Stormbringer's Thunder

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen So, some folks over yonder in the European Union think that robots should have rights, as they may develop self-awareness. Have they been smoking wacky tobaccy? This opens up a passel of problems from the get-go. First, they need to define robot . Some task-saving devices are called robots, so a definition for a robot may need certain advanced capabilities. Seems mighty subjective, though. Does it have to look human? Suppose "lower" robots decided they were discriminated against. It happened with blacks, Jews, and others who were considered less than human by other humans, you know. Can you imagine the social justice warriors pushing for legislation to protect robots? Then we have Mr. Gordons, who refers to humans as "meat machines" . Imagine this scene: a robot complains to a supervisor that it does not like to be referred to as a "robot", but prefers the title of electronic person. Also, a complain was filed because the te...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Jared Huffman, a Democrat Congressman from California, recently "came out" as a Humanist. There is no appreciable difference between Humanists and atheists, though some theists call identify as Humanists because they have a low view of the Bible and elevate humans to the highest priority. Huffman does not go on record as endorsing atheism, but says he does not believe in God. He seems to be politically timid, keeping mum about his beliefs for years (atheists generally do not get elected). He felt he had to finally admit his views. The Democrat party has a disdain for God and the Bible, and Huffman believes in homosexual "rights", he is pro-abortion, and just what you'd expect from a leftist in general. Identifying as a Humanist, or atheist (or maybe he'll change to agnostic), should fit in well with the current political climate. I want to interject something here. Atheists are materialists, rejecting God and the supernatural (...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen This article contains a time-sensitive link that may expire soon, at which point, it will be deleted. The murders of people in Sutherland Springs, Texas, has stirred many emotions. Grief, pain, anger, and others. It has also raised questions about how a loving God could allow this, what were the motives, and just...why? We will never have all the answers tied up in a neat package. We can find some of them. Credit: Pixabay / MissSuss At this writing, the motives are not known. I'm not going to varnish this, we already know that the killer was a seriously disturbed, violent atheist . Some are saying the motive was because of a domestic situation, others say "unknown" and "uncertain". The rampage may have been far worse if the shooter was not interrupted by the heroic actions of Stephen Willeford . If the motive was due to hatred of his mother-in-law, he could have killed only her elsewhere. The fact that he did this rampage duri...

Science is supposed to be a search for knowledge, with scientists considering evidence, proposing hypotheses, then running them up the flagpole to see if anyone salutes them. When ideas are refuted, they accept the changes and try something else. Problem is, that scenario is fictitious. (For that matter, when people claim that "science has proved" something are showing their ignorance of the philosophy and methodology of science .) Scientists, medical doctors, and others have refuted consensus views and been resisted. For example, Ignaz Semmelweis demonstrated that the mortality rate of women giving birth could be drastically reduced with antiseptics , but he was ignored by the establishment. Sara and Her Mother with the Baby , Mary Cassat, 1901 Scientists and the secular scientific establishment seem to be increasingly biased nowadays, especially to viewpoints propagated by leftists . Something that is in opposition to the Bible is celebrated, even when they try to sla...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen At first glance, this may look like a basic reaction to vindictive atheists. Nope. It's a whole heap more than that, showing how professing atheists and anti-creationists resort to contemptible methods in their efforts to silence biblical creationists. As shown in numerous posts here, on my Piltdown Superman site, The Question Evolution Project Fazebook Page , and at numerous other sites and forums, the typical village atheist who trolls the internet demonstrates very little ability to use logic. In addition, they often seek to justify what passes as morality in their world by railing against God by using selective citation of biblical texts (that is, woefully out of context) and straw man arguments. A couple of tinhorns consistently wants to slap leather with me and "debate", but there is no sense in defending positions I don't hold.  Background image from Clker clipart I have long maintained that atheopaths are made stupid by thei...

The source of morality is disputed among secularists, some claim that it comes from evolution, some say it is based on society, some postulate other sources. People who have a materialistic view of morality cannot  have a consistent moral standard, and end up with disastrous speculations  when they suppress the truth. Riot in the Galleria , Umberto Boccioni, 1909 I reckon it should be common sense that you can't follow the crowd. (Isn't following society's dictates a form of just "following the crowd"?) I don't like crowds, you never know when they can get mean. Things get out of hand, next thing you know, the saloon's ceiling is shot full of holes, the town marshal and his buddies show up, and guys spend a few nights in lockup, even after they get sober. Individually, if you asked these rambunctious patrons about right and wrong, they'd have told you differently than what they did that night in the saloon. Those jaspers knew better than to get r...

There are people who consider peer review as the gold standard in science, and it is somehow a guarantee of truth. Not hardly! As we have seen, the secular science industry is becoming increasingly biased and involved in leftist political activism . Add to this the fact that their peer review process discriminates against creationists, has numerous retractions, passes junk (including computer-generated papers ), and is pretty much a good ol' boys' club. Their image has a bad complexion , and some scientists are calling for major changes. Made at Hetermeel.com , then modified with colors Unfortunately, the sidewinders in charge want to circle the wagons and maintain the status quo. They don't want transparency and accountability. Others want to improve ethical standards. Wait, what? People who reject the Creator and his Word have no consistent moral standard are going to decide what is right and wrong? Scientists are people, complete with presuppositions, knavery, a...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Many people are baffled as to why a saddle tramp comedy actor turned children's television show host who never bothered to get an advanced science degree is considered an expert on practically everything. Bill Nye is calle d a "science guy", and did fairly well when he did actual science. Amazingly, his net worth is rated at 6.5 million USD , probably because atheistic propaganda pays well — just ask C. Richard Dawkins . Nye hopes to gain more from his lawsuit against Disney . Why he did not sue years ago, I have no idea. Even so, if he deserves the money, he should get it. The way I see the way things happening, he became popular when he attacked biblical creationists, and especially Answers in Genesis. Dr. Georgia Purdom of AiG challenged Nye to a debate (which he dodged) , and he eventually settled for a debate with Ken Ham, who has a bachelor's degree in applied science . Ham also earned a Diploma of Education so he could become a sc...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen It is no secret that the public has trust issues with atheists, and also with the secular science industry. This is nothing new, and there are still laws on the books that prohibit atheists from holding some elected public offices. (Ironic, most atheists erroneously claim that atheism is not a religion, but keeping them out of office violates their religious rights.) There was a time when the assertion of atheism was shocking and put people to the one making the declaration, but not so much these days. They still score low in polls . People are reluctant to trust atheists. Do they ride their horses side saddle? Put their pants on both legs at once instead of one leg at a time? Steal booze from homeless winos? No more than anyone else that I'm aware. They do earn their bad reputations, however. The mass-murdering dictators of the 20th century were mostly atheists (Hitler was not an atheist, he was an occultist at best), Norwegian murderer Brevik wa...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Here in the United States, and to some extent in other parts of the world, there has been considerable debate about the religion of the Founding Fathers. While the majority of them could be considered fundamentalist or evangelical Christians by today's standards, a few were Deists. Secularists who attempt to rewrite history somehow try to make it seem that the appearance of these Deists negated the fact that America was clearly founded on Christian principles .  There are different stripes of Christians, Buddhists, Mohammedans, atheists, and other religions. Indeed, even within certain sects and denominations, you will find variations. This includes Deists. I've encountered deists who want to join in with misotheists in slapping leather with Christians, and others who are more moderate. Like other groups, there is no "one size fits all" for Deists. Benjamin Franklin / Joseph Wright, 1782 Benjamin Franklin was unarguably one of the m...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Don't be getting ahead of me, the Laws of Thermodynamics (especially entropy) should  have nothing to do with hate per se,  and hate should not  involve laws of science. When you get atheists wanting to slap leather with biblical creationists, however, their blind hate and seething rage prompts them to use science for leverage in their quest for the ideological supremacy of materialism and the promotion of their death cult of evolutionism. Credit: Freeimages / Peter Skadberg There was a recent article by Creation Ministries International  where creationist engineer Colin Gibson was interviewed about his faith journey. As a child, he was not taught the Christian faith effectively. When he was confronted by evolutionary propaganda, he believed that the State school was being truthful, and rejected Christianity for the most part. Still, Gibson had "nagging doubts" about evolutionary adaptation. When he heard creationary speaker Carl Wie...

When it comes to sensationalistic fake news that denigrates the Bible, the secular science industry is relentless. Ever see those documentaries that crop up around Christmas and Easter where producers round up unasinous liberal scholars to malign the Bible? Not only do they ignore conservative scholars and focus on the odd ones, but stories like the tomb of Jesus and so on are discredited or forgotten. This bit of disingenuous journalism is of the same pathetic caliber. But I forgot, lying is in the nature of secularist leftists. Mostly made at Image Chef Those of us who actually believe the Bible and know about how it has been supported time and again through history, science, and archaeology have to endure the constant attacks on the Word of God. It's one thing to disbelieve and offer arguments or evidence as to why not, but it's another to act like an evolutionary scientist that makes up his or her own "facts", and ignores pertinent data. What really takes t...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen One of the high priests of atheism is C. Richard Dawkins. (His tinhorn fans consider themselves "New Atheists", but the only thing "new" about them is their extreme hatred and intolerance, dishonesty, lack of thinking skills, redefining "reason" and "rational" to mean "naturalist" and "atheist". Background image of shattering atheist symbol courtesy of Why?Outreach They are  detestable to the rest of the American population . (I reckon professing atheists of yore would be embarrassed by this lot.) Atheopaths rally behind Dawkins since he gives a façade of intellectualism, although atheism cannot withstand true logic. To put it another way, he's considered brilliant by people who already hate God and are digging up excuses to justify their rebellion against their Creator. Dawkins is angry, hypocritical , and mean-spirited in general, but is surprised that people do not like him . In the formerly ...