Archive for the ‘Scientists’ category


May 1st, 2010

The Sky Is Falling Again
Um, never mind. On March 12, 1998, on the front page of The New York Times, a headline read: “Asteroid Is Expected to Make a Pass Close to Earth in 2028.” Brian G. Marsden, director of the Central Bureau for Astronomical Telegrams at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, predicted that on October 26, 2028, an asteroid about a mile in diameter would come within 30,000 miles of Earth. That’s within spitting distance, spacewise, which evoked comparisons to the asteroid that crashed on the Yucatàn peninsula 65 million years ago, allegedly wiping out all the dinosaurs. “When you first discover a comet, or any kind of body, you start measuring its position,” notes Robert Park. “From that you extract its trajectory. The more measurements you make, the more accurate your trajectory gets.” Marsden issued his warnings based on very early trajectory measurements. Now he anticipates the asteroid will pass Earth at a safe distance of 600,000 miles.

Nuclear Winter of Our Discontent
In 1983, astronomer Carl Sagan coauthored an article in Science that shook the world: “Nuclear Winter: Global Consequences of Multiple Nuclear Explosions” warned that nuclear war could send a giant cloud of dust into the atmosphere that would cover the globe, blocking sunlight and invoking a climatic change similar to that which might have ended the existence of dinosaurs. Skeptical atmospheric scientists argued that Sagan’s model ignored a variety of factors, including the fact that the dust would have to reach the highest levels of the atmosphere not to be dissipated by rainfall. In a 1990 article in Science, Sagan and his original coauthors admitted that their initial temperature estimates were wrong. They concluded that an all-out nuclear war could reduce average temperatures at most by 36 degrees Fahrenheit in northern climes. The chilling effect, in other words, would be more of a nuclear autumn.

Piltdown Chicken
The finding was initially trumpeted as the missing link that proved birds evolved from dinosaurs. In 1999 a fossil smuggled out of China allegedly showing a dinosaur with birdlike plumage was displayed triumphantly at the National Geographic Society and written up in the society’s November magazine. Paleontologists were abuzz. Unfortunately, like the hominid skull with an ape jaw discovered in the Piltdown quarries of England in 1912, the whole thing turned out to be a hoax. The fossil apparently was the flight of fancy of a Chinese farmer who had rigged together bird bits and a meat-eater’s tail.

The “Archaeoraptor” fake

In 1999, a supposed ‘missing link’ fossil of an apparently feathered dinosaur named Archaeoraptor liaoningensis“, found in Liaoning Province, northeastern China, turned out to be a forgery. Comparing the photograph of the specimen with another find, Chinese paleontologist Xu Xing came to the conclusion that it was composed of two portions of different fossil animals. His claim made National Geographic review their research and they too came to the same conclusion.[7] The bottom portion of the “Archaeoraptor” composite came from a legitimate feathered dromaeosaurid now known as Microraptor, and the upper portion from a previously-known primitive bird called Yanornis.

Editor’s note: I know that nonsense is spelled wrong. I hyphenated it for effect.  Recently “global warming” has come to light as a complete hoax (post coming). Hoaxes, frauds and half-truths have been around since the fall of man from grace in the Garden of Eden. Today (the last 200 years), evil men diligently work towards enslaving you to take your money, your freedom and if possible your soul. You have a choice, either follow the truth or sell yourself into bondage.

This blog will continue to expose pseudo science. Make sure that you scrutinize all science that is contrary to GOD’s WORD. Take off your (if you are wearing them) evolutionary glasses and look at look at true science through GOD’s WORD and you will never be lead astray by hucksters who try to minimize GOD’s WORD which rightfully proclaims that HE created everything seen and unseen. The science says that there can be no other explanation. See Romans 1:20-23 if you are looking for an excuse.


Universe Is Closer to the End Than Expected

February 10th, 2010

Study Shows the Universe Is Closer to the End Than Expected

by Brian Thomas, M.S. *

Every known system degenerates. Metal rusts, food rots, and flowers wither. Even something as large as the universe will eventually run down. How much usable and still-ordered energy remains in the universe?

Australian researchers have generated a new estimate, one that includes the energy-destroying effects of “supermassive black holes.” Their computations indicate that the universe is perhaps 30 times more run down than similar estimates published just last year.

After adding in “the contributions of black holes 100 times larger than those considered in previous budgets,” co-authors Chas Egan and Charles Lineweaver reported in the Astrophysical Journal that the universe is at least an order of magnitude more run down than secular astronomers once thought.1

The largest contributor by far to universal entropy (a measure of usable energy) is generated by supermassive black holes, according to the published study. Evidence of these, as well as the smaller “stellar” black holes, has been found mostly in galactic cores. Black holes rapidly randomize ordered forms of energy and matter, turning them into heat that then dissipates.

Though some of the assumptions used in the Egan and Lineweaver study rely on aspects of Big Bang cosmology, a large portion of the computed entropy was derived from temperature and volume measurements or estimates. A host of other observations has demolished the Big Bang theory,2 but the very fact that the universe is slowing down is both counter to evolutionary assumptions and supportive of biblical creation.

Lineweaver said in an Australian National University press release, “Contrary to common opinion, the maintenance of all the complicated structures we see around us―galaxies, stars, hurricanes and kangaroos―have the net effect of increasing the disorder and entropy of the universe.”3 The longstanding scientific observation of continually decreasing order in all systems contradicts the evolutionary doctrine that order has spontaneously increased.4 But evolution’s simple-to-complex story has been so uncritically accepted that it isn’t surprising that the science of entropy, which calls that story into question, is not as well known.

Since the universe is currently unwinding through natural processes, it stands to reason that at some point it was intentionally “wound up” by something outside of the universe. This corresponds well with the Bible’s assertion that “in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”5

In fact, the culmination of the heavens wearing down was mentioned in the book of Isaiah, to whom God said, “Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.”6

Egan and Lineweaver suggested that future research could use their new numbers to recalculate how much time the universe has left. But failing to consider revelation from the God of creation must lead to confusion over the ultimate questions of origin and destiny. Whereas evolutionary scientists can be sure that the universe is running down—though unsure about when it started or how it will end—God states that “all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll,”7 “and the stars shall fall from heaven,”8 so that He can establish “new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”9 This present universal economy will be supernaturally restructured long before it fizzles out.


1.   Egan, C. A., and C. H. Lineweaver. A Larger Estimate of the Entropy of the Universe. Astrophysical Journal. 710 (2): 1825-1834.

2.   Gish, D. 1991. The Big Bang Theory Collapses. Acts & Facts. 20 (6).

3.   Astronomers: The end is nigher than we expected. Australian National University press release, January 25, 2010.

4.   Morris, H. 1985. Does Entropy Contradict Evolution? Acts & Facts. 14 (3).

5.   Genesis 1:1.

6.   Isaiah 51:6.

7.   Isaiah 34:4.

8.  Matthew 24:29. 2

9.   Peter 3:13.

Image credit: NASA

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR).

Article posted on February 9, 2010 in the Science Update published by ICR

Scientific Hoaxs

January 31st, 2010


Piltdown Man Hoax: Perpetrated in 1912. The Piltdown Man Hoax led to erroneous pictures of mankind’s supposed ape-like ancestors in textbooks for 70+ years.

Editor’s Note: This hoax has recently been spotted as an example of evolution nearly 100 years after it was found to be one of the greatest hoaxes in history. “The significance of the specimen remained the subject of controversy until it was exposed in 1953 as a forgery, consisting of the lower jawbone of an orangutan that had been deliberately combined with the skull of a fully developed modern man.”


Biogenetic Law Fraud: Ernst Haeckel was actually called before a board of examiners and chastised for fudging the data. He proposed Biogenetic Law was supported with fraudulent pictures showing similarities of human embryos to those of fish, pig, chicken,etc. This was his attempt to demonstrate our common ancestry with animals. Although discredited 100 years ago, his drawings are still in some textbooks today.

Stem Cell Fraud: South Korean stem-cell researcher, Woo Suk Hwang, was “the centre of one of  the largest investigations of scientific fraud in living memory.” Hwang was discredited by his own home research institution,  Seoul National University, for presenting fraudulent data,  Nature Reported.  “The revelation has destroyed the best evidence so far that stem cells can be extracted from a clone matched to a specific patient. With Hwang discredited, both the field of therapeutic cloning and the public’s trust in science have suffered a serious setback.”  Nature, 1-11-2006

Scientists Invent Results: Times Online (June 4, 2009) headline reports that “One in seven scientists say colleagues fake data.” That figure applies to serious breaches of “acceptable conduct by inventing results.” The article went on to say that “46 percent say that they have observed fellow scientists engage in ‘questionable practices‘, such as presenting data selectively or changing the conclusions of a study in response to pressure from a funding source.”

ClimateGate: Washington Times (Nov 20, 24, etc. 2009) reported on potential fraud relating to global warming turned up by hackers breaking into the e-mails from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UAE) in England. “Those e-mails involved communication among many scientific researchers and policy advocates with similar ideological positions all across the world. Those purported authorities were brazenly discussing the destruction and hiding of data that did not support global-warming claims.” If investigations confirm that climate data has been hidden which negates the currently “politically correct” global warming hysteria, as well as the attempt to silence the “dissenters,” this would likely become the biggest scandal ever perpetrated on the whole world.

Editor’s Note: These are just a small sampling of the plethora of  “scientific” frauds that have been told and written over and over again. Creation-Facts will continue to expose these frauds a few at a time.

The above articles were taken from Think & Believe (January/February, 2010 Vol 28, No 1) newsletter written by Dave Nutting of Alpha Omega Institute of Grand Junction, CO.

Evidence From Geology

September 15th, 2009

AG1060aTopsoil consists of weathered rock and organic material (decomposed from plants and animals). Millions of years should have produced extremely thick** layers of soil throughout the geological record. However, ancient topsoil layers are missing between virtually all rock layers. The geological record shows layers of sedimentary, metamorphic, or igneous rock deposited directly on top of one another. There are very few places where topsoil is found between these rock layers. So where is all the topsoil from millions of years of Earth history?

Standard geology teaches that land surfaces, supporting lush life, have been here continuously for hundreds of millions of years. Where is all the topsoil between the sedimentary, metamorphic, and igneous layers which make up the geologic column*? The layers of rock in the geologic column*, with essentially no layers of topsoil in between them, seem to indicate that little time occurred between the deposition of these layers. In those few places where soil-type sediments are present between rock layers, there is evidence that they were deposited by flood waters.

The best explanation for the geological column is that these layers were deposited over a short period of time, one layer right after another, which allowed no time for topsoil to form between the layers. The virtual absence of topsoil within the geological column* is excellent evidence in support of the biblical claim for a young earth.

The above was quoted from The Young Earth, p.97-98 as depicted in A Closer Look At The Evidence by Richard & Tina Kleiss.

By wisdom the LORD laid the earth’s foundations, by understanding he set the heavens in place…. (Proverbs 3:19 )


* Editor’s Note: Charles Lyell created the geologic Column to explain the various rock layers and to bolster his belief in evolution. He also decided that it took millions of years (unlike the billions of today) to lay down all the various rock layers that he saw. He was also a strong proponent of uniformitarianism (a philosophy of science).

**Editor’s Note: The top soil is literally only a few inches thich all over the planet indicating a very young earth, not a very old earth as evolution requires.

Evidence From Mathematics

August 17th, 2009


The simplest conceivable form of life (e.g., bacteria) contains at least 600 protein  molecules. Each of these molecules performs specific functions by fitting into other molecules shaped in exact three-dimensional spacial arrangements. These proteins work like a key fitting into a lock – only a specifically shaped protein will fit. Yet there are multiple trillions of possible combinations of protein molecules * and shapes. How could the exactly required shape find the exactly correct corresponding protein in order to perform the required cellular function? The mathematical probability that the precisely designed molecules needed for the “simplest” bacteria could form by chance arrangement of amino acids (these are the chemicals that link up to form proteins) is far less than 1 in 10450 . Most scientists acknowledge that any probability less than 1 in 10 50 is considered an impossibility. One wonders why this “impossibility” is taught as a “fact of science” to millions of school children each year.

* Editor’s Note: When going to the link on “protein molecules” be sure to scroll down about 1/5 of the way to a box titled “A Deeper Look”.

The above document is from In The Beginning, 7th Ed., p.14 as quoted in A Closer Look At The Evidence by Richard & Tina Kleiss.

“As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways are higher than your ways and My thoughts higher than your thoughts.”   (Isaiah 55:9)


Dinosaur Soft Tissue

August 17th, 2009
T-Rex from

T-Rex from

Dinosaur Soft Tissues: They’re Real!
by Brian Thomas, M.S.*

Paleontologist Mary Schweitzer’s discoveries of soft blood vessels, proteins, various blood cells, and even DNA inside fossilized dinosaur bones have been met with extreme skepticism from the scientific community. It has been well established that such biological structures and molecules should not last beyond a few tens of thousands of years, and could not possibly survive millions of years. So why are they there?

Scientists have made multiple attempts to debunk Schweitzer’s findings. Over the last 15 years, alternate explanations for the soft dinosaur tissue include contamination in the field or in the lab, bacterial activity producing the illusion of blood vessel remains, and the possibility that protein signatures derived from the tissues are actually just statistical artifacts (i.e., distortions or data errors).

In an effort to answer these objections, Schweitzer’s team implemented sterile excavation procedures and had an independent third party analyze their results. They confirmed that the soft tissues could not have come from bacteria. Bacteria do not manufacture products in the shape of vertebrate blood vessels, nor can they produce the kind of collagen found in the dinosaur bones.

The issue has generated such fervor that John Asara of Harvard Medical School, who found clear collagen signatures in Schweitzer’s dinosaur tissues,1 placed his data on line so that anyone could access it. Researchers from Palo Alto reanalyzed the data and published their report on line in the Journal of Proteome Research.2 They verified that four of Asara’s original seven collagen sequences were clearly legitimate, using different statistical and bioinformatics techniques. So far, there is every indication that the dinosaur soft tissues—incredible as it seems—are real biological leftovers from their once-living hosts.

Three options present themselves for the presence of molecules and blood vessels in creatures that purportedly passed on eons ago. Perhaps the soft tissue is some kind of mistake—it isn’t really organic material. But the number of other possible substances it could be is dwindling. Or perhaps there is an entirely unknown natural process that could have preserved soft tissue for millions of years. But this is a special pleading argument, one with strong laboratory evidence against it. Third, perhaps the soft tissue, and therefore the sedimentary rock that encased it, are thousands—not millions—of years old.

Dinosaur soft tissue leaves the evolutionary paradigm, which must have millions of years in order to achieve even remote plausibility, between a rock and a hard place. However, these dinosaur blood cells and vessels fit perfectly into the biblical history of the world, which indicates that man and dinosaurs both were created on the same day in the relatively recent past.3

Asara, J. M. et al. 2007. Protein Sequences from Mastodon and Tyrannosaurus Rex Revealed by Mass Spectrometry. Science. 316 (5822): 280-285.
Bern, M., B. S. Phinney, and D. Goldberg. 2009. Reanalysis of Tyrannosaurus rex Mass Spectra. Journal of Proteome Research. Published online July 15, 2009, accessed July 30, 2009.
Genesis 1:24-27.

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

This post was taken from the Institute For Creation Research

And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:25)

Evidence From Mathematics

August 11th, 2009

simple cell drawingDrawing of a cell membrane from Wikipedia.

At one time living cells were considered no more than empty table tennis balls. As biochemists have learned more about the complexity of life, it has become increasingly apparent that thousands of specific and complex chemicals are required for any form of life to survive. Evolutionist Harold Morowitz estimated the probability for chance formation of even the simplest form of living organism at 1/10340,000,000. By contrast, only 10²º grains of sand could fit within a cubic mile, and 10 billion times more (10³º) would fit inside the entire earth. So the probability of forming a simple cell by chance processes in infinitely less likely than having a blind person select one specifically marked grain of sand out of an entire earth filled with sand.

There is nowhere near enough time nor matter in the entire universe for even the simplest cell to have formed by chance combinations. Even if all the correct chemicals somehow came together in the correct place, you still wouldn’t have life. This is exactly the situation every time a living organism dies. Immediately after death, all the right chemicals exist, in the right proportions, and in the right place – yet the creature is still dead!

Five billion years is nowhere near long enough for evolution to have taken place. In reality, all of eternity would not provide enough time for random processes to form the enormous complexity of life.

This document was taken from Energy Flow in Biology, Academic Press, NY, 1968, p.99 and quoted in A Closer Look At The Evidence, by Richard & Tina Kleiss.

I will proclaim the name of the LORD.  Oh praise the greatness of our God! He is the Rock, his works are perfect, and all His ways are just. . .  (Deuteronomy 32:3,4)

The Golden Ratio

August 2nd, 2009

In the year 1202 the Italian mathematician Leonardo Fibonacci worked out a problem about rabbits having babies and discovered a pattern of numbers: 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144,233,377, and so on. Every number in the pattern was the addition of the two that came before it: 0+1= 1, 1+1= 2, 1+2= 3, 2+3= S, 3+5= 8,5+8= 13, 8+13= 21, and so on. We see these Fibonacci numbers showing up over, and over, and over in nature.


If you ignore the zero, and divide a Fibonacci number into the one before it you get: 1, 2, 1.5, 1.67, 1.6, 1.625, 1.615, 1.619, 1.617,1.618,1.617,1.618,1.618, etc. After the first few, the answer lS always close to 1.618. Now you might ask yourself, “So what? What does 1.618 have to do with anything?” Well, as it turns out, that’s a very special number – so special, in fact, that it’s called the “golden ratio“.

The ancient Greeks based a lot of their art and buildings on the golden ratio (often shown as the Greek letter Phi Φ). The length of the Parthenon, for example, is a rectangle 1.618 times as long as it is wide (known as a golden rectangle). They also designed much of their pottery with the same ratio. Now why did they do that? They did it because they believed that this special ratio was much more pleasing to the human eye than any other ratio. Many of the great artists used the golden ratio in their art. For example, Mona Lisa‘s face is 1.618 times as long as it is wide. Beautiful symphonies also have the same golden ratio. The first movement is usually 1.618 times as long as the second one.

So why do we find that number so pleasing to the eye and to the ear? Do we find it beautiful because it copies creation, the work of the Master Artist, God? Could it be that the golden ratio is one of the blueprints God used in His creation? Let’s look at a few of the other ways that the number 1.618 shows up over, and over, and over again throughout the universe.

ΦEach segment in your finger is roughly 1.618 times as long as the next one.

Φ Your forearm is approximately 1.618 times as long as your hand.

Φ People with mouths 1.618 times as wide as their noses, are often considered the most beautiful.

Φ In addition, the distance between their pupils is about 1.618 times as wide as their mouths.

The leaves and stems of some trees are arranged at 137.5 degrees from each other. That angle lets the sun shine on the greatest number of leaves. When you draw that angle inside a circle, you get two pieces. Divide 137.5° into 222.5° and you get … 1.618!

If you make a spiral based on Fibonacci numbers, where every quarter turn is 1.618 times as far from the center as the previous one, you get what is known as a “golden spiral”. Amazingly, most of the spirals found in nature are golden spirals.

The list of golden ratios goes on and on and on. From art and music to nature and science, 1.618 keeps showing up over and over. It is almost as if “Somebody” used that number as a measuring stick for the universe. It just can’t be an accident. Many people call the golden ratio the “divine proportion” because it is clear only God could have done it!

The above document was published by Alpha Omega Institute, Kids Think and Believe, March-April 2006 and authored by Lanny & Marilyn Johnson.

Dr. Michael Ruse

August 2nd, 2009


Michael Ruse, editor of the Cambridge Series in the Philosophy of Biology and founding editor of the professional journal “Biology and Philosophy” is a hardcore Darwinist. Yet he considers both Dawkins and Dennett “dangerous.” Ruse is worried that if Dawkins and Dennett make evolution and atheism one (they do!) then Intelligent Design advocates will have a legal basis for its discussion in science classrooms. Why? Because teaching Darwinian evolution in the classroom as equal to atheism would violate the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Ruse has a valid point. Sooner or later Secular Humanism as a religion will be in the courts, and atheism will be a key element in the discussion. Already the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has declared atheism a religion. But Ruse, who teaches at Florida State University, is even more direct than Dawkins and Dennett, who equate atheism and evolution. In a telling article published in the Canadian National Post (May 13, 2000) he writes, “Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion-a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality …. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.”

Secular Humanists generally deny their world view is a religion. Their opponents, however, argue that Secular Humanism IS as much a religion as Christianity, Islam, et al, and, therefore, should not be the religion of American public schools. Ruse gives the whole Secular Humanist case away when he says, “Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitution for Christianity. It stressed laws against miracles and, by analogy, it promoted progress against providence …. One of the most popular books of the era was Religion Without Revelation, by the evolutionist Julian Huxley, grandson of Thomas Huxley.”

The above excerpt was taken from The Schwarz Report, April 2009, p.2

Paul Amos Moody

August 2nd, 2009

Paul Amos Moody, a superb scientist, wrote Introduction To Evolution published by Harper and Row. In it, he admits to his students that the more he studies science, the more impressed he is with the thought that “this world and universe have a definite design–and a design suggests a designer.” He goes on to say, “It may be possible to have design without a designer, a picture without an artist, but  my mind is unable to conceive of such a situation.”

The above exerpt was taken from The Schwarz Report, April 2009, Volumn 49 Number 4,  p.2