Posts

Abiogenesis — A Secret Evolutionary Dogma

Image
When presented with the observed fact that life only comes from life and never from non-life, proponents of evolution distance themselves by claiming that evolution only deals with the development of life and not the origin of life. This is a disingenuous ploy, similar to when atheists attempt to change the established definition of atheism into " lack of belief in God "; both are transparent attempts at moving the goalposts. It is interesting that evolutionists will claim that abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution, but will gleefully accept poor "evidence" that they think accepts abiogenesis, and will also defend the discredited Miller-Urey experiment — usually by ignoring facts and citing outdated and unfounded rhetoric by other evolutionists as "proof". Despite theories, conjecture, guesses, wishful thinking and loud bullying, the fact remains that life comes from life. Assumptions based on faith will not change that.

Stellar Formation — No Evidence

Image
Circular reasoning in evolution extends to cosmology. Start with current assumption that the universe is 13.75 billion years old, add the constant speed of light, leave out contrary evidence, add a generous helping of conjecture, mix in some genuine observable science (leave out a workable mechanism) and your concoction conveniently "proves" cosmic evolution. Except that the speed of light may very well not be constant , and other observations simply do not support such an old universe. But never mind the details, "science of the gaps" prevails. The formation of stars has not been observed, and the data indicate that may not be happening at all. An international team of astronomers recently analyzed a specific frequency of light that hot gas clouds in outer space produce. Very hot stars, like blue stars, are thought to burn near or within these clouds, energizing the gas so that it can emit this characteristic light signature. Secular astronomers

Using Fraud in Evolution Education? You Betcha!

We have explored the willingness of evolutionists to indoctrinate children, even though their critical thinking skills suffer. (After all, belief in evolution is more important than thinking, yes?) Eugenie Scott has been downright dishonest in her crusade to attack creation science and Intelligent Design, and textbooks contain outdated and fraudulent material . It should not come as a surprise that students are presented with the long-debunked drawings of Haeckel and told that they are real. In addition, their reasoning skills are hindered with question-begging exams!  A government education institution recently provided a textbook example of how evolutionary dogma blinds the eyes of educators, crushes the ability of students to think critically and hinders the progress of true science. The biology paper in the Higher School Certificate exam on 19 October 2012, a major public matriculation exam in New South Wales, Australia, contained a question featuring Haeckel’s fraudulent em

Biases in Evolution at Ancient Ruin

Image
A frequent presupposition from evolution is that ancient man is extremely primitive. After all, he was just a brute that had recently evolved, and had not yet learned to do those things typical of civilized humans. But excavations keep contradicting that bias. An excavation in Bulgaria predates ancient Greece by about 1,500 years, they say. Yet there are signs of civilization, even though they had not invented the wheel. Oh, really? That is an assumption, a kind of argumentum ad ignorantiam — because no wheels were found, they must not have existed . The evidence for civilization would imply otherwise, wouldn't it? Researchers are calling an ancient ruin near Provadia in Bulgaria Europe's oldest town. Its carbon age between 4700 and 4200 B.C. predates the accepted calendar age of ancient Greece by about 1,500 years. Investigators have uncovered enough clues from the intriguing site to attempt reconstructing the lives of its ancient inhabitants, but it appears that t

Fossil Finds Continue to Dismantle Evolution

Image
People believe in evolution despite the evidence. Even when scientists admit that discoveries work against them, they quickly make up implausible stories to cling to their fundamentally flawed worldview. And the faithful spread these tales as if they were fact. In this article, three items are featured. Read " Three New Fossil Finds Challenge Evolution ".

More Assumptions on the Fossil Record

Image
"We know evolution is true because we have transitional forms!" No, you have things that look something like other things, but you do not have undisputed "transitional forms ". "We know evolution is true because we have the fossils!" mnh.si.edu No, you have preconceptions loaded with assumptions. Fossilization is uncommon. Although there are billions of fossils, there are many more creatures that were not fossilized. The overwhelming majority of fossils are marine life, and over ninety-five percent are marine invertebrates . By the way, we have fossils too. It's not a case of your facts versus our facts; everyone has the same facts. The questions arise on the interpretations of the facts. The coelacanth fossils were dated at 70 million years old, and it was assumed that it "disappeared" because no more were found in the fossil record. But the coelacanth was simply playing peek-a-boo, as it was discovered to be alive an

Evolutionists and Insufficient Information

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen There are many fallacies that Darwin's Junior Storm Troopers use when criticizing Intelligent Design proponents and creationists. Many of these have been discussed elsewhere . There is something that, frankly, (mind if I call you Frank?) I cannot slap a label on. It could be a form of the Fallacy of Suppressed Evidence , where relevant data are ignored when reaching a conclusion. Here are some ways that I have found that evolution adherents will deceive others.  First, I must reiterate that their insistence on calling other people "liars" because they do not accept evolutionary orthodoxy is both childish and reprehensible. Further, it is an attempt to protect evolutionism from critical examination. Here are some disingenuous obfuscations involving absence of information that I have encountered: Commenting on articles without reading. We all do it to some extent. But to simply be a troll and say, "That's not true", make