Posts

Human Reproduction is Still a Mystery to Evolutionists

Image
Since social(ist) media have their on bots search and destroy missions for things that are against their so-called community standards , I was a bit vague on the title. This is about sex, the matrimonial mattress mambo. More importantly, it is about design and wonder. Credit: Pixabay / Karin Henseler As we have seen previously, the human reproductive system is an enigma to Darwin's disciples . In their paradigm of time, chance, mutations, natural selection, random processes, and so on, they cannot explain it — especially the specified complexity of the male reproductive system . Their lack of understanding doesn't stop them from making ludicrous assumptions and using evolution to excuse promiscuity in humans , though. It is interesting that sex is our means of reproduction and also a source of pleasure. Indeed, it is a gift of God within the confines of true marriage. Although the porn industry is making huge amounts of money and Mohammedan countries are increasing their popula

Solving the Dinosaur Demise Mystery

Image
The most common narrative is that dinosaurs lived somewhere around 250 to 65 million Darwin years ago, then they became extinct. Whyzat? Supposedly they were doing fine until something fell from the sky and killed them off. Actually, secularists argue about their extinction. Credit: Pexels /  Engin Akyurt Your typical village atheist or other evolutionist seems to think that evolution is a "fact". To have a fact, there needs to be incontrovertible evidence. Not only is there considerable evidence refuting dust-to-dinosaur evolution, secular scientists are not in agreement about it. Nor do they agree about the extinction of dinosaurs (the fact that there is no evidence for their supposed evolution might have something to do with that). Some scientists think they gradually faded away, others think it was sudden. New research shots that it was sudden — and fits right nicely with creation science Genesis Flood models. Instead of excluding biblical creationists, the scientific co

Lying for Darwin about "Junk" DNA

Image
A few days ago, Jacqueline Hyde, the lady friend of Rusty Swingset from the Darwin Ranch, wanted to meet up with me over at Gravel Gulch. Although an evolutionist, she has some doubts. She also was not happy about recent dishonesty regarding so-called junk DNA. If interested, you can find the original 1895 photo at  Wikimedia Commons , Papa Darwin's image is found all over the web, and the source of the DNA image is at openclipart Evolution is essential for making an evolutionary worldview appear rational. Its adherents despise anything that even hints at design, since they are committed to time, luck, time, chance, time, mutations, and especially time. They make up ridiculous dysteleology arguments that our Creator is a bad designer, therefore he must not exist. However, their specious arguments have been clearly refuted in creation science, the Intelligent Design organizations, and the secular science industry. Pre-refuted for your convenience. Who do they think they are, Bill Ny

Creation Science and Studies of Baraminology

Image
Believers in universal common ancestry get a mite riled when biblical creationists discuss the created kinds (e.g., Gen. 1:25). Ironically, Carl Linnaeus, who got the taxonomy ball rolling, was a creationist who believed in the created kinds . Creation scientists are working out the details of baraminology .  Credit: RGBStock / Graeme Rainsbury Don't be disunderstanding me now, creationists do believe in speciation and variations . There are some creation scientists who are exploring the created kinds , which would be a larger category than species . As with any scientific model, there are differing views that need to be worked out. Remember that creation science models come and go, but creationists who propose them agree on the truth of God's written Word. Two distinct views used in the pursuit of this science are discussed. New genomics-based statistical approaches have helped us in baraminology research. There is currently much genomic data available in the public databases

Dr. Duane Gish and Debating Evolutionists

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Dr. Duane T. Gish was born one hundred years ago today, and was referred to as "creation's bulldog". Thomas Henry Huxley was "Darwin's bulldog [ 1 ]", and C. Richard Dawkins was nicknamed "Darwin's Rottweiler [ 2 ]". The bulldog monikers refer to tenaciously advocating viewpoints. Original image furnished by Why?Outreach Today is the 100th anniversary of Dr. Gish's birth. He was involved in the foundation of the Creation Research Society and the development of the Institute for Creation Research [ 3 ]. He was 92 when he passed away in 2013. Here are some tributes and biographical sketches [ 4 ], [ 5 ], [ 6 ] ). Duane gave many lectures, as well as writing numerous books and articles. Many fish-to-Gish evolutionists and atheists with knowledge and life experience know of him from his 300 or so debates where evolutionists chose to slap leather with him. The Infamous "Gish Gallop" Trope Unfortunately, a pejora

Evolutionists Telling a DAM Lie

Image
Believers in minerals-to-misotheist need to be asked some direct questions, such as if evolution is a proven fact, why do they expect evidence to be found later? That is faith, old son, not science. Also, why do they need to use falsehoods and chicanery? If evolution were a "proven scientific fact", it could successfully slap leather with all challengers. Helpful hint: Science does not prove anything, only disproves. Hypotheses, theories, even laws stand until even one contrary piece of evidence brings them down. That is falsifiability . I gave Charlie a floral wreath at PhotoFunia . It's quite fitting. Darwin's Abominable Mystery troubled him for years and was never resolved. Flowering plants existed too soon for evolutionists, a fact which supports recent creation. Deal with it, hippies. But no, living by faith, evolutionists have tried to hoodwink us with tall tales and even outright deception instead of admitting that they have insurmountable problems. Of course,

The "One Gene, One Trait" Myth

Image
For many years, it has been taught that our traits are the result of our genes. Did Ellen touch the cleft in your chin after you were putting up the Christmas lights, Sparky? That crease was caused by a gene, they say. Credit: RGBStock / Helmut Gevert Eye and hair color, straight or curled, sizes of various body parts, other things — a gene for each. While this idea is useful to advance the particles-to-paralegal storyline, it is not true. Unfortunately, bad science ideas (especially those that support evolution) tend to remain in textbooks. The truth is much more complicated; Dr. Robert Carter said, "If life were really simple, evolution might be possible"; evolution is increasingly less possible relative to the complexity of life. Several genes are involved in traits and trait expressions, and other factors come into play. Indeed, our Creator likes variety, and he gave us many factors to express our individual characteristics. I taught college level human genetics and was c