Skip to main content

Fake Science News of Phosphine on Venus Overturned

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

So many times, the secular science industry galloping for the fences with "news" supporting minerals-to-machinist evolution. Unfortunately, some biblical creationists are not grounded in the faith or knowledgeable about science, and they panic. "This can be refuted, right?" For example, alleged signs of life on Venus.

Remember the excitement a spell back about indications of life on Venus? While silly from the start, that research has now been shown to be faulty.
Original image before tampering from NASA / JPL-Caltech
(Usage does not imply endorsement of contents on any of my sites or even of my existence)

Something I've cautioned many times is to take it slow and wait. Many new discoveries don't pass the smell test, and end up being discarded later. (Part of the problem there is the secular science industry's lapdog media going for the big sensational story.) Critical thinking and some rational creation science articles help, of course. Most of all, have your faith grounded in the Word, not the ever-changing whims of man-made science philosophies, you savvy?

Elsewhere, I posted links to articles about the stench of presumed life on Venus. The hands at the Darwin Ranch were as excited as election-stealing Democrats (most of them are leftists anyway). You know how they are with circular reasoning, fundamentally flawed presuppositions, poor logic, incomplete or faulty research, and so on. From there, they foolishly extrapolate that if there's a hit of evolution, there is no God, so we're not accountable for our sinful lives.

It turns out that the research itself is what stank, not the reported phosphine. Seems that some other scientists said, "Rein in that horse, Hoss!" They examined the information and said, "Not hardly!" The report was ridiculous and the research was faulty. Yippie ky yay, secularists! For more information, see "Strong Doubts Arise About the Reported Phosphine Biosignature in the Atmosphere of Venus".

Comments