Search This Blog

Loading...

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

"Scientists Say" — That's Enough? Not Hardly!


Many times, people will appeal to the authority of scientists have said, often without bothering to find out which scientists said what things, when, and where. This fits in with the worship of Scientism, where scientists are the high priests of knowledge and wisdom. Many people think that scientists are dispassionate to the point of being automatons, collecting evidence and following where the evidence leads.

That is the opposite of the truth. Scientists have biases and presuppositions. Some of us disagree with the consensus, and are considered "misinformed". Some of us would rather follow the truth than follow the intellectually lazy crowd, even though our "marginal views" are considered unworthy of respect.
Many Americans are convinced that mainstream narratives are true—like humans descended from ape-like ancestors or that burning fossil fuels causes global warming. But many times large contingents totally disagree with these popular ideas. How can equally intelligent and educated people arrive at such opposing conclusions? Conventional thinkers often assume that those who diverge from mainstream narratives simply need more science education. However, a new study shows why some other factor must be to blame.
To finish reading the article, click on "Do We Always Believe What Scientists Say?".


Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Darwinian Fail Domino Effect


Some people knew that Darwin's evolutionary ideas were faulty from the beginning. Others abandoned them for neo-Darwinism later on. A few of the concepts are still around, but today's evolutionary speculations have almost no resemblance to the stuff that Darwin put forth.

Charles Robert Darwin did not think of evolution all by himself. No, it is actually an ancient pagan religion that had been adjusted and toyed with for a long time. (In fact, Alfred Russel Wallace almost wrote it first.) Chuck took ideas from Erasmus Darwin, Charles Lyell, James Hutton Herbert Spencer, Thomas Robert Malthus and others. Darwin's Drones insist that evolution is a fact, a law, and practically an irresistible force of nature that effects everything.

morgueFile / summer visit to Columbia Bottoms / jdurham
The ideas of Malthus about competition for survival had a tremendous impact, and was one of Darwin's themes. Some evolutionary scientists are seeing the dominoes falling, however. Algae is not so competitive. If competition in nature is not so true after all, then social Darwinism and vicious competition in human society is also out of place — as biblical Christians knew all along. No, the good competition of free market enterprise is healthy.
There’s no evidence for a key presumption of Darwinian theory – the very presumption that gave birth to Social Darwinism.

It’s rare to see a science article say “Darwin was wrong,” but Live Science reluctantly admitted that a key idea Darwin proposed in The Origin in 1859 is the opposite of the way nature actually works.

One of Charles Darwin’s hypotheses posits that closely related species will compete for food and other resources more strongly with one another than with distant relatives, because they occupy similar ecological niches. Most biologists long have accepted this to be true.
To finish reading and learn about where the dominoes fall, click on "Malthus Misled Darwin Who Misled the World".


Wednesday, July 09, 2014

Telling an Evolutionary Whale Tale


The whale is often cited as one of the best examples of evolution. But is the evidence actually there, or is it simply more wishful thinking on the part of Darwin's Cheerleaders? In reality, there is more fancy than fact.
One such evolutionary claim that has been around since the days of Darwin asserts that whales (which are mammals, not fish or reptiles) descended from some four-footed land mammal. Darwin thought that it was a bear-like animal that evolved into whales, but today evolutionists disagree. Some speculate that hoofed animals (like cattle) or wolf-like carnivores were the ancestors of whales. Others insist that DNA evidence indicates that the ancestors were hippopotamus-like. More recently, evolutionists claimed deer-like, raccoon-size animals had evolved into whales.
You can read the rest of the article in context by clicking "On Making a Whale".

Wednesday, July 02, 2014

Israel, Conquests and Archaeology

Archaeology is one of the newer sciences, and can be tricky. It has been used to study all sorts of ancient and not-so-ancient civilizations. Only a few years ago, archaeologists were able to find what is probably George Washington's boyhood home. Imagine the added difficulties going back thousands instead of hundreds of years. Like other sciences, it has needed to develop techniques. Also like other sciences, archaeology can be less useful when it is approached with negative biases. Such was the case of studying Joshua and the Israelites' Conquest of Canaan.


The Taking of Jericho, J.J.J. Tissot
Although archaeological finds have never disproved the Bible, people have fallaciously argued from silence against it. That is, if something was not found to verify the biblical account, then the event did not happen. Add to that some misinterpretations of information, biases that "we won't find it anyway", and the conquest of Canaan was disputed. Better technology and a desire to actually search instead of making assumptions has changed the situation. Although we knew it all the time, God's Word has been verified — again.
Archaeological research in the Holy Land began in earnest in the 1800s, driven by a keen interest in the history of Bible lands. Joshua’s Conquest of Canaan soon became an important focus. Unfortunately, two developments eventually led most scholars to deny that the Conquest ever happened.

At first the digs were promising. One of the first cities excavated in Israel was Jericho, the first stop in Joshua’s campaign of conquest in the Promised Land. A group of German scholars did the first excavations at Jericho in the early 1900s. In the 1930s, British archaeologist John Garstang started new excavations at Jericho, finding local Canaanite pottery from Joshua’s time and evidence for massive destruction by a fierce fire, including ash deposits up to 3 feet (1 m) thick. The evidence was consistent with an Israelite attack on the city around 1400 BC, the biblical date for the Conquest
You can dig up the rest of this article at "Archaeology’s Lost Conquest".


Wednesday, June 25, 2014

Education, Propaganda and the Erosion of Freedoms

Posted by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

There is a radio show called "Stand Up for the Truththat I am going to discuss. Specifically, the second of two episodes. The first one is "The Eroding of the Freedoms We Knew". One of the topics that Mike LeMay and Amy Spreeman discuss is rather alarming, based on an article called "25 Signs That America Is Rapidly Becoming More Like Nazi Germany" by Michael Snyder. This episode sets up the second one, which is a the focus of this post. You can download or listen to the first one here.



In the second broadcast, Mike LeMay interviews Dave Drake from Freedom Project Education and JD King, the director of the film, "Blue Beats Green". There is some political content (although "Stand Up for the Truth" is not necessarily a political show, it is intended to inform and encourage Christians). There are comments about a conference that is over, just wait them out. 


Leftist environmentalism is prominent in American education, but kids are behind the rest of the world in many aspects of what should be taught. Environmentalism goes hand-in-hand with evolutionary indoctrination, since both reject that mankind is a special creation of God. This should not be surprising, since secular science often has a leftist political bias. Indeed, many environmentalist extremists see humanity as the enemy, and Earth worship has its own sin and redemption dogmas. (For that matter, sound the alarm, we only have five years left! See this article that was published almost five years ago.) Kids are being educated (read: indoctrinated) in evolutionism, but seldom understand it or the nature of science itself. The government is an ally in all this, too. After all, if you can dislodge the true God of the Bible, then the state can prop up its own god for the citizens to worship. Nebuchadnezzar tried that, and Darius tried something similar.


It is fashionable under a humanist worldview to mock Christians, especially creationists and those who doubt global warming (how very "human" and "tolerant" of them). Theistic evolutionists, old-earth creationists and atheists work together to attack biblical creationists. (Strange bedfellows should make people suspicious right there.) Freedoms of speech, expression and religion are being whittled away. From a governmental perspective, why not? In addition to removing God, controlling those things helps in the process of controlling thought. For that matter, the UK has banned teaching creation science from government-run schools




But enough of my nattering on. This is an interesting interview, and Mike has some hard truths for Christians. It is well worth your time to listen to "
Who's Filling the Brains of Our Next Generation".

Wednesday, June 18, 2014

A Shortcut and a Detour


by Cowboy Bob Sorensen


And now for something completely different.

I get several regular visitors to my sites by way of search engines. That baffles me, because a bookmark/favorite/desktop shortcut is so much more efficient.

It seems that a basic browser detail has been forgotten by many. Now, I assume that most of us know that Control (or Command) + D will add a bookmark (or favorite, the terminology differs with browser makers) into your bookmarks/favorites. Many know that we can modify our settings to have folders for our favorites. (I've gone as far as to tell the browser to show the "bookmarks bar", then add favorites, and folders of favorites, to that.) 

But sometimes, we do not want the bookmark in our browser. In that case, some of us like to save shortcuts to our desktops. In my case, I often want a desktop shortcut because I'll be deleting it soon, such as after using it for reference when composing an article. Internet Explorer ("The number one browser for downloading a better browser"; but let's be fair. After the increasing popularity of Firefox, then Chrome and some of the others, Microsoft did make significant improvements in function and safety for IE), it pretty much has this nailed down with a right-click and select "Create shortcut". For some reason, Mozilla did not see fit to add this shortcut function to Firefox, but there are add-ons like "deskCut" that will do the job quite nicely.

But why didn't Google's Chrome add this function, or allow add-ons? Google is very proprietary, too, and I cannot find a good, fast shortcut maker to add to the browser. Sure, they have an awkward process where you can create an "application shortcut". This is in a Menuland maze, which is annoying enough, but also launches the shortcut in Chrome (even if it's not your default browser) with menu settings at the top clipped off. I don't like that. Also, many people are furious that add-ons from other companies have been disabled by Google. They say it's for our safety. It's interesting that add-ons are only available in the Chrome Store, where people have to pay a fee to make their products available.

Sometimes I use Chrome or Dragon and do not want to switch over to my default browser for the sake of making a shortcut. In my opinion, the fastest way to get a Chrome shortcut is also the oldest way, which seems to have been forgotten by many people. At least, people I showed this to had forgotten it or never even known about it.

"Get on with it, Cowboy Bob!"

Right. I'm using screenshots of Chrome, because that what brought this article on in the first place. The method works with IE, Firefox, Comodo Dragon, Chrome, and probably with most others.

This will not be possible if you have your browser in full screen mode. We want to see empty space in the desktop. I can't tell you what to use on a Mac, but Windows calls it "Restore Down". That is, click on the thing that looks like double boxes so the browser gets smaller. 



You may have to use your mouse pointer, get it to show double arrows <---> , grab sides or corners of the browser to adjust it so that it doesn't take up your entire screen. Here is mine with some of my Windows 7 desktop showing (click for larger): 



From here, you want to find the icon next to the URL in the Address Bar. In this case, a green padlock because the site is secure (https):



Click, hold and drag it off the browser onto the desktop. You should see a shortcut arrow (did not appear in the screenshot) and the name of the site:



Sometimes they get fussy, so if you don't see any sign of shortcut-making activity, release and try again. When it is completely off the browser, you have your desktop shortcut, showing in Firefox because that is my current default browser, like so:



Bonus fun fact: This works in reverse. If you have an existing shortcut and do not wish to double-click on it, you can drag the shortcut onto the browser, release it, and it will toddle off to the site as ordered. 

Although there are several steps involved (resize the browser, drag the icon to the desktop, release, restore the browser to the way you want it), this series of steps is easy to master and the shortcut process ends up taking only a few seconds.

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Leftists Want to Silence the Opposition



You might think it's just a bad joke, but it happens. People on the left, including militant atheists and evolutionists, political leftists, whatever, want to silence the opposition. Since they cannot defeat Christians, creationists and conservatives through logic, science and reason, they find other ways to try to silence us.

Some try to simply downplay our ideals and convince others that we have nothing worthwhile to say. There are those who try to convince places like Facebook to suspend our accounts. Then there are those who hate God, Christians, Conservatives, creationists and so on so much want to silence us permanently.


I've seen it, and even been on the receiving end. Yes, it happens. Just ask Matt Walsh.

To my leftwing friends: 
Last night, someone sent me an email threatening to murder me because they disagree with my opinions. It read, in part: 
“F*ck you… I will find a way to kill you. Make no god d*mn mistake, you filth.” 
Concise. Eloquent. And now on file with the state police. 
After I reported the threat to law enforcement, I didn’t pay it much mind. But then, a few minutes ago, I received this message from someone else: 
“Matt, you are so filled with hate in everything you write. You are part of the reason why conservative teabaggers in this country are nothing but hate mongers and bigots. Do you want to know why I’m a “liberal”? Because liberals know how to make a point without being hateful and spiteful.(Emphasis mine). 
I laughed quite heartily when I read that. Perfect timing. Mere hours after someone called me ‘filth’ and announced their plan to end my existence all because of my beliefs, I’m informed that these are precisely the people who ‘know how to make a point without being hateful and spiteful.’
Read the rest of the narrative at "This person is planning to kill me in order to teach me that I shouldn’t be mean and hateful".