Stormbringer's Thunder

One of the most simplistic and annoying tricks that atheists pull is their unwillingness to answer questions about knowledge and morality. When pressed, they resort to dodging the question, throwing the question back in the face of the one asking, denying what they said, use logical fallacies, accuse others of fallacies and more ( this MP3 is a good example ). I believe the reason for such behavior is simple: They know that God's ultimate standard is true, but do not want to face it. However, their subjective morality is fundamentally flawed and will self-destruct. Attempting to blame God and make him the bad guy by quote mining the Bible is a massive fail. So is attempting to place your own arbitrary, subjective morality on God . When the atheist is pinned down on the absurdity of subjective morality and has nowhere left to turn, often he'll attempt to point the finger right back at supposed problems with Biblical morality. But there are numerous overarching logical

Atheopaths have a hard time thinking rationally, and yet they claim to be the intellectual elite simply because they reject evidence for God. Then, they attack Christians with pathetic accusations. These accusations describe atheists, not Christians. But we're not into letting them manipulate us, and try to restrict our speech — and our thoughts — from those who claim to be "tolerant". Here's a classic example. If we point out that most of the greatest mass murderers in history were atheists (I'm not counting Hitler, some people say he was an atheist, but he was an occultist), then they say that the murderers' atheism had nothing to do with their actions, or that they did not do things "in the name of atheism". So what? They still had no consistent moral standard. Then they complain about what Christians think and believe, because we might do something rotten in the name of God (never mind the galactic ignorance of biblical teachings on the part o

stock.xchng/nion I'm going to redirect you to a mult-faceted post. The first part is about the "ownership" of science. Many atheists strut around as if they invented the thing, and that to be a scientist, you have to be an atheist. Dead wrong, Robert! Does science belong to Christians and Theists? We (not me, of course, I wasn't born yet) invented the whole modern disciplines of science. Whether genetics or physics or electrical theory or classification of organisms or chemistry or you name it... You could assert that the ancient Greeks like Archimedes were the first scientists and there is some support for that. However, the axiomatic way of viewing the world proved to be a hindrance to science. Keep in mind that science was always simply a part of the overall concept of philosophy and was not considered separately back in the ancient world. How does that grab ya? But wait, if you act now, you'll get absolutely free, a bonus post about space aliens!

Since my priorities are at Piltdown Superman and The Question Evolution Project , I haven't been motivated to post here very often. After deleting quite a few articles and posts, I am using this for occasional use, but primarily as an archive. Especially for the stuff that tells how atheists really are. You might like to see this article about a problem that evolutionists have .

NASA image, slightly modified Since haters are gonna hate no matter what some of us do, I may as well give the mentally challenged atheopaths another gem: I believe that UFOs exist. There is no way that so many people for so many years have been faking video footage, lying, hallucinating or been simply mistaken. Do I believe that they are beings from outer space? Not anymore. I used to, though. People would tell me that since the Bible does not say that there are extraterrestrials, they must not exist. Their arguments were superficial, mainly a fallacious argument from silence, and I used my own bad argument, that the Bible does not tell us that they do not exist , so they might exist after all. Silly, I know. In addition, I had a weird notion based on wishful thinking and bad theology that Jesus went to other planets to offer salvation, like in the Ray Bradbury story, " The Man ". Do I believe that governments are covering up contact with extraterrestrials, or wha

Atheists and evolutionists are not only confused by their irrational worldviews, but they are also cunning. One of their tricks is to first deceive themselves, and then deceive others, about the definitions of words. The disingenuous redefinition of atheism to mean "lack of belief" is laughable to any thinking person. The Evo Sith will sneak a change in definition of the word "evolution". These word games are some of the tools used to attack Christians and creationists. These tricks and attacks are partly the result of realizing that they cannot defeat the biblical creationist worldview with reason and science. We are right, they know it, and they hate it. But hiding from the truth and redefining words will not change the end result. For anyone reading this and watching the video below, it's not too late. It might be too late in an hour, though.

Some people who want to be considered "intellectual" and say that they live by "reason" love to ridicule the Bible. They are wrong. Three of the main objects of derision are the Genesis flood, Jonah and the great fish, and the resurrection of Jesus. Did you know that these three historical events have something in common? And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat (Genesis 8:4) . And the LORD spake unto the fish, and it vomited out Jonah upon the dry land (Jonah 2:10) . He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay (Matthew 28:6) . These three verses of Scripture speak of three great events of history, widely separated from each other in time, but each involving a mighty miracle. Each testifies of God’s creative power, as well as His judgment on sin and His grace in salvation. The accounts tell of three remarkable specially prepared—yet temporary—

Pilate also had a sign lettered and put on the cross. The inscription was: JESUS THE NAZARENE THE KING OF THE JEWS. Many of the Jews read this sign, because the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and it was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek. So the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, “Don’t write, ‘The King of the Jews,’ but that He said, ‘I am the King of the Jews.’ ” Pilate replied, “What I have written, I have written.” — John 19:19-22 , HCSB All four Gospel accounts mention the sign on the cross. All four accounts differ a little bit. This seems puzzling when approached on a superficial level. In reality, it is not a difficulty at all. Why do all four Gospels contain different versions? Does this indicate error? By no means. Both Luke and John tell us that the inscription on the Cross of Jesus was written in three languages, Greek, Latin and Hebrew. It is therefore a reasonable assumption that three of the Gospel writers each chose to quote a dif

Starring Richard Dawkins, Sam "Ben Stiller" Harris, Charles Darwin, and everybody's hero, Piltodown Superman!

From the day of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, people have been attempting to make excuses to explain away this greatly attested fact of history. Some have been pathetically desperate to say that he never existed , but they have to find a minority of crackpot "historians" to support this conjecture. Others have come up with silly ideas, such as, "His disciples sole his body while we were sleeping" (Matt. 28.13). So tell me, how do you know what happened while you were sleeping, Buttercup? Using basic logic, the false explanations of the absence of his body do not withstand scrutiny. Definitions Sir Karl Popper, the late philosopher of science, devised a falsification criterion that can be used to disprove theories. It is derived from the modus tollens rule of inference, which is of one of these two forms: Form 1 1) p⇒q 2) ¬q ∴ p Form 2 1) p⇒¬q 2) q ∴ p The falsification criterion devised by Karl Popper is an example of form 2 of the modus

We have seen in numerous posts that atheism is an incoherent, irrational, unreasonable and self-defeating worldview (as is its confused, timid kid brother, agnosticism). Evolution is a cornerstone of this belief system, since both rely on materialism , a self-affirming and intellectually suffocating idea that starts and ends with the physical universe. Atheism and evolutionism also rely on viciously circular reasoning. To admit that there really is a Creator would destroy atheism instantly, because that would imply that we need to find out what the Creator has to say to us. Further, atheism relies on relativism, a convenient means of excusing thoughtlessness and convenience-based "morality". Relativism is an absurd philosophy. "Relativism is the concept that points of view have no absolute truth or validity, having only relative, subjective value according to differences in perception and consideration... The term often refers to truth relativism , which

It is truly baffling to me when atheists want to "give" Hitler to Christianity. And they do it with gleeful self-humiliation. "Why is it self-humiliation, Cowboy Bob?" Most atheists that I have encountered, especially on the Internet, fallaciously declare themselves to be the intellectual elite, simply by virtue of being atheists. (Ridiculous, I know.) Yet these bastions of enlightenment commit logical fallacies freely and frequently. They also do not know how to correctly identify fallacies. Hitler supposedly claimed to be a Christian (but his "Christianness" is easily refuted ). When a Christian says, "Hitler was not a real Christian", the misotheist will scream, "AHA! The 'No True Scotsman Fallacy'". Except that he's dead wrong , and has embarrassed himself by incorrectly attempting to use a logical principle. Remember, don't fear the atheist. They have a great deal of bravado, but even a cursory knowledge of

Took down the last one and reworked it. Sorry for the inconvenience. At least, it's short. People are so consumed by hate, they're stupidified. Motto: "Where people mercifully free of the ravages of thought gather for support and group hugs". First, I want you to see this annotated bit (click to enlarge) from the creationist-hating group at the British Centre for Scientism and Evolutionism: Now, a screen shot of the actual post that was disingenuously, incompletely cited : Once again, I must remind my friends, acquaintances, agents and associates that I don't want to know about this stuff. Even though I did like showing their lack of fact checking and outright dishonesty.

Crank up the dance music and boogie!

And now for something completely different. While researching material on background music for videos, podcasts and whatnot, my edjamacation has increased dramatically. Sure, you can get "royalty free" music. But you still have to pay for it; the only thing free is that you don't have to pay royalties. There are several sites that have this kind of music available. The people at " Partners in Rhyme " have some good material. If you want to avoid getting into legal trouble (or having YouTube mistakenly identify music you've uploaded as belonging to someone else, which has happened to me), get the royalty free stuff that you can run with to your heart's content. They also have some free samples, as well as sound effects. Don't be misled, they are not indicative of the material that you can buy (I almost wanted to start a podcast to tack onto the music!), but there are some gems here that can be pretty good for special projects. Royalty Free Mus

This steak still has marks from where the jockey was hitting it! — Rodney Dangerfield in "Caddyshack" I tried to tell people before, but did they listen? Noooooooo! What is it, really? morgueFile/MaxStraeten So I'll say it again, and appeal to the wallet instead of ethics: This is not the kind of economy for businesses to be cheap! There are reports of horse meat in various products [ 1 , 2 ] ("contanimated" is such a strong word...it's just not what people paid for) and speculation that the merchants are cutting corners. "Generic" or "store brand" items thaqt were formerly comparable (and sometimes superior) to their name-brand counterparts are getting less desirable ; t he name-brand products are often reducing quality themselves. Customer service? In many cases, fuggedaboudit! Little to no help. You have to learn how to work that gadget yourself. Restaurants that water down the soup? How cheap can you get?

When Facebook allows Pages and groups whose names are unfit to mention in front of children and sensible ladies, when they allow atheopath hate speech, when they allow libel, when they allow threats of violence, when they allow all sorts of infractions that violate their "Terms of Service", and do not enforce them, what good are they? The message they send is the Satanic, "Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law". This was reported, and they said it was not a violation! I have reported several posts, pictures and so on that any sensible person would clearly see that the contents violate the ToS of Facebook. Big deal. Perhaps it's because of the atheistic leanings of Facebook, but obscene anti-Christian materials are left alone. This lack of activity from FB gives me the go-ahead for some truth-telling pages about wicked atheopaths, then. They won't care about the screenshots, will they? On the other hand, Wordpress may not be a company to

Evolution cannot withstand scrutiny. But it is foundational to liberal Christianity, other irrational religions and especially the incoherence known as atheistm. That's why evolution is protected, and contrary evidence suppressed, by the Evo Sith in their efforts to protect their fundamentally flawed worldviews. And yet, the truth is discovered. Oh, sure, the protectors are sent scrambling to find excuses to keep their failed "theory" intact. Here is another short video with more information to show that evolution is a fun damentally flawed belief system. That is, evolutionism keeps looking more and more far-fetched because the evidence shows the Creator. How good is that?

The religion of atheism is irrational and fundamentally flawed. Although many who call themselves "atheists" claim to have rejected the existence of God through "reason", they have failed miserably, deceiving themselves and perhaps deceiving others. The irrational, unscientific worldview called "evolution" is a cornerstone of atheism. It gives their religion a veneer of intellectualism, and they refuse to acknowledge the multitudinous failings of evolutionary theories. They prefer to continually prop up the failed "science" of evolutionism for emotional comfort. Atheism is incoherent, lacking the necessary preconditions of human experience. There is no plan for the life of the atheist, since everything is an accident of nature. This also means that there is no foundation for morality (I can name atheists who will say and do anything because their "morality" is based only on their immediate desires, and they are useless for humanity

Having second Weblogs on Posterous was a silly idea, I admit. Since this Weblog is a general purpose thing, I did not really need to use it. But I wanted to try it out. Posterous is a good idea that is poorly executed. You can upload MP3s and some other things and they make it accessible to everyone. The main problem is that they were down a great deal of the time. Another problem is that for having a Weblog like Blogger, Wordpress and others, fuggedaboudit. The concept was good for multimedia but I did not like it for trying to write something up. After they were bought out by Twitter, they became even more unreliable. One time, it took me almost a week to get a good connection to be able to edit one post. Worse, one of my Posterous Weblogs had content vanish! I sent them an e-mail, asking what was going on. No reply. After several days, I fully deleted the account. I know of one page that was there, it contained public screen shots of atheopaths showing how rotten they can be in t

Now, I know that there are people who will go with redefinitions and a "No True Scientist" fallacy here, that true scientists accept evolutionism; anyone who rejects evolution must be an unedjamakated fundie. But that is obviously fallacious. It is also an attempt at poisoning the well and an appeal to ridicule. This short video will inform you of the truth.

Before you get your knickers in a twist about the use of the word "idiot" in the title, let me point out the historical setting. A "useful idiot" was a supporter of the Soviet Union in the West, and the Soviets  held them in contempt . They blindly followed fatally flawed ideology. Zack Kopplin is being used by atheistic evolutionism. Like Bill Nye, he is unclear on several concepts, including the difference between operational and historical science, the profound lack of importance of evolution to scientific development, and more. He has been deceived by fundamentalist atheist evolutionists and is adored by Richard Dawkins  and other proselytizers of atheism. The religious dogma of evolutionism cannot withstand scrutiny and it cannot tolerate competition. Many seek to punish doubters of evolution. (It must drive them batty that this date has been established as Question Evolution Day , huh?) Atheists and evolutionists are usually bigoted and intolerant of an

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen It must drive Michael Zimmerman and other misotheists around the bend that there are people who are not interested in his "Evolution Weekend" apostasy drive. F'rinstance, there are Bible-believing Christians who take a stand and proclaim " Creation Sunday " every year since 2006. There are also people involved in the grassroots " Question Evolution Day ", started by yours truly in 2012. It was inspired by the " Question Evolution! " campaign. One part of "Question Evolution Day" includes the use of the " 15 Questions for Evolutionists " presented by CMI . (I was honored that they liked my video and included it in their "15 Questions" page.) As I've said for a while now, hate stupidifies. (For the atheopath readers, that's stupid-i-fies, it makes people stupid.) Their emotions cloud their reasoning abilities. I am not a reader of the "Huffington Post", even t