Stormbringer's Thunder

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen It is not only very helpful to learn about informal logical fallacies, but can be fun. At least, they are for me. Prove it! Not only does this help you in discussions so you can see if some owlhoot is building an argument with faulty reasoning, but helps you check your own arguments so you can present present them as accurately as possible. Back up your assertions! The more I learn about fallacies, the more I see that not only can many of them get combined and overlap (a comment can a contain complex question, an ad hominem  and a genetic fallacy all at the same time, for example). Are you afraid to back up your claims, or just too stupid to cite something from a real source and not from creatard sites? More than that, I keep seeing additional "fallacies" that appear to be simply made up. Someone accused me of committing a fallacy because I pointed out his own fallacies, therefore, I was "negated" and he was free to continue buil

Atheism is in trouble. It is on the decline globally 1 , 2 , they are the least-liked, least trusted group 3 (but their status may have improved slightly since the surveys were taken), and they humiliate themselves and even other atheists with their antics 4 . Some will whine, "We're persecuted!" Seldom true. "You hate me because I'm an atheist!" Also seldom true, but you identify with anti-Christian bigots 5 , and that doesn't help you. Courtesy of Kirk Hastings , used with permission In addition, the idea of a universe that caused itself is philosophically and scientifically untenable 6 , and they hate that fact. One thing that militant atheopaths cannot tolerate is a defector, whether it is someone who leaves their religion 7 , or dares to question materialism since most rely on that. Materialistic evolution is also a tenet of fundamentalist atheism 8 . I've noticed that they seem to attack former atheists with amazing vitriol, a

"The hope of a Christian is inseparable from his faith. Whoever believes in the divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures must hope that the religion of Jesus shall prevail throughout the earth. Never since the foundation of the world have the prospects of mankind been more encouraging to that hope than they appear to be at the present time. And may the associated distribution of the Bible proceed and prosper till the Lord shall have made 'bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God' (Isaiah 52:10)." — John Quincy Adams Despite the efforts of revisionists to take away the truth and secularize America, the fact remains immovable that this country was founded on Christian values . Although this country was founded on the Bible, there was never a threat that people would be forced to worship at a state-run religious establishment; people were free to believe or disbelieve as they chose. Am

Buon giorno. Here's something short that occurred to me. Republicans, and many Conservatives, distance themselves from people who have doubts that B. Hussein Obama was actually born in the United States. They even have a disparaging word, "Birthers". (Of course, leftists utterly detest anyone who does not bow down and worship Dumbobama, so they are not worth consideration.) There are nagging developments about his birth certificate that make the anti-birthers rethink their positions, however. But I don't want to get into that. Then there are the "Truthers". In general, Republicans and Conservatives distance themselves from this lot, with good reason. I want to slap them until their heads spin for their belief in utterly ludicrous conspiracy theories, capice? It's usually  cafones who want to believe sensational stuff, mostly leftists who hate liberty and freedom, who promote this crap. I wrote about this some time ago, go here for that article an

As always, there's a chance I'm being set up and some juvenile-minded individual will say, "Haw, haw! He went for it!" So be it, Soviet. On the other hand, it could be real and this inquirer has taste, discernment and obvious intelligence. I see that he landed at Piltdown Superman, a great place to begin searching for answers.

The good ones (the polar bear, Spock and the dorky cat) were made by Kirk (The Captain). "...because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse." (Romans 1:19-20, NASB)

Buon giorno. The "Question Evolution Day" project is now more ambitious. It is now " The Question Evolution Project ". Yes, we're still going to be heard on February 12 (Darwin's birthday), but the page at Piltdown Superman and the Facebook Page are resources to encourage and provide information for those of us who do not think according to the dictates of others. We think for ourselves, capice? I've got some bad news for you, Sunshine, evolution is a bad philosophy. And no, it's still not a place for atheists and evolutionists to badger creationists and ID proponents. Troublemakers get banned. Bwahahaha! Click for larger Basement Cat

Question Evolution Day is February 12! For more information and more videos, go to Piltdown Superman dot com .

Again, I have to say that people who claim to believe in "tolerance" (which is another form of relativism ) tend to be the least tolerant. The true spirit of science is to investigate possibilities, test, repeat, verify and so forth. Except that evolution is protected as a "fact", and none dare question it (faith based on dogmatism). When creationists come along and say, "We have scientific evidence that evolution is not correct, and we have better explanations of the facts", well... Information scientist, author and evangelist, Dr Werner Gitt, a close friend of CMI, told us that on 23 October 2008 he was subjected to the most strident opposition he had ever encountered. The venue was the Audimax theatre at the Leibniz University in Hannover, Germany. Dr Gitt had been invited to give a lecture by the Forum Bibel-Glaube-Wissenschaft (Forum of Bible-Faith-Science). The talk was titled, ‘Why I as a scientist believe the

As usual, the more I examine logical fallacies, the more I see how people blend their fallacies into dreadful monstrosities. I have had many experiences where people will attack by asserting that they have a bad or ulterior motive, so be careful of Proof by Assertion because it lends itself to reinforcing other fallacies. " Proof by Assertion " (sometimes "Proof by  Repeated  Assertion", a relative of  Circular Reasoning ) is one of my favorite fallacies because I encounter it so  very  often. In its simplest form, Proof by Assertion happens when someone declares a "fact" without offering supporting evidence: This is similar to the mantra, "Evolution is science, creation is religion". An assertion with an excuse. I still say, "Disingenuous". That was a very strange assertion and cop-out. Another reason that I like "Proof by Assertion" is that it is conveniently linked with

Buona sera.  Before I ask my question, I need to give some background information. My regular readers know that I am very annoying to certain people because I am not only an unashamed follower of Jesus, but I am also a Biblical creationist for our origins (evolution is untrue, evidence points to God of the Bible). Naturally, I have some vituperative atheist stalkers. One in particular has a phone-in podcast where they malign Christians. He and his cronies have attempted to have me call their "show" through various means: Appeal to pride Appeal to cause (ie, "Don't make Jesus cry by refusing") Repetitive attempts at bullying Attempts at humiliation Ridicule Libel The one that is probably their ringleader has consistently shown himself incapable of understanding basic logic;  insists that I call "The Atheist Experience" because he called Matt Slick at CARM (I do not see much point in debates, and do not seek debates); is unnaturally

"Those behind the call for ‘evolution not creationism’ say teaching that God created the world is dangerous and must be prevented by law." "For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived. A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question ; and this cannot possibly be here done." — Charles Darwin, Origin of Species Buona sera. I'll keep on saying it: Since modern atheists do not bother with boring stuff like logic and critical thinking, and evolutionists cannot bear to have the flaws in their "theory" exposed, they seek to silence the opposition. Emotionalism, personal attacks and ridicule, provocation — and by legislation, when possible. Intellectual honesty, and scientific inquiry, will be willing to examine contrary evide

Buona sera.  This nonsense constantly amazes me. It also adds fuel to my fire that atheists are opposed to freedom of speech. Since they are unable to engage in rational, civil discourse, they resort to their tired, annoying tricks of maligning the person (or organization) instead. Atheists call themselves "rational", "free thinkers" and other misnomers, and then engage in irrational "arguments". In fact, they appear to oppose freedom of thought. Atheists say that they believe in science and in the human mind. Well, the spirit of scientific inquiry does not  mean "smash the opposition instead of examining the evidence". But, since evolution is ill-supported and unscientific, it must be bolstered by data manipulation and outright fraud . No wonder they fear creationists, refusing to listen to their evidence. By the way, what is this "scientific inquiry" attitude of attempting to dismiss all creationism as "a lie"? Are at

For more information that evolutionists do not want to face, check out my Creation Science site, " Evolutionary Truth by Piltdown Superman ".

Piltdown Man was a fraud. Why not, if it advances "science"? Buona sera. I wanted to tell you that my newer Weblog, " Evolutionary Truth by Piltdown Superman ", will be more active. It contains links to articles against the "fact" of evolution, and also to material supporting Intelligent Design and Creation Science. Evolutionists give only one side of the story and suppress contrary evidence. Presenting only evolutionism is not science, it is brainwashing. There are scientists who disagree with the mainstream interpretation of the facts. By the way, some people are incapable of differentiating (I know, Uncle Bob's using big words again, look them up) between differences of opinion and lies. People like that will not even begin to understand the material presented there, so they may as well stay home and play Solitaire. I will write an occasional article, but most of the work will be done by other people. Oh, and I will not be taking comments

A letter from "T.B." of the UK illustrates the way that many atheists try to shift the goalposts of the debate in their favour. Dr Jonathan Sarfati , Creation Ministries International, Queensland, Australia responded to show that Christians need not play by self-serving new rules made up by their opponents. Click here to read the article .

Here is a feedback article from Creation Ministries International that features an email exchange between Brandon M. from Canada and CMI’s Dr Don Batten , where Dr. Batten shows how they haven’t stereotyped atheists in our article on atheism . Click here for the article, Arnie .

The rules of the game As the ‘rules’ of science are now defined, creation is forbidden as a conclusion—even if true. by Carl Wieland ‘Creationism isn’t science.’  ‘They don’t understand the rules of what science is, or they deliberately ignore them.’  Comments such as these flow readily from the pens of the many critics of the modern creationist movement. Why are such comments so widely and passionately believed? I believe that the only rule creationists are ‘breaking’ is one which cannot be said to properly belong to a scientific inquiry into origins, and which effectively imposes a religious dogma upon science. Read the rest of this article here .

I maintain there is much more wonder in science than in pseudoscience. And in addition, to whatever measure this term has any meaning, science has the additional virtue, and it is not an inconsiderable one, of being true. — Carl Sagan Buona sera. I was going to go for something lighter, but Lee Strobel fueled more thoughts in me about evolution and random chance. I have always been amazed when scientists and anti-theists will say ridiculous things like the Carl Sagan (rhymes with "pagan") quote at the top. They will claim that belief in God is not only irrational, but that it takes away the wonder of the universe. Let me ask you something: Which is sillier, to investigate the way God has performed his wonders, or to investigate the dead ends of a philosophy that is based entirely on random chance? When a biochemist examines the intricacies of, say, a single cell, he or she is faced with astonishing complexity and evidence of design. And yet, there are people who b

Edited for wording 9-21-2012 Guten tag, again. If you missed our last episode, you can read Part 1 here , or scoll down if it's on the same Web page at the moment. Within hours, I received some venom-enriched hate mail that proves what I'm saying about the intolerance and emotionalism of Darwinists. It was a personal attack, including my religious beliefs (which is pretty low of them), but there was no "religion" in my previous article! Evolutionism as a world view has led to a host of problems. It has led to a loss of faith because people chose to believe in the philosophy of evolution. “Survival of the fittest” is a frequent excuse for economic and social injustices . It leads to a liberal view of euthanasia and abortion. Eugenics, the sterilization and extermination of the “unfit” people of the world fits Darwinism. Marxism is hard-core Darwinism applied politically. So is Nazism. Hitler was a devout Darwinist, and thought that he was doing the