Piltdown Superman

Seems like feathers have been in the science news quite a bit lately. The biggest story was the attempt to say that a feathered tail fragment in amber belonged to a dinosaur. Recently , we looked at reports of fossilized bird feathers that had proteins and pigments . Now we have the "mud dragon" fossil, from a report in November 2016. Generated at Image Chef There are two aspects to the story. First, the claim that it had feathers, even though there's no evidence of that. This apparently came about because some bumps on a dinosaur looked kinda sorta like the beginnings of feathers, especially if you squint really hard and ignore other possible (and more logical) explanations. Also, they shove it into the "dinosaurs-to-birds" myth to get away from admitting there's a Creator. Therefore, illogically speaking, this one must have had feathers as well. Some creationary scientists have a view of, "If a dinosaur was conclusively shown to have feather

Paleontologists seem to have found bird fossils dated at 120 million Darwin years (I said "seem to have found" because the location in China has been the source of bad material in the past). Darwinistas managed to give the required homage to evolution, and then speculated on the origin of colors in feathers. The "remarkably preserved" fossils gave rise to further speculations and assertions without evidence and mechanisms. Worse for their old Earth beliefs, the feathers were "modern" looking. Of course they were, Earth and everything in it was created much more recently than is dreamt of in their philosophies.  For more about this, see " Early Fossil Bird Feathers Were Modern and Colorful " . Image credit: Pixabay / Pexels Moving on, additional information came in. A bird fossil that dates 10 million Darwin years older than those discussed above has a few surprises. The paper involved Mary Schweitzer, known for the discoveries of soft tiss

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Th is article contains links to several items that are articles, videos, and audi o. I realize that this is a busy time of year for many, but if you have some time, I hope you 'll delve into the material. Or maybe save some of the items for a more convenient time. Although there is dispute about the actual day, most people who identify as Christians celebrate Christmas on December 25. No, we are not commanded to celebrate Christmas or Easter, we have the liberty to celebrate or leave it alone . (Saying it's wrong to celebrate because we're not commanded to do so is the argument from silence fallacy. Also, Jesus celebrated Hanukkah, John 10:22–39, although it was not a required observance. Nor are we required to observe Hanukkah , but some think it's a good idea .) We commemorate the day that Jesus Christ, God the Son, our Creator, humbled himself and took on human form for our redemption. Creationists have many reasons to celebrate the day .

An established dogma used by proponents of common-ancestor evolution is the alleged similarity between human and chimp DNA, sometimes cited as high ninety eight percent similarity, depending on who you talk to. Chimpanzees are allegedly our close evolutionary cousins, so the similarities in DNA are mighty important to some folks. They conveniently ignore the human-gorilla genome similarities , because that doesn't fit the storyline, and they also ignore lincRNA regions . Genome similarities are nowhere near proof of evolution, old son. Assembled from components at Clker clipart. There are very some serious scientific problems with that human-chimp genome similarity. Creationary scientist Dr. Jeffrey Tompkins did new calculations and found out that the similarities were much lower than evolutionists had proclaimed. Then it was learned that the software was defective . What's a scientist who wants to know the truth to do? Keep working! His latest technical paper on this su

Edited for wording on December 23, 2016 There's a great deal o f talk these days about "fake new s". As I understand the term, some sites write up "reports" for the Web that are entirely false, and people believe them. (These are un like clearly identifiable parody sites .) But what about untrue news from sources that are considered reputable ? Darwinists are cranking that stuff out mighty fast. Over yonder at Deception Pass, the hands at the Darwin Ranch are getting a mite consternated. They're losing their grip on public sentiment, credible evidence, and even on reality. (The failure of "Lucy" made matters quite a bit worse for them.) To keep the funding coming in, they whip their ponies of persuasive propaganda into a gallop and commence to presenting strong evidence for evolution — or so they think. What really happens is that we get a passel of speculations, assertions, guesswork, bad reasoning, and the like that are passed off as "

Sometimes, it's mighty nice to have a copy of something. To make a copy, you need the necessary equipment, such as a computer, printing press, or somesuch. I have a series of s teps to obtain articles: go to the Web article, send it to the e-book reader, then convert it using te xt-to-speech into an MP3. For copies of other objects, you need skill, imagination, special equipment — here, I'm thinking of biomimetics , where nature inspires man-made applications. When we copy a feature of something that God designed, it's clunky at best when compared to the original. Image credit: Pixabay / Patrice_Audet One of the strongest indications of life is that something is able to reproduce itself. You know, like make young 'uns. Even at the cellular level, copying happens. The Evo Sith disingenuously try to distance themselves from abiogenesis (the origin of life), because the origin of cells, and the steps needed in reproduction (not to mention evolving into higher life

According to mythology, humans are at the top of the evolutionary tree. Our ancestors went through many changes, and we eventually evolved intelligence, so here we are. Kind of curious that all of our alleged ancestors and their relatives didn't do a whole heap of learning and pass along safety tips to the next generations, isn't it? Critters just don't do that. Assembled from elements at Clker clipart Seems like our "closest cousins" according to evolutionism would have learned a thing or two as well. But a baboon can still be caught because he reached into a hole for a prize and refused to let go . Apes haven't learned any kind of musical innovation, but some birds have the ability that matches human skills . While fish haven't learned how to avoid nets and do other stupid things, there are some that exhibit skills that surpass those of apes. Since evolutionary thinking permeates the entire spectrum of biology, scientists are consistently surpri

Secular geologists are proposing some interesting ideas about how plate tectonics caused the Ice Age. Their scenario has an interesting sequence of events where continental plates collided, volcanoes were formed, gasses were released, and the Ice Age happened. And you thought volcanoes were just hollow mountains where criminal masterminds had secret bases, didn't you? Manam volcano image credit: Jesse Allen / NASA, who are not endorsing the contents In all this tectonic activity, rocks were exposed, carbon dioxide was absorbed from the atmosphere. Seems plausible at first, but there's a problem with the presumptions for which the evidence is interpreted. Biblical creationary scientists have a far different (and better) interpretation of the data, which involves the Genesis Flood and a young Earth. Remember, there is no "our facts" and "their facts", we all have the same facts to work with. In the evolutionary uniformitarian (slow-and-gradual) view

I wasn't going to post about "Lucy" again so soon, but more information has come in and this will be a link-loaded resource, including articles and a new video. The hands at the Darwin Ranch have been mighty glum lately. News about the alleged transitional form known as Lucy have been going from bad to worse, and it's not only because of biblical creationists. That's right, even evolutionists are admitting that Lucy's status upright-walking link is poor. Some of Darwin's Cheerleaders will deny the evidence (preferring outdated material and uninformed opinions to credible evidence). Do they know that one of the bones assigned to the creature was actually from a baboon ? Modified from a public domain image at Wikimedia Commons First, an article. Further studies show that this extinct ape was swinging from the trees, but they still cling to their story and say that maybe perhaps somehow she spent part of the time on the ground. Pretty desperate to p

You'd think the hands at the Darwin Ranch would know a thing or two about cattle down there at Deception Pass, but the only thing they grow is conjectures. (I think they get into the peyote buttons on occasion, but never mind about that now.) Some cattle kinds from the days of yore are causing some consternation. Image credits: both from Morguefile: Bison (left) by gduncan , Longhorn (right) by ArturoYee When microcephalic thrill-seekers drove the bison of the American Great Plains to near extinction, Longhorn cattle were brought in. Longhorns are hearty and strong, and will breed with other cattle. Crossbreeding got so intensive that the Texas Longhorn itself almost became extinct . The point is that cattle are willing to crossbreed. DNA from very old cattle bones, plus help from archaeologists who know about cave paintings, sculptures, and other things, helped identify three kinds of cattle. One of them was a baffling hybrid they called the "Higgs Bison" (I lik