Real Science Radio

Real Science RadioBest of Real Science Radio

Welcome to Real Science Radio: with co-hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams who talk about science to debunk evolution and to show the evidence for the creator God including from biology, geology, astronomy, and physics. (For example, mutations will give you bad legs long before you'd get good wings.) Not only do we get to debate Darwinists and atheists like Lawrence Krauss, AronRa, and Eugenie Scott, and easily take potshots from popular evolutionists like PZ Myers, Phil Plait, and Jerry Coyne, but we also occasionally interview the outstanding scientists who dare to challenge today's accepted creed that nothing created everything.

NASA Rocket Scientist on Real Science Radio

Date: Jul 3, 2015 Length: 55:12
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* A Science Hero's Work Corroborates the Young Earth: Real Science Radio's Bob Enyart and Fred Williams interview the scientist, Henry Richter, who led the team building America's first satellite Explorer 1. Dr. Richter (on left in this 1957 photo with JPL's George Ludwig) also held leadership roles in the launch of a number of the spacecraft that landed on the Moon, and even after he himself left the space program, his team completed the work on the scientific instrumentation for NASA's Mariner spacecraft which enabled it to explore Mercury, Venus and Mars! Dr. Richter earned a place in the history of scientific advancement. He is a biblical creationist and his efforts helped bring about the early and important discovery of the Van Allen radiation belt; he helped relieve the fear of too much dust on the moon (see below); and his work helped provide the benchmark from which NASA has learned that Mercury's magnetic field is rapidly decreasing in strength (see just below). Pleasing young-earthers and confounding old-earth planetary scientists, Mercury's magnetic field has decayed in strength eight percent from 1974 to 2011, not unlike Earth's field, which has lost ten percent of it's energy over just the previous 150 years! Dr. Richter also made a brief comment regarding the bizarre moon landing hoax claim, which has been unecessarily but fully refuted here (see below).

* Thank you David Coppedge and Rob Carter: Real Science Radio thanks former JPL systems lead, David Coppedge, for arranging this historic interview for RSR. And we thank CMI's biologist Dr. Robert Carter for his great Henry Richter interview in the current issue of Creation magazine.

* Planet Mercury Leaves NASA Jaw-Dropping Shocked: Mercury's density is far beyond what evolutionary accretion could produce. From its pull on NASA's 1974 Mariner space probe, we learned of Mercury's great density, unachievable by the now falsified nebular hypothesis. So as they do with most of the planets, Big Bang proponents including theoretical physicists (with the emphasis on the theoretical, as in the RSR interview with Lawrence Krauss), appeal to catastrophism, whereby first Mercury formed in the traditional way claimed through the condensing swirling nebula (which Isaac Newton evaluated as impossible via gravity), but then a planet-level collision ejected all the light matter off of Mercury and left just the heavy stuff. Really.

Magnetism: The claim that Mercury is four billion years old led BB proponents to predict that it would be a dead (so to speak), inert rock having no magnetic field. But in 1974, by the scientific leadership of American hero and scientist Dr. Henry Richter, NASA's Mariner 10 spacecraft measured Mercury's magnetic field and provided hard data contradicting that fundamental evolutionary assumption. Then in 2008, NASA's Messenger craft measured the field's strength as significantly decreased, in only those few decades, which again contradicted their theory. Then in 2011, Messenger orbited the planet, and confirmed a startling (to old-earthers) 8% decrease since 1974. So, as with the Earth's rapidly decaying magnetic field, if Mercury were billions of years old, planet-wide features like it's magnetism would have reached stasis and not demonstrate such rapid change. See rsr.org/mercury for more! 

For today's show RSR recommends
What You Aren't Being Told
 About Astronomy:
Our Created Solar System!

* Moon Dust Argument: See Dr. Walt Brown's brief summary and then his careful analysis of how much dust should be on a four-billion year old  moon. (A lot more than is there.) And see Terry Hurlbut's great article, The moon-dust argument might be valid after all. Dr. Brown's calculations are based on actual data and seriously challenges Answers in Genesis long-standing warning that creationists should not use the moon dust argument. On February 13, 2014, Ken Ham blogged about his great debate with Bill Nye  and listed moon dust among "outdated or discredited" arguments. For years, Real Science Radio has been calling for AiG and other young-earth ministries (who have our love and respect) to either update their decades-old argument to show the public, if they can, where Dr. Brown's assembled data and mathematical calculations are in error, or they should remove moon dust from their "do not use" list. Or, preferably, they themselves should resume using this powerful argument for a young moon!

2015 AiG Update: In July we noticed that AiG has removed moon dust from their Arguments to Avoid article. As we've long said, we respect and love Ken Ham, all of AiG, their fabulous Creation Museum, and that we're praying for God's blessing on their enormously important Ark Encounter! So while we could call them and ask, like them (and like everyone), we're all so busy! :) So until we hear otherwise, we'll leave it at this: We're hoping that removing moon dust from AiG's Arguments to Avoid list was intentional.

* First an Atheist Caller Talks to NASA's Dr. Gold: Welcome to a special edition of Real Science Radio. An atheist caller, Forrest from Hawaii, had previously claimed that he had spoken to a NASA scientist Dr. Thomas Gold, who had personally told him that NASA had no concern about too much dust on the moon. Forrest wanted to use this information to discredit Bob Enyart's account of NASA designing the Lunar Module with large "feet" to prevent it from sinking into dust on the moon.

Lunar Lander with pod feet* Secondly Retired Engineer Bob Ball Reports His Research & Personal Recollection: Long-time friend of BEL and retired computer engineer Bob Ball from Indiana confirmed through his own research and independent recollection, NASA's serious, though unwarranted, concern in the 1960s that the moon would hold a tremendous amount of dust (because they believed it would have been collecting dust for billions of years, an age, and therefore, a concern, that young-earth creationists would dispute). Ball further recounted that this concern was promoted by NASA's own Dr. Thomas Gold himself, the very man our caller Forrest says that he had spoken to, who allegedly claimed that NASA had no such concern, and especially not when they designed the Lunar Lander.

* Atheist Forrest Calls Back: Forrest states that he did not accept Bob Ball's report that Dr. Thomas Gold was the very astronomer who most promoted the unnecessary concern over moon dust.

* Next Listener Darrell Birkey Quotes NASA: Birkey, of Goshen, Indiana called in to quote from NASA's own website, which states, "astronomer Thomas Gold asserted, however, that the apparently smooth areas on the moon were likely to be covered with a layer of fine dust several meters thick, raising the prospect that the lunar module might sink out of sight..."

So NASA's own historical account (it's own revisionist footnote notwithstanding) agrees with what Bob Enyart surmised on the air, refuting Forrest's first specific criticism of BEL. For NASA itself states, "Spacecraft engineers at Houston's Manned Spacecraft Center, meanwhile, in spite of their real need for this information [how much dust] in designing the lunar landing module, had to go ahead without it [without that data]." That is, NASA was designing the Lunar Module prior to its Ranger and Surveyor missions discovering that the depth of dust on the moon was negligible. So NASA gave the lunar lander large "feet" because they were pressed for time (to fulfill John Kennedy's dream of reaching the moon by the end of the decade) and so they designed the landing features so as to prevent the craft from sinking in dust.

* NASA's Burke & Richter Discuss Moon Dust: The Smithsonian Channel and Real Science Radio have broadcasted interviews with leading NASA scientists documenting the moon dust concern.  Henry Richer corrected BEL's mistaken atheist caller (see above) who had been insisting that NASA never feared that the moon might be covered with meters of dust. However, Dr.Richter recalled for RSR the invalid but great concern, arising out of the old-earth worldview, that the Lunar Lander might sink out of site into dust that would have accumulated on the surface of the moon over its alleged billions of years. Additionally, this 3-minute audio excerpt, courtesy of the Smithsonian Channel's Space Voyages: Into the Unknown, presents another NASA scientist, James Burke, explaining that the Surveyor Mission proved that a vehicle could land on the Moon without sinking deep into the dust that evolutionary scientists feared may have been there. Dr. Burke was project manager for the Ranger missions (which preceded Surveyor), and Roger Launius, also heard on this audio clip, is the curator for the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum. Determining how much dust had accumulated on the lunar surface was one of the primary goals of the Surveyor program which eventually landed seven robotic craft on the moon. As Burke said, "If Surveyor had sunk in out of sight, then of course there would have been a different course of events." For, contrary to biblical creationism, the evolutionary old-earth mindset had led NASA to fear that the moon may be covered in dust even perhaps dozens of feet deep. See more at rsr.org/nasa-feared-deep-moon-dust.

* RSR Answers Specific Moon Landing Hoax Claims (collected from the Conspiracy Theory program and elsewhere)
- Can't see stars in various photos: The bright foreground and dark background composition of such photos results in a photographic effect whereby dimmer objects, such as stars in the sky, do not appear.
- Craters on moon may actually be from Area 51: "Conspiracy Theory" aired prior to Google Earth displaying Area 51. Conspiracy theorists have not since not linked to, nor otherwise documented there, the alleged terrestrial moon landscapes.
- No engine noise: On Star Trek TV shows, there is a quiet hum from the engines during typical scenes that take place on the ship. However, the audio from the Lunar Lander is very quiet and an astronaut even mentioned how quiet it was. Sound waves don't propagate in space, so while on earth engine noise will bounce back off the air surrounding a car on the highway, that effect doesn't exist in space. The only engine noise would have been transferred through the craft's structure, which could certainly be audible, but NASA explains that the all important insulation on the craft would significantly dampen that sound.
- No crater in the dust from Lunar Module landings: Photos and videos don't show landing craters below modules, even though NASA artwork previously predicted such craters would result from blown away dust. Of course, the depth of any expected crater would originally be influenced by NASA's fear of deep dust. (See above and NASA feared deep dust on the moon.)
- Missing Lunar Module in photo: A photograph exists of a distinctive moonscape without the lunar module, and then another with the same moonscape that includes the lunar module in the photo. When the module blasts off, it leaves its base, so the first photo seems to have been taken prior to the astronauts landing on the moon. The answer lies in the hills of the moonscape being very far away and because there is no atmosphere on the moon, the image has great clarity giving the impression that the hills are nearby. Then, when the camera is moved just a hundred yards or so to one side and snaps a photo in the same direction, the Lander is no longer in the frame, but the background is hardly changed, because of its distance. Careful examination of the famous photos does show the parallax however. A YouTube video has a great example and actual photos showing that parallax.
- No exhaust plume on leaving moon: The Conspiracy Theory "documentary" claims that there was no exhaust and that the Lunar Module appears to have been lifted off its base by a cable. However the A11-FSOTM documentary shows the blast off with debris flying and the flag being thrown.

RSR: June is Whale Month Pt. 4

Date: Jun 26, 2015 Length: 28:49
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* Homosexual Marriage Update: DBC Announcement: Dear loved ones, with the horrific supreme court ruling attempting to force homosexual marriage on the entire country (the way they forced child killing on the country with Roe v. Wade), we will have an emergency showing on Sunday morning at 9:30 a.m. at Denver Bible Church of Ray Comfort's film Audacity. Part documentary, part movie, Audacity will teach millions what the Bible actually says about homosexuality. And for the worship service, which begins at 10:50 a.m., the sermon of course, and tragically, will be on how to protect our families from the wickedness flooding our land. And if you can, please publish this notice on your social media.

Denver Bible Church rejects the court’s immoral and perverse opinion on homosexual marriage. The creator Jesus Christ said that God made us “male and female at the beginning of creation” and God instituted marriage between a man and a woman. All governing officials at every level of government should reject and ignore any and every attempt, whether legislative, by popular vote, or judicial, to redefine marriage. Likewise, all governing officials should reject Roe v. Wade and any and all other attempts to repeal God’s enduring command, Thou shall not murder.

Grieving, yes, but with ultimate victory in Jesus Christ!

- Pastor Bob Enyart and the Elders of
Denver Bible Church
4085 Independence Court 
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033

We Just Want To Be Left Alone: Right. "In the public square, Christianity and homosexuality are mutually exclusive. One or the other will be in the closet", said Bob Enyart. A homosexual replies: "No really, we just want to be left alone. Oh yeah, and you better bake us a cake. Or else. Or a pizza pie. And cookies. And send us flowers. And you better give me a haircut while I'm waiting. And take some photos. Or else. And forget your heterosexual student clubs and dating services, and as for your teachings on morality, we've decided to ban them. Oh yeah, and did we tell you? You're going to print us some t-shirts and then host our wedding! Yup. Even on your church property. And we want a parade, and you're going to provide security too." See more. Unfortunately.


Now, for the conclusion of Whale Month on RSR

* The Canonical Whale Evolution Story Falling Apart: Real Science Radio host Bob Enyart concludes this comprehensive series of interviews with filmmaker Carl Werner whose videotaped interviews with the discoverers of the "walking whales" have caused museums around the world to change their fossil exhibits. Dr. Werner reports on one of the most fascinating chapters in the history of science. For the imagined whale-like features of creatures like Pakicetus, Ambulocetus, and Rodhocetus, one by one, are being falsified and their "whale features" are being withdrawn by "whale evolution experts" and even by the discoverers themselves, the teacher Philip Gingerich and his former student Hans Thewissen.

* RSR's List of Whale Problems: For the actual (growing) list, see below.

* Sending Werner's Work to the Experts: RSR would like to mail a copy of Dr. Werner's Evolution book and the companion video to Dr. Gingerich and Dr. Thewissen (and perhaps to the other whale experts referenced therein). If you would like to underwrite that task for $100 per expert (to pay for the materials, shipping, our researcher's time, follow-up, etc.), please call 800-8Enyart or consider donating online! Thank you!    

* Filmmaker's Bombshell Report -- Forged Whale Fossils: Dr. Werner interviewed the scientists who supplied the primary whale evolution "fossils" to the world's leading museums including the Smithsonian, Carnegie, American Museum of Natural History, NHM of London, NMNS of Tokyo, Melbourne Museum, Canadian Museum of Nature, and the NHM of Paris. Gingerich now admits that Rodhocetus had no flippers and no fluked tail (and certainly no blowhole), so what millions of evolutionists believe regarding whale fossils is based on fabricated, and fully falsified, misinformation. Hear it, read the full press release, and see it for yourself below (rather than accepting the widespread Darwinist misinformation like about Rodhocetus from princeton.edu). 


*
Today’s Resource: You'll just love Carl Werner's  Evolution: The Grand Experiment DVD and his Living Fossils DVD! Want something else? Just browse the Science Department in the KGOV store for the best of the best in creation books, debates, and videos, or just call us at 1-800-8Enyart (836-9278).

 
* Richard Dawkins Whale Tales: Click to Watch Richard Dawkins spout off on whale intermediates 


* RSR's List of Whale Evolution Problems: In the tradition of the beloved RSR List Shows, we hope the following information will be helpful to you. Throughout the month of June, we will be adding items to this list and Bob Enyart asks you to help us turn this into a comprehensive and succinct resource, so please don't hesitate to email Bob@rsr.org your suggestions for what should be included here:
- Ten thousand paleontologists over 150 years have failed to discover whale transitions 
- Two guys in a few decades discovered Ambulocetus, RodhocetusPakicetusSinonyx and more  (see below)
- The teacher Dr. Philip Gingerich became famous for discovering Rodhocetus, Pakicetus, and other whale transitions
- The student Dr. Hans Thewissen became famous for discovering Ambulocetus
- Without limb or tail bones to justify his imagination, Gingerich drew flippers and a fluked tail onto Rodhocetus
- Gingerich admits on film to Dr. Carl Werner that additional fossils show Rodhocetus had four legs
- Gingerich admits that there is no evidence that Rodhocetus, a good runner, had a fluked tail
- Major museums begin to pull the famed Rodhocetus from their whale evolution displays
- Werner-aware articles like at Wikipedia either omit Rodhocetus or downgrade it to just one of the Protocetids
- Smaller-staffed sites like Francis Collins's BioLogos continue to showcase the completely misconstrued Rodhocetus
- Gingerich reconstructed a Pakicetus skull from fragments but now admits there was no indication of a blowhole
- After more bones were excavated, Pakicetus became a land animal but still kept its place as a whale transitional form
- Listing nine whale features, Thewissen, et alconclude in Nature, "Pakicetids display none of these [whale] features"
- Since Gingerich and Thewissen, whales are now widely claimed to be the best fossil evidence for Darwinian evolution
- Real Science Radio often hears evolutionists use Rodhocetus and Pakicetus as evidence for evolution, as did AronRa
- Berkeley's Whale Evolution article says: "These first whales, such as Pakicetus, were typical land animals."
- Leading evolutionists focusing on teeth, ear bones, ankles, mouth, or genes thus argue for a different land ancestor
- Since 1998, leading institutions argue whether whales evolved from animals like hyenas, cats, deer, wolves, or hippos
- Darwin focused on the wide-open mouth and predator behavior to claim that whales evolved from bears
- Dr. Gingerich explains that what "is similar between hoofed hyenas and the archaic whales are the teeth."
- Tokyo Institute of Sciences focused on genome similarity and concludes that whales evolved from a hippo-like species
- The whale evolution saga pits geneticists against anatomists against paleontologists
- Neo-Darwinism claims that evolution happens in the genes, yet unlike whales, hippos have plant-eating teeth
- Geneticist claims whales evolved from hippos but paleontologists say hippos evolved tens of millions of years too late
- The water-deposited geologic column's flood sorted fossils contain no hippo bones lower than whale bones
- If today's neo-Darwinian paradigm were true, then hippo gene similarity leaves zero fossil evidence for whale evolution
- Gingerich's "problem" with hippos is that "they are all plant eaters; [but] whales today are all carvinovres."
- Science: "the teeth of... mesonychids, such resemblance is sometimes overstated and... represents ... convergence"
- Though whales are among the "best" fossil evidence for evolution, experts disagree even on their land ancestor
- Thewissen reconstructed Ambulocetus' skull with a blowhole where no skull fragments existed to justify it
- The world's leading museums display a full Ambulocetus skull as though it had been found, including with a blowhole
- Smithsonian and other Darwinist artists added tiny ears reminiscent of whales without fossil evidence to support them
- Whale eyes typically line up with the upper teeth so Gingerich doubts Ambulocetus because its eyes are atop its head
- Thewissen admits in Werner's film that a major claim for Ambulocetus, a "sigmoid process" ear bone, is questionable 
- Whale evolution believer and expert Dr. Berta nonetheless refers to Thewissen's "purported whale characters"
- The "sigmoid process" is "questionable" and only "purported" because it doesn't look like that diagnostic whale trait
- The other "purported" Ambulocetus "whale" features are consistent with land animals but not with whale features
- Gingerich found Rodhocetus, Pakicetus, Synonyx and also Maiacetus ("mother whale") and Artiocetus!
- So the dynamic duo found Rodhocetus, Ambulocetus, Pakicetus, SynonyxMaiacetus, Artiocetus, and  __________?
- The whale evolution cottage industry is run like a family business with proprietors who cannot be trusted
- (Feel free to send suggestions for additions to this RSR List to Bob@rsr.org)

While maintaining his evolutionary political correctness, Wayne Carley, the president of the Nat'l Association of Biology Teachers nonetheless observed, "The very day I viewed the segment “Great Transformations," wherein P. D. Gingerich firmly stated that whales evolved from wolf-like carnivores, he and several colleagues published a paper in Science (293: 2239) showing that, in fact, whales evolved from ancestral artiodactyls." P.C. aside though, 100,000 U.S. professors think intelligent design is a significant scientific alternative to Darwinism, half-a-million U.S. medical doctors say that God brought about humans, and 30,000 U.S. public high school biology teachers do not endorse Darwinism in class.

Credit: Just as we credit RSR's List of Fresh Fossils and our rsr.org/dinosaur-soft-tissue#supplement to Brian Thomas over at the Institute for Creation Research, so too we credit Dr. Carl Werner for his startling exposé of the fraudulent whale transitional fossils that enabled us to produce this latest RSR List. Thank you Brian and thank you Carl!" - Bob Enyart & Fred Williams

RSR: June is Whale Month Pt. 3

Date: Jun 19, 2015 Length: 33:40
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* The Canonical Whale Evolution Story Falling Apart: Bob Enyart continues a comprehensive series of interviews with filmmaker Carl Werner whose videotaped interviews with the discoverers of the "walking whales" have caused museums around the world to change their fossil exhibits. Dr. Werner reports on one of the most fascinating chapters in the history of science. For the imagined whale-like features of creatures like Pakicetus, Ambulocetus, and Rodhocetus, one by one, are being falsified and their "whale features" are being withdrawn by "whale evolution experts" and even by the discoverers themselves, the teacher Philip Gingerich and his former student Hans Thewissen.

* RSR's List of Whale Problems: For the actual (growing) list, see below

* Filmmaker's Bombshell Report -- Forged Whale Fossils: Dr. Werner interviewed the scientists who supplied the primary whale evolution "fossils" to the world's leading museums including the Smithsonian, Carnegie, American Museum of Natural History, NHM of London, NMNS of Tokyo, Melbourne Museum, Canadian Museum of Nature, and the NHM of Paris. Gingerich now admits that Rodhocetus had no flippers and no fluked tail (and certainly no blowhole), so what millions of evolutionists believe regarding whale fossils is based on fabricated, and fully falsified, misinformation. Hear it, read the full press release, and see it for yourself below (rather than accepting the widespread Darwinist misinformation like about Rodhocetus from princeton.edu). 


*
Today’s Resource: You'll just love Carl Werner's  Evolution: The Grand Experiment DVD and his Living Fossils DVD! Want something else? Just browse the Science Department in the KGOV store for the best of the best in creation books, debates, and videos, or just call us at 1-800-8Enyart (836-9278).

 
* Richard Dawkins Whale Tales: Click to Watch Richard Dawkins spout off on whale intermediates :


* RSR's List of Whale Evolution Problems: In the tradition of the beloved RSR List Shows, we hope the following information will be helpful to you. Throughout the month of June, we will be adding items to this list and Bob Enyart asks you to help us turn this into a comprehensive and succinct resource, so please don't hesitate to email Bob@rsr.org your suggestions for what should be included here:

- Ten thousand paleontologists over 150 years have failed to discover whale transitions 
- Two guys in a few decades discovered Rodhocetus,AmbulocetusPakicetus, and ___________ (fill in the blank).
- The teacher Dr. Philip Gingerich became famous for discovering Rodhocetus and Pakicetus
- The student Dr. Hans Thewissen became famous for discovering Ambulocetus
- Without limb or tail bones to justify his imagination, Gingerich drew flippers and a fluked tail onto Rodhocetus
- Gingerich admits on film to Dr. Carl Werner that additional fossils show Rodhocetus had four legs
- Gingerich admits that there is no evidence that Rodhocetus, a good runner, had a fluked tail
- Major museums begin to pull the famed Rodhocetus from their whale evolution displays
- Werner-aware articles like at Wikipedia either omitRodhocetus or downgrade it to just one of the Protocetids
- Smaller-staffed sites like Francis Collins's BioLogoscontinue to showcase the completely misconstruedRodhocetus
- Gingerich reconstructed a Pakicetus skull from fragments but now admits there was no indication of a blowhole  
- Listing nine whale features, Thewissen, et alconclude inNature, "Pakicetids display none of these [whale] features"
- Since Gingerich and Thewissen, whales are now widely claimed to be the best fossil evidence for Darwinian evolution
- Real Science Radio often hears evolutionists useRodhocetus and Pakicetus as evidence for evolution, as did AronRa
- Leading evolutionists focusing on teeth, or earbones, or mouth, or genes each thus argue for a different land ancestor
- Since 1998, leading institutions argue whether whales evolved from animals like hyenas, cats, deer, wolves, or hippos
- Darwin focused on the wide-open mouth and predator behavior to claim that whales evolved from bears
- Dr. Gingerich expalins that what "is similar between hoofed hyenas and the archaic whales are the teeth."
- Tokyo Institute of Sciences focused on genome similarity and concludes that whales evolved from a hippo-like species
- The whale evolution saga pits geneticists against anatomists against paleontologists
Neo-Darwinism claims that evolution happens in the genes, yet unlike whales, hippos have plant-eating teeth
- Geneticist claims whales evolved from hippos but paleontologists say hippos evolved tens of millions of years too late
- The water-deposited geologic column's flood sorted fossils contain no hippo bones lower than whale bones
- If today's neo-Darwinian paradigm were true, then hippo gene similarity leaves zero fossil evidence for whale evolution
- Gingerich's "problem" with hippos is that "they are all plant eaters; [but] whales today are all carvinovres."
- Though whales are among the "best" fossil evidence for evolution, experts disagree even on their land ancestor
- Thewissen reconstructed Ambulocetus' skull with a blowhole where no skull fragments existed to justify it
- The world's leading museums display a full Ambulocetusskull as though it had been found, including with a blowhole
- Smithsonian and other Darwinist artists added tiny ears reminiscent of whales without fossil evidence to support them
- Whale eyes typically line up with the upper teeth so Gingerich doubts Ambulocetus because its eyes are atop its head
- Thewissen admits in Werner's film that a major claim forAmbulocetus, a "sigmoid process" ear bone, is questionable 
- Whale evolution believer and expert Dr. Berta nonetheless refers to Thewissen's "purported whale characters"
- The "sigmoid process" is "questionable" and only "purported" because it doesn't look like that diagnostic whale trait
- The other "purported" Ambulocetus "whale" features are consistent with land animals but not with whale features

- See more at Part 1 of RSR's 2015 Whale Month (and feel free to send suggestions to Bob@rsr.org)

Credit: "Just as we credit RSR's List of Fresh Fossils and our rsr.org/dinosaur-soft-tissue#supplement to Brian Thomas over at the Institute for Creation Research, so too we credit Dr. Carl Werner for his startling exposé of the fraudulent whale tranistional fossils that enabled us to produce this latest RSR List. Thank you Brian and thank you Carl!" - Bob Enyart & Fred Williams

RSR: June is Whale Month Pt. 2

Date: Jun 12, 2015 Length: 28:20
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* The Canonical Whale Evolution Story Falling Apart: Bob Enyart continues a comprehensive series of interviews with filmmaker Carl Werner whose videotaped interviews with the discoverers of the "walking whales" have caused museums around the world to change their fossil exhibits. Dr. Werner reports on one of the most fascinating chapters in the history of science. For the imagined whale-like features of creatures like Pakicetus, Ambulocetus, and Rodhocetus, one by one, are being falsified and their "whale features" are being withdrawn by "whale evolution experts" and even by the discoverers themselves, the teacher Philip Gingerich and his former student Hans Thewissen.

* RSR's List of Whale Problems: For the actual (growing) list, see below

* Filmmaker's Bombshell Report -- Forged Whale Fossils: Dr. Werner interviewed the scientists who supplied the primary whale evolution "fossils" to the world's leading museums including the Smithsonian, Carnegie, American Museum of Natural History, NHM of London, NMNS of Tokyo, Melbourne Museum, Canadian Museum of Nature, and the NHM of Paris. Gingerich now admits that Rodhocetus had no flippers and no fluked tail (and certainly no blowhole), so what millions of evolutionists believe regarding whale fossils is based on fabricated, and fully falsified, misinformation. Hear it, read the full press release, and see it for yourself below (rather than accepting the widespread Darwinist misinformation like about Rodhocetus from princeton.edu). 


*
Today’s Resource: You'll just love Carl Werner's  Evolution: The Grand Experiment DVD and his Living Fossils DVD! Want something else? Just browse the Science Department in the KGOV store for the best of the best in creation books, debates, and videos, or just call us at 1-800-8Enyart (836-9278).

 
* Richard Dawkins Whale Tales: Click to Watch Richard Dawkins spout off on whale intermediates :


* RSR's List of Whale Evolution Problems: In the tradition of the beloved RSR List Shows, we hope the following information will be helpful to you. Throughout the month of June, we will be adding items to this list and Bob Enyart asks you to help us turn this into a comprehensive and succinct resource, so please don't hesitate to email Bob@rsr.org your suggestions for what should be included here:
- Ten thousand paleontologists have failed to discover whale transitions while looking for 150 years 
- Two guys in a few decades discovered Rodhocetus, Ambulocetus, Pakicetus, and _________ (fill in the blank).
- The teacher Dr. Philip Gingerich discovered Rodhocetus and Pakicetus
- The student Dr. Hans Thwissen discovered Ambulocetus
- Without bones to justify his imagination, Gingerich drew flippers and a fluked tail onto Rodhocetus
- Gingerich admits on film to Dr. Carl Werner that additional fossils show Rodhocetus had four legs
- Gingerich admits that there is no evidence that Rodhocetus, a good runner, had a fluked tail
- Major museums begin to pull the famed Rodhocetus from their whale evolution displays
- Werner-aware articles like at Wikipedia either omit Rodhocetus or downgrade it to just one of the Protocetids
- Smaller-staffed sites like Francis Collins's BioLogos continue to showcase the completely misconstrued Rodhocetus
- See more at Part 1 of RSR's 2015 Whale Month (and feel free to send suggestions to Bob@rsr.org)
Credit: "Just as we credit RSR's List of Fresh Fossils and our rsr.org/dinosaur-soft-tissue#supplement to Brian Thomas over at the Institute for Creation Research, so too we credit Dr. Carl Werner for his startling exposé of the fraudulent whale tranistional fossils that enabled us to produce this latest RSR List. Thank you Brian and thank you Carl!" - Bob Enyart & Fred Williams

More Soft Tissue Confirms RSR Dino Prediction

Date: Jun 10, 2015 Length: 27:53
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* Dinosaur Soft Tissue is COMMON: Today's special edition of Real Science Radio reports on the latest astounding recovery of actual dinosaur soft tissue (See right, the false-color photograph of actual dinosaur collagen!) David Coppedge, former ground computer administrator for NASA's Cassini Saturn mission, joins Bob Enyart to discuss this week's reports in the journals Nature and Science of more, and more, and more red blood cells soft tissue being discovered in dinosaur bones. As at rsr.org/predictions, this confirms Bob's and Fred Williams' 2014 creation science prediction that dinosaur soft tissue will be found not only in rare circumstances, but rather easily, i.e., when looked for. As reported by Coppedge at his important Creation Evolution Headlines website at crev.info, via the journal Science: "this week's issue of Nature Communications backs up previous, controversial reports of such structures in dinosaur bones. It also suggests that soft tissue preservation may be more common than anyone had guessed. 'It’s encouraging,' especially because the proteins were found in what appear to be the most unremarkable, ordinary bones..."

* From rsr.org/creation-science-predictions: RSR confidently predicted the very OPPOSITE of what the science journals had claimed! Every old-earth scientist and every media outlet and scientific journal that addressed the issue claimed that only in very rare circumstances has dinosaur tissue survived till the present. But on February 21, 2014 we predicted on our regular Real Science Radio broadcast and in the written show summary that dinosaur soft tissue was not rare but could be found easily. Here's what we predicted, and the confirmation notice:    

Dinosaur soft tissue will be found not only in rare circumstances, but rather easily, i.e., when looked for.
CONFIRMED in May 2015! From the world's leading journal, Nature, and at crev.info as reported as reported in Science, America's leading journal:Signs of ancient cells and proteins found in dinosaur fossils, "this week's issue of Nature Communications backs up previous, controversial reports of such structures in dinosaur bones. It also suggests that soft tissue preservation may be more common than anyone had guessed. 'It’s encouraging,' especially because the proteins were found in what appear to be the most unremarkable, ordinary bones, says Matthew Collins, an archaeologist and biochemist at the University of York in the United Kingdom."

June is Whale Month on RSR

Date: Jun 5, 2015 Length: 28:20
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* The Canonical Whale Evolution Story Falling Apart: Real Science Radio host Bob Enyart begins a comprehensive series of interviews with filmmaker Carl Werner whose videotaped interviews with the discoverers of the "walking whales" have caused museums around the world to change their fossil exhibits. Dr. Werner reports on one of the most fascinating chapters in the history of science. For the imagined whale-like features of creatures like Pakicetus, Ambulocetus, and Rodhocetus, one by one, are being falsified and their "whale features" are being withdrawn by "whale evolution experts" and even by the discoverers themselves, the teacher Philip Gingerich and his former student Hans Thewissen.

* RSR's List of Whale Problems: For the actual (growing) list, see below.

* Sending Werner's Work to the Experts: RSR would like to mail a copy of Dr. Werner's Evolution book and the companion video to Dr. Gingerich and Dr. Thewissen (and perhaps to the other whale experts referenced therein). If you would like to underwrite that task for $100 per expert (to pay for the materials, shipping, our researcher's time, follow-up, etc.), please call 800-8Enyart or consider donating online! Thank you!    

* Filmmaker's Bombshell Report -- Forged Whale Fossils: Dr. Werner interviewed the scientists who supplied the primary whale evolution "fossils" to the world's leading museums including the Smithsonian, Carnegie, American Museum of Natural History, NHM of London, NMNS of Tokyo, Melbourne Museum, Canadian Museum of Nature, and the NHM of Paris. Gingerich now admits that Rodhocetus had no flippers and no fluked tail (and certainly no blowhole), so what millions of evolutionists believe regarding whale fossils is based on fabricated, and fully falsified, misinformation. Hear it, read the full press release, and see it for yourself below (rather than accepting the widespread Darwinist misinformation like about Rodhocetus from princeton.edu). 


*
Today’s Resource: You'll just love Carl Werner's  Evolution: The Grand Experiment DVD and his Living Fossils DVD! Want something else? Just browse the Science Department in the KGOV store for the best of the best in creation books, debates, and videos, or just call us at 1-800-8Enyart (836-9278).

 
* Richard Dawkins Whale Tales: Click to Watch Richard Dawkins spout off on whale intermediates 


* RSR's List of Whale Evolution Problems: In the tradition of the beloved RSR List Shows, we hope the following information will be helpful to you. Throughout the month of June, we will be adding items to this list and Bob Enyart asks you to help us turn this into a comprehensive and succinct resource, so please don't hesitate to email Bob@rsr.org your suggestions for what should be included here:
- Ten thousand paleontologists over 150 years have failed to discover whale transitions 
- Two guys in a few decades discovered Ambulocetus, RodhocetusPakicetusSinonyx and more  (see below)
- The teacher Dr. Philip Gingerich became famous for discovering Rodhocetus, Pakicetus, and other whale transitions
- The student Dr. Hans Thewissen became famous for discovering Ambulocetus
- Without limb or tail bones to justify his imagination, Gingerich drew flippers and a fluked tail onto Rodhocetus
- San Diego State's whale evolution expert Dr. Berta: "Rodhocetus [used] its fluked tail for propulsion through water..."
- Gingerich admits on film to Dr. Carl Werner that additional fossils show Rodhocetus had four legs
- Lacking evidence and left with only contrary evidence, Gingerich now believes that Rodhocetus did not have a fluked tail
- Major museums begin to pull the famed Rodhocetus from their whale evolution displays
- Werner-aware articles like at Wikipedia either omit Rodhocetus or downgrade it to just one of the Protocetids
- Smaller-staffed sites like Francis Collins's BioLogos continue to showcase the completely misconstrued Rodhocetus
- Gingerich reconstructed a Pakicetus skull from fragments but now admits there was no indication of a blowhole
- After more bones were excavated, Pakicetus became a land animal but still kept its place as a whale transitional form
- Listing nine whale features, Thewissen, et alconclude in Nature, "Pakicetids display none of these [whale] features"
- Since Gingerich and Thewissen, whales are now widely claimed to be the best fossil evidence for Darwinian evolution
- Real Science Radio often hears evolutionists, like AronRa, use Rodhocetus and Pakicetus as evidence for evolution
- Berkeley's Whale Evolution article says: "These first whales, such as Pakicetus, were typical land animals."
- Leading evolutionists focusing on teeth, ear bones, ankles, mouth, or genes thus argue for a different land ancestor
- Since 1998, leading institutions argue whether whales evolved from animals like hyenas, cats, deer, wolves, or hippos
- Darwin focused on the wide-open mouth and predator behavior to claim that whales evolved from bears
- Dr. Gingerich explains that what "is similar between hoofed hyenas and the archaic whales are the teeth."
- Tokyo Institute of Sciences focused on genome similarity and concludes that whales evolved from a hippo-like species
- The whale evolution saga pits geneticists against anatomists against paleontologists
- Neo-Darwinism claims that evolution happens in the genes, yet unlike whales, hippos have plant-eating teeth
- Geneticist claims whales evolved from hippos but paleontologists say hippos evolved tens of millions of years too late
- Howard University's whale fossil expert Prof. Daryl Domning: "this is nonesense... Hippos were very late on the scene" 
- The water-deposited geologic column's flood sorted fossils contain no hippo bones lower than whale bones
- If today's neo-Darwinian paradigm were true, then hippo gene similarity leaves zero fossil evidence for whale evolution
- Gingerich's "problem" with hippos is that "they are all plant eaters; [but] whales today are all carvinovres."
- Science: "the teeth of... mesonychids, such resemblance is sometimes overstated and... represents ... convergence"
- Though whales are among the "best" fossil evidence for evolution, experts disagree even on their land ancestor
- Thewissen reconstructed Ambulocetus' skull with a blowhole where no skull fragments existed to justify it
- The world's leading museums display a full Ambulocetus skull as though it had been found, including with a blowhole
- Smithsonian and other Darwinist artists added tiny ears reminiscent of whales without fossil evidence to support them
- Whale eyes typically line up with the upper teeth so Gingerich doubts Ambulocetus because its eyes are atop its head
- Thewissen admits in Werner's film that a major claim for Ambulocetus, a "sigmoid process" ear bone, is questionable
- Whale evolution believer and expert Dr. Berta regarding Ambulocetus refers to its "purported whale characters"
- The "sigmoid process" is "questionable" and only "purported" because it doesn't look like that diagnostic whale trait
- The other "purported" Ambulocetus "whale" features are consistent with land animals but not with whale features
- Gingerich found Rodhocetus, Pakicetus, Synonyx and also Maiacetus ("mother whale") and Artiocetus!
- So the dynamic duo found Rodhocetus, Ambulocetus, Pakicetus, SynonyxMaiacetus, Artiocetus, and  __________?
- The whale evolution cottage industry is run like a family business with proprietors who cannot be trusted
- More to come through June 2015 (and feel free to send suggestions to Bob@rsr.org)

While maintaining his evolutionary political correctness, Wayne Carley, the president of the Nat'l Association of Biology Teachers nonetheless observed, "The very day I viewed the segment “Great Transformations," wherein P. D. Gingerich firmly stated that whales evolved from wolf-like carnivores, he and several colleagues published a paper in Science (293: 2239) showing that, in fact, whales evolved from ancestral artiodactyls." P.C. aside though, 100,000 U.S. professors think intelligent design is a significant scientific alternative to Darwinism, half-a-million U.S. medical doctors say that God brought about humans, and 30,000 U.S. public high school biology teachers do not endorse Darwinism in class.

Credit: Just as we credit RSR's List of Fresh Fossils and our rsr.org/dinosaur-soft-tissue#supplement to Brian Thomas over at the Institute for Creation Research, so too we credit Dr. Carl Werner for his startling exposé of the fraudulent whale transitional fossils that enabled us to produce this latest RSR List. Thank you Brian and thank you Carl!" - Bob Enyart & Fred Williams

RSR's Software Invention: The Omniscient Display.exe

Date: May 29, 2015 Length: 38:30
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

"Science" says American Pharaoh can't win Triple Crown* Post-show Update: See the Daily Camera quoting Bob Enyart regarding Boulder, Colorado's infamous abortionist Warren Hern.

* A Software Program to Inform Philosophical Discussion: The Real Science Radio hosts have fun describing Bob Enyart's software invention. Its stunning features make it a "software invention" rather than a typical example of "software development." Bob promises to resign his radio program of 25 years if he is not being truthful about what his program can do. For example, it displays the pages of books. All books. Software engineer Fred Williams discusses the source code published below with this RSR show summary, and the truncated version of Display.exe, below, which runs in your browser. Of course the program is not actually omniscient; but rather, as the guys list its many features, it merely appears to be omniscient, virtually. :)

POSTED on TOL December 3, 2009: Publicly disclosed on television June 2, 1998 and before. (We don't know if anyone else has ever invented this, so this post may help to answer that question.)

Software Feature #1: I've written a software program that displays the code of OTHER software programs. You don't have to have the other program available, neither the source (obviously), nor even the executable code. You just run Display and it will show the source code of any other program.

OutputSoftware Feature #2: 12-6-09 My program also displays the pages of published books. Every book. And you don't have to have any such book available. The program itself displays the pages of any book.

Software Feature #3: 12-7-09 My program also displays published texts, translated into other languages.

Software Feature #4: 12-8-09 Display.exe presents a universal mathematical proof demonstrating that human creativity is not infinite but finite.

Software Feature #5: 12-11-09 Display.exe will display the text on scrolls.

Software Feature #6: 12-15-09 Yes, Display.exe will display sheet music. (A TOL'er called the radio studio, and I agreed to answer this here. I apologize that we've been too busy to keep up with this thread. On Jan. 1, 2010, we'll post to TOL either a typical output page from Display, or the program's own source code, depending upon interest.)

Software Feature #7: 1-3-10 Photos & Captions: In response to Stripe who wrote, "looks like it'll produce just about anything you want it to... in text only form... " Thanks Stripe for weighing in on this. It will display not only the text of books, but also their photos (with captions), graphs, and charts.

The startling implications of Display.exe are far beyond anything the Supreme Court may rule in their current intellectual property case.

-Bob Enyart
realscienceradio.com
co-host
Battle Royale VII: Does God Exist? combatant

Display.exe Source Code

Public Class Form1
....Dim n As Integer
....Dim HistoryWritten As Boolean
....Dim upperbound As Integer = 10000001
....' Set binary array to needed length + 1
....Dim MBit(upperbound) As Boolean

....Sub ZeroOutArray()
........For n = 0 To upperbound - 1
............MBit(n) = 0
........Next
....End Sub

....Sub Count()
........n = 0
........Do
............If MBit(0) = False Then
................MBit(0) = True
................For n = 0 To 100000
................Next
................DisplayArray()
............Else : HistoryWritten = True
................For n = 0 To upperbound - 1
....................If MBit(n) = False Then
........................HistoryWritten = False
....................End If
................Next
................If HistoryWritten = False Then
....................n = 0
....................MBit(n) = False
....................Label1.Visible = False
....................Do While MBit(n + 1) = True
........................n = n + 1
........................MBit(n) = False
....................Loop
....................MBit(n + 1) = True
....................n = n + 1
....................DisplayArray()
................End If
............End If
........Loop Until n = upperbound
....End Sub
....' History dump... world, that is.
End Class

Here's an example output page from Display.exe. By the way, the program doesn't have to start from the beginning, but it could start from any point, for example, the user could begin with this image and have the program run forward to the see the next images. Or, it could run backward. Either way.

* Shocking Debate Aftermath: As promised on today's program, this 2-minute video documents the shocking aftermath involving R.C. Sproul Jr. and James White in the hours after White's debate with Bob, The Battle at the Palace:

Calling on Travis Barlock to Retract Rodhocetus Claim

Date: May 25, 2015 Length: 28:50
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* Asking Travis Barlock to Retract Rodhocetus Claim: Real Science Radio host Bob Enyart is asking recent DU biology grad Travis Barlock to retract a specific claim he made about evidence for evolution during a debate with Bill Jack at the University of Denver. On today's program, courtesy of filmmaker Dr. Carl Werner, hear the Rodhocetus discoverer Phil Gingerich admit that the fossil never showed evidence of whale flippers nor of a fluked tail. And now that they have recovered its front legs, Gingerich admits that Rodhocetus did not have flippers, and that therefore, the whale's tale that he imagined was not valid. In a discussion with Enyart after the debate, which you can see in the brief YouTube video below), Barlock said that if he could confirm this information, he would stop using this claim. Bob Enyart Live is now calling on Travis to make good on that commitment. And hear the audio from that post-debate discussion on today's program for questions raised about Barlock's other evolution claims.

* Inviting DU Evolutionists to Enjoy:
RSR's List of Scholars Doubting Darwin
List of Genomes that Just Don't Fit
List of Shocked Evolutionists
List of Missing Transitional Fossils
List of Carbon 14 Everywhere it Shouldn't Be
List of Dinosaur Soft Tissue Journal Papers
List of Fresh Fossils
RSR's List of Not So Old Things

* Debate After Party: After the debate, Bob asked Travis about his favorite transitional fossils example: whale evolution, whether he was aware that the discoverer of Rodhocetus has now recanted that the creature had a fluked tail and flippers? Barlock said he was unaware of that development and that if and when he confirmed this, he would of course stop using Rodhocetus as a favorite example of evidence for evolution.

 


* See More of Travis' Favorite Transitional Whale Fossils Debunked
: On the show page for the Real Science Radio interview of filmmaker Dr. Carl Werner, rsr.org/whale-fossils-faked, see more video clips of the other now falsified alleged whale transitional fossils. In addition to Rodhocetus, consider also Werner's interview with the discoverer of Ambulocetus, which reveals to the general public what only few insiders knew. Dr. Hans Thewissen is Philip Gingerich's student who, astonishingly, has been celebrated for also (allegedly) discovering a whale transitional form. Following his mentor into fame, and then into shame, Thewissen has now admitted on film that he fabricated the blowhole that he claimed was on the creature's snout. Yet public television nature programs and natural history museums worldwide, demonstrating their notoriously low standard for evidence, have long accepted that imaginary blowhole so that millions of people, like Travis Barlock, believe that fantasized claim to be among the best evidence for evolution.


Used by permission of Dan Piraro over at bizarro.com!* DU Students Say Whale Transitions are Travis' Favorite Examples: University of Denver students in the audience told Bob Enyart that the (alleged) transitional whale fossils were among Travis Barlock's favorite evidence for evolution. This is reminiscent of the millions of evolutionists who justify their belief in evolution by citing the content in Richard Dawkins' books, even as the author himself knew and has now admitted that his books contained no evidence and only assumed evolution to be true (see video below). This Bill vs. Barlock debate also reminds RSR of when Bob Enyart asked the famed evolutionist Dr. Eugenie Scott for her best evidence, and she answered "junk DNA", which very term today has been identified as a science stopper and severely hindered the growth of genomic research as a generation of geneticists were heavily deterred by strong-armed neo-Darwinists from even looking at the non-coding regions of our DNA, vast swaths of which have now been confirmed to have function. As the scientific evidence for our Creator God continues to grow, the big Darwinists claims are shrinking.

* Expecting Barlock to Keep His Word: So as this DU evolutionist agreed that if evidence is shown to be invalid, that he would no longer use it, we are hoping and expecting that Travis Barlock will retract his often repeated claim that Rodhoectus is a good example of the evolutionary transition from land animal to whale.



* Today’s Resource
: Get the greatest cell biology video ever made on DVD:
- helps you to share it with others
- helps keep Real Science Radio on the air, and
- gets you Dr. Don Johnson's book as a bonus!
Information is encoded in every cell in our DNA and in all living things. Learn how the common world view of life's origin, chemical evolution, conflicts with our knowledge of Information Science. Finally, information Science is changing the way millions of people think about all living systems!

Also, have you browsed through our Science Department in the KGOV Store? You just might LOVE IT!!

 

* Travis, Look What the Lord Has Done! The latest stunning animation from the anti-Darwinist ID folks...

NYC Endocrinologist Dr. Joel Brind on RSR

Date: May 22, 2015 Length: 33:50
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

Abortion breast cancer linkNational Cancer Institute Researcher Admits Abortion/Breast Cancer Link!

This is a very Special Edition of Real Science Radio!

* NCI Senior Researcher Louise A. Brinton Reverses Herself: Brinton, largely responsible for getting the government-funded National Cancer Institute to deny the abortion-breast cancer link, has co-authored a new study which describes significant risk factors, including "induced abortion." The study also says that these risk factors are "consistent with the effects observed in previous studies on younger women." Endocrinologist Dr. Joel Brind of NYC's Baruch College joins Bob Enyart and Doug McBurney toward the end of the program to discuss this dramatic development! Also, hear about the 320% increase in risk for women taking the birth control pill to develop TNBC, Triple Negative Breast Cancer, a particularly aggressive and treatment-resistant cancer. Learn more at AbortionBreastCancer.com. Update: Further, while the U.S. study shows that abortion is the "best predictor of breast cancer" two more studies, now from China and Turkey, also show the link between breast cancer and abortion.

Bill Jack is Back, Now at DU Debating Evolution

Date: May 15, 2015 Length: 28:50
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline
* Bill Jack vs. Travis Barlock at DU: Real Science Radio host Bob Enyart interviews the inimitable Bill Jack, founder of Worldview Academy, guide with BC Tours, and one of the few bakery customers in history who ended up in a lawsuit. Join Bob Enyart and others from Denver Bible Church attending the debate this Sunday evening in Sturm Hall at the University of Denver. And please pray for Bill's debate opponent, Travis Barlock. To prepare, perhaps Travis might check out any of these Real Science Radio list shows:
 

RSR's List of Scholars Doubting Darwin
List of Genomes that Just Don't Fit
List of Shocked Evolutionists

List of Missing Transitional Fossils
List of Carbon 14 Everywhere it Shouldn't Be

List of Dinosaur Soft Tissue Journal Papers
List of Fresh Fossils
RSR's List of Not So Old Things
 
* Debate After Party: After the debate, Bob asked Travis about his favorite transitional fossils example: whale evolution, whether he was aware that the discoverer of Rodhocetus has now recanted that the creature had a fluked tail and flippers? Barlock said he was unaware of that development and that if and when he confirmed this, he would of course stop using Rodhocetus as a favorite example of evidence for evolution.

 


* See More of Travis' Favorite Transitional Whale Fossils Debunked: On the show page for the Real Science Radio interview of filmmaker Dr. Carl Werner, rsr.org/whale-fossils-faked, see more video clips of the other now falsified alleged whale transitional fossils. In addition to Rodhocetus, consider also Werner's interview with the discoverer of Ambulocetus, which reveals to the general public what only few insiders knew. Dr. Hans Thewissen is Philip Gingerich's student who, astonishingly, has been celebrated for also (allegedly) discovering a whale transitional form. Following his mentor into fame, and then into shame, Thewissen has now admitted on film that he fabricated the blowhole that he claimed was on the creature's snout. Yet public television nature programs and natural history museums worldwide, demonstrating their notoriously low standard for evidence, have long accepted that imaginary blowhole so that millions of people, like Travis Barlock, believe that fantasized claim to be among the best evidence for evolution.


* DU Students Say Whale Transitions are Travis' Favorite Examples: University of Denver students in the audience told Bob Enyart that the (alleged) transitional whale fossils were among Travis Barlock's favorite evidence for evolution. This is reminiscent of the millions of evolutionists who justify their belief in evolution by citing the content in Richard Dawkins' books, even as the author himself knew and has now admitted that his books contained no evidence and only assumed evolution to be true (see video below). This Bill vs. Barlock debate also reminds RSR of when Bob Enyart asked the famed evolutionist Dr. Eugenie Scott for her best evidence, and she answered "junk DNA", which very term today has been identified as a science stopper and severely hindered the growth of genomic research as a generation of geneticists were heavily deterred by strong-armed neo-Darwinists from even looking at the non-coding regions of our DNA, vast swaths of which have now been confirmed to have function. As the scientific evidence for our Creator God continues to grow, the big Darwinists claims are shrinking.

* Expecting Barlock to Keep His Word: So as this DU evolutionist agreed that if evidence is shown to be invalid, that he would no longer use it, we are hoping and expecting that Travis Barlock will retract his often repeated claim that Rodhoectus is a good example of the evolutionary transition from land animal to whale.



* Today’s Resource
: Get the greatest cell biology video ever made on DVD:
- helps you to share it with others
- helps keep Real Science Radio on the air, and
- gets you Dr. Don Johnson's book as a bonus!
Information is encoded in every cell in our DNA and in all living things. Learn how the common world view of life's origin, chemical evolution, conflicts with our knowledge of Information Science. Finally, information Science is changing the way millions of people think about all living systems!

Also, have you browsed through our Science Department in the KGOV Store? You just might LOVE IT!!

 

* Travis, Look What the Lord Has Done! The latest stunning animation from the anti-Darwinist ID folks...

Syndicate content