is a repost, as the original disappeared after a day or so. Blogger has its own formatting ideas that I can't control. Centuries ago, I applied for a data entry job, but was hired to be a production supervisor. I knew nothing about the industry. My supervisor went out sick and my trainer quit, so I ended up discussing things with foremen and production workers. I did not ask the right questions, nor did I even know what questions to ask. Fortunately, I brought few assumptions to impede my learning. By the grace of God and with the help of other people, I was able to have reasonable success in the job. Jigsaw GRAPHIC, Freeimages /  Andronicus Riyono Imagine if I had been full of bravado and made wrong assumptions based on my presuppositions. It would not have gone well. We have seen in a similar way that many secular scientists presuppose evolution, then are puzzled when the evidence doesn't line up with expectations. Their research is often befouled at the get-go. Secular

The other day, Lisa Myworries, the Winkie Guards supervisor from the Darwin Ranch, stopped by my place to discuss some Darwin doubts that she dared not say at work. At one point, she blurted that there were so many stars, there just had to be other planets with life on them. Then she suddenly asked, "So where are they?" Darwin's disciples are dancing with space aliens in the pale moonlight, it is important to prop up Charlie's Victorian myth. All of alien speculation is based on naturalistic presuppositions and assumptions. Darwin dancing with space alien in pale moonlight, made at Bing AI , edited at cleanup.pictures What Lisa was doing was expressing a common thought: Space is so big, it simply must have intelligent life out yonder. (Many Christians think the Creator did not stop with us, but that idea is theologically unsound.) In addition, she indirectly brought in the Fermi Paradox. One big reason for secularists to want to find extraterrestrials is that they thi

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  When perusing Evolution News , the primary website of the Discovery Institute, there seems to be a great deal of self promotion. There is also quite a bit of science and philosophy. There are scientists involved, and it is reasonable to think that they publish in secular scientific journals just like creationists. My problems with the ID movement are that while they show unguided  evolutionary processes are not possible, it has a big tent. That is, there are agnostics, biblical creationists, what appear to be theistic evolutionists, and others involved. Sometimes Christians there seemed to be reluctant to mention the Creator. Also, I am a biblical creationist and presuppositionalist. Neon question mark, Unsplash / Emily Morter Everyone has presuppositions, things we assume to be true, that comprise our worldviews . Biblical presuppositionalists presuppose that the Bible is true  and the final standard of truth. "Ya think, Cowboy Bob?" Yes, I had to be

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Internet atheists express their hatred of God and bigotry toward Christians quite freely from the safety of their keyboards, and they insist on asserting false facts. One of these is that creationists believe "God did it" is a sufficient scientific explanation for something. They are unable to meet the challenge to produce a creation scientist who uses that idea. Another false fact is that if someone is not an atheist, he or she is not a real scientist. Although ridiculous, it shows their bigotry. It is also a way to control science itself to fit their own naturalistic beliefs. Train waiting on tracks, Unsplash / Cowboy Bob Sorensen Something I read long ago in a UFO publication is that they first seek natural and rational explanations before appealing to UFOs. I have seen a similar view used by paranormal researchers (never mind whether or not experiences were genuine). In simple terms, science uses methodological naturalism . While Christians presupp

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen There is a line in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy   that states , "Earthmen are not proud of their ancestors and never invite them round to dinner." Well, I never have my ancestors round to dinner either because they are dead. In context, Douglas Adams was referring to our alleged evolutionary cousins . No, you will not find it in the book. Adams was an atheist and an evolutionist, and he probably wrote the sequence showing a chimpanzee at a formal dinner party for the BBC series . So he probably meant cousins . Formal dining with a chimpanzee, made with Bing AI image generator , modified at PhotoFunia In " When a Child and a Chimp Were Raised Together ," Denyse O'Leary wrote about an experiment in 1931. A couple of married psychologists decided to raise their ten-month-old son and a seven-month-old female chimpanzee together. Whoa there a minute, Pard. Back in 1931, Sigmund Freud was held in high esteem and the field of psycholo

Everyone has presuppositions and worldviews, and these things drive science. Secular science assumes that the universe is billions of years old and that cosmic, chemical, biological, and other evolutions happened. Biblical creation science affirms recent creation, and modifications are not evolution. Evolution extends beyond academic and scientific discussions and influences the lives of people. While people disliked other ethnic groups different from their own, Darwinian evolution (and modifications) gave rise to "scientific racism" and greatly increased the problem. Smithsonian Building, Wikimedia Commons / Noclip (modified at Fotosketcher ).jpg Evolutionists often become incensed when it is pointed out that Charles Darwin was a blatant racist. Some try to improve history , but the facts cannot be changed. In the Victorian era and later, scientists attempted to justify racism and eugenics. They insisted that darker people were physically and mentally inferior to white folk

There was a time that people who believed in Unidentified Flying Objects and extraterrestrial life were considered to be a part of the kook fringe, but that is the opposite of the way things are today. There are respectable people who believe in UFOs, and they are in the news again. The newer designation of UAP (Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena) came from the US government, and the changing of the middle name to anomalous from arial was because they followed NASA's lead on wording. Seems like a good idea. There are many reasons for the interest in UFOs, and if you follow the money, the funding comes from the secular science industry. Somehow they think if UFOs are found, it will prove that life evolved elsewhere in the universe, with the subtle implication that God does not exist. This is terrible logic. Old train with UFO in background via Pxhere US Air Force veteran David Grusch testified that the government had alien remains in its possession. Problem is, he did not g

When dealing with professing atheists, many make the claim that they can be "good without God." Misotheists can live apparently moral lives for the most part, but they tend to make exceptions for personal benefit. And they cannot explain their foundations. Laws? Laws change. Evolution? Not hardly ! Some atheists accuse creationists of lying about evolution (a ludicrous charge*), but they cannot coherently explain why , if such a charge were true, lying would be wrong in an atheistic worldview! There have been several attempts in secular philosophy to pin down morality without God. Broken foundation, RGBStock / Adrian van Leen Various secular frameworks have been proposed for morality, but they have internal inconsistencies. Some are arbitrary, so good and evil are based on following a set of rules that are incomplete in dealing with human experiences. Some appeal to higher standards outside themselves — when an atheist says that lying about evolution is wrong, they are appeal

Added link about altering facts to fit views on 10 July 2023. As we have seen many times, people interpret evidence according to their worldviews. For example, an evolutionist can see a trilobite fossil and say that it is millions of years old, a biblical creationist uses the same evidence and interprets it as representing the Genesis Flood. Nobody is strictly neutral. Secular scientists are thought to be objective, following where the evidence leads, but that does not happen when the narrative is paramount. It is adjusted so Darwin's frown will turn upside down and people continue to be hoodwinked. Darwin Approves of Evoluton Fairy Tales, modified from Favourite French fairy tales / Barbara Douglas , 1921 In The Face of Evil , a 1977 "Dr. Who" story, The Doctor was given these words by writer Chris Boucher: You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common, they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views,

When dealing with Darwin's disciples on teh interwebz, most are professing atheists who say they are driven by reason , not faith. When informed that atheism is a religion and that evolution has also become a religion , they become incensed. Some say that religious people want to atheists like them. Huh? I had a couple of trolling raids on social(ist) media that were saturated with fallacies and disingenuous questions. "Creation 'science' 🤣" ... "The human eye proves evolution" ... "Lucy is a human ancestor," and more. They ignored or rejected evidence that people presented. Summoning the Spirit of Darwin, made at PhotoFunia When on their secular jihads, these owlhoots are confirming that they do indeed have faith. Evolution cannot even be questioned. Sure, the minutiae, but not the "fact" of universal common ancestry — even though there are secular scientists who doubt evolution . "Where do fanatical evolutionists get their id

People may take the tongue for granted, but it is more than just a lump of meat that we distend to express disdain or taste food. It is essential for speech (apes have tongues but still cannot articulate sentences) and other purposes. Many critters including mammals, amphibians, reptiles, and whatnot, have tongues. Lizards and some birds use specially-designed tongues to snag insects. Tongues come in many shapes and styles showing that the Creator put variety into his creation. Once again, believers in descent with modifications cannot explain them. Cat showing tongue, RGBStock / Gesine Kuhlmann As usual, Darwinists beg the question by using evolution to prove evolution. They presuppose that life began in the sea, then some life continued on land. One problem is that fish, our assumed ancestors and distant cousins, do not have actual tongues. A prototongue evolved, but there is no evidence of this. Just stories. Tales of the tongue ( Science Magazine, 25 May 2023). “Tales” is right. O

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Something that keeps getting slipped over the transom in my study is news about Dr. James Tour. He is a professor of several things including chemistry at Rice University, and friendly with the Discovery Institute, an Intelligent Design organization. He makes Darwin sad by refuting claims of materialists on the origin of life. No, I refuse to accept the claims of Darwin's acolytes on social(ist) media and elsewhere that the OoL has nothing to do with evolution, as that has been handily refuted many times over. Background image by Cowboy Bob Sorensen , photos from James Tour's YouTube post, then modified* Dave Farina considers himself an educator on science topic and has made good use of the popularity of YouTube. His channel is Professor Dave Explains . (People call themselves whatever they want, but in science and academia, claiming titles like doctor or professor is akin to stolen valor in the military .) Like other atheists, he presupposes a materiali