Piltdown Superman

Predictions and expectations of secular models of the age and formation of the solar system are not happening.  "Don't biological, chemical, and cosmic evolution give opportunities for predictions, Cowboy Bob? " They would if they were true, and if scientists actually understood what they were talking about before pontificating. But they're not true, and secular scientists have a habit of being un-humble. Maat Mons volcano on Venus image credit: NASA/JPL , who would not endorse this site Some newer problems for secularists are occurring out yonder. Mars has carbon dioxide eruptions that are eroding the surface that look to be about 2,500 years old. Rescuing devices are being utilized. Meanwhile, Venus is showing signs of very recent volcanic activity. Then there's that Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko mission by Rosetta, which I suspicion that scientists may be regretting because they're none to happy with the results about comet dust, the formation

With apologies to writers Don Barnes, Jeff Carlisi, and Jim Peterik of the band Thirty-Eight Special, "You see it all around you, good science gone bad..." Yes, once again, we have an instance of unwarranted conjecture be proclaimed as science. In other news, evolutionists Make Stuff Up™. Generated at ImageChef Bearded dragons are popular pets ("bearded" because of the frill that happens under the neck ). Someone got a notion to do some actual science and find out why the " naked bearded dragon " has no scales. They had some good science happening at first, but then sought evolutionary clues. First clue: it's a mutation. Second clue: disingenuously using the discredited myth of embryonic recapitulation. Third clue: comparing a mutation in birds, mammals, and reptiles. The Darwinoids saw some similarities and claimed to "conclusively" show that everything evolved from a common ancestor. Naturally, the press stampeded with this bad scien

Here we are with our digital technology, space rockets, increases in medical care, and more. God some mighty fine plans for the future, too, if we don't blast ourselves back a thousand years. We think we're lords of all we survey, don't we? Reckon so. Except that the idea that we're more intelligent than our ancestors is based on evolutionary presuppositions and arrogance. The storyline goes that stupid brutes evolved, then gradually evolved intelligence, and on from there. Not hardly! Image credit: Pixabay / Gerd Altmann We're not really the sharpest knives in the drawer, we've just accumulated more knowledge and learned a lot. When you study on ancient people (including the surprising, fully-human Neanderthals ), you'll see that there are many examples in ancient history of human ingenuity. People with an evolutionary paradigm get all worked up over this and sometimes even say that our ancestors had help from aliens because they "could not"

Heading up Deception Pass way, you might catch the hands at the Darwin Ranch feeling a mite glum over the outcome of the latest facts. Another of their latest efforts to support common-ancestor evolution has been thrown onto the compost pile out back. Again, it involves DNA, which has never been a friend to their paradigm. Image credit: Pixabay / PublicDomainPictures Evolutionary scientists show a heap of hubris by asserting that something is due to evolution because they don't understand it. For example, the "junk" DNA fiasco, where sections of DNA were declared leftover junk from our alleged evolutionary past, then discovered to be very important indeed . Three bases in RNA work on coding for a protein. The third base was considered redundant (no reflection on Kris Bryant ), therefore, evolution could maybe perhaps occur. Evolutionists tried this trick before to no avail, and it's not working now. (They can cry, protest, and riot if they want to, but that won

Once again, a fatal flaw in fungus-to-philologist evolution has been found, putting the evolutionary establishment in an uproar. Fossils have been misinterpreted, and the discovered problem means that the "facts" are stampeding away to freedom on the open plains. Image credit: US National Park Service , who would not endorse this content even if they knew it existed. The method of correcting fossil diversity records has been found to be extremely inaccurate. The authors suggest a phylogenetic approach, which is still based on the presumption of evolution, and is circular reasoning. In reality, the only worldview that makes sense of the data and doesn't need excuses from Charlie Darwin's Fudge Factory is: biblical creation. Fossils may be real, but the methods used to analyze them have come under fire, with implications for Darwinian theory. It can ruin your whole day. Finding that, after years of work, your assumptions undermine everything you believed ca

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen It's interesting to me when things come together in a short period of time, and I kind of wonder if God is prompting me to do (or, in this case, write) something. The other day, I was asked about how to deal with the question of stars falling to Earth. Scoffers have a problem with contexts in the Bible. They frequently cherry-pick verses out of context and claim something is a contradiction or an impossibility. Often, parallel accounts in the Bible of an event can offer clarification, but there are times when we need to get into bigger contexts: historical, cultural, grammatical, linguistic, and so on. Image Credit: NASA / Bill Ingalls I was contacted by someone who was challenged about the phrase, "The stars will fall from the sky". Now come on, that can't happen, they're giant super-hot balls of gas and they're not going to come crashing down here. First, look at the immediate context. The scoffer drew from a passage in the G

Biomimetics (or biomimicry) is the concept of getting ideas from nature and building practical applications for our use . Usually, the owlhoots give credit to the puny god of evolution for the design in nature. (In academia, this theft of credit is called plagiarism. ) Image credit: Elizabeth Hertel / US National Park Service Use does not imply endorsement of site contents Moving on, pitcher — I mean, picture this: a slick surface is needed. Sure, we get those, they repel water. But how about repelling other fluids as well? And repair itself? Such a thing is happening, inspired by our Creator's handiwork on the pitcher plant. We have probably all seen the sign, “Caution—slippery surface,” and likely experienced the slipperiness of a wet floor firsthand. Not surprisingly, surfaces which repel fluids efficiently are correspondingly slippery, and such surfaces can have many useful applications in industry. Vast amounts of money are spent each year in developing materials t