Piltdown Superman

So, Bill Nye wrote a book. Ken Ham, his debate opponent on February 4, 2014, has authored, co-authored and edited dozens of books. Ham writes a lot, nobody bats an eye. Nye writes one book, and everyone loses their minds . The difference is that Nye is a celebrity propagandist for evolution, which he equivocates with "science", and Ham teaches biblical creation science — which is considered "cool" to bash nowadays. Wikimedia Commons / Ed Schipul  ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) Bill Nye apparently can't stand Ken Ham. In interviews and things, he refers to Ham as "that guy" . The question has been raised that if Nye trounced Ham in the debate like his fans claim, why doesn't he promote the video, which is available to watch free online? Perhaps it's because he misrepresented many things and told several untruths. Or maybe because the debate format itself was appallingly bad. Even so, Ken Ham's not afraid or ashamed of the debate. I had to edit i

The pseudoscience of astrobiology has less justification for its existence all the time. Using scenarios that look good on paper but have no evidence, astronomers are speculating that Earth's primordial atmosphere may have been blasted away by multiple impacts when the solar system was forming. (I didn't see any explanation about oxygen's presence in "old" rocks, belying the idea of an old atmosphere that was replaced later on.) These are people that believe in the Oort cloud, you know. The "impacts destroy atmospheres" concept does not bode well for planets elsewhere in the universe, even by evolutionary reckoning. Additional observations and speculations are hostile to the future of astrobiology. There are people who use Sagan-esque speculations based on the presupposition that evolution is true, then play the odds that since there are so many stars and galaxies, there must be life out there. That hope has been diminished by 90 percent, due to s

The human hand is a marvel of engineering. With it, a cowboy can maneuver to throw his lariat, and then hang on once he lassos the critter. Dexterity, sensitivity, strength. Very complex, very useful — there's nothing else quite like it among the animals. Even with admiring the intricacies of the hand, Darwinists still want to give praise to blind, purposeless evolution and to natural selection. Storytelling is passed off as "science". Amazing how their faith keeps them from giving deserved credit to the Creator. As part of a television series called Dissected, Britian’s BBC website has published an article written by the show’s presenter Dr George McGavin titled ‘The incredible human hand and foot’. In it, Dr McGavin outlines several fascinating features of our hand, which gives us a powerful grip but also allows us to manipulate small objects with great precision. This ability sets us apart from other creatures. The muscles in the hand are ‘strangely’ arrange

Once again, genetics is showing how evolution is increasingly ridiculous. Single-celled creatures that were considered "simple" are, upon closer examination, amazingly complex. A ciliate under study has two genomes, and after reproduction, they scramble and rearrange the genomes — with an encryption that would cause envy in IT people. Blind and purposeless? Nope. The complex product of a Creator with a purpose in mind? You betcha! One-cell creatures called ciliates are expanding our knowledge of genome dynamics and complexity. Now a newly sequenced ciliate genome reveals unimaginable levels of programmed rearrangement combined with an ingenious system of encryption. Contrary to the evolutionary prediction of simple-to-complex in the alleged tree of life, one-cell ciliates are exhibiting astonishing genetic complexity. The ciliate Oxytricha trifallax has two different genomes contained in separate nuclei. The micronucleus is dense and compact and used for reproduction

Tracks can give some decent information about who or what made them, including size, weight, stride and so on. Fossil footprints are a bit less reliable because they are usually made in some kind of mud. The stuff distorts the footprint, and the fossilization process also adds some distortion. Grallator track / NPS.gov Researchers have a new technique for studying dinosaur tracks. They study birds making tracks in poppy seeds. I reckon that some people can't get past the disputed dinosaurs-evolved-into-birds story, even though not all paleontologists are in agreement with it, dishonesty in museum displays , and the fact that dinosaurs ate birds. Still, they want to use birds. The technique is interesting, but does not support evolution in any way. Nor does it shed light on how fossil footprints formed, and how they lasted for alleged millions of years. That  is best explained by biblical creation Genesis Flood models. By devising a ground-breaking technique to peer beneat

Just for fun, this was scheduled to post on the thirteenth of December, 2014 at 10:11 AM Eastern Time. So, for Americans, we can say 10:11, 12-13-14. Little things like that amuse me. One creature that creationists and Intelligent Design proponents have long liked to discuss is the archer fish's hunting abilities . It was already impressive, knowing that it could lurk below the surface of the water and squirt out a jet of water, knocking an insect off a branch into the water below as a guest for lunch. Wikimedia Commons / Pearsman Scott Foresman The argument for design becomes even more impressive with the fact that further research shows that a fair amount of physics is involved with the archer's arching. Too many details are present that can be accounted for by evolutionary means. The secret of the archer fish’s powerful spits has been discovered, and it isn't powerful muscles. The fish that shoots bugs out of the air uses physics, a paper in PLoS ONE decla

How do biblical creationists explain some of the things we see in nature? After all, the Bible clearly teaches that everything was created vegetarian in the beginning, and God said his creation was "very good". I suspicion that "very good" supports the contention that living creatures, נפש חיה, did not experience death for a short time because death was not a part of God's creation. freeimages.com / mexikids Indeed, death entered through sin (Romans 8.19-23a), and death is an enemy (1 Cor. 15.26) — do you reckon that death will be a part of the new creation at the end of it all? Not hardly! So, back to the big questions: From a biblical creationist perspective, where did death, pointy teeth, venom, poison and all that stuff enter into the picture, and can this be addressed without compromising on scriptural truth? There are answers that are theologically sound, and also have scientific support. One of the most common questions asked of Christians is so