Piltdown Superman

It becomes difficult to reason with atheists and evolutionists. Some of us want to have meaningful conversations, and we are met with arguments akin to, "You st00pid creatards are wrong because atheism and evolution and stuff". They base their "thinking" on invalid assumptions, such as those in a recent Y chromosome study. Made at Pablo Secularists who believe that human males are going extinct  have made some serious errors in that area, and some of the same problems are still recurring. They claim Neanderthals became extinct 40,000 Darwin years ago. The prediction that the Y chromosome is shrinking and will disappear has a challenge from a study from this Neanderthal Y chromosome study. DNA is fragile, and continues to deteriorate even after death. A crime lab technician cannot reasonably expect to test DNA after someone has been long dead. Under the right conditions, it can last a while. That's why scientists were able to do a study on Neanderthal DNA and the

Unfortunately, I have to keep gnawing on this bone: scientists are people, too. They make mistakes and have biases. As such, they are not the impartial arbiters of truth and science that many people believe. Many want to do science, others manipulate data for their own agendas. Since nobody is a blank slate and everyone has some kind of bias, it follows that nobody is completely impartial. Try to present creation science materials to atheists and other evolutionists, they often cry, "But that's biased! Those liars for Jesus are trying to convince us of their views!" Brilliant, Sherlock! Doesn't everyone want to present an argument to convince others of their point of view? Also, the ad hominem  is entirely irrational — not only from it being a logical fallacy, but also because biblical creationists serve a holy God who requires righteousness and hates lying. To say that we are lying to get others to believe in God is utterly vacuous. As mentioned several times before,

Believers in deep time and universal common descent have a silly habit of believing that humans long ago were stupid brutes, freshly minted from evolving and the ink was not dry yet. Yet another archaeological find supports the views of biblical creationists. Portelet Bay, Jersey / Library of Congress, Photochrom Print Collection If you are on the southeast coast of the larger British Isles facing Normandy, France, you will also be facing the much smaller Channel Islands. They are in the English Channel (the French call it  la Manche ). Doing some island hopping, the second nearest to Normandy is Jersey. Some interesting scratchings were found on a plaque that was broken into ten pieces. They are dated at many thousands of Darwin years old, but their condition and other considerations make the great age implausible. It is interesting that not only did the ancient artist have to do self-expression in stone, but abstract thought is evident — something that atheism and evolution cannot ex

Once upon a time, it was dark and there was nothing. Suddenly, nothing exploded for no reason. This gave us an orderly universe with predictable planetary patterns, and eventually atoms-to-astrophysicist evolution. But the naturalistic origins myth is continually being shown to be just a fairy tale. Made with Paint dot Net , then at PhotoFunia Materialistic cosmologies expect order and predictability from the Big Bang, but our own solar system belies those notions. We have planets and several moons out yonder that rotate in a manner that doesn't fit secular models. For that matter, secularists have trouble explaining why the composition of the inner planets is rocky, outer planets are gas giants, then rocky stuff out even further. Then there's that gigantic wall of superhot plasma that surrounds our solar system like a bubble.  No, don't let secularists buffalo you when they pretend they have everything figured out. "So what about that hot Neptune thing, Cowboy Bob?&qu

The Kitzmiller v. Dover legal decision was one of the worst miscarriages of justice and violations of American freedom of our time. Atheists and other anti-creationists have celebrated it for years — which is both ironic and instructive for us. The ironic part is people having Atheism Spectrum Disorder cheer the ruling, saying that the judge was wise in declaring Intelligent Design a religious movement (and other words to that effect). Darwin's handmaidens will also tell creationists that we have no business discussing flaws in evolution if we are not scientists — but Judge Jones was not a scientist. Two standards, no waiting. Let me make this worse for them: they  have no business promoting evolution because they are not scientists themselves, nor can they criticize the Bible because they are not theologians. They get shot with their own guns that way. This decision was not binding outside of the school district, but anti-creationists have acted like it was a Supreme Court ruling.

Although the dirt-to-dinosaur evolution narrative precludes humans coexisting with them, there are historical evidences. We have examined some of these before, such as " St. David's Dragon ", the dinosaur on Bishop Bell's tomb , and others. There are others to consider. Spinophorosaurus  image credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Nobu Tamura  ( CC BY 3.0 ) Because of naturalistic evolutionary and deep-time presuppositions, Darwin's disciples evosplain away written historical accounts  and biblical depictions  of dinosaurs. If you strip away the storyline and assumptions to look at the evidence, it is not so easy to dismiss the fact that dinosaurs and humans coexisted. In addition to arguing from presuppositions, materialists argue from silence and ignore other possibilities. Is that a carving of a stegosaurus? No, because of this and that. Other possibilities neglected would be that it's a different dinosaur altogether, the carver was unskilled or made some adjustment

A post was made about how archaeology supports the Bible, and an atheopath said that it never has, never will. To be blunt, that is stupid as well as bigoted. Geology also supports the Bible. In fact, the cities of the plain in Genesis 19:29 KJV that God destroyed have apparently been located . Lot and his family leaving Sodom , Peter Paul Rubens, 1625 Sodom was a big place, and it had some smaller states around it. In fact, it was a nice place, and that's why Lot chose to live there when he parted from Abram (Genesis 13:8-12). When Lot was warned and forced to evacuate the exceptionally sinful area, they  fled to Zoar .  The Bible tells us about fire and brimstone that destroyed the area, and geological evidence has been found to support this. By the way, when Lot's wife looked back and turned into a pillar of salt, it wasn't just a quick glance over the shoulder. It would have been a case of lagging and longing. Remember, the angels compelled Lot and the others to leave.