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

Tuesday, July 2, 2019

Evolution and Horse Diversity

We know that selective breeding in dogs causes them to be more pleasing to humans to put in shows and such, but this also reduces their fitness. Even without artificial measures, humans are suffering from genetic degradation, which is evidence for recent creation. Now we learn that horses are losing genetic diversity.

Genetic degradation can be seen in many places, but it has been demonstrated in horses as well. This is further evidence against evolution and in favor of special creation.
The spotted stallion in a hilly landscape by Paulus Potter, ca. 1650
Believers in universal common descent evolution have difficulties with alleged horse evolution, and it turns out that our trusty steeds have genetic degradation as well. Some of this is comparatively recent. This, too, points to recent creation.
In an attempt to discover the lineage of horses, over one hundred researchers have recently examined the genomes of over two hundred fossil horses and compared them to the genomes of modern horses. Their results indicate that horses have lost a lot of genetic diversity—much of it within the last two hundred years. The average loss among modern breeds of horses when compared to their horse ancestors is over 16%. In other words, modern breeds of horses have 16% less available options than their ancestors. For example, the frequency of the gene for slower speeds, which likely has some fitness benefits, has drastically decreased, as humans bred horses for speed. The frequency of coat colors, such as spotted, have also decreased. Even more interestingly, the horse Y chromosome has suffered a similar drop in diversity in the last millennium. 
To read the entire article, ride on over to "Speedy Horses Can't Outrun Loss of Diversity".


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

Monday, July 1, 2019

Worldwide Evidences for the Young Earth

Ready to go into the second half of 2019 with my unregistered assault keyboard.

While it is useful to learn the details about creation science and origins subjects, sometimes it is helpful to get less technical material. We have seen overviews of evidences for the young earth from biology and geology, now we can get a much larger perspective: globally.

In this overview, we see five evidences for the young earth on a worldwide scale. Secular rescuing devices fail, and creation science has the best answer again.
Credit: RGBStock / rizeli53
Even using assumptions and calculations from secular scientists, several items yield a much younger earth than they want to present to Darwinists to work their magic. In addition creationists have made predictions for a recent creation that secularists have waved away. Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ swoop down and gibber, "You're lying because evolution, because Wikipedia, because atheism, because propaganda.talk.origins!" Aside from uninformed true believers, secular scientists have attempted to round up rescuing devices that still fail.
The evolutionary story requires millions and billions of years, and most people assume that scientific dating has conclusively proved such ages. However, most dating methods yield age estimates that are much too young for the evolutionary story, even given uniformitarian assumptions.1 These include estimates that look at the earth as a whole. Such estimates should be more reliable because rates averaged over the entire earth should be less subject to local uncertainties.

In this article, we examine five global processes that strongly indicate a young earth.
To read the rest, click on "Five Global Evidences for a Young Earth".

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

Saturday, June 29, 2019

The Alleged First Molecule Detected in Space

The hands at the Darwin Ranch were whooping it up and passing around a bottle of rye to celebrate the discovery of the first molecule. Well, they did not discover the first molecule per se, but they found helium hydride. Cosmologists think that was the first molecule that formed after the Big Bang, but they have no actual scientific evidence. Looks good on paper, though.

Cosmologists think that the first molecule formed in the universe after the Big Bang is helium hydride. Astronomers found some in space, but the discovery is not really that impressive.
Credit: Hubble, NASA, ESA; Processing & License: Judy Schmidt
Space is full of atoms and molecules, but the ones that are the least likely to react are in the areas between stars. Planetary nebula NGC 7027 was the area being studied, and yee ha boy howdy, they found themselves the molecule that doesn't occur naturally on Earth! This thing is essential for the Big Bang, but all naturalists have are theories and guesswork. In reality, the discovery is not all that impressive happening because the helium hydride will probably react with other molecules quite soon. Try as they might, secularists cannot overturn the truth of recent creation.
From time to time there are news stories of the latest findings in astronomy that are a bit sensationalized and hence are misrepresented. . . . A case in point is the recent announcement of the discovery of helium hydride in space, the first molecule purported to have formed in the universe. Press accounts suggested that astronomers had discovered the molecules that first formed only a hundred thousand years after the big bang and have survived the 13.8 billion years since. However, the situation is a bit murkier than that.
To read the whole article, click on "Helium Hydride: The First Molecule?"

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

Friday, June 28, 2019

The Truth about Vaccinations and Health

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

In 2019, there have been severe outbreaks of measles in the United States prompting official states of emergency in parts of New York and the State of Washington. Border guards are becoming infected by diseases carried by illegal aliens. There are many diseases that were considered under control or even eradicated, but there they are again. Part of the problem is the anti-vaccine movement.

The anti-vaccination movement is not only spreading, but has caused harm to other people. Many people who mean well and think rationally in other ways are drawn into this faulty idea.
Credit: Freeimages / Brian Hoskins
Although vaccines have kept people healthy and saved millions of lives, some people passionately resist using them. (Although atheists will ridicule some religious people and cultists who suffered the loss of a child because of this stance, it is not just a "theist" problem, as some atheists are also anti-vaxxers.) For some reason, the anti-vaxxer movement is growing despite science and common sense. Many proponents of this act like they are more intelligent and have higher moral standards than the rest of us, which makes no sense at all.

People get notions, and commence to finding dubious sources that support their views. There's a passel of anti-vaccination material on special sites and YouTube that may sound good, but are deceptive. Some of these people act like they have the moral high ground because they reject vaccinations, even though they are putting themselves, their children, and many other people at risk. There is a great deal of unbiblical pride in this movement, and some of its fans act like martyrs when their claims are refuted. There are also folks who believe that vaccinations are part of a strange government conspiracy. Oh, boy.

Unfortunately, some creationists have saddled up to ride with the anti-vaxxer brand. Some of them are very skilled at dismantling evolutionary, poor theological, and old earth arguments, but they don't seem to use those analytic skills in approaching anti-vaccination material. There was a recent article on a creationist site that bothered me, and I consulted Dr. Jonathan Sarfati who has a Ph.D. in physical chemistry and wrote the article featured below. He noted that the author was rather unskilled, and used an inaccurate graph by Children of God for Life. But if the author has an anti-vaccination view and the graph looks all sciencey and stuff, may as well use it, right? Not hardly! EDIT: I was informed that I missed the part where that author is anti-vaccination.

On a side note, some anti-creationists will claim that antibiotic resistance is proof of evolution, so that's why you have to get a flu shot every year. That's not evolution, pilgrim. Viruses are tricky things and can change quickly, but they remain viruses; no new genetic information is added. In addition, the evolutionary concept of spontaneous generation has been refuted, which has been a great benefit to medical science and the development of vaccines. Despite the numerous times that evolutionary thinking has hindered science, secularists are shooting themselves in the foot when they try to use evolutionary concepts for medical purposes. Darwin cannot help doctors, old son.

Although primarily intended for Christians, the main article linked below will be useful to anyone (even anti-creationists, if they can get past their genetic fallacy predispositions), and I hope you will keep the shortcut for reference. It deals with several misconceptions, answers questions, and refutes several falsehoods about vaccines.

Unfortunately, this excellent work is rather long, so I have a couple of suggestions. First, use an add-on or built in "reader view" (or similar name) so you're not staring at a monitor for all that time if you're not so inclined. I use free add-ons to send articles to my ebook reader (like this one, and another one that lets you save in different formats), then articles like this are available at your convenience. Just suggesting.
As a biblical, scientific organization, we often get asked by inquirers about our position on a range of related issues. One such issue is vaccinations. We realize that for some this is a highly charged issue that can engender strong emotions. Unfortunately, there is much confusion and even emotion, even in Christian circles, as a result of misinformation that is proliferated on the Internet. Often, with Christians, much of the thinking is driven by well-meaning, but misapplied biblical statements and, in some cases, even conspiratorial (anti-government or anti-establishment) constructs—an area outside of CMI’s purview.
. . .

It is a scientific and historical fact that vaccines have saved millions of lives. Thus, as a part of our duty of care for our staff and supporters, we should support medical treatments with a proven record of high safety and effectiveness.

To read the entire article, click on "CMI, vaccines, and vaccination". A related shorter article that deals a bit more with an issue raised is "Vaccines and abortion?" Finally, something I wrote that focuses on other aspects is "Vaccinations, 'Big Pharma', and Evolution".

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

Thursday, June 27, 2019

Artificial Intelligence and Fake News

A new expression that I have picked up on is fake news. In many cases, it is an accurate description of how some media outlets will omit important details or even lie outright in order to persuade people. Unfortunately, it also is growing in the secular science industry. Now we have to contend with fake news and artificial intelligence.

Fake news is a problem in the secular science industry, and artificial intelligence can make things far worse. The morality and worldview of programmers is very important.
Pixabay / Garik Barseghyan
AI can be used to generate fake news as well as to determine which news is false. This can be both good and bad, depending on who is doing the programming. The results have been a bit unnerving because they are difficult to discern from actual news reports, complete with references. 

Any kind of computer or AI depends on the programming it receives, which reflects the biases and worldviews of the programmers (see "Artificial Intelligence and Evolving Morality" and "Artificial Psychotic Intelligence"). Imagine if some sidewinders promote new pharmaceutical products that are not actually cleared for the market.

Also, biased programmers can arbitrarily decide that anything that supports biblical creation science or even Intelligent Design is fake news and should be herded off the nearest cliff, all based on personal preferences tainting the programming. Meanwhile, they could promote fake deep time and evolution news upon the unsuspecting public — and scientists. Social(ist) media are hunting down and removing things that they determine are fake news, so they would be thrilled to have their work computerized.

Science is supposed to be self-checking, but secular science has a mighty big reproducibility crisis, and secular peer review has serious problems as well. The standards of morality behind these things as well as AI fake news applications are missing integrity and morality. What do you expect when secularists believe that morality comes from evolution and reject our Creator, the true source of morality? This could be a big problem.
Without this essential ingredient, long taken for granted, science could collapse.

Imagine a world where science journals could not be trusted. In this imaginary world, at least half of all journal articles have been generated by artificial intelligence (AI), but are fake. The algorithms have gotten so good in this imaginary world, nobody can tell the difference—not editors, not peer reviewers, not even other AI algorithms. And as another consequence, suppose that reporters are fooled, and write up these fake research findings as fact. Is this dystopian vision possible?

We hear a lot about fake news in politics. Each election season, journalists worry about disinformation campaigns by the Russians using social media to stir up partisan attitudes based on bogus claims. Is science immune from the Big Lie? New Scientist looked into the very real problem that AI can generate fake science.
To continue reading, click on "How Science Could Destroy Itself".

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

Wednesday, June 26, 2019

Denisovans in Tibet

It is known that, like Neanderthals, the Denisovans were not exactly content to stay in one place. They also managed to share their DNA with other people groups, and the Tibetan people have a genetic variation that is shared with the mysterious Denisovans and nobody else.

The mysterious Denisovans traveled quite a bit, all the way into Tibet where a fossil and DNA evidence has been found. We can examine the post-Babel timeline and see where they fit.
Credit: Freeimages / Niko Nami
Imagine the Denisovans looking around and saying, "Nice plateau here. Impressive planation surfaces, those are going to be irritating to secular geologists in a few thousand years!" Well, maybe they didn't say exactly that. Moving on.

In addition to DNA, a Denisovan fossil was found in Tibet back in 1980. Tests show that there was no DNA, but tooth dentine was examined to determined to be a close match to that of the former inhabitants of the Denisova cave way over in Siberia. Evolutionists commenced to using fundamentally flawed dating methods and using the scientific principle of Making Things Up™. Let's take a look at the biblical timeline and see how these these post-Babel Ice Age folks fit in.
The first Denisovan fossil outside Siberia has been found. While anthropologists are excited at the find, the location of the fossil in Tibet raises some puzzling questions for the evolutionary view. Secularly dated around 160,000 by flawed radiometric dating methods and with Denisovans often described as archaic hominins or evolutionary cousins to modern man, what are Christians to think of this mysterious people group? From a biblical perspective, this is a post-Babel (and completely human) fossil, which makes much more sense of the data. This fossil may also give us clues into which of the sons and/or grandsons of Noah could have been the father of the Denisovan line.
 To read the entire article, click on "Denisovan Fossil Found in Tibet".

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

Tuesday, June 25, 2019

Draining the Dinosaur Swamp

We do not exactly see dinosaurs hitched up to carts for manual labor or getting saddled up for use in a posse comitatus. Practitioners of evolutionary pettifoggery will have us believe that dinosaurs joined the choir invisible millions of years before humans evolved, but biblical creationists have different ideas.

Biblical creationists affirm that dinosaurs were on Noah's Ark. There are three main reasons that they are probably extinct today.
Assembled at PhotoFunia
Apparently they are bereft of life and taking dirt naps, except in a few possible instances in modern times, in the Bible, and in other instances of ancient history. Biblical creationists reject naturalistic presuppositions and believe that not only was there a global Flood at the time of Noah, but various dinosaur kinds were on the Ark. (Apparently, many dinosaurs were ill-tempered critters and became nuisances, so they were hunted.) The Flood radically changed the world, including the stomping grounds that dinosaurs preferred. Even the Sahara Desert was wet many years ago. Loss of habitat is a primary cause of extinction, you know.
Genesis says that “every beast after its kind…went into the ark to Noah, two by two, of all flesh in which is the breath of life.” Dinosaurs were beasts, and their fossil nostrils show they had the breath of life. So, if a breeding pair of every dinosaur kind entered the Ark, why don’t we see dinosaurs alive today?

Many other animal kinds also died out after the Flood. Mammal-like reptiles called synapsids left Flood fossils and then later went extinct. Other animals that vanished include the “bear dogs,” rat-size morganucodonts, and Leptictidium, which walked like a tiny, hairy tyrannosaur. We can’t know specifics about their extinction without going back in time, but three key clues sketch an answer.
 To read the rest, click on "What Happened to Dinosaurs after the Flood?"

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