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

Oort Cloud is fiction - because YECs say so

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Nov 28, 2017 12:36 am ... dence.html 'The Oort Cloud: Faith without Evidence'
Except for the evidence known as long period comets with highly elliptical orbits - pointing to how very far away from the sun they are at aphelion - and coming on trajectories that are steeply inclined to the ecliptic, liar Bob. Plus the fact that since asteroid Oumuamua has destroyed young earth creationism, we now have further confirmation that the solar system is 4.5bn rather than 6,000 years old so that reservoir of comets known as the Oort Cloud makes perfect sense. Perhaps it was created by God - strange how YECs are saying God created no such thing. And two months ago we couldn't detect any interstellar asteroids liar Bob - but God created some of those too. So it's a good job real science is NOT solely limited to "the study of the natural world using the five senses" and that so-called 'desperate measures' (which sometimes falsify a 'young' 6,000 year old universe) are sometimes vindicated later on.

Meanwhile Bob's young earth buddies at CMI are getting very agitated about a member of the BCSE committee: (attacking this: ... tion-81581)
Count the lies and denials and overblown accusations:
"Seven million! Says who? Fossils do not come with age labels attached, and age is not something that can actually be measured. Age can be calculated, but all such calculations rely on assumptions. The only reliable way to know the age of something is from reliable historical records (see Immeasurable age) and the Bible’s record of history, which has proven supremely reliable, reveals that the world is only about 6,000 years old. For some scientific support, see Age of the earth: 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe."
"You have chosen poorly, Paul. The proposed transitional ape-human status of the Sahelanthropus tchadensis (aka ‘Toumai’) fossil skull was denounced by other evolutionists mere days after its finder published his claims—see New ‘ape-man’ preliminary response. And within a few months a letter in Nature dealt the fatal blow, confirming beyond doubt that it was just a female gorilla skull, and not some esoteric new species of ape-man."
Not according to this you CMI LIARS: The Nature letter (Lamb's footnote 3) is also referenced (again Note 3) and the letter in question - which represents one scientific viewpoint only - does NOT, I repeat NOT, state that the skull was of a 'female gorilla' (as in today's gorillas): (the letter casts doubt on bipedalism and suggests, according to Wikipedia, that this was an extinct ape of the Miocene)
"Only an incorrigible die-hard atheist, as Braterman is by his own admission, who refused to stay informed would still accept Sahelanthropus as an ape-human transitional form ...". But according to Wikipedia "Sahelanthropus tchadensis is an extinct homininae species" (homininae being a subfamily of Hominidae). Besides what Braterman ACTUALLY wrote was "the first known upright ape-like creatures".
The rest of the article is mostly long-winded pomposity and bigotry such as:
"Evolution and creation are both over-arching paradigms within which all the multifarious facts of science are interpreted";
"we think that ... evolution should be taught, but taught properly, i.e. warts and all, as a scientific theory, open to criticism and discussion of its faults and weaknesses, not as indoctrination and dogma, which is the way evolution is typically taught in government schools currently";
"Belief in evolution is strong, for philosophical and social reasons, but none of the many proposed models of evolution has stood up to testing and criticism. And note, even if scientists could manage to evolve a new type of organism in the laboratory, that would not prove that such evolution happened in the remote past. Rather it would prove what creationists believe—that an enormous amount of applied intelligence is necessary to create a new type of organism!";
"An important example of equivocation is the way evolutionists use the word “evolution” to describe two very different phenomena: 1) the observed scientific phenomenon of natural selection (aka adaptation / survival of the fittest) which involves loss, shuffling or damage of existing genetic information, and 2) the hypothetical never-observed (hence unscientific) phenomenon of the coming into existence of new types of organs and organisms, which would require vast quantities of new genetic information";
"Paul, you’re living in the past. This is ancient history. Mainstream creationists have been advising for decades against using the “evolution is just a theory” argument"; So? Mike Pence - the subject of Braterman's article - was saying "Charles Darwin never thought of evolution as anything other than a theory": ... onist.html
Besides CMI wrongfully suggest that their followers should say that "particles-to-people evolution is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture" rather than say "evolution is just a theory".
"all new facts get pretzeled into an evolutionary framework of understanding, no matter how great the discordance";
"Paul, you keep referring to illustrious biblical creationist founders of modern science, like Linnaeus. Why not refer to evolutionist founders of … oh, wait, because there ARE NONE";
Because science was founded before evolution was discovered, dummo.
"Science is about what can be observed and measured and repeatedly tested. Evolutionary changes of the sort you express belief in here have not been observed, only assumed or inferred. It takes blind faith to believe what you believe";
It's NOT 'blind' faith. It's based on evidence.
"there are millions of fossils showing stasis (i.e. no change)—note, not ‘evolutionary stasis’ (an oxymoron of breathtaking brazenness), just plain old ‘stasis’—plus a sad, paltry handful of dubious candidate transitional fossils like your beloved Sahelanthropus";
Which disproves the RAPID post-flood speciation over less than 4,500 years that YECs pretend is 'science'.
"After the Flood, marsupials and other animals recolonised the globe starting from the Mountains of Ararat in the Middle East, where the Ark landed. They likely migrated northwards through Eurasia, across the ancient Bering land bridge, then through North America and southwards into South America";
Yet VERY FEW marsupial fossils have been found in Europe and marsupials are now extinct in Europe. Biogeography can account for that but young earth creationists cannot.
"in places where marsupials live today, the lower rock strata are virtually devoid of marsupial fossils";
As Lamb admits, evolution can live with this.
"Finding identical kinds of animals living on two distant parts of the globe and nowhere in between, a phenomenon known as disjunct distributions, fits more naturally with the biblical account of creation, Flood, dispersion from Ararat, and subsequent ecosystem decline, than with the traditional evolutionary story of organisms evolving into existence at the locations they now inhabit";
Unfortunately Lamb fails to explain how and simply supplies a link to a past CMI article. I can supply links too:
"No, you can not and no, it is not. See Pesticide resistance is not evidence of evolution. What you observe in the field and in the lab is natural selection, a process heading in the opposite direction to microbes-to-man evolution"; (I do not feel qualified to challenge that assertion but Braterman might.)
"Indeed we can, and what we find in the world’s sedimentary strata is a general sequence of sea floor organisms buried first, then sea creatures, then vegetation and land creatures, peppered throughout with numerous exceptions (so-called ‘out of place’ fossils)—which is exactly the pattern we would expect from the chaotic global Flood";
The pattern of the fossil record is NOT chaotic in the way that YEC 'flood geology' beliefs would require it to be.
"But continental drift was probably much faster in the past, as per catastrophic plate tectonics";
That is not science - it is not supported by ANY evidence.
"Groan! Alleged whale transitional forms are only one rung above Sahelanthropus on the credibility ladder. See Whale evolution fraud";
Their argument is so weak that they resort to "read this past article" again. An article with a typically emotive, propagandist title - so favoured of CMI.
"evolution is malleable, and room can be made for even the most obstinate facts. This can give an illusion of ‘consistency’ but only because the alternative framework of understanding—biblical creation—is being excluded from consideration. In fact the vast majority of facts fit far more comfortably into the biblical framework of history";
"Evolution is successful in the sense of achieving dominance, yes, but only via indoctrination, censorship and other totalitarian means";
It's not usually evolutionary websites which censor their critics - it's young earth creationist ones (CMI have frequently censored critical but carefully argued comments I have sent them on past online articles).
"Allowing students and teachers the academic freedom to air and discuss the flaws and shortcomings of the theory of evolution free from academic and social persecution would be a good start";
Ah yes - pretend that science is the same as eg politics, merely a matter of opinion.
Posts: 8183
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom


Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Nov 28, 2017 12:37 am

CHartsil wrote:Just make a secondary account. I make accounts all the time.

Sorry - but I don't behave unethically. Besides I would not know how to make a 'secondary account' for eg Facebook purposes.
Posts: 8183
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - compulsive liar exposed

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Nov 28, 2017 12:56 am
Flagging this: ... m=facebook
His reaction: "Because a rocky band of objects in a rocky solar system is just too much. Clearly, muh space wizardry."
Oh no! You're totally wrong Mr TQEPD! Bob has got it all correct (and wants other Christians to think like him). See his main Facebook page:
"If the universe was as old as secularists claim, comets should have been used up long ago. The Oort cloud is a desperate rescuing device that has no scientific evidence. Looks good on paper, though."
The fact that the Oort Cloud does have evidence to support its existence does not bother Bob in the least. If it refutes a 6,000 year old Earth and universe then it is FICTION. Except that YECs, even Bob, have already admitted the interstellar asteroid Oumuamua - which totally destroys young earth creationist timescales - is REAL.

PS Also from TQEPD: "Wow I wasn't aware Bob was sufficiently self aware to be embarrassed enough to delete one of his posts I called him on, lol...". I've seen that happen before and have documented it on this site. (Of course he almost NEVER tells his fans he deleted, or corrected, anything.)
Posts: 8183
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

YEC zealot Bob Sorensen

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Dec 03, 2017 9:09 pm

Delusional pathological liar can't resist revisiting his latest nemesis: ... to-it.html
"Some tinhorns are desperate to deny evidence of a young solar system, even saying that the interstellar object 1I ‘Oumuamua is the "death knell for young earth creationism" based on conjectures and assumptions that support their preconceptions. (Really? One thing can overturn the body of work, thousands of books, videos, articles, by biblical creation scientists and others, and destroy the Word of God? Learn to think, for crying out loud.) This denial of evidence for recent creation, and affirmation of nothing special, happens a great deal, and some can be seen from the supposed joy and excitement of the scientists over observations that refute their fundamentally flawed worldview in this article:"

As someone else who 'Cowboy Bob' cannot tolerate on the internet has just said on Facebook:
""Pl-please believe that we're smarter than those atheists. Hold on a second"
*censors atheist criticism*
"We-we're so scientifically literate. Just look at all these atheists we have the guts to refute directly.""

Run it past me again Bob - well for the first time actually - exactly HOW does Oumuamua the interstellar asteroid 'not' refute young earth creationist timescales totally and utterly? Answer this question. HOW could Oumuamua have travelled to the vicinity of our sun in 2017, from another solar system (that's what interstellar means), in no more than 6,000 years?

As for Haumea, 'young' does NOT mean 6,000 years old liar Bob.

Bigot becomes religious and ties his own brain in knots whilst becoming an internet serial liar and fraud wearing Christian/Bible clothing.

I'm the person doing the thinking and the questioning about science and reality, Bob. You are the person who HATES that.
Posts: 8183
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 3 guests