Thursday, October 22, 2015


by David Wilson

"The Atheist Religion". While the notion appears on the surface to be a self-contradiction,  the behavior of those self-identified as atheists makes it quite clear that atheists are practicing a form of religion regardless of how angry atheists get or the degree to which atheists do what they always do when faced with a fact they cannot reasonably debate: call their friends and pile on with mockery in an intellectually dishonest attempt to silence the truth.

The atheist religion contains no single deity, but rather, despite the a-theist in the name, is a self-centered theistic notion in which each individual is as much of a God as those of any other religions. They do not preach that, but that is what the atheist pronouncements clearly suggest, since it is the works of men and women like themselves which inform the atheist belief system, even when those works have been long-proven false.

In the atheist religion, science finds the answers for the users while - in a total contradiction - the atheist also uses unintended references to intelligent design such as "(this creature) has such and such because without it that creature would die", "X is a wonderfully designed adaptation"  and the like.  This contradiction in thought and semantics not only does not bother the atheist, but the atheist embraces such semantics in an apparent shortcut around logistical stumbling blocks so as to keep their fantasies alive. For example: a cat has whiskers which help it to judge physical areas immediately around it. The atheist says, "The cat has those whiskers so it can get through tight areas." It never occurs to the atheist that in so speaking, they are making a direct reference to an intelligent design line of thinking. However, when called out on that fact, the atheist is bound to become angry at such notions in the same way Christians would and sometimes do when someone insults Jesus Christ - once again strongly suggesting a self-centered theistic aspect to atheism.

The atheist religion is one in which human beings are at the top of conscious creation while showing equal respect to all nature, which makes the atheist religion most closely related to paganism than any other. One is likely to find many hedonistic and pleasure-related references in atheist discussions when discussing atheism itself, and once again that draws direct parallels to paganism.

The self-centered theist aspect of atheism also appears manifest when the atheist is greeted by some personal tragedy. Apparently unable to reconcile the fact that his own feelings are not paramount in the eyes of a higher power, the atheist rejects the higher power, claiming no higher power exists. However, often without realizing it, the atheist becomes a worshiper of himself, because since, to the atheist, humankind is the highest form of consciousness on earth, the atheist himself becomes by default the greatest on earth and potentially his own figure of worship, whether he is consciously aware of it or not.

Atheist prophets are called scientists but are regarded as more than that by the dictionary definition of the word "scientist" for the atheist. The scientist to the atheist is a prophet because the scientist/prophet's words are often taken by the atheist as proof of a concept without any empirical or historical evidence to back it up. Darwin is a primary atheist prophet: Darwin simply lifted his offering into the atheist orthodoxy from ancient Greek mythology which atheists called a theory (improper use of the word) and in short order then taught as fact. These prophets are regarded in high esteem and often referenced with the same admiration with which Christians hold the apostles, only for the atheist, the scientist/prophet does not give them assurance in another higher power, but rather assures the atheist that there is no higher power than the atheist himself, which appears to please the atheist.

At 15% in the US and UK, atheism is one of the smallest religions in the world. Their daily rituals, among others, appear to be in condemning other religions, mostly Christianity, with many repeated (read ritualistic) phrases which by inference supposedly place the atheist at a higher plane of intellectual existence than anyone believing in another religion, though there is no evidence to prove that the atheist is correct in his apparent conclusion.

Unlike Christianity which preaches peace, self-discipline and adherence to a highly moral philosophy, the atheist religion is essentially negative. An intense thread of childish hatred appears to runs through atheism's more outspoken proponents, who, appearing to be satisfied with themselves as the highest on earth  as their religion demands, spends much time and effort condemning other religions,

Atheists are also counter-intuitive in their view of statistical probability, and rather than temper their judgement of the unknown with open minds regarding a Creator, the atheist population places faith in unknown knowledge coming to light by the providence of scientist/prophets in whom the atheist imagines spiritual kinship and thus appears to further aggrandize himself by association.

As long as these facts of the atheist religion are made public, the atheist religion is certain to die off even in terms of its own small numbers of adherents in less than 100 years. With scientific understanding making it evermore credible that the miracles in the Bible are simply science misunderstood as "magic", only those who are determined to worship themselves alone will be the final practitioners.

As we hope this website is proving categorically in short order, the more science we learn, the more the answers of the mysteries of the world around us point to God, not to random chance and certainly not to other men. Science is making it clear: God is the answer.

If you like what you see and read on CreationDino, please help us continue our work as well as additional installments of the video Behold Now Behemoth by giving a "Christian Payment Offering" for the dollar amount of your choice with the dropdown menu on the Paypal button on the upper right hand side of the screen for what you read and watch on CreationDino. We could really use the help right about now.

Thursday, October 15, 2015


by David Wilson

A spectacularly appropriate image from Beckett's masterpiece. Used via the Fair Use Act.

In 1949, playwright Samuel Beckett wrote one of the great masterpieces of the theater, "Waiting for Godot" and in so doing, essentially both created and defined for all time the "theater of the absurd".

During Godot, the two main characters (interrupted by a few nearly inconsequential, random characters who come and go) ruminate on all there - and about Godot himself, who, while entirely unknown, is expected by the characters to explain all when he arrives. Naturally, Godot never shows up.

The main characters' conversations are all at once meaningless and yet as surreal as they are, profoundly illuminate the human condition as they wait for the unexplained Godot, who never arrives (and no, Beckett did not mean "God" in the name Godot as he himself explained that in his original French version, the character would have otherwise had some variation of the french word for God, which is Dieu.

We see this same theater of the absurd played out among vitriolic atheists and the secular scientific mainstream in general.

The atheistic and secular science culture discuss and write with alternating concentrated, furrowed brows and gleeful, sparkling eyes about absolute absurdities, such as the fantasy semantics covered in another post on this site: they say there is no guiding intelligence to the manifestations in nature, and yet apply terms like "needed", "must have", "design" and the like to supposedly secular phenomena while often deriding God Himself as an "Invisible Man in the Sky". Truly absurd theater which would make Beckett's nimble surreal wordsmithery seem like a second grade reader about maintaining an operational bicycle.

Like Beckett's characters, the logic of mainstream science goes around and around in ever tightening circles like a pathetic figure with obsessive/compulsive disorder who cannot get out the door because his uncontrollable circular rituals are endless. For example, the scientific community once said that turkeys were warm blooded. But then if they were once dinosaurs, they must have been cold blooded, but if dinosaurs which supposedly led to turkeys were endothermic (warm blooded) then they must have been warm blooded - but that is not what some of the dinosaur structures show. This theater of the absurd culminated in a grand finale for this viewer while watching a show several years ago on the Discovery Channel which, in an effort to explain the paradoxes of evolution regarding the turkey, actually - believe it or not - had scientists communicating to the viewers that turkeys must have been warm blooded, then became cold-blooded for awhile then reverted to being warm-blooded again, all this without a shred of empirical evidence that such transitions ever actually took place - it was all hypothesis stated as immutable fact. Oh! Beckett would be green with envy!  Beckett slaps his head in the afterlife and intones, "Oh, warm-blooded-to-cold-blooded-to-warm-blooded! Why didn't I think of that?!"

And last but not least, atheists, particularly, demand that any scientific exploration entirely discount God in the scientific process, because "science and religion don't mix". I have news for the atheists; God is not defined by religion and should be taken into account as a possibility in any scientific discussion because God would exist entirely outside of any religious practice. If not a single person on earth worshiped Him, He would still exist. Since God is not defined by religion, He stands alone from the term and thus should very definitely be included as part of the hypothesis where knowledge otherwise fails.

This is not to say that science should stop looking for answers simply because something can be explained as the works of God. I am all for scientific exploration into the infinitely vast, the infinitely small and the infinitely complex, and so should all faith-based Christians, because, invariably, as the pattern always shows, when such things are understood, they clarify the existence of a Creator they otherwise take on Faith. My own feeling is that such illuminations in the human mind please God, and he puts a gold star on every deserving report.

Atheists, in Beckett's world, are plainly Waiting For Godot to explain all while doing Beckett one better in the absurdity department by appearing to think they already know it all, anyway. Christians are not waiting for Godot. They don't need him. They know God and know God is already here.

With so much empirical evidence of a Creator in things such as a billion unexplained instincts in 1.5 million species of life on earth, it may be that atheists claim God to be an Invisible Man simply because they, the atheists, simply have their eyes closed.

And such a state of being is truly absurd.

If you like what you see and read on CreationDino, please help us continue our work as well as additional installments of the video Behold Now Behemoth by giving a "Christian Payment Offering" for the dollar amount of your choice with the dropdown menu on the Paypal button on the upper right hand side of the screen for what you read and watch on CreationDino. We could really use the help right about now.

Proverbs 11:25
"Be generous, and you will be prosperous. Help others, and you will be helped.

If you like what you see and read on CreationDino, please help us continue our work as well as additional installments of the video Behold Now Behemoth by giving a "Christian Payment Offering" for the dollar amount of your choice with the dropdown menu on the Paypal button on the upper right hand side of the screen for what you read and watch on CreationDino. We could really use the help right about now.

We're passing around the hat, now, everyone - we just began Behemoth Volume 2 and 3 to follow up on Behold Now Behemoth Volume 1 from 2007, which was the very first special-effects-heavy Christian educational video ever made.
Volume 2 and 3 will be spread all over the internet entirely for free. Therefore this is a true ministry in the purest use of the word and can only proceed with your prayers and financial support.
If you know our work, you know we mean it. One UK Facebook poster even called our style "cheeky". Well, we love that! We're tired of Christians mistaking timidity for grace. Even Jesus turned over the tables of the money changers. We're not fooling around. Behemoth volumes 2 and 3 will blow your mind in stereoscopic 3D HD and have you cheering. I guarantee it. When it comes to those who would defame God, we're taking no prisoners in the war of ideas. You'll love it.
Hebrews 13:16 “Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.”

Scenes from Behold Now Behemoth, Volume 1

Monday, October 12, 2015

What's Happening Is This....

More art for you to use to make the case on social media. Expect more and more. It's time to win this ridiculous war the atheists have launched against Christianity, and win it once and for all.
If you like what you see and read on CreationDino, please help us continue our work as well as additional installments of the video Behold Now Behemoth by giving a "Christian Payment Offering" for the dollar amount of your choice with the dropdown menu on the Paypal button on the upper right hand side of the screen for what you read and watch on CreationDino. We could really use the help right about now.

Saturday, October 10, 2015

Wilson's Scientific Law of Biblical 6-Day Creation

... And Why 6-Day Creation is Absolutely Scientifically Possible According To The Laws Of Known Science.

by David Wilson

All quotes and images used via the Fair Use Act. 

How could God have created all we know in 6 days if all we know of science demands billions of years? It's a now-old question.

The answer resides in quantum physics, and while I am not the first one to posit quantum physics as the answer, I cannot find another answer which is the same as what is being posted here, so for fun, I will call it Wilson's Scientific Law of Biblical 6-Day Creation because I have started having a pretty good time of late naming my own ideas after myself, and these points of debate appear to be shutting down the malicious atheists cold, and that's a good thing, so why not?

Most reference sites that mention quantum physics in relation to Creation either cite the fact that quantum process are often different in reality depending on how they are observed (one of those scientific mind-benders) or they launch into alarmingly over-complicated stream-of-consciousness such as this somewhat unnervingly random explanation by Ken Ham which is off in a seeming million directions (perhaps in trying to describe quantum physics, like a poet he was also trying to write his points in the form of quantum physics, so it was filled with endless subjective paradoxes for the reader which appears to slow time to a crawl..... who knows?)

This will be now be explained quickly and easily so anyone can understand it, because there is no point writing about something if it is only understood by a few. Read it and when the question arises, answer it, and together, change the world.

What science knows: All matter is comprised of energy, and all "objects" in the universe are simply areas of energy vibrating at different frequencies. the edge at which one area of energy is vibrating at one frequency from another is what distinguishes one object from another.  Science also knows that mass causes gravity, and the larger the object, the more gravity it produces, and gravity distorts time. 

This gets heady, but as you read here in the previous post,  any being capable of manipulating in a very nuanced fashion the frequencies of energy vibration literally has control over all creation, and could (or can) mold all energy into whatever form of matter that Being wished, presumably almost instantly. That is God-like power of Creation in the literal sense , scientifically qualified, a fact that the mainstream scientific community seems to have missed for decades(see also, this on CreationDino). There is no magic or superstition about it, and it is impossible to refute, so we must assume that to be a categorical fact.

Here we now get to Wilson's Scientific Law of Biblical 6-Day Creation and I am happy to tell you that Einstein would agree with at least part of it: it isn't over-complicated. It's nice and simple, but not too simple. In a nutshell, it goes like this:

Wilson's Scientific Law of Biblical 6-Day Creation: Energy = Matter, Matter causes Gravity, Gravity distorts Time. Therefore, any being capable of creating matter from energy in any form,  via energy frequency manipulation could, by doing so on a vast scale and/or nuanced manner, also manipulate time in exactly the same fashion, presumably almost effortlessly. This cannot be disputed. It is a scientific fact. And there is your 6-Day Creation, qualified scientifically regardless of how anyone decides to measure a 'day".

Nice and clean and simple. None of this, "it depends on how the phenomena is observed", or "were there clocks when God made the universe?" (which is not a scientific question, but really a philosophical one). You now have a totally scientific hypothesis which qualifies the possibility of 6-Day Creation in a way which does not require interpretation via objectivity, subjectivity, philosophy or assumptions of future discoveries as yet unknown by science.

One easily anticipates atheists engaging in non sequitur by asking, supposedly rhetorically, "Why would God choose 6 days?' and that is not a point of science. To question the motivations of God is a point of philosophy, although it is easy to postulate that intending to explain all this in simple terms to His creations, He merely did it all in what would otherwise be measured in 6 24-hours of earth rotation so to keep it simple. You have doubtless of explained things very simply to children in ways that while honest, did not no into detail that the children could not possibly understand, though they would when they grew up. I submit that we see the same general approach by God in the Bible. The communication style makes perfect sense with which anyone can relate.

The point here is not to qualify God's intentions. The point is to prove that a physical 6-Day Creation, measured even in the form of a 24-hour-rotation before the earth even existed (and indeed, quantum paradoxes could have the earth in existence and rotating in a 24-hour cycle before it even existed). The point of Wilson's Scientific Law of Biblical 6-Day Creation  is to prove that a physical 6-Day Creation is  entirely scientifically possible according to what we already understand about the nature of time and matter.

And for the time being, that's all that matters.

If you like what you see and read on CreationDino, please help us continue our work as well as additional installments of the video Behold Now Behemoth by giving a "Christian Payment Offering" for the dollar amount of your choice with the dropdown menu on the Paypal button on the upper right hand side of the screen for what you read and watch on CreationDino. We could really use the help right about now.

Tuesday, October 6, 2015

Scientific Concepts; Why A Literal Interpretation Of The Bible Makes Perfect Sense

By David Wilson

All quotes and images used via the Fair Use Act.

I am amazed at the lack of imagination of people who say the Bible accounts are "impossible". Any science fiction geek worth his rubber Spock ears will be able to rattle off intriguing scientifically possible terms such as "transmutation of matter", "genetic engineering", "severe gravity-caused time distortion" / "time warp", "hyperspace" and basically those alone would cover everything that happens in scripture as literal fact.

The rod that (transmutes) into a snake, The woman created (potentially from the genetic material and countless other options) from Adam's rib; Severe time distortion during the 6 "days" of creation (the incomprehensible gravitational forces during the creation of the universe would play incalculable massive havoc with time), the animals that arrived in pairs at the ark (easily explained via genetic engineering and countless other scientific possibilities), Time stopping for Joshua appears to deny the theory of relativity but being temporarily taken into an inter-dimensional state of being could easily explain that since most astrophysicists agree that time and space could easily be operating under entirely different physical laws in different dimensions); the great flood would be too, too easy, of course.

On an even deeper level, all matter is comprised of energy that vibrates at different frequencies. Any being capable of extremely nuanced modification of those frequencies could, presumably instantly,  mold any and all matter like putty in an infinite number of ways and on an infinite scale, a concept of control by God usually stupidly mocked by the mainstream science atheists as "impossible" even though the concept falls well within what is categorically scientifically accepted of the nature of physical matter.

Some of the greatest scientists the world has ever known have been creationists including Louis Pasteur; Werner Von Braun, the father of rocketry; Nobel Prize nominee  Physical Chemist Melvin Alonzo Cook;  Physicist Robert V. Gentry (world's foremost authority on radiohalos);  Award-winning physicist D. Russell Humphreys; Leonid Korochkin, Professor of Genetics at Yale University; Max Planck (quantum theory); Dr. Arthur E.Wilder-Smith (former evolutionist, 3 Doctorates and a NATO 3-star General) and a list that could fill ten pages of this website.

Most secular science types are the first to say, "Magic is only science misunderstood." It is bewildering that when it comes to the Bible they lose their grasp of this entirely sensible intellectual concept.  Remember what Einstein said: "Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited, imagination encircles the world." But just put the words God and Jesus into the mix and these otherwise forward-thinking intellectuals go dumb as a post and start measuring all there is according to "A Charlie Brown Christmas". Pathetic.

Absolutely everything described in the Old and New Testament could be explained with the same future science concepts which esteemed writers such as Dr. Isaac Asimov apply to mere future humankind, so otherwise lovingly embraced by the very people who cite scripture as "Fairy Tales". That's a numb-numbing degree of pathetic confusion on the part of pro-science Christian-haters. As Dr. Steven Hawking, himself an atheist, ironically, wrote, "No matter how thorough our observation of the present, the (unobserved) past, like the future, is indefinite and exists only as a spectrum of possibilities."

There is absolutely nothing in the Old and New Testaments that can not be fairly easily assumed as true and accurate by very simply applying a little good old-fashioned futurist conceptualization. The Christian-haters and creationist-haters would do well to stop being such dim-witted hypocrites and try it, sometime.

Image used via the Fair Use Act. 
One of many actual or hypothetical spacetime phenomena which are readily accepted by the mainstream scientific community which could in part explain the 'magic" described in the Bible, a point of debate lost when secular scientists go into "hate mode" and turn off their brains.
If you like what you see and read on CreationDino, please help us continue our work as well as additional installments of the video Behold Now Behemoth by giving a "Christian Payment Offering" for the dollar amount of your choice with the dropdown menu on the Paypal button on the upper right hand side of the screen for what you read and watch on CreationDino. We could really use the help right about now.

Thursday, October 1, 2015

The Fantasy Semantics of the Mainstream Scientific Community

... Or, How the Dinosaur Became So Old, and other Just-So Stories.

By David Wilson

All images and quotes used via the Fair Use Act.

se·man·tics  (sĭ-măn′tĭks)
n. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)

1. Linguistics

2. The meaning or the interpretation of a word, sentence, or other language form: We're basically agreed; let's not quibble over semantics.

Just-So Stories
The Just So Stories for Little Children are a collection written by the British author Rudyard Kipling. Highly fantasied origin stories, especially for differences among animals, they are among Kipling's best known works. ~ Wikipedia. "How the Elephant Got His Trunk", for example.

You have seen here how the mainstream scientific community generally needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into accepting scientific fact. But worse yet, not only do they refute obvious fact, they enthusiastically feed their own fantasies with illogical semantics.

Let's face it. Most scientists got their stations in life from a diploma gotten by regurgitating information which was merely desirous to hear from professors who were generally not even good enough to succeed outside of the teaching field. This pattern is bound to produce a field of scientists at a lower standard than the generation that proceeded it. There are brilliant rare exceptions, and if you dig deep, you will find that most of the achievers do, actually, believe in God, and some are Creationists.

How often have you heard terms like, "Animals X used camouflage to protect it," or "Animal Y has feature Z because it helps the animal to do A, B &C?"  Remember from the last post that mutation is a random happenstance according to the scientific establishment; mutation never and can never "try" to give a species what it "needs". Mutation it is a chaotic, random process.  

There are so many examples of scientists turning a hopelessly confused phrase and undermining the logic of any case to be made that they could - and generally do - fill a host of encyclopedias.

Here are a few examples of the mainstream scientific community telling Just-So Stories. Once you pick up on their confused semantic wordplay, please post an example of such hopelessly confused wordplay in the comments section below this post, which you can do with an anonymous option, if you like. Let's build a - pardon the expression - mammoth treasure trove of astounding casual scientific Just-So Stories!

All following examples are from secular science websites, Click on each for the original source.

"Although both dogs and cats have supracaudal glands on the surface of their tails, the reason for this is unknown."

"Gills are wonderfully well designed, and they have to be because ..."

"As fish grow larger, the relative surface area of their gills has to increase at an exponential rate to compensate for the falling surface area to volume ratio, or they will get less and less oxygen in relative terms."

"For organisms that do it, bioluminescence has many uses, according to the exhibit materials. Fireflies use flash to attract mates ...." 

"Biologists think mammals developed whiskers because they need help sensing their environments at night."

"The arteries in gas bladder fish, therefore, are actually vestigial pulmonary arteries that have been co-opted for new functions."

"The majority of the process is believed to have taken only a few million years, as the first predator to gain true imaging would have touched off an "arms race". Prey animals and competing predators alike would be forced to match or exceed any such capabilities. Hence multiple eye types and subtypes developed in parallel. "

"The higher level of cognition needed to perform these tasks could have led to an increase in brain size."

"In order to survive at night, these animals had to find food in the dark. Some developed a highly-advanced sense of smell or specialized hearing abilities such as echolocation. Others acquired eye adaptations for improved night vision."

"Tender leaf tissues, however, would freeze in winter, so plants must either toughen up and protect their leaves or dispose of them."

(Regarding Prehistoric birds) "That’s because this shape helps create lift..... This kept the leading edge of the feather relatively rigid and better for pitch control. "

Remember, evolution by mutation is a chaotic - random - process. By mainstream science's own collective definition, Mutation does not "try" to "help" anything. It's random. But you would never know it when reading essentially every science article that's ever been written in the last 30 years.

"Because", "Helps" "Needed" "The Reason For"  "Had To" "In Order To". Every one of these turns of phrase and hundreds of thousands more at critical points in explanations demand an intelligence either of a Creator, or in the animals themselves to re-design themselves according to a need it could never understand even if had the power to transform itself. Every time any article makes a remark in this fashion while denying a Creator, it is espousing a fairy tale no better, though much more high-tech sounding, than Kipling's 1902 Just-So Stories.

The pathetic fact is our current scientific culture is steeped in fairy tales made seemingly plausible by accepted semantic shortcuts which, in the final analysis, lead to nowhere. These people are not helping humanity. They are spending billions of real dollars which could go to the needy but instead are being spent by the mainstream scientific community so they can live out their child-like fantasies about animals, as their eyes, in a shocking display of arrested development, sparkle at the "marvel" of it all.

Since evolution by mutation is a random process, animals do not have anything "because" unless God's hand is in the works.

Read just about any science article about the development of man or current unusual living creatures today and you will find yourself hip-deep in implications of a guiding intelligence helping the animals "because it needed this" or "they use that" as a primary aspect of survival".

So until they phrase their casual statements differently, I agree with implied statements of virtually every mainstream science writer:  life in earth was Created, presumably by God. Surely, in their obvious confusion,  that is what the mainstream science community is implying thousands of times a day, whether they realize it or not.

Triceratops and T-Rex square off, trying desperately to illustrate mainstream science's demand that they be endothermic and ecdothermic at the same time in ways which preclude one from the other, painted about the same time that Kipling wrote Just-So stories. The difference between Kipling and mainstream science is that in 1902 Kipling stopped writing Just-So Stories.

If you like what you see and read on CreationDino, please help us continue our work as well as additional installments of the video Behold Now Behemoth by giving a "Christian Payment Offering" for the dollar amount of your choice with the dropdown menu on the Paypal button on the upper right hand side of the screen for what you read and watch on CreationDino. We could really use the help right about now.