YEC Bob Sorensen - compulsive liar exposed

Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

Moderator: Moderators

Challenging Bob

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:08 pm

https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/
"There are anti-creationists and atheopaths who will call biblical creationists "bad", even "evil", the ever-present "liar" (which means, "I dislike your interpretations of the evidence), and more. One thing I've posted several times, even writing about it at length, is that they have no consistent moral standard. Further, if evolution were true, there is no right or wrong, we're just bundles of chemicals doing chemical stuff. I'm a creationist because I was born that way, and you have no reason to complain.
But...what if I was a "liar for Jesus", just like many of them belong in the #liar4darwin camp? Why can't I act like an atheist and lie? What's wrong it it? Why can't we all do what helps us to survive the way be see fit? Since evolution is irrational, and atheism is incoherent, they cannot give logical answers to this hypothetical situation.
God is the Creator, HE makes the rules. Not Darwin, not chemistry, not relativism, not utilitarianism, not survival of the fittest.
-Cowboy Bob Sorensen"

Answer the question, proven evil liar Sorensen.

Tell us on your blog or facebook what sort of animal you think Job 41 is discussing (or if you don't know say "I don't know").
Last edited by a_haworthroberts on Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Despicable hateful hypocrite

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:31 pm

'Liar' means Sorensen deliberately twisted on his hate pages my recent words addressed to him.

Liar means Sorensen falsely claimed: "There are a couple of creatures that God discusses that many biblical creationists believe are dinosaurs, the behemoth and the leviathan". Despite CMI - who he then referred to - making very clear that in their viewpoint "the best explanation seems to be that the Leviathan in Job was a giant crocodile known as Sarcosuchus...". Job 41:15 - "Its back has rows of shields tightly sealed together". Job 41:30 - "Its undersides are jagged potsherds, leaving a trail in the mud like a threshing sledge". (However the Hebrew word translated 'leviathan' apparently means 'whale' though some think the creature was some sort of sea/water monster or even a large aquatic snake.)

That's just for starters.

Need I continue?

It's also very clear that Bob wants to twist or ignore what the Bible (Old Testament) says and means when it suits his anti-science agenda. How does God feel about that, Bob? Does he approve?
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Hypocrite

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Sep 02, 2016 7:12 pm

YEC Bob Sorensen really really hates me exposing him as a pathological liar in a class all of his own (and a sort of online cult leader who tells his followers WHAT to think rather than helping them in any way) on this forum.

Which is why he keeps posting garbage like this. Rather than address the SUBSTANCE of my posts:

https://www.facebook.com/cowboybobsorensen/
"So, a stalker who has it in for me is tattling on me in a forum nobody reads, sends out e-mail to people who don't want it (many block him), is not taken seriously by atheists or Christians — I'm shaking in my cowboy boots, Pilgrim. Bless his heart."

Hypocrite. Liar. Hate-monger. Fraud. Authoritarian bigot.

'Christian'.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Despicable hateful hypocrite

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Sep 02, 2016 9:04 pm

Looks like Liar Sorensen may have been crawling in his New York City sewer all night (after visiting his doctor). Get some sleep, Bob. Chill.

https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/
"Short video, "The False Dilemma Fallacy".
The False Dilemma Fallacy is used frequently. It is slightly misnamed, sometimes used unwittingly, but I have found that it is usually a cunning attempt to force someone to choose between two possibilities when there are really more than two. Haywire the Stalker was kind enough to provide some examples.
I can think of three cautions that are needed here. First, there's no need to jump at someone and say, "Aha! You've just used the either/or fallacy!" when someone is simply making conversation. Second, if you do point out the fallacy, be ready to show one or two options that were left out. Third, sometimes there really are only two possibilities.
https://youtu.be/hvXPxcvT8bU
[I checked and this is some Sorensen garbage from 2014, it's nothing new. He attempts to ridicule me by speaking my words in a stupid voice (I mean a stupid voice other than his normal silly voice that you can hear in the rest of the video). And this is false libel (about me allegedly committing logical fallacies). Some people have successfully sued for the offence of false libel and the offender has had to pay up*.]

Clearly he is not used to having many people expose him as liar (who even lies about the Bible). It enrages him. I think it leaves him feeling emasculated. Whatever, he always responds by lying and hating even more (like the coward that he is he does it on his own hate pages where I cannot defend myself). When they are under pressure you find out what people are really like. In this case it's not a pretty sight.

And the thug Curtis Long is raving impotently again:
"Haywire's purpose in life is to be an example of putrid thinking."

I expose Sorensen's online lying. He responds by false personal attacks from the past. Which shows him for the utterly nasty piece of work that I saw that he was from the very FIRST day that I discovered his blog pages.

These people are evil. Absolutely evil.

Revelation: 21:8.


* viewtopic.php?f=18&t=3153&start=540
My response of 27 April 2014 still applies.
However, I can add that Sorensen got upset (or faked it because he likes basking in the praise of bigoted people who follow his blogs) because I accused some YECs of either 'utter incompetence' or 'deliberate lying'. And started raving about how I did not suggest 'accidental lying' - that would be incompetence - and thus, according to him, I committed the crime of the 'false dilemma fallacy'. Apparently I should also have suggested that the YECs at CMI merely interpreted the evidence differently to me. But - unless Bob can demonstrate otherwise in the example in question that he was banging on about - YECs such as CMI either twist the meaning of evidence or cherry pick evidence or dismiss evidence! But me allegedly committing this crime against logic of course means for the cultist Sorensen "I can ignore all of Ashley's arguments and instead respond with cowardly personal attacks". Which of course he did; and continues to do to this day because that is all he has got and because he cannot resist temptation. Oh and I committed the 'appeal to motive fallacy' too. How ghastly of me. Pity I shredded Bob's false claims about leviathan in Job 41 last week; no doubt he could destroy my arguments - but because I keep committing these dreadful 'fallacies' therefore instead of destroying them Bob must post libellous videos against me instead. Even though he knows how childish and borderline psychopathic that looks to the people who view this forum - even some YECs; I guess he must suffer from either a masochistic tendency or a superiority complex. Of course some may say I behave a bit like him. Difference is that he lies about me every single time, whereas I never ever lie about his behaviour but simply report it (however I do so on a forum that Bob CANNOT dishonestly censor and he is worried about his followers seeing the material in question so feels he must falsely demonise me.)


ADDENDUM (10.15 pm)
Hello Bob you lying shit. Less than five minutes ago you ranted on two different facebook pages: ""I stand by EVERY single word I wrote that Sorensen is quoting from." Nothing like taking pride in being illogical! -CBB". WHAT fallacy is that which are you committing hypocrite Bob? Go on - NAME IT. Unlike you I never HIDE my past words - something you frequently do (as documented in this thread and also by email).

ADDENDUM (10.18 pm)
Hello Bob you lying shit.
https://www.facebook.com/cowboybobsorensen/
"Almost forgot this one that I made a few years ago ...".
You do know that Gene Wilder is dead, don't you?
As reported here: https://www.facebook.com/nate.franklin.37

Now logging off. Any more shit from Sorensen will be addressed later as required. He has an incredible talent for turning facts into shit and shit into facts.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Scum

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Sep 03, 2016 2:13 pm

https://www.facebook.com/cowboybobsorensen/
I see the lying is continuing. These people hate inconvenient facts - such as the fact that they are misrepresenting the Bible, misrepresenting and trying to undermine science, misrepresenting other creationists, and damaging Christianity with their bigotry, extremism, irrationality and plain falsehoods. They STILL think they can lie all over the internet and nobody will challenge them. They STILL hope that I will feel intimidated and leave them alone :)

Sorensen is complaining today about 'Bible twisters':
http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2016/09 ... rtant.html
Which is rich coming from the person who wrote at the same blog page on 23 January 2015: "Many creationists go against evolutionary and uniformitarian dogmas by believing that not only did man and dinosaurs coexist, but they are described in the Bible... Here are two candidates for dinosaurs in the Bible... First, we have Behemoth ... Next up, we have something that is both frustrating and amazing: Leviathan." Leviathan cannot possibly be a dinosaur - it's clearly either a crocodilian or some kind of 'sea monster'.

Bob is a false teacher with an anti-science agenda of trying to persuade uninformed people that humanity and dinosaurs co-existed, despite the lack of evidence for such a claim.

Oh, and Sorensen hates Hillary. I guess he must be going to either abstain or vote for the fascist instead. The fact that professing Christians in America would vote for such a candidate tells you a lot about these 'Christians':
https://stormbringer005.blogspot.co.uk/ ... ngton.html
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Sep 13, 2016 3:04 am

http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2016/09 ... ntrol.html 'Labels and Speech Control'
And Cowboy Bob certainly can't be a fascist. Since the fascists are all those other people that he dislikes and who he wishes to label as 'atheo-fascists' (especially Dawkins, Krauss and Nye).
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Bob Scum

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Sep 17, 2016 3:21 am

a_haworthroberts wrote:https://www.facebook.com/cowboybobsorensen/
I see the lying is continuing. These people hate inconvenient facts - such as the fact that they are misrepresenting the Bible, misrepresenting and trying to undermine science, misrepresenting other creationists, and damaging Christianity with their bigotry, extremism, irrationality and plain falsehoods. They STILL think they can lie all over the internet and nobody will challenge them. They STILL hope that I will feel intimidated and leave them alone :)

Sorensen is complaining today about 'Bible twisters':
http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2016/09 ... rtant.html
Which is rich coming from the person who wrote at the same blog page on 23 January 2015: "Many creationists go against evolutionary and uniformitarian dogmas by believing that not only did man and dinosaurs coexist, but they are described in the Bible... Here are two candidates for dinosaurs in the Bible... First, we have Behemoth ... Next up, we have something that is both frustrating and amazing: Leviathan." Leviathan cannot possibly be a dinosaur - it's clearly either a crocodilian or some kind of 'sea monster'.

Bob is a false teacher with an anti-science agenda of trying to persuade uninformed people that humanity and dinosaurs co-existed, despite the lack of evidence for such a claim.

Oh, and Sorensen hates Hillary. I guess he must be going to either abstain or vote for the fascist instead. The fact that professing Christians in America would vote for such a candidate tells you a lot about these 'Christians':
https://stormbringer005.blogspot.co.uk/ ... ngton.html




Back on 3 SEPTEMBER (NOT on 11 September) the pathological liar Sorensen wrote on his blog:
"There have been numerous concerns raised about Hillary Clinton's health, and if she'd be physically fit to be the American President. (Intellectually, morally, spiritually, no she's not fit, but sheeple want her, and I believe this country is under God's judgement, so we may very well get her.) Shrillary is reported to talk to the spirit of Eleanor Roosevelt (no, Eleanor isn't doing any talking, that's a far different spirit Clinton's talking to), but the Democrats try to dress this story up in Sunday-go-to-meetin' clothes by saying it was all pretend and therapeutic. Meadow muffins."

Bob hates Hillary. As I said above.

Now the pathological liar cannot resist accusing me of posting a 'lie'. Yet he lies whenever I make an accurate statement about him (it's not just Hillary he hates)!
https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/
"Encountered any poisoned wells lately? A certain atheopath persistently presents me with examples of logical fallacies, and was kind enough to do it again. "Poisoning the well" is essentially a preemptive strike, a manipulative tactic to color the opinions of people so that they'll take the side of the poisoner. (Not to be confused with persuasion, which can be done without malice.)
It can be difficult to spot, since there are often other fallacies attached, such as the ever-present ad hominem, lying, and loaded terminology. (Saw a show the other night, the judge said something about "get the trial overwith so's we can hang the murderer", and the trial hadn't even started.)
The following posted in an anti-creationist forum. I try to keep my political stuff to a minimum here, so I'll edit out the names of a candidate.
"Sorensen hates [candidate]".
My political views are irrelevant to the origins issue. Also it is a lie, since I did not say I hated the candidate.
"I guess he must be going to either abstain or vote for the fascist instead."
Ignorance of the American political system exhibited by this Brit. Also another lie, since I did not call the candidate a fascist, which would be incorrect.
"The fact that professing Christians in America would vote for such a candidate tells you a lot about these 'Christians': [link followed]."
This atheist slams certain Christians in an either/or fallacy in a statement that is pretty much nonsensical."

The man is evil. As well as extremely hypocritical. And he hates the only politician who stands between the evil of Trump and the White House.

Donald Trump is a pathological liar who also spreads hatred. It's true that he has not actually said "I am a pathological liar and I spread hatred".

Bob also appears to be losing his mind, since he also accuses me of a thing done by OTHER people even though (unlike his lie above) he does not gain by falsely associating me with other critics of YEC fanatics like him:
"Elsewhere, he referred to the Ark Encounter as "failing". This is false, and he may have been getting his information from sources that are presenting dishonest reports (I don't know why they don't sue those newspapers for libel). Try this link: https://answersingenesis.org/…/ark-encounters-responding-m…/". I HAVE NEVER EVER SAID THAT ANYWHERE. I HAVE EXPOSED ITS PSEUDO-SCIENCE, I HAVE NOT SPECULATED ON ITS 'SUCCESS' OR 'FAILURE'. ANYWHERE. OTHERS HAVE DONE THIS. I HAVE NOT.

And the thin-skinned coward (who posts videos calling me Hitler whenever he loses it) is now wailing:
"He also gave a veiled threat about suing me because I have posted his comments (several times with screenshots) demonstrating his many logical fallacies. Uh, sure. Although seeming to present himself as knowledgeable in international law, he would have to prove that all those fallacies I displayed are not fallacious, even though I named them.
For more about poisoning the well, which I coupled with an article on the genetic fallacy, click here: https://stormbringer005.blogspot.com/…/logic-lessons-geneti…
-CBB".


As for science issues, before discovering Bob's latest abuse of Facebook social media, I flagged the following piece of science rejection to several email recipients:
"Another YEC web of lies and bigotry.
http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2016/09 ... -lucy.html
"Go to a museum to see Lucy, and you won't get the whole story."
I think you must have in mind the 'Creation Museum', Bob.
"The science press goes with the unproven assertion that this ape was our ancestor."
Actually, the relevant scientists are not as dogmatic as you would like to pretend (for starters 'Lucy' was a member of a different genus to Homo):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australop ... _afarensis (see opening para)
Dogmatist and inventor of facts Sorensen is pushing THIS angry sounding post:
http://crev.info/2016/09/human-evolutio ... ence-tree/
"Lucy was just an ape. Get over it."
Yet he sounds outraged that a scientist is suggesting the creature fell out of a tree. Climbing trees is a regular activity of 'apes'.
If you reply to this, please copy everyone including Bob, in. He blocks my emails. He probably does not block yours."
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby ProfessorTertius » Sat Sep 17, 2016 4:41 am

Whenever someone like Cowboy Bob starts complaining about "sheeple", I'm reminded that reading his stuff is a total waste of my time. Yet, I must admit that I often succumb to gaper's block. It's hard to look away from the self-destruction. I guess his Kruger-Dunning confidence is just too mesmerizing for me. It is as Bob has been vaccinated to where he is entirely resistant to any and all EVIDENCE.

Even after all of his years of ranting about Lucy, I doubt that he's aware that "Lucy" was just the first of a long series of Australopithecus afarensis discoveries at a great many sites. (And I'll even bet he still repeats the old myth about "all of the bones [sic] paleontologist study in relation to human evolution would fit in a single casket.")

Bob also dodged my tutorials explaining his misunderstanding of The Laws of Thermodynamics by saying, "I have never claimed to be an authority on thermodynamics." Yet he thought himself enough of an authority to declare "The Laws of Thermodynamics make biological evolution impossible!" It just goes to show that he's just as ignorant of physics as he is about biology. (Of course, he's incredibly ignorant of the scriptures and Bible hermeneutics but that's a whole 'nother tangent. He's run from my debate challenges for years. The first time was when he casually challenged me, not realizing that I would say yes and not realizing that I was a born-again, Bible-affirming evangelical Christian who was a professor at one of those big bad universities which allegedly refuse to hire Christ-following Christians! Science-denying Young Earth Creationists fear and hate science-literate and Bible-literate Christ-followers even more than their atheist boogey-man opponents.
ProfessorTertius
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 5:26 pm

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby ProfessorTertius » Sat Sep 17, 2016 4:43 am

Ashley, I've not read much Cowboy Bob nonsense in a while. Does he ever say anything in support of Donald Trump? I would think not---but just wondering.
ProfessorTertius
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 5:26 pm

PiltDOWN in the Gutter

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Sep 18, 2016 1:04 am

ProfessorTertius wrote:Ashley, I've not read much Cowboy Bob nonsense in a while. Does he ever say anything in support of Donald Trump? I would think not---but just wondering.



Perhaps Sorensen would care to enlighten as to whether he is planning to vote for this fascist since he is happy to trash Hillary on his North Korean style blog pages?

https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/
I see that yet another Hate and Lie Fest is underway in the sewers on New York City. What sort of person feels better after publishing lies and hate every single week of the year - and then falsely calling opponents 'demonic' and falsely accusing them of lying? A pathologically evil and cowardly one I suggest (and a hypocrite to boot since he claims the Christian God is inspiring him).

I have taken photos of THEIR demonic hatred (demonic according to THEIR beliefs). Between them they pack in 11 TOTAL LIES.

The comments are being widely circulated via email. As an example of how 'Christian' extremists behave when you call out their internet lies and hatred. Which I will CONTINUE to do, liar Bob and liar Curtis and the rest of you disgusting lying bigots who lurk on this facebook page. Your hate will not silence me.

"This atheist slams certain Christians in an either/or fallacy in a statement that is pretty much nonsensical". How utterly arrogant (if he really believed his own words). 'Either/Or' describes American politics pretty well. In case Cowboy Bob has not noticed.

As for this page, which Bob is PROUD of, his threatened new post that he bizarrely thinks and hopes will leave me needing 'sedation' has failed to appear. This liar cannot keep his own promises:
http://radaractive.blogspot.co.uk/

(Slightly amended; now final at 3.03 am BST.)
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Twisting or just ignoring what the actually Bible says

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Sep 18, 2016 10:37 pm

By YECs like Bob Sorensen.

http://radaractive.blogspot.co.uk/2016/ ... bible.html 'What About Dinosaurs in the Bible?'
Pushing this piece:
http://creation.com/behemoth-and-leviathan
The leviathan of Job 41 sounds very much like some sort of crocodile. For the reasons I gave in this thread on 27 August. Yet this sometimes rather silly article won't accept that (that's it's a crocodile as is still found today). The writer refers to verse 1 "Can you pull in Leviathan with a fishhook or tie down its tongue with a rope?" (the implied answer is 'no') but then informs us that "a crocodile does not have a clear tongue" (which is something I did not know). Thus a crocodile remains a very strong candidate for 'leviathan'. Yet this article bizarrely argues "it is unlikely that the animal referred to is a crocodile, because the tongue of this animal is hardly noticeable". If he is right, it's funny how those other fools at CMI have argued that leviathan WAS some kind of crocodile (though they of course insist the extinct sarcosuchus because they wish to deny millions of years of Earth history and that many extinctions happened an awful long time ago and before humans were around to see the creatures).
https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j19 ... _14-16.pdf

I do not find the remaining arguments as to why leviathan was 'not' a crocodile convincing (and Sorensen fails to mention them so he can't have been much impressed assuming he actually read them). The only argument with possible merit is that the ancient Egyptians sometimes caught crocodiles whereas this chapter implies a creature that could not be captured or tamed. (The sarcosuchus was a lot bigger than eg a Nile Crocodile but Job 41 does not say anything specific about enormous size.)

The article in fact eventually does suggest that leviathan might have been a sarcosuchus (even though they were long extinct when Job was written). And not some sort of 'dinosaur'; extant and extinct crocodiles are not descendants of dinosaurs either. Though the writer also observes "the description in Job 41 does not have a scientific character and we cannot identify precisely which animal is meant". The sarcosuchus was NOT a 'dinosaur' as I said here weeks ago. And Sorensen is now muddying the waters by using the phrase 'living dinosaur' (which he did NOT use when I criticised his previous posts weeks ago).

"Behemoth and leviathan may well be now extinct species that were still living in Job’s day." The biased CMI author fails to identify any such. Probably because the sarcosuchus for instance was NOT extant when Job was written.

And Bob's blog title is totally misleading (what did you expect?). If he was not pushing blatant propaganda he would instead use 'What about Behemoth and Leviathan in the Bible?'

Dinosaurs are not described in the Bible. YECs twist what Job 40 actually says in order to present behemoth as a 'dinosaur'. For instance, and as I have previously reported on this forum:
https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/ ... 3dinosaurs
Job 40:17a, NKJV, reads: "It moves its tail like a cedar". This describes the tail's movement more than its size - which from the context of the surrounding verses at 15-24 cannot really have been large enough to be from a massive dinosaur such as a sauropod. The creature lay under lotus trees, and these are not particularly tall or wide. Yet Ham misleadingly claims: "the tail of behemoth is compared to the large cedar tree" (he implies this is due largely to its size). Ham also claims - for reasons that are unclear - that verse 19a "He is the first of the ways of God" means that this was the biggest land creature ever created and quite possibly (based on knowledge in 2007) a brachiosaurus.
That is eisegesis not exegesis.

Edited post - now final at 11.43 pm BST.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

White flag of surrender from Cowboy Bob?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon Sep 19, 2016 12:34 am

Since this is all he can come up with on his facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/
"[EDIT: I mis-scheduled, it will appear HERE at 7 PM Eastern, but is already published at Radaractive. Also, I mis-calculated, forgetting that it would be midnight Monday. Naturally, in the Kingdom of Demoniac Hatret, mistakes are "lies" according to this fool.] -CBB".

So much poison from a so-called 'Christian'. I never said it was lie, Bob. I said "this liar cannot keep his own promises". The promise was not a lie but this whole thread documents many (but not all) of Bob's deliberate lies online since 2012.

And he accused ME of 'quote-mining'.

On his original accusations:
"Interesting how he's so self-absorbed, even when he's not named, "It's all about ME!"". It's not. If I only protested when he attacked me by NAME (or nickname) that accusation might make some sense. I don't. I am not only against crime if I am a victim of it (if I am not named Bob says I am not a victim and that makes some sort of sense - though he used my words, or parts of them, to churn out false propaganda and try and make himself 'look good' to the rabble who 'like' his pages). Finally, I quote from last night's email:
"This is not about me as Sorensen falsely claims (his latest facebook attack did not name me, initially, but he was misusing my words in order to falsely build his bogus 'Christian martyr' persona amongst his mad followers). It's about pathological lying. It's about HIM and about HIS misbehaviour."
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Angry Bob changing the subject

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Sep 21, 2016 1:51 am

http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2016/09 ... ience.html
Pure creationist bigotry, Bob.
By contrast there was no 'bigotry' in my post, just a reporting of facts - which is why you fail to quote from it, you CYNICAL FRAUD:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3774
However, I can't disagree with this comment:
"People like this assume the worst about us: creationists share their worldview, and either don't know what we're talking about (even though we often understand evolution and current science better than they do), or that we're simply lying." I can't speak for every YEC, but you would be simply lying Bob. It's your trademark.

Still I'm glad you have accepted my arguments in this thread.
And maybe you are even no longer blocking my emails? Since it was in one of my recent emails, not on this forum, where I wrote:
"Ken Ham is anti-science. (Not merely anti-naturalism though he is that too.) His pleas in articles like this one that creationists of his ilk 'love' science ring very hollow indeed when you examine the facts and look at specifics instead of generalities (all Ham really 'loves' is modern technology and advances within medicine). What about the specifics? Such as the false claim by AiG and others that the non-random pattern of the fossil record is explainable by a 'Noah's Flood' less than 5,000 years ago. Ham also falsely claims that the fossil record fails to offer evidence - alongside other kinds of material evidence - for the kind of evolution that the 'biblical creationist' cult rejects, mostly for entirely non-scientific reasons. If AiG were really pro-science they would be transparent about their science-related claims and willing to enter into honest debate on their website about them with informed critics (eg those who are not anti-religion but simply pro-science as a typical dictionary would define the term)."
(The lengthy email was critiquing the first section of this very lengthy article:
https://answersingenesis.org/what-is-sc ... lassrooms/)

"No surprise that a criminal and defamer quote mines and can't get basic logic. His ego is what's at stake even when he's unnamed and only a few can guess who it is. His ego is bigger than Pike's Peak." Curtis Long apoplexy on Sorensen's facebook on 19 Sept. I repeat - it is about Bob's evil behaviour not about me (it still matters if Bob shows such despicable behaviour to me or to another opponent, though of course I know the facts BEST when it is MY words which are being twisted by this hypocrite).
Curtis Long is a HYPOCRITE and a LIAR. Sorensen constantly either quote-mines me (selectively quoting whilst ignoring proper context if he thinks he can get away with doing such), or badmouthing me whilst quoting NONE of my words, or falsely twisting my words. Normally without even posting the relevant link (because transparency is an alien concept to Bigot Bob who like Kim Jong-un must not be questioned).

If I quote Sorensen I always provide the relevant link. ALWAYS. I have never quote-mined him. Curtis cannot show that I have. He is a liar.

But apart from Curtis, few of Sorensen's followers are joining in with the lies and the hate. I guess Bob needs to try HARDER to deceive MORE people/recruit MORE liars to the cause.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Not the 'Genesis Flood'

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Sep 22, 2016 10:23 pm

http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2016/09 ... flood.html
"Geologist David Montgomery made an off-the-cuff speculation that legends surrounding this may have been the source of the Genesis Flood. That'll be the day!" WHERE, Bob?

Bob is alluding to disparaging comments made about Montgomery by Tas Walker, here:
http://creation.com/chinese-jishi-gorge-flood 'Chinese flood at Jishi Gorge is not Noah’s Flood.'
Such as:
"Montgomery’s book and Perspective illustrates the sloppy attitude secularist geologists bring to their investigations of the biblical Flood and flood legends ...";
And in particular:
"Geologist David Montgomery, in a perspective in the Science journal, commented on the idea that the geological evidence could confirm the legend of Emperor Yu. He said, “How many other ancient stories of intriguing disasters might just have more than a grain of truth to them?”"
However, Bob's tiny mind is - apparently - under the impression that Walker in quoting Montgomery wrote (or meant) the phrase 'Genesis Flood'. But if Walker meant Genesis Flood he would have either quoted Montgomery using that phrase or else made a case that in using another phrase Montgomery really meant 'Genesis Flood'. He did NEITHER. (Walker did refer to Montgomery's book 'The Rocks Don't Lie' - without quoting ANY text from it - and then claimed "In that book and in his Perspective Montgomery continued to suggest the so-called Black Sea local flood was the source of the Noah’s Flood account".)

THIS is that Montgomery 'Perspective':
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6299/538
"We know of the legendary Emperor Yu through the story of China's Great Flood, a tale already ancient when first recorded around 1000 BCE (1). On page 579 of this issue, Wu et al. offer a provocative new explanation for this story. They present evidence for an enormous landslide dam break 1922 ± 28 BCE (2) that coincided with the major cultural transition from the Late Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age in China and that also helps explain curious details of Yu's story."
(note that there's NO mention of the 'Genesis Flood' within the Summary here - which is all I can read without joining the AAAS)

However, when I searched using the title quoted at Walker's footnote 3 it did NOT take me to that Perspective but instead to THIS article (is this incompetence and sloppiness on Walker's part):
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 152433.htm

I also exchanged emails with Montgomery (the exchanges were copied to several others) after that Walker article appeared. On 1 September he informed us "In the perspective piece I noted that Ryan and Pitman argued for the Black Sea flood, and in the longer format of the book I also went into the subsequent geological arguments (ca. 2007) about whether the Black Sea flood was gradual or catastrophic. In neither did I come down cleanly on the Black Sea flood as the “true” source of the Noah’s Flood story — in both I only made the point that it offers one of two potential reasonable explanations, the other being an extraordinary lowland estuarine flood like that which devastated the Irrawaddy River delta a few years back (killing 130,000 people overnight)."

Bob: unless you can provide chapter and verse showing that Montgomery suggested that this CHINESE (not Black Sea in case you are a teeny weeny bit confused) 'Great Flood' legend may have been the/a source of the 'Genesis Flood', you are (in this case) either sloppy and incompetent or else a pathological liar.

WHICH is it?

I am sure Montgomery has NOT said what you claim he said 'off-the-cuff'. So it's either sloppy incompetence or deliberate lying.

If it is the former you will of course CORRECT your blog.

If it is the latter you will not.

If you are feeling unwell, I understand (I am feeling a little bit 'under the weather' this week with er a urinary tract infection).
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Sorensen is SERIOUSLY confused

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Sep 27, 2016 3:40 am

http://radaractive.blogspot.co.uk/2016/ ... rents.html
"Remember in the February 2014 debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye the Not Really a Scientist Guy that Nye persisted in using "facts" that should have been embarrassing to any knowledgeable evolutionist? ... One of his ignorant assertions is that there should be more canyons like the Grand Canyon. He should have known about that huge canyon detected in Greenland, but there's more information for him to ignore — which should prove troubling to uniformitarian geologists and to those proclaiming global warming.
It's another case of Darwinistas being shot with their own gun. That is, using their own assumptions as well as obvious data, the canyons were carved by rivers, not glaciers. More than that, it appears that the area was much warmer, and probably full of life. And that's before humans could be saddled with the responsibility of fouling up the temperature of Earth. Looks like the planet isn't so old after all."

TOTAL UNMITIGATED GARBAGE.

Would you like me to explain Bob? I would gladly do so.

The man is away with the fairies if he thinks ancient canyons carved by water either are a 'problem' for science or 'confirm' the garbage that is 'flood geology'. Rivers slowly carve out canyons. Hold the Front Page!

Bob's political attacks on man-caused recent global warming are equally absurd.

His claim that 'no' man-caused global warming (so what is causing it then) means that the planet must be 'young' looks like ridiculous joke by a Poe. But the man is serious.

Seriously confused.

As for the article linked to:

It asserts "But wouldn’t the current glaciers have modified the margins after millions of years?" However he does not answer his own question.

How could ice 2,000 metres thick appear in the dry interior of Greenland in less than 4,500 years? No answer is provided.

"Nor would it take millions of years to accumulate all the current ice." Coppedge appears to be deliberately lying since scientists believe the current ice sheet is around 110,000 years old.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet

PS
Hope you enjoyed/enjoy the big debates, Bob.

Since you are also clearly a very right wing political anorak:
https://stormbringer005.blogspot.co.uk/ ... -ritz.html
This article is partly about Putin but parts of it turn blind eye to the PATHOLOGICAL lying of the neo-fascist Donald Trump. Why am I not surprised? Though he also implies that he will not vote for Trump even though he has a visceral hatred of Clinton.
"So what are Americans faced with? A seemingly strong but inconsistent Donald Trump, a wicked abortionist leftist Hillary Clinton, a history of Obummer's leftist machinations, not knowing who to trust, some of us wonder if a third-party candidate can win, praying for God's will and mercy." That's funny, I thought Trump supported abortion too? Surely you aren't judging the candidates by two different standards, Bob? (Like you do with creation vs evolution.)

I guess Bob would have voted for Cruz.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

PreviousNext

Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron