Posts Tagged ‘evolution’

The Top 11 Science Stories of 2011 for Christians/Creationists

Church of Darwin, Fin De Siecle, s8int.com, Science, The Flood of Noah, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Jan 11 2012


by Chris Parker

Last year we published The Top 12 Science Stories of 2010 for Christians and Creationists on January 7th so this doesn’t 2011 roundup is not that late after all..

These stories are the ones that strike us as having been the most interesting, the most impactful in terms of the evolution creation debate or because we didn’t want to rename this article the Top 7 Science Stories of 2011 for Christians/Creationists. This year we’ve only selected 11 stories but remember; we’re in a recession.

Our selections are printed here in no particular order.

1)Science Keeps on Marching Backward: Science ‘Walks Back Some Dubious Claims in 2011

In 2009 and 2010 Ardi and Ida were both effectively debunked as human ancestors within six to eight months of their worldwide discovery announcements, setting new records “for scientists had previously thought” reversals.

In terms of past dubious claims, it had taken NASA 11 years to march back from its 1976 alleged alien life on a meteorite discovery. On Friday, March 4th of last year NASA had another opportunity to march science backward with “alien claims”. Nasa scientist Richard Hoover published a peer reviewed article in the Journal “Cosmology” with the claim that that he had found tiny fossils of alien life in the remnants of a meteorite.


This story was published internationally under headlines like: “NASA Scientist Finds ‘Alien Life’ Fossils”. Naturally, the NASA connection seemingly provided some support to the alien claim which was met with excitement-and skepticism.

Hold that thought for a minute before; the rest of the story.

In another area of scientific dubiosity; “Twenty years ago the palaeontological community gasped as geoscientists revealed evidence for the oldest bacterial fossils on the planet.”..naturenews

The evidence here was a piece of rock found in Australia known as the Apex Chert and it contained it was said evidence of the earliest life on earth. Scientists declared that the Apex Chert was 3.5 billion years old, whereas Genesis would set its maximum age at 10,000 years or less. Late last year there was a development re the Apex Chert as described by this headline:

“Whoops! Scientists left red-faced as oldest ‘evidence of life’ turns out to be iron deposits.”

Whoops indeed. And what about all those evolution adherents who had snootily quoted this “fact” to non-evolution believers for twenty years? This ‘scientists had previously thought” item took even longer than the 1976 NASA “discovery” to reverse.

Getting back to NASA scientist Richard Hoover’s “alien life fossils”.

They were announced on a Friday and disavowed by “top scientists in different disciplines”, including NASA by the following Monday, by noon, setting new standards for scientists had previously thought type reversals. No alien fossils and quite probably no bacterial fossils.

Finally there were the international headlines about the “God Particle”. Science it was said was very close to discovering the “God Particle”, which is a major tenet of materialist beliefs about the creation of the universe is a supposed fundamenal particle reponsible for the creation of the mass of the universe’s mass. Two weeks after the banner headlines about the closeness the world of science was to the discovery we learn in less banner headlines that the particle may not exist.

What doesn’t exist any more are the billions of tax dollars that went into the constructiion of the giant CERN particle accellerator in Geneva.

2) A 2011 Gallop poll indicates that 92% of Americans affirm a belief in God. A surprise; Atheists are more likely to live on the East Coast than the West Coast.

Apparently, one of the un-cleverest things that a presidential candidate could utter these days is that they believe that Genesis is the literal story of how the universe was created and that they personally believe that man and dinosaur co-existed. Even the Republican candidates would be hard pressed to say that publically even if they’re trying to win South Carolina.

So, the Atheists and evolutionists must be winning, right? Not so fast.

“A poll released by Gallup yesterday confirmed what a deeply religious America continues to be 92 percent of Americans still say “yes” when asked the basic question “Do you believe in God?” In 1947, this number was 94 percent. Considering the events over the past 60 years, this is a remarkably stable statistic to say the least.

Gallup notes that in particular, the belief in God is high across all subgroups of the population, but there are variances. Women are more likely to believe in God than men. Liberals are less likely to believe than conservatives. Young people are the least likely to believe.

Those with a post-graduate education are less likely to believe than high school or college graduates. Finally, East Coast Americans are the least likely to believe in God, and Southerners are the most, with the West and the Midwest coming in equally in between.

But how do we stack up against other countries? A 2008 Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey reveal that only 1 in 4 of our neighbors up north believe in God. And a 2005 Eurostat poll indicated that the French, perhaps our cultural opposite, had the highest atheism in Europe — 33% responded that they believed in “neither a Spirit, God, or life force.”

Here is the breakdown of the Gallup poll for U.S. adults.”


In concert with these poll findings other recent polls continue to show that Atheists are the most distrusted group in America although Muslims and Scientologists have made up some ground.

Elsewhere:A University of Minnesota Study on “American Attitudes Towards Atheists & Atheism”
Finds that Atheists are Most Despised, Most Distrusted Minority..
The findings indicate that Americans are least likely to vote for an Atheist for President than any other group. What would happen if a Christian acknowledging that he believed in a literal reading of Genesis ran against an Atheist?

3) Darwinists Alarmed at Teachers’ Caution Over Evolution

Jan 29, 2011 — “Creationism” refuses to die in American high schools. Two researchers at the University of Pennsylvania sounded the alarm in Science, with suggestions for what to do about it. The only suggestion off the table was to have debates about the evidence; no, that was completely out of the question: the report was focused on “Defeating Creationism.”

Michael Berkman and Eric Plutzer, professors of political science at U Penn, surveyed a “national representative probability sample” of 926 high school biology teachers about their teaching of evolution. Only about 28% of the respondents consistently teach evolution “unabashedly”.

The rest are either bashful or unabashedly “creationist” when teaching the subject of origins, the survey found. 13% of the teachers “explicitly advocate creationism or intelligent design by spending at least 1 hour of class time presenting it in a positive light (an additional 5% of teachers report that they endorse creationism in passing or when answering student questions).”

This sounds like a very small amount of time to worry about in a semester-long course, but Berkman and Plutzer’s alarm was palpable: “The boldness and confidence of this minority should not be underestimated.”

Of greater concern, however, (to evolutionists) “the cautious 60%” who sit on the fence to avoid controversy. Some of them avoid the topic, or just teach to the test, or teach various views to let the students make up their own minds. Few of the fence-sitters are advocates of young-earth creationism, which Berkman and Plutzer said “would prevent them from becoming strong advocates for evolutionary biology.”

The authors worry that many students, who will take biology as their only science course, will fail to hear from these cautious teachers the “evidence that evolution has occurred,” and that instruction in evolution will be “absent, cursory, or fraught with misinformation” in American high schools.

They worry about a “cycle of ignorance” in many communities, especially the “socially conservative” communities, where more of the “creationist” and “cautious” teachers tend to reside. The cycle must be broken to prevent a “systematic undermining of science.” Source: The fantastic
CreationEvolutionHeadlines

4) Peer reviewed scientific paper claims that the geological time scale could be off as much as 99%.

Guy Berthault, the author of the study is a graduate of The Ecole Polytechnique, France, and a member of the International Association of Sedimentologists and lives in Paris, France. The article is entitled “Analysis of the Main Principles of Stratigraphy on the Basis of Experimental Data”, and although it reaches some startling conclusions it’s caused barely a ripple in the millions of years geological continuum.

They are walking by faith and not by sight (or site) so that mere evidence is not going to impact them.

“When I started my experiments on strata formation I was surprised to find how little work had been done on the subject in the past. Of course, sediments had been examined and flume experiments performed in connection with building and other projects, but none with the object of explaining the mechanics of stratification.

I searched the data banks but found little to help with my research. I began to realize that the basic principles of superposition, continuity and initial horizontality laid down in the seventeenth century had been accepted, albeit with developments, virtually without question. There seemed to have been little attempt to examine the actual mechanics involved.

Yet a few simple experiments, first with laminae and later with strata revealed that the time needed for micro or macro strata formation was of quite a different order to that generally accepted. The implications were far-reaching both as concerns the geological time-scale and the fossil record.” Source: Author’s Site

5) Archaeopteryx Feathers will fly: Archaeopteryx relegated. Reclassification Raises Fear of Creationists
July 28, 2011 by Steve Drury |EARTH PAGES

“This year, 2011, is the 150th anniversary of the first Archaeopteryx specimen being unearthed from the famous Solnhofen limestone lagerstätte. With its feathered, lizard-like tail; two-clawed, stubby wings; a bill-shaped muzzle with teeth but no keratin coating; feet capable of perching and unlike those of small dinosaurs; a ‘wishbone’ and lightweight bones, Archaeopteryx was just the half-and-half missing link in the fossil record so desperately needed to support Darwin’s Origin of Species, published two years beforehand.

It has remained controversial ever since, even having been claimed to be a forgery by such luminaries as cosmologist Fred Hoyle in 1985, despite its superbly preserved intricacies and the existence at the time of 6 slightly different specimens from the same source some discovered long after Hoyle’s supposed master craftsman must have died.

Creationists soon after the first discovery claimed it was simply a bird created on a Friday together with fish (Genesis 1:20) and must have predated dinosaurs by a day, as they were created on the 6th Day along with all the ‘cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth’ (Genesis 1:24-31).

That scurrilous sect will certainly leap gleefully on the new discovery of a feathered dinosaur from the ever productive Late Jurassic Tiaojishan Formation in NE China (Xu, X. et al.2011. An Archaeopteryx-like theropod from China and the origin of the Avialae. Nature, v. 475, p. 465-470) because ironically, by itself, it could be said to be a missing link too.”

In fact, Xiaotingia zhengi possesses features very like those displayed by Archaeopteryx but convincingly close affinities to deinonychosaurian dinosaurs. The shared features show that neither is a bird (Avialae) and nor are they part of the clade that evolved to birds: they are part of the growing group of feathered dinosaurs that may well have glided or even flown.

As Lawrence Witmer of Ohio University has observed (Witmer, L.M. 201. An icon knocked off its perch. Nature, v. 475, p. 458-459),

‘This finding is likely to be met with considerable controversy (if not outright horror)…’.

Source:Earth Pages

6)More Fear of Creationists: Pssst! Don’t tell the creationists, but scientists don’t have a clue about how life began..

John Horgan writing for Scientific American wanted to use that headline 20 years ago when writing about the sad state of science with respect to the origin of life but couldn’t get away with it then. See, science is absolutely certain that life didn’t begin as it is described in Genesis but unfortunately science has no satisfactory alternative explanation. Well actually, they have dozens of alternative, mutually exclusive alternative explanations for the origin of life.

You’re not a scientist? Don’t know much about biology? How about life comes from life? Biogensis, life from life is all anyone knows but science is sure by faith that abiogenesis; life from non-life somehow occurred.

Mr. Horgan is letting us know from the inside that despite their assurance after many years no one has any idea how abiogenesis could have happened.

In 2011 the famous primordial soup grew cold and was thrown out. In our own article on the topic (Life is a Killer Problem for Science –And Hope for Alien Life; Dies Again. Plus, Shhh, Don’t Tell The Creationists we identified dozens of competing theories for the origin of life.

Source:Scientists Don’t Have a Clue How Life Began


7) 80 Whales Buried Mysteriously in Chilean desert .. Shhh, Don’t tell the creationists?
Marine graveyard is evidence for Noah’s Flood?

by Tas Walker
Published: 01 December 2011

“Researchers from the USA and Chile reported, in November 2011, a remarkable bone bed on the west coast of northern Chile near the port city of Caldera, about 700 kilometres (440 miles) north of the capital, Santiago. Excavations uncovered the remains of some 80 baleen whales of which more than 20 specimens were complete.

They also found other kinds of marine mammals including an extinct dolphin with tusks and a sperm whale.

The previous year, construction workers upgrading the Pan-American Highway discovered the fossil site in a road cut just north of Caldera. Since then, teams of scientists led by palaeontologist Nick Pyenson from the Smithsonian Institute and Mario Suarez from the nearby Museo Paleontologico de Caldera have been working to excavate the fossils while the road works were temporarily suspended.

The fossils alongside the highway are confined to a sandstone ridge about 20 metres (70 feet) wide and 240 metres (800 feet) long. Most whales were about 8 metres (25 feet) long, and perfectly preserved. Some whales were so close together that they overlapped one another. The site in a corner of the Atacama Desert is now well above sea level and over a kilometre from the shore. Suarez said it was well known that whale bones jutted out of the ridge, which was given the name Cerro Ballena, or Whale Hill.

Paleontologists were thrilled to find the treasure trove, describing it as “very unusual”. Pyenson thinks the whales all died “more or less at the same time” after they were trapped in a lagoon. Others suggest they became disoriented and beached themselves.

Paleontologist Erich Fitzgerald from Museum Victoria in Australia said it’s possible the remains accumulated over thousands of years. Whale expert Hans Thewissen from Northeast Ohio Medical University thought the whales might have gathered in a lagoon and been stranded by an earthquake or storm. After the connection to the ocean closed, the lagoon dried up and the whales died.

The puzzle of how these marine creatures died has caught news headlines with one reporting “Fossil Bonanza Poses Mystery”. Another asked, “How did 75 whales end up in the desert?”

Interestingly, some of those posting comments on these news reports suggested the creatures perished in Noah’s Flood. Robert Raeburn of Western Australia said, “The whales probably swam there when the whole world was covered in water, about 4000 years ago at the time of Noah. They would then have been stranded when the waters assuaged (drained back) to expose the dry land. … This all makes sense when viewed from a ‘Bible’ perspective.” An email friend suggested the same to Mario Suarez, one of the lead paleontologists. Not surprisingly, this idea generated a deal of web comments.

What stops people making the obvious connection between these fossils and Noah’s Flood? It’s the million-year ages assigned to the fossils.

The field evidence for large-scale catastrophe is overwhelming as these research scientists have reported. What stops people making the obvious connection between these fossils and Noah’s Flood? It’s the million-year ages assigned to the fossils.

On one comments thread Holly from the USA responded to the Noah’s Flood idea with, “Nothing from the Bible perspective makes sense, since 4,000 years ago that area wasn’t covered with water. However it was about 2 million years ago.” “

The remainder of the article and the source: Source

8)Everything that You thought you knew about dinosaurs is wrong! Again!

Were dinosaurs cold or warm blooded? Bi pedal or quadrupedal? Did the hold their heads erect or down? Omnivore, carnivore or vegetarian?

An article written in 2000 in Discover Magazine informs us that no one knows what dinosaurs looked like (except the people who saw them?) A 2009 article in LiveScience suggests that paleontologists have overestimated the girth of certain dinosaurs by as much as a third to a half-all this time.

In 2009 also UC Berkeley paleontologist Mark Goodwin and his partner Jack Horner of the Museum of the Rockies concluded that many dinosaurs once thought to represent new or separate species may have been new or separate at all.

A miniature creature known as Nanotyrannus, the recently discovered “tiny tyrant” that resembled the ferocious Tyrannosaurus rex, may have been nothing more than a juvenile version of the big dinosaur. And a giant headed, frill-necked creature that its discoverers called Torosaurus turns out to be only an old-age stage of the well-known plant-eating Triceratops.

And Hogwartia, the famous dinosaur that looked like a dragon!!? Just a plain old Pachycephalosaurus!

(What now will become of Chrisparkerosaurus!?

Is the constant shuffling of dinosaurs and dinosaur identifications the result of scientists seeking personal glory or the results of a field, paleontology, which is to science what Denny’s is to haute cuisine?

Yes!

Elsewhere on Horner and Dinosaur Identification Problems: “Dinosaur Classification Is a Mess CreationevolutionHeadlines

May 13, 2011 — Are there a thousand species of dinosaurs – or far fewer? John Horner, a dinosaur hunter himself, thinks the classification is a mess and wants to clean it up. According to Science Magazine News Horner is worried that “with almost 1000 types of dinosaurs on record and a new species being named somewhere in the world every 2 weeks—too many supposedly new discoveries are actually duplicates of animals already on the books.” Another paleontologist, Michael J. Benton, estimates that over half of the named dinosaurs are misclassified.

Apparently human pride is to blame. “Part of the problem, Horner says, is that scientists are sometimes too keen on finding and naming new dinosaurs.” Naming a new dinosaur gets you noticed and published. As a result, fossil hunters tend to focus on the differences instead of the similarities.

Additionally, “paleontologists are coming to realize that the bones of an adult dinosaur can be very different from those of a juvenile animal of the same species and can easily mislead scientists into thinking they are two different species.”..….CreationEvolutionHeadlines

9) Some “Non-Avian Feathered Dinosaurs” May Have Been Birds
Oh, I see; some of your non sequential, ill-logical thoughts have been formed into words

Did you follow that? Some “non-bird” feathered dinosaurs may have been birds?

Science writer Jennifer Viegas in Discovery News summarizes a research paper which had been published in February 2009 Medical Hypotheses. What is a non-avian dinosaur? Or more to the point, why are certain of God’s creatures known broadly as non-avian dinosaurs?

After all, aren’t all creatures either avians or non-avians?

It’s because in the absence of that description people would think that they were birds! In order to support the evolutionists current dinosaur to bird mythology, however, science needs these birds to be dinosaurs.

Suppose evolutionists had a mythology that t-rex’s evolved into dogs. Certain extremely dog-like fossils would be named; –non-dog-ian dinosaurs. (non-canine-dinosaurs)That way everyone would “know”. Source: Discovery News

10)Scientists Continue to Marvel at How Much the Universe is Fined Tuned for Human Life

Existence: Why is the Universe Just Right for us?
by Marcus Chown NewScientist, July 29, 2011

“IT HAS been called the Goldilocks paradox. If the strong nuclear force which glues atomic nuclei together were only a few per cent stronger than it is, stars like the sun would exhaust their hydrogen fuel in less than a second. Our sun would have exploded long ago and there would be no life on Earth. If the weak nuclear force were a few per cent weaker, the heavy elements that make up most of our world wouldn’t be here, and neither would you….(Chown)

If gravity were a little weaker than it is, it would never have been able to crush the core of the sun sufficiently to ignite the nuclear reactions that create sunlight; a little stronger and, again, the sun would have burned all of its fuel billions of years ago. Once again, we could never have arisen.

Such instances of the fine-tuning of the laws of physics seem to abound. Many of the essential parameters of nature – the strengths of fundamental forces and the masses of fundamental particles – seem fixed at values that are “just right” for life to emerge. A whisker either way and we would not be here. It is as if the universe was made for us.

What are we to make of this? One possibility is that the universe was fine-tuned by a supreme being – God. Although many people like this explanation, scientists see no evidence that a supernatural entity is orchestrating the cosmos.

(What! See Prior Paragraphs in this article, genuises!…s8int.com)

Source: NewScientist

11) The Continued Rehabilitation of New-anderthal


“New investigations at an iconic cave site on the Channel Island of Jersey have led archaeologists to believe the Neanderthals have been widely under-estimated.” ..BBC UK

Enough all ready! Several years ago a DNA study showed that Neanderthal DNA matched human DNA to 99.97%. You match your neighbor’s DNA to 99.99%. Jack Cuozzo, a dentist discovered that Neaderthal reconstructions had been deliberately tricked up to push their faces forward in order to make their faces appear to be more apelike. Cuozzo Story

But even though science is reporting these recent truths about Neanderthal; that he was fully human, apparently the message hasn’t penetrated the entire paleontological community.

We get it. The truth is; we never thought otherwise and in fact creationists were there from the beginning–from Genesis. If it was me I’d start to get irritated if people kept making a big deal about how “fully human” I am…BBC News UK

Dinosaur and Human Interaction in Our Times (the New York Times, LA Times, Chicago-Sun Times etc. Historical Newspapers)

Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, s8int.com, Science, Sophistication of Ancestors, The Flood of Noah, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Jun 03 2011

Photo: Dr. Requena reports finding artifacts of an unknown, advanced civilization in Venezuela who had sculpted extinct creatures incuding several versions of the diplodocus dinosaur. Modern Mechanix, 1934

by Chris Parker, Copyright 2011
Quoted Headlines and news content in this article are in a blue font

“Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: He calleth them all by names by the greatness of His might, for that He is strong in power; not one faileth” (Isaiah 40:26).

Charles Darwin’s book; “The Origin of the Species; was written back in 1859. The word “dinosaur” had been coined a few years earlier, in 1841 by Sir Richard Owen.

I began a review of the dinosaur and man controversy in the press after that time thinking that perhaps the world of science and news reporting would have still been rather naive and innocent for a time and still willing to report things as they were discovered-without the filter and hold that Darwinism currently holds over both.

Actually, the Darwin free “honeymoon period” proved to be remarkably short, however, scientists did make reports during this period that would ruin the reputation of anyone making such “scientific” claims today.

Some say that you can’t prove a negative; what is true is that when you make a negative proposition, i.e. “blue fairies don’t exist”, the breadth of that statement is universal, while the positive (opposing) side of that argument, i.e. “blue fairies do exist” only has to be shown to be true in one place in the universe to be correct and to simultaneously prove the “negative proposition” incorrect.

Photo: Mesopotamian Cylinder Seal showing sauropods from 300 B.C. The Lovre.

Another example of this type is the proposition that man and dinosaur never interacted. In fact, according to science, they missed each other by 65 million years. This negative proposition must be universal to be true; that is, man and dinosaur never interacted at any time or in any place in this universe.

For the opposing proposition to be true; that man and dinosaur did coexist- it need only be proved that they in fact, did interact at least in one instance at one time and at one place anywhere in the universe.

But we have proof of much more than a single instance in the newspapers and magazines that existed prior to the complete establishment of the Darwin filter.

Advanced Civilization in Venezuela Lived with Dinosaurs
Special Correspondence to the New York Times, Caracas, June 5, 1932 PUBLISHED JUNE, 12 1932
DATES EARLY MAN BACK 8,000 YEARS
Dr. Requena Holds Discoveries Indicate Venezuela Was Civilization’s Cradle
Found Fossilized Skulls—Lake Valencia Relics Show That Makers Were Familiar With Prehistoric Animals

In the early 1930’s Dr. Rafael Requena was an anthropologist affiliated with Academy of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, National Library, National Congress, Central University of Venezuela.

From the above named article:

“Evidence that Venezuela was the cradle of civilization is offered in a volume on his archaeological discoveries which is being published by Dr. Rafael Requena, private secretary to President General Gomez. The publication of this book will lift the veil of secrecy which has shrouded Dr. Requena’s discoveries since they were announced briefly a year ago.

Most startling among the relics unearthed by Dr. Requena from the ancient tombs that dot the shores of Lake Valencia are images of pre-historic animals.

Among these, well sculptured in clay and kiln baked, are models of the diplodocus, a four footed monster with a goose-shaped body, surmounted by a dorsal fin, the neck of a giraffe and the jaws of a crocodile; a gliptodante, a squat four-footed beast with a hideous frog shaped head, bulging eyes and two rows of humps along its back; the prehistoric marine turtle and its equally great land-loving brother and carved from stone, the head of a hadrosaurus.

Alongside these relics were discovered the jaw bone of a dinosaur and pieces of the armor plate of the hadrosaurus…”

Photo:Closeup and comparison of one of Requena’s sauropods. From photo at top of page.


The article goes on to mention that the skulls of the people found at the location had been fossilized. Dr. Requena noted that there appeared to be a high degree of civilization that preceded all other South American civilizations. Dr. Requena, assuming that the current scientific thinking re the age of the dinosaurs was correct, and finding numerous examples of sculptured dinosaurs, reasoned that the civilization and the dinosaurs must have been from 250 million years prior.

In his book he endeavored to link the ancient civilization to Atlantis.

The April, 1934 issue of Modern Mechanix, ran an article about Dr. Requena and his archaelogical discoveries in an article entitled; “Scientists Find Traces of Two Lost Continents”. The pictures that accompany this portion of our article on dinosaurs and man in historical press accounts comes from the Modern Mechanix article.

From that article:


“DOWN through the ages, man has hung to the words of Plato. For Plato told of a great continent, Atlantis by name, which slipped under the waters of the sea, carrying with it an entire civilization.
Recent discoveries point to the fact that approximately 250,000,000 years ago, South America, Africa, India, Australia and a great portion of the Antarctic region were a single continent.

Similar discoveries reveal the existence, until about the same period, of a North Atlantis, a sort of super-continent, which ran from the present western shores of North America to the British Isles, and possibly connected, by a few small peninsulas, with Europe.

Mysterious prehistoric rock writing, recently found in Venezuela by Dr. Rafael Requena, is believed to be the work of people who lived on the lost South Atlantis. In addition to the writings, Dr. Requena has found many relics of a by-gone culture.

They include small statues of humans, with males and females easily distinguished and replicas of animals, many of which resemble the strange dinosaurs which have been dug up in other portions of the world.”

Well, that’s it, right?

The one instance in the world of scientifically verified interaction between man and dinosaur that disproves the proposition that man and dinosaur never lived together? After all, there wasn’t just a single piece that perhaps could have been misinterpreted; there were several sculptures of “diplodocuses” in various poses and sculptures of other dinosaurs and extinct creatures; not discovered by some nameless amateur but by a scientist?

Unfortunately, not as far as “science” is concerned.


On the same continent, over 17,000 and counting “Ica Stones” discovered in 1966 near Ica, Peru; many displaying drawings of dinosaurs and technology such as telescopes etc. and 32,000 Acambaro figurines, many in the shapes of dinosaurs and other extinct or fantastic creatures discovered in 1944 in Acambaro, Mexico have also been ignored by the scientific community.

Dinosaurs and Man in the Gobi Desert

“Roy Chapman Andrews (January 26, 1884 – March 11, 1960) was an American explorer, adventurer and naturalist who became the director of the American Museum of Natural History. He is primarily known for leading a series of expeditions through the fragmented China of the early 20th century into the Gobi Desert and Mongolia. The expeditions made important discoveries and brought the first-known fossil dinosaur eggs to the museum.” Wikipedia


This next series of articles deals with the discoveries of Roy Chapman Andrews in the Gobi desert. Andrews was a well known adventurer scientist of his day whose adventures often made the front pages of the New York Times and newspapers and magazines across the country and the world. It is important to realize that Andrews was not outside of the scientific mainstream but was a part of it. He was always associated with the American Museum of Natural History.

Explorer Finds Remarkable Tools of Stone-Age People
Roy Chapman Andrews, Back from China Describes Prehistoric Life
Miami Herald, August 25, 1925

“Stone implements and weapons of a race of men who lived thousands of years ago among sand dunes on the shore of a lake since swallowed up by the Gobi desert have been found far in the interior of Mongolia by the third Asiatic expedition of the American Museum of Natural History……

…These primitive men bored the shells and made ornaments of the eggs laid by the dinosaur, the giant reptile that roamed the Asiatic uplands some 10,000,000 years ago….”

In case you missed it, Chapman believes that man lived with dinosaurs in ages past because they had made ornaments out of dinosaur eggs, something that could only be accomplished with unfossilized dinosaur eggs!

Andrews Expedition
Glasgow Herald, September 9, 1925

“Among the most unique of these discoveries were the various clutches of dinosaur’s eggs, which were unearthed to the number of forty this year and thirty last.…

….Fragmentary dinosaur’s eggs figure also among the human relics, for a number of pieces were found which had been cut in regular shapes, presumably to form ornaments for prehistoric belles.”

Humans Coeval with Dinosaur (Coeval: of the same or equal age, antiquity, or duration)
The Spokesman-Review – Aug 19, 1925

Photo: The Mongolians drilled and cracked dinosaur egg shells as well as ostrich egg shells to make jewelry. Ostrich eggshell jewelry is shown here.

“…These primitive men bored the shells and made ornaments of the eggs left by the dinosaur…..They used for the same purpose the egg shells of a gigantic ostrich, long ago extinct”.

Mr. Andrews went on to date the age of the Mongolian dinosaur civilization back to 25 million years ago as science came to move the age of the dinosaurs back further in time. Clearly the Mongolians were coeval with the dinosaurs whenever it was that they lived. Calling them primitive even though no human remains were found was their way of trying to preserve some kind of evolutionary order.

Additional Articles

Only 50,000 Years Old
The Meriden Daily Journal – Jun 18, 1925

“Moscow—Two human skeletons of the Neanderthal type, believed to be at least 50,000 years old recently found in a cave near Crimea.

The skeletons of dinosaurs, hyenas and bears were also found in the cave.”

Prehistoric Game Found
Monsters With Which Ante-dilluvian Man Contended
The Turners Falls Reporter – Dec 16, 1908

“The remains of the Dryopitheous or fossil man discovered on the Bengawan River, in Java mixed as they were with fossil bones of reptiles of the Cainozoic (SIC) age, and lying in the cretaceous strata, clearly prove that man was contemporary with the later of the giant Saurians.


Moreover, the discovery of the Nampa image, a piece of handiwork found in the cretaceous strata in Ada county, Idaho would imply that he had attained some slight degree of art. Assuming then that man was living in the Cainozoic (SIC) age, the question is, how did he survive his acquaintanceship with the gigantic Saurians….”

Confirms Story of Prehistoric Finds in Kenya Colony—U.S. Anthropologist Says Bones Prove Theory of Man’s First Habitat
In Stone Age Deposit
The Montreal Gazette – Sep 24, 1927

“….the Cutler dinosaur expedition to Tanganyika, who in six weeks found seven skulls at Nakeru in a Stone Age deposit, and also unearthed a complete skeleton of a six foot man buried twelve feet deep with more than 100 stone tools. Dr. Collie gave a pledge to the discoverer not to discuss the details of the Kenya find until after Dr. Leaky (yes that Dr. Leaky) has published them this fall.

He stressed the importance of the discovery because of the apparently inexhaustible supply of these remains, and the fact that traces of dinosaurs were found. Mr. Leaky was acting for the Royal Society and the Cambridge School of Anthropology, where he is a lecturer.”

The Sunday Tribune – Mar 15, 1925

Petrified Footprints of Man Assured Museum
Evidence of Human Life on American Continent Millions of Years Ago Offers Basis for Speculation
The Deseret News – Jul 24, 1934


“Here are the footprints of the Huntington Man claimed by scientists to have roamed the wilds of Utah nearly 200 million years ago. You will note that the foot widens out at the toes, indicating that the owner of these footprints must have had to walk on soft or miry ground. The prints are almost a foot long, and more than five inches across the toes. The deep mark at the side of the footprints was probably made by the head of a flint spear, resting on marshy ground.

….If these footprints were made when the sand of this period were soft then man must have been there to make them! So if you can, envision wild and woolly men riding tamed herbiverous dinosaurs racing up and down the country……”

In this gentler, less dogmatic Darwinist time, science appeared to be willing to admit that man and dinosaur interacted. The time difficulty enters in because they still accepted the Darwinist geological time scale. When was sandstone formed they believed; 200 million years ago. Therefore they reasoned, man must have been alive 200 million years ago-along with the dinosaurs.

The truth is that the rock formed and the man left his prints and dinosaurs all lived within the last few thousand years.

Unearthed Image Presents a Puzzle
The Calgary Daily Herald – Aug 6, 1924

“A rock image lately unearthed near grand Lake, high in the Colorado Rockies, presents a puzzle. It is a blue granite stone weighing 66 pounds. But what makes it remarkable is that it is covered with carvings indicating a very early period of human life.


The mammoth animals outlined are contemporaneous with the Cro-Magnon age. Among those pictured are prehistoric dinosaurs and mastodons. The main carving represents an early man with hands that have but three fingers. The flat nose pictured is generally associated with a race preceding the Aztecs according to J.A. Jeancon, curator of the Colorado Historical and Natural History Society.” Article

Oldest Footprints in the World
The Portsmouth Sunday Times – Feb 14, 1931

“A number of clearly defined footprints in solid rock have just been discovered in France which are believed to date back from two to three million years and perhaps record the mysterious first man. The face of the rock in which the prints are embodied is criss-crossed with the steps of dinosaurs and similar prehistoric animals and indicates that a terrific struggle once occurred there.

The imprints were, of course made when the rock was soft and then slowly hardened and were preserved for all time. The amazing discovery was made at Bagnoles-de-l’Onrne in Normandy by Dr. Marcel Morin, a well known French scientist.

…..Archeologists have been much impressed by this discovery. As a result of their investigations it is suggested that man first appeared in the earlier periods of the Tertiary Age of Mammals, which ranges loosely between two and sixty million years ago.”

How Science Responds to Its Own Discoveries

Nature is Interesting
Footprints in the Rock
Toledo Blade – Nov 1, 1950

By William Holt, a retired member of the faculty of Bowling Green State University and was recognized as one of the leading geologists in the nation.

“Occasionally peculiar shaped depressions in the surface of the bedrock have caused some persons with abnormal imagination, and a lack of geological training, to “see things” in the rock. Human footprints, hand impressions, and even tracks of dinosaurs or other prehistoric animals are recognized (?).

A most interesting case of a foot-print in a slab of surface rock was recently called to my attention. The footprint was in sandstone, and was so real (?) that to some at least there was no doubt that it was actually made by man. The main question seemed to be how many millions of years old it was.

Although I did not see the original, a clear photograph of it was quite sufficient in this case; and I attempted to make the answer clear to the questioners by the following statements:

First, that no human or animal could possibly make a deep imprint in solid, hard rock.

Second, that this particular Ohio bedrock was formed many millions of years before even primitive man existed. Hence no human foot ever could have stepped on the loose sediments of which this rock later was formed.”………William Holt

William is a materialist “scientist” and thus has trained himself not to believe his own lying eyes. In later years he got himself into trouble by reasoning that the IRS didn’t exist and therefore he didn’t have to pay taxes.

In Conclusion:

August 8, 1955 The Le Mars-Globe

“A skeleton found in a gravel pit here—a fairly complete skeleton, has been declared by Dr. Reynold Ruppe, state University of Iowa archaeologist, to be the remains of an ice-age man, who lived near the south edge of the glaciers which once covered Plymouth
County.

The Monona County ice-age man, who lived at least 10,000 years ago, ..was not like a modern Indian. He’s something older—and something new.

Bones of a dinosaur were found in the same deposit—about 10 feet deeper.

At first this led to speculation that the dinosaur was the aborigine’s pet, but that didn’t hang together. Dinosaurs disappeared from the earth a million years before the first, man showed up.

So the dinosaur must have left his bones a long, long time before the man died, was drowned or trapped in quicksand at the spot near, Turin where his skeleton was recovered.”

The reader sitting on the edge of his seat when he initially began to read this was quickly calmed by the explanation that this could not be what it might have seemed to be– he was reminded that there was no evidence that dinosaurs and man ever lived together! Science!

Though this scene in various forms, in various venues and with a variety of potential proofs has no doubt been played out thousands of times in thousands of locales, the Atheist continues to ask “where is the evidence” or “why hasn’t evidence of this interaction ever been found” and many Christians wonder also while nevertheless holding on to their beliefs. The relevant information is being suppressed-sometimes “automatically” because it doesn’t fit the paradigm.

See Also
Man and Dinosaur Co-Existence Proof Accepted by Science–Giant Footprints in Stone–Giant Humans in Stone–All Verified by Orthodox Scientist After 30 Years of Ridicule

Life is a Killer Problem for Science –And Hope for Alien Life; Dies Again. Plus, Shhh, Don’t Tell The Creationists

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, s8int.com, Science, The Flood of Noah, Uncategorized | Posted by Chris Parker
Mar 21 2011


Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Gen 2:7/

Photo: Shhh, don’t tell the creationists!

As we’ve noted previously in this space, one of the most frequently used phrases in articles about science is; “scientists had previously thought”, or some close variation. Some claim that this is the very thing that is so wonderful about science, that science and its practioners refuse to rest on its/their laurels and that they/it keep searching for the truth and freely admit their mistakes when they’re discovered.

I personally hadn’t noticed that about science, but do note with interest that the internet and the current 24 hour media cycle appear to be speeding up the rate of “previous believism”.

To wit; Back in 1996 NASA’s announcement that alien bacteria had been discovered in a meteorite from Antarctica evoked quite a bit of international fanfare from inside and outside the scientific community. Although there were always skeptics of the “discovery”, it wasn’t until 2007 that the claim was thoroughly disproven when Mary Sue Bell, a University of Houston grad student was able to precisely recreate the alleged “bacterial” imprints with a lab created collision similar to a meteorite impacting a planetary surface.

NASA had to back away from its alien bacteria claims, but it took them 11 years.

On the othert hand, Ida, the alleged human ancestor fossil that was going to change everything, was introduced with much fanfare in April, 2009 and debunked before the end of that year, failing to make most top ten science story lists of 2009. Ida was replaced on some top ten lists with Ardi, another proposed earliest human ancestor, whose discovery had been announced in October of 2009.

However, by May of 2010, the same journal; “Science”, which had mucho ballyhooed Ardi, had this to say:

“Ardi,” the fossil female whose discovery is thought to stretch our human ancestry back more than 4 million years, has been challenged by specialists who discount the evidence of how she lived and maintain she was never a forerunner of the human line.”

Ardi and Ida were both effectively debunked as human ancestors within six to eight months of their worldwide discovery announcements, setting new records “for scientists had previously thought” reversals.

The Whole Alien Life and the Origin of Terrestrial Life Thing

It had taken NASA 11 years to back away from their 1976 alleged alien life discovery. On Friday, March 4th of this year NASA scientist Richard Hoover published a peer reviewed article in the Journal “Cosmology” with the claim that that he had found tiny fossils of alien life in the remnants of a meteorite.

This story was published internationally under headlines like: “NASA Scientist Finds ‘Alien Life’ Fossils”. Naturally, the NASA connection seemingly provided some support to the claim which was met with excitement-and skepticism.

Hold that thought for a minute before; the rest of the story.

“Twenty years ago the palaeontological community gasped as geoscientists revealed evidence for the oldest bacterial fossils on the planet.”..naturenews

The evidence here was a piece of rock found in Australia known as the Apex Chert and it contained it was said evidence of the earliest life on earth. Scientists declared that the Apex Chert was 3.5 billion years old, whereas Genesis would set its maximum age at 10,000 years or less. Last week there was a development re the Apex Chert as described by this headline:

“Whoops! Scientists left red-faced as oldest ‘evidence of life’ turns out to be iron deposits”

Whoops indeed. And what about all those evolution adherents who had snootily quoted this “fact” to non-evolution believers for twenty years? This ‘scientists had previously thought” item took even longer than the 1976 NASA “discovery” to reverse.

Getting back to NASA scientist Richard Hoover’s “alien life fossils”.

They were announced on a Friday and disavowed by “top scientists in different disciplines”, including NASA by the following Monday, by noon, setting new standards for scientists had previously thought type reversals. No alien fossils and quite probably no bacterial fossils.

So what’s going on? Why the dubious claims of proofs of early life and of the discovery of extra-terrestrial life?

The title of a recent article published in Scientific American* and written by John Horgan might provide a clue; “Pssst! Don’t tell the creationists, but scientists don’t have a clue how life began”. S8int.com blogged about this earlier this year in our article; When It Comes to Explanations for the Origin of Life, Genesis Has the Quality; So, Science Comes At You With Quantity

We think that materialist science understands that if it cannot accept the Genesis account a good counter would be to be able to prove exactly how life “actually” began. They have been and will continue to be unsuccessful. Frustrated perhaps with this paralyzing failure, some scientists have felt the need to come up with some incredible theories to fill the void. Increasingly, the idea that life may have begun elsewhere in the universe and made its way to earth on a comet has become popular even though this only moves the origin of life problem to a new location.

Recently, famous Atheist Dawkins, allowed that while he couldn’t accept God as the Designer/Creator of life on earth, he didn’t have the same reticence in believing some alien was the designer/creator.

Another famous Atheist, or so he claims, named John W. Loftus, the author of several Atheistic books was very excited about NASA scientist, Richard Hoover’s claims about alien life fossils. He posted the following telling post on his Debunking Christianity Blog entitled: NASA Scientist Finds Evidence of Alien Life “

See, the Bible doesn’t mention alien life. Therefore proof that alien life exists or even that it existed in the past would serve as a way of debunking Christianity, God and the Bible.

In the wake of recent events, however that post is no longer available.

*Thanks to CreationEvolutionHeadlines for the heads up on this article.

Survival of the Fittest? The Creation Museum A Natural Selection? Museum Thriving in its Environment

Church of Darwin, Dinosaurs in Literature, Religious, Science, The Flood of Noah, Uncategorized | Posted by Chris Parker
Mar 17 2011


After Three Years Creation Museum Is Evolving (But Not In That Way)
By Dennis O’Connor

Religion News Service, November 2010
The Huffington Post

Ken Ham, the Australian-born creator of the Creation Museum looks around the throng of about a thousand guests on a hot, August morning and notes that “for a Tuesday, this is not a bad crowd.”

In fact, more than three years after it opened in this remote corner of Kentucky, the 70,000-square-foot “walk through the Bible,” consisting of animatronic displays, video features, theaters and restaurants has evolved into a thriving enterprise.

“We have consistently surpassed our own forecasts for attendance,” said Mark Looy, a co-founder of the museum and spokesman for the center. Last month (August), the Creation Museum counted more than 1.2 million guests since it opened in 2007, he added.

While Ham and Looy expected attendance to be high for the first year because of the curiosity factor — there were about 500,000 guests in the museum’s first year — no one predicted the continuing growth in attendance.

Ham, who was instrumental in the startup of the museum’s sponsoring organization, Answers in Genesis, said that despite the economic recession, families, individuals, church groups and even bus tours continue to pour into the Creation Museum, often spending a couple of days in the region to sample other attractions in the Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky market.

“The recession has not in any way affected us,” Ham said. “Many people who were going to come here were going to make this their destination anyway. Add to that people who decided instead of taking an expensive vacation in Florida, they wanted to either stay in this area or make the trip here. Either way, the museum has really helped the local economy more than people may realize.”

Tom Caradonio, president of the Northern Kentucky Convention and Visitors Bureau, said that one of the Creation Museum’s greatest strengths is the interest and support it has garnered from evangelicals, a large demographic group.

“When Answers in Genesis did their demographic studies for the museum, they obviously knew that they had a group of people who would be highly motivated to visit,” Caradonio said.

Pastor Brad Bigney of nearby Grace Fellowship Church in Florence, Ky., said another reason for the museum’s steady flow of guests is Ham’s frenetic schedule, which puts him on the road up to 250 times a year.

“He’s a great spokesman for the museum, and he plants the seed for individuals and groups to make the trip to Northern Kentucky,” Bigney said.

Four years ago, the museum was beset by feuds over zoning issues and opposition from many corners of the scientific community.

That sideshow has not gone away, Ham said. Anti-creationist bloggers continue to pan the facility, and some critics have taken shots at the museum’s concept and staff. The pinnacle of ridicule came in the form of cable television star Bill Maher, who snuck into Ham’s office one day to do a taping for his movie “Religulous.”

But the biggest doubt over Answers in Genesis’ project was questions about whether organizers could raise the $27 million it would need to launch the project, Caradonio said.

“If you go back to the issue of private funding — there was no government money involved in this project — you will see that about $5 million came from big donors, but by and large the other contributions came from individuals who were giving $25 or $50 from all over the country,” Caradonio said. “With that many people invested in the project, you have built a huge audience that says, `Hey, I’ve put some money into this, and now I want to see the place.’ That became a tremendous incentive for people to visit.”

Looy said that more than half of the museum’s visitors come from outside a 250-mile radius of the region, which has bolstered the bottom line for numerous hotels in and around the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, located just a few miles from the museum.

“That has been kind of a surprising development, with the hotel packages for museum visitors,” Caradonio said. “It goes back to this whole issue of the kind of people the Creation Museum attracts: wholesome family-oriented people who the hotel folks love to have. And their arrival has helped make up for the loss in business because of the cutbacks (at Delta Airlines hub operations at the airport).”

Ham estimated that the museum has generated $65 million in overall financial impact on the community, helping support more than 2,000 jobs,in the region.

Ham and co-founder Looy said that the museum’s success has allowed them to plan for expansion, including transforming warehouse space into additional room for a theater, and a new hall for visiting exhibits.

Ham noted that museum staffers already are planning for 20,000 guests to visit for the annual live Nativity exhibit, a substantial increase from last year’s attendance, which was about 15,000.

“We are growing,” Ham said. “And we don’t see that stopping any time soon.”

Creation Museum Website
Original Source:The Huffington Post

Ancient Mound Builder Controversy: Did They Interact with and Memorialize Allosaurus, T-Rex or Carnotaurus? Plus, Champ or Ogopogo?

Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, s8int.com, Sophistication of Ancestors, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Feb 28 2011

by Chris Parker

Drawing: Mound Builder Artifact from the book: “Records of Ancient Races in the Mississippi Valley, 1887

It’s amazing how little we as a supposedly educated culture actually know about the past. Even if we’ve studied the past, much of what is being taught or that is commonly believed is untrue. For instance, Columbus did not “discover” America. He was preceded here certainly by its inhabitants of the time, but also by the Norse, the Chinese, Africans, the Irish and the Vikings to name a few. Nero did not fiddle while Rome burned, Eve did not eat an apple, Egyptians were Africans. Dinosaurs and man Did interact

When in comes to the American continent, Native Americans supposedly came here from Asia 20,000 years ago across the Bering Straight land Bridge. However, a mysterious people, now called the Mound Builders whose works the Native Americans didn’t know were apparently here before them and their artifacts show that they interacted with the mastodon, dinosaurs and aquatic reptiles. Dinosaurs and aquatic reptiles supposedly went extinct more than 65 million years ago.

No one knows for sure who the Mound Builders were and where they came from but one thing is certain; no one believes that they lived with the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. The question is; did some dinosaurs and Mound builders live together here on this continent in “recent” times?

I present here some theories about the actual aimals being depicted here. Of course I could be wrong but I feel that if science believes that the ancient mound depicted on the left represents a Swan rather than a quadruped such as a sauropod that I’m on safe ground.

“The group of cultures collectively called Mound Builders were prehistoric inhabitants of North America who constructed various styles of earthen mounds for burial, residential and ceremonial purposes. These included the Pre-Columbian cultures of the Archaic period; Woodland period (Adena and Hopewell cultures); and Mississippian period; dating from roughly 3000 BCE to the 16th century CE, and living in regions of the Great Lakes, the Ohio River valley, and the Mississippi River valley and its tributaries.

As a comparison, beginning with the construction of Watson Brake about 3500 BC in present-day Louisiana, indigenous peoples started building earthwork mounds in North America nearly 1000 years before the pyramids were constructed in Egypt. Since the 19th century, the prevailing scholarly consensus has been that the mounds were constructed by Indigenous peoples of the Americas, early cultures distinctly separate from the historical Native American tribes extant at the time of European colonization of North America. The historical Native Americans were generally not knowledgeable about the civilizations that produced the mounds. Research and study of these cultures and peoples has been based on archaeology and anthropology.” Wikipedia

Mound Builder Theropod Dinosaur


This artifact (also pictured at the top of the page) is a drawing from the book; Records of Ancient Races in the Mississippi Valley: Written By William McAdams published in 1887 Page 14.

The author and the experts refer to the depiction as a “dragon” and it might seem presumptuous of me to disagree (particularly since we have only the head of the creature) but I see something else entirely. The Mound Builder creatures surrounding this piece are for the most part recognizable and are sculpted in a realistic style. There is no reason to suppose that this is a mythological creature other than because one has an A Priori scientific belief that these creatures did not exist within the lifetime of man.

Here is the author’s discussion of the piece in question and the other pieces found with it in the mound.

Graphic:Left, T-rex, Right Carnotaurus

“In our collection of pottery from the ancient mounds we have several pieces ornamented with dragon-like devices. We give an illustration of two of these; burial vases, with a most pronounced dragon-head standing up from the rim of the vessel. There is the great mouth with the teeth revealed, and protruding tongue, with fierce eyes, and the general aspect, not only of the Piasa, but of those mythological representations of the dragon so frequently found in Asia. We present a sketch of another.

Graphic:Left, Allosaurus, Right Carnotaurus


It is all the more interesting since we found with it a magnificent collection of pottery, of more than a hundred pieces, at the base of the great Cahokia mound, (pictured above, right) in the American Bottom, in Madison County, Ills.

This is the largest artificial mound in the United States, and perhaps in the world, being one-hundred feet in height, and covering with its base sixteen acres of ground. It is the centre of a group of seventy-two others, which surround it, and of which a description will be given farther on in this work. They are situated on a level plain, miles from any natural elevation. For a complete description and survey of them, see “The Antiquities of Cahokia, or Monk’s Mound’

Upon taking these curious old burial vases from the place where they had rested for ages, it was like exhuming a museum of natural history in ceramics ; for these were the shapes of animals, birds, reptiles, fishes, and aflmost all animated nature, together with the shapes of From Cahoki Mound. ithe human form. Among them were several vases adorned with the dragon heads.”

This is a realistically sculpted creature, posed withn a frog, it is certainly not a lizard and its teeth and head indicate that it is a carnivorous reptile. Quite frequently, such a creature is laabeled a dragon, and if not then a crocodile or alligator. This creature is clearly not one of those. It appears to be a lifelike depiction of a theropod dinosaur; a species similar to the allosaurus, t-rex or Carnotaurus. Are those horns on the top of its head or are those prominent eye ridges as depicted in a number of t-rex renditions. Keep this in mind; the piece you see here may have been done by an eyewitness.

We have compared here the Mound Builder creature with several examples of meat eating theropod dinosaurs. In our minds, the Carnotaurus, to date found in South America, most closely matches the Mound Builder artrifact.

Carnotaurus (pronounced /?k?rn??t?r?s/; meaning “meat-eating bull”, referring to its distinct bull-like horns (Latin carne = flesh + Greek tauros = bull) was a large predatory dinosaur, with horns vaguely resembling a bull’s. Only one species, Carnotaurus sastrei has been described so far. Carnotaurus lived in Patagonia, Argentina (La Colonia Formation) during the Campanian to the Maastrichtian stage of the Late Cretaceous, and was discovered by JosĂŠ Bonaparte, who has uncovered many other South American dinosaurs. Wikipedia

Allosaurus and T-rex are North American dinosaurs according to science.

Mound Builder Aquatic Reptile: Champ or Ogopogo

The Tusayan people are named after a ruin located in the Grand canyon National park in Arizona. These ancestral Puebloan people lived in the area until 1,000 years ago archaeologists believe. In American Anthropologist, Volume 5, January 1892, in an article entitled “ A Few Tusayan Pictographs” is a very interesting pictograph showing four long necked creatures.


Aquatic reptiles became extinct more than 65 million years ago as did the long necked sauropods according to science. The pictographs were thought to be a little as a thousand years old, possibly several thousand but certainly not millions of years old. Could science be wrong or are the more benign “nothing to see here, move it along” explanations of the archeologists satisfactory?

Here we compare the Mound Builder pictographs with; an ancient Roman “sea monster” and with several other classic sea or lake monsters.

Here’s what the author wrote about the pictograph in question:

“It will be noticed in examining the cut of these four pictographs of the great serpent that one is about horizontal and the other three erect. It will also be noticed that the horizontal specimen has a zigzag outline, as if in motion, which the others do not have. They are undoubtedly, however, figures of the same mythological personage”.

Ogopogo and Champ


“Ogopogo or Naitaka (Salish: n’ha-a-itk, “lake demon”) is the name given to a cryptid lake monster reported to live in Okanagan Lake, in British Columbia, Canada. Ogopogo has been allegedly seen by First Nations people since the 19th century. The most common description of Ogopogo is a forty- to fifty-foot-long (12 to 15 m) sea serpent. It has supposedly been photographed and even been caught on tape.” …Wikipedia


“Champ, or Champy is the name given to a reputed lake monster living in Lake Champlain, a natural freshwater lake in North America, partially situated across the U.S.-Canada border in the Canadian province of Quebec and partially situated across the Vermont-New York border. While there is no scientific evidence for the cryptid’s existence, there have been over 300 reported sightings. The legend of the monster is considered a draw for tourism in the Burlington, Vermont area.”… Wikipedia

The creature appears to be drawn with a beard which is typical of some “sea monsters” and drawn with a type of headcrest or ears.

I’m not suggesting that this creature is either Ogopogo or Champ but that it could represent a tyoe of sea or lake monster that has been seen and described by even the Romans and Greeks and by ancient and recent North and South Americans.

It appears that neither theropod dinosaurs or aquatic reptiles died out millons of years ago and were instead seen and memorialized by ancient peoples.

How Darwinism Deals with Human Giants: Go Lieth?

Church of Darwin, Giants in Those Days, Science, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Feb 10 2011

Numbers 13:33
And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

The Quote Box following contains an Email sent to s8int.com by Jim S. which itself contains quotes and references to an article on the website; The Naked Scientists, which is an interview with a South African anthropologist.

Photo: Sellards: giant of early 20th century Florida anthropology and geology.
“As just one example of the “deception” that Jim S. references, Elias Howard Sellards, who became the first state geologist of the State of Florida, found human bones near Vero Beach Florida of what he admitted were “fully modern” individuals he estimated to be between 10 and 12 feet tall. Today, Vero Beach man remains controversial because of his “modernity” but no refererence is ever found concerning his alleged giant stature. A link to that article is at the end of this one.

Following Jim’s email is a news article we’re presenting that appears to be somewhat related….s8int.com

Hello,

Photo: Femur of Ancient Giant compared to normal human

“This is Jim, the guy who found the Castelnau giant report. I recently stumbled across this interesting new bit of information concerning a race of giants in Africa:

Although you will never hear about it in the National Geographic or Nature Magazine, Evolutionist scientists have known all along that races of giants have existed. We all know about Meganthropus and Gigantopithecus, but many skeletons of other giants have been found by anthropologists for decades, and in this rare 2007 interview by “The Naked Scientist” we can get a quick glimpse of some of what has been found.

A 2007 interview with Professor Lee Burger, University of Witwatersrand South Africa reveals some startling clues:”
Prof. Lee Burger -
“One of the most interesting things that the fossil record reveals is that we went through a period of extreme giantism. These were people routinely over 7ft tall, they were huge. This was before we turned into the modern humans of today. ”

” What we’re looking at is the most enormous femur: the bit that forms your hip joint. That’s huge. As a doctor I know how big they normally are, that’s huge.

They are huge. That’s so big we can’t even calculate how big this individual was.”

“….we found a lot of them. Everywhere we find them we find them enormous. These are what we call archaic Homo sapiens. Some people refer to them as Homo heidelbergensis. These individuals are extraordinary, they are giants”

thenakedscientists

Jim’s Remarks Continued:
“This is just another example of the establishment finding races of giants, and trying to reconcile them into their pet ape ancestry agenda. It’s also very remarkable that this race of giants has never made the headlines in Nature Magazine or Nat Geo, whereas the discovery of the 3 1/2 foot tall pygmies on the Island of Flores in 2004 created an Academic sensation with headlines all over the press announcing the discovery of tiny ape men, who were probably just smaller versions of us.

Perhaps they are concerned that if they were to report the discovery of a race of 8 foot tall ancient giants, they would somehow be vindicating scripture and they simply cannot allow this.

Dwarfs and small ape sized men are OK to report, but giants twice our size cannot be reported for fear that Bibles might start thumping and accountability and God might actually exist. Well maybe I am going a bit too far, but you get my point.

God bless,”
Jim S.

United Press Feb. 9, 1929
Drawing by Dan Smith, 1929

Ancient Battle:
Capetown, South Africa. Feb. 9. An important anthropological discovery consisting of the fossil of a gigantic prenegroid man and a huge extinct type of buffalo fossil was announced last night by the Transvaal Museum authorities.

The positions of the fossils indicated the buffalo had trampled the man in a battle.
The skull of the man had been crushed.

The fossil of the buffalo showed that the animal measured 12 feet between the horn tips. The fossils were found near Springbok Flats, Transvaal.

See Also: Giant Men? Evidence; Amen! Giant Tracks? Science Attacks! 12 Feet Tall? Darwinists; Not at All! Historical Evidence That There Were Giants in Those Days-As Alleged by Scientists of the Recent Past

The Splay-Footed Cricket’s Giving Darwinists a Spot of Bother
For 100 Million Years Baby Looked Just Like Mother and Father?
So How Have These Crickets Stayed in Stasis For So Long?
Does This Evolving, Non Evolving Problem Show Darwin Was Wrong?

Church of Darwin, s8int.com, Science, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Feb 05 2011


Rare insect fossil reveals 100 million years of evolutionary stasis
February 3, 2011
Physorg.com

Photo: A fossil found in northeastern Brazil confirmed that the splay-footed cricket of today has at least a 100-million-year-old pedigree. Credit: Hwaja Goetz

Researchers have discovered the 100 million-year-old ancestor of a group of large, carnivorous, cricket-like insects that still live today in southern Asia, northern Indochina and Africa.

The new find, in a limestone fossil bed in northeastern Brazil, corrects the mistaken classification of another fossil of this type and reveals that the genus has undergone very little evolutionary change since the Early Cretaceous Period, a time of dinosaurs just before the breakup of the supercontinent Gondwana.

The findings are described in a paper in the open access journal ZooKeys.

“Schizodactylidae, or splay-footed crickets, are an unusual group of large, fearsome-looking predatory insects related to the true crickets, katydids and grasshoppers, in the order Orthoptera,” said University of Illinois entomologist and lead author Sam Heads, of the Illinois Natural History Survey.

“They get their common name from the large, paddle-like projections on their feet, which help support their large bodies as they move around their sandy habitats, hunting down prey.”

Although the fossil is distinct from today’s splay-footed crickets, its general features differ very little, Heads said, revealing that the genus has been in a period of “evolutionary stasis” for at least the last 100 million years.

Other studies have determined that the region where the fossil was found was most likely an arid or semi-arid monsoonal environment during the Early Cretaceous Period, Heads said, “suggesting that the habitat preferences of Schizodactylus have changed little in over 100 million years.”

More information: The paper, “On the Placement of the Cretaceous Orthopteran Brauckmanni groeningae From Brazil, With Notes on the Relationships of Schizodactylidae (Orthoptera, Ensifera),” is available online.

Provided by University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (news : web)

See Also: Pelican Fossil Poses Evolutionary Riddle; Why, They Haven’t Evolved, Not Even a Little

Thanks to Chris Z. and Scott S.

The Top 12 Science Stories of 2010 For Christians/Creationists

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, Religious, s8int.com, Science, Sophistication of Ancestors, The Flood of Noah, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Jan 07 2011

by Chris Parker, Copyright 2010

2010 came in like a lion with a major earthquake in Chile and went out with snow like lamb’s wool covering many parts of the United States. So much for global warming?

More on that later.

There really is no way to quantitatively select the top 10 or 12 science stories that were the most important to the cause of belief in God, special creation and Biblical truths in 2010. This is quite obviously a subjective exercise. No real attempt has been made to here to prioritize among these choices either. If last years list is any indication, we’ll get some argument and some suggestions-some of which will be printable.

At s8int.com, we believe and fully accept the Biblical account for creation. That faith and belief helps us form our world view and our view of science. We’ve always assumed that true, honest and objective science would support the Biblical account and God’s place in the universe—and it has.

The world’s preeminent Atheist, Richard Dawkins, made the following observation in his book; The Blind Watchmaker’

“An atheist before Darwin could have said, following Hume: “I have no explanation for complex biological design. All I know is that God isn’t a good explanation, so we must wait and hope that somebody comes up with a better one.” I can’t help feeling that such a position, though logically sound, would have left one feeling pretty unsatisfied, and that although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.”

It’s been a tough decade for Darwinism, though and 2010 was no different. It continues to be the case that the more science learns about the universe and our place in it the less tenable is the Darwinist faith. Despite the hard work and dedication of Darwinists, a new Gallup poll (reported in December of 2010) shows that only 16% of Americans subscribe to the view that “Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in the process.”

Photo:Stein interviews Dawkins in “Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed!”

Things have gotten so bad for Darwinists that Richard Dawkins now says that he could accept the notion that “super-intelligent aliens” are responsible for creating life on earth and that this would explain why life seems designed. (Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed , 2008

Dawkins doesn’t even seem to realize that this illogical and contradictory position puts him squarely back in the pre-Darwin; anything or anyone but God camp! The very position he described as being “logically sound” but “intellectually unsatisfying”!

The Joy of Ignorance? What group has tried to turn their own ignorance into a virtue as aggressively as the Darwinists? Remember “vestigial organs”? Basically science was ignorant about the function of certain “organs” and so they declared them functionless, leftovers from the evolutionary process.

They asserted that God wouldn’t have created useless organs and that ergo; there was no God!

Unfortunately for this theory, science could not maintain its ignorance for long; the list of supposedly vestigial organs in humans has gone from approximately 180 in 1890 to arguably, none in 1999. (Bergman, Jerry, “Do any vestigial organs exist in humans?”, Journal of Creation 14(2):95–98, August 2000)

Dawkins and other atheists also trumpeted “Junk DNA” as proof that there was no God. God they reasoned, would not have created useless, functionless, “junk” DNA (non-coding DNA ) that took up so much of the space in the genome. They fairly chortled about it. Dawkins said;

“Once again, creationists might spend some earnest time speculating on why the Creator should bother to litter genomes with untranslated pseudogenes and junk tandem repeat DNA.” (Dawkins: The Information Challenge)

Time and additional scientific knowledge and understanding vindicated God as the creator and showed that Dawkins and other evolution believing critics were simply speaking from a very deep well of ignorance. It turns out, once again that science’s (and Dawkin’s) own lack of knowledge was the problem here, not God’s creative abilities:

” “The findings, from a project involving hundreds of scientists in 11 countries and detailed in 29 papers being published today, confirm growing suspicions that the stretches of “junk DNA” flanking hardworking genes are not junk at all. But the study goes further, indicating for the first time that the vast majority of the 3 billion “letters” of the human genetic code are busily toiling at an array of previously invisible tasks.” (Washington Post, July 14, 2007 Intricate Toiling Found In Nooks of DNA Once Believed to Stand Idle
)

Finally, Darwin admitted that it was difficult to conceive of how an organ as complicated as they eye could have evolved (although he believed it did). Michael Behe, an architect of “intelligent design” deemed the eye irreducibly complex; in other words it had to be the result of a deliberate design rather than evolution because it would have been useless without all of its parts being fully functional.

Evolutionists have deemed the eye to be one of evolutions biggest mistakes because it appears to them to be wired backwards. In 2010 it became clear once again that ignorance on the part of atheists and Darwinists was the problem. A study showed that the design of the eye leads to better vision and that in fact its design should be copied in order to make better optical machines.

This is a principle Christians can depend on; if evolutionists think that something God created is imperfect;- simply wait until their ignorance dissipates. “Let God be true and every man a liar!” Romans 3:4

We combed through; Discovery News, CreationEvolutionHeadlines, NewScientist, s8int.com/WordPress and other sources to compile news stories of interest. Here’s our list of the top science stories of 2010 for Christians/creationists.


1)Universal Health Scare: Study Locates Conscious Minds Locked in Appearance of “Vegetative State And; Atheist Doctors More Likely to Kill You!

“Distressing” is not an adequate word to describe a study by Cambridge University neuroscientist Adrian M. Owen that proves that many people in supposedly vegetative states actually are quite aware of what is happening around them and have opinions and views about it all. There may be thousands of such people in the U.S. alone.

The implications are hard to bear and yet demand action. Can you imagine anything much worse than being completely unable to communicate with others and yet affected by them? Anyone who has suffered an injury that impairs even a small function knows how frustrating that can be. But this is almost like being buried alive. With this difference: the patient is aware of people’s conversations and can, at least in his mind, respond. But no one in the presence of such a person–until now–has found a way to “listen” and therefore to converse.

This study adds force to the anti-euthanasia arguments made in cases like that of Terri Schiavo. It also calls in the name of human compassion for greater efforts to engage such conscious minds encased in unresponsive bodies and to give their lives some scope for vigorous interaction. It also calls for greater scientific and technological efforts to break the physical chains binding such people.

A colleague of Dr. Owens sees a number of immediate practical uses of the new way of communicating with conscious, but immobilized persons. “This technique could be used to address important clinical questions. For example, patients who are aware, but cannot move or speak, could be asked if they are feeling any pain, allowing doctors to decide when painkillers should be administered.”

But another urgent need is to find ways to communicate more directly than is possible now. In their study, the Cambridge team used MRI technology, which is expensive and obviously hard to arrange on any regular basis. Posted by Bruce Chapman on February 3, 2010 4:03 PM Discovery News

Atheist Doctors More Likely to End Your Life–ScienceDaily (Aug. 26, 2010) —

Atheist or agnostic doctors are almost twice as willing to take decisions that they think will hasten the end of a very sick patient’s life as doctors who are deeply religious, suggests research published online in the Journal of Medical Ethics.


And doctors with a strong faith are less likely to discuss this type of treatment with the patient concerned, the research shows. The findings are based on a postal survey of more than 8500 UK doctors, spanning a wide range of specialties, which was designed to see what influence religious belief — or lack of it — had on end of life care…. ScienceDaily


2)Darwinian Reversals

“There is a wide consensus among paleontologists that birds are the descendants of theropod dinosaurs”, according to Wikipedia and other Darwinist sources. This idea is a new tenet of the Darwinist faith and the truth is the acceptance of the idea has never really been as much of a consensus as advertized. As we’ve noted many times, “Storrs Olson, Curator of Birds at the Smithsonian and evolutionist himself proclaimed that “a cadre of “zealots” were trying to “actively promulgate the theropod dinosaur origin of birds theory in concert with Nature and National Geo”… Quote Story

An article published in 2009 in Medical Hypotheses noted: Some “Non-Avian Feathered Dinosaurs May Have Been Birds.” Spend a few minutes working out that headline’s meaning. In an article published in PhysOrg, a different group of evolutionists at OSU made a complete reversal of the Darwinist tenet by claiming that the evidence showed that dinosaurs evolved from birds!” Commentary by: CreationEvolutionHeadlines

“Feb 9, 2010 — Birds evolved from dinosaurs, we are often told. That’s backwards, reply some scientists at Oregon State University. According to PhysOrg, the recently-published bi-plane model study of Microraptor gui (01/29/2010) demonstrates that theropod dinosaurs did not sprout wings and fly; instead, they became flightless after their bird ancestors came down from the trees.

Their response demonstrates how the same evidence can be spun different ways. They are adamant about it: “The weight of the evidence is now suggesting that not only did birds not descend from dinosaurs,” John Ruben of OSU said, “but that some species now believed to be dinosaurs may have descended from birds.” He’s glad to see a breakthrough from the conventional wisdom. “This issue isn’t resolved at all. There are just too many inconsistencies with the idea that birds had dinosaur ancestors, and this newest study adds to that.” CreationEvolutionHeadlines

From Soup to Nuts! One of the oldest tenets of Darwinism is that life began in a “primordial soup”. However, “the ‘soup’ theory has been overturned in a pioneering paper in BioEssays which claims it was the Earth’s chemical energy, from hydrothermal vents on the ocean floor, which kick-started early life.” ScienceDaily

The truth is that absent an acceptance of the Genesis account science has no idea how dead chemicals became living. There are literally hundreds of competing ”scientific” theories regarding life’s origin, as we covered in our story:. “When It Comes to Explanations for the Origin of Life, Genesis Has the Quality; So, Science Comes At You With Quantity

Neanderthal Now One of Us. Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon have long been enlisted by the Darwinists as a caveman/primitive man proof of the truth of the evolution of man from lower forms. They were successful enough that even some Christians invented “pre-Adamic” man to try to help the Bible out.

As late as last year some scientists were still claiming that man and Neanderthal never interbred; that they couldn’t speak, that they had no language, argued over whether they buried their dead, claimed that they only ate meat because they weren’t smart enough to cook vegetables, etc. etc. (Cro-Magnon was rehabilitated some years ago).

Now, it’s all changed. It’s been reversed…

An analysis of “Neanderthal” DNA indicated that their DNA matched “modern” man’s DNA to 99.97%. Since the analysis was only of 60% of the genome the actual match might be closer. That awaits further study. It’s worth noting that each of our own DNA is a match to our neighbor’s to 99.999%.

Scientists Lied and Real Neanderthals Died! Neanderthal DNA 99.97% Identical to that of Evolutionary Scientist’s!

Neanderthals Admired Beauty 01/10/2010
Jan 10, 2010 — This may be the last evidence needed to debunk the image of Neanderthals as dim-witted brutes: they wore make-up. CreationEvolutionHeadlines

    Humans and Neanderthals Are One 05/08/2010

“May 08, 2010 — If Neanderthals bred with modern humans, they are one and the same species. That must be the case according to the most widely-accepted definition of a species: those who can breed and produce fertile offspring. The news media are abuzz with Science magazine’s cover story this week, “The Neanderthal Genome.” Most anthropologists are now accepting the genetic evidence for human-Neanderthal mixing of DNA, and that there are remnants of the Neanderthal genome walking the earth in living human beings. CreationEvolutionHeadlines

Science Daily announced, “Neandertals ‘Hardly Differed at All’ from Modern Humans.”

Fossil Ida:

The last bit of dirt was kicked over Ida, the fossil that evolutionists claimed was going to change everything. ‘Missing Link’ Fossil Was Not Human Ancestor as Claimed, Anthropologists Say ScienceDaily (Mar. 3, 2010)


3)Macro Evolution’s Evolving, Non-Evolving Problem The trade secret of paleontology might very well be the lack of transitional fossils..(Gould); but the Darwin family secret is the long list of supposedly millions of years old fossils which are indistigushable from their living counterparts. Two of those articles are linked here:

Pelican Fossil Poses Evolutionary Riddle; Why, They Haven’t Evolved, Not Even a Little

“Oh What A Tangled Web We Weave, When At First We Practice to Deceive”–Alleged 165 Million Year Old Spider Looks Just Like 165 Day Old Spider


4)
Evolutionists Blind, Ignorant, Criticism of the Design of the Eye Proves to be Short Sighted and Wrong. (Will Science Teachers Continue to Constrict Their Pupils with This Kind of Teaching?)

Dawkins is not great. First, as head atheist he jumped on the; vestigial organs prove there is no God train, only to see it derailed; then onto “junk DNA” and finally to the “backwards designed” eye.

A 2007 Article entitled” Evolution’s Greatest Mistakes” claimed that the eye was an example of “flawed evolution”.

“The most famous flaw is found in vertebrate eyes. Their light-sensing structure, the retina, is wired up back-to-front.) NewScientist

In May, commenting in an editorial about a 2007 German study that found that the eye is wired backwards, purposely –or at least to the benefit of the eye said:

“IT LOOKS wrong, but the strange, “backwards” structure of the vertebrate retina actually improves vision.”
NewScientist went on to note that creationists have defended the eye design by claiming that the backwards design actually enhances vision:

“…creationists have argued that the backwards retina clearly has no problems providing vertebrates with excellent vision – and even that its structure enhances vision.

“This week, a study by (non-creationist) neurophysicists in Israel has found just that (see “Optical fibre cells transform our weird, ‘backward’ retinas”). Their simulations showed that MĂźller cells, which support and nourish the neurons overlying the retina’s light-sensitive layer, also collect, filter and refocus light, before delivering it to the light sensors to make images clearer.”

You have to love this defensive quote from NewScientist;

“The findings do not mean the creationists have a point – although they may well quote the study”.

According to the authors of the research paper, the findings of the study could lead to better designed optical equipment and cameras. So much for bad design.


5)Not A Grain of Truth to Science’s Claim That “Primitive Man” Domesticated Food Crops: Animals Refuse to eat Genetically Modified Foods..

It’s the belief of evolutionary scientists that all the domesticated grains that we eat; grains like rice, corn, oats, wheat and barley, were created by deliberate cultivation over hundreds or even thousands of years by our primitive ancestors. They would have needed the ability to work tirelessly and purposefully for a period of generations on crops that would have no food value for them until the projects were created; all eons before Gregor Mendel developed prinicples of genetic transmision of inherited traits.

This story is hard enough to believe but here’s another problem. If man genetically modified all the food crops we mentioned; why were cows and pigs eating them? And why do they have a problem with the New genetically modified foods? Isn’t the same agent, man responsible for the old GM crops as well as the new?

Clearly not, the crops we’ve known for thousands of years were created by God—not man. When Adam was punished he was told that he would have to earn a living by the sweat of his brow, he was meant to plant and harvest crops–the same crops that Cain brought as a failed offering to God.

Animals didn’t have a problem with the former, but the do have a problem with the latter. Article


6) Why Paleontology is Not “Science”; When It Comes to Giant Pterosaur Flight, Science Believes Very Strongly Both Ways!

In the course of a year’s time paleontologists made the bold statement that pterosaurs couldn’t fly; only to have another study claim that they were the greatest flyers ever!

Any discipline that claims two mutually exclusive things are both true in that short a period of time can’t be called a science. This is the stuff they want to teach your kids. Article


7)
Research Indicates Ancient Civilization Thrived Until Ocean Submerged It Beneath the Persian Gulf “About” 8 Thousand Years Ago: Do You Noah What That Reminds Us Of?

An ancient civilization the size of Great Britain was located under the Persian Gulf. The civilization was “drowned” thousands of years ago.


8) Science Daily Article: Liberals and Atheists Smarter? Intelligent People Have Values Novel in Human Evolutionary History, Study Finds.”

Unfortunately, we’re not smart enough to comment on this article. We didn’t understand it. It didn’t make any sense to us…. Article


9) Human Genome “Infinitely More Complex” Than Expected 04/05/2010 “April 05,

2010 — Ten years after the Human Genome Project was completed, now we know: biology is “orders of magnitude” more complicated than scientists expected. So wrote Erika Check Hayden in Nature News March 31 and in the April 1 issue of Nature.

An air of daunting complexity haunts the article. The Human Genome Project was one of the great scientific investigations of the end of the 20th century. Some compared it to the Manhattan Project or the Apollo program. It used to be tedious, painstaking work to read the sequence of DNA letters.

Now, deciphering genomes is a matter of course. But with the rush of data coming from genomes of everything from yeast to Neanderthals, one thing has become clear: “as sequencing and other new technologies spew forth data, the complexity of biology has seemed to grow by orders of magnitude,” Hayden wrote.

…..Hayden acknowledged that the “junk DNA” paradigm has been blown to smithereens. “Just one decade of post-genome biology has exploded that view,” she said, speaking of the notion that gene regulation was a straightforward, linear process – genes coding for regulator proteins that control transcription. “Biology’s new glimpse at a universe of non-coding DNA – what used to be called ‘junk’ DNA – has been fascinating and befuddling.”

If it’s junk, why would the human body decode 74% to 93% of it? The plethora of small RNAs produced by these non-coding regions, and how they interact with each other and with DNA, was completely unexpected when the project began.

These realizations are dissipating some of the early naïveté of the Human Genome Project. Planners predicted we would “unravel the mysteries behind everything from evolution to disease origins.” Cures for cancer were envisioned. We would trace the path of evolution through the genetic code. That was so 1990s.

Joshua Plotkin, a mathematical biologist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, said, “Just the sheer existence of these exotic regulators suggests that our understanding about the most basic things – such as how a cell turns on and off – is incredibly naïve.” “ CreationEvolutionHeadlines


10) Evolution as “Scientific Literacy” Dropped by NSB; Sets Off Firestorm 04/11/2010
April 11, 2010 — Can you be called scientifically literate if you deny that humans evolved from lower animals? What if you deny the universe began with an explosion? American students have typically scored low on those questions, leading to charges that they are scientifically illiterate compared to other countries in Europe and Asia.

But now, the National Science Board (NSB) decided to drop those hot-button questions in the 2010 edition of Science and Engineering Indicators, a biennial compilation of the state of global science, on the grounds that they don’t accurately reflect students’ knowledge of science, but rather their beliefs. The decision set off angry protests in certain quarters.

Yudhijit Bhattacharjee reported on this issue in the April 9 issue of Science. He quoted Joshua Rosenau of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) calling it “intellectual malpractice” to discuss scientific literacy without mentioning evolution. “It downplays the controversy,” he said. Jon Miller, a science literacy researcher at Michigan State, conducted the survey until 2001. As the one who added the survey question in the first place, he thinks the current board is making a big mistake.

“If a person says that the earth really is at the center of the universe, … how in the world would you call that person scientifically literate?” he asked. Bhattacharjee said, “those struggling to keep evolution in the classroom say the omission could hurt their efforts.”

But the NSB defended its decision to drop the “value-charged” question on evolution as a misleading indicator:…… CreationEvolutionHeadlines


11) The Great Global Warming Collapse

“In 2007, the most comprehensive report to date on global warming, issued by the respected United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made a shocking claim: The Himalayan glaciers could melt away as soon as 2035.

These glaciers provide the headwaters for Asia’s nine largest rivers and lifelines for the more than one billion people who live downstream. Melting ice and snow would create mass flooding, followed by mass drought. The glacier story was reported around the world. Last December, a spokesman for the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental pressure group, warned, “The deal reached at Copenhagen will have huge ramifications for the lives of hundreds of millions of people who are already highly vulnerable due to widespread poverty.” To dramatize their country’s plight, Nepal’s top politicians strapped on oxygen tanks and held a cabinet meeting on Mount Everest.

But the claim was rubbish, and the world’s top glaciologists knew it. It was based not on rigorously peer-reviewed science but on an anecdotal report by the WWF itself. When its background came to light on the eve of Copenhagen, Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC, shrugged it off. But now, even leading scientists and environmental groups admit the IPCC is facing a crisis of credibility that makes the Climategate affair look like small change.” Globe and Mail


12)Bible Possibly Written Centuries Earlier, Text Suggests
Clara Moskowitz
LiveScience Staff Writer
Jan 15 2010
“Scientists have discovered the earliest known Hebrew writing – an inscription dating from the 10th century B.C., during the period of King David’s reign.
The breakthrough could mean that portions of the Bible were written centuries earlier than previously thought. (The Bible’s Old Testament is thought to have been first written down in an ancient form of Hebrew.)
Until now, many scholars have held that the Hebrew Bible originated in the 6th century B.C., because Hebrew writing was thought to stretch back no further. But the newly deciphered Hebrew text is about four centuries older, scientists announced this month.

“It indicates that the Kingdom of Israel already existed in the 10th century BCE and that at least some of the biblical texts were written hundreds of years before the dates presented in current research,” said Gershon Galil, a professor of Biblical Studies at the University of Haifa in Israel, who deciphered the ancient text.” Article

Top 12 Science Stories for Creationists/Believers of 2009

When It Comes to Explanations for the Origin of Life, Genesis Has the Quality; So, Science Comes At You With Quantity

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, s8int.com, Science, Uncategorized | Posted by Chris Parker
Dec 06 2010

Genesis 1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

“The origins of life on Earth bristle with puzzle and paradox. Which came first, the proteins of living cells or the genetic information that makes them? How could the metabolism of living things get started without an enclosing membrane to keep all the necessary chemicals together? But if life started inside a cell membrane, how did the necessary nutrients get in?

The questions may seem moot, since life did start somehow.” New Glimpses of Life’s Puzzling Origins…NYT June 15 2009 Article

How close are scientists to knowing the origin of life on earth … Oct 21, 1999 … www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-close-are… Article

In 1924, Oparin began publishing his ideas on how life may have evolved from a prebiotic soup ….… www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/…/slm/originday.htm -

From Soup to; “Nuts?!” New Research Rejects 80-Year Theory of ‘Primordial Soup’ as the Origin of Life
S8int.com Article

Life could have evolved on Earth not once but twice.” BC Focus Magazine Video

Revolutionary New Theory For Origins Of Life On Earth

ScienceDaily (Dec. 4, 2002) — “A totally new and highly controversial theory on the origin of life on earth, is set to cause a storm in the science world and has implications for the existence of life on other planets. Research* by Professor William Martin of the University of Dusseldorf and Dr Michael Russell of the Scottish Environmental Research Centre in Glasgow, claims that living systems originated from inorganic incubators – small compartments in iron sulphide rocks. The new theory radically departs from existing perceptions of how life developed and it will be published in Philosophical Transactions B, a learned journal produced by the Royal Society”…Article Source

“Life May Have Evolved from Inanimate Matter, with associations among molecules becoming more and more complex. In this view, the force …” www.darwinspredictions.com/

“According to a new study, scientists found that life on earth went from single cells to blue whales and giant sequoias in 3.5 billion years in two distinct bursts. The study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. This theory is against the preconceived notion of life slowly evolved from simple to complex multicelled organism. The analysis of the fossils showed that the study of the two sized jumps were from bacteria to eukaryotic cells and from unicellular to multicellular organism.” Article

“Mineral cells might have incubated first living things.John Whitfield

Life on Earth may have begun in rocks on the ocean floor. More than 4 billion years ago, tiny cavities in minerals may have served as the first cells, two biologists are proposing. Other researchers argue that the idea leaves many questions unanswered.

The key to the new theory is iron sulphide. Hot springs deposit a honeycomb of this mineral on the ocean floor, with pockets a few hundredths of a millimetre across. This would have been the ideal place for life to get going, say William Martin, of Heinrich-Heine University in Dusseldorf, Germany, and Michael Russell of the Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre in Glasgow, UK.

“There are lots of theories [of the origin of life] but ours is the first to start with the cell,” says Martin. Most scientists assume that self-replicating molecules or proteins came first. NatureNews Article

Methane-Belching Bugs Inspire a New Theory of the Origin of Life on Earth

Two laboratories at Penn State set out to show how an obscure undersea microbe metabolizes carbon monoxide into methane and vinegar. What they found was not merely a previously unknown biochemical process–their discovery also became the inspiration for a fundamental new theory of the origin of life on Earth, reconciling a long-contentious pair of prevailing theories. This new, “thermodynamic” theory of evolution improves upon both previous theories by proposing a central role for energy conservation during early evolution, based on a simple three-step biochemical mechanism. Article

Life Could Have Evolved in Armoured Clay Bubbles ….. arXiv:1011.4711 Article

Life Could have started as self-assembling organic molecules. … Wikipedia Article

Did Life Evolve in Ice? Funky properties of frozen water may have made life possible….. Discover February 2008 issue; published online February 1, 2008 Article

Evidence Mounts That Life May Have Begun In a Scalding Toxic Bath

Born in the fire Evidence mounts that life may have begun in a scalding toxic bath By David Chandler, Globe Staff, 9/12/2000 For humans, it’s about as … Newsgroup Article

Life May Have Begun In The Hot Or The Cold

Over 3000 million years ago, life may have begun in the sea as simple bacteria. As ancient time progressed, there slowly evolved a diversity of …Astrobiology Magazine, Moffet Field CA (SPX) Feb 26, 2008

Life May Have Begun in Upper Atmosphere An experiment that simulated chemical reactions in the atmosphere of Saturn’s moon Titan suggests that life could have begun in the sky. American Scientist, November 2010
Article

Life May Have Begun Deep Down Under the Ground and Then Only Later Evolved and Adapted To Cooler Surface Conditions On Earth. … Nov 16, 2009
earthsky.org/space/paul-davies-do-we-live-in-a-bio-friendly-universe Article

Could life have evolved in cometary nuclei? A. Bar-Nun, A. Lazcano-Araujo and J. OrĂł

On Earth it is believed that life originated or could have originated in caves or round Hydrothermal vents…. Wikiversity.org

Life on Earth could have grown from the broken remains of alien viruses–Alien “Zombies?” …. Article;Wired Science

Comets may have brought life to Earth: New study www.physorg.com/news203584634 Article

But life could have taken 7 billion years to develop, and still have left time to evolve to beings like us, who could ask about the origin of life. … hawking.org.uk

Researcher Says Life Evolved Between the Mica Sheets: …www.nsf.gov/news/news Article

A new model shows how primitive life could have evolved from simple amino acids in a “primordial soup” – news.softpedia.com

The deep sea vent theory for the origin of life on Earth might apply to ……
www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/…/enceladus-f20080326.html Article

So the common ancestor of life could harness the natural proton … If life did evolve in alkaline hydrothermal vents, it might have …….www.allbusiness.com/science-technology/…/13228098-1.html Article

First Animals Evolved in Lakes, Not Oceans, Study Hints

Jul 28, 2009 … Earth’s first animals may have evolved in salty lakes, not oceans, … and its longevity may have helped animal life gain a foothold, Kennedy said. … Still, there could be other explanations for why older animal …news.nationalgeographic.com/…/090728-first-animals-evolution-lakes.html

Life May Have Evolved From Fresh Water? Carrine Blank, Ph.D., Washington University

Life may have evolved chemically, not biologically www.thaindian.com/…/life-may-have-evolved-chemically-not-biologically_ 1003221.html

Mars; Not Mars

–Or, more extraordinarily, it has been suggested that life may have evolved first on Mars and then come to Earth by the process of ballistic panspermia.7 …www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/M/Marslife.html

–Frozen Mars Likely Never Evolved Life
Jul 21, 2005 … This in turn suggests that Mars likely has not had conditions suitable for life to evolve, at least in the last 3.5 billion years. …www.sciscoop.com/2005-7-21-151739-652.html

–Life may have been seeded on Mars < ---from Earth. www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/M/Marslife.html

--Who knows, that an intelligent life may have evolved on Venus in distant past, even more ‘intelligent’ than us, who might have ruined the …www.chowk.com/articles/11545

What Dr. Seth Shostak is suggesting could come out of the pages of a science fiction novel. His idea is that intelligent life may have evolved into or created artificial intelligence.

These ‘robot’ forms of life may have different forms of communication and could be living in parts of the universe inhospitable to organic life forms like us. Dr. Seth Shostak, who is the Senior Astronomer at the SETI Institute. Article

Diamonds may have been life’s best friend.

Billions of years ago, the surface of these gems may have provided just the right conditions to foster the chemical reactions believed to have given rise to life on Earth, researchers in Germany report. ScienceDaily (July 30, 2008)

Unique three-dimensional native structures of first biopolymers could have evolved as a side effect of nonspecific physicochemical factors acting at the prebiotic stage of evolution. Harvard university Jan 23 1996

New theory fills in the gap before Darwin
By Tim Friend, USA TODAY

“Forget what you learned in biology about the origin of life: that it began with a single mother of all cells and became increasingly complex. It was a simplistic notion anyway.

A new theory by leading evolutionary microbiologist Carl Woese, which may revolutionize notions on the origin of life, suggests that life really began with at least three primitive cell-like structures engaged in a promiscuous gene-swapping free-for-all more than 3 billion years ago.” USA Today Article

Why Paleontology is Not “Science”; When It Comes to Giant Pterosaur Flight, Science Believes Very Strongly Both Ways!

Church of Darwin, Crypto, s8int.com, Science, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Nov 11 2010

by Chris Copyright November 2010

Re: Photo:Ancient Pacific Northcoast First Nations Artists came down firmly on the side of giant pterosaur flight? “Haida Raven Rattle” shows man on the back of large flying creature. A dragon at the rear has tongue connected to rider which was a common feature of these pieces. Comparison with Quetalcoatlus, a giant pterosaur.

There are a lot of “disciplines” out there that call themselves “science” or scientific which in fact are neither. Paleontology is one of those disciplines.

Wikipedia tells us that; “science is an enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the natural world”. An older definition of science would call it a body of knowledge that could be logically and/or convincingly explained.

Quite a bit of what passes for science these days would not fit either of those “classical” definitions of science; and this specifically includes paleontology. Early God believing practitioners of the Aristotelian method used its logic and its deductive and inductive reasoning to study and make observations about God’s creation. Modern scientific disciplines have become unscientific because its materialistic practitioners create mythologies and just so stories in order to seek to separate God from His creation.

Modern science has become religion. Modern science is about consensus. Modern science is about materialistic explanations only. Modern science is concerned with politics and right thinking. Modern science goes after non-conformists every bit as much as the Catholic Church went after Galileo.

Michael Crichton, an evolutionist, sadly now passed on once wrote:

“In recent years, much has been said about the post-modernist claims about science to the effect that science is just another form of raw power, tricked out in special claims for truth-seeking and objectivity that really have no basis in fact. Science, we are told, is no better than any other undertaking. These ideas anger many scientists, and they anger me. But recent events have made me wonder if they are correct.”…Aliens Cause Global Warming

Crichton’s specific concern was the kind of “consensus science” that surrounded disciplines like climatology and SETI. Science was now in the business of creating a consensus instead of building and organizing facts around testable hypotheses. Not only that science is now in the business of attacking the credibility and motivations of even their brother scientists whenever they failed to bow down to the paradigm, he believed.

As a current example, science has taken to identifying climate warming non adopters by the pejorative term “climate change deniers” in an attempt to cast people who have doubts about the global warming consensus in the same light as those who deny the Holocaust.

Climatology is not science. This supposed scientific discipline studies supposedly studies the history of our planet covering they believe over 4 billion years. In the past 30 years or so they have been building a consensus built upon carefully selected data for “global warming”. In the process, they attack and silence non-believers.

If this really was a science that built and organized testable explanations or that created a body of knowledge that could be logically or convincingly explained, why was the principal fear of that science as late as 1975; worldwide, global cooling?

Here is a headline from the New York Times, 1975: “Scientists Ask Why World Climate Is Changing; Major Cooling May Be Ahead; Scientists Ponder Why World’s Climate Is Changing; a Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable…by WALTER SULLIVAN, The New York Times
May 21, 1975”.

A discipline that comes to diametrically opposing conclusions within the span of 35 or 40 years about the weather of a planet supposedly 4.5 billion years old has no predictive or scientific value whatsoever. That’s why climatology is not a science. (see All The Really Smart People Believe in Man-Made Global Warming)

Can we say that Genetics is not science? Clearly there are aspects of genetics that fit the classical definitions of science. However, as I.L. Cohen, Researcher and Mathematician and member of the NY Academy of Sciences noted “At that moment, when the DNA/RNA system became understood, the debate between Evolutionists and Creationists should have come to a screeching halt…….”

He said that because design and intelligence are now obvious and inherent characteristics of the DNA/RNA system. DNA is a language that contains an unimaginable amount of data that is stored in the cells of everything living. DNA is not only a language like English or Russian, it conveys a Message to every living cell that components of the cell understand and execute. Life could not exist without the DNA/RNA system because the instructions for life are conveyed by the system.

Any science that ignores this obvious truth and instead mythologizes a materialistic “explanation” for DNA’s creation and existence cannot be called a science. After all, it is ill-logical and thus anti-scientific to find a message in literally every living cell and not to understand that someone or something intelligent sent that message. The contents of the message conveyed by this langauge in the smallest single bacterium cell is beyond the technology of man.

As an additional blemish on their scientific credentials; “scientists” named a portion of DNA that they did not have the capacity to understand “junk DNA” believing at the time it had no function. As time has passed and it’s become clear that those sections of DNA in fact have very important functions, the term junk science would seem to have been more appropriate.

Cosmology is not a science. The big bang is not a theory; (a hypotheses backed by testing data) it is a materialistic philosophical mythology. How can a scientific explanation fail to explain upwards of 97% of observation? This is in fact the exact opposite of the classical definitions of science. Dark matter and dark energy are two place fillers invented out of darkened imaginations to account for observations in the real world that the theory doesn’t contemplate and can’t explain.

Neither dark matter nor dark energy can be seen or detected. They are invisible, undetectable and mythological in exactly the same way fairies are. This is why cosmology is not science.

Sometimes even “hard science” like physics isn’t science. Not when it has to do the bidding of materialists. In the last several decades it’s become abundantly clear that we live in an anthropic universe. That is, it’s become clear that the universe was created to cradle life and even more disturbing for some; that this planet and solar system have many characteristics seemingly tailored for life.

In desperation, superstring theory; a mythology that there exist an infinite number of universes inhabiting the same space and that we just happen to be one among those infinite universes that supports life has been created out of vivid imagination, materialistic philosophy and chewing gum? Of course, the multi-verses of superstring theory can not be seen, detected. The theory is untestable. This lack of “testability” is precisely why materialists claim that “special creation” is not scientific.

A paleontologist is a “scientist” who studies the history of life on earth, focusing on organisms that lived in the distant past. Paleontologists can wax for hours about the “Cambrian Explosion” and the “Great Dying” mostly without even realizing that they are describing creation and the fall from Genesis.

Paleontology is the kind of science where someone with a PhD can publish an article in a scientific journal suggesting that “maybe” a mutation in a single protein-led to smaller jaw muscles in an ape—which then gave them more room in their skulls to develop a larger “human” brain. This scientific mythology was reported worldwide. One can only surmise that the authors of this “scientific article” and those who accepted it must have had disturbingly large jaw muscles?

Paleontological scientific findings are slavishly reported by the news media and fawned over by materialists because it is the scientific discipline that most directly seeks to support Darwinism and materialism. Evolutionary theory is most often seen through the lenses of this “science”. One with an open mind would be hard pressed to discover one thing that paleontologists are correct about. On the other hand, no one speaks with more apparent authority than the paleontologists. Every body that they study is already dead after all; whose going to contradict?

Remember Ida, the fossil that was supposed to be an early human ancestor that was going to change everything? The subject of the simultaneous release of a book and a documentary and much slavish media reporting in April 2009 did not in the end make most if any of the most prominent Top 10 Scientific Stories of the year lists. How is this possible for a science? (see Fossil Ida; Evolutionists Now Dare Not Speak Its Name)

Well, paleontologists practically invented the phrase; “scientists had previously thought”.

Apologists for non-science science often snootily declare that this is what is great about science; its always willing to admit its mistakes and then to move forward. This is what is admirable about science they say.

Perhaps this is true, but meanwhile; the patient is dead.

In April 2009, a study was published and then breathlessly reported worldwide to the effect that Giant Pterosaurs, a creature supposedly extinct for more that 65 million years, could not fly. “Giant Pterosaurs Couldn’t Fly, Study Suggests”

It’s a mystery how natural selection working through beneficial mutations could confer evolutionary advantage to a creature with giant, useless wings but that is paleontology for you; its not rocket science—its not even science. Shut up and believe.

The study was published by study leader Katsufumi Sato, an associate professor at the University of Tokyo’s Ocean Research Institute.

“Based on the weights and body sizes of modern birds, a new study finds that animals heavier than 90 pounds (41 kilograms) with wingspans greater than 16.7 feet (5.1 meters) wouldn’t be able to flap fast enough to stay aloft.”, the study concluded.

The conclusion casts serious doubt on the flying ability of large pterosaurs such as Quetzalcoatlus, thought to be one of the largest airborne animals of all time.

Dutifully, other scientists began surmising that these giant pterosaurs were swimmers instead. Materialistic science teachers passed this new information on to their students. Young evolution influenced kids began drawing versions of wingless pterosaurs and posting them on evolution websites looking for approval.

Posters on sites like Talk Origins went on and used this new “scientific information” to berate believers. “Why would God create a giant pterosaur that couldn’t fly”? Why would evolution do that they forgot to ask themselves….what would be the evolutionary advantage?

Anyway, another scientist in the paleontological world was working on his own study regarding pterosaur flight. Now, if both of these studies were scientific, and relied on building testable hypotheses or built knowledge bases etc….. One might say, how could they do that? The creatures they study or just bits and pieces of fossilized bones, I would say; “exactly correct” and that again is why paleontology is not science.

Paleontologist Michael Habib offered new findings about giant pterosaurs based on “new models of their wingspans, shape and body mass”. His study was reported on October 18, 2010 in National Geographic News approximately 18 months after the prior study had been reported on, also in National Geographic News.

Now would Habib’s study support Sato’s no fly theory? Would it perhaps suggest that well…..maybe they could fly a little bit given a strong wind, a one thousand foot cliff and Air Jordans?

The title of the new study or at least of the News articles tell the story: “Prehistoric Reptile Could Fly 10,000 Miles”.

“It’s now believed that some of the larger pterosaurs, such as this Tropeognathus mesembrinus, could fly as far as 10,000 miles at a time.

Whether you learned in school to call them pterodactyls or pteranodons, pterosaur fossils have been found all around the world and lived from 65 million to 200 million years ago.

They ranged in size from some with an average wingspan of 6 feet to the giant giraffe-sized Quetzalcoatlus of Texas that could reach up to a 30-foot wingspan.”

Quetzalcoatlus was one of the giant pterosaurs specifically mentioned in the prior article as not being able to get itself off the ground.

Evolution is incredibly flexible and malleable and so are its believers. You see how the article explains that they now believe something diametrically opposed to what they firmly believed only 18 months ago?

Remarkable. That’s why paleontology is more religion; faith and belief than it is science.

Paleontologists have certainly covered the bases here when it comes to giant pterosaur flight. There is one thing that we now know with “scientific certainty”; giant pterosaurs either could not get off the ground and couldn’t so much as even flap their wings—or they were the greatest terrestrial flyers of all time! One scientist claims that his study shows that giant pterosaurs could not get off the ground. The second study indicates that they were the greatest fliers of all time.

Meanwhile, the news media slavishly reports the new information without reference to the old information and certianly without criticism or their own analysis. Materialistic science teachers passed this new information on to their students. Young evolution influenced kids began drawing versions of space-going pterosaurs and posting them on evolution websites looking for approval.

Posters on sites like Talk Origins will now go on and try to use this new “scientific information” to berate believers.

Giant Pterosaurs Couldn’t Fly Study Suggests

Prehistoric Reptile Could Fly 10,000 Miles