Piltdown Superman

Proponents of atoms-to-entomologist evolution include natural selection as a means of evolution, although that has been largely abandoned. Except when it is convenient to equate natural selection with evolution. It is often included with mutation as a means of upward changes. Evolution itself is not operational (observable) science, but is historical science instead. Also, science needs to make predictions, which is something that evolution fails more often than not. Walking stick image credit:  Aurea Moragón , US Department of Agriculture (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) A study of those stick insects ("walking sticks") was undertaken to see if random chance could be predictable. Yes, it doesn't make sense to me either: random doesn't lend itself to predictability. What did researchers find? Disagreement. via GIPHY David Coppedge, the author of the article linked just below, shows how the concepts of Darwin and his successors fit the

Researchers studying South American tree iguanas were a mite stumped because they were not doing what they are supposed to do. Namely, adapt and evolve. Instead, males and females of some species were taking ecological niches that could have been filled by variations. A recent study of these iguanas does not support universal common ancestor evolution. Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Ryan Kaldari The Master Engineer designed critters and other organisms to adapt and fill various niches. This is part of how they were designed to keep from going extinct, especially after the changes on Earth after the Genesis Flood. Darwin's disciples falsely call these variations "evolution", but nothing is changing into something completely different. In a recent study of South American lizards of the Liolaemus genus (commonly called tree iguanas), native to Chile and Argentina, researchers discovered that interspecies sexual size dimorphism (hereafter called SSD according to the jour

Horses have been popular with people for a mighty long time as pack animals, to do the work, scouting, in battle, pleasure riding, cowboy work, and much more. (A bit of trivia: the American  Plains Indians had no word for horses at first, since they were unknown on this side of the Atlantic until the Spanish brought them over.) Darwin's disciples have insisted that the evolution of the horse has a strong evidence. Prospecting for Cattle Range , Frederic Remington, 1889 If you study on the displays a spell, you'll realize that this evidence is flimsy and inconsistent; it only exists in textbooks and museum displays, not in reality. The critter presented as the earliest horse,  Hyracotherium , was discovered by Richard Owen. He called it that because of its strong resemblance to the rock badger. It was later called the "dawn horse" because: evolution. via GIPHY The number of toes and ribs changes with each specimen, and loss of features is falsely called e

A planarian is a flatworm, and there are quite a few variations . They tend to be on the small side and can be found in all sorts of watery environments, including moving water such as streams. A few of these are parasitic. Yes, the tapeworm that gets into some people's digestive tracts is a flatworm, but you are not going to get it by wading. Planaria are hermaphrodites (both male and female sex organs). They are not likely to be kept as pets, being rather unattractive among other things. Schmidtea mediterranea image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Alejandro Sánchez Alvarado The version for our purpose is the Schmidtea mediterranea , a freshwater palanerian that is not a parasite. What has caused fascination among zoologists is the way planerians can be sliced and diced, and then the parts can grow into full-fledged planeria. Their ability to regenerate is not to be confused with that of Time Lords , which are one at a time and tend to have quirky personalities. But I digres

The word headbanger  is associated with heavy metal music, supposedly because fans became so excited at concerts, they would literally bang their heads on the stage. These jaspers were known to hurt themselves, too. (Some with a grain of sense would go through the motions and make their long hair fly around, so they had to settle for hearing loss from loud music.) You aren't built to do that, old son. However, there's a critter that is  built to bang its head. The Great Black Woodpecker , Akseli Gallen-Kallela, 1893 Ever heard a woodpecker pecking wood? They may be drumming to communicate, but they use their engineered bird parts to get food. The beak is extra strong, so is the skull, and it has a special sticky tongue to snag the snack that is trying to escape. Before the term irreducible complexity  was termed, I was presenting the concept years ago when I discussed the woodpecker in creation science lectures. Just thought I'd throw that in there. So, why don

If you have a mind to, check some of the last few posts. There is an unintended theme of sorts regarding how evidence in astronomy, geology, and biology work against the timelines and belief systems of secular scientists. They try to tame those wild stallions and bring them into the corral by coming up with all sorts of rescuing devices. Credit: Freeimages / luis rock Here is another series of reports regarding butterflies, moths, and flowers. The fluttering insects were found to have existed many millions of Darwin years before flowering plants were supposed to have evolved. But butterflies live off the nectar of flowers. Also, they have that very long strawlike mouth thing (proboscis) that is specialized, but would be pretty much superfluous until flowering plants got around to evolving. I reckon believing in universal common ancestor evolution is akin to believing in leprechauns, since both require believing despite logic and evidence, not because of them. Rescuing device

When reading creation science publications, you are likely to see the expression "Flood model" in geology. (Regular readers have seen it here.) The way I figure it, this is a sort of general expression because there are actually several models of the Genesis Flood processes, but most are in agreement over the main points. Credit: RGBstock / Aureliy Movila Geologists of the biblical creation persuasion agree that the Genesis Flood actually happened, and it happened a few thousand years ago. Their models are far more effective at describing what is observed in geomorphology and other areas than secular uniformitarian dogma. Flood geologists have their hypotheses and models. However, when scientists do science stuff, they disagree on details. Was there a post-Flood boundary? If so, where? How does it compare to other boundaries? Why do secular scientists shy away from the unique continental shelf and slope? Models are run up the flag pole to see if anyone salutes them.