Welcome to the home of The Question Evolution Project. Presenting information demonstrating that there is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution, and presenting evidence for special creation. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Saturday, April 7, 2018

No Chance for Naturalistic Origin of Life — Part 2

In a previous exciting installment, we examined how abiogenesis (life arising from non-life) has serious problems from the get-go. If you have ever read or watched science fiction, you may have encountered reorganization or relocation scenarios. That is, put the story on a distant planet, or in the far future where Earth was mostly destroyed by a war or other catastrophe. Seems like Darwin's lab-coated disciples do this in reverse for their tales: since conditions on Earth make abiogenesis impossible, go back in time and imagine a different world so that life could spontaneously form.

Evolutionists are continuing to come up with outlandish scenarios for the origin of life.
Credit: Unsplash / Lucas Vasques
Under scrutiny, we see that life requires water and oxygen. However, water is a serious impediment in the spontaneous formation of those nucleotides that are necessary for the formation of life. Some riders of the owlhoot trail are attempting to deny the Creator's work by suggesting that life formed in formamide. (Careful, I though the world was "formaldehyde" at first.) Never mind that formamide is not naturally plentiful on Earth, and is toxic to cells. Then these pseudo-scientists suggested that maybe perhaps sometime it could be radiation made life evolve in those conditions.

In the previous post linked up topside, the atmosphere was discussed. Even though geologic evidence reveals that our atmosphere has been pretty much the same throughout Earth's history, evolutionists imagine a different scenario and build their speculations on it anyway.


Like a desperate movie producer, they throw in some attention-grabbing items. How about asteroids? Yeah, and we can zap stuff with lasers, pretending we're simulating conditions on Earth back then just after the asteroids hit! Nothing useful was found, however, and they proceeded to collect grant money that came from taxpayers. This is modern science, old son: storytelling without evidence, logic, or even science. Hail Darwin, blessed be! Oh, please.
In addition to original research and data analysis on important themes in the origins debate, ICR scientists also evaluate the progress of secular research reported in many scientific publications. One of the fruits of this research was noted in last month’s Acts & Facts Impact article on the topic of abiogenesis—the supposed development of life from non-life. It reviewed the history of research on the origin of life and showed how utterly futile the evolutionary explanations of the alleged naturalistic beginnings of life really are. The article wasn’t able to include all the important recent scientific publications on the topic, so we’ll cover some of those here.
This is very interesting, and to finish reading, click on "Abiogenesis: Water and Oxygen Problems".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Friday, April 6, 2018

Impact Craters and the Genesis Flood

We see impact craters on the moon, Mars, Mercury, and a few on Earth. Not much of a view of Venus because of its dreadful atmosphere and conditions, and not much to smack into in the gas giants. Their moons have some. Oh, and Pluto. Can't forget that one. Creationary scientists as well as those of the secular persuasion are trying to understand why so few are seen here, but the "Late Heavy Bombardment" myth is being put out to pasture.

There are far fewer impact craters on Earth than on other planets
Crater Lake image credit: Freeimages / John Vician
Some creationists propose that there were two bombardments, one at creation, and another at the time of the Genesis Flood. Our focus is on the latter, and much of the information about craters and basis is gained from examining the moon. To determine this particular model, the dynamics of velocity, size, composition of asteroids and such have to be considered. Then, factor in what happens when an impact is made and a crater or basin is formed.

Obviously, biblical creationists reject radiometric dating and deep time that are axioms for secular scientists. Impacts may have been one of the trigger events to open up the fountains of the great deep (Gen. 7:11). At any rate, during the Flood, there would have been less scarring of the earth's surface, and geological activity would have erased many of the signs of the impacts. Here, let's take a look at the article:
The moon is the standard by which to estimate the number of craters on the earth. The number of craters greater than 30 km by evolutionary age categories is about 1,900. Scaling to the earth and considering the greater gravitational cross section results in 36,000 craters greater than 30 km. Based on very larger craters on the moon and Mars and the size frequency distribution on the moon extrapolated to the earth, about 100 craters greater than 1,000 km in diameter and a few up to 4,000 to 5,000 km in diameter should have occurred on Earth. This tremendous bombardment must have occurred very early in the Flood, tailing off during the rest of the Flood with a few post-Flood impacts. Such a bombardment would be adequate to initiate the Flood. The evidence for such an impact bombardment very likely can be found in the Precambrian igneous rocks and suggests that the Precambrian is early Flood.
To read the rest of this impactful article about a new model-in-process, click on "How many impact craters should there be on the earth?"

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Thursday, April 5, 2018

Upside-Down Armored Dinosaurs

Sometimes I get to cognating that perhaps ignoring pertinent information and doing incomplete work are included in the criteria for being an evolutionary biologist. Read back several posts, and you will find several egregious examples of these things.

Ankylosaur fossils are usually found upside-down
Rock strata image before my tampering by Jebulon at Wikimedia Commons
In this instance, we have the ankylosaur fossils. You wouldn't cotton to having one of those beasties coming your way and making you think it's an M1A3 Abrams tank or something. So, why is it that most of their fossils are found upside down?

Remember, we have fossils to work with, plus some evolution-defying soft tissues now and then. But no living specimens to weigh, measure, and otherwise examine. That doesn't stop some devotees of Hanuman the monkey god from offering praise to Darwin and presenting incomplete conjecture. One idea is the "bloat and float" concept. They drowned, bloated, inverted, got carried around by the water until the carcasses beached, then they fossilized. Not hardly!

Numerous inconvenient facts were ignored, including other fossilized critters of similar size, how armored dinosaurs did not seem to be frequenting oceans, lakes, and rivers, and how they were found fossilized in their inverted positions on several continents. 

The ankylosaurs would have been quite heavy, so what moved them? The clearest explanation that secularists dismiss out of hand is the Genesis Flood. Ever see motor vehicles swept away in videos of local floods? The Genesis Flood was far more powerful, so moving armored dinosaurs is entirely plausible. In addition, the Flood would have done the rapid burial needed for fossilization. The ridiculous bloat and float story should not have seen the light of day without actual scientific research and consideration.
Why are 81% of ankylosaur fossils found belly up? With clever storytelling, you can accommodate this to evolution’s long ages.

Paleontologists since the 1930s have wondered why ankylosaurs (heavily-armored dinosaurs) are usually found buried in an upside-down position. It’s been a common anecdote among fossil hunters, so the Canadian Museum of Nature decided to investigate. A paleontologist with the museum, Dr Jordan Mallon, counted 26 of 32 known ankylosaurs—over 80%—that were reported found fossilized on their backs. He considered possible reasons:
To finish reading, click on "Most Armored Dinosaurs Found Upside Down". For a similar article with some additional information, click on "Genesis Flood Explains Bloat-and-Float Dinosaurs". ADDENDUM 1-22-2019: A new article with additional material: "The ‘bloat and float’ ankylosaurs of Alberta".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Wednesday, April 4, 2018

Our Stable Sun

No, I do not mean that Junior is cleaning up after the horses. Stable, as in, not changing easily. We have a sun that is rather constant, giving a reliable source of heat without going to extremes. Those hot and cold days are basically because of changes in weather and the orbit of Earth, not from wild solar activity.

Proxima Centauri can help us appreciate our stable sun
Credits: NASA/SDO
For being so big and mostly empty, space is mighty dangerous. Our solar system was placed by our Creator in a special section, away from bursts of gamma rays that would destroy life. Our sun gets on the prod now and then, shooting out solar flares and such. We are protected (for now) with our own deflector shield and atmosphere, so those flares disrupt communications and such, but don't blast away the oceans or irradiate life to extinction.

I'm old enough to remember the television show Lost in Space, and have been able to have fun with it on rerun stations. The original series ran from 1968-1968, and was set in "the future" (1997), with the Jupiter 2 heading out Alpha Centauri way. That is the closest star system to us, and the closest star is Proxima Centauri. It's a grumpy red dwarf that recently went haywire. Good thing the Robinson family never found their way to it. (Robot shouts, "Danger!" Danger", then emits showers of sparks.) Our Creator knew what he was doing when he designed Earth, the solar system, our galaxy, where he put us, and the universe itself.
Astronomers recently detected an enormous but short-lived increase in radiation from the nearby star Proxima Centauri. This radiation burst, known as a flare, caused the star to become a thousand times brighter for ten seconds. Our sun also has flares, but those flares are much smaller. At the time of its peak brightness, the Proxima Centauri flare was ten times brighter (in the measured wavelengths) than even the largest flares emitted by our sun. This is another reminder of how our sun is especially designed for life on Earth.
. . .
The lead scientist on the team, Meredith MacGregor, described how the flare could affect the nearby exoplanet:
To find out what Meredith said and to read the rest of the article, click on "Stellar Superflare Reminder: Our Sun Is Special".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Tuesday, April 3, 2018

Cuttlefish and Camouflage

Yes, I did say camouflage. It's based on the French word for disguise, camoufler. Disguising itself is something the cuttlefish does quite well, and it is quite impressive. Seems a bit surprising that the critter can hide itself, what with having all those bright colors and all.

The cuttlefish is an evolution-defying example of the Master Engineer's design skills
Credit: Freeimages / John Boyer
It's first trick: it's not a fish, exactly. It's a cephalopod, like it's squid and octopod cousins. The name came from the shell-like bone on the inside, the cuttlebone. Why fish was tacked on is anyone's guess. Also, the cuttlefish is not exactly huge.

The cuttlefish can change its appearance on the fly (so to speak), even in the process of swimming! When stalking for food, it can mimic kelp, the ocean floor, a black-and-white chessboard, or something else. (Okay, so it doesn't cotton to imitating chessboards in the wild, but it has been observed doing so!) Excellent eyesight and intelligence help the camouflage process. In addition, it has very smooth skin, but can change its texture as well.

So many detailed components together in one critter at the same time, working in unison for a purpose. This is another example of the Master Engineer's handiwork, and I reckon the cuttlefish is laughing at evolution all the while. For that matter, one that was dated at 37 million Darwin years has the impossible (to long agers) soft tissue. Evolutionists should cringe at the mere mention of cuttlefish.
Though the cuttlebone is unique to cuttlefish, the thing that makes them seagoing superstars is their unparalleled camouflaging skill. Cuttlefish can dramatically alter the colors, patterns, and even texture of their skin. Several interconnected designs are necessary for this to occur, and only an ingenious Creator could put them all together. Between their sharp eyesight, color sacs, specialized muscle cells, and supersized brain, no other creature in the animal kingdom can change its appearance the way cuttlefish can—and all in the blink of an eye.
To read the article in its entirety (or download the MP3 version), click on "Masters of Disguise".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Monday, April 2, 2018

Five New Fossil Forests Evosplained

Way down Antarctica way, a fossil forest was found. That is interesting in and of itself, but the research began contradicting themselves. One notable example is that they said the tree stumps had turned to stone, but amino acids were found. This is only the beginning of their evosplaining.

Five more fossil forests were discovered in Antarctica, explained by bad science
Original image credit: Jacques Descloitres, MODIS Rapid Response Team, NASA / GSFC
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Later, five more of these things were found. A good story about the expedition was spoiled by some illegitimate conjectures and homage to Darwin, blessed be! Researchers used the scientific principle of Making Things Up™ in the course of their evosplaining. The strange effort to bring in the Permian Extinction story and apply it to global climate change (yes, really) is also baffling. Bad science, bad logic. Happens a lot nowadays.

These findings are a threat to long ages and indicate that the earth is young, so researches invoked a weak "It's shrouded in mystery approach". (Sometimes, that is appropriate in theological matters, since we cannot understand everything about our infinite Creator. But it is a cheap escape when alleged scientific facts are being asserted.) Even a cursory reading of the report shows desperate attempts to preserve long ages (and therefore, evolution, which requires them). Quite a bit of effort to deny evidence of the Genesis Flood and recent creation, n'est-ce pas?
The extent of fossil forests buried in the coldest continent on earth continues to grow and astound explorers.

Last November 17, 2017, we relayed findings about fossil forests discovered by Erik Gulbransen’s team in Antarctica, with wood “so well-preserved in rock that some of the amino acid building blocks that made up the trees’ proteins can still be extracted.” Now, National Geographic reports that five new fossil forests have been found. The article is part discovery and part adventure story, as the team endured incredible hardships in “one of the harshest environments on the planet.”
To read the rest, click on "More Fossil Forests Found in Antarctica".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Sunday, April 1, 2018

The Resurrection, Creation, and the View from the Hill

Back in the olden days, I had a professor who frequently talked about "getting up on the hill", and similar phrases. He did not explain it, he just used it. Finally, I figured out that he was talking about getting a broad perspective. It can also be expressed as getting the big picture or a broader perspective. Things like that.

Get up on the hill for the big picture and see how creation affects the gospel message
Photo by adrian on Unsplash
Knowledgeable creationists will not tell you that believing in a literal six-day recent creation is essential to salvation (although atheopaths lie that this is one of our teachings). It is a "side issue", but that does not mean creation is unimportant. Not by a long shot!

Getting the right perspective helps us realize that adding long ages, evolution, and other things to God's Word is damaging to the gospel message. Ultimately, the death, burial and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead becomes irrelevant!
While many Christians still consider the Creation doctrine a fringe issue, a proper understanding of the Christian message finds creation at its core—a necessary, foundational component of the Christian worldview—without which Christianity flounders around in illogic.

It's helpful to think of creation as the "big picture," which answers the vital questions. Who made us? Who is God? What does He expect of me? What is sin? What is the penalty for sin?
To read the rest of this short article, click on "Creation's Easter Message". 

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!