Piltdown Superman

Although there is abundant global evidence for the Flood, the British Isles are an area that warrant special study. Uniformitarian assumptions keep leading researchers on dusty trails to dead ends and wrong destinations. Great Britain was completely submerged at one time during the Genesis Flood, but uniformitarian geologists refuse to accept this, and often will often refuse to examine the evidence. For example, Siccar Point in Scotland does not have much information about it because of uniformitarian assumptions; this is the same kind of bad science that has held back research in biology (such as "junk" DNA) and other areas because they think they have things all figured out. FreeImages / Ben Nevis via Carn Mor Dearg Arete / biscuits17 Radiometric dating is no account because of the bad assumptions involved (knowing the beginning "parent" quantities, the decay rates, and the ending "daughter" amounts). Further, those decay rates have been show

So what was it really that done in them dinos, anyway? Some people claim that "science knows" what happened to them, but "science" knows nothing. After all, science is not a sentient being. Also, even thought the dominant theory among secular scientists is that an asteroid smashed into the earth, that raises more questions and speculations, such as why mammals didn't all die, too. There are actually many guesses as to why the dinosaurs cashed in their chips , and some parts of the "theories" that scientists are not so forthcoming about, as you'll see in the article linked below. Image assembled from components at Clker clipart Some are going to volcanic activity for the demise of the dinosaurs. Or maybe a combination of volcanic activity, long-term decline, and the asteroid. Oh, boy. May as well add in the constipation theory to the volcanoes and fireball from the sky. Or we can use the biblical creationist models of the Genesis Flood, th

The gas known as methane is known to exist throughout the universe. Most of the stuff on Earth is made through various biological processes. Methane is in places where it is accepted that there is no life, just as the gas giants in our own solar system. When it was detected on Mars, people got excited, thinking that it may be the product of life. Gale Crater on Mars NASA/JPL-Caltech/University of Arizona (slightly modified) Many evolutionists think that Mars is the most likely place in our solar system outside of Earth to have life. They play the odds, even though the odds have been greatly reduced . (For that matter, the chances against life on Mars are a million to one.) Biblical creationists generally dismiss the idea of life elsewhere in the universe because of scientific reasons against evolution, and more importantly, from scriptural interpretations. The Bible doesn't flat-out say that there's nobody home out there, but that's the most likely interpretations.

Aside from being the name of a color, amber is fossilized tree resin. Paleontologists love it, because it trapped insects and things, and preserved them. Nowadays, scientists can examine the fossils. (Amber with bugs in it is also used as jewelry, which strikes me as a mite odd.) A new discovery of an ant beetle in amber is called a "transitional fossil". Really? Credit: Pixabay / PublicDomainPictures Mayhaps one reason there's so much disagreement about "transitional fossils" (supposedly something evolving into something else) is that the definition of the term is so loose. I reckon it means that something looks like maybe it could be similar to something else. This new ant fossil? They're really reaching when they call it "transitional". If ancient history according to Scripture is true, then what should we expect to find in animal fossils? Surely excellent body designs would top the list, closely followed by a lack of "transitio

At this time of year, many Christians read our Bibles for the Christmas story. And I reckon many of us read the genealogies in Matthew and Luke (and other ones) very quickly, if at all. I don't know many people who actually like them because we want to get to the "good parts". But they're important nonetheless. Biblical creationists maintain that the Ussher chronologies are reliable , and an indicator that the earth is young (our foundation is God's Word, you know). There are several detailed lists in Scripture. But there are some marked differences between the listings in Matthew and Luke, and mockers who don't bother to research claim that they're contradictory.  Not hardly. The genealogies are there for a purpose, and are reliable. Many Bible readers are tempted to just skip over the long lists of names that sometimes seem to interrupt the narrative of Scripture. These genealogies appear often in Genesis, Chronicles, and other places in the Old

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Yes, I know that there are many misconceptions about Christmas. Jesus was probably not born on or about December 25. Isn't that reason enough for Christians to ignore celebrating ? Not hardly!  Also, the "three wise men" were unlikely to have shown up at the manger. Instead, it may have been quite a while later. And three? The Bible doesn't say, but it names three gifts. I won't discard them from the creche scene, though. "No room at the inn" implies that the hotels were booked. The "inn" is more accurately rendered "guest quarters" ( the International Standard Version has it right ), or "lodging place" ( Young's Literal Translation and the Holman Christian Standard Bible ). Still, I cowboy up and ride along. I'm not going to fight with people about traditions, or even if Christians are wrong for celebrating Christmas. Here's a corral-load of links with historical information and

Evolutionists like to claim that the evolution of the horse is one of the best evidences of biological evolution, and their evidence is in the geologic record. But the evolution of the horse is not what they claim , being loaded with assumptions and bad logic — and the horse was never a good example of evolution. It's not as simple as before, more like a patchwork quilt with things added and others taken away. New developments should make equine evolution stories only fit for telling around the campfire. Vito (left) and Royal are both American horse breeds. Thanks to Michelle Studer for the picture. Once again, genetics is an enemy of evolutionary ideas. Populations, reproductive isolation, "positive selection" and so on need to be addressed. For that matter, equine populations and species show remarkable diversity. In the picture above, Vito (on the left) is a 16-hands tall cart-pulling Standardbred, and Royal is a 30-inch Miniature who can also pull his own cart