Search This Blog

Sunday, July 22, 2018

The Non-Evolution of Religion

Every once in a while, atheists bring up their faith-based assertion that children are born atheist, or that atheism is the "default" position for infants. This claim is irrational as well as unscientific, although there is evidence that the opposite is true. However, some atheist scholars did not get the "born atheist" memo, and claim that "religion" has evolved. In this worldview, people have religious outlooks because they are born that way.


Some atheists believe that religion evolved, which gives them a problem with morality and ethics.
Credit: Pixabay / Stanislav Velek
Evolutionary psychologist Steven Pinker has some interesting views on how and why we have religion. The problem he faces, and others who share such thinking, involves ethics, which atheists say is not real. Well, if something is not empirically testable, does it exist? If the answer is no, congratulations, you just sent logic, love, numbers, compassion, morality, ethics, and a host of other things into the trash can!


via GIPHY

Atheism is inconsistent and irrational, full of self-refutations and arbitrary assertions. Pinker realizes that he has a problem, but he is hoping that the problem with ethics in science will be solved eventually. That is not science, old son, it is blind faith in the religion of atheism. Atheists suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18-23). In reality, we were created in God's image. This includes the knowledge that he exists, and we need to repent and learn our responsibility to him
Religious belief has had a pervasive presence among the human population throughout time and across cultures. Darwinists are consequently faced with the unavoidable question of the origin of religion. If life spontaneously generated and progressively evolved by means of mutation and natural selection, then religion must be a product of evolution as well.
Why has the vast majority of people who have ever lived endorsed the existence of supernatural entities? A common explanation among evolutionary psychologists is that cognitive mechanisms have evolved which supposedly make our “species” vulnerable to religious belief. Psychiatrist Andy Thomson, a trustee of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science and author of the book Why We Believe in Gods, claims that experts in his field are on the threshold of a comprehensive cognitive neuroscience of religion which deepens the conflict between science and religion. Creationists should not feel threatened by such an assertion, however.
To read the rest, click on "Did religion evolve? — "Steven Pinker’s evolutionary psychology fallacies". For another interesting study, see "Can Religion Be Modeled on Computers?"

Sunday, July 15, 2018

Materialists are not the Fittest to Survive

One mantra chanted by riders for the Darwin brand is "Survival of the fittest". Fitness seems to be determined by survival, and I heard someone say that it is nonsensical: "Survival of the survivors". When it comes to humanity, "fitness" is arbitrary, based on materialistic evolutionary presuppositions. The "science" of eugenics is one example of atheists and evolutionists utilizing Darwinism to the fitness of other people. However, there is another contrast that needs to be made.

In the "survival of the fittest" view, materialists are not the fittest. Guess who has better ethics and is more fit?
Credit: Unsplash / Aaron Burden
Evolutionary scientists have resorted to dishonesty in areas like origin of life studies and peer review. Civilized folks tend to think of that as being immoral, and detrimental to not only science, but society itself. But hey, they are only living up to their worldviews. However, many of us hold to a higher standard with a solid foundation for morality. 

When a science writer referred to certain animals as "freaks of evolution", she was being inconsistent with her own paradigm. After all, evolution does what it does, and nobody has any business complaining. (Creationists believe that critters are the way they are because they were designed for certain purposes, so let's find out more about them.) However, she also said in typical leftist fashion some blatant untruths about evangelical Christians, and called us the freaks of evolution. (If you study on it, dishonesty and ridicule are a frequent part of persecution.) Question-begging epithet noted. See "Freaks of Evolution Exposed" for more.

Darwinism dehumanizes people, reducing us to the products of time, chance, random processes, and so on. Studies on "religion" and "religious people" have provided some interesting results, but they are flawed. Atheists claim that they hate religion, and generalize about all religions, but conveniently neglect that fact that atheism is a religion as well. It would be nice to know which religions researchers are discussing. Church-goers are have fewer mental health issues and less likely to use recreational drugs. Seems like the evidence is showing that these people are more fit to survive and benefit society than secularists. To read about this, click on "Religious People Have Better Fitness".

Secular scientists are preoccupied with proving evolution and denying the Creator, so they are unlikely to realize that he makes the rules, even though scientific malpractice is consistent with their paradigm. When it comes to education, scientists should pay attention to how "religious" students are more academically successful. Not the nominal or cultural Christians, but those who live the life. Secularists play up the community aspects and neglect the spiritual, however, since they have their a priori commitment to naturalism. Younger people today, those indoctrinated in atheism and leftist education, are more sexually promiscuous than other folks. Is that really such a mystery? One other point. 


Despite the frequent, refuted lie that atheists tell, that "atheism is the default position at birth" or "born atheist", and believing that natural selection and survival of the fittest is the source of morality, children are showing virtue and cooperation. Darwin had it wrong again. To read more, click on "When Learning, Don’t Neglect the Religion".


Sunday, July 08, 2018

Evolutionary Thinking Muddles Turtle Sex Selection Study

Reptiles generally lay their eggs in the sand, but people have been curious as to why the hatchlings are usually of the same sex. (That would make things a mite difficult when they decide to make little turtles.) They do find each other eventually. It has been determined that temperature and humidity play a big part in whether or not they get Josephs or Josephines.

Turtle research shows sex selection based on eggs sensing temperatures hindered by evolutionary thinking.
Red-eared slider turtle image credit: NASA / Johnson Space Center Public Affairs Office
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Later, it was learned that the sex has something to do with temperature and humidity — the eggs actually sense conditions. Researchers conducted some mighty fine research all the way down to studying genes, but it was tainted by evolutionary thinking. Instead of using a design framework (things were created to do what they do for a reason), researches invoked evolutionary mysticism, such as non-science like "selective pressures". They have yet to determine why only some reptiles have this temperature-sensing egg thing happening. Scientific evidence shows that mechanisms are internal, as programmed by the Master Engineer, and not external, as envisioned by those who ride for the Darwin brand.
Remarkably, when a number of reptilian mothers (including lizards, snakes, turtles, and alligators) bury eggs in warm, incubating sand, all the eggs may produce offspring of the same gender. Females develop at one temperature and humidity, males at another, and a ratio of both sexes at temperatures and humidity levels in between. Sophisticated research is finding some key molecular links between ambient temperature and reptile sex expression. However, if researchers had not initially rejected an engineering-based framework and then embraced evolutionary notions, they may have found research clues that would save years of time.
To finish reading, click on "Turtle Eggs Sense Temperature Changes".


Sunday, July 01, 2018

Communication and Creation

Seems that the Master Engineer built the desire to communicate in many living things. While critters and even trees have some form of communication, one of the things that sets us apart from other living things in creation is language. Sure, apes can mimic and learn a few things, but they do not have a structured language, whether in the wild or after training by humans. That makes sense because languages did not evolve, despite the campfire stories of Darwinists.

Language was given to us by the Master Engineer.
Credit: Pixabay / PublicDomainPictures
We have a desire to share our thoughts, make our needs known, and so forth. It may take verbal forms, but it is done through printed languages (like this), computer languages, and others. Cultures and subcultures develop their own variations on languages that are supposed to be common. The language allegedly spoken in the formerly Great Britain is English, as it is in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and other places. But there are difficulties in conversation because of dialects, slang, and that kind of thing. Even in these here United States, you could commence to conversatin' with a yokel from another area when y'all are in New York, and have some difficulties. 

Communication is often expressed through gestures as well, such as reaching for something or pointing to your mouth if you're hungry. There are many kinds of sign languages incorporating gestures and such that are useful to deaf folks so they can communicate as well. It's mighty handy (and common) for a deaf person to have a communicator present. Although the American version of sign language is popular, it is by no means universal.

A group of deaf children came together in Nicaragua. Although they had their own personal gestures of sorts, there was no standard sign language for them. They developed a language among themselves. This is an example of what the Bible teaches, that Adam and Eve were created as intelligent beings with the capacity for language. This ability has been passed along.
Many experts, unwilling to contemplate the existence of a creator, have sought to explain the development and use of language by naturalistic means. So they tell us that as man evolved he developed a vocal tract of the right shape to produce various speech sounds, and that as his brain became bigger he developed the ability to control and use his vocal tract for communication. Initially, we are told, he used grunts and hoots to express himself, and over a long period he refined these into what we today call spoken language.
The famous 20th century linguist Noam Chomsky (not a creationist) tried to find an explanation for language. He concluded, taking a stand against many of his contemporaries, that human language ability is innate. Today we have more evidence to back up this claim.
To read the entire article, click on "Born to communicate".

Sunday, June 24, 2018

Some Rebels Dare to Doubt Darwin

Some scientists are raising doubts about evolution, and secularists are getting irritated.

The hands at the Darwin Ranch have been finding it more difficult of late to ride herd on some science-minded folks who want to think for themselves. Sure, they expect renegades from the biblical creation science camp, but they don't cotton to having their own kind wandering off. 



Some evolutionists do become creationists when they lose their shackles by God's grace. That's a mite alarming to the rest of the Darwin ranch.

Don't disunderstand me, it's not like scientists are publishing "Hey, evolution is false!" material. But some are daring to doubt Darwinian dogma, as well as bad climate change science. One study inadvertently agrees with biblical creationists that the majority of species in existence today haven't been around as long as evolutionists want to believe. (When Ken Ham posted on this, a two-bit tinhorn railed as if Ham blatantly misrepresented the facts, and frantically searched for succor. Some Darwinoids seem to think that if they can find the slightest bit of contradiction to information they dislike, it is magically refuted.) If you want to see Ham's post, it has an embedded bit of video where Dr. Georgia Purdom and others discuss this news. It's refreshing when evolutionists are bluntly honest about the lack of evidence for their belief system.

At the other end, loyal disciples of evolution are still claiming that "EvolutionDidIt", but ignoring important information and conveniently neglecting to offer plausible models. Blind cavefish evolved, the faith demands it. Another study has people admitting that evolution has flaws, but still cling to the "half right" part. A new guide to the sacred text, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (which has been revised and abandoned for the most part) is being released. It rehashes discredited "science" from classic Darwinism, blessed be!

To read about the aforementioned and more, click on "Is It Becoming Safer to Doubt Darwin?"

Sunday, June 17, 2018

How Cheetahs Prosper

A few minutes ago, I was playing with Basement Cat. She wanted to play Swatties, with some biting thrown in. When I hold my hand up just right in a position I call The Claw, she is compelled to strike. I can see her watching, her pupils dilate a split second before she lunges, and there is not time for me to pull away first. I tell her she's a fast pussycat; I've always admired the feline machine.

The design of cheetahs refutes Darwinism, and affirms special creation.
Original image credit: Freeimages / chadmula
Basement Cat's distant cousin is way over yonder in the Serengeti region of Africa. The cheetah is the fastest runner on Earth, and even a cursory examination reveals that this critter was built for speed. 



Cheetahs must use their speed, since they are not all that powerful at keeping their kills. No bits and pieces of Darwinian evolution here, Hoss. Everything in place at the same time, or nothing works or makes sense. 
Cheetahs are the fastest land animals alive; everyone knows that. Everyone also knows why they run so fast—to catch their dinner. But before the Fall, there were no carnivores, so why would God design cheetahs for speed?

The simple answer is, all of today’s cats descended from the two members of the cat kind that were on the Ark. The cheetah’s phenomenal speed is one example of the variety God placed within cats to meet new challenges in a fallen world.
To read the rest or download the audio version with my favorite reader, click on "Speedsters of the Serengeti". 



Sunday, June 10, 2018

Jumbled Fossils Support Genesis Flood

Defenders of deep time and uniformitarianism (present processes are the key to the past) shout, "Katie, bar the door!" when given contrary information, and commence to conjure up rescuing devices to protect their paradigm. Fact is, if observed geological data are plugged into a Genesis Flood model, the explanation is far more reasonable than uniformitarian assumptions yield. Some sidewinders give Flood evidence a hand-wave, even calling it "fiction". Darwin needs deep time and denial of reality for evolution, and secular geologists are more than happy to help them avoid the truth of recent creation.

Let's take a look at one of the basic arguments for the Genesis Flood that many biblical creationists use, but Darwin's rancorous disciples refuse to examine. The standard story is that fossils are formed when something dies, sinks to the bottom of a lake, river, ocean, or whatever, gets buried, then millions of Darwin years later, a fossil is formed. This not only defies basic knowledge of nature (scavengers and decay happen to dead things), but leaves out the fundamental principle of rapid burial. It also ignores the fact that many fossils show that creatures were buried alive. For fossilization to occur, conditions are far more important than time.


Credit: Pixabay / Efraimstochter
If you ever find yourself down near Western Cape, South Africa way, you might want to saddle up your beast of burden and head on over to a massive fossil graveyard. There is a huge jumble of various kinds of plants and animals. Evolutionists tell an implausible story about a local river flood, but it must have been a very impressive, non-local flood. Furthermore, these mixes of fossils are found all over the world. If you study on it, you'll see that the fossil evidence indicates a global flood, such as is described in Genesis. Although Darwin's Flying Monkeys© foolishly deny it, there is abundant evidence for the Flood.
This jumble of death represents only a portion of the original find. Many tonnes were ground into fertilizers rich in phosphate from as early as 1943, long before scientists became involved and the fossil-find carefully preserved.

The evolutionary explanation for the mayhem under and around our feet is that 5 million years ago a precursor of the present Berg River flooded and the fossils are remnants of animals that were washed into the area. Interestingly, the information material refers to a catastrophic flood as well as the ocean levels being about 30 m (98 ft) higher than today — this is to account for the marine fossil/phosphate deposits.

The sheer numbers of creatures that died raises the question: what kind of river was this? Today, when a river floods, most, if not all, of the mammals quickly move away. What then of the scores of species of flying birds ranging from quails to albatrosses that were unable to simply lift their wings and fly away?
To read the entire article, click on "‘Animal salad’ points to catastrophic demise".