Posts

Two Oceanic Critters and Evolution

Image
This child thinks that our Creator like variety and has designed some things for our wonder and maybe even our amusement. It could be that he knew how professors of fish-to-fool evolution would get mighty uncomfortable explaining how some things came to be. For example, the predation skills of the slapping shark and the pistol shrimp. Original image before modification: NOAA (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) When a pistol (snapping) shrimp takes a notion to have a critter for lunch, it slaps leather (so to speak) by firing off a shot. The cavitation bubble is lethal, and when it pops, the sound reaches of 200 decibels! It's also great pals with the goby fish. In a similar manner, the pelagic thresher shark smacks little fish with its powerful tail. If it sees you, it won't bite, but would rather get out of Dodge quick-like. Evolutionists resort to the scientific principle of Making Things Up™ to evosplain why their deity deigned to deliver these uniqu

Mica in Sand Thwarts Secular Geologists

Image
Saddle up and ride over to the gorge-ous Grand Canyon, then take special notice of the rock layers and the various colors. There's a whitish-yellowish part known as the Coconino sandstone that uniformitarian (deep time) geologists think is a problem to creationists. Not happening, pilgrim. Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Diego Delso , delso.photo, License CC-by-SA 4.0 Secular geologists say that the Coconino sandstone was made in a desert and could not possibly have been formed by the global Genesis Flood and allows millions of years for evolution to happen. From superficial examination, it does appear to be a problem. Further examination, however, shows that there is mica in the sand, which should not be there under the conditions secularists expect. Instead, this mica supports the Genesis Flood. My graduate school professor, Dr. Steve Austin, was a serious field geologist. But periodically, his childlike delight in exploring God’s creation shone through. He taught us to let t

Astrobiology, a Pseudoscience Without Evidence

Image
Supposedly, a science requires research, investigation, and especially evidence. People can get degrees in bio-astrology — I mean, astrobiology — even though it is based almost entirely on guesswork. Worse, astrobiology has no evidence to back up the numerous claims and expectations. Credit: NASA (usage does not imply endorsement of the truth contained on this site) It is ironic that materialists demand evidence for God and miracles, yet they believe all sorts of things based on ipse dixit — because someone said so.  Long ago, people were discovering how to get away from reliance on the claims of others. They wanted evidence. Bioastrologers — I mean, astrobiologists — and other secularists are locking themselves into consensus and disinterest in evidence. The following article has several items showing how astrobiology shenanigans are a waste of our tax money. They're probably laughing over their firewater at how we have to pay them to deny the Creator. Cyanide in a meteo

Engineered Nanobot Evolution

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen A few months back, I took some inspiration from a 1989 episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation that tied in with a previous post on gene editing ethics (see " Science Fiction and Genetic Engineering "). While taking a break from serious stuff on my Roku device , it happened again. Fun fact: the Angry Picard "meme" is from a segment where he was quoting Shakespeare I had to turn the dial on my suspension of disbelief gadget up to eleven because the show was saturated with evolutionary propaganda that ran contrary to what I have learned about both creation and evolution. Speaking of which, the episode is simply titled " Evolution " and it involved nanotechnology . Although it does not actually exist yet in any practical sense, research is happening. Nanites (nanobots, nanomachines, and other names) are supposedly one billionth of a meter in size . If they are developed, nanomachines could be extremely important in medical

Damage Response Machine for DNA

Image
When everything was perfect in the beginning, the Master Engineer knew that things would run down after the Fall of Man. He put systems into place The exceptionally important and extremely complex molecule for life known as DNA is quite fragile. However, the MRN complex helps fix things up. Credit: Unsplash / Blaz Erzetic This molecular machine is comprised of three proteins, and repairs several kinds of damage. Proponents of molecules-to-molecular biologist evolution really have no explanation or model for how they came into being. It is amazing that the more we learn about the world even on the molecular level, the more we learn about the brilliance of God. You have been designed with many trillions of cells. Within the nucleus of each cell (except for red blood cells) is the “molecule of life” called DNA. It’s organized into chromosomes (humans have 46) upon which many thousands of genes are found. Genes are hereditary units, comprised of nucleotide bases called T, G, C, and

Neglected Abundance of Food

Image
It gets a mite difficult for people like me who can place an order for food on the telephone or on a website for delivery — "You do that quite a bit, don't you, Cowboy Bob?" They told me my weight is genetic. Or something. Moving on... Many of us have little worries about getting victuals (correctly pronounced "vittles") at our convenience, so we may have problems understanding or empathizing with those who are desperate for decent food. In other places, people eat and thrive on things that make those of us in the Western world cringe. Then there are various things that people have not considered for sustenance and could theoretically alleviate starvation. Some of the starvation problems are not simply drought, but bad government. Back in 1985 and following, there were rock concerts and such with the noble intention of alleviating starvation in Ethiopia caused by famine. It was not a good idea because distribution and other factors were not considered. E

How Humans are also Animals

Image
In " Animals Do Not, But We Do ", we saw that critters can do all sorts of things, but they cannot develop languages, create civilizations, build colleges and hospitals, and all sorts of things. However, biologists will tell you that humans are animals. Is that correct? Well, yes and no. The Cowboy by Frederic Remington, 1902 According to biological classifications and physiological traits, we are considered animals. (Using the same kinds of system, we certainly are not plants or minerals.) Going further, we are more specifically classified as mammals, which have certain characteristics in common beyond those of animals. Some humans can be considered animals because of their actions like those who crashed planes into buildings on September 11, 2001. Darwinists use cladistics and homology to argue for evolution, but their systems can work the other way, arguing for a common Designer. Even though we are biologically animals and mammals, we are still very different, havi