Piltdown Superman

"Science is self-correcting", they say. Not hardly! Scientists tend to cling to their paradigms. Sometimes it's out of pride, other times it's because an idea is presumed to be an undisputed fact, other reasons — but especially if it involves evolution in some way. Evolutionary theories keep getting retooled these days, don't they? Image credit: morgueFile / kconnors For a long time, the established view was that, since Earth and the rest of the solar system formed out of hot gasses at about the same time, it was dry when it cooled off. A new theory gets traditional long-age scientists all het up because it says Earth was wet, and did not get water from asteroids. That causes consternation, because other scientists need the asteroid theory, despite contrary evidence, because asteroids and things supposedly brought life here so it could evolve. These science-deniers are suppressing the truth that creation scientists have been telling them all along: the ev

One of the difficulties for spore-to-sportscaster evolution is the evolution of the cell. The hypotheses of endosymbiosis has simple bacteria-like cells way back yonder being the ancestors for the cells found in plants and animals today, including the trillions of cells found in humans. With advances in genome sequencing (and a mighty helpful reduction in cost), endosymbiosis is in a world of hurt. Image credit: Darryl Leja, NHGR / National Human Genome Research Institute New research is a vexation for evolutionists, which is not surprising, since endosymbiosis was based mainly on superficial resemblances and all. One problem is that there is no evidence for mitochondrial genes having an origin in the bacterial cells. Another is that there is no sign of the kind of steady, gradual progression that we've all been assured is a registered trademark of evolution. What we find is organized complexities specific to organisms, just the way our Creator planned things out. One of

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen As regular readers may have noticed, an advantage to my data entry job is being able to listen to things. Rows of people in Cubicleland are plugged in to music, radios, audio books, and in my case, podcasts. I happened across this series called "God and Evolution" by Andrew McCaskill on Sermon Audio, and am pleased to share it with you. The lecture series is a mite longer than I usually share, what with being sixteen parts and all. But I reckoned it was important. It was presented April-September 2015 at Emmanuel Baptist Church in Verona, Virginia . Mr. McCaskill isn't one of those yee-ha entertainment-driven teachers. Instead, he is soft-spoken and more concerned with delivering his content. You won't be overwhelmed with science, but there is some as well as serious theological content involved; Andrew show serious flaws in theistic evolution. Y'all know how I feel about that stuff . Andrew McCaskill has taught biology for sixteen

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen The age of the Earth is determined primarily through radiometric dating methods. However, radiometric dating is loaded with scientific difficulties, circular reasoning, presuppositions, and other anti-science posturing by long-age proponents. (Links to an eight-part series on radiometric dating difficulties can be found here , and you can also search the site for articles on "age of the earth".) The workers at the Darwin Ranch don't bother to use Earth rocks very much. Instead, they calculate the putative age of the Earth from space rocks . Meteor Crater, Arizona / Image credit: NASA The cognating on using meteorites and other space rocks is that the rocks right here on the place they're trying to find the age for are no good, what with plate tectonics fouling them up and all. Using their presuppositions, secular scientists assume that, since everything was formed at the same time billions of evolutionist years ago, space rocks are mor

DNA is vitally important, but is subjected to abuse through use; various stresses cause considerable hurt. Passing along such seriously damaged DNA to the next generation would lead to a quick extinction of humanity, and wouldn't be much good for other living things, either. Combined clip-art images from Clker The 2015 Nobel Prize for evolution — "No, Cowboy Bob. There is no Nobel Prize for evolution." Oh, right. That's mighty silly of me. Anyway, the 2015 Nobel Prize for chemistry was awarded for research into how cells repair their own DNA. It's not just a matter of enzymes, but also communication of information, and repairs are conducted. This process is clearly from the grace of our Creator, and evolution is impossible. Tomas Lindahl from Sweden, Paul Modrich from the United States, and American-Turkish researcher Aziz Sancar were awarded the 2015 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for uncovering how cells repair their own DNA.1 DNA repair mechanisms keep u

If you study on it for a spell, you'll realize that the brain and the mind are extremely complicated. DNA is busy doing work, perception is happening, signals are being relayed so we can make sense of what our senses tell us, we have abstract thought, composition, and much more. You've really got to hand it to the brain! Image credit: Pixabay / geralt There has been a tremendous amount of research being conducted regarding the brain, thought processes, various aspects of neuroscience, and the like. Some give the typical hand-waving adoration of Darwin (it seems like some scientists consider this obligatory), there is some dreadful science with fact-free conjectures — and some that not only shows how evolutionary thinking has nothing to do  with biological science, and even hints at the Creator. Evolutionists take swipes at saying the most complex matter in the universe is a product of blind, aimless processes of nature. Did sight emerge from blindness without wantin

While it is expected for scientists to work from their worldviews and assumptions, secularists have a habit of clinging to evolution and uniformitarian biases to the point of absurdity. Part of that problem is that these scientists do not consider possibilities beyond their own presuppositions. Speculations are put forward in an effort to explain various findings, but those speculations often defy analysis. Juvenile hadrosaur / Pavel Bochkov / Wikimedia Commons / CC BY-SA 2.0 In the instance of juvenile Hadrosaur-like bones discovered in Alaska, the ruling paradigm dictates that, although these dinosaurs were rapidly buried, it was due to local flooding. This concept does not fit the observed facts. The better explanation is anathema to them: the rapid burial was due to the global Genesis Flood. In late September of this year a report was published on a new species of Hadrosaurid dinosaur (commonly and hereafter called duck-billed dinosaurs) dubbed Ugrunaaluk kuukpikensis (“a

One of the most common moves for someone who feels that they've been dealt a losing hand is to play the victim card. It's usually a move to get sympathy from the uninformed, emotionally-driven crowd or from peers who shave the same perspectives as the card player. Instead of playing the hand they're dealt or cashing in their chips and finding another game, they try to stack the deck and manipulate others. Modified from Clker clip art There are certain political parties that are famous for this, as well as atheists and evolutionists who realize that they've been bested by Christians and creationists. When this "oh poor me, I'm a victim" move is used, it can be cranked up to blaming other people for circumstances of the player's own making. It's sort of like an old joke I heard: A mother hears crying from the living room and rushes in. "What's the matter, little Tyler?", and Tyler sobs, "Tony hit me back! " Creationis

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Theistic Evolutionists and other long-age compromisers have claimed that biblical creationists are distorting the gospel message and being harmful to the overall health and unity of the church as a whole. Why? Because we believe that the Bible means what it says, even back in Genesis 1, and don't cotton to adding to God's Word (Prov. 30:6). People have come to faith in Christ through biblical creation ministries, and I reckon one reason is that we don't compromise on the authority of the Bible. They, however, are trying to make God more attractive by elevating atheistic interpretations of evidence to the magisterial position, and telling God what he said and meant. By adding to God's Word and taking a low view of Scripture, they are essentially lying about God. These owlhoots invariably demonize biblical creationists, as I discussed in one example, here . We're used to being called "science deniers", creatards, cultists, an

A classic argument used by creationists against microbes-to-mechanic evolution is the first law of thermodynamics, which in the simplified form states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. Riding close on its heels is the second law, where energy becomes less useful. This is entropy.  The second law has been modified in recent years, formerly understood as everything goes from order to disorder. Image credit: Pixabay / skeeze Years ago, I used the entropy argument inefficiently. Yes, our own observations and common sense tell us that things go from order to disorder. But too many Christians do not have a good working knowledge of the laws of thermodynamics and are unable to respond to critics. Of course, when tinhorns who do not understand the material resort to "Dawkins refuted this", throwing links at you, or complaining about what is not  mentioned, it's time to saddle up and ride on. That's part of the problem — many evolutionists do not have a good