Piltdown Superman

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen As secularism takes hold in the rest of the world, it eventually reaches Canada, and then the United States. Indeed, Belgium recently allowed a child with a terminal illness (whose name and age are unknown) to be granted a request to be euthanized . Now, many countries have a legal voting age of 18 or 21, presumably based on the belief that minors are not mature enough to vote. Currently, the voting age in Belgium is 18 , but a child has the maturity and wisdom to decide to end his or her own life? Not hardly! To further illustrate how Belgium is morally conflicted regarding children, that country may be lowering the age of sexual consent to a mere 13 ! What do you think is the root cause of these things? Increased secularization. A recent report in Canada's National Post  tells of how the academic journal Bioethics  discussed a debate about disallowing conscientious objectors to abortion and euthanasia to be barred from refusing these procedures to p

We think they are dead, but Darwin's acolytes keep using the black magick of scientism and wishful thinking to bring them back. Not living organisms, but their bad ideas. In this case, the idea that an unborn child goes through evolutionary stages in its development. This has been proven false for a mighty long time, pilgrim, but it is still used to justify abortion. Original image credit: Pixabay /  Ahmadreza Heidaripoor If scum-to-sorcerer evolution were "settled science" or a fact, there should  be no need to use bad logic, misrepresentation, startlingly bad mistakes — and outright fraud. When posting about Haeckel's fake drawings on social media, people said those long-discredited things coupled with the rejected recapitulation idea can be found in modern textbooks. As any knowledgeable propagandist can tell you, concentration and repetition coupled with the Big Lie are effective tools to influence the undiscerning. Devious Darwinists seem to be trying to

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Edi ted 11-11-2015 The Genetic Fallacy is, in simplest terms, rejecting something because someone does not like the source. For example: Th e text in the image shows not only that the commenter does not like ICR, but includes other fallacies as well, including the ever-popular   ad hominem . And he wonders why he was banned from the Facebook Page? Seriously? Virginia Heffernan formerly wrote technology and culture for the New York Times.   She admitted recently that she is a creationist . Well, what kind of creationist, I'm not certain. (If she wants to discuss these things , biblical creationists will be glad to assist her.) What matters to her detractors is that she rejects evolution. This led to a slew of ridicule. Hamilton Nolan of "Gawker" said : "We are not saying you're a bad person, Virginia, but you should probably expect that, from now on, when people read your musings on, say, the future of internet commun

Some of the things pointed out previously can be seen continuing to happen, as secularists use what they call science against Christians and creationists. We have seen that opinions and speculations are often falsely presented as facts. Materialists will assert that their atheistic view is "reality", Darwin's disciples often claim that evolution is  science, global climate change caused by humans is "settled science". Christians, scientists, and creationists are demonized in many ways , including as "science deniers" because we oppose faulty science and logic. Unsplash /  Kelly Sikkema The public has a love/hate relationship with science, not really understanding much about it (often viewing it with suspicion), but using "science" as a weapon when convenient (see " Science in Name Only "). If the spectral monolith of Science (as an entity) is invoked as an authority, "Science says...", then something is assumed to be true

When someone claims to not have a philosophy of life (worldview from presuppositions and axioms), just ask a few questions. Yo u 'll find out that y es, they do have a worldview. Everybody has one, even if they haven't written it down in a journal or something. A big part of that worldview is the question of right and wrong . An atheist or evolutionist cannot give a coherent reason for saying that torturing children for fun is wrong, but the Bible-believing Christian has a consistent foundation to oppose it. The atheopath who goes haywire with trolling and bullying biblical creationists on teh interwebs because creationists are "evil" and "liars" — that ornery cu ss cannot say why his actions are "good" and creationists are bad, except for his opinion, culture, and relativism — a justification for "morality" that goes up in smoke. Image generated at fodey.com Secular scientists and their sycophantic press make proclamations a

There are a couple of things that stand out regarding disgraced evolutionary scientist Marc Hauser. First, his unethical approaches to science were not caught for several years. When he was caught, it turns out that he had numerous infractions — and then he complained that the stuff he did that was "right" would also be called into question. Well, that happens when a boy falsely cries, "Wolf!", he is no longer believed, even if he is right. Chimpanzee, morgueFil e /  seeka Second, so what? Isn't evolution about the "survival of the fittest"? Cheating to get ahead is a natural result of Darwinist philosophies (as are eugenics , abortion , communism and more). In this philosophy, Hauser was only living the evolutionary philosophy. What's the big deal? Nature News reported: “Former Harvard University psychologist Marc Hauser has admitted to making ‘mistakes’ in his research that led to findings of research misconduct announced today by the U

Proponents of minerals-to-man evolution tend to take a reductionist approach and reduce all life to chemistry. This comes from their materialistic presuppositions including no God and that evolution is a given. This dehumanizing worldview affects both scientists and us regular folk, since evolution is viewed as a science and, therefore, truth, so it spills over into economics, religion, politics, abortion, "scientific" racism, and more. Image credit: jk1991 at FreeDigitalPhotos.net Materialism rules the scientific community, and data are interpreted through this view. Just follow the money, and you'll see that funding goes toward evolutionary goals. Scientists with a creationary worldview are not getting the grant money, no matter how good their credentials are. In fact, creationists are mostly blackballed. Evolutionary owlhoots are intolerant of their own their own kind who don't absolutely toe the line. An author said that an old carving looked like a dino

“This is the book which contains the basis in natural history for our view.” — Karl Marx, in a letter to Friedrich Engels about Darwin's book Although evolutionists attempt to deny history, evolutionary views ("survival of the fittest", " nature red in tooth and claw ", "natural selection") have been essential for all sorts of evils when applied to people. After all, using "science" seen in nature, it is natural to apply it to humans, yes? Darwinism has been at the root of " Social Darwinism ", the Nazi legal system , eugenics, abortion and other horrors . Since evolution gives a pseudo-intellectual rationale for a materialistic disbelief in the Creator, atheist communist power-lovers applied Darwinism to communism. Summary: A review of the writings of the founders of communism shows that the theory of evolution, especially as taught by Darwin, was critically important in the development of modern communi

The popular conception of scientists is that they are driven by facts and reason, and have everyone's best interests at heart. Also, scientists are above regular people, uncorrupted by greed and avarice, so they're morally above us as well. If you study on it, you'll see that this Scientism view makes them non-human. But they're not automatons. It occurs to me that one reason people may be looking up to scientists is something lef t behind f rom the days of class distinctions. Ed jamakation was not freely available to all, only the elite few. (If someone was wealthy, they were somehow "better" than the poor, who were also created in God's image.) So, a scientist was a bette r , elite person who had money for education, so you have jolly well listen. These days, degrees are much more freely available, and the criteria for granting them are much lower. Everyone has a worldview, even though most don't sit down and cognate on it, "Here's my

The spirit of Sanballat can be seen in many atheists and anti-creationists who implore us to be reasonable and put aside our foolish creation-believing ways. They utilize ridicule, intimidation, misuse of the law or rules (when possible), and other methods. Then the Sanballats offer to be pals, which should get your spider sense a-tingling. Background image courtesy of Why?Outreach "Who is Sanballat, Cowboy Bob?" You can find him discussed in the Old Testament in the book of Nehemiah. The displaced Jews were given permission to rebuild the wall, but Sanballat and his cohorts got on the prod about it. He pulled his shenanigans with Nehemiah including a "Why can't we all just get along?" bit. Nehemiah was not having any of it. See " Ten Lies Satan Tells to Biblical Creationists " for more. The National Review is ostensibly a Conservative publication in the United States, so it seems out of place for it to be publishing a Darwinism propaganda

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen When running this online creation science ministry, and being in contact with others who stand for biblical creation, we see some pretty vicious stuff from anti-creationists and misotheists. (When I say that I am a biblical creationist, I mean that I believe in a literal six-day recent creation as well as the global Flood, according to what the Bible teaches.) Evolution is a cornerstone for atheism and liberal Christianity (or a word I like to use for liberal religion, “churchianity”), and they detest those of us who will not compromise on what the Bible says. Several creationist Pages on social media are what I consider "link mills", simply pasting links to creation science articles ( sometimes sending them to sites that are, as a whole, opposed to our message even though the specific articles may be adequate). Some of us strive to aim higher, and are very selective in what links we post. In addition, we encourage people to learn how to

In recent years, American voters were bombarded with questions about embryonic stem cell research for medical and other purposes , and if federal funding to destroy the lives of the unborn to further this research should be allowed. All sorts of claims were made about the benefits of ESR, but they were with little merit. It was mostly emotional hype based on leftist politics and the "right" to abortion. Meanwhile, adult stem cell research has been progressing. There are some startling benefits from the stem cells of humans — and some animals. The results are very encouraging, and human life does not need to be sacrificed. With adult and induced pluripotent stem cells in abundance, it should not be necessary to destroy human embryos to understand stem cell science. Research with adult stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) is continuing to produce amazing discoveries. Read about some of these amazing discoveries at " Stem Cell Science Can Pro

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen This is going to be one of my more unusual articles. My personal social media policy is stricter than my employer's policy: nobody needs to know where I work. I'm referring to them as The Company. However, there are several things that may change this. Eventually, I may reveal the name of The Company. However, many aspects of this article are apposite for many in the business world, so I am using my own experiences as illustrations. Inset photo credit: Pixabay / StockSnap My Life On a Spreadsheet The Company contracts with other corporations to perform various duties. Our location, along with several others, is what I call a data entry mill. Over the years, over a hundred of us were hired to do a job and be paid by the hour. We were informed that we are now going to be paid "piecework", which is based on the number of fields that we enter. (Not what we signed on for, but that's a privilege of laissez-faire capitalism. Different