Search This Blog

Sunday, December 29, 2019

Neanderthal Extinction Ideas Raise Questions

In bygone days, Neanderthals were considered to be an evolutionary link to modern humans. That nonsense has been fully discredited, evolutionists acknowledge that Neanderthals were fully human. By the way, the -th at the end is pronounced without the "h" sound, Neandertall is more correct. (Well, they were not all that tall, but never mind about that now.) So how did they become extinct?

Evolutionists wonder how they became extinct, yet their speculations and assumed timeline makes things worse for them.
Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Rawansari at English Wikipedia (CC by-SA 3.0)
Nobody knows why they went extinct. Maybe it was global warming. (This child wonders if they were assimilated instead of extinct.) Those folks traveled a great deal, and they were generous in sharing their DNA with other people groups — many people today have Neanderthal DNA and some of their features. (Another bit of wondering on my part: although the Neanderthal remains were first discovered in the Neander Valley. Was that their home base or just one of the stops on their journeys?) Speculations about their disappearance are based on evolutionary presuppositions. Things make far more sense using the biblical timeline and factoring in recent creation, the migration after the Genesis Flood, and the dispersion at Babel.
How did Neanderthals go extinct? Four researchers from the Netherlands recently published the results of their computer-modeled human populations in the journal PLOS ONE. The findings show that small Neanderthal population sizes would have caused them to become extinct in just 10,000 years. How did Neanderthals survive the 400,000 years they were supposedly on Earth?
Neanderthals were real people. Hundreds of recovered bones show big brow ridges, sloping foreheads, and thick upper arms. They buried their dead, made music, jewelry, used makeup, and built tools for hunting and even surgery.
To finish reading, meander on over to "Neanderthal Extinction Dilemma".

Sunday, December 22, 2019

Evolution, Atheism, and Redefining Terms

When having discussions, it is very important to be certain that people are in agreement about how terms are defined. It can even be accomplished by stating which definition will be used. Otherwise, people can end up jawing about a whole lot of nothing and "talking past" one another.

Once again we see that agreeing on the definitions of terms is important. Beware of false definitions and redefinitions by atheists and evolutionists.
Credit: Pixabay / Andrew Martin
There are many terms that can cause confusion in discussions about origins. It is extremely important that creationists know their own material, and to keep Darwin's disciples from pulling the ol' bait 'n' switch. That is, equivocating terms, such as discussing natural selection and variations, then they are asserting evolution occurred. Another trick from atheists is to insist on the redefinition of atheism to mean "lack of belief in God or gods", an intellectually and morally dishonest trick that works against them anyway. (I sincerely believe that they want to put us on the defensive, often through efforts at intimidation.) Keep atheists and evolutionists on the subject and don't change horses — I mean, definitions — on the way.
When wading into the waters of apologetics and the origins debate, it usually doesn’t take long before we hit problems defining terms. Many words commonly used in these debates have large ranges of meaning that often get conflated and confused with each other. If we are to have a meaningful dialogue, we must be careful to define our terms carefully so that everyone understands each other.
L.K. from the United States wrote:
I’d prefer a response, or whether it be to still contact me in this email so I have a larger character limit to choose from, or to direct me to a better area, as your Q&A section wasn’t that helpful.
But I’d like to let you know two simple things.
Atheism is not a religion, it is a word, it has one definition, regardless of how people use it, it will always mean what its defined as, a lack in belief of god, and just because people lack a belief in god does not mean a god doesn’t exist, nor that it DOES, just because something doesn’t exist mean it does, but I’ll get into that later.
And evolution, evolution simply means CHANGE OVER TIME, regardless of how you think it is, the animal doesn’t have a genetic coding for different types of beaks (well, in a birds case, id be surprised if a dog had a beak) for many types of beaks, it has one “Switch”, which tells the beak when to grow, and when to stop, and multiple other “Switches” telling the beak how to form, they don’t have a pelican beak in one switch, and a finch beak in the other.
Also, natural selection is the process evolution takes, saying natural selection is a thing, but evolution isn’t is just plain stupid.
Mutations are evolution in a less controlled sense, but most times if the mutation is detrimental it will not be passed on.
Just, this entire website is full of unscientific lies meant to spread christianity, from making your own definitions to words to using arguments already disproven.
CMI’s Shaun Doyle responds:
Shaun had an excellent response. To read it, click on "Defining terms carefully — Why we need clarity when we debate evolution".

Sunday, December 15, 2019

Social Darwinism and Racism in Korea

Despite attempts at redefining the word racism by American social "justice" leftists, the problem has existed for millennia among assorted population groups. The article linked below focuses on Pan-Asian countries, especially Korea. Existing problems of Asian-against-Asian racism were greatly exacerbated by social Darwinism.

Racism has existed for millennia. The linked article focuses on how racism was affected by social Darwinism in Korea and surrounding areas.
Credit: NOAA NESDIS (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Once Darwinism was introduced into Asia, the intellectual elite embraced the concept and each group felt superior to the others. (It is ironic that many Pan-Asians felt superior to the "white race", but drew the principles from white people.) Not all were in agreement on evolutionary concepts, but the intellectuals wanted "backward" Korea to leave behind the Confucian principles that they had embraced for so many years. These Darwinism concepts were manifest in several wars, especially in the 20th century. Biblical creationists point out that there are no races, but there are ethnic groups. All are humans descended from the same created man and woman.
A review of the effect of rejecting the traditional Confucian belief structure in Korea by certain social groups, and the acceptance of Darwinism, was completed. The process of the acceptance of Darwinism by specific Korean academics, writers, and others and its horrendous effects in terms of lives lost was documented.
To read the rest of this extremely interesting analysis of history, click on "Korea, Darwinism, Racism, and War".

Sunday, December 08, 2019

False Claims of Beetle Evolution

Beetles. There are quite a few types. To use the expensive scientific term, bunches of them. Some folks get a mite creeped out by the things, but if you can don't let the subject bug you, it can be quite interesting. You see varieties of beetles in many places, even where they are not wanted. Evolutionists make false claims about their so-called evolution.

There are many varieties of beetles in the world. Evolutionists have to come up with explanations for their diversity without using concepts creationists accept as well. They fail.
Credit: RGBStock / K Rayker
Creationists have no problems with speciation and adaptation; we use the concepts frequently to help explain the Creator's plan for diversity. Proponents of universal common ancestor evolution, to be consistent with their paradigm, need to come up with valid examples of random processes so they can deny the work of the Creator of everything. Instead, they show variations and natural selection and falsely claim that they are examples of evolution.
Two recent papers attempt to account for the evolution of beetle diversity. Beetles (order Coleoptera, or “sheath-wing”) are considered by Darwinists to be one of the best examples of “adaptive radiation” and “evolutionary diversification” after their appearance in the Carboniferous (assuming the Darwin Years timeline). But is evolution the best explanation? After all, creationists allow for a great deal of “horizontal” diversification within genera and families, through sharing of pre-existing genetic information.  . . .  Can they do it without reference to miracles of emergence: i.e., the Stuff Happens Law?
To read the whole article, click on "Beetle Diversity Without Evolution".

Sunday, December 01, 2019

Common Features by Design

When discussing a problem with my mechanic friend, he said that my car needed a certain part replaced. He paused and said, "Unless you don't need a brand new part for your old car", and obtained the necessary part from a similar model that was going to be scrapped. Providentially, this part was just fine. 

Evolutionists use common features and homology to prove evolution. This circular reasoning is foolish and works the opposite way.
Credit: GoodFreePhotos / Huw Williams
Obviously, parts are not always interchangeable, even when manufactured at the same plant. It would be foolish to think that a car made in, say, Romania could have parts easily swapped out with an American-made car. Similarly, people cannot have organ transplants or blood transfusions on the simplistic basis that we're all humans. Tests have to be run and comparisons must made to prevent possibly disastrous results.

Even so, the concept of homology is based on amazingly bad circular reasoning and personal preferences; they are assuming that if certain parts are similar, they must have evolved from the same ancestor. Horse pucky! Also, "it evolved" is a non-explanation, buttercup. These owlhoots also exclude the more rational explanation that commonality indicates a common designer. If you study on it, why would the Master Engineer essentially reinvent the wheel for every living thing?
An evolutionist friend and I recently chatted about animals. He said it’s amazing how many different animals’ skeletons look so similar. Just stretch, shrink, and shape the bones of one creature to transform them into the skeletal arrangement of another. I recognized this as his way of expressing the keystone argument for evolution called homology. The conversation reminded me of two major flaws with this idea.
To read the rest, click on "Homology: Descent or Design?" You may also like to see a similar article starting at "Homology and Design Features".

Sunday, November 24, 2019

Dealing with Apparent Conflicts Between Geology and the Genesis Flood

Who are you going to believe, the Bible or your own lying eyes? It seems like a tough decision at times. The problem gets worse when people are uneducated about the sciences, the Bible, and creation science. Appearances can be deceiving, so we will take a look at how what we see in geology can appear problematic.

There are times when secular geology appears to be at variance with Flood geology. A proper understanding can help things fall into place.
Monument Valley, Arizona image credit: Freeimages / Enrico Nunziati
If you saddle up and ride to, say, Monument Valley and a creationist tells you about the Genesis Flood, you may want to ask, "How can that be?" And yet, in the middle of the desert we can see formations that are clearly the results of cataclysmic water rushing through. There are other areas of apparent conflict, but a proper understanding of Flood geology and errors inherent in the uniformitarian system can help things fall into place.
I had explained to the people who packed the auditorium in Bridgnorth, England, that the Bible records the true history of the universe. Thus, we should use the Bible as our starting point in science, especially sciences like geology that deal with Earth history.
‘I believe the Bible,’ my visitor said, ‘but how can we accept what it says when it contradicts scientific facts? It is clear from geology that the rocks did not all form in a worldwide Flood.’
‘What do you mean?’
‘I’m a lecturer in chemistry at university. My geological colleagues tell me that the area all around was once a desert. You can see the sand dunes in the cliffs. How could there have been a flood here when it was a huge desert?’
. . .
Anyone who takes the Bible seriously cannot escape the obvious—the Flood was global. My questioner now realized this and was concerned. How could there be a huge desert in England in the middle of a global flood?
You can read the rest by clicking on "Shifting sands — How do we handle conflicts between geology and the Bible?" For a related article, see "Have scientists proved that the earth is old?"

Sunday, November 17, 2019

Nerve Distribution by the Master Engineer

In our previous exciting episode, we learned that a newly-discovered organ works with cells to give the brain input on pressure and pain. Most of us know that we have assorted nerve endings that give us stimulation for both pleasure and pain. In a fraction of a second, we can know the burner on the stove is too hot and pull our hand away, or we know that something feels wonderful and hope for more. The nerves were designed by our Creator to have strategic placement.

We have nerves that are distributed throughout our skin. They are placed by the Master Engineer where they will be beneficial but not cause us sensory overload.
Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos / yodiyim
If you study on it a bit, you will see that we can have too much input, which would make it difficult to decide if something we touch (or is touching us) is should have our immediate attention or disregarded. Some areas that we frequently use or have special importance have more nerve endings than others. I reckon that God placed things in specific areas for certain purposes.
In addition to targeted nerve distribution, our brain has the remarkable ability to block overstimulation as well. This leads to some interesting effects. For example, can you feel your socks right now? Well, now that they’re on your mind, you probably can. But after you got dressed this morning, you likely forgot how your clothes feel. If you think about it, you can feel their texture, but you have to focus on it. Your brain filters out information it deems unimportant—like feeling your clothes—so you can focus on more important matters.
To read this short article from the get-go or download the MP3 by my favorite reader, click on "Nerve Distribution—A Sensitive Topic".

Sunday, November 10, 2019

Engineering the Pain-Sensing Organ

When people are asked to name organs in the human body, the obvious come to mind. Those include the heart, lungs, Wurlitzer, brain, and so on. There are actually quite a few organs.

"Is this going to be an organ recital, Cowboy Bob?"

Not hardly! While the skin itself is an organ, a new one has been discovered working with the skin.

A new pain-sensing organ that works with skin cells has been discovered. This illustrates design principles used by the Master Engineer.
Credit: Unsplash / Max Libertine
This new one works with cells that scientists had not realized had additional functions, and these respond to pain, pressure, and so forth. But they do not respond to all stimuli, which is an example of design through engineering principles. 

Let me attempt an analogy. You could have a motion-sensitive camera installed, but it would not be helpful if it was triggered by every leaf blowing by or a pet sauntering past it. This new organ responds only to specific stimuli, which is what human engineers and the Master Engineer would develop.
New human organs are rarely discovered, but that’s what several astute scientists recently accomplished at Sweden’s Karolinska Institutet’s Department of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics.1 The organ is a loosely connected mesh of cells in the skin’s nervous system that are sensitive to painful conditions straining the skin. This research also demonstrates fundamental design principles of biological sensors.
The press release showcasing the discovery states,
To find out what is happening, click on "Pain-Sensing Organ Shows Engineering Principles".

Sunday, November 03, 2019

Wood Chips Buried in the Ocean Floor

Secular geologists commenced to tap-dancing around some inconvenient evidence found in the ocean floor. Core samples revealed very small wood chips where there should not be found. These were quite a long way out to sea and deep in the floor. The discovery could affect climate models.

Secularists have some additional problems. Wood chips from Himalayan trees were found deep in the ocean floor, and climate change models are affected.
Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Missb7 (CC by-SA 4.0)
Climate change alarmists have not taken many factors into account in their models, and this carbon sequestration is likely to have an impact on the carbon cycle, and then climate models. In addition, secularists are puzzled because the wood is from Himalayan trees. Uniformitarian geologists envisioned several catastrophic events that raise more questions than they answer. The most logical explanation, which is consistent with many other findings that are anomalies for secularists, is the Genesis Flood.
Wood chips hundreds of feet deep in ocean sediments have been found. How did they get there?
Watch out for ocean trees.
Geology researchers from the University of Southern California (USC) went boring into ocean sediments near India, and were surprised to find direct evidence that “Catastrophic events carry forests of trees thousands of miles to a burial at sea.” They pulled up six cores of sediment from the ocean floor a thousand feet below the surface. The cores were extracted miles apart and over a thousand miles from shore.
To read the rest, click on "Wood Buried Under Ocean Floor Thousands of Miles at Sea".

Sunday, October 27, 2019

Straw Man Trek

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Star Trek:The Next Generation has given me some ideas (such as "Engineered Nanobot Evolution"), and I obtained another inspiration. This time, it is the 1989 episode, "Who Watches the Watchers". The Star Trek franchise is very strong on secular humanism (atheism) and evolution. While science fiction and fantasy require the viewers to suspend their disbelief, creationists have to work a mite harder to do this in order to enjoy something. "Watchers" quickly became annoying with its straw man presentations and moral posturing against religion, but I cowboyed up to see the conclusion.

An old episode of Star Trek TNG was heavy on the atheistic propaganda. We can see what really happened and the inconsistencies.
Credit: Pixabay / Gerhard Janson
Before riding the trail further, we need to remember that atheists and evolutionists presuppose religion itself evolved. They assume that primitive people had recently evolved from apelike ancestors, so when something happened in nature, these ancestors supposedly considered everything to be supernatural. Biblical creationists know that humans were created as intelligent beings from the get-go. I'll allow that there are some relatively modern instances of the cargo cult idea where modern humans and technology would be worshiped, but the extrapolation of that idea on a large scale over many thousands of years is quite a stretch.

Now let's continue.

The Federation has a Prime Directive which dictates they cannot interfere with a civilization's natural development. It was not only a law for the Federation, but also considered their moral duty and they followed it religiously. However, atheists believe that we are simply sacks of chemicals dancing to our electro-chemical impulses, so they cannot have a consistent standard of morality! To say that something is right or wrong, they are appealing to their arbitrary, man-made standards that are subject to change and are not ultimate, but are really standing on the biblical worldview.

Federation people had an outpost on the planet used for stealth observations. The duck blind effect went on the fritz and Lito, a resident of the planet, saw the outpost, so he went up the hill to check it out. There was an accident and he was hurt, so he was transported up to the Enterprise. He was in a semi-conscious state and saw the medical facility. He also saw that Captain Picard was in charge. Picard was angry that the ship's doctor did not let Liko die (a dubious morality). Liko was fixed up and returned to the planet.

Using a cargo cult motif, "The Picard" was perceived as a god and Liko wanted to worship him. Picard was outraged — outraged, I tell you — that this happy atheistic culture would be falling back to their cargo cult ways, and had to find a way to restore them to the "rational" views of atheism and evolution. Atheism and evolution have no real foundation for morality, but that point was not mentioned in the show (nor would it be, since many of these episodes preach the hubris of secular humanism). The entire show was a straw man based on atheistic presuppositions about God, and how much better life is by "outgrowing" such beliefs.

On a side note, Stargate SG-1 has occasional snide remarks about theism. In one episode, a technologically advanced society looked down on people of Earth for being less advanced. The "intellectual" Dr. Jackson said,
We'd be colonising space right now if it hadn't been for the Dark Ages.  There was a period of over eight hundred years where science was heresy and anathema. Maybe [those beings] didn't have that setback.
Just reign in that hoss a moment there, pilgrim. The "Dark Ages" is an atheistic pejorative against the Middle Ages. They began shortly after the fall of the Roman Empire. The line that "science was heresy and anathema" is a blatant lie, as many cultural and scientific advances occured at that time. 

And now, back to Picard and his amazing friends.

One thing that makes a straw man argument seem reasonable is when there is a veneer of truth. Obviously, people do stupid things in the names of their gods, to curry favor, assuming what their gods (or other people they want to impress) want, and so on.

While this self-appointed denizen of the Thought Police was relying on prejudicial conjecture, incomplete information, and a double standard, there is a grain of truth in the concern that people will take action based assumptions of what will please their god. Atheists and evolutionists are no prize (just tally up the murders by Stalin, Mao, Lenin, and other atheistic despot in the 20th century alone, for example). Professing Christians have the Bible, so to do acts of vigilante "justice" are contrary to the teachings of Scripture.

In "Watchers", Liko wanted to execute someone to please "The Picard". When Captain Picard arrived, Liko did not believe Picard's claims to be a moral man just like he was. Instead, Liko was usurping the will of his imagined deity.

Some professing Christians are guilty of the same thing. Obviously, Christians have to grow in Christ and learn and are progressing in our sanctification, but we do have an ultimate starting point in the written Word of God. As mentioned before, Picard and other atheists do not have such a moral standard.

We learn that atheistic and evolutionary propaganda in the media can make falsehoods palatable. That's what propaganda does. People are given false information in a manner that is pleasing to them or supports their biases (it often does both of those things). Biblical creationists point out that we are constantly bombarded with evolutionary and atheopathic material to influence us away from the truth of Scripture and the foundations of the gospel message in Genesis. That is why we need to remain vigilant and stay in the Word of God.

Sunday, October 20, 2019

Wollomombi Gorge and the Genesis Flood

Slow and gradual uniformitarian processes are the secular standard used to explain geological formations, but they often have prairie schooner-sized holes in them. Creationists use the catastrophic activities of the Genesis Flood to better explain what is observed, and these would leave distinct signatures.

Genesis Flood models in creation science require certain signatures. The Wollomobi Gorge has what would be expected in creationist models.
Wollomombi Falls with two rivers, image credit: Wikimedia Commons / Yuanchen Chen (CC by-SA 4.0)
Basically, scientists get a notion and want to see if their model is supported by observed evidence. Secular scientists want to give Darwin millions of years to work his wonders, but the facts are not cooperating. The landscape at Wollomombi Gorge (Oxley Wild Rivers National Park, New South Wales, Australia) is an excellent example of Flood geology. The size, scope, rock debris, and other details are compatible with biblical creation science Genesis Flood models and recent creation.
The Wollomombi Gorge is quite narrow at the bottom but nearly a kilometre wide in places at the top. It is much narrower than the wide valleys further east that are used for farming and which can be many tens of kilometers across. This narrowness indicates that the gorge was cut quite late geologically. Is it possible for the gorge to have been cut by the Wollomombi and Chandler rivers in the approximately 4,500 years since the Flood? That seems unlikely to me considering the volume of material removed from the gorge. It seems more likely that the gorge was cut very late in the Flood when the flow of water was much reduced but still flowing with significantly more energy than the present rivers can muster, even after heavy rainfall.
You can read this article in its entirety by clicking on "How landscapes reveal Noah’s Flood".

Sunday, October 13, 2019

The Hard Truth on Self-Repairing Concrete

You know that feeling when the wrecking ball slips off the crane and shatters the pavement? Sure you do, it happens to everyone now and then. Sure would be nice if concrete was able to repair itself like when you have a torn muscle. Actually, there are some similar scenarios.

Using biomimetics, biological principles made by the Master Engineer are utilized for concrete
Credit: PIXNIO / redfox
While the wrecking ball thing was an exaggeration for dramatic impact (heh!) and such a thing would require replacement, there is such a thing as self-repairing concrete. The concept is based on how our muscle tissue is made of bundles of bundles, all the way down to proteins. This means the load and stress are not all in one place. Using biomimetics, biological principles made by the Master Engineer are utilized for concrete.
Engineers are now looking to God’s creation for innovative ideas in architecture. From new ventilation systems that imitate termite mounds to plots of plants on rooftops, building design will never be the same. Even the basic building block, concrete, has been altered based on insights from human muscles.
Three basic types of muscles exist in the human body—smooth, skeletal, and cardiac (heart). Two are of special interest to concrete engineers. Smooth muscles control most involuntary actions, such as digestion. Their fibers are arranged randomly and don’t bulk up. Skeletal muscles allow us to move voluntarily, and these can be strengthened with exercise.
To finish reading, click on "Self-Healing Concrete".

Sunday, October 06, 2019

Disingenuous Classroom Evolutionists

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

There are numerous reports of Christian and creationist students facing ridicule and harassment in secular schools from Darwin apparatchiks, and these are the ones paid to allegedly educate them. The fact that these sidewinders attack positions they dislike shows their bias, and it is the opposite of teaching.

Christians and creationists in educational settings often have to face intimidation from their instructors. The harassment from them is a con game.
Modified from a photo at Freeimages / Jeramey Jannene (click  for larger)
Something to which biblical creationists are subjected is a barrage of questions from a scoffer that runs the gamut of scientific disciplines, theology, philosophy, and so on. Somehow, anti-creationists proclaim that there is no God or that biblical creation science is faulty if someone does not have all the answers to every question (many of which are fallacious, such as the complex question); we do not have every answer to every question. Nobody does. If you ask me something about God or creation science that I can't answer, it only means that I do not have the answer. 

On a related note, some tinhorns will say that you are not a Christian if you do not meet their arbitrary standards, therefore, you are a liar and biblical creation is false. These intellectually dishonest folks are smart enough to be amazingly dishonest, and there is no need to be buffaloed by those who hate the truth and authority of Scripture.

In the same way, secularists do not have all the answers, either. There are disagreements about speciation, some scientists rejectt dinosaur-to-bird evolution, there are scientists who reject Darwin, the Big Bang has numerous versions because of the many problems, whether or not australopithecines are human ancestors, and so on. However, they still accept evolution even though they do not have all the answers. Indeed, they believe evolution despite the appalling lack of evidence, and their incoherent worldviews cannot withstand prodding.

Many instructors in the public education indoctrination organizations (commonly known as schools) saddle up a corral-full of logical fallacies, demand that some students know all of the answers, intimidate the students, and proclaim victory when a question or doubt goes unanswered. They are disingenuous, and utilize many manipulative tacticsYes, we know what you do. Deal with it, hippies!

Students do not need to have their belief system shaken by secularists, whether in academia or in other places. Like science (and all of life), we do not have all the answers, but biblical creationists do have a valid and coherent worldview.
Many Christian students in secular universities can relate to this scenario: An evolutionist college professor is doing his best to convince his class that biblical creation is absurd. . . .

One of the unspoken assumptions behind this barrage of questions is that you shouldn’t hold a particular worldview unless you know the answers to all possible objections. If a student can’t answer on the spot every objection the instructor throws out, it’s seen as evidence that biblical creation is inherently irrational.

However, this is an intellectual con job. Knowing the answers to all possible questions would require perfect knowledge, which none of us possesses. If one follows this logic to its natural conclusion, it means that no one—evolutionist or creationist—is allowed to hold any kind of worldview!
To read this short article in its entirety, click on "Confronting a Clever Classroom Con".

Sunday, September 29, 2019

Faster-Than-Expected Geological Processes

The default position of secular geologists is slow and gradual (uniformitarian) processes over millions of years gave us the landforms and things that we see today. Except when the evidence is inescapable and rapid processes were involved, then they reluctantly refer to those.

Secular geologists tend to say things take a long time, but they are surprised by rapid and recent activity that can be observed.
New thermal area at Yellowstone National Park
Image credit: USGS / Michael Poland (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
Many things that geologists say took millions of years do not fit the evidence and cannot be explained through uniformitarian means. We have seen on this site alone many instance where the catastrophic deluge of the Genesis Flood provides a far better framework. More than that, there are geological processes that can be observed in the here and now.
  • Pumice from an underwater volcano filled a huge area of ocean
  • Salt Crystals in the Dead Sea accumulate quickly, and may explain other large salt deposits that were attributed to millions of Darwin years
  • Yellowstone's thermal areas and caldera activity were attributed to thousands of years, but a new on happened just recently
You can read more about these and one other item by clicking on "Geological Processes Can Be Rapid".

Sunday, September 22, 2019

Biologists Surveyed, Life Begins at Conception

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

This article will be a mite different, since the inspiration came from a news source that has no real interest in creation science. Biblical creationists, however, have maintained for a long time that life begins at conception. Medical science has demonstrated this fact numerous times.

A study shows that most biologists in the USA believe that life begins at conception. The researcher had some unexpected findings about atheists and leftists as well.
Credit: RGBStock / Sanja Gjenero
Steven Jacobs was doing research for his doctorate. He asked many Americans of various political and religious views about who to ask regarding the beginning of life, and the questions did not seem biased or loaded. (This is far better than leftist-biased "surveys" where people asked opinions of their cronies in the bar after work or something.) The majority believed that biologists should be the ones to answer that question. Philosophers and theologians did not score as well.

Interestingly, the overwhelming majority of biologists believe that life begins at conception, which is in line with a previous study that also showed how most Americans also believe the same way. There is a problem in academia nowadays where professors and such are overwhelmingly on the political left and are atheist or have liberal religious views.

Some of these respondents were hostile to the innocuous questions, even showing hatred for God and Christians. They were reading things into the straightforward questions that were nonexistent, and circling the wagons to hinder Dr. Jacobs' intellectual, academic, and speech freedoms. Ever notice how atheists are usually on the political left? Both groups are opposed to things of God, such as marriage between a man and a woman, the sanctity of life, and more.

People are often unwilling to respond to logic and evidence. In this case, they know that abortion is murder and simply do not care. (Try to tell them that we are created in the image of God, not just evolved animals, and they'll want to slap leather with you.) The presuppositions of misotheists and anti-creationists are displayed in the things they endorse and the principles they oppose. These people need to humble themselves and repent before the Creator and Redeemer.

To see the article that inspired this one, click on "Study: 96% of 5,577 Biologists Say Human Life Begins at Fertilization". You may also like to see "Refuting Arguments Abortionists Use". By the way, the remarks at the very end of this music video are very startling:

Sunday, September 15, 2019

Pterosaur Illustration and the Flood

Someone who wants to create a realistic illustration is likely to use surroundings that are authentic. Something that is used to represent historical matters are expected to have things that are appropriate to the period; no cowboys on horses firing ray guns, for instance. The same would apply to biblical illustrations.

A pterosaur illustration in 1863 about the Genesis Flood includes a surprising item. This raises some interesting points for Christians to  consider.
Made with PhotoFunia
Let's take a few more steps back. An illustration of the Genesis Flood would indicate animals that the artist expected to be alive at the time — especially if he believes the Bible. Way back in 1863, Edward Burne-Jones made a bit of art depicting Noah's Ark just after the Flood. While there are several errors in it. (Also, this one by Paul Gustave Louis Christophe Doré is gruesome, and there should be no bodies after the Flood, but the Ark looks good). Burne-Jones had some points in his favor as well. 

But why a pterosaur in the art? It's not like he saw on for himself, but he had access to information about such things. Apparently, he wanted to show that this critter was living at the time of the Flood. Also, the Ark itself is rather good, not like the silly stuff that people use to entertain children. Misrepresentations of the Ark or any other biblical history make it seem like just a story, and that's no good.
Have you ever thought about drawing an image of the events surrounding the global Flood of Noah? If so, what would you include in your depiction, assuming contemporary knowledge of animals that lived during that period? Would you include extinct kinds of animals such as dinosaurs, dicynodonts and pterosaurs, or only those alive today? To help explore these questions a case-in-point comes from a nineteenth century drawing recently on display in the Tate Britain Art Museum, London, entitled “Noah receiving the dove back onto the Ark” (1863).1 It was drawn with pen on a wooden block by English artist Edward Burne-Jones (1833–1898). Considered one of the last Pre-Raphaelites, before becoming an artist he had intended to become a Christian minister. His depiction of the Ark and what is floating in the flood water prompts several points worth discussing.
To continue reading, click on "A pterosaur in the Flood waters? — Artistry and being consistent with the Biblical text".

Sunday, September 08, 2019

Biblical Counseling and Creation Face Similar Opposition

As we have explained numerous times, biblical creationists and adherents of universal common ancestor evolution have the same evidence. Likewise, those who believe in deep time and recent creation have the same evidence; it is not theirs versus ours. Evidence is interpreted according to our presuppositions. There are surprisingly similar difficulties encountered with biblical counseling.

Creation science and biblical counseling face similar obstacles from those who do not realize that both secularists and Christians have the same facts available. Facts are interpreted according to presuppositions.
Credit: RGBStock / Dez Pain
Like with creation science, opponents of biblical counseling get all het up about "facts", but they are opinions and interpretations of observations. Creationists who add evolution do violence to the gospel message, and secular psychology has an evolutionary core which gives secularists a passel of problems. Biblical counselors approach the facts with God's Word as the ultimate standard, rejecting the idea that we are just modified pond scum.
Evolutionists have created a cottage industry out of accusing creationists of being committed to magic rather than science. Such epithets miss the point. Both sides of the debate traffic in facts, but interpret those facts based on different sources of authority that inform their worldview commitments.
. . .
When it comes to counseling, the debate between those committed to biblical counseling (as I am) and those committed to other approaches concerns whether the Bible is sufficient to inform the counseling task, or whether psychology provides a crucial adjunct to the conversations that happen in counseling. Those who believe that the Bible is not sufficient for counseling, and who argue for the necessary inclusion of psychological methods in counseling, point to the science of psychology to buttress their claim.
To read the entire article or download the MP3, click on "Biblical Counseling—Common Cause with Creation".

Sunday, September 01, 2019

Blue Eyes and Evolutionary Racism

Evolutionary dogma was used to justify the false idea of scientific racism, and the idea that blue eyes are a mutation were a part of that concept. Although Darwinists have attempted to skedaddle from the idea that lighter-skinned people are more highly evolved, the belief is still a pillar of evolution. You can't hide your lyin' racist evolution eyes.

Although evolutionists try to distance themselves from their racist dogma, it persists. One place is the refuted idea that blue eyes are a mutation from brown.
Credit: Freeimages / Ne¾a Èerin
Seems that when people are tearing down statues of people in the past who were considered racists, they would also pull down statues of Papa Darwin. Maybe have him disinterred from Westminster Abbey and dump him in the Thames. But no, evolution is a pillar of the left and is used to promote certain agendas.

Centuries ago, my eyes were blue, but became the steel grey they are now. My wife's eyes are startlingly blue; she even compared the color to that of the Siberian Husky. Her color never changed from childhood. 

The evolution story maintains that since we emerged out of Africa, we would have brown eyes because of our putative apelike ancestors. Digging into genetics, scientists have learned that eye color is complicated. It comes from pigment, genetic switches, and is not a mutation at all. It is actually part of the variety programmed into us by the Master Engineer. 
When it comes to the history of basic human traits, an evolutionary myth about eye color often pops up. The secular story maintains that blue eyes are the result of a genetic mutation that occurred in the recent evolutionary history of modern humans. This narrative is rooted in the belief that modern humans originally evolved from dark-skinned, dark-eyed ancestors from Africa. As the story goes, a mutation occurred when humans migrated into more northerly climates where the trait was supposedly favored by the lower-light environment. But, as I’ve discussed in previous articles, this out-of-Africa idea is contradicted by both genetic and linguistic data.
I hope y'all see it clear to read the rest, just click on "Are Blue Eyes in Humans a Mutation?"

Sunday, August 25, 2019

Deceptive Reporting on Yeast Evolution

Researchers commenced to fiddling with yeast, found a modification, and cried, "Evolution! Hail Darwin, blessed be!" They were shining ultraviolet light on the yeast. Maybe they got the notion from playing with a black light poster that had a picture of a hippie and had "Peace" in big letters.

Scientists fiddled with yeast, obtained a variation, and called it evolution. Instead, it shows no evolution, but instead, built-in adaptability designed by the Master Engineer.
Credit: Unsplash / Jonas Jacobsson
However it came about, they did not demonstrate any kind of evolution. They almost-intelligently designed a variation where a species of yeast can metabolize a food that it could not use previously. Every cell has a membrane that keeps good things in the cell and other things need to have an authorized escort. This yeast was given a transport so it could strap on the feed back for its new food. This may be beneficial for the brewing industry. What scientists found is actually evidence for special creation and built-in adaptability designed by the Master Engineer.
A research team at the department of Biotechnology at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands claims to have ‘evolved’ a species of yeast (Saccharomyces eubayanus) to digest a complex sugar called maltotriose. After exposing the yeast to high levels of ultraviolet light, they discovered a hybrid gene that gave it this new ability. The hybrid gene codes for a transporter protein which allows maltotriose into the cell. The yeast strain with the newly engineered gene was capable of increased maltose and maltotriose fermentation, which can be used in the brewing industry.
All living things, from single-celled bacteria to multi-trillion-celled-humans, have a cellular membrane that prevents things from leaking out of or from entering the cell. In order to live, food has to be brought into the cell through that membrane. Thus, all species have transport proteins that help to bring things into the cell. The genes responsible for transporting sugars into the yeast cell are called SeMALT genes. There is a diversity of such genes found among the many yeast species.
To read the rest of the article (it's a mite technical), click on "New sugar transport gene evolved in yeast? Mixing genes does not equal evolution!" Also, there is a follow-up feedback article, "Can mutations lead to new genetic information? A necessary clarification".

Sunday, August 18, 2019

Evolution, Mathematics, and God

For science to operate, we must have an orderly and predictable universe. If you drop a ball it will hit the floor or whatever. It would take unusual circumstances to drop a ball and have it fall up. Science depends on consistent laws of logic and mathematics, and these things defy atheism and naturalism.

Science, logic, and math are not possible in a consistent atheistic worldview. They are only possible through biblical creation.
Credit: Pixabay / Gerd Altmann
I am one of those people who shunned mathematics and thought I would never use it later in life. Wrong-o! We use math every day, often without realizing it. Astronomers must have a good grasp of advanced mathematics, as do people in other scientific disciplines. Evolution makes science, math, logic, and everything else impossible (if they are consistent in their worldview). In fact, these things depend on the principles of biblical creation, because if a universe without God was possible in the first place, such a random place makes math, logic, and science impossible!
You have probably heard of evolutionary biologists – those who study biology from the perspective of Darwinism.  And you have probably heard of evolutionary geologists, or evolutionary astronomers – those who study their respective disciplines from secular assumptions of origins.  But have you ever heard of evolutionary mathematics?  No doubt there are some mathematicians who believe in neo-Darwinian evolution, but can math itself have an evolutionary origin?  What would that even mean?
We can consider, at least as a hypothetical scenario, the idea of particles-to-people evolution in the field of biology because we know that organisms change over time.  We know that descendants are not exactly the same as their ancestors.  And therefore, it is natural to ask what kinds of changes are possible.  The evolutionist believes that organisms like fish can eventually give rise to organisms like people.  The creationist argues that organisms diversify but remain the same basic kind.  Contrary to the straw-man arguments asserted by some evolutionists, creationists do believe that animals change over time – but that there are natural limits to such change.  The fact that organisms change means that we can intellectually consider (for the sake of argument) either creation or evolution as a possible scenario to explain the patterns we find in living organisms today.
Although this article is a mite long, it is extremely interesting and useful. To finish reading, click on "Evolutionist Math".

Sunday, August 11, 2019

Easter Eggs of the Brain

Gamers are usually acquainted with Easter eggs, a term used to describe hidden rewards or effects. Physicians and scientists know a great deal about the human brain, but keep discovering more interesting things to investigate further. Here are a few more.

The more doctors and scientists research the human brain, the more "Easter eggs" they find. This testifies of the genius of our Creator and leaves Darwin behind.
Background image credit: Freeimages / artM
Just when they may think they've mastered a scene or a level in the brain game, something new is found. Back a few months ago, we got a head start (heh!) on brain studies with "Software in the Brain". Purveyors of minerals-to-man evolution keep on a-trying to lasso evidence for evolution where none exists. When that fails, they fall back on the old "Hail Darwin! Blessed Be!" invocations when they should really be giving credit to the Master Engineer who gave them everything they have.
  • The brain has a built-in draining mechanism to rid itself of cerebrospinal fluid, which saves us the trouble of attaching a spigot and finding someone to hold a pail for us.
  • It also conveniently forgets some things, which may be a blessing so we are not overloaded with clutter. (I wonder what will become of the belief that we never forget anything completely.) 
  • Although Neanderthals have been conclusively shown to be fully human, some evolutionists insist that studying them can help us understand how humans probably evolved. Start with your conclusion, end with your conclusion. Use circular reasoning and faulty presuppositions, plug in your Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Ring™ and call it science. It is not really how it works, old son, but secularists do that quite a bit anyway.
You can read about these and more by clicking on "Brain Secrets Seen Through a Glass Darkly". Also, you may want to look at "Brains by Mistake: The Darwin Poof Spoof", your brain is the most complex object in the known universe but Darwinists say it is the product of multiple mistakes. Finally, "Brain Provides Shortcuts for the Will", the brain is like a smart assistant, allowing previously-learned actions to be called up on demand.