Welcome to the home of The Question Evolution Project. Presenting information demonstrating that there is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution, and presenting evidence for special creation. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Monday, December 31, 2012

Lunar Formation Theories Keep Falling to Earth

A huge problem for evolutionary cosmologists is the formation of Earth's moon. Several theories have been put forward that seem somewhat plausible at a glance, but have fallen apart with further scrutiny. Even the newest (fifth) hypothesis is already on the verge of being ejected. Of course (and as usual), the most logical conclusion is one that best fits the facts, but evolutionists do not want to consider that possibility. So, the Man in the Moon is having a good laugh at their expense...

For the past 200 years, scientists have been working hard to come up with an explanation for the Moon's formation that does not involve the direct work of a Creator. The fourth hypothesis in that the Moon was formed by the impact upon Earth of a body the size of Mars. Early this year it was proved to be wrong by new evidence. A fifth hypothesis has quickly taken its place!
You can read about the five theories, why they fail and the best conclusion at "Another Lunar Formation Theory is in Trouble".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Friday, December 28, 2012

Venus Flytrap — Still Baffling After All These Years

Many people are familiar with the carnivorous plant known as the Venus flytrap. Kids like to poke it to watch the "jaws" snap shut, or feed it raw hamburger — both activities are bad for it, however. It's that snapping shut in 1/10th of a second that is the main puzzler.

It is not mechanical, so there are no wires, pulleys and things like that. And it is not an animal, so there are no muscles to make it close. Yet, scientists are working on biomimetics because they believe that this plant inspires them to intelligently design imitations of its actions. But they cannot figure out how (or why!) it allegedly evolved.
The Venus flytrap remains one of the most intriguing plants in the world.  What makes it snap shut in a tenth of a second?  Can we imitate its motion without muscles, wires or batteries?
A press release from the American Physical Society’s Division of Fluid Dynamics sets up the questions:
Plants lack muscles, yet in only a tenth of a second, the meat-eating Venus fly trap hydrodynamically snaps its leaves shut to trap an insect meal. This astonishingly rapid display of botanical movement has long fascinated biologists. Commercially, understanding the mechanism of the Venus fly trap’s leaf snapping may one day help improve products such as release-on-command coatings and adhesives, electronic circuits, optical lenses, and drug delivery.
You can read the rest of this short but very interesting article, "Venus Flytrap Still Mystifies, Inspires", here.

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Radiometric Dating — The Thrill Is Gone?

morgueFile/xandert (modified) 
No scientist is neutral regarding data (despite the claims of Darwin's Cheerleaders). Everyone has a starting point. Creation scientists have long pointed out flaws and inconsistencies in radiometric dating. Evolution scientists obtain inconsistent results that are cherry-picked to fit their uniformitarian, fundamentally flawed presuppositions.

Scientists put forward models and ideas and see if the data support them. Creationists from the RATE Project have been frustrating uniformitarian scientists. But they are not in lockstep on their models or their findings, and are continuing their investigations and analyses.
Radiometric dating is still a faulty argument against biblical history. Naturalistic geolo­gists often “cherry-pick” dates they deem appropriate to their particular studies. Carbon-14 has been found in coal and diamond samples supposedly be billions of years old, even though the half-life of 14C is only 5730 years. The creationist RATE group's theory that there have been periods of accelerated nuclear decay in the past runs into the problem of rapid volume cooling. Woodmorappe's statistical noise theory that radiometric dating is inherently unreliable may indeed be vindicated.
The inherent inconsis­tency of secular results strengthens the argument for a young earth, as the Bible describes in a most straightforward way!
Selections from RATE Study: Questions Regarding Accelerated Nuclear Decay and Radiometric Dating, by Carl R. Frode Jr. and A. Jerry Akridge.

(These selections by Marko Malyj are of the article published in Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal, Volume 49 Number 1, Summer 2012)
You can read the rest of "Is the Romance of Radiometric Dating Getting Old?", here.

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

"Junk" DNA Myth Continues Its Downward Spiral

So let me get this straight: A certain section of DNA was studied, some of it was understood, and then whatever else that was not analyzed or not understood was classified as "junk". Got it. Pretty arrogant, innit?

We have seen that so-called "junk DNA" has clawed its way out of its premature grave and is humiliating evolutionary scientists who are finding out that the "junk" is useful after all. As proponents of Intelligent Design as well as biblical creationists have said all along, there is a purpose for it.
Secular biology, intelligent design, and creationist communities are abuzz with the recently reported data from 30 simultaneously published high-profile research papers in the field of human genomics, proclaiming that the human genome is irreducibly complex and intelligently designed. From an evolutionary perspective, this is a massive blow to the myth of “junk DNA.”
A large-scale international research effort, ENCODE (Encyclopedia of DNA Elements), began in 2003 as an outgrowth of the Human Genome Project. Although the human genome had been largely finished in its final draft form in 2004, very little was known about the functionality of the many areas outside the protein-coding regions that comprised less than 5 percent of the total DNA sequence. A large number of biologists considered this excess DNA to have little value, referring to it as “junk DNA.” However, many early studies in functional genomics contradicted this idea and showed that non-coding DNA played a significant role in gene regulation and genome function. The ENCODE project was initiated as a massive global research effort to map and characterize the functionality of the entire human genome.
You can read the rest of this trainwreck for evolution at "Junk DNA Myth Continues Its Demise".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Monday, December 24, 2012

Increased Thought Control in the UK

Secular Humanism is a religion. 

Evolution is religious in nature. It looks like the UK is forcing adherence to a state religion, and evolutionism is a cornerstone. 

"Stop that, Cowboy Bob! Evolution is about science!" 

 An evolutionist disagrees: 
‘Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint—and Mr [sic] Gish is but one of many to make it—the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today. ‘… Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity.'
Michael Ruse

The four biggest bigot groups in the UK are at it again. They already forced the teaching of origins in government-run schools to be regulated. Now they want evolutionary dogma to be taught as unquestioned fact.

Is this not contrary to the spirit of scientific inquiry and education? Protecting evolutionism against scrutiny is not education, it is brainwashing. That's right, I said it! True education would allow students to examine the facts, interpretations, conclusions and so on so they could decide for themselves if the evidence supports evolutionism or points to the Designer. If the evidence truly supported evolutionism, there should be nothing to fear from honest examination.

Instead, the anti-creationist thought police want students indoctrinated in their propaganda, and make them unable to think for themselves. (I have seen many times where this is working — Darwin's Stormtroopers attack creationists and are dumbfounded when creationists show them the folly of their presuppositions and fundamentally flawed worldview.) Instead, students become drones, unable to do critical thinking. 

I guess creationists in the UK can no longer say, "It's my country, too!" How good is that?
The UK Government, following a campaign by the British Humanist Association (BHA), the National Secular Society (NSS), the British Centre for Science Education (BCSE), and the Royal Society, is now threatening to remove funding from free schools that do not teach evolution as a “comprehensive, coherent and extensively evidenced theory.” The new rules will apply from 2013. CMI has previously commented on this secular humanist campaign, and provided a time-line of recent events here. I have also offered my response.
This further ruling is now seen as a necessary move to close a loophole because the secularists fear that free schools (that is, privately-run schools receiving state funding) may simply not teach evolution at all to get around present legislation. Sir Paul Nurse is reported as saying that,
What are the Darwinists so afraid of, that they must hide their pet theory behind a legal fig leaf? No other scientific idea gets such legislative protection from scrutiny.
“The new clause in the funding agreement should ensure that all pupils at free schools have the opportunity to learn about evolution as an extensively evidenced theory and one of the most fundamentally important tenets of modern biology.
The development of the theory of evolution is an excellent example of how science works and there is a clear consensus within the scientific community regarding both its validity and importance.”

Responding to this latest challenge

You can read the response to the challenge, and see the missing links (snicker), when you read "Further restrictive legislation to keep Creation out of UK state-funded schools", here.

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Friday, December 21, 2012

Penguins, Speed and Air Jackets

This rather short article on the ability of penguins to zip through the water is quite interesting. There are several intricate features that show how they are designed for what they do — and do it quickly.
Penguins are fast swimmers, but they shouldn't be. As they rocket themselves through the water and onto overlying ice shelves, the drag of water friction is supposed to be too great. Researchers familiar with recent attempts to use air as a lubricant for ships noticed air bubbles jacketing penguins during their boisterous ascents, and that led them to question if penguins use air to accelerate underwater.
National Geographic recently reported on how Bangor University biologist Roger Hughes, inspired by a 2001 BBC documentary that featured emperor penguins leaping out of the water, partnered with an engineer in Denmark and two other researchers to investigate how the penguins could do this. Their results appeared in the journal Marine Ecology Progress Series in 2011, where they showed penguins' unique and remarkable design for fast swimming.
You can read the rest of "Scientists Discover Secret to Fast Swimming Penguins", here.

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Evolution, Genetics, Real Science and Spin

The more we learn about real science, the more evolutionary theory suffers for it. To protect their faulty worldview, evolutionary scientists and publicists need to "spin" the data. That is, the make excuses and manufacture transparent explanations that do not fool anyone except fundamentalist evolutionists and the willingly galactically gullible.

Library of Congress
The spin is extremely noticeable in regards to the newest discoveries in genetics (such as their humiliation about "junk" DNA) and unique genes. The pusillanimity regarding the raw facts is distressing.
You’ve heard of novel genes—genes that are found in only one species, and you’ve heard of alternative splicing—complex genes that are edited in different ways. Now put them together and on steroids, and to top it off, all in a mere unicellar algae. It’s another damage control nightmare as evolutionists again can’t figure out what went wrong.
The explosion in molecular biology in the past fifty years brought a plethora of new DNA sequence data and with it many new contradictions for evolutionists. One interesting finding was that in the higher species, genes are often interrupted multiple times. Instead of one DNA segment, those complex genes consisted of several smaller segments separated by intervening sequences.
You can read the rest of "Bigelowiella natans: Evolution Damage Control is Frantic", here

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!