Piltdown Superman

There are two very similar mollusks, the chambered nautilus and the argonaut (which is often called the "paper nautilus" because of the female's paper-thin eggcase). In ancient Greek legends, Jason took fifty men to find the golden fleece on a ship called the Argo , so they were argonauts. This relative of the octopus was thought to sail in its own way. See how that works? People thought they stole the shells, the wicked little pirates, but no, they own the shells. Argonauta argo , Comingio Merculiano, 1896 People have been baffled by the argonaut for a long time, but gradually, many of its secrets have been revealed. It uses a form of jet propulsion, and actively scoops air to control buoyancy. I should have said she , because only the females have the shells. Males were unknown until the 19th century, and being exceptionally small is a contributing factor to their lack of discovery. Reproduction is something that is quite unique. The argonaut is yet another exampl

According to proponents of vertical (universal common ancestor) evolution, the simplest life forms are in the oldest rock layers, and then things became more advanced. This story is built on assumptions, and paleontologists are constantly finding fossils in the wrong order, and critters that "astonish" them. Happens a lot, really. Credit: Clker clip art Papa Darwin called things that appeared to be extinct but are doing right well in the here and now " living fossils ". Seems like we have something that may qualify. A beetle that is 300 million Darwin years old shows all sorts of features that its fully modern counterparts exhibit. So, evolutionists are amazed. They wouldn't be having these problems if they realized that God's Word is true, evolution is false, and the world was created recently. Fossils like this happened quickly in the Genesis Flood, not gradually over zillions of years. Then all the evidence would line up nicely for them. Unfortuna

Looks like the hands at the Darwin Ranch have been overworked, moonlighting at the new propaganda mill over near Fort Defiance. I say that because they seem to have been gnawing on a mess of peyote buttons again. And I say that  because of the outlandish "research" being conducted using the ever-present circular reasoning: to prove evolution, you assume it's true. Then they mix in some more strange assumptions and bad logic. Ain't working, Pilgrim. Credit: Pixabay / 1447441 Just a moment for a side note. Proponents of molecules-to-monkey evolution get on the prod when someone says that they believe we evolved from apes. To get into semantics, they believe we evolved from a common ancestor, the lineages for apes and humans having diverged way back when. Then they prop up the idol of failed transitional form Lucy , an  Australopithecus afarensis (Latin for "Southern ape from Afar", because scientists like dead languages out of tradition). Proposed missi

As carbon is to living things, silicon is to rocks. Silicate minerals comprise most of the rocks on Earth, and silicon is extremely compliant. Carbon wanted to have a party and invited other elements. The noble gasses remained aloof, what with being noble and all. The fun started when silicon showed up, since it mixes well with a passel of other minerals. The garnet gemstone has silica in its composition. Credit: Morguefile / arien Silicon is plentiful, and its ability to combine with other elements gives us a tremendous variety of shapes and colors in rocks. More than that, our Creator engineered silicon so we could use it in many applications and improve our earthly lives. Not just function, but our viewing pleasure. So why do minerals have so many different shapes and colors? The answer tells us a lot about God’s love and care for us. He created a small set of basic building blocks, out of which the earth could provide the amazing variety of minerals we need to build places

Or, "How Do I Refute Thee? Let Me Count the Ways..."  by Cowboy Bob Sorensen As we have seen numerous time on this site alone, anti-creationists want to debunk what we have to say. These self-appointed social justice warriors go on search-and-destroy missions, attacking creationary sites in their efforts to protect "science". In reality, they are attempting to protect evolutionism from rational scrutiny. We get a boatload of them at The Question Evolution Project . What follows involves my own observations as well as material that I recommend for your edification. Credit: Freeimages / gestoerte Darwin's Crusaders Science thrives on information and discussion, but anti-creationists not only oppose free speech, but free thought. Darwinism must  be guarded, lest people see it for what it really is. Many of these folks fancy themselves as crusaders for science, falsely  calling those who disagree with evolution "liars" , egos telling them t

During a few hours of downtime, the hands at the Darwin Ranch were working with their Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Rings© (obtained by sending in UPC codes from Uncle Nabal's Primordial Soup© cans). They were trying to determine if they had evidence — real  evidence — for the origin of the universe. They used a word they learned down Mexico way:  nada.  Or, zilch. Nil. So, they did what they saw in a cartoon and invoked a miracle for the origin of the solar system. Credit: NASA (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Atheists do believe in miracles , secular cosmologists and cosmogonists ignore inconvenient scientific truths to invoke their  miracles. No, they do not give credit to the Creator. Instead, they give their puny gods of evolution and nature a kind of intelligence that makes things happen. Those owlhoots have an amazing amount of blind faith in nothing, don't they? Skipping over a difficulty because it can’t be solved scientifically: that

So, when rock layers that have assigned ages are separated by non-depositional or erosional surface, that surface is called an unconformity.  There are four of them, with words that are unlikely to be found in casual conversation: nonconformity, angular unconformity, disconformity, and paraconformity. The last is the most troubling for uniformitarian geologists. Angular conformity near Catskill, NY, about half an hour north of me ( street view , I drove right by this) Credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Michael C. Rygel ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) Since geological activity happened in the past, it is history, and not strictly science, so there cannot be eyewitnesses. Scientists have speculations, reasoning, models, and so forth based on the presumption of an old earth. Errors are made, and some facts are neglected. What we really  have is geology that is best explained by the rapidly-flowing water and catastrophic tectonics of the Genesis Flood. What are unconformities and what do they mean to

According to Big Bang mythology, the numbering of "population" stars is backward. Population III stars are presumed to be the oldest, although none have been discovered. Population II stars are somewhat younger, and were brought into being by population II stars. These have more metals. (In astronomical terms, "metal" is defined as elements heavier than helium. Yeah, makes sense to me, too.) So, population I stars are the ones with even more metals, and are youngest. Credit:  Digitized Sky Survey (DSS) , STScI/AURA, Palomar/Caltech, and UKSTU/AAO Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents Some factors in determining the ages of stars is first by presuming the Big Bang and stellar evolution in the first place, rejecting special creation, measuring brightness and metal content, and so forth. There's a star with the romantic name of HD 140283. (I'm going to write a song, "Kiss Me when HD 140283 Rises, Oh My Darling".) Using secular models

Never underestimate the power of water — especially when it is moving. People get hurt or killed when they think they can drive or walk through swiftly-moving flood waters, and storms on the ocean shore can fling huge boulders. Waterjets have been developed to direct the stuff at high velocity and cut through hard objects with precision. Another way that water can pack a punch is through cavitation. Credit: Pixabay /  Tobias Dahlberg Water commences a-churning from pumps, dams, propellers, and other sources. Bubbles are formed. Under the right conditions, they implode with sound and fury, signifying destruction. When your outboard motor's propeller has been pitted and possibly damaged, cavitation has happened. Tiny bubbles, but the energy in them is tremendous, and is also very hot. Interestingly, our Creator equipped a kind of shrimp with the ability to hunt by cavitation ! On a large scale, dams have been dramatically damaged by cavitation, and this kind of power fits in m

Some rather deep articles have been linked from here regarding engineering causality as a response to Darwinism . The short form is that Darwin and most of his followers believe that external forces are responsible for changes, and they extrapolate horizontal changes into vertical evolution — of which there is no evidence. The answer for Darwinism's silly idea is that organisms were designed by the Master Engineer. It is interesting that many human inventions and structures reflect designs in living organisms. Interior of Salisbury Cathedral , William Turner, 1805 Architects who engineered cathedrals built them to endure, and many have lasted many centuries. Some of the support structures are found in the skeletons of animals. Only took humans a few thousand years to catch on to that aspect of our Creator's design. For that matter, the box turtle's shell exhibits architectural engineering as well! Interestingly, some evolutionists give credit to nature  (which is the

Biblical creationists have pointed out for a long time that evolution is not just a campfire discussion topic for academics and scientists. It is far more than that, since it is a worldview that not only covers origins, but meaning, purpose, the future, and more. Materialists who control the science industry use atheism and evolution to affect Western society. Credit: Pixabay / Herbert Aust The biblical creationists present a message of hope: We are created in God's image There is a purpose in life Our Creator has redeemed his people through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ There is a final Judgment where people are recompensed according to their deeds, evil receives eternal punishment and God's adopted children are rewarded.  Darwin's Flying Monkeys© on the internet want to destroy this, offering: We are the products of time, chance, and random processes There is no purpose in life There is no ultimate justice, we're just worm food w

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen "I spy with my little eye...something beginning with F." "Fossil!" "Right. How did you guess so fast?" "Because we're in the fossil section of the natural history museum, doofus. So which fossil?" "That one — hey, it's gone! Those people are taking it away!" "Bad luck, pal." Hidden in the Museum It is a fact that museums have much more in their collections than are visible to the public. This applies to archaeology, religious art, erotica, paleontology, and more [ 1 ], [ 2 ], [ 3 ], [ 4 ], [ 5 ], [ 6 ], [ 7 ], [ 8 ]. They are so secret, we can read about them on the web. Is there a conspiracy  here yet? Actually, some artifacts and such are hidden away for the safety of the items, additional research is needed, offensive nature of ancient art, to simply rotate the stock because they have so much to exhibit, and other reasons. In addition, some people who do not know how to hand

There's nothing cowboys like more than riding into town for supplies and slipping off to the library to do some reading on abiogenesis. Good times, good times... Just kidding, science fiction is low on their list of priorities. Even so, some folks want to read secular materials to get a handle on how Darwinists are thinking, and how they try to deny the Creator. Credit: Pixabay / StockSnap First off, to tackle that kind of thing, it helps to have a strong background in science. Second (and this is the kind of thing creationists discuss frequently), a reader needs to understand the presuppositions of materialists and the assumptions upon which they base their research and conclusions. Third (one of my favorites), keep an eye out for bad logic — especially circular reasoning and affirming the consequent . Fourth, a good knowledge of creationary material is very important, since creationists are not likely to twist science to advance secular paradigms. There are some other thi

One of the popular speculations about the origin of Earth's moon is that a celestial body was unable to stay in its traffic lane, lost control, and smacked into Earth way back when. This would explain the absence of lunar water to the satisfaction of naturalists who deny the truth of recent creation. The Harvest Moon , Samuel Palmer, 1833 Even a cursory consideration of this idea shows that it is ridiculous. After all, the moon is the perfect size to obscure the sun during a total eclipse, and the moon is necessary for keeping life on Earth working efficiently. It has that almost-circular orbit and all. Rocks that Apollo astronauts brought back were tested in 2008 and found to have water, but that didn't seem to make an impression. Now that the moon can be studied from a distance, scientists learn that there is indeed water in the rocks. But it shouldn't be there according to proponents of the impact hypothesis. New clues confirm that the moon looks created. In

Advocates of deep time and dust-to-dinosaur evolution presuppose that dinosaurs died off 65 million Darwin years ago, and biblical creationists presuppose that Earth is much, much younger. With incontrovertible evidence of soft tissues in dinosaur bones, evolutionists had to circle the wagons and open fire on facts (and people presenting those facts) that threaten their belief systems. Credit: Freeimages / jim daly Some people tried to say that there were errors in lab testing, and Darwinoids on the web called the creationists who knew more about science than they did "liars". Other folks tried to get dismissive about this massive problem for deep time and evolution, hoping that their bad news would go away and things would be peachy keen if they pulled the covers over their heads and got a good night's sleep. Didn't happen. People at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (who are also fond of advancing the bad science promoting evolutionism) c

Everybody knows that water has no taste, right? That's a good thing when riding the long, hot trail and you need a good draw from your canteen that doesn't taste fruity or bitter. Well, I don't want flavor when I'm all hottened up. Don't be so sure there's no taste. A study indicates that mice are able to taste — more likely, maybe distinguish or discern that they are actually drinking water. Mice, critters, and people are designed to have many things in common, so it's likely that we can "taste" water as well. Credit: Pixabay / Capri23auto The Big Box Chain Store sells its own brand of water, and I think it tastes mighty find. But on the label, it lists the ingredients as purified water (as I wanted), some chemicals, and minerals to enhance flavor. Strikes me as odd that they're enhancing something that has no flavor, but that's just marketing. People have subjected brands of bottled water to taste tests as well. My speculation is t

Supporters of universal common ancestor evolution claim that the fossil record contains some of the strongest evidence for their belief system. Evolution requires huge amounts of time so things can go about the business of changing into other things, so there should be a multitude of transitional forms. Ain't happening, Zeke.  " But we've got excuses because you're wrong becaus e evolution !" The hands at the Darwin Ranch have worked overtime down at the propaganda mill to cover the fact that there are no undisputed transitional forms. Sure, they cite propaganda mills like Wikipedia, propaganda.talk.origins, and so forth that state what they want to believe, but those shnooks are at odds with the experts. I'd like to see trilobites do a coelacanth trick and suddenly get discovered alive Credit: Freeimages / Dave Dyet Doesn't a proper scientific attitude require evidence before a hypothesis is formed? Darwin admitted in Origin of Species, "