Piltdown Superman

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

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

People who study origins and evolution have heard of Darwin's Abominable Mystery. Like the irreducibly complex eye was a serious problem for Darwin  (yet he still believed in gradual evolution anyway), the fact that flowering plants appear in the fossil record too soon was another problem for him. Neither was resolved. Evolutionists are prone to lying to con people to accept evolution, and they did so a spell back about DAM . This time, however, they are honest about the inescapable conclusion (based on their systems) that flowering plants existed millions of years sooner than they previously thought. Phylica pubescens , WikiComm  Marco Schmidt ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) Something that adds to their problem is that a flower found in amber is a Phylicia, which is basically identical to its living counterparts. It did not see fit to evolve after being subjected to "evolutionary pressures" through all those alleged millions of years. In addition, there should be a chain reaction in e

If you take a notion to go hiking in an area of the eastern Grand Canyon, you might come across a line of big fossils. Erosion in the Grand Canyon made them visible. Dr. Andrew Snelling says they look like fossilized giant toadstools. How did those  get there? According to biblical creation science, the Genesis Flood was exceptionally violent. (The Hebrew word מַבּוּל ( mabbul ) is only used about the Flood; other floods have different words.) It tore up everything, and we have jumbles of fossilized organisms from different habitats found together. Stromatolites in Shark Bay, Australia, Flickr / Paul Morris ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) But these stromatolites (which are living fossils, since a few exist today) are nice and orderly. In fact, they look like they were buried before  the Flood (as indicated by the layers and erosion). It greatly puzzled this child how  something like this could be buried, but the answer is quite simple. When God finished creating everything and declared it “very good”

On numerous occasions, secular scientists use words like exciting  as a cover for when discoveries threaten their deeply-held beliefs. It seems that such things are uttered by cosmologists as well as paleontologists. Oops, they did it again. Paleontologists found a fossil of a critter related to the modern aquatic animals in the phylum Cnidaria. From the report,  Auroralumina attenboroughii seems to have been quickly buried by a sweeping deluge of volcanic ash caused by the Genesis Flood. This upsets their notions of when modern animals first evolved. Cnidarians, NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Secularists have a heap of trouble dealing with the Cambrian explosion in the first place. Now this thing pops up 20 million Darwin years before the Cambrian explosion, so they have to evosplain it away while calling it "exciting." Well, it's exciting for biblical creationists as well, but for very different reaso

At first glance, the American paddlefish can be mistaken for a shark. Scientists long ago thought this was the case, but paddlefish and sharks are not close relatives. Its appearance is rather startling. There are or were relatives of  Polyodon spathula in China and the Mississippi River. Paddlefish Polyodon spathula , WikiComm / Хомелка  ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) Ol' spatula snout has a relative — "Isn't that a 1984 song by Madonna, Cowboy Bob?" "No, that's 'Like a Sturgeon.'" How did you guys get in here? You're both wrong, anyway. Speaking of sturgeon, the paddlefish is related to them. In fact, they startled believers in fish-to-fool evolution when it was discovered that  the two fish could interbreed . Because these fish have remained unchanged for millions of Darwin years, they are living fossils . Evolutionists call it stasis  (they didn't evolve because they didn't need to), which is a way to get out of the problem this presents. Anyon

Some evolutionists act like they are still giddy after spending May Day at the Darwin Ranch near Deception Pass, dancing around the May Pole and singing hymns to the Bearded Buddha. Mayhaps they joined the ranch hands in consuming peyote for religious purposes. In their ongoing mission to explore strange new ways of affirming evolution, some interesting methods to affirm it without evidence have been written. We have three articles to consider. The first is the longest, about a 12-minute read. Ichthyosaur, Copyright Expired Science Illustrations / Heinrich Harder , 1916 Some of these critters of dinosaur times were porpoise size, others were as big as a whale. Evolution is supposed to be without a plan, but evolutionary paganism was in the reports. Somehow, purpose-driven evolution provided numerous adaptations for marine reptiles. One weird speculation is that they evolved in "bursts." Uh, evidence, please?  Fun fact: The English word please  is a shortened form of plesiosau

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen This post will have a rather substantial interruption, since one thing led to another in my research. While going down rabbit holes can be fun, it can be a huge distraction for this child (and many other folks). The topic is how secular scientists were sad about a disease found in a fossilized dinosaur. I searched for news of a fossil where a hadrosaur was injured by a T. rex before it took a dirt nap. Stay with me while I discuss a snarky anti-creationist, okay? Sauropod, Flikr / tadekk  ( CC BY 2.0 ) Plaintive Paleontologists There are advertisements designed to tug at viewers' heart strings by showing suffering animals, you can help by giving them money (use caution and check them out first ). Sure, those are living things, and decent people don't want to see them suffer. But why would researchers grab tissues over a sauropod fossil? It is demised. It is no more. It is an ex-sauropod. The sauropod showed signs of having a painful disease, and they spe

It must be rough being a scientist who is trying to investigate, explore, calculate, and generally do science stuff, but the secular science industry has leftist and materialistic agendas. (I know myself the feeling of working for dishonest companies while trying to make a living, but it must be worse for a genuine scientist.) Especially when having questions and scientific material ignored or even suppressed. Not only is this rampant in origins research, but leftists manipulate global warming with fear and disingenuous science. Made from images at Clker and Open Clipart One blatant example of sycophants in the secular science industry is how a  vampire squid fossil was named after Joe Biden . This was done not because of paleontology, but because they approve of his "green" agenda. That stuff is  very socialist . People can be intimidated with the appeal to authority of, "Scientists say..." Political leftists and the secular science industry use that, coupled with

Other biblical creationists and I think that not only does God have a sense of humor, but he has set up various creatures to be discovered to defy Darwin's acolytes. We have examined the platypus here several times, and when evolutionists study it further... it does not go well . The title of this post is not something I dreamed up all by my lonesome. It is based on terms that secular researchers used themselves, and the alleged evolution of this crab fossil is troubling for evolution. Callichimaera perplexa , photo by Javier Luque via Wikimedia Commons  ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) Charles Darwin famously admitted: To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. He went on to say that he believed that it evolved anyway . Modified at

There are three family classifications of pinnipeds, which are walruses, sea lions, and seals. These oceanic carnivores account for one quarter of all carnivores on Earth, and these eat a variety of marine animals. Pinnipeds have a variety of movements in water and on land. Believers in universal common descent evolution say that the three families, like whales, had land ancestors that did an about-face and evolved some more to live in the sea. Other evolutionists disagree, saying that genetics does not support a single ancestor. Atlantic Grey Seals, RGBStock / Elvis Santana The fossil record does not support any kind of pinniped descent with modifications. Sure, there is evidence for variety, but not evolution — which is what biblical creationists expect. One weak attempt to find a fossil link between seals and their land-based ancestors was simply an otter. Question Evolution Day is February 12 For that matter, fossils of monk seals are the same as their living counterparts. The evi

If you head north in England, you will reach the ceremonial county of Northumberland. Find Howick and head for the North Sea. If you go for a stroll, be careful walking on boulders, and watch out for overhangs. Boulders fall. Also watch out for millipedes as big as cars. As big as cars? By length, mayhaps, but not by weight or width. And not living. An incomplete fossil was discovered in one of the aforementioned boulders that fell and broke open. Arthropleura , extinct millipede, model. Maker: Peter Roberts, Photographer: Benjamin Healley Source: Museums Victoria ( CC BY 4.0 ) Secular paleontologists commenced to using circular reasoning about the age and former environment. They also used guesswork on their deep time and evolutionary presuppositions, but there's no sign of an evolutionary progression from smaller critters. Their speculations raised other questions that went unanswered. What was found is best explained by recent creation, then rapid burial during the Genesis Floo

You have probably seen those crime scene shows where the investigators search for stains from blood or other things, and it glows under alternative lighting even though it was invisible under normal conditions. Although such things are exaggerated for the sake of the story, there is also truth to them. In a similar forensic manner (after all, origins science is historical and forensic in nature), researchers examined pterosaur fossil that was probably considered old news and had nothing left to tell. New methods gave insight into its flying ability. Pteranodon from Pixabay / Damian Trochanowski , modified at PhotoFunia , then cropped Darwin's disciples have puzzled until their puzzlers were sore about powered flight in pterosaurs, coming up with schemes that are non-science . Instead of bowing to the Bearded Buddha and mindlessly chanting, " It evolved !", they should consider the fact that the Master Engineer designed living things. This is obvious in the revisited foss

According to proponents of molecules-to-miner evolution, the fossil record reveals an orderly progression of life forms changing from simple to more complex over long periods of time. That is the sanitized version presented in schools and proclaimed out yonder at the Darwin Ranch. In reality, there are fossils in the wrong order and many observed facts give lie to evolutionary stories. The Cenozoic is not friendly to evolution despite the claims of Darwin's disciples. Many mammals appear in the Cenozoic, giving superficial credence to evolution. Coal mining at Powder River Basin in Wyoming Flickr / BLM Wyoming ( CC BY 2.0 ), usage does not imply endorsement of site contents Darwin's abominable mystery (not to be confused with his abdominal mystery, which involved a bad burrito and global warming) was the sudden appearance of flowering plants (angiosperms). That owlhoot knew all along that the fossil record was unfriendly to his speculations, but he sold it anyway. That's w

This post features the third part in a series by Dr. Robert Carter, first two of which were made available in this post . I thought he was done, but he had some more to discuss with us. In this article, he discusses a model for the created kinds, baramins , of Genesis. Darwin's "Tree of Life" simply does not work. Biblical creationists have pointed out that created kinds are like an orchard, or branching trees in a forest. Dr. Carter believes that this concept should be developed another way. Corals extend tentacles, NPS / A. Bourque (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Many secularists get furious — furious , I tell you — that creation scientists reject  their  classification system (which materialists stole from creationist Carl Linnaeus and modified to fit atheistic naturalism), and are working on baraminology , the study of created kinds . No, creationists do not believe in the "fixity of species" (no speciation, everything stayed the same). T

We continue the series by Dr. Tomkins of the Institute for Creation Research on geological layers, this time seeing problems presented by the Cretaceous to particles-to-paleontologist evolutionists. Slow and gradual transitions from simple to complex are just not happening. The lack of transitional forms was acknowledged by Charles Darwin to be a difficulty for his ideas, but he pressed on in the hope that maybe someday they would be found. Evolution is supposed to be built on evidence, not blind faith or wishful thinking. Edmontosaurus annectens by  Nobumichi Tamura  at Wikimedia Commons ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) Despite their appearances in movies with the word "Jurassic" in their titles, some of the most famous dinosaurs are registered to vote in the Cretaceous. (Paleontologists are seeking rescuing devices while biblical creationists are celebrating soft tissues and more from these bad boys.) There is nothing to indicate evolution, they just suddenly appeared — which is yet anoth

Descent with modifications evolution is presented in sanitized versions, omitting or even misrepresenting inconvenient facts. Presenting both sides of the equation can get someone virtually horsewhipped, such as in this example . Sometimes, facts against evolution are glaringly obvious. (Out near the Darwin Ranch on Peach Road lives one of the workers who was driven insane by the truth. He keeps mumbling, then screaming, about living fossils.) Charles Darwin himself admitted that living fossils are one of many problems for his speculations. His acolytes are blowing smoke on the problem. Mostly made at PhotoFunia Presupposing deep time and assigning dates to fossils and rock layers, paleontologists find fossils of various organisms that are essentially unchanged from their living counterparts. They get tagged with the moniker living fossils . There's a passel of them, not just a few here and there. Since evolution is used to explain everything (logically fatuous, so it actually expl

A spell back, a Page on Fakebook dedicated to sharing Christian material for the purpose of mockery stated in part, "Another thing that supposedly confirms Noah's flood." If this troop of Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ paid attention, there are numerous evidences for the Genesis Flood, not just a couple of items. Here we have two examples of something troubling to evolutionists and deep-time proponents: massive fossil graveyards. There are many of these all around the world, and are not just anomalies to dismiss. Credit: Another work by  Nobumichi Tamura  at Wikimedia Commons ( CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 ) In an article originally posted in 2007, a passel of dinosaur fossils was discovered not all that far from Ulan Bator, Mongolia. While parrot-beaked dinosaurs were smaller than the big ones that get so much attention, they were not tiny and helpless. Paleontologists are baffled, and tried to evosplain the fossils. It did not go well. How do you fossilize 187 parrot-beaked dinosaurs

If you start in London town, it takes about twelve hours to drive to Loch Torridon, a place that got Darwinists all excited about fossils that look like tiny balls. (If you go to Kelso , that is the wrong way. People who start out there, however, still have almost six hours to drive.) Several science disciplines are involved in discussing these balls found in phosphate deposits, such as geology and biology. This ties in with their beliefs about the origin of life. Loch Torridon image credit: Freeimages /  Ceitidh MacMaster The articles we are going to examine has some technical material, and it is split in two parts. Evolutionists make a passel of presuppositions regarding the fossils that look like balls of cells. They evosplain that they are primitive, and that the ancestor of all living things (who never receives birthday cards or phone calls) was even more primitive. Well, that part is consistent with their views. It is becoming more frequent for scientists to find exceptionally we