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

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Jun 21, 2015 1:43 am

Just discovered - about to take a closer look:
https://bibleandscienceforum.wordpress. ... s-howlers/
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

YEC Bob Sorensen - dinosaur?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon Jun 22, 2015 10:56 pm

How ironic that one of the biggest anti-education and anti-science propaganda merchants on the internet is telling his readers that the BBC puts out evolutionary 'propaganda'. ... istic.html

I guess he must mean programmes like this about ratites (I caught the last 15 minutes earlier and will shortly watch the remaining part): ... -big-birds
"Meet the big birds, a feathered family who have never flown a day in their lives! From ostriches to kiwis, these bizarre birds appear to be nature's greatest novelty act. How they came to be and how they continue to survive is a fascinating tale that has long captivated Sir David Attenborough. It is a story of dedicated dads, enormous eggs and a serious need for speed. And far from being the court jesters of the animal world, these flightless curiosities once nearly ruled the land."
All these bird species (including some extinct ones too I gather) appeared to have lost the need and thus the ability to fly over (geological) time. It's still evolutionary change Bob.
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

YECs are reality deniers

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:34 pm

Message as sent to an astronomy journalist 48 hours ago (it is a matter of public record that both he and liar Coppedge have failed to reply):

"DC [initials of astronomy journalist concerned]
You (and EG - [journalist] - of Nature News) might wish to be aware of this article by a somewhat notorious US young earth creationist who used to work for NASA (or perhaps a colleague at the 'CREV' blog page): ... formation/

The writer cites these articles: ... rs-1.17802 ... e-big-bang

Quoting David Coppedge or whoever wrote this latest anti-science propaganda at CREV:
"These can’t be first-generation stars if they are younger than second-generation stars, especially when theory expects first-generation stars to burn out quickly." Oh yes they CAN. Would you like me to explain HOW? Clue - these stars did not form from the remains of any second generation stars (if such are thought to have been viewed elsewhere in the same galaxy, having formed from the remains of other first generation stars that had already gone supernova). Make sense Mr CREV? Or am I 'lying' too?

But apparently astronomers (not you journalists this time) but the astronomers whose work you are reporting are being 'downright deceitful' and have 'misrepresented their empirical evidence'!

However this Christian extremist with an agenda fails to present any kind of convincing demonstration of lying, deceit and misrepresentation of empirical evidence by either astronomers or journalists (and the work has been accepted for publication). Unless of course I am managing to 'miss' his argument - in which case perhaps he would like to explain it to all of us."
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Liar Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Jun 25, 2015 12:09 am

Sorensen is whinging on facebook:
"An amusing story about this. The post was written up several days ago and scheduled for today (my usual process; next week's Radaractive is done). An atheopath stalker posts on a bigoted "Let's censor creationists" forum and has a section dedicated to ridiculing me. Under my name, he railed about the article linked in the post above. But it had nothing to do with me, as this was not posted yet. What's funny (well, *I* think it's funny) is that his whining comment on my "timeline" was written several hours before this post appeared; NOW it's in the right place! -CBB"

I never said that any of this was (before THIS which Sorensen is now flagging: ... m=facebook) anything to do with Sorensen. I simply looked for the thread where I last posted about the false accuser and propagandist Coppedge. It was this thread.

Coppedge lied. And fellow YEC bloggers like this Radaractive person (I gave up reading his blogs because they looked so bizarre and off-the-wall) and Cowboy Bob APPROVE. YEC-ism clearly attracts some very bad people.

When have I EVER censored a creationist on a public forum Bob? The answer is NEVER. And the BCSE community forum does not censor YECs - they censor THEMSELVES ie they do not have the guts to debate openly here, on a non-YEC run forum. (I did block some YEC lowlife who spammed me with personal abuse on my (inactive) Facebook page.)

Another LIE by Sorensen.

Who also thinks complaining about someone falsely accusing scientists of lying is 'whining'. What a twisted mentality.
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Latest truth about pathological Liar Sorensen

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Jul 04, 2015 11:35 pm

Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

ANOTHER creationist hypocrite

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Aug 02, 2015 5:07 am

Can you guess who (apart from Sorensen) I am referring to? This might help:

My two - suddenly zapped - comments (deleted because Sorensen was doubtless incandescent with rage and demanded that Gilbert zap them forthwith) are reproduced below:

"Dr Barton and others [Barton criticised Sorensen on 22 July and incredibly the coward Gilbert has suddenly zapped all HIS posts too]
I have discovered - having challenged his strident online claims and attacks against others (whether Christians or not) that 'Cowboy' Bob
Sorensen is a most dishonest bigoted young earth creationist boor and zealot. I have personal experience of him and his crazed followers:
(Sorensen has attempted to 'label' me a liar numerous times - I have SHOWN him to be one but he lies to his followers by complaining that I was always either making claims 'without evidence' or was being 'illogical'. I did and was neither of those things. The onus is on him to show that I DID and WAS. He always ducks the challenge to substantiate his allegations - of course most of the lowlife who frequent his pages accept allegations by Sorensen at FACE VALUE (and label Sorensen's critics like myself as 'mad').
Now I see he is attacking critics like yourself on his main anti-evolution hate blog again. Where of course NO dissenting comments are EVER allowed (and if you post them at his Facebook page 'The Question Evolution Project'/'Piltdown Superman' they will be rapidly deleted): ... lming.html
(This attack upon Dr Barton and others - Sorensen also claims to know who the 'so-called' Dr Barton really is but of course does not divulge this - is highly typical of how Sorensen behaves.)
I've only skimmed the above but whenever Sorensen attacks critics on his blog (an almost daily occurrence) he almost never posts the material in its full context nor is properly specific about the real issue(s) under discussion. He posts PROPAGANDA pure and simple. Full of childish name-calling and tedious pseudo-intellectualism.
Sorensen will never deal with the full substance of criticism he receives. Instead he turns everything into character attacks against his critics (even though he has normally never ever met them).
He and people like him are a disgrace to both Christianity and humanity. So much poison.
I can't currently comment on the podcast on carbon-14 - because Sorensen has not provided a link to it. If THIS site provides the link in question, I may then comment specifically";
"Sorensen's new blog post is accusing Barton of fallacies etc. But Barton DEALT with those allegations here on 22 July (Sorensen failed to respond). Yet further proof of Sorensen's hatred and mendacity against his (informed) critics."

I've just emailed Gilbert (copied to others) as follows (apologies for the typos I was rushing):
"You, Sir, are a disgusting fraud. I have exposed the even more disgusting behaviour of the pathological hate-filled liar Sorensen and suggested you might contact the person he was vilifying and falsely accusing. Instead - more than 24 hours later you suddenly zap all the relevant posts - leaving the dirty reputation of this online hypocrite and fraud appearing unblemished. Your sudden suggesting that you are suddenly 'facilitating' a fight is complete nonsense and an excuse for Christian dishonesty after you have been lent on by one of the worst liars on the whole of the internet. You people sicken me. It's like whenever Christians are, correctly, accused of paedophilia or financial fraud by non-Christians - and the Christians close ranks to protect the offender and oppose the person who is interested in truth.
I expect the coward and total fraud Sorensen has ranted about me to you 'behind my back' and demanded that my posts be censored - because he knows that I simply tell the truth about him and that will NEVER do! And you have caved in. Why else would you suddenly 'change your mind'? What part of my posts and messages failed to show Sorensen for exactly what he IS. And you were NOT participating in a 'fight' - you were simply, for a brief moment until you were 'got at', allowing FREE SPEECH and scientific debate. Things fundamentalist Christians HATE if the outcome for them is bad (as it always is for lying young earth creationist zealots).
My posts still exist and if I ever discover who Dr Barton is I will expose to him your revolting and unjust behaviour, as well as that of the mendacious and poisonous Sorensen towards him. Though he might discover something of your hypocrisy (as a radio journalist and author CENSORING truth for NO good reason other than appeasing a wolf in sheep's clothing) on his own.
I think your behaviour in also deleting HIS posts for 'my' sins stinks to high heaven. No winder atheists are increasing in number in the 'religious' US as well as in other 'Christian' countries. Your fundamentalist version of Christianity thrives on deliberate falsehoods, hatred and false accusations against those who disagree, authoritarian attitudes and blatant censorship of truth for no good reason - accept for protecting the pathetic 'reputation' of other fundamentalist frauds.
I sometimes struggle to put into words the utter contempt I feel for two-faced people like you.
If God agrees with your behaviour he can GO TO HELL.
More likely there is NO god, just hate-filled religious zealots and some more moderate believers like Professor Tertius - and most Christians in the UK."

These people are the devil.

This one being a journalist and author deleting truth whilst not deleting lies.

PS Whilst it was still visible at the VFTB thread, Sorensen reproduced PART of Barton's comments here: ... lming.html
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Liar and hater Sorensen lying and hating again

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Aug 20, 2015 6:38 pm

Email as just sent to Professor David R Montgomery (copied wider):

Professor David Montgomery ... ience.html
'Cowboy' Bob Sorensen is a despicable human being. See here:

I read chapter one of your 'The Rocks Don't Lie' online. Sorensen shows NO sign of having read ANY part of your book. He simply parrots 'Answers in Genesis' - and ATTACKS you in a blog where no comments are permitted (he does this to all and sundry - including Christians - who do not subscribe to YEC dogma because of scientific reality). (Comments are sometimes permitted on his Facebook page:

I distinctly recall making some brief written comments recently about the Mortenson piece - either directly to AiG or in an email or under somebody's blog (probably one of the copy recipients). Unfortunately I CANNOT now find my text (I normally save such things)! Not very helpful I know. I distinctly recall googl[ing] 'Shinarump' and addressing Mortenson's text at 'Noah's Flood is capable' (pity it never happened) and his Conclusion (where he tubthumps "It is a conflict of worldviews. Stripped of naturalistic interpretations of the scientific observations, the evidence from the physical world powerfully confirms the literal truth of Genesis 1–11, which teaches young-earth creation. Most scientists are suppressing the truth about God ..." thus proving that he is ANTI-science - because scientific evidence refutes both a young Earth and a recent literally global flood.

EUREKA (sort of). Having just glanced again at this - the original article by Montgomery that Mortenson is attacking though he FAILS to address everything within it - I now recall that I made a comment under one of the recent 'God of Evolution' blogs by Tyler Francke (after a similar issue came up in preceding comments made there): ... nism-40356

HERE is the link in question: My comment - made around 4 August - read as follows (I've omitted the opening para which referred to a different blogsite):

"PS Talking of the science hater Mortenson: ... eationism/
“On the contrary, Noah’s Flood is the key to explaining most of the geological record and as such it washes away millions of years.”
Funny how the wider universe is provably BILLIONS of years old, Terry. Something YOU don’t bother to mention.
The article attempts to argue that conglomerates could be biblically young … His main strategy appears to be to say that Montgomery is wrong because his “thinking is controlled by naturalistic uniformitarian assumptions”. Mortenson also discusses – in a not very accessible fashion for the layman – the Shinarump Conglomerate (see here: And he also claims that the Genesis flood (IF it really happened) is ‘capable’. “Some of the sediments formed early in the Flood year would be eroded in the recessional stage and deposited again elsewhere, thus providing the slightly older conglomerates within newer ones via successive catastrophic episodes over the course of only a few months or at most a few years, not millions of years.
Heat and pressure certainly can speed up the process of turning wet conglomerate sediments into solid conglomerate rock. Far more important, however, is the cementing agent in solution in the sediment that “binds the sediment into a rock.””
I’m no geologist but I am un-persuaded that this is a scientifically plausible scenario or that it is MORE convincing than the claims of Montgomery.
Mortenson also ignores this comment in the Montgomery article that he is attempting to critique:
“Interestingly, one can challenge Flood Geology on biblical grounds. What did Noah do in the biblical story? He saved two of every living thing. So consider the case of fossils, which creationists attribute to the flood. What you find in the rocks is that more than 99% of all species entombed in the rock record are extinct. This simple fact offers a stark contrast to what you would expect to find based on a literal reading of the biblical story.”
God sends global flood but saves land-based creatures from extinction on a floating ark (even though YECs insist only representative ‘kinds’ were on board). Only for 99 per cent of species then to go extinct ‘within the past 5,000 years’ despite God’s plan being for animals to ‘multiply’. Not only utter garbage but unbiblical TOO."

Mr Ashley Haworth-Roberts
PS Sorensen and AiG both hide from my emails. But I am adding this to the Sorensen thread at the BCSE community forum - see my second link above - thus I expect they will both get to see it. They will not of course concede the accuracy of what I say about them there.
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Who is the Hypocrite?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Sep 25, 2015 10:58 pm

Wide circulation email as just sent (including to Sorensen):

Guess who Sorensen is primarily attacking today (he does not name anyone - but I recognised some of the words he quoted and I followed the links). ... tages.html

Compare his style of writing with mine. Compare whether he backs up his wild claims - and whether I back up my claims.

And please decide for yourselves whether the 'fascist', if there is one, is the person (ie me) who being accused by this person (who bans all comments under his Piltdown Superman blogs) - or whether it is the person doing all the ranting and accusing.

Decide for yourselves. WHO really likes North Korean style propagandist ranting about 'proselytizing', 'manipulation', and 'hypocrisy' etc by OTHER people - people who challenge this sort of blogging misbehaviour in the first place.
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Daily Whinge

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Oct 24, 2015 11:31 pm ... evear.html
I really can't summon up the enthusiasm to listen - but somebody else might (it's David Rosevear interviewed mostly about Genesis Expo in Portsmouth).
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Cowboy Bob seeking some attention

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Feb 09, 2016 12:20 am

So I decided to give him some attention as 'Question Evolution Day 5' is fast approaching in the US. ... n-day.html (6 February)
He is struggling to get his 'information' into churches. ... day-5.html (3 February)
But he DID recently manage to get himself an interview on 'Pirate Christian Radio' about his activities.
According to Bob on 6 February there is 'outrage' about Question Evolution Day 5 and those who see them 'growin' ' are 'hatin' '. So I had a look on the internet on 6 Feb to see what was there about Question Evolution Day 5 from people other than Bob. And found NOTHING. ... lution-day (new CMI guest article dated 9 Feb)
"we can go deeper and give people information about problems with evolution and show that there is a Creator" (Bob's activities are mostly NEGATIVE and science bashing)
"When they see that scientific evidence for evolution is seriously lacking, we hope that they will be open to the message that the Creator, who has spoken to us through his Word, has the answers—beginning in Genesis 1" (he uses lying non-specific propaganda - which evidence for evolution is 'not' evidence or is missing/lacking - and also does not hesitate to censor opposition whilst espousing the virtues of free speech and 'intellectual and academic freedom' FOR CREATIONISTS)
"those of us who speak up and express doubts about evolution are often bullied by atheopaths attempting to silence us through ridicule and intimidation (many draw inspiration from Richard Dawkins). If we take some time to learn about basic logical fallacies, we can see that the anti-creationists commonly trade on unsustainable bluster, which can be exposed".
If Sorensen is referring in part to myself, he has NEVER exposed any challenge I have put to him and his claims as 'bluster'. Rather I have exposed bluster about me by HIM, along with a repeated refusal to deal with the specific contents of emails I have sent to him and which I know he has read.

My next post will provide material in support of that last claim (material that I have held back from posting here up to now). (There might be a slight delay as I am currently struggling to access Google in order to view emails sent from my gmail account.)
Last edited by a_haworthroberts on Tue Feb 09, 2016 12:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re Cowboy Bob seeking some attention

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Feb 09, 2016 12:28 am

I show below VERBATIM the contents of a wide-circulation email I sent dated 16 November 2015.

"'Cowboy' Bob Sorensen continues to deny reality - the reality that I exposed him in my email of 7 November as a liar and false accuser (yet again).

In that email I addressed his false accusations against my words in his comments here as quoted below: ... -results=7
"When making such an accusation, evidence must be shown that there is an effort to deceive. (I reckon that if someone has a proven record of lying, that's worthy of consideration.) This does not allow the possibility of mistakes on the author's part, or that the one making the accusation of "liar" is actually disagreeing with the science; if Dr. Clarey writes something he doesn't agree with, then Clarey is lying. Not hardly! In fact, such a casual, emotive accusation makes the accuser into the liar."

In my email of 7 November refuting Sorensen's accusations I wrote:
"Want those eight Clarey LIES, Bob?
"This may have occurred during the beginning of the post-Flood period, and possibly during the Ice Age, when water levels and climate fluctuations would have been more dramatic and sporadic." WHAT post-Flood ice age - that is an INVENTION of young earth creationist ideologues.)
"The geology, anatomy, lack of dating, and evidence of recent water action reveal that the media blitz and excitement over Homo naledi is essentially based on a falsehood." (The evidence did NOT point to 'recent water action' so the real scientists ruled out the hypothesis, Dr Clarey.)
"It appears the secular scientific community continues their predecessors' search to find a "missing link" and establish what they have already decided to believe: that our human race came from apes, not Adam." (Clarey falsely attacking scientists because of their alleged motivations - to LEARN about the past.)
"These scattered fossils are most likely young, just thousands of years old, and deposited post-Flood". (The scientists don't know the age of the bones. YOU do NOT know the age of the bones.)
"They show no indication of any evolution." (Oh yes they very much DO - when viewed within the context of other fossils discovered previously - and which have been scientifically dated. But YECs typically IGNORE context.)
"The claimed new species appears to be a mosaic of different species put together based on evolutionary biases, not scientific evidence." (PROVE it. Or withdraw the accusation. There are TWO lies here - the totally claim that two or more species' bones have been found mixed together - in his earlier article of 15 October Clarey stated that certain features were 'early human' whilst others were 'more like Australopithecus', and then spoke of 'unusual sizes' and claimed, desperately, that "presumed males and females may have come from different species". And then in his third article Clarey also made the utterly DESPERATE insinuation that the scientists are guilty of some sort of deliberate FRAUD.)
"The scientists built an imaginary creature from bones that likely come from both humans and non-humans." (PROVE it. Or withdrawn the accusation.)
People like Bob and the ICR routinely censor people who challenge their fact-free claims with awkward real facts. Why? Because they believe nonsense about fossils and the like - and condemn all those who do not agree with their position whilst often refusing to enter into real, meaningful, discussions about the actual scientific evidence."

Sorensen's response since my email was sent has been to spew venom against me at frequent intervals. And to pretend that my email does NOT EXIST by refusing to address a SINGLE WORD of it.

If you don't believe me look at the lying and deliberate evasiveness here by 'The Question Evolution Project' (incidentally yesterday Sorensen got himself banned by the Christian who runs this site): ... rnational/

He also called me 'narcissistic' for making the perfectly reasonable demand that he DEAL with the CONTENTS of my email of 7 November (see the comments under this, especially his dated 7 Nov): ... istic.html

And on 15 November, after he was banned from 'God of Evolution', he posted this piece of propaganda: ... sized.html
"Professing atheists riding the owlhoot trail are frequently claiming to be purveyors of "science" and "reason", but often displaying an inability to understand either. People with even a rudimentary understanding of logic can see their posturing for what it is. (Atheopath stalker tinhorns like Abby Normal can have their logical fallacies dismantled, claim they made no fallacies, then demand further analysis of their ravings. Some of us don't cotton to wasting our time on mouthy demoniacs, though.)"
(from his opening paragraph: I know that he knows that I know that he is talking about, and deliberately lying about, me - again)







The above links further prove Sorensen to be an evasive, hate-filled deliberate serial liar and hypocrite. Not a Christian. Or not what I thought a 'Christian' was when I embraced it, certainly something I never was myself - and I never ever want to be in the future either.

By the way all this highlights exactly WHY I went after Sorensen in the first place. Because I could tell how unpleasant a 'Christian' and person he must be - simply by reading his blogs and facebook comments and noticing his disdainful refusal to engage in any meaningful or rational discussions with people who disagree with his strident online pronouncements. (None of the other YECs copied in to this behave as badly as Bob on the whole. But NONE has publicly disowned him either.)

In case he is tempted to block me and pretend again that this email does not exist, I have of course just INFORMED Sorensen via his Stormbringer blog of this email. I told him I was telling the truth about him.

I can confidently say that no copy recipient would be able, were they 'so minded', to truthfully demonstrate that my claims here are invalid or incorrect. The facts of this matter are not at all complicated."
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

More attention seeking

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:43 pm (a belated rant response from Cowboy Bob - which I quote IN FULL below)
"I CONFESS! But I should give some background. It starts out seeming self-indulgent, I'll allow, but please bear with me.
Regular readers of my Weblogs may recollect that I have a few cyber stalkers. One in particular is one I named "Haywire". He has stated that he hates me, and has made an effort through spam, Weblog comments, posts on his Forum of Futility, and more to defame me and discredit me among Christians and creationists. (A tremendous stroke of irony is that he complains about "censorship", yet does not complain when I get censored and lose my "free speech", and he posts on that forum of an organization dedicated to censoring creationists!) My article at really put a burr under his saddle. Haywire attacks many creationists on his secularist jihad, not just me.
A recent post was, "Cowboy Bob seeking some attention". That's what I'm confessing to! I've been seeking attention for Question Evolution Day (annually on February 12) since early January, and hope that people will participate in both big and small ways. What vituperative anti-creationists like this will deny is that (and I'm on record for this) I seek glory for God, not glory for Bob. Please pray that I continue to seek God's glory, and for the impact of Question Evolution Day. -Cowboy Bob Sorensen"

Why not post a link to my ACTUAL COMMENTS above and then SHOW us how you are 'not' falsely and cynically accusing me of 'bluster' on the website of Creation Ministries International (since what I am doing and have done for YEARS is expose your pathological dishonesty not post 'bluster')?

By the way, you have NOT been banned from or censored on this community forum Liar Bob. You have censored YOURSELF. You also block my emails instead of dealing with their contents. Because you cannot answer my challenges. You cannot.
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby Peter Henderson » Fri Feb 19, 2016 2:05 pm

new CMI guest article dated 9 Feb

Yep, just got this through in a mailshot today.

Personally, I think you should ask him should we not have a "question gravity" day as it's more a "theory" in crisis than evolution.

What a bunch of twats.

"Cowboy" Bob. "Cowboy" science.
Peter Henderson
Posts: 4353
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby Peter Henderson » Fri Feb 19, 2016 2:10 pm

From the comments:

I say to students, " There are 3 questions to answer first about Evolution. 1. What went Bang? 2. Where did it come from? 3. What caused it to explode? After that we can look at other ideas."

Such ignorance

Sigh :(
Peter Henderson
Posts: 4353
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Feb 19, 2016 8:49 pm

I sent him a message last night, referring to a previous post of mine on this forum, after he was encouraging visitors to his blog this week to read some tripe by Andrew Snelling about Hawaii and claiming that creationists have a sensible 'Flood geology model' : ... flood.html

(If readers wish to check out, please see this from 30.5.14:

The evidence that the Hawaiian islands are millions of years old is incredibly compelling.
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom


Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests