Posts

Showing posts with the label Evolutionism

Ideologies In Collision

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen There are several major paradigms active in the world today that have many adherents and are also in conflict one another. Some try to have a kind of synthesis of views, while others have no interest. There is a unified focus, but I don't reckon that participants are aware of the grand scheme. I don't see a kind of shoot-out at the OK Corral of philosophy, though. There have been several philosophical eras over the years that had odd names as far as I'm concerned. Doesn't modern  mean today?  Not when it comes to labeling. The last three are premodernism, modernism, and postmodernism. (Some are saying that postmodernism is already morphing into something else, but there's no title yet as far as I can tell.) One of the main characteristics of postmodernism is that people believe that there are no absolutes . Forget presenting truth to postmoderns, they've asserted that there are no absolutes (a self-refuting claim) and that truth is re

Darwin Day Religiosity and Question Evolution Day Summary

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen This article is about the religious nature of evolutionism, reactions of anti-creationists to the fifth annual Question Evolution Day , a discussion of some behind-the-scenes aspects of QED, and more. Spreading the Word A few years back, a reporter asked me if there were "supporters" for Question Evolution Day. I figured that he meant famous people or organizations. In the past, I had several interviews on radio and podcasts , usually about QED. This year, I increased my efforts to obtain interviews or at least mentions on sites and things. Of the twenty or so contacts I made, most did not bother to reply. (That's a mite disheartening, since most of them agree in principle with the purposes of QED.) One gave a brusque brush-off, one waited too long to reply, another got the notion to do an interview when time was short, but there was no time, what with conflicting schedules and all. There was only one interview, but it was a good one

Anti-Creationists and Faulty Worldviews Part 1

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Things were surprisingly quiet at The Question Evolution Project over Christmas. But New Year's Day and afterward, some owlhoots from the Darwin Ranch rode over, full of beans and ready to slap leather. (From the quality of their comments, they had too much firewater during their celebrations and weren't ready to deal with polite society yet.) Fortunately, their comments were helpful resources for writing this article, and I saved a heap of screenshots. One of these troublemakers had a wagon load of assertions based on his presuppositions, but was jawing about nothing rooted in fact. I'll omit his insistence on using the irrational, disingenuous redefinition of atheism  as "lack of belief" and stick with the evolutionism comments: Evolution is directly predicated on the scientific method. To state otherwise is illogical. It requires peer review and falsifiable evidence, like all scientific disciplines. It's directly predicat

Continuing the Creation Journey in 2016

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Wishing you all a Happy Calendar-Changing Day! Well, there's nothing all that special about New Year's Day, and many cultures past and present established different dates and customs for their new year. Although I believe in setting goals and enacting them at the best possible time, January 1 is convenient in some ways — especially since those late-year holidays that many of us observe are taken care of. I'm ready to begin 2016 with my unregistered assault keyboard and hoping to equip all y'all who are willing to read. I agree with other writers who have said that people like some of the personal stuff, so this article will have a bit more of that than usual.  Image credit:  NASA/JPL-Caltech/SSC , who would certainly  not  endorse the contents of this site! But — why me? Why am I doing this?  Seriously. There are many people with more intelligence, charm, good looks, skill, education, and experience than I have who say some of thes

Evolutionary Speculations Go Uncontested

Image
It's getting to become a common thing, just press play to hear approval for things that are passed off as "science". We've seen many times some amazingly unscientific speculations presented to the world as scientific advances, especially in areas related to origins. The Darwinism supporters in the press are all-fired joyful about sharing it with the world, often embellishing the "discoveries".  If people had a mind to, they could examine these speculations and see that there is no actual science  involved, just expensive words given with authority. To hear Darwinistas tell it, the consensus is that evolution is true, and scientists are all in agreement. Not hardly! I reckon they're getting more and more desperate to avoid facing evidence for the Creator, don't you? A scientist examines Earth animals, and has a guess as to what aliens would look like Evolution treated like an entity with the ability to learn  Evolution is like a computer

Darwin Did Not Create Evolution

Image
When we point out that evolution is actually an ancient religious view, uninformed Darwinistas tend to get a mite irritated and tell us, with incontrovertible logic, "That's not true!" This is often accompanied by assorted insults. If they had a mind to do some homework, they'd learn that evolution goes back to the ancient Greeks, and beyond that. For that matter, when anti-creationists want to claim that we believe in Bronze Age fairy tales, they'd be upset to learn that forms of evolution have been the subject of fantasies and legends in many ancient cultures. To equate the Bible and biblical creation with fairy tales, magic, and other ideas is not only ignorant, but disingenuous. I've been told to read Darwin's On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, maybe I'd learn something. First, which version? It's been revised several times. Second, it's been larg

Dinosaur Soft Tissues and Evolutionist Science Deniers

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Edited 12-14-2015 Evidence supporting an old Earth has been iffy for a long time. Uniformitarian geologist Charles Lyell (a lawyer by trade) wanted to free the science of geology from Moses , and famously gave his own estimates of the rate of erosion for Niagara Falls despite  evidence to the contrary . Today, there is deceptive reporting in paleontology . " Dinosaur Fossils " image courtesy of  khunaspix / FreeDigitalPhotos.net Dishonesty is not surprising. After all, atheists and other anti-creationists are opposed to the biblical worldview, and are  living up to their own ethical standards . In addition, they don't look too kindly on scientific evidence that refutes long ages, and microbes-to-minerologist evolution requires huge amounts of time. Ain't happening, but they need the time for their Just So Stories. There have been numerous challenges to long ages of late from many places, so evolutionists are circling the wagons to de

Faith Statements of Evolutionism

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Evolutionists and atheists make statements of faith as if they were secular holy writ. Their fans adore this, and some people can be intimidated when such statements are made with confidence and authority. This is often mixed with pseudo-intellectual philosophical jargon. However, when people know the truth of what is being said, there is no cause to give heed to such assertions. Actual quote from Clinton  Richard Dawkins,  The Blind Watchmaker , 1996, page 1 Have you noticed that people tend to pay attention when someone speaks with confidence and authority? Imagine this: A crisis situation, and someone who is not in uniform takes charge of the situation. Even though that person is a stranger to everyone else, they often follow instructions. Of course, if someone toting a badge shows up, that's  the one most likely to be obeyed. People who are popular and make strong statements get attention and often get adoration. (Why people care about the opi

My Favorite Martian Fallacy

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen What is the attraction to Mars? Maybe people want to go there because the place has atmosphere. Well, there one possibility. Well, it's very thin and mostly carbon dioxide, so that's not it. Maybe it's the long romantic notion of going there. Wild stories about a lady standing on the surface of Mars get people's imaginations a mite agitated. Besides, Venus is so hot and acidic, it melts space probes, so people aren't getting serious notions of visiting there. Panoramic view from Curiosity Mars Rover / Image Credit: NASA, JPL-Caltech, MSSS When people develop a skill in spotting logical fallacies , they can find them in many situations. (Someone must have noticed the fallacy of ambiguity when I equivocated on the word "atmosphere" just above.) I was watching a rerun of My Favorite Martian . It was originally aired in October 1963, and called " Man or Amoeba ". You can watch it here if you have a mind to. If so,