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

Thursday, February 28, 2013

Evidence of Evolution — SERIOUSLY?

morgueFile/cielo 
Not too long ago, I was fond of the "reality shows" that dealt with the paranormal. The investigators would look for natural explanations of phenomena before they would entertain a paranormal explanation. The door opens by itself? Yes, and opening a door down the hall would create a kind of wind effect, plus the weak latch — no spirits here, Bruce. 

Similarly, critics of creation science create a straw man based on prejudicial conjecture: that creationists simply write everything off as "GodDidIt", and that do not want to know anything that is actually scientific.

Yet, evolutionists will look for "EvolutionDidIt" as the first explanation.

Sometimes they do this despite evolutionary mechanisms that are postulated, and despite empirical evidence! In fact, they are guilty of circular reasoning, because they allege that many things, despite alternative explanations, are considered to be evidence of evolution. People believe things like this with no evidence because they want to — it keeps them comfortable with their fundamentally flawed worldviews.
Some things in nature get attributed to Darwinian evolution, but might be better seen as manifestations of design or other alternative, non-Darwinian mechanisms.
Deterministic Evolution
In “Predictable Bacterial Diversity,” Nature highlighted some experiments that showed bacteria converging on the same mutations when exposed to identical environmental stresses.  “They found many similar and a few identical mutations that underlay the evolution of diversity in the three experiments,” the article said. “The findings suggest that this evolution is a predictable processthat is driven by natural selection.”  The story is based on a paper in PLoS Biology that was summarized in on Science Daily, which said, “Any evolutionary process is some combination of predictable and unpredictable processes with random mutations, but seeing the same genetic changes in different populationsshowed that selection can be deterministic.
This claim, however, runs contrary to the unpredictable, contingent nature of Darwin’s theoretical mechanism.
You can read the rest of "This 'Evolution' Is Not Darwinian".




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

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Darwin and Racism

"Although atheism might have been
logically tenable before Darwin,
Darwin made it possible to be an
intellectually fulfilled atheist."
— Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker


New Guinea Aborigine added to Darwin picture. Darwinism has given a kind of false respectability and "scientific" justification for racism.

Darwinism has given a kind of false respectability and "scientific" justification for all sorts of evils in the world.

"How can you say that, Cowboy Bob? Evolution is a biological theory."

A biological "theory" with cooperation from several scientific fields, and extended into social sciences. Evolution has been used as a support for communism, Nazism, abortion, eugenics, racism, and more. Racism has existed for ages, we all know that. People will always find an excuse to hate someone they do not like, or is different (and then justify themselves).

But racism is strongly supported in evolutionism, and can be found in Darwin's own plagiarized ideas. Radar has an article showing this, and his article continues into another article, "Did Darwin Promote Racism?", which shows how evolution and racism are incompatible with biblical creationism and Christianity. Here is the beginning:
Another "accomplishment" of Darwinism was to give racism the excuse of being supported by science.   This reprehensible result of his assertions was the murder and imprisonment of many people whose "crime" was to have darker skin.  With all the racism already in place in the world and an African continent where black and Arab tribes were raiding and selling members of other tribes to slave traders before Darwin published his books, evil men needed little encouragement to take advantage of others anyway.  

Who do you suppose wrote these words in a book entitled "The Descent Of Man", Darwin as quoted from the book.

Darwin on human engineering - “With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man............hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed” Pages - 138-139

(Radar - By the way, the Nazi propaganda machine converted some of this exact language into their films denouncing Jews and people with medical problems).

Darwin on monkeys and Negroes- “For my own part I would as soon be descended from that heroic little monkey, who braved his dreaded enemy in order to save the life of his keeper, or from that old baboon, who descended from the mountains, carried away in triumph his young comrade from a crowd of astonished dogs—as from a savage who delights to torture his enemies, offers up bloody sacrifices, practices infanticide without remorse, treats his wives like slaves, knows no decency, and is haunted by the grossest superstitions” Pages - 642-643

(Radar - well now here in America we have abandoned decency and practice infanticide without remorse.  So Darwin may well have been haunted by the results of his books, in fact, in later life he fought depression over this very thing).
You can read the rest of "Darwinism - the so-called 'scientific excuse' for racism!", here




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

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Appalachian Mountains and the Flood

The large system of mountains know as the Appalachians is considered to be quite old by uniformitarian geology standards. However, they show features that are "young".

Secular geologists have ideas on how the "old" Appalachian mountains show "young" features, but they are inadequate.
Image credit: morgueFile/youvebeenreviewed
There are several ideas put forth to explain the observed features, but they do not adequately explain these features, nor do they offer satisfactory mechanisms. The using the global Flood model, the data fit quite well.
An interesting article, published in GSA Today (a publication by the Geological Society of America) in February 2013, describes features of the landscape of the Appalachian Mountains. These are a system of mountain ranges in eastern North America, extending from around Atlanta, Georgia, north past New York, and into Canada (see figure left). The paper is entitled Miocene rejuvenation of topographic relief in the southern Appalachians.
This title would not mean anything to most people, because like most geological articles in geological journals this one is written in technical language making it difficult for a lay person to follow. So I’ll post the abstract below with my lay-friendly comments interspersed.
You can read the rest of "Appalachians eroded by receding waters of Noah’s Flood, new GSA paper shows", here. (Note in the comments area that some of Darwin's  Stormtroopers that police the Internet will attempt to put Dr. Walker in his place because he does not kowtow to their worldview, therefore, he must be wrong. Also note that the expected personal attacks are used. He responds accordingly.) Then, you can read one of the responses that was given its own post, here. Finally, a graphic illustration giving further evidence supporting Dr. Walker's statements.






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

Friday, February 22, 2013

Subatomic Bird Thoughts

morgueFile/ana_c_golpe (modified)
People have long wondered how birds navigate. Some travel huge distances, and they do it with precision. Perhaps they are able to do this at a subatomic level. At any rate, this is further evidence of amazing design.
Being called a "bird brain" implies that an individual is scatterbrained and flighty. Through the decades, however, ornithologists have grown to appreciate the amazing design and abilities of these feathered creatures. From their respiratory system to intricate vocalization patterns, birds reveal profound sophistication.
Smithsonian magazine recently featured a brief article on bird navigation. The opening statement reads, "Birds must be geniuses because they use quantum mechanics to navigate."
You can fly over to "Bird Brains and Quantum Mechanics" to finish reading this short article.




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

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Whale of a Transition Tale

NOAA 
NEWS FLASH! PARTIAL WHALE FOSSILS DISCOVERED IN CALIFORNIA!

Big deal.

Although paleontologists expected to find transitional forms (and are looking to hang such a label on one of the creatures), they did not label any of the other oceanic life forms as "transitional". In fact, they found a lot of junk as far as evolutionary theorizing is concerned, since several other things were found that interfere with evolutionary conjectures, and excuses must be made to protect "science".

Of course, creationists do not have this problem.
Several fossil whale parts found in a southern California canyon are being called transitional forms in whale evolution.
The article on Science NOW doesn’t say “transitional” in the headline or first half of the story, but the RSS feed subtitle says, “Road project reveals transitional forms to modern toothless whales.”  The word “transitional” only appears once in the article, and that without certainty: “Thus, they aren’t ancestral to any of the living whales, but they could represent transitional steps on the way to the toothless mysticetes [baleen whales].”
What was actually found tells a more convoluted story.  Some 30 partial whale fossils were found in a Laguna Canyon road cut, including four newly-identified species of “toothed baleen whale—a type of whale that scientists thought had gone extinct 5 million years earlier.”
You can fin your way over to read the rest of "California Whale Fossils: Transitional Forms?", here





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

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Evolution Trickery, and the Age of the Solar System

Purveyors of evolutionism believe in their fatally flawed hypothesis despite the evidence, not because of evidence. The science is against it. Yet they deceive themselves, and are deceiving others, for a belief system that force-fits data into their presuppositions. When the facts interfere with their worldview, they perform feats of prestidigitation with "explanations" that should not convince (or fool) anyone. And call those of us who present contrary evidence, "Liars". Yet, the "theory" is still intact despite logic and science.

People need to put aside the propaganda and honestly look at the evidence. If they dropped their presuppositions, the data would make much more sense. But to admit that the evidence actually points to a Creator instead of supporting ever-changing naturalistic philosophies? Inconceivable!

The following article discusses the philosophies that keep people deceived about evolution. Then it goes on into another article with several evidences for a young solar system that are infuriating to evolutionary cosmologists. Why are they infuriating? Because Darwin's Cheerleaders demand an old universe so they can pretend that evolution actually happened. It won't work.
Charles Darwin could not conceive of the cell as more complex than all the factories and machines of his native England.   Most folks didn't know that Lyell and Haeckel were outright liars.   The 19th Century man did not have a huge accumulation of fossils nor did marvelous inventions like the electron microscope happen until generations later.   Ignorance mixed with hatred of God and the desire to have some kind of logical reason to reject Creationism was of utmost importance to men like Darwin and Huxley and they succeeded in pulling off a masterful con job on the world.   Perhaps the greatest folly is perpetrated by those who believe the foolishness themselves?   But after so many decades of being aware of the complexity of the cell, the magnificent coding of DNA, the interdependent workings of cell with DNA and ATP or even knowing all about the life cycle of the Monarch Butterfly?   No scientist in the world is innocent who perpetuates this fraud!

Yes, Darwinists now are much like magicians.   Magicians really don't saw people in half or make an elephant disappear or pull rabbits out of their hats.   They use sleight-of-hand and carefully crafted orchestration of movements and unseen mechanisms.  We have been tricked, as if by a magician, as Darwinism has called upon us to look HERE while the evidence is over THERE and it is fatal to Darwinism!  Not only is it a sad truth, it is an amazing one!   So many Darwinists have to realize the preponderance of evidence is against them and yet they persevere and continue to stick with their increasingly unbelievable attempt at subtefuge.  No magicians actually do magic and none of them believe that they do it.  We go to magic shows wanting to be fooled and believe what is incredible.

But science is not like a magic show, at least it ought not be.   We should not expect to be lied to and fooled when we go to science to try to understand how things work.  So why should we stand for being lied to and fooled when we wonder where everything comes from and why?  You see, there is a place where science and philosophy are connected.  It is at the intersection of origins street and purpose avenue.   Where the Universe came from also comes with the question of why and not just how.   When we ask why we are here and how we came to be here, we find ourselves asking the scientist, the philosopher and the man of faith.   The man of faith in God has known that God created all along, the philosophers run the gamut from A to Z and the scientist?   The scientist once assumed that God created and investigated how the created things worked.  This is how science advanced from superstition and supposition to multiple disciplines of study and accomplishment.  Now we have scientists who assume that no God exists and irrationally seek order within a Universe they believe popped randomly from nothing for no purpose by no plan.  Evidence has been cast aside in favor of fairy tales.   So now the cultural myths of isolated third-world tribes make about as much sense as does Stephen Hawking and vice-versa.   Hawking is just as ludicrous as Mongo the Witch Doctor, only with better math skills.
You can read the rest of "Question Evolution Day Worked!!! Evidences for a Young Universe", in context, here.






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

Monday, February 18, 2013

Living Fossils — Keep the Change

fws.gov
When an organism is found fossilized and the living specimen is virtually unchanged, it is called a "living fossil". Such things are baffling to evolutionists (although Darwin's Uninformed Cheerleaders brush off the facts by saying, "Well, evolution does not require things to change"). To have so many critters in "stasis" in their ecosystems for alleged millions of years simply does not make sense and interferes with evolutionary theories.
Some folk just don’t see the significance of the myriad examples of ‘living fossils’. Following our interview with Dr Carl Werner on the topic, one evolutionist protested:
“There is no written rule that says a lineage has to die out just because an offspring develops a beneficial mutation. The theory of evolution explains how species change over time, it doesn’t say that all species must change over time. As long as a species can survive in its environment and pass on its genetic information to its offspring, it can survive indefinitely. It doesn’t mean that the ‘living fossil’ didn’t speciate, it just means those possible splits died out while the original lineage was able to always successfully reproduce even into today. How exactly does that not work with evolution?”
Evolution is about change, and putting ‘evolutionary’ in front of ‘stasis’, does not explain the stasis in terms of evolution.
However, as Dr Werner said in the article:
“If a scientist believes in evolution and sees fossils that look like modern organisms at the dinosaur digs, he/she might invent an hypothesis to ‘explain’ living fossils this way: ‘Yes I believe that animals have changed greatly over time (evolution), but some animals and plants were so well adapted to the environment that they did not need to change. So I am not bothered at all by living fossils.’ This added hypothesis says that some animals did not evolve. But if a theory can be so flexible, adding hypotheses that predict the opposite of your main theory, one could never disprove the theory. The theory then becomes unsinkable, and an unsinkable theory is not science.”
Furthermore, some evolutionists have admitted that living fossils (‘stasis’) are a big problem for evolution. They have no explanation. This is not about suggesting that something has to go extinct if something evolves from it; that is not the point. The point is the lack of change, which is a huge problem for evolution, which is about vast changes. As high-profile evolutionists Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge admitted, “the maintenance of stability within species must be considered as a major evolutionary problem.”
You can read the rest of "Evolutionists Can't Dodge 'Living Fossils'", here.





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

Labels