Piltdown Superman

A different kind of post today, just some personal reflections. (See what I did there?) Some of us tend to think darker thoughts a bit more often than others. On this first day of the New Year, I want to tell you about my impending demise. No, I don't know when it will happen, but scientists have shown two things. First, people are more likely to believe something if it is prefaced with "scientists have shown..." Second, everybody dies. "Big deal, Cowboy Bob. We all know that." I've been wondering what I will leave behind. Material things all wither and fade away. Some take longer than others, but they all go away. Some people think that things on the Web will last forever, but who knows — and if it does last, who will find it in the clutter? No, what I want to leave behind are transcendent things like knowledge and spiritual values. Evolution is a cancer. This Weblog alone has about 670 posts and articles that show how evolutionary thinking ha

Although some people try to deny it, evolution has been used as a "scientific" basis for racism . White Europeans had largely forgotten that their lifestyles originated with biblical principles, and believed that they were racially superior. Such ideas became justified by Darwinism, and were found in the United States and elsewhere. (Why do you think Elliot Marston thought it was just fine to hire Matthew Quigley to kill off Aborigines ?) Some people thought that blacks were "less evolved" than whites, so they should be treated like the inferiors that they considered to be. Biblical principles, genetics and medical science give a far different perspective than the fantasies resulting in evolutionary presuppositions. It is a sad fact that there is a large gap in social stability and opportunities between Australia’s Aboriginal people and the rest of the society there. But why is this so? A reader wonders whether the evolutionist sentiment that Aboriginal

People like to say that "Science is self-correcting". Well, "science" is not a living entity, but people mean that scientists will make adjustments for new data and even discard theories and hypotheses if they are falsified. It amazes me that people will cling to a "theory" when the evidence is against it. I am referring to evolution. Instead of trashing the thing (which should have been done over an 'undred years ago), they hide evidence, make excuses, ignore conflicting data, proceed from presuppositions, conduct bad science (including outright fraud) and more. Tyrannosaurus Rex Holotype specimen at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh Wikimedia Commons / Scott Robert Anselmo When anomalies were found in 1966, they were discarded because they did not fit with evolutionary presuppositions. Various soft tissues in dinosaur bones have been found, and excuses have been made. More discoveries, more excuses. Now that blood and soft ti

The "Appeal to Motive" Fallacy (a form of the "Circumstantial Ad Hominem" is considered. People pretend that they know why someone makes certain statements, holds a particular view or takes a course of action. But this is just an attempt to attack the person and avoid the topic. The MP3 version can be downloaded here .

Evolutionary Visigoths have raided real science and rational thought. A huge part of the problem is their own presuppositions, biases and barbaric scientific practices that have actually hindered scientific progress for a long time. For example, DNA. Using bad science, people have perpetuated the myth that "humans and chimps are 98 percent similar in DNA" (the number varies, depending on who you talk to). That has been refuted .  Then, using evolutionary presuppositions, the difference between the numbers of human and ape chromosomes was assumed to be due to "chromosomal fusion". This was "proved" because of sloppy science — the so-called fusion was in something they considered a "pseudogene". Why was it called a pseudogene? Because they could not see any evolutionary purpose for it, so it must not be important (not true, pseudogenes are actually very important ). Once it was decided that DNA should be more completely sequenced, the problems

The Curiosity rover on Mars is going to work on analyzing what appears to be a dry lake bed. It has been named the Yellowknife Bay formation. The thinking is, if there was water, there may have been microbes. Various minerals found appear to be friendly to such life there. Other conditions on Mars, however, are not so friendly. NASA / JPL-Caltech / MSSS What if some kind of life is actually found there? As we have seen, evolutionists (and especially their press) will probably make the wild leap of faith masquerading as logic: Life on Mars, therefore, evolution on Earth. Of course, they would need to demonstrate how life evolved there. It would be quite a task, since molecules-to-man evolution has not been observed here, nor is there a plausible mechanism for such a thing. Curiosity , the eighth Mars landing in the ongoing quest for life on the Red Planet, has found in the dry mudstone of Gale Crater’s Yellowknife Bay the chemical elements ordinarily associated with living o

On Christmas Eve, 1968, the Apollo astronauts did a live television broadcast from near the moon. They read the first ten verses of the Bible. (Naturally, atheopath Madalyn Murray O'Hair filed a lawsuit. Atheists protest a lot of things Christians do that threaten their worldview. Intolerant lot.) This is still a popular event all these years later. So I will let this video (which has some great music) be my Christmas greeting to you. May the Creator of the universe, who humbled himself and took on the form of a child, died for our sins, was bodily raised on the third day, become a very real part of your life. Have a blessed Christmas! — Cowboy Bob Sorensen

It is acknowledged that members of the media will run off with sensational science stories and exaggerate information, sometimes even making claims of which the scientists themselves are unaware. This brings two questions to my mind. First, should science publications show some restraint? Second, should they do some checking to make sure they are not contradicting their own worldview, even if scientists did make off-the-wall speculations? Image sources: Wikimedia Commons / PD / US morgueFile / dee37 In this case, evolutionists are up to their old tricks, imagining a connection (homology) so they can bolster their belief system even though the connection is unwarranted. Plus, claiming that birds evolved from hadrosaurs...oh, my. Never mind that they are continuing the mythology that dinosaurs evolved into birds, because dinosaurs ate birds , and bird fossils are found with dinosaur fossils . Then they have to explain how a fleshy appendage lasted for an alleged 65 million years

People say that "science corrects itself". (But "science" is not an entity, so right away, they are guilty of the fallacy of reification .) This is not completely true. When it comes to evolutionism, proponents will resort to various tricks to keep their worldview going despite the evidence. There are anti-creationists who insist that creationists (especially biblical creationists) are "liars" and "fact deniers". Their basis for such accusations? It is primarily because we do not believe in the atheistic, old-earth, evolutionary interpretations of the evidence. Further, we promote evidence that refutes evolution and affirms a young earth. This is contrary to the spirit of scientific inquiry. Interestingly, those who call us "liars" are guilty of blatant hypocrisy, promoting not only bad science, carelessness (by people who should know better), deception and even outright fraud. Worse than this, shoddy research and dishonest pron

The last podcast before Christmas! It's just under eight minutes, many of us are busy this time of year, no need to be lengthy. Continuing our series on informal logical fallacies, we examine and give examples (two, in the Atheopath Follies) of the "Straw Man Fallacy". The MP3 version can be downloaded here .   The straw man is a favorite among evolutionists and atheists, but is actually just a distraction. Don't fall for it. Be better than they are.  Apologies for the replacement microphone. I'll have to replace the replacement, this one makes it sound like I have a cold.