Piltdown Superman

Many creatures are wonderful to behold, and the specified complexities used by the Master Engineer are amazing. Some critters are considered ugly or even repellant, but people can get past " the eww factor " to appreciate them for what they are. It is easy to appreciate waterfowl — the family Anatidae — such as ducks, swans, geese, and others for their beauty. Many are sources of food (although people are reluctant to eat swans ). Some migratory birds are protected by law but can also become nuisances. Common Loon, Unsplash / Jeremy Hynes The existence of feathers is an insurmountable hurdle for Darwinists, which are arranged on waterbirds to keep them buoyant. Glands and preening help with waterproofing. In addition, they have a passel of hollow bones so they are not weighted down and prevented from flying. The webbed feet are also products of brilliant design, helping them move efficiently in the water. Each feature defies molecules-to-mallard evolution, and taken together

My friend Hammond Suisse was talking to some of the hands from the Darwin Ranch in town, and there were a mite glum because of recent reports on fish lizards (ichthyosaurs). They knew that the narrative about evolving and re-evolving did not hold water. Now this. Despite claims of fundamentalist evolutionists, there are fossils out of sequence. Since there is no reasonable evidence for the evolution of those extinct marine lizards, one owlhoot came up with the idea that they evolved in bursts . Now there is an ichthyosaur fossil in the wrong place. Ichthyosaur, Copyright Expired Science Illustrations /  Heinrich Harder , 1916 Way up yonder, north of Norway, is an island called Spitsbergen. The source of the consternation was found there. No signs of evolution, this monster (some of these wet dinosaur cousins were huge ) was fully formed and in rocks that are dated by secularists as 250 million years old. That is too old for the evolutionary scenario, but right in keeping with the fact

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen This is an article I would rather not write, but my experiences and thoughts may be useful to others. Maybe I will get insight from them. A spell back, I was confused by Dr. Todd Wood who appeared in the creation science film Is Genesis History . Well, it was afterward that I was confused. He seemed to be advocating for baryons-to-biochemist evolution . After a bit of investigation, I wrote an article discussing both my confusion and also a video he made that seemed to settle things. Todd Wood with Del Tackett, Is Genesis History screenshot, modified with FotoSketcher Although I am a nobody, I was hoping that he would respond to the article. That didn't happen. After a while, I stopped paying attention to Dr. Wood's activities. Then some articles from Answers in Genesis got my attention. They were doing a series on young-earth evolution , which is something new to me. The idea seems contradictory, because evolution demands deep time and a denial of th

With the possible exception of Darwinistic laissez-faire capitalists , most people think it is a good idea to take care of the environment. Today is Earth Day. (No coincidence that it is also Lenin's birthday .) Good work for the environment was hijacked by leftists, but now they are more concerned with foisting anthropogenic climate change on the masses. Some are so weird, they want to give rivers and lakes personhood status ! These people are evolutionists, but ironically, caring for the environment is in keeping with biblical creationist principles. Cattle, Pixnio / Hagerty Ryan, USFWS Back in Genesis, God gave Adam and Eve responsibilities to care for the Garden. This is called the dominion mandate . We are stewards and receive many of the benefits, but ultimately, God is the owner (see Psalm 50:7-15). It is not an exact comparison, but Mark 12:1-12 has the Parable of the Tenants. They worked for the owner and received some of the goods, but he retained all the rights — even a

Hands at the Darwin Ranch over at Deception Pass are excited about how the James Webb Space Telescope is checking out exoplanets: that means evolution. This great and expensive accomplishment is getting some great views of the heavens, but the main goal is to find extraterrestrial life. If there is life, it must have evolved, right. Not hardly! So far, however, it has inadvertently supported creation science predictions instead of materialistic views. Sort of causing secular views rapid unscheduled disassembly... Extrasolar planets are plentiful , but unsuitable for life. Mayhaps the JWST will provide more information. HD 149026b (Smertrios), NASA / JPL-Caltech / T. Pyle (SSC) (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Despite the artwork, nobody really knows what these planets look like. One listed as HD 149026b is also called Smertrios, after a character that eventually merged with the Roman god of war. It is one of those "hot Jupiters", big and unpleasant. Smert

Curious that a British exclamation of approval is uncommon in the formerly United States, but this child is not using it in a literal way. The mantis shrimp smashes things — except for those that have harpoons instead of smashing claws . This predator has a resemblance to the praying mantis because of a second pair of limbs, hence the name. But it is not a shrimp, only distantly related to them. The mantis shrimp slaps down its prey very hard, very fast. Peacock mantis shrimp, Wikimedia Commons / Rickard Zerpe ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) Believers in stardust-to-stomatopod evolution cannot come up with plausible explanations for this critter's development. Study on it. That claw catapults at high speeds with a special mechanism. In fact, the bubbles made are even more devastating that the initial strike because of cavitation  (which would have been powerful in the Genesis Flood ). Get your finger too close and you may regret it . They also have exceptional vision which is being studied for

Trilobites have long been an icon of evolution (Russell Watchtower at the Darwin Ranch has a big 3D picture of one on his wall), but trilobites do not support it. The more scientists study them, the more they learn things that testify of creation and oppose Darwinism. We saw before that trilobites had exceptional optics , and there is a new development: median eyes, common arthropods. It was long thought that trilobites did not have them. Very useful for sensing objects while critters are moving. This discovery is inconvenient for evolutionary dogma. Trilobite, US Dept / Interior, BLM (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) For a long time, it was believed that these critters didn't have the extra eye part. The reasons given for why the discovery was late are, well, plausible. Ocelli (median eyes) were put in place from the beginning by the Creator, and evolutionists cannot say they "emerged" or "developed" later. Oopsie! The propaganda mill was put

People with Atheism Spectrum Disorder and other Darwinists get on the prod when biblical creationists and Intelligent Design folks get mighty ornery when we say that some creature thwarts, defies, baffles, or something similar in regard to evolutionists. There are quite a few. That dark thing scurrying over there...no, not a large mouse or a small rat. Look at that face, it is split into tentacles like it belongs in an H.P. Lovecraft story. There are several things about the star-nosed mole that mystify not only evolutionists, but the scientific community. Star-nosed mole, Flickr / gordonramsaysubmissions ( CC BY 2.0 ), modified at PhotoFunny For some reason, this child expected the star-nosed mole to reside in more exotic areas. It lives in the Northeastern U.S. and on up into Canada. The first thing that baffles evolutionists is that there is no evolutionary history. Beyond that, star-nosed moles have an exceptional sense of smell. The big puzzler is that the nose has exceptionally

Believers in universal common descent have a rough time using the science they claim to love. They also like to slap around logic, presupposing that everything evolved — which means they believe it without evidence as a starting point. Then commence to using circular reasoning. Another tactic they use is to suppress inconvenient evidence (the fallacy of exclusion ). Because certain living things have traits in common, Darwinists say this is evidence of evolution (often using the non-answer, convergent evolution ). Since apes and humans have traits in common, this is evidence of a common Designer. Macaque will not make tools, original image: Hippopx With their failed historical science machinations, evolutionists are bringing tears of embarrassment to Papa Darwin's eyes lately. Pieces of stone were found and attributed to ancient "hominids," but one bunch in Brazil was made by made by monkeys (possibly a brazillion of them). Another time, hilarity ensued when it was learn

Back when Darwin roamed the earth, he called the ginkgo a living fossil. Some organisms with that moniker disappeared from the fossil record, then were found alive and well ( such as the coelacanth ). Others have remained essentially unchanged over alleged millions of years when compared to their fossils. A frequent rescuing device when something remains unchanged is stasis : It had no need to evolve. To be blunt, that is a stupid excuse because a lot can happen over all those years. No, one reason it did not change is because the earth is not as old as evolutionists claim. Gingko leaves in autumn, Wikimedia Commons /  Joe Schneid  ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) Moving on from the living fossil aspect, people can easily find ginkgo biloba supplements in "natural" food stores and in vitamin sections of stores. Like with many health benefit claims, those not fully researched . Coordinated international research would be nice. Ginkgo is a large, hearty tree. It also has a large genome — bigge