Eminent British Scientist Urges Honesty Oath For Scientists  03/30/2001
Sir John Sulston, a leading British scientist, is recommending that scientists take the equivalent of a Hippocratic Oath to cause no harm and be wholly truthful in their public pronouncements, according to a story in the BBC News.  He feels a code of conduct would be a good step toward rectifying the growing public distrust of scientists.

    Honesty is a prerequisite for good science.  That is one reason why the Christian world produced so many of the world’s first and best scientists.  Can the pursuit of truth be expected to prevail in a culture that values fame, fortune and survival of the fittest?  Even if Sir John gains support for his proposal, can we expect scientists to agree on a code of ethics when there is no consensus about a foundation for ethics on which to build?  After all, God is out these days, so it’s all about power and pushing your own agenda: animal rights, global warming, personal prestige or what have you. 
    What remains of good science today is coasting on the ethics of the founding fathers of science who were primarily Christians.  Scientific endeavor presupposes a truth that can be pursued and must be valued for its own sake.  Christianity provided both the philosophical framework and moral impetus that ushered in the scientific revolution.  For an example, see the dedication to the first (1665) issue of The Royal Society, the world’s oldest scientific journal, that expressly stated their goal of deciphering the true nature of God’s glorious works for the benefit of all mankind.

No one is suggesting we go pig out on the monsterburger and fries, but this essay is important for pointing out the difference between real and perceived science.  In the back rooms of research, scientists often disagree strongly and present contradictory evidence.  To the public, however, whether through government Public Service Announcements, TV programs and other media outlets, the story is presented as absolute truth.  This is exactly the situation with evolution.  As we show repeatedly in these pages, the evidence is questionable at best, downright contradictory to Darwinism at worst, yet it is taught as gospel truth in the schools and museums.  Teachers are even threatened with lawsuits or recrimination for even timidly trying to present the problems with Darwinism.
    So should you eat fat?  Biblical principles of behavior are superior here to scientific ones: enjoy what God has provided, yet with moderation.
Next headline on: Health.

Debate 03/28/2001: The Martian meteorite: evidence for life?  Space.Com examines opinions of the believers and skeptics.
Next headline on: Mars.

Update on Archaeoraptor 03/28/2001: BBC News explains how the Archaeoraptor hoax (a.k.a. Piltdown Bird) was perpetrated (see our Sept 29 story).  Article also mentions other paleontological frauds and mistakes of reconstruction.
Next headline on: Fossils.

Early Earth Just Right, But Not For Long  03/27/2001
How much time did life have to get a foothold on earth?  A paper by scientists from NASA and Stanford in PNAS estimates that the early earth went through Three Bears stages (too hot, too cold, and just right), but not just right for long: only 100,000 to 10 million years, just a blink in geologic time.

They would have a major problem getting life started with 10 quintillion years.  This just adds insult to injury.  It’s just not going to happen without a Creator, no matter how much time (or faith) you have.  Notice the fallacy of personification in Philip Ball’s statement.  Bacteria are clearly incapable of caring one whit if they survive or not.  Are we supposed to imagine them having a huddle, or organizing a tiger team to map out a strategy for dealing with the climate change?  Come on.
Next headline on: Origin of Life. • Next dumb story.

Nonliving things like rocks usually get simpler the closer you look.  Not so for life!  The closer we look, the more complexity and wonder unfolds before our scientific eyes.
Next headline on: The Brain. • Next headline on: Human Body. • Next headline on: The Cell and Biochemistry.

The evolutionists immediately jump for joy at the prospect of studying salamander evolution here, but fail to ponder the logical question that if evolution is such a pervasive agent of change, why are today’s salamanders virtually identical to their 150 million year old parents?  The article mentions “possible salamander ancestors in the Paleozoic,” leaving room for storytelling.  The article says the fossils are dead ringers for those alive today, but in the next sentence quotes a paleontologist calling them “very primitive.”  This is the Darwinian mindset, feeling compelled to shoehorn things into an evolutionary sequence, whether they fit or not.  Salamanders are not primitive!  They are highly complex vertebrates with exquisite capabilities for respirating in water and on land.  The fossil record in general shows abrupt appearance of complex life-forms, and often catastrophic burial.  That pattern is exemplified right here with these salamanders.
Next headline on: Fossils. • Next headline on: Darwinism.

Sadly, the article again lays the praise at the feet of the usual false god: “It [spider silk] is nature’s undisputed high-performance polymer fibre, fine-tuned by several hundred million years of evolution.”  If you can hold your stomach on that line, the rest of the article is instructive on the wonders of spider technology.  But Jonathan Sarfati writing in the latest Creation Magazine beat Nature to the punch on this scoop.
Next headline on: Bugs and Crawlers. • Next amazing story.

Whether or not this hypothesis is true that the retina sends a stripped-down version of the image remains to be seen; it’s probably much more complex than that.  It seems doubtful that the brain is interpolating all the fine detail you are seeing right now, considering the millions of photoreceptors in the retina.  Read this article, though, to get a feel for the mind-boggling processes at work in the eye.  No wonder it gave Darwin cold shudders.
Next headline on: The Brain. • Next headline on: Human Body. • Next headline on: The Cell and Biochemistry.

It’s doubtful that Adam and Eve picked Prozac off the trees.  They communed with God surrounded by His creation, and no doubt were physically active every day till sin brought depression into the world.  You might try a Creation Safari next time you feel down.  (Click here for other ministries doing similar activities.)  It worked for the writer of Psalm 42: he took a walk up to Mt. Hermon and the cascades of the upper Jordan, and renewed his hope in God.  Jesus also took his stressed-out disciples for a retreat in the wilderness.  Some fresh air and a break from the routine might clear your head.
Next headline on: Health.

Each of our senses is so amazing and complex, you have to just gasp the more you learn about them.  The pressure waves in the air that make up sound can be as low as 2 x 10^-5 N/m², yet the sensitivity of the eardrum, the ossicles, and the cochlea to these whispers of sound is astounding – the ear can handle intensities of a million million to one.  The eardrum’s microscopic vibrations are amplified by the bones of the middle ear twentyfold as they transmit from air to fluid in the inner ear, where further amplification takes place.  This article provides just one more detail on the process.  Like all other proteins, prestin is made up of hundreds of amino acids, all left-handed, that are arranged in a precise sequence to allow it to perform its job as an amplifier.  God has given you a high-precision, advanced-technology stereo sound system in your head!  Its specifications surpass anything man has ever made.  Even if yours isn’t working properly at this time, you have backup senses, no less marvelous, to keep you in touch with your surroundings.  Enjoy!
Recommended reading: The Wonder of Man, by Dr. Werner Gitt (CLV, Germany, 1999).
Next amazing story.
Next headline on: Human Body. • Next headline on: The Cell and Biochemistry.

If the moon is still emitting gases from the interior, maybe it’s not as old as claimed.  Volcanic activity was supposed to have ceased a billion years ago.
Next headline on: Dating methods.

This experiment had nothing to do with natural selection, i.e. Darwinian evolution, but everything to do with artificial selection, i.e., intelligent design.  The experimenter had a goal in mind and manipulated every step to get what he wanted.  Nature, however, cannot select what isn’t already there.  The experimenter also commits a fallacy of ascribing natural selection to gasses, which cannot reproduce.  To call this an evolutionary algorithm is, therefore, an empty P.R. stunt that tries to make Darwinism seem useful in the laboratory.  An astrologer could give credit to horoscopes by similar reasoning.
Next headline on: Darwinism. • Next dumb story.

You can really see the propaganda tactics of the opposition: fear-mongering, loaded words, ad hominem, etc.  Is it not shocking that, in America today, you can be called on the carpet and treated as a lawbreaker for daring to question naturalism (not even mentioning God or saying anything about the identity of an undesignated designer), yet homosexual activists are being actively promoted in our public schools and given free reign as role models to portray their dangerous lifestyle as normal to impressionable students, even in the primary grades.  Is anything shocking anymore?  Wake up, people!  The Bible and common sense teach that ignoring evil makes one a party to it.  And what is the connection between evolution and homosexuality?  Darwinism teaches that we are only evolved animals, and therefore morals are phantoms, and we can make up our own choices about sex.  This is the legacy of naturalism that has “suffocated the human spirit and debased the culture,” as quoted in the article.
Next headline on: Schools.

This scientist is onto something, but unfortunately justifies it with an evolutionary tall tale: “Early humans found that places with open views offered better opportunities to find food and avoid predators,” Dr. Frumkin explains.  “But they needed water to survive and attract prey, and groups of trees for protection.  Modern research has shown that people today, given the choice, prefer landscapes that look like this scenario.”  On the contrary, God put the first man and woman in a garden, surrounded by plants and wildlife and natural beauty.  That is why activities like Creation Safaris are a healthy return to our roots as humans: fellowshipping with our Creator and glorifying Him for His works.  Here’s an experiment you can do right now: go to this nature photo gallery and look out the window in a brick wall at some wonders of creation.  Feeling better yet?
Next headline on: Health. • Next headline on: Plants.

Article 03/21/2001: John Woodmorappe writing for Answers in Genesis discusses possible mechanisms for accelerated nuclear decay, and laboratory demonstrations of some of them.  These mechanisms could reduce radioactive dates by a factor of a billion or more.
Next headline on: Dating methods. • Next headline on: Physics.

New Hominid Fossil Found in Kenya  03/21/2001
National Geographic reports that Meave Leakey’s team has uncovered a hominid fossil they have named Kenyanthropus platyops (flat-face), representing a new line unrelated to Lucy and other alleged human ancestors.  They date the fossil at 3.5 million years old.  This story made Nature’s Feature of the Week, but the journal Science laments that this find scrambles a once-simple story of early human ancestry: “Experts are unanimous that the find will complicate efforts to trace the convoluted course of human evolution.  Indeed, experts say the importance of the new discovery lies in its demonstration that the roots of the human evolutionary tree are pretty tangled.”

As predicted here, the rivals are getting their first down on the field.  National Geographic, which has funded the Leakeys for decades, is not about to let the French score a touchdown.  How can perceptive observers of this contest believe a word they say?  No matter how badly the next find disagrees with previous beliefs, there is always a rationalization for how it is improving our understanding of our origins.  Consider this sentence from the article: “Though the discovery seems to blur the lines of humankind’s family tree, according to Daniel Lieberman, an anthropologist at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., ‘This is part of a trend. We’re getting to know our ancestors better.’”  This is like claiming victory from under the dogpile.  Yet in spite of the morass of conflicting stories, and how every year a new find upsets the whole applecart, the Discovery Channel and National Geographic TV using computer graphics and actors in monkey suits continue to produce documentaries making it appear the scientists have it all figured out.  Follow the chain links here and see all the conflicting opinions just in the last few months.
Next headline on: Early Man.

Monarch butterflies have often been used by creationists as examples of exquisite design in nature.  Their fantastic metamorphosis, their epic migration as far as 3000 miles each year, their exquisite colors and defense and navigation mechanisms are amazing stories told with exceptional photography in Moody’s classic film The Wonders of God’s Creation.  If weather alone is the factor in their current plight, we must accept this as an act of a sovereign God, who cares about even the sparrow that falls to the ground.  If, however, this is caused by man’s greed, we must object.  Man has a right to harvest timber and build homes, but not to selfishly wipe out populations of God’s creatures: this is not fulfilling our role as stewards of His world.  If a particular forest is home to a concentrated population of wonderful creatures who rely on it for their life cycle, then we must harvest our timber elsewhere.
    Creationists would improve their witness by showing outrage at wanton destruction of habitats for human greed.  This must be done with balanced thinking, of course, not like environmental fanatics who see a bug as more valuable than a human.  (Notice that some of the worst examples of environmental destruction have been committed by superstitious pagans like African poachers who see rhino horn as an aphrodisiac, or by totalitarian regimes and their poor, victimized populace.)  When there are alternative ways to meet our needs than to wipe out something rare and beautiful, we should take pains to protect God’s handiwork.  It is both responsible stewardship and important for our witness as Christians.  Should we dam the Grand Canyon to power our homes?  Should we cap Old Faithful to pipe hot water to a hotel?  Should we harvest a species of hummingbird to the point of extinction to make fashionable corsages, as almost happened in the 19th century?  There’s more to living than vanity and building cities and making our lives comfortable at the expense of vulnerable creatures and delicate or rare phenomena.  People tend toward extremes on this issue, and these must be avoided.  There can be win-win solutions that protect the environment as well as meet human needs.  Perhaps the Mexican wintering grounds for the monarch could bring good income as a tourist attraction instead of a lumber mill.  Regardless, it is worthwhile to get outdoors and enjoy the creation for its testimony to the Creator.  The monarch butterfly is certainly a worthy attraction that should be protected.  Take your Sunday School class on a Creation Safari and teach them the marvelous life cycle and epic migration of the monarch butterfly.
Update 04/24/2001: ABC News describes efforts underway to devise win-win solutions, such as eco-tourism and non-intrusive products as a substitute for lost logging income.  Apparently, locals are signing on.
Next headline on: Environment. • Next headline on: Bugs and Crawlers.

Essay 03/18/2001:  Mark Hartwig at the Discovery Institute says “Don’t Blame Fundamentalists for Evolution Controversies.”  He gives examples of the tactics of equivocation, sidestepping and big lie that the new science standards implemented by the Kansas School Board employed to insulate Darwinism from criticism and prevent critical thinking by students.

Neanderthal Opens TV Propaganda Season  03/18/2001
The Discovery Channel aired its new evolutionary documentary Neanderthal Sunday, featuring beetle-browed pug-nosed imbeciles locked in a hopeless struggle against their shaved-head Cro-Magnon superiors.  Following that, the channel aired “Humans: Who Are We?” with assorted action shots of actors in monkey suits portraying Australopithecines and Homo erectus, living out their survival-of-the-fittest lifestyle by mutation and natural selection.  A flood of video Darwinism is in the pipeline, according to Ken Ham’s newsletter; Steven Spielberg’s upcoming movie Evolution, which will include a 26-part animated TV series aimed at children, and the PBS series Triumph of Life which aired last month.  Tonight viewers can see Discovery Channel’s documentary on the documentary, “The Making of Neanderthal.”

It is imperative that viewers hone their skill at Baloney Detecting, these days, because the baloney is flying fast and furious.  Anti-creationist forces, alarmed at the success at creationism and intelligent design theory, are stepping up the rhetoric and indoctrination.  The American Association for the Advancement of Science is, for instance, undertaking a project to “support the teaching of evolution in the schools and combat efforts to teach creationism in science classes.”  I.e., never mind facts: this is war.  Neanderthal is nothing more than wild speculation acted out by hired help.  Teach your kids to visualize the cameraman just out of range: they are not looking at history, but actors.
    What is the evidence on which these shows are constructed?  Just some skulls and skeletons.  Creationists can take the very same physical evidence and tell a very different story – survival of nomadic tribes after the Flood in a drastically changed climate – but they don’t get the government grants and Hollywood special-effects wizards to put it on the screen.  When paleoanthropologists themselves disagree violently among themselves over what these bones mean (as we reported earlier); and when reconstruction is known to be highly subjective; and when history is replete with shameful frauds and hoaxes concerning early man, it is disingenuous for PBS and the Discovery Channel to present wild speculation wearing the mantle of “science.”
    Some of the baloney on the Discovery Channel programs is so blatant it is almost humorous.  The narrator, introducing the new Homo erectus, says “a new species arose that was an evolutionary work of art.”  Call foul!  You cannot say that if you are an evolutionist.  There is no art; there is no Artist.  The program says a mutation doubled the size of his brain.  This is tantamount to belief in miracles.  It has a camera shot of scientist holding a computer model of a Homo erectus brain, describing its various parts and their evolutionary adaptations, when all he has to go on is bone!  Welcome to the mythology of the 21st century.  It would be laughable if it weren’t taught to impressionable children as “science” with all the support of the federal government and the scientific establishment.
Next headline on: Early Man. • Next headline on: Movies.

Garden of Eden Opens in England  03/16/2001
Those living near Cornwall can go to the grand opening of the garden of Eden Saturday, according to a story in the BBC News.  The Eden Project, a high-tech museum of plant diversity, consists of several biomes under huge geodesic structures and features a visitor center, music and interpretive displays.  It hopes to attract millions of visitors and change people’s thinking about the environment.

Anything that showcases creation is worth visiting, if you can filter the evolutionary storytelling and political agendas.  Interesting how mankind seems to retain a longing for the lost Eden, mythical though some may think it to be.  But despite man’s technology, the way back to Eden is blocked because of sin.  Only the Savior, Jesus Christ, can lead us to the tree of life.
Next headline on: Environment. • Next headline on: Plants.

Note how he even uses the term “Noachian epoch” for this alleged period of volcanism and water flooding.  Curious line of reasoning: Fact 1: Mars has no surface water.  Fact 2: Earth’s surface is over 70% water.  Conclusion: Mars had a worldwide flood, but on earth, Noah’s flood is just a myth.
Next headline on: Mars. • Next headline on: Solar System.

You either have to believe we are incredibly lucky, looking at the “many accidents of physics and astronomy that have worked together for our benefit” (as Freeman Dyson once said), or you can know the Designer personally who fashioned these properties from the beginning: “For thus says the LORD, Who created the heavens, Who is God, Who formed the earth and made it, Who has established it, Who did not create it in vain, Who formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD, and there is no other.” Isaiah 45:18.
Next headline on: Physics.

A weed is just a beautiful plant out of place.  Treat that weed with a little more respect next time you work in the garden.  You never know how it might just save your life one day.
Next headline on: Health. • Next headline on: Plants.

Evolutionary just-so storytelling gets almost humorous at times.  These stories do not come from the scientific data - creationists and evolutionists agree on the data - but how you fit the data into an origins story depends on your world view.  Never would it cross the mind of materialistic Darwinists to see intelligent design in eyes or leaves, because such explanations are ruled out by their world view.  So they are forced into telling how these things came about by materialistic, purposeless, unguided processes of mutation and natural selection.  It doesn’t matter that the mechanism is totally inadequate, and that they must resort to personification fallacies and circular reasoning.  It doesn’t matter that the story contradicts known laws of science.  It doesn’t even matter if the new evolutionary stories contradict the old ones, as admitted in both these articles.  They know they are right, because they cannot allow a Divine foot in the door. 
Next headline on: Mammals. • Next headline on: Darwinism.

The data are the X-rays.  The interpretations are the ages and the processes that created them.  Nevertheless, this is a stunning observation and set of images.  It is comparable to the meditative treasure-store of the first Hubble Deep Field.  Black holes remind us of the Entropy Problem in modern cosmology: why is the entropy of the universe as low as it is?  Why is there so much order and structure, instead of particles uniformly distributed in space, or everything in black holes?  If the universe is running down, like a clock, Someone must have wound it up at the beginning.
Next headline on: Cosmology. • Next headline on: Physics.

The discoverer concedes that, “To have an incredibly new and complex thing suddenly arise with no known antecedents is tough to explain.”  Feathers are indeed wonderfully complex, with a shaft, barbs, barbules and hooks that keep the feather rigidly locked into a beautiful, functional, lightweight structure.  Feathers are totally different from reptile scales in their structure and growth.  Only wishful thinking would see ancestral feathers in these fossil impressions.  Besides, all alleged “feathered dinosaur” fossils are younger than modern birds, so where is the ancestry?  Another paleontologist admits, “We’re looking at stuff strewn about on a rock, and consequently a lot of it is open to interpretation.”  There is still no evidence birds evolved from dinosaurs.  Birds - and their feathers - appear like everything else in the fossil record: abruptly, fully formed, and well adapted to their environment.  This is the trade secret of paleontology.
Next headline on: Fossils. • Next headline on: Birds. • Next headline on: Dinosaurs.

How Do Cilia Move in Concert?  03/12/2001
Cilia, the microscopic hair-like projections on some single-celled organisms such as Paramecium and in the human body such as the lining of the esophagus and digestive tract, have long puzzled biologists with their ability to beat in synchronized wave patterns.  In the March 22 issue of the Biological Proceedings of the Royal Society, two Israeli scientists use 3D modelling to simulate how this motion is achieved and find that the viscosity of the surrounding medium influences the motion.

Right now, cilia are moving in picturesque waves along your throat, sweeping your windpipe clean of contaminants as you breathe.  Readers of Michael Behe’s Darwin’s Black Box will remember the cilium as one of his examples of irreducible complexity (structures composed of multiple parts that cannot work unless all the parts are present, therefore could not have evolved by a series of mutations acted on by natural selection).  Take a look at this paper to gain an appreciation of the magnitude of the problem.  After pages of differential equations and diagrams, the scientists call their work a “simplified model” of the “internal engine.”  To work properly, or at all, each cilium engine requires many diverse components, such as dynein and nexin rods and cross-bridges arranged in a structured 9+2 pattern, ATP for energy, the proper membrane voltages and calcium levels, the ability to respond to neighboring cells with the proper timing, and other factors not yet understood.  Yet we are asked by the scientific establishment to believe that brainless cells figured out these engineering feats without an Engineer.
Update 03/14/2001:  Nature has just published a paper on another of Behe’s examples of irreducibly complex systems: the bacterial flagellum.  The flagellum is now seen as a reversible helical propeller that allows the bacterium to switch between running and tumbling modes.  The complexity just keeps getting more and more mind-boggling.
Next amazing story. • Next headline on: Human Body. • Next headline on: The Cell and Biochemistry.

Race to Clone Humans Accelerates  03/09/2001
The BBC News has several stories today on human cloning.  The lead story is that doctors in the US and Italy are defiantly moving ahead despite widespread public condemnation and ethical concerns.  Another story tries to answer “Cloning: Can It Really Be Done?.  Another article by ethicist Dr. Donald Bruce examines the “terrible odds” of the procedure.  On another medical ethics front reported by CBS News, use of stem cells from aborted fetuses to treat Parkinson’s disease isn’t working, and produces negative side effects.  This will surely add fuel to the political battles about this controversial line of research.

With the technology in our grasp, and no moral compass to guide us, we are embarking on a voyage into a brave new world.  While we all can sympathize with the plight of childless couples, it is not an excuse for pragmatism when adoption is still an alternative.  The experiments will surely lead to the deaths of hundreds of embryos (only 1% of animal attempts survive), and endanger the lives of the mothers and create deformed children in the process.  What’s driving the rush to open Pandora’s Box?  Pride: the desire by infertile males to pass on their genes, and the desire by scientists to be first and maybe win a Nobel Prize, or worse - get rich.
Next headline on: Politics.

Is this an admission that current evolutionary theory is deficient, or a flight from the hopelessness of randomness?  Apparently, both.  But you cannot escape randomness if you are a consistent naturalist: unless you start with information, you cannot pull information out of noise.  In the beginning was the Word.
Next headline on: Darwinism.

You can be an atheist and win the Templeton Prize, as long as you can say something nice about religion.  Another man with the Templeton name, Charles Templeton reminds us of the slippery slope of evolution.  Once a vivacious Christian, pastor, evangelist, and even a mentor to Billy Graham, he lost his faith because of the teaching of evolution as fact.  There have been many others.  Some of them have become ardent anti-Christians and anti-creationists; some, like the current winner, take evolution as a given, but retain some longing for the sense of meaning and purpose that the faith of their fathers once provided.  Read Arthur Peacocke’s comments and you get the feeling that he grips naturalistic science firmly as the Truth with a capital T, but is willing to extend a hand to religion, any religion, as providing some truth with a small t.  This kind of compromise thinking may be harder to debate than pure atheism.  Phillip Johnson has good insights into the relation of liberal theology to evolutionism in his latest book The Wedge of Truth.  As long as naturalistic science is the unassailable arbiter of Knowledge in society, religion (which also just evolved) may be tolerated, but must bow the knee to Emperor Darwin.  It’s time to proclaim the emperor has no clothes.

Notice that even though the these enzymes have an outward resemblance (a similar fold), they have entirely different amino acid sequences.  In actuality, ATP utilization is an irreducibly complex mechanism in living cells.  We have written earlier about the wonder of ATP synthase; no way could something like this just evolve by natural means.
    When you learn the art of baloney detecting, it is not hard to find the fallacies in this kind of story.  The professor attributes wish fulfillment and cooperation to enzymes and bacteria: this is the fallacy of personification.  He claims similarities prove ancestry: this is non sequitur.  Then he uses his assumptions of evolution to demonstrate evolution: this is circular reasoning.
Next headline on: The Cell and Biochemistry. • Next dumb story.

Each of your billions of brain cells can make thousands of connections to other brain cells, forming a neural net of an estimated 10 trillion connections.  That’s more than all the soldered joints in all the electrical appliances on earth.  During development of the embryo, each neuron’s growing tips are guided unerringly to their destinations.  If not, the result would be far worse than a bad computer memory chip that makes the software crash: you would be a vegetable or DOA.  This discovery reveals just one small aspect of how this marvel of assembly is accomplished.  It should make us all stand in awe of the wisdom of our Creator.  Think of this the next time you hold a newborn baby in your hands, watching it sense its new environment for the first time.
Next headline on: The Brain. • Next headline on: The Cell and Biochemistry.

Only an evolutionist could take a molecule and weave an epic tale of catastrophe from it.  The use of helium-3 can be taken as a chronometer if properly calibrated, they say, but how can you calibrate against a hypothetical singular earth-shattering event in the unobservable past? 
Next headline on: Dinosaurs.

This story makes a good case study in detecting logical fallacies.  If you read carefully, you will find evidence for post hoc, personification, begging the question and circular reasoning.  There is also bluffing, because the fine print uses plenty of might, could, maybe words while the title and abstract confidently proclaim Darwinian selection has been found.  If you look at the raw data, this story actually confirms the Genesis principle of after its kind, and the wonder of how eyeless sperm and egg are able to recognize they belong to the same species.  The Creator in His wisdom has built in enough variation to adapt to changing circumstances.  This is not evolution.  Let the Darwinists tell us how sex evolved in the first place.  Nothing in evolutionary theory predicts such a marvelous and mysterious phenomenon.  (For a good treatment of the problem, read Ch. 7 of The Biotic Message by Walter ReMine.)
Next headline on: The Cell and Biochemistry. • Next headline on: DNA. • Next headline on: Darwinism. • Next headline on: Mammals. • Next dumb story.

Not too much should be concluded from this report, since the measurements are very hard to make and could only have detected the largest possible planets.  But give evolutionists all the planets they want; they’ll need plenty, because the chance origin of life is so improbable it would never happen in a billion universes as vast as ours.
Next headline on: Stars. • Next headline on: Cosmology.

So the vast gulf between life and non-life has been bridged, eh?  So spontaneous generation is back, eh?  Not so fast.  There was a lot of intelligent design in this experiment, but very little intelligence in the conclusions.  These experimenters brought together three highly improbable ingredients into close quarters, which would not have occurred naturally in sufficient concentrations to provide a chance for fellowship.  They also neglected the destructive effects of UV rays and oxygen, and other nefarious compounds which would act like muggers in the party.  And the claim of information is a stretch: sequences that match would lead only to repetitive crystals, not complex aperiodic information that could have any bearing on the formation of functional proteins.  This experiment seems like an extrapolation on the old joke about two hungry hoboes, one of which tries to cheer up his buddy by saying, “If we had ham, we could have ham and eggs, if we had eggs.”
   It is conceivable that if you took apart a complex mechanism like a watch, parts of it would still work.  Some of the gears and springs might still move.  This is what these experimenters have done: disassembled a tRNA molecule and got parts of it to work.  To have any relevance to the origin of life, they need to start with nothing, not something: get a watch to build itself without any springs and gears, and nobody around giving a hoot whether it worked or not.  Anything less commits the fault of investigator interference and the fallacy of personification.  And remember, until replication is nearly 100% accurate, any progress is lost when the next lightning bolt strikes.
Next headline on: Origin of Life. • Next dumb story.

Evolution thrives on propaganda, and a picture is worth a thousand words.  Since Darwin’s time this museum has been a propaganda powerhouse for evolution.  How many visitors are aware of the problems, such as reported on this website?  Here one of the most powerful, classic examples of evolution (the horse) is admitted to be wrong!  What you were taught in school is a myth.  The fossils come from different continents at different times, but were force-fitted into an evolutionary sequence because of a priori assumptions that evolution had occurred, when in fact each animal was perfectly adapted to its environment and had no urge to evolve into something else.  And despite their disclaimers, the fleshed-out imaginary models of ape-like human ancestors carry inestimable propaganda potential.  Look at the evidence itself, however (modern-looking footprints), and you will find no basis for the conjectured features - other than a prior commitment to evolutionary theory.  Another exhibit on Archaeopteryx shouted in bold type, “Birds Are Dinosaurs,” even though as reported here, scientists disagree strongly among themselves on this, and many other aspects, of evolution.  Caveat emptor.
Next headline on: Schools. • Next headline on: Darwinism. • Next headline on: Fossils.

The article admits from the start that “There is no consensus among experts about how this dazzling leap in technology influenced human evolution.”  So paleoanthropologist Stanley Ambrose “challenges conventional wisdom about Paleolithic technology and hammers out a set of new hypotheses about our evolutionary odyssey.”  In other words, he charges into an open arena for storytelling where anything goes, asking us to believe something clearly preposterous: that the fantastic capabilities of human hands and brains, allowing humans to make complex tools, use grammatical language and solve problems, evolved independently and simultaneously.  And they deride Christians for believing in miracles.
Next headline on: Early Man. • Next headline on: The Brain.

This quote from the article says it all: “Nanoscale self-assembly already happens, every instant, in living cells.  These can be seen as collections of molecular cogs, motors and energy generators, programmed by DNA to organize themselves into a functional unit.”  Nature (read: creation, intelligent design) had it first.
Next headline on: The Cell and Biochemistry.

See Finagle’s 2nd Law, right.

Men cry peace, peace, when there is no peace.  The words pessimism and acrimonious debate characterize the storytellers from both camps.  This project involved no field work, only library research, the Internet, and a computer to try to find a consensus between the two warring parties.  It is not only in the arena of placental mammals where molecular phylogenists have fought the morphologists, as we have shown earlier.
Next headline on: Mammals.

Two conclusions can be inferred from this article: (1) global warming predictions may be vastly overrated, and (2) the Creator has built in safety mechanisms to maintain dynamic equilibrium on our life-sustaining planet.
Next headline on: Environment.