April 24, 2017

Further Adventures in Atheo-Fascism

Atheists and evolutionists want biblical creationists silenced
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

By my reckoning, evidence refuting evolution and deep time is increasing, as is evidence for special creation. Anti-creationists on the web commence to jabbering, trolling, bullying — but are unable to offer luculent responses. Instead, they react.

Hatetheists and fundamentalist evolutionists detest that we present our side of the origins controversy. In fact, many act like we do not even have the right to disagree with their worldview. Something I've said before of which I am more firmly convinced than ever: they want us silenced. 

Many scoffers will pretend to read articles, listen to podcast, or watch videos we provide. However, they make judgments based on a title, a summary, or some-such. They embarrass themselves because their criticisms were often addressed in the items they refused to investigate, such as this one.

In their blinded pride and arrogance, mockers utilize many rescuing devices, often using logical fallacies to dry-gulch the opposition. For example, they reject Christian or creationary sources outright (the genetic fallacy), as well as utilizing straw man arguments, ad hominems, and more. You can often see them justify their bigotry and abuse of reason. I was even attacked for giving a warning about fake accounts and the risk of identity theft (you can see that here, but it takes a moment to completely load.) Since they cannot make us shut up and go away through superior science and reason, they vilify us in an effort to negate what we are saying, and gleefully engage in bullying.


Used under Fair Use guidelines and with the commenter's permission
Click for full size
In addition to the above screenshot, someone posted a comment on an atheopath Page. A commenter on that Page went to his timeline and trolled him. These clowns are unable to understand that ridicule is not refutation. 

I reckon that those who are serious about wanting to learn what we believe and teach would actually read the articles, and even check out references and "for further reading" links. But no, they get that bullying and ridicule bit between their teeth and it's off to the races. Go ahead, Skippy. You race, then come back to your mother's basement and the poisonous talking wall fungus. I've got other things to do.

Further, anti-creationist owlhoots use those ad hominem remarks to try and poison the well against Christians and biblical creationists. They seem to think that assertions and accusations are self-validating; perhaps if an utterance is made from The Mighty Atheist™, it becomes a fact. That'll be the day! In a similar manner, the ad hominem labels they attempt to attach to us are expected to be true despite lack of relevance or truthfulness: liar, science denier, homophobe, coward, evil — and of late, fascist.

That last one is common among Darwin's Flying Monkeys© who really have no idea what it means They call someone a fascist in retaliation for being banned because of trolling, blasphemy, bad logic, narcissism, or whatever. While most of us believe in free speech, we know there are limits for it (such as defamation, incitement to violence, obscenity, and more. For a detailed article on this, see "Free Speech, Censorship, the Internet, You and the Bad Guy", and I admit that the title is excessively long). Someone gets banned from a part of social media or his comments are disallowed, he shrieks, "Censorship! You're a fascist!" Such weak attempts at manipulation invariably fail, and even strengthen the resolve of those who did the banning.

Fascism is based on pagan nature worship (as is evolution) and is merged with nationalism. With atheism, secularism, and evolutionism tracking the way they are, I affirm my article, "Evolution and the New Atheo-Fascism". Atheo-fascists do not want free speech, they want us silenced. Bullying, ridicule and misrepresentation were common propaganda tactics during fascist rule. While misotheists claim to care about science, they prefer to protect their religion from scrutiny and exposure. Note how they congratulate each other on churlish behavior, and all creation evidence must be attacked by the brown shirts. Sieg Heil, mein Liebling! They try to shout us down until we go away.

People also believe in things because of celebrity influence. Evolutionists and atheists work the celebrity angle quite frequently. (Shamefully, so do Christians to some extent.) Hume, Dawkins, Nietzsche (I doubt that they've really read him, he didn't cotton to Darwin's views), even elevating failed scientist Nye to atheistic pope status. Atheopaths claim that they are the clever ones because they analyze things, and Christians are mindless sheep. This shows they are not logical thinkers, because they use prejudicial conjecture, sweeping generalizations, and other fallacies in that ego-boosting claim. Again, such behavior is used to poison the well against Christians and creationists.

Bill Nye the Scientism Guy (who does not know what he's talking about regarding climate change) was called a fascist, and I don't think that's far off the mark. He wants to control education so that it promotes naturalistic evolution only, despite what the majority of Americans desire. Nye also wants climate change "deniers" put in jail. He's influential as a celebrity and poster boy for secularism and materialism, but not influential as a scientist. He never was a scientist, but he uses his status to promote leftist political causes

Watch for the atheopaths who are self-appointed experts in all sciences, including psychology. It is common to see a Christian point out a failing in logic, science, morality, or whatever, and have it deflected with, "You are using projection". If you study on it a spell, projection is often a characteristic of narcissism, and many atheists (especially keyboard warriors on the web) fit the bill for narcissistic sociopaths. Sure looks like the ones accusing people of projection are really the ones doing the projection. Same thing with those accusing others of being fascists, when evolutionary atheists are being fascistic themselves. Yippie ky yay, secularists!

Materialism, leftism, and fascism are on the increase in society. God the Creator as revealed in his written Word is despised and rejected. Those of us who have the impudence to show that atheism is irrational, stand for the truth of Scripture, tell the world that science actually supports biblical creation and the Genesis Flood, must be silenced according to their rule book. They don't know that the final victory belongs to God.



April 21, 2017

Ad Blockers and Stealing

Some people think that using an ad blocker is stealing

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Some website owners have a burr under their collective saddles about ad blockers, and we frequently encounter a site that will say, in essence, "Shut off your ad blocker or we won't let you view our site". (If I wanted to get bullied, I'd talk about the truth of biblical creation science to atheists.) So, I click out of the site — which may have received traffic if I used them as a reference in an article. There are some sites that ask you nicely to shut off the ad blocker, but let you continue. An attitude like that may cause me to reconsider if I have to go back there again. Some cranky authors attempt to make a case that we are "stealing" if we use an ad blocker. Are we stealing when we fast-forward through commercials on our DVRs? Wonder where their foundation is for morality and ethics. Anyway, such a complaint doesn't make a whole heap of sense if you study on it.
  • Bandwidth
    Not everyone is blessed with ultra-high speed connections that gallop to the far horizon in a flash. Advertising is intrusive and slows folks down, especially on mobile devices where the user is required to pay extra for internet access. What really takes the rag off the bush is when advertising videos pop up when I'm trying to read or research. I close out of those, too.

  • Privacy
    One reason ad blockers exist is because of privacy and tracking concerns. There are services that combat tracking that are used in conjunction with ad blockers, but they often interfere with your browsing pleasure if they're not adjusted properly. Sometimes they interfere anyway.

  • Irrelevance
    Some sites "monetize" (which I can do on my own sites). This can be done by popping up ads about vacations (can't afford Jamaica and don't have enough vacation time), cologne (got some that I haven't worn in years, don't need more), a new car (paying off the emergency loan on the current car), a new computer (maybe later), dating sites (my wife frowns on that), and so on. Besides, if I'm pressed for time or just want to read and more on, I ignore the ads that don't get blocked. I reckon that most people have trained themselves to have blind spots to them as well.

  • Annoyance
    Have you ever had a site that gave you so many ads through pop-ups, pop-unders, videos, and so on that the browser crashed? I have, but it was in the olden days of Windows 95 and far less sophisticated browsers. Even so, lots of stuff vying for your attention gets irksome. Hey, I wonder if pop-up blockers that are built into browsers are "stealing" as well? Or the people who disable JavaScript?

  • Adware, Malware and PUPs
    Many sites run low-quality ads, and worse, allow sidewinders to post adware, malware (such as "you have been infected, call...") and links to Potentially Unwanted Programs. Then you have to learn how to remove the infections and PUPs. I suspicion that ad blockers help reduce those threats. Practice safe computing so you don't get infected with something nasty.
Let's study on this claim that using an ad blocker is "stealing" a bit more. When we visit sites, we are not committing to purchase a doggone thing. Going into the Big Box Chain Store to look around, or maybe have something specific in mind that we can't find, we're not stealing. (The comparison is flawed, I know, but I think the point is valid.) Also, there are many sites that are free, so we don't cotton to getting bushwhacked by those who say they depend on ad revenue for purchase that are unlikely to happen in the first place. They get paid for letting people post the ads? Not my problem. After all, aren't we trained by cyber experts to be skeptical of monetary scams?

So, to the guy who says that those of us who use ad blockers are "stealing", I have some bad news for you, sunshine: nobody's stealing. Maybe if you made your site a pay-for-subscription thing, people would be happy to make you rich to see your exquisite and informative content. By the way, something else I've seen is that site content is freely available for a while, but later it's only available to subscribers. That may be a good idea, since the free material can be advertising in a way for the rest of the content.

Here's an article that deals with the above subject matter in less of a rantish and sarcastic manner: "Is using ad-blocking software morally wrong? The debate continues".


April 1, 2017

The Amazing Super Powers of the Mighty Atheist™

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Years ago, I wrote "atheist" on Twitter, and one cautioned me about using that word because I risked "calling down the thunder". We know that they can be ornery cusses even on their good days, but I was unaware of the intellectual prowess and wisdom of The Mighty Atheist™, dwarfing that of a mere theist. What I had yet to learn, however, is that they also have super powers that are even magical at times. Now I know better. Christians and creationists, I hope you heed this warning!


Super powers mighty atheist
Graphic modified from Clker clipart
As with other super powers, those of The Mighty Atheist™ are difficult to categorize. Not all atheists and evolutionists have the same powers to the same degree, and there is no special school for gifted atheists under a professor so they can develop their abilities. Like logical fallacies, powers often blend and overlap. Let's saddle up and ride over yonder to Deception Pass where the atheists, atheopaths, anti-creationists, and others are having a hootenanny to celebrate International Atheists Day right now.

PRECOGNITION AND CLAIRVOYANCE
Yes, they know what you are going to say, or what a creationist is going to say at a conference. Many often know what you are doing during your Sisyphean apologetic efforts. They also know that difficulties for evolution discussed by creationists (such as dinosaur blood and soft tissues) will someday have a scientific explanation, so creationists are already wrong before that great day happens. "I could ask Gordons WHAT 'misrepresentation' took place and WHAT relevant information I omitted. But he would not answer my question. So I don't think I'll bother."

AT-A-GLANCE ASSESSMENT
Atheists are able to read an introduction to an article or even just a title and know what is being said. There is no need to follow links or read the rest of the article. This tinhorn is able to asses the intellectual ability of a writer and utterly dismiss him simply by reading a few paragraphs. Cherry-picking and straw man argumentation is permitted (discussed below).

EDUCATION IS UNNECESSARY
When challenging evolution and atheism, the Christians and creationists are required to provide credentials of advanced education in relevant areas. Since atheists and evolutionists have no need for reading articles and their supporting links, they are not required to show credentials — or even to possess significant education; any jasper can defend evolution. Flinging outdated, biased links from Wikipedia, Talk.Origins, (Ir)RationalWiki, and other sites that favor them is justified. Even an abstract (which is a kind of promise for what will be included in a scientific paper) is devastating to us. Indeed, the links to do not even need to be related to the topic at hand, and we are effectively refuted. A step further, although they disbelieve in God (but still hate him) and reject the Bible, many are experts in theology (albeit without education) and can refute any Christian who dares to oppose their statements.

LOGICAL FALLACIES BECOME ACCEPTABLE
While the rest of us are constrained to following the rules of logic, The Mighty Atheist™ is able to use cherry-picking, misrepresentation, ad hominems, straw men, hasty generalization, and many more arguments that are normally considered illegitimate. When a Christian or creationist identifies those, fallacies are no longer fallacies, but are transformed into legitimate argumentation. In addition, actively lying about Christians and creationists is effective, because lies become truth when uttered by those with super powers. In a similar manner, opinions change into facts! Any assertion or accusation can be made, and evidence is unnecessary. Changing the subject when cornered and attacking is encouraged, and again, no longer fallacious. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

REDEFINITION
Atheists have conveniently redefined atheism as "lack of belief" instead of the long-established meaning of "belief that there is no God or supernatural". It becomes valid for an evolutionist or atheist to call someone a liar when a statement is made that these sidewinders dislike or are unable to refute. Yes, it becomes a lie because they said so. Actual definitions of atoms-to-atheist evolution can be changed so they can be more evolution-friendly. Calling someone a "fascist", even though most do not know what that word means, makes someone a fascist. We cannot dispute this ability, and must accept it.

AMAZING FAITH IN MATERIALISM
The Mighty Atheist™ has no tolerance for those of us who dare mock their popes and high priests, such as Carl Satan Sagan, Charles Darwin, Clinton Richard Dawkins, and so on. Presuppositions held by materialistic atheists and evolutionists are true, and need not be supported through logic. When challenged, the empowered atheist may shoot you down with death rays from his eyes, usually accompanied with epithets of, "Liar! Fascist! You know nothing of science! What you said is not true! I'm smarter than you!" and so on. Although they reject God, they hate him; blasphemy is acceptable in their eyes, even daring to call God a liar.

RECRUITMENT IN THE CAUSE
They can find like-minded people to join on their atheistic jihads. Think of piranhas. (This ability is used frequently among atheists and evolutionists who have less developed super powers.) I had said that one atheopath has a personal motto of "I'm telling!", and that is common among them. They seek out their own kind to join in with attacks, but also tattle on Christians and creationists to entreat assistance from those who may have power and authority. These junior members are often ignored by their superiors.

CONCLUSION 
One of the best things I learned from a comic book was the line from Spider-Man, "With great power comes great responsibility". When it comes to The Mighty Atheist™ , something similar is true: with great egos come the illusion of great power. Though most try to deny it, atheism is a religion. They may think we are defeated, but we have truth in the Word of God.

They may think they are bringing the world wisdom and reason, but they are fools (Psalm 14:1). Despite the protestations of professing atheists, they do know that God the Creator exists (Rom. 1:18-23). Their worldly "wisdom" is worthless (1 Cor. 1:20). Like the rest of us, they have sinned (Rom. 3:23) and deserve divine punishment, but can be redeemed (Rom. 6:23). Not only redeemed, but can become children of God (John 1:12, Rom. 8:13-17). The tremendous pride, arrogance, and bullying of atheists and fundamentalist evolutionists makes it difficult for them to humble themselves and repent, but they can have new life. Not just atheists, but all unbelievers are under God's wrath and need to repent for salvation. Today is April 1. Don't be a fool in God's eyes.


March 17, 2017

Induced Morality

The public has a strange relationship with the secular science industry. Some adore it and put their unquestioning faith in it (Scientism), such as I saw years ago in response to a question: "Scientists will come up with a pill for it or something". Others have a mixture of trust and increasing suspicion, especially since the secular science industry has been betraying that trust. Now there's speculation that morality could be done by ingesting certain chemicals.


Prescription chemical morality
Made at Custom Prescription Maker
This should raise alarm among thinking people: whose morality? Most likely, it would depend on those in power. Atheists and other secularists have no consistent foundation for morality, and some seek it through evolutionism. Some owlhoots believe that they are doing good when they are doing evil. As a Bible-believing Christian, I do not want secularist "values" shoved down my throat — which could happen literally.
We often take pills to feel healthier, to ease pain, or to relieve symptoms. But what if you could take a pill to become a more moral you? According to an article in the National Post,
Neuroethicists and others thinkers are increasingly absorbed by the idea of “moral enhancement” through pharmaceuticals, implanted brain electrodes or other biomedical means.

Leading proponents argue advances in cognitive neuroscience suggest morally desirable capacities may, at least in part, be neurologically-based and therefore amenable to tinkering.

Some envision a day when we could use drugs that act directly on the brain to dial down aggression and other “anti-social” sentiments and dial up “pro-social” ones like compassion and trust.
Some studies have indeed suggested that certain prescription drugs do modify behavior, making people, for example, “more cooperative, less critical of others and more sensitive to other people’s pain.”
To read the entire article, click on "Prescription for Morality?"



March 13, 2017

Secularists Protect Evolution from Thought

Evolutionists are on the prod again. A bill was proposed in South Dakota that required...what? What was in it that would cause such distress? Maybe if the bill required the teaching of Intelligent Design, or even biblical creation science, and exclude evolution. That'll be the day! Actually, the "problem" with the bill is that it promotes critical thinking instead of blind acceptance of evolution, so flaws in evolutionary speculations should be made known.


Evolution education law
Generated at Glass Giant
The secular science industry has been getting more political nowadays, with a distinct leftist bias. But Machiavellian approaches to evolutionary education have been happening for some time now — it's acceptable to deceive students for the sake of believing evolution. Critical thinking is unacceptable (as is free speech when contrary to leftist causes, atheism, and evolutionary thinking). Unfortunately, true science thrives on critical thinking and challenges, and free speech is also necessary. But atheists and other anti-creationists seek to protect their cult of death from scrutiny, so they unleash Darwin's Flying Monkeys©.
Secular reporters, for the life of them, can’t get their facts right. When it comes to the teaching of evolution, knees jerk, kicking the boilerplate machine into programmed output.

A proposed bill in South Dakota, called an “academic freedom bill” (SB 55) simply says this:
No teacher may be prohibited from helping students understand, analyze, critique, or review in an objective scientific manner the strengths and weaknesses of scientific information presented in courses being taught which are aligned with the content standards established pursuant to § 13–3-48.
Sound fair enough? Not to the secular press. One would think all hell broke loose, and we’re headed back into the dark ages. The story by AP reporters James Nord and Hannah Weikel hit the fan, splattering lies around the world as all the major media echoed it uncritically. The AP gives the impression that sneaky creationists were kicking Darwin out of science class and replacing it with the Bible, God and the dreaded c-word, creationism. Anyone see any of that in the bill’s language?
To read the rest, saddle up and ride over to "Fake News on Education Bills". 

March 4, 2017

Leftists Using the Arts for Propaganda and Bullying

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Here is another post inspired by my buddy, Dr. Albert Mohler.

"He's your buddy, Cowboy Bob?"

Sure! He comes to Kingston, New York now and then. We go out for nachos, have a few beers, throw darts, and discuss theological matters. It's fun.

Actually, he has no idea that I even exist. I'd like to have a few hours discussing some things with him, though.

Have you ever noticed that people in the arts tend to be politically left and morally liberal? Woodstock, the founders of the famous rock music festivals, is just a few miles away from me. Lots of artsy stuff, leftover hippies, strange shops — my wife and I feel creeped out just driving through there. Naturally, their vote is overwhelmingly Democrat. (For that matter, the state of New York hasn't voted for a Republican since Ronald Reagan in 1984. If New York became a "red state", I think Woodstock would relocate to California.) Artists seem to engage in all sorts of leftist causes, including anti-Christian, anti-family, and pro-abortion.

So anyway. Hollywood liberals consider themselves purveyors of goodness and light. Of course, watch the material that comes out of there, and you'll be hard pressed to find many pictures with traditional or especially Christian values. They are thrilled to bash Donald Trump and other Republicans, and will do so for the next seven years and eleven months. There are a few Christians and Conservatives in Hollyweird, but most have to kowtow to the majority or remain unemployed.

Hollywood liberals Oscars agenda platform
Made with the template at Custom Medal Maker
On a recent episode of The Briefing, Dr. Mohler noticed that novelist John Irving urged the leftists at the Oscars to use their public platform. Somehow, the Hollywood elite consider themselves to be representatives of the arts. Not that they're vainglorious or anything, presuming that everyone in the arts is in full agreement with them. They're essentially claiming that it's their duty to spread their version of morality. However, they do this through verbal attacks, financial bullying, condoning violence, lying, and more.

Hollywood people are increasingly vocal about their disrespect for traditional values, and are promoting their own agendas. For example, Disney is making a children's movie with a blatant homosexual scene, and sexuality of any kind should not be pushed on kids. Do you think attitudes in Hollywood has anything to do with the ratings dip for the Oscars and their Trump bashing?

While the leftists in the arts are turning the volume up to eleven, many of us reg'lar folk are losing interest in the way they use their celebrity status for political and moral agendas. As if they actually knew anything about real people who work for a living, Christians, Conservatives, or anything else.


February 22, 2017

Secular Science Industry Getting More Nutty

In "Blind Bias in the Secular Science Industry", we saw that those organizations are not aloof and impartial in the slightest, and have a distinct leftist bias. For that matter, I'll borrow a line I heard: they're so left wing, they fly in circles. We're used to secularists in the science industry and their sycophant press opposing biblical creation science and using devious as well as distinctly unscientific methods. Now they're getting downright nutty — but then, we've seen quite a few leftists becoming totally unhinged from hatred, haven't we?


The secular science industry and media are increasingly biased toward leftist politics, but are getting downright nutty.
Credit: Freeimages / Jason Antony
At this writing, Donald Trump has just completed the first month as the American President, with 23 left to go. I'm not his biggest fan, but from what I've seen so far, he may end up doing a very good job; I'm cautiously optimistic. Before the inauguration and in that first month, people were acting like he's going to destroy their civil rights and become a dictator. The secularists were even worried that they would lose money ("scientific integrity" is the code word). Despite reason and the American Psychiatric Association, some nutty psychologists were "analyzing" Trump — as if you can analyze a public figure that you've never met and has not been in office for very long! Unethical dolts.

Another example of unethical behavior from supposed professionals is that a new "medical theory" for Trump's "bizarre behavior" is due to neurosyphilis. The New Republic floated this hit piece and made it sound like serious, unbiased health professionals have examined Donald Trump. No, it's leftists and sore losers whining. That, and the psychological "diagnosis" nonsense mentioned above are not examples scientific integrity, old son, they're leftist politicking, plain and simple.

Let's ride a different trail for a while, shall we? Here's an excerpt from the Murray Leinster'sw 1963 story, "Med Ship Man":

Calhoun reread the briefing. Maya was one of four planets in this general area whose life systems seemed to have had a common origin, suggesting that the Arrhenius theory of space-traveling spores was true in some limited sense. A genus of ground-cover plants with motile stems and leaves and cannibalistic tendencies was considered strong evidence of common origin.
The story assumes evolution happened on other planets, and presents a panspermia version of abiogenesis. I had to suspend my disbelief and accept those fictional realities, and the story was rather good. But ETs, abiogensis, and spores-to-space traveler evolution belong in science fiction.

Are secular scientists sane? They are determined to find any kind of evidence for evolution so they can deny the Creator, and since aiogenesis did not happen here, it must have happened way up yonder. Even the so-called building blocks of life. You can just imagine the cry, "We found amino acids on other planets, so life must have evolved out there. There is no God. We're saved!" Nutty. Searches for ET are really going off the rails.

The preceding paragraphs are leading up to something. (That's what preceding paragraphs do, you see.) I'd be much obliged if you'd read this article that has many examples of nuttiness in the secular science industry, "Questioning the Sanity of Big Science and Big Media".




February 12, 2017

Lying, Science, and the Bible

Howdy! Hope all y'all are having a great Question Evolution Day!

When someone commences to telling lies, it usually brings an uncomfortable feeling along with it — at first. More lies get told, and it becomes easier. Some folks are so used to lying, they do it automatically. There are those who get so accustomed to lying, they are suspicious of others, even becoming unable to discern deception from disagreement, humor, or error — especially when they have a precommitment of rejecting the truth of another's position. This is easily seen in atheists and anti-creationists, who are unwilling to even consider the truth of biblical creation science, or to admit that God exists (Rom. 1:18-23, Psalm 53:1).


Another scientific study is verifying the truth of the Bible. In this case, a favorite pastime of atheists and anti-creationists: lying.
Image credit: Freeimages / Christian Carollo
When someone lies, it often escalates in another way: having to tell more of them to make a convincing story. Lots of details need to be kept straight, and the whole tall tale becomes so cumbersome that people get caught by the details. It's easier to tell the truth than to do the tangled web thing that Sir Walter Scott mentioned.

It must put a burr under the saddles of atheopaths that science is once again confirming what the Bible said all along. Brain scans are showing what happens to people when they progress in their lying, and how it gets easier. The Bible tells us that people's consciences get seared (1 Tim. 4:1-2), and now science is catching up to this truth. 

Another issue is that people who reject the God of Creation have no ultimate foundation for morality. There are anti-creationists who call biblical creationists "liars", and I've challenged more than one tinhorn to explain why lying is wrong in their materialistic worldview. After all, we're bundles of chemicals following our electrochemical impulses, so lying, murder, theft, and other things that are generally considered evil cannot be legitimately called wrong! Their views are inconsistent, arbitrary, and irrational. Only the biblical worldview comports with reality and human experience. God hates deceit, but evolution does not, because evolution is not an entity that gives moral guidance.
“Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.” True to the old saying, one lie becomes two lies, which become four lies, which can quickly spiral into a web of deceit. New research shows that the more we lie, the easier it is to continue lying.

The authors of the study noted that most people feel bad when they intentionally deceive someone, but eventually this feeling goes away. It seems we become desensitized to lying over time. Here’s what they discovered:
Brain scans showed that the first lie was associated with a burst of activity in the amygdalae, areas involved in emotional responses. But this activity lessened as the lies progressed. The effect was so strong that the team could use a person’s amygdala activity while they were lying to predict how big their next lie would be.
To read the rest, click on "A Tangled Web: The Science of Lying Agrees with God’s Word".

February 6, 2017

Snowflakes Burning with Hate

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

It is indeed unfortunate that the political and cultural situations in the United States are not unique to our borders; the affliction is global. Instead, it is a reflection of postmodernism and nihilism, replete with relative truth and despair. After Hillary Clinton lost the election to Donald J. Trump, people were suddenly confronted with the stark possibilities of having to actually work and become productive members of society for eight years; they never considered that Hillary could lose the election. Further, they were willingly blind to the duplicity and outright lies of the Obama administration, carrying this over and expecting more promises of good things from the leftist Democrats.

On the spiritual side, we get something like this confused ramblings from someone who has claimed to be an atheist and not an atheist in the same paragraph. He usually identifies himself as an atheist, and has said God is "non-existent". Here is an edited version of something this atheist said:

I sometimes feel anger towards "God". Maybe he is real for some but chose to withhold his reality from me, and that's unfair.
Hold on a spell, pilgrim! What makes you so doggone special, that God would "withhold his reality" from you? Things didn't go the way you liked, God did not jump through a flaming hoop to give you your desires? Did you ever carry your cross through town, wrongly condemned and sinless? Further, you are calling God a liar! God did make himself known to all (Rom. 1:18-24), and you're not the special snowflake that is the exception, and God is not a liar (Num. 23:19). If you want "fair", then you don't want God! That's right, because all have sinned (Rom. 3:23) and deserve death (Rom. 6:23). He didn't have to do it, but God gave us the offer of redemption through Jesus Christ, God the Son. Repent of your perverse reverse idolatry (making a false god that you can hate) while there's still time.

There are others who feel that they are beyond God's reach, exceptions to the rules, and so forth (the Democrat Party actually booed God). They are rejecting him so they can make themselves into their own postmodern false gods and make their own rules, especially in areas of sexuality. Leftists are known for opposing Christian moral values, the family, the sanctity of marriage, and endorsing every form of sexual perversion. God is not welcome in Leftistland, but reality cannot be changed through tantrums.

When the election did not go their way, many liberals became hysterical, needing safe spaces in which to cry and use coloring books. These are children in adult bodies, and such coddling is actually harmful to them. Can you imagine a campus debate club nowadays? "Don't cry, we'll let you win the debate. That's right, the Soviet Union was good for the world!" I can just imagine such weak-minded individuals who have been ill-prepared to face the real world actually having to obtain employment and then be told that they cannot have their way.


Delicate liberal snowflakes are burning with hate for anyone who disagrees with them. While calling others "fascists", they show the same attitudes themselves.
Modified from a graphic at Clker clipart
Now we have these poor, poor, pitiful snowflakes burning with rage and showing how contemptible the left really is. (Yes, in this case, snowflakes really do burn.) They're still delicate, but fearless in a mob setting. They wanted mob rule from the election instead of the established, legal Constitutional process that prevailed.

Leftists claim to be all about free speech, but apparently that only works one way: they demand to be heard at any time, in any place, in any way. If you do not allow an obstreperous balatron free reign with his or her outbursts, then the individual or group will invariably play the fascist card (among others). It's a favorite word of late, but the users do not know what it means. They simply use it to provoke negative emotional reactions. President Trump has been called a fascist by many, but his policies belie that claim. (I've been called a fascist, and someone was called a "fascist follower of the North Korean style false propaganda blog", showing that the writer has no concept of what either word means.) What is interesting is that these benighted accusers are unaware (whether through stupidity or willing ignorance) that Hillary Clinton's "Stronger Together" slogan has fascist origins.

Unfortunately for intelligent people who must suffer because of excerebrose rioters and slogan chanters, they have not realized that their statements comparing Trump to Hitler (or even saying Trump is Hitler) are utterly vapid. After all, those — almost called them sidewinders, but I don't wish to insult venomous reptiles with the comparison — losers still have their free speech. They are still criticizing the government and individuals in it, still unimprisoned, still alive. I'm fully in favor of arresting, prosecuting, and punishing those who set people's hair on fire, shove bloody tampons in someone's face, riot, burn buildings, and so forth. Put 'em in the slammer.

The crocodilian attitudes of the left become even more apparent with the treatment of Milo Yiannopoulos. He embodies two traits that leftists adore: he is not an American citizen, and he is blatantly homosexual. He also tends to be correct about some topics, but quite crude as well. Since he supports Trump, he's persona non grata. Those advocates of free speech and tolerance are themselves engaging in their version of fascism, even to the point of rioting to protest the free speech of someone they dislike!

Let me ride off on a side trail. Come along, will you?

Republicans and Conservatives are more likely to uphold traditional moral values and the rule of law, but we've been bamboozled by country club Republicans in the past. Politicians lie, it's their nature. (I can hope that Trump is different, but it's too soon to tell. Good start in many instances, though.) When Hillary Clinton insulted millions of Trump supporters by calling them a "basket of deplorables", many embraced the term. On social media, you can find groups and Pages using the title "Deplorables" and some variations. I scanned some of them, and they are living up to the title. There is hatred for the left and extreme profanity. Sure, the bigotry of the left has provoked negative emotions on the other side, but the profane, hateful reactions to the leftists are outrageous.

Back to the main trail again.

Let me edjamakate y'all: The problem is not political, philosophical, or social. It is sin. Membership in a political party does not mean you are a Christian, nor does it make you faultless. Politics cannot save you. Donald Trump cannot save anyone (I don't reckon he has such an exalted view of himself anyway). Salvation comes through Jesus Christ alone, not through works, rituals, membership, or anything else added on, you savvy? Trump campaigned to make America great again. Can that happen? In my opinion, we're under God's judgement, but we've been given a reprieve by not going full left. If we as a nation will humble ourselves and seek God, it may happen. Perhaps the leftists outside our borders will then learn from our example.





February 1, 2017

Blind Bias in the Secular Science Industry

Those allegedly dispassionate scientists in the secular science industry are actually blind to their biases. They are also strongly leftist in their advocacy.

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Scientists are portrayed as dispassionate, objective, and following where the evidence leads. Not hardly! They're people living in a sinful, fallen world just like the rest of us. Unfortunately, those making money in the science industry have some serious problems that stem from their materialistic worldviews and the philosophies of the age — and their political positions are on the hard left. My tax dollars at work! What follows will link you to four articles, so I hope you come back to finish reading this post.

Many of these scientists, as portrayed by their obsequious media, are the arbiters of truth. After all, they're scientists, and have the necessary tools. Their elitism shows in their blatant hatred of President Donald Trump, who has only been in office for a few days, but these yahoos have him all figured out and condemned. But that's the left, they do that. 

The leftist science industry is also very interested in education (especially evolution and global climate change), you bet your boots. They're scientists, they have the truth, and everyone else (especially Conservatives) are ideologues. But they have to convince (actually, manipulate) people with propaganda, and browbeat people they consider to be enemies. This is similar to the attitudes of people who oppose Question Evolution Day: ridicule, mockery, claiming to believe in freedom of speech as long as it meets with their approval, and so on. Typical leftists. Typical anti-creationists.

From there, they move on to a secularist jihad to fight back against the truth. Or, as they believe, against error because they have the truth. Of course, there is no reason to consider any evidence against their presuppositions and the "science" presented through poor research and circular reasoning.

Here's the first link, "Big Science Blind to Its Bias".

Now we get more involved with the political aspect of the secular science industry. They have assumed Trump is evil, as are Republicans. (I expect bias and bigotry from atheopath stalkers on the Web, but such ridiculous thinking from people who are trained and paid to think rationally is beyond the pale.) One reason to hate Trump and Pence is that they are not sheeple who follow the global warming consensus or lichen-to-leftist evolution viewpoint. They think "science" is threatened, which is based on their leftist views and on fallaciously conflating science with consensus. There is also the claim that Trump is pushing scientists to political activism. That dog won't hunt, old son. People are responsible for their own actions — at least, in the real world.

Time for the second link, "Big Science Blind to Its Political Bias". The third link ties in with it. It's a much newer post than the others, discussing leftist science resorting to fear mongering, playing the fascist card (bonus: my article on that one is here), and outright lies, click on "Big Science Goes Total Left in Opposing Trump". (Second bonus link, "The Science Industry Supports Abortion".)

The secular science industry and their feckless media are overwhelmingly materialistic, rejecting God the Creator and any evidence contrary to evolution and global warming. An aspect of their philosophy is scientism, a self-refuting view that truth comes from science. Some tinhorns go so far as to equivocate science with reason. (Then they call us "anti-science" when we have the temerity to show the flaws in their worldview.) But science can only go just so far. In fact, it is a method of interpreting observed data, and those interpretations are based on the worldview of the scientist (or anyone else, really).

Now I'll give you the final link, "Big Science Blind to Its Scientism".

What we see is consistent: leftists are blinded to the truth, oppose the truth, despise any who disagree with them, and prop themselves up at the noble elite. But they are blind fools. All of this should not be all that surprising to those of us who know the Bible. Still, it's disappointing to see people who are supposed to be (and claim to be) objective acting like angry children. At least furious leftist scientists are not smashing windows at Starbucks or burning cars. Yet.


January 21, 2017

Synchronicity in the Press? Not Hardly!

The word synchronicity originated with Carl Jung, was developed by Arthur Koestler, others have offered their views on the concept, was the title of the final studio album by The Police, the title of a 2015 science fiction movie involving time travel, and more. Pseudo-intellectual New Age and postmodern writers (their material is easily obtained on the Web) are fond of synchronicity. I don't cotton to getting into all that, and want to keep it simple: according to synchronicity, coincidences are not what they appear, and may have a sort of supernatural basis.

Is it synchronicity, collusion, or something else that media sources keep on using the same terminology?
Image credit: Pixabay / wilhei
In the early days of the George W. Bush presidency, Rush Limbaugh collected a montage of remarks from different leftists, saying that Bush lacked "gravitas". So many people from different sources all suddenly using a rather uncommon word at the same time? The same kind of happenstance has occurred many times over the years. Fascinating.

When updating my post about pinheads who refused to provide services for the Trump inauguration, I found out that Ralph Lauren received the prestige for doing Melania's dress. (Some people care about fashion stuff. I'm a "get dressed and go to work" kind of guy.) Something that caught my attention was how a passel of agencies were were using New Age spiritism lingo, saying that Melania was "channeling" Jackie Kennedy. I used Google and typed, without quotes, melania channels jackie. Give it a try.

Way back yonder, typesetting was the way books, magazines, and so forth were given words so others could read them. Lead cold type in various fonts was set, backwards, so it could be inked and printing would happen. I was a typesetter for a few years, but I reckon it was called typesetting for lack of a better word, because I didn't set lead type. Rather, the Compugraphic was a computer that connected to a big box thing which photographed each letter or symbol, and produced a sheet of camera-ready paper that needed to be taken into the darkroom for developing. The machine with the film actually shook during the process. (Developing was easy, just put it in a machine that sent it through the proper chemicals.) Now it's done by typing on my unregistered assault keyboard and I can send something electronically for printing, Web publishing, or whatever. Why did I tell you about my typesetting days? For contrast in the history of printing, and I just felt like it.

"Get on with it, Cowboy Bob!"

Yes, well, you see, I lack belief that there's any synchronicity involved. Some agencies and reporters may borrow certain words or expressions from each other, but not on this scale. It seems like typeset boilerplate terminology is issued. (We see this all the time in atheists and anti-creationists.) Collusion? Shenanigans? Could very well be happening. Original thought, not so much.


January 20, 2017

Trump Inauguration Refusers Flip Off Millions

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

People are making the news by refusing to perform at any of Donald Trump's inauguration events. They'll say things like, "He's not fit to be president", and "Trump offends people". Yeah, as if Hillary Clinton was fit. Not hardly! We also see violent protests by sore losers who reject the rule of law. (One sidewinder thinks they're justified, since he's tried, sentenced, and condemned Trump in the supreme court of his opinion). But that's okay, they're leftists, so the rest of us have to be tolerant of these domestic terrorists, right?


In the time leading up to the inauguration of Donald Trump, a lot of Americans have show their shameful true colors. People refusing service are not only rejecting Trump, but millions of other people outside their elitist group.
Image credit: Michael Vadon (CC BY-SA 2.0)
What really takes the rag off the bush is when Jennifer Holliday accepted the opportunity to perform, then backed out because the LGBT "community" was "heartbroken". Why? Do none of them believe in freedom? Jenny caved in to bullying, she said about the "community", that it "...was mostly responsible for birthing my career and I am deeply indebted to you". Seriously? Only them, no straight people bought tickets to see you or had any part in launching and continuing your career, buttercup?

Well, maybe they are all shallow and vindictive, and will boycott Holliday forever because she dared to take the opportunity. Maybe, I said. Something that really amazes me is that Jenny and the others who claim a high moral ground by refusing to perform in association with Donald Trump have yet to indicate where and how Trump has said anything about harming this precious small minority "community". I guess y'all never paid attention when your parents said to stand up to bullies, huh? To be fair, she said she received death threats.

If you study on it, the violent people you hear about are not Trump supporters, they're leftists. You can bet it wasn't from Republicans that Holliday got her alleged death threats, and it wasn't a Trump supporter that set himself on fire, saying Trump is “incapable of respecting the Constitution of the United States". And Hillary respected laws? Nope.

Then there are those fashion liberals who refuse to do Melania Trump's dress. Talk about throwing away significant fame and possible future customers because they're pouting about the election results! Ralph Lauren may be the one to do it [EDIT: Lauren got the job], and he's a Clinton supporter. Isn't that they way things should be, putting aside disagreements to get the job done?

The message that Holliday , the dressmakers, and others are sending is that they are not for all the people, but only some.

In case you hadn't noticed, the popular vote was almost 50-50, but most of the electoral votes were not in elitist leftist dense urban areas (even though Clinton won the popular vote by 2.1 percent, but we're not a mob rule country). The electoral votes piled up in rest of the country, that area leftists call "fly over" and hold in contempt. New York, California, and other liberal centers are all that matter to other liberals. By saying you're too good to perform for Trump or perform services, you're flipping off about 63 million people that voted for him. You elitist entertainers and so on are also showing your contempt for people who voted for Clinton, but are rational enough to hope for the best and get on with their lives. Guess you leftists don't need income from the rest of us.

One good thing about the election and events leading up to today (and probably afterward) is that a lot of truth came out. We've seen B. Hussein Obama's legacy of increasing racial tensions, anti-Christian activism, how intolerant those who demand tolerance can be, the way people despise the law when it's not in their favor, skyrocketing pro-abortion activism, and more. Although Trump was not my first choice for president, I'm not sulking, and pray that he does a good job. Proud to be an American? Well, not proud of my unthinking, emotionally-driven fellow countrymen.


Subscribe in a reader