Piltdown Superman

Tibetan Plateau -  Jeff Schmaltz, MODIS Rapid Response Team, NASA/GSFC Actualist and uniformitarian geologists are having to deal with more and more evidence for the global Flood. Current geology does not adequately explain observational evidence, including the coarse gravel sheets in south-central Asia. Rapid continental erosion and uplifts of mountains fit some creationist models. Tall erosional remnants indicate rapid, continent-wide erosion, which is consistent with the Retreating Stage of the Flood. While the floodwaters were retreating and eroding the continents, resistant rocks were transported long distances, as has been documented for the United States. A similar pattern of coarse gravel transport is evident in the mountains of south-central Asia. These areas are south of the Himalayas, north of the Tibetan Plateau, all around the Tian Shan Mountains, southwest of the Zagros Mountains, and east of the Tibetan Plateau on the west edge of the Sichuan basin. The character

People have a serious misunderstanding of the nature, origin and purpose of science. It is a method, a tool for acquiring knowledge. The definition of science cannot be determined by  science, nor can any of the scientific methods. These definitions are philosophical in nature. When there are arbitrary, self-serving assertions such as, "You must be an atheist to use science", the entire process is misunderstood. Many people cannot differentiate between operational science and historical science . Further, many will equivocate "science" with "evolution" , leading to the fabrication that evolution is  science and misleading people who do not know the difference. morgueFile / cohdra Like in silly assertion just below, I have had people say that Christians cannot do science because of their worldview. A scientist's belief in creation does not negate his or her ability to perform actual science. One of the most baffling remarks I ever encountered was w

For many years, uniformitarian geologists claimed that fossils were formed over long periods of time. Something died, sank, was buried by sediment and so forth, and became a fossil. Some seem to still believe this, but it defies common sense and the most basic observations. morgueFile/gracey  One killer for the idea that fossils happen slowly is the very existence of their tracks. Yes, dinosaurs left tracks in mud. And it is apparent that different ones were attempting to deal with flood waters. This supports creationist models for the Noachian Flood. What's so fascinating about dinosaur tracks? Maybe it's because their many mysteries beg for solutions. For instance, because tracks in mud are so short-lived today, how did dinosaur tracks ever preserve in the first place? Newly described prints bolster biblical creation's explanation of dinosaur footprints.  Researchers working in China's Sichuan Province recently reported their discovery in the Chinese

  Gale Crater on Mars NASA/JPL-Caltech/University of Arizona (slightly modified)  Evolutionists are desperate to find signs of life elsewhere in the universe. They insist that evolution is true here, so it must have happened out there. Finding some kind of life would (to them) prove evolution. But then, we're used to circular reasoning from them. Actual observations are constantly wrecking their hypotheses and dreams. Water on Mars would be a good chance of finding life on Mars. Bzzzzz! Wrong answer, Hans!  What appeared to be signs of water are actually signs of wind. The more we learn about Mars, the more we learn that it is downright toxic, and even colonizing Mars is probably a bad idea. Evidence disputes Mars water, let alone life.  It’s looking like a toxic place.  Besides, where would the water come from?  The big mound in Gale Crater, site of the Mars Curiosity Rover, looked like a tantalizing place to look for habitability.  Mt. Sharp, as it is called, appear

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Edited 6-21-2016 Before I went ahead with this article, I checked with some other people about the content. Three hours before auto-publish, I removed the name of the evolution stormtrooper that I dealt with, even though they thought I should use it. "Dr. Duncan, I forbid you from letting any student pass your class if they still believe in their imaginary friends by the end of the semester.  If you don’t make every student in there an atheist by the time they graduate, then you, sir, have failed as an educator!" — Dr. Robert Farris, The Deception  by Steven J. Wright , p. 68 We have seen that indoctrination is paramount in evolutionary education; students are not told how  to think (critically, honestly examining the evidence), but what  to think (presupposing that evolution is true, and then using circular reasoning to "prove" it). Although the "educator" in the example at the top is fictional, such antics are not. T

stock.xchng/ninci  It has been stated here several times before, but must be repeated: Scientists are not the impartial, objective bringers of knowledge that many people think. In reality, they are human.  As such, they are subject to the same ambitions, lusts, greed, dishonesty and other vices that the rest of us face. And the competition to produce something is fierce. "Why are you defaming scientists, Cowboy Bob?" No, dispelling false images is not defamatory. In fact, it's a public service. People do not need to be accepting something as truth just because a scientist  says so. We still have to use our minds. They might appreciate the chance to get off the pedestals, as they are not objects of worship — I doubt that many choose to be, either. The peer review process is biased, discriminatory and unreliable. Papers are being recalled for serious errors, and some are outright plagiarized. Academic fraud does exist, I hate to tell you. Being a scientist is a n

Evolutionary geologists insist on using their failed models and presuppositions when doing their studies. Uniformitarianism, "the present is the key to the past", takes present processes and assumes that they have been constant.   Image credit: NOAA  These assumptions frequently prove embarrassing, inaccurate and contradictory within their own framework. If they would admit that their models did not work and used the far more accurate biblical Noachian Flood models, they would have greatly improved results. An alarming headline on  Science News  reads, " Ice-Free Arctic May Be in Our Future, International Researchers Say" . This report provides a classic example of how researchers’ flawed understanding of earth’s geological history leads them to to seriously wrong conclusions. Their conclusions actually fly in the face of the evidence they report, and in this case it could cause unnecessary panic about a situation that will not happen. The report explains