The Most Informative Neanderthal Show Ever!

* The guys find something you can really gnaw into: Part 2. So, Bob & Fred really did stumble upon the most informative interview ever in the study of Neanderthals. Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams report also on the latest genetic research that shows that Neanderthal are closer to human than a chimp is to a chimp, which powerfully corroborates Dr. Jack Cuozzo's anatomically-based conclusion from the 1990s that Neanderthal were human. Dr. Cuozzo has studied firsthand and x-rayed more Neanderthal skulls than anyone else, ever. For part 1 of Dr Cuozzo's interview, click here.

* Two Thumbs Down on Noah; Thumbs Up on God's Not Dead: As a result of watching Ken Ham's program, RSR has decided to recommend against seeing the movie Noah, which portrays Noah as a psychopathic failure and God as worse. However, we highly recommend the movie God's Not Dead!

* Enjoy RSR via SoundCloud: Here's another way to listen to Real Science Radio on your smartphone or iPad. Just click for RSR on the SoundCloud app!

* And from the RSR Caveman Show:

* DNA Doesn't Lie! Neanderthals were MAN: Now that geneticists have sequenced the entire Neanderthal genome, they have proved wrong many of the world's leading evolutionists who had long claimed that Neanderthals were not Homo sapiens. [Update: Of course this corroborates Dr. Jack Cuozzo's creation-based findings from two decades earlier!] The young age of the earth, and that life had to be specially created because it is  information based, prove that Man was specially created and that there never was such a thing as an ape/human ancestor. Now, DNA proves that Neanderthal men and women were fully man, that is, they were Homo sapiens, because along with many other indicators, genetically they are closer to modern humans than two living chimps of the same species are to one another!

* Two Chimps Are More Different than Neanderthals Are To Us: Regarding Georgia Purdom's report that, "two modern chimps of the same species will have more DNA variation than Neanderthals or Denisovans have to modern humans," see creation geneticist Dr. Robert Carter in the Journal of Creation 23(1) 2009, p. 40-43, The Neanderthal mitochondrial genome does not support evolution, along with Becquet, C. et al., Genetic structure of chimpanzee populations, PLoS Genetics 3(4):617–626, 2007, as reported at Science Daily and Kaessmann, H., Wiebe, V. and Pääblo, S., Extensive nuclear DNA sequence diversity among chimpanzees, Science, 286:1159-1162, 1999 as reported in a 2007 AAAS news release.

* AiG Keeping RSR Informed: The current edition of the flagship publication of Ken Ham's Answers in Genesis presents a great series of caveman articles by David Menton, John UpChurch, Andrew Snelling, Mike Matthews, and Georgia Purdom, including as Purdom writes, "two modern chimps of the same species will have more DNA variation than Neanderthals or Denisovans have to modern humans." Taking the lead from Answers, RSR co-hosts Bob Enyart (above left) and Fred Williams (right) put themselves in a caveman's moccasins :) to figure out why Neanderthal (and others) lived in caves and why they looked so different. RSR believes that "Homo erectus", Neanderthal, etc., lived in caves only temporarily, to escape bad weather, etc., and they looked so different only because of ethnic differences which were often exaggerated by longevity.

* Preemptively Correcting Evolutionists: Invariably, when evolutionists get proven wrong on a major prediction, even one in print for decades, atheist and other Darwinist listeners to RSR will claim, "Evolutionists never said such a thing." Even before our RSR Caveman program aired, the guys told an evolutionist about the Neanderthal sequencing, who replied, "Evolutionists never claimed that Neanderthals were a difference species." So, to the evolutionists who post at EvolutionFairytale.com and at the BEL forum at TheologyOnline.com, before you accuse someone of making an error, it would help if you fact checked your own claim. Preemptively today, Bob Enyart's 12-year-old son Michael found this 1995 book and checked it out of his local public library, The Last Neanderthal, a book sponsored by the American Museum of Natural History. The author, paleoanthropologist Ian Tattersall, described as "one of the most respected authorities on the subject," claimed that the word "'human' is extremely ill-defined," and that, "As used here, 'human' ... is more loosely employed to refer to all primates that share a common ancestry uniquely with us, from Australopithecus on." This is science by definition. It reminds us of the evolutionists who argue that we should simply "define" various domestic dog breeds as different species. Thus, like magic, by science by definition they can then prove that speciation occurs commonly. Viola! On classification, Tattersall went on to say that, "in my view and that of a growing number of colleagues, there is no good reason to doubt that the Neanderthals deserve recognition as a species of their own." Except that they were not. And DNA doesn't lie. So Tattersall knew of no good reason, that is, other than that creationists disagreed with him. And since creationists have a better track record regarding scientific predictions, on those grounds alone Tattersall should have been more cautious. For then, he wouldn't have been falsified just a few years later on yet another major prediction from Darwinists. And finally, note the bias he exhibits suggesting that 3-foot tall monkeys like Lucy should be considered "human", while claiming that the human Neanderthal should be an entirely different species!

 * "Cavemen" were Ice Age People: 2013 Update: Click to see this "Neanderthal tooth" which was initially dated by the infamously inaccurate "rock layer method" to tens of thousands of years ago. Now, secular scientists have now used reliable scientific methods to date the tooth, and lo and behold, it belonged to a person who lived less than 5,000 years ago! Thank you Lord for a world full of evidence affirming the Holy Scriptures! But back to the ice. But how do you get an Ice Age to start? Old-earth geologists have an impossible time trying to create a scientifically reasonable computer simulation that shows how an Ice Age could begin, for two opposing factors are needed: cold continents and warm oceans. Dr. Walt Brown's Hydroplate theory very directly explains how the Ice Age began! 

Today’s Resource: Get the greatest cell biology video ever made! (By buying it here, you'll also help keep Real Science Radio on the air, and you'll get Dr. Don Johnson's book as a bonus!) 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! For after all, most fundamentally, rather than being carbon based, life in information based! (And have you browsed through our Science Department in the KGOV Store? You just might LOVE IT!!)