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

Saturday, October 12, 2019

Ancient Israeli City Surprises Experts

Much of Israel has not been excavated by archaeologists because people are living there. The unexpected discovery of an ancient city during road construction proved to be both fascinating and startling to many people. It also does not comport with evolutionary thinking.


An ancient city in Israel called En Esur was discovered. It was large, advanced, and the opposite of evolutionary expectations.
Assembled from images found at openclipart
Sure, archaeologists work on settlements all the time, but few this one was a city. Not a settlement or even a village, but a very big city. They found all sorts of evidence of intelligent human work and organization, and for people who built this place long before the time of Abraham, it does not fit "primitive" man ideas of Darwinists. However, aside from tenuous dating methods from secularists, it does fit with the biblical timeline, including recent creation and the dispersal after Babel.
One of the earliest archaeological sites ever found in Israel is being described as the ‘New York’ of its day.

Archaeologists from the Israel Antiquities Authority have been excavating a fascinating site in Israel north of the city of Tel Aviv called En Esur. It was discovered two and a half years ago during construction of roadworks. This week, the researchers made their findings public. It’s an Early Bronze Age site they estimate was built 5,000 years ago, contemporaneous with the first Egyptian pharaohs. That’s not all; the site shows another occupation at the site 2,000 years earlier. Here are some of the news sites announcing the find with photos and descriptions:
To read the rest about this ancient Big Apple, bite into "Ancient Israeli City Was Already Advanced".




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

Friday, October 11, 2019

Whale Hybrid Baffles Evolutionists, Affirms Creation

The hands at the Darwin Ranch are amazed because DNA testing on a while skull demonstrated that it was a hybrid between beluga "sea canary" whales and narwhal whales with that long pointy tooth. According to evolutionary mythology, the belwhal should never exist.


A hybrid between a narwhal and beluga whale should not exist according to evolutionary mythology. However, it supports biblical creation science.
Narwhal Illustration,William Scoresby, 1820
You see, the narwhal and beluga supposedly split in their ancestry millions of Darwin years ago, so all those confounded mutations should have made interbreeding impossible. It happened anyway (they didn't consult evolutionists before getting frisky in the Arctic waters). However, this is not all that surprising for biblical creationists. Indeed, it supports baraminology (the study of the biblical created kinds). This gives rise to many varieties.
Three unusual-looking whales were caught in Greenland by Inuit hunters in the late 1980s—unlike any the Inuit had ever seen. Each was an even grey colour, with flippers like those of belugas, and tails like those of narwhals.

One of their skulls was preserved; a DNA study has now identified it as a first-generation hybrid between a male beluga and a female narwhal—a ‘belwhal’. . . Evolutionary biologist Eline Lorenzen called it “the first and only evidence in the world that these two Arctic whale species can interbreed.”
To read the entire short article, click on "The surprising ‘belwhal’ — DNA reveals beluga-narwhal hybrid".



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

Thursday, October 10, 2019

Chernobyl and Radiation Adaptability

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.

Chernobyl is known for the nuclear disaster and radiation, but plants are thriving and animals are returning. This is testimony their design by the Master Engineer.
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 things to change and adapt through internal mechanisms all the way down to their DNA. This is a far better explanation for adaptation to radiation then hit-or-miss evolutionism.
A recent Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) report highlighted creatures’ designed innate capacity to self-adjust to incredibly challenging exposures. The article, by Stuart Thompson who is a senior lecturer in plant biochemistry at the University of Westminster, describes plants thriving around the former Chernobyl nuclear reactor in spite of high doses of radiation. Though he claims the radiation-resistant mechanisms in plants somehow evolved, the characteristics of their adaptations are far more consistent with systems designed to be adaptable.

. . .
Wagner characterizes a “trial and error” process fueled by a copious flood of random errors. To evolutionists, a few lucky solutions are source material for potentially innovative biological traits. Wagner acknowledges that “error” is synonymous with death. His view aligns with the eminent evolutionist Stephen J. Gould, who understood that evolution requires copious “hecatombs of death as preconditions for limited increments of change” in “a theory of ‘trial and error externalism.’”
To read the rest, click on "Rapid Chernobyl Adaptations Surprise Evolutionists".



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

Wednesday, October 9, 2019

Genetics and the Recent Creation of Humanity

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.


The detailed article linked here discusses how the creation science model for genetics explains recent creation of Adam and Eve.
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 chapter is divided into three subsections. I have a couple of suggestions for reading lengthy articles. First, use an add-on or built in "reader view" (or similar name) so you're not staring at a bright monitor for all that time if you're not so inclined. You can also convert it to a PDF for more convenient reading. As for me, 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. Or print it, but that's going to take quite a bit of ink (or toner) and paper.
The advent of modern genetics has seen the evolutionary community redouble its efforts to argue for human-primate common ancestry and against the traditional Christian understanding of the origin of the human race. As has been argued in previous chapters, a careful reading of Genesis 1–11 indicates that God created Adam and Eve supernaturally and without prior ancestry, and that all of humanity traces their ancestry back to this original couple — and not to a group of primates or proto-humans. Combined with a careful reading of the rest of Scripture, this narrative places the creation date of Adam and Eve approximately 6,000 years ago and places another population bottleneck about 4,500 years ago at the time of the Flood. This scriptural framework leads to very specific expectations about the genetic differences among humans and other species, expectations that can be scientifically tested against modern genetic data. In this chapter, we contend that genetics confirms the recent, supernatural creation of Adam and Eve and refutes the evolutionary narrative on human origins.
To read the rest, make yourself comfortable and click on "Genetics Confirms the Recent, Supernatural Creation of Adam and Eve".

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

Tuesday, October 8, 2019

Snake Legs and a Double-Header

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.


Evolutionists are difficult to deal with. First, they get their story about snake legs completely wrong, then they do not celebrate the double-headed rattlesnake.
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 functional mating spurs. . . . the loss of legs story was begun by Darwin and repeated ever since, as if Darwin had the last word on the topic. Darwin concluded that snake spurs are “rudiments of the pelvis and hind limbs” and are evidence of the evolution of snakes from limbed ancestors. Ever since then, Darwinists have used the fallacious argument that the support system for these claw-like, horny spur structures are vestigial “legs” left over from the snakes’ limbed past.

. . .

These appendage claws, although small—particularly in the case of large constrictors—assist in locomotion. The claws are especially useful when climbing trees–their natural habitat–or when hanging from tree branches.
To read the entire article, navigate yourself over to "Snake 'Vestigial Legs' Debunked", then I hope you'll come back for the next short feature.

Normally, you would expect a trick double-headed timber rattlesnake in a freak show, but this critter is real. Both heads are working independently, too. Seems like the hands at the Darwin Ranch would be riding into town, celebrating by hitting the fire water and shooting holes in the saloon ceiling. Not happening, old son. Why not? Isn't evolution about the oddity, the change, the mutation? Creationists have been saying for a mighty long time that living things are declining, and this snake is not a good thing.
This is just the kind of thing Darwinists have been waiting for! Aren’t two heads better than one?

A two-headed timber rattlesnake has been found in a New Jersey forest, reports Fox News Science. It must be surviving, because it wasn’t born yesterday. Bob Zappalorti, the CEO of the Herpetological Associates of Burlington County, an environmental consulting company that studies endangered reptiles and birds, among other animals, says the snake was found in a nest where it must have emerged from a clutch of newborns.
To finish reading, head on over to "Snake Evolves Two Heads". A bonus for you, Pastor Tommy Mitchell used a rattlesnake narrative as a very interesting sermon illustration. It's just a few minutes, and you can see that here at the 48 minutes 33 seconds mark.





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

Monday, October 7, 2019

Post-Flood Dispersion and the Red Fox

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.


Examining the red fox population growth in Australia provides some insights into post-Flood animal migration.
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) that there were many ice ages.
The red fox in Australia provides a well-documented example showing just how quickly animals can spread geographically. Within 100 years, it had spread across 76% of Australia, about 5.8 million km² (2.2 million square miles) of land, which it continues to inhabit today. The only part of Australia that it did not enter is the tropical north, where the climate is unsuitable for it to thrive. Current estimates for fox numbers in Australia range between 7 and 40 million.

It is incredible to think the red fox was able to colonize such a large geographical area in such a short time. This is despite its relatively average birth rate in the animal kingdom. The female (vixen), sexually mature at 9 months, generally only breeds once a year, and can have up to 11 cubs in a litter, but the average is four to five cubs each time.
You can read the article in its entirety by clicking on "The Red Blanket — Australia’s red fox sheds light on migration after the Genesis Flood".




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

Saturday, October 5, 2019

Examining the Created Kinds Concept

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.


Here is our Basement Cat. Creationists attempt to define the biblical created kinds, a field called baraminology. This is close to the families concept, but there are differences.

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, but one species never changes into another.”  While I appreciate the sentiment, these claims are not true.  In reality, new species do arise over time – a phenomenon we call speciation.  Secularists sometimes claim that speciation is proof of Darwinian evolution, but this too is an error.  All of these mistakes can be eliminated when we distinguish between species and kinds.  Furthermore, when we study what the Bible says about kinds, and when we explore the scientific evidence pertaining to speciation, we see that the science confirms biblical creation and is inconsistent with evolution.
To read the rest of the article and learn more, click on "Species or Kinds?" For additional information, see "Species Confusion and the Created Kinds".




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

Labels