Real Science Radio

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.

John Hartnett on Surface Brightness and the Expansion

Google: evidence against the big bang, and click on the RSR article at kgov.com!* Physicist John Hartnett on the Surface Brightness of Galaxies: Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart interviews one of the creators of the most precise clock ever made by human beings, physicist John Hartnett, on evidence that appears to contradict one of the most fundamental claims of the big bang. Whereas "the Big Bang theory tells us that in an expanding Universe [distant galaxies] actually should appear fainter but bigger", which would reduce their surface brightness per unit area, it turns out that the surface brightness of the furthest galaxies studied is identical to that of the nearest galaxies! A 2014 physics journal paper reports careful observations of about a thousand galaxies that fundamentally contradict the prediction of the big bang. Astrophysicists led by Eric Lerner from Lawrenceville Plasma Physics published, UV surface brightness of galaxies from the local universe to z ~ 5 , (i.e., to very far away) and found that, as reported in Sci-News, "Contrary to the prediction of the Big Bang theory, they found that the surface brightnesses of the near and far galaxies are identical." And further, "It is amazing that the predictions of this simple formula are as good as the predictions of the expanding Universe theory, which include complex corrections for hypothetical dark matter and dark energy," said one of the study's co-authors, Dr Renato Falomo of the Osservatorio Astronomico di Padova, Italy.

* Surface Brightness and the Big Bang: Like absolute magnitude for stars, the concept of surface brightness for galaxies is straightforward. However, it is more complicated to understand that which astrophysicists acknowledge, that equivalent surface brightness in both nearby and distant galaxies contradicts the big bang. Measuring surface brightness involves the canceling effects of light's inverse square law, with the area of the galaxy, which itself is calculated by squaring the radius. That relatively simple approach works very well with actual empirical data from our observatories. Yet, if the big bang theory were correct, the expansion of the universe would complicate that cancelation effect, and therefore that approach should not work. But it does. This is explained further by creationist physicist Dr. Hartnett (in a paragraph added at the request of RSR to his great article), Is there definitive evidence for an expanding universe?

* Following Dr. Hartnett & His Work at CMI: Here at Real Science Radio we keep up with the latest in the the rough-and-tumble field of cosmology by following JohnHartnett.org and Dr. Hartnett's articles at creation.com.  And you just my love listening to our rsr.org/hartnett-evaluates-rsr-evidence-against-the-bb interview! 

* Link to this Program: A "URL redirect" that links to this program is rsr.org/expansion-of-space.

* Post-show Note -- Atheists Boot Bob: Tolerance by the atheists at RationalSkepticism.org lasted until Bob's 27th post. Was Bob the victim of spam entrapment? :) Get the links and see the story below...

RSR: When Did Adam and Eve Sin?

* The Timing of the Fall in the Garden of Eden: Today is Friday, June 13, 2014. Thanks for tuning in to Real Science Radio! We depart from our normal science programming to ask you a question: How soon after their creation on day six did Adam and Eve sin? It turns out that there are clues from biology, Scripture, and history that help to answer that question. In Creation magazine, in the article, Why Bible History Matters, Dr. Jonathan Sarfati makes three observations that provide a time frame.

   1. Adam and Eve did not conceive any children prior to the Fall
   2. Eve would likely have become pregnant during her first menstrual cycle
   3. Lucifer also would have rebelled in the short time between Creation and the Fall

Bob Enyart's verse-by-verse study of Genesis 3Recognizing that Adam and Eve fell prior to conceiving their first child is the primary realization for chronicling the earliest days in human history. Our Bible study album, Genesis: The Fall, makes these and other biblical, biological, and historical observations (some of which are presented below) that may further narrow the timing of the fall of Adam and Lucifer. Scripturally, Dr. Sarfati is on solid ground concluding that Satan fell in that short time period. For as traditionally understood, the passage interpreted as Satan's fall in Ezekiel 28 says about Lucifer that, "You were in Eden, the garden of God." And in Isaiah 14, the parallel passage about the perfect and wise Lucifer, “you have said in your heart: ‘I will ascend into heaven… I will ascend above the heights of the clouds…"

Lucifer was "fallen from heaven," not geographically, for He was on the Earth in the Garden of Eden coveting to rise above the clouds and ascend of his own will into heaven. So he fell not from heaven, but from God's kingdom of heaven, which initially encompassed everything created, including, in a special way, our planet's surface, which God prepared for the kingdom of heaven on Earth. For Lucifer was, "perfect… from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you." And prior to his temptation of Eve, he was not cursed to be lower than the animals, and prior to Eve's fall he was not at enmity with Eve nor with her future descendants. For God said, "Because you have done this, you are cursed more than all cattle… And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed."

Real Science Radio Goes To Math Class

* How Einstein and Others Can Use Their Minds To Make Discoveries: As author James Nickel recently told RSR, mathematicians turn away from the physical universe and yet make astounding discoveries that help to explain the world of matter and energy. Using their minds, rather than microscopes or telescopes, theoreticians make discoveries years, decades, and even centuries before their real-world counterparts make the same discoveries by observational science. Some examples:
- Max Planck, in the year 1900, by thinking about how to solve a math problem in physics, discovered the Planck constant, the foundation of the quantum mechanics revolution of the 1920s.
- Paul Dirac, by thinking, discovered the positron (the electron's antimatter counterpart) in 1928, prior to physicists noticing it in 1929 and confirming its existence its 1932.
- Peter Higgs in 1964 saw in his mind the existence of the subatomic Higgs boson almost a half century before scientists empirically found it using the nine-billion dollar Large Hadron Collider.
James Clerk Maxwell, father of the science of electromagnetic radiation, discovered in 1859, not with a telescope but by thought, that Saturn's rings were not, as had been supposed, solid, nor a continuous fluid, but were made up of disconnected particles, a discovery confirmed 122 years later with NASA's Voyager 2 mission.
Mathematician and astronomer Joseph-Louis Lagrange discovered the gravitationally stable Lagrange Points where today we position our most important exploratory satellites. Lagrange was born in Turin, Italy in 1736 and discovered these points with his mind.
- Time Magazine's Albert Einstein: The Enduring Legacy says that today's "high precision instruments such as atomic clocks and lasers... have shown that he was absolutely on target with the equations he worked out with nothing more than a pencil." And describing Einstein's visit with his wife in 1931 to see the 100-inch reflecting telescope at California's Mount Wilson Observatory, Richard Lacayo writes for Time that, "When the astronomers there boasted that their telescope could probe the structure of the universe, Elsa quipped: 'My husband does that on the back of an old envelope.'"

* Einstein's Lab Where He Discovered Special RelativityMany materialists claim, along with similar atheistic cliches, that you can only know that which your five senses tell you. But of course none of their five senses were able to tell them that, just as Einstein's five senses didn't reveal relativity to him. So we watch as today's materialists are becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the non-physicality of information, with the reality of logic, with the existence of absolute morality and math, and even with the existence of truth itself.

* Einstein Confuses Lawrence Krauss: As an extraordinary example of today's atheists trying to distance themselves from the realm of ideas, theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss (emphasis on the theoretical), in his book A Universe from Nothing, attempts to refute the phenomenon described by Nickel, that mathematicians often use their minds, rather than scientific equipment, to make astounding discoveries of the physical universe. In support of his denial, he presents an anecdote about Albert Einstein which, even in Krauss' own telling, EXACTLY contradicts Krauss' own reason for telling the story. Einstein used telescopes, yes, to make an astronomical observation, yes, but NOT to form his theory, for his theory had already been written on paper. Discover magazine's Richard Panek explains:

In the late 17th century, Isaac Newton helped inaugurate a scientific revolution by taking Galileo's observations of the heavens' motions and expressing them mathematically. Then in the early 20th century, Albert Einstein helped inaugurate a second scientific revolution by reversing that process, taking his own calculations and looking for their physical expression in the heavens.

* Rather Touchy Atheists: Atheists are rather touchy on this subject. For example, when this RSR article was first posted, we provided Cherenkov radiation as an example of a pre-discovery as already described for years on Wikipedia. Yet shortly after we made that point (and the link), the Wikipedia article was edited (as happens, including for example when we posted about mammoths) to downplay the extraordinary significance of the prediction of this radiation made in the 1880s by Oliver Heaviside! But to take this further, this self-taught physicist also illustrated the main point of this article when he realized that complex numbers which include the imaginary square root of -1 were useful in describing electrical circuits! In the Krauss' example above, Einstein used his eyes to make an observation to confirm the theory he already established with his mind. For Einstein is not renowned for his eyesight but for his intellect.

* Comprehending the Gulf that Einstein said was Incomprehensible: Einstein wrote that it was "incomprehensible" that the non-physical realm of "ideas" could even exist in a physical world. It was incomprehensible to him that non-physical mathematics, which itself is not composed of matter or energy, could describe so beautifully the physical universe. After realizing that the physical laws do not address morality, Einstein then wondered even about the physical laws themselves and why it should be that mathematical ideas, which are non-physical, should correspond so well to the physical universe. In 1921 Einstein asked, "How can it be that mathematics, being after all a product of human thought which is independent of experience, is so admirably appropriate to the objects of reality?" 


* Einstein's Gulf: Even though Einstein was uncomfortable with this concept, fifteen  years later he was still wrestling with the same unshakable observation. For in 1936 Einstein
famously wrote that, "the eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility." Then in 1944, remarking about atheist Bertrand Russell, he described the ability to get from matter to ideas as a "gulf–logically unbridgeable," which some scientists and linguists refer to as Einstein's Gulf. For while matter can be arranged to represent data, information itself is not material. Richard Walker, in his value-added re-airing of today's RSR program on Boston's WROL radio, mentioned the iconic article with a title that reiterates Einstein's point, The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences, by Nobel-prize winning physicist Eugene Wigner.)


The explanation for this phenomenon is one that Einstein (and Krauss) reject
a priori. Mankind can understand the correspondence between pure ideas and physical phenomenon only by the realization that the universe was designed in the mind of God. So its workings can be discovered by the mind of men who are made in God's image. However, Einstein denied the existence of a personal God. Yet in more accurate science, as Kepler is paraphrased, we are thinking God's thoughts after Him.

* The Multiverse Yardstick: In the years since Einstein observed the gulf, things have gotten so bad for materialists that they have introduced a new measurement tool called the multiverse. The multiverse is a yardstick used to measure the strength of the fine tuning argument for God's existence. It's speedy acceptance is measuring the desperation of the materialist. And finally, the one-word proof that the big bang theory has failed in it's purpose to provide an explanation for the existence of the universe: multiverse!

* Astounding and Unexpectedly Beautiful Equations: E = mc2. Exploring unexpected and even startling symmetry and patterns from the microscopic to the galactic scale, mathematicians often describe their work as an aesthetic pursuit of beauty, as Lacayo quotes Einstein that relativity was his "most beautiful discovery." Similarly, scientists enjoy the inverse square law, the beauty of Maxwell's equations, and of Boltzmann's formula for entropy, which is even engraved on his tombstone. And as math becomes increasingly purely theoretical, it seems to do an even better job at describing reality, as with the use of the square root of negative one, not only as in describing electrical circuits in the 1800s, but also today for describing quantum mechanics. Ludwig von Mises similarly writes in Human Action, that contemporary philosophers "are entirely wrong in their endeavors to reject any kind of a priori knowledge and to characterize logic, mathematics and [economics] as empirical and experimental disciplines. ... Moreover, it is not experience but thinking alone which teaches us that, and in what instances, it is necessary to investigate unrealizable hypothetical conditions in order to conceive what is going on in the real world" pp. 32, 65.) In the 1820s Carnot realized that even an idealized perfect heat engine could never operate at 100 percent efficiency (The Arrow of Time, Coveney & Highfield, p. 149). Like Einstein and Schrödinger, "Galileo is also known for his thought experiments", says Nova. "These are carried out entirely in the mind..." So ignoring their five senses, the mathematicians who turn away from the physical world to the non-material world of ideas, seeking pleasure from pure intellectual elegance, often end up being the ones who come closest to describing the physical nature of the cosmos. Atheists struggle with this phenomena because it suggests that the universe originated with the desire for beauty in the mind of a personal Creator.

* Mathematics Useless for Moral Truth: Conversely, while math helps man to understand physical reality, it is no use whatsoever regarding moral truth. Moral understanding never involves numbers. As American Right To Life put it in their Albert Einstein: In His Own Words article (extending upon a quote above):

Earth & Mercury's Decaying Magnetic Fields

* Boy do the atheists have a problem: Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart interviews physicist Russell Humphreys on the Earth and Mercury's rapidly decaying magnetic fields, and on Dr. Humphrey's fulfilled predictions about the magnetism of the distant planets Uranus and Neptune. With Earth losing 10% of it's magnetic field in just the last 150 years, and Mercury's even faster drop, materialists have to appeal, once again, to claims of wildly coincidental occurrences to explain our observation of such rapid loss on planets that are allegedly billions of years old.

* Transient Events Everywhere: See RSR's List of the Transient Events in the Solar System for our large and growing list of the amazing short-term events that are happening everywhere throughout the solar system, each one a surprising coincidence that they'd happen now if the solar system were 4.5 billion years old! 

* From the Popular RSR Site YoungEarth.com: A here's more on planetary magnetic decay... 

* Earth's Magnetic Field Decay: As summarized by University of Maryland geophysicist Daniel Lathrop, “In particular, over the last 150 years or so, the Earth’s magnetic field has declined in strength about ten percent, and continues to decline in strength [as is evident] every time people go and make new measurements.” Creationists point out that this rapid decay is not expected in such a brief snapshot in time if our planet were 4.6 billion years old. On the other hand, these careful, long-term, and worldwide measurements that document the rapidly decreasing strength of Earth's magnetic field are consistent with a young Earth. Lathrop, not surprisingly, is an old-earth geophysicist who nonetheless acknowledged this data at the opening of and midway through the 2013 program Magnetic Shield, an episode of The Weather Channel's Secrets of the Earth with theoretical physicist (emphasis on the theoretical), Michio Kaku.

The Soft Tissue Deniers

Real Science Radio DNA logo* Soft Tissue Deniers / Science Deniers: Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams list the soft tissue deniers, aka the science deniers, among leading evolutionists, media outlets, and anti-creation websites.

* RSR's List of Soft Tissue Deniers (and Doubters): This brief representative list documents the evolutionist science deniers and doubters for this specific topic. We'll occasionally update it and if any of these popular evolutionists sends a retraction or clarification to RSR, we'll note it here.

After two decades of extensive research and publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals, soft tissue deniers seem to be the rule rather than the exception among atheists and evolutionists. (Further, as of April 2014, the existence of dinosaur soft tissue, likely the greatest paleobiology discovery ever, remains virtually unknown to the general public as anyone can extrapolate by asking a few dozen people. RSR is working toward educating the public through radio shows, websites, and by presenting the information in easy-to-use formats.)

Soft tissue deniers (and such science doubters) include:

- Smithsonian Dinosaur Expert Brian Switek: 2012As late at Sept. 27, 2012, Switek wrote, "The supposed dinosaur leftovers may be microfossils created by bacterial biofilms..." 2014: In 2014, this evolutionist left soft tissue off his list of the Top Ten Dinosaur Mysteries. 2016: And as of November 2016, he still demonstrates an astounding lack of interest in the greatest paleontological discovery in history, original dinosaur soft tissue, while writing for either the Smithsonian or over on his paleo blog over at Scientific American (and remember, Bob informally debated SciAm's atheist editor, Michael Shermer).

- Oxford-educated widely-published anti-creation activist Paul Braterman: On March 8, 2014,  wrote, "despite much hype the only surviving material is in the form of a collagen-bone composite.” (Prof. Braterman is a British Eugenie Scott and made his claim even after browsing our rsr.org/dinosaur-soft-tissue, which is the world's most complete catalog of such findings.)

- Anti-creationist YouTube star AronRa: If you click the link, then just search for: No. :)

- RationalWiki: The science deniers over at the atheist, anti-creation RationalWiki.org, as late as May 12, 2015, are still denying the overwhelming hard science that has documented the existence of endogenous, extant dinosaur soft tissue. (Note too their observation that DNA would be undetectable after 100,000 years and so the lack of DNA in dinosaur bones proves the earth is old, yet a leading science journal published powerful evidence for the recovery of DNA from a hadrosaur and a T. rex.) 

- Talk Origins quote from their Age of the Earth article as accessed on March 1, 2012 through Nov. 10, 2016:

"Answers in Genesis claims that paleontologist Mary Schweitzer found 'obvious, fresh-looking blood cells' and traces of blood protein hemoglobin in a Tyrannosaurus rex bone… all these claims are absolutely false." -Talk Origins :)

- League of Reason in a high-profile debate, and in its Peanut Gallery comments from moderators and regular members (click and search for: soft), including as late as 2014 and March 2015.

- Phys.org as late as May 2015 published Bob Yirka's Iceman reveals oldest known example of red blood cells claiming that the oldest red-blood cells ever recovered belong to modern homo sapiens. However the science community is going to have to come to terms with the reality that dinosaur soft tissue is not going away. For peer-reviewed reports on recovered blood cells, see Science 1993 and Proc. Royal Soc. 2007 and for blood vessels see:

Darwinism: The Universal Acid

* Acid Claim Based on PhD's Research: Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart interviews Dr. Jerry Bergman about the effects of evolutionism on the culture, including the Darwinist genocide that eradicated the Tasmanians, an entire people group, and the undermining of sexual morality and the God-given right to life.

* LOOK WHAT THE LORD HATH WROUGHT! This just in... (well, yesterday), the latest stunning animation from the anti-Darwinist intelligent design folks over at the Discovery Institute...


* 10,000 Views
: Update: It's June 2, 2014, and this animation is about to hit it's first milestone, the 10,000 views mark. Generally, science videos don't go viral as quickly as cute kitten and music videos. 

* 55,000 Views: Update: It's Sept. 17, 2016 and this animation is at 55,000 views! Atheistic science videos fueled by rebellion against God and promoted by the Darwinian industrial complex sometimes quickly gain a hundred thousand views and more.  For a science video not fueled by atheopathy, this amazing Kinesin animation is doing well, and hopefully, as homeschoolers and others find out about it, it will eventually go viral! Great job Casey Luskin and crew!

* The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory Video: You can now pre-order this half-day seminar, The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory, on either DVD or Blu-ray. The pre-release copy that you will get in the mail, Lord willing, by June 1st, will not be the final production version. We are praying, however, that our friends will purchase this and send in their comments. That kind of timely editorial input from our early viewers will be invaluable toward enhancing the final release. The $50 price will also help RSR stay on the air! So to order, just call 1-800-8Enyart. Or, feel free to browse the Science Department in our KGOV store!

RSR: Hitler and the NAZI Darwinian Worldview

* RSR co-host Bob Enyart interviews Dr. Jerry Bergman: Real Science Radio friend Dr. Bergman's latest book is about the leading influence that Charles Darwin had on the public policy and personal hatreds of the German Third Reich. Previously, racism was "justified" based on things like envy and vengeance. Darwin ostensibly gave scientists, economists, and academics a supposed biological justification for what actually was their sin, Announcement: Dr. Bergman is speaking in the Denver area tonight, May 9th, at 7:00 p.m. at Bethlehem Lutheran Church. See you there!

* For Our Atheist Listeners: For the many atheists who have long tried to associate the Third Reich with Christianity, among the thousand contrary proofs, consider this article from Der Spiegel on How the Nazis Tried to Take Christ Out of Christmas

* For Our Pro-Abortion Listeners: The fabricated quote apparently attributed by a Joseph Kellard to Hitler's Mein Kampf in an apparently delusional Nazism and Christian Conservative, goes like this: "‘I’ll put an end to the idea that a woman’s body belongs to her... Nazi ideals demand that the practice of abortion shall be exterminated with strong hand.’" I apologize for lacking sources here, but from my reading decades ago, probably from Cleansing the Fatherland, The German Euthanasia Program, or Leftism Revisited, I learned that the NAZIs at first banned abortion to increase the German population but in their last couple years in power began to decriminalize abortion for various purposes. Please feel free to send along information on this to Bob@kgov.com.

* Most Prolific Creationist Writer in Studio: You may also enjoy listening to this earlier RSR interview with Dr. Jerry Bergman who had just writtenSlaughter of the Dissidents (buy now at creation.com!) Bob has been reading Dr. Bergman's writings for 30 years and is honored to have the good doctor in studio! Ben Stein's movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, created more awareness for Dr. Bergman's book. Enyart and Bergman discuss evolutionists who kill the careers of those who doubt Darwin, and they talked about Richard Dawkins, Richard Sternberg, and Dr. Jonathan Sarfati's new book that references Dr. Bergman's work.

* For Dr. Bergman's Book: just click on this image to get a copy...

Breaking: Leading Whale Fossils Faked

* Filmmaker's Bombshell Report -- Forged Whale Fossils: Bob Enyart speaks with Dr. Carl Werner about the filmmaker's interviews with the scientists who supplied the primary whale evolution "fossils" to the world's leading museums. (Which museums? Smithsonian, Carnegie, American Museum of Natural History, NHM London, NMNS Tokyo, Melbourne Museum, Canadian Museum of Nature, NHM Paris). Gingerich now admits that Rodhocetus had no blowhole, fluked tail, or flippers, 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 naively accepting the 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).

 

* RSR Shows about Dr. Carl Werner's Work:
- June 2015 is Whale Month at RSR
What Museums Aren't Showing You
Rodhocetus: Whale of a Tail [related: RSR "hip bones and fetal teeth" show]
Dr. Carl Werner and the Living Fossils
Many Modern Birds Found in Dinosaur Layers
- Breaking News: Leading Whale Fossils Faked (this show)

RSR Wound Up Over a Molecular Clock

click to read this great ICR article by Dr. Jeanson* Ticked Over Talk: Time and again evolutionists get ticked over our talk on molecular clocks. Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams report on Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson's new molecular clock research conducted over at the Institute for Creation Research. His paper, must reading for all informed creationists, New Genetic-Clock Research Challenges Millions of Years, is refreshing coming, as it is, from a scientist who received his Ph.D. in cell and developmental biology from Harvard University!

* "Noah" Box Office and Profitability: On the dove, the raven, and Russell Crowe, this disgraceful film has lost a lot of money! See below.

* Molecular Clock Criticism of "Darwin's Doubt": This post-show note quotes the relevant part of Bob Enyart's published review of Stephen Meyer's best-selling book Darwin's Doubt. "Meyer explains the failed Darwinist attempt to use sequencing to date divergence, for “the same or similar groups of molecules have generated dramatically different divergence times” (p. 107). He points out admissions from Dobzhansky prote?ge? Francisco Ayala, who says that such evolutionary calculations are 'fraught with danger.' And Berkley’s James Valentine joins others in acknowledging that 'the accuracy of the molecular clock is still problematical, at least for phylum divergences, for the estimates vary by some 800 million years.' Meyer then references a Michael Behe paper regarding DNA-packing histones, reporting that even with a dozen years of experiments in yeast showing that histones can tolerate dramatic deletions, regardless, across phyla histones remain highly conserved (i.e., minimally different). Meyer argues this against the Darwinists, showing their tendency to commit the cherry-picking fallacy, in this case by selectively ignoring data. But he doesn’t mention that IDers are guilty of the same failure, regarding the same evidence no less. The evolutionists assume their own conclusion in that, as Meyer points out, histones 'are never used as molecular clocks ... Because ... the small differences between histones yield an extremely recent divergence' (p. 107; emphasis added). By the way, how recently? He does not say. And neither did Behe offer an estimate for how long he believes plants and animals have existed with this extreme lack of mutation. Behe did point out, though, for example, that 'the green pea differs from that of mammals by only two conservative substitutions in 102' (Behe, 1990, p. 374). Yet intelligent design, Meyer explains, does not rule out common ancestry (p. 339), for, allegedly, a billion years ago a designer could have engineered a split between plants and animals. But Meyer cannot have it both ways. He wields the histone evidence against Darwinists but only by committing an equally circular, selective data fallacy. As with the intelligent design movement generally, Meyer's book fails to acknowledge this extreme lack of mutations as at least apparent evidence against these phyla having lived for hundreds of millions of years."

* NOAH Box Office Revenue vs. Cost: As of Sept. 24, 2014, the film Noah, thank you Lord, appears to have lost a lot of money. DVD sales will undoubtedly be depressed because of this film's mocking of the biblical account, but until those numbers are in, consider these numbers from the film's worldwide box office:

RSR's List of Missing Fossils

Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams take a survey of one of the most reliable kinds of testimony available in the history of mankind, that is, the contrary to interest testimony of hostile witnesses. Leading evolutionists for 150 years have admitted that the transitional fossils that should exist, if Darwinism were true, are missing. Evolution fails the fossil test. The guys also have a fun time talking about quote mining and the virtually complete nature of the fossil record.

* Darwinism Fails the Fossil Test: Fun! Yes, Darwinism fails the Transitional Fossils test, as evidenced in the quote below and, as of April 25, 2014, on Real Science Radio at rsr.org/missing-transitional-fossils!

Biology text, Campbell, Reece, et al., 2006, p290* The Essentially Complete Fossil Record: As our friend Walter ReMine points out, when paleontologists dig up a new fossil, or a thousand of them, they typically fit nicely into the existing and very well established framework of kinds of organisms (phylum, class, order, family, etc). Because this has been the rule for decades now, during which time millions of fossils have been dug up, this is powerful evidence that mankind possesses an essentially complete fossil record.


* Darwinists Aren’t Looking So Hard Anymore: Because the fossil record is essentially complete, evolutionists are not looking so hard anymore for all those breakthrough transitional “missing links” that had once been the great hope of the Darwinist. Researchers have catalogued the great extent of the length and breadth and depth of the entire fossil domain. (One of our confirmed creation science predictions was that Antarctica’s sealed-off Lake Vostok would not reveal 15 million years worth of evolution.)  When we’re searching for fossils, we’re not looking into infinity. There are only so many kinds of organisms that have lived on earth, and so, there is a finite number of fossils that are discoverable. However, let a Darwinist's imagination loose, and there’s a virtually infinite number make-believe creatures that he can invent.