Piltdown Superman

There has been a flurry of activity on the Internet about the so-called "God Particle", a name that is not popular among physicists. What does it have to do with evolution? Nothing. What does it have to do with cosmology? Perhaps something, but it's dependent on your worldview and presuppositions. Some people are desperate to do away with God, so they will take any excuse to claim that he was not needed, that the universe somehow made itself (never mind that this is absurd even on the surface). Those of us who believe in a Designer can easily see further affirmation of his incredible wisdom, even on the subatomic level. Standard Model diagram of particles (TriTertButoxy, Public Domain) According to a recent news item flashed around the world, scientists at CERN, using the Large Hadron Collider, say they have confirmed the existence of a previously hypothesized particle officially called the Higgs boson but colloquially referred to as the ‘God part

When evolutionist scientists insist on using erroneous preconceptions, they get embarrassed. For instance, relying on evolution yields "living fossils" (plants and animals that were only known by their fossils, presumed extinct, and later found alive and well). In addition, not every square inch of this planet has been explored; new species are frequently discovered. Encompassing Cambodia, southern China, Laos, Myanmar (Burma), Thailand and Vietnam, the Greater Mekong region’s rainforests and swamps are home to a myriad of creatures. So many, in fact, that in the last decade or so more than 1,000 species of plants and animals previously unknown to science have been discovered—an average rate of two per week... ..The ‘Lazarus effect’ refers to the unexpected ‘reappearance’ of an ‘extinct’ kind of creature after “a lengthy hiatus [gap] in the fossil record.” However, as our earlier article explained, in reality there is no ‘Lazarus effect’ spa

Despite the evidence (such as the osedax in the last post , a fossil of a fish eating another fish and others), people insist on the uniformitarian belief that fossilization is a slow process and not the result of rapid burial and proper conditions. The latest? Mating turtles. I can think of several jokes to make now, but I will leave the tacky stuff to the high-class science journals. Not only are evolutionists baffled and leave it as a "mystery" (note the double standard, creationists cannot get away with that kind of thing), they are also troubled about the alleged conditions of the environment where this happened. Yet again, this all fits well with creationist and global flood explanations; we do not need to have "just so stories". Evolutionary paleontologists have a mystery on their hands: how did turtles in the act of mating become fossilized? Most of the news media are amusing themselves with prurient attention on turtle sex, using double entendres and F

Uniformitarianism, the belief that "the present is the key to the past", is based on the preconception that natural processes that we see today are the same as they were in the distant past. There is little or no room for global catastrophes like Noah's Flood. Difficulties for this viewpoint continue to crop up, however. For instance, the osedax worm eats the bones of dead things. Many fossilized organisms have been found with bore holes from the worms. This indicates that burial and fossilization had to have been rapid, not gradual. Osedax worms—also called "zombie" worms—live off the bones of dead creatures. Several species of  Osedax  surfaced in Monterey Bay, California, in 2002, and evidence of them has now been found in the Mediterranean in a fossilized whale bone. These bone-destroying worms have evidently existed across the globe as long as animals have, which raises a question: If the fossilization of bones requires vast timespans, why didn't 

This week, we are keeping the articles lighter and shorter. After all, last week had some deep stuff. Do bacteria show the effects of age? Yes. No. Both. Maybe. What bacteria do with aged and damaged biochemicals is yet another indication of the Creator's ingenuity. Bacterial cells are singularly long-lived. They keep dividing for what seems like forever. But because they are made of biochemicals, their DNA and proteins should suffer damage similar to what any other cell endures, including animal cells. What keeps bacterial cell components from wearing down? Microbiologists have been trying to find out how these single-cell organisms handle chemical damage, which relentlessly accumulates due to friction and uncontrolled chemical reactions. So far, the results have been confusing, but a new analysis appears to have confirmed that bacteria have a remarkably well-engineered damage-reduction program. You can read the rest of "The Ingenious Way That Bacteria Resist Aging", he

The past two weeks have had some complicated material on DNA and so forth. Next week, we will look at some shorter and less "heady" material. Library of Congress/F.B. Johnson (modified) One of the problems with evolutionism is when its fundamentalists accept the pronouncements of scientists and educators, even when the information is inaccurate, misleading, outdated and even fraudulent. (In some ways, it is not entirely the fault of the faithful, as they are not given knowledge of evolutionism's failings and errors  1 , 2 ,  3 , and being a liar for Darwin is acceptable to evolutionists  4 .) Then these fundamentalists spread bad science. When the general public are not skilled in chemistry, they can be fooled. Evolutionary biochemistry has some serious problems: Chemical stability, chemical reactivity and chemical selectivity are noteworthy. According to modern evolutionary theory, the recipe for life is a chance accumulation of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, a

Found this on Facebook, and then improved on it: