Piltdown Superman

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen If you ever find yourself riding near Deception Pass, try to visit the Darwin Ranch for the worship service. Not much of a spectacle, but it's an educational experience. They bring out their idol of Dagon, have devotional readings from Clinton Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Charles Darwin, and others. They don't do hymns, though [ 1 ]. Bas relief of Dagon as a half-man, half-fish god Satire aside, we have seen that Darwin did not create evolution all by his lonesome [ 2 ] and evolution is, in reality, an ancient pagan religion [ 3 ]. I agree with the remark that essentially says Darwin took an old belief system and gussied it up in a lab coat. Indeed, evolutionism is pantheistic, and even includes elements of animism [ 4 ]. When Paul was debating the Greek philosophers in Acts 17:16-32, they were pagan evolutionists. Pagan evolutionism did not originate with the Greeks, however. Their worldview can be seen in ancient Hindu beliefs [ 3 ]. Hang on,

Believers in fish-to-physicist evolution have a detailed mythology that they get all gussied up and show off as actual science. In reality, they have loosely connected mythologies that are taken by faith, not demonstrable science. Although some countries claim to believe in keeping religion separate from government-run schools, secular humanism (atheism) by way of evolution is the unofficial state religion for many secularists. Images found at Clker clipart were modified One statement of evolutionary dogma is that life began in the sea. Eventually, we get to where some creatures got ambitious and flopped onto land, evolved lungs and legs, and eventually turned into all land life. Hail Darwin, blessed be!  Except there is no actual scientific evidence for this. Some people claim that certain catfish that use their fins to navigate over land from one bit of water to another, or critters like lungfish , are evidence for evolution. Not hardly! They are creatures with certain abi

We frequently see the fallacy of reification , where something abstract is given traits belonging to a person or entity. This sort of thing is done frequently and often for humorous purposes, like when Basement Cat gives me an evil look. No, she can't do that. Or saying that the beach is calling for me. No, ain't happening, sorry. Science says...no, it doesn't, but maybe some scientists say. See? Figures of speech using reification abound in stories and casual talk, but when used in an argument or scientific paper, reification is a fallacy. Proponents of scum-to-skeptic evolution are using the fallacy more and more frequently, indicating that evolution chooses, selects, decides, and so on. It's not infrequent to see an evolutionist making evolution into a puny god.  Pantheon of gods in  The Triumph of Civilization by Jacques Réattu, 1793 Evolution has always been a religious idea from way back, including Greek and Hindu religions. What we have now is mo

Today, we have a couple of related items for you. Materialists are unable to account for a sense of purpose, and have no ultimate foundation for morality. Some believe morality has its source in evolution , but that simply doesn't work. They have two minds, seeking a sense of purpose, but also claiming that "reality" dictates that when we die, that's it. Atheists agree to an arbitrary definition of "reality" as materialism with no God. This concept is based on their own presuppositions — as if they had some kind of right or moral imperative to define reality itself. Seems a mite ironic. Another irony is that anti-creationists need creationists to give them a false sense of purpose , as exhibited in their secularist jihads. Made at Atom Smasher Secularists have been doing some research on areas of the brain to see what lights up (so to speak), and are seeing that those who have a sense of purpose — a large-scale purpose — have happier lives. Biblically

If you study on it for a spell, you'll notice that secularists have double standards, especially related to anything Christian or creationist: When we teach our children about biblical creation, we're "indoctrinating" them. When government-run secularist education centers give them materialistic and evolutionary material for several hours a day over a period of years, they're "educating" them. When evolutionists disagree about hypotheses and models, it's good for science. When creationary scientists disagree with each other or offer other possible interpretations of evidence, well, creationists cannot get along with each other. When atheists and evolutionists attack Christians and creationists, they're being "rational". When creationists present evidence and refute the attacks, we're "right wing extremist s" and " science deniers". When using quotes of evolutionists admitting they have problems, it's &q

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen If you study on it, you may realize that atheists, cultists, anti-creationists, and others have similar thinking patterns. While much of Western society tends to have an adoration for logic, numbers , science, scientists, facts, and so forth, people are prone to "thinking" with their emotions. That is, some owlhoot comes along and sounds like he knows what he's saying, possibly using expensive words, but there is still some kind of appeal to emotions. Then people end up being deceived. Other biblical creationists and I keep trying to encourage people to learn how to think rationally so they can spot logical fallacies and manipulation. Thi s can help keep deception to a minimum . Ever notice that some people can be excellent thinkers, but when it comes to certain religious matters (and especially evolutionism), they can't think straight ? Before I continue, I want to point out that there are different kinds of common ancestry evoluti

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

In any apologetics endeavor, we have to be aware that people will naturally argue from their worldviews. We are to present the gospel (Luke 24:46-27, 1 Peter 3:15-16), and the other person's starting point may be it's atheism, evolutionism, a false Christian system, postmodern philosophy, or a different religion entirely. They ask questions and we can give answers, but watch out — some people use loaded questions and try to keep us on the defensive. They have assertions of their own that they need to explain. In addition, we need to know what the Bible teaches and be clear about it, because some people will think that the true God is just another deity to add to their stable; receiving Jesus is almost meaningless to them. Generated at Redkid , then added some text of my own. A follower of the an offshoot of Hinduism known as Jainism was trying to say that God did not create time. Instead, time created God. Then he insisted that since the Bible does not specifically say,

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

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen I disremember how I came across this 2012 article, " Should Humanity Take Religion On Interstellar Space Voyage? ", but thought it had some things that needed addressing. It's obviously written from a secularist perspective, and the token Christian that they interviewed certainly did not express an understanding of the Bible. He said we have to leave behind Earth-based religions. I reckon he doesn't know about religion, history — and people. Modified image from Pixabay / falco and clip art from Clker It's one thing to leave behind our political views or other things that we select, but the Christian faith is who we are, it's not like choosing a hat or something. A Christian has been changed by God (2 Cor. 5:17) and is adopted as one of his children (John 1:12, Rom. 8:15, Heb. 12:7). Several astronauts are Christians, including James Irwin , Jack Lousma , Rick Husband and Michael Anderson (who perished in the 2003 Columbia  di