Stormbringer's Thunder

In Going Rogue: An American Life , Sarah Palin recounts the vetting process she experienced before she was selected to be the GOP vice presidential nominee in 2008. While being interviewed as a potential candidate for the McCain campaign, all went smoothly until something made the McCain staffers wince. “I had just dared to mention the C-word: creationism,” wrote Palin, the daughter of a science teacher. “But I felt I was on solid factual ground.” During the Delaware senate race of the 2010 midterm elections, Chris Coons ordered Christine O’Donnell to “come clean” with voters during a debate. When O’Donnell insisted she had already come clean on every position, Coons mustered up the most devastating, scandalous, humiliating, skeleton-in-the-closet-detecting litmus test he could think of: “Do you believe in evolution?” Recently, a woman parroted the same query over her little boy’s shoulder to Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry. The Texas Governor dared to affir

Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory. — Stephen Jay Gould, 1977 Evolution is racist. Why is this concept not being proclaimed more clearly? Evolution, as is popularly defined, is a gradual continuance and weeding out of physical traits. Therefore all the physical traits that we know as defining race……skin color, shape of the eyes, hair, etc., are all supposed to be due to some evolutionary benefit for survival. So we are told, no trait survives the proces of natural selection unless it benefits survival in some way. Therefore all the races of human got that way due to some evolutionary reason. The shape of the eyes, skin and hair color, all presumably got that way for a reason benefitting survival. This, by definition, is racial. Notice what I’m NOT saying. This does not mean that every person who holds to evolution is a biased racist. I’m not saying

"Fundamentalist Christian", indeed. Caught you liars again. The guy was a Darwinist!

"If you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God then you are a religious Christian. Myself and many more like me do not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God. We do however believe in Christianity as a cultural, social, identity and moral platform. This makes us Christian.” — Anders Behring Brevik "If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love. I have told you this so that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be complete. This is my commandment: that you love one another as I have loved you. No one shows greater love than when he lays down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command you." — Jesus (from the International Standard Version) You are probably saturated with news reports about Anders Behring Brevik. Brace yourselves, I think this is going to be a long ride. The road is already full of

"A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question."  — Charles Darwin In honour of Papa Darwin's birthday, my current profile icon is Piltdown Man. Remember hearing about him? He was a big deal in his day, a strong "missing link" between you and your evolutionary past. Except that he was a fraud, a fake from the gullible scientific community, and fooled people who should have known better for decades. Anyway, Darwin is that failed, backslidden theology student who gave atheism a pretense at respectability. Who needs God when we evolved over huge periods of time through the blind, gibbering mad god of Chance? Now, the passionately religious orthodox evolutionists  deny that there is any evidence contrary to their claims, except from idiot graduates from Billy Bob's Backwoods Bible Baptist Church and Seminary and Creation Science School. Problem is, there are credentialed s

Slightly edited January 1, 2018. Buona sera, wherever you are. Uncle Bob is really burned up about something. No, that's wrong. I want to say that today's topic is about bad science. First, I'm going to talk about what makes things burn. Naturally, you're going to say oxygen, or combustion process, or maybe an independent fuel source. Well, we do know about what makes things burn today. Way back when, it was a different story. It was a mystery. Johann J. Becher put out (ha!) his theory of phlogiston in 1667. (Surprisingly, Wikipedia has a very good article on the subject.) Basically, stuff burned because it contained this ingredient. No phlogiston, no burning. You may be tempted to laugh at it today because science has left the theory behind over a hundred years ago, but it was an attempt to work through and explain the observed phenomenon of burning. It was also used to explain rusting, but there is no need to make this discussi

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

Edited for wording 9-21-2012 Guten tag. I've just gone through Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed for the second time, and I'm glad I bought the DVD. The first time through, I had to walk away because the logical conclusion of what the movie presented was very upsetting. I'm not much of a fan of documentaries, but this one sings a song that I've been doing for many years. It shows the flaws of the philosophies of evolution, and the discrimination of the scientific establishment against anyone that dares run against their orthodoxy and say that maybe, just perhaps, Intelligent Design (I.D.) should be considered an alternative explanation of the facts. Some of what I'm writing now is a repeat of previous postings. Get over it, because it's important, capice? Important point: Defining the term “evolution” is the gradual development of life over vast periods of time, with transitional forms leading to completely new species of life. I am not talking ab