Piltdown Superman

The city of Pripyat, Ukraine was the home to about 50,000 people. The Chernobyl nuclear power plant was also near there, and it experienced a devastating explosion in 1986. This city had to be abandoned. There is a huge exclusion (no-go) zone to everyone out except those with special permission. Pripyat, Ukraine after the 1986 Chernobyl disaster Credit: NASA GSFC Landsat / LDCM EPO Team (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) The radiation killed many people, and it was expected that nothing could survive near there for many centuries. Surprisingly, there are living things there. Many plants, and animals are returning. Secularists claim that this is due to evolution. Not hardly! Evolution is supposed to be random and it takes a great deal of time, so claiming credit for Darwin is contrary to their own belief system. Human engineers attempt to anticipate problems and build contingencies into their designs. As we have seen, the Master Engineer has designed living th

Genetics is not helpful to proponents of universal common ancestor evolution and the belief in deep time. Materialists reject recent creation because evolution, but they have a heap of problems of their own to deal with. Both creationists and evolutionists interpret data from their worldviews. Modified from Adam and Eve in Worthy Paradise , Peter Paul Rubens, c. 1610 One reason secularists reject creation science material is the genetic fallacy. That is, they do not like the source, even though creation scientists have valid degrees. Further, the scientific evidence needs to be considered, not just circumvented or evosplained away. Taking the data and applying the creationist model, we see that the science supports our position and glorifies the Creator, not Darwin. What follows is a link to a self-contained book chapter that is quite long. It has charts and a great deal of data, plus documentation and links for those who want to really did in to the technical aspects. The c

Submitted for your examination, two articles about snake evolution. First up is a tale of the alleged evolution of snake legs. Darwinists are fond of their mythology, but they do not get it right. The idea of when and how snakes lost their legs is argued, but also false. Emerald tree boa image credit: RGBStock / Juliane Riedl Evolutionists assume evolution and then work from there instead of questioning whether or not hadron-to-herpetologist evolution is true in the first place. The story is that those bumps or "spurs" on snakes are vestigial; they had them millions of Darwin years ago, and then lost them. Say it with me: loss of functions is devolution , not a gain of function. You savvy that? In reality, these spurs are designed by our Creator for use in trees and for, uh, romance. They don't use their spurs on horses because they can't reach the saddles in the first place. . . . The fact is, boas and pythons do not have vestigial legs but rather very funct

People wonder how animals spread out after they left the Ark, and that is a fair question. We can glean some answers by observing the growth of the red fox population in Australia. It was brought there by Europeans for hunting purposes (something I consider barbaric), and their quantities grew. Credit: Pixabay / Karen Arnold The red fox does not have many natural predators in 'Straya, which helps its numbers grow. This member of the created dog kind is a pest in many areas. Probably because of global warming. They are intelligent, hardy, and resourceful to ensure their survival. They tend to eat many things (you've probably heard about farmers chasing foxes out of hen houses). Indeed, the red fox can be found in most areas of the world. Biblical creationists believe that they had many ways of spreading out, including land bridges that were available in the Ice Age which was a result of the Genesis Flood. Evolutionists believe (without evidence or explanations) th

A source of contention between biblical creationists and other biologists is the created kinds that we read about in Genesis. We are not given a great deal of information about what exactly they are, which prompts discussion among creationists as well. The study of biblical created kinds is called baraminology. Creationists believe that Basement Cat and lions developed from the original cat kind. The same with dogs, horses, and such. We are all from the same human kind. The system of taxonomy we use was devised by creationist Carolus Linnaeus , and scientists have made adjustments to it for many years. He was attempting to determine the created kinds in Genesis, and at first, thought that kinds were on the level of species. Biologists of the creation persuasion tend to think that kinds most closely line up with the classification of family, but there is some variation on that theme. Sometimes a creationist will say “there are no transitional species” or “animals do change, bu

Although the law of biogenesis shows us that life only comes from existing life, Darwin's acolytes continue to experiment with chemical evolution. Even evolutionists generally admit that abiogenesis is pretty much impossible, but they keep on trying to displace the Creator. Original image from MorgueFile , modified with FotoSketcher By the way, if someone tells you that the origin of life has nothing to do with evolution, he or she is misinformed, deluded, or lying outright. They try to back off from the OoL problem. As is common with evolutionists, a recent study involved dealing from the bottom of the deck instead of playing the hand that they were dealt. That is, numerous assumptions were made, important information was circumvented, and a prairie schooner-full of "givens" had to be made. (Reading the article struck me that the scientist were acting similarly to when kids will play, "What if...?" and then building on those fantasies.) Worse, there wa

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen We hear, watch, and read about the increasing hysteria from leftists about anthropogenic climate change. Their tendentious, skewed, and inaccurate evidence is exceptionally myopic. This evolution-based atheistic posturing is presenting change made by humans as bad, and ignoring the fact that we have been changing our environments from the beginning. Credit: Freeimages / Flavio Takemoto Evolutionists act like once we commenced to evolving from an apelike ancestor, we finished and sat around doing almost nothing for a huge amount of time. That's ludicrous on the surface, and it also goes against human nature . Let's go with atheistic thinking for a moment. Since they think that we are nothing but advanced animals, what about critters? Animals (like beavers) transform their own environments , why can't we? Also, are animals bad because they change things? The truth is, we have been effecting the world wherever we live. Somehow, modifications