Search This Blog

Sunday, July 29, 2018

A Numerical Model for Genesis Flood Processes

Despite false statements spread by their opponents, creationary scientists do research, publish in journals, and present models like their secular counterparts. Sometimes these are turned down by other scientists, and sometimes the scientists realize that something is amiss. Such is the case with this model for the Genesis Flood by Dr. John Baumgardner. Anti-creationists get on the prod when confronted with evidence and coherent models for the Genesis Flood, because that global event refutes many uniformitarian views and is strong evidence for a young earth.

A technical paper presented in 2016 with a model for the processes of the Genesis Flood was revised with better data.
Credit: RGBStock / Dez Pain
Dr. Baumgardner had a "waitaminnit" moment when he realized that certain aspects of the previous version of his model, published in February 2016, did not work. There was a numerical issue that negated the paper he presented, so he commenced to doing some revision, and has presented this improved version. Note that it's rather technical, as you'll realize from the abstract, and people with a strong background in geology are more likely to fully appreciate it.
This paper describes a numerical model for investigating the large-scale erosion, transport, and sedimentation processes associated with the Genesis Flood. The model assumes that the dominant means for sediment transport during the Flood was by rapidly flowing turbulent water. Water motion is driven by large-amplitude tsunamis that are generated along subduction zone segments as the subducting plate and overriding plate, in a cyclic manner, lock and then suddenly release and slip rapidly past one another. While the two adjacent plates are locked, the sea bottom is dragged downward by the steadily sinking lithospheric slab beneath. When the plates unlock, the sea bottom rapidly rebounds, generating a large-amplitude tsunami. Theory for open-channel turbulent flow is applied to model the suspension, transport, and deposition of sediment. Cavitation is assumed to be the dominant erosional mechanism responsible for degradation of bedrock as well as for erosion of already deposited sediment. The model treats the water on the surface of the rotating earth in terms of a single vertical layer but with variable bottom height. Illustrative calculations show that with plausible parameter choices average erosion and sedimentation rates on the order of 9 m/day (0.38 m/hr) occur, sufficient within a 150-day interval during the Flood to account for some 70% of the Phanerozoic sediments that blanket the earth’s continental surfaces today.
If you're ready to proceed, get comfortable because this is neither quick nor easy, and click on "Numerical Modeling of the Large-Scale Erosion, Sediment Transport, and Deposition Processes of the Genesis Flood".

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!


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".