Welcome to the home of "The Question Evolution Project". There is no truth in goo-to-you evolution. We are bombarded with dubious evidence for the "fact" of evolution. Contrary evidence is suppressed. That is against the true spirit of scientific inquiry. Using an unregistered assault keyboard, articles and links to creation science resources are presented here so people can learn something besides materialistic propaganda. בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ.

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Part of the Problem with Evolutionists

Before I went ahead with this article, I checked with some other people about the content. Three hours before auto-publish, I removed the name of the evolution stormtrooper that I dealt with, even though they thought I should use it.
"Dr. Duncan, I forbid you from letting any student pass your class if they still believe in their imaginary friends by the end of the semester.  If you don’t make every student in there an atheist by the time they graduate, then you, sir, have failed as an educator!"
— Dr. Robert Farris, The Deception by Steven J. Wright, p. 68
Source for this excellent image not found.
We have seen that indoctrination is paramount in evolutionary education; students are not told how to think (critically, honestly examining the evidence), but what to think (presupposing that evolution is true, and then using circular reasoning to "prove" it). Although the "educator" in the example at the top is fictional, such antics are not. Teachers have actively ridiculed Christians and sought to destroy their faith, and those that are openly creationist are at the receiving end of blatant discrimination. It is imperative for the Evo Sith to protect their fundamentally flawed faith, resorting to deceiving the students, using faulty textbooks, bad thinking and more. So it is not a surprise that Darwin's Cheerleaders are bullies, attempting to silence creationists and pa-TROLL-ing the Web with bad attitudes and worse "science". (One atheopath tactic is to review books that they have not read simply because they disagree with the topic. This is a common trick, and one reason that the reviews at Amazon are no longer very credible.) They are also fond of derision as a means of attempting to silence the opposition.

I had a bit of an encounter with one of these "instructors". But first, some background.


One of the "occupational hazards" of taking a stand for our academic, intellectual and speech freedoms is that we gain stalkers. One in particular is obsessed with inflicting his unwanted opinions on others. He often resorts to spamming. I analyzed what passes for logic on his planet, (and it appears that anyone who says something he does not like is quickly labled "liar"), hoping he would be embarrassed and go away. Nothing doing, he's too obsessed. I had to cancel one e-mail account (come on, G-mail, you need better filters), and he is blocked on my Hotmail/Outlook account. This stalker and libeler knows that he's blocked, but he still adds me to his spam list anyway. Perhaps he thinks his spam will magically go through if he sends enough?

I learned about his rage about this post when I received a "reply to all" from one of his correspondents, a little-known professorThe message was amazingly vacuous. I did not ask to be on the spam-all reply list. He caught me at a bad time, and here is the exchange:
I know that you are passionate about this, but take some pleasure in knowing that the trash projected by people like Tas Walker does not have any impact on the work or thinking of working scientists, the only people whose opinions matter on issues of science.
Look at the loaded terminology and ridicule. This guy is a scientist? They are supposed to use logic, you know. Such fallacies and arrogance! I couldn't let that go:
Thanks for including me in your reply to all. I can use your illogical, myopic and bigoted remarks in a Weblog.
To re-use one of my favorite quotes from Mark Levin, "That's right, I said it!" He replied:
Do I care?
Take note that I did not ask for this correspondence (he sent it to me and to five other people), and I did tell him that it was going to be put on a Weblog. He persisted.

I refrained from giving his name, telephone number, IP address, e-mail address and physical address that are in his e-mail signature. How noble of me (yawn)."Do I care?" His indication of unconcern was clearly the opposite of the truth. So, I gave him a bit more:
Obviously not. Just another bigot in action. Noted.
He could not let my remark go, and came back with:
Actually, just another scientist with enough knowledge to see that creationism is nonsense and that its proponents are dishonest. But hey, that's just me and the vast majority of scientists around the world.
Is this guy for real? He's appealing to his own authority and using sweeping generalizations as well as defaming thousands of people. It's a shame that people like this are "educating" people. I called him on some of it, not having the time or desire to go into an analysis of his logical fallacies:
Might makes right, huh, Skippy? Majority rules? Everyone believed in phlogiston at one time. Your false religion of evolutionism is the modern phlogiston theory. Trot on.
(If you want to know about phlogiston, click here.)

Yes, I'm not sugar-coating my irritation.

Well, I knew his ego would not rest, but I was going to turn in for the night. Perhaps he did as well, because when I came home from work, I found some more gems from the guy who said he did not care.
Science moves forward on the consensus of the experts in a particular field. Creationists do not operate in that environment. They never take their arguments to the scientific community. Therefore, creationist thinking can never impact science, Skippy.
He reminds me of Norman the Paranoid Troll. I named him "Norman". His response was to show his brilliance by calling me "Norman" right back. Now this "scientist" is showing the same lack of imagination by calling me "Skippy" in return.

More importantly, he is appealing to a kind of ruling elite about the absurd mob rule "consensus of the experts". I guess Einstein, Pasteur, Lister and many other scientists broke the rules then, huh? The claim that "creationists do not operate in that environment" is an outright lie. There are many scientists who are creationists and are working in their fields. "Therefore, creationist thinking can never impact science" is not only built on an untrue premise, it is based on his faulty biases.
By the way, phogiston theory was disproved by the methods of modern science over 250 years ago, in much the same way that Young Earth Creationism was disproved.  So, although you are right that old scientific ideas are sometimes replaced by new ideas on the power of the evidence, science always moves forward.  Never backward.  So you should not hold out hope of resurrecting your long-ago disproven biblical notions within the scientific arena.  Ain’t neva gonna happen, Skippy.
Ummm...Young Earth creationism has not been "disproved", except in the presuppositions of evolutionists using circular reasoning, as has been demonstrated here many times. And the biblical "notions" have not been disproved, sorry. This guy is full of assertions. I see where Darwin's Cheerleaders get this stuff. He wasn't done:
One more thing, Bob.  If you ever decide you want to start engaging the evidence honestly and learn some actual science from an actual scientist, I’d be happy to help.  Until then, I wish you the best of luck dealing with your cognitive dissonance.
Now we're on a first-name basis? Not only does this misotheist impugn thousands of creationist scientists and millions of Christians, he appeals to his own authority (and ego) by offering to edjamakate me, since he is an "actual scientist" by virtue of being an evolutionist. Edit: Perhaps this is one reason that tenured evolution indoctrinators are having problems.

In addition, not only did he call me dishonest because of my views, he apparently is able to practice psychology and make a diagnosis from just a few lines of correspondence (I have some speculations about his own ego and need to be accepted, but never mind about those now). He was vituperative and irrational — why would anyone want to be taught by him?

So, here you have it: A prime example of the irrational attempting to educate the youth, but all they do is continue to indoctrinate. Some of us are true freethinkers and do not accept evolutionism just because we are told it is true, and we reject faith in Scientism. Hey, I wonder if this is one of those people who claim that we reject evolution because we do not understand it, but do not understand it themselves?

—Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Labels