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

Friday, July 24, 2020

Slowly Loving the Venomous Loris

Found in jungles of Southeast Asia and thereabouts, these cute and cuddly-looking critters can be dangerous. No need to run screaming from the building, deaths to humans from their bite are rare. You can walk away. The moniker slow loris is appropriate.

A creature known as the slow loris is cute, but potentially lethal. Unlikely, but possible. The Master Engineer provided it with some unique and unusual qualities.
Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Aprisonsan (CC BY-SA 4.0)
There are a few venomous mammals (including several types of shrews), but they are not known to be fatal to humans. However, the slow loris can give a defensive bite that is potentially fatal. Ironic, because they are used in the exotic pet trade — don't even think about it! The slow loris uses its lack of speed to its advantage, and it also has the ability to mimic venomous snakes. It is another example of the provisions built in by the Master Engineer.
Slow lorises are small primates that dwell in the jungles of Southeast Asia. While other primates like monkeys swing and leap through the trees, slow lorises sneak across branches. Even the quicker members of the loris kind, the slender lorises and the pottos, climb at a cautious pace. But if you’re tempted to think slowness is a handicap, not so fast. The slow loris’ sluggishness contributes to a feature called crypsis—the use of stealth to avoid predators and to hunt.
To read the entire short article or download the audio, click on "Slow Loris: Fuzzy Can Be Fatal".

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

Thursday, July 23, 2020

Darwinists Want to Give a Fish a Hand

When proponents of universal common ancestry evolution insist that the fossils prove evolution, biblical creationists ask for the transitional forms. You know, where something is indisputably evolving into something else. They trot out variations and different sexes, but nothing convincing. 

Darwinists think they found a fish that was evolving a hand. They forgot humiliations by using bad science before in their efforts to deny the Creator.
Elpistostege watsoni fossil image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Placoderm2 (CC BY-SA 4.0)
There should be billions of actual transitional forms if evolution were true. Instead, we get evolutionists fighting tooth and nail for every possible candidate for a transitional form. What's this one fish hand thing? Yes, some are claiming to have definitive proof that the lobe-finned fish Elpistostege watsoni was evolving a hand. The evidence is dubious, and not everyone in the evolution camp wants to hop on that bandwagon.

Indeed, a few similarities in a fossil or two does not indicate evolution of limbs. Consider the amazing complexity of the hand that the Master Engineer designed. See "Hand Signals of Design".

Are there other possible explanations for what was found? No, because evolution! (And some balatrons accuse us of confirmation bias.) Never mind the coelacanth that made fools of evolutionists. They claimed it was extinct and evolving, but it was found alive and well — what was presumed by bias confirmers had a different function. There is also the embarrassment of the tiktaalik. Some people will not learn, because as well have seen so many times, the naturalistic narrative is more important than the facts. Denying the work of the Creator is paramount to these owlhoots.
In order for the bizarre theory of evolution to be validated, evolutionists must show how inorganic non-life organized itself into carbon-based (organic) life. They also must show how major transitions in animals occurred, including how fish became the first tetrapods. This means fish fins would need to slowly turn into feet and legs. As one secular journal said, “The evolution of fishes into tetrapods—four-legged vertebrates of which humans belong—was one of the most significant events in the history of life.”
You can read the rest by using your Creator-designed finger and clicking on "Was a Fossil 'Fish-Hand' Discovered?" A related article with additional insights is found at "Did Fish Evolve Hands?"

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

Wednesday, July 22, 2020

Titan Rapidly Fleeing from Saturn

It has been discovered that Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is receding from that nice planet much faster than cosmic evolutionists expect. Moons recede. They do that. However, the rate at which Titan lit a shuck out of there causes considerable consternation.

The rate at which Titan is receding from Saturn startles secularists and causes them many difficulties. Biblical creationists are not bothered in the least.
Titan with clouds image credit: NASA / JPL / University of Arizona
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Indeed, secular scientists are constantly denying evidence for a young solar system (see "Saturn Scientists Dodge Age Issues".) None of the secular ideas for the formation of the solar system are good, so the best of the worst is the nebular hypothesis. Essentially, everything formed at the same time (never mind that Venus and Uranus defy the edict had have retrograde rotations, as well as some moons). Earth's moon is receding, and using uniform assumptions against secularists, it would have been impossibly close to Earth in the past. Titan would have needed to form in a different place than was originally assumed, and this causes problems throughout secular cosmology. Recent creation does not have all these problems and the need for reworking bad theories.
A recent news release from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) announces that new examination of the data from the late Cassini spacecraft indicates that Saturn’s moon Titan is moving away from the planet at a higher rate than previously thought. What are the implications of the fact that the moon is moving away? A bit can be said about the time scale of the age of the Saturnian system.
To finish reading, click on "Titan Is Running Away from Saturn". For a similar article with additional information, see "Titan Receding from Saturn Faster than Expected".

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

Tuesday, July 21, 2020

Propaganda for Children is a Tree Ring Circus

In a previous post we saw how naturalists are indoctrinating children. After all, secularists control public thought control systems commonly referred to as schools, so they have their minds captive for many hours in a year. That is not the only method.

A children's book is being used to indoctrinate in the bad science of tree ring dating. Once again, the narrative is more important than evidence and truth.
Credit: Unsplash / Aleksandar Radovanovic
Another effective means of propaganda is though storybooks. I was talking with Trevor "Red" Schnapper the other day, and he told me about a book for children that he encountered. It was about counting tree rings. This is, to use the expensive word, dendrochronology. (In case you're curious, you can see the word components. -ology is "the study of", dendron is for "tree", cronos is time — but I see you checking the chronograph on your wrist and know it's time to get back to the subject.) Like many other kids, I was taught that one ring means one year of growth.

That seems good on the surface, but there are factors involved that sometimes the sidewinders at the indoctrination centers don't bother to tell people. Counting tree rings is unreliable. Boy, those deceptive deep-time proponents sure are fond of layers, aren't they? This stuff is being pushed on children despite the bad science involved. Remember when Joe Biden said, "We choose truth over facts"? For naturalists, the narrative is more important than actual evidence and logic. The truth they ignore is that the earth was recently created.
A new book on tree rings—Valerie Trouet’s Tree Story — blends some serious tree science with some uniformitarian mythology. The book is being heavily promoted by Johns Hopkins University. Aimed at young readers, it will indoctrinate children into the same old mythology about trees, implying that tree ages can be determined by counting growth rings.
Wooden you know, you can read the rest by clicking on "Children’s Tree Book Rings of Evolutionary Agenda".

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

Monday, July 20, 2020

Painting with Octopus Ink

That is a title I did not expect to use. Although a group of fossil octopuses was discovered in 2009, it was not until a few years later that the lovely and talented Esther van Hulsen was commissioned to paint a picture of it using its own ink.
Using the ink from a fossilized octopus raises several questions about the age of the earth. This, and the fossil itself, supports creationist claims about the Genesis Flood.
If the octopus was Keuppia levante, it may have looked like this
Image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Smokeybjb (CC BY-SA 3.0)
Using the dried-out ink sacs of cephalopods for writing and art is not a new idea, but the effort by Esther was large and highly publicized. Many questions arise that trouble proponents of deep time:
  • How could a soft critter like an octopus be fossilized slowly?
  • Why is the ink sac still extant after 95 million Darwin years?
  • Why is the pigment of the ink, a kind of melanin, still stable?
  • Shouldn't everything be permineralized after all that alleged time?
  • How do you reconcile this and the discoveries of soft tissues and even DNA — which should not exist according to your paradigm — with observed facts?
The narrative among secularists is that the earth is very old. This gives Darwin time to peep and mutter so he can work his magic. However, the evidence, including the existence of octopus fossils, indicates a young earth and rapid burial by the Genesis Flood. Yippie ky yay, secularists!
A rather unusual painting hangs in Oslo’s Natural History Museum, Norway. Displayed beside a magnificent fossil octopus is a painting meant to depict it when alive. What makes this painting so unusual is that the ink used to paint it came from the same ink sac that can be observed in the fossil. It is quite literally a painting in the present made from pieces of the past.

While evolutionists claim the fossil octopus is 95 million years old, it serves instead as a demonstration of the rapid deposition of sediments during the Noahic Flood some 4,500 years ago.
You can read the rest by clicking on "A painting ‘95 million years’ in the making?" There is a short video below. Never mind it's promoting false science and has no sound, we can get a glimpse of the artist (in Brooklyn, pronounced "ottist") at work.

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

Saturday, July 18, 2020

More Follies with Darwinian Racism

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Although some acolytes for Charles Darwin try to deny it, his racism has been abundantly documented (here is a sampling), so we have no need to spend much time on that. To go further, we will examine how presuppositions based on "race" and "primitive people" influenced the treatment of ethnic groups.

Darwinists are constantly surprised at how intelligent and advanced people they consider intelligent were. This is based on personal preferences and presuppositions.
Modern Comanche by Frederic Remington, 1890
Once again, however, it needs to be stated that racism (despite the fact that genetically and biblically we are all one race) is ancient, and was exacerbated by Darwinian views and "scientific racism"[1]. One problem with deeming people to be primitive is the evolutionary concept that our ancestors swung down from the trees and commenced to developing consciousness, hunting, language, and civilizations.

Evolutionists have been repeatedly surprised that their presuppositions have been demonstrated to be fatally flawed. Roads discovered beneath ancient Roman roads in Britain[2], early humans were sailing to Greek islands[3], an ancient Israeli city was quite advanced[4] — and the sophistication of Neanderthals really puts burrs under the saddles of evolutionists[5]. For that matter, there are modern humans with facial features that "belong" to our alleged evolutionary ancestors[6]. Of course, biblical creationists are not constantly challenged to rewrite history and evolution textbooks because our beliefs do not correspond with the facts. We presuppose the truth of the Bible and are consistently shown to have the facts on our side.

In more recent times, Native Americans were called primitive, but they were judged by people who were from a different culture, mostly white Europeans. My culture is better and more civilized than your culture because it's mine and I like it. While Native Americans did not seem to have written languages and some tribes were constantly moving around[7], they were living their lives — probably without thinking, "I sure hope we become civilized someday". Primitive is often equated with stupid, and those people were intelligent. They just did not do things the way people from Western cultures thought they should live.

When Charles Darwin was taking his trip on the Beagle, there was a run-in with the Fuegians. These people were considered primitive, but some were captured and taken to Britain (one died there early on), Christianized (or at least, they played along), educated, and shown to the king and queen of Britain. After the Fuegians were back home, they quickly reverted to their original ways. It's not so much savage hearts or a primitive nature, they simply had no need of Western trappings[8].

Our Creator made only one race, but there are many ethnicities. Those who call others primitive should keep that in mind. In addition, they should realze that such a view is based on personal personal preferences and presuppositions — and many of those are based on Darwin's failed worldview.

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

Friday, July 17, 2020

Secularist Crystal Gazing and Earth's Magnetic Field

Secular geologists have struggled to explain the origin of Earth's magnetic field, and recent research has made things worse. Yes, we know that it has had reversals and they have happened more rapidly than previously thought. Their latest efforts to explain the origin of the field amount to zircon crystal gazing.

Secular scientists cannot determine the age of the earth's magnetic field. Their attempts resembling zircon crystal gazing have not gone well.
Original image before modification courtesy of Why?Outreach
Here's how it allegedly happened. Like teenage girls having a sleepover party that start messing with a spirit board, the hands at the Darwin Ranch (up yonder by Deception Pass) were having themselves a hootenanny. Even Rusty Swingset, the foreman, joined in. He had a bit too much firewater, and draped the curtains over his back so he could play super hero before dancing with his lady friend Jacqueline Hyde (she still wasn't herself that day). Then they decided to perform some divination on the age of the earth with zircon crystals. It did not go well.

Results were contradictory, and even fouled up the timeline again: the age did not go back far enough. Somewhere, somehow, mayhaps over the rainbow, the answer for what drove the magnetic field for a heap of time may be found. Biblical creationists know that their dating methods are fundamentally flawed, and that the Genesis Flood greatly affected Earth's magnetic field.
When did the Earth get its magnetic field? It’s important because life depends on it. Watch MIT fumble and stumble over the question.

Consumers of science news often get triumphant-sounding assertions about things, leading the reader to assume that the experts know what they are talking about. A typical statement might say, ‘The Earth’s magnetic field originated 3.5 billion years ago from a dynamo caused by stirring of molten iron in the Earth’s core, and reverses its polarity in 100,000 year cycles.’ Here’s a sample from Live Science last September, where reporter Stephanie Pappas adds some sugar and spice to fresh expert cud:
To learn more about the failure of secular scrying, click on "Origin of Geomagnetism: Bumbling in the Dark Past".

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