Some continued discussion of the origin of life While admitted to be unsolved, the false impression given to the public is that life definitively will evolve from non-life. The solution is vastly oversimplified as presented by science popularizers, such

Electron micrograph of gears in issus. (The evidence of the Designer continues to grow.) As you read the details of the amazing discover of the First Mechanical Gear in a Living Creature, be sure to pay attention to the difference between the operational

The mainstream science view of geology fails to explain many obvious and significant geological structures, such as mountain ranges, planation surfaces, and other landscapes. For example, "The remarkable African Planation Surface" Therefore, geomorpholog

The closer we look, the more design evidence we see... Evolutionists have long pointed to the vertebrate eye as proof of non-design. Consider these evolutionist pontifications: The anatomy of the human eye shows that it is anything but “intelligently d

On the past 2 shows we discussed the "Darwin was wrong about the tree of life" issue, including the cover article in New Scientist. We included the quotes from the actual scientists detailing the reason why the old tree concept is incorrect and must be mo

A Primer on the Tree of Life (Center for Science and Culture) some excerpts: ...when speaking before the Texas State Board of Education in January, 2009, University of Texas evolutionist biologist David Hillis cited himself as one of the “world’s le

Darwinian evolution made simple: mutations change DNA content in an undirected way Natural Selection (NS) then "selects" from among the resulting variants Signficant problems: NS only works at the level of the entire creature (phenotype vs genotype)

Mudstones make up majority of geologic column claim: mud will only settle in very still water, and only very slowly, so it took enormous amounts of time to form the mudstone strata in the geologic column fact: mud will settle from moving water! What a

The writers of the New Testament and Jesus himself believed that the creation account in Genesis was history. Increasingly, Christian academia is claiming they were wrong: "Jesus didn't know as much science as we do today." Academia makes this extraordin

Don't fall for the hype. "Claim: Science has proven Biblical creation false." Let's examine this a bit. This claim requires proven scientific models (ie 'true' models) that preclude the 6 day creation as recounted in Genesis. Do such models exist?