Piltdown Superman

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen There seems to be a fine line between rejecting material because someone dislikes the source (the genetic fallacy ), and using caution because the source is questionable. Some owlhoots fallaciously balk at learning science from creationists because creationists do not support materialistic presuppositions. Other times, material from individuals is questioned because they lack the proper credentials. Image credit: digitalart at FreeDigitalPhotos.net Readers of this Weblog and The Question Evolution Project may notice that several creationary mavericks are absent from the corral that I choose for reliable resources. I'll allow that sometimes I'm a mite skittish when atheopaths are looking for excuses to discredit individuals or organizations since I also want to make good material available for readers and viewers, but do not want to give detractors fuel for their fires. Don't disunderstand me. There are very intelligent people who have no

It seems that dinosaurs have always had had some popularity over the years, especially for children, but I reckon that their popularity has escalated in recent years. And why not? There's an element of mystery to them, and they've been the subject of many stories in movies, print, and so forth. Dinosaurs have also been used as a tool for evolutionary propaganda to reach the young (to see how evolutionists are attempting to offset children's inborn belief in God, see " Accelerated Evolutionary Indoctrination of Children "). When handled properly, the subject can work in the favor of biblical creationists, a fact that sometimes causes rage among secularists . One thing I learned early on in my creation science studies is that too many parents do not know that answers for questions about Earth's age, evolution, creation, and dinosaurs can indeed be found if people will bother to look. Parents cannot bluff their children. If you don't know, then admit it

Back in 2010, an atheopath on Twitter made a comment along the lines of, "Creatures are born atheist". I challenged him that his statement is an unprovable assumption. (Telling the truth gained me a stalker for a few years.) Shortly after, we learned that children are born believing in God ! This supports what the Bible teaches. But like any totalitarian knows, gotta get 'em while they're young and get that brainwashing going! Even though dust-to-Dawkins evolution is untrue, unprovable, untestable, unrepeatable, is a hindrance  to science, is ignored in biological sciences, well hey, it must  be taught, children must  believe in evolution. Why? My answer is that these Darwinista owlhoots want more recruits in their rebellion against the Creator, so they are getting more aggressive and Machiavellian in their tactics, including "reeducation". Interesting that the atheistic Soviet Union not only imprisoned, tortured, and executed Christians, but sent them t

A proponent of Darwinian evolution was Ernst Haeckel, and he was so het up about proving evolution, he made some drawings about it. Ever heard of "ontology recapitulates phylogeny"? That's the fantasy that an embryo goes through the various stages of evolutionary history, and Ernie illustrated it. With fake drawings. The concept has been lassoed and hog-tied for a mighty long time. But "science" must prevail, even if dishonesty is necessary! So, even though government school indoctrinators and textbook writers know that Haeckel's material was proved to be fake, they use them anyway! Some people have tried to redeem him. I've even had people comment that it doesn't matter if they drawings are fake, what they show is true. Sure, Poindexter. I bet you believe in square circles, too. Can't let people know there's a Creator God, now, can we? Mayhaps they keep bringing this nonsense back is because they use it to support abortion. There ar

We want to teach our children Bible stories in Sunday School and have them grow up to be strong believers, don't we? Sure, so we make images of Bible stories that are colorful and attractive and talk down to them. That happens quite a bit in Western churches, but there are some serious problems involved. Cartoon Noah's Ark, modified, original image credit Pixabay /  sferrario1968 One problem is talking down to kids with over-simplified versions of the events described in the Bible — they're not stupid, but can get the idea that Bible stories are not narratives, but fictional stories.  Then we have the unbiblical, or even anti-biblical, graphic illustrations of Noah's Ark that have almost nothing to do with the Bible's description. Some artists may mean well, but most illustrations fail. In addition, making cartoons is a long-established method of ridicule and misrepresentation — and we know how anti-creationists are fond of misrepresenting Genesis, God, creat

Shielding children from atheistic interpretations of origins is not a good idea, because they will learn about common-ancestor evolution. It comes from all kinds of source, including entertainment, documentaries, friends — and education systems. Also, people need to know the predominant worldviews that they will encounter in life. This applies to public school, Christian school, and homeschooled students . Generated at AddLetters.com If you study on it a mite, you'll see that it's best for the young 'uns to learn about evolution from knowledgeable Christians. Otherwise, they'll be given the best "evidence" without the flaws, and conjectures presented as "scientific research". Sure, everyone interprets and examines the world around them in light of their own worldviews, but evolutionists are disingenuous, and actively oppose evidence that is contrary to evolution. That's not education, old son, that's brainwashing! They're not abov

A common lie that Darwinistas tell is along the lines of, "You don't believe in evolution because you don't understand it". Those owlhoots conveniently ignore the fact that there are many scientists who do understand evolution and have rejected it — some prominent biblical creationary scientists are former evolutionists. There was a satirical cartoon posted at The Question Evolution Project , and someone came along saying that it indicates that we don't understand evolution. Some Darwin devotees tried to explain it to us, including the catch-all expression, "Evolution is change in allele frequencies", which is too broad a definition to be useful, and that creationists accept those small changes anyway. But people like that try to deceive us by equivocating "small changes" with "descent from a common ancestor". What's interesting is that many times, creationists have to correct evolutionists on their own pseudoscience! Imag

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Proponents of particles-to-propagandist evolution have an easy job. The groundwork has been laid by false science, popular opinion, appeals to authority, other logical fallacies, and especially through emotional manipulation. Propaganda techniques include: Using entertainment media Dominating the press Concentration and repetition Emotional manipulation Creating a common enemy to hate (such as biblical creation science) Pseudo-deification of a leader (done with Darwin, Dawkins, Nye, Tyson, and others) Appeal to a higher good ("science" education) Confusion (equivocating  evolution  and  science ) Arbitrary assertions Fraud peddled as science Control of textbooks Ridicule and more Since the scientific evidence is strongly against the  cult of evolutionism , fundamentalist evolutionists resort to emotional manipulation maneuvers resembling, "Real science is free of inflexible dogma and subject to independent peer review. Creation s

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Sometimes, anti-creationists riding the Owlhoot Trail want to slap leather with creationists but they don't bring a gun to a gunfight. They don't even bring a knife or a pointed stick. I reckon they don't want to say anything meaningful, they just want to "prove the st00pid dumb creotard" wrong. Problem is, they show their own lack of thought and look mighty silly. Courtesy of Why?Outreach Too many people read just the caption of a picture or a few lines of text and then leave a comment. Unfortunately, this short attention span trend is common and seems to be growing, and the ignorant comment is a bane to many Page owners and bloggers. I shared this picture, " The Lincoln Memorial Disproves Old Earth Theories " about stalactites and stalagmites that had formed quickly under the memorial. Apparently, this guy didn't bother to pay attention to the excerpts in the caption or look at the two links. He complained, "

The geologic column exists in many textbooks, but is not found in nature. It is presented in a nice, tidy order where simple life forms are at the bottom, with more complex evolving up to the top. However, the geologic column and index fossils are constructs of the imagination . Some owlhoots have trolled, "The geologic column proves evolution, and there are no fossils out of order". They don't know what they're talking about, there are fossils "out of order" according to evolutionary timelines. So, it exists, but not in the way microbes-to-mechanic evolution want us to think . Modified from an image from the US Geological Survey Do biblical creation models do a better job of explaining what we find in the fossil record? That's a mite difficult. There is a general order to be had in the fossil record, and the Genesis Flood models explain a great deal. Yes, there are disagreements among Flood geologists as to the details — which is not much of a

It is easy to see that evolutionary education is misnamed. It is not education, it is indoctrination , and if evidence for Intelligent Design or creation science was presented, it might "confuse" students , and they would dare to doubt Darwin. The vigilant Evo Sith are on patrol to silence opposition and protect "science" by disingenuously equivocating "evolution" with "science". These sidewinders must be an embarrassment to evolutionists who actually think, and who want to examine the evidence instead of rejecting creation science simply because they believe what they're told about what creationists say . Some of us reckon that if people were allowed to see evolutionary thinking with it's flaws and with evidence that supports creation, there would be far fewer Darwinists. Creationists want people to learn critical thinking, and some of us emphasize learning logical fallacies so people are not deceived by profound pronouncements

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen If you study on it, you'll see that people who are called "intellectuals" or the "intelligent s ia" have often been in a class by themselves. It's usually been more of an informal social class than anything else, and not really involved with economics (such as "upper middle class"). It seems to be a symbiotic relationship. Generally speaking, many people who are considered intellectuals are aloof and look down on common folk. Yet, commoners tend to look up to the intellectuals. Then the contradiction sets in, with us regular folk viewing the intellectual elite (and those who consider themselves so, without good reason) with distaste. (People are not anti-intellectual, but as for me, I'm anti-arrogance .) So people seem to have a love-hate view of intelligent s ia. Somehow, having a degree is supposed to mean that someone is a genius and able to perform well. But it gets ridiculous: A woman working in the human

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen There is quite a bit happening in the realm of creation science (I have posts scheduled for over a week ahead right now!), but once in a while, people like some personal glimpses and behind the scenes information, so here you go. The other day, the pastor and I were discussing my online creation science ministry. He asked, "Who is your audience?", and, "Who are you trying to reach?" The easy answer would be, "Anyone who wants to read it", but that is rather simplistic. I pondered these questions and realized that there are several answers. Some people use the Web as an occasional information and communications tool. They send out e-mail, newsletters, Weblogs, and they look up information when they need it . Then there are those of us who spend a great deal of time online, trying to make information available in our areas of specialty to the first group, and to people who "live" online. (There are also blogs where peo

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen In yesterday's post, points were made that atheists and evolutionists blatantly misrepresent the biblical creationist position  in their efforts to control education. They present evolution as indisputable scientific truth. One of the main problems with this is that people will simply accept such statements as accurate, and then expect creationists to defend positions that we do not hold. Educators present only the good side of evolution, often including (sometimes from ignorance) outdated and inaccurate information from textbooks . Indeed, some textbooks also contain fraudulent material . Creation science and Intelligent Design materials are actively suppressed, and evolution is sometimes required to be presented with no contrary information . Add this indoctrination to the additional problems that people tend to "think" with their emotions, and that students are not taught to think critically. Then we have Darwinoid Drones arguing wit