Showing posts with label creation science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label creation science. Show all posts

February 12, 2020

Totalitarian Leftists Hijacking Science

The influence of Darwin's ideas has not been confined to biology, and has influenced other sciences. Unfortunately, these fundamentally flawed concepts have been applied to western society as social Darwinism, giving us eugenics, justification for abortion, and influencing tyrants. For Question Evolution Day, we will see some examples of how leftist ideologies, influenced by Darwinism, have hijacked much of the secular science industry.


Scientists are biased, and many are active promoting leftist causes. Scientific and academic institutions show their loathings for Bible believers.

Charles Darwin hated God and the Bible, and that view influenced his version of the evolution myth. Other people who wanted to rebel against God as well as theistic evolutionists (a religious fifth column working to nullify biblical theology) embraced those views. Since evolution is pervasive throughout the secular science industry, actual truth-seeking science has been hijacked by leftists who propagate evolutionism. The battle of worldviews is clearly evident.

It is interesting to this child that with postmodernism and truth being considered relative and without absolutes, people appeal to science as an arbiter of right and wrong — but only when it suits leftist causes. It is a scientific fact that men and women have different XY chromosomes, and no "gender reassignment" can change that fact. But yee haw boy howdy, if someone states that there are only two sexes, he can lose his job. It almost seems pointless to discuss facts and truth when people only use them when convenient. It's like American Democrats hypocritically appealing to religion and the US Constitution when they are trying to manipulate the public, but they show disdain for both the rest of the time.

People who have seen my work before know that I emphasize clarifying words and terms for more effective communication. Atheists and evolutionists play fast and loose with definitions, using the fallacy of conflation by changing the meanings of words and by disingenuously equating variations and change to mean evolution in the Darwinian sense. Leftists are manipulating the language of science for their own ends, and people who are supposedly doing science are making using false science for political causes. We have several important articles for your education and edification.
Leftist academia pretends to be pro-science, but the politics drives their positions.

A funny thing happened in the Inspector General’s report (see Breitbart News) on abuses by the FBI in early December, 2019. The IG found 17 abuses they committed in obtaining FISA Court authorization to spy on the presidential campaign. The funny thing was, all 17 of the mistakes and abuses helped the Democrats, but hurt the Republicans. Some commentators noted that all the “mistakes” worked to try to hinder the Trump campaign and administration once he was elected. This undercut any claims of objectivity by the FBI agents.

A similar thing is going on in “political” science (meaning: science that intersects with governmental policies). No matter the subject, it’s always anti-Trump. It’s uniformly in favor of Leftist ideals, including global governance, redistribution of wealth, and radical environmentalism. The conservative Trump administration is always cast in the worst possible light, but the same scientists and media people completely ignore or excuse similar policies or actions by the past liberal administration of Obama. This also undercuts any claims of objectivity by Big Science and Big Media who also, notably, accept Darwinian evolution uncritically. Let’s look at some recent examples. [Article written January 11, 2020]
To learn about what's happening, click on "Leftism Manipulates Science Language". I'd be much obliged if you'd come back for the other articles.

We continue with how leftists appeal to science and use it as a disguise for their political causes. Environmentalism is a good idea, but not when it's done for their agendas for power. Anthropogenic climate change supporters reject scientific information that does not fit their existing conclusions. Homosexuality evolved for social reasons (this is illogical, presupposing evolution from the get-go). There are other examples to consider.
Leftists have learned that the ‘science costume’ is their most effective means of propaganda.

Science is supposed to be apolitical. Why is so much of the science news profoundly leftist in view? Do leftists really have science on their side? We think not. Rather, it’s a consequence of political and cultural movements that began in the riots of the 1960s, when radicals crept into the universities and slowly took over. Now, many university departments lack a single conservative, especially in political ‘science,’ psychology and the biological sciences. The materialist aspect of leftist science can be traced back to Darwin and others like Comte du Buffon (16 September 2018).

Liberals are not necessarily leftists, because classical liberals believe in free speech. Leftists are totalitarians. They are pushing right now for a society of uniform acceptance of their goals: global governance, redistribution of wealth (socialism and communism) and radical materialism. Most of them are Darwinists. They advocate unlimited abortion and even infanticide and eugenics. Most of them are atheists who hate religion. Instead of appealing to evidence and logic, they use subversion to undermine traditional values and foment class warfare to increase the ranks of ‘victims’ who can be exploited for a socialist revolution. They engage in punishing those who refuse to kowtow to their redefinition of terms like sex, gender and marriage. They do this by mounting lawsuits, and coercing corporations and governments to make traditional values illegal. These haters accuse their opponents of hate.
You can read this second article by following the link to "Leftists Use Science as Camouflage". Then we have a third installment.

Totalitarians are already gaining power and using science with useful idiots in the secular science industry. Words and phrases are manufactured those that already exist are given new meanings that suit the ruling elite. From their perspective, you must not think for yourself, and you certainly cannot speak or write contrary views in many cases before you are silenced (or at least negated). Notice that leftist causes are anti-God, anti-Christian, anti-Bible, and they are increasing in fervor.
Totalitarians must be resisted before they gain power. The potential evils are far greater today with the growing loss of privacy, GPS tracking, and social-media databases. Big Brother is here, watching our every move. Today’s totalitarians would create genetically-modified clones if they could – beings incapable of resistance. They never want to reason their way into power, convincing citizens by logic and history that they have better ideas. No; they seek power by subversion. Our Baloney Detector defines propaganda as “Any attempt to influence people’s actions or attitudes without making them think.” It includes nudging (11 June 2017), repetition, and redefining words. Look how modern totalitarians are manipulating citizens with subterfuge, not reason:
For the entire alarming article, click on "Totalitarians on the Loose in Science". Then you can come back for the last of the articles. You'll thank me later.

Secularists did a study and told us what we already know: Christians, and especially creationists, are unwelcome in the halls of academic indoctrination. The research was conducted using a materialistic approach, of course, but still had some interesting conclusions. They apparently were not interest in the clash of worldviews, and could not possibly consider the fact that the world is under Satan's control and that he blinds unbelievers (John 8:44, 1 Cor. 2:14, 2 Cor. 4:4, Rom. 5:10). As I have said many times, origins and other matters are not about facts or intellect, but are instead spiritually based. Materialists presuppose that God is not there, so their research is fatally flawed.
I have now been researching the problem of academic intolerance against Christians for over a half a century. A paper by Barnes et al. published on January 29th in PLoS One is the first research study that appears to attempt to find out why scientists and academics are biased against Christians, specifically Creationists. Many studies have been completed, mostly to find out how many students hold to a creation worldview and, once the number was determined, the study focused on how to better indoctrinate students into the Darwinian worldview to lower what the study’s authors argue is the unacceptably high number of Darwin Doubters.  It is well documented  that scientists are generally opposed to theism, especially a creation worldview.

In short, according to a recent Gallup poll, 40 percent of Americans agree that humans were created less than 10,000 years ago, a position the Brenan calls a “strictly creationist view of human origins.” This is in contrast to the orthodox Darwinist view that  humans evolved from some ape they call the modern ape-human common ancestor, some 6-to-7-million Darwin years ago, and that God had nothing to do with either creation.

The fact that almost half of Americans reject the alleged ‘most basic foundation of science,’ evolution, is highlighted as evidence of the abysmal state of science education in America. They view it as a crisis of denying ‘the fact of evolution,’ a premise believed to be so firmly supported by evidence that many assume it is true and, therefore, act and teach as if it were true. Accepting this definition, Darwinists argue that evolution has been overwhelmingly validated by the evidence in the same way that the Earth’s revolution around the Sun is a fact. The quotation below from a leading evolutionist of the last century, Hermann J. Muller, in his article titled, “One Hundred Years Without Darwinism Are Enough,” explains the point very well.
You can read the rest of Dr. Bergman's article (note the many materialistic presuppositions) by clicking on "Anti-Christian Bias in Academia Is Real".

Question Evolution Day has several purposes, and one of those is to give support for intellectual, academic, speech, and other freedoms. We must use our freedoms while we still have them.


February 11, 2019

Religious Freedom, Free Speech, and Question Evolution Day

In these here United States and several other Western countries, people have the right to free speech. The US Constitution also guarantees freedom of religion. There are atheists and other anti-creationists who flat out lie, saying that Christians are violating the "Constitutional separation of church and state", but that only appeared in the Soviet Union documents.


Atheists and other anti-creationists try to stop freedoms of speech and religion, and hate Question Evolution Day as well as biblical creation itself. Christians do have rights and can stand up for them.
The Apostle Paul explains the tenets of faith in the presence of King Agrippa,
his sister Berenice, and the proconsul Festus
/Vasily Surikov, 1875
Atheists will lie and harass Christians who often have to take their case to court to fight for their rights. Unfortunately, some professing Christians have a wrong view, saying that it is "Christlike" to endure such persecution. That view is unbiblical.Some owlhoots may claim that since the term religious freedom is not in the Bible, it must not be true. It helps to know our rights, and yes, we can stand up for them. After all, if we sit back and let things happen, we will lose our rights even more quickly.

February 12 is Question Evolution Day, and some folks hate it. While anti-creationists will claim that they believe in free speech, they (like other leftists) only like the free speech that meets with their approval. Otherwise, biblical creation science must be stopped. Misrepresentation, defamation (here is one example), straw man arguments, and more are standard operating procedures for these sidewinders. I'll allow that nobody is shoving bamboo shoots up our fingernails, but they do persecute us in their efforts to silence the message. Despite opposition, we spread the message and endure persecution while we still can.


Atheists and other anti-creationists try to stop freedoms of speech and religion, and hate Question Evolution Day


Persecution is happening to many Christians around the world, and it is increasing in the West. Governments and court systems are increasingly secular, so there is no guarantee that Christians will prevail even when the truth is clearly on their side. The Apostle Paul is an example of both knowing and standing up for his rights in the Roman system.
Since religious freedom has been a hot-button social issue and is more and more frequently covered in secular and Christian news media outlets, we sometimes are asked these questions. Does the Bible address religious freedom, and, if so, what does it say and where?

The Apostle Paul (and his traveling companions on various mission trips) is perhaps the most notable example of a biblical figure who suffered religious persecution and also on occasion stood up for his religious liberty. It is interesting that Paul did so in a government that had some similarities to Western nations.
To read the rest, click on "Is Religious Freedom Addressed in Scripture?"



January 1, 2019

Modern Creation Scientists Refuting Atheism and Evolution

One of the cornerstones of atheism is evolution, which is their creation myth. Atheists and other anti-creationists have been known to say, "There is no such thing as creation science". These sidewinders also tend to ridicule scientists who are creationists, saying that they are not "real" scientists". I lack belief that those making such claims have done any investigation, preferring instead to use prejudicial conjecture, straw man arguments, and outright lying. 


When atheists and other anti-creationists say there are no creation scientists or they have no credentials, this is completely false
Credit: Pixabay / Konstantin Kolosov
The view that someone must be an atheist or naturalist to be a scientist is false. Many of those who put the foundations of modern science in place were creationists, and current creationists have contributed to their disciplines and been published in science journals, often despite the blatant discrimination against creationists as a whole. It is interesting that several biblical creationists began as atheists and eventually realized that recent creation is the right trail to ride.

Here is an article that mentions some current creation scientists and their accomplishments. When anti-creationist poltroons deny the existence or credentials of biblical creation scientists, show them this link and watch them engage in hand waving.
I was recently asked to speak on creation in my Sunday school class. TASC had been helping organize the recent Origins Truth conference at the time, so I decided it might be encouraging to share something about the lives and work of two of the invited speakers for the conference: John Sanford and Russ Humphreys. I then added three more scientists: Matti Leisola, James Tour, and our very own Gerald Van Dyke to the talk. Each of these scientists has a unique story and has given glory to God through their life and research. Here, I share the essence of that presentation.
To read the article, click on "A Few Modern Creationists".

May 30, 2018

Science as a Manipulative Technique

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

First, a side note before I commence do be writing the actual article. It was eleven years ago today that I started this, my first weblog. Then, as now, it is a sort of general purpose thing. But back then, it had a great deal of political material and things that were dreadful (many of which have been removed). Although I still do some political things, I also post material on theology, refuting atheism, and some odds and ends. My main weblogs are Evolutionary Truth by Piltdown Superman and Biblical Creation and Evangelism. Also, I've been filling in for the owner of Radaractive. Those three are the weblogs that are updated the most often. Quite a contrast from when this one started.


Atheistic interpretations of science are made into the religion of Scientism.
Credit: CSIRO / David McClenaghan (CC BY 3.0)
As I have written in several places, some folks (especially atheists) believe that "science" is something special, even deserving of special consideration and privileges. They make science into an infallible entity — a demigod — that seeks the truth. In this case, the scientists are erroneously viewed as dispassionate and honest about data. They are just as human as you and I, old son, and they operate from their own presuppositions, just like biblical creationists. 

The adoration of scientists and science itself is a de facto religion called Scientism (see "Scientism, a Religion of Atheism" and "Scientism, Heal Thyself" for more). Many atheistic adherents of Scientism try to horswoggle us by pretending to be smarter than they are (which is only smart enough to be incredibly dishonest), insisting that the Genesis Flood is fiction, biblical creationists are liars or just plain stupid, putting words in our mouths, railing against side issues ("false thesis" fallacy), and so on. They seek to silence us through ridicule and defamation since they cannot rationally deal with the topics at hand. All this because they do not really know the nature of science, and that it is a tool, not a lifestyle, nor is it to be used to intimidate, bully, and manipulate people who reject atheism and Darwinism.

We are sometimes told that creationists are wrong because you cannot question science. That'll be the day! Some of us think for ourselves instead of bowing down to the alter of atheistic interpretations of science. Critical thinking is lacking in the secular science industry and in the minds of atheopaths. It can be your friend. Get your ownselves introduced sometime. The ultimate source of truth and logic is Jesus Christ.


October 22, 2017

More On Atheistic Straw Man "Reasoning"

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 their blind hatred of God and his followers. Several times, I've seen discussions that were moving along quite nicely, then quickly degenerate when professing atheists let their inner demons and hatred come out, and their reasoning became incoherent. 

Recently, I wrote an article on dreadful atheistic and anti-creationist reasoning (see "How Biblical Creationists Are Refuted, Or, "How Do I Refute Thee? Let Me Count the Ways...") True to form, some angry atheopaths reacted, using a couple of tactics: ridicule the person instead of dealing rationally with the content, and also setting up straw man arguments. (Ironically, they proved my article to be correct.) The venom was so thick, I slipped in a puddle of it and almost fell. Well, if it was literal, it would have puddled on the floor. Anyway, the vituperative ridicule was extended to an article I posted regarding atheistic reasoning. 

Interesting, Creation Ministries International posted their article on the same day that I posted mine. I shared it to The Question Evolution Project. A furious atheopath shared my post of CMI's post to his Page for the purpose of ridicule. He commented, "So to try to rebut the claim that creationists ignore science, you post a link to an organization which outright admits to ignoring evidence that contradicts the [B]ible? Lol". He didn't like my comment on my own Page. I wrote, "An atheopath liar said...[previously quoted text]...Aside from an appeal to motive fallacy, this tinhorn lied outright about CMI. They ADMIT to "ignoring evidence that contradicts the [B]ible"? Dishonest assertion. And he thinks he's worth debating? That'll be the day! -CBB". 

He responded with a post full of ad hominem remarks and other fallacies, plus a screenshot of some of CMI's "About Us" section. This section was emphasized in his screenshot: "Facts are always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information. By definition, therefore, no interpretation of facts in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record". The sneaky atheist accused me of stupidity and lying, and he lied about CMI when he said, "...They come right out and say that they're going to ignore anything that doesn't fit what they already want to believe". They did not say this. He conveniently twisted their words (he's an atheopath, they do that, it's who they are) and set up a straw man by ignoring key words in his own quote, especially the word interpretation. Meanwhile, as this blackguard lies and misrepresents creationists, atheopaths cheer him on, applauding like palsied spider monkeys but offering nothing of substance. Just hate.

Something else I've said for a long time is that a fact is a fact, people are not disputing the existence of facts, and there is no such thing as your facts and our facts. The disagreements come from interpretations of facts. You can have a fossil and say that it's 200 million Darwin years old. I can say it was buried in the Genesis Flood a few thousand years ago. Two interpretations, the only definite fact in this scenario is the fossil. See how that works? 

Someone who was intellectually honest and not blinded by hate might want to cowboy up and examine more than just one sentence in CMI's "About Us" section. Since it's easier for rapscallions like that to ignore the truth and avoid doing their homework, guess I'll have to show why his "proof" is actually a manipulative lie. See how the word interpret(ation) is used in these examples:
Christians and especially biblical creationists should be above the accusatory nature of our detractors. See how easy it is to refute the refuters? Don't be like them. Be able to intelligently back up your claims, because we represent Christ. They represent their father down below. EDIT: He proved me right again by sharing the link to this post, ignoring the content, and reaffirming the previous lie in a comment under the post.

September 23, 2017

Bill Nye the Atheism Shill Guy Rides Again

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 called 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 science teacher way back when. (Both Nye and Ham have honorary doctorates.) Bill Nye used outdated and inaccurate science claims, and also underhanded tactics in the debate with Ken Ham. I'll allow that the debate format was poor, and gave Nye the opportunity to use elephant hurling and other fallacies. For more on that event, see "Reflections on the Ken Ham - Bill Nye Debate". I recommend "We Have a Book for That", which shows the fundamentally flawed foundations of Nye and his secularist cohorts.

Here are some skillful edits of a Nye photo for your amusement.

Moving on...



After Bill Nye made a fool of himself in the debate with Ken Ham (with great applause from biased secularist owlhoots who are unskilled in both science and logic), he eventually went on to write a propaganda book. In addition, he gained a television show, Bill Nye Saves the World, on the pay channel called Netflix. Apparently, he wants to save the world from science and critical thinking, preferring to promote leftist and atheist views. However, his preachy demeanor is putting off his fans, and it apparently lacks actual science.

Now he has a movie? You betcha! Bill Nye: Science Guy takes shots at creation science, especially Ken Ham. Selective citing was employed, as well as blatant falsehoods and more bad science. See "Bill Nye: Science Guy or Secular Activist?" for more. By the way, ever notice that the real debate between Ham and Nye, as well as the Nye snark fest "second debate", are posted for free viewing by Answers in Genesis, but Bill's fans do not direct people to those?

People are becoming increasingly suspicious of the leftist slant of the secular science industry. Well, there's mucho dinero in evolutionary "discoveries" and conjectures presented as real science, you know. For that matter, secularists seem to applaud any  fuel for dumpster burning that attacks the Bible, such as their self-humiliating "Canaanites disprove the Bible" fiasco. Let's face it, the secular science industry is highly biased nowadays, and shills like Bill Nye are highly unlikely to be giving us the truth.

This all comes down to something that people do not want to hear: rebellion against God. That's right, they suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:18-23) so they can justify denying God. If some folks are willing to graciously grant God his existence in their philosophies, then they reject the authority of his Word in their pride. It's their nature, and who they are. People must humble themselves, repent, and find out what our Creator has to say in his Word. 
 

August 26, 2017

Laws of Thermodynamics and Hate

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 Wieland give a presentation, the part about the Second Law of Thermodynamics made him sit up and take notice.
Professional engineer Colin Gibson was raised in a church where he was taught six-day creation in Sunday school but that grounding was challenged at high school when evolution and millions of years were presented as fact in his science class.
That left him confused and thinking that he must have been taught fairytales at Sunday school. Thereafter he began a slippery slide away from church but, through a remarkable chain of events, including attending an address from Creation magazine founder Carl Wieland, Colin’s thinking was turned on its head.
I'm going to do my usual thing and give you the link to keep reading, but I have more to say about atheists and hate, and some useful links on thermodynamics. The rest of the article is found at "Confronted by the Second Law of Thermodynamics — Warren Nunn chats with engineer Colin Gibson on his journey from evolution to creation". Now for the part about atheopaths and bile.

In what I call the Forum of Futility (where precious little science and logic are presented, and most people ignore the thing), a libelous criminal cyberstalker who execrates biblical creationists and people who disagree with him decided to attack the article linked above. In his quest for atheistic adoration, he reproduced a letter that he sent to CMI. He has attacked them for many years (as well as other biblical creationist individuals and organizations). Surprisingly, even after he repeatedly calls people "liars" (I'm surprised that he left "fascist" out of this particular diatribe), he received a response. In what is probably a copyright violation, he reproduced the reply but omitted the name of the sender.

This sidewinder criticized Mr. Nunn for leaving out certain remarks made by Dr. Jonathan Sarfati regarding entropy as a creationary argument. Yes, Dr. Sarfati advised creationists to leave it alone, mainly because the argument is misused. However, the article under discussion was not a treatise on science, but was a discussion of Colin Gibson's faith. The attacker used selective citing, such as ignoring the link that contains Dr. Sarfati's remark:
"I suggest that thermodynamic arguments are excellent when done properly, and the ‘open systems’ canard is anticipated. Otherwise I suggest concentrating on information content" (my emphasis added).
The mocker also used ad hominems, affirming the consequent, argument from silence, straw man arguments, and other logical fallacies. You can see his foolishness here. Note the absence of links to material supporting his accusations. But hey, if The Mighty Atheist™ makes a claim, it must be true! Yeah, that'll be the day.

For some reason, atheists and evolutionists get the bit in their teeth about the laws of thermodynamics. Like a social media relationship status, it's complicated. Scoffers frequently disunderstand and abuse the laws of thermodynamics, but unfortunately, many Christians don't exactly have that subject lassoed and hogtied themselves. Therefore, it's a good idea to leave it alone.

I've posted about 1,730 articles on my primary site, Evolutionary Truth by Piltdown Superman (which began in 2011), and I can only account for less than ten related to thermodynamics on there. Hundreds of posts on my other sites — sorry, searches didn't find any. Sure, I've mentioned thermodynamics, but I don't claim to be an expert in the subject. That's why this attack from a narcissistic atheopath pretending to a be a Christian is bewildering:


Click for larger. Used under Fair Use provisions for educational purposes.
He calls me a "coward" for not wanting to debate an anonymous liar on a subject on which I never claimed to be an expert. Hypocrite much, Buttercup? By the way, if I'm a "false teacher" like this atheopath claims, why would that be wrong in his worldview? To be consistent, he has to stand on the biblical worldview! Also, he has never provided documentation for this libelous "false teacher" assertion. I have a Statement of Faith. What's wrong with it?

I reckon there's a Law of Hate in there somewhere, that anti-creationists will resort to almost any means possible to shut down the truth of the gospel that begins in Genesis. For some reason, people like that like to (mis)use the Second Law of Thermodynamics. And such hate sends logic and reason galloping away on the dusty prairie.

In descending order of intensity: atheists, agnostics, Deists, theistic evolutionists, and old-earth creationists utterly despise biblical creationists and seek to silence us. They use ridicule, personal attacks, straw man arguments, and so on to make themselves and their spurious arguments look good (although defaming creationists does not make evolution any less false). I'm certain that one day, attacks will become physical as well as the verbal, written, legislative, and electronic kinds we deal with now. I'm willing to die for the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Better men and women than me have given their all.

Now, I mentioned material on thermodynamics. Some of my own posts appear below (and a few date back to 2012), plus some others that I hope will be useful resources. Not so sure about the first couple, but I'm including them for the sake of accuracy about my claims.
I hope that the linked material as well as this here article will prove useful to y'all.

April 24, 2017

Further Adventures in Atheo-Fascism

Atheists and evolutionists want biblical creationists silenced
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

By my reckoning, evidence refuting evolution and deep time is increasing, as is evidence for special creation. Anti-creationists on the web commence to jabbering, trolling, bullying — but are unable to offer luculent responses. Instead, they react.

Hatetheists and fundamentalist evolutionists detest that we present our side of the origins controversy. In fact, many act like we do not even have the right to disagree with their worldview. Something I've said before of which I am more firmly convinced than ever: they want us silenced. 

Many scoffers will pretend to read articles, listen to podcast, or watch videos we provide. However, they make judgments based on a title, a summary, or some-such. They embarrass themselves because their criticisms were often addressed in the items they refused to investigate, such as this one.

In their blinded pride and arrogance, mockers utilize many rescuing devices, often using logical fallacies to dry-gulch the opposition. For example, they reject Christian or creationary sources outright (the genetic fallacy), as well as utilizing straw man arguments, ad hominems, and more. You can often see them justify their bigotry and abuse of reason. I was even attacked for giving a warning about fake accounts and the risk of identity theft (you can see that here, but it takes a moment to completely load.) Since they cannot make us shut up and go away through superior science and reason, they vilify us in an effort to negate what we are saying, and gleefully engage in bullying.


Used under Fair Use guidelines and with the commenter's permission
Click for full size
In addition to the above screenshot, someone posted a comment on an atheopath Page. A commenter on that Page went to his timeline and trolled him. These clowns are unable to understand that ridicule is not refutation. 

I reckon that those who are serious about wanting to learn what we believe and teach would actually read the articles, and even check out references and "for further reading" links. But no, they get that bullying and ridicule bit between their teeth and it's off to the races. Go ahead, Skippy. You race, then come back to your mother's basement and the poisonous talking wall fungus. I've got other things to do.

Further, anti-creationist owlhoots use those ad hominem remarks to try and poison the well against Christians and biblical creationists. They seem to think that assertions and accusations are self-validating; perhaps if an utterance is made from The Mighty Atheist™, it becomes a fact. That'll be the day! In a similar manner, the ad hominem labels they attempt to attach to us are expected to be true despite lack of relevance or truthfulness: liar, science denier, homophobe, coward, evil — and of late, fascist.

That last one is common among Darwin's Flying Monkeys© who really have no idea what it means They call someone a fascist in retaliation for being banned because of trolling, blasphemy, bad logic, narcissism, or whatever. While most of us believe in free speech, we know there are limits for it (such as defamation, incitement to violence, obscenity, and more. For a detailed article on this, see "Free Speech, Censorship, the Internet, You and the Bad Guy", and I admit that the title is excessively long). Someone gets banned from a part of social media or his comments are disallowed, he shrieks, "Censorship! You're a fascist!" Such weak attempts at manipulation invariably fail, and even strengthen the resolve of those who did the banning.

Fascism is based on pagan nature worship (as is evolution) and is merged with nationalism. With atheism, secularism, and evolutionism tracking the way they are, I affirm my article, "Evolution and the New Atheo-Fascism". Atheo-fascists do not want free speech, they want us silenced. Bullying, ridicule and misrepresentation were common propaganda tactics during fascist rule. While misotheists claim to care about science, they prefer to protect their religion from scrutiny and exposure. Note how they congratulate each other on churlish behavior, and all creation evidence must be attacked by the brown shirts. Sieg Heil, mein Liebling! They try to shout us down until we go away.

People also believe in things because of celebrity influence. Evolutionists and atheists work the celebrity angle quite frequently. (Shamefully, so do Christians to some extent.) Hume, Dawkins, Nietzsche (I doubt that they've really read him, he didn't cotton to Darwin's views), even elevating failed scientist Nye to atheistic pope status. Atheopaths claim that they are the clever ones because they analyze things, and Christians are mindless sheep. This shows they are not logical thinkers, because they use prejudicial conjecture, sweeping generalizations, and other fallacies in that ego-boosting claim. Again, such behavior is used to poison the well against Christians and creationists.

Bill Nye the Scientism Guy (who does not know what he's talking about regarding climate change) was called a fascist, and I don't think that's far off the mark. He wants to control education so that it promotes naturalistic evolution only, despite what the majority of Americans desire. Nye also wants climate change "deniers" put in jail. He's influential as a celebrity and poster boy for secularism and materialism, but not influential as a scientist. He never was a scientist, but he uses his status to promote leftist political causes

Watch for the atheopaths who are self-appointed experts in all sciences, including psychology. It is common to see a Christian point out a failing in logic, science, morality, or whatever, and have it deflected with, "You are using projection". If you study on it a spell, projection is often a characteristic of narcissism, and many atheists (especially keyboard warriors on the web) fit the bill for narcissistic sociopaths. Sure looks like the ones accusing people of projection are really the ones doing the projection. Same thing with those accusing others of being fascists, when evolutionary atheists are being fascistic themselves. Yippie ky yay, secularists!

Materialism, leftism, and fascism are on the increase in society. God the Creator as revealed in his written Word is despised and rejected. Those of us who have the impudence to show that atheism is irrational, stand for the truth of Scripture, tell the world that science actually supports biblical creation and the Genesis Flood, must be silenced according to their rule book. They don't know that the final victory belongs to God.



March 13, 2017

Secularists Protect Evolution from Thought

Evolutionists are on the prod again. A bill was proposed in South Dakota that required...what? What was in it that would cause such distress? Maybe if the bill required the teaching of Intelligent Design, or even biblical creation science, and exclude evolution. That'll be the day! Actually, the "problem" with the bill is that it promotes critical thinking instead of blind acceptance of evolution, so flaws in evolutionary speculations should be made known.


Evolution education law
Generated at Glass Giant
The secular science industry has been getting more political nowadays, with a distinct leftist bias. But Machiavellian approaches to evolutionary education have been happening for some time now — it's acceptable to deceive students for the sake of believing evolution. Critical thinking is unacceptable (as is free speech when contrary to leftist causes, atheism, and evolutionary thinking). Unfortunately, true science thrives on critical thinking and challenges, and free speech is also necessary. But atheists and other anti-creationists seek to protect their cult of death from scrutiny, so they unleash Darwin's Flying Monkeys©.
Secular reporters, for the life of them, can’t get their facts right. When it comes to the teaching of evolution, knees jerk, kicking the boilerplate machine into programmed output.

A proposed bill in South Dakota, called an “academic freedom bill” (SB 55) simply says this:
No teacher may be prohibited from helping students understand, analyze, critique, or review in an objective scientific manner the strengths and weaknesses of scientific information presented in courses being taught which are aligned with the content standards established pursuant to § 13–3-48.
Sound fair enough? Not to the secular press. One would think all hell broke loose, and we’re headed back into the dark ages. The story by AP reporters James Nord and Hannah Weikel hit the fan, splattering lies around the world as all the major media echoed it uncritically. The AP gives the impression that sneaky creationists were kicking Darwin out of science class and replacing it with the Bible, God and the dreaded c-word, creationism. Anyone see any of that in the bill’s language?
To read the rest, saddle up and ride over to "Fake News on Education Bills". 

November 11, 2016

Hating Donald Trump Near and Far

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

There is an amazing amount of vitriol aimed at Donald Trump, his supporters, and Christians. There were many Christians who did not support him, or (like me) only did so reluctantly in hopes that he meant what he said about appointing Supreme Court judges that are pro-life [1], supporting religious freedom [2], and he promises to uphold the Constitution [3]. Whether or not appointed judges betray the values they claim to uphold (like some have done) remains to be seen. Also, there's that "down ticket thing", people running for other offices; it wasn't just a presidential election, you know.


So Donald Trump won the election. Some are celebrating, some are full of hate and rage. Ideologues hate not getting what they want. Why did he win, why did Clinton lose, and what lies ahead?

I'm cautiously optimistic, and hope he gets advisers who know what they're doing. Christians need to pray for him [4]. I'd like to recommend a Christian analysis of the election on Janet Mefferd's podcast [5]. For some interesting discussion from a secular source, I had a great time listening to analysis and callers on this podcast by Chris Plante [6].

Hillary Clinton is a monster leftist who is a radical pro-abortionist. Abortion is the modern version of child sacrifice to Molech, and she wants to make it even more accessible. More? Right now, an unfit mother can be in the middle of giving birth, say she doesn't want to continue, so the murderous doctor can shove in a knife and kill the child on the spot. It's commonly called "partial-birth abortion" [7]. Amazing how heartless people want to put this wicked woman into the highest office in the land. Don't get me started on crimes and the way she treats people...

Perhaps Trump also won because of the contempt that leftists have for voters [8], such as Hillary calling half of Trump supporters a "basket of deplorables" [9]. (I don't recollect Donald Trump giving blanket insults for Clinton supporters.) It's also been said that people have had enough of a Clinton/Obama/Clinton political dynasty. For that matter, Obama and Clinton were pushing toward Marxist globalism and surrendering American sovereignty (Obama circumvented the Constitution with his executive orders [10], and some of us believe we were on the way to a dictatorship), and Trump's victory is seen as a win against globalism as well [11]. The trend toward globalism may be faltering, as is seen with Brexit [12]. Two others offering analysis to consider: Matt Walsh has some ideas on how leftists can come to terms with their crybaby hysteria: they lost because Clinton was lousy [13], and Albert Mohler has some interesting thoughts about how the election of Trump was a repudiation of not only Clinton, but also of political elitism [14]. 

Sneering at Trump has come from other world leaders, but that seems to happen whenever a Republican wins (or even runs for office), people commence to whining. Leftists sneer and ridicule. That's what they do, it's their nature. The United States is not yet a socialist country and we're not interested in electing leaders to please people in other countries, you savvy?

Too bad people within our borders can't grow up.

Several celebrities said they'd leave the country if Trump won [15]. That nonsense has happened before [16]. What in the world are they thinking? People will adore them so much, even though they're not close personal friends, that they'll vote for Hillary so the celebrities will stay put? Those sidewinders are just being manipulative as well as stupid.

How about schools that offer "emotional support" [17] for students because Shrillary lost and Trump won? Or the Yale professor that makes midterm optional [18] because the poor children are so upset? Or the students that burned the flag [19] because Trump won? Or the detestable people who want Trump assassinated [20]? How about the temper tantrums by leftists [21] over a legitimate election?

EDIT 11-12-2016: 
Used under Fair Use provisions for educational purposes
Interesting that Republicans and Conservatives don't have these problems. Perhaps it's because we cowboy up and deal with things. Some folks say that the rest of the world is laughing at America (as if they did a survey). Not laughing because of Trump, I think it's because we're turning into a nation of wimps. Those of us who stand up for what's right scare the leftists.

Some people are upset over the fact that Hillary won the popular vote by about 337,000 votes of the 120, 212,000 or so that were recorded (not including absentee ballots and others to consider, but are including votes from tampering with voting machines [22], illegal aliens [23], votes from dead people [24], and other fraud). They're angry that the Electoral College foils their fun and will place Trump as president (the Electoral College has rarely overruled the popular vote before). In a way, the small margin of difference in the popular vote is irrelevant [25], as the Electoral College was put into place to protect citizens from mob rule [26].

I heard the Chris Plante Show for election day, and a caller remained anonymous. He was a registered Democrat who voted for Trump but had to keep his mouth shut out of fear of retaliation. I remember similar things when George W. Bush was running for president, cars would get their paint "keyed", people would be verbally harassed. Never heard of it happening the other way around, and no Republican riots happened when B. Hussein Obama was elected [27].


"But I still believe in America, and I always will. And if you do, then we must accept this result and then look to the future. Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead. Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power.

"We don't just respect that. We cherish it. It also enshrines the rule of law; the principle we are all equal in rights and dignity; freedom of worship and expression. We respect and cherish these values, too, and we must defend them." 
— Hillary Clinton, November 9, 2016 [28]

Although I dislike giving narcissistic atheopaths any attention, some give me good material for examples of bad thinking and rage. Here is an astonishing vituperative attack from a bitter British tinhorn who hates God, Christians, Donald Trump, and especially biblical creationists. I've challenged him repeatedly to say why someone or something is evil based on his atheistic worldview, but he continuously dodges the challenge. That's because atheism is irrational and has no consistent foundation for morality. He has no legitimate basis to say of me, "The man is evil. As well as extremely hypocritical. And he hates the only politician who stands between the evil of Trump and the White House [29]." On what basis am I evil? What makes Trump evil? How can someone with any sense or conscience think Clinton is decent? By the way, he also does not understand the American political system.

Here is a screenshot of his bitter whining (click for larger):


Narcissistic atheopath is bigoted.

This is posted at a forum of anti-creationist bigots [30]. Yes, really. BCSE promotes censorship [31].
  • "A load of fundamentalist US Christians"
    Uh, did you take a survey? Not hardly. About 60 million votes for Trump were cast from people with a variety of religious and non-religious views [32].
  • "got into bed with the fascists"
    Loaded terminology fallacy. Fascist? He keeps using that word. It does not mean what he thinks it does [33].
  • "voted for a pathological liar"
    Documentation, please. Not just emotion-provoking rhetoric, we have plenty of that here in the US anyway.
  • "because they think he is more sympathetic to hardline 'biblical values' than the other candidate"
    He frequently uses the appeal to motive fallacy. Also, documentation would be helpful, especially since there are Christians who don't believe Trump upholds our values very well [34], "hardline biblical" or not. There are even sanctimonious professing Christians who have unfavorably judged other Christians who voted for Trump.
  • "But let's salute and remember all those other Christians, conservatives, liberals and independents who listened to their conscience."
    Is that a contradiction of the previous section? More likely, he's redefined those "other" people as those who meet his approval because they voted for Hillary Clinton.
He added, "These right wing bigots (Ken Ham on his facebook is another one) don't understand - or do understand but don't care - that there is genuine fear (and shock) within the US population at the election of Trump. As long as those awful 'anti-Christian' liberal Democrats have been shafted that's all they care about." [35] That loathsome hatred is not worth analyzing. Sure does hate Bible-believing Christians, doesn't he? It would be helpful for incoherent people to refrain from making ridiculous statements in public forums. Especially when a quick look at the facts contradicts such statements. 

Interestingly, despite this guy's arrogant ignorance (he probably gets his information from leftist Brit media and leftist American media), some people in other countries know a great deal about the American political process, even better than some Americans. I know this guy in Thailand as well as a non-citizen creationary scientist that could edjamakate a passel of Americans on what goes on.

Remember that the Democrat Party is on record for booing God [36]. You'll be hard pressed to find knowledgeable, Bible-believing Christians and biblical creationists who are loyal Democrats. Just look at their policies and actions. Hillary Clinton would continue Obama's anti-Christian and Marxist activities (I received a posted comment that was accurate, "A Clinton presidency would be the failed Obama presidency on steroids"). There are times when someone will run for office as a Democrat because he or she cannot defeat the local, corrupt Republican machine. In those cases, people vote for the candidate, not the party. Such instance are rather rare.

Leftists like anti-creationists and are in favor of the globalization initiatives of the politically-oriented pseudoscience of "climate change". (The character in the above screenshot said, "Trump denies climate change and Pence denies evolution" [37].) I found out after the election that Mike Pence is a creationist [38] (learned it from an Australian, no less), so that makes him a bad man according to evolutionists. Look up "Mike Pence creationist" on a search engine and see the evolutionists who are using the lie that he is "anti-science", which is a conflation of "science" with "evolution". I've not heard Trump discuss creation science or evolution. 

It is indeed unfortunate that anti-Christian, anti-creationist ideologues are so myopic that they hate Donald Trump even before he began his duties. The left has been slapping leather with Christians, Conservatives, and Republicans to support leftist goals. Since such a climate is actually bad for real science (see the references at "An Improper Environment for Science" [39]). Trump's pro-business views, if he follows through, can be beneficial for science [40].

Although many people in the United States and around the world express views that are decidedly anti-Christian, anti-capitalism, and anti-creationist, they must live with the fact that Donald Trump was elected president of the United States. Some are angry because this thwarts their desires for the United States to continue toward apostasy, globalization, and Marxism (with the expected result of shutting down free speech and religion for Christians and biblical creationists). They demonize Trump, Spence, people who voted for him because that's their nature. They're bigots. It's what they do. Others vote Democrat because they like their traditions, and are sad that their candidate lost.

Even Hillary said we should give Trump a chance. Yes, let's. Christians, we need to pray for him to have wisdom — and safety. I believe God has stayed severe judgement on our country, and we need to pray for that as well.

Subscribe in a reader