Piltdown Superman

Operating from materialistic presuppositions, believers in descent-with-modifications evolution have attempted to create life in various ways. Although the obedient media of the secular science industry trumpets how they proved that life can happen by chance, such claims are false. In a similar way, people are all atwitter about alleged synthetic life.  Since their worldview requires life to begin as simple cells, scientists tried to make their own cells. They pattern their work from cells that already exist. It did not go well. Modified from a photograph from  PIXNIO The goal was to make the cells as minimal as possible, so they assumed that certain genes were not essential. Then they found out that those were essential after all (reminiscent of the dreadful assumptions made in the "junk" DNA fiasco ). Their final product could not exist in the wild, so to speak. Also, the synthetic cells would have to rely on existing cells for their own survivial. God is still the Creator

It is one thing for scientists to make mistakes, but Darwin's acolytes are slow to correct them when the naturalism narrative is threatened. Indeed, several icons of evolution have been referenced on this site alone that continue unabated. One of these is the claim that the appendix is "vestigial". Neotinic atheists and many evolutionists are happy to let errors slide despite the oft-repeated mantra that "science is self-correcting". So-called vestigial structures/organs were supposedly unneeded leftovers from our evolutionary past, so they atrophied or became nonfunctional. Like the claim of "junk" DNA , evidence was hitched to the wagon of evolutionary presuppositions, and a passel of hubris was added to the load. All of these are assumptions based on worldviews, not conclusions based on scientific evidence. The hubris is that secularists did not understand DNA ( which had not been fully sequenced ), nor did they understand the functions of certain s

A few days ago, Jacqueline Hyde, the lady friend of Rusty Swingset from the Darwin Ranch, wanted to meet up with me over at Gravel Gulch. Although an evolutionist, she has some doubts. She also was not happy about recent dishonesty regarding so-called junk DNA. If interested, you can find the original 1895 photo at  Wikimedia Commons , Papa Darwin's image is found all over the web, and the source of the DNA image is at openclipart Evolution is essential for making an evolutionary worldview appear rational. Its adherents despise anything that even hints at design, since they are committed to time, luck, time, chance, time, mutations, and especially time. They make up ridiculous dysteleology arguments that our Creator is a bad designer, therefore he must not exist. However, their specious arguments have been clearly refuted in creation science, the Intelligent Design organizations, and the secular science industry. Pre-refuted for your convenience. Who do they think they are, Bill Ny

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  The content of this post (and especially in the featured article below) is  both important and disturbing , so be forewarned on both counts. People want to believe they are special, and the Nazis used evolutionism, bad science, and propaganda to "prove" the Aryan "race" was superior. Background image furnished by  Why?Outreach An honest examination of evolutionary thinking reveals that it has spawned many evils, including: Medical malpractice such as  "junk" DNA  and  "vestigial" structures Communism Scientific Racism It played a major factor in  World War I Eugenics Abortion Nazi racist policies , which were not limited to the Jews,  but also Gypsies  and others As we have seen many times, many adherents of the  Darwin Death Cult® are not driven by evidence, but instead are trying to promote the atheistic naturalism narrative . (If evolutionists were indeed following the evidence, they would all be biblical creationists!

There was a time when, with scant knowledge of Venus, people fantasized about it being a sort of paradise. That was spoiled by increases in science and technology; no life could exist there. Now because Venus stinks, there must  be life there. Idunn Mons on Venus image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / ESA (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) I heard it said of Venus, "Baby, she's got it!" Not a chance. If you're into extreme heat and pressure, clouds of sulfuric acid, volcanoes,  a day there is almost as long as an Earth year,  and other things that make it low on recommended lists of vacation spots,  have a nice trip. Scientists are excited because the toxic, odoriferous gas known as phosphine may have been detected in its clouds, and as far as we know , it is given off by living things. So, life on Venus is the only possible explanation? Must be something interesting to survive all those other conditions, huh? Of course, it would need something

It seems that scientists would learn from their mistakes, especially after being humiliated for decades over the insipience of referring to some parts of DNA as "junk". New research demonstrates even more how sufficient research is needed before waving off things that are not understood. Image assembled from components at  Clker  clipart Not only did the assumption of evolution hinder research, but they married that idea up with the fallacy of arguing from ignorance. Essentially, "We don't know what this part of the genome does, it doesn't code for proteins, so it must be junk from our evolutionary past. Because evolution." An important thing for them to learn is that the Master Engineer puts things in place for specific purposes. Recent research from the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (OIST) continues to highlight how evolutionary theory influenced scientists to foolishly conclude that DNA in organisms not used to co

For a long time, it was thought that DNA was the lord of genetic molecules to rule them all. When research indicated that genes can effectively jump and reattach, scientists circled the wagons and responded not only with ignoring the material, but also with hostility. Since then, it has been bad news for Darwin's followers. Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net / Stuart Miles As an aside, the strong reaction against research and the efforts to protect the paradigm of unchanging DNA reinforces the point that scientists are not "follow where the evidence leads" dispassionate automatons. They are people. Since evolutionary dogma is based on purposelessness, one may expect that if genes detach themselves and wander off, it would make matters worse for the organism. Unfortunately for naturalists, research shows that this detaching and reattaching in other areas is an important function. Not only does this further exemplify the work of the Master Engineer, it also shows the foo

The more we learn, the more we discover that we did not know much at all. Then we realize that we still have much more to learn — and how fundamentalist Darwinists can be obtuse popinjays. Take that red stuff flowing in our veins. A new discovery opens up a passel of possibilities. Credit: PIXNIO / Janice Haney Carr , USCDCP Darwin did not know very much about the natural world, and he should have paid attention to the beginnings of genetics pioneered by Gregor Mendel (peas be upon him). An amazing amount of information has been learned about genetics in a short time, and knowledge about blood has also increased. Mitochondrial membrane proteins are an amazing discovery that further support the genius of the Master Engineer. Fortunately, instead of acting like earlier DNA researchers and waving off what they did not understand as "junk", these researchers want to determine the function of circulating mitochondria. It was known that mitochondria are found outside of ce

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Some of the most popular television programs involve forensic science to investigate crime scenes. The CSI  franchise had almost 800 episodes, and numerous law enforcement dramas involve forensic technician activities. You can find many documentaries that are nonfiction. I feel that some of those are more disturbing than the fictional programs. Credit:  Bureau of Labor Statistics (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) These people are highly trained and specialize in different fields (television shows are a bit misleading when they portray them as experts in practically everything). Attention to the smallest details are essential, and evidence can accumulate to lead investigators to successful conclusions. Sometimes new technology can be used to solve "cold cases" that were shelved for years. Both creation science and universal common ancestor evolution are forensic sciences. Biblical creationists believe the Word of God while mo

If you ride up on the hill and look down at the bigger picture, you should be able to see that Darwinism interferes with medical science. Enthusiasts try to convince us that evolutionary thinking is important , but it is harmful to medical science. Consider what has been provided to us.  Modified from a photograph from  PIXNIO Typically, purveyors of minerals-to-mycologist evolution believe in time, chance, random processes, mutations — and supposedly no design (unless they appeal to pantheism and Gaia ) and no Creator. By presupposing materialism, Papa Darwin's version of natural selection, and evolution, we have been subjected to the foolishness of vestigial structures , so-called junk DNA , and more. Indeed, it is best to realize that the Master Engineer put things in their places for specific purposes.  Real medical science has little use for evolutionary thinking, but secularists want to increase their input. Just because scientists do not understand their function do

It is bad enough when minerals-to-microbiologist proponents use faulty arguments to put the spurs to their beliefs, but it is far worse when they hinder science. Especially medical science. We have seen the harmful results of this with so-called vestigial structures , and evolutionary reasoning has given us "junk" DNA. This embarrassing concept is based on ignorance as well as presupposing evolution. Basically, "We can't find a use for what we see, so it must be useless leftovers from evolution". Creationists have said all along that the Master Engineer puts things in their places for definite purposes, and subsequent findings for non-coding DNA have shown it to be essential. Yippie ky yay, secularists! However, medical science has been held back by such evolutionary foolishness. The term ‘junk DNA’ became popular in the 1960s. It was used to support neo-Darwinism, since it is widely known that recessive mutations accumulate relentlessly in sexually repr

When Gregor Mendel (peas be upon him) pioneered the science of genetics, little did he dream that the field would develop so dramatically. With the advances came questions of ethics regarding genetic tampering  including the outrage caused by Dr. He Jiankui forumulating designer babies . The science can cause a passel of problems as well as substantial benefits. CRISPR genome editing / Image credit: National Institutes of Health (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents.) Lives may be improved with the repair of congenital defects, but there is one very large problem: some of these owlhoots do not know what they are doing. They can use CRISPR-Cas9 and do some gene editing to some extent, but some seem to be the equivalent of people selling pharmaceutical products in dark alleys. To make the ethics questions worse Remember, using bad science techniques, lack of knowledge, and microbes-to-microbiologist evolutionary presuppositions, scientists came up with the seriou

It is a mite distressing that some people believe the earth is flat, and some of them are professing Christians and even creationists. This is ironic because not only was the idea started to make the Bible look foolish, but it has been soundly refuted both scientifically and theologically . (The president of the Flat Earth Society is a Darwinist, by the way.) One of the strangest claims that some flat earthers make is that moonlight removes heat and cools things. Sea View by Moonlight , Ivan Aivazovsky, 1878 This idea should be subject to verification or refutation scientifically. Some owlhoots have made a pretense at proving their claim, but their efforts are woefully inadequate. Like faulty evidence for evolution ( including "junk" DNA ), people doing what passes for research argue from their presuppositions, find a bit of data they think is confirmation, and think their work is done. Experiments and research must be done as completely as possible. Neutral or ne

When scientists first sequenced the human genome, they were working from their evolutionary presuppositions and using inferior equipment. They also made mistakes, and there is a problem with inaccurate results from contamination. Their "junk DNA" assumptions have been debunked. Credit: CSIRO/ Garry Brown  ( CC by 3.0 ) (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Since scientists could not find a use for some parts of the genome, they called it "junk", leftover from our alleged evolutionary past. Creationists said all along that the stuff is not junk, and eventually were proved right because many functions have been discovered. Sad for Darwinists, because they need  the so-called junk to support their ideas. The usefulness of introns  has also been doubted. How about going to something simpler for testing? Yeast is good for this. The genome only has 295 introns, after all, so yeast is easier to study. Research showed that introns are also valuable. B

This post contains some direct material, but it is biological, not salacious. We have seen how Darwinists make claims that something is "poorly designed", therefore, evolution. (This is self-defeating, because chance cannot produce something better that the subjects they question.) Their claims are refuted upon examination. We can add the male reproductive system to the list. Credit: Freeimages/ Erik Araujo I could say that I have no complaints, and have children to prove that it works. People who know about logical fallacies should be able to see how that one is wrong, and the same bad reasoning has been used to support evolution. One secularist complaint is that since testicles are outside the body and not on the inside (such as with reptiles), this is bad design. That is a very superficial "argument" based on opinion, not scientific facts. Naturalists have made bland assertions about things like "junk" DNA, vestigial organs/structures, and more

While scientists work from their presuppositions and interpret the evidence accordingly, many owlhoots will attempt to force-fit the evidence into their views. For years, proponents of muck-to-misotheist evolution have claimed that we have "junk" DNA, arguing from ignorance. In addition, they claim that we have pseudogenes. This was also based on assumptions and lack of knowledge. Then they commenced to making excuses with what they called pseudo-pseudogenes. Background image modified and furnished by Why?Outreach There is still a great deal to learn from the science of genetics that Mendel began (peas be upon him), so a bit of humility from scientists is in order. Similar "mistakes" in different organisms are illogically hailed as evidence for evolution. Not hardly! When further scientific research with better methods is conducted, we learn that there is no "junk" DNA and that pseudogenes do indeed have functions. Important functions. Yes, som

Some scientists are planning an experiment with releasing what is essentially chalk dust into the atmosphere. They think a large cloud of the stuff may reflect sunlight and cause global cooling, which may be useful geoengineering against global warming. They have ignored some important details in their hubris, and inadvertently point to science that supports the Ice Age resulting from the Genesis Flood. Credit: Add Letters Secular scientists often pretend to have more knowledge than they actually possess. This is seen in many areas, such as calling some parts of DNA "junk" , deciding that some body parts are "vestigial ", thinking that the moon would be a really swell place for a colony , failed evolutionary predictions regarding the fruit fly , the exceptional arrogance utilized in human gene editing experimentation , and so many more. Global climate change models spectacularly fail ( just ask Algore ), which is partially because they use faulty data ; those

Adherents of Big Bang-to-banker evolution, whether cosmic or biological, often resort to hidden causes. Since the Big Bang does not work, cosmologists bring in fudge factors and occult cosmology like dark matter, dark energy, and more to make their speculations seem plausible. Other riders for the materialist brand are using related terms to prop up Darwinism. Background image furnished by Why?Outreach In biology, these "dark" things are not just made up to make evolution look good. Instead, secularists are speculating about things they do not understand. "Junk" DNA , for example, was something that scientists did not understand, so they arrogantly declared significant parts of DNA to be leftover junk from our alleged evolutionary past. It's a natural fact that their hubris is vexatious. Now they are appealing to other "dark" things in biology, including DNA: dark DNA is the driving force of evolution. Of course, these owlhoots are presenting