Piltdown Superman

If you listen to Darwin's Cheerleaders, belief in the Bible (especially a recent, six-day creation) is the domain of the mentally incompetent or scam artists. However, there are actually many scientists, past and present, who reject evolution and accept Genesis as literal history . In addition, there are many non-scientists who believe the Bible as well; scoffing does not equal intellectual superiority — or truth. NASA/JPL-Caltech Astronomy and astrophysics are disciplines that one would consider "off limits" to creationists, especially with black holes, huge distances and so forth. Not hardly. Some are able to cast off "deep time" presuppositions, believe the Bible and also be productive in their fields. Dr. Jonathan Sarfati had a discussion with Dr. Markus Blietz about such things. After progressing through the rigorous German schooling, Markus eventually specialized in astrophysics. In particular, he explains: “My Ph.D. work was about a special cl

When reading or listening to evolutionists, some of the metaphysical elements of their worldview becomes apparent. Evolution itself is often spoken of as if it was an entity, with volition to select and even direct the changes in organisms. This is a form of pantheism. Evolution is not a being or a force. (There is only one Creator, and evolution was not his method of creation.) Nor can any creature decide to evolve another feature — or evolve itself into something else. No animal can plan ahead how it will evolve, so why do some evolutionists talk like they do? “ 500-million-year-old creature was on the way to evolving jaws ,” Sid Perkins titled his short article in Science Magazine, accompanied by an artist’s conception of “ one of the world’s oldest known vertebrates ”—a Cambrian creature named Metaspriggina from Canada.  The thumb-sized swimming creature possessed “ eyes, muscle groups and the support for gills ,” the article says; the upward-pointing eyes were “ large and

The debate has raged for decades whether or not dinosaurs are warm-blooded or cold-blooded. They had to be cold-blooded because they were just overgrown, terrible lizards, yes? However, since an ancestor for bird evolution could not be found, dinosaurs were nominated as candidates for the bird ancestor position and given the status of warm-blooded. Dino-to-bird evolution is the dominant viewpoint for evolutionary scientists, but it is not unanimous. There are problems with it, including the fact that dinosaurs ate birds , and dinosaur fossils have been found with modern birds , so those facts should destroy the "theory" right there. Evolutionists get desperate to deny the Creator, and give evolution undeserved credit for all sorts of change , further reducing origins science to absurdity. There is hope in the dino-to-bird camp. New studies indicate that instead of either/or regarding dinosaur warm- or cold-bloodedness, it may be neither/nor . Unfortunately (and de

The overriding viewpoint for evolutionary geology is uniformitarianism; the present is the key to the past. Geologic processes are observed and measured in the present, and then the assumption is that these rates have been the same throughout geologic history. However, not only do these conflict with biblical creationist models on the age of the earth, but they even contradict the expectations of secular scientists. Pixabay/WikiImages Problems down south. Antarctic ice has been rising and falling at rates that are far too rapid for evolutionary assumptions. Worse for them, the rates are not constant. This is problematic for uniformitarian geology, but not for young earth creationists. Land is not supposed to rise this fast. Generations of geologists have been trained to think in terms of slow and steady processes to explain Earth features. New results show that the continental crust underlying Antarctica is rising rapidly as parts of its massive ice sheet have been melting awa

When NASA sent the Cassini spacecraft to Titan (the largest moon of Saturn), certain things were expected to be found based on their ancient universe and evolutionary presuppositions. Titan was baffling already, because it has a dense atmosphere, which was a puzzler right there. Image Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech Worse for secular scientists, Titan was recalcitrant by acting decidedly young. With Cassini using radar and other instruments to map its surface, tellers of cosmology tales are in high gear finding truly remarkable "explanations" to force Titan into pretending to be old. It makes more sense to admit that the ancient universe paradigm is wrong and that the data fits a young universe. As the Cassini orbiter makes its 103rd close pass by Titan, have long-agers found ways to keep it billions of years old? Space.com announced the 103rd flyby of Titan by Cassini, and it’s a daring one: just 2,274 miles above the surface at 13,000 miles per hour; PhysOrg annou

Evolution has been an excuse to deny God and help atheists pretend that they are "intellectually fulfilled" . There are other people who are seeking to have faith in God, but the presentations of evolution as a fact cause them doubt and confusion. It is not surprising, since people are not trained in critical thinking, but blind obedience. Society has come to the religion of Scientism , elevating science and making scientists its priests. Further, evolutionists present their beliefs in slick packages with great storytelling. Of course, they leave out facts that controvert their presentations. When people actually examine the evidence, they will see that evolution does not have a leg to stand on or a tail by which to swing. The evidence supports what the Bible says, and it also supports biblical creation science. A letter to CMI and the response by a former atheist is presented. I watched David Attenborough’s Rise of Animals today. Although I cannot accept life from z

It's a bit distracting to be writing this while the cat is snoring. I should record it, people won't believe the log-sawing.  Creationists keep pointing out that there are fossils out of order according to the geologic column, and Darwin's Cheerleaders come up with various rescuing devices to keep from discarding it. Similarly, there are things that just do not belong according to archaeology, history and so on. Rather than admitting that evolution has been refuted seven ways from sundown, people will resort to speculating that ancient space aliens are the answer, or simply cover up the many anti-evolution smoking guns. Spend a half an hour on this video by Ian Juby for " Genesis Week " and see some information about artifacts that fluster evolutionists . They really should abandon their "theory", the evidence supports the biblical creation model far better than their conjectures. ADDENDUM: A three-part article on OOParts can be found at the

It seems to be happening with increasing frequency that the more scientists discover, the more there is to learn. Regarding DNA and the human genome, some of the surprises are because of the presuppositions of evolutionists (and yes, "evolutionist" is  a word , even though some of them do not like it). Since part of the genome was not understood, it was presumed "junk" and not studied properly. That specter has come back to haunt them repeatedly. In this case, hundreds of proteins have been identified, and they were in areas called "junk". Using a creationist paradigm (and yes, "creationist" is a word, but creationists do not seem to object to it) believing that God created amazingly complex things and we should discover what makes them tick, perhaps there would not be so many surprises. Once again the oft-repeated phrase "More complex than previously thought" has been used to describe new research cataloguing thousands of prot

This post has two featured articles on a related topic from the same source. Give a listen to the music at the end of this post, too. First, secular "peer review" process has some serious flaws , especially regarding origins science. Creationists often receive glib comments of the woefully uninformed that resemble: "Get your creationist nonsense peer reviewed and then maybe I'll read it". Although creationists do have peer review , people making comments like that are implying that creationists should subject their material refuting evolution to the secular process. Picture furnished by Michelle Studer Peer review is a good idea and many people work hard to keep up the standards, however, it is time-consuming and expensive. But there is also bad science, recalled papers, bias and fraud — especially when trying to prove evolution with the sacred cow of peer review. The first featured article discusses that some are saying that peer review as we know it

Is there an echo in here? Clinton Richard Dawkins says that teaching creation science to children is child abuse. Bill Nye the Propaganda Guy spouts off prejudicial conjecture about how people who disbelieve in evolution are harming science.   Neil deGrasse Tyson uses his status to spread untruths about the same kind of thing. All three of them are guilty of conflating "science" with "evolution", and speaking falsehoods about the importance of a "proper" belief in origins (that is, evolutionism) for the progress of real science. None of them really understand the nature of science. It all comes down to faulty presuppositions making a failed worldview. Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, in an interview posted on National Geographic’s website on June 6, wants to “fix” adults he considers “scientifically illiterate.” His 13-part series Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey claims its aim is to promote science literacy, but by this phrase and the content of many of