Piltdown Superman

Despite all the tall tales, speculations presented as science, and rescuing devices, secular astronomers and cosmologists are consistently unable to make the universe seem old. Accumulated evidence continues to affirm that our solar system is young , and star formation ideas continually fail. What about those exoplanets? Credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Since hopes of finding life outside our solar system are disappearing quick-like, mayhaps naturalists can salvage an old universe formed by cosmic evolution. The accretion concept of planetary formation is the best of the worst, and it does not hold up very well . People will believe in deep time despite the evidence, not because of it, and they come up with other things that get their hopes shot down, such as the idea of dust rings forming planets. Not working out so well, old son. Maybe disk instability is the way to explain rapid formation of planets without having to admit t

The hands at the Darwin Ranch down Deception Pass way have been hitting the firewater again and telling tall tales — and getting paid. Wild speculation has been recorded and presented as "science", but there's a bit of disagreement with someone spoiling the celebration by bringing up a few facts. Then some yahoo brings up a completely different idea. We have a pair of related articles on these matters for your perusal. M6.4 class solar flare erupting, image credit: NASA / SDO (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) One of the oldest problems for evolutionists is the "faint young sun paradox". Basically, since everything is supposedly the result of the Big Bang, our sun was too cool to support life on Earth. Life couldn't evolve. But they insist on an ancient universe, so there's the "paradox". One Darwinista in the pseudoscience of astrobiology proposed a solution to the problem, but naturally, it involves a whole whack of

"Breaker breaker 1-9, izzat you, Ganymede?" "That's a big 10-4. You on my back door, Callisto?" "Yeppers! A few dozen of us moons have noticed you cracking wise." "I admit to having a few faults, good buddy." Okay, I was playing with citizen's band radio chatter stereotypes and the fact that in the American dating system, today is ten four. Roger that? Anyway, we have seen many times that the solar system does not act the age assigned to it by secular scientists. For example, Pluto and it's system are not what they expected. Also, the moons of outer planets show youthful activities , flustering believers in cosmic evolution. Now we will take a look at Ganymede. Ganymede as seen from the Juno spacecraft /  NASA / JPL-Caltech / SwRI / MSSS (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) This bad boy is the largest moon of Jupiter and is about the size of Mercury. Like other planets and moons, it defies cosmic evolution and testifi

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen I missed out on the big money. At one time, this child had the notion that he'd be a right fair science fiction writer. Since I am not good at dialogue and story development, I gave up. It turns out that I should have pursued my interests in science, since naturalists saddle up some really wild ponies and gallop away with their strange ideas. Credit: Freeimages / Leandro Cavinatto The stuff is easy if you study on it. The public has a love/hate relationship with science, being suspicious on one hand but adoring scientists as priests and kings on the other hand. As many of us have observed, if people are told that "scientists say" or some-such, they tend to believe whatever it is. This makes things very helpful for materialists who seek to deny the work of our Creator. For that matter, people accept the dubious authority of the likes of Bill Nye the Not Really a Scientist Guy, Clinton Richard Dawkins, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Laurence Krauss, a

Naturalists are riding the cosmic cougar and are afraid to jump off. Like their late high priest Stephen Hawking , they are committed to the Big Bang and an ancient cosmos even though the evidence supports recent creation. So they keep on a-riding that false paradigm. Europa water vapor plumes Credits: NASA / ESA / W. Sparks (STScI) / USGS Astrogeology Science Center (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) News includes a whole passel of widely scattered evidence that "should not" be there according to secular beliefs, but fit right well with biblical creation. To read about these, click on " Young Solar System Evidence Pops Up Everywhere ". You will probably like another that will tell you all about what's shaking: the moon. Yep, moonquakes provide " More Evidence Our Moon Is Young ".

We have seen numerous examples of how Earth and the rest of our solar system are younger than secular cosmologists expect, so it should be interesting to take a look out further. Current cosmogony has the universe clocking in at a tad over eleven billion years old , but the observed evidence does not support this. M72 globular star cluster, credit: NASA , ESA, Hubble, HPOW Cosmic evolution as well as real science depends on certain laws and rules. When observed data are recalcitrant, secularists circle the wagons and deploy rescuing devices that make things worse. The article featured below presents an overview of four examples of how deep time and the facts are not on good terms. Secular astronomers claim our universe is unimaginably ancient—almost 14 billion years old. Yet the Bible clearly teaches that God created the universe in the relatively recent past, about 6,000 years ago. A previous Impact article described how observations in our own solar system are much more con

Take the trail toward Deception Pass and you'll most likely come upon the Darwin Ranch. The hands there have been a mite cranky lately because they depend on billions of years to justify their worldview, and the news hasn't been too good as of late. Especially regarding astronomy and cosmology. We're all star stuff from the Big Bang, you know — a star died so you might live, and all that kind of thing. Their stargazing friends have made pronouncements of how everything came to be (never mind the lack of observable, testable, repeatable evidence), and those people have been getting humbled these past few years. More so in recent times. Here are four reasonably short articles to 'splain, Loocy. Saturn / Image credit: NASA / JPL / Space Science Institute Hot Jumping Jupiter! You might jump too if you were as hot as some of the exoplanets detected elsewhere in the universe. What's frustrating to astronomers who presuppose evolution is that these seem to be the

Whenever there is a noticeable celestial object in the night sky, people tend to make efforts to see it. As well they should. Annual meteor showers are interesting. Comets, however, garner more attention, possibly because they are less common. Have you ever stopped to consider them? Credit: Unsplash /  Tim Dennert F'rinstance, comet C/2020 F3 (NEOWISE) was discovered, and was eventually close enough to be seen with the naked eye . (By the way, it's thought that those annual meteor showers are from the debris of comets.) Comets can only last with an upper limit of 10,000 years, which is far too small to fit old solar system narratives. Various rescuing devices are concocted using the principle of Making Things Up™ and then passed along as science. So, they have to be replenished. One of the alleged sources for comets is the Oort cloud, which has no observational evidence and the concept is self-refuting; it can't work. (One jasper with Atheism Spectrum Disorder decl

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Both creationists and evolutionists expected Pluto to be mostly ice, with perhaps a small rocky core. Preliminary findings reveal that there are many features on Pluto and Charon that were quite unexpected and downright baffling for believers in an ancient solar system, but less surprising for biblical creationists. See " New Horizons, Pluto, and the Age of the Solar System ", " Pluto Inbound Image Stuns Scientists ", " Pluto Is Young ", and " Is Pluto Another Geyser World? 'Shocking” Images Baffle Scientists' " for information from creationist perspectives. Pluto from New Horizons . Image Credit: NASA, Johns Hopkins Univ / APL, Southwest Research Inst Scientists presenting the information on Pluto pointed out several features and admitted that Pluto looks young. Naturally, evolution's Luddites will be scrambling to find excuses to justify clinging to "deep time". We should expect a wagon-loa

For thousands of years, planets were only known as brighter stars that moved differently than the others in the night sky. Telescopes came on the scene, and more wonders unfolded. In 1659, Christiaan Huygens determined that Saturn has a ring system. With greater technology (including space probes to go up and look), more rings in the system have been found. Those around Saturn baffle scientists with their structures and complexity, defying secular planetary formation speculations. Rings have been discovered on other bodies in our solar system . Saturn and rings, NASA / JPL-Caltech and others (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) It amazes this child how biblical creationists will relate that secular scientists admit Saturn's rings are far younger than they thought , then misotheists mock us — yet we are often more current with science than they are! Scientists are adding fuel to the fire by reaffirming the youthfulness of the rings. Also, the rings are  ephemeral . T

Deep time proponents have a terrible time dealing with facts that do not fit their fundamentally flawed worldview, especially when it comes to celestial objects . One problem is the presence of oxygen in a comet's atmosphere , but never mind about that now. (Some may think that the interstellar asteroid  ʻOumuamua is devastating to biblical creation science, but it is actually rather unimpressive .) Secularists circle the wagons of excuses to protect their views, but they only end up looking foolish when denying the evidence in front of them. Credit:  NASA /JPL-Caltech/Space Science Institute (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Many objects in our own solar system don't "act their age" according to secular views, and even contradict prevailing views of the solar system's cosmic evolution. The battle raged for years over Saturn's rings. Evidence would indicate that they cannot be ancient, so atheistic magic would be used to conjure up

Purveyors of evolutionism believe in their fatally flawed hypothesis  despite  the evidence, not because of  evidence. The science is against it. Yet they deceive themselves, and are deceiving others, for a belief system that force-fits data into their presuppositions. When the facts interfere with their worldview, they perform feats of prestidigitation with "explanations" that should not convince (or fool) anyone. And call those of us who present contrary evidence, "Liars". Yet, the "theory" is still intact despite logic and science. People need to put aside the propaganda and honestly look at the evidence. If they dropped their presuppositions, the data would make much more sense. But to admit that the evidence actually points to a Creator instead of supporting ever-changing naturalistic philosophies? Inconceivable! The following article discusses the philosophies that keep people deceived about evolution. Then it goes on into another article wit

Exoplanets (extra-solar planets) are simply planets outside our own solar system. The first confirmed exoplanets were discovered around a pulsar in 1992 by radio astronomers, but we don't know a great deal about them. In 1995, the first exoplanet around a star similar to the sun, 51 Pegasi b, was discovered. It's a big one, half the size of Jupiter, which is the largest planet in our own neck of the woods, so to speak. Getting any indication of their existence is difficult, and any pictures are the result of imagination, not observation. Still, astronomers have put notches on their collective belts for over 3,000 of the things. Probably quite a few more out there. 51 Pegasi b credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech (Usage does not imply endorsement) Why all the hubbub? Since it is impossible for life to form on Earth, use your Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Ring™ and discover that life must have evolved out yonder and come here one way or another . That just pawns off the problem

Jupiter is the largest planet in our solar system, and is second in mass only to the Sun itself. You can get a good look at it with a backyard telescope. This bad boy is huge, but has a rotation rate of only ten hours. Also, it is graced with the most known moons (that we know of) at sixty seven, and Ganymede is the largest moon in the solar system. But it is mostly gas, so do not expect to land on it and meet residents that look like green and purple birds with orange beaks . The Great Red Spot is thought to be a storm. A big storm, the size of Earth, twice over. A high-resolution image of Jupiter taken by NASA's Cassini spacecraft. Credit: NASA   / JPL (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) But Jupiter also confounds evolutionary scientists. It is hot, and has a powerful magnetic field. And all those moons? They do not orbit in the same direction, many are in retrograde — which confounds planetary formation speculations and supports biblical creation models

People who like space exploration, and even those who are uninterested, are likely to have heard about the New Horizons spacecraft and its visit way out yonder. Arguably the biggest news came from the flyby of Pluto. The results were surprising to both creationists and secular scientists. Things keep getting worse for proponents of cosmic evolution. Credits: NASA / JHUAPL / SwRI (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) If you think back on your basic solar system knowledge, you might rightly recollect that the first four planets are called terrestrial, skip the asteroid belt, then we find the gas giants like Jupiter and the next three. After that comes a lot of rubble, Barney, called trans-Neptunian (or Kuiper belt) objects. Pluto and its system are way out there. While secularists have a whole heap of problems dealing with evidence that the solar system is young , they are also struggling with various speculations on how it formed. (My own guess is that our Crea

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen This article is going to take a somewhat different approach, but I think you will find the information interesting. It is about that asteroid that could have originated outside of our solar system homestead. That chuck of rock is called ‘Oumuamua (specifically, 1I/2017 U1, which is rather boring). ‘Oumuamua is Hawaiian for “a messenger from afar arriving first”. Really? Kind of presumptuous, don't you think? The word sounds like high society air kisses: "Oh, it's so good to see you, oh, mua, mua [makes smacking noises]! Here, have a cigar." Or maybe not. Artist’s concept of asteroid `Oumuamua Credit: European Southern Observatory ( CC BY 4.0 ) (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) ‘Oumuamua is not well understood by astronomers as creationary astronomer Dr. Danny Faulkner points out . One rancorous owlhoot is so passionate about evolutionism that he made the gelastic claim that this one chunk of rock negates all of b

You know about the sun, right? Perhaps you've heard of it, it's the greater light that rules the day (Gen. 1:16). By astronomical standards, our sun is well-behaved and quite stable . Other stars tend to be cranky, shooting out solar flares, superflares, and the like on a basis that would be dangerous for life on Earth. M6.4 class solar flare erupting, image credit: NASA / SDO (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Secularists argue from materialistic presuppositions, including deep time. Using the discredited nebular hypothesis , they build a scenario for the origin of the solar system and the planets. Since they presume that life evolved, they commence to building themselves a heap of problems, such as the alleged faint young sun paradox . As scientific knowledge increases, their guesswork becomes increasingly implausible. Interestingly, there are secular scientists who think that superflares may have made goo-to-gambler evolution possible.  Biblical cr

When calling Earth, Saturn, the solar system, and so on, "young", it is relative. But it gets a mite awkward to use titles like, "Saturn is not Displaying Evidence for Billions of Years Even After Additional Information is Acquired". However, that is what we see happening. The second-largest planet out yonder has been studied intensively, and the evidence is bad medicine for believers in billions of years. Secularists and churchian compromisers are committed to deep time so Papa Darwin can work that old black magic.  Worse, it indicates that everything was created much more recently than they want to admit. Credits:  NASA / JPL-Caltech / Space Science Institute (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) The moons of Saturn reveal that they are a fraction of their assumed age, so secularists use the tried 'n' true method of Making Things Up™. This includes wild guesses about life on the moons, and illogical guesses about space rocks impacted Encel

It has been discovered that Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is receding from that nice planet much faster than cosmic evolutionists expect. Moons recede. They do that. However, the rate at which Titan lit a shuck out of there causes considerable consternation. Titan with clouds image credit: NASA / JPL / University of Arizona (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Indeed, secular scientists are constantly denying evidence for a young solar system ( see " Saturn Scientists Dodge Age Issues " .) None of the secular ideas for the formation of the solar system are good, so the best of the worst is the nebular hypothesis. Essentially, everything formed at the same time (never mind that Venus and Uranus defy the edict had have retrograde rotations, as well as some moons). Earth's moon is receding, and using uniform assumptions against secularists, it would have been impossibly close to Earth in the past. Titan would have needed to form in a different p