Piltdown Superman

Mercury is supposed to be a dead rock orbiting the sun. There should not be any activity there, no surface features forming, no outgassing of volatile materials, right? Well... NASA's Messenger spacecraft mission to Mercury has given scientists the opportunity to learn more about the properties of the solar system's innermost planet. After supposedly billions of years since its formation, the planet should be dead, or geologically inactive. New data from Messenger, however, show that Mercury remains active and is still generating surface features.  Before the Messenger data acquisition, astronomers observed that the sunny side of Mercury is hot enough to melt lead, and like other rocky objects in the solar system, many craters pockmark the planet's surface. In early 2011, Messenger carefully maneuvered into orbit and took photographs with unprecedented detail.  Images of the planet's surface revealed unusual, irregularly shaped hollows or depressi

Your worldview (philosophy of life) influences your perceptions, beliefs and actions. That should be a "given". Darwinism has influenced many areas of society and culture, including our perceptions of the law. How one defines law depends greatly on what one believes. The definition of law varies from culture to culture, religion to religion, and from philosophy to philosophy. It is important therefore to consider how different worldviews affect the way people think about law. Darwin’s theory of evolution is said to have generated a materialistic worldview that has had a significant impact on Western conceptions of law. Under the direct influence of Darwinism a profound transformation of legal studies took place in the nineteenth century. It is the main purpose of this article to reveal some of the philosophical implications of Darwinism and to explore how this particular worldview affected the general perception of law in Western societies. In so doing, this

It is commonplace, and even expected, for evolutionists to hide behind their lack of knowledge with " Science of the Gaps " (where maybe someday, "science" will find the answer, but we'll just keep on believing anyway), or the explanations that contain words like "maybe", "perhaps", "scientists think", "scientists speculate", "it could be" &c. solarsystem.nasa.gov However, it is more difficult to accept the use of a more complex explanation known by scientists as "making stuff up". When it comes to astronomy, the sky's the limit (heh!). It has always been impossibly difficult for astronomers to realistically explain how galaxies, stars, and planets might have formed through natural processes. To prop up their naturalistic theories, they will sometimes invent unobserved structures, such as the Oort cloud for comets. More recently, astronomers conjured an unknown massive planet t

That's right, you heard it! Evolution is a pseudoscience. "How can you say that, Cowboy Bob?" Take a look-see: " Science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge. This system uses observation and experimentation to describe and explain natural phenomena. The term science also refers to the organized body of knowledge people have gained using that system. Less formally, the word science often describes any systematic field of study or the knowledge gained from it." [ 1 ]   Made at Hetemeel.com Another definition says, " Science is a way of understanding the world, not a mountain of facts. Before anyone can truly understand scientific information, they must know how science works. Science does not prove anything absolutely — all scientific ideas are open to revision in the light of new evidence. The process of science, therefore, involves making educated guesses (hypotheses) that are then rigorously and repeatedly tested." [ 2 ]   Nice e

Try as they might, evolutionists still fail with trying to force-fit "missing links" into the parade of human "ancestors". The tale of the hobbit begins with a strange hominid skull found in 2004 in a cave on the island of Flores, part of Indonesia. Although otherwise appearing human, the skull, like other bones found nearby, was diminutive—hence the appellation “hobbit” to the finds. But since then, scientists have been divided: was this hobbit (and its kin) fully human, on the whole—or do the bones represent a separate species (dubbed Homo floresiensis )? Now, scientists Robert Eckhardt of Pennsylvania State University and Maciej Henneberg of the University of Adelaide have released a new defense of the idea that the hobbit skull was actually from an abnormal Homo sapiens . The work appears in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology . Read the rest of the story of the Bagginses here .

One of the most basic points against evolution is the scarcity of "transitional forms" (something in process of evolving into something else). When queried, fundamentalist evolutionsts exclaim, "The fossil record is full of transitional forms!" Actually, no. When something is found that can be considered a transitional form, it makes the news. Why? Because they are so scarce! Just like archaeopteryx was reclassified as a true bird (again) , Tiktaalik is also a disappointment for the faith-based, no evidence religion called evolution. Tracks of footprints found in a quarry in Poland have turned the palaeontological world upside down. For years there has been a neat evolutionary story about how fish evolved four legs and came out of the ocean onto the land. Probably the most famous fossil in this sea-to-land icon of evolution is Tiktaalik roseae , a fish with fins that was claimed to have had features intermediate between fish and tetrapods. Creation

"For the past five years, I have closely followed creationist literature and have attended lectures and debates on related issues.... based solely on the scientific arguments pro and con, I have been forced to conclude that scientific creationism is not only a viable theory, but that it has achieved parity with (if not superiority over) the normative theory of biological evolution .  That this should now be the case is somewhat surprising, particularly in view of what most of us were taught in primary and secondary school. In practical terms, the past decade of intense activity by scientific creationists has left most evolutionist professors unwilling to debate the creationist professors . Too many of the evolutionists have been publicly humiliated in such debates by their own lack of erudition and by the weaknesses of their theory." Robert F. Smith, "Origins and Civil Liberties,"  Creation Social Science and Humanities Quarterly,  3 (Winter 1980): 2