Piltdown Superman

It should come as no surprise that not only are rocks exposed at the Grand Canyon, but the layers as well. Geological questions are raised, so the inability of secularists to give plausible answers to what is observed exposes their faulty presuppositions as well. Coconino Sandstone (center) / Image credit: US Department of Agriculture Forestry Service (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) When dealing with a claim, it is often helpful to examine what would be expected if it were true. We can also ask about things that are missing. Uniformitarian (slow and gradual processes over deep time) geology has many holes in the stories told about what is observed.  If Genesis Flood geology models are true, there are certain things we would expect to find, and creationists have to deal with holes in the theories as well. However, Flood geology is far more plausible in describing observed evidence in the Grand Canyon. As you look across Grand Canyon, observe the layers on both wa...

Using uniformitarian (slow and gradual) assumptions, secular geologists have long believed that crystals cool and form over very long periods of time. There were still questions about what was actually observed that went unanswered. New research caused serious problems for their belief system. Watermelon tourmaline image credit: Flickr / Orbital Joe ( CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 ) There are some secular scientists who are not content to accept the established narrative and seek answers instead. We have seen that in several cases, their research was inconvenient for one consensus or another. In this case, it was determined that crystals can grow in a fraction of the time that was previously believed. We can also see that the results are in keeping with creation science Genesis Flood models and recent creation. Today, we have two articles on this subject. The first one is longer and more technical, and the second is easier for people like this child to understand. Let's rock! Crystal size is tr...

It should be obvious that molecules-to-mineralogist evolution and deep-time geology are not observable science. That does not stop people committed to the narrative of atheistic naturalism from speculating about the distant past and referring to their pronouncements about the distant past as science. Credit: Flickr / Mike Fernwood  ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) As discussed previously, evolution is malleable so that it explains everything. Which means it actually explains nothing. Evolution's partner in villainy is secular geology. This, too, can be stretched and bent to give the illusion of  scientific explanations. Mountains can spring up faster than they thought. Aside from the fact that a major biblical creation science model is catastrophic plate tectonics  that involves rapid uplifting of landforms, the secular researchers discussed in the link below made assertions and told stories based on their naturalistic worldview, not from science. Creation science models of the Genesis F...

If you take a notion to visit the Grand Canyon, you can also see smaller canyons and several trails. One of these is the Bright Angel Trail, which was set up by the Havasupai folks. After they were told to get lost, Ralph Cameron improved on it and gave it its current name. Wonder what he would have thought about those tracks. Credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Jarek Tuszyński  ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) Just up yonder above the trackways, separated by fifty million Darwin years, is the Coconino Sandstone. Deep time believers cling to the uniformitarian narrative despite the startling hugely bigness of the flaws of wind-driven narrative. These include lizard tracks , mica in the sand , and more. In fact, biblical creationists have been pointing out this bad science for decades . But naturalists are like political leftists receiving fraudulent votes: if something appears to bolster something in their favor, no matter how absurd, they'll disregard the facts. Something widely known in ...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Making fun of an institution through satire and parody can be found throughout millennia to illustrate perceived absurdities of belief systems. These are used for various targets, but the most common seem to be political or religious.  C. Richard Dawkins ridiculing Ray Comfort, image credits: Flickr / David Shankbone ( public domain ), modified with FotoSketcher So why attack individuals instead of ideas ? It seems like practically everyone does it. Just ask the uncool kids in school. This is far beyond satire or persuasion . A quote commonly (but probably erroneously) attributed to Socrates is, "When the debate is over, slander becomes the tool of the loser". This child sees a useful principle in that statement. Although it is common to encounter proponents of atheistic naturalism ridiculing biblical creationists in rallies, books, videos, and so on, it is greatly intensified on social(ist) media. With the option of anonymity, attacks increase with ...

Even though I am not listening to it as I write, sometimes I like some hard rock. So do geologists (but this is a fallacy of ambiguity because of different definitions of hard rock). In geological terms, concretions  are very hard rock that uniformitarian geology cannot explain. Arizona concretion image credit: Smithsonian /  C Gilmore "Arizona Concretion" would be a good name for a hard rock band It may seem that geology is rather simple. You learn some expensive words and identify rocks, but there is much more to it. Geologists also deal with chemistry, biology, and other natural sciences. The article linked below makes this evident. Because this article was published in the Journal of Creation , it has some technical lingo. Concretions  are basically pieces of harder rock embedded in other rock. They vary in size from huge boulders that threaten to flatten Indiana Jones to bits and pieces that are easily overlooked. Concretions are probably formed by diagenesis , wher...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Under usual circumstances, the secular educational system has students under its control for several hours a day, weeks a year, many years. They are typically given the airbrushed versions of secular humanism and evolution.  Image courtesy of Genesis Apologetics Ironically, when Christian and creationist parents want to do what is right and teach their kids the truth, atheists and evolutionists say that we are "indoctrinating" them. Not hardly! In fact, they  are doing the indoctrination, then accusing us of what they are doing themselves. It's okay to question evolution so you can learn how it happened, but it is streng verboten  to question if it happened in the first place. "Go to a natural museum history", they said. "You'll learn a lot." Yes, you'll learn how cherry-picked facts based on the naturalism narrative can be presented as scientific truth. Also, you can see from models and reconstructions how artists' ...

Siberia is famous for extreme cold and political prisoners, yet some people call it home. Imagine if you will some reindeer herders going about their routine and finding the frozen remains of a cave bear. They saw fit to make the finding known. We have a couple of articles on this subject for your consideration. Assembled with items from Clker clipart This critter was dated at many thousands of Darwin years ago, but was in surprisingly good condition. Such a huge amount of time assigned to it is based on the naturalism narrative, not science or even good sense. Ever put a slab of meat in your freezer and then find it again some time later, only to find it has deteriorated and not worth putting in a stew? That's in a well-controlled environment. We're supposed to suspend reason and believe what scientists say, follow the consensus , and believe that seasonal changes, earth movements, predators, and whatever else didn't bother it. They say this bear, with soft tissue, organs...

As stated before, scientists who ride for the biblical creation brand are like their counterparts in the secular science industry. Not only are they educated and credentialed, but are not always in lockstep when it comes to scientific models. Heavily modified from an image at Pixabay by Jeff Jacobs One major difference between the camps is that biblical creationists believe that the Bible is true, but models will come and go. Secularists have been dishonest for money and prestige. There are a few scientific models for the Genesis Flood among creationists, but the two best known are Catastrophic Plate Tectonics and the Hydroplate Theory . Some people passionately promote the Hydroplate Theory and consider it superior to Catastrophic Plate Tectonics. However, most creationists find serious flaws with it. If it is superior, then it would be the best of the worst — sort of like the nebular hypothesis  for the formation of the solar system is bad, but the others fail even more...

Purveyors of fish-to-florist evolution and their compadres  in secular geology maintain that the fossil record is orderly, showing progressions from simple life forms to more complex. As we have seen many times, many fossils are recalcitrant to that notion. Take flowers, for example. Credit: StockSnap / Jeffrey Betts It has been uncomfortably acknowledged that pollen has been found in "older" rock layers — where it shouldn't be according to evolutionary paradigms. They cannot explain the origin of flowering plants, nor the puzzle of why they are in Early Cretaceous layers. Since biblical creation science Flood models are better explanations of many things that thwart evolutionists, let's see if creationist speculations are more reasonable. A new study published in Nature Ecology & Evolution has claimed that flowering plants, the most common type of plant on Earth, first appeared in small numbers in rocks of the Early Cretaceous. Fossils indicate that th...

Betcha never heard of the Salt Range over yonder in Pakistan. Me, neither, until I read the article linked below. Although it is not expensive now, it was valuable way back in the old days. This area of plentiful salt deposits had some Darwinist geologists ready to slap leather with each other over the equivalent of Precambrian rabbits. Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Khalid Mahmood "Why did you mention Precambrian rabbits, Cowboy Bob?" Oh, you know. Evolutionists have said that if a rabbit was found in the Precambrian layer (which only exists in textbooks and imaginations, not reality), it would falsify evolution. According to their belief system, the fossil record is orderly, from simple to complex, and a rabbit would be too complex to be found in the Precambrian layer. But evolution is malleable — pliable — flexible — so it has no real explanatory value . If evolution were actual science instead of a materialistic philosophy, it would have been abandoned long ago. No...

Secular geologists were making waves by saying that the earth was entirely covered by water a few billion years ago, and some people wondered if they were affirming the Genesis Flood. That'll be the day! This is about worldviews and definitions. Credit: StockSnap / Travel Photographer Because secularists are committed to naturalism and deep time, their narrative requires tendentious interpretations of what has been observed. The old news about submerged Earth in the Archean Period (which followed the Hadean Period, named because the newly-formed Earth was as hot as Hades) is part of their shipbuilding. Various "events" in our history had to have eras that support Darwinism, and history is constructed on that. However, their history is not supported by the evidence. The world was indeed covered in water, but not in the way materialists say. In the far more rational worldview of biblical creation science, these eons are only useful as reference points. The true hist...

When I first saw the material that is linked below, I was not exactly enthusiastic. While I do have some interest in history, I was not all that interested in the history of France. I was glad I paid attention, however, because we can follow the connections and see the impact it has for us today. Credit: Pixabay / Gerd Altmann It has been said that no movement occurs in a vacuum or because of a single incident. We can follow the origins of various events of history. The Russian Revolution of 1917 didn't begin with Lenin, evolution was an ancient religion before Erasmus and then Charles Darwin picked it up, the American civil rights movement did not being with the staged Rosa Parks incident , and so on. Evolution and deep time are entrenched in civilizations. The British were influenced by the French (but downplayed that for the sake of national pride), and the French were influenced by paganism and the so-called Enlightenment (read: rejecting the Creator and the authorit...

The best way to fold layers of rock is to grab on with both hands and push down. No? Well of course not, those are rocks, not sheets of paper. If you saddle up and ride out Utah way to Dinosaur National Monument, then take a look around near the Quarry Visitor Center, you will see some impressive rock folding. Do you wonder how that happened? Credit: US National Park Service (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) It takes a tremendous amount of force to do this. Ask uniformitarian geologists how it happened, and you'll likely get some song and dance about millions of years. That's convenient. However, folded rocks are found in large areas all around the globe, and rocks have an unfortunate habit of breaking. They had to be soft and pliable at some point. The truth is, it is conditions , not time , that cause rock folding. These necessary conditions can be found in creation science models of the Genesis Flood. That's hard evidence for a recent creation. ...

Secular geologists, probably eating hamburgers, pondering "Whopper Sand" and rescuing devices they can employ. Whopper Sand cannot be adequately explained through uniformitarian concepts, and are best explained by creation science Genesis Flood models . Here are two more problems for them. This "oil painting" is a USDOI photo  that was run through FotoSketcher (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents by either party named above) This child occasionally wonders if people who are going about their business get a mite irritated when science folks swoop down on their activities. Oil companies found resources in areas that deep time proponents think shouldn't be there. The layers are very thick, too. Another major oil discovery in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico has been recently announced. Equinor, a Norwegian-based oil company, and partners Progress Resources USA Ltd. and Repsol E&P USA Inc. made the proclamation last week. This is an...

A person may not be lying when what is related is considered true, and sometimes people have deceived themselves. The secular science industry is riding for the Darwin brand and they work and finding answers, but they are building on seriously flawed presuppositions. Two linked articles demonstrate this. Chimney Rock image credit: Freeimages / Steven Ritts Scientists have ideas and work from those to see if they have validity. We get that. However, there are times when they have had numerous failures and dead ends that they should ask themselves if their starting points are correct in the first place. They often do not realize that they are mistaken by illusions of progress when they are cantering in the opposite direction. Deep time geology has a passel of problems, and geologists would do well to seriously consider the work of creation scientists instead of rejecting catastrophism out of hand for the sake of the naturalism narrative. Here is the first linked article: It...

Although we discussed polystrate fossils a few months ago (see " Let Me Be Polystrate With You "), it is time to run the subject up the flagpole again and see who salutes it. Like the problems of soft tissues, DNA, and such in dinosaur fossils, assorted rescuing devices are manufactured. Original image from GoodFreePhotos /  Paula Piccard The main approach of secular geology is uniformitarianism, but occasionally Janus-faced geologists will invoke catastrophes when their philosophies fail. They have even imagined multiple small floods without evidence instead of the best explanation: the global Genesis Flood. Polystrate fossils are a serious problem, and these are often completely ignored in textbooks and such. Wikipedia, that font of secularist propaganda, does not have a section on polystrate fossils, but there is a sentence in the fundamentally dishonest section on creationism about what creationists believe. Of course, they wave the fossils off without providing...