Piltdown Superman

The two types of science used in discussions of origins are forensic  and operational ,   the latter being used to describe science that is testable, repeatable, observable, and so on in the present. Forensic science attempts to explain the past by working backward from evidence in the present. Credit: RGBStock /  wernerb Suppose you came upon some rubble that included broken bricks, a shoe, and other things. Is there an interesting story or did someone just throw things there? Someone involved in forensics would attempt to piece together the details if there was a need to do so. I recently saw an episode of CSI  where there were no witnesses and no suspects in a murder investigation. The crime lab team members were attempting to reconstruct the sequence of events and getting nowhere. Then they realized they were doing things backward, and this led to finding a crucial piece of evidence. While only a story, it illustrated how people can make wrong assumptions and have to change

Something that has caused a great deal of controversy among both creationists and believers in atom-to-anthropologist evolution is H. naledi.  Although we have discussed this before (the last post is here ), some of the dust has settled and a couple of more thorough articles are available. Homo naledi skeletal specimens, Wiki Comm /  Lee Roger Berger research team  ( CC BY 4.0 ) Before we commence to digging, I want to say that there is a balance to be kept. My usual counsel to folks who get all het up about evolutionary news is to wait a spell until more information is presented. However, if stories are big enough, they need to be presented — but with a note of caution. Such was the case with Homo naledi . There were many suspicious elements about the H. naledi  stories, especially the part about remains that appeared to have been buried in a cave chamber with difficult access, implying that the creature was somewhat intelligent. Instead, the best explanation is that the rema

It seems possible that the scientific principle of Making Things Up™ originated with the ancient Greek philosophers. Like scientists, those philosophers based their speculations on observations and their theological views. Biblical scientists managed to liberate science from the predominant Greek ideas. Credit: Pixabay /  Gerd Altmann They had a belief that matters had a divine substance and that the gods were subject to that and to other laws. The Stoics thought that objects had souls, and had occult qualities attached to them; sympathy would cause a man to be attracted to a woman like a iron is attracted to a magnet (I wonder if Walter Egan knew this). The Epicureans (Paul the apostle debated Epicureans and the Stoics ) had evolutionary ideas. Plato and Aristotle also had some odd concepts, and this child wonders if logic had developed enough for people to ask, "How do you know that?" Later, people believed the Bible instead of just-so stories, and many of those pe

Creationists have been using the bombardier beetle as an example of irreducible complexity before that that phrase was first used by Dr. Michael Behe. Essentially, everything has to be in place from the start or nothing works. The bombardier beetle has also inspired some scientific applications.  There are many species of these beetles. Some of them are the explosive types that fire off bursts of hot liquid accurately at predators, and others have similar approaches.  Australian bombardier beetle,  Wikimedia Commons /  Peter Halasz  ( CC by-SA 3.0 ) Clinton Richard Dawkins told half truths and left out important information while denigrating creation and affirming evolution. Of course, his "it evolved" non-answer was typical of Darwin's acolytes. Professor Andy McIntosh was familiar with the common fascinating information, but he has a different perspective and education, so he asked different questions than the rest of us may ask. His collaboration and examinati

When soft tissues of dinosaurs were discovered, they were considered oddities or misunderstood. Problems for secularists continued as more soft tissues were found as well as proteins, so rescuing devices were attempted. Another effort was made that does not bode well for evolutionary ideas. Count Krosstich told me that these folks have to deal with a great deal of cognitive dissonance . True, they are  presuming that dinosaur bones have been in the ground for millions of years, but also knowing that soft tissues and proteins cannot last anywhere near that long. The toast concept and  Maillard reactions have been invoked, but nothing popped up with them. New studies have tremendous flaws. These people should admit that the evidence supports recent creation and the global Genesis Flood of only a few thousand years ago. The latest fossil biochemistry paper, published in Scientific Reports , describes “blood vessel structures” recovered from inside a T. rex femur. This is the s

My old pal Miles Prower stopped by to let me know that the hands at the Darwin Ranch were cranking up the propaganda mill again, this time to give more fake news about fossilized dinosaur feathers. Here we go again. We saw that proponents of particles-to-paleontologist evolution are riding hard and fast to use  space aliens for propaganda , but they are especially enamored with using dinosaurs to promote evolution. People with a modicum of critical thinking skills and some degree of science knowledge should be able to see that this report is nonsense. Assembled with components from  Clker  clipart One significant problem here is the same as we experience at The Question Evolution Project  — a frustration common to Page owners. Namely, lack of reading. People see headlines and summaries but tend to avoid actually reading the material and thinking about the poor science and reasoning involved. Ride up on the hill for the bigger view. What did they find? Fossils of feathers. W

My unregistered assault keyboard is ready to go on this New Year's Day (happy Calendar Changing Day). While it is wishful thinking that people will be able to see twenty-twenty (see what I did there?) about origins, we still have to present the truth. It is up to them what they do with it. The portrait of Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon was run through PhotoFunia Today's atheistic and anti-creationist activists are ready to go on the attack at full gallop and with lack of reasoning abilities. (I believe atheopaths nowadays do not even want to think rationally, let alone use science or civil discourse. Emotional reactions are used in place of thought.) People were more respectful and circumspect in earlier times. As far back as the 16th century, there were people advocating naturalism and to replace biblical truth. They hated creation and the Genesis Flood. Since many people still respected God and believed God's Word to some extent, it was unthinkable to g