Piltdown Superman

One of the most common complaints by professing atheists is that there is insufficient evidence for God. They have disingenuously redefined atheism from one who believes there is no God or gods  into lacking belief . Many will not give a direct answer as to what would constitute evidence for God, or even whether or not he would be able to make himself known. Many want God to meet their arbitrary subjective standards. The Creator of the universe is not a performing seal, old son. Webb telescope galaxies, NASA , ESA, CSA, and STScI (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Those of us who believe that the Bible means what it says know that despite their protestations, God has indeed made himself known. A standard argument by theists is to say that unbelievers just need to look around, his design is clearly evident. Do not  fall into the "prove it to me" trap because they are getting you to admit that you don't believe what God's Word says. Somehow, tinhorns li

On Fakebook, I saw an exchange with an angry misotheist who is also an evolutionist and an anti-Christian bigot. It was about " Lizards Foul Up Evolutionary Timeline ," and the misotheist said, "...you never see anything like this in legitimate scientific literature." (Note the genetic fallacy with the word "legitimate".) A supporter showed the references from that featured post including Science , Live Science , and others. This showed that the attacker did not even look at the material, and I reckon self-humiliation is unimportant as long as he expresses hatred. It's who they are and what they do. But what of professional evolutionists? Atlantic white shark, National Park Service / Bill Fisher (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) We have seen that secularists have money and power, so they make the rules. Creationists come along with evidence that is contrary to the faith, and they circle the wagons to fire back or simply exclude unple

Make yourselves presentable, pet the neighbors and wake the cat, because the invisible imaginary friends of evolutionists are sure to make an appearance within the next few years. Our long wait is finally going to be over and it will be a big thing. Yee haw boy howdy! How do they know? Because reasons. Why will it happen? Because evolution. Atheists presuppose materialism and evolution. Although they cannot account for the origin of life, they are certain that it happened with the help of deep time, so aliens have evolved and are very advanced in many ways. Alien encounter with children, Pixabay / ImaArtist Their presuppositions prompt assertions of a near-future alien contact, playing the odds that some of those extrasolar planets must  have those advanced civilizations. Somehow, seekers have funding for another project to listen for alien communications. Because of all the hype and promises that never came true, it would be surprising if the public became excited. Secularists think t

Most evolutionists and professing atheists become irate when it is show that they have religious attitudes in their worldviews, but not all try to distance themselves. The account of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead is well known. Secular scientists, deliberately or unwittingly, mock the work of Jesus by naming bacteria that appear to have "come back from the dead". Mayhaps it is cute, but a person is quite a bit more complicated than bacteria, so the title is misleading. Then there is that religious element. Summoning bacteria spirits, Pixabay / Arek Socha , modified at PhotoFunia These simple organisms have been entombed for long periods, then coaxed into activity by putting them in optimal conditions. Were they really dead? Not entirely. Secularists may have an ulterior motive for studying these things involving life from space (still assuming Darwinian evolution after it supposedly arrived), which would give them something that looks like evidence to use in denying the

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Other biblical creationists and I emphasize rational (critical) thinking, and to use it plus healthy skepticism. Such thinking is not just for sciences or academic purposes, but is helpful every day. We use it daily to some degree or another, often without realizing it. If you will mount up and ride the trail with me, I will provide a fun piece, some examples from feral atheists, a bit of strange pseudoscience, then move onto more specific ways that we use logic every day — and why such thinking is extremely important right now. Woman thinking by water, Pexels / Engin Akyurt Something I'd like to give you to put in your pocket right now. You can take it out every now to look at: Undue haste is a tool of Satan. Yeah, it's a mite overstated, but memorable. When being pressured to make a decision right now , with no time to stop and think, you are probably better off not making any changes. I remember times of being hurried that were disastrous. On occasion

In several posts over the years, we have seen that psychologists are struggling to understand the mind and the brain. (No, the brain is not  the mind — the mind uses  the brain.) There are numerous approaches to psychology, and they are based on evolution and atheistic materialism. There are many reasons to think that psychology is not actually a science at all, especially since it does not follow the same rules that are expected of the "hard" sciences. Psychologists do not understand mental illnesses such as borderline personality disorder , and schizophrenia is under scrutiny. Psychology puzzle, assembled from graphics at Openclipart  and with Paint.Net Schizophrenia is a large category and several other problems are under that umbrella. A very small percentage of the population is diagnosed with it, so that means there are also undiagnosed people trying to live their lives with that condition. Several possibilities for the cause are offered, but no one really knows. People

There is a movement called transhumanism  that is essentially an attempt to improve God's design through technology and genetic engineering. There are numerous related concepts, one of which is mind cloning. However, there are several serious problems with the whole thing. First of all, universal common descent evolution is assumed and all approaches stem from that. Another is that they are physicalists , so the mind is simply a manifestation of the brain. Generally speaking, biblical creationists believe that the mind is separate from the brain, but the mind uses it. For that matter, materialists have no idea where the mind originates . Brain graphic by  yodiyim at FreeDigitalPhotos There is not enough technology available to map the brain of a mouse, let alone a human brain. That aside, mind cloning raises a passel of questions and ethical dilemmas. Where is the soul? Is it duplicated? People change, will the clone come to have values and beliefs that are different from the orig

As we have seen numerous times, secularists are thrilled that the number of people are believing in minerals-to-microscopist evolution is increasing. At the same time, they  increase their indoctrination efforts . We saw what their bleak worldview does to young people . When a person is under the control of drugs or alcohol, in a cult, exhibiting harmful behavior, etc., friends and family may stage an intervention. A wake-up call, if you will, in an effort to correct the situation. The secular science industry does not want "consensus" science questioned, and some sidewinders want to have interventions to make people agree. Good sheep obey the consensus, image used:  Jo-Anne McArthur at Unsplash According to the United Nations, " We own the science ." That should tell you a great deal right there. Many creationists, including myself, encourage people to use critical thinking and spot logical fallacies. This is especially useful when someone is attempting to deceive

When a creationist of even a little stature writes or posts something refuting a major dogma of evolution, and it must follow, as night the day, a misotheist is compelled to argue. Here is an example of same nonsense, different day. Several weeks ago, I shared the post, " Genetics and the Coffin of Darwinism ." A misotheist shared it on his Fakebook Page for the purpose of ridicule, and attempted to refute the very recent scientific material  with a propaganda piece from 2010 ! (He constantly refuses to read creationist material. Based on my observations, I lack belief that people like this would understand scientific material from either side, even if they did read it. They might even see citations from evolutionists who admit they don't know certain things.) Encounters like this frequently happen regarding the evolution of the eye. Staring fox up close, Unsplash / Erik Mclean Regarding the way fundamentalist Darwinists throw links at creationists to refute us, there is

Most scientists live by the philosophy of materialism. That is, the atheistic that matter is all that exists. It is presupposed. Scientism stems from materialism, and it is a belief that everything can be explained by scientific methodologies — including philosophy and morality. Scientism is a de facto  religion . Those practicing Scientism (who may not realize that their belief system has a name) tend to be insufferably smug. They are the self-appointed intellectual elite, and thinking they are better than others because they are materialistic scientists is logically fallacious. This "1889 Guy" was colorized at  Playback.fm , further modified with  FotoSketcher One tinhorn was talking about "scientific truth", and secular elitists are to be the ones who determine truth. He bases his woefully insufficient beliefs on what is "known" through science, but his own reasoning is saturated with difficulties. After all, many scientific "facts" have been

Although we are going to delve into some in-depth biology, there is no need to be intimidated by the jargon. The recurrent laryngeal nerve involves the operation of the larynx, informally called the voice box. I had to look up why it is "recurring", which is based on the Latin re curr , meaning it loops into the opposite direction. We have discussed dysteleology  before, which is the idea that the Master Engineer fouled up, so he does not exist. (Interesting that secularists praise the grandeur of evolution, but blame alleged bad design on the Creator.) "Bad design" claims keep getting refuted because misotheists and other Darwinists are arguing from ignorance and incomplete information. The RLN is subject to this attack. Recurrent laryngeal nerve, WikiComm / Jkwchui from Truth-Seeker2004 ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ), I modified it for visibility Think of their track record. One of the most famous "bad design" claims is the human eye, which has been conclusively ref

Rusty Swingset, foreman at the Darwin Ranch near Deception Pass, was all excited about new efforts that are being made to show how morality itself evolved. Those rascals keep trying to find ways of explaining immaterial things using materialistic presuppositions. That is, only naturalism: No Creator need apply. Their efforts do not go well. To have morality, it stands to reason that consciousness itself must exist. Secularists cannot explain the evolution of consciousness . Then there is the puzzle of how morality evolved, but that is not explained either . Are new efforts to explain the evolution of morality faring any better? Puzzled chimpanzee is puzzled, Pixabay / Marcel Langthim , modified at PhotoFunia Before we go any further, a bit of history. While Charles Darwin gets applause for creating evolution ( no, he did not ), Alfred Russel Wallace is sometimes credited as a co-discoverer of evolution through natural selection. What is less known is that, although they maintained a c

There was a period in certain parts of Europe called (with a passel of hubris in the eyes of this child) the Age of Reason  or the Enlightenment . These things do not simply spring up on their own, but are developed from religious, cultural, intellectual, political, and other cultural views that happened before. The Enlightenment was by no means unified. Some had a fondness for Classical things (Socrates himself was particularly missed by Voltaire). Some wanted knowledge without the senses, others believed knowledge could be achieved by reason alone. This period is sometimes considered a triumph of atheism (indeed, the bloody French Revolution was the culmination). Erasmus Darwin, the grandfather of Charles, was an atheist who lived at this time. His Zoonomia  was unfluential to Charlie . Immanuel Kant by Johann Gottlieb Becker, 1768, modified with PhotoFunia Criticism of the Bible was widespread at this time with efforts to find excuses to intellectualize it away. (For that matter,

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Some things pertaining to evolution are not common knowledge. For example, there are many  strange religious ideas presented as empirical evolutionary science . In addition, people have the notion that evolution was invented by Charles Darwin, but he did not come up with the idea all by his lonesome: Evolution from a common ancestor is actually an ancient pagan belief. Although science thrives on challenges, folks like to protect the consensus and are slow to accept better ideas. One example is phlogiston. That was the stuff that was thought to cause burning. When that idea was overturned because of better science , it met resistance and was slow to extinguish. Of course, evolution itself is protected red in tooth and claw by the secular science industry, and evidence refuting it and supporting biblical creation science are repressed with a vengeance. Some ideas, however, are allowed to be heard and presented — as long as they do not favor the Intelligent Desig

What is arguably the best job security for a secular scientist is something that has the word evolutionary  in the title. Those things are self-serving, requiring assumptions of Darwinism, then working from there in efforts to prop up evolution and do research that has no practical value. It is interesting that atheists sometimes say that Christianity does not allow free will, but they use theirs to reject God. Then they argue from their materialistic presuppositions and preach evolution — which means that we are all just animals responding to our electro-chemical impulses. Wolf pack, Unsplash / Thomas Bonometti What atheists and other evolutionists don't understand is that ought  or should  that can not be justified in their worldview. If an atheist complains that a Christian is doing something wrong (or creationists "lying" about evolution by presenting material that refutes it), they are appealing to a higher moral standard . By doing so, they are tacitly admitting tha

Although he opposed slavery, Charles Darwin was a racist. His disciples become infuriated with us when we point out this fact and cry, "That is an ad hominem! " While it is indeed about the man, it is not fallacious. His racist views were instrumental to his version of evolution. Darwin considered black people and others to belong to less-evolved inferior races. Eventually, those "races" would be replaced by civilized man — white people. (This child wonders if the best white people were the Victorian English.) This exacerbated racism and formed "scientific racism." Tops Friendly Market, Flickr / Nicholas Eckhart  ( CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 ) The way mainstream media refer to white supremacists, neo-Nazis, etc., make it sound like there are quite a few of them. I have never met any. Yes, I've met racists but not the hardcore types, and turned down connection requests on social(ist) media for white supremacists. The Buffalo shooter on 14 May 2022 was racially mot

There is a kind of pseudo-intellectual process called deconstruction , where people supposedly analyze their Christian faith and choose to modify it or apostatize. There are performers in the Christian music industry who have "deconverted", but this kind of thing is also done by people who are not celebrities. Several times in my own experience, I have heard of and even encountered people who claimed to be former Christians or ex-creationists. When they talk about what they left behind, they show an appalling lack of knowledge, indicating they never were Christians or creationists. Unsplash / Danny Howe It can be extremely helpful for people to question or deconstruct things they have been taught, which is something that I have done myself. There has to be a foundation, since everyone has a worldview . Deconstructing teachings based on assumptions and traditions, then seeing if they have validity according to the ultimate standard (for Christians, it should be the Bible) can