Piltdown Superman

Quark-to-quartermaster evolution requires deep time for the propagation of its stories, and also to make evolutionary stories seem plausible in the first place. Geological evolution provides whatever billions or millions of years that biological evolutionists require. One serious limitation in these fields is that secular scientists have been taught to think in evolutionary paradigms. Maverick thinking beyond uniformitarianism is rare. Many scientists are willing to fit in with the crowd and play with chunks of time to make Darwin smile. Doing lazy research while restricting interpretations of data to yield expected results are not uncommon. Geological interests at Colorado Springs, Unsplash / Taylor Burnfield Those canyons in central Colorado? Carved out by rivers over millions of years, they insist. Other explanations are neglected, and the expected conclusions are supported by limited attempts at empirical research. Dating methods based on assumptions and circular reasoning make the...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  A kind of holiday was made to celebrate Star Wars  movies, a cash cow for the Disney Corporation since 2012. Many space operas came along afterward, such as the dreadful  Starcrash  a year later. Fans do not really need a holiday, as there is something Star Wars  frequently happening throughout each year.  Some folks make a distinction between science fiction  which is generally more serious and thoughtful, and sci-fi , which is usually mental fluff. Early Star Trek  had real and imaginary science in their stories, and Stargate SG-1  used some actual science. Space war, Pixabay / Adis Resic Fantasy and science fiction have been around for a very long time, but it really took off in the twentieth century. Comic books had science fiction. Television and movies got into the act later. It is interesting that many Christians enjoy science fiction and sci-fi, but the majority of the authors of these and fantasy material (the...

A few years back, I posted an article by biblical creationists proposing that one way animals spread around the world after the Genesis Flood was by rafting. Misotheists had a grand time ridiculing it — unaware that evolutionists had been catching onto that idea. In a grandiose display of evoporn, Darwinists demonstrate that they believe reality does not compare with pure imagination: Iguanas rafted from North America to Fiji thirty-four million fanciful years ago. They must have because they live there now — which is the fallacy of  affirming the consequent . Rafting iguanas and rainbow of imagination, made by DeepAI This peer-reviewed  story is gelastic for several reasons. One is that there is no plausible mechanism. Another is that desert iguanas, not the swimming type, are the supposed ancestors of those in Fiji. Third, they could not survive such a trip. Yes, lizards have been seen rafting and presumed to successfully make some trips — but nothing nearly as long as this ...

It has been rightly said that trust takes a great deal of time and effort to earn, but can be ruined in an instant. Darwin's disciples have been caught doing shoddy research, ignoring pertinent evidence (the fallacy of exclusion ), seeing only one possible explanation of evidence, lying, and doing outright fraud. Then they wonder why the public is increasingly reluctant to trust their morality. These are the same sneaky sidewinders who redefine words making them appear to support the Bearded Buddha's concepts. People are thinking dinosaurs had feathers, but evidence does not support their claims. Assembled with components from  Clker  clipart Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ online will swoop down on creationists, jabbering, "We got a study!" (Many people are prone to believe practically anything if it seems to support their preconceptions, especially studies.) "A scientist said it's a simple matter for a scale to become a feather." Not hardly! On at least ...

It has been said that the flat-earth movement has some characteristics of a cult. There is no authoritative set of doctrines , and beliefs are varied, as seen in a cursory view of the Flat Earth Society FAQ . Some are typical, such as Earth being flat and round like a disk, but others hold views that are...truly bizarre. Some of the strange views are found online (the internet has given flat-earth views a wide audience ). Members had a chance to put up or shut up with something called The Final Experiment. It did not go well. Flat Earth rendering, public domain image, Wikimedia Commons /  Trekky0623 Another trait that flat-earthers share with cults is a victim mentality; they're all out to get us. NASA photographs proving the spherical earth? Faked for various reasons, and thousands of people are in on the deceptions. (Was I forced to wear a NASA T-shirt while I wrote this post, or will people believe me when I say that it's entirely coincidence?) Flat-earthers have many rescui...

Today is the anniversary of the first human in space, the Soviet Union sent Yuri Gagarin on an orbit of Earth that lasted 108 minutes. Nikita Khrushchev did not know that Yuri was secretly a Christian  living in that atheistic regime. While there was science and technology involved, the flight had goals that were primarily for military and propaganda value. Of course, the USSR believed in evolution, but they were probably not concerned with finding extraterrestrial life — certainly not like obsessive secularists later. Cranky Alien image furnished by Why?Outreach The space aliens are still screaming silence . Secularists are sure of abiogenesis somewhere, sometime, so alien civilizations must have evolved. These scientists are offering speculations that smack of desperation, even saying that a null result still shows hope. (No, Skippy, it shows nothing.) If a bacterium was found on Mars, these jaspers would be ecstatic, but they would have to prove that it was native to Mars. ...

First, a warning. There are words in here that may trigger bots on social(ist) media, so people who quote them should d!sgvise them. Concepts learned here are useful elsewhere, such as spotting logical fallacies . Another is how words can be manipulated. The word p0rnography  was redefined by leftists to include the Bible . According to some people, I am a rac!st because I have less melanin than some folks , and it is acceptable to hate me — they redefined racism. Indeed, the word evolution  itself is conflated so that small changes in organisms means Darwin was right. Image by Cowboy Bob Sorensen of angelic visitation manifesting (I redefined "lens flare") Redefining words to suit an agenda or public sentiment is often used to smuggle concepts into discussions and even public policy. A dry arroyo can be a "navigable river" for the sake of governmental control and generating money. How about non-avian dinosaurs ? Those sidewinders are manipulating people into accept...

Although it seems less frequent nowadays, cancel culture  is a method of punishing those who dare to go against the prevailing viewpoint. I believe that people want to be "right" or in the "best" movement, whether it is religious (including atheism), a political party, or something else. Those who disagree are shunned and even canceled. A form of this happened when C. Richard Dawkins was "deplatformed" at the University of California, Berkeley. He said something people did not like about Islam. He has said other things that caused people to dislike him. These come about because someone goes against the trend. Image from "The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton" by Sidney Paget , Strand Magazine , 1904 (enhanced at iLoveIMG ) Creation science and the Intelligent Design movement are unwanted on social(ist) media, and many times atheists try to have it stamped out. Calls for trolling raids, feculent comments, ridicule, and more are common fare ...

Some of us are not surprised when bad science and malfeasance are found among Darwinoids, but some stuff gets me on the prod . They have a materialistic worldview that requires deep time, so interpreting evidence through those glasses is to be expected. Manipulation of that data is another story. Know that "tangled web we weave" line about practicing to deceive? The so-called earliest bird has been discovered in Antarctica. Purveyors of evoporn are web=tangled indeed, conflicting stories are more fun than a pig in a steel barrel. Ducks and Ducklings , John Frederick Herring, Sr. (1850) Evolution is not a person, except when it makes choices and does experimentation. That's pantheistic, old son. The Chicxulub impact caused dinosaur demise, but that story is unraveling and not all dinosaur scientists accepted it anyway. The discovered bird is just like a modern duck, but gets its own classification — because evolution. Wait'll you get a load of the guy who has faith th...

The morning of the one-year anniversary of my wife's passing , I wanted to commemorate the day. It began by going to the Hudson River in the morning. Those parks open at sunrise, which I looked up online. It happens on a predictable basis. Why should it? Some folks do not like this, but presuppositional apologetics  has its ultimate starting point in the authority of God's Word and character as revealed in the Bible. Science, logic, and other things are not possible in a worldview of atheistic materialism; they only make sense in a biblical worldview. Morning on the Hudson River, Unsplash / Cowboy Bob Sorensen We all have presuppositions and an ultimate starting point. The sun will rise tomorrow, a lighter will make a candle burn, pictures on the wall will not float upward. Things happened before, so they will again — but that is circular reasoning! God holds the universe together, making logic (inductive and other kinds) possible. From there, science is possible. And mathemati...

From the extremely silly material turned in with straight faces as "research," it is no wonder that the secular science industry does not want financial scrutiny. It does not take a scientist to use logic and coherence to determine a...truly bizarre paper. Evolution is supposed to be without purpose because it is not an entity. Sure, figures of speech can treat something like a person, everyone does that. Then Darwin's votaries really do get into pantheism and treat evolution as a being. Luis Zaman claims evolution itself evolves. Video game console and effects, Pixabay / Vika_Glitter The worshipful description of evolution evolving because evolution is evolution and evolution evolves probably embarrassed even Rusty Swingset and the hands at the Darwin Ranch (up near Deception Pass). What was Zaman's research method? Essentially, a glorified video game that oversimplified their subjects. The software itself is known to be faulty. This tinhorn seems utterly committed t...

Some years ago, I  briefly discussed the genetic fallacy . We need to give it another look. In one way, it is simple: People reject information because they dislike its source. That is a cop out to avoid dealing with subject matter that may be pertinent. Recently, I wrote in  Resistance to Question Evolution Day  that someone posted about QED on Reddit and angry atheists had many illogical comments. The poster was asked if people should pay attention to someone called "Cowboy Bob." The genetic fallacy was weaponized and the content of QED was ignored. Plato and Aristotle dazzle the School of Athens  with basketball displays Regular readers know that I encourage people to know basic informal logical fallacies . It can be quite fun. Christians (especially biblical creationists) need to know these things not only to catch deceit and manipulation from misotheists and Darwin's disciples, but also to keep from doing it ourselves and dishonoring the Lord. One challenge...

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Although Reddit is really big on teh interwebs and seems to have evolved from newsgroups , I have little use for it. Interesting because I was involved in newsgroups for a spell. They were like the Wild West; there was no town marshall, so almost anything could be posted. Reddit is a bit moderated, I hear. Someone posted about Question Evolution Day . As expected, atheists and other anti-creationists went ballistic. A cursory glance shows that they still reject rational discourse and logic — yet they claim to be the rational ones. The first thing I noticed (again, cursory glances) is that the substance of QED was not discussed. Instead, they used straw man arguments, prejudicial conjecture, and some fabricated complaints that were decades  old (railing against a book from 1997). One complained that creationists are always lying, which I have pointed out is ludicrous even on the surface: Why would we, who believe in a holy and righteous God who hates lyi...

An exclamation of amazement at absurdity is, "How dumb can you get?" It implies that stupidity cannot get much worse. Someone pointed out that it seems like a challenge, so: "How dumb can you get? Hold my beer!" We have contenders from the nature rights movement. Those addlepated folks at the Nonhuman Rights Project tried to get personhood status for an elephant , but that was overturned. They are still trying. Also, there is no mention if hallucinogenic substances were a factor, but a mountain is legally a person with rights and responsibilities. Elephant reading a book, made with  Bing Image Generator  and enhanced The Nonhuman Rights Project keeps trying to get legislation for critters to be granted personhood. They failed in the People's Republic of New York, so they turned their attention to getting a pachyderm made a person in Colorado. Those people weren't having it . The whole idea is infested with ridiculous ideas and contradictions. In New Zealand,...

When attempting to make a point with rational arguments, misotheists are generally unwilling to "allow" Christians (and especially biblical creationists) to be right about anything of importance. I recently scanned a Page by a bigoted atheist whose material I had used for demonstration purposes a spell back, and he is still at it. That is, he shares Christian material to ridicule and makes comments that display his foolishness. In one share, a valid point was made but he refused to admit it. Monkey in snow, cropped from Unsplash / Shino Nakamura Professing atheists and other defenders of molecules-to-monkey evolution on social(ist) media are often committed to attacking their opponents instead of having any kind of intelligent discussion. It is ironic because they claim to have the upper hand over "theists" regarding reason, yet frequently violate laws of logic. Indeed, many times they clutch their pearls and holler because they do not grasp an argument, nor can the...

As many people know, particles-to-painter evolution is fundamental to atheism. One can have a reasonable dialogue for a short time with a professing atheist on a few subjects, but must not criticize evolution. (Indeed, I remember a discussion where the atheist woman thought the Christian was going to criticize evolution, and began to arch her back and extend her claws. It was  civil before.) Most of the vocal proponents of evolution are atheists, but the quality of supporters has declined over the years. Blur of sun and trees image by Cowboy Bob Sorensen One can often judge the substance of a position by its proponents. (No, a comely face and dulcet tones do not make something correct, nor do wise-sounding words. Intelligent supporters may prompt someone to listen more closely to a claim, yes?) Quality opponents can give someone serious pause. In days of yore, Darwin's disciples were plentiful and famous. They presented what appeared to be valid science according to what was known...

So it is 2025, and my unregistered assault keyboard is still under warranty despite heavy use. Proponents of minerals-to-machinist evolution desperately want to convince other people that they are right, pretending the Creator does not exist (Rom. 1:18-23). We have seen shenanigans and hooey used as propaganda. Definitions of words are changed, speciation and variations are called evolution — but no creature has become something else. Indeed, it appears that many of Darwin's disciples do not understand the basics of evolution themselves, so they blow smoke just like Charlie did! Mostly made at  PhotoFunia Atheists and other secularists tell people what  to think about origins.  Biblical creationists want people to learn how  to think — and why. There was a fellow who seemed to live in fear, so whenever a new assertion was made by evolutionists, he would contact others and me, asking, "This can be refuted, right?" Aside from having faith in ever-changing apparent evid...

A hoary old canard used by Darwin's disciples to make the origin of life, and also evolution itself, seem feasible involves monkeys. There are several versions of the concept and the actual origin seems uncertain, but Thomas Henry Huxley made use of it way back when. The idea is that given an infinite amount of time and a million immortal monkeys, they could eventually type out out the works of William Shakespeare. The concept is actually plausible the way it is written but is not realistic. Researchers tell us what we already know. Bronx Zoo Postcard — Chimpanzee at Work, 1907, Flickr / Jim Griffin (PD) The monkey theorem is a way to get Darwin doubters to admit that something absurd is actually possible, never mind the logic. From there, all sorts of lucky breaks result in evolution bringing all the wonders of life. The Creator is then displaced. However, dealing with the real universe, even secularists see there ain't no way nohow. The “infinite monkey theorem” began in som...

There was some excitement at the Darwin Ranch the other day, and foreman Rusty Swingset rode over to my digs to get me his ownself. Lisa Myworries, the Winkie Guards supervisor, was near emotional collapse. "But why does she need you ?" Rusty asked. I had no answer. Her job is stressful and that was compounded when some of the guards got rebellious. Some of the ranch hands were walking and talking about how they "saw" evolution, and those guards demanded to know where the real evolution was. It did not go well. Wicked Witch Darwin and Monkey "Finding Evolution", main image from Why Outreach Although Rusty, his assistant Cliff Swallows, and some of the other higher-ups at the Darwin Ranch can be decent sorts, Lisa and I have a bit of a rapport. It turns out that she was agreeing with the Winkie Guards who expressed (in their limited vocabulary and speaking abilities) doubt that what is called evolution really is  evolution. That is a subject we have discuss...

Interesting that believers of descent with modifications go ape when someone says that we "evolved from monkeys," yet Charles Darwin himself said that we essentially have monkey brains. He also wondered how trustworthy the human brain can be due to its origins. Naturally, biblical creationists say that our brains are  reliable because they were designed by our Creator who intended for us to use them. It seems that atheists are not using — or even abusing — logic in origins stories (see " Logic Getting Worse in Evolutionism "). Bonobo, Pixabay /  Herbert Aust When materialists try to explain how brains and minds (and logic) came about through evolution, they cannot come up with a consistent story. Invoking natural selection backfires because it assumes too much. Apelike creatures were not the beginning of evolution, but a whole chain of alleged creatures going all the way back to atoms in motion. Some materialists know they have no leg to stand on in this, but they b...