Cowboy Bob Sorensen

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Today is the thirteenth annual Question Evolution Day , and is a surprising entry in the Year of Firsts without Charlene. I invented the thing, inspired by the Question Evolution! campaign  by Creation Ministries International (my comment as "Robert S." was posted on July 4, 2011.) At first, QED was not something we did together. After a radio interview I had, the host suggested some things to enhance the observance. These included food items. We ended up planning on doing this annually. Made at RedKid Today I made pancakes and found out why blueberries are preferred over blackberries: Those puppies were an inch long and lumpy, making for uneven cooking. Charlene would have known better, and I had to learn it my ownself. For supper, I'm going to open up a can of split pea soup (primordial slime) and do fish fry takeout (Darwin's disciples believed we evolved from fish) from the same diner we've done before. She's not here to make a laye

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Way back on 4 May 2011, Don Batten of Creation Ministries International wrote about a "Question Evolution" campaign. It seemed strange to me, calling it a "grassroots" because it was not initiated at the popular level. Pay attention here. I had a wrong opinion based on conjecture, which is something people do far too often. I did not act on it. Instead, I learned that essentially a grassroots movement/campaign is a way of having the people take action, not a political party or other organization. Those others may initiate the action, however. Grass background for Question Evolution Day from Hippopx CMI seems to have edited down the original, but at the Wayback Machine, you can see an article about the "Question Evolution" campaign plus the comments . Two months later, I added my comment, suggesting a coordinated Question Evolution Day. Nothing happened. If y'all are interested in my comment, click for larger After spearheading

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  For the tenth annual Question Evolution Day , we will examine striking similarities between some outlandish conspiracy theories and evolutionary thinking. Readers of Piltdown Superman saw that evolutionists freely use logical fallacies, and these are plentiful in the most outlandish conspiracy theories. Variation based on one of the early graphics for QED In my biblical creation science work, I've learned quite a bit about logic. I'll allow that I still have more to learn. Many aspects of logic are actually quite simple to lasso, such as  basic errors in reasoning . We expect scientists to use logic and science to back up their claims, but critical thinking becomes very important when examining dubious evidence about minerals-to-miner evolution. The same can be applied to conspiracy theories. We can be bombarded with reports about various conspiracy theories, and they crop up in all sorts of areas. It's mighty tempting to ask the people who float so

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Something I have noticed for a long time is that leftist harassment of their opponents and the atheistic/evolutionist attacks on biblical creationists parallel each other. In fact, these kinds of things seem to be increasing. While leftists and atheists claim to believe in free speech, they only support speech (and thought) on subjects that meet with their approval. This adds to the importance of Question Evolution Day . Intellectual Dishonesty    Maybe it's because of global warming, but more likely it's the commitment to naturalism that prompts the hands at the Darwin Ranch (up yonder near Deception Pass) to hide the truth about evolution . Darwin's handmaidens troll teh interwebs, gleefully attacking and ridiculing believers in biblical creation as well as Christians in general. Those sidewinders are intellectually dishonest, ignoring the fact that they know God does indeed exist (Roman 1:18-23) and refusing to examine additional evid

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. 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.

Although it is unlikely that anyone is interested, it is kind of fun for me to give background on some things that are old hat to many people. I seldom use Skype, and installed it in the first place for a media interview — if I recollect rightly. Bryan Melugin runs the site A Bit of Orange and posts videos under that name. I had posted several of his videos and articles at The Question Evolution Project , and we had corresponded a few times. Late in 2017, he contacted me about doing a video interview. He had done several others, and he takes them, splits them into smaller bits, does some editing, and presents them to the world. When he asked me, I was going through some rough patches and had things to deal with, so I said it would have to be later. We also had some scheduling conflicts, as both of his have jobs. It worked out that I had Monday, January 29, 2018 off from work so I could take care of some medical stuff in the morning. (It involved fasting, which I learned later

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen To celebrate the fifth annual Question Evolution Day , I thought it would be helpful to revisit a logical fallacy that is often used by the Darwinistas. It should be well understood that science thrives on challenge so that a hypothesis or theory can be revised when unsupported by evidence — or discarded entirely. Unfortunately, evolutionary owlhoots often try to lock away contrary evidence, especially when it points to the Creator. Can't have that, it interferes with naturalistic presuppositions . Image credit: Pixabay / tpsdave Among the logical fallacies that anti-creationists employ is the fallacy of exclusion. (For an earlier article with a funny video I did on this subject, click here .) This fallacy has variations and different names, including cherry picking, suppressed evidence, card stacking, incomplete evidence, and more. Many people believe in scum-to-scientist evolution because they are simply not given all the evidence. Making a conjec