Piltdown Superman

Although the Bible is completely accurate in everything it touches on, it has a strong emphasis in history. Archaeology has never contravened anything in it. Darwin's acolytes believe that if the ancient people of the Bible existed, they were stupid brutes.  This is false. Mostly made at  Image Chef Secularists should cowboy up and stop denying that the Bible is right every time! (The secular science industry press humiliated themselves by trying to prove the Bible wrong about the Canaanites , but they only showed that the press are unwilling to do actual research.) These folks were intelligent and sophisticated (morally degenerate, however). Not only were they genetically distinct, but their genes live on, although admixed. A new study finds that the the Canaanites before the Conquest were a distinct people, as the Bible says. A gene study of ancient DNA from 73 individuals in 9 Bronze Age sites confirms that Canaanites were genetically distinct, yet became admixed with

Antarctica should be predictable to secular scientists. Drill some ice cores, study penguins and such. Things like frog fossils , those five fossil forests , and so forth have been perplexing, however. A new discovery really puts burrs under uniformitarian saddles: remnants of a rain forest. How did that  get there? Photo courtesy of  Ted Scambos and Rob Bauer , National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of Colorado, Boulder (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) The mosey-along-slowly processes of uniformitarianism are applied to plate tectonics, so plants that are doing right well further north are inexplicable to secular geologists. By taking the observed data and plugging in to a creation science Genesis Flood model, things make a heap more sense. A recent study published in Nature has evolutionary scientists baffled. The researchers reportedly found an ancient rainforest in Antarctica, of all places. The study’s authors claim this part of Antarctica

There is a critter that could be filed as, "Something the Creator made to fluster scoffers", along with creatures like the pangolin , echidna , hoatzin bird , and others. The tapir confuses many people because it has characteristics reminiscent of several animals. It also thwarts particles-to-paleontologist evolution. Credit: Unsplash /  Dušan Smetana Using circular reasoning and the scientific principle of "It sorta kinda resembles certain things", the tapir does not conveniently fit into categories. They evosplain it through failed attempts at homology, but alleged similarities plop onto the dusty trail as science advances. Saying that "it's primitive" and " it evolved " are not satisfying, old son. While the tapir seems to be found mainly in the Southern Hemisphere, its fossils have been found on practically every continent. Darwin's deceivers cannot provide a rational analysis of the fossils, since there are no appreciable

It is supposed to be baseball season in some areas, so we can talk about bats. Well, not those bats. These are the flying mammals that some folks think look like rodents, and they do not move the needle on the cuddly meter. Evolutionists are attempting to salvage bad ideas about how they evolved. Flying fox (fruit bat) image credit: Morguefile /  kconnors Bats have been in the news because some folks think they're good eats (maybe getting diseases after eating them is a status symbol, I dunno). For a long time, Darwinoids have been striking out on bat evolution ideas. These creatures were obviously created to be distinct, and they have many characteristics that thwart taxonomy. Lots of bat species fluttering around, too. An article in Smithsonian  tries to conjure up some rescuing devices, but these are examined and rejected. I have been writing about many of evolutionists’ greatest puzzles for over a half-century, producing close to 1,500 publications. Now this puzzle has

Although real science affirms what most of us know (that men and women are different ), there are some people who do not like their genders. In fact, new words have been manufactured to distinguish between sex (what you were born with) and gender (whatever way you identify yourself). Some people resent the way they were born and want to change (gender dysphoria). There are several causes. Credit: Pixnio / Bicanski Although there are some strange twisting of science, critters know what they are and don't resent being male or female. It is politically and culturally incorrect to mention the fact that there are people who transitioned to having the appearance of the other sex and regretted it , but there are those who say, for example, "I am a woman trapped in a man's body!" — as if he would know. Research is showing that gender dysphoria has nothing to do with genetics or biology . And they have the nerve to call biblical creationists "science deniers"!

Proponents of universal common descent have a difficult job, since they have to continually redate various various aspects of evolution. Especially when it comes to humans. Well, if accuracy and results are not that important, it is steady work. For example, the Kabwe 1 from Zambia, H. heidelbergensis . Kabwe 1 skull cast image credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Gunnar Creutz  ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) The skull is thought to be part of an "archaic human" subspecies, H. heidelbergensis, and related to H. erectus , which was an ancient human that has been found in many places. For that matter, the Kabew 1 skull is from Zambia, but its relatives were found in Heidelberg. Ancient humans moved around and spread out quite a bit, and didn't even use private jets. The reason this skull (which has been around for about a hundred years) is garnering attention is because the date has been reassessed, and that in turn is causing problems for the human evolution timeline. These problems keep

With an abundance of material, I thought it best to combine links to these articles into one post. Each of these is a quick read but they have some interesting information about how paleontologists are baffled by new discoveries — including how one fossil blatantly defies deep-time reckoning. Credit: Pixabay /  GeorgeB2 Our first entry is about sex. Katie, bar the door! Just kidding. It's more about how difficult it is to determine the sex of dinosaurs. There have been many speculations over the years, but it's mighty difficult when all you have are bone fragments and fossils (reasonably complete skeletons are rare). Since paleontologists agree that dinosaurs were probably reptiles, perhaps a comparison with existing reptiles could help. Seems reasonable. Recently, a new study led by Queen Mary University of London concluded that dinosaur bones tell us little about their sexes. In the past, secular scientists have made various claims about the ability to make sex dete