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.



Sunday, April 14, 2019

Workforce Hero

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen
Edited 4-15-2019

Many of us who have jobs know the frustration of having upper management make demands, expecting those of us who actually do the work to somehow make their dreams and their bonuses come true. Unfortunately, too many people in their positions do not know how things work, but they make promises to clients that cannot realistically be fulfilled. I say that the motto of The Company is the song by Queen, "I Want It All (and I Want It Now)".


The hero-martyr who sold his soul for money and tries to put guilt on the rest of us.
USSR Order of Labor Glory 3rd Class Medal
Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Fdutil
(CC by-SA 3.0)
While my work at The Question Evolution Project and the Piltdown Superman site (among others) sometimes feels like a full-time job, I have a day job to pay the bills. It is a data entry job, so you can imagine the eye strain from doing that plus writing posts and articles.

My own social media rules are stricter than those of The Company because all y'all don't need to know where I work. One reason for that came from an incident on Twitter where someone looked up my employer and said he was calling them to get me fired. Why? Because he didn't like something I wrote. (Leftists want people silenced, you know.) As if he could reach the CEOs of a huge international corporation anyway — not that they would care about a whining troll in the first place.


A Bit of Background

This job requires us to make bricks and gather our own straw. That is, we are not given the necessary tools. We have outdated computers ("Optimized for Windows XP", tricked out for Windows 7), a rented building that would probably not pass inspections by the county health department or the fire codes, quirky climate controls, and so on.

We also use second-drawer software. Even before I began riding for the brand, people disliked this operating system. Sure, every OS needs adjustments. But when we've been complaining for years and are repeatedly told that "we're working on it", it's downright discouraging. In fact, the IT department makes adjustments that take away functionality. Live with it. Don't you know who we are? We're The Company! When both speed and accuracy are essential, we don't want to hear excuses and get workarounds that take too much time. Fix it, or put it back the way it was, Skippy.

The Company has rules, and you will obey them. You haff relatives, in ze old country, ja? It is possible for someone to get fired for not being stupid; blind obedience is paramount. It doesn't help matters that the rules keep changing.

Add to this the inconsistent screen displays. Forms vary greatly, and many are nearly illegible as well as being in different sizes and fonts. This produces eyestrain and overall fatigue.


Mandatory Overtime

When we signed on to this job, we took a shift with specific hours. Overtime was voluntary and intermittent. People plan their lives accordingly. Some have children, second jobs (The Company is downright cheap), and have lives to live, savvy that?

Although there were not enough people to perform the work, The Company made promises to their primary customer that we could handle a massive increase in volume and the time commitments. Not hardly! Naturally, we fell behind. The facilities manager (who acts like a kindergarten teacher who is angry because someone was eating paste) passes along directives from on high to managers below her: make things work. Immediate managers want to do a good job, and they have to be the town marshals. 

The Company dry-gulched us with mandatory overtime.


Disspirited

The manager below the angry teacher-type manager is intelligent and compassionate, which makes his job more difficult (it's easier to do that job if you are have no heart). He tried to make arrangements with people who could not stay for an extra ten or more hours a week. In a group meeting, they gave us a speech about how we need to get out of backlog, it shouldn't take long, save the company, and so on. No apologies about wrecking our plans for the Christmas season, though. Or Hanukkah. Then Easter and Passover.

It went on.

Eventually, we were out of backlog and there should be no more overtime. But wait! It happened again! Why? Because management from the schoolteacher-type on up are incompetent and they do not equip us to succeed. So, more OT. Some of us think it will never end


Torches and Pitchforks

We had another group meeting, and I was on the prod. Many of us were. In fact, I had to restrain my yap so I didn't get fired. This time, they were complaining that people were not doing voluntary overtime. Schoolmarm was using guilt, manipulation and shaming on us. (I wondered if they would hang "I didn't work enough overtime" signs on us, take our pictures, and post them on Fazebook.) The powers that be cannot understand why we have such a high turnover rate, blaming the people they depend on instead of examining themselves. This is a big part of it.

The usual points were made that we have system issues and were given the "we're working on it" response. In addition, it was stated that people get burned out, so when OT is not mandatory, some of us want to have the kind of hours for which we signed on. Other points were made, and a bit forcefully at times. I thought of the old Frankenstein movie where the villagers were going after the doctor and the monster with torches and pitchforks.


Hero-Martyr

One guy who is a team lead (only hired a few months ago, and then promoted) always struck me as someone who wanted to impress the bosses. He said that his grandmother had just died, and he should be home grieving, but chose to put in overtime. Guilt manipulation was added. I wanted to say, "Do you want a medal?" I have a Soviet Union worker's medal at home, I could give it to him. Another co-worker said, "You're not the only one carrying this team".

I was also offended. No, I'm not like leftists who file complaints and make people miserable. I was offended because I had been out for three days on bereavement. My mother-in-law had died so I wanted to be there for my wife and deal with family things. I wonder if, in his eyes, it makes me a bad person. It was providential that I had the following week off because we were taking care of things during that week. Also, I learned that during that week off they had more mandatory overtime, and then the voluntary overtime was instated for the week that I returned. I don't react well to guilt and manipulation, as certain stalker and trolls can attest.

It's truly sad that hero boy has misplaced priorities. He put money and job status above family and friends, and I'm certain that he will regret his decision someday.


Overlooked Lessons

There are some things that management should consider. But I am unworthy to even have opinions, let alone, to express them. (Interesting that anti-creationist and anti-Christian trolls act the same way about people who have contrary views.) So you can read a few:
  • We signed on for a shift and specific hours
  • If they want to succeed, they should equip the people they depend on so we can all succeed
  • People do not respond well to bullying and manipulation
  • Immediate managers and supervisors are in a bad place, trying to make things work despite inane upper management
  • Yes, there are slackers, those exist in any business
  • Don't punish us all for the slacking of a few
  • You have stolen wages from employees, and I have the Department of Labor documentation to prove it; our trust levels plummet even further because of corporate dishonesty and incompetence
  • Helpful hint: you cannot defy the laws of time and space, nor can you reject the laws of logic. Stop trying.
  • Many employees have physical limitations and medical conditions
  • While some light a shuck out of there whenever they are slightly under the weather, many come to work sick or in pain
  • When overly tired, people make more mistakes
  • We do the best we can with what we have


Most Important

I reckon that most people simply want to do a job, go home and get on with their lives. As for me, I work to live, I don't live to work. Others seem to live to work, gaining prestige in their jobs. It is my considered opinion that they have sold their souls for money — and will suffer for it (Luke 16:13, Matt. 16:26, Luke 12:16-21). This or any other company can rail about it, but they will not get my soul. It is not mine to sell because it has been bought by the blood of Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 6:20, 1 Peter 1:18-19). I don't expect medals from an employer. 

From the Irony Board, a song from angry Trent Reznor and Nine Inch Nails has some lyrics that I agree with on the love of money. The live versions are high-energy, intense, and musically exciting, but more brutal and have profanity that I won't post. Here's the studio version:



Monday, March 11, 2019

A Little Help from Science and Technology

People have hopes and dreams, but those can be shattered by accidents and other circumstances. A surgeon needs intelligence, good vision, skill, and fully functional hands and fingers to do important work. Singers need their voices. Musicians need their appendages. They also need discipline to learn and practice. There is something else that is vitally important.


I thank God that he has given many people skill to develop science and technology to help others who have needs.
Violin,  Kuzma Petrov-Vodkin, 1916
That other item is talent, which is a gift of God. You can have the desire and practice, but if that talent is missing, there will not be much to show.

Rick Allen, drummer for the band Def Leppard, lost his left arm in a car crash. With the support of friends, the band, other musicians, and special equipment, he returned to drumming. We read stories and watch videos of people who have lost limbs in combat, accidents, and in other ways but are equipped to live their lives. Others are handicapped in ways that cannot be overcome yet, and they are able to survive (see my book review and recommendation of Creation, Evolution, and the Handicapped). I thank God that he has given many people skill to develop science and technology to help others who have needs.

Tuesday, February 12, 2019

Using Question Evolution Day to Confront Fake Science

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Some of the advantages of Question Evolution Day are to encourage people to use and develop critical thinking skills, have a spirit of inquiry, and develop healthy skepticism regarding scientific pronouncements. (An example of this can be found in my article on how hummingbirds "evolved" at "Hummingbirds Evolving for Combat?") Secularists get so all-fired determined to convince people of their materialistic views that they get on the prod when their depradations are brought to light. This is readily apparent in the global climate change propaganda.


Rational thinking and inquiry emphasized on Question Evolution Day apply in other areas. We can spot fake science regarding alien spaceships and in climate change.
Made at Add Letters
Scientists make pronouncements when they do not have all the facts or have an adequate understanding of the topic at hand. Yes, it is the nature of science to change and develop when new information is obtained, but when it comes to subjects like origins and climate change, they present fake science with spiteful intent despite inadequate information or investigation.



Some tinhorns have made global climate change into their religion, and trying to talk sense with them is like pulling wisdom teeth from jellyfish with a frayed lariat. The same happens with Darwin's disciples who only "know" that we're wrong, and tell us so via atheistic clearinghouse propaganda sites and so forth; if you tell them something they don't have a notion to understand, these leftist apparatchiks "refute" new information with outdated agitprop — when it fits their narrative, of course.

Biblical creationists are used to reading that something "happened earlier than we thought", fossils are out of order, living critters are unchanged from their fossil counterparts after millions of Darwin years (such as mites in amber), and so on. Two things that really take the rag off the bush are the false claims that humans and chimps have greatly similar genomes, and that we have "junk" DNA from our evolutionary past. Evolution is their faith-based axiom, so they do not question it. Unfortunately, evolutionists often neglect to verify data and end up humiliating themselves.

It behooves (do people still use that word?) anyone who takes science seriously needs to slow down, ask questions, and wait for additional information. The secular science media are interested in making converts and especially making money on sensationalized but incomplete stories, so y'all need to holler, "Whoa!" when confronted by grandiose claims.


Rational thinking and inquiry emphasized on Question Evolution Day apply in other areas.

Let's ride on up this here side trail a spell. A puzzling space object called 'Oumuamua (I still think it sounds like kisses from rich people, "Good to see you, oh, mua mua!") causes some speculation, but astronomers have no real idea as to what the thing is. In a recent podcast/transcript of The Briefing, Dr. Mohler discussed how Harvard astronomer Avi Selk claims that the object has extraterrestrial origins — not that he has any way of knowing that. But sometimes scientists say things they do not necessarily believe just to "put it out there". This is science, Sigmund? Dr. Mohler adds:
Not how are we supposed to square that with the claims made by scientists that they are operating on the basis of objective reason, and presumably, they would never argue for something that they do not believe? That seems completely contrary to everything the scientific establishment has been telling us about the very nature of science. We are living in an age not only of modern science, but of a worldview of scientism. How in the world can they face the rest of us if they now are admitting, in this kind of academic squabble, that at least some astrophysicists are publishing articles in journals based upon theories that they pose as if believing, but actually do not believe, as this one astrophysicist said, "just to put it out there"?
Excellent comment, and it fits with what we're examining about fake science. To hear or read this segment, it concludes this episode of The Briefing.

Now we're back to the main subject. Global cooling/warming/climate change devotees have been pronouncing end of the world scenarios for many years, and proven wrong over and over. Information that is contrary to the globalist political narrative is ignored (see "Climate Change and Evolution: Similarities in Bad Science") and even ridiculed by the climate change cultists. It is indeed unfortunate that politicians make laws based on the unquestioning acceptance of fake science. Don't get me started on the decrees of celebrities...

God has given us minds and the ability to think, and he intends us to use them. Science is supposed to be a method of processing observations and information, not a religion in and of itself. Our Creator upholds the universe, and has explained himself in the Bible. Despite the mockeries of Bill Nye and other atheopaths, it is true and we need to find out what the Master Engineer has to say. You savvy that?

I have an additional link for your consideration.
Some matters are just too complicated to know with certainty. Here’s another “whoops” moment in climate science.

Look at this headline in Nature by Fangqun Yu, analyzing a recent paper: “Atmospheric reaction networks affecting climate are more complex than was thought.” Those last two words are telling. Beware scientists who think they “now know” something. Sometimes they do, but sometimes they only “thought” they knew. They study phenomena, measure things, analyze things, and draw conclusions. An unsuspecting public or policy official trusts that scientists know what they say they know. Laws ensue that can affect nations for good or ill. Sometimes they can affect the whole world.
To read the rest of the article, click on "Global Policies Can Trust Fake Science". Don't be indoctrinated by secularists and their bad science. Thanks for reading this article, and for thinking.



Monday, January 14, 2019

Editing and Ethics

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

In the publishing world, nonfiction writers are expected to write accurately and document their sources. Sometimes new information is obtained or corrections need to be made. Newspapers and magazines issue corrections and retractions. In the worst case, books are recalled. Ever notice that there isn't always an explanation for a new or revised edition for a book? I reckon it's up to reviewers to find out where things are changed if the author or publisher doesn't explain things.


Making changes in weblogs can seem unethical. What are the rules?

When it comes to electronic media, it the rules seem to be different. If bloggers make changes, we can be found out. (I remember one tinhorn atheist who called me a coward for not putting my name on my site, and I told him that it was indeed there. He checked the link on the internet archive to see if I was acting like an atheist and lying about it.) Some people are criticized for making changes, even minor ones like wording and typos. Sometimes I edit within an hour or two after the thing is published without feeling guilty. When do we need to add notations?

There doesn't seem to be a rule book on this that I can find. Although I wasn't worrying on this overmuch, I did commence to pondering on it off and on. Somebody told me that it's my weblog so I can do what I want. That didn't quite strike me as ethical — at least, not when it comes to science and theology. On the other hand, things can be cluttered with numerous notations of edits.

I decided that minor corrections, including adding or deleting links, do not need notations. Things that affect the content of the piece should have some kind of note. People who read my articles and posts have probably seen those, even a note at the beginning that let the readers know that something was revised. Changing important things that are pertinent to the content without some kind of note strikes me as rather unethical. 

So that's where I stand on this. Important changes require an editing note, but the minor stuff, not so much. This cuts down on the clutter and keeps editing in balance. Sound like a good plan?