Piltdown Superman

Amber is fascinating for scientists, since it is such a preservative of old life forms. In fact, it also works against deep-time proponents. (One example of this is the preservation of amino acids .) Today we shall consider the preservation of an ammonite in a chunk of Burmese amber. Ammonites were extinct cephalopods with shells, so they have no relation to the wicked descendants of Ben-Ammi mentioned in the Bible. But you probably knew those details. Since amber is hardened tree resin, how did a deceased marine creature end up there? Credit: PNAS via Wikimedia Commons ( CC BY 4.0 ) (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Ammonites varied in size, so they were not too large to become encased in a small chunk of amber. Its placement is the greater puzzle. Secular scientists have tried various rescuing devices, but they don't hold water. Plugging the data into a biblical creation science Genesis Flood model provides a far better explanation. Discovered in Myanmar, the

Although it may take quite a while, plants find the nutrients they need. They also have a habit of growing and reclaiming land and getting into the foundations of buildings. I remember one time when the sewage for a house had backed up because a tree root had grown into the pipe. Plants are persistent things. They also play a big part in biblical creation science models. It is reasonable to use what is observed today regarding living things and expect that they acted much the same way in the past, yes? Creationists present evidence for the Genesis Flood, but it is understandable to wonder how plants played a part in the earth's recovery in the aftermath. Banding in quartzite image credit: Flickr / James St. John  ( CC BY 2.0 ) By the way, I really despise alphabet/Google/Blogger with a passion. This site may become an archive, so eventually the excitement may very well be at  Creation Cowboy  if I can get the hang of the interface. Back in 1980, Mt. St. Helens provided evidence fo

Way back in 1977, The Doctor said , "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". (This became  a nice graphic .) While those words describe the attitudes and actions of totalitarian governments, they are also quite fitting for what we constantly see in origins and age of the earth discussions. There are numerous examples of dreadful research, omitted data, deception, and more by owlhoots who are determined to promote their naturalistic narrative. In this example, Zion National Park has itself some mighty nice sandstone going on. The official dogma is that the Navaho sandstone is the product of wind. Not hardly! Checkerboard Mesa photo credit: USGS / Annie Scott (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Ideally, scientist saddle up their ideas and see if they will be able to ride them to the end of the trail. If ideas don't fit what is observed or dis

We have seen many times that deep-time geology and universal common descent evolution have many serious challenges, but people still choose to believe them anyway. Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ patrol teh interwebs to screech at biblical creationists and throw propaganda links at us, telling us that everything is fine for evolution. Not hardly! It was bad enough for the hands at the Darwin Ranch to come up with rescuing devices for dinosaur soft tissues, DNA, and such. Now they have to contend with leaves  of all things. Fossil leaves image credits: Original at Flickr / Bonnie Kirkwood  ( CC BY 2.0 ), modified at PhotoFunia If you head out Idaho way and take the last train to Clarkia  (actually, find Moscow and head northeast), you can visit the fossil beds and even dig some up for yourself (see  some excellent pictures at this link ). This is actually exciting news for biblical creationists because, like dinosaur soft tissues, these leaves refute deep time up one side and down the othe

A few of the hands from the Darwin Ranch were having a spirited discussion at Ghost Ranch. Foreman Rusty Swingset and his lady friend Jacqueline Hyde organized a kind of working retreat to discuss fossils and geology. Why not, after all the overtime they've been putting in doing propaganda? They were cogitating on the book Dawn of the Dinosaurs  and noticed some mighty curious explanations about the colorful layers of the Painted Desert, petrified trees, and other things. Explanations for the features in the book struck them as dodgy at best. Credit: National Park Service / T. Scott Williams Stories by secularists are also inadequate to explain the petrified trees. ( Petrified Forest National Park joins up with the Painted Desert). They are just stumps with no roots. In addition, there is a passel of fossils. These are mixed with creatures of both land and sea, and birds as well. The storytelling is wretchedly inadequate. What we have here is an accumulation of evidence for the Ge

The Western part of the formerly United States has a passel of areas to cause excitement for geologists. If you find yourself out Colorado way, look for Gunnison National Park. Then head over to Black Canyon (because black canyons matter) and look for the Painted Wall. Credits: National Park Service (public domain, see the original here ), then modified at Big Huge Labs Biblical creationists agree with their secular counterparts about many aspects of how these things formed, but not about deep time. Here, people who made the park signs used the assigned age given by secularists to this basement rock of 1.7 billion years (I don't know scientists held their pinkie fingers up to their mouths when they said that alleged age, though). Also, there is a problem of missing eons of time where a huge chunk of it is missing. Then that unconformity , like others around the world, makes things even more puzzling. Over and over, uniformitarian geology fails to explain what is observed, so rescu

The hands at the Darwin Ranch have been desperately trying to shloop stories and fool the public. Mayhaps they are on the prod because biblical creation science ministries have been trying to teach people to think and ask questions. The problem of Rohmer's Gap is not going away. Pederpes image credit: Wikimedia Commons / DiBgd ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) No, Rohmer's Gap is nowhere near the Darwin Ranch. It is in the fossil record regarding missing transitional forms (as if they had any undisputed transitional forms in the first place!), and it's huge. Try as they might, evolutionists cannot shrink or eliminate the gap despite a few prospective failed candidates. They plug in their naturalistic models, but those do not explain what is observed. Using a creation science Flood geology model, however, makes a great deal more sense of the evidence. Yippie ky yay, secularists! One of the biggest hurdles for evolution to overcome is the transition of creatures from living in water to liv

Biblical creationists have long wondered about the world before the Genesis Flood, including why people lived longer. Speculations abound. One thing upon which creationists and secular scientists agree is that the atmosphere was different. Some interesting hyperbaric research ties into geology. Credit: Pixabay /  Sebastian Ganso There is evidence that the ancient atmosphere was much richer in oxygen and had greater pressure, which is indicated by fossils of very large critters. Hyperbaric chambers are used to treat patients with increased pressure and oxygen levels. Their cell metabolisms and telomeres in chromosomes are positively affected, and this may be an indication for why pre-Flood people lived such huge amounts of time. All of this is in preliminary stages as far as creation science is concerned, and it will be interesting to see what other creation scientists have to contribute. There are some strong indications about ancient Earth's atmosphere from this hyperbaric researc

When secularists ridicule biblical creation science Ice Age models, you may get a variety of answers. That is, if they have anything other than, "Because atheism". Uniformitarian views require billions of years of gradual processes so Darwin's magic can happen, but they fail to explain observed evidence. Upsala glacier photographed from the International Space Station, Image credit:  NASA (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) In fact, the idea of an ice age was resisted by secularists for many years after it was first proposed. It was viewed as a threat to uniformitarianism, but they later incorporated it into their speculations because they couldn't ignore the evidence. However, they still have no idea how it happened; conjectures are conflicting and contrary to data. So, since they can't explain even one ice age, why not fifty? That's science. Use the fundamentally flawed Milankovitch Theory , because that's science, too. Never mind that bi

Secular geology is dominated by uniformitarian (slow and gradual beliefs), but when cornered, they invoke forms of catastrophe. One example is the Channeled Scablands . Another is mudstone, which was previously used in efforts to refute the Genesis Flood. It has been proven to form very rapidly. Mudstone in New Zealand image credit: Flickr / Rachael  ( CC BY 2.0 ) Indeed, it was proven to form rapidly before (see " Fast-Forming Mudstones and the Genesis Flood "), and things have become worse for proponents of deep time and gradual processes. To be blunt, it's nice to see that there are still some scientists who are willing to admit that part of their paradigm were wrong. To see them admit that this is evidence for the global Genesis Flood — that may happen eventually. A radical revision of the origin of mudstones in 2014 just got another surprising update favorable to creationists. Old-earthers have long pointed to mudstones as evidence against a young earth. The thinking

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  In anticipation of the tenth annual Question Evolution Day on February 12 , we should mount up and head for yonder hill to get a bigger perspective. Misotheists and other evolutionists say that biblical creationists believe "myths" and "fairy tales" despite  scientific evidence. This raises some important questions. Image Credit: US Geological Survey (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Actually, the questions that are raised fit under an umbrella question: Why don't biblical creationists fear science? People who have something to hide or know that their belief systems won't withstand scrutiny seem to shun science, logic, and good theology. But we embrace such things. If natural sciences like geology truly support deep time, why are there organized tours by creationists? There are many, with people and organizations such as: Russ Miller of  Creation, Evolution & Science Ministries Eric Hovind of Creation Today Gra

Darwin's Handmaidens on teh interwebs and social(ist) media often utter words of profound wisdom: "Haw, haw! You idiots believe in that global Flood!" However, they reject the Genesis Flood despite the evidence. How do they react when secular sources indicate a massive flood? Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Nobu Tamura ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) While some evolutionists are quick to run off at the mouth and make proclamations that are not necessarily supported by evidence, a study was conducted over 20 years on dinosaur bones. (For supposedly having joined the choir invisible 65 million years ago, I reckon that their bones shouldn't be sticking up out of the ground like that.) They were disarticulated (not joined together), the bones were sorted from heavy to light, and other details. The data clearly indicates a huge flood. Biblical creationists have seen evidence of the global Genesis Flood in many places around the world. This includes sedimentary rock formations spanning huge

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Scoffers of the Genesis Flood often ask where all the water went, and biblical creationists point out that Earth is 70 percent covered by water. Also, if the earth were completely smooth, it would be completely covered by water. But there's more. Credit: NASA / ISS 42 / Terry Virts (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents by anyone) Something secularists detest (as do many old-earth creationists and theistic evolutionists) is that Genesis indicates the Earth was created out of water. Dr. D. Russell Humpreys based his accurate predictions of planetary fields on this. I reckon that if science contradicted creationism, we would light a shuck out of there. When materialistic assumptions and circular reasoning are stripped away, science supports creation; we have an especially good time with geology. I was spurred to write this here article because of one from 2018, " Science confirms Genesis Flood account, again ". While it is not a science

Like anyone else that commences to telling tall tales, secular scientists get their stories going but trap themselves. For example, they claim that Earth had five major ice ages that would have turned Earth into a snowball — with no mechanism for thawing even once! Then there are glacial striations. Gravelly Mountains image credit: USDA / Preston Keres Secularists believe that there were actually fifty (count 'em!) lesser ice ages in the Pleistocene, but each one conveniently ruined the evidence. But hey, look at the glacial striations in rocks, like them thar in the landslide on top of the Gravelly Mountains! (Also, there's tweaking the data from the ineffective Milankovitch theory .) A big problem with the so-called glacial striations is that they sure do look a lot like the results from rocks bouncing off one another. Actually, their ancient ice ages are explained by the one Ice Age and the Genesis Flood. Pleistocene sediments or geomorphological features before the last ice

We recently looked at how it is reasonable to expect to find certain things if an idea is correct, and this is borne out in the Grand Canyon in support of creation science Flood geology . We need to visit there again and examine folded rock layers. Credit: US National Park Service (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Believers in deep time seem to want us to believe irrational and contradictory things. Sedimentary layers are supposedly laid down gradually over hundreds of millions of years, but using the complex scientific principle of Making Things Up™, these stiff rocks folded under proper conditions. (By the way, folded is used to describe curved layers as well as those which aremore dramatically folded.) Still waiting on empirical evidence to support these unobserved events in the distant past. When the data is plugged into creation science Genesis Flood models, what is observed makes a great deal more sense. One thing the secularists have right: sedimentary rocks

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 walls.

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 Flood are 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 geology is that

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