Showing posts with label ApologetiX. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ApologetiX. Show all posts

Thursday, February 18, 2021

Shining the Light on a Darwinist Deceiver

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

This is part 2 of Conspiracy Theories, Creation, and Reason, but takes a different approach. We saw how a number of factors contribute to the act of purveying conspiracy theories, and how there are several reasons why people believe them. Then there is the alleged creation science conspiracy.

Anti-creationist gadfly Paul Braterman wrote a hit piece on creationists. It was posted on the leftist Snopes site, who did not bother to fact check.
Credit: Unsplash / Steve Johnson
We have three articles to consider, two of which are from the same ministry. Naturally there will be some overlap, but they each offer material that comprise a larger picture.

There was a time when if someone had a question about, say, that 2002 email saying the teddy bear icon in Windows was really a virus. They could check Snopes and find out that it was a hoax, and they could search for urban legends. Unfortunately, they became heavily involved in promoting leftist political views with "fact checking", and their credibility became questionable. Snopes even attacked the parody site Babylon Bee (one of whose slogans is "fake news you can trust"). They are powerful unqualified amateurs, but pretend to be experts. 

Shouldn't fact checkers check facts on their own site, or just post something because they thought their readers would find it interesting? That is hypocritical. It happened when retired professor Paul Braterman wrote an anti-creationist hit piece that targeted several creationist organizations, emphasizing Answers in Genesis. Braterman is known for misleading rhetoric and getting his evolutionary mythology wrong (as seen in "Braterman ‘slam dunk’ flunk"), and being a gadfly. He hobnobs with professing Christians who also mount up and ride for the Darwin brand, such as the comments on this post.

It is interesting how some owlhoots are so quick to demonize biblical creationists that they do not conduct proper research. I was grouped in with Answers in Genesis by atheist Michael Zimmerman when he attacked Question Evolution Day with some very bizarre material. More recently, Phil Vischer attacked AiG. When he was shown to be disingenuous by Dr. Jason Lisle (see "False History of Creationism is Full of Beans"). Vischer then compounded his false statements, prompting follow-up articles by Lisle.

Why don't they just let us be (in their view) stupid and uninformed? In "Dr. Duane Gish and Debating Evolutionists", we saw how Darwin's disciples hammered Dr. Gish, who had a reputation for defeating his opponents in debates. Many of us see the diatribes against creationists by arrogant misotheists. Creation science really puts burrs under their saddles,

Ken Ham pointed out the hypocrisy of Snopes and some of the false statements of Braterman in his article. He referenced another article by Answers in Genesis that goes into more detail, which is linked further down in this article.

Recently, Snopes, a popular website, disseminated false information with the posting of an anti-Christian commentary with an agenda—an article which had not been fact-checked. Snopes.com posted a piece entitled “Why Creationism Bears All the Hallmarks of a Conspiracy Theory.” This article made many false accusations and disseminated false information about Answers in Genesis, me, and other creation-apologetics ministries.

How could a supposed fact-checking group get away with this? Easy. At the top of the article, an editor stated, “This content is shared here because the topic may interest Snopes readers; it does not, however, represent the work of Snopes fact-checkers or editors.” In other words, they did exactly what they tell others not to do: they published an article without fact-checking. They tried to justify posting the hostile commentary by stating it’s an article they considered (without any fact-checking for themselves) to be of interest to their readers. Obviously, to them, it’s ok to pass along information that hasn’t been fact-checked, but nobody else should dare do such a thing! What utter hypocrisy.

To read the rest of this first article, head on over to "Snopes Exposed!" That's just the beginning. I'd be much obliged if you would come back for the rest.

Readers of Piltdown Superman and other sites know that biblical creationists emphasize learning logic and critical thinking: secularists and leftists tell people what to think, while we want to help people learn how to think. Sometimes we have to confront those who want to dry gulch us and point out their viperine tactics.

What a way to begin: the title, “Why Creationism Bears All the Hallmarks of a Conspiracy Theory,” of a Snopes article reprinted from The Conversation is a question-begging epithet fallacy. Such an attacking title with emotive language lets us know what The Conversation’s and Snopes’ religious beliefs are up front. Our hope is to challenge their religious beliefs in this response. We are used to being hated and attacked. Jesus even said:

"If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you.” (John 15:18 NKJV)
Nevertheless, we want readers to know that we love and care for those at Snopes and The Conversation, regardless of their views against us, and would love to see them repent of their sin and turn to Jesus Christ for salvation. Our response is said with a caring heart, though there will be times where we will be bold.

To read the rest of this second of three, visit "Fact Checked: No Conspiracy Here (But a Lot of Fallacies There)". Be sure to come back for the final article so you can get a more complete understanding of what's happening.

Our final installment discusses how Braterman confuses the Intelligent Design movement with biblical creation science (a modicum of research from the ID people would dispel that notion). He also has several logical fallacies, claiming that creationism is "hostile to science". What ineffable twaddle! Again, an honest researcher could easily find out that there are many creation-believing scientists in many fields of science — and not just creation ministries. He also tries to hoodwink us further by slipping in what appears to be an endorsement of communism, and brings up irrelevant material that should have been scrutinized by fact checkers. But he seems to be more interested in spreading evoporn than promoting truth.

To read this last article, see "Name-Calling Anti-Creationist Fails on Facts".

Monday, February 1, 2021

Getting Spammed about Evil People and Evolution

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen 

Just as I was getting ready to write a pseudo-medical post, I saw that I had a risible spam and decided to write about that instead. Writing things that appear on the internet brings unique annoyances. One of these is a kind of targeted spam.

Writing things on the internet brings unique annoyances, such as bots targeting keywords and sending spam. The mail I received is actually humorous.
Background image furnished by Why?Outreach
A spell back, I wrote "Evil People Trying to Prove Evolution". This was primarily about many wicked things that evolutionary thinking has spawned, with an emphasis on how the "Aryan race" did horrible things to "prove" that the Jews were an inferior race. (I wrote a follow-up satire because feral atheopaths inadvertently confessed to being Nazis.) I did not write about the Wuhan virus at all. Twelve days later, the interesting and amusing spam arrived:
Subject line: Piltdownsuperman.Com's support for Black-owned businesses during COVID-19
Emma [Redacted - for now]

Hi there,

I saw your page piltdownsuperman.com/2021/01/evil-people-trying-to-prove-evolution.html, and I wanted to thank you for supporting the Black community.

The events of last summer (BLM protests and COVID-19) saw many people rally to support Black-owned businesses. Sadly, since summer ended, people forgot to keep sharing and supporting these businesses.

I just found a new article with links to more than 150 Black-owned businesses. I was so happy to see that people still care about helping these companies thrive! The link is here: [redacted]

I think sharing this link on your page would be a great way to help your readers keep supporting Black-owned sites and stores. I think it will be a great addition to your site and that your audience will love this new resource!

Thank you in advance for your support,
Brianna

Wait...what? It was sent from "Emma", and signed by "Brianna". I disremember where, but I read that these things are generally sent out by bots that seek out key words. "Covid" was not in that article, but it was in the keywords list that followed. I lack belief that a human read my article.

Why is Black now capitalized when referring to "race", but white is usually not? There is only one race, and I reject the concept that an ethnic group should be given preferential status because it's trendy for the weaponized "woke" movement. Leftists will tell people that they are not skilled or smart enough to succeed, so they must keep leftists in power as a nanny state giving handouts. Study on that a spell.

These bot spam things show up in my mailbox every once in a while. I'll send Emma... Brianna... whomever... a link to this here article. It won't cost me anything. Besides, the girl in the picture was attractive.

Tuesday, February 11, 2020

Free Speech and Question Evolution Day

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.


The parallels between world events and attacks on creationists show a need for us to use and preserve free speech. #questionevolutionday is a part of this.


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 evidence when presented.


Image provided by Why?Outreach
I reckon that ridicule is a cheap way of silencing us when legislation is too slow and violent persecution is still illegal. If you study on it a mite, you'll see that the desired effect is to negate the opposition. Atheopaths ridicule creationists and Christians, and appeal to the pride of onlookers, such as, "You don't want to pay attention to these people because they believe ridiculous things, and us smart fellers believe in science!" Instead of seeing the bigotry and fallacies in remarks of this nature, people can bolster their egos by agreeing with fools (Psalms 14:1, Proverbs 1:8).

Startling Parallels

 

While listening to podcasts and things at the workplace, I have been amazed many times at the parallels between what creationists experience and happenings in the political realm. This section could easily become excessively long, so I will keep it to just a few examples.

Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi childishly tore up the printed copy of President Trump's State of the Union address. She said that she could find nothing truthful in it (which is a lie) but she also pre-ripped the speech before she had even heard it. Based on her desire for power and hatred of President Trump, she was unwilling to find anything in the speech she liked. Economic gains and record unemployment are not things that leftists cheer about because it hinders their lust for power.

Atheists and evolutionists demand evidence for God and for creation, and they want it on their terms. I've got some bad news for you, Sunshine, the Creator of the Universe who was crucified for our sins and bodily arose on the third day isn't interested in your demands. He has done his part — and more. The evidence is there, and scientific evidence not only refutes evolution but also affirms special creation. For more about atheopaths rejecting evidence and being obstreperous, click on "First Degree Atheopathy".

Fake Conservative Jennifer Rubin was ridiculing Trump's lawyers and saying that the Chief Justice was not a "real judge". The people she mocked were eminently qualified, but Rubin humiliated herself with her risible comments. Why were they targets of her ridicule "unqualified"? Because they were not supporting leftist causes. Similarly, leftists refuse to accept the verdict for Trump's acquittal because "it was not a fair trial". The entire impeachment was partisan, and there were no actual charges filed, but simply vague witch hunt vagaries.

There are many scientists who are creationists, both past and present. Yet atheopaths and fundamentalist evolutionists will say creationists are not "real" scientists based on worldviews, not on capabilities or credentials. Biblical creationists, like their secular counterparts, have disagreements on details of various scientific models and such, but they agree that the Bible is inerrant. Materialists despise anyone who does not hold to their narrow view, so they indulge in dismissing creationists as scientists.

Intellectually dishonest people use such manipulation to negate and silence us because they cannot deal with the facts. Ridicule is one of those methods. At the leftist CNN television show with Don Lemon, a tirade was launched against Donald Trump supporters. Apparently we're all a bunch of ignorant rubes with Southern United States accents (thereby insulting millions of Southerners), and we must think we're elite while hiding our envy for the real elite, who are leftists. Not hardly!

In the same way, misotheists attack creationists and Christians by saying that we are ignorant but they are Hanuman the Monkey God's gift to humanity. However, even a cursory knowledge of science, logical fallacies, theology, and what creationists actually believe and teach equips us to see through their foolishness and bullying tactics.

Big Differences

 

When B. Hussein Obama was elected, Republicans and Conservatives were not burning cars, smashing windows, murdering police officers, demanding censorship, and other malarkey. Don't believe me? Look these things up — but the leftist media does not deal with such things much, so you'll have to use alternative news media that tells the truth. Also, a Bernie Sanders staffer is in favor of gulags and reeducation camps. Caliph Obama had a kill list called the "disposition matrix". Worse yet, leftists use climate change hysteria so they can scare children and use them as tools:


These sidewinders are not interested in bettering their countries or the world. It's all about power and money. They are creepy as well as dangerous.


Having a Voice and Preserving our Freedoms


Having a say in important matters is no longer the realm of those who are established authors, politicians, legislators, pastors, and so on. The internet has also given a voice to the rest of us. It is important to become involved in #questionevolutionday (hashtags are important on social media), even if it is simply posting or sharing creation science material. An inquiring evolutionist may stop to consider what we have to say and question evolution, then follow the links to resources. Ultimately, they may come to faith in Jesus Christ.

We have free speech for now, but anyone who has paid attention to the media (including material on The Question Evolution Project, Piltdown Superman, Stormbringer's Thunder, and others) knows that our rights may be kicked to the curb at any time. QED is for almost everyone, and there is no financial outlay or sign-up. Since we have the freedoms, we should use them while we can. Other Christians are not so fortunate.



Tuesday, November 5, 2019

Slaves, Masters, and our Workplace Reputations

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Every once in a while, I commence to cognating and sometimes writing about reputations. In my sixty years, I've seen and sometimes experienced how things like trust, respect, honor, and reputations take a mighty long time to build on the positive side but can be destroyed in a hurry.

Our reputations, especially as Christians, can be easily ruined after being built up. We have to continue to do what is right and glorify God.
Joseph, son of Israel, as a powerful ruler in Egypt
Image credit: Free Christian Illustrations
The largest section of Genesis, chapters 37-50, have Joseph the son of Israel (Jacob) who was despised by his brothers and sold into slavery in Egypt. Potiphar was important in Egypt and Joseph impressed him so much that Potiphar put him in a position of power. When Joe turned down the Pot-man's wife for a roll in the hay, she lied about him. Joe's reputation was negated because someone in a respected, noble position lied.

Joseph was thrown in prison but the jailer in chief was so impressed by him that he basically let him have the run of the place. A new reputation was being forged, and it was reinforced when he was explaining the meaning of dreams. Later, Pharaoh himself was troubled, and someone said, "Waitaminnit! I just remembered this guy down in the dungeon who might be useful." Joe explained the dream, and Pharaoh made him exceptionally important in Egypt. He even was able to forgive and bless his brothers who sold him into slavery (Genesis 50:20).

All thought the ups and downs, God was with Joseph, who never lost faith despite the circumstances.

It gets difficult when you're accused of doing something wrong and you're innocent. I've been accused by someone who has earned a reputation for being a liar and insane, so sensible people do not take him seriously. Using a form of the genetic fallacy, I've been lied about by someone with prestige; my word was negated, and my reputation took a slapping down.

Ain't no way that I can compare myself to Joseph. There are times when it's difficult to build a good reputation in a workplace when those in power take a notion to dislike you, but you just have to cowboy up and do your job the best you can with what you have.

Recently, we had a lull in work so we were sent home. I filled out the form to account for the difference in hours. Later, I went to my supervisor and said that I wasn't sure of my math. She told me that I overstated the amount by half an hour and she made the adjustment. Although the system would not let her put in an excessive amount of time for me, she said she knew I wasn't trying to get away with something. Another time, I was talking with her supervisor about using a less-known system tool. He said he can trust me with it, but didn't want everyone doing that thing for certain reasons. Those moments of affirmation felt good. While others are more productive than I am in certain areas, it's good that my reputation with those supervisors is pretty good.

Even so, it seems like there's a kind of entropy with people. Bad reports, rumors, other negative things tend to be more easily believed that the positive. A good reputation can be destroyed quickly, especially if it's clearly your fault. I've had to restrain my urges to run my mouth or take other actions, and I have to pray for patience and wisdom quite often.

Christians must glorify God, and we are to do this in our work. I've heard several sermons on Ephesians 6:5-9, which is about slaves and masters in ancient Rome. While our masters cannot actually buy and sell employees, they can fire us. The principles in this passage apply to Christians in the workforce today. We ultimately work for God and should seek to please him.


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?



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.



Wednesday, December 19, 2018

Inner Survival Alarms

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

We all have various reactions to different kinds of alarms, whether conditioned, learned, or provided by the Master Engineer. Some reactions may be a combination of inner and learned, such as reaching for a gun or freezing in place at hearing a growl in the dark. When the smoke alarm goes off, we take some kind of action. Sirens from emergency vehicles prompt us to locate the sources and get out of the way. We several built-in alarms.


Last night could have been my last night. The Master Engineer has given us inner survival alarms, one of which prompted me to stay alive.
Credit: Morguefile / Stuart Whitmore
Something goes bang, you look in the direction of the sound. Hearing a strange noise at night can wake many people up so they can check it out or call the police. One time, I sat upright in bed because I had stopped breathing and disremembered to continue, but that passed. Smelling smoke, with or without an audible alarm, can get you moving. Taking hold of a hot pan sends a very fast message in your system to let go in a hurry. 

Animals have inner alarms too, of course. Sometimes I worry that Basement Cat will smother herself in her fur because of an awkward sleeping position, but her breathing warning will kick in. 

I had something different happen that set off an inner alarm.

This is a tricky situation as far as wording is concerned, trying to strike a balance between including relevant information and omitting details that would be unpleasant. I also don't want to sound overly dramatic, but what happened could have made me ring down the curtain and join the choir invisible.

Last night (Tuesday the 18th) was a vexation. Something went on with my stomach that hasn't happened for a long time, and my night episode may have been the worst. Feeling a bit queasy at bed time, I took a couple of antacids before hitting the hay. Suddenly, I was awake and choking, having vomited in my sleep (sorry, can't find a better way to put it). There wasn't much, but I had inhaled it. That inner alert mechanism had me waking up and standing almost instantly, and I went into the bathroom to cough and gag. I had to do some very slow, controlled inhalations so I could cough out the stuff. The whole situation lasted a spell until it was under control and I was breathing again. Sure, I'm ready to go to be with Jesus, but who wants to die that way?

I've had acid reflux incidents at night before and thought this was possibly the most severe episode. However, my wife had some bad stomach feelings Tuesday night as well. Both of us had some, uh, symptoms that lasted into this morning, so we think there was something wrong with supper. It's been almost 24 hours, and I'm still not quite right, plus exhaustion from having my sleep interrupted and being unable to get comfortable while propped up. I regretted leaving the workplace early but it was necessary. (Having a good reputation for attendance helps, they know I'm not being cavalier about going home sick.) Near-exhaustion and stomach problems are an unpleasant combination, plain and simple.

Although my demise was possible, I don't think it was likely. But I thank God that he not only gave me (and us) those inner survival alarms, he has granted me more time in life to continue serving him.


Wednesday, May 23, 2018

Morality and Spy Stuff

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

What is spying? That word has various meanings depending the individual. The meaning seems to have broadened nowadays, what with advances in technology, internet usage, and all that. Generally, it is obtaining information for your own purposes through secretive means. This is often done illegally or at least without the subject's knowledge and approval. Because I work with protected information, my employer has cameras to help them ride herd on us. Although we know about them, some folks feel "spied on". It is legal.


Questions were raised about morality in the confirmation hearings for Gina Haspel
Credit: Pixabay / Free-Photos
Privacy concerns on the internet have given rise to encryption software for email and browsers, and even for files on your computer. Cyber security checks for and attempts to thwart spyware and malware that track your browser activity, and to keep hackers out of your system. Your smart TV is probably spying on you, and the makers do not have your best interests at heart. There is also industrial espionage, but that would make this article far too lengthy.

On a lower level, people snoop on others using social media. Cyberstalking is a crime, but I know of some sidewinders who justify their activities to protect "science" from the evil of biblical creation science. Yeah, makes sense to me, too. He's an example of Romans 1:24. 

When is spying wrong?

A few days ago, the new director of the Central Intelligence Agency was sworn in. Her name is Gina Haspel. While other directors have been administrators, she has experience as a spook. Makes sense to me to have someone in charge that has experience riding for the brand.

In the confirmation hearings, Haspel was questioned about her activities in "torture", which is a loaded word used to provoke negative emotions by the likes of the leftists at the New York Times. Here's an idea: look up torture methods, and compare them with waterboarding, which left the two prisoners of which she supervised alive and well. A bit damp, though.

Were her actions, and the actions of others involved, wrong? Not to this child.

When it comes to espionage, nations spying on nations (sometimes spying on allies), a passel of questions arise. They sneak, lie, steal, kill, hack into computers, and do all sorts of things to obtain information. The spies Joshua secretly sent to Jericho used stealth and deception. 

That impeccable source of information about The Circus spy stuff, James Bond movies and novels, the hero had sex with many women. In the 1965 movie Thunderball, he said, "My dear girl, don't flatter yourself. What I did this evening was for Queen and country. You don't think it gave me any pleasure, do you?" She didn't believe him, and neither did I. You can only suspend disbelief for a movie just so much. Even so, sex for information is a frequent occurrence in these circles.

The point remains that clandestine operations require people to break rules that the rest of us are supposed to follow.


via GIPHY

Back to Gina's interrogation. She was asked about morality, and if something was moral then, but is not moral now. This indicates what is happening in society today: subjective morality and shifting standards. When I mentioned the cyberstalker above, he believes what he is doing through stalking, harassment, defamation are good and right. Because evolution. Because atheism. Because hatred. But there is no objective moral standard in his case, nor with subjective morality in society today!

Secularists often try to find their morality not only in shifting cultural standards and arbitrary personal opinions, but in evolution. The same shifting and vague moral standards apply to espionage. We have to protect our country, and others feel they have to protect theirs — sometimes by destroying ours. I have to admit that this is a difficult area and can lead to many long discussions on moral standards. An important question is where to draw the line.

The true moral standard comes only from God our Creator, who has made himself known in his Word.

Something that has been occurring rather frequently of late is that I have been inspired to write based on material presented by Dr. Albert Mohler. I recommend this podcast, which you can download or read the transcript.



Sunday, April 1, 2018

Examining the Witnesses of the Resurrection

Using science, psychology, and years of refinement, investigators have developed some rather impressive systems at determining the truth of "Who did it" and "How it happened". This can apply to horrendous criminal cases, reasoning to a conclusion, and other applications.


From a legal perspective, the witnesses of the Resurrection are entirely reliable.
Credit: RGBStock / Robert Linder
Circumstantial evidence can only get you so far. Forensic (historical) science involves determining past events with evidence that exists in the present, so it gets mighty difficult when a significant amount of time passes. Eyewitness accounts are extremely important, and when hitched to a team with circumstantial and forensic materials, you are likely to reach a logical conclusion.

People who have watched courtroom dramas (on the screen or in person) may have encountered attorneys putting some hard questions to witnesses. This is to establish credibility or discredit the witnesses. In police matters, never let witnesses sit together. Separate them. Why? So there's less chance of them "getting their story straight", because it will take longer for legal folks to get to the truth. They can tell this when there are too many details that match exactly. Small discrepancies or disagreements actually help validate the truthfulness of the witnesses.

I have had furious atheists that have lied, misrepresented biblical creation science and people, tried to defame us with other Christians, had their logic refuted, pretended to be experts in theology, and more. They have no credibility, and thinking people do not take them (or their claims) seriously.

We have the ultimate eyewitness, because God is the guiding hand behind the men who penned Scripture (1 Peter 1:19-21, 2 Timothy 3:16). Although Adam was not there for the first days of creation, he probably wrote a manuscript that Moses used later. God directed men to write the rest of Scripture as well — including those eyewitnesses who wrote the four Gospels.

Are there discrepancies in the Gospels? Yes. People have their own minds and perceptions, and they were not always standing at the same corral gate, so to speak. This, too, lends to their credibility, and the main points that they discuss are still supported.

Let's take a look at a discussion of the Gospel witnesses from a legal perspective in more detail.
The truth of the Resurrection stands or falls on the truth of the witnesses. Are they reliable? Of the New Testament writers, there are six witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, if we include the apostles Peter and Paul. These people have left us writings in the form of historical documents which give us their testimony concerning the resurrection.

The question is—are these historical documents reliable? Can we trust them? One way of determining whether the documents are reliable is to put the people who wrote them through the test a good magistrate or judge would put them through. The accuracy of these witnesses depends on five things: their honesty, ability, their number and consistency of their evidence, the conformity of their testimony with our own personal experience, and lastly, the coincidence of their testimony with other circumstances and facts.
To read the rest of this very interesting article, click on " Can we believe the Gospels? — A former chief magistrate examines the witnesses to the resurrection".




Monday, December 25, 2017

Earning Gifts from Santa

The way I've always understood it, a gift is something that is freely given. If you work to receive something, it is not a gift, but earned like wages or something. Children in many parts of the world are told about a being known by many names, including Father Christmas, Sinterklaas, Saint Nicholas, Santa Claus (see the pattern on the last three names?), and others.


Credit: RGBStock / LUSI
Way back yonder, Nicholas was a godly man who was also a giver of gifts. Legends built up, and today we have a recluse who lives at the North Pole, flying around the world with in a sleigh drawn by reindeer and giving gifts to all the good little girls and boys. Probably defies the laws of physics, as this internet legend indicates.

Like many others, I believed in Santa Claus, but as I grew older, I realized that the storyline was impossible. The myth was shattered when I walked past my parents' bedroom, the door was wide open and a big box of unwrapped gifts was in the middle of the floor. If they didn't want me "snooping", they could have at least moved the box out of plain view.

I never shook the feeling that my parents lied to me, though. Many adults are telling this fable to their children, often to prompt them to "be good" so Santa will bring them presents. (It probably works for about a week before Christmas, then they're back to being their old selves again after they grab the loot.) My kids were never told the full myth, but were told about it. I disremember if we told them not to spoil it for other kids who believe in Santa, though. The reason we leveled with them about Santa is that we did not want them to associate that with the truth of God becoming flesh and taking on the form of a man, whose birth is observed on December 25 or January 6. Here is one picture mixing the Santa myth with the reality of Jesus' birth that I like very much.

There is a false salvation connection with Santa. He sees and knows every child all the time, like an omniscient god. (Someone pointed out that he shouldn't need a list to check twice if he's that all-knowing.) Kids have to earn their gifts through good behavior. Then they are not gifts, they are wages. It is very bad to associate salvation with works, because it is only through God's grace and a gift of God (Rom. 3:23, Rom. 6:23, Eph. 2:8-9). Don't confuse the kids, you savvy? And don't confuse yourselves, either. No religious traditions, ceremonies, chanting, "being good" or anything else can save you except repenting and trusting Christ alone for your salvation.

You want to play at the Santa game, fine. It's a cute decoration (except for the creepy ones) and ubiquitous. If you don't like it, that's fine too, but don't be going Pharisee on folks, old son. Santa is still a veiled symbol of giving, and God gave us his Son as the ultimate gift.
[A] popular song portrays the portly North-pole dwelling St. Nick as omnipresent and omniscient—he somehow knows what every child is doing everywhere in the world. Of course, those are attributes that belong to God alone.

It also urges children to “be good for goodness’ sake!” But some vague idea of “goodness’ sake” or the hope of reaping a reward from Santa (or anyone else) should never be our motivation for being good. And who defines what “good” is in this context anyway?

We should be “good”—as defined by God in his Word—because we love our Heavenly Father and do not want to sin against him, and because he has commanded us to be perfect as he is (Matthew 5:48).
To read the entire article, click on "Naughty or Nice?" Also, for more material of a biblical nature and a passel of links for further reading, click on "Christmas and Creationists".



Saturday, September 16, 2017

Using Irony for Effect

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Edited 9-18-2017

After I get this here article done, I am going to submit it to the Irony Board for approval.

Unfortunately, the words irony, ironic and related words are greatly overused, and often incorrectly. I've been confused myself because of seeing many instances of, "This is ironic..." that may or may not have been used correctly. Seems that quite a few people are uncertain about the proper usage, and there is a site where someone can ask if something is ironic. What is the real meaning? The Cambridge Dictionary defines it as, "a situation in which something which was intended to have a particular result has the opposite or a very different result". But irony has several meanings and applications, which includes using it as a literary device.


Using this picture of iron in an article about irony is a play on words, it is not ironic.
Credit: Pixabay / ptdh.
I've been accused of unintended irony against myself on occasion, but those were from people who were on the prod and looking for excuses to indulge in vituperation. One time, I used a video clip of the "holy hand grenade" from Monty Python and the Holy Grail in an article. Why? Because it was funny, and seemed to fit. Someone commented that I was stupid and the Python boys were ridiculing religion. Even if his claim was true, his remark was an ad hominem and irrelevant.

More recently, I see angry atheists attack The Question Evolution Project for discussing logic and pointing out reasoning errors from atheists and evolutionists. They claimed that it was ironic for creationists to be discussing logic. No, that's just another ad hominem coupled with the genetic fallacy.

Deputy Curtis was in a time-wasting mode and teased some virulent atheopaths (for a definition of atheopath, click here and see footnote 1). I annotated and cropped his screenshot (click for full size):

Used under Fair Use provisions for educational purposes.
Used under Fair Use provisions for educational purposes.

Okay, is it ironic that I obtained this screenshot while I was commencing to write this article? Not that I can see. Interesting timing, yes.

Anyway, it is ironic that atheists pretend to be the arbiters of reason and science, but frequently display ignorance of both. Indeed, creationists often have to correct village atheists regarding their own evolutionary faith, as well school them on logic. They claim we're ironic, but they disunderstand that their own fallacies are the real ironies.

Seems to me that it's ironic that leftists will call people they dislike "fascists", "Nazis", white supremacists, while embodying fascism themselves — especially suppressing free speech and free thought. Taking cues from leftist movements, atheists and other anti-creationists, many of these are leftists, will indulge in the same things. When we ban trolls, we're "fascists" and engage in "censorship", then they seek to recruit others to join in with their tantrums, demonize those they dislike, and more. Most professing atheists are leftists, and they want the opposition (especially creationists) silenced. They irony of their hypocrisy escapes them. I think the psychological term of projection applies here as well, since it is common in certain personality disorders.

Moving on up the trail to where I really wanted to go with this, there are times when I've used some things to be ironic. "Memes" with atheists, more Monty Python material, and so on. (One bit of unintentional irony was when I used a Gandalf "meme" with Ian McKellen, and didn't know that he is an atheist.) Sometimes my use of cowboy lingo is purposefully ironic.

Also, I think it's ironic that the Christian parody band ApologetiX uses secular songs and rewrites the lyrics to convey biblical truth, such as taking "(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction" by the Rolling Stones and making it into "Triune Godhead".

Something else that I find ironic is that evolutionists have methods that they claim show the earth (and the universe itself) to be ancient, and creationists often use their own assumptions against them to obtain far younger results. Also, dinosaurs are icons of evolution, but creationists use them to spread the gospel mesage — Ken Ham calls them "missionary lizards". Sort of like a a gunslinger who gets shot with his own gun.

So, yes, I use ironic things in posts and articles. It's fun, adds a bit of "color" to posts and articles, and is also a way to communicate some points. Other ironies are more subtle and you need your cognating cap to figure them out.