Piltdown Superman

You know the old saying about beauty being in the eye of the beholder, which basically means that what may look good to you may not look so special to me. On a larger scale, there are things that people generally agree upon that contain beauty. This applies to architecture as well. Credit: Pixabay / Robert Jones There was a time when people made an effort to design a building that was pleasing to the eye, and people wanted a house "with character". With the advent of modernism came utilitarian approaches to building. Bland houses and apartment complexes that were scarcely above the aesthetic value of things resembling bunkers ensued. Some of the designers were actually opposed to the beauty of what went before. Modernists tended toward materialism, and intertwined in that were atheism and Darwinism. I think they also sacrificed quality of work. This utilitarian approach is a tenet of evolutionism. While we have ugly buildings and cheapness in construction, there is

Catfish are considered good eating in the southern United States and are often fried . That should not be surprising since they are found in the Big Muddy (Mississippi) least ways, and this continent has quite a few catfish in rivers and such. By the way, watch out for the dorsal and pectoral fins, because many of them are venomous — some dangerously so, which means get treatment . Credit: Unsplash / Milos Prelevic Catfish are found on almost every continent in varying sizes and shapes.Aquarium fanciers can have those that are smaller than the ones served up on a plate just before the sweet potato pie is served, and there are also some monsters in the wild. The Mekong Giant Catfish is huge, but endangered, so don't be eating those because they're endangered . Savvy that? Sometimes people are surprised by new critters, but thousands of species are discovered every year. That means we don't know all there is to know, you know? Places like the Mekong River have more t

Particle physics is one of those areas that can be useful, but only look good on paper when applied to Big Bang guesswork. Secular cosmologists and cosmogonists are constantly attempting to conjure up rescuing devices for the Big Bang, appealing to their own "miracles" that only make things worse. Antimatter and baryons are bucking broncos that secularists cannot tame. Baryon decuplet image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Trassiorf Sometimes, they simply say that there is a difficulty, such as the baryon asymmetry problem , but they don't let details interfere with good storytelling, yee haw boy howdy! In the case of baryon conservation, there should be equal numbers of matter and antimatter colliding and giving energy. Not happening. That's because the Big Bang did not happen in the first place, and the universe was created by God. That is the logical conclusion, and our Creator told us about it in his written Word. Everything is made of matter. Matter is made

Our Creator has made himself known. Just look around and see the wonders of his work (Rom. 1:18-23), unless you are suppressing the truth. Likewise, there is a great deal of evidence all around us for the global Genesis Flood. Unfortunately, people prefer atheistic interpretations of geological information and choose to deny the Flood — which is something we were told would happen (1 Peter 2:3-7). Inselbergs and other planation surfaces might be easily dismissed as anomalies, but they are found all around the world. Fossilization itself is evidence of the Flood as well, since there are billions of things buried all over and this requires a great deal of sediment and quick action. Indeed, secularists believe in long ages despite fossils that are found in "wrong places" according to their paradigm . There are also many smaller floods to consider. I'll allow that these by themselves are not conclusive proof of the Genesis Flood, they add to the cumulative evidence.

One way to get someone mighty cranky is using his or her words in refutation of a stated position. If you spend some time looking at the sites of creationists and Intelligent Design proponents, you will invariably find quotes of Darwinists that work against evolution. When we do that, screams of "Quote mining!" can be heard at impressive distances. Made at Atom Smasher You can often catch owlhoots like that in their double standards when they quote mine the Bible and misrepresent what is written. I'll allow that some creationists imply that some quotes mean an evolutionists has gone over to creationism, and they should be clear. Imagine:"Fellow scientists, since we have to keep changing the evolutionary timelines every time a discovery is made, we have a serious problem." It would be a mite disingenuous to omit, "However, we still believe in evolution and reject a Creator" in this fictitious example. Illegitimate accusations of quote mining by

The subject of well-preserved soft tissues in dinosaurs is fascinating (and also infuriating for dust-to-diplodocus evolutionists). Reports of these discoveries in other critters are also noteworthy. Evolutionists have to work from deep time presuppositions, so they are flustered by discoveries that do not fit their worldview. Archaeorhynchus fossil image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Ghedoghedo ( CC by-SA 4.0 ) One "impossible" fossil discovery is of an arthropod where bits of neural tissue were preserved . Stormie Waters told me that there is considerable consternation up at the Darwin Ranch about another fossil find: a bird. Whether or not scientists are using fossil loosely, to mean permineralized or if the tissues themselves were intact. Either way, soft tissues are delicate things, and a true bird with avian lungs in the "dinosaur age" exists. The feathers were looking mighty good, too. This further refutes the dinosaur-to-bird evolution concept. Both

Both creationists and Darwinists study biogeography, which is the dispersal of living things around the globe. Creationists say that critters (more precisely, macroorganisms) dispersed after the Genesis Flood by various means. Some creationary suggestions ( such as rafting ) have been supported by secular scientists. What about on the microorganism level? This is a slide culture of a Streptomyces sp. bacteria, which had been cultivated on tap water agar. Credit: CDC / Dr. David Berd (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Microbes do not have a history of traveling well, but many of the same kinds (biblical kinds apply here as well as on the macroorganism level ). The paper linked below discusses how evolutionists cannot explain the biogeography of microorganisms, but the Genesis Flood is the most plausible model. It is rather technical and lengthy, but people with knowledge of science can still get something out of it as well as those with advanced training. Th