Piltdown Superman

Way back in 1770s, David Hume said , "For all inferences from experience suppose, as their foundation, that the future will resemble the past, and that similar powers will be conjoined with similar sensible qualities". James Hutton was studying geoscience, which was not yet a formalized field of study (doctorates would b given in geology many decades later). Still, he liked what he was doing and published books in the late 1700s, establishing uniformitarianism, summarized as "the present is the key to the past"; processes we see in geology today are the same as they've always been. Hutton influenced lawyer Charles Lyell, who expanded on Hutton's work. He wanted to save geology , "freeing the science from the old dispensation of Moses." When people like Lyell oppose the Bible, it's no surprise that they're willing to lie to promote their views . From here, failed medical student and backslidden clergyman Charles Darwin became excited by Ly

People have a whole heap of ways to express emotions, what with tone of voice, facial expressions, gestures, and so on. It seems that our eyes can convey a great deal. Notice how many songs talk about the eyes, and we use expressions like, "I see it in your eyes"? Pictures can convey some of the emotions, but when we're with someone, we can discern an emotion. I was upset and hiding it by giving myself a stone face, but people still knew something was wrong. People who know me can tell when I'm up to something, also. Credit: Pixabay / PublicDomainPictures We were created with many special muscles, more than apes have, to help us communicate in a way that is unique to humans. Darwin's disciples have invented a silly story that an ancient ancestor copied from an ape, but conveniently ignore several important details, including evidence and a model. Face it (heh!), we were designed to be different, old son. Unlike animals, we communicate all kinds of informa

You may not know the word, but arthropods are all over the place, on land, in the sea, and so on. They comprise most of the animal world, and have an external skeleton, many limbs, a segmented body, and are cold blooded. You have your spiders, insects, scorpions, lobsters, and a whole passel of other things. Let's highlight a few of them, which are being studied for biomimetics (imitation for our benefit). Credit: National Science Foundation (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) That big nose-like thing you see in the butterfly picture that looks like a straw is called the proboscis . It works like a straw, or maybe a sponge, or is that a sensor, or some of all of those things. This is being studied for several applications, including a drug delivery system. Did you know that mosquitoes beat their wings about 800 times a second? (I still swat at the things when I hear that annoying whine.) More impressive is that they make efficient use of their wing strokes

Another idea in microbes-to-metallurgist evolution is being turned upside down, and it supports biblical creation science. Turns out that promiscuity to increase evolution is inconceivable; it slows down alleged evolutionary processes. Instead, monogamy is the real source of diversification. So for those folks with alley cat morals, you can't use evolution as an excuse any longer. Once again, a study made speciation the equivalent of evolution. Not hardly! (This old terminology switcheroo happens so often, I wonder if many of these scientists are not so much deceptive as they are ignorant of biology basics.) Creationists believe in speciation and natural selection, which are not the things that add information for evolution to supposedly happen.  We also have diversification after the Genesis Flood. If you study on it a spell, there were two of each created kind (seven of certain others) on the Ark. They were forced to be monogamous. Aw, I'm stumbling on my words

When it comes to indigenous people, evolutionary thinking persists and affects how "white" people like me are supposed to view them. That is, the a priori assumption that atoms-to-aborigine evolution occurred, then the semi-sapient humans began to learn how to survive, think, sit around for a few thousand years and then build cities. Silly thing, that, since the evolutionary timeline does not jibe with human nature . So, what are we to make of evidence that conflicts with the evolutionary narrative? Pleiades image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech Evolutionary astrophysicist Roy Norris found out that the textbooks on Australian Aborigines were absolutely false. More than that, he learned that they had a deep understanding of celestial objects that belied biased evolutionary assumptions about their culture and intelligence. While Norris maintained his belief system, he noticed the amazing similarities between Aboriginal stories about certain constellations and those of people el

The hands down yonder at the Darwin Ranch keep coming up with "discoveries" that are nothing new, but they get all agitated about them anyway. In this case, meaningful interaction between fathers and daughters is important. The Bible made it plain long ago about the importance of the family unit, beginning with God's plan for marriage back in Genesis. Credit: Pixabay / platinumportfolio Scientists learned that fathers giving stability in the household makes daughters less likely to engage in "risky sexual behavior". Both parents need to be united in child raising, whether boys or girls, and one parent must not undermine the efforts of the other. In addition, kids quickly develop a "divide and conquer" strategy, such as asking the father's permission, adding that, "Mom said it's okay with her if it's okay with you" — but Mom wasn't asked in the first place. That's not a part of the study, I'm sharing something add

Can you imagine a game show where people need to match survey questions about items found in a cave? "Stalactites, Steve!" Yes. "Bats!" Yes. "Water!" Yes. "Dirt!" Yes. "DNA!" Gets a strange look from the host, checks the results. Buzzzzz! Nope, DNA didn't match the survey. But DNA is in caves, especially in the soil. Some of it comes from our fully-human Neanderthal ancestors, too. Credit: Morguefile / Koan Scientists are disagreeing about the age and movement of the DNA. The stuff breaks down over a short amount of time. Maybe soil helps preserve it, but water in the soil helps mix it up and seep into deeper rock layers. Some secularists are believing that the DNA is way, way old, and others are saying, "Waitaminnit, it has age limits". To date the DNA because of their long-age assumptions require it to be old is circular reasoning, but actual science shows that the DNA cannot be all that old. There w

Several years ago, I stopped into a sandwich shop in East Lansing, Michigan. Things had changed a bit since the last time I was there, and one of those changes was the cute little pickle they speared with a toothpick and shoved into the sandwich. Okay, I'll start with the pickle. That was how I learned about a jalapeño pepper on a stick. It took many years before I came close to them again, and made sure that small pickles were indeed small pickles. Unpleasant surprises are educational. Great Barrier Reef Near Whitsunday Islands, International Space Station, credit: NASA (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) In a similar manner, a fish commences to chowing down on a fangblenny, a fish the size of your finger. Munchie discovers that the fangblenny is one of many venomous fish in the deep blue sea and gets himself bitten from the inside. Although there's no pain from the venom, it causes his jaw to drop open and the fangblenny swims away. Later, Munchie decide

Creationists have to deal with Darwin's Flying Monkeys© (because the Evo Sith don't want to invest in krakens), and they go on the prowl citing what they consider to be facts supporting scum-to-scoffer evolution. It is almost comical at times, because defenders of Darwin use incomplete, fraudulent, deceptive, and often outdated material. Informed creationists often correct them on their misuse of science. Bacteria image credit: National Institutes of Health (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) One item that seems to have fallen through the cracks is the claim that random mutations produced nylon-eating bacteria. (With Evo Sith logic, that slight modification means that universal common ancestor evolution is true, and there is no Creator. Sure, you betcha.) The entire story is outdated and incomplete, but a passel of people believe it; fake evolution news tends to get stuck in the public's craw , and they pass it around. Dr. Don Batten wrote about nylon

When "debunking" creationary material, anti-creationists use several tactics, but seldom employ reason, science,  and logic. Ironically those are things they claim to uphold. Instead, they use logically fallacious arguments such as the straw man, loaded terminology, arbitrary assertions, poisoning the well, the red herring, outright lying, and their usual first resort, the ad hominem  attack. (I believe most of their fallacies could be considered variations on the red herring diversion .) Something I've said for years is that respect must be earned ,  and such scheming moves their respect percentages into the negative numbers. One version of the red herring/ ad hominem  is the use of emotive terminology. Fine print fail (lower right), made on imgur , URL added later Those of us who reject microbes-to-mocker evolution are often bushwhacked with speech-control labels such as "anti-science" ( here, for example ), or its ugly kid brother, "science denie

One of the most popular propaganda ploys that evolutionists use is the so-called high similarity between the human and chimpanzee genomes, which is then proclaimed throughout all the world as proof that we evolved from a universal common ancestor. Check out your Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Ring™ (even the cheap new ones that don't have a whistle), and you'll see that this claim is used to justify assertions that there is no Creator, or at least, that evolution of that sort actually happened. However, the science that they hang their hopes on is nothing but choplogic. Credit: Pixabay / venturaartist The chimpanzee-human genome similarity was shown to be false through re-examination by a notable creationary scientist. The whole comparison thing was bad science from the get-go, as the chimpanzee genome was actually not sequenced. Just a few portions were examined, assumptions about evolution were made, and human contamination was added to the mix. The whole shootin&#

Yes, it's true. A famous astronomer built on the work of a previous astronomer and saw canals on Mars. What, you didn't know? It was in the newspapers, even the New York Times .  Except that the big news was in 1907. Seems that fake news is not a new phenomenon, only the moniker is new. Making use of the Breaking News Generator again This is where someone might object that scientists makes mistakes, but things got fixed because science is self-correcting . No, not really. Secularists often use the reification fallacy and act like science is a sentient being that makes choices (especially regarding muck-to-mechanic evolution), which is a form of pagan nature worship . Giovanni Schiaparelli thought he saw channels on Mars, and the Italian word was translated as canals  (which strikes me as an easy mistake), and Percival Lowell "saw" canals on Mars. He even wrote a book or three on the subject. Those mistakes were corrected with additional research and improve

Some people go wild downloading apps (applications) when they get a new smartphone, tablet, or whatever. There are millions available, and many are junk — or worse. (I have apps that came pre-packaged that I don't want, don't use, and can't uninstall. Bummer.) It's not surprising to hear someone say, "There's probably an app for that".I reckon some folks have apps on the brain. Credit: Pixabay / Gerd Altmann The human mind and brain have been compared to computers in many ways, except that our working, uh, hardware is far more intricate and specific than anything a computer company could dream up. There are apps for your brain that sound exciting, and you'd like to download them into it. But that's not possible. Nor necessary. You have pre-packaged evolution-defying apps in the brain, courtesy of our Creator (who wrote our Operator's Manual ). Yep, we got us the Magic Rocks app for our inner ears to help us keep our balance. Then th

News keeps getting worse for the hands at the Darwin Ranch down Deception Pass way. Trying to deny science related to dinosaur soft tissues and still believe in long ages is downright difficult, but they make a serious effort. Now the prospect of actual dinosaur DNA is becoming more of a possibility. Some evolutionary scientists are being confronted with a choice: the narrative that dinosaur fossils are multiple millions of Darwin years old (which is based on assumptions), or the scientific fact that DNA degrades rapidly, and cannot for long periods. Secular scientists are loathe to admit that facts show the earth was created recently because minerals-to-mastodon requires those long ages. According to Dr. Adrian Lister, a British paleobiologist, DNA cannot survive in dinosaur bones because dinosaurs lived far too long ago for their DNA, which is inherently unstable, to survive to the present . . . Dr. Lister is no stranger to Ice Age remains, having a particular expertise in

In Texas, one of the state mammals is the armadillo, but the reason why escapes me because lots of folks consider them a nuisance, especially gardeners and home owners. There was a time when Charles Apelt got the notion to hollow out the carcass and use the hard shells to make into baskets. A tisket, a tasket, an armadillo basket... Personally, I don't like the idea very much. You'd think that will his business interest in them, he'd have hunted the armadillos to extinction. Instead, they are thriving, and even found in new areas. The armadillo (Spanish for " speed bump ") looks like slow-moving speed bumps I've encountered in Michigan and New York: the opossum. But even though they have a superficial resemblance ( sans body armor), they're not closely related. The opossum is a marsupial, the armadillo is a mammal. And no, the 'dillo is not a rodent, like some people think. One other thing that the two critters have in common is that some people ea

Darwin's Brigands™ are continuing the old bait 'n' switch trick with terminology again. ( Again? More like, still. ) When you have a discussion with these hijackers of science, you have to nail down your definitions. Evolution has many meanings, and when you're talking to someone who believes in scum-to-stalker evolution, watch out that he or she does not point to variation or "change over time" as evidence for his belief system — changes are not evidence that Darwin was right, but they get sneaky by equ ivoca ting on the word evolution. Very disingenuous. Made at Add Captions , then modified a bit As in other cases, evolutionists are all het up about a study in the genetics of salivary protein, and the variations thereof. They call it "evolution", but that is nowhere near the truth. Life, the universe, and everything were created. Despite all the efforts of secularists, they cannot change this truth, nor can they change how the facts refute

According to deep time adherents, some celestial objects just won't act their (assigned) ages. There are many links on this site alone to how planets, moons, and whatnot are showing signs of youth instead of millions of years. Secular cosmologists keep on plugging away with their narrative, even when they repeatedly encounter observed evidence that refutes their predictions. Probably because they find recent creation detestable, despite the evidence. They continue to present things they know are untrue, even according to their mythology. Galaxy cluster MOO J1142+1527, credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / Gemini / CARMA (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Beginning with Big Bang and deep time presuppositions, astronomers and cosmologists are baffled when galaxies that are supposed to be very old have "stopped forming stars". Not that anyone has actually seen stars forming, we're only presented with presumptions based on their paradigms. Still, there is

Way back in the olden days, we had a small dog, but my parents were not overly concerned with protecting me from the unsanitary beast. Nor were they all that worried about unsanitary cats, once they became part of the family. Proper hygiene was in order, and that was enough. (By the way, some people have scared pregnant women into avoiding cats, but the danger there is mitigated by taking care when changing the litter box .) I know people who would want to have "kisses" from their German Shepherd and have her lick their faces, even on the lips. I can't do that. Children Playing with Puppies , William Collins, 1812 The idea that dogs' mouths are cleaner than ours is a myth, they have their own bacterial flora . No need to overreact, though. Our society has been " too clean " these past years (the word germaphobe is used too freely in my opinion, as a true germaphobe suffers from obsessive-compulsive disorder ), and are actually doing harm to ourselve

You may find this difficult to believe, but some owlhoots present the development of a tadpole into a frog as an example of evolution. Now, they're using the vague definition of evolution as change over time , and then implying that this change illustrates all life evolving from a common ancestor. Not hardly! Chiricahua Leopard Frog credit: Jim Rorabaugh / USFWS| (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Mr. Jeremy Fisher was once a tadpole, a critter that people sometimes go "hunting" and raising . It undergoes drastic changes and becomes a croaking hopper that eats flies. (If you get the right one, it'll sing and dance for you .) The changes it goes through are quite dramatic, actually. Everything is changed and rearranged through and through. How does it know how to do this, and how do the changes happen the right way, in the right order? The Creator put the intricate design plans into it's DNA, which defies changes-by-chance evolution. Ne

It is an established fact that everywhere we turn, we are assaulted with remarks about evolution that assume it to be an undisputed, every scientist in lockstep, fact. Whether it's an animated feature for children, advertisements, nature documentaries that invariably give homage to Darwin, proselytes of evolutionism on the web, or many other possibilities, evolution is confidently asserted.  Made at imageGenerator.net We expect vagaries in science terminology from cinema, music, or whatever. Unfortunately, it is becoming more common in mainstream scientific journals to read things like, "Scientists think...perhaps...it is thought...maybe", and then have erroneous, unscientific conclusions pawned off as being conclusive. Is that ethical? The only thing conclusive is the written Word of God, who told us how he did the creating. Supplanters who attempt to replace God really do not know what happened in the distant past. An article about the development of instinct is

People who want us to believe in fish-to-firefighter evolution have been doing some finagling about the development of gills and, ultimately, where we came from. One indicator that bad science is being presented is when the question is begged. In this case, the hoary canard, "Ontology recapitulates phylogeny" was presumed. Also, evolution is used to support abortion, since the unborn child supposedly goes through a fish stage with "gill slits". Discus fish image credit: Pixabay / Bergadder A study of fish embryos and gill development assembled some good data. Unfortunately, the study was used to prop up evolution. The reasoning was faulty, beginning with the presupposition of Darwinism. They assume that embryos show their evolutionary stages, and ignore the facts that superficial resemblances to gill slits in creatures are imaginary. Those things that appear  to be gill slits are actually an important part of development. Can a landmark discovery about how

Every once in a while, an unbelievable story told around a campfire or in a tavern is based in reality:   I'm tellin' ya, we was sleepin' below deck in the boat, see. Woke up the next mornin', and breakfast delivered itself right smack on the deck. It was a squid. Musta flew up there! Don't be too hasty to dismiss the seafarer's experience: squid do fly. They're not just jumping (breaching) like "devil rays" , or doing some impressive gliding like flying fish . While it's not as free and easy as a bird, some species of squid take to the air in their version of powered flight. Specifically, it's jet-propelled flight, and it's not just a hop, either. Made at Atom Smasher I reckon that there's a heap more to learn on Earth, and our money could be better spent here instead of searching for space aliens , but I digress. This is clear evidence of creation, since all of the pieces had to be in place and functioning at the s