Thursday, September 12, 2019

Creation Science and the Age of the Earth

First, a bit of behind the scenes for y'all. This site is something I registered because of sidewinders who have tried to dry gulch my name through impersonation. It also is a marker of sorts for some of my activities on teh interweb, so it's also useful. I try to post here about once a month to keep it active. But there's more in this instance.


Nice picture of Earth from Apollo 10 in 1969. The linked post on the age of the earth could not go directly onto Facebook, so here is a workaround with some background information.
Earth from Apollo 10, May 18, 1969 via NASA
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
I wanted to post an article from Answers in Genesis about the age of the earth directly to The Question Evolution Project on Facebook. Although I often post material from AiG, this one was instantly refused for alleged violations of their "Community Standards". Science and biblical history are streng verboten in this case? Well another case, I had to do something similar, but I disremember when.


The linked post on the age of the earth could not go directly onto Facebook, so here is a workaround with some background information.
Used under Fair Use provisions
Click for larger
Posts and articles from this site, Biblical Creation and Evangelism, and Stormbringer's Thunder are supposed to automatically (eventually) post to my Cowboy Bob Page on Fazebook; they won't censor the AiG link when it's in this post. Then I can copy the link on one FB Page and schedule it to another one. I like to schedule my posts.


So, let's get to the post for which I've been doing a workaround and giving you behind the scenes information.
The question of the age of the earth has produced heated discussions on internet debate boards, TV, radio, in classrooms, and in many churches, Christian colleges, and seminaries. The primary sides are
  • Young-earth proponents (biblical age of the earth and universe of about 6,000 years)
  • Old-earth proponents (secular age of the earth of about 4.5 billion years and a universe about 14 billion years old)
The difference is immense! Let’s give a little history of where these two basic calculations came from and which worldview is more reasonable.
To get on with it, click on "How Old Is the Earth?"

Monday, August 19, 2019

Snap Judgemental

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Being judgemental is usually frowned on in Western societies, often based on misusing verses like Matthew 7:1. The immediate context and other parts of Scripture command Christians to exercise righteous judgement. Here is an example of an unrighteous snap judgement.


A lesson from a very brief experience on how I could have used unrighteous judgement, and how hasty conclusions can be harmful.
Credit: Unsplash / John Tuesday
People use the corridors at the workplace for conversation and smartphone use. This is a common thing in places of employment. I was on my way to the restroom, and a woman was in the corridor using her phone. She looked up at me for a split second and went back to her activity. No greeting or acknowledgement of my presence, but we had briefly seen each other several times before.

My snap judgemental thoughts included that she is stuck up, aware that she is very attractive, possibly afraid of me (I believe that women nowadays are trained by leftists to loathe men, but that's a topic for another time), that I am unimportant (well, I am in that place), and so on. Maybe she wants to go mattress dancing with me but is afraid to ask. (No, she's not blind or drunk, so that thought is easily dismissed.) But what did I really know from her actions?

This ties into something I have tried to teach in several of my articles: we only know so much, thus making hasty judgements counterproductive. As A. Conan Doyle had Sherlock Holmes say in A Study in Scarlet, "It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment." I reckon those words are true for just about everyone.

The woman was using her phone. She briefly glanced up at me, then back down. I know that she works for the same company as I do but in a different department. I don't know much more than that, not even her name. I have no reason to judge her. Interestingly, the next day I was told to grab my gear and saddle up, I was working in her department for a spell. This woman was nearby. Someone engaged her in a brief conversation, but she is not like some chatterboxes that I've been around. Nope, the quiet type. If I had judged her harshly in my mind, I would have had to modify my opinion in light of more information.

But in any case, I would not have been exercising righteous judgement. I certainly don't like being in the gunsites of judgemental folks, so I try to walk in the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-26). That helps reduce bad behavior on my part. I still have a long way to go.



Saturday, July 20, 2019

Earthside Reflections on Apollo 11

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen
Edited July 21, 2019

It seems like only yesterday — not really, it seems like fifty years ago that Apollo 11's Lunar Module Eagle landed on the moon. As a nine-year-old boy playing with space toys and waiting for the big event, it seemed interminable. Today, I have a better idea about why NASA did not do things on my impatient timetable. Years later, I learned more about just how dangerous space and space travel can be. Scientists have also learned a great deal.


Childhood memories of the Apollo 11 voyage and the joy of scientific accomplishments. We have learned so much in fifty years.
Photo of Edwin Aldrin by Neil Armstrong after being run through FotoSketcher
Original photo credit: NASA (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
I had plastic models and booklets, but also some vinyl records. The "Talespinners for Children" company had a record album that was like a radio play that went through astronomy with Kepler, Galileo, and others. It also contained audio of the moon landing. I'd like to hear it again.

The public and I had moved on. Other Apollo missions followed as well as orbiting space stations, the Apollo-Soyuz mission, space shuttles, unmanned probes to both inner and outer planets, the International Space Station, and other space news. Political and cultural events as well ad budget cuts had an impact on the space program. Having had an interest in creation science for years and managing The Question Evolution Project in recent years, I have learned many things about various branches of science. My favorite has always involved space exploration and astronomy. Want to see my collection of Soviet Union and American postage stamps on the subject?

When the big anniversary of the first lunar landing was coming up, I realized that I was very excited all over again and even a bit emotional. With social media, I could join the celebration and even find some documentaries to watch on my Roku device.

I'm certain that leftists will be crying about how the Apollo landings were made by a bunch of white male heterosexuals, several of them Bible-believing Christians. If that vapid complaining isn't happening now, wait a bit.

As another aside, there are atheopath and other anti-creationist sidewinders who prefer to attack people instead of rationally dealing with subjects. Common epithet used against creationists is "science deniers", "science haters", and similar things. Even a cursory glance of biblical creation science sites (as well as mine) shows that such remarks are blatant lies. What we deny is propaganda and fake science; faulty assertions of "it evolved" (biological as well as cosmic) are things that we dare to question.

To give some creation science perspectives, I have a passel of links for those who want to do some investigation. The first group is from David Coppedge at Creation-Evolution Headlines. (Look for the fantastic artwork by Alan Bean.) David worked on the Cassini mission as a system administrator at JPL until he was fired for having the wrong views. His passion for space exploration remains strong. Some other links of interest follow those.


Thursday, July 11, 2019

A Bane of Social Media

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

While there are several frustrating things on social media, one stands out from the herd. That is when people are compelled to comment without having read the posts or articles. The worst part is when people who post things are told they're wrong, stupid, lying, whatever, by people who have not bothered to read the material. Answers to objections and questions are often contained in the linked articles.


One problem on social media seems to stand out from the rest. A little experiment helped support my position.
Image provided by Why?Outreach
Sometimes people will read the few sentences of introduction that are placed to encourage people to read the actual article, and they seem to feel that they are well enough informed to comment. Not usually.

Now don't be disunderstanding me, most of us who make posts are not expecting everyone to read everything. Also, a stand-alone captioned picture is an invitation for comments. (People who are aware of my posts and articles may have noticed that I seldom use a question as a title in hopes that people will actually read the linked material before commenting. A question can be taken as an invitation to comment without reading.) This kind of commenting is seen throughout social media, including Fazebook, Twitface, weblogs, and more. 

In fact, I've embarrassed myself by reading something too quickly, commenting, and being informed that my query was addressed after all.



Not too long ago, I posted an article about the value of vaccinations. Many people were outraged, and I saw Proverbs 18:13 validated before my eyes. They did not want to read the material, even castigating me for writing it. Worse, there was no interest in actually reading the material that I wrote or the detailed articles that were linked. Apparently, people were locked in by their emotions and the "facts" that they already believed from anti-vaxxers and similar groups (see Proverbs 18:17).

I had a bit of an experiment a spell back. On Facebook at The Question Evolution Project, I posted an item called "Atheist Accepts Multiverse Theory Of Every Possible Universe Except Biblical One". We had many comments by people who were angry at atheists, but didn't notice the source: The Babylon Bee, a "Christian news satire" site.



Here is where I want to make another point. People tend to accept what they read when the material confirms their biases or assumptions without checking the source. Good satire can be hard to distinguish from actual reports, and this one about the atheist accurately described how many of them act. Some of the people commenting on the post knew that it was a parody site, but others lashed out at the "atheist" in the story. I was letting it go, but another Admin stepped in and made it clear in the comments area that the content was satire.

Care should be used when getting material from unknown sites. You can find material that "proves" ghosts, UFOs, that the Anunnaki are our ancient reptilian masters from outer space working with the Illuminati, anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers, atheists, geocentrists, King James Onlyists, and more. Often, the name of the site or the weblog can prompt a reader or researcher to find more reliable sources. I lack belief that sites like that consider material that does not fit their narratives. God gave us minds, and he expects us to use them.



Monday, June 3, 2019

Having a Purpose in Life

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

You may have what you consider your purpose in life, and it varies by individuals. Some want to succeed in the business world, others want to watch the world burn. You may be a doctor, lawyer, scientist, teacher, welder, construction worker, stay-at-home-mom, or a host of other possibilities. You may be shocked — shocked I say — to learn that jobs, hobbies, and religions are not our primary sources for purposeful lives.


People with purposeful lives are supposedly healthier and happier. However, they need to be complete and have the right purpose.
Credit: Freeimages / Thad Zajdowicz
I've heard it said that men are hard-wired to get their satisfaction in life from their jobs. That doesn't happen for me since I'm just a data entry clerk, but I am able to listen to podcasts and articles to try to make myself more smarter and anthropomorphic. Some people consider it their duties to save the world from biblical creation science, Conservative politics, "infidels", and others they despise using any means necessary.

One feckless sidewinder wants to destroy creation science (and especially me, personally), but he's an uneducated bigot that isn't taken seriously. Of course, leftists and globalists (but I repeat myself) seek their life's purpose in gaining power. People are greatly mistaken in finding their purpose outside of the Creator. After all, he made us and makes the rules, so we must find out what he has to say.

Atheists and evolutionists may tell you that evolution provides a "message of hope", but if you get up on the hill and look at it from a bigger perspective, you'll see the absurdity in such a belief. Way back when, the universe formed by chance, then stars and planets. Life itself began by chance, and then through chance, time, random processes, unexplainable forces like evolutionary "pressures", life continually advanced (defying common sense and laws of science), and here we are. Life has no meaning, your only purpose is to pass along your genes (why?), there is no Creator, no ultimate Judgment or justice. When you die, you're worm food; time and chance won't help you. Makes me want to embrace atheism spectrum disorder right this minute!

Many evangelists are in error by telling people that if they come to Jesus, life gets better. That is horribly incomplete, and backfires immediately when people think that life is fine without him. We must come to God, and we must come on his terms, with humility and submission to the authority of his Word. All are lost sinners and need to repent. Don't get me wrong, life in Jesus does give us joy and purpose, but salvation is of primary importance. Modern "gospel" messages are not interested in glorifying God and explaining sin, Hell, Heaven, repentance, and salvation.

People who do have purposeful lives are better off psychologically, it seems. But we need to ride the trail all the way to the end.
Live Science published results of a study by the Journal of the American Medical Association that confirmed longevity benefits for people who describe their life as purposeful.
. . .
The findings from a long-term study that began in 1992 and carried forward to a questionnaire in 2006, involving 7,000 people. Mortality rates of participants were studied over subsequent years. Those with low life-purpose scores were more than twice as likely to die, researchers found. The reason, they believe, is that purposeful living lowers stress hormones that lead to inflammation. “Inflammation, in turn, has been previously linked with an increase in risk of early death, according to the study.”
I'd be much obliged if you would read the entire article. Just click on "Purposefulness Promotes Health, Longevity".



Saturday, May 25, 2019

The Big Bang of Thrones Game Theory

Step aside, guard! The king must use the throne. No, this is just a game.

Two television programs have ended that were loved by many. One was a fantasy drama called Game of Thrones, the other was a comedy known as The Big Bang Theory. From what I read, both generated quite a bit of emotion in some folks. 


So, Game of Thrones and The Big Bang Theory have each concluded. I do not care.
Background image before malevolentification by NASA / WMAP Science Team
(ain't no way they endorse any part of this site), with a graphic from Clker clipart
I didn't care. Two shows that people talked about that had many episodes, and I never saw any. Previews for The Big Bang Theory struck me as silly and I didn't want to spend time on it. Game of Thrones has been described as not only violent and trying to be politically correct, but it had graphic violence and was pornographic.



Fans were disappointed in the ending of GoT, I'm sad to know that some professing Christians were putting that kind of thing in their minds. So, did you imagine Jesus sitting with you eating popcorn and appreciating GoT? I wonder how he would like BBT?



Sunday, April 21, 2019

Clothing, Modesty, and the Resurrection

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Until the last few years, people knew that men and women are different. Not only do we have distinct biological differences that are important medically and in other ways, but it is the way God designed life. We are also psychologically different. It is indeed unfortunate that I have to state what was formerly obvious.


Modesty is not the usual subject for Easter, but it traces back to Genesis and into the gospel message.
Credit: Flickr / Mike Baird (CC by 2.0)
The University of Notre Dame was a religious school last I knew, and as such, claimed to uphold certain standards. Apparently modesty is not so important. One of the differences between men and women is that us menfolk are visually stimulated. Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr. discussed a problem at the university where a mother wrote a column in the student newspaper about leggings. I highly recommend his March 29, 2018 The Briefing podcast that can be heard online, downloaded, or you can read the transcript.

One of the various names for this piece of hosiery for women is yoga pants, which shows that they are intended for athletic purposes. It has become fashionable to wear them in the workplace, for casual activities — and apparently even to religious services. People have described leggings as looking like they were "painted on". I've seen them and agree with that description. They are not mentioned in the company dress code where I work, but other items of modesty are addressed such as strapless tops. Ironic, I think.

Christianity and other religious emphasize modesty among both men and women, but especially for women because of the aforementioned visual stimulation of men. I have seen atheopaths (who compulsively oppose almost anything that the Bible upholds) say that immature men are the problem, so the "freedom" of women should not be at issue. Such an argument is both ignorant and risible.

Years ago, there was a controversy about thongs on beaches. I was puzzled. As a child, I used to wear what we called thongs (sometimes called sandals), but I grew to dislike them. Today, that unpleasant bit of footwear are known as flip-flops.

Nowadays, a thong is a skimpy bit of apparel that is like fabric spaghetti splitting the buttocks, then brought up between the thighs and attached to a waistband. (Many jurisdictions consider them to be indecent and they are outlawed.) I remember a television show, perhaps it was Phil Donahue, where a woman with a snide attitude was given the microphone and said, "What's the big deal? Everybody's got a butt!" Sure, princess, but everybody doesn't necessarily want to look at yours in a public place — or see those other parts that are normally kept private.

It seems that some people are too selfish to be considerate of others, even at the point of being visually provocative. This strikes me as narcissistic as well as selfish.

As Dr. Mohler points out in his analysis, the Bible tells us that we keep private parts private. Certain areas of the body are to be presented between a husband and wife, not paraded for the prurient desires of strangers.

In a silly 1958 short story called "Do Unto Others" by Mark Clifton, some prissy Earth women took a notion that the buck naked octopus-like inhabitants of Capella IV needed to be clothed. Let's assume for a moment that such critters exist. While forcing modesty on space aliens may seem well-intentioned, it is also pointless because they are not children of Adam and Eve. You'll see what I mean in a moment.

People may ask why we wear clothes in the first place. I mean, aside from cold weather and such. Clothing goes back to Genesis. After Adam and sinned, they felt the need to cover themselves (Gen. 3:7). God said, "Ain't no way", and covered them with the skins of animals (Gen. 3:21). This was the first covering for sin, and blood was shed.

You'll have to do some research on the theology involved, but animal sacrifices in the Old Testament were a temporary covering for sin and foreshadowed the coming of Jesus Christ. Bloodshed is necessary to cover sin. God the Son, our Creator, took on human form, died on a cross for the remission of our sins. He bodily arose on the third day, defeating death and doing away with the animal sacrifices.

Our clothing and modesty are reminders of not only respect for each other, but of sin covering. Jesus Christ attained the victory over sin and death. Most professing Christians celebrate Easter, and we have a great reason to do so. Sins are no longer covered. Instead, Christians are forgiven and we are children of the living God.