Piltdown Superman

Some people claim to have a thorough knowledge of evolution. Amazingly, there are tinhorns who claim to know more than evolutionary (and non-evolutionary) scientists! Evolution is inconsistent and constantly changing, and needs a great deal of tweaking to keep the pseudoscience in line with scientific observations. Do evolutionary scientists themselves claim to have full understanding of evolution? Not hardly. Some will actually admit to having a lack of understanding. Yet, they persist in keeping the faith despite the evidence. Philip Ball’s opinion piece in this week’s Nature, the most popular science magazine in the world, is news not because he stated that we don’t fully understand how evolution works at the molecular level, but because he urged his fellow evolutionists to admit it. On this 60th anniversary of the discovery of the DNA double helix, Ball reviews a few of the recent findings that have rebuked the evolution narrative that random mutations created the biol

“In science, people argue for their ideas, in terms of the evidence that they have. There should be more opportunities to look at why some ideas are wrong, as well as what the right ideas are.” — Jonathan Osborne When discussing origins with proponents of evolution, we find that they simply repeat what they have been taught. Unfortunately, they have been taught "facts" that are conjecture, and "evidence" that is based on presuppositions and circular reasoning. Questioning evolution as a fact is effectively forbidden, and fundamentalist evolutionists strive to suppress critical thinking and examination of the evidence. Jonathan Osborne wants to do things differently. Instead of reciting facts (both real and imagined), he wants students to do something radical: Argue from the available facts instead of starting with a conclusion. Although it's a step in the right direction and interferes with evolutionary indoctrination, it's not quite enough. A pr

by Robert ("Cowboy Bob") Sorensen This article is for the creationists, and I implore you to spare ten minutes to read it. Science is on our side. Most of us are aware of th is fact. Also, our numbers are growing and atheism is on the decline [ 1 ] . It is an exciting time to be a creationist! There are many organizations that present the science and theology supporting creationism and make material available on the Web  [ 2 ] , as well as books, videos and so forth. So what are people doing with this wealth of information? Some will learn a bit, but after the entertainment value wears off, they lose interest. Others will become enthusiastic but do not continue to learn, and become intimidated when challenged by scoffers. There will be some who lose sight of the importance of the message because of their other concerns and leave it behind. Then there are the ones who are excited about the message, the science, the relevance and more, so they dig in deeper. These will lea

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen The term “Luddite” refers to a rebellious movement in the early part of the Industrial Revolution. At that time, some people were destroying machinery that was going to put them out of work because they could be replaced by unskilled, low-paid people who would run the machines  [ 1 ] . Although most people do not know the real meaning of “Luddite” today and the fear of unemployment and starvation that motivated the movement, many know the disparaging term from definition number two, “One who opposes technical or technological change” [ 2 ] . Even that meaning is being lost because the term is being used imprecisely. People who want an emotionally-charged word for their political or religious enemies will call them “Luddites” [ 3 , 4 ] . I have encountered the term dreadfully misused several time in reference to creationists. Since someone who believes in Intelligent Design or biblical (Six Day) creation is tagged with this term, it seems fitting to t

NOAA To journey to the ocean floor, special equipment must be used because the tremendous pressure can crush a submarine like an eggshell. Yet, there are living things there. Even more amazing, they live in  darkness around hydrothermal vents that exude great temperatures and toxic gasses. The existence of such creatures (and the symbiosis of many) defies evolutionary explanations. Some locations on earth seem just too extreme to support life. One such extreme environment is vents at the bottom of the ocean that spew out superheated water and toxic chemicals. Yet even here we find an abundance of living things, well designed for life at the extreme. An ugly gash slices across the earth’s surface, zigzagging 49,700 miles (80,000 km) around the globe. Superheated water gushes out of underwater fissures, spewing clouds of toxic chemicals. Temperatures can reach 700°F (400°C), and pressures can exceed 10,000 pounds per square inch. Surely this should be the most desolate s

The famous "geologic(al) column" that is presented as evidence for uniformitarianism and evolution has several problems. The first one is that the sequences do not exist except in textbooks and the imaginations of Evolution's True Believers ®. The layers are out of order. A second problem is the circular reasoning used to date the layers by use of index fossils (we know how old a layer is because of the fossils in it, and we know how old a fossil is because of the layer in which it was found).  A further problem for evolutionary geologists and paleontologists are the missing layers, totally disrupting the expected sequences. These are not minor aberrations in small areas that can be dismissed. Instead, they cover large areas and involve alleged millions of years. The frequent flatness add to the annoyance. To make matters worse for uniformitarianism, these gaps support  Noachian Flood models postulated by creationists. ‘Flat gaps’, generally known as paraconfor

PD/Modified  We already know that atheists have a problem with sexual harassment , and the majority of evolutionists are atheists, so it should not be a surprise that anthropologists doing fieldwork experience it as well. Should we fault them, though? If we have animals in our ancestry, we should be able to act like animals. Right? After all, they believe that evolution is the source of morality, so they are only exhibiting the logical result of their worldview.  A shocking percentage of male anthropologists sexually abuse their female students, a new report says.  Science Insider broke the story: “ Survey Finds Sexual Harassment in Anthropology. ”  Previously afraid to speak up out of fear for their careers, women responded to an anonymous survey that shows sexual abuse, up to and including rape, is rampant by their superiors: Fieldwork is a rite of passage for anthropologists. It gives the initiate firsthand knowledge of a culture, along with a feeling of camaraderie w