Stormbringer's Thunder

Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth. - Sherlock Holmes I had better point out to my more vicious, childish readers that I know full well that Sherlock Holmes was a fictional character. But everyone would be enriched by watching the way Jeremy Brett portrayed him! But look, there is more to logic and reason than you may think. Some people think they know everything humanly possible. How do you deal with facts that do not fit your presuppositions? You must accept the conclusions of the evidence, whether you like them or not. There is something that I have to address with my critics. They are angry because I do not engage them in protracted discussion on other people's blogs. These arrogant atheist trolls demand that I reply to each and every comment they make, and even bring up material that I have written here , to be discussed there , even though I am commenting (or in some cases, absent from commentin

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen There is a connotation of science  where scientists gather information, make a hypothesis, test it, revise as necessary, it becomes a theory, and eventually a law. Somewhere along the line the thing gets put out to pasture if the facts are recalcitrant. Such a view is not only naïve, but ignores human nature. Scientists are human, after all.  Scoffing at new material One expression I have encountered when discussing the origins controversy is that "science corrects itself". Aside from the reification fallacy ( science  is not a living thing, but scientists may correct themselves), this has been shown to be false — often in areas of technology. Great inventors were laughed at, such as Robert Fulton and the Wright brothers. It was said that if people move too fast (aside from dangerous acceleration, change of direct, and deceleration), they would have physical problems or even die. Scoffers were silenced by results. Some people attribute this ridi

"It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity." — Sir Francis Bacon I have to admit that I'm stumped about something. And I do not like writing an article of this nature, where I am responding to something said about me in the comments section of another Weblog. But I feel that I should. There was a comment about me at "Atheist Central", but I am reluctant to name the source. I'm thinking that he (?) may not want to be named outright, here. Well, if he (?) wants to leave a comment and claim it, then fine, I'll acknowledge it. But he will not, since he said (among other hateful things), "Thankfully, my atheistic moralit

For a long time, I have said that people are stupidified by hate. (Yes, I learned that word from Matt Slick .) They are so wrapped up in their hatred of people that there is little, if anything, that hate-ee can do that is "right" in their eyes. When it comes to atheism, the stupidification is a spiritual problem. Not only are they suppressing the truth about God (Rom. 1.20), they are unable to understand deeper spiritual matters (1 Cor. 2.14). This feeds itself and other areas of their lives are affected (Rom. 1.21-22), especially the ability to reason. Some refer to this as the "noetic effect of sin". This helps explain why the garden variety atheopath is unable to understand basic concepts of logic, even after they are explained. These proponents of "reason" are exceedingly irrational. (Click for larger.) This troll's assertion is helpful how, exactly? Since they are unable to defend their incoherent worldview, preferring instead

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

Tweaked for wording later that same day. Buon giorno. How low can you get? Norman the irrational, hate-filled troll made a remark to another irrational, hate-filled troll , completely off topic for the purpose of taking a cheap shot at yours truly, or will leave comments on Weblogs when I am not the topic of conversation . (I think he's still angry that I am his intellectual superior. But that is not a difficult accomplishment worth my bragging about.) Anyway, I get that. Being attacked, having petty Weblog articles written about what a bad man I am &c. is all a part of the territory.  The screen shot below has one typical lie from Norman, that I am "unable to talk about non-Christians without venom". Readers with any degree of intelligence know that I have referred to and conversed with non-Christians without venom. But the ones that get back what they give out are sobbing in Mommie's aprons, so naturally, they use absolute terms to color the readers'

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen (Edited 11-06-2015) I'm speaking in generalities. There are theistic evolutionists who are not actively trying to troll the Web and recruit Bible believers away from their faith. Also, there are yet a few professing atheists who really don't care what the rest of us believe, and want to go on about their business.  A foundation for the religion of atheism is evolution, which gives many professing atheists a "scientific" explanation for the origin and development of life. Naturally, atheists attack Christians because it's their nature to do so (John 8:44, Luke 6:22, 2 Timothy 3:12). But they hate creationists even more, because creation wrecks their evolutionary foundation. When it comes to biblical ("young Earth") creation, they ride in at full gallop with guns blazing, because evolution requires time — a lot of it — and biblical creation science shows not only the flaws in evolution, but gives evidence for a recent crea

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Edited 23 Mat 2922 Free speech is something that is cherished by many people in the Western world, but it is being suppressed drastically. Most of the mainstream media are so left-wing, they fly in circles; news reports infested with opinions. The secular science industry promotes leftist views, and is anti-science in many ways . Biblical creationists uphold the authority of the Word of God, beginning in Genesis. Biblical truth undermines socialism and many other political evils, so no wonder creation scientists are suppressed when they present evidence against evolution. Something very important that many of us teach is the importance of definitions. Surveillance, Pixabay /  Jürgen Jester (modified with FotoSketcher ) Darwin's acolytes tell us that evolution is a "fact" and that it has been observed. This often comes with conflating variations  and speciation  (among other things) with evolution , where they are intending to dry gulch people int