Piltdown Superman

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

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen In my years of writing, doing social media, having conversations, and simply observing people, I have come to the conclusion that many want to believe that they are better in some ways than other people. One means to this end is to have some kind of special knowledge. Image credit: Pixabay / Vicki Nunn Atheists rank near the top of the uppity scale, imagining that they own science and reason. They use these to suppress the truth of God in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:18). Universal common ancestor evolution is a cornerstone of atheism and of anti-creation compromisers. Those of us who believe the truth of Scripture and the reality of biblical creation science are deemed inferior. This is primarily based on their arbitrary presuppositions that science must be rooted in naturalism. However, their presuppositions and assumptions are not supported by logic or evidence . Conversely, there are professing Christians who are full of pride about their salvation

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen An aspect of discussions, debates, or even everyday life that can get almost anyone on the prod is when someone says or acts like something is all right for them but not for someone else. This can be referred to as special pleading, but a broader term is double standards. I reckon that we all have double standards to some extent, but Christians and biblical creationists need to be careful to minimize them, especially in apologetics encounters. Political Double Standards We see examples of "fine for me but not for you" in political situations, especially from those on the left. When Judge Brett Kavanaugh was being confirmed as a US Supreme Court justice, some women accused him of sexual misconduct from a previous decade. Although their stories had no substantiation, Americans were told to "believe the women". Why? Because they were women? Genetic fallacy. The blatant hypocrisy in this is that a Moslem, Keith Ellison, was accused of

Once again, astronomers find a celestial object that should not exist, but it does anyway. This happens quite frequently, whether baffling planets and moons in our own solar system, or exoplanets such as the oversized NGTS-1b. Why are they so befuddled? Because they work from irrational materialistic presuppositions. Credit: Rgbstok / kimolos This planet is almost the size of Jupiter, orbits a small star, and (according to cosmic evolutionary mythology), there is not enough material for the planet to have formed in the first place. (Then there's the alleged super-huge black hole that shouldn't exist .) It's not just in astronomy where secular scientists keep getting amazed, it happens in paleontology as well . Ironically, secularists use theological arguments based on their naturalistic opinions in other ways. The embrangled theology is first based on the assumption that God the Creator does not exist. F'rinstance, owlhoots who hold to a naturalistic paradigm co

Adherents of molecules-to-man evolution are passionate about their beliefs, and many are intolerant of those who reject this position, whether for scientific or theological grounds, or both. They are not content to allow the study of origins to be an academic discussion, preferring to vilify their opponents. They engage in stalking, misrepresentation, libel, censure, dreadful logic, outright persecution , and more. This kind of behavior is typical of atheists, but it is distressing that professing Christians corinthianize with said atheists in maligning people that should  be their brethren in Christ. Naturally, atheists approve of this behavior, since it advances their naturalistic worldview and Christophobic agenda. Basil of Caesarea icon from  Wikimedia Commons The most egregious attacks seem to come from theistic evolutionists (who disingenuously call themselves "evolutionary creationists"). They have a man-centered low view of Scripture, preferring to allego

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Greek mythology tells us that Achilles was a great warrior and was invulnerable except in his heel. When Paris, son of the king and queen of Troy, shot him in the heel, he was able to be killed . This gave rise to the expression Achilles' heel to indicate someone's weakest point. Common-ancestor evolution has a passel of weak points, and several of them are quite serious. Disclaimer: none. I bought Evolution's Achilles' Heels all by my lonesome, so I received no benefits for writing this here review. Just over a year ago, I gave a favorable review of the 96-minute documentary by the same name , and it's fitting that I write about the book as well. I reckon that because people are enamored with credentials and such, the good folks at Creation Ministries International didn't give scoffers the excuse of saying someone is "not a scientist" — the book has nine Ph.D. scientists, and the documentary ups the ante to fifteen.

Most people have probably indulged in woolgathering about going forward or backward in time, maybe to warn Wild Bill Hickock to sit with his back to the wall in that poker game , warn yourself to stay home instead of going out on a certain night, cheating on the lottery numbers, or somesuch. Time travel has been the subject of many science fiction stories in printed and visual forms. But can it be done? There are things to deal with in physics, logic — and theology. Restored police box in Glasgow, Scotland / Image credit: Freeimages / Jon Stout There are many logical problems involved with going back in time that can make for interesting campfire discussions, but the paradoxes are insurmountable. Going forward in time? A form of that is possible according to Einstein (and was a key part of the Joe Haldeman novel The Forever War ), but probably not in quite the way many people might think. What an experience it would be to have a time machine! Just imagine traveling into the f

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen As regular readers may have noticed, an advantage to my data entry job is being able to listen to things. Rows of people in Cubicleland are plugged in to music, radios, audio books, and in my case, podcasts. I happened across this series called "God and Evolution" by Andrew McCaskill on Sermon Audio, and am pleased to share it with you. The lecture series is a mite longer than I usually share, what with being sixteen parts and all. But I reckoned it was important. It was presented April-September 2015 at Emmanuel Baptist Church in Verona, Virginia . Mr. McCaskill isn't one of those yee-ha entertainment-driven teachers. Instead, he is soft-spoken and more concerned with delivering his content. You won't be overwhelmed with science, but there is some as well as serious theological content involved; Andrew show serious flaws in theistic evolution. Y'all know how I feel about that stuff . Andrew McCaskill has taught biology for sixteen

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  One of the most common complaints that Christian apologists have is that our critics rarely do their homework. Many cannot be bothered to do actual research, insisting that we're wrong without even reading (or in some cases, reading at  but not understanding) the material. Research for the purpose of meaningful discussion? Naw, don't pay it no nevermind, just spout off with the hate and say you slapped down them st00pid dumb Xtians with "reason". Atheopath keyboard warrior using fallacies and ignoring  the content of the article . Atheists and anti-creationists are notorious for this kind of behavior, then they wonder why they get banned or have their comments moderated. In addition, these owlhoots complain about "censorship" when they can't say what they want, where they want, even though they don't understand what censorship really is .  By the way, I've been the victim of what those people would call "

It's ironic that people who don't believe the Bible want to know about how things seem "old" in the Genesis account of creation, and then refuse to accept explanations that are offered. Fortunately, there are people who honestly want to know about that as well. Even though some well-meaning creationists have offered their ideas, they should've left their six-guns in their holsters instead of misfiring and making things worse. "Creation of the Animals" / Raphael / 1519 When reading Genesis, we can tell that Adam and Eve were walking and talking from the beginning, they were to tend to the garden, trees bore fruit, animals were brought to Adam, stars were shining — those mean that there was an appearance of age, right? Not hardly. "Appearance of age" is an incorrect and misleading term, and entirely subjective. But there's a better way to look at things, especially if I stop muddying the waters with this introduction. Extracted and