Posts

Evolutionary Circular Reasoning on Carnivorous Plants

Image
One reason that Darwinian thinking has so many people hogtied is because the non-explanation of " it evolved " is used so freely. Add to this the phrase "scientists say", and too many people will accept such a remark without question. Venus flytrap image credit: CSIRO / Malcolm Paterson   (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) For me, good documentaries on living things are spoiled with assertions of "it evolved", as if homage to the Bearded Buddha somehow provides scientific validation. I'm sure some of you have felt the same way. Why not simply describe what is observed without delving into what is assumed about the subject's history? We have two examples in the article linked below. Folks riding for the Darwin brand commit circular reasoning and other bad logic by assuming evolution to prove evolution. In fact, two carnivorous plants defy evolution. Instead, they show specified complexity that could not have arisen by evolu

Fake Facts of Evolution

Image
People who promote goo-to-goat herder evolution are intent on converting Darwin skeptics by insisting that there are mountains of evidence for evolution, which is false . The typical proselytizer uses outdated and even deceptive "facts", and even spreads fraudulent claims. Apes in the Orange Grove by Henri Rousseau, 1910 Some people have disingenuously taken the name of The Question Evolution Project to mean, "We have questions about evolution. Kindly straighten us out so we can mindlessly follow Darwin". Actually, we want to spark people to think for themselves and question evolution. You do not need a doctorate in science to keep up with the global changes in the origins climate. A basic knowledge of science, obtaining information from biblical creation science sites, and a basic knowledge of logical fallacies can give you an advantage in spotting false claims. In addition, we can (and should) ask pertinent questions and also plant some seeds and promp

Shipbuilding Skills and Noah

Image
Due to the prevalence of evolutionary thinking on society, people today tend to think ancient people were stupid. We are modern, so we are smarter. That'll be the day! This criticism has been leveled against Noah, assuming he could not have built that Ark. Humans were intelligent from the beginning of creation. Ark Encounter, Pixabay / Michael Wysmiersk One area of cultural bias and scientific racism has been the assumption that Neanderthals and other ancient humans were unintelligent. They were actually very intelligent . (An attempt by Darwinists to save face over their bad science is to propose that they went extinct because they were too smart !) If you've watched shows or read novels about the old American West, you could easily wonder how those folks survived. Although they didn't have modern conveniences, they were inventive. Do a search for a show called Wild West Tech that ran for about thirty episodes, you should be able to find the videos online. Fascina

Antibiotic Resistance is not Evolution

Image
Evolutionists like to claim that antibiotic resistance is a clear example of evolution, but that is the opposite of the truth. Variations, natural selection, mutations, yes, but what is observed has nothing to do with microbes-to-medical doctor evolution. What is going on with bacteria, then? Credit: RGBStock / Sanja Gjenero A great deal of research, testing, and expense are involved in making antibiotics in the first place, so it's not like a company can simply whip up a batch for something new or a variation. There are three primary mechanisms that cause microbes to resist antibiotics. Instead of supporting naturalism, these actually fit in with biblical creationist views. Let's saddle up and ride on over for some detailed explanations of what's going on. The discovery of antibiotics was one of the most important advances in medicine, profoundly improving human health. Many bacterial infections (for example, tuberculosis and wound infections) that often killed pe

Recent Humans with the Wrong Features

Image
Racism has been prominent in evolutionary thinking ever since Papa Darwin published his version of evolution. People seem to have an inordinate fondness of dividing things into categories, and this applies to people. Although out of fashion, racism still exists in evolutionary thinking today . Do not disunderstand me. I am not saying that all evolutionists are racists. But their theory is laden with racism and subdivisions. Ever notice that the evolutionary parade illustrations of simple to more complex humans also progress from dark to light skin? For that matter, "primitive" and "archaic" humans are dark skinned, considered more apelike because of their physical features. The Piltdown Man fraud included a human jaw and orangutan teeth. For that matter, some professing Christians who need to be quirted for their terrible science and worse theology believe in a non-Adamite (and non-white) race . Humans sure like to emphasize otherness, and not-us-ness! As

Deceptive Walking Whale News

Image
There is both an advantage and disadvantage to writing up posts several days ahead of time. This one was set up and ready to go, and then suddenly three more posts appeared on the subject that offer additional information. This post can be a resource for those who want details on the alleged "walking whale".   We know that paleontologists can determine a great deal of information about an organism, especially when they have something living to make comparisons. I reckon the would not be able to know that a frilled lizard will hiss and run on hind legs, for example. So, how can scientists know that a critter was a walking whale? Credit: Unsplash / Ryan Grewell A fossil discovered in Peru was referred to as a "walking whale", and purveyors of evoporn got the bit in their teeth and told unfounded, unscientific stories about how it walked across continents and similar nonsense. There is no evidence for how it lived and acted, or that it was a long-distance trav

Refuting Mountains of Fossil Evidence for Evolution

Image
You may rightly ask how we can refute all those mountains of fossil evidence that are presented for evolution. If you start at the foundation, it is far less difficult than my may think. Readers have seen that a fact is a fact, a fossil is a fossil, but it is the interpretations of facts that are the key to correctly understanding evidence. Yesterday, we saw that alleged evidence for the dinosaur extinction impact theory actually supports the Genesis Flood . Atheists and other anti-creationists make a wagon train-load of assertions accompanied by fallacies used to intimidate Darwin doubters. You know the kind: "So much evidence for evolution, you don't want people to think you're a st00pid dumb fundie by denying the facts, do you?" Questions and rational thinking can dispel a great deal of inflated claims . Also, a well-informed creationist can show that many evolutionists do not know their own dogma, nor do they keep up to date with findings. When asked to pr