Piltdown Superman

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Up yonder near Deception Pass lies the Darwin Ranch, but if you go without an invite, watch out because the Winkie Guards get a mite irritable about trespassing. An exception is when the ranch hands feel generous and share the peyote with them. We have seen in numerous posts that evolutionary thinking has actually been harmful to medical science. Such thinking has been a waste of time and money in other areas of science as well (for example, see " The Absence of Alien Contact "). It is a vexation to see supposedly educated folks get paid for doing nothing useful. Modified from a photograph at  Pixnio Tinhorns like Bill Nye the Leftist Propaganda Guy and others claim that science cannot advance without evolution, but that falsehood is easily refuted. Still, they proclaim it. There is a "meme" on Fakebook at Evolution is a Lie of a game show contestant being asked, "Which branch of the sciences has Darwinian evolution advanced the most sin

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  The title may prompt the reader to expect an article about the importance of creation science from both science and biblical standpoints, but that is not the case. For Question Evolution Day , it seemed like a good idea to go back to one of the basics. I did not practice what I preach on getting a definition nailed down. This error illustrates how we can make assumptions about word meanings, then have confusion if people do not have a meeting of the minds on terminology. Sunrise , Mikalojus Konstantinas Ciurlionis, 1904 Regular readers have known this child to emphasize how we must be careful in discussions to make sure all parties understand what is being discussed. Otherwise, there can be arguments, then shootouts in the saloon which startle the horses outside. Okay, I mean that confusion can also lead to anger. The word evolution  has several meanings, and Darwinists often conflate change, variation, speciation , and other things with particles-to-painter evo

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Someone comes along to read a post, then notices a link to an extremely long article. What is a reader to do with that? Most web traffic is from mobile browsers (which I believe encourage people to sacrifice quality content for convenience and brevity). Ebooks are increasing in popularity, however. When I say ebook, I include shorter articles. Sales of ebook readers is declining. One reason is that readers tend to last many years and do not need replacing. Another is because people read ebooks on mobile devices. How is that happening? Photo of my ebook reader modified at BigHugeLabs.com , modified again with Paint.Net With Question Evolution Day just a week away, I thought it would be helpful to provide suggestions for people who are serious about learning biblical creation science. Now, don't get on the prod and disunderstand me. I know that everyone can't read or watch everything, and aren't interested in every subject (I certainly skip many thin

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  We have seen many times that not only are atheists very religious , but evolutionism is also religious in nature . Obviously, people will object to both of those facts because atheism has no deity, and evolution is "science. Atheists are frequently disingenuous. One glaring example is their redefinition of atheism as "lack of belief" instead of "believes there is no God or gods". They conveniently neglect definitions of religion  that do not involve organized worship services or a deity. Secular humanism is a deity-free religion as well, and evolution is an  ancient pagan religion  that Charles Darwin gussied up in a lab coat.  Image credit before modification: Unsplash / Kimberly Lake The idealized form of science is very different from reality. Science should be sharpened through challenges and thinking beyond the consensus, and different ideas should be evaluated. If a theory or hypothesis turns rancid, it should be thrown away inste

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Subjects like radical  and Saul Alinsky are not exactly what one would expect for the tenth annual Question Evolution Day , but hopefully this article will be interesting. This is in no wise an endorsement of Alinsky or Rules for Radicals , but there are some things that can be learned. Modified with a graphic from Photos Public Domain The word  radical  is frequently thrown around with little regard to its original meaning. It is quite often used as a pejorative. Nowadays it can have connotations of people with Molotov fire bombs or doing other acts of violence. It is used to label extremist views (making Charles Darwin a radical because his views were not readily accepted at first). The true meanings of radical are quite different, including holding to a  foundation or basic principle .  Saul Alinsky was friendly to communist views and leftist government, but did not seem to promote actual violence. What I read of Rules for Radicals  was interesting and unpre

As we are coming up on the tenth annual Question Evolution Day , we can hope that some believers in atoms-to anthropologist evolution may begin to realize that the narrative has problems. Consider the news about older cave art than previously known. Credits: Unsplash / Max Saeling , modified with PhotoFunia Out Indonesia way is the island of Sulawesi. Paintings of animals were found there, and secularists gave kinda-sorta-maybe dates that were older than the famous Chauvet (the Ardeche region of France) cave art. There are many facts to consider , and they should give a thinking evolutionist a passel of reasons to ask questions. According to evolutionary timelines and fact-free speculations, intelligence "emerged" eventually after we were done evolving from some apelike critters. Nobody knows when that allegedly happened , nor do they know about the "emergence" or self-awareness or artistic expression. Those scrawls from the Ice Age didn't help their belief sys

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  In anticipation of the tenth annual Question Evolution Day on February 12 , we should mount up and head for yonder hill to get a bigger perspective. Misotheists and other evolutionists say that biblical creationists believe "myths" and "fairy tales" despite  scientific evidence. This raises some important questions. Image Credit: US Geological Survey (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Actually, the questions that are raised fit under an umbrella question: Why don't biblical creationists fear science? People who have something to hide or know that their belief systems won't withstand scrutiny seem to shun science, logic, and good theology. But we embrace such things. If natural sciences like geology truly support deep time, why are there organized tours by creationists? There are many, with people and organizations such as: Russ Miller of  Creation, Evolution & Science Ministries Eric Hovind of Creation Today Gra

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Riders for the Darwin brand are usually committed to and presuppose naturalism , the belief that natural laws and processes are the only things that exist, as their foundation. Naturalism is essentially an atheistic view, so this is something with which we must contend on Question Evolution Day. Original image before modification from RGBStock / Dave Dyet QED is an existential threat to those who try to suppress intellectual and academic freedoms, as well as freedoms of speech and thought. Militant Darwinists who are riding herd do not tolerate their folks expressing doubt about evolution. Some who are safely established have done so , but they still imperil their careers and reputations in the secular science industry and academic institutions. Who will they please (John 12:43), and at what cost (Mark 8:36)? Although there are secular scientists who have not heard of creation science and are taught to believe that evolution is the only possible

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen While we want to reach people with honest inquiries and remove stumbling blocks on Question Evolution Day , those of us who spend any amount of time discussing biblical creation science online encounter furious atheopaths (see atheopath definition in footnote 1, here ) and militant Darwinists. While pretending to be harbingers of science and reason, they frequently display little knowledge of either. Critics of Christianity, the Bible, biblical creation, and so on use social media when they seek to slap leather with us. They know that God exists (Romans 1:18-23. Psalm 14:1, Proverbs 1:7) and presuppose philosophical naturalism. I fully believe that they are intent on validating their rebellion against God and biblical authority (Job 40:8). If someone holds a position that they dislike, the positions are misrepresented; the person is called an idiot and a liar, but they only succeed in displaying their own corruption . As I have said many times, some tinho

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Although Western civilization claims to value free speech, that commodity is being trampled like sawdust on a saloon floor nowadays. The secular science industry is heavily biased  and increasingly involved in leftist causes . To have the freedom to present evidence supporting recent creation and refuting evolution presented in the secular science industry? Fuggedaboudit. They want to control the narrative and the information. Background image furnished by  Why?Outreach For example, much of the information presented by climate alarmists is tainted, and they reject not only contrary information, but logic itself . If you offer scientific information that is suppressed by climate cultists and leftist science, expect to have those tinhorns shout you down . You may hear something like, "I don't care if there is documentation! Ignore the false predictions ! I can tell you that deniers are all liars, even though I don't read or understand the

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Sometimes people do not understand concepts no matter how well things are explained to them. Add to that when sidewinders that are so consumed with hate, they are unable to think rationally. When the two conditions are combined, it only makes for angry chin music. Here are some examples. Made at Kapwing Let's start with lies. On the November 22, 2019 episode of the Chris Plante Show, a leftist tinhorn lied. The documentation proving that he was lying was present, and the facts were also explained to him. He lied about the same thing again anyway. In a similar manner, a vindictive anti-creationist calls everyone he disagrees with "liars" , and he "proves" it by calling them liars again. It has been explained that he has not ever proven that his targets were dishonest, but only that he disagreed with them; disagreement or differences on the interpretations of facts are not lying. Also, he was using the fallacy of repeated assertion