Posts

That "Quote Mining" Monkey Business

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen There was a time when people would cite something, give a reference, and that was that. If there was an inaccuracy, it would be calmly pointed out and corrected. Not so much on the Internet anymore. Sometimes creationists produce quotes from evolutionists who admit doubts about their belief systems, their commitment to naturalism, flaws in their process and so on. We can almost guarantee that atheists and anti-creationists will cry, "Quote mining!" Naturally, they'll quote mine the Bible up one side and down the other, but never mind about that now. Quote mining is finding a quote or phrase and lifting it out of context for misleading purposes. It is essentially making someone say something contrary to what he or she really meant, and twisting it for your own purposes. It's similar to selective citing, and all of this is related to the straw man fallacy . Most of the time when I've seen the accusation of quote mining, it is because

Evolution's Lack of Prediction Ability and Benefits

Image
Evolutionists insist on interpreting observations through their Darwin spectacles and forcing facts into their paradigms. "Nothing in biology makes sense without the guiding light of evolution", that kind of thing. That saddle's on the wrong horse, Hoss. We're told that Darwinian evolutionary theory is useful in making predictions. Is it? In some ways it's true, because there are so many things pretending to be predictions, sometimes they get a vague "prediction" right and then shout it from the rooftops. The reality of the situation is far different. Over and over, we keep hearing about how something is discovered that is not  predicted by evolutionary ideas, and even where discoveries cause evolutionists to "rethink". The scientific method according to evolutionists is quite biased and unscientific. For more about this, click on " How Explanatory Is Evolutionary Theory? " Darwinoids will also insist on using "evoluti

Gilgamesh, Genesis and Myths

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  People who want to detract from the Bible's historical and divine nature have tried to wave it off as just myth. Worse, they ignore a lot of reality by saying that the Hebrews copied from the myths of other people, touched them up and then declared them to be holy writ. I read the Epic of Gilgamesh  and studied on it for a spell. (I thought "epic" meant "very long", but not necessarily ; it could mean epic "style". The Gilgamesh  epic poem is not all that long, especially since a lot of it is missing.) The part of this that is of interest to biblical creationists is the story of the global Flood in the 11th tablet. Some things about the Epic of Gilgamesh   just reared up as obviously mythology, what with gods and goddesses getting angry and fighting each other, Ishtar having snits because Gilgamesh won't giver her a tumble, references to the Anunnaki (pick your story about who they were, some people believe that the Anu

Archaeologist Found a Thrill on Potbelly Hill

Image
Standard evolutionary thinking will not allow for ancient people to have any great intelligence levels. After all, they evolved up from the slime through various stages including ape-like brutes and eventually to human form. Evolutionists do not know where intelligence came from except the ad hoc explanation of "EvolutionDidIt". When advanced techniques in lifestyles, architecture and so on are discovered, I reckon it's a bit disconcerting to them because their presuppositions are out of whack. Göbekli Tepe (Turkish for "Potbelly Hill") was an unimpressive site, mostly ignored for about 30 years. Then Klaus Schmidt noticed some interesting things. Now  the site is impressive, since there are examples of architecture, artwork and construction that are interesting — and mysterious. Now they have to study on how this fouled parts of their belief system. These discoveries do not fit with evolutionary assumptions, but are completely in line with biblical creatio

Ashes to Ashes, Cosmic Dust to Cosmic Dust

Image
That story about the origin of the universe popularly known as the Big Bang has to keep evolving. (Some people get upset about that name and when people use the term "explosion", but they need to cut some slack to people who use those words because such usage is completely understandable , even if technically inaccurate.) Currently, it is considered a period of inflation. A few times, "proof" of the Big Band or inflation has been presented, only to be found seriously lacking. Credit: NASA/WMAP Science Team The "proof" of the inflation of the universe was supposedly found in cosmic microwave background radiation imprinted by so-called "gravity waves", but this was quickly put in doubt  because it was probably nothing but dust. Now it looks like data from the Planck satellite will put that proof six feet under where it belongs. It would be really something if proponents of the evolution of the universe would admit that the evidence reveals t

Oxygen, the Origin of Life, and Another Vindication of Creationists

Image
In the evolutionary scheme of things, origin of life ideas require absence of oxygen on a primordial earth. Abiogenesis does not work, despite the claims of proponents of the failed Miller-Urey experiment . That's because oxygen will cause such life to cash in its chips . Creationists (and some evolutionists) have known for a long time that Earth has had, and must have, oxygen from the beginning. This deals aces and eights to origin of life conjectures. It also throws a wild card into the draw for speculations about extraterrestrial atmospheres. Free oxygen is death to life trying to evolve, but it was present early on, being formed naturally from atmospheric carbon dioxide. What is life? What is the meaning of life? Astrobiologist Chris McKay says it’s a tricky question, but on Astrobiology Magazine, he offers a contrasting challenge: “in the search for life in our solar system what is needed more than a definition of life is a definition of death.” And what does it m

Puzzling Planetary and Satellite Formation

Image
Anti-creationists dismiss creation scientists through prejudicial conjecture and poisoning the well, claiming that creationists' explanations are essentially, "GodDidIt, that's all". Some serious investigation of creationary materials will show that this is incorrect. While admittedly there is a grain of truth to the "GodDidIt" claim, creationary scientists do not stop there; they want to know how God did it, and more. Some evolutionary theories of the formation of the solar system, including planets, comets, satellites and so forth have occasional plausibility from a historical science perspective, but have many failings under scrutiny. Essentially, when cosmological theories break down, ad hoc explanations are rustled up and added in, but those theories should be put out to pasture. "EvolutionDidIt" or "NaturalProcessesDidIt" are unhelpful. "Starfield 3" from Sad Monkey Designs Creationists have pointed out the num