Why Dr. Mike Shermer Is Way Wrong, A Rebuttal

Last night, Mike Shermer spread his usual errors on the Coast to Coast AM radio show while trying to explain away phenomenon that don’t fit modern atheist and Marxist views of not just science, but physical laws. He gave a point of view based on baseless atheism, he even says a “skeptical” (doubting) view, not truly unbiased or truly objective.

Second he said of magicians that he doesn’t know how certain magic tricks are done but KNOWS they’re just magic. In other words he has FAITH in what he does not know is purely material phenomenon. And he treats this faith as “scientific” and “logic” and “reason”.

Third: in general he is right that magicians do magic, however he’s over generalizing, as plenty of magicians have engaged in experiments are acts that resulted in what the world has and can see to no end are repeatable phenomenon that cannot be explained by pure materialism/atheist-biased science/science from an atheist’s faith that everything is explainable materiastically. Also, magicians have never: a) caused a UFO or ghost phenomenon that violate physics observations, especially spectacular b) haven’t supernaturally healed c) have not reproduced demon possession phenomenon which is well-documented, and on and on. Tricks that are clearly matetiastic are just that, they have nothing to do with things occuring OUTSIDE a magic trick set up! Take for example regular UFO phenomenon in certain spots: where’s the magician? How is he profiting from them, where’s he getting the time, materials, money and energy for the daily phenomenon he himself said military pilots observe? He also said the usual narcissistic, “I’M SPECIAL, why (wouldn’t God let me see) didn’t I see such things?” line, only with an added twist: “everyone has phones and high resolution cameras”. Says who, rich man Shermer? Shermer, everyone’s rich and not worn out like your privelaged self? Shermer ignored the obvious: 1. The Bible’s/God’s testimony that Satan is a deciever with god-like power and a huge amount of evil ingenius helpers who are like him, so, obviously, and as endless reports indicate: the phenomenon is made by intelligent beings, and as the Bible indicates are in general going to be from evil, malicious beings, beings that love to harm, frustrate, abuse, confuse, corrupt and kill (if possible) the observers or they are targeting. 2. IS indeed everyone carrying a high res phone with such high resolution that a person like Shermer (who is unwilling to admit any pic or vid of any UFO or “ghost” shows a non-human or animal-made object or that isn’t natural) will admit it’s not a human-made object that was recorded, because many UFOs are far away, travelling extremely fast, faint, or disappear quickly 3. Are are high res phones free of scratches, cracks, grease or dirt on the lense? 4. Do all high res phones have screens that are easy to see in bright sunlight when trying to record 5. Do all the high res phones have uncracked and unscratched screens so they cam be used well? 6. Do they all instantly turns on and 7. the camera quickly focuses and has good focus tracking and good stabilization and correct white balance and ISO set, and 8. do all the phone users have good eyesight, and 8. their eyeglasses clear and ready, and 9. not busy, 10. not in a crowded situation, 11. their phones have necessary power to start getting good photos and videos and 12. enough memory? 13. Is everyone in good health, NOT weary and NOT in pain and 14. looking up nonstop (which would be weird snd hsrd on the neck to do) 15. or looking out nonstop from an airplane? 16. I think many people are not even aware they are seeing a UFO/demon/angel/or uncommon bird or reptile, and by the time they think it’s worth recording it’s maybe too far or gone (just as when one may try to record a bird of prey or vultures or some rare but well-documented animal, or even insect). 17. Shermer is being arbitrary and vague by requiring “high resolution” recordings. What would be “high” enough for him? Since many pics and vids are clear enough that it’s obvious the UFOs in them are not human-made, why must the resolution be higher? It’s not a logical or scientifically honest for Shermer to set some arbitrary bar and unreachable at that. 18. Shermer made a false argument, a “strawman” by claiming there’s no video or photo good enough, and it’s arrogant and evil for him to pretend so and pretsnd he speaks for everyone. There’s endless good examples of unnatural objects such as is shown on The Secret NASA Tranmissions Documentary at https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8Dro2CTqEhI and photos from 1870-1959 which was a time when photo-faking wouldn’t be common or likely due to the culture (what people would be interested in doing during that era), finances of most people and available technology (see https://www.ufocasebook.com/bestufopictures.html) and this wonderful collection https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=01VxWsHLQJs. And why cannot Shermer do his own recording attempts? It’s easy for a rich man like him to do high res night time recordings of haunted houses or remote areas of the night time sky. Whose stopping Shermer from exploring non-stop supernatural hotspots like Skinwalker Ranch, Goatman’s Bridge and the Yellowstone area plagued with supernatural disappearanes of people/missing persons?. So, Shermer’s reasoning is extremely oblivious to, like all illogical demon-blinded sin-enslaved minds: MANY FACTORS and over generalizing and over simplifying. It’s the same as him saying, “Oh all eye witness accounts are unreliable, and memory too!” while as one caller said basically to him, “So why believe you?” and to which he instantly replied with a contradiction: “Don’t just believe me/skeptics”, yet in the end that IS what he wants and so is literally just making contentious arguing that self-contradicts due to his logical fallacies and biased and baseless suppositions. Shermer denies what is obvious and twists the truth, lies to no enr and ignores truths because? Because as Jesus said, he’s blinded by the god of this world, enslaved to doing wrong (like lying and being self-centered and prideful/has baseless privelaged thinking, delusions of granduer that he has the special ability to know things without testing this (so he’s a hypocrite too), and if so and so sees or sees all the time he’d see it too, AND INSTANTLY GET GOOD PICS AND VIDS YA’LL! because he’s so worthy, so important, and surely if there was a God he’d have shown him to his face every incident he personally doubts or says couldn’t be (how unreasonable, arrogant, conceited and insulting, eh?)

‘Fossil Fuels’ Discovered In Space, Again | Evolutionists Faced With Reality Again

Complex organic matter discovered throughout the Universe
00:42 October 28, 2011
By Darren Quick

A spectrum from the Infrared Space Observatory superimposed on an image of the Orion Nebula where the complex organics are found

Researchers at the University of Hong Kong (HKU) claim to have solved the mystery of “Unidentified Infrared Emission features” that have been detected in stars, interstellar space, and galaxies. For over two decades, the most commonly accepted theory regarding this phenomenon was that these signatures come from polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) molecules – simple organic molecules made of carbon and hydrogen atoms. Now HKU researchers say the substances generating these signatures are actually complex organic compounds that are made naturally by stars and ejected into interstellar space.

The team of Prof. Sun Kwok and Dr. Yong Zhang used observations taken by the Infrared Space Observatory and the Spitzer Space Telescope of stardust formed in exploding stars called novae to show that the astronomical spectra contain a mixture of aromatic (ring-like) and aliphatic (chain-like) components that cannot be explained by PAH molecules.

The researchers say the substances generating these infrared emissions actually have chemical structures that are so complex that their structure resembles those of coal and petroleum. Since coal and petroleum are remnants of ancient life (does Darren even realize what he’s saying? Look at that, Darren, an evolutionist, in denial, even though he’s reporting on astronomy that is only supposed to support evolution but yet clearly isn’t) and this type of organic matter was only thought to arise from living organisms, the researchers say this suggests that complex organic compounds can be synthesized in space even when no life forms are present. (That sentence didn’t make any grammatical sense. Darren just said that these researchers are saying that stars can make petroleum because it’s believe that it came from [dead remains] of ancient life and because it was only thought to “arise”, wow “arise” nice flowery big word), from living organisms. No Darren, that’s not why they think they found oil in space, unless they are kook scientists and crazed hacks at science pretending to know what they are talking about like you are. And no sane scientist has said they come from living lifeforms let alone ancient living ones as you nonsensically implied with your poor superfluous wording. All you had to say was “SOME scientists claim that oil comes from millions of years old dead remains” and if you had an ounce of honesty in that mind would also have said that some scientists say it is continually being produced by the grinding up rock under great heat and pressure and perhaps also processed by thermophile bacteria to produce petroleum.)

Supporting an earlier idea by Kwok that old stars are molecular factories capable of manufacturing organic compounds, they say that not only are stars producing this complex matter on extremely short time scales of weeks, but they are also ejecting it into the general interstellar space in between stars.

“Our work has shown that stars have no problem making complex organic compounds under near-vacuum conditions,” says Kwok. “Theoretically, this is impossible, but observationally we can see it happening.” – more here

And when did the “fossil fuel” blind guide “judgmental” hypocrites already find this out only to keep repeating their fossil fuel mind-numbing, blissfully ignorant, children’s fantasy propaganda? (more like miserable zombie brain nonsense):

New data: Maybe oil isn’t from dead dinos
Saturn moon has more hydrocarbons than all of Earth’s known reserves

215\2008\6:52 PM Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi

Saturn’s moon Titan has hundreds of times more liquid hydrocarbons than all the known oil and natural gas reserves on Earth, according to a team of Johns Hopkins University scientists, adding to evidence that oil is not biological in origin.

The scientists at the Laurel, Md., institution were reporting this week on data collected from NASA’s Cassini probe.

“Several hundred lakes or seas have been discovered, of which dozens are estimated to contain more hydrocarbon liquid than the entire known oil and gas reserves on Earth,” wrote lead scientist Ralph Lorenz of the university’s Applied Physics Laboratory in the Jan. 29 issue of the Geophysical Research Letters. – more here

Unfortunately Jerome Corsi is a Catholic, which is worse than an atheist, because Jerome confesses the Bible to be true, and God’s word, and even gives out evidence for it, like the Shroud of Turin, yet leads people down the wrong path, down to Hell with his suffer-for-your-own-sins and do good deeds gospel, which is no good news at all. It’s a contradictory impossible path, as God demonstrated on Israel and their endless failure to obey God’s Law, and despite that some boast about knowing how many laws there are in the “first half” of the Bible.

Also interesting is that the Mainstream Science cult is hiding these discoveries (guess why). Is it on Sciencedaily, which shows off stories even from many years ago? No. Though right now they are declaring the fantasy evolutionary tree of Mollusks has just been completed lol. Delusional! Propaganda! Stupid! Waste of time and money that could be used on space exploration and COLONIZATION and exofuel mining, and advanced in medicine (not vaccines or “cures” for sexually transmitted diseases for kids – sounds like a child molester’s fantasy), transportation, computer power, artificial intelligence, software, agriculture, mining, fireproofing, oceanic exploration and colonization, housing, optics, sensors, communications, sanitation and recycling. Not, “Look I discovered all there is about mollusks over billions of years, trust me and waste your time reading this story to become a confused delusional zombie who will only listen to other evolutionists and stupidly laugh whenever you just hear the word creationist or creationism or intelligent design, or Christian or religious scientist.” Nor does Sciencedaily’s sister anti-Christian propaganda site Phys.org carry this story (these sites are almost identical except phys.org has a forum and seems to lack the videos of Sciencedaily).

Is Intelligent Design Compatible With Darwinian Evolution Theory?

On 6/20/2010 on Coast to Coast AM, radio show host George Noory interviewed “Dr. Bernard Haisch” who the C2C AM website describes as “an astrophysicist and author of over 130 scientific publications. He served as a scientific editor of the Astrophysical Journal for ten years, and was Principal Investigator on several NASA research projects. His professional positions include Staff Scientist at the Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory and Deputy Director of the Center for Extreme Ultraviolet Astrophysics at the University of California, Berkeley. In addition, he was also Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Scientific Exploration.” George almost right away brought up Stephen Hawking asking what was going on with him, and Bernie made it seem as if Hawking had had a change of mind after having written a book (his latest) called The Grand Design and might believe in an intelligent designer who designed the universe, saying that it seemed to Hawking that the laws of the universe were “finely tuned” (designed) for life (an old evidence for God or someone or someones like him having created the universe), but actually Hawking hadn’t changed his mind since writing his book, and was simply stating what seemed true to him, yet is in denial about it as his book The Grand Design shows. Bernie then said that he believed that humans had been created with a purpose and that’s “It’s more likely that the universe is a finely tuned place for life.” Bernie also brought up how astrophysicist George Ellis said that “life would not be possible if there were very small changes”. What Ellis said actually said was, “What is clear is that life, as we know it, would not be possible if there were very small changes to either physics or the expanding universe that we see around us.

However he said that he believed we were created through evolution, and “to learn” and that God didn’t create us in the way the Bible says and doesn’t “interfere” , because that would be “like [the] Santa Claus [story being true]” He also said that “the purpose behind all this is for God to evolve himself”. He said that he went to the “Latin school of Indianapolis” and to a Catholic seminary for one semester in an attempt to become a (Catholic) priest. He also posed the question “was the universe was made in a way that was conducive for life” and answered himself, saying “yes it was.”

Bernie’s misdescribes what it is when God acts within the universe, calling it “interference”. Why so? When a human does something is it automatically “interference”? Obviously not. Further, he compares the claim that God directly created humans instantly as being like the Santa Clause story, but does not explain why, or how such a comparison is evidence against the Genesis record. Further, his claim that God acting within the universe would go against “us” (humans) learning anything is without evidence. He doesn’t explain how that would prevent us from learning anything. And it goes against common sense: why if God gave us information would that PREVENT any human from learning anything? It would be just the opposite: they would learn about God (some way in which he does or can communicate) and learn the information he gave them if he allowed them to understand what he said. Also, why if God was able to create the laws of the universe (which is nothing simple, and which no creature has apparently mastered, not even aliens being that they can crash and die, must travel in vehicles to get to Earth and use created tools to examine us further than what they can learn simply by their senses), why if God could do that, and create a universe itself, would he NOT be able to see the future perfectly as the Bible claims, or alter it in anyway without preventing us or himself from learning or evolving as Bernie implied? Why would God NOT learn anything by altering what he made? Would God NOT learn something he spoke to a human or any of his creatures and observed how they reacted? I also noticed that part of Bernie’s illogical beliefs about reality was due to his belief in randomness, a thing which doesn’t exist being that everything, as he himself acknolwedges, goes by finely tuned laws, and that there is a purpose behind everything, not a “random non-purposed experimental universe by a God who failed at his experiment”. So, he contradicted himself. And because of his belief in randomness (a thing which allows for things to happen for no logical reason, apart from the laws of the universe and therefore unable to be purposed/directed), he also believes in Darwinian evolution. Bernie also believes in the “Big Bang”, a thing which has much evidence against it.

After, George said to Bernie that he didn’t believe that God sent floods and Bernie agreed saying that there were verses in the Bible that were “simply awful” like a verse in Deuteronomy in which if a man discovered his bride wasn’t a virgin, that he must stone her to death on her father’s doorstep, and saying that that was man’s evil projection onto God, and so revealing his ignorance about God’s authority, the symbolism in the Bible and his laws, and projecting his evil mind onto God’s, which is obviously a hypocritical thing and which contradicts his self-righteous “spirituality” which he said he had on the show. George asked Bernie if he believed that there was a purpose behind everything, and Bernie said that he believed there was. Bernie then said he believed we had spirits that continued to exist after we died.

After that, but not immediately after, George allowed a caller to correct him and Bernie, but they both rejected the correction. Among other things the caller said that there was no evidence for evolution, and said that the claim that God loving everyone would prevent him from harming anyone was false. George challenged the caller a little asking illogically how God could flood the world (and be loving), which is nonseniscal because the caller didn’t say that God WOULDN’T do that, but was saying the opposite of that, and that probably confused the caller a little, because the caller made the mistake of at first denying that God directly caused the flood, but then said it was necessary to get rid of the corruption in the world, the corrupt people being like a poisoned leg that needed to be removed lest the whole body dies. The caller also believed wrongly that the “Nephilim” were all evil (which he implied were of the corrupt people that needed to be killed), which isn’t something you can know being that that word means “giants” and is debatable as to whether or not it also means “bully” which is another way it can be used. When the caller met George’s challenge George seemed a littled annoyed, and Bernie failed to refute the caller, and in part of Bernie’s reply to the caller, claimed that he was wrong to say that there was no evidence for evolution and that it was “well laid out”, even though the caller made it clear that he was talking about two different types of evolution: micro evolution and macro, but again, Bernie ignored that and simply said “evolution”, ignoring the two types, and so committed the logical fallacy of bait and switch (equating two things which are not equal).

It’s also notable that George is a Catholic and pro-Catholic and anti-fundamentalist Christian, yet by denying “awful” verses in the Bible is committing heresy against Catholicism, and he’s been doing this for many years, in the ears of many millions of people, including Catholics, and yet his Pope has not excommunicated George for this nor rebuked him for it. So, George is a hypocrite, and it is strong evidence that Catholics are poorly unified. Unity is supposedly one of the evidences that Catholicism is the true religion according to various Catholics, including the Popes who has lead them. On about June 6th I had been in a Catholic church and observed Catholics doing mass for the first time, and the priest gave a sermon, and in it said that Catholics had a problem with unity, so, at least one Catholic of standing is in agreement with me (but he didn’t know that that is what I believed).

For those who might argue, “Evolutionists who say that evolution is random don’t understand what they are talking about since evolution really isn’t random but follows the laws of the universe. So really there is no problem with evolution science it’s just one of the laws of the universe.” Still, such a statement doesn’t give any evidence that molecules can by the laws of the universe turn into living things, like the simplist living thing to humans or aliens as intelligent as or more intelligent than humans. And for those who simply argue that it’s a myth that evolution is random, like Cameron McPherson Smith and Charles Sullivan, two evolutionists, they give no evidence for this being a myth, but use this stupid time-wasting insulting argument: “But we know that a glance at a flower or moose or meadow isn’t enough to appreciate all of nature, just as a glance at a book isn’t enough to appreciate a whole story. A glance at a living thing sees the here and now, but is blind to the billions of years of life recorded in the fossil record,” as if anyone has been around to see billions of years go by. And from the rant I took that quote from, they don’t say why it’s a myth, but end their insultingly stupid time-wasting rant with, “Both supporters and critics of evolution use the same phrase–“evolution is random”–to support their claims. To really understand the phrase we need to distinguish between how it’s used to support these opposing viewpoints.” I wish I could punch them for deceiving me into reading their Internet pollution, their misleading search engine dung. Why did these idiots claim that “evolution is random” is a myth and why do they claim to be scientific and scientists and yet use non-scientific ranting like that? It’s digusting and sickening to me. And that I still take a chance and read supposed “why creationist is wrong and evolution is right” evidence refutes the moron evolutionists who claim I ignore the evidence and don’t listen and am deluded and close-minded etc. No morons: I have read your “evidence” very carefully as the many articles in my journal and elsewhere shows, and everytime I take a chance to read some new evidence, it turns out to be a disgustingly time-wasting rant or dumb false cult-minded claims, not evidence. And I think that that is the last time I am going to use my time to read anymore supposed evidence for evolution. I am utterly sickened by being told such and such is evidence for evolution and against creationism, only to read an illogical claim. I see now it’s all a shell game and time-wasting game and show-off “look at me and what I feel” game and spam the net to force it down the throats of non-liberals game. Doesn’t the world refer to people who do this as “trolls”? And yet the world calls true Christians “trolls” in their hypocrisy instead. That is what is truly “hypocrisy” and “blind”.

For those who don’t believe in an intelligently designed universe, or designed laws at least, and yet claim that evolution is not random – they are confused or being contentious, because IF THE LAWS OF THE UNIVERSE WERE NOT DESIGNED, THEN THEY WERE WITHOUT PURPOSE AND LAWS DON’T CREATE THEMSELVES, therefore they would have to be produced by the opposite of something with a purpose, a RANDOM act, and randomness is WITHOUT ANY PURPOSE. Purpose is only something a thing with a mind would have, not a law that came into existence by randomness. And for those who would argue that it’s more likely then that the laws that produced the universe were always in existence or that the universe and the laws of it always existed, then a Creator: such people have no evidence for that claim, it’s just their ignorant opinion, even if they call it a fact.

God didn’t use man-to-molecules evolution because it is a pointless process: God taught man both directly and indirectly what right from wrong was within a few days, and gave further insight over thousands of years to learn about it. To spend billions of years waiting to teach HUMANS that is nonsensical, since humans didn’t exist for billions of years in Darwinian Evolution Theory, but only for at the most, hundreds of thousands of years, and maybe a few million, and so God would have waited billions of years just to say, “It’s wrong to disobey me”. Bernie’s version of learning right from wrong is also nonsensical, since if God doesn’t teach what right from wrong is, then no one would ever learn what it was, since right and wrong would never be known: Darwinian Evolution Theory has nothing to do with right from wrong and there is no evidence that it would cause any living things to think, “This is good and this is bad” or “This is the right way to do something and this is the wrong way”. DE Theory is an UNINTELLIGENT MINDLESS supposed law, but mindless doesn’t produce minds. Further, there is no evidence for Bernie’s claim that we’re all here to learn and then go on as spirits. Yet Bernie insists that his belief is true without evidence, like a cultist would do, an idiot.

People like Bernie who have the contradictory belief that there is such thing as randomness and simultaneously unchangeable laws are confused and say contradictory things.

Related Information:

An M.I.T. trained scientist takes a look at Darwin, the fossil record, and the likelihood of random evolution

Evolutionist Fantasies – Logical Fallacies Made by Evolutionists

Yesterday, on Coast to Coast AM, “Ian Punnett was joined by psychology professor Douglas Kenrick for a discussion on how the primitive, animalistic underside of human nature, with its sexual fantasies and homicidal tendencies, has actually given rise to the most positive features of our race.” I listened to this show and found it interesting that this professor said that those who were exclusively homosexual were “a puzzle” to evolutionists, because it didn’t help to spread their genes. He made a one or two other nonsensical statements like this, which evolutionists often repeat, which is that “genes want to spread” / “copy themselves”. They do this so often without explaining further what they mean, that no one can tell if such crazy-talk is literal or not. Evolutionists literally believe that animals “desire to spread their genes”, as if that that is what they are thinking when they are “in heat” or trying to mate, and are literally “looking for a mate with good genes” or “the best genes”. It’s absolutely stupid to say such things. Animals obviously are not intelligent to think such things, and how much less would genes have thoughts and desires? And back to the homosexuality “puzzle” which he seemed to imply must have some usefulness; says who? Why would it have usefulness in evolution? Why can’t something be a non-useful trait in evolution? Douglas said himself that exclusive homosexuality is an irrational choice, and yet he insisted that it must have some usefulness that couldn’t be seen (a clear contradiction). Is he biased? Is he double-minded because he is pandering to the homosexuals “community” and the liberals that determine his pay or whether he gets paid or not? Why doesn’t he just say, “It’s an aberration that repeatedly gets eliminated like evolution, like a harmful genetic mutation”. He also said that, “It’s not like homosexuality is a choice”, which was evidence of his bias. Who says it’s not a choice and where is the evidence? There are homosexuals who have said that it is a choice. There are also former homosexuals. Sexual attraction is also something that develops over time; people’s tastes change. And who would argue that babies are born being sexually attracted to anything? Are babies also born in the act of theft? This claim that babies can be born gay and is why they are gay or bisexual seems to be tied in to the illogical belief and excuse that God made sinners. For example, it’s common for ignorant and confused people to blame God for themselves being corrupt, asking, “Why did God make people sinful?” or “Why did God make me gay?” That’s as nonsensical as asking, “Why did God ecreat me in the act of stealing a car?”; no one is created in the act of stealing, lying, murdering, having sexual thoughts or committing adultery, married to anyone, or born a “Jew” (“Jew” and “Jewish” are racial words which are often incorrectly used in place of “Judaism”) or Christian. And a side note: The “Free Will” Christians who often make these claims of God making them the way they are (in the act of doing something including lusting to do certain evil things) are contradicting their claim that they have a completely free will which God isn’t allowed to and doesn’t “mess with”.

Also, does evolution also have desires and want to perpetuate itself? Yet so called “scientists” like Professor Douglas and others who believe in evolution, especially evolution-scientists, keep making the clear logical fallacy of giving emotions to dna and genes, and another fallacy, which is giving animals (and they consider humans to also be animals) false motives. It’s also bizarre that they give animals and their “genes” and dna the same motives, as if the dna and genes that exist in the animal they are in have separate minds of their own and are not apart of one being (creature). Even if they are speaking figuratively, it is a bad form of teaching to repeatedly do this (as bad as the nonsensical cliches “science tells us” and “science says”) and not explain what you mean, and to keep doing that leads to the ones you saying it to, believing such fallacies and to their own hurt, leading them to Hell because of believing such stupid and illogical things. It may be that certain evolution-scientists used this stupid talk to make it easier for kids and “stupid people” to understand, and got into the bad habit of repeatedly explaining things this way, and/or that certain ones with bad intent, noticed that by saying “dna is programmed to replicate”, which some evolutionists will admit, gives the correct implication that it was intelligently programmed (because mindless things like evolution and so called “nature” do not program things, and obviously DNA didn’t create or program itself), and in their hatred of God and the Bible, didn’t and don’t want anyone to know or believe the truth, which is that we were created by God and that the laws of universe, including our biology, were made by him.

The Great Gravity Probe B Hoax: More Evolutionist (Anti-Christian) Fraud

Sadly, evolutionists have further wrecked science, spreading more lies in the astronomy field, spreading more confusion and causing more scientific and technological stagnation and religious/spiritual confusion as a result. They have done so this time by making false claims about the Gravity Probe B satellite experiment, which in 2008 NASA had made clear was a failed experiment. But now, in March 2011, it’s suddenly a success. Look at how much propaganda was spread by the experimenters:

78 news articles claiming that the GPBSE was a success, and many blogs, including Michio Kaku’s.

Even Wikipedia is spreading the hoax which is evident from the title of the Gravity Probe B experiment picture they placed on the Gravity Probe B page. It says, “Gravity_Probe_B_Confirms_the_Existence_of_Gravitomagnetism.jpg” (the same picture I used for this post). I wonder if that was the original title or if some weasel retitled it.

At this Google knol link here, physics researcher Michael Suede points out why the claim of success and vindication is false, among other reasons for Relativity being false. He claims that the GPB error data was used to produce a positive result, which the geocentrist Malcom Bowden predicted would happen.

If you hate reading or would rather watch videos of evidence against General Relativity, here are some videos on Youtube:

Einstein Was Wrong – Falsifying Observational Evidence Presented

Quasars: Why Einstein Was Wrong

Related Videos and Articles:

Geoncentrism Evidence:

Hidden scientific evidence for geocentrism

Evidence of Geocentrism 1 of 3

Evidence of Geocentrism 2 of 3

Evidence of Geocentrism 3 of 3

Geocentricism – The Orrery

The geocentric Venus-Mars-cycle – animation

Earth, Venus, Sun: Geocentric Orrery

Geocentric Model with Sun and Venus

Geocentric model of the solar system, demonstrating the celestial sphere and epicycles

Morning Meteors Explain Geocentrism

Geocentricity – Satellites + Mach

GEOCENTRISM – Sagnac’s experiment – an animated explanation

Geocentricity explains the seasons

The Static Earth – The Geostationary Model works!

Geocentric Universe – Celestial Poles

GEOCENTRICITY – An animated explanation of “Airy’s Failure”

Galileo – Quadricentennial Myth vs fact

A written rebuttal against the arguments of Los Almos’ Nieto’s arguments against geocentrism

Big Bang Contradictions:

Technical Paper on Plasma Cosmology and Big Bang

The Big Bang Theory–A Scientific Critique

Fast stars challenge big bang origin for dwarf galaxies

Why we’ve got the cosmological constant all wrong (note the comments too)

New Discovery: Dwarf Galaxies May Nix Theory of Dark Matter in the Universe

Faster Than Light? Neutrino Finding Puzzles Scientists

Faster than a Speeding Light Wave

The First Test That Proves General Theory of Relativity Wrong

Was the Speed of Light Faster In the Early Universe?

Faster Than the Speed of Light: The Story of a Scientific Speculation

Speed of Light May Have Varied in the Early Universe

Copernicus and his Revolutions

The Decrease In the Speed of Light – An Update On Developments

Reports of the Death of Speed of Light Decay are Premature

On the Constancy of the Speed of Light

Starlight and Time

Scientists Cover Up Proof of Evolution: Featherless ‘Naked’ Penguins Confuse Evolutionists

post link: http://featherless.tk

Evolution Is TRUE!

Penguins Go Naked: The Sacred Penguin Prophecies
By Facebook the Expert Gypsy Studier

Mainstreamer scientists are “perplexed” according to CNN over the evolution of penguins which have lost their feathers in order to evolve into sun birds. The Mainstreamers fought with one another when some, lacking faith in god-man Darwin, attempted to cover up, actshually hide this proof of Mother Evolution and her Punctuated Equilibrium, aka Hopeful Monster children, which Goldschmidt the Great prophecied would happen in the past, over and over, which is how irreducibly super complex beautiful symmetrical creatures of all kinds turned suddenly turned into other animals without having to evolve. From CNN’s Blog:

A mysterious ailment is causing penguins to lose their feathers, according to researchers at the Wildlife Conservation Society.

The condition, called feather-loss disorder, has been seen in penguin chicks in both sides of the Atlantic Ocean the past few years and is featured in a recent edition of the journal “Waterbirds,” the release said.

While scientists don’t know what could cause a penguin to go “naked,” possible culprits include genetics, nutrient imbalances, thyroid disorders or pathogens.

“We need to conduct further study to determine the cause of the disorder and if this is in fact spreading to other penguin species,” Dee Boersma, who has studied Magellanic penguins, said in the release.

Feather loss in pet birds has long been a common ailment seen by pet stores and private owners, but researchers studying the penguins in the Atlantic said this is something different.

“The recent emergence of feather-loss disorder in wild bird populations suggests that the disorder is something new,” Mariana Varese, acting director of the society’s Latin America and Caribbean program, is quoted as saying in the release. “More study of this malady can help identify the root cause, which in turn will help illuminate possible solutions,” she said.

While the illness does not appear to be fatal, the sick birds, unlike their feathered counterparts, linger in the sun instead of seeking refuge from the midday heat. That behavior has led to several deaths, according to the release.


I theororize that Mainstreamers’ disrespect of Mother Gaya by refusing to admit Wicca as the truth and because of the fundistsmental Cristians, which are destroying Mother Gaya through aka Climate Disruption of our Mother Earth aka known as Climate Interference aka Weather Affection aka Hindering the Weather aka formerly known as Global Warming Syndrome also aka known The Coming Hot Ice Age, that’s all so far I think, well that all that is making it hotter so that the penguin peoples’ DNA has decided to evolve and become greedy by trying to warm themselves even more, out of greed for Father Sun’s heat rays, for his warmth. They can’t help but be greedy oh peoples of the world, including you other animals who are sisters and brothers and cousins and asexuals and hermaphrodites and LGBTs to the penguin peoples, so please don’t judge them for trying to take all the heat for themselves, it’s natural selection aka survival of the fittest. They’re just trying to be fit okay, Jesus said they don’t need our help that the birds will feed and clothe themselves, so please stop putting them in warm-suits aka hot and wet suits, leeeeeave theeeeem aloooooone, because that’s not what Mother Nature intended, it just interferes with the natural way of things, whether it be extinction or multiplication (did I spell that rite?), well at least I know how to spel “spell” ha.

Now please discuss the consequences of the illogic of Mainstream Scientists who won’t stay true to their faith, which Mother Nature aka Gaya is punishing them for, because she doesn’t want hypocrisy, people. THE ICE IS MELTING PEOPLE! MAKE IT STOOOOOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *stressing*

You know wat? This reminds me of the mutant sheep pig which is trying to look like a dog as adaption of the species, click here to see it, it’s so strange.

Holy Invisible Intelligence: ”Grass didn’t exist back then,” say Mainstream Scientists

Hands off my leaves! Scientists discover sabre-toothed tortoise
by John Hutchinson
3/25/2011/11:05 AM

With its fearsome canines and a mouth filled with teeth, experts could have been forgiven for thinking they’d discovered another great dinosaur predator.

But this prehistoric tortoise is no more predatory than its latter-day relative.

Rather than being a snarling meat-eater this sabre-toothed beast – that lived 260million years ago – feasted on leaves and stems [and the evidence for this is, or should we all just have “blind faith” in whatever you say?].

Odd: Surprised scientists have discovered the remains of a sabre-toothed vegetarian – which was the size of a dog but has an uncanny look of a tortoise about it

The fossilised remains of the creature, known as Tiarajudens eccentricu and which was the size of a large dog, have been discovered in Brazil.

While apparently unnecessary due to it’s vegetarian tendencies, the dagger teeth will have been very much needed to fight off predators and enemies.

Speaking to LiveScience [another Mainstream Science cult], vertebrate paleontologist Juan Carlos Cisneros at the Federal University of Piauí in Teresina, Brazil said: ‘If you asked me how surprised I was about finding this fossil, I can tell you that finding a fossil so bizarre as Tiarajudens eccentricus, a fossil that looks like if it has been made from parts of different animals, is like finding a unicorn.

‘You see it, but you don’t believe it.’

Discovery: The leaf-crunching animal lived 260 million years ago in what is now Brazil – and used his dagger teeth to ward off enemies

Discovery: The leaf-crunching animal lived 260 million years ago in what is now Brazil – and used his dagger teeth to ward off enemies

In addition to the crayon-size saber canines, the entire roof of its mouth was covered with teeth.

Grasses did not exist at that time

SAY WHAT? “GRASS”?! Yeah because that’s way more complex saber-toothed torti and every other animal.. 0_0 What extremist stupidity! Is there no end to the stupid things anti-Christians will say and do? Only gullible, insane, moron or greedy liars only interested in temporary pleasures and making money (which now is also temporary) say extremely stupid things like that. It didn’t exist back then because: “We can’t see it anywhere,” and just like you can’t see the human fossils and footprints (some along with dinosaur footprints) stuck in “millions of years old” rock, coal and sediment, and on and on and on. At least the Huffington Post didn’t make or repeat such a stupid claim, wouldn’t put it past them though. Learn more about ooparts at s8int.com or read Forbidden Archeology (which includes findings from famous evolutionists themselves).

Update 6:05 P.M.

The Grass That Broke the Pseudo-scientists’ Back

I thought dinosaurs DIDN’T east grass cuz there was none around:  Dung Reveals Dinosaurs Ate Grass (And from guess who?: Livescience! And what’s this article date here?: 17 November 2005 Time: 09:01 AM ET? So, you had SIX YEARS to get your lies straight, but are so arbitrary, careless and money-addicted, you still couldn’t do it. That’s what happens when you get addicted to pleasure and lie too much, you contradict yourself, to no end.


Those who care about the truth, remember it;
those who don’t, lie.

What the… Mutant Sheep Dog or Mutant Dog Sheep or Alien Experiment On Sheep Baby?

Post link: http://sheepdog.tk

I dub this new breed (hopefully), “Shogs”!
Maybe they can name him her “Shog”?

A mutant sheep that looks like a god. There’s no end to the amazing things God shows us eh?
May an alien messed with the baby sheep’s DNA? What’s next? Rhino dogs? Hippo dogs? Giraffe dogs?

I can hear the music and lyrics now: “Teenage Mutant Ninja Sheep Dogs”. Don’t even talk about “evolution” Darwinists. That takes millions of years to make a transition like this, and it isn’t going to be a sudden change. In fact this is evidence against it, because it shows how similar DNA is (which is NOT evidence of evolution despite what Darwinists say), so similar, because there was no evolution, but a God who used very similar structures to create life on Earth.

I hope they clone this sheep, animal, whatever it is, and breed lots of them.

By the way, for those of you anti-Christian and fake Christian idiots who keep lobbing around the term, “sheeple”, you’re the ones being dumb:

The ‘intelligent’ side of sheep
Sheep can remember faces says professor
Study shows Welsh sheep ‘more clever than thought’
They pulled the wool over our eyes! Sheep are so intelligent they can make ‘executive decisions’
Far-farmyard-dunces-sheep-intelligent-think.html Baa! Far from being farmyard dunces, scientists insist that sheep are intelligent
Scientists say sheep are brighter than we thought. But they don’t know the half of it…

And about other animals, they aren’t stupid either, in comparison to intelligent humans, yes, but to our inventions (made possible by God, and which are often based on what we learn about them, no): www.animalbrains.tk

Massive Nemesis of Stupidity in Nonexistant Oort Cloud Threatens to Destroy Earth’s Science Even Further

Massive Nemesis of Stupidity in Nonexistant Oort Cloud Threatens to Destroy Earth’s Science Even Further:

Massive dark object ‘lurking on edge of solar system hurling comets at Earth’
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 12:28 PM on 10th December 2010
Comments (190) Add to My Stories
A massive dark object may be lurking on the edge of our solar system, according to scientists. [What ‘scientists’? Not all scientists despite the implication of this immoral weasel.]

Most comets that fly into the inner solar system seem to come from the outer region of the Oort cloud [seem to who you weasel? So you speak for everyone? Arrogant.]- a region of icy dust and debris left over from the birth of the solar system [it’s an evolutionist theory, not a known real region as you imply].

The cloud starts from a point about 93 billion miles from the Sun and stretches for around three light years and contains billions of comets, most of them small and hidden [so goes the theory, liar. And if most of them are small and hidden, how do you know this cloud exists, or your “scientists” friends? Contradict yourself much Mr. Evolutionist Pretending to Be a Scholarly Scientists and Journalist?].
A Nasa graphic which illustrates how the Oort Cloud surrounds our solar system. [really? It’s from NASA, that company packed full of creationist scientists? No.] Scientists believe [what scientists you weasel? All scientists? No.] that an object with a huge mass may be pushing comets towards Earth from the cloud[.][And? We should believe with these so far unknown scientists, because? Well because you’re talking pretentiously, like you’re king of the world, and mentioned scientists all believing so and so, and you mentioned NASA, the great center of scientific mastery, which is why it still uses rocket technology from the 60’s.]
Now new calculations suggest a large object that is up to four times as big as Jupiter could be responsible for sending them in our direction. [Cool: “Now new calculations”. I’m scared. I’ve now abandoned Christianity and recalculated my life to be atheist and believe in evolution and read dailymail all day long. I’m really productive now!]

The scientists [what scientists? ‘Just have faith’ right?] have analysed the comets in the Oort cloud [you can’t analyse something that hasn’t been found] and deduced that 25 per-cent of them would need a nudge by a body of at least Jupiter size before they changed orbit. [You still haven’t explained why these scientists believe in this flying elephant planet.]

Astrophysicists John Matese and Daniel Whitmire at the University of Louisiana came up with theory said that ‘something smaller than a Jovian mass would not be strong enough to perform the task’. [You still haven’t explained why these scientists believe in this flying elephant planet.]
They believe that our solar system has a hidden ‘companion’ that has so far remained undetected. [You still haven’t explained why these scientists believe in this flying elephant planet, or why I should trust in these people. Oh I know: because you called them astrophysicists. They must be trustworthy..]
The scientists [the what? Repeat that 100 times in a row to brainwash me more.] have been studying the cloud using WISE, Nasa’s infra-red space telescope that is capable of detecting dark objects. [And what did they find?]
Matese said: ‘I think this whole issue will be resolved in the next five to 10 years, [Oh, they found nothing, and yet you speak of them as having found something. You wasted my time and the time of thousands of others.] because there’s surveys coming on line that will dwarf the comet sample we have today. [Because you said so.]

‘Whether these types of asymmetries in the directions that comets are coming from actually do exist or not will definitely be hammered out by those surveys,’ Matese added. [Wait: you mean you don’t know? But this article was about you and other “scientists” knowing.] ‘We anticipate that WISE is going to falsify or verify our conjecture.’ [Wait again: I thought you were already sure and full of evidence for this imaginary cloud. And uh, so why was this invisible planet of faith brought up again? Oh: sensationalism, draw in people to read your article. Liars won’t win in end, nor thieves. ]
About 3,200 long-period comets are known, one of the most famous being Hale-Bopp which was visible to even the naked eye during 1996 and 1997. [But where’s the cloud?]
Halley’s Comet, which reappears about every 75 years, is a ‘short-period’ comet from a different part of the Solar System called the Kuiper Belt.

[…]These occasional comet showers could be why the mass extinctions on Earth are so regular, some scientists believe. [What… is this an allusion to evolution… in an astrophysics article…? No: evolutionists never use propaganda in other fields of science, they never associate things like the Big Bang with evolution and then repeatedly mock Christians by asking them why they “always talking about the Big Bang and evolution as if they have something to do with each other,”… nah: they never do that…]

The research appeared in the online edition of the journal Icarus. [Sounds sciency and cool: must be trustworthy.]
‘Most planetary scientists would not be surprised if the largest undiscovered companion was Neptune-sized or smaller, but a Jupiter-mass object would be a surprise,’ Matese told SPACE.com [And how does this person know that it’s “most scientists” who would not be surprised at this? Did he take a poll? Is there a survey on this somewhere? ]
‘If the conjecture is indeed true, the important implications would relate to how it got there — touching on the early solar environment — and how it might have affected the subsequent distributions of comets and, to a lesser extent, the known planets.’ [“early solar system environment”: How early? Are you trying to bring us back to the Big Bang? Weasel.] – Source

It occurred to me after having finished this post, and then adding the tags for it, that as I typed planet x as part of the keywords, repeatedly, realized this dailymail article and the “scientists” it quotes were trying to cash in on the Planet X scam, something which is discussed on certain radio shows and websites repeatedly, to get more visitors and more money from advertisers.

“Most of them small and hidden” indeed, just like the good deeds of these “scientists”. They are all liars, just as God said.

Evidence that some Neanderthals were Homo sapiens deformed by disease

Bone Disease Simulating Ancient Age in “Pre-Human” Fossils
by Rush K. Acton, M.D.

The presence of bone disease of one kind or another as an explanation for so-called “pre-human” fossils is not a common finding but it has been a recurring theme in the scientific world literature. In 1871, Charles Robert Darwin published his second book, The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. Here Darwin presented an ages-old theory that man is merely the highest product of evolution to date, beginning with the lower animals, and thus postulated the presence of “pre-human fossils” on their way up the evolutionary ladder from ape to man. Even before this time, specimens of bones began turning up in excavations around the world. Until a few bones and teeth began to appear, even such a staunch evolutionist as T.H. Huxley had expressed doubt that any of man’s ancestors would ever be found in the earth’s strata. Since that time evolutionary scientists have accumulated a scattered series of skeletons and parts thereof with various features of man or apes. In spite of considerable disagreement on these various finds, a sort of imaginary family tree of man’s ancestors has been developed from these bones and pieces of bones. There is no universal agreement among evolutionists on these findings and their significance or exact place in the hypothetical family tree. Most examples of the “fossil men” can best be explained as variant forms of man or ape with an occasional example of outright fraud. Frank Cousins in his book, Fossil Man, mentions the matter of indecent haste in reporting and withholding of information. Dr. Duane Gish gives an excellent summary of the entire field in his book, Evolution, the Fossils Say No! He discusses the theoretical evolutionary sequence from early primates to modern man. He quotes a number of well known evolutionary paleontologists who make vague statements about the place of each fossil in the history of man. Dr. Gish goes on to develop the thesis that some of these are fossil remains of apes or ape-like creatures while other fossils meet all the requirements of Homo sapiens or modern man. He concludes that there is a consistent lack of transitional forms between the lower primates and man and that there is no evidence whatsoever in the fossil record for evolution.
It is common practice to assign a specific time period to a fossil in a rather dogmatic way, implying that there is good hard evidence to support the assigned date. Relative dating is based on the theoretical geologic time table which does not occur in its entirety anywhere on earth and in fact is based on a form of circular reasoning that assumes evolution. Absolute dating is commonly based on radioactive decay of certain elements. These elements undergo a spontaneous transition from a parent element to a daughter element at a given rate of decay. The proportions of parent to daughter elements in a given sample are put into a formula to determine the age of the material. False assumptions of purity of parent and of daughter elements in the sample and the known inconstancy of decay rates allow for enormous errors in the direction of falsely older dating. Dating methods become more unreliable the further one goes into the distant past. In addition, a great body of scientific evidence is beginning to accumulate that actually limits the age of the universe. This limitation is far short of the time absolutely required by the evolutionary theory. Thus, when evolutionists admit in the literature that disease processes leave their imprint on bone and teeth, producing a false impression of their concept of fossil man, it bears investigating.

Sir Marc Arman Ruffer coined the term “paleopathology” in 1913 in order to describe the study of disease processes and their effects on fossilized remains. Roy Moodie, Ph.D., an associate professor of anatomy, published a thorough review of the field in 1923. Being an evolutionist, Dr. Moodie believed that the history of disease begins with the early Paleozoic (judged to be about 100,000,000 years old then, now estimated to be 600,000,000 years ago). In a chapter in Diseases in Antiquity (Brothwell and Sandison) published in 1967, Dr. Moodie further states that organisms of disease have followed the same general evolutionary processes as have other living things. Fossil animals have shown evidence of various diseases including abscesses in teeth and jaw bones, arthritis, osteomyelitis, benign and malignant tumors, rickets, syphilis and tuberculosis.

Let us examine Neanderthal Man, a supposed forerunner of modern man in the light of paleopathology. In 1856 workers blasted a cave in the Neander Valley near Dusseldorf, Germany. They discovered limb bones, pelvis, ribs, and a skull cap. These bones were examined by scientists in various parts of the world. An ardent evolutionist, T.H. Huxley, ruled this specimen out as an ape-to-man link. A German anatomist, Rudolph Virchow, said in essence that the fossil was the remains of modern man (Homo sapiens) afflicted with rickets and arthritis. In 1886, two more skulls of the same general configuration were found at Spy, Belgium. In the early 1900’s, a number of similar specimens were found in Southern France and by now were lumped together as Neanderthal Man. There are now over one hundred specimens of Neanderthal Man. A paleontologist named Boule reconstructed a set of Neanderthal bones into a very ape-like creature but was severely criticized for this by other evolutionists who noted that the fossil represented Homo sapiens, or modern man, deformed by arthritis.

The very fact that there is such an abundance and variety of forms of the so-called Neanderthal Man is in itself a problem. The appearance of these specimens ranges from the classical Neanderthal of Western Europe to the more modern type which shades into Homo sapiens. The more primitive classic type has a large cranium about the size of modern man’s but with a tendency to be flattened on the top side and to bulge more at the back and the sides. A bony prominence at the back of the skull marks the attachment of the spinal muscles and is referred to as the “Neanderthal bun.” The forehead is marked by a massive supraorbital ridge.

Ivanhoe, writing in the scientific journal, Nature, in 1970, titled his article as follows: “Was Virchow Right About Neanderthal?” Virchow had reported that the Neanderthal Man’s apelike appearance was due to a disease called rickets. He notes that every Neanderthal child’s skull studied so far was apparently affected by severe rickets. When rickets occurs in children it produces a large head due to late closure of the epiphyses and fontanels. The forehead is high and bulbous, the “Olympian front.” The skull bulges at the four corners giving the “caput quadratum” appearance and the teeth are characteristically bad. These features approach those of the classic Neanderthal skull. Large orbits (eye sockets), elliptical in the vertical dimension, are another feature of rickets seen in the Neanderthal children’s skulls and are taught as a simian (ape) characteristic of fossil skulls. Ivanhoe goes on to make a very good case for the correctness of Virchow’s assumption that Neanderthal was merely modern man with rickets. Being a staunch evolutionist, however, he doesn’t perceive this amazing thesis as any support of creation vs. evolution. He further notes the wide distribution of Neanderthal finds in various parts of the world and different climates. He feels that the more classic types of Neanderthal bones merely reflected the increased degree of bone changes from rickets in areas where sunshine is less available. Rickets is related to a relative shortage of Vitamin D which is manufactured in the skin upon exposure to light. Vitamin D is also found in certain fatty fishes and in eggs, among other things. Ivanhoe felt that Neanderthal had little exposure to the sun because of the cold weather, increased atmospheric turbulence, and rain in some of the areas where specimens were found. Mousterian sites of Neanderthal showed little evidence of fish consumption and eggs were thought to be rare. The corresponding condition which occurs in adults from lack of Vitamin D is osteomalacia or softening of the bone. Softening leads to bowing of long bones, and bowing of these bones is seen in both adults and children among the Neanderthal fossils. Both rickets and osteomalacia represent the lack of mineral salts in the protein matrix of bone, causing this relative lack of sturdiness of bone with resultant deformities. There are many causes of these conditions, including defects of nutrition in babies, and certain types of kidney disease. Vitamin D deficiency can also be associated with dimpling and formation of furrows in the enamel of permanent teeth. This feature alone can blur the identification of fossil teeth, which are often found alone or with a minimum of bony structures. Molar or cheek teeth of the old world monkeys, for example, have four cusps or little mounds and those of apes and man have five. Deficiencies in Vitamins A and C can also produce deformities of the permanent tooth structure.

It is possible that some of the changes that occur in fossil bones are attributable to a condition called Paget’s Disease or Osteitis Deformans. This occurs most often between fifty and seventy years of age and can involve one or many bones. Hereditary and familial factors are known to play a role in Paget’s Disease in some cases. It is not known exactly what causes Paget’s, but it has been clearly shown that there is a greatly increased blood flow. This blood flow in pagetoid bones may be twenty times that of the normal rate. Common sites include long bones of the lower extremity and the spine and less often the bones of the upper extremity. The bones become thickened, softer and often curved. Thomas Fairbanks reported on Paget’s Disease in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery in May, 1950. He noted that when advanced cases involve many bones, the individual may assume a crouching “simian” posture. Even the hips assume a more ape-like angle of the femoral neck to the shaft as in the non-upright walkers. The larger skull is thrust forward and held low as in the apes. A loss of as much as thirteen inches in height has been reported. More commonly in Paget’s, the skull is enlarged without enlargement of the facial bones causing the face to look unusually small.

An excellent report by a pathologist from the Hospital for Joint Disease in New York, Dr. Goldenberg, describes the overall appearance of the disease in this way. “In advanced cases of polyostotic Paget’s Disease, the deformities of the spine, femora, and tibiae may result in considerable loss of height. The enlarged head, apparent lengthening of the upper extremities, waddling gait and bow legs suggest a simian appearance.”

Congenital syphilis occurs when the mother affected with this venereal disease transmits it by way of her own blood stream to the yet unborn baby. The fetus within the mother’s womb is usually protected from this disease until the sixteenth week of pregnancy, and most infections occur in the last weeks before delivery of the baby. Fiumara and Lessell, writing in the Archives of Dermatology, describe a number of common findings in this condition. The most frequent sign occurring in eighty-seven percent of their series is called frontal bossing of Parrot. This is due to local areas of frontal bone periostitis (inflammation) caused by the microorganism that produces syphilis. When it involves the forehead above the orbits, it produces the so-called Olympian brow similar to the classic features of western European Neanderthal skulls. Deformities of the long bones of the limbs can occur with syphilis and may produce bowing and curvature of these bones. A condition called Moon’s “mulberry molars” was found in about two out of three of this group of patients. The molar teeth are deformed with many poorly developed cusps (grinding surfaces) instead of the usual pattern of five cusps. Syphilitic incisor teeth can be deformed, barrel-shaped and thicker than normal. A specialist in venereal diseases in London named D.J.M. Wright examined the collection of Neanderthal bones in the British Museum of Natural History and reported that these bones could be merely modern man affected by congenital syphilis.

Neanderthal Man is now taught in evolutionary circles as being Homo sapiens, a sub-species of modern man that lived about 40,000 to 100,000 years ago as a predecessor to modern man.

There remains considerable disagreement among evolutionists as to whether some or all of the Neanderthals evolved into modern man or whether they just vanished into extinction. One author of a 1977 edition of a textbook used in a large university today has an entire chapter on the Neanderthal problem. There are several problems, the most striking one being the sudden disappearance of Neanderthals. The author believes that this suggests catastrophism and even mentions the Genesis flood.

Putting aside preconceived notions of evolution or creation, one can clearly see that the evolutionary scientists have provided good evidence to suggest that Neanderthal Man might well represent some of Noah’s descendants ravaged by various diseases. How blind man can be to scientific evidence when it conflicts with a compelling need to demonstrate that God does not exist and that the creation did not take place.Bibliography1 Brothwell, Don and Sandison, A.T.: Diseases in Antiquity, Springfield, Illinois, Charles C. Thomas, 1967. 2 Cousins, Frank W.: Fossil Man, A.E. Norris & Sons Ltd., 1971. 3 Fairbank, H.A. Thomas, “Paget’s Disease Syndrome—Osteitis Deformans,” The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Vol. 32B, pp. 253-365, May, 1950. 4 Fiumara, N.J. and Lessell, Simmons: “Manifestations of Late Congenital Syphilis,” Archives of Dermatology, Vol. 102, pp. 68-83, July, 1970. 5 Gish, Duane: Evolution: The Fossils Say No!, San Diego, California, Creation-Life Publishers, 1973. 6 Ivanhoe, Francis: “Was Virchow Right About Neanderthal?” Nature, Vol. 227, pp. 577-579, August 8, 1970. 7 Moodie, Roy L.: Paleopathology, Urbana, Illinois, University of Illinois Press, 1923. 8 Parrot, M.: “The Osseous Lesions of Hereditary Syphilis,” The Lancet, Vol. 1, pp. 703-705, May 17, 1879. 9 Wright, D.J.M.: “Syphilis and Neanderthal Man,” Nature, Vol. 229, p. 409, February 5, 1971.*

Dr. Rush K. Acton: In addition to his practice as an orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Acton is Clinical Associate Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery, and Clinical Associate Professor of Anatomy at the University of Miami. He is a Diplomate of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgeons and a Fellow of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.Click here to see the original article

Related Information:

Neandertal Genome Confirms Creation Science Predictions

Sleep with Neanderthals? Apparently we (homo Sapiens) did

Spinning a DNA Tale: Evolutionists Lie About Neanderthals Again

“Neanderthals are no longer considered a separate species”

No Fruit Fly Evolution After 600 Generations or Bacteria Evolution After 40,000 Generations

No Fruit Fly Evolution After 600 Generations
by Brian Thomas, M.S.

Many Americans believe that the big-picture story of evolution, as biology professors routinely expound it, is false.1 Basically, they haven’t bought into the concept that all life descended from one common ancestor that miraculously sprang into being millions of years ago. And that makes sense, considering there are no real examples of that kind of evolution.

If evolutionary biologists could document such evolution in action, they could vindicate their worldview and cite real research to support their surreal claims. In 1980, this search for proof led researchers to painstakingly and purposefully mutate each core gene involved in fruit fly development. The now classic work, for which the authors won the Nobel Prize in 1995, was published in Nature.2 The experiments proved that the mutation of any of these core developmental genes―mutations that would be essential for the fruit fly to evolve into any other creature―merely resulted in dead or deformed fruit flies. This therefore showed that fruit flies could not evolve.

Similarly, Michigan State University evolutionary biologists Richard Lenski and his colleagues searched for signs of evolution in bacteria for 20 years, tracking 40,000 generations.3 In the end, the species that they started with was hobbled by accumulated mutations, and the only changes that had occurred were degenerative. University of Bristol emeritus professor of bacteriology Alan Linton summarized the situation:

But where is the experimental evidence? None exists in the literature claiming that one species has been shown to evolve into another. Bacteria, the simplest form of independent life, are ideal for this kind of study, with generation times of 20 to 30 minutes, and populations achieved after 18 hours. But throughout 150 years of the science of bacteriology, there is no evidence that one species of bacteria has changed into another, in spite of the fact that populations have been exposed to potent chemical and physical mutagens and that, uniquely, bacteria possess extrachromosomal, transmissible plasmids. Since there is no evidence for species changes between the simplest forms of unicellular life, it is not surprising that there is no evidence for evolution from prokaryotic to eukaryotic cells, let alone throughout the whole array of higher multicellular organisms.4

In a recent study, also published in Nature, University of California Irvine researcher Molly Burke led research into the genetic changes that occurred over the course of 600 fruit fly generations. The UCI lab had been breeding fruit flies since 1991, separating fast growers with short life spans from slow growers with longer life spans.5

The UCI scientists compared the DNA sequences affecting fruit fly growth and longevity between the two groups. After the equivalent of 12,000 years of human evolution, the fruit flies showed surprisingly few differences.

One requirement for Darwin’s theory is that the mutational changes that supposedly fuel evolution somehow have to be “fixed” into the population. Otherwise, the DNA changes quickly drift right back out of the population. The researchers found no evidence that mutational changes relevant to longevity had been fixed into the fruit fly populations.

The study’s authors wrote, “In our sexual populations, adaptation is not associated with ‘classic’ sweeps whereby newly arising, unconditionally advantageous mutations become fixed.”5

They suggested that perhaps there has not been enough time for the relevant mutations to have become fixed. They also suggested an alternative—that natural selection could be acting on already existing variations. But this is not evolution, and it is actually what creation studies have been demonstrating for many years.6

Evolution was not observed in fruit fly genetic manipulations in 1980, nor has it been observed in decades-long multigenerational studies of bacteria and fruit flies. The experiments only showed that these creatures have practical limits to the amount of genetic change they can tolerate. When those limits are breached, the creatures don’t evolve—they just die.

Although the experimental results from these studies were given titles with an evolutionary “spin,” the actual experiments demonstrate undoubtedly that bacteria and fruit flies were created, not evolved.

Dao, C. Poll: Majority of Americans Don’t Believe in Evolution. ICR News. Posted on icr.org February 24, 2010, accessed November 9, 2010.
Nüsslein-Volhard, C. and E. Wieschaus. 1980. Mutations affecting segment number and polarity in Drosophila. Nature. 287 (5785): 795-801.
Barrick, J. E. et al. 2009. Genome evolution and adaptation in a long-term experiment with Escherichia coli. Nature. 461 (7268): 1243- 1247.
Linton, A. H. 2001. Scant Search for the Maker. Times Higher Education. Posted on timeshighereducation.co.uk April 20, 2010, accessed November 9, 2010.
Burke, M. K. et al. 2010. Genome-wide analysis of a long-term evolution experiment with Drosophila. Nature. 467 (7315): 587-590.
For example: “Normal variations operate only within the range specified by the DNA for the particular type of organism, so that no truly novel characteristics, producing higher degrees of order or complexity, can appear. Variation is horizontal, not vertical!” From Morris, H. 1974. Scientific Creationism, Public School Edition. San Diego, CA: Creation Life Publishers, 51.

Original article here

More Information:

Uncooperative Fruit Flies Refuse to Speciate in Laboratory Experiments
Mutant Fruit Flies Bug Evolution

The Enotes Evolution Hoax: Is Micro Raptor a Transitional Fossil? NO.

A picture of a Micro raptor gui fossil, by Marjorie Lipan


From http://www.enotes.com/topic/Archaeoraptor:

paleontologist Christopher Brochu concluded in November 2001: “That birds are derived theropod dinosaurs is no longer the subject of scholarly dispute.”[29] Though playing the role of “terrestrial dinosaur” in the “Archaeoraptor” affair, Microraptor, showing wings and clear traces of rectrices, is generally assumed to have had at least a gliding capacity and is itself an excellent example of a transitional fossil.

And the word of Christopher Brochu is oh so important, because? And notice how the author or authors weaseled in after Christopher’s comment another, in such a way that it could be easily confused for his own statement? And notice the narcissistic pretentious comment, “is generally assumed”? Is generally assumed by who, oh pompous writer? And who said it’s an excellent example of a transitional fossil? And hello: how many transitional fossils exist out of trillions that are supposed to be in the ground in what was generally assumed and still is by evolutionists, to be a nice neat stratum of small to big and big to small? Just enough for one or two pages, tabled, to make it look more impressive and long, as was done on Wikipedia. But that doesn’t raise a red flag for evolutionists? Or does it, but they continue their lie. There should be just as many transitional fossils as ones which aren’t. Further, what is the evidence that micro-raptor is a transitional fossil? Oh, it’s that it has “rectrices” (a rectrice is a type of feather). But the idiot author or authors don’t other to mention that the rectrices ARE FULLY FUNCTIONAL, not TRANSITIONING. And since when is assuming anything scientific? Disgusting and stupid babble and lying is what this is. As for Christopher magically being the representative of all paleontologists, he isn’t, there is no universally elected speaker for paleontology or science, and further, truth is not determined by consensus as these evolutionists on enotes and Wikipedia and everywhere else want you to think, and many of them are bent on mind control to get the consensus they want.

From http://creationwiki.org/Archaeoraptor:

Creationists and evolutionists both agree that there are some problems with dinosaur to bird transitions. Alan Feduccia stated that there are significant differences between the embryonic thumb structure and also how the lungs are shaped. He also states that “dinosaurs have exactly the wrong anatomy for developing flight, with their large tails and hind limbs and short forelimbs”[5]

And who is Mr. Feduccia? He’s only the

S. K. Heninger Professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. He is an evolutionary biologist interested in vertebrate evolution, especially the origin of birds from reptiles, the origin of avian flight, and Tertiary adaptive radiation. Feduccia took his B.S. in Zoology from L.S.U., and Masters and Ph.D. from the University of Michigan. He lectured at Michigan and then taught at S.M.U. for two years before joining the University of North Carolina faculty in 1971. Feduccia’s research has taken him on numerous expeditions to Central and South America and Africa. He is the author of more than 125 scientific publications dealing primarily with the evolution of birds and other vertebrates, embryology, comparative morphology, and evolutionary systematics. His publications include some ten books (including editions & translations), and five monographs, including the internationally acclaimed and award-winning, The Age of Birds, Harvard University Press (1980), which appeared in Japanese, German and paperback editions. Reviewer comments included: “a revelation of clarity and synthesis…Feduccia–himself a leading anatomist–has brought together startling new evidence on the reptilian-avian relationship… science writing at its best,” and in 1993 the book was termed “definitive” by the New York Times.

according to http://www.bio.unc.edu/faculty/feduccia/references.htm

And from http://www.unc.edu/depts/uncspeak/feduccia.html:

Perhaps no area of evolutionary study has been more controversial than the origin of birds. While most paleontologists have advocated a dinosaurian origin, Alan Feduccia, professor and chair of the Biology Department in the College of Arts and Sciences, challenges that view. His recent fossil finds in China indicate that there was an evolution of birds before the arrival of the toothy, reptile- like Archaeopteryx, which was popularly thought to be the dinosaurian ancestor of all birds. Feduccia’s talks also cover his “big bang” theory: that about 65 million years ago most birds died with the dinosaurs, and that the ancestors of all of today’s birds evolved explosively in only about 5 to 10 million years. His latest book, The Origin and Evolution of Birds, presents his position in detail.

And according to Wikipedia:

Alan Feduccia is Alan Feduccia is a paleornithologist, specializing in the origins and phylogeny of birds. He is now Professor Emeritus at the University of North Carolina.

And from Barbara J. Stahl, anatomy professor and paleoichthyologist of Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire, wrote a book titled, Vertebrate History: Problems in Evolution. She said,

“In the absence of fossil evidence, paleontologists can say little about the date at which these sixty-nine living families of Passeri-formes… appeared”. (You can read about Passeriformes here).

Why didn’t the authors of enotes note any of these opposing claims from high prominent mainstream evolutionists? They didn’t because they are biased hypocrites who love lies, hate God, and therefore the truth, because God is the source of truth, always says what is true, and the closest thing to living truth.

Related Articles:

Ornithologist and Evolutionary Biologist Alan Feduccia—Plucking Apart the Dino-Birds (published by Discover Magazine on 2/1/2003)

150 Years Later, Fossils Still Don’t Help Darwin (published by ICR on 3/2/2009)

Destroyed!: Evolutionist Theory of How Solar System Formed

WOW, what a lost utter failure of a cause Darwin’s stolen twisted theory of evolution has been, it’s one under cut and slice to the top middle and bottom after another, and so much for atheism too:

(Published on 9/3/2010:)

Trojan asteroids make planetary scientist lose sleep

A FAMILY of asteroids that travels in lockstep with Jupiter appears to be different in one important respect from their purported kin in the outer solar system. The mismatch could spell trouble for the leading theory of how our solar system evolved.

This theory, called the Nice model, suggests that as Jupiter and Saturn moved to their current orbits, they wreaked gravitational havoc in the early solar system, scattering lumps of rock in their vicinity. Some of these ended up on tilted orbits in the distant Kuiper belt, beyond the orbit of Neptune. Others were hurled inwards, with more than 4000 getting trapped on Jupiter’s orbital path as “Trojan” asteroids.

Now Wesley Fraser at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, and colleagues, say that the Trojans have a different size distribution to tilted Kuiper belt objects (Icarus, DOI: 10.1016/j.icarus.2010.08.001). That suggests that the Trojans have a different origin, but if so, the Nice model cannot say where they formed. All it can say is that they could not have formed where they are now, as they would have ended up being shunted elsewhere.

Fraser says he has “lost a lot of sleep” over the puzzle. Alessandro Morbidelli of the Côte d’Azur Observatory in France, who helped develop the Nice model, says he “cannot imagine any scenario that has a chance to explain this result”. But he says there is still some disagreement over the sizes of tilted objects in the Kuiper belt, so it may be premature for “modellers to bang their head against the wall”. – Source

Interesting how these evolutionists refer to these asteroids as “Trojans” as if they were something evil, rather than blessing God for revealing to them the truth. God is so evil when he gently and peacefully reveals truths to those not just love him, but hate him, isn’t he? The “Trojans”, are those who pretend to be good, especially a “child of God”, when clearly God hates evil, including evil beings.

You hate all who do wrong.
Psalm 5:5

Related Articles:

Contradictions in Expansion Theory (Big Bang Theory)

Who Needs Evidence, Just Have Faith: Evolutionist Scientists “Assume” Things to Make the Big Bang Theory Fit

Top 30 Problems With the Big Bang Theory

Inflation Hypothesis Doesn’t Measure Up to New Data

Quasars Quash Big Bang Assumption

The Big Bang Theory Collapses

Atheist Evolutionists of National Geographic “Solved Mystery” Everyone!

The Yeti crab is blind, yet still manages to see better than atheists with eyes that can see.

Check it out everyone, the atheist evolutionists of National Geographic have committed high blasphemy against Father Darwin by not mentioning evolution in one of their articles!:

Mystery Solved … Crab Swarm

A new study solves a longstanding mystery surrounding the crabs: how the the normally sedentary species has the stamina to “undergo one of the most arduous migrations on Earth,” in the words of study co-author Lucy Turner.

When the wet season blows into Christmas Island (map) each year, millions of Christmas Island red crabs hike for several days, from a high rain forest plateau down to Indian Ocean beaches, where the crabs mate in burrows.

“It’s an amazing feat—going from not being able to exercise for more than ten minutes to walking for several miles,” said Turner, a biologist at the University of Bristol in the United Kingdom.

But by sampling circulatory fluid—the equivalent of blood—from migrating crabs, Turner and colleagues discovered that a surge in the crustacean hyperglycemic hormone works with glucose, an energy-producing sugar, to fuel the epic trek.

(See “World’s Longest Migration Found—Two Times Longer Than Thought.”)

The crab’s endocrine system also stockpiles enough sugar to allow the crabs to return to their forest homes, Turner added.

Study published in the September issue of the Journal of Experimental Biology.

—Christine Dell’Amore

Published September 3, 2010

(Just forget how the crab’s evolved to have such a system everyone and focus on how National Geographic posted a sciency “discovery”. Don’t ask questions, no further explanations needed; evolutionists are the bestiest, rightiest, “no Gods no guilt” non-group group of people with no beliefs, I mean who have different beliefs (and no similar ones, but “atheists are perfect.” Just look, they even posted a story on the danger of BPA SEVEN DAYS AGO! THEY ARE REALLY LEADING THE WAY ON HEALTH WARNINGS NOW! WOOOOOOIE! (This health campaign by Christians and others from May 12, 1999 to eliminate BPA doesn’t really count, it’s nooooot reeeeeeeeeeal peeeeeeoople, nothing to see here.) And they are letting tons of people comment too can’t you see?! Oh wait, they still have none, might be because everytime I try they give me the friendly message: “You are not allowed to comment.” Only atheists may speak their deep thoughts, like, “be honest you damn theists! Stop being hypocrites! I love to get drunk and act stupid with my sisters and try to deconvert them to atheism.” Atheists are so profound and scientific.)

Related Post:


See also: www.truth-haters.tk for more information on fundamentally ill atheists.

Spinning a DNA Tale: Evolutionists Lie About Neanderthals Again

Post link: http:/neander.tk

By Daniel Knight, Science Editor

Below is an article by a guy named Mark, awesomely dubbed “Science Editor” making him a reliable source of truth on the topic of science. It’s an article by a Christian-hating evolutionists (as evolutionists usually are) helping other evolutionists to put a spin on evidence for the Bible, so that it appears to be evidence against the Bible. In other words, a lie. It spins the finding that Neanderthal DNA is apart of human DNA (BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY NEANDERTHALS ARE HUMANS) is a result of interbreeding with Neanderthals, conveniently not mentioning that the odds of two creatures evolving to be genetically compatible IS NOT POSSIBLE, and would take a string of coincidences that occurred for billions of years. That’s like telling someone something like, “I won 1 billion dollars once a minute by playing a lottery with 100 trillion other players for 15 billions years in a row.” No, I don’t think so. What is OBVIOUS is that if Neanderthals and humans are genetically compatible, and had offspring, is that THEY WERE HUMAN. Cats can’t have babies with dogs and dogs can’t have babies with cats, and whales can’t have kids with eels and eels can’t have kids with whales. But magically, thanks to the Fly Magical Big-Bang Evolution Spaghetti God of the Gaps, you can cross Neanderthals and Humans, yeah right:

Neanderthal gene found in human DNA of people living out of Africa
by Mark Henderson, [EVOLUTIONIST] Science Editor (sounds impressive doesn’t it?)

They have been extinct for 30,000 years [JUST TRUST US EVOLUTIONIST WHEN WE MAKE MERE CLAIMS], but a small part of the Neanderthals lives on in the DNA of every person with ancestors outside Africa.

The genetic code of Neanderthal Man has revealed that Homo sapiens mated with our closest evolutionary relatives soon after migrating out of Africa, leaving traces that can still be detected in human DNA.

A comparison of the genomes of the two human species has shown that between 1 and 4 per cent of the DNA of modern non-Africans has a Neanderthal origin, while no Neanderthal genes can be detected in Africans today. This indicates that the first modern humans to leave the continent must have interbred with Neanderthals they encountered, probably in the Middle East. Their descendants went on to populate the other continents.

“Those of us who live outside Africa carry a little Neanderthal DNA,” said Svante Pääbo, of the Max Planck Institute in Leipzig, Germany, who led the research. “What we find is that Neanderthals are slightly more similar in their genome to people outside Africa, no matter whether they live in Europe, Asia or Papua New Guinea. This shows that there has been gene flow between Neanderthals and populations ancestral to humans,” he added.

The findings, published in the [EVOLUTIONIST] journal Science, settle a long-running controversy over whether Neanderthals bred with modern humans or made any lasting contribution to the human gene pool.

This article is also contradictory, it says that DNA can still be “detected in human DNA” but a few words after says “human species”. Why do evolutionists refer to humans singularly and then in the next breath say they are a species (meaning more than one kind?). Yes, there are types of humans: Caucasian, Negretic and Semetic, and subtypes under them, but SPECIES? Huh? What’s that even mean? A species isn’t a race or subtype of race, so what do evolutionists mean with that magically conveniently vague word? As idiotic and heretical anti-Trinitarians love to say: How can one be three? In this case, one can’t be three because a human is a human like a cat is a cat and cats can’t have offspring from dogs. There are no two species of dogs anymore than there are two species of humans. It’s evolutionist misdirection confusion babble.

Also, as usual, where is the evidence that we evolved from little thingies, whatever these magic thingies were? When will evolutionists stop being gullible, deceiving themselves and deliberately lying to others? Money, temporary pleasure and (evil) friends don’t matter more than eternal peace and eternally good friends. When will the world heed that?

Related article:

Evidence that some Neanderthals were Homo sapiens deformed by disease

Related Book:

What evidence lists try to bury: Buried Alive