Piltdown Superman

Promoters of evolutionism tend to obscure the truth in their pursuit of "science". Sometimes, evolutionists are so determined that their naturalistic worldview is the only possible interpretation of facts, they see things that are not even there. In this case (and with help of the biased media), "feathers" were found on a dinosaur. Wow! Proof that dinosaurs evolved into birds! Except that evolutionary scientists are not in lockstep on the dinosaurs-to-birds bandwagon. More than that, the tendentious interpretations of this "evidence" is shameful. Any scientist with integrity should be embarrassed. The first North American “feathered dinosaur” has put the media in a frenzy of celebration over questionable data. Three Canadians from Alberta took a look at old fossils of the “ostrich-mimic” dinosaur Ornithomimus stored in drawers at the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Palaeontology, and found fibrous impressions in the sandstone they interpret as fe

There are dinosaur footprints in the Kimberley region of Western Australia. People with an evolutionary worldview posit models that attempt to fit the facts into their presuppositions. This uniformitarian approach fails to explain the evidence in a credible manner, and requires explanations that defy credibility. On the other hand, biblical creationist scientists posit models for the Noachian flood, and the observed data support this view quite well. In October 2012, Catalyst , the science television show of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, featured amazing dinosaur footprints from the Kimberleys in north-west Australia. Catalyst reporter Mark Horstman says, "You’ve gotta be quick to study the fossils here. This tide is racing. And this was dry a few minutes ago. The tidal range is up to 10 metres, and the fossils are only visible at the lowest of low tides, so that’s for a few hours for a few days for a few months every year." Sand is washed in

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

To see Darwin's Cheerleaders resorting to logical fallacies to defend their errant worldview is commonplace. But to see several logical fallacies used in an attempt to influence political opinion and promote evolutionism is rather painful. And humorous. Here, we can see poisoning the well, name calling, prejudicial conjecture and more. The conviction that the world must have arisen spontaneously dates back to antiquity and is no less strong today. Its contemporary label is evolution and if you want your funding, or just respectability, you must accept it. Skepticism of the power of spontaneity is not allowed as this latest post from investor and all-around smart-guy Whitney Tilson makes clear: Even if Romney is a pragmatic centrist, I question his ability to act independently of a party that I fear has become beholden to people I view as extremists – anti-intellectuals who are hostile to women, minorities, the poor, immigrants, and gays, and who don’t believe

Sometimes, evolutionary "explanations" require the suppression of remarks like, "You gotta be kidding!" in public because they are ridiculous even on the surface. Of course, if a silly explanation of how something evolved is challenged, you may have to endure the standard, "What's your  degree in?", as if only the educated elite are allowed to challenge evolution. But I know stupid stuff when I hear it. Evolutionists attempt to use their worldviews and extrapolate faulty principles with unintentionally humorous results. Sometimes Darwinians are funny.  They take themselves so seriously, applying natural selection to everything on earth except their own seriousness.  Charlie Green:  At New Scientist, Mark van Vugt and Vladas Griskevicius think a little applied Darwinism can turn us a different color.   “ Let’s use evolution to turn us green ,” they said.  People want to be green, but they are too stuck in their old ways.  Why? It may be time

As most of you probably know, evolution cheerleader Bill Nye let fly with an anti-creationist video that got him into trouble with creationists. Ken Ham, Dr. Georgia Purdom and Answers in Genesis issued a debate challenge , followed by an additional challenge . Modified from Clker An update in Ken Ham's October 25,2012 Weblog has additional information: A number of people have asked Answers in Genesis if we would be open to the possibility of debating the TV personality known as “Bill Nye the Science Guy” (of PBS TV and the Disney Channel)—after Nye’s harsh anti-creationist video went viral on YouTube.  At last count, over 4.8 million people have watched him make a number of misrepresentations about the creationist position. We posted our own rebuttals to YouTube (“ Bill Nye, Creationism is Highly Appropriate for our Children ” and “ Ken Ham Responds to Bill Nye ‘The Humanist Guy’ ”). We did publicly challenge Bill Nye to a debate on my blog, but we have also made a

A Republican Congressman, Representative Dr. Paul Broun, Jr. is a medical doctor. In addition to having a science background, he is the Chairman of the Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee for the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee". He spoke at a church function . He referred to evolution as "lies from the pit of hell". This set evolution propagandists into a frenzy. After all, what business does someone knowledgeable in science have badmouthing a state-sponsored belief system? He should keep his views to himself, because freedom of speech is only allowed if it is acceptable speech! That bulwark of unbiased journalism known as CNN did a piece on this story. They interviewed "scientist" Bill Nye (funny how someone whose only earned science degree is a Bachelors in Mechanical Engineering is referred to as a scientist, but PhD scientists who believe in creation are not "real" scientists, go figure). CNN also interviewed Dr. Jason

Once again, evolutionists have had things wrong and have been misrepresenting the data. It had been assumed that intelligence was based on cranial capacity, and evolutionary fitness came about from having a larger brain. But it turns out that things are much more complicated than that, and the body would have to evolve in order to accommodate a larger brain. Creationists do not have to come up with such cockamamie schemes. Brain size can’t be used as an independent measure of fitness, five evolutionary anthropologists contend. How long have evolutionists told us that our relative brain size gave us the fitness edge as we evolved from apes?  That assumption has been called into question by Jeroen B. Smaers and four European colleagues in a new paper in  PNAS. . . . Dr Jeroen Smaers ( UCL  Anthropology and  UCL  Genetics, Evolution & Environment), lead author of the study said: “When using brain size relative to body size as a measure of intelligence,  the assumption has

“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla.” — Charles Darwin It has long been established that evolution is racist in nature , and has been used to justify racism . This goes back to Darwin's writings as well. But what happens when one racist-based pseudoscience is used to support another racist-based pseudoscience? Phrenology , was pseudoscience that postulated that the size and shape of the skull indicated levels of intelligence. Although its advocates stu

This edition will probably appeal to Christian apologists most of all. Sunday, October 14, 2012 was an interesting day for me. I was invited ("invited" as in, "hounded the guys until they gave in") to be on the "Evidence 4 Faith" radio show/podcast . Host Keith Kendrix was away, and Kirk Hastings was filling in. It was my first live guest spot on a radio show , not including call-in shows. (Before that, I was involved in a three-part   podcast for Theopologetics , but that was recorded and not a live broadcast .) I was hesitant a few times, not wanting to steamroll over Kirk — it's not my  show. And I had a dry throat problem on occasion. By the way, they've read my letters a coupl e of times on the air. One of my haters wrote to them in response and told them what a bad man I am. I bet he loves this development. Enough of the personal stuff. We discussed several things, including logic, atheism (which is fundamentally flawed), e