Like a thermostat talking to the furnace, trees talk to one another, and even to the neighbors' furnaces, so to speak, and by the analogy, to many other devices. Bob Enyart and Fred Williams highlight Real Science Radio's existing reports at rsr.org/trees including on tree-ring dating and how seeds know which way is up and which is down (their cells produce an anchor that sinks so they can shoot up their stems in the opposite direction). The guys then review forest expert Tom Hennigan's report for Answers in Genesis on trees reproducing the saliva of attacking beetles to attract predators to come and get the beetles, and how for a sapling other trees will pull back their roots, and how in some species when one tree is diseased other trees will give up nutrients in hopes of nursing the sick tree back to health.

Today's Resource:

Get all of our 2020 Real Science Radio shows on two MP3 discs!

* Here's How Savant Syndrome Occurs: Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams have corrected and expanded the definition of "savant" and have explained conceptually how the savant syndrome occurs. The secular world is uncomfortable with savants because of what their condition suggests, as discussed on today's broadcast. Hear also a clip from a documentary about Kim Peek, the model for the Rain Man character played by Dustin Hoffman. And the guys present the corrected meaning of the word savant from rsr.org/definitions: a person with a physiological break in the barrier that formed after Man's Fall, that break opening partial access through the barricade designed to block access to our greatest intellectual potential. Hear also a news report about a slingshot savant, Rufus Hussy, who like Annie Oakley, almost never misses and hits quarters out of the air, bugs without damaging the leaves they're sitting on, and can slice tall weeds to fall, as requested, to the right or left. Finally, to give more context to understand their expanded definition of savant, the guys share audio from neuroscience professor Dr. Michael Egnor presenting scientific evidence for dualism, that the mind is not the brain, but that these are distinct entities with the mind not being physical.

* See Also:
- rsr.org/brain-dead-patients-who-have-recovered
- rsr.org/savants (part 1 of this 2-part series)
- rsr.org/mri (RSR friend invented the MRI)
- rsr.org/not-physical#mind

Today’s Resource: Whatever happened to the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil? The answer is fascinating and can be found in this fun and amazingly educational 3-part video. Available on DVD (and audio download or MP3 CD).

In the Galapagos Islands this week, the collapse of the gnarly looking "Darwin's Arch" became a metaphor for the collapse of the guy's theory. After all, as documented at rsr.org/list, Charles Darwin's finches can adapt in 17 years, not needing the 2.3 million presumed by evolutionists. A single finch species introduced to a U.S. Bird Reservation in the Pacific in only 17 years had diversified their beaks, related muscles, and behavior to fill various ecological niches, just like Darwin's finches. And see RSR's List of Collapsing Natural Bridges! The guys also give an update on Bob's Tuesday night presentation on the scientific predictions that flow from the fountains-of-the-great-deep flood model. They also condemn Twitter for hiding the video of the Palestinian leader calling for Israeli Arabs to behead Jews. And the guys talk about their preemptive strike against Colorado Democrats working to introduce a vaccine passport. But first, prompted by a call from a reporter with the AFA News Network, the guys air audio of a Colorado news report about the sacred burial on government land of a dead baby eagle pointing out the hypocrisy that the state permits the killing of unborn children. So Bob and Fred air a BEL audio clip from nearly 30 years ago that prompted the state's Division of Wildlife to call the station regarding complaints that Bob had fried and eaten eagle eggs on the air!

Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams crack up about Steak-Umm going after Fake News astrophysicist Neil Smokin' de-Grasse Tyson. And the guys share that eleven days after their Steph Curry savant broadcast, in the Warrior's pregame show against the league's #1 team the Utah Jazz, whom Golden State beat, the host said, "Well, we know that Steph Curry is an offensive savant!" :) Then the show turns dark as the guys air audio of the Palestinian leader, who thankfully was just killed by the IDF as part of their retaliation for thousands of rockets being launced at Israel, who called upon Israeli Arabs to buy and sharpen knives to behead Jews. Then the guys discuss their main rsr.org/predictions#hpt when they ask Walt Brown fans to email to Bob any favorite confirmed science predictions of the Hydroplate Theory.

Bob Enyart interviews the author of Authentic: The Case for Mark 16:9-20. In all of church history, the very first surviving quote from Mark's last chapter, written in the 100s by an influential bishop in France, quotes verse 19. Thus begins the long and powerful defense for the full chapter being written by Mark.

Of the 1,650 Greek manuscripts that include Mark, only three end at verse 8. These, along with 40 church fathers who wrote while Rome still had an emperor on the throne, along with thousands of additional manuscripts in other languages, correct the false claim of the "higher critics" of the 1800s and even many of today's populist theologians such as James White, John MacArthur, and Matt Slick, that the ending of Mark's Gospel should be rejected. If these critics were right, Mark would have penned the worst ending in the history of endings, without record of Jesus appearing to the apostles, nor to the women who went to His tomb. Instead, it would end like this, "So [the women] went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid." Instead of that absurdity, here is the testimony of Bishop Irenaeus circa 180 A.D. who wrote of the beginning and ending of the Gospel, "Wherefore also Mark, the interpreter and follower of Peter, does thus commence his Gospel narrative: 'The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; as it is written in the prophets' [then] towards the conclusion of his Gospel, Mark says,  'So then, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sits on the right hand of God.'"

* God, Science, and Savants like the NBA's Steph Curry: He's a savant. Of course we're not using the standard deficient dictionary definition of savant but an expanded and more accurate one as at rsr.org/definitions. UPDATE: Eleven days after this broadcast in the Warrior's pregame show against the league's #1 team the Utah Jazz, whom Golden State beat, the host said, "Well, we know that Steph Curry is an offensive savant." Update to the Update: Okay, okay, back in 2019 a Canadian sportswriter called Steph an "offensive savant". Still, we like spreading the word! :)

On today's program, Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams discuss various famed savants and then expand the discussion to include people like Annie Oakley, Roger Federer, and the NBA's greatest shooter of all time, and a believer, Stephen Curry. If interested, see also our conclusion at rsr.org/savants-2.

 * PART II -- Real Science Radio on the Big Bang with Lawrence Krauss: (Hear also Krauss part I but for our written evidence against the big bang, keep reading here.) Creationist co-hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams present Bob's wide-ranging discussion with theoretical physicist (emphasis on the theoretical) Lawrence Krauss. These RSR programs air on America's most powerful Christian radio station, Denver's 50,000-watt AM 670 KLTT. Over time this web page will grow as we add the work of countless secular scientists who document widely accepted observational data, which facts taken individually and together challenge the atheistic big bang origins claim made by Krauss.

* Krauss: "All evidence overwhelmingly supports the big bang": Mentioning some of the obvious studies and massive quantities of data (see list below) that at least apparently seems to strongly contradict fundamental big bang predictions, Bob offered Krauss a chance to dial back his written claim that "all evidence now overwhelmingly supports" the big bang (p. 6 in his book, and 3:45 into today's program, beginning with Krauss' question, "You're not a young earther, are you?"). Instead, Krauss dug in deeper. There is nothing objective about Lawrence Krauss. He comes across more like the high priest of a cult than a scientist willing to acknowledge and follow the data. Each of the major observations below require secondary assumptions and rescue devices, some of which have not even been invented yet, to keep these enormous quantities of scientific data from apparently falsifying the big bang and its standard claims for the age of the universe and for star and planetary formation (this list will grow including with additional references over the next months):

RSR's List of Evidence Against the Big Bang: For the latest version of this list which includes links to dozens of peer-reviewed journal papers where even proponents themselves admit their major discoveries go against the predictions of their own big bang theory, see rsr.org/evidence-against-the-big-bang. Here's a summary:

* Mature galaxies exist far, far away where the big bang predicts that only infant galaxies should exist.
* Hundreds of galaxies are clustered out at tremendous distances where the big bang predicts that such clusters should not exist.
* Spiral galaxies look “too perfect” because they are missing millions of years of their predicted collisions.
* The surface brightness of the furthest galaxies is identical to that of the nearest galaxies, contradicting a central prediction of the big bang.
* Nine billion years of synthesized heavy elements are missing from a trillion stars. That’s a lot. This study failed to confirm the fundamental expectation of the big bang’s theory of nuclear synthesis.
* Not even one of the millions of stars ever analyzed is a supposed “first generation” star (aka Population III), contrary to big bang expectations.
* The discovery of exoplanets, including hot Jupiters and one with a retrograde orbit, has completely falsified the big bang’s nebular hypothesis of solar system formation, as openly admitted by Mike Brown, the exoplanet database manager for NASA.
* It is not a scientific statement but merely a philosophical one to claim that the universe has no center, and thus, the big bang’s central Copernican principle is not based on science but on philosophical bias, as widely acknowledged including by Stephen Hawking and Richard Feynman.
* The most advanced three-dimensional map of more than a million galaxies seems to imply that the universe has a center.
* Our sun is missing nearly 100% of the angular momentum (i.e., spin) that the big bang theories of stellar evolution and solar system formation predict that it should have.
* There is an entire universe worth of missing antimatter if the big bang theory were true.
* The big bang’s theory of chemical evolution is in crisis as inherently admitted with the National Academy of Sciences report titled, 11 Science Questions for the New Century which asks “How were the heavy elements from iron to uranium made?” with the journal Nature recently publishing a paper also admitting that even supernovae cannot produce our earth’s heavy elements.

Today's Resource: For today's program we recommend
RSR's Evidence Against the Big Bang video.

From the BEL archives Real Science Radio has a Far Ranging Conversation with Krauss: Co-hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams present Bob's interview of theoretical physicist (emphasis on the theoretical), atheist Lawrence Krauss. Fred says, "It's David vs. Goliath, but without the slingshot." As the discussion ranges from astronomy and anatomy to cosmology and physics, most folks would presume that Dr. Krauss would take apart Enyart's arguments, especially when the Bible believer got the wrong value for the electron-to-proton mass ratio. But the conversation reveals fascinating dynamics from the creation/evolution debate. (The planned 25-minute interview ran 40 minutes, so there's also a Krauss Part II and once in each half we say, "Stop the tape, stop the tape," to comment.)

* "All Evidence Overwhelmingly Supports the Big Bang": Contradicting Dr. Krauss' over-the-top sales pitch, see RSR's List of Evidence Against the Big Bang, cataloging major observations made by NASA and leading institutions which, as the discoverers typically admit, contradict what was predicted based on the most fundamental expectations of the Big Bang.

Correction: "I was wrong on today's broadcast to describe Dr. James Tour as a young earther. After this interview, he replied to an email...

Dear Mr. Enyart,
To clarify, I am a creationist. ... As far as the time it took for creation, the age of the earth and the age of the universe, I have no idea. That often renders me an outcast from scientific communities... God bless, -Jim Tour

See below for more on this and other particulars about today's program.

Bob concludes his interview (see Part 1) with the author of the Wall Street Journal's A Compromise on Creationism: Mainstream scientists shouldn’t completely shun organizations friendly to the belief. First though Bob lays out the case against Washington University's Dr. Swamidass about him denying what he wrote in the WSJ only one month ago, and regarding Joshua's claims about thorns and eunuchs. (To directly rejoin the interview, just skip to 20 minutes in.)

Last month the Wall Street Journal published the article, A Compromise on Creationism, Mainstream scientists shouldn’t completely shun organizations friendly to the belief. Bob was frustrated interviewing the author, Dr. Joshua Swamidass, associate professor of laboratory and genomic medicine and biomedical engineering at St. Louis' Washington University. It seemed that Dr. Swamidass talking on the radio to a creationist repeatedly denied the overt recommendations he had made in print just a month ago. We lay out these particulars below including for example Joshua's argument that in Mark 10:6 when Jesus quoted Genesis chapter 1, that at "the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female'", Swamidass claims that the Lord was not reminding us of when God created mankind and when He instituted marriage (i.e., from the beginning of the creation itself), but rather, that Jesus was somehow rebutting something like transgenderism or homosexual marriage. Again, please see below and see the conclusion of the interview at rsr.org/swamidass-2.