January 22, 2019

Celebrity Appeal and Propaganda

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

The other day, Stormie Waters was frustrated with her gold prospecting efforts and ventured up past Stinking Lake (which is not as bad as the name implies) and up into Deception Pass. Somehow she avoided the Winkie Guards and drew near to the Darwin Ranch. Then she overheard Rusty Swingset telling the hands that they need to step up their propaganda game — using celebrities.


Atheists and evolutionists are using celebrity propaganda to manipulate people into accepting their views.
Background image furnished by Why?Outreach
I'll allow that we gravitate toward people who think like us (and Christians are commanded to have teaching and fellowship with other believers, but it seems that we seek out celebrity endorsements a bit less than other people.) Having someone famous who is on your side has a greater impact. You can find listings of famous atheists in history and the media, and lists of creation scientists and other scientists who disagree with Darwinism can be found. People of varied interests find influential people who share their interests.


Propaganda and Persuasion

The word propaganda is not necessarily a dirty word, but it has strong negative connotations. Advertising is a kind of propaganda to persuade people to use a product or service. Propaganda has been used during wars to help improve the morale of the populace and the military, and is used to discourage the enemy. 

Unfortunately, a great deal of propaganda for leftist political purposes, global climate change, evolutionism, and other things is deceptive. Misquotes are used with impunity and pertinent information is omitted in order to deceive people. I reckon that propagandists know that people are unable or unwilling to think critically, preferring to "think" with their emotions, so they swallow the lies and succumb to manipulation — all the while believing they were reaching their own conclusions through reason.

Celebrity Influence — It Should Not Matter

Really, who cares? Thinking people should not be influenced by the opinions of people in the arts. (Ever notice that movie and rock stars as well as others in arts-related fields are usually leftists and others who reject biblical authority?) Rock star Alice Cooper (Vincent Furnier) bluntly said, "f you're listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you're a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we're morons. We sleep all day, we play music at night and very rarely do we sit around reading the Washington Journal."

Like rockers, film stars are not exactly known for being experts in foreign policy, climatology, or economics. To use a phrase from Chris Plante, they "play dress up and make believe". Actors generally do not have time for more intellectual pursuits. A well-known advertisement for a cough syrup used an actor who played a doctor on a soap opera telling us to use that product, but he was not a real doctor. This was an implied appeal to authority. Just stop and think when you're influenced by that actor in the latest hit movie about comic book heroes brought to life.

Celebrities are not exactly known as role models for morality, and a presuppositional apologist would like to ask someone making declarations, "What makes this policy or person you're condemning bad (or good) according to your hedonistic worldview? What is your ultimate standard of morality?"' What we all could do (when we get a notion to using our think bones) is consider those questions ourselves when a celebrity is pontificating.

Making the Stars

While many celebrities get attention the usual way (film attendance, album sales, and so on), others have their status inflated. Atheists have their "rock stars" that owe their popularity to the web, and others are poor philosophers that sell books to other atheists who seek support for their existing anti-Christian bigotry. It baffles me why Clinton Richard Dawkins is an "expert" on religion when he is a materialistic scientist and has no formal training in theology. Celebrity atheists sell books, give lectures, and make big money hating God, though, experts or not.

Evolutionary and atheistic icons receive hero worship that is largely undeserved. Charles Darwin is touted as a "great scientist", but when we point out that his only formal education was in theology, not science, his disciples get a mite obstreperous. In the same way, Bill Nye is sought after for his views on atheism, evolutionism, and climate change. When shown that he is a former comedian that became a television actor, not a scientist, and a propagandist for leftist causes (like abortion, global warming, evolution, etc.), his admirers tend to go ballistic. Indeed, Nye used fake, outdated science and bad logic in his debate with Ken Ham, and Answers in Genesis provided many articles refuting his ignorance. 


If you read about propaganda used by Nazis, Mao, the Soviet Union, and so on, you will see the cult of personality approach is used to inflate the celebrity status of those in power. People were persuaded by posters, leaflets, broadcasts, and testimonies of how wonderful their leaders were. You do want to please Our Leader, don't you? Think of how badly you would feel if you let him down, boy howdy! Fear was a big part of this because people who displeased those in power were made to go away, which also helped the propaganda.

Christians tend to get a few sensational claims from celebrities to prove their points. It puts a burr under my saddle when people misquote Uncle Albert (Einstein), for instance, when as a student he puts an atheistic teacher in his place. The account is fictional, and Einstein did not hold to any semblance of Christianity. Some of us have passed around things without checking on their validity, presumably with some sort of celebrity appeal. This only gives misotheists additional excuses to ridicule us.

The basis for our thinking is the Word of God, not sensationalism or the opinions of famous people who ride for the secularist brand. God gave us minds and expects us to use them. People are not converted to Christ through celebrities, that is the work of the Holy Spirit.

Thinking for Ourselves

Don't get me wrong, it's interesting and even fun when a famous person shows up in the studio or at a gathering to lend support to a cause. It's even better when they have knowledge of the subject they are supporting. But be very careful about being swayed by emotional appeal. "Fiona Famousgirl supports this, so I should too because I adore Fiona". Wrong.

I may write an article on this sometime, but I believe that we are ripe for a dictatorship. Study on it a bit and see that people do not think logically, are easily manipulated by celebrities and false authority figures, and are driven by their emotions. (The Antichrist could easily harness all that, but I'm not going to turn this into an eschatology article.) What can we do?

For one thing, take Mr. Newhart's advice and stop it. Get up on the hill for the bigger picture and reason things through. Is there any reason to care what some famous person thinks about a subject, especially if they are opposed to our values? Not hardly!

This article was inspired by another that I am going to recommend. I'd be obliged if you'd read "Can evolutionists use celebrities to brainwash the public?"


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".

December 24, 2018

Atheistic Anti-Holiday Foolishness

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Canada has been doing a whole whack of stuff that is anti-family, anti-conservative, anti-free speech, and anti-Christian. Like many other parts of the world (including these here United States), this kind of behavior by governmental and legislative officials has been increasing. Atheists whined, and were financially rewarded. What, is Canada turning into France and surrendering to bad behavior?


Atheist parents in Canada sued a school and won over Christmas and Hanukkah displays. In reality, they lost on many levels.
Background image courtesy of Why?Outreach
Up yonder in British Columbia, an atheist family complained about religious holiday symbols (atheists complain a lot, it's their nature). "You have to stop what you're doing and everybody else has to comply to our demands", it seems. The school didn't want those obstreperous schmendricks in their establishment, so they said not to come back. The atheists sued and won!

Although what used to be civil and legal rights were on the side of the school, when you have leftist misotheists in power, rights do not matter any longer. While the atheists "won", they actually lost:
  • They are teaching their child intolerance and bigotry.
  • The child is learning that whining and seeking legal action are the way to settle disputes.
  • This child is also learning to be a jerk, expecting the rest of the world to cave in to his or her narrow demands.
  • Schools are supposed to be places of learning, including what other people think and believe. It appears that these unfit parents want to keep the kid in a bubble, unaware that other people think and feel differently.
  • Unless something changes drastically, this child is learning to be unfit in dealing with other people, whether in Canada or other cultures; shielding the kid does not work.
People celebrate Christmas and Hanukkah. That means songs, symbols, greetings, decorations, and so forth. Despite the efforts of misotheists, most calendars number the years based on the fact that God the Son, the Creator, entered his creation to redeem us. Trying to change AD and BC to CE and BCE are shallow efforts to deny historical reality. Is the child going to complain about the years on calendars or stamped on coins?  Perhaps Junior will become a Christian despite the efforts of atheo-fascist parents.

I'm going to ride down a side trail for a moment. Some professing atheists are "live and let live". That is, "You believe, I don't. Let's go on about our business". Those seem to be fewer as time goes on, but this one realizes that Christmas is a big part of our culture:


The biggest loss that these parents will receive is at the Judgment of Christ. Although they suppress the truth of God's existence in unrighteousness, they know (and their child knows) deep inside that God exists. Hell is getting hotter for them because of hindering their little one. They need to repent. Then they can celebrate the birth of Jesus with a few million of the rest of us. Until then, they can work on Christmas instead of getting a day off and celebrate the virgin birth for the God they hate. Christmas and Hanukkah still happen, whether atheopaths like it or not.



December 5, 2018

Science Shows the Differences Between Men and Women

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Some people refer to those of us who reject fish-to-fool evolution or the current version of anthropogenic climate change as "science deniers", "anti-science", and similar labels. Such claims are clearly blatant lies utilized to elicit emotional reactions for the sake of demonizing their opponents. 

It is not uncommon for advocates of evolution and climate change to misrepresent those they perceive of as enemies, even lying all the more in their straw man "arguments". Part of the problem is the all-or-nothing argumentation; we state that we appreciate real science, but they portray us as if we reject all science. You savvy? When it comes to differences between men and women, there are indeed science deniers. No, not all of science, but that which is applicable to their gender activism.


Medical science and biology affirm the differences between men and women. To ignore the facts can lead to serious health hazards.
The Happy LoversGustave Courbet, 1844
I have written about the differences between males and females (and how science confirms what the Bible says) in a previous post. Also, leftist activists in the secular science industry are denying what they are supposed to know and fueling gender confusion for a small segment of the population. (Interesting that all sorts of deviations have escalated ever since the Obergefell ruling.) For centuries, people knew that men and women are different; there are only two sexes like the Bible says (Genesis 1:27, Genesis 5:2). Nowadays people don't know which restroom to use. Your gender is not "fluid", and if you'll permit me a moment of the reification fallacy: science does not care how you feel.

Aside from the obvious differences in strength and physique, our differences go all the way down to the cellular level — even into the DNA. Men respond to certain medications differently than women. Snoring and sleep apnea are bad for anyone, but they seem to be a greater cardiac problem for women. Both sexes have kidneys, but those of women have been complicated. Men are less likely to survive some cancers than women. There is a great deal more in the link below.

Meanwhile, leftists want to ignore the factual differences between the sexes, and political correctness can interfere with proper medical procedures. As Christians and creationists (as well as secularists who have sense) have said all along, we are different and no amount of personal preference assertion can change that. Leftists mocked Donald Trump for saying that there are only two sexes. He is right. 

To read about science between the sexes, click on "Biological Fact: Men and Women Are Different". EDIT: I also recommend "Marriage and identity crisis" Redefining marriage, gender, age and species" for additional information.

Here is a song that leftists are making noise about getting banned. Probably because it is about man and woman stuff.




October 31, 2018

Protestants, Atheists, and Science

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

There is a picture of a young guy with a beginner's mustache, glasses, and he has one eyebrow raised. His shirt is printed, "I'm an atheist debate me". The caption reads, "Atheism A Religion People Join to Appear Smarter". Although it has been given many captions, I like this older one the most. You can see it here if you like, the one I'm talking about should be at the top. Anti-creationists get rambunctious with it, but I believe the original picture is a parody of atheists' attitudes.

Atheists pretend to be smarter than Christians, but reality shows otherwise.
Bellvue Baptist Church photo credit: Freeimages / Ricky Gipson
The majority of American atheists are younger males and white. The caption about "appear smarter" is especially fitting, as many atheopaths are trolling the web, trying to impress others with their genius. They get upset when we point out their poor logic, and frequently display their ignorance, such as in a 3-on-3 debate that I wrote about. Professing atheists today are not too likely to do their thing and let us do our thing. No, atheo-fascists want us silenced, mein Herr. (Regular readers have seen my reports of blind hatred from a criminal cyberstalkers.) The great irony that they miss is when they claim that they are more intelligent than "theists" by virtue of being atheists, they are demonstrating fallacious thinking! Many times, these Mighty Atheists™ display their super powers, but only demonstrate poor logic, narcissism, and bigotry.

Click for larger ("Tweets" are public domain)
Atheists have extreme faith in their religion. By denying that atheism is a religion because they reject a deity, they are ignoring definitions of religion. (Ironically, they have their own naturalistic miracles for their worldview) Also, they build a straw man argument by using the hoary canard that "faith is believing in something you know isn't true". R.C. Sproul wrote
The first assertion that faith is rational means that faith is intelligible. It is not absurd or illogical. If biblical revelation were absurd and irrational, it would be utterly unintelligible and meaningless. The content of the Bible cannot pierce the soul of a sentient creature without first going through the mind. It was Augustine who declared that faith without evidence is credulity. At this point we understand that though faith is rational, it is also reasonable. Biblical faith does not call people to crucify their intellect or take irrational leaps of faith into the darkness with the hope that Christ will catch us. Rather we are called to leap out of the darkness and into the light. 
God requires us to have faith (Habakkuk 2:4, 2 Corinthians 5:7, Hebrews 11:6). Cowboy up and realize that God does not require his people to do stupid things. Faith is real and important, and has nothing in common with the way professing atheists portray it, you savvy?

Some people say that they want to raise their children with no religious input and "let them decide for themselves". Congratulations, you just told your children that there is no ultimate truth, and that philosophies are like choosing hats. I was recently told about someone in her 20s who recently visited a church for the first time. Her parents were "not religious", but by their lifestyle, they were still influencing their children. 

You will also hear, "I don't believe in religion, I believe in science!" Science is a tool, and a philosophy for interpreting data. It is based on one's worldview. Atheists begin with materialism and see evidence for evolution, and Bible-believing Christians see evidence that supports Scripture that tells us about our Creator. Going beyond materialism and into human experience on the spiritual level, there are no atheists, only those who suppress the truth (Romans 1:18-23). 

If you've noticed, atheists as a whole are not the ones spearheading disaster relief efforts, building hospitals or schools, or anything else. Sure, individual atheists contribute to science and society, but the heavy lifting is done by Christians. Today is Reformation Day because when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the Wittenburg door, the Reformation "officially" started. Actually, it had been in the making for some time before, and continued afterward. Luther promoted public education.

It is interesting that Protestants have more interest in having science in their lives than atheists, and display more logical thinking! Well, that was the case in the past more so than now, because of the secularization and Islamization of various nations. Today, state education systems are indoctrination centers for atheism and evolution, but people are not learning the truth, nor are they learning critical thinking.

Now we come to an article I strongly recommend: "Who’s Got Logical Reasoning? Protestants, Not Atheists".


October 22, 2018

Atheists Spread the Bruno Science Lie

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Seems to me that it is human nature to like to find people or read statements that agree with our existing opinions. When people deny facts in favor of their opinions (such as, "My little Johnny would never rustle cattle!" when the varmint was caught red handed), that is a problem. Changing the facts to fit an opinion or a narrative is lying, and that's a natural fact. That's a big problem. Atheists are generally known for lying, and one of their favorites lies is about "The Church hates science". In this case, the false legend built up about Giordano Bruno.

One of the falsehoods spread by atheists to demonize Christianity is that Giordano Bruno was killed because he was a scientist

Recently, a rider from the Owlhoot Trail spread a claim from atheistic dogma that Giordano Bruno "was killed by the Church for daring to believe and expand upon the heliocentric model, he dared to state that the Earth revolved around the Sun, not the other way around, and that there were more planets than just the Earth and the other Solar System based planets out there". Absolutely false. 

Click for larger
To see the atheopathy inherent in the system, click here and take a gander at the comments
Used under federal Fair Use provisions for educational purposes
His remark was in response to a short video posted at The Question Evolution Project regarding falsehoods circulated about the Middle Ages. Such a claim ignores history and how universities were invented back then, plus the fact that great scientists (many of them were creationists) began important studies. Indeed, the atheopath dismissed the entirety of the video. Obviously, it contained truth that was threatening to his fundamentally flawed worldview.

Let's take that a bit further. This pusillanimous attack is used to demonize Catholicism and especially Christianity in general, and to support the presupposition that Christianity as a whole is wicked. If that's the case, then to be consistent and honorable, we must discard all of the sciences, art, and other accomplishments that began in the Middle Ages. For that matter, discard everything invented by Christians — especially creationists — because we're bad people.

Creation Ministries International touched on the Bruno thing when they were exposing the numerous falsehoods in the newer version of Cosmos. Since people like that are fond of using the genetic fallacy to avoid facing the facts, we need to go somewhere else. (I'll allow that the CMI article was not thorough on the Bruno section, but that was not their intention.) How about if we take a look at something completely different: history for atheists, written by an atheist?

Tim O'Neill makes me want to weep. He is intelligent, articulate, pleasant, and the kind of guy I'd like to hang around with. The noetic effect of sin that affects the thinking of those who reject God does not seem to have fouled him up yet. I hope and pray that he will humble himself and submit to Jesus Christ for salvation. There is still hope for that.

Mr. O'Neill points out that the claims made about Bruno were not based on historical records but (in my words) Atheistic Clearinghouses of Disinformation. The stuff is propaganda and has no  support. Bruno was not a scientist, but a mystic who happened to use science on occasion. In fact, it's clear that he was a nut.

Some angry misotheists claim that Isaac Newton was a mystic, so his biblical creation beliefs are negated. They should reject the laws of motion and his studies of gravity as well. O'Neill points out that many of the Medieval scientists had a mystical bent, but unlike Giordano Bruno, they were indeed practicing actual science. Bruno was not executed for being a scientist. He was executed for being a heretic, like other people of that time who spread wild-eyed beliefs, and opposed the political powers that be.

To see how Tim examines the history, including the culture of the time and related procedures, I strongly recommend clicking on "The Great Myths 3: Giordano Bruno was a Martyr for Science".


October 16, 2018

Zoroaster and Monotheism

As a kid, I liked watching Zoroaster, as portrayed by Guy Williams. He wore a mask, fought for justice in Spanish California, and slash a Z with his sword —

"No, Cowboy Bob! You're thinking of Zorro!"

Oh, right. I was wondering why he started a religion over yonder, in Persia and India.

Now it's time to stop playing with words and get serious. The history of Zoroaster (Zarathustra, and other names) is controversial, and is generally considered to have lived long before Jesus. Some two-bit tinhorns say that Christianity stole concepts from Zoroastrianism and Mithraism, but examinations of source documents show that such is not the case.

Zoroaster began a religion that has some similarities with Christianity.
Public domain image attributed to Clavis Artis,
an alchemy manuscript, via Wikimedia Commons
Zoroastrianism is considered monotheistic, but that is not entirely accurate because. They have a God, but also have an immortal counterpart for evil. Christianity does not have Satan as God's equal, but as a created being who turned evil and is defeated at the end. Their god, Ahura Mazda, was a creator, but there are very distinct differences between that creation account and the true creation found in Genesis.

Stories of the Genesis Flood that are spread all over the world and many still have elements of the true account, and people most likely carried some form of the narrative with them after the dispersal at Babel. Not only are people born with a knowledge that God exists, but I suspicion that some semblance of accounts of the one true God were dispersed as well. That may explain some similarities between religions. Also, it is likely that later versions of Mithraism and Zoroastrianism borrowed from Christianity.

Y'all might be wondering why I'm posting something about this obscure Eastern religion. One reason is to challenge the foolish claim that Christianity stole from Zoroastrianism. Another one is because the religion may seem obscure in the West, but is has very many adherents in India, Iran, and other places. Also, there are mixtures of cultural religions and Zoroastrianism, and even some modifications of Islam. Don't be surprised if those folks moving in next door have some shades of this religion. They need Jesus too.
The early history of Zoroastrianism is much in dispute. The religion was founded by Zoroaster, but it is not certain when he lived, where he lived or how much of later Zoroastrianism came from him. Tradition puts him in western Iran in the sixth century BC, a little earlier than the Buddha in India, but it is now thought that he lived in northeastern Iran, in the area on the borders of modern Afghanistan and Turkmenistan. An alternate theory dates him much earlier, somewhere from 1700 to 1500 BC, and places him in the plains of central Asia, perhaps before the first groups of Aryans moved south from the plains into Iran and India.
. . .
This religion obviously has aspects similar to Christianity and may have been influenced by events from Genesis forward as they were passed down from generation to generation.
. . .
Regardless, Zoroastrianism is considered one of the world’s oldest monotheistic religions — the doctrine or belief that there is only one God. However, while Zoroastrians say they believe there is one supreme God whom they call Ahura Mazda, they also recognize another immortal deity, known as Angra Mainyu, who represents the epitome of evil. So using the traditional definition of monotheism, many religious scholars would say it is more accurate to describe this religion as polytheistic. 
As Christians, it is important to understand that when God created us in His image, He wrote monotheism into our “spiritual DNA.” In helping us to understand this reality, the Apostle Paul explains in the first two chapters of the book of Romans that the existence of only one true God is evident to everyone in one of two ways.
To read the rest (it's a bit long, but very interesting), click on "World Religions and Cults: Zoroastrianism".


Subscribe in a reader