Ida sinks, Darwinists unapologetic

Remember all the noise generated by the Darwinianist propaganda engine back in the spring when the press unskeptically parroted the claims about Ida, supposedly The Fossil Which Proved Evolution?

Scientists Hail Stunning Fossil

and

Missing link fossil on display

Well now the backpedalling has started and it turns out that the Fossil Which Proved Evolution turned out - quelle surprise (we Canadians have by law to be able to write in French) - to be just another dead monkey after all.

''The suggestion that Ida [was]... specifically related to the higher primates, namely monkeys apes and humans, was actually a minority view from the start. So it came as a surprise to many of us who are studying primate palaeontology," said Dr Seiffert, from Stony Brook University in New York, US.

Yes, right, it was a minority view right from the start. Which is why we heard so many of supposedly common doubts back when Ida was being hailed as the most important fossil of all time. Piltdown Man, anyone?
As Casey Luskin, the principle bone expert at the Discovery Institute in Seattle observes:

It only took a few months for Ida to go from celebrity-status “missing link” to just another extinct lower primate. As Nature is now reporting...

"Ida is as far away from the human lineage as you can get and still be considered a primate," says Christopher Beard, a palaeoanthropologist at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Incredibly, professional Darwinists are even trying to frantically retrofit Ida's demotion into their worldview as yet another triumph for materialistic atheism:

Isn't Science wonderful? Unlike some other ways of knowing, science can self-correct.

Oh yes such humble and gracious apologies. Self correcting after getting it massively wrong. After making it legitimate for people to keep dangerous chimps as pets, how much more damage will this Darwinian delusion do before the elite come to their senses?

Find out why there's an Origins controversy!

Darwinism sinks lower in public mind

Despite the ongoing indoctrination and hero worship being foisted on the British people at the moment about that old racist and noted kitten-drowner Charles Darwin, people are still waking up to the glaring flaws in his outmoded theory and demanding a more even approach in the science classroom.

Some 54 per cent of Britons want biology teachers to discuss 'alternative perspectives' on human origins alongside traditional explanations of evolution.

They also want children to be told about intelligent design, the idea that aspects of the universe are too complex to be explained by science and natural selection.

And these doubts about Saint Charles' infallibility are spreading wider, even getting as far as the pages of World Net Daily where influential cultural commentator sums up his problem with the whole stinky edifice:

I don't believe the Earth is billions of years old. I don't believe animals have transitioned from one species to another. And I certainly don't believe that nothing created everything.

I once believed it. I don't anymore.

Why? Because I looked at the so-called "evidence." And found none.

Learn why there's an intelligent design controversy!

Popular media "getting" the problem with atheist neuroscience?

Popular media is finally waking up to the death of materialist neuroscience as 'Time' examines the placebo effect:

Exactly why the placebo and nocebo responses arise is a puzzle

The helplessness of materialists to explain the placebo effect shows that the other option - that the mind is the product of the nonmaterial soul being beamed into the person by God - is a more elegant solution.
There have been excellent books written about this by leading scholars of the subject, and are available on audio CD.

Bottom-feeding flatfish consume tax dollars

Flatfish have always been a problem for darwinists because nobody's ever seen a symmetrical fish squash itself flat. Instead they come up with just-so stories of a symmetrical fish squashing itself flat in small incremental steps over millions of years, but nobody's ever seen that either.

Charles Darwin grappled unsuccessfully with the problem. Darwin was troubled by how fish such as flounder and sole had made the seemingly improbable evolutionary leap from being symmetrical to having two eyes on the same side of their face.

According to the Times of London someone thinks he's found the "missing link" of flatfish evolution so Saint Darwin was right. Tax money well spent; looking for squashed old fish instead of finding a cure for cancer.
When will scientists accept that in reality these are not "transitional fossils" at all? They don't have one leg or half a wing like a proper transition should but instead are fully formed and perfectly complete fish. Neither regular upright fish nor flatfish but perfectly complete and designed leaning-over-in-between fish.

Meyer and Wells educate Oklahoma

Discovery Institute's Stephen Meyer and Jonathan Wells took the fight to the enemy recently, giving an extended lecture on intelligent design at Oklahoma University. The darwinbots came along and shouted a bit were unable to counter any of the good gents' arguments. Darwinoids often talk about how allegedly "common" genes supposedly prove that puddles turned into people, but Professor Wells points out something they don't want to hear:

Furthermore, the similarity of HOX genes in so many animal phyla is actually a problem for neo-Darwinism: If evolutionary changes in body plans are due to changes in genes, and flies have HOX genes similar to those in a horse, why is a fly not a horse?

The darwinianists still haven't given an answer to this question which is surely like a festering wound eating away at materialistic biology's Creation Myth. The best they've managed is over at the highly offensive Pandas Thumb darwin echo-chamber where someone dismisses it out of hand as the "Egregiously stupid remark of the week" without explanation. Once again we see darwinists sink to ad hominen when they run out of logic.

ID research wins Nobel Prize

A trio of diligent Americans have won a Nobel Prize for discovering how the ends of chromosomes don't fall off when they are copied. As is explained at Uncommon Descent, this is exactly the sort of thing which ID researchers would have predicted if only they'd known about it. Certainly the discovery was only possible through the application of much intelligence and carefully designed experiment.

Every day brings the end of the Darwinianist hegemony a step closer.

Learn why there's an Intelligent Design controversy.

Athiest propaganda movie leaves critics cold

I'd not heard of Ricky Gervais before, but apparently he's big in England and he's made a movie which portrays God as a fictional "Man in the Sky" looking down at all of us who's been invented and promoted by a liar for reasons of personal gain. Worse than that is the trailers don't reveal this and pretend the movie's a romantic comedy, so the public might come along for a good time, buy a ticket and then be unwittingly exposed to atheist propaganda. But it looks like it'll fizzle at the box office anyway as critics S.T. Karnick and Kyle Smith get the word out about its true message.

Coffee! Darwin's payroll clerks mired in porn

Now we learn why the Darwin-worshippers have been getting so many of the taxpayers' dollars: the NSF were too busy looking at pornography to think clearly about allocating funds to new and promising branches of science like ID, finding a cure for atheists and the construction of more effective Prayer Amplifiers.

Time for a root and branch reform of science funding.

'Ardi' demolishes story of human evolution

Christian Today reports that the acclaimed "Ardi" fossil being held up by evolutionists of proof we gone came from monkeys does nothing of the sort. The report quot anthropologist C O Lovejoy of Kent State University as saying

The most popular reconstructions of human evolution during the past century rested on the presumption that [the] earliest hominids were related to … these living great apes (Chimpanzees, bonobos, and gorillas) … Ardipithecus ramidus nullifies these presumptions

Perhaps realising how weak their fossil evidence is, evolutionary psychologists are scrabbling to plug the leaking dam by wheeling out the "lusty ladies" theory of human evolution. Apparently evolution means that some women are supposed to act like hussies, which I think tells us all we need to know about those researchers.

Hyenas bury materialist neuroscience deeper

The Darwinianist orthodoxy's insistence that we're so close to chimps fails again as researchers discover that hyenas are smarter than chimps at solving rope-related problems which any human infant would solve in an instant. If humans were really just 99% the same as chimps the apes should have cinched this, and moved on to typing Shakespeare after retrieving the food prize. Just as an excellent recent book compellingly argues this shows that thought cannot be the result of simple dumb molecules bumping around. Don't expect to see this news on too many front pages, though.