The Mathematician

God has made the wisdom of this world look foolish. 

1 Corinthians 1:20 NLT

"The interpretation of a physical theory partakes of a dark art, one in

which mathematical concepts are ceded dominion over the physical world.

In practicing this art, the mathematician, like the necromancer that he is, is always liable to the temptation of confusing the structures over which he presides with things in the real world."
David Berlinski, Was There a Big Bang? 1998

Ushikawa Man DEBUNKED

 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. 

For it is written, 

He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 

1 Corinthians 3:19

"Between 1957 and 1959 two fossilized limb bone parts were uncovered in Japan. Scientists thought the bones were human—a portion of humerus (upper arm bone) and the head of a femur (thigh bone). So they were dubbed ‘Ushikawa Man’ because they were found at the Ushikawa (牛川 = Ox River’) district in Toyohashi city, Aichi Prefecture, central Japan.

Scientists claimed that ‘Ushikawa Man’ was a male human who lived somewhere between 129–774 thousand years (ka) ago. This would make him Japan’s most ancient fossil human. A few decades later, the ‘date’ began to be progressively revised down to about 20 ka ago, still among the country’s oldest fossil humans. That is, until recently.

A 2024 study has re-examined the bones and discovered that they

are in fact the bones of a brown bear. The ‘humerus’ was actually a radius bone—from the bear’s forearm, not its upper arm. And the femur head was also from the bear. ‘Ushikawa Man’ actually never was.

This is not the first time that bear and human bones have been confused. A bone found in a cave in Alaska in the 1990s, even though found near shell beads, was thought to belong to a bear. When re-examined in 2019, it turned out instead to belong to a Native American woman.

Incidents like this should remind us to be cautious about interpretations of the past when the physical evidence is scant. In fact, this is only one of many instances in which a further examination of the physical evidence has led to museum displays correcting their signage. The obvious lesson is that we should be especially cautious about interpretations of physical evidence which promote or convey an evolutionary worldview that contradicts Biblical history." 

CMI

The Darwin Dictionary

 "The Darwin Dictionary as a unique tool to help you engagespecifically in the battle over origins.
As Proverbs 27:6 tells us, “Faithful are the wounds of a friend.”

No matter what worldview you bring to the table, we hope your thinking will be challenged and sharpened by The Darwin Dictionary. Happy reading!
Abiogenesis, n. – Rocks begetting life, in violation of the most basic, observed law of biology.
Apemen, n. – Ever-changing, imaginary creatures that inhabit museums and textbooks, concocted by speculation wrapped in conjecture bundled with an unhealthy dose of artistic license.
Big bang, n. – The logic-bending theory that everything was produced when nothing at all exploded.
Consensus, n. – What evolutionists appeal to when the evidence is lacking.
Convergent evolution, n. – The position of refuge for evolutionists who think that complex, sophisticated structures like camera eyes, billed snouts, sticky tongues, and electrosensory organs must have arisen multiple times by coincidence on separate branches of the evolutionary tree. Don’t bother them with the odds.
Dark matter, n. – The invisible, undetectable substance that supposedly holds the universe together, invoked liberally to prop up evolutionary cosmological theories that would otherwise fail to fit the evidence.
Dysteleology (poor design), n. – The not-at-all-pretentiouscategory into which evolutionists put the many ingeniously-designed biological features whose purposes they have failed to understand.
Evolutionary stasis (lack of change), n. – The part of the evolutionary process which has by far the most abundant fossil evidence—during which no evolution occurs.
God of the gaps, n. – The deceitful charge, seemingly immune to correction, that the case for a Creator is based on ignorance rather than positive evidence—a misrepresentation which evolutionists believe will become legitimate if they just keep repeating it.
Junk DNA, n. – Highly functional parts of the genome that specialize in confounding smug evolutionary claims that these genetic segments represent nothing more than clutter accumulated in the distant Darwinian past.
Living fossil, n. – An organism that refused to change over time, just so that it might bewilder evolutionary textbook authors.
Millions of years ago, adv. phrase – A heads-up that an ideologically-driven just-so story is coming next. Not so different from the phrase, “Once upon a time.”
Multiverse, n. – A desperate, evidence-free, unscientific gimmick to explain away the spectacularly precise fine-tuning of theuniverse without resorting to a Creator.
Nebular hypothesis, n. – An easy way for solar systems to form from gas clouds, as long as the laws of physics (such as the conservation of angular momentum) need not be a constraint.
Peer reviewed, v. – Vetted by the evolutionary echo chamber.
Pseudoscience, n. – Any field of study that poses a challenge to naturalism.
Quantum fluctuation, n. – The phenomenon of subatomic particle materialization which strictly obeys the well-established laws of physics, yet which big bang proponents confusingly invoke in their attempts to circumvent these same laws of physics (i.e., postulating that something can spontaneously come from nothing for no reason).
Quote mining, n. – The reasonable creationist practice of accurately citing a leading evolutionary authority figure whose comments somehow escaped censorship from the Darwinian thought police.
Settled science, n. – A phrase evolutionists find useful to preemptively shut down critical thinking.
War on science, n. – The fearmongering ‘sky-is-falling’ narrative spun by evolutionists whenever their unscientific worldview is challenged in public."
CMI

Sign of Allegiance to the CREATOR

 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: 

Exodus 20:10

“Pointing to God as the Maker of the heavens and the earth, it [the

Sabbath] distinguishes the true God from all false gods. 

*All who keep the seventh day signify by this act that they are worshipers of Jehovah. 

*Thus the Sabbath is the visible sign of man’s allegiance to God as long as there are any upon the earth to serve Him.” 

E.G.W.

Consciousness —as the Music of the Mind

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Genesis 2:7

"University of California (Santa Barbara) cognitive neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga has written a significant article at IAI.TV. He and synthetic biologist Bridget Queenan maintain there that “People with missing brains make clear the mystery of consciousness.”

Mystery? Gazzaniga, who trained under Nobelist Roger Sperry (1913–1994), is a close colleague of leading neuroscientist Christof Koch. Is he backing away from eliminative materialism (the mind is simply what the brain does)? He and Queenan dance around the topic in a most interesting way, beginning with people missing large parts

of their brains:
A 2013 case reported a 60-year-old missing the back of her brain. Again, normal on the outside: employed until recently, married, with one child and the ability to live alone. Inside, a cavity where the cortex should be. A 2018 case reported a 60-year-old, unmarried and unemployed, but active in a band and a choir, with his head full of fluid and only a thin sheet of cortex. A 2021 case reported a 72-year-old living independently, again largely without what we might recognize as “a brain.” Even rats got in on the action: R222 lived well into adulthood, performing well in lab-rat escapades despite a hollowed-out brain.

Collectively, these findings suggest that the human (and rat!) brain is considerably more plastic than expected. If you were born with bones or muscles half the expected size, or a quarter, or a tenth, you wouldn’t carry on unimpeded. If you were born with a tenth of your liver, we’d have a problem. Yet, somehow, the human brain can rise to the occasion—at a performance review…

Q: Is your brain really necessary for consciousness? 

Gazzaniga and Queenan argue that “It may be time for a new approach to brains and ‘consciousness’—as the music of the mind.” Music, they remind us, is more than volume and can be produced in a variety of ways.

What’s missing from Gazzaniga and Queenan’s model of consciousness becomes clear when they turn to analysis:
They write, “We can explain what makes music bad, though it’s much harder to explain what makes it good or great. That’s why we need to build a definition of consciousness from the ground up.” They then, puzzlingly, seek to downgrade language — unique to humans — compared to the “music” of consciousness:

Language is not the same as consciousness. Plenty of composers —Beethoven and Tchaikovsky among them—are in the Pantheon of “Great Composers” for music alone. We don’t require them to handle the words. We only seem to demand words when we want to exclude members from the club.
It’s time to admit that many living creatures aren’t so great at language, while being perfectly good at consciousness. They are musicians, but not singers, they are composers, but not librettists—get over it and move on. “Necessary for consciousness?”

Q: What’s obviously missing from this account is the mind of the composer?

A: Everything else flows from the immaterial ideas that inspired the composer who began the process by writing them down in musical notation:
Second, human language is similarly the outcome of abstract ideas arising in an immaterial mind. It is in no way inferior to music, as great literature attests. 

Animals have languages, to be sure. But their languages are signal systems — Even if Gazzaniga and Queenan wanted to provide an account of the origin of music in immaterial ideas, they could not do so. They would find themselves in direct conflict with the — increasingly unbelievable — mantra that the mind is simply what the brain does. So they end up confusing the issues around language and talking around the inescapable fact of human exceptionalism often complex ones, to be sure, but not the same thing." 

MindMatters

Idolatry and natural selection

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). The Creator of all things is the Lord Jesus Christ, who has no equal in authority and status. The first two commandments reiterate that this high position is His alone: “You shall have no other gods before Me. . . . You shall not make any . . . likeness . . . . You shall not bow down to them nor serve them” (Exodus 20:3, 4).

Darwin’s clever link between idolatry and the evolutionary worldview is natural selection and the concept behind that term. Scientists initially criticized natural selection as a personification. As a science historian explains, “One source of trouble was that Darwin liked the term ‘natural selection’ because it [a mental concept] could be ‘used as a substantive governing a verb [a real agent that can act]’ (F. Darwin, 1887, vol. 3, p. 46). But such uses appeared to reify, even to deify, natural selection as an agent.”

Q: Do evolutionists invoke natural selection as a substitute creator? 

A: Let’s hear from them.

"This was Darwin’s fundamental discovery, that there is a process that is creative, although not conscious. . . . It was Darwin’s greatest accomplishment to show that the complex organization and functionality of living beings can be explained as the result of a natural process—natural selection—without any need to resort to a Creator or other external agent."

"Natural selection is a creative process that can explain the appearance of genuine novelty."

Natural selection is venerated as the creator of biology, so why not for the entire universe? As one evolutionist put it, “Charles Darwin .

. . [has] brought the entire natural world under a single law of natural selection . . . [the] starting point [of my theory about the universe’s evolution] is the remarkable theory of cosmological natural selection proposed by the physicist Lee Smolin.” It follows that “the universe could be further understood as a self-coherent and self-creating whole, without the need for anything outside itself to give it law, meaning or complexity.”

Natural selection is idolatrous in the basest of ways. Not only does it ascribe rational powers to unconscious environmental features, like any other idol, but it also induces people not to give the Lord Jesus credit for the incredible intelligence and machinery He has built into His creatures that enable them to adapt to their environment. Consider the Lord’s declaration in Isaiah 42:8: “I am the LORD: that is My name: and My glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images” . . . or to nature as creator." 

ICR

BIG BANG: Temperature Uniformity

 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing. Job 26:7

"The universe is too big to have formed in only 10-20 billion years as

the Big Bang theory suggests, since the Big Bang is theorized to have happened only about 13.7 billion years ago. This is because the speed of matter is limited by the speed of light.

The problem here is that if the Big Bang had occurred, firstly the universe is too large to have only happened 13.7 billion years ago, and secondly there is temperature uniformity which requires matter to have moved beyond the speed of light to become universally uniform. This of course, is impossible according to Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, because nothing can move faster than the speed of light." 

TechReader

Duckbilled Dinosaur Chromosomes Found

And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

Genesis 7:12

“I couldn’t believe it, my heart almost stopped beating.” This was one of the research team’s reactions when they found evidence of proteins, chromosomes, and chemical markers of dinosaur DNA in the remains of a duckbilled dinosaur (Hypacrosaurus stebingeri).

Dozens of disarticulated baby dinosaurs were discovered in the 1980s at Two Medicine Formation in northern Montana. A recent detailed examination of one of the skulls led the team to identify cartilage cells, with internal structures resembling nuclei and chromosomes.

Of course, not everyone is happy with this find. The dinosaur is ‘dated’ at 75 million years old, but precise calculations based on the laws of science demand that DNA should be totally disintegrated long before that.

One paper calculated that DNA should be totally fragmented to one BP in about 6.8 million years even if frozen to –5°C. This is less

than a tenth of the claimed age of the dino fossil. But at 15°C and 10,000 years, the average length of DNA would be about 13 BP.

The Bible is clear that these dinosaur remains cannot be millions of years old. They were likely buried in sediment as a result of the global Noahic Flood around 4,500 years ago.
The calculated figures from real chemistry are clearly consistent with this—and totally inconsistent with millions of years."
CMI

Spiritual Lesson from the opening of Creation Week

 "Genesis chapter 1 reading from verse one. In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form and void, and

darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, "Let there be light." And there was light. And God saw the light that it was good. And God did what? Divided the light from the darkness. God did what? God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light day and the darkness he called night and the evening and the morning were the first day. 

We see God dividing, separating, severing one thing from the other. It was not God's will when he created this world physically that light and darkness should coexist, should commingle and intermingle and mix and by the way intermarry.
Some things should not mingle and mix and have any form of fellowship or communion." 

Randy Skeete