Piltdown Superman

Darwinists dutifully repeat the title of an essay by Theodosius Dobzhansky that "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution," then smile smugly as if they cited a creation-destroying maxim. Actually, evolution is scarce in college textbooks in life sciences . It is useless when it is not harmful in medicine. As I mentioned elsewhere, nobody consulted or referenced the Darwin oracle during my extended stay in the hospital. At least, not in my presence or to discuss my treatment plan.  Darwin spirit and medical science modified from a photograph at Pixnio It's a good thing evolution is scarce in textbooks considering all the harm that evolutionary thinking has produced in medical science. For example, the  vestigial organs concept has been refuted . Using faulty presuppositions, evolutionists stifled research because they declared  large portions of DNA to be "junk ." Don't forget the risible thinking that  heart problems exist  because of

Proponents of spores-to-spectroscopist evolution like to tell biblical creationists how wrong we are, and they cite "evidence" from textbooks and the popular press. Those of us who have ridden the trail for a spell have seen numerous occasions where new discoveries in human origins cause turmoil for the hands at the Darwin Ranch. Modified from an image at Openclipart Time and again, there are troubles in evolutionary dogma where we read, essentially, "This changes everything, and we have to rewrite the evolutionary timeline". Even so, outdated and even false material shows up in textbooks, on documentaries, and especially on Internet posts by Darwinistas. They wouldn't have this problem if they didn't cling to their rebellion against the Creator and keep concocting false origins fantasies. Some of the latest problems involve Homo naledi, Homo floresiensis, and a really disturbing bit of news on Homo sapiens in Borneo, where they had just about everyth

To continue with our bad science education focus, today's article will discuss how the number of retractions has escalated dramatically. As I said before , people want the grants and prestige with being the one to discover or make up a new theory, so they rush their work to market. This results in some retractions. But even so, bad "science" is still in the textbooks. The number of retracted scientific papers has skyrocketed in the last decade. In 2010, two science editors started Retraction Watch, a blog dedicated to tracking science paper retractions. So far, the site has tracked about 200 papers. Retractions can occur for different reasons. About 73 percent of retracted papers in 2010 had errors, either in the research methods used or in the writing, and about 27 percent contained fraud, according to a recent presentation on the blog. But just because a retraction occurs doesn't mean that the flawed report goes away. Nature reported that 235

Not too long ago, it was reported that scientists learned of something unthinkable: white blood cells working in both the brain and the immune system . Now this. Ever hear of interferon gamma? It would make for a lousy name for a horse, sounding like something from a Transformers  movie. Researchers have unbridled a long-standing belief about the immune system that involves interferon gamma, so textbooks will have to be rewritten. Image assembled from graphics at Clker clipart Interferon gamma changes from a giant robot into a yellow Camaro — I mean, this molecule has a purpose that was previously unknown. Scientists did some genetic interfering and engineered mice without this molecule (a pretty impressive bit of work). Turns out that the molecule affects social interaction as well as the immune system. What do evolutionists do? Not only do they wonder how it evolved, but they gave evolution that puny god status again: it can make decisions and foresee the future! But wait, t

When the cause is "right", then it does not matter how one goes about achieving a goal, yes? Misleading people, outright lying, shading the truth — those are acceptable, yes? For the most part, the philosophy of "the end justifies the means" is frowned upon. But apparently, indoctrination in evolutionism is an exception. In that case, go ahead and lie to students; they must be compelled to believe in evolution (and use the equivocation fallacy to refer to this philosophy about the past as "science") at all costs. Don't forget to leave the mistakes, frauds, errors and reclassifications in the textbooks! When these sidewinders lie, they are being consistent with their fundamentally flawed worldview. There have been many examples of evolutionary falsehoods used to indoctrinate students into evolution. The list includes Forged Haeckel embryo pictures, still used in many textbooks Staged photos of peppered moths whic

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

Once again, secular scientists have used their presuppositions to force-fit information, then proceed to do a half-hearted job at explanations — then leave it. The explanation is accepted and then put into textbooks with a truckload of other semi-investigated findings. Later, some other scientists decide that something needs another look, and the whole thing needs to be retooled. Given the track record of evolution and old-earth devotees, bad information is likely to remain uncorrected in textbooks for many years, if ever. In this case, the so-called Messinian salinity crisis. This involved having the Mediterranean Sea dry up repeatedly over millions of years, but the evidence does not support the claims. Also, the scientists partially left their own presuppositions to invoke the word "catastrophe", which was not well received by other uniformitarian geologists. Further investigation is warranted, and biblical creationists need to give this project serious examination

What do you call a story that has historical underpinnings, believers, defenders, promoters, fanatical devotion — without any empirical evidence? I would be tempted to say that it sounds like a myth. In 1999 Phillip Johnson, author of Darwin on Trial , said on CNN: "I think we should teach a lot about evolution. In fact, I think we should teach more than the evolutionary science teachers want the students to know. The problem is what we're getting is a philosophy that's claimed to be scientific fact, a lot of distortion in the textbooks, and all the difficult problems left out, because they don't want people to ask tough questions." But in the ensuing dozen years, how much has really changed in science classrooms? What follows is a partial list of questions that could be used to critically examine and evaluate evolution. They would make good classroom discussions, initiated by either teacher or student, or research assignments. You can read the rest o

As usual, I am going to give you an introduction and then link to a specially-selected article. And now for something completely different. For a bit. The article that I am going to link is on a site that is very difficult to read. Edit: It's been improved, so I am leaving this paragraph here for helpful browser hints. So I am going to offer a few practical options. First, many current versions of browsers will let you enlarge and reduce text on pages with CTRL+Plus Sign, or similar keystrokes. You may want to check your "View" in the menu bar. Second, you may want to have an RSS reader available. Several are listed here . Third, Send to Reader is useful for Firefox users with the free "bookmarklet", but works only for Kindle. Fourth, Push to Kindle by fivefilters also has browser extensions. It does what it says, strips out the clutter and sends to the Kindle. In addition, it also has a few other options where you can download the Kindle and EPUB format

The more we learn about the complexities of genetics, amino acids, the cell itself, mutations and so many other things, the more we can see that evolution is an empty, unscientific philosophy that should have been discarded years ago. For example, people still insist that the long-discredited Miller-Urey experiment regarding the "primordial Earth" is proof of chemical evolution. What did they really  get from this experiment? Image modi fied from Yassine Mrabet   /Wiki media C ommons First, cheating pays off in "science", because they started with amino acids, broke them down, and then got amino acids again. Second, it shows that intelligence, not chance, made things happen (such as the "cold trap" trick). Third, that a bad experiment (a spark does not equal a lightning bolt, get real) can yield "results" if they fit preconceptions. Even worse for evolutionists, this faulty experiment manages to argue against abiogenesis. Abiogene

Julian Huxley was a propagandist for Darwinism, and he published something in 1952 that should have been immediately dismissed. Huxley, and later Carl Sagan, claimed that the "Samurai Crab" (heikegani) is an example of evolution in action, and people ate up this concept — but not the crabs. Samurai statue image credit: Pixabay/ Samuele Schirò In their efforts to dismiss our Creator, Huxley and Sagan claimed that natural selection was at work because superstitious Japanese fisherman threw the heikegani back into the water because they resembled samurai warriors. The samurai became the military ruling class and rose to prominence during medieval times. So, the crabs with the resemblance to samurai warriors were thrown back and kept reproducing. People accepted this dishonest propaganda. I believe that is is partially based on authority because Huxley and Sagan were scientists. Being a scientists does not make someone right, pilgrim, but it impresses people who are unwi

Some advocates of virus-to-virologist evolution try to distance themselves from origin of life problems by claiming that abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution. People who have two or more brain cells to rub together can easily tell that this is false. If you study on it, you'll see that not only is the origin of life prominent in textbooks, documentaries ( just ask David Attenborough ), NASA , and so forth that deal with evolution, but you can't have anything evolve if there is nothing living. That means the origin of life is important to evolutionism. Savvy? Image by Rudi Williams , American Forces Press Service, 2002 Although the chances of one cell evolving by chance are about one in forget it, a few cling to the idea, and others put the problem way up in the nothingmuch of deep space. Some troublemaker at the Darwin Ranch dropped a string of firecrackers in the Origin of Life Corral, and all the horses bolted in different directions. Wild ideas about pansper

Those undaunted defenders of Darwinism are stepping up their attacks. Allow people to see the flaws in evolution? Present evolution honestly in textbooks? Ranging from the fury of the "New Atheists", to the propaganda mills like NCSE, to the dishonest BCSE and the useful idiots who support them , to the wandering evolutionists who patrol the Web — academic, intellectual and religious freedoms are receiving more pressure all the time. Some people are not even allowed to have a private opinion that disagrees with evolution! Some recent cases of intolerance against  Darwin skeptics are so extreme, they defy all logic or propriety.  Yet when Darwinists promote radical ideas, they get a pass. The Discovery Institute is on a campaign to defend the career and reputation of a Ball State University professor, Eric Hedin, who dared to present both sides of the debate over intelligent design instead of just the pro-Darwin side (see Evolution News & Views).  Not only t

As we have seen several times, it is important to define your terms in certain discussion. In this case, the word metal means something different to astronomers than to us reg'lar folk. For them, it is an element more dense than hydrogen and helium . The terms heavy metal or heavy element are not defined consistently. RCW 86 supernova remnant enhanced image credit: NASA / ESA / JPL-Caltech  / UCLA / CXC / SAO (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) According to Big Bang mythology, that event produced hydrogen, helium, and some lithium. Then stellar fusion produced some of the lighter metals. To rock on to the heavy metals, however, requires supernovas and even kilonovas. Cosmologists deny recent creation and keep digging themselves in deeper because they cannot explain the abundance of useful elements on Earth. They also have other problems that are conveniently ignored. Stuff happens is an accurate summary of "scientific explanations" presented t

Evolutionary paleontologists are known for using circular reasoning . They deny this, of course, but take a look-see: The age of an index fossil is determined by the rock layer where it was located. The age of the rock layer is determined by the index fossil. Then they lay out the geologic column according to their long-age belief system and put it in textbooks. Looks good in books, because the geologic column you see there doesn't exist in nature. Whitby Lighthouses / PublicDomainPictures / Pixabay The cliffs at Whitby, England, down by the seashore (where maybe Sally sells seashells) are eroding and giving up some fossils. Most are no big deal, but there was one big deal, a Jurassic fossil. Circular reasoning and dating according to worldviews ensues, and a great time is had by all. However, the real world is not convenient for evolutionists. Instead, erosion rates and fossil yields support not only a young world, but indicate the global catastrophe called the Genesis Floo

It is a fact that young people will be indoctrinated in particles-to-professor evolution in schools, whether public or Christian. Indeed, some homeschool curricula are not to be trusted. Some parents may want to shield students from evolution. Bad idea, because they will learn it one way or another — and possibly wonder why their parents are afraid of "the truth." Evolution is not just a biological theory. Instead, many people (especially in science organizations or academia) have evolution as a worldview, guiding their thoughts and actions, then preaching fallacious principles. University lecture, Pixabay / Nikolay Georgiev It may seem like drama, but it is a fact that professors use evolution as a "scientific" way of destroying the faith of students. Well-documented is the fact that students lose their Christian beliefs. Why is that? One simple reason is that parents are unable to answer questions, and just wave them off. They know that creation is true, but their

It is common knowledge that the secular news media are, for the most part, heavily biased toward the political left. This obviously influences their reporting — which seems more like propaganda than actual journalism. After all, journalists are expected to investigate and ask hard questions. There are a few reporters who want to do their jobs. Unfortunately, they are obscured by the lapdog majority. In the secular science industry, leftist causes and Darwinism are paramount as well as symbiotic. The public wants answers and is getting annoyed with the science press. Sausages by Amanda Lim at Unsplash (modified, obviously) In an article on an Intelligent Design site titled " Why Are Science Reporters So Credulous? ", David Klinghoffer points out that secular science journalists are assembling press releases instead of doing genuine reporting. He quotes Nicholas Wade, who indicates that journalists put scientists on pedestals which hinders doubt or healthy skepticism. The secu

One problem that creationists have is that we have to deal with Darwin's Drones who want to negate what we have to say with proof of evolution. (Some are more reasonable and simply want to give what they consider to be evidence of evolution, not "proof".) Creationists and Intelligent Design proponents do not have a problem with evidence, because what Darwinists have to offer in defense of their worldview is weak. Have you ever seen a creationist haiku on a tombstone before? The most frequent problem we have is when evolutionists present what they consider evidence, and it has been dealt with by creationists already or even discarded by evolutionary scientists. They seldom do their homework. Unfortunately, these things keep popping up and are even in textbooks and so forth. We often know their material better than they do. This article presents two items that are touted as evidence for evolution that should be buried. One is a claim that since some members o

Laypeople who are devout evolutionists are a gullible lot. That's right, I said it! Especially the ones who troll the Internet, looking to harass non-believers . Their sources of information include outdated textbooks (where the alleged "ancestors" of man that have been discredited, reclassified, revealed as outright fakes and so forth), popular evolutionary propaganda sites and publications that only reveal the acceptable side, as well as their own willingness to be deceived. I have received comments about this site being "wrong". Why is it wrong? Because some wandering evolutionist fundamentalist said so.  (Even more interesting is when a fellow told me that the article that I linked was completely wrong. It turns out the link was broken; he had never read it! On Twitter, this is an example of #Liar4Darwin.) Most of the time, these pop evolution propaganda readers only bolster their emotional reactions and enthusiasm, but not actual science learning. They ce

The famous "geologic(al) column" that is presented as evidence for uniformitarianism and evolution has several problems. The first one is that the sequences do not exist except in textbooks and the imaginations of Evolution's True Believers ®. The layers are out of order. A second problem is the circular reasoning used to date the layers by use of index fossils (we know how old a layer is because of the fossils in it, and we know how old a fossil is because of the layer in which it was found).  A further problem for evolutionary geologists and paleontologists are the missing layers, totally disrupting the expected sequences. These are not minor aberrations in small areas that can be dismissed. Instead, they cover large areas and involve alleged millions of years. The frequent flatness add to the annoyance. To make matters worse for uniformitarianism, these gaps support  Noachian Flood models postulated by creationists. ‘Flat gaps’, generally known as paraconfor