Real Science Radio

RSR'S Timesaving Google Creation ToolMultiple Creation Site Search!

Welcome to Real Science Radio: Co-hosts Fred Williams and Doug McBurney talk about science to debunk evolution and to show the evidence for the creator God including from biology, genetics, geology, history, paleontology, archaeology, astronomy, philosophy, cosmology, math, and physics. (For example, mutations will give you bad legs long before you'd get good wings.) We get to debate Darwinists and atheists like Lawrence Krauss, AronRa, and Eugenie Scott. We easily take potshots from popular evolutionists like PZ Myers, Phil Plait, and Jerry Coyne. The RSR Archive contains our popular List Shows! And we interview the outstanding scientists who dare to challenge today's accepted creed that nothing created everything.

RSR airs every Friday at 3pm MST on AM 670 KLTT in Denver, Colorado. For rebroadcast times and podcast platforms, see our Affiliates page.

Watch RSR on YouTube

 

Stephen Meyer Rebutting Critics on RSR

Post-Show Note: The CRSQ creation science journal has published Bob Enyart's review of Darwin's Doubt

* Paperback of New York Times Bestseller Released: RSR continues the discussion with old-earth anti-evolutionist Dr. Stephen Meyer of the Discovery Institute on the his instant bestseller, Darwin's Doubt. [Hear the first interview.] Amazon.com has about 500 reviews of this significant Intelligent Design (ID) movement book. Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart talks with Dr. Meyer about the more prominent critiques which are answered in a new chapter that now appears in the paperback release of Darwin's Doubt.

Location of the James White vs. Bob Enyart Open Theism Debate* Tuesday Night Open Theism Debate Enyart vs. White: Well-known theologian James White will debate Bob Enyart, the pastor of Denver Bible Church on Open Theism: Is the future settled or open? On Tuesday evening, July 8 at 6:30 p.m., the debate will be held downtown Denver at Colorado's historic Brown Palace hotel. If you're in the state, or can be, you are cordially invited to come on out and we'll have a great time in the Lord! Admission is free and seats for 100 attendees are available on a first-come, first-served basis. Quoting OpenTheism.org, "Open Theism is the Christian doctrine that the future is not settled but open because God is alive, eternally free, and inexhaustibly creative." That is, God can forever think new thoughts, design new works, write new songs. He has not exhausted His creativity and never will for. Of His kingdom there will be no end and thus by God's everlasting freedom and abilities, the future cannot be settled but must be open. In the meantime, check out Bob's previous efforts by clicking on the "Debate" tab at OpenTheism.org.

Darwin's Doubt by Dr. Stephen Meyer interviews on Real Science Radio* Bob's 2011 Comment Prefiguring Meyer: Part II of Stephen Meyer's 2013 book is about "The Cambrian Information Explosion", genes, epigenetics, etc. In a comment to an evolutionist on TheologyOnline.com in 2011, Bob wrote Alate_One, "And as for [Charles Doolittle] Walcott and the Cambrian Explosion, adding to his being stunned by the complexity of life so low in the geologic column, I imagine you've thought through the stunning discoveries in molecular biology that supercharges the 'explosive' part of all that variety?"

* Stephen Meyers is Not a Creationist: Sadly, Dr. Meyer, along with virtually all the Christians in the ID community, rejects the young earth as well as the need to take the scriptural account of the global flood as literal. As a further result, typically, old-earth Christians also reject the literality of many divine interventions taught in the Bible, including about the Tower of Babel, the creation of the Earth before the stars, etc. So, sadly, it is incorrect to refer to them as creationists. Still, we love those guys and pray for them!

* A Shared Antagonist Eugenie Scott: Dr. Meyer seemed interested in the claims made by anti-creationist anthropologist Dr. Eugenie Scott when debating Bob Enyart on national TV. Hear these select soundbites from Eugenie Scott, an adversary of both Meyer's ID community and Enyart's creationist allies. In 1998, answering Enyart's repeated request for her best evidence for evolution, Eugenie said that the non-coding regions of DNA were affirmatively known to be useless, that further research would not show otherwise, and so that Junk DNA was great evidence against the existence of a Creator. (Of course, as offered for decades by virtually the entire evolution community, that is not an argument based on the laws of science, but a metaphysical argument, based on what a Creator may or may not be inclined to do; and the irony of it all, is that the this neo-Darwinian assumption retarded the advancement of science, for many years, as an evolutionary bias set in against recognizing function in the regions of DNA that did not code for protein.

RSR's List of Shocked Evolutionists

* Jaw-dropping, head-banging, socks blown off, eye-popping, baffled, shocked & stunned: Really. :) Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams have fun providing so many examples of evolutionists (chemical, stellar, biological) being jaw-dropping surprised, shocked, even stunned and horrified, when their huge discoveries contradict some of the most fundamental predictions of their materialist theories.

* Head-banging: As reported by LiveScience, cutting-edge researchers running a major National Science Foundation evolution experiment admitted that, "If Darwin was right", they would have documented the evidence for his claimed insight on competition and the (supposed) tree of life. Instead, their results falsified Darwin's claim. Of the 60 species of algae being studied for a five year period, Charles Darwin predicted how well and how poorly such organisms would compete for resources, based on their respective distances from each other on the (supposed) tree of life. But of the outcome, "It was completely unexpected. We sat there banging our heads against the wall. Darwin's hypothesis has been with us for so long, how can it not be right? ... We should be able to look at the [supposed] Tree of Life, and evolution should make it clear who will win in competition and who will lose. But the traits that regulate competition can't be predicted from the Tree of Life." For more, see LiveScience and rsr.org/darwin-was-wrong-about-the-tree-of-life.

* 2015 Update: One of many discoveries that could added to this list of shocked evolutionists is the black hole at 12.8 billion light years away the mass of 12 billion Suns that "simply can't exist" by the big bang theory, but does.

* Stunned without the Foggiest Notion: So "astounding" are the "similarities" of Hox developmental regulatory genes across the animal kingdom that prominent evolutionist Sean Carroll wrote that, “no biologist had even the foggiest notion that such similarities could exist between genes of such different animals.” Because little in biology makes sense in the light of evolution, a world full of neo-Darwinist scientists never predicted this astounding consistency because, by their belief system, "The evolutionary lines that led to flies and mice diverged more than 500 million years ago..." So, this world famous biologist admits that, "Such sequence similarity was just stunning." Of course this falsified one of the most fundamental predictions of neo-Darwinism. [This item is a post-show update.]

* Horrendous: Dr. David Page of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass., said in the journal Nature that the human and chimp Y chromosomes are "horrendously different from each other." Horrendously? Is that a scientific term? Why not just, "different?" Is Saturn horrendously different from Mars? Why horrendously so? Because for modern Darwinism to not lose face, chimps have to be shown to be our closest relatives. Yet 15% of the gorilla genome is closer to us, and the chimp's Y chromosome (that which makes us males... well, males...) is so massively different that we have yet more evidence on its face that the human genome is not 98.5% identical to the chim. For more, see rsr.rog/list-of-genomes-that-just-dont-fit.

* Jaw-dropping: National Geographic quotes NASA's Messenger team member David Blewett saying, as RSR documents evolutionary scientists saying all the time regarding major observations that contradict predictions based on their most fundamental claims, "this jaw-dropping thing that nobody ever predicted," that Mercury has actively forming surface features, something judged impossible for a tiny, four-billion year old inert rock. :)

* Socks Blown Off: Close-up photos showed the youthful appearance of Pluto as did the images of its largest moon: "We originally thought Charon would be an ancient terrain covered in craters," said New Horizons team member Cathy Olkin. "So when we saw the pictures this morning, it just blew our socks off." And panning upward from their feet, Discover Magazine reports on NASA's Pluto team including principal investigator Alan Stern's eyes popping out of his head. 


* Baffled by Asteroids that Look Like Comets
: See phys.org, NASA, EarthSky, and AmazingSpace

* And the Beat Goes On: For more really fun examples, just listen to today's program! And as an honorable mention, consider the response of the scientists who found the presence of modern bacteria, etc. in these allegedly 220 Mya microbes! :)

Bob asks you: If you love RSR, could you purchase this to help us stay on the air?Today's Resource: Please check out our newest science resource...

The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory
Blu-ray, 2-DVD Set or HD Download

Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart presents the scientific evidence for Dr. Walt Brown’s model of the global flood, along with the relevant biblical material. Enyart also discusses Brown's opponents and contrasts both the vapor canopy and catastrophic plate tectonics with the hydroplate theory.

DVD Vol. 1
1. Walt Brown, Creation Leaders, and Scripture
2. Hydroplate Theory & Scientific Evidence

DVD Vol. 2
3. Hydroplates vs. Plate Tectonics
Bonus: Origin of Earth's Radioactivity

The Blu-ray disc contains all parts on one disc. And for now, save $10 with our special introductory pricing!

What Do Thorns Have To Do With It?

* A Special Episode of Real Science Radio: Bob Enyart gives a run down of how far many Christian organizations, from Christianity Today (see magazine cover, right), to most of the major Christian colleges, have run from the many biblical teachings on the history of the Earth. For example, they tend to reject the six literal days of creation; the order of the days; no death before Adam; no thorns before the Fall; the global flood; the Tower of Babel; painless childbirth before the Fall; that God made man from the dust of the ground; and even the the fall of Jericho, Joshua's battles, Abraham's ancestry through Noah to Adam, the book of Jonah, and many other historical events recorded in the Bible. See more at rsr.org/christianity-today, rsr.org/day-age, and rsr.org/evidence#bible.

* Post-show SCOTUS Update: With a direct connection to Bob Enyart Live, the U.S. Supreme Court today struck down the Massachusettes "bubble law" which criminalized pro-lifers who attempted to leaflet or speak to people on the public sidewalk in front of an abortion mill. What is the connection to BEL? One of our occasional guest hosts, Jo Scott, was falsely convicted for a violation of Colorado's bubble law, and in her current appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, filed by KGOV friend and attorney Rebecca Messall, the brief directs the justices to go online to see the "evidence video" used in court against Jo at kgov.com/jo-scott-evidence-video.

RSR: When Did Adam and Eve Sin?

* The Timing of the Fall in the Garden of Eden: Today is Friday the 13th. 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 all of Adam and Lucifer.

* The Timing of Lucifer's Fall: The Fall encompasses the downfall of Adam, Eve, and Lucifer! Scripturally, Dr. Sarfati is on solid ground concluding that Satan fell in that short time period between creation and Adam's sin. So we add the following observations:

  4. No sinless human offspring were born to Adam and Eve

We reliably infer from both secular and sacred history that Adam and Eve had no sinless offspring. For if they had, there would have been war not only in heaven, and between the fallen and unfallen angels, and between man and God, but there also would have been war between fallen and unfallen mankind. Neither secular history, nor, decisively, the Scriptures, indicate that there has been a war between fallen and unfallen mankind. Thus, Eve did not conceive a child prior to Adam's sin and the Fall.

  5. At his Fall, Lucifer was "in Eden, the garden of God" Ezekiel 28:13
  Unusual cloud formation photographed by Bob Enyart 6-5-216. ‘I will ascend into heaven… I will ascend above the clouds…" Isaiah 14:13-14
  7. So Lucifer has "fallen from [the kingdom of] heaven" Isa. 14:12

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 (also called the firmament, terra firma, the raqia), 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" (Ezek. 28:15).

  8. God didn't curse Lucifer until the Fall in the Garden, "Because you have done this, you are cursed" Gen. 3:14

Prior to his temptation of Eve, God had not cursed Lucifer to be lower than the animals nor had he been identified as the enemy of God the Son who, because of sin, now would come as the Seed of the woman (i.e., the Christ).

  9. "Because you have done this [tempted Eve, there is] enmity between you and... her Seed [the Christ]; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel." Gen. 3:15

And prior to Eve's fall, he was not at enmity with Eve nor with her future descendants, which would now include the coming Messiah, the Savior of all those who trust in Him, Jesus Christ. 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

Mathematics & God
Why Many Vital Equations Are Beautiful

Clickable Table of Contents:
- See Einstein's lab where he discovered special relativity
- Einstein, et al., making discoveries with mind (not with the senses)
- Comprehending Einstein's incomprehensible gulf between matter and ideas
- The multiverse is a measurement tool like a yardstick used to measure... 
- Astounding and unexpectedly beautiful equations like E = mc2
- The square root of negative one reveals the Creator's intellect
- For discerning morality mathematics is useless
- Did Richard Feynman see God?
- Mathematicians, evolutionists, and the Wistar report
- Is math science? About those who say no...

Equation tatoos: E=mc2 and F=ma* How Einstein and Others Can Use their Minds to Make Discoveries: Materialists will claim that you can only learn what your five sense tell you, but then, which of their five senses told them that? 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 empirical 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 in one of the greatest applications of math to physics, and so, 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.
- Maxwell also discovered, not by experiment but with his mind, that a moving electric field will create a magnetic field, and in 1862 again only with his mind and mathematics, discovered that light and electromagnetism are the same phenomenon with a calculation of the self-propagating speed of an EM radiation wave showing it to approximate the speed of light, for it is light, not empirically observed for another 20 years.
Mathematician and astronomer Joseph-Louis Lagrange discovered gravitationally stable Lagrange Points. He was born in Turin, Italy in 1736 and discovered two of these points with his mind, a few years after Leonhard Euler first discovered three, with his mind! Today we position exploratory satellites at these points where also two major but temporary (transient) dust clouds are held in place.
- Time'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 magazine 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 relativity: His living room.* Einstein's Lab Where He Discovered Special RelativityMany materialists claim that you can only know that which your five senses tell you. This is one of the ten atheist cliches which RSR refutes in eight seconds or less. But no atheist could ever learn from any of his five senses that he can only know what his five senses tell him. Likewise, 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 math and absolute morality, and even with the existence of truth itself. (See a list of non-physical things at rsr.org/physical.) 

* 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.)

However, introduce a Designer, and Wigner's observation flips into the reasonable effectiveness of mathematics! So 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. Brilliant though pagan Indian mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan once said, "An equation for me has no meaning unless it expresses a thought of God." (Ramanujan's celebrated biographer Robert Kanigel wrote, "openness to supernatural influences... left him receptive to what those equipped with more purely logical gifts could not see." And of course logic enables men to perceive more than Kanigel assumes there.) Einstein however denied the existence of God so he was left to his confusion, whereas Kepler understood and 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. So the one-word proof that the big bang theory has failed in its purpose to provide an explanation for the existence of the universe: multiverse! Finally, if you Google: fine tuning, RSR's page is on Google's second page of results, but if you Google: fine tuning of the universe, fine tuning of the solar system, or, fine tuning of the earth, Google ranks rsr.org/fine-tuning on its first page!

Dirac's beautiful equation


* 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."

The mathematical symbol for the square root of negative one with a halo over it. :)
i
Symmetry E = mc2
Electrons (i∂ - m)ψ = 0
Entropy S = k log W
Propagation I = P/(4π r2)
Fields ∇∙B = 0
Uncertainty ∇ P ∇x ≥ ħ/2
Thermodynamics dS ≥ 0
Radiation E = hf
Waves ψ(x, y, z, t) a + ib a
Force F =ma

 
 
 

 
  
 


 

 


And then there's even complex numbers, and the square root of negative one, which itself is a beautiful conundrum, which govern electric circuits and other areas of quantum mechanics!

What forces obey the inverse square law? Light, gravity, electric fields, sound, radiation. And why say, "Obey"?

And what do we make of the beauty of Dirac's equation, (∂ + m) ψ = 0, describing how fast-moving electrons behave? He himself wrote in Scientific American in 1963, "It seems to be one of the fundamental features of nature that fundamental physical laws are described in terms of a mathematical theory of great beauty", and further, on a blackboard in Moscow, "A physical law must possess mathematical beauty." Consider that scientists enjoy the inverse square law  I = P/(4π r2), the beauty of Maxwell's field equations, and of Ludwig 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. Another Ludwig, von Mises, similarly wrote 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 could not empirically sense but he did intellectually realize 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.

 

The mathematical symbol for the square root of negative one with a halo over it. :)* The Square Root of Negative One Reveals the Creator: Using an imaginary number, we achieve improved understanding of the physics of quantum mechanics (as mentioned just above) and of electric circuits (a bit further above). How could that be? The square root of a negative number has no material analog and is only a concept. Therefore only an intellect, heavenly or not, can use imaginary numbers. For arguments sake, we can concede that something like the inverse square law could conceivably arise in a posited big bang materialist "reality". But such a big bang universe would be unable to use the square roots of negative numbers because they are not "real", except that as concepts, they are as real as any other concept. And intellects use "concepts" as design parameters all the time. Cartographers, for example, use imaginary numbers within complex formulas to create sophisticated map projections. When God designed the universe, being the Great Mathematician, He not only used arithmetic but complex, higher mathematical disciplines that He himself had created. God used the imaginary unit, that is, the square root of negative one, in His design. So when human beings, sentient, brilliant, and made in God's image, likewise devised higher mathematical disciplines, they made discoveries including the  concept of the imaginary unit and, by their God-given inquisitiveness and creativity, probed the world of physics through the lens of imaginary numbers and found a startling correspondence, such that the use of the square root of negative one gives real insight into the deep physical reality. Because a strictly materialist big bang reality could not utilize a concept such as an imaginary number that has not physical analog, the usefulness of the square root of negative one reveals the Mind of the Creator to us as we explore His cosmos. In a section over at rsr.org/atheism titled Materialists vs. Everything, of the many real things that are not material, we list some of the more substantive ones, including numbers, math, information, codes, the laws of logic, morality, souls, and spirits. And then we ask a question that is yet another potentially devastating issue for materialists: What is matter made of? What if it turns out that matter itself is non-physical? Like biological organisms that are information based more than they are carbon based, if it turns out that matter itself is, like physicist John Wheeler implied, is information based, then materialism is deader than a doorknob. Many struggle to understand Wigner's point in his Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics, and Einstein's point that, "the eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility" and that the gap between matter and ideas should be (as a materialist would see it), a "gulf–logically unbridgeable." Those who have the same difficulty as Wigner and Einstein might be able to cross their "gap" as they ponder the implications of the effectiveness in understanding physics by the use of the square root of negative one.

* 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

(Updated May 22, 2020)

* 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.

* South Atlantic Anomaly: The SAA hole in Earth's protective magnetic field is so severe that when passing through the Hubble takes no photographs and instruments on traversing satellites routinely experience minor malfunctions. Previously believed to be an extremely temporary phenomenon, in 2015 Nature Communications published archaeomagnetic evidence of "the antiquity of the South Atlantic Anomaly" going back a thousand years with a rapid decrease in field strength roughly around 450 AD, 750 AD, and 1300 A.D. The evidence points to "something unusual about the core-mantel boundary under Africa" yet that part of the Earth is allegedly over four billion years old. Especially knowing that 90% of Earth's radioactivity exists in the continental crust (and preferentially near granite), the inner Earth should have reached equilibrium billions of years ago. So if this anomaly exists at the core-mantel boundary, that's more evidence, along with dinosaur soft tissue and carbon-14 in diamonds, against vast ages.

Aurora Borealis, a listener's photo used by permission
Aurora Borealis from a listerner's porch!

* 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!

* Historical Measurements of Earth's Magnetic Field: NASA reports:
- 1840 - 1970: 5% weakening per century
- 1970 - 2018: ~7% weakening per century
- 2019: 5% weakening per decade according to a rumor from Drudge, zerohedge, Forbes, and Quora, claiming that NASA's SWARM satellite has measured this. Drudge Report headline, April 13, 2019: Earth's magnetic field weakeningAnd there's the concurrent record-breaking speed of the movement of the magnetic north pole now at 55 km per year and headed toward Siberia. (If you have a link to an authoritative report on this, please send it along to Bob@rsr.org. Thanks!)

* 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 (i.e., Science) 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!

* Hitler mentions evolution in Mein Kampf: In chapter 11, Race and People, Hitler wrote...

 "The stronger must dominate and not mate with the weaker, which would signify the sacrifice of its own higher nature. Only the born weakling can look upon this principle as cruel, and if he does so it is merely because he is of a feebler nature and narrower mind; for if such a law did not direct the process of evolution then the higher development of organic life would not be conceivable at all."

* For Our Atheist Listeners: For the many atheists who have long tried to associate the Third Reich with Christianity, among the thousand contrary proofs including that he replaced Christmas with the winter solstice, consider this article from Der Spiegel on How the Nazis Tried to Take Christ Out of Christmas. So while Hitler wasn't a Christian, he was a left-wing Darwinist who advocated cradle-to-grave socialism who did however at times use the "church", as per our author interview at kgov.com/bonhoeffer.

* 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.

Darwin and Hitler graphic* Most Prolific Creationist Writer in Studio: You may also enjoy listening to this earlier RSR interview with Dr. Jerry Bergman who had just written Slaughter 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 that image to get a copy.


Rob Yardley, Chuck Smith's Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa treasurer, J. Vernon McGee's board member, and friend of Henry Morris & Walt Brown * Where on our site do we mention RSR friend Rob Yardley? Here...
- As a board member for the McGee network, see immediately below
- See Rob listed at rsr.org/WB-HPT#supporters
- See Rob at How the Canopy Got Walt Brown Sideways with the Movement
- Hear Rob below in RSR's Global Flood and Hydroplate Theory video.